*****************************************************************
04/18/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.92
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 BBC: Petition for nuclear-free Wales
2 [southnews] Bush won't exclude Iran nuke strike
3 [NYTr] Iran's ex-Pres Stresses Peaceful Use of Nuke Pgm
4 IRNA: Iran future nuclear talks to be based on IAEA regulations - 1s
5 IRNA: ElBaradei's deputy due in Iran Friday: source 
6 IRNA: Rafsanjani: Threat of possible US military action on Iran a
7 IRNA: Tehran, Tokyo to hold nuclear talks: official 
8 BBC: Iran brushes off uranium worries
9 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Still Opposed to Sanctions on Iran
10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy: Iran Sanctions Discussed
11 New York Times: Iran Claims Nuclear Steps in New Worry - 
12 BBC: Oil soars to $71 on nuclear row
13 AFP: Canada's Harper backs US nuclear standoff with Iran 
14 AFP: Iran ready for showdown with US - Rafsanjani
15 AFP: Iran nuclear talks start in Moscow 
16 AFP: Bush keeps Iran options open as diplomats meet in Moscow -
17 AFP: Powers meet in Moscow on Iran nuclear impasse 
18 BBC: US pressure on 'criminal' N Korea
19 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Talks to Resume Friday 
20 AFP: US asks China to be assertive to break Korea nuclear logjam -
21 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Amid Threats, Some Republicans Seek
22 US: [du-list] DU:   THE REAL WMD'S IN IRAQ - OURS
23 Xinhua: India refuses US proposal to stop nuclear test   
24 Financial express : We'll retain right to N-tests - India to US
25 UPI: India: Against U.S. nuclear conditions
26 [NYTr] Venez Denies US Charges of "Nuclear Deals"
27 Sydney Morning Herald: Coal will still be king of power, says indust
28 Calgary Sun: Nuclear nod unlikely
29 New York Times: In Candor From China, Efforts to Ease Anxiety - 
30 UPI: Russia: G8 to focus on energy
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
31 UN Issues Landmark Health Report On Chernobyl: Excess Cancer Cases, 
32 US: Science for Sale: The People of TMI Respond to Patrick Moore 
33 US: [NukeNet] Media Rebuttal Re More NPPs Needed [19 More In S.E.
34 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Oconee Nuclear Plant 
35 US: NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice
36 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at McGuire Nuclear Plant
37 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Victims Still Face Uncertainty
38 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Toll May One Day Surpass 90K
39 Guardian Unlimited: Hidden costs of Finnish reactor
40 ForUm :: Chernobyl aftermath 20 years ago
41 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Oyster Creek
42 Daily Yomiuri: Winny virus exposes nuclear plant info
43 Bellona: Nuclear Textbook Provokes Debate
44 BBC: Leaders 'not ready' for Chernobyl
45 BBC: Greenpeace rejects Chernobyl toll
46 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Catawba Nuclear Plant
47 BBC: The Chernobyl nightmare revisited
48 US: WNYC: Indian Point Threatened With Lawsuit Over Leaks
49 US: Platts: Nine Mile Point-2 sets station record for shortest refue
50 Platts: ANALYSIS: UK lawmakers say nukes won't fill energy gap, gas
51 AFP: Public opinion warming to nuclear power 
52 SE: CLOSURE OF BULGARIA'S NPP MAY LEAD TO BALKAN ENERGY INSTABILITY
53 US: NRC: NRC Chairman to Visit Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant Apri
54 Farmers Weekly: Chernobyl compensation in need of review as Welsh fa
55 Greenpeace International: Chernobyl death toll grossly underestimate
56 US: Vallejo Times Herald: Shiloh Wind Project bringing needed, clean
57 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Meeting Notice for Discussion of 
58 US: NRC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Denver Federal Center
59 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee Meet
60 US: NRC: NRC Enforcement Policy: Extension of Discretion Period of
61 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice
62 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
63 US: NRC: NUREG-1842, ``Evaluation of Human Reliability Analysis Meth
64 US: NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for th
65 AFP: Gorbachev wants cleaner environment, help for Chernobyl victims
66 US: NRC: NRC, FERC Commissioners to Discuss Grid Reliability April 2
67 US: NewsDay: Riverkeeper threatens lawsuit to get EPA involved in In
68 US: csmonitor.com: Should oldest US nuke plant stay on line? | 
69 AFP: Russian scientists downplay fallout from Chernobyl disaster -
70 US: NRC: NRC Finds No Significant Environmental Impacts from Extende
71 icWales: MPs join opposition to nuclear move
72 icNorthWales: Secrets of N-plant fallout revealed
73 icWales: Shockwaves of Chernobyl still felt 
74 US: Online NewsHour: Exelon Corportaion Mishandles Nuclear Power Lea
75 UPI: Group predicts 100,000 Chernobyl deaths
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
76 Pacific Magazine: Nuclear Security Official Postpones Visit Indefini
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
77 [DU Information List] Is Doomsday coming for u.s forces in iraq
78 US: "Dummies" Irving Wesley Hall on TV
79 [du-list] Depleted uranium in The Daily Reckoning, Mogambo
80 US: [du-list] Aid urged for vets exposed to Uranium
81 US: [du-list] Depleted uranium could damage DNA
82 [du-list] Iraq Mess Is Literally Making People Sick (April 10,
83 US: [du-list] Cantwell demands Rumsfeld answer DU questions; Stars
84 Guardian Unlimited: Fallout
85 US: NRC: NRC Proposes $3,250 Civil Penalty Against Firm in Puerto Ri
86 icWales: Radiation tests continue on 359 farms
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
87 US: Herald Sun: Beattie won't budge on uranium 
88 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Goshute nuke plan foes urge public response 
89 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH86 Spent fuel casks
90 Washington Post: The Debate: The Toxic Waste Version of Shrinky Dink
91 US: PRN: Most Contaminated Counties in California Shown to be the Mo
92 US: NRC: RIN 3150-AH86 List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: 
 
                           PEACE
 
93 BBC: ON THIS DAY | 18 | 1960: Thousands protest against H-bomb
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
94 DOE: Extraordinary Contractual Actions
95 Knox News: Happy neutron dance
96 Knox News: First refurbishment of B-61 bomb components finished at Y
97 Knox News:Wamp says agency using Y-12 funds at other facilities
98 reviewjournal.com: Reid endorses UNLV bid for DOE contract
99 Hanford News: FFTF gets historic landmark designation
100 DOE: Office of Environmental Management; Site-Specific Advisory
101 Paducah Sun: Whistle-blower: DOE after his job - 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 BBC: Petition for nuclear-free Wales
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
[Campaigners handed in petition ]                               

Campaigners handed in the petition at Downing Street                                                                

Anti-nuclear power campaigners have handed in a petition to 
Downing Street to "keep Wales nuclear-free". 

The petition, signed by several thousand, was taken to London by 
a delegation including three Welsh MPs - two Liberal Democrats 
and one Labour. 

The petition calls for "safer, cleaner and cheaper technology" 
than nuclear power to be used in Wales. 

Prime Minister Tony Blair has said renewable energy could fill 
some but not all the UK's energy shortfall. 

It is believed Mr Blair favours building new nuclear power 
stations to meet the country's energy needs. 

The petition will be presented by Liberal Democrat MPs Lembit 
Opik (Montgomeryshire), Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central) and 
Labour MP Nia Griffith (Llanelli) along with representatives from 
Welsh environmental groups. 

[Trawsfynydd nuclear reactor]                           

The Trawsfynydd nuclear plant in Gwynedd is being decommissioned                                                                

Organisers said the petition, which pledges "strong opposition" 
to nuclear power in Wales, had been signed by between 4,000 and 
5,000. 

Ms Griffith said:"We simply do not want to down the route of new 
nuclear build in Wales. 

"It's completely unnecessary. It won't meet the timescale 
required to buy in other energies more quickly. And the legacy of 
nuclear waste is horrendous." 

The Trawsfynydd nuclear power plant in Gwynedd is being 
decommissioned, while the Wylfa plant on Anglesey is due to close 
in 2010 - although local councillors have supported the principle 
of building a second one on the island. 

Ms Willott said Mr Blair should not "simply impose" a new 
generation of nuclear power stations in Wales. 

New generation 

She added: "Our message to the government is clear: nuclear power 
is not the answer to Wales' energy needs. 

"Nuclear power is hugely expensive, has a terrible environmental 
legacy, and is a huge security risk. 

In November, Mr Blair launched a review of UK energy needs which 
could pave the way for a new generation of nuclear power 
stations. 

The review is headed by Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks and will 
report by the middle of next year.                                                       

*****************************************************************
 2 [southnews] Bush won't exclude Iran nuke strike
 
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 01:47:07 -0500 (CDT)


US president George W Bush yesterday refused to rule out nuclear strikes 
against Iran which sent oil prices to a record high of $72.64 a barrel, 
raising fears of a cut in supplies from the world's fourth biggest crude 
exporter.

Iran, which says its nuclear programme is purely peaceful, told 
permanent members of the UN Security Council it would pursue atomic 
technology whatever they decided at a meeting in Moscow yesterday.

Asked if options included planning for a nuclear strike, Mr Bush 
replied: "All options are on the table. We want to solve this issue 
diplomatically and we're working hard to do so." Speculation about a US 
attack has mounted since a report in New Yorker magazine said this month 
that Washington was mulling over the option of using tactical nuclear 
weapons to knock out Iran's subterranean nuclear sites.

Bush Won't Rule Out Nuclear Strike on Iran

By Edmund Blair
Reuters Tue Apr 18, 11:36 AM ET

President Bush refused on Tuesday to rule out nuclear strikes against 
Iran if diplomacy fails to curb the Islamic Republic's atomic ambitions.

Iran, which says its nuclear program is purely peaceful, told world 
powers it would pursue atomic technology, whatever they decide at a 
meeting in Moscow later in the day.

Bush said in Washington he would discuss Iran's nuclear activities with 
China's President Hu Jintao this week and avoided ruling out nuclear 
retaliation if diplomatic efforts fail.

Asked if options included planning for a nuclear strike, Bush replied: 
"All options are on the table. We want to solve this issue 
diplomatically and we're working hard to do so."

Speculation about a U.S. attack has mounted since a report in New Yorker 
magazine said this month that Washington was mulling the option of using 
tactical nuclear weapons to knock out Iran's subterranean nuclear sites.

The United States, which accuses Iran of seeking atom bombs, was 
expected to push for targeted sanctions against Tehran when it meets the 
U.N. Security Council's other permanent members -- Britain, France, 
China and Russia -- plus Germany in Moscow.

Russia and China oppose sanctions and the use of force.

Deputy foreign ministers from the six nations are meeting ahead of an 
end-April deadline for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to 
report on whether Iran is complying with U.N. demands that it halt 
uranium enrichment.

"I recommend that they do not make hasty decisions, be prudent and study 
their path in the past. Any time they have pressured Iran they have got 
adverse results," Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said.

"Whatever the result of this meeting might be, Iran will not abandon its 
rights (to nuclear technology)," he added later.

Iran defied U.N. demands by declaring last week it had enriched uranium 
to a level used in power stations and was aiming for industrial-scale 
production, ratcheting up tensions and sending oil prices to record 
highs above $72 a barrel.

The United States, which already enforces its own sweeping sanctions on 
Iran, wants the Security Council to be ready to take strong diplomatic 
action, including so-called targeted measures such as a freeze on assets 
and visa curbs.

Washington says it does not want to embargo Iran's oil and gas 
industries to avoid creating hardship for the Iranian people. Iran is 
the world's fourth-biggest oil exporter.

CHINA, RUSSIA OPPOSE SANCTIONS

China, which sent an envoy to Iran on Friday to try to defuse the 
standoff, repeated a call for a negotiated solution.

"We hope all sides will maintain restraint and flexibility," Chinese 
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said in Beijing.

Russia restated its opposition to punitive action. "We are convinced 
that neither the sanctions route nor the use of force route will lead to 
a solution of this problem," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin 
said, Itar-Tass news agency reported.

U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman, a member of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee, told Israel's Jerusalem Post the United States probably could 
not destroy Iran's nuclear program but could attempt to set it back by 
strikes as a last resort.

"I think the only justifiable use of military power would be an attempt 
to deter the development of their nuclear program if we felt there was 
no other way to do it," he said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking at an annual military 
parade, said the army was ready to defend the nation.

"It will cut off the hands of any aggressors and will make any aggressor 
regret it," Ahmadinejad declared.

In Kuwait, former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said he 
doubted the Americans would use force. "It is unlikely that they would 
enter into such a perilous situation from which they cannot come out."

Iran says it will not drop its right to enrich uranium for peaceful use 
but that it will work with the IAEA.

The U.N. nuclear watchdog says it has been unable to verify that Iran's 
nuclear program is purely civilian, but has found no hard proof of 
efforts to build atomic weapons.

IAEA inspectors are due in Iran on Friday to visit nuclear sites, 
including one at Natanz where Iran says it has enriched uranium to 3.5 
percent, the level used in nuclear power plants.

IRNA news agency said Olli Heinonen, ElBaradei's deputy for safeguards 
issues, would lead the team. One diplomat said his presence suggested 
Iran might provide some missing information.

Experts say it would take Iran years to produce enough highly enriched 
uranium for one bomb from its current 164 centrifuges. But Iran says it 
will to install 3,000 centrifuges, which could make enough material for 
a warhead in one year.

(Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi and Alireza Ronaghi in Tehran, 
Guy Faulconbridge in Moscow, Mark Heinrich in Vienna)

The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ 

*****************************************************************
 3 [NYTr] Iran's ex-Pres Stresses Peaceful Use of Nuke Pgm
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 16:13:55 -0500 (CDT)


Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Radio Havana Cuba
http://www.radiohc.cu

Iran's Former President Stresses Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Program

Kuwait City, April 17 (RHC) -- Former Iranian president, Akbar Hashemi
Rafsanjani reaffirmed on Sunday that Iran's nuclear program is a
peaceful one.

Speaking in Kuwait City, where he is on a short visit aimed at easing
concerns over Iran's nuclear program, Rafsanjani stressed that the
Iranian program is at the service of the entire region.

The former president also said any possible U.S. military action on
Iran would run contrary to US interests and would cause regional
instability.

Xinhua news agency notes that Rafsanjani's remarks came in response to
recent reports of a possible U.S. military action on Iran, one week
after Iran announced it had succeeded in enriching uranium for power
plants.

Iran's announcement prompted the UN Security Council to demand that
the Islamic republic freeze the sensitive nuclear work by April 28.

Meanwhile, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan also warned that any
military action would complicate the situation.

The United States has accused Iran of secretly developing nuclear
weapons, a charge repeatedly denied by Tehran.

Iran insists that its nuclear program is aimed at generating
electricity to meet its surging domestic demand.

Before visiting Kuwait, Rafsanjani met with Syrian officials in
Damascus.
       
                                *
================================================================
.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: Iran future nuclear talks to be based on IAEA regulations - 1st VP - 

Tehran, April 17, IRNA                                                                                                           

Iran-China-Nuclear 

First Vice-President Parviz Davoudi said here Monday that Iran's
future talks on nuclear case would be based on international
regulations and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).


 "President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stood up to all international
pressures bravely and materialized access to nuclear fuel cycle
technology.

 "The president did not yield to pressures even those exerted by
the UN Security Council and materialized the national will," he
said.

 The first vice-president added, "With such a spirit, the
Iranian youth can successfully overcome all obstacles that the
country will encounter.

 "The 9th government has repeatedly announced that access to
peaceful nuclear energy is a national demand. The country
obtained access to nuclear fuel cycle on laboratory scale."
 2327/1412

*****************************************************************
 5 IRNA: ElBaradei's deputy due in Iran Friday: source 

Tehran, April 18, IRNA                                                                                                           

Iran-IAEA-Nuclear issue 

A deputy of the chief of the international nuclear watchdog, lli
Heinonen, is expected in Iran on Friday, an informed source in
the Iranian nuclear negotiating team said.

 Speaking to IRNA on condition of anonymity, he said that
Heinonen, who is deputy of the International Atomic Energy
Agency's Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei for safeguards
issues, is scheduled to visit Iran within the context of the
country's constructive cooperation with the IAEA.

 Heinonen will be accompanied by a number of senior IAEA
inspectors, the source said, adding that the sides are expected
to discuss remaining issues in Iran's nuclear program.

 He said inspectors will verify Iran's alleged enrichment of
uranium up to 3.5 percent.

 On April 11, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran
(AEOI), Gholam-Reza Aqazadeh, said Iran had successfully
enriched uranium up to 3.5 percent in its Natanz facility thanks
to the efforts of its young, talented scientists, and which now
paves the way for the country to carry industrial-scale uranium
enrichment.


*****************************************************************
 6 IRNA: Rafsanjani: Threat of possible US military action on Iran a
"hollow fantasy" - 

April 18, IRNA                                                                                                                 

-- 
Expediency Council Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said Monday
that the threat of a possible US attack on Iran was a "hollow
fantasy."
 Speaking to reporters at the Kuwaiti parliament, the cleric
underlined the firm stance of Iranian officials vis-a-vis any
aggression against the country.

 "A new conflict in the Middle East will not favor the US, Iran
or any other regional state," Rafsanjani said.

