***************************************************************** 03/10/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.59 ***************************************************************** 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 Brian Ross "Completely Aware" of WMD Context 2 [NYTr] GROUND HOG DAY: Iran "months" from bomb technology: UK 3 [NYTr] Iran Resists New Threats from Washington 4 IRNA: Annan sends ElBaradei's Iran report to Security Council 5 IRNA: OIC backs Iran's right to nuclear research, says secretary gen 6 IRNA: Reactions after reporting Iran to UNSC 7 IRNA: CPI criticizes UPA government's stand on Iran nuclear issue - 8 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Proposes More Talks on Iran Crisis 9 TIME.com: Why Russia and China Hold the Key to an Iranian Nuclear De 10 TIME.com: Iranian Bombshell? 11 Guardian Unlimited: Security Council Considers Iran Proposals 12 Guardian Unlimited: France Urges Iran to Return to 'Reason' 13 Guardian Unlimited: Rice: Security Council Should Press Iran 14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.: Iran Dispute to Test Sec. Council 15 Guardian Unlimited: Iran is only months from bomb technology, 16 IRNA: Supreme Leader lambasts US hue and cry over Iran's nuke plan - 17 IRNA: Defense minister: Iran determined to use nuclear energy 18 AFP: Jack Straw still hopes diplomacy can solve Iran crisis - 19 AFP: UN Security Council holds no fear for Iran - experts 20 AFP: Key Security Council members discuss Iran's nuclear defiance - 21 AFP: Rice says Iran case must go to Security Council 22 AFP: West wants two-week deadline for Iran to stop nuclear fuel work 23 IRNA: Major cleric warns about using language of threat against Iran 24 IRNA: President: Access to nuclear energy, right of whole nation 25 IRNA: India discusses Iran issue with Annan 26 Bush's Nuke Deal, Congress and Peace Voter 27 [NYTr] The Nuclear Adventure: Invented by the USA 28 TIME.com: A Nuclear Deal 29 US: Reuters: U.S. Found in Violation of Human Rights of Native Ameri 30 US: Platts: California IOUs, consumer group press for shared generat 31 US: TomPaine.com: Drain America First 32 AFP: US-India nuclear deal to spur 100 billion dollars in energy ven 33 AFP: India involved in illicit nuclear activities - US think tank - 34 AFP: US rejects Russia's proposal for crisis talks on Iran - 35 DN!: Tony Benn on How Britain Secretly Helped Israel Build its Nucle 36 IRNA: UK sold plutonium to Israel to develop nuclear weapons - repor 37 Guardian Unlimited: Britain gave Israel plutonium, files show 38 Bellona: China raises stakes on renewable energy 39 Bellona: Sufficient growth of spending on renewable sources of energ 40 Bellona: Bellona presents the way forward for CCS in Europe 41 Xinhua: Russia extends deal on nuclear fuel supplies to Bulgaria 42 Xinhua: Bulgaria secures deal with Russia on nuclear fuel supply unt 43 Daily Times: VIEW: Shed no nuclear tears 44 UPI: U.K. sold Israel plutonium, files reveal NUCLEAR REACTORS 45 US: TMI at 27: The łBrown SideČ of Nuclear 46 Guardian Unlimited: Mexico's Only Nuclear Plant Restarts 47 Miami Herald: Reactor back in operation - El Universal Online - 48 Bellona: Construction of floating nuclear plant begins 49 US: NRC: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear 50 US: Herald News: Exelon says cobalt 60 never left plant 51 US: Herald News: Message to Exelon: Hurry up 52 US: Platts: Senate budget panel halts Bush plan on BPA surplus reven 53 US: Platts: EC's energy paper leaves renewables, nuclear groups want 54 US: APP.COM: Senator to NRC brass: Get involved | 55 US: Concord Monitor Online: Power boost halted at nuclear power plan 56 US: Brattleboro Reformer: VY power boost halted at 5 percent indefin 57 US: cbs2chicago.com: County May Test About 300 Wells Near Nuclear Pl 58 Nigeria Limited: Nigerias Nuclear Programme On Course NAS 59 US: Vermont Guardian: Vermonts nuclear crossroads: Where four major 60 UPI: U.K. ministers ease pace on nuclear power 61 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria's Failed N-Plan Unit Back On NUCLEAR SECURITY 62 US: reviewjournal.com: HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS : 'High threat' fund NUCLEAR SAFETY 63 [NYTr] Australian Senators Hear It on DU 64 [NYTr] Halliburton Covers Up Deadly DU Levels in England 65 US: AP Wire: Nuclear worker program overspends millions NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 66 US: Gallup Independent: Officials stall on delivering water to users 67 US: Deseret News: Huntsman lawyer raps PFS chief's comments 68 US: TIME.com: Utah's Toxic Opportunity 69 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting 70 Bellona: Nuclear experts discuss radwaste repository options for Rus 71 US: reviewjournal.com: NUCLEAR WASTE: Lawmakers snub reprocessing pl 72 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Science panel urges major overhaul of nuke-wa 73 US: Daily Herald: PFS chairman says opponents cannot stop Utah waste 74 University of Idaho Argonaut: Engineers assess risk at Nuclear-Waste 75 AU ABC: Northern Land Council open to nuclear dump plan 76 AU ABC: Dispute may aid nuclear dump proponents. 77 US: Cańon City Daily Record: FCIOC discusses latest Cotter incident 78 News & Star: Cumbria needs nuclear jobs 79 News & Star: THE RACE IS ON FOR NEW NUKE PLANT 80 Pahrump Valley Times: Senator doubts Congress will act on Yucca this PEACE 81 [southnews] Nuclear non-proliferation a delicate business US DEPT. OF ENERGY 82 ContraCostaTimes.com: Sandia lab invites guests to join in celebrati 83 SF New Mexican: LANL blasts excess explosives: Mesa-top detonation r 84 Santa Fe New Mexican: Feds OK lab's new pay, benefits package 85 Platts: US DOE sees its budget rising 4% to 8% over the next five ye 86 Tri-Valley Herald: Sandia : The other weapons lab 87 lamonitor.com: NNSA: LANL compensation plan equivalent ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Brian Ross "Completely Aware" of WMD Context Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 00:59:08 -0600 (CST) http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2833 ACTIVISM UPDATE: Brian Ross "Completely Aware" of WMD Context So why weren't ABC viewers allowed to know? March 3, 2006 Two recent reports on ABC raised the possibility that 10-year-old tapes of Saddam Hussein might show that he "did hide weapons of mass destruction"--giving the White House's rationale for the March 2003 invasion a boost. But as a February 17 FAIR action alert pointed out, ABC's reporting omitted evidence that undermined this argument. The tapes seem to show Hussein Kamel, Iraq's weapons chief at the time, talking about information about weapons programs that Iraq had concealed from U.N. inspectors. But when Kamel defected--soon after these tapes were recorded--he not only told CIA and U.N. investigators about this concealment, he at the same time insisted that Iraq had destroyed all its unconventional weapons stockpiles. FAIR's alert questioned why ABC failed to inform its viewers about this key information. Responding to a query from FAIR about whether ABC was aware of the Kamel story, ABC reporter Brian Ross wrote: "Completely aware of it of course. We felt the tapes stand for themselves." This admission is puzzling, to say the least. How could a news outlet raise the possibility that Kamel's comments on the tapes could bolster the argument that Iraq had hidden weapons of mass destruction, and not mention that he had repeatedly told the U.S. and U.N. that Iraq had destroyed all of those weapons? And far from letting the tapes stand for themselves, ABC provided comments from sources to help viewers interpret Kamel's recorded remarks--even though, in light of Kamel's later statements, some of those comments seem to be inaccurate. For example, ABC viewers heard from Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), who said, based on the tapes, "You would think that it's pretty likely that there were WMD that were hidden or that were moved out of the country." If ABC knew about Kamel's later insistence that Iraq destroyed its WMDs, that means the network had compelling information to suggest that Hoekstra's interpretation was wrong. Instead of reporting that, ABC's Nightline segment concluded that the tapes might "help both sides bolster their arguments." It's difficult to have any kind of rational argument when crucial information is kept out of the discussion. ****** If you would prefer to receive these messages in HTML format, please visit our website to change your Email Preferences. Go to: http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/fair/signUp.jsp?key=708. Your donation to FAIR goes a long way. Help us hold mainstream media accountable. Make a difference Support FAIR today! http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=103 SUBSCRIBE TO EXTRA! AND GET FAIR'S NEW BOOK FOR FREE: The Oh Really? Factor http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=114 FAIR SHIRTS: Get your "Don't Trust the Corporate Media" shirt today at FAIR's online store: http://www.merchantamerica.com/fair/ FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 130 stations in the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest you, visit http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=5 Feel free to respond to FAIR ( fair@fair.org ). We can't reply to everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate documented examples of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of your email correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to fair@fair.org. Our subscriber list is kept confidential. To unsubscribe from this list at any time, visit our web at: http://www.demaction.org/fair/unsubscribe.jsp and follow the instructions. Or send an email to fair@democracyinaction.org with unsubscribe in the subject line. FAIR (212) 633-6700 http://www.fair.org/ E-mail: fair@fair.org /*Your email ID. --*/ ***************************************************************** 2 [NYTr] GROUND HOG DAY: Iran "months" from bomb technology: UK Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:57:21 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Simon McGuinness [Now let me see ... three years ago, almost to the day, these very same sources said Saddam Hussein was 45 minutes away from launching a nuclear missile. That was untrue - he was at least 4.5 years away from it and, even then, it might have had a payload sufficient to blow up a small house 100 miles away. Based on their previous record, that would mean that the current prediction is, in reality, at least 52,560 years in the future (the second half of the fifty-fourth millennium). Will another 200,000 innocent people have to die to prove the Brits wrong again? - Simon McGuinness] Irish Times - Mar 10, 2006 http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2006/0310/3101030732FRIRAN.html Iran months from bomb technology, claims Britain IRAN: The West's confrontation with Iran over its nuclear activities intensified yesterday after Britain claimed that Tehran could acquire the technological capability to build a bomb by the end of the year. A day after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) referred the dispute to the UN security council, British officials also indicated that London would back Washington's efforts to impose a UN deadline of about 30 days for Iran's compliance with international demands. The five permanent members of the security council began consultations on an expected statement on Iran on Wednesday after Russian-led attempts to broker a compromise failed. A deadline could be set as early as next week, and would cover a period "of weeks, not months", officials said. A British official said that while it could take Iran years to build a nuclear weapon, it might acquire the technical knowhow within months. Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons. The IAEA concluded this week that its assurances were insufficient. Iran has 85 tonnes of uranium gas stockpiled for enrichment at its Isfahan facility, held under UN seals. American officials say this is enough for 10 bombs. Iran says it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges for enriching the gas at its Natanz underground complex by the end of the year. Western diplomats said any signs that Iran was moving the gas from Isfahan to Natanz would set alarms ringing. Since last month, the Iranians are reported to have been feeding uranium gas into a small rig of 20 centrifuges at Natanz. That can yield little useful fissile material, but plenty of knowhow for a later, more ambitious project, said an official close to the IAEA investigation. Britain maintains that military action to destroy Iran's suspect facilities is not under discussion. But the Bush administration, backed by Israel, has refused to rule out the use of force. Faced with the threat of possible sanctions, Iran warned the US that it could also inflict "harm and pain". Yesterday, Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, said: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the [ one] we would like to see developed." ) Guardian Service * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 3 [NYTr] Iran Resists New Threats from Washington Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:53:14 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Radio Havana Cuba - Mar 6, 2006 from http://www.radiohc.cu Iran Resists New Threats from Washington Tehran, March 8 (RHC)-- Iran has responded to new threats and rhetoric from Washington over its peaceful nuclear program, warning that any military action against the Islamic Republic would turn the country into a "killing field." The not-so-veiled threats of military attacks against Iran have recently come from U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, who warned that Tehran faced "painful consequences" if it refused to stop its program. In response, the deputy head of Iran's armed forces retorted: "Iran's armed forces, through their experience of war, will turn this land into a killing field for any enemy aggressors." Representatives from the 35 member states gathered at the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna this week for talks aimed at defusing the stand-off through diplomatic means. Oil-rich Iran insists that it only wants to carry out nuclear enrichment activities to produce domestic power -- considering peaceful nuclear power its "God-given right." Washington claims that the research is a front for a covert weapons program. Tehran has been reported to the UN Security Council and diplomats are meeting this week to discuss ways to head off a confrontation. Iran has raised the stakes by vowing that it would scale up its research operations into large-scale uranium enrichment if it were unhappy with the outcome. Mohamed ElBaradei, who leads the UN's nuclear watchdog body, opened the week of talks on Monday by saying that he remained hopeful a deal could be reached. He said that there was frantic diplomatic activity to try to get Tehran and the European Union back to the negotiating table. The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said that a deal on small-scale enrichment -- which Iran resumed last month -- and a resumption of talks between Tehran and the EU-3, comprised of England, Germany and France, would be enough to head off immediate Security Council action. He stressed that Iran was cooperating with inspectors, "but not with the magnitude and the speed expected." Ali-Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, reiterated Tehran's position, saying that the Islamic Republic "will not show any flexibility on research and development" -- which is every country's sovereign right. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 4 IRNA: Annan sends ElBaradei's Iran report to Security Council United Nations, New York, March 10, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-SC The United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan sent the report of IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei on Iran's nuclear activities to the international body's Security Council, said the UN chief spokesman Stephane Dujarric here Thursday. Dujarric said the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) failed to issue any resolution in its Wednesday's meeting on Iran and ElBaradei's latest report was submitted to the Security council. "The secretary general is not to follow up the case in person," said the spokesman when asked whether Annan would cancel his next week African tour to pursue the case personally. "The report would be studied by the UN Security Council (UNSC)," said Dujarric however adding, "Annan will be in touch with the UN Headquarters in New York to follow up the issue while he is in Africa." ***************************************************************** 5 IRNA: OIC backs Iran's right to nuclear research, says secretary general - London, March 10, IRNA OIC Ihsanoglu-Iran The Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) supports the Iranian government's right to nuclear research, says the secretary-general of the 56-nation group, Professor Ekmeleddin Inhanoglu. Speaking at a news conference at the Foreign Press Association in London Friday, Inhanoglu also said that his organization was opposed to the double standards being used over Iran's case at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. "We are with Iran and for Iran," he said when asked why the OIC does not seem to support its member state in the rising tensions between Tehran and Washington. "We defend the right of any state to acquire nuclear capability for research and peaceful use," the Turkish professor told foreign journalists. He also said that the OIC was "staunch supporter" of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. "It should be adhered to by everybody and not by somebody," he added in reference to the case of Zionist regime. The OIC secretary general said that his organization supported the resolution of Iran's case through diplomatic means. "We are against the use of power and against the imposition of sanctions" which have been threatened by some countries in taking the case to the UN Security Council. Inhanoglu warned about the dangerous situation being created in the developing crisis, saying that "any spark" could inflame the region. "We don't want any conflict in the Middle East. We have had enough. Enough is enough," he stressed. The Middle East, he said, should be a zone "free" of weapons of mass destruction. "Nobody should have nuclear weapons" in the region, he said. The OIC secretary general has been visiting London, during which he has held meetings with Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on Wednesday and with representatives of the Muslim community on Thursday. After meeting Straw, they issued a joint statement, stressing that "the need to enhance cooperation and deepen understanding between peoples, cultures and faiths has never been more important than present." ***************************************************************** 6 IRNA: Reactions after reporting Iran to UNSC Tehran, March 10, IRNA Iran-Nuclear-Views Iran is in the spotlight as the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan sent the report of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei's report on Tehran's nuclear dossier to the Security Council Thursday. The world leaders and ranking officials have differently reacted to the issue. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who is currently in Italy, said the move brings Tehran under pressure but it is not the solution to its nuclear standoff with the West. The Italian news agency (ANSA) reported that Mubarak's remarks came at the end of his meeting with Italian President Carlo Azeglio and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in Rome Thursday afternoon. The visiting president said the only way to settle the nuclear case is the resumption of negotiations between Iran and the European troika (Britain, Germany, and France). Stressing that Cairo opposes any form of military actions, Mubarak said the issue should be solved through a "diplomatic agreement". In another development, ANSA quoted a statement by the Italian Foreign Ministry as saying that the reporting of Iran to the UN Security Council (UNSC) "is not the end of diplomatic talks". The statement added the move is only a step into new stage to find a political solution. Meanwhile, a visiting Jordanian parliamentary official in the Iranian ancient city of Isfahan Thursday said Tehran will "thoughtfully" go through safely. Head of Jordan's Parliamentary Friendship Group, Muhammad Bani Hani, expressed Jordan's dissatisfaction over reporting Iran to the UNSC. Speaking during a dinner banquet in Isfahan's Abbassi Hotel, the official reiterated he was confident that Tehran will successfully go through. Another report from Moscow quoted a Russian analyst as saying that the UNSC "has no legal justification for imposing sanctions against Iran". Head of the Russian Academy of Sciences Center for International Security, Alexei Arbatov, said there is no acceptable reason for reporting Iran's nuclear case to the Security Council. Addressing a gathering on Iran's nuclear program in the Russian capital, the analyst added Tehran has breached none of its commitments within the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Consequently, Arbatov concluded, any ultimatum to the country could "only escalate international tensions". News sent: 13:38 Friday March 10, 2006 Print ***************************************************************** 7 IRNA: CPI criticizes UPA government's stand on Iran nuclear issue - New Delhi, March 10, IRNA India-Iran-CPI(M) Reacting on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) decision to shift the Iran nuclear issue to the United Nation Security Council, Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M) today said it was indeed unfortunate and regrettable that the Congress led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government was party to the Iran issue going to the Security Council. A statement issued after the meeting of the Party's Polit Bureau here on Friday critisized the Indian government for voting with the US, EU-3 and others in the February meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors. All the sophistry indulged in that India wants the matter settled by dialogue is meaningless, CPI(M) said, adding that the Prime Minister's statement in Parliament was notable for the omission that the issue should be settled within the framework of the IAEA. There was not a word that the matter should not be referred to the Security Council. In contrast, on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement (NAM), the representative of Malaysia in a statement to the Board meeting stated NAM strongly believes that diplomacy and dialogue must continue in order to find a long-term peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear issue. To this end NAM is of the view that engagement of other UN bodies at this juncture should be avoided," the statement said. ***************************************************************** 8 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Proposes More Talks on Iran Crisis From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 9:31 PM AP Photo VAH102 By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia proposed more talks on Iran's nuclear program as the five U.N. Security Council powers Friday considered a statement to pressure Tehran to clear up questions about whether it is trying to build atomic weapons. The U.S. was skeptical about the idea, saying it was time for tough action after three years of failed negotiations. The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, who weild veto power, gathered Friday afternoon for their second meeting on Iran, and were expected to discuss new proposals aimed at getting Tehran to clear up questions about its disputed program. The ambassadors met at the U.S. mission to the U.N. several blocks from the United Nations Secretariat building in a bid to avoid media scrutiny. Ambassador John Bolton and other senior American officials have suggested that if the Security Council does not take tough action, Washington might look elsewhere to punish Iran - possibly by rallying its allies to impose targeted sanctions. ``We are going to press for as vigorous a response in the council as we can get, and hope that that gets the Iranians' attentions,'' Bolton said Thursday. ``This is a test for the council. And if the Iranians do not back off from their continued aggressive pursuit of nuclear weapons, we will have to make a decision of what the next step will be.'' But Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said talks should be held that include Moscow, the United States, China, France, Germany, Britain and the International Atomic Energy Agency. ``We all have to get together again to collectively find a new consensus regarding our strategy at the current stage,'' Lavrov said in an interview with state television broadcast Thursday but published in full on the Foreign Ministry's Web site Friday. The Foreign Ministry declined to comment on the exact format for the proposed talks. However, Lavrov's call for Germany, which is not a member of the Security Council, and IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei to be included appeared to indicate he meant the talks should take place outside the framework of the U.N. body. ``It's an attempt to stop the referral to the Security Council and have more talks,'' said Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. ``We've been talking for three years. At some point, the international community has to decide whether or not the IAEA resolutions and the U.N. Charter mean anything.'' The United States and its allies believe Iran is seeking to develop atomic weapons, but Tehran denies the allegations, saying its nuclear program is solely for generating electricity. Diplomats have indicated they will move slowly, focusing initially on a presidential statement that will likely ask Iran to comply with demands by the IAEA, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The agency triggered council action by sending a Feb. 27 report on Iran's activities to the council. One of Iran's senior clerics warned the Security Council to be careful before making any further decisions on Iran's nuclear program. ``Our nation insists on its rights and will never back down. Talking to this nation with a threatening tone is unwise and stupid,'' cleric Ahmed Khatami said during Friday prayers in Tehran. Iranian legislator Kazem Jalali also said ending negotiations was not a ``good solution'' for breaking the impasse and cautioned the move could have region-wide consequences. ``Our region is not ready for another crisis. Any new crisis might even harm the whole region,'' he told AP Television News. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said he would not be opposed to the Russian proposal for more talks with Iran, but he expected the Security Council to issue a presidential statement first. ``Then, we'll see,'' Steinmeier told reporters on the sidelines of a meeting of European Union foreign ministers in Salzburg, Austria. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy also underscored the need for diplomacy. ``I think that now more than ever there should be negotiations,'' he said. ``One must believe in negotiations, one must believe in diplomacy, one must believe in reason.'' Officials in Washington have raised the possibility of a Security Council resolution backed by the threat of military force that would demand Iran abandon uranium enrichment and answer outstanding questions about its nuclear program. The United States also wants the statement to include some condemnation of Iran. ``We're confronted with a threat here as Iran pursues not only nuclear weapons, but the capability through increasingly longer-range and more accurate ballistic missiles ... that is obviously very, very dangerous,'' Bolton said. ``So we have a responsibility in the council to try and deal with that threat.'' But Russia and China, which have closer ties to Iran, oppose sanctions on principle and fear that tough council action will lead Iran to abandon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty for good and expel IAEA inspectors. To try to stave off sanctions against Iran, Russia proposed to host Iran's uranium enrichment program in an offer backed by both the U.S. and the EU as a way to tighten controls over Tehran's atomic program. But talks on the issue have stalled over Iran's staunch refusal to reimpose a moratorium on domestic enrichment activity - a condition that accompanied the Russian offer. ``Yes, the situation is critical, including because of the position of the Iranian leadership, which we do not approve of,'' Lavrov said. ``But it does not mean that everybody now has to go to the Security Council and start to issue calls, threaten and put such threats into effect.'' Britain, also a proponent of tough action, has proposed asking ElBaradei to report back in two weeks on Iran's compliance with IAEA resolutions. But Russian Ambassador Andrey Denisov said Thursday this would not give Tehran enough time. British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said the council should respond quickly and urge Iran to meet the IAEA requirements. ``If the Iranians meet the requirements of the (IAEA) government board, then there's no activity here, no need for the Security Council to be involved,'' he told AP Television News. Top EU officials stressed Friday that a diplomatic solution is still possible, but also appeared to leave open the possibility of sanctions. ``Everything is on the table, everything is open,'' EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said when asked about a report in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard in which he was quoted as saying that sanctions cannot be excluded. --- Associated Press writers Henry Meyer in Moscow and Veronika Oleksyn in Salzburg, Austria, contributed to this story. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 9 TIME.com: Why Russia and China Hold the Key to an Iranian Nuclear Deal KEITH BEDFORD / REUTERS Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov speaks to reporters at U.N. headquarters in New York on Wednesday Web Exclusive| World Security Council referral means it will be up to veto-wielders Moscow and Beijing to find a formula that averts a dangerous confrontation Posted Wednesday, Mar. 08, 2006 A diplomatic solution remains the preferred outcome of the key players in the Iran nuclear standoff, but a "diplomatic solution" is easier said than done. The Board of the International Atomic Energy Agency decided in Vienna Wednesday to forward to the UN Security Council a report from the UN nuclear watchdog that could not certify that Iran's nuclear program is strictly, as Tehran claims, for civilian energy purposes. The council could discuss the matter as early as next week and present Iran with an ultimatum to comply with IAEA demands that it suspend uranium enrichment activities. But IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei urged all parties to cool the rhetoric and apply themselves to the search for an agreement: On Tuesday, Vice President Dick Cheney threatened "meaningful consequences" for Iran's defiance, while Iran's ambassador to the IAEA warned that Iran was equally capable of inflicting "harm and pain" on the U.S. in retaliation. Although the Security Council has the power to impose sanctions on Iran, that option is strongly opposed by veto-wielders Russia and China, and won't be initially sought by the U.S. and its allies. Instead, the Security Council will likely issue some form of ultimatum for Iran to comply with IAEA demands within a given time frame — the U.S. is believed to want a 30-day deadline — followed by a further resolution threatening action after that. Still, the Bush Administration hopes the Iranians, confronted with the prospect of UN action, will buckle and accept the Western insistence that Iran cannot be permitted to enrich uranium on its own soil (because this technology and industrial capacity would allow it also to create the fissile fuel necessary for a nuclear weapon). If Tehran remains defiant, the U.S. and its allies have an uphill task of persuading a reluctant international community to impose sanctions, or else consider some form of military strike that risks provoking a catastrophic backlash without even necessarily guaranteeing the elimination of Iran's nuclear activities. But defiance carries a cost for Iran, too: Ultimately, the regime's survival may depend less on its ability to build a nuclear weapon than on its ability to create the jobs for which millions of Iranians are desperate, and a confrontation with the West will deprive Tehran of the foreign trade and investment essential to growing its economy. Diplomatic solutions, by nature, have to allow both sides to claim some sort of victory, and the best contender had looked to be a Russian proposal to enrich uranium for Iran's reactors on Russian soil. Iran was always iffy about that proposal, but when Russia sought to sweeten the deal by allowing for some limited enrichment for research purposes in Iran, the U.S. balked. (Permitting any enrichment activity would allow Iran to perfect its techniques, and also provide it with cover for procuring nuclear technology that could aid a bomb program.) Once it became clear that the U.S. wouldn't buy it, Moscow abandoned the plan: Russia's objective, after all, is to find a fix that averts a confrontation. The more the confrontation escalates, of course, the harder it will be to find a face-saving formula to allow Iran to back down. The regime in Tehran has wide popular support for its nuclear stand, and it is likely to offer to accept expanded IAEA monitoring of all its activities as a means of allaying Western fears. But right now the U.S. and its allies don't appear likely to accept anything short of a suspension of all enrichment-related activities. With both Tehran and the Western allies now committed to mutually exclusive positions, and the matter headed for the Security Council, the role of Russia and China becomes decisive. Moscow and Beijing are ultimately aligned neither with the West nor with Tehran, and their economic interests in Iran and a range of economic and diplomatic ties with the West give them an overwhelming incentive to find a formula acceptable to both sides. Copyright © Time Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 TIME.com: Iranian Bombshell? By ELAINE SHANNON Posted Sunday, Mar. 05, 2006 As the U.N. Security Council prepares to debate Iran's nuclear ambitions--perhaps as early as next week--Bush Administration officials are readying a new intelligence briefing for council members on Tehran's weapons programs. It will rely mainly on circumstantial evidence, much of it from documents found on a laptop purportedly purloined from an Iranian nuclear engineer and obtained by the CIA in 2004. U.S. officials insist the material is strong but concede they have no smoking gun. They do, however, have diagrams that they believe show components of a nuclear bomb. According to a Western diplomat familiar with the U.S. intel brief, a Farsi-language PowerPoint presentation on the laptop has "catchy graphics," including diagrams of a hollow metallic sphere 2 ft. in diameter and weighing about 440 lbs. Other documents show a sphere-shaped array of tiny detonators. No file specifically refers to a nuclear bomb, but U.S. officials say the design of the sphere--an outer shell studded with small chemical-explosive charges meant to detonate inward, which would squeeze an inner core of material into a critical mass--is akin to that of classic devices like Fat Man, the atom bomb dropped on Nagasaki during World War II. "Because of the size and weight and the power source going into it and height-of-burst requirements," says the diplomat, Western experts have concluded that the design "is only intended to contain a nuclear weapon. There's no other munition which would work." A report issued last week by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), says Iranian officials have dismissed a number of the laptop documents as fabricated. Intelligence of this kind helped secure the backing of Russia and China in last month's IAEA vote to refer Iran to the Security Council. Western officials hope the new briefing will win council support for further action; most of them see no viable alternative to U.N. efforts to try to gain Iran's compliance. As a Western diplomat puts it, "There's a military option--but not a military solution." ***************************************************************** 11 Guardian Unlimited: Security Council Considers Iran Proposals From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 10:46 PM AP Photo UNDK112 By NICK WADHAMS Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The five veto-holding members of the Security Council considered proposals on Friday to pressure Iran to resolve questions about its nuclear program, including demands that it abandon uranium enrichment and stop construction on a reactor, diplomats said. But Russia indicated it was uncomfortable with the Security Council taking any significant action at all, fearful that Iran could spurn negotiations entirely at a time when the West fears the Islamic state is determined to have nuclear weapons. Britain, France and the United States are seeking a tough statement aimed at pressuring Iran, while Russia wants the council to remain in the background. China is believed to side with Russia. The proposals were preliminary and almost certain to change in the final text that the full 15-nation council was expected to consider next week. The five permanent council members met again on the proposals Friday afternoon at the U.S. mission to the U.N. Iran insists its program is for peaceful purposes only, but the United States claims that it has been working to build a bomb for more than a decade. Britain and France are also skeptical of the Iranians, and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, says it has serious questions about Iran's program. On Wednesday, Britain and France circulated a list of proposals for the statement. A diplomat who had seen the list told The Associated Press that they included a demand that Iran halt construction on its heavy-water reactor and that Iran halt all uranium enrichment, which can be used to make nuclear arms. A diplomat in Vienna said the draft proposal asked IAEA chief Mohammed ElBaradei to report to the council within 14 days. Another proposal said that council action is necessary ``to reinforce the authority of the IAEA'' and persuade Iran to fulfill its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The document circulated to the permanent five also called for quick council action and said Elbaradei should report to the council ``in a short timeframe'' on Iran's progress toward answering the questions about its program, the diplomat said. According to the diplomat based at U.N. headquarters in New York, the early ideas did not include any threats against Iran. All the diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity because the permanent five had agreed to keep the proposals secret. ``It's more about noting with concern and expressing serious concern, calling for transparency, reminding all states, not just Iran, of their obligations,'' the diplomat said. ``There's no threat of anything and there's certainly no threat of measures or next steps.'' A lack of any threats is a clear effort to get Russia and China on board, but it's not clear they would even go that far. Russia, for example, has made clear it opposes the council taking any substantive action, because it fears that Iran could then make good on veiled threats to expel IAEA inspectors entirely. ``The Security Council should not take upon itself the leading role in determining the presence or absence of real - and not imaginary - risks of violations of the nuclear nonproliferation regime,'' Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. In an interview with state television broadcast Thursday, Lavrov proposed more talks outside the council on Iran's nuclear program. He said the talks should include Moscow, the United States, China, France, Germany, Britain and the IAEA. ``We all have to get together again to collectively find a new consensus regarding our strategy at the current stage,'' Lavrov said in the interview. Ambassador John Bolton and other senior American officials have suggested that if the Security Council does not take tough action, Washington might look elsewhere to punish Iran - possibly by rallying its allies to impose targeted sanctions. ``We are going to press for as vigorous a response in the council as we can get, and hope that that gets the Iranians' attention,'' Bolton said Thursday. ``This is a test for the council. And if the Iranians do not back off from their continued aggressive pursuit of nuclear weapons, we will have to make a decision of what the next step will be.'' Nonetheless, diplomats have indicated they will move slowly, focusing initially on a demands that Iran comply with the IAEA. The agency triggered council action by sending a Feb. 27 report on Iran's activities to the council. One of Iran's senior clerics warned the Security Council to be careful before making any further decisions on Iran's nuclear program. ``Our nation insists on its rights and will never back down. Talking to this nation with a threatening tone is unwise and stupid,'' cleric Ahmed Khatami said during Friday prayers in Tehran. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 12 Guardian Unlimited: France Urges Iran to Return to 'Reason' From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 9:01 AM PARIS (AP) - French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy urged Iran on Friday to return rapidly to ``reason'' as the standoff over its nuclear program moved to the U.N. Security Council. ``The hand is extended. Negotiations are possible,'' Douste-Blazy said on RTL radio. ``Iran must understand that it has no choice. It has the right to civilian nuclear energy, it does not have the right to something else.'' Tehran's tone was increasingly threatening Thursday as the hard-line Iranian president warned that the West would suffer more than his country if it tries to stop Iran's nuclear ambitions. ``France's job is to move forward with firmness ... so that Iran responds quickly, returns to reason, responds to the agency,'' Douste-Blazy said, referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency. As soon as the Iran file reaches the U.N. Security Council, the minister said, ``We must move quickly.'' He did not elaborate. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 13 Guardian Unlimited: Rice: Security Council Should Press Iran From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 9:31 PM AP Photo DCMC102 By ANNE GEARAN AP Diplomatic Writer SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) - There is no need for the U.N. Security Council to delay taking up the question of Iran's disputed nuclear program, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday as she all but dismissed a Russian proposal for more talks. Russia suggested additional discussions about Iran as the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council considered a statement Friday aimed at pressuring Tehran to clarify whether it is trying to build atomic weapons. Rice was skeptical about the Russian idea, saying it was time for tough action after three years of failed negotiations. ``I'm always happy to meet with my colleagues, but I think we know what we need to do now,'' Rice said. Aboard her plane en route to the weekend inauguration of Chile's first woman president, Rice said the United States, Russia and other permanent security council members already agreed last month that a security council review would be the next step. ``I think it is time,'' Rice said. ``I think what is ahead of us now is pretty clear and that is that the security council needs to be able to take this up.'' The security council has the power to impose economic or other sanctions on Iran, though there is little movement - or support - for doing so quickly. Russia has suggested a new round of talks involving Moscow, the United States, China, France, Germany, Britain and the International Atomic Energy Agency. ``We all have to get together again to collectively find a new consensus regarding our strategy at the current stage,'' Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview with Russian state television broadcast Thursday. Rice also signaled that she wants to soften a hardline stance against participation by other countries in a new world court. The Hague-based International Criminal Court was set up in 2002 to hunt down perpetrators of genocide and other crimes against humanity. The Bush administration and many conservatives in Congress have long opposed it, saying it might be used by hostile countries to prosecute U.S. troops. By law, nations that ratify the ICC treaty without also agreeing to an exemption for U.S. citizens can lose U.S. military aid. Twelve nations in Latin America have lost U.S. aid and training because of their ICC stance. Rice plans to attend Saturday's inauguration in Valparaiso of Chilean President-elect Michelle Bachelet, a pediatrician who is the first Latin American woman to be elected president without a powerful husband. Rice will hold a closely watched first meeting with Bolivian President Evo Morales, one of a string of leftist politicians to win recent democratic elections on the continent. The Bolivian president is expected to come to the meeting with the mild anti-American stance he campaigned on. He jokingly mispronounced Rice's first name before his election in January, calling her ``Condolencia,'' - Spanish for condolences - and made headlines with his remark that his election would be a nightmare for the United States. --- On the Net: State Department: http://www.state.gov Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 14 Guardian Unlimited: U.S.: Iran Dispute to Test Sec. Council From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 10:31 AM AP Photo NYSF106 By EDITH M. LEDERER Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The United States views Iran's disputed nuclear weapons program as a test for the U.N. Security Council that should be addressed urgently but in a cautious and deliberate manner, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said. The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council are scheduled to hold their second closed-door meeting Friday to discuss a proposed response to the Iranian nuclear crisis. The Americans hoped the statement could be adopted next week. ``We are going to press for as vigorous a response in the council as we can get, and hope that that gets the Iranians' attentions,'' Bolton said. ``This is a test for the council. And if the Iranians do not back off from their continued aggressive pursuit of nuclear weapons, we will have to make a decision of what the next step will be.'' Bolton and other senior U.S. officials suggested Thursday that if the Security Council does not take tough action, the United States might look elsewhere to punish Iran - possibly by rallying its allies to impose targeted sanctions. ``We're confronted with a threat here as Iran pursues not only nuclear weapons, but the capability through increasingly longer-range and more accurate ballistic missiles ... that is obviously very, very dangerous,'' he said. ``So we have a responsibility in the council to try and deal with that threat.'' Security Council members have indicated they will move slowly, focusing initially on a presidential statement that will likely ask Iran to comply with demands by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The agency triggered council action by sending a Feb. 27 report on Iran's activities to the council. Officials in Washington have raised the possibility of a Security Council resolution backed by the threat of military force that would demand Iran abandon uranium enrichment and answer outstanding questions about its nuclear program. The United States also wants the statement to include some condemnation of Iran. But Russia and China, which have closer ties to Iran, oppose sanctions on principle and fear that tough council action will lead Iran to abandon the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty for good and expel IAEA inspectors. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned after meeting U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Wednesday that having no inspectors to keep an eye on Iran's nuclear activities would be a serious mistake. Britain, also a proponent of tough action, has proposed asking International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed Elbaradei to report back in two weeks on Iran's compliance with IAEA resolutions. But Russia's Ambassador Andrey Denisov said this would not give Tehran enough time. Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said the council should respond quickly and urge Iran to meet the IAEA's requirements. ``It would demonstrate the Security Council's support for the agency,'' he told Assciated Press Television News. ``If the Iranians meet the requirements of the (IAEA) government board then there's no activity here, no need for the Security Council to be involved,'' he said. But if Iran does not meet the IAEA demands, officials in Washington have raised the possibility of a Security Council resolution backed by the threat of military force that would demand Iran abandon uranium enrichment and answer outstanding questions about its nuclear program. The United States also wants the statement to include some condemnation of Iran. At a Senate hearing on Thursday, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice suggested that the international community could impose visa restrictions and an asset freeze. She said that investors may take ``a second look at whether investments in Iran are really a good idea under the circumstances.'' French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy urged Iran on Friday to return rapidly to ``reason.'' ``The hand is extended. Negotiations are possible,'' Douste-Blazy said on RTL radio. ``Iran must understand that it has no choice. It has the right to civilian nuclear energy, it does not have the right to something else.'' Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 15 Guardian Unlimited: Iran is only months from bomb technology, says Britain Simon Tisdall and Ian Traynor Friday March 10, 2006 The Guardian The west's confrontation with Iran over its nuclear activities intensified yesterday after Britain claimed that Tehran could acquire the technological capability to build a bomb by the end of the year. A day after the International Atomic Energy Agency referred the dispute to the United Nations security council, British officials also indicated that London would back Washington's efforts to impose a UN deadline of about 30 days for Iran's compliance with international demands. The five permanent members of the security council began consultations on an expected statement on Iran on Wednesday after Russian-led attempts to broker a compromise at the IAEA in Vienna failed. A deadline could be set as early as next week and would cover a period "of weeks, not months", officials said. A senior Foreign Office official said that while it could take Iran several years to build a serviceable nuclear weapon, it might gain the technical knowhow within months. "By the end of the year is a ... realistic period," said the official. "It would be really damaging to regional security if Iran even acquired the technology to enable it to develop a nuclear weapon." Until now, European diplomats have referred to a period of five to 10 years during which Iran might potentially build a bomb, while conceding that hard evidence is lacking. By publicly focusing on the level of Iran's technical capabilities, Britain may have shortened the timeframe for a peaceful resolution of the crisis. Iran denies it is seeking nuclear weapons. The IAEA concluded this week that its assurances were insufficient. Iran has 85 tonnes of uranium gas stockpiled for enrichment at its Isfahan facility, held under UN seals. American officials say this is enough for 10 bombs. Iran says it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges for enriching the gas at its Natanz underground complex by the end of the year. Western diplomats said any signs that Iran was moving the gas from Isfahan to Natanz would set alarms ringing. Since last month, the Iranians are reported to have been feeding uranium gas into a small rig of 20 centrifuges at Natanz. That can yield little useful fissile material, but plenty of knowhow for a later, more ambitious project, said a senior official close to the IAEA investigation. At the end of the Vienna talks this week, a statement by Britain and European negotiating partners said: "Indicators of a possible military dimension to Iran's programme continue to be a legitimate source of intense concern." Britain maintains that military action to destroy Iran's suspect facilities is not under discussion. But the Bush administration, backed by Israel, has refused to rule out the use of force. This week's Vienna breakdown has prompted angry recriminations. Faced with the threat of possible sanctions, Iran warned the United States on Wednesday that it could also inflict "harm and pain" in the dispute. Yesterday, Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, said at a congressional hearing in Washington: "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran, whose policies are directed at developing a Middle East that would be 180 degrees different than the [one] we would like to see developed." [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 16 IRNA: Supreme Leader lambasts US hue and cry over Iran's nuke plan - , March 9, IRNA Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei in a meeting with members of Experts Assembly Thursday morning briefed them on the facts about nuclear issue and two major reasons for the US continued hue and cry. Ayatollah Khamenei also said this (US hostility) has been going on at various occasions over the past 27 years. The Supreme Leader said that today, the Iranian people and officials resist any pressure and threat by relying upon the Almighty God. Ayatollah Khamenei added that by resorting to their wisdom and keeping up their unity, the Iranians are determined to continue their move to access advanced technologies, such as that of the nuclear energy. The Supreme Leader referred to the US pretext to continue psychological war against the Islamic ruling system and preventing Iran's scientific and technological progress as the basic reasons for US objection to the peaceful use of nuclear energy by the Iranian nation. "The Americans are well aware that due to the strategic depth of the late Imam Khomeini's spiritual influence and the highly attractive system of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the world of Islam, today in any election held in Islamic states, such as that in Iraq and Egypt, people will vote for Islamic groups. "Such facts make it almost impossible for them (enemies) to tolerate the Islamic system," added the Supreme Leader. Turning to the faith, consciousness, experience, growing progress, strongly organized domestic system and deep spiritual influence in the world of Islam as the principles of the authority of the Islamic system, Ayatollah Khamenei said that in practice the US confrontation with Iran manifests itself in continued psychological war with the Iranian ruling system and nation. "Given that a pretext is required for such a psychological war, today the US administrators have turned to the nuclear energy as an excuse. "On different occasions over the past 27 years, whenever the US pretext lost its effect for any reason, immediately it brought up another one, given its belief that continued psychological war with the Iranian nation is the best way to confront the Islamic system," added the Supreme Leader. Ayatollah Khamenei said that therefore, if the government and nation surrender their rights to access nuclear energy at this point, the game will not be over rather the US will find another excuse. The Supreme Leader pointed to Iran's continued cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on its nuclear program and noted that over the past two and a half years, the government has tried in every possible way to solve the issue. "However, the Europeans eventually told us that to gain their confidence we should suspend our entire nuclear activities. "In the world of today, scientific knowledge is the foundation of economic and political power, and for this reason the US attempts to prevent Iran's scientific progress," added Ayatollah Khamenei. The Supreme Leader said that according to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), all countries are entitled to access nuclear energy. Referring to the call of some Western states for official recognition of Iran's right to access nuclear technology, Ayatollah Khamenei said that recognizing an inalienable and legal right is a superficial, futile and senseless privilege, given that it has been officially recognized in international treaties. "Therefore, it does not need to be officially recognized by Europeans," concluded the Supreme Leader. ***************************************************************** 17 IRNA: Defense minister: Iran determined to use nuclear energy Khorramabad, Lorestan prov., March 9, IRNA Iran-Defense Minister-Nuclear Defense Minister Brigadier General Mostafa Mohammad Najjar said on Thursday that the Islamic Republic of Iran is determined to make use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes as its legitimate right. In an exclusive interview with IRNA, he said "Depriving the country of access to peaceful nuclear technology is like depriving the nation of its natural access to air, water and food." "We have announced times and again that peaceful use of nuclear technology is among our legitimate rights and we are to make use of it," he said. Iran favors as a world free from nuclear weapons to let humanity live in peace and tranquility, he said. Iran's nuclear dossier is a technical issue and therefore it should not be turned into to a political-security problem, pointed out the minister. The whole world knows that reporting Iran's nuclear dossier to the N Security Council would only discredit international organizations, he said. If any country intends to attack Iran, it should expect a fatal reply by the Iranian armed forces, he said. The Iranian armed forces are in full combat readiness and are to defend the country's territorial integrity with full power, concluded the minister. ***************************************************************** 18 AFP: Jack Straw still hopes diplomacy can solve Iran crisis - Fri Mar 10, 8:24 AM ET SALZBURG (AFP) - Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he still hopes for a diplomatic solution to the Iran" /> nuclear crisis, despite the escalation of the standoff this week. He was speaking on arrival at talks with his European Union" /> (EU) counterparts clouded by the Iran case, which was referred to the UN Security Council on Wednesday. "The purpose of sending the matter to the Security Council is in order to reinforce the authority of the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> (IAEA), he said, referring to the UN's nuclear watchdog. "We very much hope, although it's late in the day, that this matter can be (resolved) by diplomatic negotiations," he said, adding: "Let's take this thing one step at a time." The Europeans have spearheaded efforts to engage Tehran diplomatic over its nuclear plans, which the United States in particular suspects of providing cover for work to develop a nuclear weapon. But those efforts were suspended after Tehran resumed sensitive atomic activities in breach of a 2004 accord last year. Prolonged IAEA efforts failed to resolve the issue, and Tehran was referred to New York earlier this week. EU foreign policy Javier Solana meanwhile cautioned against escalating the diplomatic pressure on Iran too quickly -- and downplayed comments in which he had refused to rule out UN sanctions against Tehran. "I don't talk about sanctions," he told reporters. "Everything is on the table. Everything is open. I don't think this is the moment for that ... This is still the moment for the gradual approach. "Still there is some room for diplomacy. We hope that with that gradual approach we will have the possibility of helping the Iranians come back to the position that we can continue with negotiations," he added. In an interview with the Austrian daily Der Standard Solana had earlier refused to rule out sanctions. "I don't rule out sanctions, it depends on what kind of sanctions," he said. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 19 AFP: UN Security Council holds no fear for Iran - experts Fri Mar 10, 2:20 AM ET SEOUL (AFP) - The decision to refer Iran " /> Iranto the UN over its nuclear weapons ambitions is viewed with scepticism by experts who have followed North Korea " /> North Korea's more advanced nuclear threat. UN Security Council is expected to confront a defiant Iran next week, after months of fruitless talks with foreign ministers from Britain, France and Germany. The world body has the power to impose political and economic sanctions on Iran for violating the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT) by hiding much of its nuclear programme for two decades. It can even back those sanctions by military action if deemed necessary. "But in reality, the UN has proved to be a paper tiger in the past. You only have to look at North Korea," said Kim Tae-Woo, a nuclear policy specialist at the Korean Institute for Defense Analyses, affiliated to South Korea " /> South Korea's ministry of defense. Iran said last year that it would defy international pressure and forge ahead with uranium enrichment and pull out of the NPT if referred to the UN Security Council. North Korea took that step in January 2003 after kicking out inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) in December 2002. That same month North Korea removed IAEA seals and monitoring cameras from its main nuclear complex at Yongbyon, north of Pyongyang, and said it was reactivating its nuclear facilities, frozen under a 1994 accord with the United States. Experts say that Iran has been closely watching North Korea's path to nuclear confrontation with the outside world. In January, Iran removed IAEA seals and monitoring equipment from its nuclear facilities. "It looks like Tehran has taken a page out of Pyongyang's brinkmanship playbook," said Peter Beck, a Northeast Asia analyst for the International Crisis Group. One month after Pyongyang withdrew from the NPT, a step that Tehran has yet to take, the IAEA declared North Korea in violation of non-proliferation accords and referred the Stalinist state to the Security Council. A hopelessly split council, with Russia and China opposed to any sanctions against North Korea, expressed concern but took no action on what IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei described as the world's most dangerous non-proliferation issue. He later said the UN failure to take action had set "the worst precedent of all" to would-be nuclear proliferators, telling them there were no consequences for violations. In the absence of any sanctions, North Korea declared itself a nuclear power two years later. Experts, including the IAEA, believe Pyongyang has since manufactured some six nuclear bombs. With similar disunity among its members, prospects are bleak that the UN Security Council will show more backbone against Iran, said Beck. Washington, along with its European allies, favours a tough line on Tehran while Russia and China, with close economic and energy ties to Iran, oppose sanctions. "The major impediment to UN action on North Korea was opposition from Russia and China," he said. "We face a similar situation with Iran. "At least Russia and perhaps others are not ready to get tough with Iran yet. That is the fundamental stumbling block." Kim said that North Korea's defiance of the world community has been relatively cost free. It is now freely producing plutonium and making nuclear bombs while the Security Council members turn a blind eye. "Given these facts, the possibility is even slimmer for them to produce any resolution to impose sanctions on Iran," he said. He cited Iran's position as a key oil producer and its ability to take reprisals against countries by shutting of oil supplies. "The United Nations or any other international body has never taken any substantial steps to punish problem countries regarding nuclear proliferation," he said. "I am not expecting any significant steps from that quarter." Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 20 AFP: Key Security Council members discuss Iran's nuclear defiance - Fri Mar 10, 7:49 PM ET UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - The five veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council held another round of private talks on how to respond to Iran's nuclear defiance ahead of an expected meeting by the full 15-member council next week. The 90-minute talks brought together the envoys of Britain, China, France and Russia and the United States at the US mission to the United Nations " /> here. But the envoys remained tight-lipped on the substance of their discussions. "It was a good meeting," France's UN envoy Jean-Marc de La Sabliere would only say as he left the US mission with his British colleague, Emyr Jones Parry. "We talked about our objectives, how the Security Council can reinforce the role of the IAEA (the UN nuclear watchdog)," China's UN envoy Wang Guangya told reporters. Asked whether the five envoys discussed plans to set a 14-day deadline for Iran to halt all nuclear work that could be weapons-related, Wang replied: "No." Friday's session followed a first round for the five envoys Wednesday after receiving an assessment report on Iran's nuclear program from International Atomic Energy Agency " /> head Mohamed ELBaradei. They are trying to agree on a presidential statement that would contain a firm but graduated response to Iran's refusal to bow to IAEA demands that it halt uranium enrichment and allay suspicions it is hiding a covert nuclear weapons pogram. A draft text written by Britain and France and obtained by AFP in Vienna Friday, would "call upon Iran without delay: to re-establish full, sustained and verifiable suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing (for plutonium) activities." It would call on the IAEA to "report to the Council within 14 days on the implementation by Iran of the actions it has requested," but makes no mention of sanctions. In Washington, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> rejected a Russian call for international talks outside the world body, insisting that the Iranian crisis be handled by the Security Council, which has the power to impose punitive measures, including sanctions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier called for crisis talks with China, the European Union " /> and United States to reach international consensus on managing the nuclear standoff with Iran without taking action at the UN Security Council. He described the situation as "critical" in comments posted on the foreign ministry website. But he said: "This does not mean that now we must now all go to the Security Council and start demanding, threatening and carrying out threats." Russia, a key trading partner of Iran, is trying to broker a compromise for Iran to enrich uranium on Russian soil in order to give it nuclear fuel but keep it from getting bomb technology. Tehran insists that its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity and that it has the right under the Non-Proliferation Treaty to conduct uranium enrichment. Enriched uranium can yield fuel for nuclear power reactors but also, in a highly refined form, supply the explosive core of atom bombs. On Wednesday, ElBaradei, in an assessment report on Iran's program to the Council, cited concern that "uncertainties related to the scope and nature of Iran's nuclear program have not been clarified after three years of intensive agency verification". UN chief Kofi Annan " /> for his part Friday asserted that "the best solution is a negotiated one" and said he was prepared, if needed, to cut short his two-week African tour, beginning Saturday, to help. "The international community would want to see full Iranian compliance with its NPT and IAEA" obligations, Annan said. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 21 AFP: Rice says Iran case must go to Security Council Fri Mar 10, 2:30 PM ET SAN JUAN (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insisted that the Iran nuclear crisis must now go to the UN Security Council, rejecting a call for international talks outside the world body. While saying that more meetings of the main countries involved in the controversy were likely, Rice said: "I think what is ahead of us now is pretty clear and that is the Security Council." Speaking on a stopover in the Puerto Rico capital while heading for Chile, Rice said the main powers had agreed that if Iran did not respond to International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agencycalls for cooperation then its case should be referred to the UN Security Council. "I am always happy to meet with my colleagues but I think we know what we need to do now," Rice said. US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns earlier said the Security Council talks will be "early next week." Washington believes Iran's nuclear programme is hiding efforts to develop an atomic bomb. Tehran insists its aim is peaceful. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said earlier Friday that the five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany should meet for talks on Iran before the case went to the world body. Lavrov said that although the situation was critical, "this does not mean that now we must now all go to the Security Council and start demanding, threatening and carrying out threats." Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 22 AFP: West wants two-week deadline for Iran to stop nuclear fuel work Fri Mar 10, 4:26 PM ET VIENNA (AFP) - The United States and Europe want the UN Security Council to give Iran " /> a two-week deadline to halt nuclear work that could be weapons-related, according to a draft text for Council action obtained by AFP. The draft, which was written by European states on the Security Council, marks the beginning of the process by Council members to agree on a presidential statement in what would be its first action against Iran's nuclear program, diplomats told AFP. It does not mention sanctions, which diplomats said was never going to be the first Security Council measure, and expresses the "conviction that . . . a negotiated solution can be found that guarantees Iran's nuclear program is for peaceful purposes." US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> insisted Friday that the Iranian crisis must now go to the Security Council, rejecting a Russian call for international talks outside the world body. Russia, a key trading partner of Iran, is trying to broker a compromise for Iran to enrich uranium on Russian soil in order to give it nuclear fuel but keep it from getting bomb technology. Tehran however refuses to give up enriching uranium on its own. The draft says the Security Council should "call upon Iran without delay: to re-establish full, sustained and verifiable suspension of all enrichment related and reprocessing (for plutonium) activities." It says the Vienna-based UN watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency " /> should "report to the Council within 14 days on the implementation by Iran of the actions it has requested." The 15-member Council is to meet next week in New York in response to Iran's defiance of the Vienna-based IAEA's call to suspend work on uranium enrichment, which Tehran resumed in February after having halted it in October 2003 as a confidence-building measure to show it does not seek nuclear weapons. Enrichment makes fuel for nuclear power reactors but also, in highly refined form, the explosive core of atom bombs. On Wednesday, the IAEA sent an assessment report on Iran's program, which the West fears is hiding a covert drive for the bomb, to the Council. Unlike the IAEA, the Security Council has the authority to impose punitive measures such as sanctions. It is, however, expected first to issue a nonbinding presidential statement calling Iran to order. Titled "Draft elements for Security Council action on the Iranian nuclear program," the proposed text for the statement begins: "Security Council action is necessary to reinforce the authority of the IAEA." A Western diplomat said the United States, Britain and France were expecting to receive reactions to their draft from the Russians and Chinese. The five nations are the permanent Council members, and have veto powers. "We would want the Council to react rapidly, working closely to maintain a strong international consensus, and sharing views with partners," the draft said. The IAEA has also called on Iran to fully cooperate with its three-year investigation of Iran's nuclear work, in which questions remain about Iran's development of the nuclear fuel cycle as well as research, projects and documents that could be related to making nuclear weapons. The draft text calls on the Council to "express serious concern" about Iran's possession of a document on casting uranium metal into hemispheres as this part would be "suitable only for military purposes." The draft restates IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei's assertion in his report sent to the Council "that the IAEA is not in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran". Furthermore, it says the Council should "agree that an extensive period of confidence building is required from Iran." Confidence-building measures should include, according to the draft document, Iran's ceasing all nuclear fuel work, including making the centrifuges used in enrichment, and the converting of uranium ore into the uranium hexafluoride gas that is the feedstock used by centrifuges. The Council is also urged to tell Iran "to halt the construction of a (plutonium-producing) heavy water reactor" which Iran is building at Araq. Plutonium is also an atom bomb material. The Council should also call on Iran to ratify an Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) that would give the IAEA wider inspection powers. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 23 IRNA: Major cleric warns about using language of threat against Iran - Tehran, March 10, IRNA Iran-Friday Prayers Tehran's Substitute Friday Prayers Leader Hojatoleslam Ahmad Khatami said here speaking in a language of threat with a great nation such as Iranians is no less than stupidity. Speaking to Tehrani worshipers, Khatami, addressing the UN Security Council, said, "Do not use language of threat in talking with Iranians." United Nations Security Council is scheduled to discuss Iran's nuclear issue next week. Ahmad khatami added the Islamic Republic of Iran tried for two and a half years so that the conflict might be solved in a peaceful manner, but the IAEA Board of Governors finally asked the agency director general to refer Iran's dossier to the UN Security Council. Khatami said Iran's nuclear issue showed that the European Union, in spite of its conciliatory gesture was intimidated and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was unable to do its task. This situation basically hurt the political reputation of the EU, rather that of Iran, Khatami said. He went on to say, "In Iran's defense doctrine there is no place for nuclear weapons, a principle taken from Islam that teaches its followers not to deprive their enemies of water, and not to uproot their trees." "If Iran's nuclear issue ends today, our enemies will bring up other issues like human rights and fight against terrorism," he added. Ahmad Khatami told worshipers, "Our oil and gas resources will end in 30 years and nuclear energy is the future energy of humanity in all basic fields." ***************************************************************** 24 IRNA: President: Access to nuclear energy, right of whole nation Khorramabad, Lorestan prov, March 10, IRNA President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad here Thursday said that the enemies presume that the right to access nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and its pursuance is merely Ahmadinejad's concern. Speaking at the gathering of the provincial town of Selseleh, he added that access to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is the right of the whole nation. In response to the outcries of local people who shouted: "Access to peaceful nuclear energy is our inalienable right", the chief executive hoped that their voice will be heard by some leaders to avoid going through trouble to disrupt our nation's will. Turning to the fact that Iran's enemies are against the progress and advancement of the Iranian nation, he noted, "Our youth have managed to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes through their efforts and intellect. But the enemies intend to deny our nation its inalienable right by exerting political pressures and creating a poisonous atmosphere." The president said that to materialize social justice in the country, all the Iranian youth should equally have access to their required facilities. Ahmadinejad hoped that the decisions to be taken in the cabinet meeting scheduled to be held tonight about the difficulties facing the residents of Lorestan province will be satisfactory. Meanwhile, addressing the residents of another provincial town, Dolfan, the president said that he will defend the nation's right for access to peaceful nuclear energy. "Our enemies intend to deprive us of our nuclear rights by exerting political pressure on our country, but we will not yield," he added. ***************************************************************** 25 IRNA: India discusses Iran issue with Annan , March 10, IRNA Indian Minister of State for External Affairs Anand Sharma said India is in favor of a resolution on Iranian nuclear case through negotiations rather than punitive action. He said Iran's nuclear case needs to reform the world body and newly established Central Emergency Response Fund is among a wide range of international matters that came up during a meeting with the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan, the PTI report said here Friday. The minister told Annan that India has a strong case for permanent membership of the expanded Security council. Sharma said he is confident that New Delhi will occupy its rightful place on the powerful panel which decides the issues of peace and security. India is for wider United Nations reform to enable it to meet the challenges of the current century, he told reporters after the meeting last evening. Earlier Sharma announced a two million dollar contribution on behalf of India for the Central Emergency Response Fund. ***************************************************************** 26 Bush's Nuke Deal, Congress and Peace Voter Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 00:58:20 -0600 (CST) Dear Friend, I cant believe Bushs seemingly boundless capacity for hypocrisy. You may have heard that Bush just signed an unprecedented deal that would transfer nuclear technology to India, even though India has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has an outlaw nuclear arsenal. The world, and especially the Muslim world, has not forgotten why Bush said he invaded Iraqto stop the spread of nuclear weapons. Bushs double standardrewarding one government that actually has nuclear weapons while invading one that did not (Iraq) and threatening another (Iran)not only hinders nonproliferation efforts, it feeds the sense of profound unfairness that supplies recruits for terrorist organizations. Congress would still have to approve this deal by changing the existing law. That is why it is so crucial that Peace Actions Peace Voter Campaign gets your support. With your help we can make sure that this deal does not go through, and make sure that Congress starts representing the 65 percent of Americans who disapprove of the war in Iraq and the 72 percent of troops in Iraq who think that we should withdraw in 2006. As I told you yesterday, one of our members has provided a $30,000 challenge grant to encourage members to help us meet our goal. The campaign is off to a good start, but we still need your help to change the political climate on Capitol Hill for the better this coming November. If you have already given, I would like to, again, say thank you! If you have not yet had a chance to lend your support , please join me today and take advantage of the challenge matching grant. Kevin M Martin Executive Director Peace Action /*Your email ID. --*/ ***************************************************************** 27 [NYTr] The Nuclear Adventure: Invented by the USA Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:52:31 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Radio Havana Cuba Viewpoint - Mar 6, 2006 http://www.radiohc.cu The Nuclear Adventure: Invented by the United States With regards to atomic energy, military use preceded peaceful purposes. The United States was the pioneer. It advanced secretly, with no ethical continence and permission to find and use a decisive weapon. What they praised at the time has now become the target of their criticism and threats. These, they claim, are other days and other circumstances. Nuclear energy made its debut in the United States, exhibiting its horrific side: the atomic bomb, the most devastating invention ever. Knowing that Germany was working to develop one, Albert Einstein, the foremost scietist of all times, encouraged US President Franklin D. Roosevelt to build the bomb in 1939. Another academic, Robert Oppenheimer, produced it. Using discretional powers bestowed by a state of war, the American President did not even inform the Congress or his vice-president, Harry Truman who, without having heard of the matter, ordered that the bombs be dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The manufacturing of the first three atomic bombs, dubbed Trinity, Little Boy and Fat Man, was the most vast, complex and secret scientific task undertaken until that moment. General Leslei Groves was the general director of the project that took two years, three months and 16 days and, at today's prices, would have cost some 20 billion dollars. The complexity of the process in which dozens of research institutes, several universities and hundreds of firms gathering 150 thousand people began to work, called for the creation of installations to be used exclusively for the project. Los Alamos, a remote spot in New Mexico was chosen as the site and under strict surveillance, became virtually inaccessible. The finished artifact worked like an ordinary bomb, made of a four-ton steel structure. The atomic element was a cylinder that held 18 pounds of uranium divided in two semicircles which, brought together through a conventional explosion, created a entity far superior than its critical mass. In just millionths of seconds, it triggered a chain reaction that caused the explosion of the radioactive material. Once the test was made, the air force was ordered to plan the lauching. The operation was called Silver Platter and began with the transportation, by sea, of the bomb's components to the Island of Tinian, in the archipelago of the Mariana Islands. Paul Tibbets, who named the aircraft after his mother, Enola Gay, was chosen as pilot. The air convoy that flew to Hiroshima was made up by three fortified aircraft: a plane for weather reconnaissance, another carrying some of the scietists who made the artifact, and the third carried the four-ton bomb, Little Boy. 8:15 am on August 6th was the time and date. President Truman received the message on board the cruise ship, Augusta. And, though everyone knew a Japanese surrender was imminent long before the bombs were dropped, a destroyed Japan gave up August 10th and signed its capitulation on September 2nd. World War II had lasted six years and a day. The Cold War, conditioned by the nuclear era, began the very next day. * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 28 TIME.com: A Nuclear Deal By MATTHEW COOPER Posted Sunday, Mar. 05, 2006 President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh finalized a nuclear-technology agreement last week. Here's a look at the deal, which the two leaders hailed as a sign of cooperation between democracies but critics called a threat to global security. What's the deal? Since it tested its first nuclear weapon 32 years ago, India has been barred from importing nuclear technology, even for power plants that it needs for its exploding economy. Under the plan, India would open existing civilian nuclear reactors to international inspection, although military facilities would stay closed. In exchange, India could import technology to build reactors. What's the controversy? The plan defies decades of global norms that isolate countries that don't comply with the international community's nuclear standards. India never signed the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998. Critics say other nations will now want their own exceptions to the rules. U.S. officials argue that this plan is an improvement on the status quo; currently only six of 23 Indian reactors are open to inspection. What's in it for the U.S.? Diplomatic dĂ©tente: the deal removes a major political obstacle between the world's most powerful democracy and its largest. There are commercial motives too. India plans to build many reactors in the coming decades; the U.S. wants part of the business. Is it a done deal? The U.S. Congress still needs to okay the deal, and Bush is expected to have a big fight. But both sides want the deal so much, it's likely to pass. ***************************************************************** 29 Reuters: U.S. Found in Violation of Human Rights of Native Americans 10 Mar 2006 16:19:00 GMT Source: Oxfam - USA Website: http://www.oxfamamerica.org WESTERN SHOSHONE VICTORIOUS AT UNITED NATIONS: U.S. FOUND IN VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF NATIVE AMERICANS – URGED TO TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: MARCH 10, 2006 FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, CONTACT: HELEN DASILVA OXFAM AMERICA HDASILVA@OXFAMAMERICA.ORG 617-728-2409 (OFFICE) 617-331-2984 (CELL) GENEVA, SWITZERLAND – TODAY, IN A HISTORIC AND STRONGLY WORDED DECISION BY THE UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (CERD) THE UNITED STATES WAS URGED TO “FREEZE”, “DESIST” AND “STOP” ACTIONS BEING TAKEN OR THREATENED TO BE TAKEN AGAINST THE WESTERN SHOSHONE PEOPLES OF THE WESTERN SHOSHONE NATION. IN ITS DECISION, CERD STRESSED THE “NATURE AND URGENCY” OF THE SHOSHONE SITUATION INFORMING THE U.S. THAT IT GOES “WELL BEYOND” THE NORMAL REPORTING PROCESS AND WARRANTS IMMEDIATE ATTENTION UNDER THE COMMITTEE’S EARLY WARNING AND URGENT ACTION PROCEDURE. THIS MONUMENTAL ACTION CHALLENGES THE US GOVERNMENT’S ASSERTION OF FEDERAL OWNERSHIP OF NEARLY 90% OF WESTERN SHOSHONE LANDS. THE LAND BASE COVERS APPROXIMATELY 60 MILLION ACRES, STRETCHING ACROSS WHAT IS NOW REFERRED TO AS THE STATES OF NEVADA, IDAHO, UTAH AND CALIFORNIA. WESTERN SHOSHONE RIGHTS TO THE LAND - WHICH THEY CONTINUE TO USE, CARE FOR, AND OCCUPY TODAY - WERE RECOGNIZED BY THE UNITED STATES IN 1863 BY THE TREATY OF RUBY VALLEY. THE U.S. NOW CLAIMS THESE SAME LANDS AS “PUBLIC” OR FEDERAL LANDS THROUGH AN AGENCY PROCESS AND HAS DENIED WESTERN SHOSHONE FAIR ACCESS TO U.S. COURTS THROUGH THAT SAME PROCESS. THE LAND BASE HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO BE USED BY THE UNITED STATES FOR MILITARY TESTING, OPEN PIT CYANIDE HEAP LEACH GOLD MINING AND NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL PLANNING. THE U.S. HAS ENGAGED IN MILITARY STYLE SEIZURES OF SHOSHONE LIVESTOCK, TRESPASS FINES IN THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND ONGOING ARMED SURVEILLANCE OF WESTERN SHOSHONE WHO CONTINUE TO ASSERT THEIR ORIGINAL AND TREATY RIGHTS. BASED UPON THESE ACTIONS AND A DRAMATIC ESCALATION OF NEW ACTIONS THREATENING IRREPARABLE HARM TO WESTERN SHOSHONE AND THEIR ENVIRONMENT, LAST YEAR, WITH THE SUPPORT OF THE UNIV. OF ARIZONA INDIGENOUS LAW AND POLICY PROGRAM, THE WESTERN SHOSHONE FILED A RENEWED LEGAL ACTION AT THE UNITED NATIONS CERD. IN ADDITION TO EVIDENCE OF THE UNITED STATES’ CONDUCT, THE WESTERN SHOSHONE DELEGATION ALSO DELIVERED OVER 13,000 SIGNATURES FROM CITIZENS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SUPPORTING THE WESTERN SHOSHONE ACTION TO CERD. THIS PETITION WAS A RESULT OF A CAMPAIGN ORGANIZED BY THE RIGHTS-BASED DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION OXFAM AMERICA TO DEMONSTRATE THE WIDESPREAD CONCERN FOR THE WESTERN SHOSHONE PEOPLES TO THE UNITED NATIONS. CERD REJECTED THE U.S.’ ARGUMENT THAT THE SITUATION WAS NOT “NOVEL” AND THEREFORE SHOULD WAIT TO BE REVIEWED UNTIL THE U.S. SUBMITS ITS PERIODIC REPORT – PAST DUE SINCE 2003. THE COMMITTEE INFORMED THE U.S. THAT “[A]LTHOUGH THESE ARE INDEED LONG-STANDING ISSUES…THEY WARRANT IMMEDIATE AND EFFECTIVE ACTION… [AND] SHOULD BE DEALT WITH AS A MATTER OF PRIORITY.” THE UNITED STATES WAS “URGED TO PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE RIGHT TO HEALTH AND CULTURAL RIGHTS OF THE WESTERN SHOSHONE…WHICH MAY BE INFRINGED UPON BY ACTIVITIES THREATENING THEIR ENVIRONMENT AND/OR DISREGARDING THE SPIRITUAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE THEY GIVE TO THEIR ANCESTRAL LANDS.” CERD PRESENTED ITS DECISION TO THE WESTERN SHOSHONE THIS MORNING. THE DECISION DETAILS THE U.S.’ ACTIONS AGAINST THE WESTERN SHOSHONE AND CALLS UPON THE UNITED STATES TO IMMEDIATELY: • RESPECT AND PROTECT THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE WESTERN SHOSHONE PEOPLES; • INITIATE A DIALOGUE WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE WESTERN SHOSHONE PEOPLES IN ORDER TO FIND A SOLUTION ACCEPTABLE TO THEM, AND WHICH COMPLIES WITH THEIR RIGHTS; • ADOPT THE FOLLOWING MEASURES UNTIL A FINAL DECISION OR SETTLEMENT IS REACHED ON THE STATUS, USE AND OCCUPATION OF WESTERN SHOSHONE ANCESTRAL LANDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND THE U.S.’ OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CONVENTION; O FREEZE ALL EFFORTS TO PRIVATIZE WESTERN SHOSHONE ANCESTRAL LANDS FOR TRANSFER TO MULTINATIONAL EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES AND ENERGY DEVELOPERS; O DESIST FROM ALL ACTIVITIES PLANNED AND/OR CONDUCTED ON WESTERN SHOSHONE ANCESTRAL LANDS; O STOP IMPOSING GRAZING FEES, LIVESTOCK IMPOUNDMENTS, HUNTING, FISHING AND GATHERING RESTRICTIONS AND RESCIND ALL NOTICES ALREADY MADE. THE DECISION IS HISTORIC IN THAT IT IS THE FIRST TIME A UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE HAS ISSUED A FULL DECISION AGAINST THE U.S. IN RESPECT TO ITS HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL FEDERAL INDIAN LAW AND POLICY. THE DECISION EXPRESSED PARTICULAR CONCERN THAT THE U.S.’ BASIS FOR CLAIMING FEDERAL TITLE TO WESTERN SHOSHONE LAND RESTS ON A THEORY OF “GRADUAL ENCROACHMENT” THROUGH A “COMPENSATION” PROCESS IN THE INDIAN CLAIMS COMMISSION. THE DECISION HIGHLIGHTS THAT THIS SAME PROCESS WAS FOUND BY THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO VIOLATE “INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS NORMS, PRINCIPLES AND STANDARDS THAT GOVERN DETERMINATION OF INDIGENOUS PROPERTY INTERESTS.” WHEN THE U.S. LAST APPEARED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE IN 2001, COMMITTEE MEMBERS EXPRESSED ALARM AND CONCERN THAT U.S. LAWS REGARDING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES CONTINUE TO BE BASED ON THE OUTDATED, COLONIAL ERA “DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY.” THE COMMITTEE GAVE THE U.S. A JULY 15, 2006 DEADLINE TO PROVIDE IT WITH INFORMATION ON THE ACTION IT HAD TAKEN. THE DECISION ISSUED TODAY DEMONSTRATES A SOLID COMMITMENT BY THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM TO MAKE THE WESTERN SHOSHONE’S STRUGGLE A PRIORITY. WHEREAS INDIGENOUS PEOPLES HAVE BEEN ACTIVE AT THE UNITED NATIONS FOR SEVERAL DECADES, THE DECISION TODAY ALSO BRINGS A BREATH OF HOPE TO INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE U.S. AND GLOBALLY WHERE THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF U.S. POLICY AND INFLUENCE REACH. IN ITS DECISION, THE COMMITTEE DREW PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO ITS GENERAL RECOMMENDATION 23 (1997) ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, IN PARTICULAR THEIR RIGHT TO OWN, DEVELOP, CONTROL AND USE THEIR COMMUNAL LANDS, TERRITORIES AND RESOURCES. ### COMMENTS FROM WESTERN SHOSHONE DELEGATION TO UNITED NATIONS (MARCH 10, 2006): “WE HAVE RIGHTS TO PROTECT OUR HOMELANDS AND STOP THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR LAND, WATER, AND AIR BY THE ABUSES OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT AND THE MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS. THE SITUATION IS OUTRAGEOUS AND WE’RE GLAD THE UNITED NATIONS COMMITTEE AGREES WITH US. OUR PEOPLE HAVE SUFFERED MORE NUCLEAR TESTING THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD AND THEY’RE CONTINUING UNDERGROUND TESTING DESPITE OUR PROTESTS. YUCCA MOUNTAIN IS BEING HOLLOWED OUT IN ORDER TO STORE NUCLEAR WASTE. WE CANNOT STAND FOR IT – THIS EARTH, THE AIR, THE WATER ARE SACRED. PEOPLE OF ALL RACES MUST STOP THIS INSANITY NOW IN ORDER TO SECURE A SAFE FUTURE FOR ALL.” JOE KENNEDY, WESTERN SHOSHONE. “THE WESTERN SHOSHONE NATION IS VERY THANKFUL TO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR THEIR DECISION AFFIRMING U.S. DISCRIMINATION AND DESTRUCTIVE POLICIES DO NOT GO ON UNACCOUNTED FOR. TRUTH IS WHAT IT IS – THAT CAN NEVER CHANGE. WE PRAY FOR THE HEALING OF OUR PEOPLES, THE LAND AND THE HARASSMENT AND DESTRUCTION TO STOP. WHILE OTHERS ARE ALLOWED THE FREEDOM OF RELIGION, WE ARE KEPT FROM THE VERY SAME RIGHT. THE NEWE (PEOPLE) USE THIS ANCESTRAL LAND FOR SACRED CEREMONIES. THE FEDERAL AGENCIES PREVENT OUR ACCESS TO SOME OF THESE IMPORTANT AREAS. OUR ANCESTORS’ BURIALS ARE BEING DUG UP AND PLACED INTO LOCAL MUSEUMS’ BASEMENT STORAGE AREAS BECAUSE OF SURGE OF GOLD MINES AND NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENTS. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE TO OUR PEOPLE!” JUDY ROJO, WESTERN SHOSHONE. “THIS BATTLE HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BUT WE’VE SEEN A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE COMPANIES’ RUSH TO FINALIZE WHAT THEY CONSIDER A SETTLEMENT IN ORDER TO GET A HOLD OF OUR LANDS FOR ACTIVITIES THAT ARE CONTAMINATING OUR WATER AND OUR AIR. AGAIN, WE ARE VERY PLEASED THAT OUR RIGHTS ARE FINALLY BEING TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO POSITIVE ACTIONS BEING TAKEN BY THE U.S.” STEVEN BRADY, WESTERN SHOSHONE. “WE ARE SHOSHONE DELEGATES SPEAKING FOR A NATION THREATENED BY EXTINCTION. THE MINES ARE POLLUTING OUR WATERS, DESTROYING HOT SPRINGS AND EXPLODING SACRED MOUNTAINS—OUR BURIALS ALONG WITH THEM--ATTEMPTING TO ERASE OUR SIGNATURE ON THE LAND. WE ARE COERCED AND THREATENED BY MINING AND FEDERAL AGENCIES WHEN WE SEEK TO CONTINUE SPIRITUAL PRAYERS FOR TRADITIONAL FOOD OR MEDICINE ON SHOSHONE LAND. WE HAVE ENDURED MURDER OF OUR NEWE PEOPLE FOR CENTURIES, AS CHRONICLED IN MILITARY RECORDS, BUT NOW WE ARE ASKED TO ENDURE A MORE PAINFUL DEATH FROM THE U.S. GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES —A SEPARATION FROM LAND AND SPIRITUAL RENEWAL. WE THANK OUR PAST LEADERS FOR THEIR PERSISTENCE AND COURAGE AND THE CERD FOR THIS MONUMENTAL STEP” BERNICE LALO, WESTERN SHOSHONE. ***************************************************************** 30 Platts: California IOUs, consumer group press for shared generation costs San Francisco (Platts)--8Mar2006 Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, the Utility Reform Network and others released a joint proposal late Tuesday on shared costs for new generation similar to a SoCal Ed plan that drew intense heat in 2005. The proposal, filed with the California Public Utilities Commission, also calls for one or more entities to buy power on behalf of all "benefiting" customers in an IOU's service territory. Adopting this approach will help the state address its supply crunch, said SoCal Ed, PG&E, TURN and other proponents. In 2005, SoCal Ed recommended that the PUC allow SoCal Ed to buy power on behalf of all customers in its service territory. SoCal Ed withdrew the proposal after opponents said they did not want to share costs for contracts selected by SoCal Ed. A representative for The California Municipal Utilities Association said it has not taken a position on the new proposal, but that munis are opposed to paying for IOU generation projects. CMUA does not support any IOU proposal that "we are responsible for costs incurred by them" if munis do not benefit from the generation, said Bruce McLaughlin, attorney for CMUA. The joint proposal was filed as part of the PUC's proceeding examining procurement policies and long-term procurement plans. For more information, take a trial to Platts Electric Power Daily at http://electricpowerdaily.platts.com. Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 31 TomPaine.com: Drain America First Joseph E. Stiglitz March 10, 2006 Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is Professor of Economics at Columbia University and was Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to President Clinton and Chief Economist and Senior Vice President at the World Bank. One of the more surreal sessions at this years World Economic Forum in Davos had oil industry experts explaining how the melting of the polar ice capwhich is occurring faster than anyone anticipatedrepresents not only a problem, but also an opportunity: vast amounts of oil may now be accessible. Similarly, these experts concede that the fact that the United States has not signed the Law of the Sea, the international convention determining who has access to offshore oil and other maritime mineral rights, presents a risk of international conflict. But they also point to the upside: the oil industry, in its never-ending search for more reserves, need not beg Congress for the right to despoil Alaska. President George W. Bush has an uncanny ability not to see the big message. For years, it has become increasingly clear that much is amiss with his energy policy. Scripted by the oil industry, even members of his own party referred to an earlier energy bill as one that left no lobbyist behind. While praising the virtues of the free market, Bush has been only too willing to give huge handouts to the energy industry, even as the country faces soaring deficits. There is a market failure when it comes to energy, but government intervention should run in precisely the opposite direction from what the Bush administration has proposed. The fact that Americans do not pay the full price for the pollutionespecially enormous contributions to greenhouse gasesthat results from their profligate energy use means that energy is under-priced, in turn sustaining excessive consumption. The government needs to encourage conservation, and intervening in the price systemnamely, through taxes on energyis an efficient way to do it. But, rather than encouraging conservation, Bush has pursued a policy of drain America first, leaving America more dependent on external oil in the future. Never mind that high demand drives up oil prices, creating a windfall for many in the Middle East who are not among Americas friends. Now, more than four years after the terrorist attacks of September 2001, Bush appears to have finally woken up to the reality of Americas increasing dependence; with soaring oil prices, it was hard for him not to note the consequences. But, again, his administrations faltering moves will almost surely make matters worse in the immediate future. Bush still refuses to do anything about conservation, and he has put very little money behind his continuing prayer than technology will save us. What, then, to make of Bushs recent declaration of a commitment to make America 75% free of dependence on Middle East oil within 25 years? For investors, the message is clear: do not invest more in developing reserves in the Middle East, which is by far the lowest-cost source of oil in the world. But without new investment in developing Middle East reserves, unbridled growth of energy consumption in the U.S., China and elsewhere implies that demand will outpace supply. If that were not enough, Bushs threat of sanctions against Iran poses the risks of interruptions of supplies from one of the worlds largest producers. With world oil production close to full capacity and prices already more than double their pre-Iraq War level, this portends still higher prices, and still higher profits for the oil industrythe only clear winner in Bushs Middle East policy. To be sure, one shouldnt begrudge Bush for having at last recognized that there is a problem. But, as always, a closer look at what he is proposing suggests another sleight of hand by his administration. Aside from refusing to recognize the importance of global warming, encourage conservation, or devote enough funds to research to make a real difference, Bushs grandiose promise of a reduction of dependence on Middle East oil means less than it appears. With only 20 percent of US oil coming from the Middle East, his goal could be achieved by a modest shift of sourcing elsewhere. But surely, one would think, the Bush administration must realize that oil trades on a global market. Even if America were 100 percent independent of Middle East oil, a reduction in supply of Middle East oil could have devastating effects on the world priceand on the American economy. As is too often the case with the Bush administration, there is no flattering explanation of official policy. Is Bush playing politics by pandering to anti-Arab and anti-Iranian sentiment in America? Or is this just another example of incompetence and muddle? From what we have seen over the past five years, the correct answer probably contains more than a little bad faith and sheer ineptitude. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2006. TomPaine.com.] [ /] [ /] ***************************************************************** 32 AFP: US-India nuclear deal to spur 100 billion dollars in energy ventures Fri Mar 10, 2:09 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - A landmark US deal extending civilian nuclear technology to India could open up 100 billion dollars in business ventures for Americans in the Indian energy sector, a top US business lobby group said. US President George W. Bush " /> and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh clinched the deal in New Delhi last week that still required mandatory US Congress approval for implementation. It gives India access to long-denied civilian nuclear technology in return for placing a majority of its nuclear reactors under international inspection. "This agreement could provide the US business community with 100 billion dollars worth of new opportunities in India in the energy sector alone," said Dan Christman, the US Chamber of Commerce's senior vice president of international affairs. It would also spur energy-starved India's economic reforms and open markets to US investment in key areas from IT and telecom to pharmaceuticals and insurance, he said as Congress mulled legislative action necessary to clear the deal. The Bush administration has proposed to Congress that an India-specific amendment be made to the US Atomic Energy Act, which currently prohibits nuclear sales to states which are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. India is currently barred under US and international law from acquiring foreign nuclear technology because it refused to sign the NPT and developed nuclear weapons. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> "gave to the congressional leadership this week in the meetings she had, some ideas for how this legislation could be written," a senior State Department official said Friday. "We have to respect the prerogatives of Congress but we are suggesting India-specific amendments to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954," Nicholas Burns, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, told reporters. "It's a waiver authority ... We are not seeking relief from US law for any country in the world except India and we don't anticipate putting any country forward. So it is India specific," Burns said after briefing the US Chamber of Commerce on the deal. The chamber, which represents more than three million American businesses and organizations, said it would make a "massive grassroots effort" to win congressional approval of the agreement. The deal would not only foster a stronger strategic bilateral partnership but also enhance nuclear non-proliferation efforts, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and open the door to more trade between the two large democracies, the chamber said. "We're confident that once Congress has all the facts, they will strongly endorse an agreement that will help cement a new and important strategic partnership between the United States and India," Christman said. "We're going to ensure that Congress and the public get those facts and clearly understand the extraordinary benefits of stronger ties between our two great democracies," he said. The pact, which also must be approved by the 44-member Nuclear Suppliers Group, would end three decades of isolation under which India was denied help for its civilian energy program after it first tested a nuclear weapon and refused to sign the NPT. Bush faces a battle to get the accord through the US Congress where legislators are concerned that regimes like Iran " /> and North Korea " /> will cite it to pursue their own nuclear weapons ambitions. Under the deal, New Delhi will split its closely entwined civilian and military nuclear facilities and put 14 of 22 civilian nuclear reactors under international inspection by 2014. Critics have focused on a provision allowing India to declare fast breeder reactors out of reach of international inspectors. They "breed" more fuel than they use and could be employed to develop more nuclear weapons. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 33 AFP: India involved in illicit nuclear activities - US think tank - Fri Mar 10, 6:36 PM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - A US think tank questioned India's nuclear non-proliferation record, saying it had uncovered illicit Indian government nuclear procurement from Europe that leaked sensitive atomic technology. US President George W. Bush " /> has used India's so-called untarnished non-proliferation record as a basis for sealing a civilian nuclear deal with New Delhi last week. But the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), a private group in Washington, said in a report Friday that it "has uncovered a well-developed, active, and secret Indian program to outfit its uranium enrichment program and circumvent other countries export control efforts." Uranium enrichment is used as fuel for nuclear reactors but can -- in highly refined form -- be the fissile core of an atom bomb. "Indian procurement methods for its nuclear program leak sensitive nuclear technology," said the report, co-authored by ISIS President David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector. When asked by AFP from where the Indian government made the illegal procurements, Albright said, "Certainly from the supplier states from Europe and could be from other places too." He declined however to elaborate. "We sculptured that comment in the report very carefully," he said. US and Indian officials claim that New Delhi does not engage in illicit nuclear procurement and has an exemplary record of preventing nuclear secrets from falling into the wrong hands. The ISIS report said that under the direction of India's Department of Atomic Energy, the public firm Indian Rare Earths Ltd. of Mumbai procured sensitive materials and technology for a secret gas centrifuge uranium enrichment plant outside Mysore in southern India. Rarely acknowledged by the Indian government as a gas centrifuge plant, the plant is believed to provide enriched uranium for civil research reactors, perhaps nuclear weapons, and a fledging naval reactor program, ISIS said. "Public information about India's procurement for (the plant) is also shrouded in secrecy," according to the report. On foreign procurement by Indian Rare Earth, ISIS said the firm, and trading companies procuring on its behalf, did not reveal that "the end user is an unsafeguarded uranium enrichment plant." Its "methods allow a supplier to easily avoid knowing the true end use of an item and thus the supplier escapes responsibility for providing a dual-use item to a gas centrifuge plant," the report said. Ironically, it said, India's gas centrifuge program was procured through individuals who also played key roles in the illicit nuclear trading network led by notorious Pakistani nuclear scientist A. Q. Khan. "We don't see India like Pakistan but they are not like Japan neither," Albright told AFP. "There are some serious issues that India has to wrestle with and certain things it has to change," he added. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 34 AFP: US rejects Russia's proposal for crisis talks on Iran - Fri Mar 10, 11:58 AM ET WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States rejected a Russian proposal for international crisis talks ahead of any UN Security Council action to resolve the Iranian nuclear impasse. "The next talks are going to be at the Security Council early next week," US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told reporters when asked about Moscow's call for crisis talks with China, the European Union " /> and United States to reach a consensus on managing the standoff over Iran " /> 's nuclear ambitions without taking action at the council. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov had said that although the situation was critical, "this does not mean that now we must now all go to the Security Council and start demanding, threatening and carrying out threats." "This just means that now everyone must get together and collectively sort out a new consensus on what our strategy will be at the current time," Lavrov said, addind that Russia, leading EU countries, and China were ready for such a meeting. "I am sure that the US will also take part." But Burns said Iran had defied a deal between the United States, Russia and several others in the international community that gave Tehran a 30-day grace period for diplomacy before the world body decides what measures, if any, to take. "So early next we begin discussions in the Security Council," he said, adding that "it will shine a very bright spotlight on Iran. "We will ask Iran to suspend its nuclear program and return to negotiations and should Iran not do that, the Security Council, we believe, should take a series of graduated steps designed to increase the pressure on the Iranian regime," Burns said. Washington, along with its European allies, suspects Iran is hiding a nuclear weapons program and favors a tough line while Russia and China, which have close economic and energy ties with Tehran, are cool to sanctions. Iran maintains its nuclear program is solely for generating electricity. Envoys of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- the five veto-wielding, permanent members of the council -- discussed the issue Wednesday and were to revisit it Friday ahead of a meeting by the full council next week. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 35 DN!: Tony Benn on How Britain Secretly Helped Israel Build its Nuclear Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:01:49 -0500 DEMOCRACY NOW! DAILY EMAIL DIGEST March 10, 2006 = = = = = = = = = * Celebrating 10 Years of Democracy Now! * Democracy Now! and WBAI cordially invite you to An Evening of Conversation with Harry Belafonte on President Bush, war, race, and Hollywood, with Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez and WBAI's Bernard White marking the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq and the 10th anniversary of Democracy Now! Saturday, March 18, 2006 The Great Hall at Cooper Union East 7th Street at Third Avenue New York City Pre-event reception: 6-7 p.m. A special gathering with Harry Belafonte and Amy Goodman. Hors d'oeuvres & Refreshments served Ticket price (includes admission to main event): $100 Main Event: 7 p.m. Ticket price: $25 Space is limited. Purchase your tickets today at http://www.democracynow.org/belafonte.shtml = = = = = = = = = TODAY'S DEMOCRACY NOW!: * Former Labour MP Tony Benn on how Britain Secretly Helped Israel Build Its Nuclear Arsenal * We have an extended conversation with Tony Benn, one of Britainčs most distinguished politicians and the longest serving MP in the history of the Labour party. Benn discusses the new revelations the British government helped Israel build the atom bomb. Benn also speaks about U.S. and U.K. relations, extraordinary rendition, Guantanamo Bay, torture, religion, and the state of the media. Listen/Watch/Read http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/10/1451237 * The Next Gulf: London, Washington & the Oil Conflict in Nigeria * In recent months, the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta ­ MEND ­ has intensified its conflict with the Nigerian government and its largest commercial partner, the oil giant Shell. Government forces have bombarded villages and oil rigs in its attacks on MENDčs ethnic Ijaw rebels. We speak with James Marriot, author of łThe Next Gulf.