 He assured Iran's neighboring states that Iran "would never be
a threat to them."
 The cleric, moreover, said that all regional states should
cooperate in efforts to preserve the stability and security of
the region.

 Rafsanjani arrived in Kuwait on Sunday for a three-day visit
upon the invitation of Kuwaiti Emir Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad
al-Jaber al-Sabah.

 He will take part in a press conference with Kuwait-based
foreign reporters as well as with those of the domestic press.

 Later in the day, the cleric will attend a dinner banquet given
in his honor by Sheikh al-Sabah.


*****************************************************************
 7 IRNA: Tehran, Tokyo to hold nuclear talks: official 

Tokyo, April 18, IRNA                                                                                                            

Iran-Japan-Nuclear issue 

Iran and Japan will hold talks on Iran's nuclear case, Vice
Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan Shotaro Yachi said here
Tuesday.

 Shotaro told reporters the ground is now being prepared for a
meeting to be held between senior officials of the two countries
on Iran's nuclear activities.

 He did not mention the exact date of the meeting but said that
Tokyo had called for a meeting with Iranian government officials
in the near future.

 He said the two countries' Azadegan oil field project, due to
be inaugurated soon, has no connection with the current standoff
on Iran's nuclear activities.

 The Japanese Nihon Keizai daily on Monday said Japan in the
meeting would be represented by the director-general of the
Middle Eastern and African Bureau of the Japanese Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, Motohide Yoshikawa, and the director-general of
the Asian Bureau of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Nematollah
Izadi, in late April.

*****************************************************************
 8 BBC: Iran brushes off uranium worries
 
Last Updated: Monday, 17 April 2006
 
[Iran's Isfahan plant]                                  

Iran has refused to halt work on uranium enrichment                                                              

Iran has again insisted it will keep enriching uranium in spite 
of growing international concern that it is pursuing nuclear 
weapons. 

Ali Larijani, its top nuclear official, said demands to halt the 
programme were "irrational" and he advised other states "not to 
repeat past mistakes". 

US senators have called for direct talks between America and 
Iran. 

New satellite photographs published in the US appear to show Iran 
has expanded and reinforced its main nuclear plants. 

Uranium conversion facilities at Isfahan look to have been 
expanded while an underground uranium enrichment plant at Natanz 
appears to have been reinforced, the US-based Institute for 
Science and International Security (Isis) think-tank reports. 

According to Isis, Natanz's two subterranean cascade halls have 
been buried by successive layers of earth and concrete and the 
roof of the halls is now eight metres (26 feet) underground. 

"Iran is taking extraordinary precautions to try to protect its 
nuclear assets," David Albright, the ex-UN arms inspector who 
heads Isis, told Reuters news agency. 

War of words 

"Iran will follow its nuclear programme with patience," Mr 
Larijani was quoted as saying by state news agency Irna on 
Monday. 

[Israel] is a decaying a crumbling tree that will fall with a 
storm Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iranian president       

US calls for the UN to authorise more robust action against Iran 
- including the possible use of force - were, he said, not new 
and would not affect Iran's determination. 

Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the former Iranian president, has 
predicted the US will never attempt to attack his country because 
of the risks involved. 

On a visit to Kuwait, he told its parliament: "Reports about 
plans for an American attack on Iran are incorrect... The 
consequences would be too dangerous." 

Iran, he added, was certain Gulf countries would not assist the 
US in any attack. 

Last week, President Iranian Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced Iran 
had successfully produced enriched uranium but insisted it did 
not want nuclear weapons. 

He later made a new prediction that Israel would be destroyed, 
saying it would "fall with a storm". 

His words were dismissed by Israeli veteran statesman Shimon 
Peres, who said Mr Ahmadinejad would "end up like Saddam 
Hussein", ousted by the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. 

'Honourable solution' 

Richard Lugar, Republican chairman of the Senate foreign 
relations committee, called for direct talks between Washington 
and Tehran. 

Despite being a senior member of the same party as President 
George W Bush, Senator Lugar's comments fly in the face of the 
policy of the Bush administration. 

It is following a multi-lateral approach through the UN Security 
Council. 

The Council is due to discuss Iran on 28 April - the deadline 
given to Iran to address its concerns. 

Sen Lugar also urged caution on sanctions while Secretary of 
State Condoleezza Rice was already outlining sanctions last week. 

Pope Benedict XVI has called for a negotiated solution to the 
crisis. 

In his traditional Easter message in St Peter's Square in Rome, 
he urged "an honourable solution... for all parties, through 
honest and serious negotiations".                                                        



*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Still Opposed to Sanctions on Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Tuesday April 18, 2006 7:31 PM

AP Photo VAH113 

By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV 

Associated Press Writer 

MOSCOW (AP) - Russia maintained its opposition to sanctions
against Iran Tuesday as it hosted talks on Tehran's disputed
nuclear program at which Western powers were expected to urge a
united international front. 

President Bush said ``all options are on the table'' to prevent
Iran from developing atomic weapons but he will continue to
focus on diplomacy. 

The United States and Britain say that if Iran does not comply
with the U.N. Security Council's April 28 deadline to stop
uranium enrichment, they will seek a resolution that would make
the demand compulsory. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remained defiant, warning
that Iran will ``cut off the hand of any aggressor'' that
threatens it and insisting that its military has to be equipped
with the most modern technology. 

``Iran's enemies know your courage, faith and commitment to
Islam and the land of Iran has created a powerful army that can
powerfully defend the political borders,'' he told a parade
commemorating Iran's Army Day on Tuesday. 

Iran has refused to give up uranium enrichment, which the United
States and some of its allies suspect is meant to produce
weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful
purposes. 

Senior diplomats from the five permanent Security Council
members that wield veto power - Russia, the United States,
France, Britain and China - plus Germany met for dinner Tuesday
at the Russian foreign minister's residence in Moscow to discuss
the latest moves in the standoff. 

Discussions were expected to continue Wednesday during a meeting
of envoys from the Group of Eight major industrialized nations. 

Ahmadinejad threw a new wrinkle into the debate last week by
claiming his country is testing an advanced P-2 centrifuge,
which could be used to more speedily create fuel for power
plants or atomic weapons. 

But some analysts familiar with the country's technology said he
could be deliberately exaggerating Iran's capabilities, either
to boost his own political support or to persuade the
International Atomic Energy Agency to back off. 

In Vienna, Austria, diplomats accredited to or associated with
the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the claim about the centrifuges
did not surprise agency officials. 

The diplomats, who demanded anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss the confidential Iran file, said past IAEA
reports on Iran documented evidence of purchases of components
for such machines. But the diplomats said the agency was
interested in following up Ahmadinejad's comments, particularly
as they appeared at odds with Tehran's public assertions that no
such work had been conducted for years. 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called his Iranian
counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki on Monday to urge Tehran to
quickly answer questions related to its nuclear bid and halt all
uranium enrichment activities, the ministry said Tuesday. 

Bush refused to rule out any options but said he will continue
to focus on the international diplomatic option to persuade
Tehran to drop its nuclear ambitions. 

``We want to solve this issue diplomatically and we're working
hard to do so,'' Bush told reporters in the Rose Garden. 

He also said there should be a unified effort involving
countries ``who recognize the danger of Iran having a nuclear
weapon,'' and he noted that U.S. officials are working closely
nations such as Great Britain, France and Germany on the
issue.'' 

Bush was asked if his administration was planning for the
possibility of a nuclear strike against Iranian nuclear
facilities. 

``All options are on the table,'' he said. 

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin reaffirmed
Moscow's insistence on more diplomatic efforts with Iran. ``We
are convinced that neither sanctions nor the use of force will
lead to the solution of the problem,'' he said, according to the
ITAR-Tass news agency. 

Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai, the country's top
nonproliferation official, visited Tehran over the weekend and
appealed to Iranian leaders to reach a negotiated settlement to
the dispute, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. 

Russia and China, which have strong economic ties to Iran, have
opposed punitive measures. Bush said he intends to call on
Chinese President Hu Jintao to step up pressure on Iran when the
two leaders meet Thursday at the White House. 

Britain also urged the countries to work closely together to
find a peaceful solution to the crisis. ``We hope that we'll get
behind a diplomatic avenue, a system of increasing but
reversible pressure which Iran will listen to,'' said Julian
Reilly of the British Embassy in Moscow. 

Iran's ambassador to Russia, meanwhile, suggested that Tehran
would prepare for war if necessary. 

``One of the ways to prevent a war is to be prepared for it. But
Iran will do everything possible to avoid any war in the
region,'' Gholamreza Ansari was quoted as saying by the Russian
news agencies. ``We hope the Iranian question will be resolved
through negotiations.'' 

--- 

Associated Press writers Ali Akbar Dareini in Tehran, Iran,
Jennifer Loven in Washington and George Jahn in Vienna, Austria,
contributed to this story. 
		 	 	   

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 10 Guardian Unlimited: U.S. Envoy: Iran Sanctions Discussed
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Tuesday April 18, 2006 9:46 PM

AP Photo VAH111 

By HENRY MEYER 

Associated Press Writer 

MOSCOW (AP) - A U.S. diplomat said Tuesday that envoys from the
five permanent Security Council members plus Germany discussed
sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, but failed to
reach agreement on how to proceed further. 

U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told The Associated
Press following nearly three hours of talks that diplomats
recognized the ``need for a stiff response to Iran's flagrant
violations of its international responsibilities.'' 

President Bush said ``all options are on the table'' to prevent
Iran from developing atomic weapons but that he will continue to
focus on diplomacy. 

Burns, speaking in Moscow, said sanctions had been discussed
during the meeting hosted by Russia but indicated that further
talks would be needed. 

``Iran's actions last week have deepened concern in the
international community and all of us agreed that the actions
last week were fundamentally negative and a step backward,'' he
told AP. ``So now the task for us is to agree on a way
forward.'' 

He was referring to the announcement last week by Iran's
hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that the country had
successfully enriched uranium for the first time. 

Burns gave no specifics as to the type or timing of sanctions
and he refused to say whether Russia had softened its opposition
to sanctions against Iran. But he reiterated that the United
States expected action in the Security Council after an April 28
deadline for Iran to stop uranium enrichment. 

Ahmadinejad remained defiant, warning Tuesday that Iran will
``cut off the hand of any aggressor'' that threatens it and
insisting that its military has to be equipped with the most
modern technology. 

``The land of Iran has created a powerful army that can
powerfully defend the political borders,'' he told a parade
commemorating Iran's Army Day. 

The United States and some of its allies suspect Iran's nuclear
program is meant to produce weapons, but Tehran insists the
program is for peaceful purposes. 

Ahmadinejad further complicated the debate last week by claiming
his country is testing an advanced P-2 centrifuge, which could
be used to more speedily create fuel for power plants or atomic
weapons. 

Some analysts familiar with the country's technology said he
could be exaggerating Iran's capabilities, either to boost his
own political support or to persuade the International Atomic
Energy Agency to back off. 

In Vienna, Austria, diplomats accredited to or associated with
the U.N. nuclear watchdog said the claim about the centrifuges
was not a surprise. 

The diplomats, who demanded anonymity because they were not
authorized to discuss the confidential Iran file, said past IAEA
reports on Iran documented evidence of purchases of components
for the centrifuges. But the diplomats noted that Ahmadinejad's
comments appeared at odds with Tehran's assertions that no such
work had been conducted for years. 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called his Iranian
counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki on Monday to urge Tehran to
quickly answer questions related to its nuclear bid and halt
uranium enrichment, the ministry said Tuesday. 

Earlier Tuesday in Washington, Bush also said there should be a
unified effort involving countries ``who recognize the danger of
Iran having a nuclear weapon.'' 

Before the meeting in Moscow, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman
Mikhail Kamynin reaffirmed Russia's insistence on more
diplomatic efforts. ``We are convinced that neither sanctions
nor the use of force will lead to the solution of the problem,''
he said in televised comments. 

Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Cui Tianka, China's top
nonproliferation official, who also attended Tuesday's meeting
in Moscow, has appealed to Iranian leaders to reach a negotiated
settlement, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. 

Russia and China, which have strong economic ties to Iran, have
opposed punitive measures. Bush said he intends to ask Chinese
President Hu Jintao to pressure Iran when the two leaders meet
Thursday at the White House. 

Britain also urged a peaceful solution to the crisis. ``We hope
that we'll get behind a diplomatic avenue, a system of
increasing but reversible pressure which Iran will listen to,''
said Julian Reilly of the British Embassy in Moscow. 

--- 

Associated Press writers Ali Akbar Dareini in Tehran, Iran,
Jennifer Loven in Washington and George Jahn in Vienna, Austria,
contributed to this story.	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 11 New York Times: Iran Claims Nuclear Steps in New Worry - 

By and Published: April 17, 2006                         

Of all the claims that made last week about its nuclear program,
a one-sentence assertion by its president has provoked such
surprise and concern among international nuclear inspectors they
are planning to confront Tehran about it this week. Skip to next

France-Presse-Getty Images 
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said his country was
seeking better ways to make atomic fuel. 
Multimedia
 [Video: Nuclear Jihad] 
Video: Nuclear Jihad 
Graphic: The Nuclear Network 

NUCLEAR JIHAD: Can Terrorists Get The Bomb?

"NUCLEAR JIHAD: Can Terrorists Get The Bomb?" a documentary
about Pakistani nuclear smuggler A.Q. Khan and his clients,
including Iran, airs tonight at 8 p.m. on the Discovery Times
Channel and Thursday, April 20, at 9 p.m. on CBC-TV ( Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation). 
 
(April 16, 2006) 

The assertion involves Iran's claim that even while it begins to
enrich small amounts of uranium, it is pursuing a far more
sophisticated way of making atomic fuel that American officials
and inspectors say could speed Iran's path to developing a
nuclear weapon. 

Iran has consistently maintained that it abandoned work on this
advanced technology, called the P-2 centrifuge, three years ago.
Western analysts long suspected that Iran had a second, secret
program � based on the black market offerings of the renegade
Pakistani nuclear engineer � separate from the activity at its
main nuclear facility at Natanz. But they had no proof.

 Then on Thursday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that
Tehran was "presently conducting research" on the P-2
centrifuge, boasting that it would quadruple Iran's enrichment
powers. The centrifuges are tall, thin machines that spin very
fast to enrich, or concentrate, uranium's rare component,
uranium 235, which can fuel nuclear reactors or atom bombs.

Mr. Ahmadinejad's statements, and those of other senior Iranian
officials, are always viewed with suspicion by American and
international nuclear experts, because Iran has, at various
times, understated nuclear activities that were later
discovered, and overstated its capabilities. Analysts and
American intelligence officials, bruised by their experience in
Iraq, say they are uncertain whether Mr. Ahmadinejad's claim
represents a real technical advance that could accelerate Iran's
nuclear agenda, or political rhetoric meant to convince the
world of the unstoppability of its atomic program. 

European diplomats said a delegation of Iranian officials is due
to arrive on Tuesday in Vienna, where the International Atomic
Energy Agency will press them to address the new enrichment
claim, as well as other questions about Iran's program,
including a crude bomb design found in the country.

"This is a much better machine," a European diplomat said of the
advanced centrifuge, which was a centerpiece of Pakistan's
efforts to build its nuclear weapons and was found in 2004 in
Libya, when that country gave up its nuclear program. The
diplomat added that the Iranians, among other questions, will
now have to explain whether Mr. Ahmadinejad was right, and if
so, whether they recently restarted the abandoned program or
have been pursuing it in secret for years.

If Iran moved beyond research and actually began running the
machines, it could force American intelligence agencies to
revise their estimates of how long it would take for Iran to
build an atom bomb � an event they now put somewhere between
2010 and 2015.

Robert Joseph, the Bush administration's under secretary of
state for arms control and international security, who is known
as one of the administration's hawks, said in an interview on
Saturday that President Ahmadinejad's claim constituted "the
first time I've ever heard the Iranians admit" to have a
significant effort on the advanced technology. Iran, Mr. Joseph
added, "has never come clean on this program, and now its
president is talking about it."

The new claim focuses renewed attention on Iran's rocky
relationship with Mr. Khan, who provided it with much of the
enrichment technology it is exploiting today. If Mr.
Ahmadinejad's claim is correct, it probably indicates that
relationship went on longer and far deeper than previously
acknowledged. Mr. Khan and his nuclear black market supplied
Iran with blueprints for both the more elementary machine, known
as P-1, and the more advanced P-2. 

There are other indications that Mr. Khan may have been dealing
with Iran as recently as six years ago. President of Pakistan
disclosed recently that he fired Dr. Khan, a national hero
credited with developing Pakistan's bomb, in 2001 after
discovering that he was trying to arrange a secret flight to the
Iranian city of Zahedan, known as a center of smuggling.

 Dr. Khan refused to discuss the flight, saying it was important
and very secret. "I said, 'What the hell do you mean? You want
to keep a secret from me?' " Mr. Musharraf recalled in an
interview with The New York Times for a Discovery Times
television documentary, "Nuclear Jihad."

 "So these are the things which led me to very concrete
suspicions," Mr. Musharraf said, "and we removed him."

 Last year, Pakistan said its investigation into the Khan network 
was closed. But the Iranian crisis has led to renewed questioning 
of Dr. Khan, American intelligence officials and European 
diplomats say.

So far his answers have been vague, investigators say. Iran, for 
its part, has said virtually nothing about its P-2 program. The 
International Institute for Strategic Studies, an arms analysis 
group in London, said in a report last year that Iran's failure 
to provide more information about its P-2 program led many 
analysts to suspect that the advanced centrifuges formed "the 
nucleus of a secret enrichment program."

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and 
International Security, a private research group in Washington 
that monitors the Iranian program, said Mr. Ahmadinejad's 
declaration, whether political rhetoric or technical reality, now 
gave the world "something to further investigate and worry 
about."

Tehran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful and meant 
for producing nuclear power.

But the Bush administration argues otherwise. "A. Q. Khan was not 
in the business of civil nuclear power development," Secretary of 
State Condoleezza Rice said in an interview for the documentary. 
"Why, if you only intended a civil nuclear program, would you 
have lied about activities at Natanz?" Later she added, "Why are 
they still unwilling to answer some of the questions that the 
I.A.E.A. has?"

The P-2 mystery began years ago when Iran told international 
inspectors that it had received plans for the advanced 
centrifuges around 1994 but had done nothing with them until 
2002, when it hired an Iranian contractor to try to make the 
complex machines.

The P-2, a second-generation Pakistani model, was the most 
advanced centrifuge sold by Dr. Khan's network. With superstrong 
rotors, it could spin faster and enrich uranium faster.

Iran repeatedly denied receiving any P-2 centrifuges from Dr. 
Khan, which would greatly ease the making of duplicates. 
Moreover, it said it did no research on the production of the 
advanced centrifuges between 1995 and 2002 because of management 
changes in its nuclear program and a lack of skilled personnel.

In report after report, the I.A.E.A. has questioned that 
explanation. For instance, last September it said the Iranian 
contractor, who allegedly first saw the P-2 plans in 2002, made 
considerable research progress "within a short period," which 
seemed to undermine Iran's claim of doing no past research.

Iran said that the research failed to produce operating machines 
and that it ended the experimental P-2 work in 2003 and instead 
focused on the easier P-1 design.

But scraps of evidence gathered by the international agency and 
the accounts of some members of the Khan network have cast doubt 
on those denials. As recently as last Thursday, when the director 
general of the agency, Mohammed ElBaradei, visited Tehran, he 
insisted on detailed answers during a private meeting, diplomats 
briefed on the meeting said.

Suspicions arose because inspectors knew that Dr. Khan had 
supplied Libya and North Korea with actual P-2 centrifuges in the 
late 1990's, and they repeatedly heard that he had done likewise 
with Iran.

B. S .A. Tahir, the chief operating officer of the Khan network, 
now in prison in Malaysia, has reportedly said that Iran received 
far more P-2 technology than it has admitted and that some 
shipments took place after Dr. Khan and the Iranians supposedly 
ceased doing business around 1995.

Speaking to reporters in Washington on Thursday, just hours after 
Mr. Ahmadinejad's claim, senior intelligence officials said they 
had seen nothing yet that would lead them to revise their 
estimate that Iran is still five to 10 years away from making a 
weapon.

Kenneth C. Brill, the director of the National 
Counterproliferation Center, created to track programs like 
Iran's and North Korea's, cautioned against accepting at face 
value Tehran's recent claims about producing enriched uranium and 
plans to produce 54,000 centrifuges.

"It will take many years," he said, "to build that many."

At the same time, intelligence reports circulating inside the 
American government, according to several officials who were 
granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, 
have raised questions of whether the Iranian government's 
decision to boast about its progress is part of an effort to hide 
more significant activity.

They suspect that a clandestine program, if it exists, would 
concentrate on the P-2 because it can produce enriched uranium so 
fast.

I.A.E.A. officials say solving the mystery of the P-2 shipments 
has become one of the most critical issues on which they need 
answers in the next two weeks, before Mr. ElBaradei issues a 
report to the United Nations Security Council on April 28.

Other pressing questions include Iran's reluctance to discuss a 
document found by inspectors - one that the Iranians were not 
willing to let the inspectors take out of the country - that 
sketches out how to shape uranium into perfect spheres, the 
tell-tale shape for a primitive weapon. Investigators say that 
document, too, appears to have come from the Khan network.

It is also unclear whether Dr. Khan sold the Iranians a complete 
Chinese-made bomb design similar to the one Libya turned over to 
the United States when it gave up its weapons program. Questions 
about other copies of the bomb design have been met with silence, 
in Iran and in Pakistan.

"Frankly, I don't know whether he has passed these bomb designs 
to others," Mr. Musharraf said. Even under a loose form of house 
arrest for the past two years, he said, Dr. Khan "sometimes has 
been hiding the facts."


NYTimes.com
*****************************************************************
 12 BBC: Oil soars to $71 on nuclear row
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
[Oil facility]                                  

Traders are worried about instability in Iran and Nigeria                                                                 

Oil prices have hit a record high of $71.60 a barrel, fuelled by 
growing fears over Iran's nuclear standoff with the international 
community. 

US light, sweet crude rose by more than $1 in New York trade, 
passing last year's previous high of $70.85 reached after 
Hurricane Katrina. 

Prices have risen 16% in the past month as Iran's nuclear row has 
worsened and Nigerian supplies have been disrupted. 

Brent crude also hit a new record of $72.64 a barrel in London 
trade. 

US crude eventually settled up at $71.35, an increase of 95 cents 
from Monday's closing price. 

Iran issue 

Analysts said that prices would continue to head upwards as long 
as Iran's dispute with the international community over its 
nuclear intentions remained unresolved. 

"We have broken new ground today," said Victor Shum, an energy 
analyst with Singapore-based Purvin &Getz. 

"The market sentiment is bullish, with yesterday's record 
closing, momentum has been built up to cause a wave of buying." 

The basic thing underlying t industry is that global demand 
remains very strong Tobin Gorey, Commonwealth Bank of Australia     

	 

Militia violence in Nigeria, which has led to the suspension of 
25% of its output, has also forced prices upwards in recent 
weeks. 

Over the past month, prices have gained more than $10, or 16%. 

Global demand for oil remains intense, particularly in the run-up 
to the US driving season, while available supplies remain tight. 

"The basic thing underlying the industry is that global demand 
remains very strong," said Tobin Gorey, commodities strategist 
with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. 

Countries in the Opec oil producers' cartel have admitted there 
is little they can do to quell the rise in prices. 
*****************************************************************
 13 AFP: Canada's Harper backs US nuclear standoff with Iran 

 Tue Apr 18, 5:29 PM ET 		 	 

OTTAWA (AFP) - Canada's prime minister backed US-led efforts to
halt Iran" /> 's alleged nuclear weapons program, but hopes for
a peaceful resolution and refuted claims the feud is fueling
higher oil prices. 

 "I think that our allies have a very serious concern when you
see a regime like Iran with the kind of values it stands for,
the kind of human rights abuses we've seen there," Prime
Minister Stephen Harper told reporters. 

"I think our allies have a completely legitimate case in being
concerned about a regime like that gaining access to nuclear
weapons." 

Harper said he had discussed Iran's nuclear ambitions with US
President George W. Bush" /> at a summit in Mexico last month
and Foreign Minister Peter MacKay talked about it again with US
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> last week. 

"Canada certainly will work with our allies to try and bring
about a peaceful solution that does not leave the government of
Iran in possession of nuclear armaments," Harper said. 

"Right now, the Americans are consulting with their allies and
other permanent members of the Security Council on finding a
peaceful solution, and I think that's what we'd all prefer to
see," he added. 

Earlier Tuesday, world oil prices hit records above 72 dollars a
barrel in London and close to 71 dollars in New York as the
market fretted over possible military conflict between the
United States and Iran. 

Iran is the world's fourth and OPEC" /> 's second crude
producer, at around four million barrels a day. 

Washington accuses Iran of working secretly to build nuclear
weapons under cover of a nuclear energy program it is developing
with Russian assistance. 

Iran denies this charge and says the program is strictly for
producing nuclear energy, and is refusing to comply with a
Security Council demand to freeze sensitive enrichment work. 

Asked about a possible link between the spike in oil prices and
the nuclear standoff, Harper said: "I think it's -- frankly -- a
little bit hard to believe that tough talk is responsible." 

"I think oil prices are driven largely by supply and demand, and
... demand is gradually outstripping supply, and there's
long-term upward pressure on prices, so I have my doubts that
prices can be attributed to" the standoff. 

With some 179 billion barrels in Alberta's oil sands, Canada
ranks second behind Saudi Arabia in petroleum reserves, but
because of the high extraction costs, the deposits were long
neglected, except by local companies. 

Since 2000, skyrocketing crude oil prices and improved
extraction methods have made it more economical to exploit the
sands and lured several international oil companies and 22
billion US dollars in investment. 

Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: Iran ready for showdown with US - Rafsanjani

  [Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani]   

KUWAIT CITY (AFP) - Iran is ready to face a military showdown
with the United States over its nuclear programme, influential
former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said as he warned of
the grave consequences of any attack.

"We are not seeking a confrontation but, if it is imposed on us,
we are prepared for it," he told a press conference at the end
of a three-day visit to Kuwait.

"The consequences of such an attack will be very grave and they
(the Americans) will not benefit from it."

Rafsanjani also issued a stern warning to Israel, saying it 
should not even contemplate an attack as it would face immediate 
reprisals against its own territory.

"Israel would not dare launch an attack on Iran because it knows
what would be the result. Israeli arms cannot reach Iran but
Iranian hands can reach Israel," he said.

Rafsanjani, who earlier held talks with Emir Sheikh Sabah
al-Ahmad al-Sabah, said Kuwait and other Gulf Arab states had
told him they would not back a US attack on Iran.

"Yes, Kuwait and other states in the region," Rafsanjani said
when asked if Kuwaiti officials had told him they would not
cooperate with any US strike on Iran.

"The states in the region are our friends and brothers ... I
don't think they will agree to an attack on Iran and if it
happened, I don't think they will support it, especially
Kuwait," he said.

Rafsanjani said his talks in Kuwait also focused on allaying
regional fears of Iran's nuclear programme which he said had
been "exaggerated by Zionists and imperialists".

Kuwait and other US allies in the Gulf have voiced concern that
the current standoff between Iran and the West may develop into
a full-scale military confrontation and fear an environmental
catastrophe if Iran's nuclear reactor in the Gulf port of
Bushehr is targeted.

The region has witnessed three major conflicts in the past
quarter-century -- the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, the 1991 Gulf
war and the US-led invasion of Iraq of 2003.

Rafsanjani declined to answer when asked if Iran would retaliate
against US bases in the Gulf if they were used in an attack.

After talks with Rafsanjani on Monday, Sheikh Sabah expressed
cautious hope that Iran's nuclear programme was for peaceful
purposes.

"The state of Kuwait is cautious regarding the nuclear matters
... We hope that what is going on in Iran is for peaceful and
not military purposes," the emir said.

Rafsanjani, who lost out in elections last year to hardline
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, remains powerful as the head of
the Expediency Council, Iran's top political arbitration body.

His visit to Kuwait followed Iran's announcement last week that
it had successfully enriched uranium to the level needed to make
reactor fuel, triggering global concern about its nuclear
ambitions.

The enrichment process can be extended to make the fissile core
of an atom bomb and the UN Security Council has given Iran's
hardline leadership until the end of the month to freeze the
sensitive fuel cycle work, a demand it has roundly rejected.

Iran's incumbent president joined in the overtures to Gulf Arab
states, discussing "ways to strengthen relations" in a telephone
call with the Kuwaiti emir Tuesday, the official KUNA news
agency reported.

Ahmadinejad had similar telephone conversations on Monday with
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and King Hamad of Bahrain. 

AFP '); [ src=] 
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: Iran nuclear talks start in Moscow 

 Tue Apr 18, 5:17 PM ET 		 	 

MOSCOW (AFP) - Senior diplomats from six leading world powers
reportedly met to discuss ways to keep Iran" /> Iran's nuclear
program in check. 

 According to the official ITAR-TASS news agency, the political
directors from Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the
United States were holding discussions over a working dinner at
a Russian foreign ministry residence in central Moscow. 

Russian officials said the meeting was private, though the US
representative to the talks, Under Secretary of State Nicholas
Burns, was expected to hold a brief news conference at around
1800 GMT. 

Journalists waited for nearly an hour at the site of the news
conference before a US embassy spokesman announced that Burns
was tired, had "no news to share" and that the news conference
was canceled. 

Later, the Interfax news agency quoted a source close to the
talks as saying that "no breakthrough decisions were made during
the meeting." 

The UN Security Council voted on March 29 to give Iran 30 days
to suspend its uranium enrichment activities. Iran announced
last week that it had successfully enriched a small amount of
uranium for use as nuclear fuel. 

The United States accuses Iran of seeking to build nuclear
weapons under cover of its civilian nuclear power program which
is being developed with Russia's help. Iran denies this charge
and says it has a full right to its own nuclear energy program. 

Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 16 AFP: Bush keeps Iran options open as diplomats meet in Moscow -
     
 Tue Apr 18, 12:08 PM ET 		 	 

MOSCOW (AFP) - US President George W. Bush" /> President George
W. Bushrefused to rule out force to keep Iran" /> Iran's nuclear
program in check as top world powers met in Moscow to align
diplomatic strategy and Iran vowed to "cut off the hand" of any
aggressor against it. 

"All options are on the table," Bush told reporters at the White
House. 

But he added: "We want to solve this issue diplomatically, and
we're working hard to do so." 

He spoke as senior diplomats from the five UN Security Council
permanent members and Germany gathered for a meeting in Moscow,
hoping to iron out their own differences over how to impose
controls on Iran's nuclear program. 

They fear Iran could use a nuclear energy program to mask a
nuclear weapons drive, though Tehran denies any such ambition. 

Political directors from the six countries -- Britain, France
and Germany, representing the European Union" /> European Union,
along with China, Russia and the United States -- met for a
working dinner on Iran at a Russian foreign ministry residence,
but Russian officials offered no details on the agenda. 

As the diplomatic drive to contain Iran's nuclear program
gathered pace, its hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad warned
that the Islamic Republic's army was like a "meteorite" that
would defeat any attack against the country. 

"It will cut off the hand of any aggressor and leave the enemy
covered in shame," he said in Tehran in a speech at the start of
the army's annual military parade. 

The US State Department meanwhile confirmed that Mohammad
Nahavandian, an aide to Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali
Larijani, was present in Washington, a rare appearance by an
Iranian official in the US capital. But a spokesman did not say
what he was doing there. 

The United States made clear ahead of the Moscow meeting that it
would continue to argue in favor of early and muscular action by
the UN Security Council. 

Russia at the same time repeated its position that neither
sanctions nor military force would resolve the Iran nuclear
impasse. 

Tehran showed no sign of backing down, and issued a stern
warning of its own to the participants at the Moscow meeting. 

"If they do not act wisely and make a mistake, they are the ones
who will suffer losses," Iranian foreign ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza Asefi said in Tehran. 

Washington accuses Tehran of working secretly to build nuclear
weapons under cover of a nuclear energy program it is developing
with Russian assistance. Iran denies this charge and says the
program is strictly for producing nuclear energy. 

The Moscow talks come after Ahmadinejad last week announced that
the Islamic state had successfully enriched a small amount of
uranium for use as fuel for a nuclear power station. 

Iran says it has the same right as any other country that has
signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to its own
nuclear energy program and says it is prepared to allow close
international supervision of this program by the UN nuclear
regulatory agency. 

The United States counters that Iran is an exceptional case
because it hid key parts of its nuclear program for 18 years and
because its leaders publicly call for the destruction of Israel"
/> Israel. 

The Security Council voted on March 29 to give Iran 30 days to
suspend uranium enrichment work pending closer scrutiny by the
International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic
Energy Agency(IAEA) whose chief, Mohamed ElBaradei, must deliver
a status report by the end of that period to the council. 

The United States wants to see the UN Security Council move
quickly towards sanctions on Iran as a start, the "EU-3" would
go along with sanctions but opposes use of force while Russia
and China, both of which have extensive links to Iran, argue
that sanctions are the wrong course. 

All six however say they agree that Iran should not be permitted
to develop atomic weapons, and Bush said the United States was
hoping for "a united effort with countries who recognise the
danger of Iran having a nuclear weapon." 	 		 			

Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 17 AFP: Powers meet in Moscow on Iran nuclear impasse 

 Tuesday April 18, 03:14 PM 

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]   

MOSCOW (AFP) - World powers have held talks on how to keep
Iran's nuclear program in check, with US calls for strong UN
action meeting resistance from Russia and China and open
defiance from Tehran.

The US State Department meanwhile confirmed that Mohammad
Nahavandian, an economics and technology aide to Iran's top
nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani, was in Washington, but would
not say how he got into the country or what he was doing there.

Russian officials said the Moscow talks were private
(Advertisement)
 [ src=] and provided no details on the agenda.

Western diplomats however said the meeting of political
directors from three European Union countries -- the "EU-3" --
along with China, Russia and the United States would take place
at a working dinner.

The United States made clear ahead of the Moscow meeting that it
would continue to argue in favor of early and muscular action by
the UN Security Council.

 Iran issued a stern warning to the UN Security Council
permanent members and Germany ahead of the Moscow talks.

"If they do not act wisely and make a mistake, they are the ones
who will suffer losses," Iranian foreign ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza Asefi said in Tehran.