Č Listen/Watch/Read http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/10/1451241 * Headlines for March 10, 2006 * - Dubai Firm Pulls Out of U.S. Port Deal - FBI Opposes Israeli Firm Buying Tech Firm w/ NSA Ties - 250 Doctors Condemn U.S. Treatment of Prisoners at Guantanamo - Civil Liberties Groups Seek Court to Shutdown NSA Spy Program - Ex-Justice Attorney: "Weak Justification" for Warrantless Spying - Pentagon Denies Report It Will Soon Close Abu Ghraib - Rumsfeld: Iraq Security Forces Will Deal With Civil War - Protester to Condoleeza Rice: "Blood Is On Your Hands" - Woman Fired Over Air America Bumper Sticker Listen/Watch/Read http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/10/1451232 = = = = = = = = = Democracy Now!'s daily news summaries are now available in Spanish: Read Friday, March 10, 2006: http://www.democracynow.org/ To subscribe to these "Titulares de Hoy" by email, send a blank message to: boletin-sub@list.democracynow.org = = = = = = = = = COMING UP ON DEMOCRACY NOW! Monday, March 13, 2006: TBA = = = = = = = = = * Amy Goodman in New York, NY: Fri, Mar 10 * TIME: 7:15 PM 2006 IBS National College Radio Convention Hotel Pennsylvania 6th Fl. Conference Suite Area * Amy Goodman in New York, NY: Sat, Mar 11 * TIME: 2 PM The Left Forum Cooper Union * Celebrating 10 Years of Democracy Now! * Democracy Now! and WBAI cordially invite you to An Evening of Conversation with Harry Belafonte on President Bush, war, race, and Hollywood, with Amy Goodman, Juan Gonzalez and WBAI's Bernard White marking the 3rd anniversary of the invasion of Iraq and the 10th anniversary of Democracy Now! Saturday, March 18, 2006 The Great Hall at Cooper Union East 7th Street at Third Avenue New York City Pre-event reception: 6-7 p.m. A special gathering with Harry Belafonte and Amy Goodman. Hors d'oeuvres & Refreshments served Ticket price (includes admission to main event): $100 Main Event: 7 p.m. Ticket price: $25 Space is limited. Purchase your tickets today at http://www.democracynow.org/belafonte.shtml = = = = = = = = = * Democracy Now! is 10 Years Old * On February 19, 1996 the first Democracy Now! was broadcast out of the studios of WPFW in Washington. You can now listen to or download an MP3 of this historic broadcast at http://10years.democracynow.org. We'll be using the http://10years.democracynow.org site to periodically highlight past programs and offer free MP3s of these shows so check back often or subscribe to our new archives podcast. = = = = = = = = = * New stations broadcasting Democracy Now! Siouxland Community Media Ch. 12 in Sioux City, IA is now airing Democracy Now! at 7 p.m., M-F. WPSU 91.5 FM at Penn State University, University Park, PA is now airing Democracy Now! on Friday evenings at 7 p.m. DN also airs on WPSU translator stations at FM 90.1 Northern Pennsylvania, 92.1 Dubois, 92.3 Huntingdon, 95.1 Treasure Lake, 100.9 Bradford, 104.7 Clearfield and 106.7 Altoona. Freethought Radio on the internet at www.freethoughtradio.com is now airing Democracy Now! at 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., M-F 3CR Radio in Melbourne Australia airs segments from Democracy Now! on Fridays at 7 a.m. = = = = = = = = = NEW FEATURE: Democracy Now! now offers high-quality MPEG-4 video files for download through the BitTorrent protocol. To learn more, see http://www.democracynow.org/bittorrent_help.shtml or get started at http://ewheel.democracynow.org/ = = = = = = = = = Now available as a "podcast"! Get the Democracy Now! daily show automatically downloaded to your computer or portable audio player. Visit http://www.democracynow.org/podcast_help.shtml to see how. = = = = = = = = = * ATTENTION EDUCATORS * Are you a professor, teacher, student, community organizer or home educator who uses the Democracy Now! (DN!) program as a teaching tool? Do you use the on line DN! search engine for content about a specific subject? Do you show individual programs in classes or meetings? Do you incorporate the daily show into your curriculum or issue-based campaign? Have you found other creative ways to use DN! as an educational resource? We are gathering information to offer DN! as a resource to educational institutions and programs. Note we also offer copies of the show in several formats at a 50% discount to educators. Please share your experiences with us by writing to (please include your contact info): education@democracynow.org. = = = = = = = = = DOWNLOAD a DEMOCRACY NOW! FLYER at: http://images.democracynow.org/full-page-flyer.pdf Help promote DEMOCRACY NOW! by handing out fliers at events, such as film screenings and lectures. Don't leave home without it! For information on 'The Exception to the Rulers' and a complete schedule of tour cities, go to: http://democracynow.org/book/ = = = = = = = = = Please forward this to friends and family and encourage them to subscribe. = = = = = = = = = To unsubscribe: send a blank email digest-unsub@list.democracynow.org Check for detailed instructions in email below. = = = = = = = = = ABOUT DEMOCRACY NOW! Democracy Now! airs on over 350 radio and TV stations, including Pacifica, NPR, community, and college radio stations; on public access, PBS, satellite TV stations (DISH network: Free Speech TV ch. 9415 and Link TV ch. 9410; DIRECTV: Link TV ch. 375); on the World Radio Network's European Service and on the Community Broacasting Association of Australia service; as a "podcast", automatically downloaded to your computer or portable audio player; and streams live M-F at 8am EST at www.democracynow.org = = = = = = = = = Now real-time CLOSED CAPTIONED on TV! You can also view/listen/read all Democracy Now! shows online: http://www.democracynow.org To bring Democracy Now! to your community, go to: http://www.democracynow.org/bringDNtoyou.html = = = = = = = = = --~---------------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed as: news@energy-net.org To unsubscribe, send email to: digest-unsub-24240406@list.democracynow.org Or go to: http://list.democracynow.org/list/digest/?m=401&p=unsub&pre=l&e=##0&pw=8ouv5h3qu7 --~-- ***************************************************************** 36 IRNA: UK sold plutonium to Israel to develop nuclear weapons - report London, March 10, IRNA UK-Israel Nuclear Arms Britain not only secretly sold Israel heavy water but also supplied plutonium to help the Zionist regime to help develop nuclear weapons, a UK weekly has revealed. The plutonium, supplied by the UK's Atomic Energy Authority, was delivered so that Tel Aviv was able to put together a pair of crude nuclear bombs, just in case things did not go as planned in the 1967 Six-Day war against Arab nations, the New Statesman report. The fresh evidence comes after BBC television's Newsnight first reported last August that documents had come to light showing that Britain secretly shipped to Israel a surplus of 20 tonnes of heavy water in 1958 that was originally supplied by Norway. In December, the programme obtained fresh documents under the country's Freedom of Information Act that confirmed the UK government was a knowing party to the deal that was crucial to Israel's nuclear arms programme. But in its edition,, the New Statesman magazine reported that as well as heavy water, Britain also sold Israel a whole range of other exotic chemicals, including plutonium, uranium-235, beryllium and lithium-6, used in atom and even hydrogen bombs. The cover story, entitled, 'Britain's Dirty Secret,' suggested that a driving force behind the sales was no other than its representative at the International Atomic Energy Authority, Michael Israel Michaels. Michaels was said not only to have claimed that Zionist regime did not have a nuclear weapons programme but was behind overcoming objections from the foreign and defence ministries to export ten milligrams of plutonium to Israel in 1966. "It occurred to him that a friendly power might give Israel a sample of plutonium to speed up the process" of making nuclear weapons when it was thought that the Zionist regime was years away, the magazine said. The reason for the UK's crucial role was that at that time there was no US-Israel alliance and was even reported that Washington was opposed to nuclear proliferation. The New Stateman indicated that the British government could find itself in trouble at the IAEA for breaching the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, saying that it still has yet to find time to tell the UN watchdog about the plutonium and uranium sales. ***************************************************************** 37 Guardian Unlimited: Britain gave Israel plutonium, files show Richard Norton-Taylor Friday March 10, 2006 The Guardian Britain secretly supplied Israel with plutonium during the 1960s despite a warning from military intelligence that it could help the Israelis to develop a nuclear bomb, it was disclosed last night. The deal, made during Harold Wilson's Labour government, is revealed in classified documents released under the Freedom of Information Act and obtained by BBC2's Newsnight programme. The documents also show how Britain made hundreds of shipments to Israel of material which could have helped in its nuclear weapons programme, including compounds of uranium, lithium, beryllium and tritium, as well as heavy water. Israel asked Britain in 1966 to supply 10mg of plutonium. Israel would have required almost 5kg of plutonium to build an atomic bomb, but British defence intelligence officials warned that 10mg had "significant military value" and could enable the Jewish state to carry out important experimental work to speed up its nuclear weapons programme. Documents show that the decision to sell plutonium to Israel in 1966 was blocked by officials in both the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office, who said: "It is HMG's policy not to do anything which would assist Israel in the production of nuclear weapons." But the deal was forced through by a Jewish civil servant, Michael Michaels, in Tony Benn's Ministry of Technology, which was responsible for trade in nuclear material, according to Newsnight. Peter Kelly, who was British defence intelligence's expert on the Israeli nuclear weapons programme, knew Mr Michaels. He told Newsnight he believed Mr Michaels knew that Israel was trying to build an atomic bomb, but that he had dual loyalties to Britain and Israel. Mr Benn told the programme that civil servants in his department kept the deals secret from him and his predecessor, Frank Cousins. He had always suspected that civil servants were doing deals behind his back, but he never thought they would sell plutonium to Israel. He told Newsnight: "I'm not only surprised, I'm shocked. It never occurred to me they would authorise something so totally against the policy of the government. "Michaels lied to me, I learned by bitter experience that the nuclear industry lied to me again and again." He thought Wilson may not have known that Britain was helping Israel to get the bomb. Last year Newsnight showed that in the late 1950s Harold Macmillan's Conservative government provided Israel with 20 tonnes of heavy water to start up its Dimona reactor. Newsnight said it learned that Jack Straw had admitted to the Liberal Democrat leader, Sir Menzies Campbell, that Britain knew the heavy water was destined for Israel, and that in 1961, Macmillan even made a failed attempt to get it back. What do you think? Email your comments for publication to politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 38 Bellona: China raises stakes on renewable energy China tries to eliminate its energy crisis and stakes on renewable sources of energy. 2006-03-09 15:21 During the nearest decades the country intends to built and install numerous windmills to supply its cities and villages, ITAR TASS reported. Nowadays the total capacity of all the windmills stands for one million kW. China has a possibility to increase this capacity up to one billion kW. According to the plans of the Chinese State Committee on Development and Reforms, capacity of all the windmills in the country in three years will stand for 3.3 million kW, 4 million kW by 2010 and 30 million kW by 2020. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 39 Bellona: Sufficient growth of spending on renewable sources of energy International Energy Agency (IEA) encourages its member countries to increase financial spending on development of renewable energy sources. 2006-03-09 17:06 The spending of countries-members of IEA for research on renewable energy development is less than 8% of all the spending on all the research works in the energy sector, ITAR TASS reported. Executive director of IEA Claude Manille underlined a necessity of financial support of this sector of energy, presenting a report “Renewable sources of energy: priorities of researches and of development”. The Chief of the IEA reminded that in 1970’s during the first “oil crisis” there was s sufficient increase of financial support for renewable sources of energy development. The current situation requires the same actions, he added. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 40 Bellona: Bellona presents the way forward for CCS in Europe Over 50 participants from the EU institutions – including MEPs and several representatives of the Commission – the oil and gas industry, power companies, national governments, and journalists attended an open hearing on carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) in the European Parliament on 7 March 2006. 2006-03-10 14:17 . The event, co-organized by British Liberal Group Member of European Parliament (MEP) Diana Wallis and the Bellona Foundation, presented the case for CCS, addressed safety concerns, and provided a case study for kick-starting CCS in Europe. Wallis spoke of the importance of the EU’s leadership on climate change issues and the already notable effects of climate change in the Arctic. She noted that, while any solution envisaged has its own problems, CCS offered great opportunities to reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere. The case for CCS After listing the various storage options and presenting the already established demonstration projects, John Gale of the IEA Greenhouse Gas R Programme emphasized that CCS is capable of large-scale reductions in CO2 emissions over the next 20 to 50 years, without the need for major energy infrastructure changes. Bellona founder and President Frederic Hauge stressed that all available options to mitigate climate change must be implemented considering the disastrous consequences of global warming. The development of renewable energy is an important part of the solution, but the current difficulty is to produce enough energy from renewables to meet growing demand. In addition, since injecting CO2 into oil and gas reservoirs leads to enhanced oil and gas recovery, any infrastructure necessary for CCS which is not already in place would essentially be self-financing. Safety aspects Speaking on safety aspects of CO2 storage, Nick Riley of the UK Geological Survey made the point that “Whilst we delay deploying CCS by agonizing over the very low risk of possible leakage from geological storage, we continue to emit 100 percent of fossil fuel CO2 emissions to the sky. What is unsafe is to fail to deal with fossil fuel emissions effectively and quickly”. The geologist added that, in addition to contributing to climate change, CO2 emissions in the atmosphere lead to the acidification of the world’s oceans, which will likely result in a collapse of the ocean ecosystem. A case study for kick-starting CCS in Europe Bellona’s Marius Holm presented a case study for kick-starting CCS in Europe and stressed that large-scale CCS will not be deployed in Europe if left to market forces alone. There currently exists a willingness to pay for CO2 in the North Sea and the technical potential is huge. However, financial and legal barriers, and the lack of a CO2 value chain, are hindering the development of commercial-scale projects. Holm told the EU’s policy-makers and legislators that there is a necessity for potential investors in the technology to see a commercial, profit-making opportunity in CCS. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 41 Xinhua: Russia extends deal on nuclear fuel supplies to Bulgaria www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-03-10 18:51:16 SOFIA, March 10 (Xinhuanet) -- Russia has extended an agreement with Bulgaria's Kosloduy nuclear plant to continue supplying it with nuclear fuel until at least 2020, Bulgarian newspapers reported on Friday. An extension deal was signed earlier in the week in Moscow between Russia's nuclear fuel corporation TVEL and Kosloduy, the reports said. The agreement conforms with European standards for transport, processing, storage and consumption of fuel for nuclear generators, the reports said. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is ***************************************************************** 42 Xinhua: Bulgaria secures deal with Russia on nuclear fuel supply until 2020 www.xinhuanet.com www.chinaview.cn 2006-03-10 20:20:42 SOFIA, March 10 (Xinhuanet) -- Bulgaria has secured a deal with Russia on guaranteed nuclear fuel deliveries until 2020, the local newspaper PARI reported Friday. During a visit to Moscow early in the week, the CEO of Bulgaria's only Kozlodui nuclear power plant (NPP), Ivan Ivanov, signed a renewal contract with the Russian corporation TVEL for the supply of fresh nuclear fuel until 2020, the report said, citing Bulgaria's Energy Ministry. This extension is extremely important for Bulgaria, as it guarantees long-term safety in supplies, Economy and Energy Minister Rumen Ovcharov was quoted as saying. The agreement includes a protective mechanism to ensure supply amid rapid changes on the world market. For the first time, TVEL has offered to transport, process and store Kozlodui's spent nuclear fuel. The agreement conforms with European standards for transport, processing, storage and consumption of fuel for nuclear generators, according to the report. TVEL is the only fuel supplier of the Bulgarian NPP and a candidate bidding for the country's second NPP Belene project. Enditem Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 Daily Times: VIEW: Shed no nuclear tears Saturday, March 11, 2006 — Saleem H Ali Instead of trying to emulate and compete with India we should consider the way countries like Thailand have developed. One thing is quite clear, the nuclear deal is bad news for India and indeed a silver lining for Pakistan. The closure of the nuclear option will force the government to focus on alternative, renewable and more cost-effective energy strategies Celebration and consternation over India’s nuclear deal with America continues across the subcontinent. Yet, there has been little analysis of the wider repercussions for India or Pakistan of a civilian nuclear energy programme. Instead, the hawks and the doves have been quarrelling about whether commercial links or security concerns should take precedence in Indo-US relations. Pakistanis, who see themselves in perpetual misplaced competition with India, are not seeing the silver lining in this cloud. The reality is that there is absolutely no economic or environmental advantage to a civilian nuclear programme for either country. Unfortunately, the public has been led astray by protests over dam projects and fossil fuels being relegated to the margins due to concerns over supply or climate change. People are jumping on the nuclear bandwagon without much analysis of the issues. Let us first consider the options available to India for energy security. The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in Delhi estimates that the Indian government will have to spend over $700 billion on energy infrastructure to meet the energy needs of the country over the next 25 years. Of this investment we should consider which energy alternative is the most cost-effective as well as environmentally desirable for the country. Despite the Bush administration’s euphoria over nuclear energy the reality is that it remains among the most expensive forms of energy per kilowatt hour. Much of the technology transfer that the US plans for India would focus on developing fuel reprocessing technologies. This creates the illusion of reducing wastes and being cost effective. But reprocessing of nuclear fuel does not reduce fuel but can only reduce the amount of mined uranium. France, among the world’s leading nuclear energy users, spends about $1 billion per year on reprocessing plutonium fuel to avoid using more uranium. Plutonium fuel obtained by reprocessing (also called mixed-oxide fuel or MOX) is two to three times costlier than uranium fuel. Apart from the machismo of being a nuclear energy producer, increased investment in nuclear power makes little economic sense. By playing around with discount rates the nuclear industry can sometimes come up with ostensibly cost-effective comparisons with other fuels but there is little doubt that the construction cost of a nuclear power plant is inordinately higher than any other source. On average a modern nuclear power plant costs over $2 billion. In a recent study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the all-inclusive cost for a nuclear power plant operating over 40 years is 6.7 cents per kilowatt, which is almost twice the cost for natural gas at current prices. If non-renewable fuels are to be the focus of India’s energy policy, natural gas should certainly take precedence. Indeed, the more important feature of President Bush’s visit to South Asia was his reference to the Iran gas deal. Apart from helping improve relations between the nuclear neighbours, the gas deal would provide energy to India at an enormous discount over even world market rates for gas. According to the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Washington, the spot market prices for natural gas are $13 to $14 per million BTU (British Thermal Units). The Iranian gas delivered via pipeline through Pakistan would cost India around $3.5-$4 per million BTU. Another aspect that needs to be considered is that of nuclear waste. Even the most optimistic projections of “ultra-safe” nuclear energy reactors provide no solution for high-level nuclear wastes. The US has itself been embroiled in litigation with communities in Nevada over the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain for the past decade. While we should always keep the nuclear option open, it should be a last resort. Apart from natural gas, there is tremendous potential for wind and solar energy across South Asia that has hardly been explored. According to Winrock International, less than 10 percent of India’s estimated wind energy generation potential of 45,000 MW has been harnessed so far. Solar energy potential — an estimated 300 days per year of full solar exposure in many areas of the country — is enormous as well. Any perception of a favourable deal with India is automatically considered a negative in Pakistan without realising our divergent needs for energy and regional competencies. Instead of trying to emulate and compete with India we should consider the way countries of similar size and demographics such as Thailand have developed. One thing is quite clear, the nuclear deal is bad news for India and indeed a silver lining for Pakistan. The closure of nuclear option will force the government to focus on alternative, renewable and more cost-effective energy strategies. With funding from the Asian Development bank, Pakistan’s government has set a target of generating 10 percent of its electricity needs using renewable energy resources (approximately 2,700 MW) by 2015. The government has established an Alternative Energy Development Board (AEDB) and will launch a Renewable Energy Project that will invest in developing electricity sources for rural areas. However, this target is woefully inadequate. Based on comparative data from India, we have the potential for solar and wind energy that far exceeds this goal. We could also have several “invisible” power stations by simply reducing energy wastage in our delivery and operation system. If there should be any competition between India and Pakistan in this domain, it should be over how fast each can harness safe renewable energy sources rather than being each other’s nuclear nemesis. Dr Saleem H Ali teaches environmental planning at the University of Vermont. He can be reached via email at saleem@alum.mit.edu Daily Times - All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 44 UPI: U.K. sold Israel plutonium, files reveal United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 3/10/2006 8:28:00 AM -0500 LONDON, March 10 (UPI) -- Britain secretly sold Israel plutonium during the 1960s despite intelligence warnings that it could help the country develop a nuclear bomb, it has emerged. Classified files obtained by the BBC under the Freedom of Information Act detail how civil servants organized the deal with Tel Aviv, apparently without the knowledge of government ministers. Israel requested 10mg of plutonium in 1966, but was refused after British defense intelligence officials warned that such an amount had "significant military value" and could enable the Jewish state to speed up its nuclear weapons program. According to the documents, the request was rejected by officials in both the Ministry of Defense and the Foreign Office, who said it was government policy not to assist Israel in the production of nuclear weapons. But the deal was reportedly forced through in secret by a Jewish civil servant, Michael Michaels, in the Ministry of Technology, which oversaw trade in nuclear material. The documents also reveal Britain made hundreds of shipments to Israel of material which could have aided its bid for nuclear weapons, including compounds of uranium, lithium, beryllium and tritium, and heavy water. Peter Kelly, then British defense intelligence's expert on the Israeli nuclear weapons program, knew Michaels. He told the BBC in a program broadcast Thursday night that he believed Michaels knew that Israel was trying to build an atomic bomb, but had dual loyalties to Britain and Israel. Then Minister for Technology Tony Benn told the program that civil servants in his department kept the deals secret from him and his predecessor, Frank Cousins. Benn said he had always suspected that civil servants were doing secret deals but never imagined they would sell plutonium to Israel. "I'm not only surprised, I'm shocked," he said. "It never occurred to me they would authorize something so totally against the policy of the government." He said then Prime Minister Harold Wilson may not have known of Britain's involvement in the Israeli nuclear weapons program. © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 45 TMI at 27: The łBrown SideČ of Nuclear Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 15:10:19 -0800 Op-Ed Three Mile Island At 27: The łBrown SideČ of Nuclear Power by Eric Joseph Epstein* Remember the environmentalist who proclaimed the dawn of a new day as he drove around town in his electric powered automobile? He chirped about the cleanliness of this mode of transport until it was pointed out that the battery was charged by the coal burning power plant down the road... Well, hečs baaaaack! A little plumper and older but still addicted. This time hečs got a better deal: Nuclear power. Nuclear advocates argue that the problem of greenhouse gases can be solved by nuclear power plants which do not emit carbon dioxide - at the point of production. What they dončt tell you is what happens to the nuclear wonder pill before it is magically transformed into green penicillin. The nuclear-carbon shell game only works if you ignore the environmental cost on the łfront endČ of nuclear power production. From the moment uranium is mined - then milled, enriched, fabricated and transported - it releases large quantities of airborne pollutants. How much? Glad you asked. The enrichment of uranium at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion plant releases massive amounts of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) which are more damaging as a global warmer than carbon dioxide. Nuclear fuel production in America creates at least 800,000 pounds of CFCs annually. CFCs remain the primary agent for stratospheric ozone depletion. The industryčs official strategy to reduce CFC emissions was to close its Portsmouth, Ohio enrichment plant and eliminate łroughly half as many miles of leaky pipes.Č The Ohio fuel plant is closed, but is undergoing a massive site cleanup to recover uranium, treat and isolate contaminated water and sewage, and decontaminate and remove miles of radioactive tubes, pipes and equipment. The production of fuel for nuclear reactors is extremely energy intensive. Paducah, the łotherČ nuclear enrichment plant, requires the electrical output of two 1000-megawatt carbon dioxide producing coal-fired plants. That facility is currently undergoing a $191 million cleanup. With all the radioactive baggage associated with nuclear power production, remember that nuclear fuel is a nonrenewable energy source with an escalating cost. The price for uranium oxide, the fuel used in nuclear plants, rose every month in 2005 to $35.25 a pound - a 66% increase in 2005 alone! This was the same low-cost drug that sold for $7 a pound in 2001. Production of nuclear fuel creates more terrorist targets, more costs, more proliferation, more toxic waste (30 tons annually per site) less safety, less security and fewer resources for alternative energy development. Nuclear powerčs greenhouse gas łcureČ claims must be examined by tracing its fuel cycle. It is clear that the production of nuclear electricity is not łcleanČ, łgreenČ or łcarbon free. Č Nuclear energy is not the answer to Americačs energy addiction. Changing the color of the drug doesn't make the side effects any safer. ----- Mr. Epstein is the Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert , Inc., tmia.com, a safe-energy organization based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and founded in 1977, two years prior to the core meltdown at TMI-2. TMIA monitors Peach Bottom, Susquehanna, and Three Mile Island nuclear generating stations. ***************************************************************** 46 Guardian Unlimited: Mexico's Only Nuclear Plant Restarts From the Associated Press [UP] Friday March 10, 2006 2:16 AM VERACRUZ, Mexico (AP) - Mexico's only nuclear power plant has returned to full capacity after workers replaced a damaged electric cable that forced operators to temporarily shut down one reactor, an official says. The Laguna Verde plant resumed regular operations Wednesday night about 12 hours after its No. 2 reactor was sidelined for repair work, Luciano Constantino, spokesman for the Federal Electric Commission, said Wednesday. ``The report is that activity is normal and peaceful,'' Constantino said. The incident was the second to affect the federally owned plant, located about 50 miles northwest of Veracruz, in recent months. In late 2005, a small fire broke out on the roof of a building housing one of the two reactors. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 47 Miami Herald: Reactor back in operation - El Universal Online - Reactor back in operation MexicoŽs only nuclear plant returns to full capacity El Universal March 10, 2006 VERACRUZ.- MexicoŽs only nuclear power plant was operating at full capacity Thursday after workers replaced a damaged electric cable that forced the plant to temporarily shut down one of its two reactors the day before. The Laguna Verde plant resumed regular operations about 10 p.m. local time Wednesday night, said Luciano Constantino, spokesman for the Federal Electric Commission (CFE), which owns the plant in the city of Alto Lucero, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) northwest of the port city, Veracruz. Plant operators shut down the No. 2 reactor about 10 a.m. Wednesday after the cable providing its electricity was damaged. The No. 1 reactor was not affected and continued to operate. Officials called the incident "minor but unusual," saying neither workers nor residents of the nearby community needed to be evacuated, and that no damage had been done to the environment. "The report is that activity is normal and peaceful," Constantino said late Wednesday. The nongovernmental ecology group Greenpeace recently alleged that the most recent audit of the plant detected safety issues. Constantino strongly denied that assessment. "The plant has worked safely and efficiently for 15 years," he said. El Universal| Directorio| Contáctanos| Avisos Legales| Mapa de sitio © 2006 Copyright El Universal-El Universal Online, México. ***************************************************************** 48 Bellona: Construction of floating nuclear plant begins Construction of floating nuclear plant begins Stanislav Antipov, head of the state Rosenergoatom consortium that oversees Russian nuclear power plants, said Rosenergoatom has drafted a plan to build six or seven floating nuclear reactors to provide electricity to distant Arctic areas. 2006-03-10 13:19 The first such reactor mounted on a barge is expected to be launched in three years. Sevmash plant is under construction at the Sevmash plant in Arkhangelsk region, he added. In 2003 the estimated cost of the construction was $210m. The financing issue has not been solved yet. It is known that Rosenergoatom will take part in financing. Besides, there negotiations going on attracting some state financing as well. According to Rosatom, the units floating nuclear power plants will be stationed in the Russian Far East in Kamchatka and Chukotka. The Russian nuclear industry infrastructure will support the plants during from the beginning till the end of operation including dismantling. The personnel will be trained in Obninsk. The environmental NGOs in Arkhangelsk region in some way approved the construction of the floating nuclear power plant, said the chairman of the Environmental NGOs Association of Arkhangelsk region Sergey Fedorov to Regnum. So, the position of the Arkhangelsk NGOs is different from the majority of the Russian NGOs, which are against nuclear power. Fedorov says the construction of the nuclear plant is not needed in the region but pushed by the Basic Element Company, which intends to establish an aluminium plant with high energy demands in the region. According to Fedorov, all the waste of the dirty aluminium production will be stored in Arkhangelsk region and that is the main disadvantage. “No nuclear plant –no aluminium production…construction of the gas pipeline could improve the environment and reduce energy prices” concluded Sergey Fedorov. Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 49 NRC: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear FR Doc 06-2320 [Federal Register: March 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 47)] [Notices] [Page 12403-12404] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10mr06-143] Operations, Inc. Notice of Issuance of Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206 Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has issued a Director's Decision with regard to a petition dated October 11, 2005, filed by Mr. Jonathan M. Block hereinafter referred to as the ``Petitioner.'' The petition concerns the operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont Yankee). The petition requested that the NRC require the temporary emergency closure or de-rating of Vermont Yankee due to flooding conditions on October 8 and 9, 2005. As a basis for this request, the petitioner stated that evacuations would be impossible as a result of storm damage to existing evacuation routes for Vermont Yankee. The petition of October 11, 2005, raised immediate concerns regarding emergency evacuation planning for the States of Vermont and New Hampshire due to storm damage to existing evacuation routes through the city of Keene, town of Hinsdale, and other portions of New Hampshire. In a teleconference with the NRC, the Petitioner raised additional concerns regarding the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (DHS/FEMA) and the State of New Hampshire's plans for an evacuation if an event were to occur at Vermont Yankee simultaneously with a natural disaster. Specific concerns were raised regarding alternative assembly points and decontamination centers for people who would normally evacuate through potentially flooded areas. The Petitioner also requested assurance from the NRC that contingency evacuation plans are in place. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director's Decision to the Petitioner and to the licensee for comment on December 7, 2005 (Accession No. ML053140204). The NRC staff did not receive any comments on the proposed Director's Decision. The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has determined that, The Petitioner's emergency request of October 11, 2005, to shut down or de-rate Vermont Yankee was denied. The reasons for this decision are explained in the director's decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 (DD-06-02), the complete [[Page 12404]] text of which is available in ADAMS, and is available for inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and from the ADAMS Public Library component on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301- 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. A copy of the Director's Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission's regulations. As provided for by this regulation, the Director's Decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the Director's Decision in that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of March 2006. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. J.E. Dyer, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 06-2320 Filed 3-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 50 Herald News: Exelon says cobalt 60 never left plant [SuburbanChicagoNews.com] Braidwood site: Obama meets with regulatory group By Kim SmithSTAFF WRITER While U.S. Sen. Barack Obama was in Washington, D.C., on Thursday urging the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support legislation requiring nuclear companies to report radioactive leaks, Exelon officials said cobalt 60 has been found on its property as a result of a 2000 spill, but was never found outside the Braidwood plant. Obama's proposed law would mandate nuclear companies immediately release information after an accidental or unintentional leak of a radioactive substance. Obama's proposal is the result of Exelon's announcement of numerous spills over the years of the radioactive isotope known as tritium. Information about the spills was withheld by Exelon until December. "My constituents deserve to be notified immediately and comprehensively when these substances are released into the groundwater," said Obama, D-Illinois. "That's why I introduced a bill to require nuclear companies to inform not just the NRC, but also state and local officials. Obama called the measure a common-sense bill that is good for public safety, the public's right to know and, ultimately, the nuclear power industry. NRC Chairman Nils J. Diaz said that under the current rules the commission would have notified officials only if the releases were large enough to merit radiological protection measures. "More timely disclosure would prevent residents from feeling angry and misled," Obama said. Exelon officials have admitted on several occasions to making past mistakes. Exelon spokesman Neal Miller said a hand-written report titled "Illinois Department of Natural Resources Duty Officer Standard Operating Procedure," dated Nov. 9, 2000, detailed a spill of tritium and cobalt 60 into a ditch along Smiley Road, but the report was later proved incorrect. Details of the November 2000 document were reported in The Herald News earlier this week. "An IDNS report of tests results four days later states clearly that no cobalt 60 or other fission products were in that water," Miller said. Tritium is not a fission product. Miller said cobalt 60 was never found in groundwater or drinking water outside the plant. "A small amount of Cobalt 60 was found near the middle of the plant property in the top 6 inches of soil near the vacuum breaker valve that spilled water in 2000," Miller said. "The finding was reported to the NRC and IDNS and none of the cobalt 60 flowed off the property or entered the groundwater." Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen that reacts with oxygen to form water. Eli Port, a specialist in regulatory and environmental solutions hired by Exelon, said tritium is produced naturally in the upper atmosphere when cosmic rays strike atmospheric gases. Tritium is produced in commercial nuclear reactors. The U.S. EPA describes cobalt as a stable nonradioactive metal found in nature. Cobalt 60 is a radionuclide produced for commercial use and is produced as a byproduct of nuclear reactor operations. It can be released into the environment through leaks or spills from power plants. For health and safety reasons, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission only allows small amounts of cobalt 60 to be released into the air or poured down drains. Residents in the area have said they don't trust the results of drinking water tests conducted by Exelon and are awaiting the results of independent water tests to be conducted by Will County officials. - Reporter Kim Smith can be reached at (815) 729-6067 or via e-mail at ksmith@scn1.com.03/10/06 SuburbanChicagoNews.com — © Digital Chicago & Sun-Times ***************************************************************** 51 Herald News: Message to Exelon: Hurry up [SuburbanChicagoNews.com] County committee: Holds company to its free-water pledge in tritium case By Cindy Wojdyla CainStaff Writer JOLIET Will County Board members want Exelon Corp. to put a rush on its pledge to provide free water to Godley-area residents. The company made the pledge after it admitted that water laced with the radioactive isotope tritium leaked from its nuclear power plant onto adjacent property. Now county officials are concerned that area wells are contaminated. They're about to launch a well-testing program to determine the degree of contamination. On Thursday, the board's health committee members urged an Exelon representative to get the free water flowing fast. Scott Humbard, Exelon's manager of public affairs, said the company is seeking a water vendor and was coordinating its efforts with the health department. Committee Chairman Don Gould, R-Shorewood, said the company should bypass the health department to streamline its water distribution. Exelon said the water would come with no strings attached, Gould added. "Now it's been 10 days, and nothing's happened," he said. County board member John Anderson, D-Monee, agreed. "I think you ought to be knocking on doors with gallons of water just giving them to people," he told Humbard. Also Thursday, the executive committee placed two other tritium-related issues on the March 16 county board agenda. Next week the board will vote on whether to hire Theodore Hogan, of Hogan and Associates of Lemont, to oversee the well testing program. If the hiring is approved as expected, Hogan would be paid $200 an hour up to $30,000 for his work. The board will vote on a contract with a Northbrook lab to test the water, too. The testing could cost another $30,000 and would be done in phases with wells closest to the power plant being tested first. Also Thursday, the executive committee: Debated a road-striping contract approved by the full board last month that could be vetoed next week by County Executive Larry Walsh. Committee members said they wanted to reconsider the contract. But Assistant State's Attorney Mary Tatroe said the board can't reconsider items under the county executive form of government. The contract will either stand as is, or Walsh can veto it and the board can attempt an override of the veto. Those are the only two options, Tatroe said. Questioned Walsh's hiring of former county board member Lois Mayer as a grants researcher and writer. The issue was sent to the finance committee and insurance and personnel committees for further debate. - Reporter Cindy Wojdyla Cain may be reached at (815) 729-6044 or at ccain@scn1.com. 03/10/06 SuburbanChicagoNews.com — © Digital Chicago & Sun-Times ***************************************************************** 52 Platts: Senate budget panel halts Bush plan on BPA surplus revenue Seattle, Washington (Platts)--10Mar2006 The Senate Budget Committee on Thursday adopted language that blocks a Bush administration plan to force the Bonneville Power Administration to pay some of its surplus power revenues to the US Treasury. The provision in the Senate's Fiscal Year 2007 budget resolution clears the way for the Senate Energy Committee to approve legislation to halt the Bush plan, according to the office of Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon. Wyden and other congressmen from the region have been trying to force the administration to back down from its budget proposal that BPA turn over any annual surplus sales revenues above $500 million, claiming BPA rates could increase up to $1 billion over 10 years as a result. The White House had proposed that BPA pre-pay some of its debt ahead of a repayment schedule already agreed upon by BPA and the Treasury Department so it could receive authorization to borrow more money to fund new transmission. The Bush administration has claimed it has authority under the Administrative Procedures Act so that it could avoid having Congress vote on the measure. Authoring the language in the Senate budget resolution were Wyden, Democratic Sentor Patty Murray of Washington and Republican Sentor Mike Crapo of Idaho. BPA historically has used surplus power funds to lower electricity rates for its utility customers. "The administration's proposal to require BPA to make additional Treasury payments would be like requiring someone to pay more in loan fees just because they make more money," Wyden said in a statement. He called the plan "government loan sharking by the administration." For more information, take a trial to Platts Inside Energy at http://insideenergy.platts.com. Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 53 Platts: EC's energy paper leaves renewables, nuclear groups wanting more Brussels (Platts)--9Mar2006 Renewables and nuclear groups are disappointed with the European Commission's green paper on secure, competitive and sustainable energy for Europe, they said Thursday. "The EC missed a huge opportunity to create a new, sustainable and ambitious strategy tackling the energy challenges in front of us," said European Parliament member Mechtild Rothe. German socialist Rothe is also president of renewables group Eufores and was responsible for guiding the EC's draft law on energy efficiency through the EP. The EC's goals such as securing low carbon energy supplies and reducing import dependency "can only be achieved by a combined strategy of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources," she said. Nuclear trade body Foratom was pleased the paper acknowledged that all energy sources could contribute to ensuring enough generation capacity to meet demand. But it said the paper "failed to highlight the crucial contribution that nuclear energy makes--as a source of secure, affordable and environmentally friendly energy--toward meeting the European Union's energy goals." Nuclear accounts for about a third of European Union power generation. The EC said in its paper that although each member state was free to decide its energy mix, each should recognize that such decisions can impact on other members. For example, decisions to phase out nuclear energy could have "very significant consequences" in terms of the EU's dependence on imported fossil fuels and CO2 emissions. The annual strategic EU energy review proposed in the paper "can play a useful role in ensuring that all costs, advantages and drawbacks of nuclear power are identified for a well-informed, objective and transparent debate," said the EC. On renewables, the EC plans to develop a road map for renewables to present to the 2007 spring European Council of EU leaders. But although this is to look at targets beyond 2010, renewables groups are disappointed it does not mention the long term mandatory targets which they consider essential to give the long term stability for investors. The EC said simply that any future targets would have to be accompanied by a "cost-efficient, market-based regulatory framework" setting up an internal market for renewable energy, with the necessary economies of scale and efficient allocation of resources. The paper also suggests setting a target for the minimum level of secure, low carbon energy sources--including renewables, nuclear and clean coal--in Europe's energy mix. "I would be in favor of clear targets for secure, low carbon energies, for example more than 50% within 20 years," EC President Jose Manuel Barroso said Wednesday. ---Siobhan Hall, siobhan_hall@platts.com For more, request a free trial to Platts Renewable Energy Report at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 54 APP.COM: Senator to NRC brass: Get involved | Asbury Park Press Online Friday, March 10, 2006 But commissioners won't be at Oyster Creek hearings BY NICHOLAS CLUNN STAFF WRITER Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J., told the country's top nuclear regulator Thursday that the Oyster Creek Generating Station should receive additional scrutiny because it's the oldest commercial nuclear power plant in the nation. But Nils J. Diaz, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told Lautenberg that neither he nor the other four presidentially appointed commissioners could intercede with a safety review of the Lacey plant because they need to remain impartial. Specifically, Lautenberg asked the commissioners to hold and attend a special hearing near the 36-year-old plant. The hearing would center on a 20-year license renewal the NRC could grant to plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. A renewal would allow Oyster Creek to run until 2029, for a total of 60 years. Without it, the plant would close in 2009. Lautenberg also said the commissioners themselves should decide on the renewal. Right now, the NRC can renew plant licenses without any commissioner involvement. "If the NRC expects the citizens who live near Oyster Creek to accept your final ruling as the result of a fair and open process, you must not rush to judgment," Lautenberg said. "And you must allow everyone an opportunity to air their concerns." The senator made those comments, his toughest stance yet on the issue, during an NRC oversight hearing in Washington, D.C., held by a Senate subcommittee. Charles Walston, a spokesman for Lautenberg, said the senator was prompted, in part, by last month's five-day Asbury Park Press series, Relicensing Oyster Creek: Is It Worth It? Activists welcome support Lautenberg's push for a more thorough review may have made Jeffrey Brown's day. Brown, of Brick, a member of Grandmothers, Mothers and More for Energy Safety, a citizens' group opposed to a renewal, has repeatedly called on Lautenberg for help. "We welcome his support and we're glad that he's finally acting to bring more transparency to the NRC, which is an extremely opaque institution," Brown said. Lautenberg spoke about Oyster Creek during a 9:30 a.m. meeting of the Clean Air, Climate Change, and Nuclear Safety subcommittee. Lautenberg joined the subcommittee last year because New Jersey is home to four reactors, his spokesman said. The senator asked for a hearing near Oyster Creek so the public could pose questions to the commissioners and to the technical specialists who work for the NRC. Diaz told Lautenberg the NRC may hold a hearing near Oyster Creek. The hearing would allow an activist coalition to challenge AmerGen's aging-management plan, as laid out in its renewal application, before a special three-judge NRC panel. AmerGen has until Tuesday to appeal the panel's decision granting that hearing. Still, the commissioners would be excluded from this hearing on purpose, said Eliot B. Brenner, director of the NRC's public affairs office. The commissioners need to remain impartial because they hear appeals of decisions made by the panel and by NRC staff. Such an appeal involving Oyster Creek seems likely. A spokeswoman for the state Department of Environmental Protection on Thursday said that it will appeal a decision by the same three-judge panel, which did not grant the DEP a hearing on safety issues it raised. Brenner again cited the importance of impartiality when he explained why Diaz could not guarantee the commissioners would decide Oyster Creek's future. "The members of the commission don't want to be in the position of prejudging anything," Brenner said. Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 55 Concord Monitor Online: Power boost halted at nuclear power plant Concord, NH 03301 March 10, 2006 The Associated Press The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission said "yes," the state Public Service Board said "yes," but a 33-year-old nuclear plant part called a steam dryer may be saying "no." The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant last week cleared the final regulatory hurdles to increase its power output by 20 percent. But it was told to do so in 5 percent increments, pausing after each to take readings from new instruments designed to read stresses on the plant's steam lines. Officials at the plant, in Vermont's southeastern corner, said Wednesday that the planned 96-hour pause after the first 5 percent increment had been lengthened indefinitely while computer models are run to determine the possible effects of vibrations picked up by the steam dryer monitoring system. The steam dryer, which takes much of the moisture out of high pressure steam before it is sent to the plant's electrical turbines, has been the source of problems at four Midwestern nuclear plants of similar design to Vermont Yankee that have tried to boost their power output. Site Vice President Jay Thayer, the top official with plant owner Entergy Nuclear in Vermont, said the new measuring devices had picked up a noise from high-pressure steam blowing through a pipe. He likened it to the sound produced by a flute. But it wasn't music to the ears of Yankee engineers. Thayer said the acoustic vibration hit a limit set by Entergy, which is still 20 percent below the limit set by the NRC. Meanwhile Wednesday, a nuclear watchdog group filed an appeal with the Vermont Supreme Court saying the Public Service Board erred when it gave final approval for the power boost last week. The New England Coalition argues in court papers that a key condition contained in the March 2004 conditional approval it gave for the power boost had not been met. That condition called for the NRC to do an independent engineering analysis at the plant. In issuing its final approval last week, the board acknowledged that the NRC had not done exactly what it had asked, but said the federal agency's review was sufficient. Entergy spokesman Robert Williams also argued that the NRC review was thorough, and said the appeal was without merit. Concord Monitor Online, P.O. Box 1177, Concord NH 03302 Phone: 603-224-5301 ***************************************************************** 56 Brattleboro Reformer: VY power boost halted at 5 percent indefinitely The Associated Press Friday, March 10 BRATTLEBORO (AP) -- The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission said yes, the state Public Service Board said yes, but a 33-year-old nuclear plant part called a steam dryer may be saying no. The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant last week cleared the final regulatory hurdles to increase its power output by 20 percent. But it was told to do so in 5 percent increments, pausing after each to take readings from new instruments designed to read stresses on the plant's steam lines. Officials at the plant said Wednesday that the planned 96-hour pause after the first 5 percent increment had been lengthened indefinitely while computer models are run to determine the possible effects of vibrations picked up by the steam dryer monitoring system. The steam dryer, which takes much of the moisture out of high pressure steam before it is sent to the plant's electrical turbines, has been the source of problems at four Midwestern nuclear plants of similar design to Vermont Yankee that have tried to boost their power output. Site Vice President Jay Thayer, the top official with plant owner Entergy Nuclear in Vermont, said the new measuring devices had picked up a noise from high-pressure steam blowing through a pipe. He likened it to the sound produced by a flute. But it wasn't music to the ears of Yankee engineers. Thayer said the acoustic vibration hit a limit set by Entergy, which is still 20 percent below the limit set by the NRC. Meanwhile Wednesday, a nuclear watchdog group filed an appeal with the Vermont Supreme Court saying the Public Service Board erred when it gave final approval for the power boost last week. The New England Coalition argues in court papers that a key condition contained in the March 2004 conditional approval it gave for the power boost had not been met. That condition called for the NRC to do an independent engineering analysis at the plant. In issuing its final approval last week, the board acknowledged that the NRC had not done exactly what it had asked, but said the federal agency's review was sufficient. Entergy spokesman Robert Williams also argued that the NRC review was thorough, and said the appeal was without merit. Copyright © 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 57 cbs2chicago.com: County May Test About 300 Wells Near Nuclear Plant Mar 10, 2006 7:12 am US/Central (AP) BRAIDWOOD, Ill. Will County officials plan to test about 300 shallow residential wells near a nuclear power plant that has reported several leaks of radioactive tritium. Chicago-based Exelon recently disclosed that four leaks occurred at its Braidwood plant between 1996 and 2003. Will County prosecutors are investigating why the company didn't report the leaks sooner. A county board committee yesterday recommended hiring a former ComEd employee to oversee the well testing. Com-Ed is owned by Exelon. County officials say the testing would start in Reed township and then move to the village of Godley. Exelon has said the leaks do not pose a hazard to residential drinking water in the area. (© 2006 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material ***************************************************************** 58 Nigeria Limited: Nigerias Nuclear Programme On Course NAS Independentng.com Friday 10th, March, 2006 By Onche Odeh Science Reporter, Lagos Contrary to recent denials by the Federal Government, the Nigerian Academy of Science (NAS) says that the country is currently strategising for the take off of an effective nuclear programme in the nearest future. This has been the crux of arguments with reported claims by government officials indicating that the country was not considering a nuclear programme. NAS President, Professor Gabriel Ogunmola who confirmed the recent development in a telephone interview with Daily Independent emphasised that a nuclear programme in the country at this time did not amount to misplaced priority as imagined by the public. Ogunmola however confirmed that Nigeria was currently in the process of developing the nuclear technology that could boost the countrys energy sector in terms of power generation. If we do not begin to plan for such a programme now then when shall we? South Africa generates as much as 45, 000 mega watts of power through this means, why cant we do same in Nigeria? he said. According to the NAS president, enough resources and political will must be given to the intention to set-up a nuclear programme in the country for energy generation. He added that adequate training of personnel must commence immediately as the country prepares to brace up to the challenges of a nuclear programme. Speaking further, Ogunmola pointed out that nuclear technologies provide a wide range of opportunities that must be explored by Nigeria. On the inherent fears expressed on the use of nuclear technology for wrong purposes, the NAS president said: The same fears are those expressed about Genetically Modified organisms (GMOs). Yet it has not been scientifically proven that the GMOs cause any serious damage to humans after consumption, rather it has been found to be the key to the food problems of the world. He, however, disclosed that his knowledge of Nigerias proposed involvement in nuclear programme was solely for energy generation and not for any other reason. Ogunmola also said the country has agreed to abide by the rules guiding safe nuclear technology as well as the code of conduct as provided by the international regulatory agency for nuclear technologies. He however noted that NAS did not have to wait for government before it offered any advise to the public and the government on what was right, adding that its advise on this issue was relative to the public response and reports. Copyright© 2004. All Rights Reserved. Independent Newspapers Limited Block5, Plot 7D, Wempco Road, Ogba, P.M.B. 21777, Ikeja, Lagos State, Nigeria. www.independentng.com e-mail: info@independentng.com Designed By INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS LIMITED ***************************************************************** 59 Vermont Guardian: Vermonts nuclear crossroads: Where four major issues intersect By Timothy Nulty posted March 10, 2006 Vermont faces four major nuclear issues. Three are requests by Entergy to increase Vermont Yankees (VY) power output by 20 percent, extend VYs operations beyond 2012, and expand the spent-fuel storage capacity by using dry cask technology. The fourth issue is the adequacy of the fund that Entergy must maintain to pay for decommissioning the plant at the end of its life. At present, our regulatory structure is biased toward considering each issue independently. In fact, they are interrelated moving parts. Without a broad review of all the issues together, and the trade-offs between them, Vermont will miss important opportunities, and incur substantial costs. VY provides more than a third of all of Vermonts power at advantageous prices derived from the buy-back provisions of the contract with Entergy concluded by the Dean administration. This arrangement is one reason why Vermont has the lowest rates for power in all of New England. In addition, VY is a major economic player in its own right providing jobs, income, and taxes to the state as a whole and the southeast region in particular. Continuing this role for as long as possible under favorable terms and subject to stringent safety and environmental safeguards is an important matter for our state. Yet, continued supply under these terms faces serious threats: The buy-back contract lapses at the end of the current VY license in 2012. If VY is recertified, will the buy-back provisions be extended on current terms? If not, what happens to Vermonts power supply and the prices for acquiring it? The uprate will increase output by 20 percent, but may reduce the plants reliability, and Vermont will get very little of the benefit of the increased output, most of which will be sold out of state at market prices. But Vermont will be fully exposed to any problems arising from the uprate safety, environmental, or supply related. The Vermont Public Service Board (PSB) is not empowered to consider the safety issue but is fully aware of the other problems. In view of this, it granted Entergy a certificate of public good (CPG) for the uprate on condition that a rigorous independent engineering study be undertaken by the NRC specifically designed to assess the effect of the uprate on VY reliability. The NRC did conduct a study, which concluded that the uprate is safe. But the NRC study did not conform to the PSB request and did not address reliability directly. Entergy argues that the study provided enough incidental information on reliability to meet the boards intent. Others, equally expert, remain unconvinced. Therefore, the questions remain open as to whether the conditions of the boards CPG have been met (and, hence, whether the CPG is in effect), what effect the uprate will actually have on reliability; and whether the ratio of potential benefits to Vermont from the uprate exceed the potential risk to its power supply. If the answer to the more previous question is no, as this author is inclined to believe, what remedies are needed to protect Vermonts interests? VY stores its spent fuel in a water-cooled facility intended to be a temporary holding tank until the permanent national repository at Yucca Mountain was complete. The federal government was supposed to take possession of the waste and move it to Nevada. In fact, Yucca Mountain has been repeatedly delayed. No one can say for certain when or whether it will open. As a result, many temporary storage facilities around the country, including VYs, are running out of space. VY cannot proceed with either the uprate or an extension of its license without a solution to the storage problem. In the absence of a federal solution, Entergy is proposing to expand its own storage facility utilizing passive, dry cask technology that does not rely on water-cooling systems. This raises a major issue for Vermont. If there is no credible federal solution on the horizon, should Vermont create a second-best solution of its own for long-term storage of both new and existing spent fuel? The alternative is to live indefinitely with the existing, unsatisfactory temporary storage facility. Whining to the federal government is not a strategy for anything except ducking the issue and making lawyers rich. Building a reasonably secure permanent or semi-permanent facility is an unpleasant prospect, but we may have no choice. Perhaps, as part of any permission for either uprate or license renewal, Entergy should be required to build dry cask storage secure enough to be a backup alternative to Yucca Mountain, thus protecting Vermont from the possibility that the Nevada facility never opens. Such a facility would probably be more secure than Entergy currently plans. What is certain is that the existing water-cooled facility is not suitable for indefinite storage even for the spent fuel already in it, let alone new spent fuel. Failing to create alternatives will ultimately force closure of the plant. This would be the worst of both worlds. Failing to deal with the need for new, more secure storage will mean shutting VY down and storing the existing waste indefinitely in the existing water tank resulting in maximum damage to both the economy and the environment Currently the decommissioning fund is being gradually filled at a rate intended to produce enough money to shut down Vermont Yankee by 2012. But if the plants license is renewed, closure will be postponed. How will the rate at which the fund is filled be adjusted? If the plant fails before the new closure date (e.g., due to problems from the uprate) the flow of money into the fund will stop. It is not certain that the fund will be large enough at that time to pay for decommissioning, so who pays the difference? Obviously, it is in Entergys interest to minimize the amount of money they put into the decommissioning fund. Conversely, Vermonts interest is that the fund be large enough to pay for a rigorous definition of decommissioning tasks. These issues are hotly disputed, and their resolution will have consequences for the first three issues: license renewal, the uprate, and dry-cask storage. In short, all four issues raise major questions and each is intimately connected to the others and to the power supply and, hence, to the economic health of Vermont. The Public Service Board has been professional and deliberate in considering the issues that lie within its purview, but restrictions on its mandate and regulatory process inhibit the boards ability to take the broadest, strategic view of these issues. That is right and proper. The PSB is a regulatory body, not a legislative one. Like the courts, regulatory bodies should not pass fundamental laws. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has an even narrower role safety, in the strictest sense. It has neither the mandate nor the inclination to assess the effect of its decisions on the economy and environment of Vermont. Finally, the Douglas administration has even less authority or strategic vision than the two preceding bodies. Vermont needs to develop a complete strategy with respect to nuclear energy and the future of VY and its place in an overall electric power strategy. If it does not, the state, its citizens, workers, and businesses will pay a heavy price. Only the Legislature is institutionally, constitutionally, and politically equipped to consider all the issues and make the difficult but necessary tradeoffs. It is time for it to do so. Timothy Nulty of Burlington is an economist and a public member of the Vermont Nuclear State Advisory Panel. His term expires this year. | | 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 (toll-free) ©2005 Vermont Guardian | Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com This document can be located online: www.vermontguardian.com/commentary/032006/NuclearCrossroads.shtml ***************************************************************** 60 UPI: U.K. ministers ease pace on nuclear power United Press International - Energy - 3/10/2006 8:24:00 AM -0500 By HANNAH K. STRANGE UPI U.K. Correspondent LONDON, March 10 (UPI) -- The British government has moved to quell concerns it is fixated on a new generation of nuclear power stations as an answer to the country's looming energy gap. Amid intense debate over Britain's future energy sources, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks insisted Thursday that the ongoing energy review was not a "headlong rush into building new nuclear plants." Speaking in the wake of warnings from government advisers that the nuclear option should not be regarded as "an easy fix," Wicks said ministers accepted there was no "single solution" to the energy challenges that lay ahead. "The Energy Review is not about ... a headlong rush into building new nuclear plants," he told a Manchester meeting of safety, security and environmental regulators, environmental groups and nuclear power companies. "It is about hard evidence, not just on the potential of nuclear, but also of renewables, fossil fuels and greater energy efficiency. "The challenges are big and there'll be no easy or single solution. But I am certain of one thing -- robust scrutiny of safety, security and environmental impact would be the prerequisite of going down the road of building new nuclear power stations." His comments follow criticism of the nuclear option by the Sustainable Development Commission, a body that advises the government on environmental issues. The commission warned Monday that nuclear power was not the answer to securing Britain's energy supply or tackling climate change. It cautioned the government against viewing nuclear power as a quick fix, saying even doubling nuclear capacity would lead to only a small reduction in carbon emissions -- just 8 percent by 2035. The report concluded that the disadvantages of nuclear power -- such as the lack of solutions for long-term waste storage, safety issues and economics -- outweighed the advantages. Britain could meet its energy needs without nuclear power, it said. "With a combination of low carbon innovation strategy and an aggressive expansion of energy efficiency and renewables, the U.K. would become a leader in low-carbon technologies." Jonathon Porritt, chairman of the commission, said: "The government is going to have to stop looking for an easy fix to our climate change and energy crises -- there simply isn't one." With North Sea oil and gas stocks rapidly diminishing and many of Britain's existing coal and nuclear power stations to expire by 2020, some prefer building a new generation of plants to increasing reliance on imports from unstable regions of the world. But within the government there appears to be considerable disagreement about the potential of nuclear energy. Wicks' comments were somewhat out of step with those of Prime Minister Tony Blair, who told Parliament Wednesday Britain faced a "major challenge" in meeting its climate change targets and energy needs without nuclear energy "in the mix." Media reports have suggested Blair is convinced of the need to build a new generation of nuclear plants, leading to the widespread perception the review is little more than a smokescreen for a decision that has already been taken. However, the SDC report appears to have caused ministers appear to temper their enthusiasm, fearing the political consequences should opinion swing decisively against an option they have robustly promoted. Speaking after its publication, Conservative energy spokesman Alan Duncan said ministers should pay attention to the commission's conclusions. "This report puts a spanner in the works for the government, who everybody believes has already made up its mind in favor of nuclear," he said. Its conclusions will certainly bolster those within the government with concerns about the option, understood to include Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett and Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt. In 2003, Hewitt, then trade and industry secretary, said there were "real problems" with nuclear power that severely limited its viability. Germana Camzi, energy campaigner for Friends of the Earth U.K., said her organization did not see the review as a done deal. "It is pretty clear that there are a variety of different forces in the government that are pushing in different directions," she told United Press International. Friends of the Earth hoped the review would come up with alternative solutions to nuclear power, she said. Camzi said it was possible to make up the energy shortfall by investing in renewable energy and improving energy efficiency. New technologies could improve the efficiency of power stations, while consumers could be encouraged to use energy-efficient products, she said. The government's last review, just three years ago, had argued the same, she added. She criticized the nuclear lobby for suggesting there was a looming energy emergency, that "the lights are suddenly going to go off." "That is completely untrue." In fact, Britain's aging coal and nuclear power stations would be phased out over time, with "no immediate danger of any energy shortfall," she said. The government must now wait for the results of its own review, due to be published in April. But whatever the recommendations, it is likely to be only the start of a lengthy -- and ferocious -- debate over the country's energy future. (Comments to energy@upi.com) © Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved ***************************************************************** 61 Sofia Morning News: Bulgaria's Failed N-Plan Unit Back On Business: 10 March 2006, Friday. Unit 5 of Bulgaria's nuclear power plant has been switched back on after a technical failure. The reactor was off for nine days, but now there is no more risk of shortage on the local energy market, Minister Rumen Ovcharov has said Friday. Kozloduy, which is Bulgaria's only nuclear power producer, has closed two units under pressure from the EU, and committed to shut down 3 and 4 this year. There has been much controversy whether the closures are necessary, or the reactors might be safe enough to keep working for several more years. novinite.com All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright &Disclaimer - Privacy Policy ISO 9001:2000 Certified Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency - www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news provider in English that informs its readers about the latest Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily online newspaper "Sofia Morning News." Novinite.com (Sofia News ***************************************************************** 62 reviewjournal.com: HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS : 'High threat' funds sought Mar. 10, 2006 Nevadans huddle with Chertoff By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada officials on Thursday began the process of trying to reclaim for Las Vegas a place on the government's "high threat" list for homeland security grants. Two representatives of Clark County Sheriff Bill Young, along with Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter, both R-Nev., met with Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. "This is the very first step in Las Vegas correcting the funding formula and the assessment data," Gibbons said after the meeting in his office. Nothing was settled, but Chertoff agreed to order senior department officials to hold more meetings with the Nevadans, officials said. "We agreed to follow up and talk more in the near term, as early as next week, about the criteria that went into the formula this year," said Russ Knocke, a department spokesman. Chertoff has said cities on this year's list have been cemented to share $765 million in grants, but he was open to receiving information as the department prepares risk and vulnerability assessments for next year's round of funding. Nevada officials reacted with alarm in January when the Homeland Security Department left Las Vegas off its latest annual list of cities considered "high threat" targets for terrorists. Placement on the list qualifies cities to compete for a special category of "urban areas security initiative" grants for first responders. Las Vegas received $8 million last year, which was used to buy chemical agent detectors and handheld computers for emergency personnel, among other items. Nevada received about $20 million last year from other grant programs managed by Homeland Security. Knocke said the state has received more than $113 million since March 2003, adding that part Thursday's discussion was about other avenues for Nevada to gain funding in the absence of the threat designation. State officials argue that Las Vegas should be a no-brainer when it comes to terrorist risk. Among the reasons, they point out that five of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had visited the city before their attacks, and that the city was under a threat alert during the 2003 New Year's Eve celebration. Chertoff was not available after the meeting. But on previous occasions, he said most cities can emphasize one or two factors that they believe should place them on the list. By contrast, he said the Department of Homeland Security undertakes a complex assessment that takes into account 3.2 billion calculations as to cities' vulnerabilities. At Thursday's meeting, Metropolitan Police Department Undersheriff Douglas Gillespie and Deputy Chief Michael McClary presented data indicating possible gaps in the department's consideration of Las Vegas, including possible tourist undercounts, according to Porter. "Chertoff said he was more than happy to look at the data," Porter said. "It wasn't like we were there to dispute particular line items. We want to look at all the data." Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement ***************************************************************** 63 [NYTr] Australian Senators Hear It on DU Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:03:07 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by mart Scoop News (New Zealand) - Mar 6, 2006 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0603/S00117.htm Depleted Uranium: email to Australian senators Monday, 6 March 2006, 3:01 pm Press Release: Robert Anderson The following email went out today, 6 March 2006, to all Australian Senators with a copy to the ICC and Human Rights Watch, and to Australia's national newspapers. In the course of the last two weeks, Australian, John Hough sent copies of The Ultimate War Crime to six Australian Senators with a covering letter similar to the email below. Mr Hough says he has received no replies to date. "Senators "This email is to draw your attention to the book The Ultimate War Crime by Robert Anderson (NZ). The book documents the prime facie case that the 'Coalition of the Willing' used and uses nuclear weapons (depleted uranium munitions) in the first Gulf War, in Afghanistan and in the current Gulf conflict. The book gives background to the use of depleted uranium to enhance conventional weapons and details the long-term harmful radiation that results. "The book also details legal opinion describing how the use of such weapons violates UN conventions and treaties. It references the first case in the UK where a British soldier was awarded compensation for the birth defects of his son resulting from the exposure to 'friendly radiation' in Iraq. It graphically describes the unusually large numbers of birth defects being encountered in Southern Iraq and references expert opinion that such defects have resulted from the use of depleted uranium munitions. "I have sent copies of the book to Senators Lyn Allison, Bob Brown, Chris Evans, Barnaby Joyce, John Hogg and Robert Hill. Please check out their copies or get your own copy (ISBN 0-473-10489-X). You can contact the author, Robert Anderson, at roberta@clear.net.nz "I have copied this email to the War Crimes Tribunal and Human Rights Watch. My aim is that no Australian Senator can claim that they were not aware of the evidence. "I believe that every Senator (collectively and individually) has a responsibility to thoroughly and impartially investigate this matter - for the protection of Australians serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for the reputation of Australia as a good global citizen. John Hough" N.B. A copy of The Ultimate War Crime was donated to all 120 New Zealand MPs. Following this, Minister for Disarmament and Arms Control, the Hon Phil Goff, responding on behalf of the Government, wrote: "I agree that there are real concerns about the long-term implications of depleted uranium (DU) use for civilian populations as well as users." "Since 2003, more than 900 DU-related urine tests have been administered to NZDF personnel either before or after their deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. To date, all tests have been negative (i.e. less than 0.3 mcg/l) for urinary DU. Information on the potential risks that may be posed by DU, and by vehicles hit by DUY rounds, now forms part of all pre-deployment briefings for NZDF personnel going to areas where DU may have been used. This includes personnel deploying to Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo and Bosnia. The NZDF will continue to provide medical checks and support to any personnel who think they may have been exposed to DU." Robert Anderson Tauranga, New Zealand 6 March 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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 64 [NYTr] Halliburton Covers Up Deadly DU Levels in England Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 01:02:33 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Andy Pollack [You can't make this stuff up: a British government facility set up to monitor radiation levels discovers that depleted uranium levels have soared, probably because of DU left by US/Brit forces in the Middle East and blown on the winds. But the information was at first kept secret (in violation of the law) because the facility is run by -- Halliburton! intro by Roland, from whom I got this: In the early 1960s, Joan Baez sang a protest song, "What Have They Done to the Rain?" about "The gentle rain (nuclear fallout) that falls for years" The Depleted Uranium from the battlefield's of the Middle East and Kosovo will be "raining" on the world for years to come. Lyrics follow the story.] San Francisco Bay View - Mar 8, 2006 http://www.sfbayview.com/030806/deathstar030806.shtml The queen's death star Depleted uranium measured in British atmosphere from battlefields in the Middle East by Leuren Moret "Did the use of uranium weapons in Gulf War II result in contamination of Europe? Evidence from the measurements of the Atomic Weapons Establishment, Aldermaston, Berkshire, U.K.," shows such contamination, reported the Sunday Times Online, in a shocking scientific study authored by British scientists Dr. Chris Busby and Saoirse Morgan. ("UK radiation jump blamed on Iraq shells" http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2047373,00.html ) The highest levels of depleted uranium ever measured in the atmosphere in Britain were transported on air currents from the Middle East and Central Asia. Of special significance were those from the Tora Bora bombing in Afghanistan in 2001 and the "shock and awe" bombing during Gulf War II in Iraq in 2003. Out of concern for the public, the official British government air monitoring facility, known as the Atomic Weapons Establishment, at Aldermaston, was established years ago to measure radioactive emissions from British nuclear power plants and atomic weapons facilities. The British government facility was taken over three years ago by Halliburton, which refused at first to release air monitoring data to Dr. Busby, as required by law. An international expert on low level radiation, Busby serves as an official advisor on several British government committees and co-authored an independent report on low level radiation with 45 scientists, the European Committee on Radiation Risk for the European Parliament. He was able to get Aldermaston air monitoring data from Halliburton AWE by filing a Freedom of Information request using a new British law which became effective Jan. 1, 2005; but the data for 2003 was missing. He obtained the 2003 data from the Defense Procurement Agency. The fact that the air monitoring data was circulated by Halliburton AWE to the Defense Procurement Agency implies that it was considered to be relevant and that Dr. Busby was stonewalled because Halliburton AWE clearly recognized that it was a serious enough matter to justify a government interpretation of the results and official decisions had to be made about what the data would show and its political implications for the military. In a similar circumstance, in 1992, Major Doug Rokke, the director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Cleanup Project after Gulf War I, was ordered by a U.S. Army general officer to write a no-bid contract, "Depleted Uranium, Contaminated Equipment and Facilities Recovery Plan Outline," describing the procedures for cleaning up Kuwait, including depleted uranium, for Kellogg, Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. The contract proposal was passed through Madeleine Albright, then U.S. secretary of state, to the Emirate of Kuwait, who considered the terms and then hired KBR for the cleanup. Aldermaston is one of many nuclear facilities throughout Europe that regularly monitor atmospheric radiation transported by atmospheric sand and dust storms, or air currents, from radiation sources in North Africa, the Middle East and Central Asia. After the "shock and awe" campaign in Iraq in 2003, very fine particles of depleted uranium were captured with larger sand and dust particles in filters in Britain. These particles traveled in seven to nine days from Iraqi battlefields as far as 2,400 miles away. The radiation measured in the atmosphere quadrupled within a few weeks after the beginning of the 2003 campaign, and, at one of the five monitoring locations, the levels twice required an official alert to the British Environment Agency. In addition to depleted uranium data gathered in previous studies on Kosovo and Bosnia by Dr. Busby, the Aldermaston air monitoring data provided a continuous record of depleted uranium levels in Britain from the other recent wars. Extensive video news footage of the 2003 Iraq war, including Fallujah in 2004, provided irrefutable documented evidence that the U.S. has unethically and illegally used depleted uranium munitions on cities and other civilian populations. These military actions are in direct violation of not only the international conventions, but they also violate U.S. military law because the U.S. is a signatory to The Hague and Geneva Conventions and the 1925 Geneva Gas Protocol. Depleted uranium weaponry meets the definition of a Weapon of Mass Destruction in two out of three categories under U.S. Code Title 50, Chapter 40, Section 2302. After-action mandates have also been violated, such as U.S. Army Regulation AR 700-48 and TB 9-1300-278, which require treatment of radiation poisoning for all casualties, including enemy soldiers and civilians, and remediation. Dr. Busby's request for this data through Halliburton from AWE and subsequently provided by the Defense Procurement Agency was necessary to establish verification of Iraq's 2003 depleted uranium levels in the atmosphere. These facts demonstrate why Halliburton refused to release the 2003 data to him and it obviously establishes that weaponized depleted uranium is an indiscriminate weapon being distributed all over the world in a very short period of time, immediately after its use. The recent documentary film "Beyond Treason" details the horrific effects of depleted uranium exposure on American troops and Iraqi civilians in the Gulf region in 1991, not to speak of those civilians continuing to live in permanently contaminated and thus uninhabitable regions. Global increases since 1991 of melanoma, infant mortality and frog die-offs can only be explained by an environmental contaminant. Alarming global increases in diabetes, with high correlation to depleted uranium wars in Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan, demonstrate that diabetes is a sensitive indicator and a rapid response to internal depleted uranium exposure. In 2003, Americans reported visiting Iraqi relatives in Baghdad who were suffering from an epidemic of diabetes. After returning to the U.S. following two to three weeks in Iraq, they discovered within a few months that they too had diabetes. Japanese human shields and journalists who worked in Iraq during the 2003 war are sick and now have symptoms typical of depleted uranium exposure. Likewise, after the U.S. Navy moved depleted uranium bombing and gunnery ranges several years ago from Vieques Island in Puerto Rico to Australia, health effects there are already being reported. The documentary film "Blowin' in the Wind" includes an interview with a family with two normal teenage daughters living near the bombing range where depleted uranium weaponry is now being used. The parents showed photos of their baby born recently with severe birth defects. The baby looked like Iraqi deformed babies and, like many of the Iraqi babies, died five days after birth. Other than anonymous British government officials denying that Iraq was the source of the depleted uranium measured at Aldermaston by AWE and some unnamed "establishment scientists" blaming it on local sources or natural uranium in the Iraq environment, there is no one, as of this writing, willing to lend his name or office to refute this damning evidence reported by Dr. Busby. All of the anonymous statements used by the media thus far are contradicted by the factual evidence found in the filters. All of it was transported from the same region. The natural abundance of uranium in the crust of the earth is 2.4 parts per million, which would not become concentrated to the high levels measured in Britain during a long journey from the Middle East. These particles traveling over thousands of miles would dilute the concentration rather than increase it. The fact that there are no known natural uranium deposits in Iraq make it impossible for these anonymous claims to have scientific credibility. Unnamed government sources blamed local sources in Britain, such as nuclear power plants, for the contamination; however, that would also leave evidence in the filters of fission products, which were not in evidence. The lowest levels measured at monitoring stations around Aldermaston were at the facility, which means it could not be a possible source. Atomic weapons facilities would be more likely to produce plutonium contamination, also not reported as a co-contaminant at Aldermaston. In other words, all factual evidence considered, the question must be asked, what were the media's anonymous experts and government officials basing their claims on? Dr. Keith Baverstock exposed a World Health Organization cover-up on depleted uranium in an Aljazeera article, "Washington's Secret Nuclear War," posted on Sept. 14, 2004. It was the most popular article ever posted on the Aljazeera English language website. Baverstock leaked an official WHO report that he wrote to the media several years ago after the WHO refused to publish it. He warned in the report about the mobility of, and environmental contamination from, tiny depleted uranium particles formed from U.S. munitions. Busby's ECRR (European Committee on Radiation Risk) report challenged the International Committee on Radiation Protection standards for radiation risk and reported that the mutagenic effects of radiation determined by Chernobyl studies are actually 1,000 times higher than the ICRP risk model predicts. The ECRR report also establishes that the ICRP risk model, based on external exposure of Hiroshima and Nagasaki victims, and the ECRR risk model, based on internal exposure, are mutually exclusive models. In other words, the ICRP risk model based on external exposure cannot be used to estimate internal exposure risk. The report also states that a separate study is needed for depleted uranium exposure risks, because it may be far more toxic than nuclear weapons or nuclear power plant exposures. In July of 2005, the National Academy of Sciences reported in their new Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VII report on low level radiation that there is "no safe level of exposure." The BEIR VII report also finally admitted that very low levels are more harmful per unit of radiation than higher levels of exposure, also known as the "supralinear" effect. This information on low level radiation risk is extremely alarming, since the AWE data from Aldermaston confirms that rapid global transport of depleted uranium dust is occurring. Dr. Katsuma Yagasaki, a Japanese physicist at the University of the Ryukyus in Okinawa, has estimated that the atomicity equivalent of at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs has been released into the global atmosphere since 1991 from the use of depleted uranium munitions. It is completely mixed in the atmosphere in one year. The "smog of war" from Gulf War I was found in glaciers and ice sheets globally a year later. Even more alarming is the non-specific catalytic or enzyme effect from internal exposures to nanoparticles of depleted uranium. Soldiers on depleted uranium battlefields have reported that, after noticing a metallic taste in their mouths, within 24-48 hours of exposure, they became sick with Gulf War syndrome symptoms. Who is profiting from this global uranium nightmare? Dr. Jay Gould revealed in his book, "The Enemy Within," that the British royal family privately owns investments in uranium holdings worth over $6 billion through Rio Tinto Mines. The mining company was formed for the British royal family in the late 1950s by Roland Walter "Tiny" Rowland, the Queen's buccaneer. Born in 1917 of illegitimate German parentage, and before changing his name, Roland Walter Fuhrhop was a passionate member of the Nazi youth movement by 1933, and a classmate described him as "an ardent supporter of Hitler and an arrogant, nasty piece of work to boot." His meteoric rise and protection by intel agencies and the British Crown are an indication of what an asset he has been for decades to the Queen, as Africa's most powerful Western businessman. Africa and Australia are two of the main sources of uranium in the world. The Rothschilds control uranium supplies and prices globally, and one serves as the Queen's business manager. Filmmaker David Bradbury made "Blowin' in the Wind" to expose depleted uranium bombing and gunnery range activities contaminating pristine areas of eastern Australia and to expose plans to extract over $36 billion in uranium from mines in the interior over the next six years. Halliburton has finished construction of a 1,000-mile railway from the mining area to a port on the north coast of Australia to transport the ore. The queen's favorite American buccaneers, Cheney, Halliburton and the Bush family, are tied to her through uranium mining and the shared use of illegal depleted uranium munitions in the Middle East, Central Asia and Kosovo and Bosnia. The major roles that such diverse individuals and groups as the Carlyle Group, George Herbert Walker Bush, former Carlyle CEO Frank Carlucci, the University of California managed nuclear weapons labs at Los Alamos and Livermore, and U.S. and international pension fund investments have played in proliferating depleted uranium weapons is not well known or in most instances even recognized, inside or outside the country. God save the queen from the guilt of her complicity in turning planet Earth into a death star. [Leuren Moret is president of Scientists for Indigenous People, a City of Berkeley environmental commissioner and past president of the Association for Women Geoscientists. Email her at leurenmoret@yahoo.com.] *** What Have They Done to the Rain? Just a little rain, falling all around; The grass lifts its head to the heavenly sound. Just a little rain, just a little rain; What have they done to the rain? Just a little boy, standing in the rain, The gentle rain that falls for years; And the grass is gone, the boy disappears, The rain keeps falling like helpless tears; And what have they done to the rain? Just a little breeze, out of the sky; The leaves pat their hands as the breeze blows by. Just a little breeze with some smoke in its eye; What have they done to the rain? Just a little boy, standing in the rain, The gentle rain that falls for years; And the grass is gone, the boy disappears, The rain keeps falling like helpless tears; And what have they done to the rain? What have they done to the rain? * ================================================================ .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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 65 AP Wire: Nuclear worker program overspends millions | 03/10/2006 | NANCY ZUCKERBROD Associated Press WASHINGTON - The contractors involved in a program to compensate sick Cold War-era nuclear weapons workers have spent millions more than was expected, congressional investigators reported Friday. A five-year contract with Oak Ridge Associated Universities has tripled from $70 million originally allocated to over $200 million, according to a report by the General Accountability Office, the auditing arm of Congress. Oak Ridge Associated Universities is the contractor assigned with helping the government estimate how much radiation workers were exposed to at Energy Department bomb-making facilities. The report did not explain why the contract costs appear to have ballooned, but the House Judiciary Committee issued a press release Friday saying lawmakers have asked the GAO to study the matter further. Ron Townsend, president of the Oak Ridge, Tenn.-based company, put out a statement saying the review would validate his company's work. "Our focus at ORAU has been and continues to be on doing good science," he said. "I am absolutely confident that we have done that." The report also found that a separate audit contractor also ran into money problems. That contractor works with an advisory board to review the quality of radiation dose estimates, which are used to decide worker claims. In the first two years of the job, it spent almost 90 percent of the $3 million allocated for a five-year undertaking, the report said. The reason cited was the complexity of the audit contractor's job. "These tasks cost more or took longer to complete than originally estimated," the report said. Congress ultimately had to appropriate more than $4 million in additional money for the audit contractor's work and that of the advisory board. Congress approved the compensation program about five years ago. Workers exposed to cancer-causing radiation or beryllium and silica - which cause lung diseases - get a lump sum payment of $150,000 plus medical benefits. Most of the workers were at Energy Department facilities in Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, New Mexico, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Washington. ON THE NET House Judiciary Committee: http://judiciary.house.gov/ ***************************************************************** 66 Gallup Independent: Officials stall on delivering water to users of contaminated wells March 9, 2006 By Kathy Helms Diné Bureau MILAN, N.M. — Results of groundwater sampling conducted in September 2005 by New Mexico Environment Department and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency show contaminants in 33 of 34 residential wells sampled, including elevated levels of uranium in 21 of those wells. Where the contamination is coming from is debatable. Gaps in data from the Homestake Mine have left state and federal regulators with a difficult task in pinpointing just how the contaminants got there. Jerry Schoeppner of NMED, at a one-on-one meeting last week with Homestake-area residents, said the lack of documentation makes it more difficult to determine which contamination is background, which is coming from Homestake, and which is coming from other nearby uranium operations. Schoeppner, along with Andy Dudley of the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and Sai Appaji of EPA Region 6 in Dallas spoke with residents about the sampling of private wells downgradient of the Homestake Uranium Mill Superfund Site. The sampling was conducted to identify location, use and quality of groundwater in four subdivisions near the site and to take appropriate measure to ensure residents are not drinking water that falls below federal drinking water standards or state water quality standards. Thirty-four domestic wells located in the alluvial, Upper, Middle and Lower Chinle aquifers were sampled. Results indicate the presence of several contaminants of concern above federal and state maximum contaminant levels. According to the February 2005 draft report from NMED's Superfund Oversight Section, contaminant standards were exceeded in 33 of the 34 wells, six of which are being used by residents as a primary source of drinking water. The other 28 wells are being used by residents as an alternate water supply. Though uranium was exceeded in two of the wells being used as primary sources of drinking water, Schoeppner said none of the residents have been supplied with an alternative water source. In all, maximum contaminant level and New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission standards for uranium were exceeded in 21 of the 34 wells; selenium in three of 34 wells; nitrate in one of 34 wells, and lead in four of 34 wells. Secondary standards were exceeded in most wells, according to NMED. Contaminants include sulfate in 33 of the 34 wells, total dissolved solids in 33 wells, iron in 14 wells, chloride in one well and manganese in six wells. It has been documented that on Feb. 5, 1977, Homestake's tailings pond ruptured, spilling 500,000 cubic feet of radioactive debris and contaminated water which is believed to have flooded residents property and seeped into their water supply. NMED and federal officials said they were unaware of the breach in the containment pond. Unfortunately, there are gaps in the data after 1975, according to Schoeppner. New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission regulations for background radiation state that any operator that contributes any kind of contamination is responsible for that contamination, Schoeppner said. "Any contamination coming from offsite, from another operation, they're not liable for that." In Homestake's case, the state also has documented contamination coming from the Ambrosia Lake area. "Homestake's not responsible for cleaning that up. They're responsible for what they contributed on top of that," he said. Health study Residents with contaminated wells apparently will have to wait on the health assessment being conducted by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry before it is decided whether they merit an alternate water source. "We're waiting for the word from ATSDR," Schoeppner said, "but also, in order for us to force any operator to buy an alternate water supply, we have to have justification, and that justification comes in our argument to prove that it's coming from that site. And again, at this site, we don't have that information. "The uranium that we're seeing at Felice Acres, Broadview Acres no doubt. It's coming from the mill site. Fortunately, there's no domestic wells there that are being used. If there were in that area, it would be a no-brainer. Those would be taken care of," he said. "The other areas a little bit further from the mill site. It becomes more complicated whether or not that's background, that's mill site, and who is responsible for that," he said. Andy Dudley of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry said the federal agency initially got involved to look at the well sampling and to provide a consultation. But in talking with the state, "we decided it was better to do sort of a historical perspective and see what people have been exposed to over a period of time. One well sampling event can't I mean, you can make all kind of assumptions but it doesn't give you exact concentrations per hour. "So that's what we're trying to do go back and look at each well, look at how many times it was sampled, what the concentrations were, how often people drink it (and) where they drink it," he said. Homestake area resident Candi Williams raised concerns regarding the bioaccumulation of uranium in humans and whether any animals she raises might be affected by the build-up of uranium in their tissues as a result of drinking the water and grazing on plants grown in potentially contaminated soils near the site. Dudley told Williams that uranium does not bioaccumulate in humans and that the impact to any lambs and pigs she raises should not be a problem. Chronic exposure Ann Harris, liaison for the newly formed Radiation Committee of the Sierra Club's Environmental Quality Strategy Team, and executive director of We The People Inc. a non-profit organization that supports nuclear industry employees abused by the employer (whistleblowers), begged to differ with ATSDR's contention that uranium does not bioaccumulate. "I respectfully disagree," she said. "Think in terms of your local X-ray at the doctor: They tell you to look at the cumulative effect over a period of years. And today we are cautioned about how many X-rays we have even at the dentist's office because of the nature of the accumulation. "That's been one of the big things that discredits those guys at the ATSDR," Harris said. "In communities where, let's say, there is exposure through the water system, it has been easily proved what was in there that was putting people in the graveyard. "The idea that they're taking care of public health and safety, I would challenge them on that because basically the majority of their rulings have been in such a way that they've proven themselves to be useless in support of public health and safety. "They can use all the big words that they want, these scientific words, but they are not looking at their own data, apparently. In my opinion the American taxpayer would best be served if they were done away with because they are of no use and haven't been to anybody except Corporate America." Regarding residents' chronic exposure to uranium and other contaminants since Homestake began operations in 1958 and the tailings ponds began leaking, Harris said, "Whenever you have this kind of unrestrained stream into the public, then common sense will tell you that there is a cumulative effect. They're not looking for it because they don't want to find it. "There's no nice way for me to say anything except they lied. Either that, or they are totally, outrageously incompetent. Whenever you make people expendable, you don't have a conscience," she said. gallpind@cia-g.com ***************************************************************** 67 Deseret News: Huntsman lawyer raps PFS chief's comments [deseretnews.com] Friday, March 10, 2006 Parkyn says wilds won't avert building of rail spur By Joe Bauman and Suzanne Struglinski Deseret Morning News The governor's legal counsel in Washington and the Utah congressional delegation Thursday blasted comments by the head of Private Fuel Storage who said a newly created federal wilderness area won't stop him from building a railroad to haul nuclear waste to Utah's west desert for storage. ['Photo'] Deseret Morning News graphic "I really am at a loss to figure out what it is Mr. (John) Parkyn is arguing" if he "suggests he can somehow build this rail spur through the wilderness area, what his legal theory would be," attorney Mike Lee said. "The basis for any such theory completely escapes me," Lee said, and all other lawyers he knows who are familiar with wilderness law. Lee was commenting on the statements that Parkyn, PFS chairman, made Wednesday during an NRC conference in Maryland. Parkyn held up a copy of the license, saying he didn't think anyone could block the project. In its ongoing effort to thwart PFS's plans, the state filed a new petition this week with the U.S. District Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., challenging the license that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted PFS to operate the high-level nuclear waste storage facility in Skull Valley, Tooele County. Parkyn indicated the recently designated federal wilderness area, created largely to block the company's preferred rail spur route, would not prevent another rail route. It was not clear if Parkyn meant a railroad route could be built to the site without crossing the wilderness boundaries. A spokeswoman for PFS said she could not comment on the chairman's statement as she had not been involved in briefings. But what was apparent is that he thinks wilderness character does not extend throughout the official wilderness area. "That doesn't mean you can't put a railroad there, whether Sen. (Orrin) Hatch understands that or not," Parkyn said. Parkyn said the 100,000-acre Cedar Mountain Wilderness, created in January, is not a real wilderness area. Utah's members of Congress just "drew a bubble" around the mountains to block the nuclear waste, he added. According to the federal Wilderness Act, except for administering the area and for such purposes as emergency rescue, "there shall be no commercial enterprise and no permanent road within any wilderness area . . . no temporary road, no use of motor vehicles, motorized equipment or motorboats, no landing of aircraft, no other form of mechanical transport, and no structure or installation within any such area." Hatch, R-Utah, disagreed with Parkyn's statement that the project is going ahead. "Their read on this certainly doesn't square with ours," he said. "I don't see how PFS will find a way to do this, with no railroad, new wilderness, and no new partners. What company in its right mind would see this as a sound business opportunity to partner with PFS?" Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, who introduced the bill creating the wilderness area, said the act would "block the northern rail spur that PFS would need to the waste" and that this represents a major setback to the project. "I'm glad we've been able to put up some serious roadblocks to this ill-advised proposal," he said. "And we will continue the fight. "The chairman of PFS may be able to explain why this foolish project would be good for him and the out-of-state utilities, but he is unable to explain how on earth it would make sense to put an above-ground high-level nuclear waste storage facility right next to a bombing range. No one can, because it doesn't make sense." Meanwhile, Lee explained that the petition Utah filed with the appeals court is the second in several months. The first was in November, before the NRC issued the license. "This is another filing in basically the same action we brought" before the license was issued, he said. "We just filed this one out of an abundance of caution, to make sure we had taken account of subsequent rulings." The state was being careful to "avoid any question of possible procedural default," he added. So, the petition now cites the granting of the license and other rulings that took place since the original petition. Some key arguments in the state's petition include: • The NRC should not have granted approval of a storage facility for highly radioactive waste in a route overflown thousands of times a year by military aircraft en route to the Utah Test and Training Range — some of which "carry live ordnance." The concern is that a plane might crash or a bomb might fall onto the storage facility. • The NRC approved the plant as a temporary storage site, even though it would use protective casks that are not the same as those that would be brought to the government's planned permanent storage facility at Yucca Mountain, Nev. When will the appeals court rule on Utah's petition? "I would imagine it would be at least six to eight months before we have any kind of decision," Lee said. "It could be a year or so." Contributing: Leigh Dethman. E-mail: bau@desnews.com; suzanne@desnews.com © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company [ ***************************************************************** 68 TIME.com: Utah's Toxic Opportunity Posted Wednesday, Mar. 08, 2006 An hour south of the Great Salt Lake, a two-lane blacktop crosses a cattle guard into a wild expanse of golden scrub grass. A few trailers and prefab houses, a collection of junked cars and a gas station that sells Spam and soda pop--such is the homeland of the Native American tribe known as the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes. At their peak, the Goshutes numbered 20,000. Today only a dozen of the band's 121 members live on the 18,000-acre reservation; the rest have scattered across the West in search of a better life. The land they left behind is scarred by the detritus of war and industry. To the southwest lies the Dugway Proving Ground, where the U.S. government develops chemical and biological weapons. To the east is one of the world's largest nerve-gas incinerators. To the north is a giant magnesium plant, a major polluter. To the northwest sit a hazardous-waste incinerator and a toxic-waste landfill. The tribe's only profitable business is a municipal garbage dump serving Salt Lake City. Now this beleaguered outpost finds itself caught up in an escalating battle over the future of atomic power in the U.S. Last month the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued a license for a $3.1 billion project that would make the Skull Valley reservation the nation's biggest nuclear-waste holding site, a temporary parking lot for 44,000 tons of highly radioactive spent fuel now being stored at nuclear power plants nationwide. For utilities, it could solve what has been a vexing problem. For tribal officials, the advantages are tangible: as much as $100 million in fees to be paid over 40 years by a Wisconsin-based consortium of utilities, Private Fuel Storage (PFS). The band hopes to use the money to finance a health clinic, a police force and new businesses that could lure scattered tribal members back home. "People say this will destroy the land," says tribal chairman Leon Bear, who brokered the deal. "But how can you poison what is already poisoned?" The plan has sparked widespread resistance, with opponents ranging from a few tribal holdouts to the Governor of Utah. The state has filed suit in federal court to void the NRC license on the grounds that the spent fuel would sit dangerously close to an Air Force training path. F-16 fighter jets roar overhead on 7,000 sorties a year. Should one crash into the steel-and-concrete casks, state attorneys argue, cancer-causing radiation could waft over Salt Lake City. Moreover, the state says, used fuel rods, parked aboveground, would be a target for car bombers or airplane hijackers--"a terrorist's dream come true," says Governor Jon Huntsman Jr., adding, "I'd lie prostrate on the train tracks to keep this out of our state." That may be a useless gesture. The Goshute band, like all other federally recognized tribes, is a sovereign nation under the law, and the State of Utah can't tell it what to do. Still, other hurdles remain. Last December Congress designated 100,000 acres west of the reservation as a wilderness area--a ploy by the Utah delegation to block a 32-mile rail spur to the site. Now opponents want the federal Bureau of Land Management to deny a permit for a truck-transfer station. In Congress, a bill sponsored by Senate minority leader Harry Reid of Nevada would undercut the project by forcing utilities in 31 states to keep spent fuel on their property rather than ship it out. Nevada has long fought a federal plan to permanently store atomic waste in a $60 billion underground repository at Yucca Mountain, northwest of Las Vegas. Underlying the uproar is a question that has haunted the nation since the 1979 meltdown at Three Mile Island: Does the U.S. want nuclear energy or not? The issue has new urgency today because electricity demand is expected to grow 45% over the next two decades and pressure is on for the country to do something about global warming. (Unlike generators fueled by coal, gas or oil, atomic reactors emit no greenhouse gases.) President George W. Bush has vowed to start building nuclear plants by the end of this decade, and last August he signed into law a multibillion-dollar package of nuclear incentives. This month Congress will launch hearings on the future of atomic energy. And a debate is expected over an Administration proposal to spend $250 million for research on reprocessing irradiated fuel--an effort abandoned three decades ago out of fear that it would encourage weapons proliferation. Before the ground breaks on any new commercial reactors, all sides agree, the U.S. must decide what to do with the nuclear waste created by existing plants. Over the past half-century, those plants have accumulated 67,000 tons of spent fuel and radioactive waste that will remain hazardous for hundreds of thousands of years. But ever since the government focused on Yucca Mountain, the project has been stymied by fears of groundwater contamination and confusion over technical design. In the past two decades, the U.S. has spent $6 billion on studies, without making a final decision. Congress will probably grapple this spring with legislation to fast-track Yucca. But even if all the lawsuits were settled today, it couldn't be built before 2015 at the earliest. Given that delay, the NRC approved Skull Valley as a 40-year stopgap. The toxic rods would be parked in this remote corner of Utah until they could be moved to permanent storage at Yucca. Still, opponents fear that the Goshute site won't be temporary: enough waste will be generated to fill both facilities by 2046. Today spent fuel is stored in the cooling ponds of nuclear power plants around the country, but those ponds are rapidly filling up. Thirty-three plants have transferred their radioactive rods into aboveground casks-- a practice that makes nearby communities nervous. Now space for those dry-ground casks is running out too, utilities say. In the meantime, owners of 10 decommissioned reactors from Connecticut to California are looking for a place to unload their waste so that valuable land, most of it near rivers and cities, can be freed for more profitable uses. "Hazardous materials--plutonium and uranium--should not be scattered around the country," says John Parkyn, chairman of utility consortium PFS. "If the Goshutes will take it, why would we object?" But not all Goshutes are enthralled with the idea. In a tiny trailer, Steven Vigil, 17, dressed in a T shirt and baggy jeans, is frying frozen burritos on a winter day. "What little we got left is being taken away," he says. His uncle Sammy Blackbear, a 41-year-old laborer, foresees the worst. "What happens if thousands of casks leak into our water and cancer rates go through the roof?" he asks. "Then they'll say, 'You people have to move.'" Calling the project "environmental racism," dissident Goshutes have filed suit to stop it. "We may be surrounded by hazardous waste," says opponent Margene Bullcreek, 59. "But this big corporation is bribing a small, weak tribe." In fact, the recruitment of Native Americans to store radioactive refuse began as a government initiative in the early 1990s. The Goshutes and a dozen other tribes received federal grants of $100,000 each to study atomic-waste management. The other tribes dropped out of the program, but Goshute officials, including chairman Bear, visited facilities in Japan, France, Britain and Sweden and were convinced of the benefits. "It was an eye opener," Bear says. "Nuclear scientists and physicists told us this is a safe thing to do." No one knows whether most Goshutes agree, since a referendum has yet to be held. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and intimidation have split the tribe. Bear says a majority of the band signed a 1996 agreement to lease the land, but opponents contend that many had no idea what they were signing. Bear's chairmanship was supposed to expire in 2004, but he has canceled four scheduled elections, saying quorums had not assembled in time. And last April, facing federal embezzlement charges, Bear agreed to return $31,542 he had taken from the tribe's accounts and pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion. Sentenced to three years' probation, he was ordered to pay $13,101 in back taxes. "It's political," he says. "They want to get rid of me." That local skirmish, however, is dwarfed by national issues. Under pressure from Utah Senator Orrin Hatch, four of the original eight utilities in the consortium recently halted further investment in the project. PFS's Parkyn expects other utilities, particularly those with decommissioned plants, to step in as the project comes online in phases. "It is cheaper to ship to Utah than to build a dry storage site," he says. "And how can you guard spent fuel forever after a plant shuts down?" He expects the 31 other states with nuclear fuel stored at home to support both Yucca and PFS projects. On the reservation, two women confront each other across a weed-choked yard. Bullcreek's run-down house is surrounded by old tires and broken furniture. "It would be nice to live comfortably," she says. "But we want to maintain our heritage--not be a dumping ground for the domineering society." In contrast, Lori Skiby, 44, the Goshutes' vice chairwoman, has built a $100,000 house thanks to utility-funded tribal loans. "Traditional values don't put a roof over your head," she counters. Both say they want the same thing: for their children and grandchildren to live a good, safe life on the reservation. How to accomplish that is a dilemma of the nuclear age. ***************************************************************** 69 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting FR Doc 06-2319 [Federal Register: March 10, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 47)] [Notices] [Page 12404-12405] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr10mr06-144] The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold its 168th meeting on March 22-24, 2006, NRC Commissioners' Conference Room O- 1G16, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The schedule for this meeting is as follows: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m.: Opening Statement (Open)--The ACNW Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of today's sessions. ACNW Working Group Meeting (WGM) on Draft Final Guidance to Implement NRC's License Termination Rule (Open)--Representatives from NRC's Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) will brief the ACNW and the ACNW's panel of invited subject matter experts on public comments received on draft proposed NUREG-1757 (Supplement 1)--``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance: Updates to Implement the License Termination Rule Analysis: Draft Report for Comment.'' The NRC staff also intend to brief the Committee on their conceptual plans for addressing the public comments received. A copy of this NUREG is available at . 8:45 a.m.-9 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the WGM Chairman--The WGM Chairman will make opening remarks and introduce the ACNW's panel of invited subject matter experts for this working group meeting. 9 a.m.-9:30 a.m.: Update on Status of NUREG-1757 Development (Open)--Presentation by NMSS Representative(s). 9:30 a.m.-10:30 a.m.: Summary of Public Comments on the Proposed Treatment of Realistic Scenarios, Intentional Mixing, and Removal of Material after License Termination Provisions of Draft NUREG-1757 (Open)--Presentation by NMSS Representative(s). 10:45 a.m.-12 Noon: Summary of Public Comments on the Onsite Disposal Provisions of Draft NUREG-1757 (Open)--Presentation by NMSS Representative(s). 1:30 p.m.-2:45 p.m.: Summary of Public Comments on the Engineered Barrier Provisions of Draft NUREG-1757 (Open)--Presentation by NMSS Representative(s). 2:45 p.m.-4 p.m.: Summary of Public Comments on the Institutional Controls/Restricted Release Provisions of Draft NUREG-1757 (Open)-- Presentation by NMSS Representative(s). 4:15 p.m.-5:15 p.m.: Roundtable Discussion (Open)--The WGM Chairman will lead a discussion among the panel of invited subject matter experts on the technical material presented and discuss the content of a possible Committee letter report to the Commission concerning potential changes to NUREG-1757 that might be proposed as a result of the public comment process. Thursday, March 23, 2006 8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACNW Chairman (Open)-- The Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of today's sessions. 9 a.m.-1 p.m.: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science and Technology and International Waste Safety-Related Research (Open)-- Representatives of the Department of Energy's Office of Science and Technology and International (OST) will discuss work being carried out under OST's science and technology research programs. These programs are directed toward enhancing the understanding and optimizing the performance of the proposed Yucca Mountain repository. The topics to be discussed will include materials performance, source term, natural barriers, radioactive getters, and use of advanced technologies. 2 p.m.-3 p.m.: Briefing by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) (Open)--Dr. Carl Paperiello, the RES Office Director, will brief the Committee on recent activities of interest in the area of radioactive waste management. Friday, March 24, 2006 8:30 a.m.-8:45 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the ACNW Chairman (Open)-- The Chairman will make opening remarks regarding the conduct of today's sessions. Recent Developments Related to Modeling the Igneous Activity in the Yucca Mountain Region (Open) 8:45 a.m.-9:45 a.m.: Modeling the Long-Term Fluvial Redistribution of Volcanic Tephra in Forty Mile Wash, Yucca Mountain--Representatives from the NRC staff and the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses will discuss a hypothetical scenario in which a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain is intersected by a volcanic vent, resulting in dispersal of contaminated ash. The speakers will discuss how the NRC staff will model the fluvial redistribution of this ash in the Forty Mile Wash drainage basin adjacent to the Yucca Mountain site. 9:45 a.m.-10:45 a.m.: ``Potential Igneous Processes Relevant to the Yucca Mountain Repository: Intrusive-Release Scenario''-- Representatives of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) will brief the Committee on their most recent independent study related to the potential consequences of an igneous event in the Yucca Mountain region. A copy of this report is available at . 11 a.m.-12 Noon: Discussion of Draft Letters and Reports (Open)-- The Committee will discuss prepared draft letters and determine whether letters would be written on topics discussed during the meeting. 12 Noon-12:30 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will discuss matters related to the conduct of ACNW activities and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of [[Page 12405]] information permit. Discussions may include future Committee Meetings. Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2005 (70 FR 59081). In accordance with these procedures, oral or written statements may be presented by members of the public. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify Mr. Michael P. Lee (Telephone 301-415-6887), between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, as far in advance as practicable so that appropriate arrangements can be made to schedule the necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras during this meeting will be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined by the ACNW Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set aside for taking pictures may be obtained by contacting the ACNW office prior to the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for ACNW meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should notify Mr. Lee as to their particular needs. Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and the time allotted, therefore can be obtained by contacting Mr. Lee. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) at , or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly Available Records System component of NRC's document system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at or (ACRS & collections/ (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). Video Teleconferencing service is available for observing open sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW Audiovisual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. ET, at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the availability of this service. Individuals or organizations requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The availability of video teleconferencing services is not guaranteed. Dated: March 6, 2006. Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 06-2319 Filed 3-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P ***************************************************************** 70 Bellona: Nuclear experts discuss radwaste repository options for Russia’s Northwest ST. PETERSBURG—Storage facilities for radioactive waste in Northwest Russia will be overflowing within 3 to 4 years and constructions of reinforcements has yet to begin, but several plans for permanent geological disposition are currently on the drawing board, said Rosatom officials and other experts at a St. Petersburg conference earlier this week. A map of the Leningrad Region in Northwest Russia. The red square represents Sosnovy Bor and the red circle the Koporye region where plans for an underground radwaste facility are being considered. The grey area represent the Gulf of Finland and far right is St. Petersburg. Bellona Vera Ponomareva, 2006-03-10 11:41 Translated by Charles Digges “There is some 500 million cubic metres of radioactive waste piled up in Russia now with an average activity of 1.5 billion curies—this exceeds the radioactivity of the Chernobyl disaster by 30 times,” said Sergey Dyakov, head of nuclear safety at Rosatom at the conference. The conference was hosted by the Nuclear Society of St. Petersburg, the All-Russia Scientific Research Institute for Energy Technology (VNIPIET in its Russian abbreviation) and the Swedish organisations SKI ICP and SKB IC. The Radon complex All participants in the conference spoke about the critical situation that has been created by over-filled radioactive waste storage facilities in Russia’s Northwest. At present the Radon complex, which deals with radioactive waste storage for the entire Northwest area of Russia, is holding 80,000 cubic metres of waste. According to Radon Director Alexander Ignatov, the complex has only 1000 cubic metres of free storage space left, all of which will be filled within the next three to four years. VNIPIET has worked out a new storage plan for Radon, but the government has for the past several years refused to earmark money for its construction. Ignatov said that funding for a new building at Radon to be built between 2007 and 2010 is now included in a Federal Target Programme for dealing with radioactive waste. Geologic Repositories Conference participants said that the best solution to the problem is to create a long term repository for radioactive waste that would guarantee its safe storage for several hundred years. VNIPIET specialists with SKB IC—which is studying the possibilities for construction of a geologic repository in Sweden—presented project outlines for two repository types, underground and surface, which the two organisations have been developing co-operatively for the past two years. The underground repository plan presented by VNIPIET’s Valery Sorokin, envisions the burial of radioactive waste in Cambrian clay at a depth of 100 metres. This sort of storage is analogous to the construction of St. Petersburg’s deep metro. According to the project outline, the facility would consist of six chambers, five for burial, and a sixth for controlling the waste The plan suggests constructing the repository near Sosnovy Bor—hometown to the Leningrad Nuclear Power Plant 70 kilometres west of St. Petersburg—in the Koporye-Globintsa area. The repository is designed to hold 340 cubic metres of radioactive waste, but can also be expanded if necessary. The price tag for this design would be some $7500 per cubic metre. “If we begin now, then by 2020 we can begin to accept the first loads” of waste, Sorokin said. He added that by 2020, the Leningrad Region—in which Sosnovy Bor and St. Petersburg are located—will have piled up some 200,000 to 250,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste. SKB IC’s schematic for surface storage. Surface storage SKB IC President Klaes Lindberg made a presentation on the project of surface repositories. “When we built a repository in Sweden 20 years ago, we chose the underground method. But at that time we did not have any other experience to draw on and had to go on what we had,” he told the conference. Now, surface repositories have begun to appear and are in use in countries like France and Spain. According to Lindberg, the advantage of surface storage is its comparatively low cost and ease of siting a location. But Lindberg refused to put a price tag on the surface repository method because expenses for such a project in Russia have yet to be calculated. According to Lindberg’s project plans, the storage facility would have to be built at the level of ground waters at a low altitude. The project envisions that radioactive waste would be placed in cement containers, and the walls of the repository would be constructed of concrete and waterproof clay. The lions share of expenses for a surface repository come during the concluding stages of filling it with waste. After the facility is packed, geological barriers are erected and the repository is sealed. Underground storage, on the other hand, requires the most funding during the beginning stages of constructing underground chambers. Comparison of the projects SKB IC and VNIPIET specialists emphasised that both project presentations need further research, including more exact financial calculations, which play an important role in choosing the variant of radioactive waste disposition. It is also necessary that the specialists compare the projects from the viewpoint of safety. According to VNIPIET’s Ignatov, underground storage of radioactive waste is the safest route. “I have always considered geologic repositories more far-sighted and reliable,” he said. Alexander Nikitin, chairman of the Environment and Rights Centre Bellona in St, Petersburg said: “I don’t think surface repositories are less dangerous than underground repositories. The economical constituent will define everything.” According to Nikitin, the advantage of surface storage is its universality. “I am not sure that all regions of Russia contain Cambrian clay. It will be much cheaper to make one project template and pass it on to other regions.” Publisher: Bellona Foundation, President: Frederic Hauge Information: info@bellona.no, Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 38 38 62 * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway ***************************************************************** 71 reviewjournal.com: NUCLEAR WASTE: Lawmakers snub reprocessing plans Mar. 10, 2006 Legislators say they'd rather see repository at Yucca By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration's ambitious plans for nuclear waste reprocessing got a cold reception Thursday from pro-nuclear lawmakers who said they were more interested in seeing a waste repository built at Yucca Mountain. At a budget hearing with Department of Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressed skepticism over the reprocessing initiative called the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP. "I am concerned that this sprawling new venture may divert DOE's attention from other immediate concerns such as fulfilling its current responsibility with respect to Yucca Mountain," said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, the committee chairman, said he believed the reprocessing plan "may be overly broad, and it may be premature." "Put me down as publicly respectful, but I am not a supporter," Barton said. "I'm not going to start down that trail until we finish other trails we started." Barton said those trails included the Nevada venture and coal and oil projects that Congress passed last year but that President Bush gave short shrift to in this year's budget. Bodman heard similar reactions Wednesday from another group of House members who handle energy bills, signaling the president's reprocessing plan might face a rocky future on Capitol Hill. As he did in the earlier meeting, Bodman on Thursday described the embattled and delayed Yucca Mountain effort as a thorn. "This one is an embarrassment," he said. "It has been around for a long time, and every time I use the words 'Yucca Mountain,' people cringe." Bodman outlined his efforts to reform the repository program, which so far is eight years behind schedule. He said he has installed new managers who are redesigning segments to save money and simplify nuclear fuel handling at the site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. A Bush bill to fix aspects of the repository program will be ready "within a month," Bodman said. He also said the Energy Department is beginning to prepare a report ordered by Congress on the possibility of building a second nuclear waste repository. The department is required to issue such a report between 2007 and 2010. "We will be examining a number of states as potential sites," Bodman said, without elaborating. As for reprocessing, the Energy Department is asking Congress to approve $250 million this year and more than $1 billion over the next few years as down payments for GNEP. Advocates say they envision perfecting technology that can reprocess spent nuclear fuel in ways to make it less attractive to terrorists while recycling elements into new fuel that can be burned in a new generation of fast reactors. The resulting waste, while destined to be buried at a repository, would be compact in volume and less toxic, they say. Critics argue that the vision is a dream and that the reprocessing the administration envisions is uneconomical and unrealistic. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement ***************************************************************** 72 Salt Lake Tribune: Science panel urges major overhaul of nuke-waste rules Article Last Updated: 03/10/2006 9:21 PM MST Utah affected: The report notes current statutes are a patchwork formed over 60 years By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune WASHINGTON - Existing regulations for storing low-level nuclear waste - the type stored at EnergySolutions' dump in Utah - need a major overhaul to reflect the risk of storing different types of material, a National Academies panel reported Thursday. The existing low-level waste rules are a "regulatory patchwork that has evolved over almost 60 years," according to the National Academies' National Research Council. That means waste management decisions are often based on who produced the waste - Defense Department, Energy Department or commercial reactors, for example - "rather than the waste's actual radiological hazard or potential risk." As a result, similar types of waste from different sources have to be handled in different ways. "It's not a useful way to deal with the efficient allocation of public resources," said David Leroy, chairman of the panel and the former U.S. nuclear waste negotiator. The committee recommended sweeping change, urging the Defense Department, Energy Department, Nuclear Regulatory Commission and industry to come together to develop a risk-based classification system. Such a system would allow the public to become more involved in making educated decisions about nuclear waste issues, the report said. But overhauling it would be difficult, if not impossible, because of the scope of the necessary changes and a lack of political will. "It's often difficult or impossible to get a sweeping change of statute passed that would consolidate or eliminate or amend all these 60 years of patchwork of acts that created the regulatory system," Leroy said. The issue of how to manage low-level waste - which comes from national defense, private operations and different types of research - is of particular importance for Utah. EnergySolutions, formerly Envirocare of Utah, operates one of just three licensed commercial radioactive waste facilities in the country, and one, Barnwell in South Carolina, is scheduled to close in 2008. The report says the situation after Barnwell closes should be watched closely, as it is "undesirable" to only have one site, EnergySolutions, taking Class A waste from 30 potentially affected states, and urged other efforts for dealing with the low activity wastes. The decommissioning of nuclear power reactors is expected to generate as much as $11.7 billion in disposal costs, according to earlier studies by the National Academies. Mark Walker, spokesman for EnergySolutions, said the regulation of low-level waste has been debated for years, but the company had not had time to review the recommendations and declined to comment. Vanessa Pierce, a project director with the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, said reform of the classification system is "long overdue." Dictating how waste is handled based not on the radioactivity but who produces it "is like saying that if an apple is grown in California, it's an apple, but if it comes from Florida, it's an orange," she said. Pierce said an example of how arbitrary the current system is came in 2003, when Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, inserted language in an energy bill to reclassify waste from a Fernald, Ohio, nuclear weapons plant. The name change would have allowed it to be sent to Envirocare, even though it was actually more radioactive than waste allowed at the site. Leroy said the existing system also requires longer shipments and more costly disposal of waste than might otherwise be necessary. gehrke@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 73 Daily Herald: PFS chairman says opponents cannot stop Utah waste storage Friday, March 10, 2006 The Associated Press SALT LAKE CITY -- Private Fuel Storage's chairman told a conference in Maryland that the consortium of power utilities is moving forward with its plans for a high-level nuclear waste disposal site in Utah and he doesn't think opponents -- who include Utah's state government and congressional delegation -- can stop it. "Yes, there is hope for our future," John Parkyn said, holding up the consortium's Nuclear Regulatory Commissions license to applause from the crowd at an NRC conference Wednesday. Several Utah officials have said that PFS already has lost the battle, despite gaining the NRC license. Assistant Utah Attorney General Denise Chancellor that gaining the license was "a Pyrrhic victory for PFS -- just a piece of paper. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has cited several utilities that have suspended their financial support for the waste facility proposed on the Goshutes' reservation in Skull Valley. He said the waning support from PFS members, plus other barriers against the proposal, have "put Utah over the hump in our fight against the Skull Valley plan." But Parkyn said Wednesday that he is seeking additional utilities with nuclear plants interested in moving waste to the PFS site, 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. He believes other utilities will join the consortium to save money. In some cases, it would cost utilities more to keep storing waste at their plant sites -- especially at nuclear power plants no longer in use -- than it would to move it to Utah, Parkyn said. And he said the federal creation of the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area will not succeed in blocking transportation of waste to the site, as intended by the state and the congressional delegation. Parkyn maintains that the wilderness area does not rule out using another rail route. "That doesn't mean you can't put a railroad there, whether Sen. Hatch understands that or not. It certainly would make getting that land lease for the purpose harder. "We will get the fuel to the site because it's a legal commodity, and we now have a license to receive it," Parkyn said. In another development, Time magazine said in a story posted on its Web site Wednesday that the Goshutes' Skull Valley Band stood to gain "as much as $100 million in fees to be paid over 40 years" by PFS. It did not cite a source for the figure. Leon Bear, chairman of the band, said he did not know how much money will be involved. "When you start talking about profits ... I can't speculate on that," he told the News Wednesday. He said the agreement with PFS "has to do with profit sharing, "and how do I know what the profit's going to be? I know the facility's going to cost quite a bit to build." PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin told the News she did not know the amount, and, "They have always considered the amount of the lease confidential. It has never been released publicly that I'm aware of." Margene Bullcreek, a leader of tribal members opposed to Bear and to the project, said she does not know the terms of the agreement with PFS. This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page D4. Copyright © 2006 Daily Herald and ***************************************************************** 74 University of Idaho Argonaut: Engineers assess risk at Nuclear-Waste Repository Local BRIEFS 03-10-2006 by Argonaut Staff Rick Allen, a university agricultural and civil engineer, is helping Sandia National Laboratories assess the risk that percolating water could pose to high-level nuclear waste planned for storage at Yucca Mountain, Nev. Yucca Mountain gets only 4 to 8 inches of rainfall a year, but if too much of it percolates down through the mountains soils and into its rock core and if sealed storage containers should leak scientists want to know how far radioactive contamination would travel underground. Allen, a professor of water resources engineering, says he was delighted to be considered as a project advisor. It feels nice to be doing this service for the nation, he said. Allen and his team, visiting-professor Ricardo Trezza and research associate Clarence Robison, were selected because of Allens authorship of a United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization publication that is the third most frequently accessed document on that organizations Web site. Staff at Sandia, located in New Mexico, told Allen that they chose to apply the FAO methodology to their evaluation of Yucca Mountain because of the conciseness and reproducibility of the studys approach, the amount of detail it provides and its worldwide and national acceptance as a standard for calculating evapotranspiration. The suite of Sandia models to which Allens team is contributing will project environmental impacts out to at least 10,000 years, including such climate-change scenarios as global warming, monsoons and mini-Ice Ages. The nuclear-waste containers are sealed very well and should never corrode and leak, Allen says, but scientists have to address the question of, What if there were a leak? Up to 77,000 tons of used commercial nuclear-reactor waste and defense waste may eventually be stored at the Yucca Mountain repository. Allens research will help the U.S. Department of Energy decide whether or not that will happen. Copyright 2000 - 2005 Miro International Pty ***************************************************************** 75 AU ABC: Northern Land Council open to nuclear dump plan PM - Friday, 10 March , 2006 18:42:00 Reporter: Sara Everingham MARK COLVIN: A dispute between two Aboriginal Land councils may make it easier for the Federal Government to find a place to put its national nuclear waste dump. Last year the Federal Government announced its plan to build the dump at one of three sites in the Northern Territory. It was a move that angered the Northern Territory Government as well as the Central Land Council, based in Alice Springs. But the Northern Land Council has taken a different view, and this week its members visited the Lucas Heights Nuclear reactor in Sydney to seek answers about the planned dump. Sara Everingham reports. SARA EVERINGHAM: When the Federal Government last year proposed three sites in the Northern Territory for its nuclear waste facility it was heavily criticised by both the Northern Territory Government and the Central Land Council. The Federal Government put forward two sites in Central Australia, both within 100 kilometres of Alice Springs and a third at Fishers Ridge about 40 kilometres from Katherine. But the Northern Land Council was behind a push to allow land councils to nominate a site on their own land for a national nuclear waste facility. The former Chairman of the Land Council Galarrwuy Yunupingu said a nuclear waste dump could bring benefits to Aboriginal people. The Federal Government accepted the argument. This week nine executive members of the NLC visited the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney. The council's Chairman John Daly says the visit will help the council make a decision about proposing a site on its land. JOHN DALY: All the information we've got is second-hand so what we wanted to do was we wanted to bring the executive down and say okay, we want to have a look at the first-hand information on this and we want to have a look at it purely and simply from a science point of view. SARA EVERINGHAM: Mr Daly says the council had many questions and described this week's visit to Lucas Heights as enlightening. JOHN DALY: I'd say most of the questions that have been raised by the council members have been on the assumption of fear. And I think, you know, the fear's been alleviated as far as quite a few of the council members are concerned. So yeah, I'd say, you know, I feel a lot more comfortable talking about the issue knowing what I know now and seeing what I've seen. SARA EVERINGHAM: John Daly says the Northern Land Council will make a decision about the site based on science, not politics. JOHN DALY: I think if we keep the politics out of it and we stick to the science, I think we'll come out with best practice as far as world wide conditions are concerned. SARA EVERINGHAM: But the Director of the Central Land Council David Ross says his opposition to a waste dump in the Northern Territory is based on science. DAVID ROSS: I think he's finally got onto the right track, and the Government should be looking at this from a scientific point of view and, you know, let's get back to the report that was prepared for Commonwealth on where is the best possible sites within Australia to build a waste dump. And most of those sites, I think you'll find, are elsewhere in Australia and certainly not in the Northern Territory, let alone in Central Australia. SARA EVERINGHAM: Do you think these comments by the Northern Land Council undermine your opposition and the Territory Government's opposition to a nuclear waste dump here? DAVID ROSS: Well, I think so, because at the end of the day the Northern Land Council area is pretty much in a high rainfall area, and as I understand it, you know, somewhere in the order of 300 millimetres fell at Mataranka last week, which is just a hope skip and a jump from Fishers Ridge. So when we talk about honesty and scientific assessments then, you know, let's be honest. I don't think anyone in their right mind would be building a waste dump anywhere near Fishers Ridge or anywhere near the Northern Land Council area. And let's be honest. They're going to be building it in an area that's of very low rainfall and, uh, you know, let's get back to the best possible site in the country was in Woomera, so you know, the Commonwealth needs to be back there talking to the South Australian Government. Let's get down to dealing with this in reality and let's look at it from a scientific point of view. SARA EVERINGHAM: The Northern Land Council's John Daly believes a trip to Lucas Heights would help convince other Territorians nuclear waste can be stored safely. Mr Daly says the council will now take what they learned this week back to consultations with Traditional Owners in the northern region. The Federal Government is planning to make a decision on where to put the national nuclear waste facility by the end of the year. MARK COLVIN: Sara Everingham. ***************************************************************** 76 AU ABC: Dispute may aid nuclear dump proponents. 10/03/2006. ABC News Online Update: Friday, March 10, 2006. 8:44pm (AEDT) The NLC is pushing for land councils to nominate their own site for the waste dump." Proposed site: The NLC is pushing for land councils to nominate their own location for the nuclear waste dump. (Lateline) A dispute between two Aboriginal land councils may make it easier for the Federal Government to find a location for its national nuclear waste dump. The Federal Government announced its plan to build the dump at one of three sites in the Northern Territory last year. It put forward two sites in central Australia, both within 100 kilometres of Alice Springs, and a third at Fishers Ridge, about 40 kilometres from Katherine. The move outraged the Northern Territory Government and the Central Land Council (CLC), which is based in Alice Springs. But the Northern Land Council (NLC) is pushing for land councils to nominate a site on their own territory for a national nuclear waste facility. NLC former chairman Galarrwuy Yunupingu has said a nuclear waste dump could bring financial benefits for Aboriginal people, an argument accepted by the Federal Government. The council's current chairman, John Daly, says it will make a decision about a site based on science, not politics. "If we keep the politics out of it and stick to the science, I think we'll come out with best practice, as far as worldwide conditions are concerned," he said. But CLC director David Ross says his opposition to a waste dump in the Northern Territory is based on science. "I think he's finally got onto the right track and the Government should be looking at this from a scientific point of view," he said. "Let's get back to the report that was prepared for Commonwealth on where are the best sites possible within Australia to build a waste dump in Australia. "And most of those sites, I think you'll find, are elsewhere in Australia and certainly not in the Northern Territory, let alone in central Australia." Mr Ross says the NLC's comments undermine his and the Northern Territory Government's opposition to a nuclear waste dump in the territory. He says the NLC area receives too much rainfall to build a waste dump there. "The best possible site in the country was in Woomera, so the Commonwealth needs to be back there talking to the South Australian Government," he said. "Let's look at this in reality and lets look at it from a scientific point of view." Reactor visit Nine NLC executive members have visited the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney to seek answers about the planned dump. Mr Daly says the visit will help the council make a decision about proposing a site on its land. "All the information we've got is second-hand, so what we wanted to do was, we wanted to bring the executive down and say, 'OK, we want to look a the first-hand information on this and we want to have a look at it purely and simply from a science point of view'," he said. He says the trip will help convince other Territorians nuclear waste can be stored safely. Mr Daly says the council had many questions and this week's visit to Lucas Heights has been enlightening. "Most of the questions that have been raised by the council members have been on the assumption of fear," he said. "And I think the fear's been alleviated. "As far as quite a few of the council members are concerned, I feel a lot more comfortable talking about the issue, knowing what I know now and seeing what I've seen." Mr Daly says the council will now take what they learned this week back to consultations with traditional owners in the northern region. The Federal Government is planning to make a decision on where to put the national nuclear waste facility by the end of the year. [Audio] Related Audio A dispute between two Aboriginal Land councils may make it easier for the Federal Government to find a place to put its national nuclear waste dump. [RealMedia 28k+] [WinMedia 28k+] [MP3] ***************************************************************** 77 Cańon City Daily Record: FCIOC discusses latest Cotter incident Publish Date: 3/10/2006 Blakely Thomas-Aguilar The Daily Record As Cotter Corp. employees are served termination dates in the wake of the depleting ore reserves and a major overhaul of a distant upper management group, members of the Fremont County Independent Outreach Committee discussed on Thursday the next steps for the mill and a recent employee accident. Environmental Coordinator and Radiation Safety Officer Jim Cain told the seven-person committee after midnight March 2, an employee noticed a bulging metal barrel that contained recently produced yellow-cake, the final product of the uranium extraction process. When the employee tried to take the lid off the barrel to release the pressure, Cain said, “yellowcake flew up in the operator’s face.” Cain said it appears there was no damage to the operator based on daily urine tests and a lung scan, but until results return from lab testing, there is no conclusive evidence. The employee returned to work almost immediately but not in the same facility, Cain said. The “incident,” Cain said, has been reported to officials at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment and Cotter awaits the next step, which Randy Roberts said most likely will be a Notice of Violation. Roberts said it was important there would be no community health or environment repercussions because the accident happened inside a contained building on the site. “This does fall into the category that there was no danger to the public,” said Roberts, a teacher at Moun-tain View Core Knowledge. Philip Krauth, the mill superintendent, said through a hydrogen peroxide solution used during processing, oxygen can release over time. He said while this pressurized situation has not happened at the Cotter loca-tion, it has happened at other similar facilities across the United States. At the height of the discussion Thursday was the future of Cotter Corp., much of which is hanging on a pending request to process 11,000 tons of radioactive materials from Sequoyah Fuels Corp., and the poten-tial acquisition of leases on government land for future mining of ore. Angela Bellantoni, the facilitator for FCIOC, said she has been researching the pending availability of 25 sites set to come up for lease should an Environmental Assessment report prove that it is plausible to con-duct mining in the Bureau of Land Management sites. The current state of affairs for Cotter show that about one month’s worth of process-worthy ore is available. The SFC shipment would resume operation for “several months,” according to Krauth’s estimation. CDPHE recently issued a Request for Information about the shipment. The March 3 letter expressed con-cerns about the levels of thorium, aluminum, fluorine and arsenic in the SFC materials, as well as questions about the safety and handling plans for the acceptance and processing of the materials. Cain said while these levels might be elevated higher than the ore currently processed, the mill has ac-cepted materials with the same general levels. “It’s quite the same radiation content to the materials we’ve processed. The gamma exposure rate com-pares to those I’d expect to be similar to yellowcake or ore,” Cain said. Cotter has 45 days to respond to the RFI, but Radiation Management Unit leader Steve Tarlton said Tues-day the final date for a decision on the MAR is uncertain. With the retirement of Richard Ziglar and the replacement of president Richard Cherry with San Diego-based General Atomics staple Amory Quinn, the committee expressed concerns about the uncertainty of Cotter’s future. Negotiations regarding past NOVs and the pending judge’s recommendation regarding a licensing stipula-tion requesting permission to conduct direct disposal on the site leave Cotter on the brink of continued operations or total inactivity. “It’s probably part of several things to look at,” Krauth said. “Is it worth it?” All contents Copyright © 2005 The Cańon City Daily Record. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 78 News & Star: Cumbria needs nuclear jobs Published on 10/03/2006 Even as the decommissioning process takes place at Sellafield, there is talk of a new nuclear power station there. The Government’s Energy Review is expected to pave the wave for a new generation of nuclear stations. Sellafield has been identified as a possible site for a station which could create up to 1,000 permanent and 2,000 construction jobs. A new reactor could be operational by 2016. For more than half a century west Cumbria has been at the forefront of nuclear power. We welcome the prospect of this relationship continuing, not least for the massive boost which thousands of jobs would bring to the local economy. But west Cumbria must continue its drive towards diversification. Nuclear power should be one piece of the jigsaw, rather than something on which the whole area is dependent. ***************************************************************** 79 News & Star: THE RACE IS ON FOR NEW NUKE PLANT Published on10/03/2006 By Victoria Brenan SELLAFIELD has been identified as a potential site for a new nuclear power station, creating up to 1,000 permanent jobs and 2,000 construction posts. Consultants told a special meeting of county councillors yesterday that the site was one of five in the UK which could house a new nuclear reactor. The former reactor at Sellafield, Calder Hall, is currently being decommissioned after it was closed in 2003. The new reactor could be a third the size of Thorp where nuclear reprocessing is currently carried out on the site. It could be operational by 2016, creating between 600 and 1,000 permanent posts with a further 2,000 involved in building the Ł3 billion plant – likely to take up to six years. The consultants were appointed by the county and district councils to advise them on the implications of the government’s Energy Review, which is widely expected to pave the way for a new generation of nuclear stations. Environmental Resources Management Ltd (ERM) and Integrated Decision Management Ltd concluded that Sellafield was a “viable option for a nuclear new-build, although not an optimal one”. There were concerns about the plant’s location ‘far away’ from the National Grid and its distance from the south of the UK where most demand is. “Sellafield is not the best site in the UK, but probably in the top five or six,” said Gregg Butler, of IDM. “It would have to be looked at quite seriously.” Pro-nuclear Copeland MP Jamie Reed welcomed the news. He said: “It’s no surprise to anybody that west Cumbria is one of the premier sites for nuclear new build. “It is now incumbent upon the county council to speak with one voice and let government know we want to see new nuclear build in west Cumbria as soon as possible – and that nuclear must be part of the new energy policy. “The jobs would certainly be welcome and in time would fetch other investment into the area. “It’s an obvious success waiting to happen and it now requires the county to speak with one voice to say this is what we want to happen.” Mr Reed earlier this week dismissed as ‘hogwash’ a report from government advisory body The Sustainable Development Commission which told Tony Blair not to build a new generation of nuclear reactors but to instead back a further expansion of renewable power. The report identified five major disadvantages to nuclear power including toxic waste, the cost, the threat of terror attacks and the effect on efforts to improve energy efficiency. Yesterday’s meeting in Kendal was held to advise county councillors on their response to the government’s energy review and how to address the impact of decommissioning at Sellafield will have. Around 8,000 job losses are expected over the next six years. Tim Heslop, Cumbria County Council spokesman on nuclear issues, said: “It’s a busy year for nuclear issues and the first big decision as a county is whether we want new nuclear reactors in Cumbria. “This seminar has been all about gathering the information from all sides, encouraging informed debate and making sure we’re making the right decisions that will have a massive impact on Cumbria’s future.” Rosie Mathisen, nuclear opportunities manager for West Lakes Renaissance, said the decommissioning process itself was an ‘opportunity’ which had led to 2,000 jobs doing clean-up work contracted out by the British Nuclear Group. This could rise to around 4,000 over the coming years. But, she added: “We can’t just rely on decommissioning. “We need to present a blueprint to the government looking at tourism, health, education and developing the west Cumbrian economy.” The meeting, which brought together delegates from the Nuclear Decommissiong Agency, Nirex, the Environment Agency and environmental groups, also heard how diversification was vital to secure new investment. The final report by the consultants on Sellafield’s viability as a new nuclear power site is expected to be presented to councillors at the end of the month. ***************************************************************** 80 Pahrump Valley Times: Senator doubts Congress will act on Yucca this year March 10, 2006 GONE FISSION By STEVE TETREAULT PVT WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate's energy committee said Tuesday he did not think Congress would act on legislation this year to help establish a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nye County. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said it is getting late to carry on a nuclear waste debate during a congressional session that figures to be shortened by elections this fall. "It seems to me to be very difficult to get it done this year," Domenici said in a remark published by Environment &Energy Daily, an Internet publication that reports on Congress. Domenici's spokeswoman could not be reached Tuesday to confirm his comment, which also was reported by Congress Daily. The senator spoke to reporters following a committee meeting. The remarks by a senator who is considered influential on nuclear issues comes as the Bush administration continues to negotiate internally over a proposed bill intended to jump-start the stalled Yucca program. Sources say officials at the Department of Energy and at the White House continue to differ on key elements of the bill, which is expected to spark debate and opposition from repository opponents. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Tuesday he hoped it would be ready "within the month." Bodman on Friday said the Bush administration would not seek permission from Congress in the bill to establish interim sites where nuclear waste could be located from power plants until Yucca Mountain is completed. On Monday, administration sources said Bodman "spoke too soon," and that interim storage still was being negotiated. Meanwhile Tuesday, Democrats said the administration's contradiction of Bodman may signal "the beginning of the end" for the energy secretary. "Given the Bush administration's emphasis on loyalty, and its record of marginalizing dissenters, this development does not bode well for Secretary Bodman," said a statement distributed by the Democrats' "war room" established by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. Democrats said former EPA secretary Christine Todd Whitman and former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill were among high-ranking Bush officials who left their jobs after disagreeing with the White House on policy matters. For comment or questions, please e-mail webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com Copyright © Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 81 [southnews] Nuclear non-proliferation a delicate business Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:15:51 -0600 (CST) "Any country has the right to master these (nuclear) operations for civilian uses. But in doing so, it also masters the most difficult steps in making a nuclear bomb," - Mohamed ElBaradei Nuclear non-proliferation a delicate business The Age, Australia By Mark Coultan March 10, 2006 IN HIS speech accepting the Nobel peace prize, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, pointed to a problem with the rules that attempt to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. "Any country has the right to master these (nuclear) operations for civilian uses. But in doing so, it also masters the most difficult steps in making a nuclear bomb," he said. To overcome this, he proposed "setting up a reserve fuel bank, under IAEA control, so that every country will be assured that it will get the fuel needed for its bona fide peaceful nuclear activities. This assurance of supply will remove the incentive and the justification for each country to develop its own fuel cycle." Dr ElBaradei has walked an independent line on the issue of Iraq's (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction, and Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology. Washington has accused him of not being tough enough on rogue states, and last year lobbied to replace him. This week, the Iranians attacked his report to the Security Council detailing their failures to comply with the IAEA's requests. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. The US, and many others, don't believe it, pointing to Iran's abundant non-nuclear energy supplies, and the 20 years it has spent working secretly on its nuclear program. It has accused Iran of lying to, and concealing material from, the IAEA. For months the US has demanded that Iran be brought before United Nations Security Council for breaching the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. But US President George Bush then undermines that treaty by supplying nuclear technology to India, a country that has refused to sign it. The NPT has, for the past 36 years, been the main instrument limiting the spread of nuclear weapons. The deal, negotiated during the 1960s Cold War, was that the five declared nuclear-armed states the US, the then Soviet Union, France, Britain and China would disarm their nuclear weapons if other nations agreed not to acquire them. Those pursuing nuclear-powered electricity generation did so under safeguards developed by the IAEA. But many countries opposed the treaty. India never signed it, saying it served only to preserve the world power balance. Nor did Pakistan, India's neighbour and rival. Both countries have tested nuclear weapons. Israel, a non-declared nuclear power, is not a signatory. But for the most part, and despite little or no efforts by the five big powers to reduce their nuclear armoury, the treaty stuck. There were even some successes. South Africa gave up a nuclear program, as did Libya. IN HIS speech accepting the Nobel peace prize, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, pointed to a problem with the rules that attempt to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. "Any country has the right to master these (nuclear) operations for civilian uses. But in doing so, it also masters the most difficult steps in making a nuclear bomb," he said. To overcome this, he proposed "setting up a reserve fuel bank, under IAEA control, so that every country will be assured that it will get the fuel needed for its bona fide peaceful nuclear activities. This assurance of supply will remove the incentive and the justification for each country to develop its own fuel cycle." Dr ElBaradei has walked an independent line on the issue of Iraq's (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction, and Iran's pursuit of nuclear technology. Washington has accused him of not being tough enough on rogue states, and last year lobbied to replace him. This week, the Iranians attacked his report to the Security Council detailing their failures to comply with the IAEA's requests. Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes only. The US, and many others, don't believe it, pointing to Iran's abundant non-nuclear energy supplies, and the 20 years it has spent working secretly on its nuclear program. It has accused Iran of lying to, and concealing material from, the IAEA. For months the US has demanded that Iran be brought before United Nations Security Council for breaching the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. But US President George Bush then undermines that treaty by supplying nuclear technology to India, a country that has refused to sign it. The NPT has, for the past 36 years, been the main instrument limiting the spread of nuclear weapons. The deal, negotiated during the 1960s Cold War, was that the five declared nuclear-armed states the US, the then Soviet Union, France, Britain and China would disarm their nuclear weapons if other nations agreed not to acquire them. Those pursuing nuclear-powered electricity generation did so under safeguards developed by the IAEA. But many countries opposed the treaty. India never signed it, saying it served only to preserve the world power balance. Nor did Pakistan, India's neighbour and rival. Both countries have tested nuclear weapons. Israel, a non-declared nuclear power, is not a signatory. But for the most part, and despite little or no efforts by the five big powers to reduce their nuclear armoury, the treaty stuck. There were even some successes. South Africa gave up a nuclear program, as did Libya. The failures include North Korea and Iran, who both signed the treaty. North Korea withdrew from it and then announced it had acquired a nuclear weapon. Iran ran a clandestine nuclear program, which it claims is for peaceful purposes. The political leverage that can be applied to Iran is limited, and it knows it. As the world's fourth-largest oil producer, Iran has more leverage on the rest of the world than the Security Council has against it. China and Russia, with strong commercial interests in Iran, both oppose applying sanctions against Iran. The most likely response is a statement from the president of the Security Council (this month chaired by Argentina) urging Iran to heed IAEA requirements. Months of diplomacy will likely follow. The likelihood of military action against Iran is remote. The US is already overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan, President Bush's public support is low, and Americans are war weary. America's case will not be helped by President Bush's recent deal with India. His double standard will not be lost on Arabs. America's deal with India is a dilemma for Australia, a strong supporter of the NPT and the first country to sign the additional protocol, which provides for increased inspections and safeguards. Australia, the world's largest exporter of uranium (which is to be used only for electricity generation by those who buy it), plays an important role in the non-proliferation regime, which proscribes the supply of uranium and nuclear technology to those countries that have not signed the NPT. It is this provision that President Bush has disregarded in his deal with India. NUTS AND BOLTS OF A TREATY ?The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty aims to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to foster peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving general and complete disarmament. ?Establishes a safeguards system under the responsibility of the International Atomic Energy Agency. ?Came into effect on March 5, 1970 and was to remain for a 25-year period. ?Signed by the US, Britain, the Soviet Union and 59 other countries. ?The three major signatories agree not to assist states not possessing nuclear explosives in obtaining or producing them. ?More countries later ratified the treaty, including the two other major nuclear powers, France and China, in 1992. It was extended indefinitely in 1995 by a consensus vote of 174 countries at the United Nations. ? May 11, 1995: more than 170 countries extended the treaty indefinitely, without conditions. ?Review conference in April/May 2000, five nuclear weapon states China, France, Russia, Britain and the US pledged their commitment to the ultimate goal of complete nuclear disarmament under effective international controls. ?As of January 2005, the NPT membership stands at 189 states. http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/nuclear-nonproliferation-a-delicate-business/ 2006/03/10/1141701693455.html The archives of South News can be found at http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ ***************************************************************** 82 ContraCostaTimes.com: Sandia lab invites guests to join in celebrating 50 years | 03/10/2006 | LIVERMORE: Festivities included luncheon, speaker Celebrating its 50th anniversary, Sandia/California National Laboratories opened its doors this week to distinguished visitors and employees' friends and families. Opened in 1956, the Livermore site is a second main lab for the Sandia Laboratories, headquartered in Albuquerque, N.M. Operated by Lockheed Martin for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration, Sandia is one of three U.S. Energy Department defense labs. The other two are Lawrence Livermore Laboratory and the Los Alamos National laboratories. Anniversary celebrations began Tuesday and ran through Thursday, with special displays, talks by notables such as former Lawrence Livermore director Dr. Johnny Foster and luncheons for workers, retirees and others. ***************************************************************** 83 SF New Mexican: LANL blasts excess explosives: Mesa-top detonation rocks area homes Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:10 pm The New Mexican A planned detonation Thursday at Los Alamos National Laboratory rattled neighboring windows and the owners behind them. The blast prompted residents to call law-enforcement agencies as they wondered what happened. "Around 11 a.m., I felt this explosion that almost lifted the house (off) the foundation and lifted my wife out of her chair," Steve Quinlan of Cuyamungue said. "I first thought it was thunder, lightning or a sonic boom," he said. Spokespeople said the lab's Dynamic Experimentation Division had detonated 300 pounds of high explosives. The lab stockpiles American weapons and must periodically destroy excess weapons, spokeswoman Kathy DeLucas said. The division deals with "things changing shape and form," she said. The division is trained to work with explosives (the lab calls them "energetic materials"), and the team is "the best in the world" at it, lab spokesman Kevin Roark said. The explosion happened on top of an empty mesa on lab property and probably was set off through copper wire and a detonator, Roark said. Quinlan said the mesa is about 10 miles from his house. The lab is permitted to detonate up to 2,000 pounds of explosives in a single blast, DeLucas said. Quinlan said he didn't think it was a lab detonation. They usually make the ground shake, he said, but Thursday's blast seemingly came out of the sky. It also was unusually intense. When the lab detonates explosives, "usually it's a boom," he said, "but this was a ka-boom." DeLucas speculated that unusually low clouds trapped the explosion's sound, allowing it to disperse throughout areas surrounding Los Alamos. "We did 400 pounds (Wednesday), and no one said a thing," DeLucas said. She also said another detonation is planned for around 11 a.m. today. Contact Brandon Garcia at 995-3826 or at bgarcia@sfnewmexican.com. ***************************************************************** 84 Santa Fe New Mexican: Feds OK lab's new pay, benefits package Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:10 pm By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican The federal government says the pay-and-benefits package offered by the new manager of Los Alamos National Laboratory is "substantially" the same as what workers have now. That determination was announced Thursday by the National Nuclear Security Administration. The proposal came from Los Alamos National Security, which is scheduled to take over management of the lab June 1 from the University of California. Thursday's announcement means Los Alamos National Security, a private company, can send job offers to lab workers. Employees have until May 15 to make a decision. "We're pleased to have their approval, so we can extend offers of employment to the people of Los Alamos National Laboratory," company spokesman Jeff Berger said. Three changes have been made to the pay-and-benefits proposal originally submitted by Los Alamos National Security, according to officials involved. The first is an assurance that no domestic-partner benefits will be lost when Los Alamos National Security takes over, Berger said. The second concerns death benefits for survivors of retired lab employees. Lab workers won't get the "25-percent survivor-continuance benefit" available under the University of California, but will get a 2.4 percent increase to certain monthly pensions to compensate for that change, NNSA reports show. Finally, employees who have chosen not to pay Social Security taxes in the past will have to now under the new manager, according to NNSA's Anthony Lovato. Those employees won't be eligible for Social Security benefits as a result, but they will be reimbursed for the new taxes they'll have to pay, Lovato said. Also Thursday, the NNSA explained three areas of concern that did not change: u Many lab retirees have expressed concerns that a private company will take over management of the retirement plan from the University of California. "There is not a greater risk to employees in having their pension plans managed by (Los Alamos National Security,)" an NNSA report reads. Lovato noted the Los Alamos pension plan will be backed by the federal government. u Lump-sum payments to lab retirees won't be allowed under the new manager, because the retirement plan would be subject to different laws resulting in much bigger payouts, according to the NNSA report. That means the new benefits package would not be "substantially equivalent" to what workers have now, according to the report. u The amount of money an employee could put into a retirement account, tax free, will be lowered under the new plan. That's because Internal Revenue Service regulations are different for private companies, according to the NNSA report. The University of California is governed by a different set of regulations for public entities. NNSA officials reported they received 1,300 comments to the original pay-and-benefits proposal submitted by Los Alamos National Security. The pay-and-benefits proposal is scheduled to be formally accepted by the government later this spring. A technical staff member and diversity leader at the lab said the domestic-partner survivor benefits have been a concern for some, and answers have been slow in coming. "What they're saying is very confusing," employee Julie Johnston said. Berger said his company has responded to hundreds of employee inquiries and continues to do so. And Lovato said NNSA would try to clarify the domestic-partner issue. U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said he was studying the proposal Thursday and encouraged employees to do the same. ©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican, all rights reserved. Opinions ***************************************************************** 85 Platts: US DOE sees its budget rising 4% to 8% over the next five years Washington (Platts)--9Mar2006 The US Energy Department expects its budget to grow 4% to 8% over the next five years, to $24.6 billion-$27 billion, according to a five-year fiscal plan Platts obtained Thursday. The plan, which maps out DOE spending and management strategies through 2011, calls for the department to increase funding for nuclear technologies by $1.3 billion annually, if the department decides in fiscal 2008 to proceed with the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. Traditionally, one-third of DOE's budget is spent on energy-related programs. The balance pays for nuclear weapons programs and cleanups at the department's weapons facilities. Under the lower "target" plan, funding for the proposed nuclear waste repository in Nevada would be flat, at just over $500 million annually. Also at that level, funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy would decline to $1.13 billion in 2011 from a requested $1.18 billion in fiscal 2007, and hydrogen technology spending would increase to $323 million from a requested $196 million. By contrast, weatherization would be slashed to $76 million, from $243 million this year. That program has been the source of controversy since DOE proposed to cut it to $164 million in fiscal 2007. DOE also is targeting for elimination the industrial technologies program. The program was cut by $11 million to $46 million in the fiscal 2007 budget request. Science spending would rise to $5.2 billion in fiscal 2011, from $4.1 billion in the fiscal 2007 request. Congress mandated the five-year budget plan as part of DOE's fiscal 2006 spending allocation. ---Daniel Whitten, daniel_whitten@platts.com For more information, take a trial to Platts Inside Energy at http://insideenergy.platts.com. Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill Companies] ***************************************************************** 86 Tri-Valley Herald: Sandia : The other weapons lab Article Last Updated: 03/10/2006 6:23 AM PST Engineers reflect on 50 years of bomb making in the shadow of Los Alamos, Livermore labs By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER Donna Edwards, a systems analyst at SANDAI and her mom, Barbara, both from Livermore, check out the bomb exhibit at the lab. (Jay Solmonson - STAFF) LIVERMORE — Inside the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, the rivalry between Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore weapons labs — for H-bomb designs, money and prestige — is legendary. But a third H-bomb lab, Sandia, operates inside that competition, with branches in California and New Mexico as two houses of defense science divided by geography and assignment if united by a single manager. What began 50 years ago as a team of ordnance engineers dispatched from New Mexico to help fledgling bomb designers at the University of California Rad Lab became a permanent partner as a full-fledged national security lab called Sandia-California. Frank Murar was one of the first 16 Sandians to come to California. This week, he and hundreds of other retirees came back for Sandia-California's anniversary and swapped tales from the Cold War arms race. "We were working with tight time scales in the'50s and the'60s in a race with the Soviet Union," he said Thursday. Murar helped create the United States' first intercontinental ballistic missile warhead and, after the Soviets broke the 1958-1962 nuclear testing moratorium, was among U.S. weaponeers who filled the skies over the Pacific with massive detonations to test bomb ideas they had stored up. "We just had a furious effort," he remembered. "There were just a whole series of designs that people had thought up." The Rad Lab and the Sandia labs, headquartered in Albuquerque, N.M., could hardly have been more different in culture. Lawrence Livermore was full of creative academics, hungry to break Los Alamos' early'50s monopoly on weapons design. Sandia's cultural parentage at Western Electric, then AT and now Lockheed Martin filled it with button-down engineers practicing near obsession with detail and procedure. Those cultures melded in a weapons design partnership team that became the tightest working relationship in the weapons complex. "We didn't always sing from the same song sheet as the folks in Albuquerque, but we had to get along with the heavy metal folks across East Avenue" at neighboring Lawrence Livermore, Jack Howard, Sandia-California's first director, said in a recorded message for the anniversary. The California labs produced some of the safest, most compact and innovative H-bombs ever devised. They invented the concepts of insensitive high explosives that merely melt in the presence of flame and permissive action links or coded locks to limit the odds of an unauthorized use of a nuclear bomb. By the end of the Cold War, Lawrence Livermore and Sandia-California weaponeers succeeded in packing every available safety and security feature into their bombs and warheads. "Weapons in the stockpile that have been the safest and most secure combinations of components came from these two labs," Lawrence Livermore weapons chief Bruce Goodwin told Sandians Wednesday at their 50th celebration. For much of the Cold War, Los Alamos physicists tended to hand a canned nuclear explosive design to Sandia-New Mexico to turn into a weapon. Thomas Cook, who as vice president over Sandia-California from 1968 to 1982 was its longest-serving chief, said the Lawrence-Sandia team conceived of their designs as a single whole. "In California, the weapons were all integrated," he said. "It saved a lot of weight." The military, especially the Navy, often ended up choosing less feature-filled designs from a competing Los Alamos/Sandia-New Mexico team for the most numerous weapons in the arsenal. The Californians, in other words, began and ended the Cold War as the underdogs. "We came in second, so we just have to try harder," said Mim John, chief of Sandia-California. For two decades, Sandians were forbidden to work on anything but weapons. But with the oil crisis of the mid-1970s, Sandia-California scientists carried the tools and knowledge of fluids that they gained from working with hydrogen in nuclear weapons to studying internal combustion engines. Inside the lab's Combustion Research Facility, they fired lasers through clouds of burning gas and diesel, then used computer simulations to help the automotive industry boost the efficiency of its engines. After the Cold War, the lab turned more of its staff toward biology, nanotechnology, chem-bio defense and homeland security. Johnny Foster, a former Livermore lab director and Pentagon testing chief, said Wednesday that Sandia's small California lab was agile and forged ties to universities and Silicon Valley that "attracted an outstanding staff, rich in advanced degrees." Measured by patents per capita, Foster said, "pound for pound, it has outperformed the other laboratories, perhaps in part because it has always worried that it (along with Livermore Lab) was on the verge of being declared superfluous and shut down." People in Livermore did not know what to make of the Sandians from New Mexico back in 1956. The town, said Howard, "didn't exactly welcome us with open arms." But lab staff threw time into a new sewage plant that restarted the flow of federal home loans to Livermore and volunteered in the local schools. "We liked home" in Livermore, Howard said. "And we helped fill Livermore schools with kids who liked home as well. Contact Ian Hoffman at ihoffman@angnewspapers.com. © 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 87 lamonitor.com: NNSA: LANL compensation plan equivalent The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor After considering public comments about the compensation proposal for transferring employees at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the local federal manager says the total package qualifies as "substantially equivalent." The decision clears the way for Los Alamos National Security (LANS), the new corporate manager of the laboratory to dispatch formal job offers to the current workforce. LANL employees will have until May 15 to decide whether to accept the offers. The new contract remains on schedule to begin June 1. The change in management means the new benefit plan "cannot be identical" to the current plan, NNSA Los Alamos Site Office Manager Ed Wilmot acknowledged, because of statutory differences between benefit plans sponsored by state and private institutions. He accepted LANS formulation that the equivalence would best be measured on the whole and determined that it met the basic test, that the employees transferring to the new program "should receive neither significantly more nor significantly less in aggregate value." The National Nuclear Security Administration that oversees the laboratory contract said it received 1,309 comments on the proposal, during a 10-day period that began Feb. 16 and was extended through Feb. 26. The comments were divided into six key issues and prompted some minor adjustments in the package definitions as well as additional explanations. Several of the questions were answered as a "decision." For example, although there were a number of concerns about the new, untried, untested and perhaps "risky" pension plan that LANS would be establishing, the NNSA response provided a more detailed description of how it will be set up and then concluded with the decision: "There is not a greater risk to employees in having their pension plans managed by LANS." Norman Kurnit, who has analyzed the compensation packages for the Coalition for LANL Excellence, still believes there is clearly a greater risk in a pension guaranteed by the troubled Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), than the one currently guaranteed by the University of California/NNSA. "We were also told that the Department of Energy had in fact in the past stepped in to rescue at least one pension fund when the contractor went out of business," Kurnit wrote in an e-mail this morning. "Are they now reneging on the promise to act that way in the future, with phrases like 'subject to applicable laws, NNSA is obligated to reimburse LANS for the allowable costs' and relying instead on PBGC?" Anthony Lovato, a contracting officer with NNSA, said there would be a further clarification of questions that were raised about domestic partners' survivor benefits, which were eliminated in proposed defined benefit plan. "LANS has found some ways to make it substantially equivalent," Lovato said, through optional forms of payment. A group of about 450 employees were given an exemption from Social Security under a special arrangement with the UC some time ago, and would be required by federal law to make Social Security payments under LANS, even though they were unlikely to have enough credits to qualify for Social Security. Responding to this apparent inequity, LANS has agreed to refund their social security taxes over time, according to NNSA's response. Lovato said many of the comments on the compensation plan - "a heck of a lot, maybe 300" - were related to the UC proposal to spinoff all UC-LANL retirees into a separate group. "We don't have a proposal from UC that they want to spin it off," he said. "We don't have anything to act on." The UC Board of Regents meets next week and its agenda includes one informational item on the UC pension matter. Glenn Lockhart, another LANL retiree associated with the Coalition for LANL Excellence, said this morning that transferring employees would lose long-term care insurance that is offered by the UC CALPERS program. "UC employees and retirees are eligible to sign up for the plan, but (transferring) employees are out in the cold," he said, adding that there were many decisions that were apparently based on the "sole discretion" of the contracting officer. The congressional delegation, which has played a watchful role in the contract developments up to this point, will continue to be engaged. "I just received a summary of the NNSA assessment of the benefits plans and want time to study it, and visit with experts on what this will mean for lab workers and retirees." Sen. Pete Domenici, said in a prepared release Thursday. "I continue to encourage employees to study their options and choices." "Many employees and retirees still have serious questions about their retirement benefits," said Sen. Jeff Bingaman, in a statement this morning. "The generic statement from NNSA that the LANS package is 'substantially equivalent' is insufficient to address those questions or provide them confidence. I urge NNSA and the LANS team to address these concerns before finalizing the package," Bingaman said. Rep. Tom Udall said he was weighing the proposals against the "substantially equivalent" requirement. "My staff and I will be in Los Alamos visiting with the community to hear their opinions and concerns, as we have done from the beginning of this process," he added in a statement today. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor 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: *****************************************************************