Washington accuses Tehran of working secretly to build nuclear
weapons under cover of a nuclear energy program it is developing
with Russian assistance. Iran denies this charge and says the
program is strictly for producing nuclear energy.

The Moscow talks come after Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad last week announced that the Islamic state had
successfully enriched a small amount of uranium for use as fuel
for a nuclear power station.

Iran says it has the same right as any other country that has
signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to its own
nuclear energy program and says it is prepared to allow close
international supervision of this program by the UN nuclear
regulatory agency.

The United States counters that Iran is an exceptional case
because it hid key parts of its nuclear program for 18 years and
because its leaders publicly call for the destruction of Israel.

The Security Council voted on March 29 to give Iran 30 days to
suspend uranium enrichment work pending closer scrutiny by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) whose chief, Mohamed
ElBaradei, must deliver a status report by the end of that
period to the council.

All six parties represented at Tuesday's meeting say they share
the goal of preventing Iran from acquiring the capacity to build
nuclear weapons. They differ considerably however on how to
achieve this goal.

The United States would like to see the Security Council begin
imposing sanctions soon and has refused to rule out use of force
against the Islamic republic.

The EU-3, which pursued negotiations for several years until
last August aimed at persuading Iran to steer clear of sensitive
nuclear work, also supports sanctions but opposes military
action.

Russia and China, both of which have extensive commercial and
strategic ties with Iran, insist that it is too early even to
speak of sanctions, arguing that they will inevitably backfire.

Iran meanwhile continued to talk tough.

Ahmadinejad vowed in a speech in Tehran Tuesday that Iran would
"cut off the hand of any aggressor."

US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack separately said
Nahavandian was not in Washington to meet US officials.

"He's not here for meetings with US government officials to my
knowledge," McCormack said Monday.

US Senator Richard Lugar said Sunday that direct talks between
the United States and Iran would be "useful" in resolving the
impasse. 

AFP '); [ src=] 
*****************************************************************
 18 BBC: US pressure on 'criminal' N Korea
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
By Charles Scanlon BBC News, Seoul   

The US is cracking down on what it terms North Korea's criminal 
activities. 

[A South Korean bank clerk works next to a show case of 
counterfeit U.S. dollar bills at a local bank in Seoul, Thursday, 
Feb. 2, 2006. ]                               

Washington accuses North Korea of circulating fake greenbacks                                                             

American secret service agents have been in the South Korean 
capital, Seoul, on the trail of the famed "supernotes" - expertly 
forged hundred dollar bills that the US says are made by the 
North Korean government. 

More supernotes have been turning up in South Korea and the
quality is getting better all the time - a recent report for the
US Congress estimated that $45m of the notes are in circulation
worldwide. 

South Korean police this month uncovered a haul of 700 fake $100
bills. 

"They're about 95% identical to the real thing," said Suh
Tae-suk, South Korea's leading expert on counterfeit currency,
"but there's a slight difference in the texture of the paper and
the make-up of the chemicals, so experts can still spot them." 

Most of the notes are brought in from China; and organised crime
networks are reported to be distributing them in Asia, and
through Russia into Europe. American officials say they have no
doubt the notes are manufactured in North Korea. 

	
Closing the bank accounts the way to bring down Kim Jong-il Kim 
Dok-hong North Korean defector           

Last September, the US identified Banco Delta Asia in the
Chinese territory of Macau as an institution of "primary money
laundering concern" under the Patriot Act. 

That move had a snowball effect. Other banks followed suit and
cut their links with North Korea. 

"The DPRK [North Korea] needs to understand that as long as it's
producing nuclear weapons we're going to have a real close look
at its finances... that's just life in the big city," Assistant
Secretary of State, Christopher Hill, said on a recent visit to
Seoul. 

'Cash-strapped embassies' 

North Korea denies the charges of counterfeiting and has been
boycotting talks on its nuclear weapons programme in protest
against the US financial squeeze. 

It says it will step up the production of its nuclear
"deterrent" unless the US lifts its sanctions. 

High-level North Korean defectors back up some of Washington's
claims that Pyongyang is involved in counterfeiting and other
illicit activities. 

US ALLEGATIONS AGAINST N KOREA           

Forging U currency Exporting missiles Drug trafficking US refuses 
to end N Korea freeze                                                                        
N Korea 'not forging dollars'                                                                   
US says N Korea forged dollars                                 

They say that going after the money will strike a painful blow at 
the leader Kim Jong-il and could weaken his grip on power. 

One former North Korean diplomat painted a picture of
cash-strapped embassies that are expected to finance themselves,
and of diplomats wracking their brains for new ways to raise
money. 

He asked not to be identified because he had left family behind
in Pyongyang, who he now considers hostages of the regime. 

"We were each given a quota of foreign currency that we had to
raise each year to show our loyalty to the state," he explained.
"I was expected to produce $100,000 a year and remit it to a
bank in China". 

The former diplomat, who has lived in Seoul since his defection,
said a superior once handed him fake US bank notes, mixed in
with the real thing, to conduct a trade deal in South East Asia. 

He said he raised money from kick-backs on trade deals, but
would also smuggle gold and "currency by the kilogramme" in
diplomatic bags. 

And there were other scams: Trading in tax-free cars, smuggling
liquor into Islamic countries, and trafficking horns and ivory
out of Africa to sell to Chinese businessmen. 

Effective instrument

At the centre of much of the trade is North Korea's top-secret
Bureau 39, which defectors say was set up in the 1970s to create
a personal slush fund for Kim Jong-il. 

"Bureau 39 has a monopoly on earning foreign currency," said Kim
Dok-hong, who worked for 17 years alongside the bureau's agents
at the North Korean Workers' Party Central Committee. 

	 		
[US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill (C) applauds at 
the close of the latest round of six-party talks on North Korea's 
nuclear program at the Diaoyutai State Guest House in Beijing, 11 
Nov]                             

Christopher Hill says N Korea must expect a probe into its 
activities                                                              

Mr Kim was accompanied by two plainclothes police when we met.
He has been under constant guard since his high profile
defection in 1997. 

"Bureau 39 has a monopoly of trade in high-quality agricultural
products like pine mushrooms and red ginseng. They also control
the drug trade. Opium is produced across the country and then
refined into heroin. Their other main role was distributing the
supernotes," he said. 

Mr Kim's own role was to proselytise North Korea's
ultra-nationalist philosophy of Juche. 

He was sent to Beijing to pose as the head of a trading company,
where he was also expected to raise money for Kim Jong-il. 

He came up with a lucrative scheme to arrange meetings between
rich South Koreans and family members in North Korea. 

"Closing the bank accounts is the way to bring down Kim
Jong-il", concluded Mr Kim. 

The US says it is trying to enforce the law and protect its own
currency. But analysts say it has also found a highly effective
instrument to exert pressure on the North Korean leadership. 		
	 		 	 	 



*****************************************************************
 19 Korea Times: Inter-Korean Talks to Resume Friday 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

SEOUL (Yonhap) _ Despite a prolonged stalemate in international
negotiations over North Korea��s nuclear weapons ambitions,
North and South Korea are set to hold a new round of dialogue
that is expected to touch upon the thorny issue of South Korean
abductees in the communist state.

 Four days of inter-Korean ministerial talks, the 18th of their
kind, are to be held in the North Korean capital Pyongyang from
Friday after a month-long delay due to North Korean protests at
annual joint military exercises involving U.S. and South Korean
troops here last month.

 South Korea��s chief delegate to the high-level inter-Korean
dialogue, Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok, is to fly directly
to the North Korean capital, ministry officials said Tuesday.

 The talks will be the first opportunity for the South Korean
minister to engage in inter-Korean dialogue following his
appointment to the post earlier in the year, but the new point
man on North Korean affairs is already moving to try something
that none of his predecessors were able or willing to do; put
pressure on the communist state.

 Since his appointment in February, the unification minister has
said resolving the issue of South Korean prisoners of war (POW)
and civilian abductees in the North has been one his main goals
for his two-year tenure in the job.

 Giving a heads-up to North Korea, the minister said he will
table a ��bold�� economic aid package for the impoverished North
Korea upon its release of nearly 1,100 South Koreans believed to
be held there.

 ��I am thinking about proposing a bold economic aid package to
North Korea to resolve the issue of abducted civilians, POWs and
separated families,�� Lee told the parliamentary committee on
unification and foreign affairs Monday.

 Seoul believes as many as 600 South Korean soldiers taken
prisoner during or at the end of the 1950-53 Korean War, as well
as some 500 civilians abducted since the war��s end, are still
alive in the communist state. The two Koreas have been divided
by a heavily fortified border since the end of the fratricidal
war.

 The issue of South Korean POWs and abductees in North Korea
returned to the media spotlight after Tokyo claimed last week
that a South Korean student abducted by the North in the late
1970s may have married a Japanese citizen, also abducted nearly
three decades ago, whose 18-year-old daughter remains in the
communist state.

 Analysts here said the government��s plan to table the
sensitive issue at the scheduled ministerial talks could mean a
major shift in what has long been criticized by the opposition
as a low-key, and what the government claims to be a practical,
approach toward issues related to the reclusive North.

 Analysts, however, remained doubtful of any positive results
from the planned proposal, saying the degree of government will
to resolve the issue is separate to the possibility of
resolution. 

04-18-2006 20:10         
*****************************************************************
 20 AFP: US asks China to be assertive to break Korea nuclear logjam -
     
 Tuesday April 18, 03:07 PM 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - China should play a more assertive role in
breaking a deadlock in six-nation talks aimed at ending North
Korea's nuclear weapons drive, Deputy US Secretary of State
Robert Zoellick said. 

China has mediated the talks, which include the United States,
the two Koreas, Japan and Russia. 

"What we are urging the Chinese to recognize is that they need
to be more than a mediator," Zoellick said when asked at a forum
about the stalled negotiations aimed at wooing North Korea to
give up its nuclear weapons in return for diplomatic, security
and energy supply guarantees. 

"They need to be a participant that recognizes that they have an
interest in trying to solve this problem and this relates to the
nuclear issue and also relates to the notion of what sort of
change and stabilitive change in the context of the Korean
peninsula," he said. 

Zoellick said the North Korean nuclear crisis was among key
issues to be discussed by US President George W. Bush and
Chinese leader Hu Jintao during the visitor's first White House
trip on Thursday. 

North Korea declared last year that it had nuclear weapons,
deepening a standoff, which began when the United States accused
the communist state in 2002 of secretly enriching uranium. 

Pyongyang has shunned the six-party talks since November to
protest US financial sanctions imposed over allegations that the
regime was counterfeiting US dollars and laundering money
through a bank in Macau. 

Bush may also seek Hu's perception of North Korea following a
landmark January visit by the Stalinist nation's leader Kim Jong
Il to China's economically booming areas, Zoellick said. 

"I think it will be very interesting to get President Hu, to
encourage him, to talk to President Bush about what conclusions
does China draw from that about the prospects for North Korea,"
he said. 

Some North Korea watchers regard Kim's tour as a prelude to
extensive reform in his reclusive nation in the near future. 

The Iranian nuclear problem will also be on the agenda at the
summit, with Bush expected to ask Hu to back UN Security Council
action over Tehran's defiance of the council's call to halt its
sensitive nuclear activities. 

"President Bush will talk to President Hu about China's
responsibilities" as a permanent Security Council member, said
James Keith, the deputy assistant secretary of state for East
Asian affairs. 

Bush would stress "the fact that we need the Iranian government
to assume a more responsible posture (in) relation to its
nuclear ambitions," Keith said. 

China and Russia are the only veto-wielding members in the UN
Security Council that oppose placing sanctions on Iran, which
announced last week it had successfully enriched uranium to make
nuclear fuel in defiance of a council demand for such sensitive
work to be halted by April 28. 

A senior US administration official said, "I think the Chinese
have come around to a point of realizing that we need to stand
firm on the issue of the Iranian nuclear program. 

"So we hope for their support," the official said, speaking on
condition of anonymity. 


Copyright � 2006 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
 21 IPS-English POLITICS-US: Amid Threats, Some Republicans Seek
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:48:27 -0700


<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS MM NA HD IP BW ML NU=20
POLITICS-US: Amid Threats, Some Republicans Seek Talks on Iran
Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Apr 18  (IPS) - Amid a new escalation in threats between the =
United States and Iran over Tehran's nuclear programme, some prominent Re=
publicans are calling for the administration of U.S. President George W. =
Bush to engage Tehran in direct talks.

At the same time, indications that Tehran may itself be hoping to engage =
Washington have been growing steadily, despite the incendiary rhetoric of=
  Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad directed primarily against Israel, which Bush =
has pledged to defend.

Whether moderate voices in both capitals, as well as similar urgings by f=
oreign powers that are increasingly worried about the regional and global=
  repercussions of a possible U.S. attack on Iran, will prevail remains ve=
ry uncertain, particularly given their history of mutual demonisation sin=
ce the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The current heated rhetoric between them makes the possibility of their s=
itting down together for a negotiation of all outstanding issues -- along=
  the lines of a much-talked-about =94grand bargain=94 several years ago -=
- appear more remote than ever.

Indeed, the rhetoric appeared to get even more heated here Tuesday when B=
ush, asked explicitly about recent published reports that the U.S. is pla=
nning for a possible nuclear strike against targets in Iran, refused to r=
ule it out, even as he stressed that his administration wants =94to solve=
  this issue diplomatically, and we're working hard to do so=94.

=94All options are on the table,=94 he declared in what one expert descri=
bed as a virtually unprecedented threat by a U.S. president to use nuclea=
r weapons against a non-nuclear state.

Bush's remarks followed a threat voiced earlier Tuesday by Ahmadinejad du=
ring an annual military parade. The Iranian army, he said, =94will cut of=
f the hands of any aggressors and will make any aggressor regret it=94.

In spite of the by now well-established cycle of threat and counter-threa=
t, however, cooler heads from within ruling circles on both sides are rai=
sing their voices, particularly in the wake of alarming -- though still u=
nconfirmed -- reports earlier this month that U.S. military planning for =
attacks, including nuclear strikes, against Iran has moved beyond its con=
tingency phase.

Last week, for example, two former senior State Department officials who =
served during Bush's first term came out in favour of comprehensive negot=
iations with Tehran.

In a column published by London's Financial Times (FT), Richard Haass, wh=
o served as director of the Department's Policy Planning Office and was a=
  top Middle East advisor to Secretary of State Colin Powell from 2001 unt=
il 2003, argued that an attack, particularly with nuclear weapons, would =
prove counter-productive to a range of U.S. interests and called for dire=
ct talks with Iran.

=94Given (the) potential high costs (of an attack), Washington should be =
searching harder for a diplomatic alternative, one that entails direct U.=
S. talks with Iran beyond the narrow dialogue announced on Iraq,=94 wrote=
  the current president of the influential Council on Foreign Relations, i=
n reference to Bush's decision earlier this year to authorise Amb. Zalmay=
  Khalilzad to engage Iran in talks strictly limited to Iraq.

A possible deal, he went on, would permit Iran to retain a small, heavily=
  monitored uranium-enrichment programme, in return for which it =94would =
receive a range of economic benefits, security guarantees, and political =
dialogue=94.

Washington would have nothing to lose from such an exercise, said Haass, =
who also served as the top Middle East aide to former President George H.=
W. Bush during the first Gulf War. =94Presenting a fair and generous offe=
r would... make it easier to rally international support for escalation a=
gainst Iran if diplomacy is rebuffed,=94 he argued.

Haass' suggestions were echoed the next day by former Deputy Secretary of=
  State Richard Armitage who told the FT that he, too, favoured comprehens=
ive talks with Iran. While he left the administration when Powell resigne=
d, Armitage has long been a personal favourite of Bush's and is considere=
d a leading candidate to succeed Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld if he res=
igns or is forced out.

=94It merits talking to the Iranians about the full range of our relation=
ship... everything from energy to terrorism to weapons to Iraq,=94 Armita=
ge said, adding that Washington could afford to be patient =94for a while=
=94 because Tehran is still at least several years from obtaining a nucle=
ar device.

On Sunday, the longstanding Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Rel=
ations Committee, Richard Lugar, also weighed in on a much-watched public=
-affairs television programme, ABC's =94This Week=94.

=94I think that would be useful,=94 he said when asked about the possibil=
ity of direct talks. He added that Washington should engage Iran about it=
s role as a major energy exporter in particular, suggesting that the two =
countries have interests in common. =94There are issues there,=94 he said=
, =94which ironically, we may come out on the same side with some of the =
Iranians.=94

While none of the three is considered part of Bush's inner circle, their =
views are taken seriously by many Republicans on Capitol Hill, particular=
ly given the growing concern among the party's lawmakers that the situati=
on in Iraq may cost it control of one or even both houses of Congress in =
the November elections.

=94'Realists' like Armitage and Lugar have been vindicated by (events in)=
  Iraq so their credibility has risen at the same time that Bush's and (Vi=
ce President Dick) Cheney's keeps falling,=94 said one Congressional aide=
  whose boss is a Republican. =94People are much more receptive to their v=
iews now even if they're still hesitant about speaking out.=94

Pro-dialogue forces also appear to be active in Tehran, even if they can =
hardly be heard over the more radical Ahmadinejad, who, despite his limit=
ed authority in foreign policy and the nuclear programme, is largely depi=
cted in the media here as the public face of Iran.

Thus former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who was defeated by Ahmad=
inejad in last year's run-off elections but who nonetheless retains key p=
osts in the regime, said just last week that the proposed talks between I=
ran and the U.S. over Iraq could lead to a more comprehensive dialogue. H=
e also reportedly asked Saudi Arabia to help mediate between Tehran and W=
ashington.

And in a move first reported by the FT but still shrouded in mystery, Moh=
ammad Nahavandian, a senior aide to Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran's=
  Supreme National Security Council who also serves as the regime's chief =
negotiator on nuclear issues, quietly visited Washington earlier this mon=
th, apparently, according to some sources, in hopes of establishing a bac=
k-channel to the administration.

Although U.S. officials initially denied any knowledge of his presence, o=
ne source told IPS this week that it prompted inter-agency consultations =
that ended when Cheney's office rejected the idea of meeting with him on =
the grounds that it would be a =94sign of weakness=94. That account, howe=
ver, could not be confirmed.
*****
+POLITICS-US: Iran Crisis, Deja Vu All Over Again? (http://ipsnews.net/ne=
ws.asp?idnews=3D32924)
+POLITICS-US: To Battle Stations! To Battle Stations! (http://ipsnews.net=
/news.asp?idnews=3D32889)

(END/IPS/NA/MM/IP/HD/BW/NU/ML/JL/KS/06)

=20
=3D 04190009 ORP001
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 22 [du-list] DU:   THE REAL WMD'S IN IRAQ - OURS
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:10:11 -0700


<x-flowed>

American Chronicle: THE REAL WMD'S IN IRAQ - OURS

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=8218

Douglas Westerman
April 17, 2006
Weapons of mass destruction are all over Iraq. Iraqi children are playing
among them every day. According to Iraqi doctors, many are developing 
cancer as a
result. The WMD in question is depleted uranium (DU). Left over after natural
uranium has been processed, DU is 1.7 times denser than lead - effective in
penetrating armored vehicles such as tanks. After a DU shell strikes, it
penetrates before exploding into a burning vapor that turns to dust.
"Depleted uranium has a half life of 4.7 billion years - that means thousands
upon thousands of Iraqi children will suffer for tens of thousands of years
to come. This is what I call terrorism," says Dr Ahmad Hardan.
As a special scientific adviser to the World Health Organization, the United
Nations and the Iraqi Ministry of Health, Dr Hardan is the man who documented
the effects of depleted uranium in Iraq between 1991 and 2002. U.S. forces
admit to using at least 300 tons of D.U. ordinance in Gulf War I, with up 
to six
times that amount in Operation Iraqi Freedom...
Read the rest of the article at:
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=8218


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 23 Xinhua: India refuses US proposal to stop nuclear test   

  www.xinhuanet.com

  www.chinaview.cn 2006-04-18 08:24:48   

    NEW DELHI, April 17 (Xinhua) -- India has refused to include
a ban on nuclear test in a draft civil nuclear cooperation pact
with the United States, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs
said Monday. 

    India is continuing its commitment to a unilateral
moratorium on nuclear testing, said Navtej Sarna, the spokesman
of the Ministry of External Affairs, in a briefing. 

    The U.S. side had shared with India some weeks ago a
preliminary draft agreement on India-U.S. civil nuclear
cooperation under Article 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act, he
said. 

    In the draft pact the U.S. side suggested that India
discontinue nuclear test, he added. 

    "In preliminary discussions on these elements, India has
already conveyed to the U.S. that such a provision has no place
in the proposed bilateral agreement," Sarna said. 

    "India's position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
(CTBT) is well known and continues to remain valid," he said. 

    New Delhi has refused to sign the CTBT, claiming that it is
discriminatory and tends to divide the world into nuclear weapon
states and non-nuclear weapon states. Instead, it advocates
universal nuclear disarmament. 

    India conducted its first nuclear test in 1974 and the
latest one took place in 1998. 

    India is bound only by the joint statement issued by the two
countries in July last year when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh visited Washington, Sarna said. 

    According to the statement, India agreed to separate its
military and civilian nuclear facilities and put civilian ones
under international safeguard while the U.S. government lift the
ban on exporting nuclear fuel and technologies to India. 

    To legalize the nuclear deal with India, the U.S. government
is lobbying the U.S. Congress to pass the amendment to laws that
ban the government from selling nuclear technologies and fuels
to the country who does not sign the Nuclear Non-proliferation
Treaty. Enditem   

Editor: Zhang Lihong   

  Copyright �2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 24 Financial express : We'll retain right to N-tests - India to US

   Tuesday, April 18, 2006

  REUTERS  
	   	 
  NEW DELHI, APRIL 18:  India said on Monday it would make no 
explicit commitment to the United States not to conduct fresh 
nuclear tests as part of a landmark civilian atomic cooperation 
agreement.

New Delhi has refused to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty 
(CTBT), calling it discriminatory, but it did announce a 
unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing after it conducted 
atomic tests in 1998.

The civilian nuclear agreement was finalised when President
George W. Bush visited India last month.

But a draft of the deal framed since suggested that the pact
would be discontinued if India tested a nuclear device, the
Indian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

"In preliminary discussions on these elements, India has already
conveyed to the US that such a provision has no place in the
proposed bilateral agreement," the statement said.

"India is bound only by what is contained in the July 18 joint
statement, that is, continuing its commitment to a unilateral
moratorium on nuclear testing," it said. This was an agreement
in principle on the deal reached when Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh visited Washington last year.

The US Congress must approve legislation to seal the deal and
India has said that a decision by Congress to block it would hit
warming ties between the two countries.

Under the deal, energy-hungry India will receive US nuclear
technology -- including reactors and nuclear fuel -- and in
return separate its military and civilian facilities, and open
up some atomic plants to international inspections.

India has already made it clear that the pact would not limit
its nuclear weapons programme.

Some analysts say Washington was attempting to get India to
commit indirectly to the CTBT's aims through the clause on
discontinuing nuclear cooperation if New Delhi tested a device
again.

� 2006: Indian Express Newspapers (Mumbai) Ltd. All
rights reserved throughout the world.               

*****************************************************************
 25 UPI: India: Against U.S. nuclear conditions
     
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

4/18/2006 5:59:00 AM -0400                              

NEW DELHI, April 18 (UPI) -- India has said it is against the
inclusion of any provision in the Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear
agreement that would prevent India from conducting nuclear
tests. 

The Hindu newspaper said Tuesday that India has told the United
States it will not accept any provision stating that nuclear
cooperation between the two countries would be discontinued if
New Delhi were to conduct a nuclear test. 

Responding to media reports, Indian foreign office spokesman
Navtej Sarna confirmed that a draft agreement provided by the
United States contained such a provision. 

"In preliminary discussions on these elements, India has already
conveyed to the United States that such a provision has no place
in the bilateral agreement and that India is bound only by what
is contained in the July 18, 2005 joint statement, that is,
continuing its commitment to a unilateral moratorium on nuclear
testing," Sarna said. 

"India's position on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is
well-known and continues to be valid," Sarna said. India has
refused to sign the CBTB, which was crippled when the U.S.
Senate failed to ratify it. 

India's position is that it is bound only by its existing
voluntary moratorium. 

Some weeks ago, Sarna said, the United States showed India a
preliminary draft agreement on Indo-U.S. civilian nuclear
cooperation under Article 123 of the U.S. Atomic Energy Act. 

Because of existing clauses in the U.S. Atomic Energy and Arms
Export Acts, Washington inserted a clause in the draft that
would end bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation if India were
to detonate a nuclear explosive device, even in a controlled
test scenario.

� Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 26 [NYTr] Venez Denies US Charges of "Nuclear Deals"
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:45:15 -0500 (CDT)


Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com

Venez Denies US Alleged Nuke Deals

Caracas, Apr 18 (Prensa Latina) Venezuela defends the peaceful use of
nuclear energy, such as that of Iran, Foreign Minister Ali Rodrmguez
affirmed Tuesday.

Addressing the TV program "En Confianza," the minister denied US
accusations of alleged deals between Venezuela and Iran for the
stockpile of nuclear missiles in the South American country.

"We have no arms deal with Iran, and the country4s military relations
are totally clear and public," Rodriguez assured, adding any country
has the right to use nuclear energy with peaceful goals.

"With such statements, the George W. Bush administration aims to
create regional conflicts, and as in the Iraq case, use the alleged
possession  of  weapons  of mass destruction as a pretext for
intervention," the official stressed.

Referring to the US military maneuvers in Caribbean waters, Rodriguez
pointed out they aim to intimidate both Cuba and Venezuela, but
discarded an aggression, since he considers the White House is not
ready to wage another war.

ln/dig/nda/mf
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 27 Sydney Morning Herald: Coal will still be king of power, says industry - 

By Rod Myer

April 19, 2006

INTERNATIONAL power companies are increasingly worried about
energy security and greenhouse emission but still plan to build
much of their future on coal, according to
PricewaterhouseCoopers' Utilities Global Survey 2006. 

The concerns of major global companies have changed dramatically
in the past two years, with security of fuel supply topping the
list of six concerns in 2006. Encouragement of renewable energy
comes in second. In 2004 transmission capacity concerns topped
the list, security of supply came second and the encouragement
of renewables was not even on the radar screen. 

A year after the implementation of emissions trading in Europe
as a result of the Kyoto Protocols, the issue of cutting
emissions has rocketed up the consciousness charts for energy
groups. But emissions are seen as part of the problem of meeting
the soaring growth in demand for electricity caused by economic
growth. 

Despite rising concerns about greenhouse emissions, coal is
still seen as a major energy source for the future. When asked
what fuel types would grow as a proportion of consumption for
generators in the next five years, gas was picked by 48 per cent
of respondents but coal came a close second at 47 per cent. 

Hydro power was cited as a relative growth area by 20 per cent
of respondents, nuclear by 19 per cent, and wind - despite the
rapid growth of that industry - by only 17 per cent. Other
renewable technologies, including solar, biomass and
co-generation, were tipped as growth areas by 29 per cent. 

The industry believes the next big move will be based on the
push to develop clean coal technologies. 

When asked which areas of generation and supply would be most
affected by technological developments over the next decade, 47
per cent replied coal generators, 41 per cent energy efficiency
measures and there was 33 per cent each for gas and nuclear
power plants. 

Renewables got the largest vote for the expected single biggest
contribution to cutting greenhouse emissions in the next decade
with 41 per cent. Coal gasification got 36 per cent and carbon
sequestration 28 per cent. Nuclear scored 27 per cent. 

An emissions trading regime such as that introduced in Europe as
a result of the Kyoto Protocol is expected to be introduced into
other regions, with 88 per cent of North American respondents
expecting the system to be adopted there. 

Of all European respondents, 53 per cent said the emissions
trading scheme had worked as expected, 25 per cent said it was
worse than expected and 22 per cent said it was better than
expected. 


 Copyright � 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald. <img
*****************************************************************
 28 Calgary Sun: Nuclear nod unlikely
             
April 18, 2006

Environment spokeswoman says minister will probably snub plant 
idea

By SHAWN LOGAN, CALGARY SUN

 Plans by a Calgary-based company to open the province's first
nuclear power plant in the oilsands are unlikely to receive an
endorsement from Alberta's environment minister. 													

 Alberta Environment spokeswoman Kim Hunt said nuclear reactors
are not at the top of the list for meeting energy needs.
													

 "I think the minister (Guy Boutilier) made it very clear...that
nuclear energy is the bottom of the barrel," Hunt said
yesterday. 													

 "I think Albertans are more eager for us to start investigating
renewable energy such as solar and wind power." 													

 Energy Alberta Corporation is in talks with a trio of oil
companies about the potential for a nuclear plant to produce
steam to separate bitumen -- thick crude oil -- from sand.
													

 Currently, natural gas is used for extraction in the oilsands,
but the process has become costly with prices soaring.
													
 Boutilier said recently while the company is entitled to go
through the approval process, he wouldn't back the plan.
												 						
 "In this province we have so much energy -- of oilsands and
other energies -- that nuclear, I would suggest, would be at the
back of the wagon when it comes to the other alternative
energies," Boutilier said. 													

 Hunt said any talk of a nuclear reactor may be premature
because the province has yet to receive an application.
													

 Alberta, she said, has already made inroads in promoting
sustainable options with 90% of the energy used by government
buildings being supplied by "green power." 													

 Energy Alberta has set its sights on beginning the regulatory
process next March, with approval expected by 2009. The reactor
could be operational as early as 2014 if it gets the OK.
                                 
� 2006, All rights reserved.                            
*****************************************************************
 29 New York Times: In Candor From China, Efforts to Ease Anxiety - 

By Published: April 17, 2006                     

BEIJING, April 16 � and the United States have engaged in public
disputes about trade, human rights, military spending and energy
security, but for just a moment late last year, their leaders
put briefing books aside and agreed to talk privately. Skip to
next paragraph Enlarge This Image [ border=] Luke Frazza/Agence

France-Presse-Getty Images 

President Hu Jintao, with President Bush last year, is visiting
this week. 

A four-hour television series and interactive web site by The
Times, The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the ZDF network
of Germany. 
-------------------------------------------------

With an aura of candor described as unusual for Chinese leaders,
President told President Bush that fighting political
corruption, rural unrest, a widening wealth gap and severe
pollution consumes nearly all his time. He said domestic
problems left China with neither the will nor the means to
challenge America's dominance in world affairs, according to two
Bush administration officials who were told about the session.

The overture � described as having improved Mr. Hu's ties with
Mr. Bush despite the Chinese leader's generally aloof style � is
part of a Chinese effort to reduce, or at least to deflect,
American anxiety about the country's growing economic, political
and military power.

When Mr. Hu travels to Washington this week for his first White
House visit as China's top leader, the question will be whether
the improved chemistry between the heads of the world's richest
nation and its fastest rising rival can enhance a relationship
that seems to be stuck somewhere between tentative stability and
stormy tension.

"At the top level, the two have become frank and pragmatic in
discussing the major issues between them," said Michael Green,
the former director of Asian affairs at the National Security
Council who is now at Georgetown University. "But China is also
trying to expand its influence in the world at the expense of
the U.S., which is not something we are going to give them a
pass on."

Mr. Bush, in his second inaugural address, promised to confront
"every ruler and every nation" that resisted the tide of
freedom. But frustratingly for an administration that has
painted the world with such broad brush strokes, the
relationship with authoritarian China has tended to resist
breakthroughs.

Unlike the "Ping-Pong diplomacy" that led to historic handshake
with Mao in 1972, the incremental talks on the main issues that
divide the two nations have seemed to leave officials fatigued.
Those issues include the control of nuclear proliferation in
Iran and North Korea, China's support for several resource-rich
dictatorships that are hostile to the United States, its gaping
trade surplus and poor human rights record, and the always
delicate question of American backing for Taiwan, which Beijing
claims as its sovereign territory.

The two countries have, arguably, become each other's biggest
long-term threat. But both sides also strive to avoid
confrontation. Their political, diplomatic and economic ties are
too intertwined for either side to pursue unilateral solutions.

"The responsible elite in China has no intention of picking a
fight with the U.S.," said Jin Canrong, an expert on the United
States at People's University in Beijing. "But no one has much
hope that the two countries can develop deep feelings of trust,
either."

Few expect that Mr. Hu will dispel that unease during his
four-day visit. But this Chinese leader is seen as having come
around to the idea that China's overall foreign policy
objectives depend on a benign relationship with Washington.
Chinese officials say he is eager to have his maiden trip to the
United States perceived as a success.

Mr. Hu, 64, emerged from the inner depths of the Communist Party
to assume the top leadership positions in 2002. He remains a
colorless conservative even by China's buttoned-down standards.
He governs sternly and secretly, almost never grants interviews,
and has overseen an unrelenting crackdown on journalists,
lawyers,and religious leaders who defy one-party rule.

Unlike his predecessor, , who was regarded as pro-American in
the Chinese political context, Mr. Hu initially worked harder to
cultivate close ties to France, Germany, Russia and Southeast
Asian countries. Last year he also ordered a "smokeless war"
against "liberal elements" in Chinese society that he believes
are openly or covertly supported by the United States, according
to several officials and journalists told about his internal
remarks.

American officials said that in the yearlong negotiations over
Mr. Hu's trip, the Chinese side focused mainly on pomp and
protocol, down to the television camera angles on the South Lawn
of the White House. The two sides argued for months over whether
Mr. Hu's trip constituted a formal state visit, until they
agreed to disagree. 


The Bush administration, wary of empty summitry, decided to call 
it a "working visit." Mr. Bush and Mr. Hu will have lunch at the 
White House, but no state dinner. Beijing still insists it is a 
state visit, an honor all of Mr. Hu's predecessors received on 
their first trip to the White House.
Skip to next paragraph
China Rises
Inside the New China

A four-hour television series and interactive web site by The 
Times, The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the ZDF network 
of Germany.
nytimes.com/chinarises �

"Hu has two priorities - to make sure relations with the U.S. are 
not a big problem, and to make sure he doesn't lose face," said a 
senior Chinese academic who asked not to quoted by name when 
talking about the Chinese leader. "Of the two, I think the second 
one is more important to him."

But Mr. Hu's earlier assurance to Mr. Bush that China's domestic 
problems were what preoccupied him most were clearly part of a 
new effort to address, if not necessarily resolve, those core 
tensions.

In a burst of checkbook diplomacy earlier this month, Mr. Hu 
dispatched China's largest-ever buying delegation to the United 
States, which committed to purchase $16.2 billion in American 
aircraft, agricultural products, auto parts, telecommunications 
gear and computer software. A negotiating team led by Wu Yi, 
China's vice prime minister, also agreed to undertake a broader 
crackdown on piracy of American copyrights and trademarks, reopen 
the Chinese market to American beef, and allow more foreign firms 
to compete for government contracts.

Mr. Hu plans to visit Microsoft and dine with its chairman, Bill 
Gates, in Seattle on Tuesday. Human rights and media watchdog 
groups have pressed Mr. Gates to raise concerns about China's 
online censorship and arrest of cyber-dissidents when they meet. 
Mr. Hu will also tour Boeing's aircraft factory there before 
continuing on to Washington on Thursday and delivering a speech 
at Yale on Friday.

On the sidelines in Seattle, Mr. Hu has also invited a small 
group of American statesmen and scholars to discuss bilateral 
relations with him privately, an event that the two countries 
agreed to keep off the official agenda to encourage candor, 
participants said.

The session was organized by Zheng Bijian, a former head of the 
Communist Party's main training academy for party cadres, who 
coined the term "peaceful rise." The concept of peaceful rise, 
though only informally endorsed by Mr. Hu, is intended to show 
that China believes that it can emerge as a great power without 
following the violent path blazed by the United States, Japan, 
Germany, Britain, France and Russia before it.

"There is a real effort at salesmanship going on," said one 
former Bush administration official invited to participate in the 
private session. "He wants to come across as charming and 
attentive to American concerns."

Optimists on both sides say the attempts to build confidence 
amount to more than a propaganda campaign. China, they say, has 
become a "status quo" power, committed to maintaining the 
international order forged primarily by the United States in the 
postwar period.

Global commerce and a peaceful diplomatic environment in East 
Asia have contributed enormously to China's rapid economic growth 
in the past quarter century, which depends on foreign investment, 
open markets, secure borders and generally nonideological ties 
with its neighbors.

Many Chinese scholars say Beijing may not tolerate American 
hegemony in foreign affairs indefinitely. But most also say that 
Beijing has too much at stake in the current world order to try 
upsetting it in the foreseeable future.

"We have no incentive to wreck the global system established by 
the U.S.," said Wang Xiaodong, a prolific writer and pundit who 
has argued that the country should not bow to American pressure. 
"The reason is, simply, that it is a game we can win."

On the American side, the trend is also toward more integration. 
Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick, who last fall 
called China a "stakeholder" in the international system, has 
promoted high-level strategic dialogue between the countries, 
which China has eagerly embraced.

But there are many pessimists as well. They see the risks of 
conflict mounting unless the Communist Party gives up its 
monopoly on power. Mr. Hu's accommodation of the United States is 
viewed as temporizing, giving China time to gather strength and 
spread its influence unhindered.

People who worry about China's intention point in particular to 
its rapid military buildup as a sign of its increased financial 
wherewithal and nascent strategic ambitions that will inevitably 
challenge America's dominance in the Pacific.

Beijing's efforts to secure supplies of oil, natural gas and 
other commodities in countries that have rocky relations with 
Washington, including Sudan, Iran and Venezuela, have also raised 
suspicions that it is using its buying power to create a circle 
of friends hostile to American interests.

Economically, China is widely accused of keeping the value of its 
currency, the yuan, artificially cheap to encourage export-fueled 
growth and attract foreign manufacturers. Last year, it enjoyed a 
record $203 billion bilateral trade surplus with the United 
States.

While Chinese officials say they intend to shift to an economic 
model that favors domestic consumer-led growth and will gradually 
let the yuan appreciate closer to its market value, both the Bush 
administration and some members of Congress say that is not 
happening fast enough to head off a possible rupture in economic 
ties.

Randall G. Shriver, a former Bush administration deputy assistant 
secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific who is now with 
Armitage International, a consulting firm in Washington, said 
Chinese actions on the economic, military and diplomatic front 
signaled a willingness to undermine American foreign policy 
goals.

"I'm not convinced that they want to challenge us across the 
board," Mr. Shriver said. "But there is a general notion that 
they want to accumulate influence, which will necessarily 
diminish U.S. power."

He added, "The game is on."


NYTimes.com
                
*****************************************************************
 30 UPI: Russia: G8 to focus on energy
     
  United Press International - Energy - 

4/18/2006 9:42:00 AM -0400                              

MOSCOW, April 18 (UPI) -- The Group of Eight nations meeting in
St. Petersburg this summer will focus on energy and education
issues, a top aide to President Vladimir Putin said Tuesday. 

"Russia is the only country which has such huge hydrocarbon
resources, on the one hand," said Igor Shuvalov, Putin's top
aide on G8 issues. "On the other hand, it has a great important
history of higher education, professional education, which
exists now in the Russian Federation. 

"These are, of course, Russia's pre-revolution traditions and
higher education in the Soviet Union, and what we have now. We
are showing that Russia, with its tradition of innovation, can
and must convert its economy in the next few years from a
raw-material one to one which will be based on knowledge." 

The comments were reported by NTV. 

Shuvalov said Russia would also pay special attention to nuclear
energy. 

This year's G8 summit comes against the backdrop of European
fears over energy security, prompted, in part, by the pricing
dispute between Russia's state-owned gas giant Gazprom and
Ukraine and other former Soviet republics. The dispute with
Ukraine led to the temporarily cutting off of supplies earlier
this year, resulting in reduced flow to the rest of Europe.

� Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 31 UN Issues Landmark Health Report On Chernobyl: Excess Cancer Cases, Deaths
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:00:26 -0400

X-Online-Freedom: http://www.eff.org, http://www.dearaol.com
 

UN ISSUES LANDMARK HEALTH REPORT ON CHERNOBYL: EXCESS CANCER CASES, 
DEATHS
New York, Apr 18 2006 11:00AM
Some 5,000 people who were children and adolescents at the time of 
the world�s worst-ever civil nuclear accident at Chernobyl, Ukraine, 
have so far been diagnosed with thyroid cancer, and there may 
be up to 9,000 excess cancer deaths, according to a new United 
Nations study, the most comprehensive scientific <"http://www.who.int/ionizing_radiation/chernobyl/en/index.html">report 
so far on 
the health impact of the disaster. 

As the world prepares to mark the 20th anniversary of the accident 
on April 26, the landmark report issued the UN World Health Organization 
(<"http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2006/pr20/en/index.html">WHO) 
recommends renewed efforts to provide the 
public and key professionals with accurate information about the 
health impact as part of the efforts to revitalize the people and 
areas affected.

�As we work to rebuild futures, we must not forget the families of 
those who died as a result of the accident, and those who continue 
to suffer the consequences of radiation exposure and the severe 
disruption of their lives,� WHO Director-General Lee Jong-wook 
said of the report, which covers contaminated regions in Ukraine, 
Belarus and Russia, home to more than 5 million people.

�The WHO report on the health effects of Chernobyl gives the most 
affected countries, and their people, the information they need 
to be able to make vital public health decisions as they continue 
to rebuild their communities. WHO is supporting these efforts.� 


The agency is continuing its efforts to improve health care for affected 
populations through the establishment of telemedicine and 
educational programmes, and supporting research.

After the accident 116,000 people were evacuated from the area. An 
additional 230,000 people were relocated from the highly contaminated 
areas in subsequent years.

Relocation proved a deeply traumatic experience because of disruption 
to social networks and the impossibility of returning home. 
For many people, there has been a social stigma associated with being 
an �exposed person,� the report notes.

Those who were affected came to be labelled as �Chernobyl victims.� 
Despite government compensation and benefits for evacuees and 
residents, some people perceive themselves as victims rather than 
survivors, with limited control over their own futures.

Many of these people have demonstrated higher anxiety levels, multiple 
unexplained physical symptoms and subjective poor health compared 
to non-exposed populations.
.
 2006-04-18 00:00:00.000 


________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 32 Science for Sale: The People of TMI Respond to Patrick Moore 
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:11:26 -0700


<x-flowed>


Subject: Science for Sale: The People of TMI Respond to Patrick Moore

Dear Patrick Moore:

Those of us who live, work and parent in the shadow of Three Mile Island
would like to welcome you to your "success story." Stop by for a visit some
time.

Even though the plant has not been decommissioned or decontaminated,
and sits on an Island in the Susquehanna River that feeds into North America's
most productive estuary, we'd love to take you on a tour of the "glow mine."

Of course you are aware that there hasn't been a human entry into the
basement of Three Mile Island Unit-2 since the "successful" meltdown 27
years ago.  However, we're willing to make an exception for you.

I like forward to bonding with you.

Hugs and kisses,

Eric Epstein, Chairman, TMI-Alert



                                                    Science for Sale:


          TMI and the University of Pittsburgh

                                       by Eric Joseph Epstein


    The University of Pittsburgh�s most recent �health study, released on 
Halloween, is
essentially a recitation of discredited protocol and disputed data. 
Re-released on October
31, 2002, the Study actually acknowledged an increase in lymphatic and 
blood cancers
among men. However, as in previous of University Pittsburgh Studies 
conducted by the
same group of researchers, e.g., (Evelynn Talbott et al; 2000) (1), this 
survey relied on
government and nuclear industry sponsored 'health studies' which were 
completed in
the early 1980s. These studies were based on inaccurate dose projections, 
did not factor
data only available in 1985  regarding the severity and conditions of the core
meltdown at Three Mile Island Unit-2 (2) , and did not factor the 
prevailing weather
conditions and wind patterns in March-April, 1979.

Nor did any of these studies evaluate the health impact to members of our 
community
who defueled Three Mile Island.  In fact, General Public Utilities  choose 
not to maintain
a health or cancer registry, despite the fact, that  from 1979-1989, 5,000 
clean-up
workers received 'measurable doses' of  radiation exposure.  (3)

Moreover, the University of Pittsburgh�s Study relied heavily on the much 
maligned
Pennsylvania Department of Health�s seventeen year-old survey released in 
September,
1985. That Study�s protocol was ridiculed and criticized by epidemiologists 
at Harvard
(Dr. George Hutchison), and Penn State (Dr. Robert A Hultquist) for 
�diluting� increases
in cancer by �expanding� the population base to include people living 
outside of ten-mile
study-zone. (October; 1985). (4)

     A great deal of radiation was indeed released by the partial core melt 
at TMI.  The
President's Commission estimated about 15 million curies  of radiation were 
released into
the atmosphere.  A review of dose assessments, conducted by Dr. Jan Beyea, 
(National
Audubon Society; 1984) (5) estimated that  from 276 to 63,000 person-rem  were
delivered to the  general population within 50 miles of TMI.  More 
recently, David
Lochbaum of  the Union of Concern Scientists, estimated between 40 million 
curies
and 100 million curies escaped during the accident.

For 11 days, in June-July, 1980,  Met Ed illegally vented 43,000 curies of 
radioactive
Krypton-85 (beta and gamma; 10 year half life) and other radioactive gasses 
into the
environment without having scrubbers in place. (6) And by 
1993,  TMI-2  evaporated
2.3 million gallons of accident generated  radioactive generated water, 
including tritium
a radioactive form of hydrogen (half life; 12. 5 years),  into the 
atmosphere despite
legal objections from community-based organizations. (7)

  The plant's owners,  co-defendants and  insurers have paid over $80 
million in health,
economic and evacuation claims, including a $1.1 million settlement for a 
baby born with
Down's Syndrome. (8)  In June 2000, the United States Supreme Court 
remanded 1,990
unsettled health suits from the TMI-accident back to Federal Court.
(GPU v. Abrams; Dolan  v. GPU.) (9)

     In August 1996, a study by the University of North 
Carolina-Chapel  Hill, authored
by Dr. Steven Wing, reviewed the Susser-Hatch study  (Columbia University; 
1991).
Dr. Wing reported that "...there were reports of erythema, hair loss, 
vomiting, and pet
death near TMI at the time of the accident...Accident doses were positively 
associated with
cancer incidence. Associations were largest for leukemia, intermediate for 
lung cancer,
and smallest for all cancers combined...Inhaled radionuclide contamination 
could
differentially impact lung cancers, which show a clear 
dose-related  increase." (10)

Today, TMI-2 remains a high level radioactive waste in the middle of the 
Susquehanna
River. There was no decommissioning fund established for TMI at the time of 
the accident.
The site of the nation�s worst commercial nuclear accident has not been 
decontaminated or decommissioned. There has not been a human entry in the 
basement of the reactor building
since March, 1979... (11)


     Mr. Epstein is the Chairman of Three Mile Island Alert , Inc., a 
safe-energy
organization based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and founded in 1977.
http://wow.tmia.com.

He is also the  Coordinator of the EFMR Monitoring group, a non-partisan
community based organization that monitors Peach Bottom and Three Mile Island
nuclear generating stations. http://www.enviroweb.org/efmr/newsletters.html



                     End Notes


1          Environment Health Perspectives,  June , 2000.

2         On November 6, 1984, research conducted by the Department of Energy
on reactor damage during the accident, indicates temperatures may have reached
in excess of 4,800 degrees. In October 1985, removal of damaged fuel from TMI-2
began.

3         On April 11, 1984, William Pennsyl settled out-of-court two days 
before an
administrative law judge was scheduled to hear his case relating to GPU�s 
refusal
to allow Pennsyl to wear a respirator during cleanup activities.

       By 1986, TMI-2 defueling work force peaks at 2,000, but by 1989, 
after ten
years of defueling activities, 5,000 TMI workers have received �measurable 
doses�
of  radiation exposure.

4          State�s TMI study clouded by survey method doubts, Frank Lynch, 
�Sunday
Patriot-News�, Front Page, Harrisburg, PA, October 6, 1985.

5          Study available from the TMI Public Health Fund, 16223 Locust 
Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19103, #215-875-3926.

6         In November, 1980, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia
ruled that the krypton venting (June-July, 1980) was illegal.

7         In 1980, the Susquehanna Valley Alliance, based in Lancaster, 
successfully
prevented GPU/Met Ed from dumping 700,000 gallons of radioactive water into
the Susquehanna River.

       Ten years later, in December 1990 , despite legal objections by 
TMI-Alert and the
Susquehanna Valley Alliance,  GPU began evaporating 2.3 million gallons of
accident-generated radioactive water (AGW).

     By August, 1993, evaporation of 2.3 million gallons of AGW was 
completed over six
months behind schedule. The evaporator was disassembled and removed from 
the site.
And on October 28, 1993, according to the Pennsylvania Department of 
Environmental
Resources, the total activity during evaporation was 658 curies of tritium 
or 1 to 1.3
MR dose to the public.

8     By 1985,  TMI had paid at least $14 million for out-of-court 
settlements of personal
injury lawsuits. The largest settlement was for a child born with Down�s 
Syndrome.
Most of the cases were �sealed�, and only those cases involving �minors� 
are published
as prescribed by the rules and regulations of Pennsylvania�s Orphan�s Court.

9     On June 12, 2000, the United States Supreme Court , without comment, 
rejected
an appeal by GPU to throw out 1,990 health suits. On May 2, 2001, the Third 
Circuit
Court ruled that �new theories� to support medical claims against Three 
Mile Island will
not be allowed.

10     New Study Shows Higher Cancer Rate near Three Mile Island Nuclear 
Power Reactor
Meltdown.

Researchers at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have published, 
in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives (February 24, 1997), a 
reevaluation of the health effects
near Three Mile Island. They have found chromosomal damage and higher 
cancer rates than
previously reported, suggesting radiation levels were higher than official 
estimates.

Copies of the study may be requested at: #919-541-3345.




11    December, 1993, GPU placed TMI-2 in Post-Defueling Monitored Storage.

  On October 17, 2001, due to a �credible threat� against Three Mile 
Island, the Harrisburg
and Lancaster airports were closed for four hours, air travel was 
restricted in a 20-mile
radius, and  fighter jets were scrambled around TMI.


</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 33 [NukeNet] Media Rebuttal Re More NPPs Needed [19 More In S.E.
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:32:02 -0700


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)


  Please act on this and forward this to other
lists and interested individuals and groups:

    http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/home.asp

     Dear All,
                     I just saw a disgraceful piece
on MSNBC about the possibility of 19 more reactors
being built in the southestern USA. There was no
critic, no addressing renewables for both energy
sources and jobs. They interviewed the mayor of
Gaffney, S.C. and some business type. The NRC was
invoked without pointing out just who they really
are what they are really in place to do. NRC
admitted top Congress that there's a 45% chance of
a core meltdown in the USA:
http://www.mothersalert.org/probability.html

     I couldn't find contact info for MSNBC to call
them and ask that they have a spokesperson from
NIRS, Greenpeace, etc. on but  a
http://www.google.com  search or a look at
http://www.fair.org/media-contact-list.html
http://www.fair.org/media-contact-list.html   and

    http://www.prop1.org/2000/media98.htm  should
provide the appropriate contact data.

     NRC and Sadia's CRAC-2 Report, along with
http://www.mothersalert.org/rickover.html  are two
sources that they should address so listeners can
make up their minds for themselves.

     -Bill Smirnow


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 34 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Oconee Nuclear Plant 

News Release - Region II - 2006-02
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region II
  No. II-06-022   		        April 17, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Ken Clark (404) 562-4416
 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov  
  

discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance last year
at the Oconee nuclear power plant, located near Seneca in
northwestern South Carolina. 

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin
at 10:00 a.m. in the Complex Building Auditorium at the plant
site. The NRC staff will present the results of the assessment
and be available to respond to questions or comments from the
public before the close of the meeting. 

The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Oconee plant
and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities, NRC
Region II Administrator William Travers said. This meeting is a
chance for us to discuss that safety performance with the
company, with local officials and with people living near the
plant. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/oco_2005q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] . 

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance
indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start
with green and then increase to white, yellow or red, depending
on the safety significance of the issues involved. 

The NRC said the Oconee plant operated safely during 2005 with
all inspection findings being green, or very low safety
significance, and all performance indicators also indicating
performance at levels requiring no additional NRC oversight in
the third and fourth quarters of the year. 

However, plant performance for the first two quarters of 2005
was still within the regulatory response column of the NRCs
Action Matrix based on a white inspection finding in 2004
related to staffing of the plants standby shutdown facility.
That finding has now been closed by the NRC. 

Current plant performance means the NRC plans to conduct only
routine baseline inspections at the plant for the rest of 2006,
but there are several issues still under NRC staff review that
may warrant additional inspections if they are determined to be
of greater than green or very low safety significance. The NRC
staff will also conduct several non-routine inspections,
including the independent spent fuel storage installation,
containment sump blockage and operator licensing exams. 

Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by specialists from the Region II
Office in Atlanta, and the agencys headquarters in Rockville,
Md. 

Current information for the Oconee plant is available on the NRC
web site at:
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/OCO1/oco1_chart.html,
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/OCO2/oco2_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/OCO3/oco3_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 35 NRC: Sunshine Federal Register Notice
 
                         FR Doc 06-3746 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19911-19912] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-100]                         
 
Date:  Weeks of April 17, 24, May 1, 8, 15, 22, 2006.
 
Place:  Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.
 
Status:  Public and closed.
 
Matters to be considered: Week of April 17, 2006--Tentative There 
are no meetings scheduled for the Week of April 17, 2006.
 
Week of April 24, 2006--Tentative Monday, April 24, 2006 2 p.m. 
Meeting with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), FERC 
Headquarters, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426, Room 2C 
(Public Meeting). Contact: Mike Mayfield, 301-415-3298). This 
meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.ferc.gov (ACRS & .
 
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1 p.m. Discussion of Management Issues 
(closed--ex. 2). Thursday, April 27, 2006 1:30 p.m. Meeting with 
Department of Energy (DOE) on New Reactor Issues (Public 
Meeting).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Week of May 1, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, May 2, 2006 9:30 a.m. 
Briefing on status of Emergency Planning Activities--Morning 
Session (Public Meeting) (Contact: Eric Leeds, 301-415-2334).
 
1 p.m. Briefing on Status of Emergency Planning 
Activities--Afternoon Session (Public Meeting).
 
These meetings will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Wednesday, May 3, 2006 9 a.m. Briefing on status of 
Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation (Public Meeting) 
(Contact: Eileen McKenna, 301-415-2189).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Week of May 8, 2006--Tentative There are no meetings scheduled 
for the Week of May 8, 2006.
 
Week of May 15, 2006--Tentative Monday, May 15, 2006 1 p.m. 
Briefing on Status of Implementation of Energy Policy Act of 2005 
(Public Meeting) (Contact: Scott Moore, 301-415-7278).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Tuesday, May 16, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Results of the Agency 
Action Review Meeting-- Reactors/Materials (Public Meeting) 
(Contact: Mark Tonacci, 301-415- 4045).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Week of May 22, 2006--Tentative Monday, May 22, 2006 9:30 a.m. 
Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program (Public 
Meeting) Contact: Corenthis Kelly, 301-415-7380).
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Week of May 22, 2006--Tentative Monday, May 22, 2006 9:30 a.m. 
Briefing on Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Program (Public 
Meeting) (Contact: Corenthis Kelly, 301-415-7380.
 
This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address 
http://www.nrc.gov .
 
Wednesday, May 24, 2006 9:30 a.m. Discussion of Security Issues 
(closed--ex. 1). 1:30 p.m. All Employees Meeting (Public 
Meeting). Marriott Bethesda North Hotel, Salons, D-H, 5701 
Marinelli Road, Rockville, MD 20852.
 
* * * * * *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to 
change on short
 
[[Page 19912]] notice. To verify the status of meetings call 
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more 
information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662.
 
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the 
Internet at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html* * * * 
* The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with 
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable 
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need 
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from 
the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large 
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, 
Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at 
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable 
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
 
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred 
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like 
to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the 
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, 
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is 
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission 
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic 
message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: April 13, 2006.
 
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
 
[FR Doc. 06-3746 Filed 4-14-06; 2:13 pm] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M

 
*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at McGuire Nuclear Plant
 
News Release - Region II - 2006-02
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region II
  No. II-06-023   		        April 17, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Ken Clark (404) 562-4416
 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     E-mail:   
  

discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance last year
at the McGuire nuclear power plant, located north of Charlotte,
N.C. 

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin
at 2:00 p.m. in the McGuire Office Complex at the plant site.
The NRC staff will present the results of the assessment and be
available to respond to questions or comments from the public
before the close of the meeting. 

The NRC continually reviews the performance of the McGuire plant
and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities, NRC
Region II Administrator William Travers said. This meeting is a
chance for us to discuss that safety performance with the
company, with local officials and with people living near the
plant. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/mcg_2005q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] . 

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance
indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start
with green and then increase to white, yellow or red, depending
on the safety significance of the issues involved. 

The NRC said the McGuire plant operated safely during 2005 with
all inspection findings being green, or very low safety
significance, and all performance indicators also indicating
performance at levels requiring no additional NRC oversight. 

As a result, the NRC plans to conduct only routine baseline
inspections at the plant for the rest of 2006. The NRC staff
will also conduct several non-routine inspections, including the
independent spent fuel storage facility, reactor vessel head and
head penetrations, containment sump blockage and initial reactor
operator licensing exams. 

Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by specialists from the Region II
Office in Atlanta, and the agencys headquarters in Rockville,
Md. 

Current information for the McGuire plant is available on the
NRC web site at:
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MCG1/mcg1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MCG2/mcg2_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 37 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Victims Still Face Uncertainty
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Tuesday April 18, 2006 4:31 PM

AP Photo XEL102 

By MARA D. BELLABY 

Associated Press Writer 

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - With every cough and sore throat, every
ache and pain, Valentyna Stanyuk feels Chernobyl stalking her.
It's only a matter of time,'' she said as she waited for a
thyroid test at a mobile Red Cross clinic in her village of
Bystrichy, 150 miles west of Chernobyl. 

The tests came back clean, but that's little reassurance to this
54-year-old woman, or to millions of others who live in parts of
Ukraine, Belarus and Russia that were heavily irradiated when
the nuclear reactor exploded on April 26, 1986, spewing
radioactive clouds over Ukraine and much of Europe for 10 days. 

The disaster forced the evacuation of large swaths of some of
the Soviet Union's best farmland and forests. The radiation
spread far enough to be detected in reindeer meat in Norway and
rainfall in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. It shocked most European
countries into a generation-long freeze on building nuclear
plants. In so starkly exposing the failings of the communist
system, the world's worst nuclear accident may even have
hastened the collapse of the Soviet Union five years later. 

And the effect on the health of the people exposed to its
invisible poisons? That is the most heatedly debated legacy of
Chernobyl. 

``There is so much that we still don't know,'' said Dr.
Volodymyr Sert, head of a team of Red Cross doctors who canvass
Ukraine's rural Zhytomyr region in search of thyroid
abnormalities - one of the few health problems that all
scientists agree is linked to Chernobyl's fallout. 

``The most important thing we can do is reassure people that
they aren't being forgotten,'' he said. 

After the explosion about 116,000 residents were evacuated from
a 20-mile zone around the plant. Some 5 million others in areas
that got significant fallout were not evacuated. 

Over the years, reports and rumors have spoken of thousands of
these especially vulnerable people dying from radiation. But a
September report by a group of United Nations agencies concluded
that the accident wasn't nearly as deadly as feared. 

Fewer than 50 deaths have been directly linked to radiation
exposure as of mid-2005, the report said. A total of 4,000 of
the 600,000 ``liquidators'' - workers who were hastily mobilized
to clean up the accident site - are likely to die from
radiation-related cancers and leukemia, it predicted. That's far
below the tens of thousands many claimed were fatally stricken. 

The researchers found that thyroid cancer rates have skyrocketed
among people who were under 18 at the time of the accident, but
noted more than 99 percent survive after treatment. 

It said there was no convincing evidence of birth defects or
reduced fertility, and most of the general population suffered
such low radiation doses that the scientists decided not to make
predictions about deaths, except to say that some increase -
less than 1 percent or about 5,000 - might be expected. 

Venyamin Khudolei, director of the Center for Independent
Ecological Expertise at the government-founded Russian Academy
of Science, disagrees with the findings. 

In the part of Russia most heavily hit by the fallout, mortality
rates have risen nearly 4 percent since the explosion,
indicating the Chernobyl toll in Russia alone could be
calculated at 67,000 people, he said. His findings are cited by
the environmental watchdog group Greenpeace, which on Tuesday
(April 18) is to issue a report on Chernobyl's consequences. 

A spokesman for Greenpeace International's main office in
Amsterdam, Omer ElNaiem, said the report will use data from
various sources, some hitherto unpublished, which ``will
indicate a rise'' over the U.N. report's casualty estimates. 

Other experts point to studies which show increases in
everything from schizophrenia among the traumatized liquidators
to breast cancer. 

The U.N. report suggested that people in heavily affected areas
were gripped by ``paralyzing fatalism'' that induced them to see
themselves as victims and blame Chernobyl for every ailment,
even those caused by smoking or drinking. 

That outraged Ukrainian officials. 

``I am speechless that we can allow this blasphemy in front of
the graves of those who died,'' said lawmaker Borys Oliynyk. 

Researchers trying to determine death tolls - and predict deaths
still to come - don't have an easy task. Soviet-era attempts to
cover up the chaotic and often inhumane response made it
difficult to track down victims. Lists were incomplete, and
Soviet authorities later forbade doctors to cite ``radiation''
on death certificates. 

The rural regions affected are impoverished and unemployment is
high. Alcohol abuse is rampant, diets poor. It's hard to
distinguish Chernobyl-related health problems from a more
general post-Soviet malaise, scientists said. 

``I'm sure we'll see claims of thousands, tens of thousands,
hundreds of thousands, millions of deaths, but again we checked,
we checked all the research, all the files,'' Didier Louvat, a
radiation waste expert with the International Atomic Energy
Agency, said by telephone from Vienna. 

``The explosion was very concentrated around the facility and
the fallout was spread in great plumes that went high into the
atmosphere and crossed Europe, diffusing the concentration ...
It could have been much worse.'' 

About 1,000 people - plant personnel, military conscripts,
firefighters from the Kiev region, emergency workers - bore the
brunt of the inferno, and 134 were officially confirmed as
suffering from acute radiation syndrome. 

One person died during the explosion and his body has never been
recovered. The U.N. report says that another 28 died from
radiation sickness in 1986, and 19 of those suffering from
radiation syndrome died between 1987-2004 but not all the deaths
were necessarily caused by radiation. The rest remain alive. 

Wearing no masks or protective suits, dozens of firefighters
were deployed. While the bosses sheltered underground, plant
workers recall, people stood around awaiting instructions,
breathing poisoned air as they watched smoke burst from the
reactor's exposed core. 

The disregard for human life persisted. Natalya Lopatyuk, the
widow of a plant worker, said that as she was being evacuated,
she saw groups of young conscripts sunbathing while waiting for
orders. 

Radiation burns ``tear at the skin and look something like a
volcano erupting on the body,'' said Oleksandr Zelentsov, head
of the Kiev-based International Organization for People with
Radiation Disease. The victims' bodies were considered so
radioactive that family members were told not to touch them and
they were buried in double-layered lead coffins. 

Such high radiation doses, however, were short-lived. The last
people diagnosed with acute radiation syndrome - three
firefighters extinguishing a cable fire - fell ill at the end
May 1986, Zelentsov said. One is dead, one suffered a heart
attack and is in serious condition and the third is healthy,
Zelentsov said. 

The Chernobyl plant now is a cracked hulk in the eerie ``dead
zone.'' The last of its four reactors was taken out of service
in 2000 and the main activity is to shore up the
concrete-and-steel ``sarcophagus'' that covers the destroyed
reactor. 

But radiation infects a vast stretch of Ukraine, Belarus and
Russia - in the soil, in the berries and mushrooms, in the
firewood needed to heat homes. 

Oleksandr Nabok, 21, has never been near the nuclear station,
some 60 miles from his village, but he was recently diagnosed
with thyroid cancer. ``I never thought about Chernobyl until I
got this news,'' he said in a Kiev hospital as he awaited
surgery. 

He is one of more than 5 million people who live in areas deemed
contaminated but habitable, far removed from the villages
circling the plant that were considered so irradiated that they
were bulldozed under grave-like mounds of dirt. There, isotopes
with half-lives of 24,390 years came to rest. 

In Nabok's village, experts say, the biggest concern was
radioactive iodine. 

People suffer from a lack of iodine in this region, so when the
radioactive iodine was released, their thyroids gobbled it up;
children's thyroid glands work most actively, putting them at
greatest risk. Many ingested the iodine in milk from cows that
had grazed on radiated fields. 

Accounts vary, but experts agree that between 4,000 and 5,000
people, children when the explosion happened, have been
diagnosed with thyroid cancer in Ukraine and Belarus - making it
the single biggest Chernobyl-related medical problem. At least
nine have died. Before the accident, the illness was so rare
that in most years only about 10 children were diagnosed with
it. 

The numbers keep growing. The main spurt was expected to come
around this time, but no one knows whether this is the beginning
of the peak or its end. 

``We cannot tell a patient that after a certain time, cancer
will not appear,'' said Halyna Terehova, an endocrinologist with
the Kiev Institute of Endocrinology. 

The U.N. report found that the high anxiety levels persist and
even appear to be growing among people such as Stanyuk who live
in zones affected by contamination. ``It is scary, you try not
to worry about it,'' said Valentyna Yanduk, whose face
brightened into a smile after the Red Cross doctors gave her
12-year-old son Ihor's thyroid the all-clear. Technically he's
not considered part of the risk group - he wasn't even born at
the time of the explosion - but his mother worries. 

``For 20 years, these people have been living as victims instead
of survivors,'' Louvat, the IAEA radiation expert, said. ``We
need to be telling them: 'Look, you survived this.''' 

--- 

Associated Press correspondent Jim Heintz in Moscow contributed
to this report. 
		 	 	   

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 38 Guardian Unlimited: Chernobyl Toll May One Day Surpass 90K
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Tuesday April 18, 2006 8:31 PM

AP Photo XOB104 

By MARA D. BELLABY 

Associated Press Writer 

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) - Greenpeace said Tuesday in a new report
that more than 90,000 people were likely to die of cancers
caused by radiation from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster,
countering a United Nations report that predicted the death toll
would be around 4,000. 

The differing conclusions underline the contentious uncertainty
that remains about the health effects of the world's worst
nuclear accident as its 20th anniversary approaches. 

A reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine
exploded on April 26, 1986, spewing radioactive clouds over much
of Europe. The fallout was particularly severe in northern
reaches of Ukraine, western Russia and Belarus. 

Areas immediately around the now-inoperative plant remain
off-limits, but people in other areas that received significant
fallout are anxious about their health. 

A report by the Chernobyl Forum - a group comprising the
International Atomic Energy Agency and several other U.N. groups
- last year said fewer than 50 deaths could be confirmed as
being connected to Chernobyl. It also said the number of
radiation-related deaths among the 600,000 people who helped
deal with the aftermath of the accident would ultimately be
around 4,000. 

The increase in cancer deaths among the 5 million people exposed
to lower levels of radiation would be so low as to be
statistically difficult to identify, the report's authors said,
estimating it could be around 5,000. 

But Greenpeace, in a report citing data from the former Soviet
republics of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, harshly disagreed and
suggested the Chernobyl Forum report was deliberately
misleading. 

``It is appalling that the IAEA is whitewashing the impacts of
the most serious nuclear accident in human history,'' Ivan
Blokov of the environmental group's Russia office said in a
statement. ``Denying the real implications is not only insulting
to the thousands of victims but it also leads to dangerous
recommendations and the relocation of people in contaminated
areas.'' 

The Chernobyl Forum report had suggested that many of the health
problems and complaints in the regions around Chernobyl were
connected with unhealthy lifestyles, including heavy drinking
and smoking, and with a culture of victimization. 

Vyacheslav Shestopalov of Ukraine's Academy of Sciences
cautioned against relying on non-radiation factors. 

``It is not only stress or a bad economic situation, there is
also radiation,'' he said. 

Volodymyr Bebeshko, a professor at the Ukrainian Center for
Radiation Medicine, said he participated in the forum but
refused to endorse the findings. ``Quite honestly, it doesn't
reflect reality,'' he told The Associated Press. ``They are very
clearly trying to minimize the consequences.'' 

Bebeshko said studies have found increases in not only thyroid
cancer, but also breast cancer in the wives of the so-called
``liquidators'' - those who were asked to deal with the effects
of the explosion - and big increases in leukemia and other blood
disorders. 

Greenpeace said statistics from Belarus indicate that 270,000
cases of cancer will be attributable to Chernobyl radiation
throughout the region and that 93,000 of those are likely to be
fatal. 

Greenpeace also cited a report by the Center for Independent
Environmental Assessment of the Russian Academy of Sciences that
found a sharply increased mortality in western Russia over the
past 15 years, suggesting the rise was due to Chernobyl
radiation. 

``On the basis of demographic data, during the last 15 years,
60,000 people have died additionally in Russia because of the
Chernobyl accident and estimates of the total death toll for
Ukraine and Belarus could be another 140,000,'' Greenpeace's
international office said in a statement. 

The report also found that ``radiation from the disaster has had
a devastating effect on survivors'' other than cancer cases -
``damaging immune and endocrine systems, leading to accelerated
aging, cardiovascular and blood illnesses, psychological
illnesses, chromosome aberrations and an increase of deformities
in fetuses and children.'' 

--- 

On the Net: 

Greenpeace International:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/ 

Chernobyl Forum:
http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2004/consequences.html 

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 39 Guardian Unlimited: Hidden costs of Finnish reactor
 
         Letters 

Tuesday April 18, 2006
 

Finland's plans for a new nuclear power station suffer from many
more problems than those your report discovered (Nuclear power,
April 14). To begin with, the plant's financing is riddled with
covert state subsidies. The consortium that ordered it and
granted it a 30-year guaranteed contract contains a
state-controlled power generation company and Helsinki council.
The Finnish state will make good any shortfall in
decommissioning costs and will take on responsibility for
nuclear waste after 60 years.

 			 		 			 			 			Article continues 			
Furthermore, the plant's French state-controlled joint suppliers 
received massive export guarantees from the French government and 
it seems also to have benefited from German and Swedish state 
support. The fact that a bank 50% owned by the state of Bavaria 
financed the deal at a rate of interest (2.6%) virtually 
indistinguishable from that offered on German government bonds 
is, to say the least, suspicious.

Moreover, Finland has not solved the problem of nuclear waste.
All it has done is persuade the inhabitants of a particular
location to allow further investigations to be carried out. I
was told in Finland that if these scientific tests show the site
is not suitable, it will not be allowed to proceed. If the
British government is to be believed when it says that nuclear
power here will receive no subsidies, the Finnish example does
not help the nuclear industry's case. 
David Howarth MP

 Liberal Democrat energy spokesperson
 
[UP] 

      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 40 ForUm :: Chernobyl aftermath 20 years ago

  News / 18 April 2006 | 10:40   

 The health effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine
20 years ago have been grossly under-estimated, says an
environmental charity, informs. 

Official UN figures have predicted 4,000 extra cancer deaths
attributable to Chernobyl's radioactive fallout. 

But Greenpeace says in a report released on Tuesday that recent
studies estimate there will be 100,000 extra cancer deaths. Many
of them will be in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, the report says. 

Doctor Oxana Lozova, who works at a children's hospital in Rivne
district, 300km (190 miles) west of Chernobyl, said many
generations appeared to be affected. 

"I think the fallout from Chernobyl has affected the immunity of
those who were young children at the time of the disaster," she
said.   "We now have to deal with people who are a lot weaker
than their fathers and grandfathers were. They're falling ill at
an age when they really should still be quite fit." The
explosion and fire at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in April 1986
was the world's worst nuclear accident. 

It spread a cloud of radioactive particles across a huge swathe
of western Europe. Several million people still live in
contaminated areas. 

In its new report, Greenpeace says recent studies suggest the
radiation from Chernobyl will cause 100,000 extra cancer deaths,
and that official figures compiled by the International Atomic
Energy Agency of just a few thousand casualties are a gross
simplification of the breadth of human suffering. 

The charity says that radiation affects the immune, circulatory
and respiratory systems, and causes an increase in foetal
abnormalities and birth defects. 

They are controversial claims. But Greenpeace acknowledges that
it is impossible to know the final impact on human health
without more research. 
  
   Comments Nickolas (10:50 | 18 April,2006) Chernobyl was no
accident. Peter Crosby (14:07 | 18 April,2006) When Chernobyl'
went up those who could got out quick leaving a population which
was disproportionately poor, unskilled, uneducated and old. The
agricultural economy collapsed due to the radiation scare and
the local fear of eating livestock (which concentrate
radioactivity absorbed from grass and ground water). The result
is a vicious circle of poverty and malnutrition which,
argueably, is a more damaging legacy than the initial wave of
cancers and immune deficiencies. Peter Crosby (14:14 | 18
April,2006) With a sickly workforce and lingering fears about
the safety of the environment investors are unwillling to look
at Chernihiv Oblast (especially when much af Ukraine south and
west of Chernobyl' was largely unaffected and offers better
access to industries and commerce). The working-age population
is abandoning Chernihiv Oblast in search of work and safety for
their families. Not just the immediate exclusion zone, but much
of northern Ukraine faces the prospect of becoming a ghost
region. Add new comment Name:
 
Comment:    characters left
 

       News 18 April 2006 17:49 The Foreign Minister of New
Zealand will visit Ukraine 17:14 The Hemodialysis Centre
launches work in Sumy 16:24 EX-Head of the Security Service of
Ukraine to be interrogated in the court 15:41 Yulia Timoshenko
pledges to back the President Yushchenko again 15:15 The World
Bank to loan $500-600 million for Ukraine's energy saving
projects 14:55 Timoshenko claims to debar Poroshenko from
coalition negotiations 13:02 President of Ukraine Yushchenko to
visit Latvia 12:42 First Lady of Ukraine helps asthma patients
12:22 President Yushchenko claims that Ukraine pays for gas in
time 12:02 Ukraine's Foreign Minister decides the fate of
Donetsk Governor 11:47 Potsdam to host Ukrainian football 11:27
The EU may abolish the asymmetric visa regime for Ukraine 11:00
Nigeria and Ukraine to cooperate on space hi-tech 10:40
Chernobyl aftermath 20 years ago 10:23 John Krueger is accused
of molesting four adopted boys form Ukraine 

  Editorial staff:english@for-ua.com
 All rights are reserved by � LTD. Inter-Media,
 ForUm 2001-2006       


  
*****************************************************************
 41 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant
 
News Release - Region I - 2006-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-024                          
April 17, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  
  

representatives of AmerGen Energy Co., LLC, on Monday, April 24,
to discuss the agencys annual assessment of safety performance
at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant. The period of
performance to be discussed is Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2005. 

AmerGen operates the plant, which is located in Lacey Township
(Ocean County), N.J. 

The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation,
is scheduled to begin at
 7 p.m. at the Oyster Creek Emergency Operating Facility, 1268
Route 37 West in Toms River, N.J. The NRC staff will present the
results of the assessment and be available to respond to
questions or comments from the public before the close of the
meeting. 

As we do every year, we have carefully reviewed the safety
performance of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant during the
previous calendar year, NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J.
Collins said. The meeting on April 24th will afford the public a
chance to learn more about the results of our assessment and to
pose any questions they might have regarding plant performance
or our oversight activities. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/oc_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] . The meeting notice, with the meeting agenda
attached, is available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS) under accession number
ML061000396. The NRC slides are available in ADAMS under
accession number ML061000370. ADAMS is accessible via the
agencys web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Help in using ADAMS is available by contacting the NRCs Public
Document Room at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at
PDR@NRC.GOV . 

Overall, the Oyster Creek plant operated safely during the
period. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and
performance indicators to assess nuclear power plant
performance. The colors start with green and then increase to
white, yellow or red, commensurate with the safety significance
of the issues involved. 

At the end of 2005, there was one white (low to moderate safety
significance) inspection finding open for the plant. In August
of last year, Oyster Creek staff did not recognize that plant
parameters met emergency action level thresholds during an
event. For the first three quarters of last year, the plant also
had another white inspection finding open. That finding involved
an inadequate emergency planning event classification procedure.
An NRC inspection in July 2005 determined that AmerGens
corrective actions for that problem were satisfactory. 

Because these two white findings in the emergency planning
cornerstone overlapped in the third quarter of 2005, the plant
was in the Degraded Cornerstone Column of the NRCs Action Matrix
during that period. However, it is currently in the Regulatory
Response Column since only one of those findings remains open.
Looking ahead, the agency plans to conduct a supplemental
inspection in May to evaluate the effectiveness of the companys
corrective actions in the area of emergency planning. In
addition, the agency will perform baseline, or routine,
inspections at the facility throughout the year. 

In the NRCs mid-cycle assessment letter for Oyster Creek, issued
on Aug. 30, 2005, the plant was advised that a substantive
cross-cutting issue identified during the 2004 assessment year
in the area of problem identification and resolution remained
open. Since then, the NRC has determined that the company has
demonstrated timely and effective corrective actions in this
area following the implementation of program improvements in
June 2005. Therefore, the agency has closed out that issue. 

Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the
Region I Office in King of Prussia, Pa. Among the areas of plant
operations to be inspected during the next year by NRC
specialists are radiological safety, problem identification and
resolution, and operator licensing initial exams. 

Current performance information for Oyster Creek is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/OC/oc_chart.html. 

In addition to the April 24th annual assessment meeting, it
should be noted that a separate meeting will be held on
Thursday, April 20, regarding an audit related to the Oyster
Creek license renewal application. Specifically, the findings of
an NRC audit associated with the aging management programs and
reviews used by AmerGen in developing the application will be
discussed. The meeting, which will be open to the public for
observation, will begin at 2 p.m. at the Lacey Township
Municipal Building, 818 W. Lacey Road in Lacey. The NRC staff
will present the audit results and be available to respond to
questions or comments from the public before the close of the
meeting. The notice for the meeting is available in ADAMS under
accession number ML060790420.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 42 Daily Yomiuri: Winny virus exposes nuclear plant info

The Yomiuri Shimbun 

Nishinippon Plant Engineering and Construction Co. has become
the latest victim of the Winny virus, after 95 files--including
information about a Kyushu nuclear power plant--were
inadvertently uploaded to the Internet from a personal computer,
the firm has said. 

The Fukuoka-based subsidiary of Kyushu Electric Power Co.
announced Monday that the virus, which attacks the popular
file-sharing software, had infected the PC, releasing
confidential material--including information on the nuclear
power plant. 

The owner of the computer is an employee in his 30s in charge of
designing facilities, such as stairwells and hallways, to be
used during maintenance and inspections. 

The files included the minutes of meetings with staff from NPC's
parent company between August 1998 and February 2004 and the
names of the people in charge of the power company's eight power
plants--including nuclear reactors. (Apr. 19, 2006) 


 � The Yomiuri Shimbun.   

*****************************************************************
 43 Bellona: Nuclear Textbook Provokes Debate
 
As the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster
approaches on April 26, a group of Russian environmentalists has
published a school textbook about the accident and begun
nationwide distribution.

St Petersburg Times, 2006-04-18 08:31

Titled �Chernobyl Lessons�, the book, put together by experts
from Ecodefense, Greenpeace Russia and Bellona, describes the
disaster and its consequences in great detail, explaining the
dangers of radiation, analyzing the mistakes that were made and
suggesting protection strategies for similar situations. 

Read the full story at St Petersburg Times web site �   


  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


*****************************************************************
 44 BBC: Leaders 'not ready' for Chernobyl
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
[The Chernobyl plant]                           

One of Chernobyl's four nuclear reactors exploded                                                               

More than 350 farms in north Wales are still dealing with the 
after-effects of the Chernobyl nuclear power station disaster in 
Ukraine 20 years ago. 

Documents obtained by BBC Wales have shown how unprepared the UK 
government at the time was to deal with the effects of the 
disaster. 

Sheep from farms in upland areas still have to be tested for 
radiation before their meat can be eaten. 

More than 10,000 people died as a direct result of the explosion 
in 1986. 

Design flaws in the reactor led to a power surge, causing massive 
explosions which blew the top off the reactor. 

BBC Wales' Welsh-language current affairs programme Taro Naw has 
obtained documents which show Welsh Office civil servants told 
hundreds of farmers high levels of radiation found in sheep would 
be a short-term problem. 

Trefor Roberts, who farms near Dolgellau, said: "In the first 
meeting we had as farmers Welsh Office officials told us that 
what they called 'this thing' would be with us for three weeks. 

[Lamb] Animals on hill farms still have to be tested for 
radiation                                                            

"At the worst scenario, he said three months. Here we are 20 
years on and we still have the restrictions." 

Radiation from the explosion reached uplands in north Wales in 
less than a week. 

Expert Kevin Doughty warned at the time that land could be 
contaminated for at least 100 years. 

Dr Doughty told the BBC: "Scientifically, it was a simple process 
for me to calculate that the radioactivity was likely to remain 
in the soil for a matter of tens if not hundreds of years. 

"That was not the message the people wanted. They wanted to hear 
that it would disappear quickly, it would go away and that the 
problem would be long gone within a few months." 

High levels 

Problems were not confined to contaminated lamb. Taro Naw reveals 
that water and milk were also tested for radiation. 

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show the 
samples were taken from areas that had not experienced the 
highest levels of radiation. 

They also show that relevant information was not getting through 
to Welsh office quickly enough and there was a lack of knowledge 
on how to deal with such an incident. 

Plaid Cymru Meirionnydd Nant Conwy MP Elfyn Llwyd said he was 
concerned that there had never been "an independent evaluation of 
what exactly happened". 

"That sounds very strange, but what I'm saying is I don't know 
whether the radioactive material in the ground has come 
exclusively from the Chernobyl fallout or if there are other 
factors in play. 

"For example, could it be that some of these farms, being in 
proximity of Trawsfynydd nuclear power station, might have 
contracted it in that way?" 

"What I would hope even now is that we could have a 
properly-funded, arms-length, expert inquiry into what exactly is 
the reason for this contamination." 

Taro Naw is on S4C at 2025 BST on Tuesday. 		 	 		 	 	 



*****************************************************************
 45 BBC: Greenpeace rejects Chernobyl toll
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
[Photos of emergency workers who died tackling the Chernobyl 
disaster]                             

Kiev's Chernobyl museum shows photos of dead emergency workers                                                          

The health effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine 
20 years ago have been grossly under-estimated, says an 
environmental charity. 

Official UN figures predicted up to 9,000 Chernobyl-related 
cancer deaths. 

But Greenpeace says in a report released on Tuesday that recent 
studies estimate that the actual number of such deaths will be 
93,000. 

Stressing that there is a problem with diagnosis, it adds that 
other illnesses could take the toll to 200,000. 

"Our problem is that there is no accepted methodology to 
calculate the numbers of people who might have died from such 
diseases," Greenpeace campaigner Jan van de Putte told Reuters 
news agency. 
	
READ THE REPORT Most computers will open this document 
automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader            

         "The only methodology that is accepted is for 
calculating fatal cancers." 

The explosion and fire at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in April 
1986 was the world's worst nuclear accident. 

It spread a cloud of radioactive particles across a huge swathe 
of Europe. 

Several million people still live in contaminated areas. 

Disputed figures 

The UN figure - of between 4,000 and 9,000 extra cancer deaths - 
came from a report released last October by the UN-led Chernobyl 
Forum. 

HOW MANY DIED?           

Acute Radiation Sickness (ARS deaths in 1986: 28 ARS patients who 
died later: 19 (some from other causes) Others who died during 
explosion: 2 Child thyroid cancer deaths (1992-2002): 15 (UN 
figure) Predicted extra cancer deaths: from 4,000 (UN) to 93,000 
(Greenpeace) Estimated deaths from non-cancer causes 1990-2004: 
107,000 (Greenpeace) Dozens killed in accidents building 
sarcophagus (according to an engineer) How the disaster unfolded                               

         In the report, the World Health Organization 
dramatically lowered the estimated Chernobyl death toll, 
suggesting confusion had been caused over the accident's impact. 

Many emergency and recovery workers, the report suggested, had 
died since 1986 from natural causes which could not be attributed 
to radiation exposure. 

But in its report, Greenpeace suggests there will be 270,000 
cases of cancer alone attributable to Chernobyl fallout, and that 
93,000 of these will probably be fatal. 

Blake Lee-Harwood, campaigns director at Greenpeace, told the BBC 
that cancer was likely to be the cause of less than half of the 
final fatalities. 

"We're also looking at intestinal problems, heart and circulation 
problems, respiratory problems, endocrine problems, and 
particularly effects on the immune system," he told the BBC's 
World Today programme. 

Child victims 

Mr Lee-Harwood cited technical reasons for the discrepancy. 

[Map of the area around Chernobyl]                                                                                              

However, he also alleged that the nuclear industry had a "vested 
interest in playing down Chernobyl because it's an embarrassment 
to them". 

Doctor Oxana Lozova, who works at a children's hospital in Rivne 
district, 300km (190 miles) west of Chernobyl, said many 
generations appeared to be affected. 

"I think the fallout from Chernobyl has affected the immunity of 
those who were young children at the time of the disaster," she 
told the BBC's Moscow correspondent, Damian Grammaticas. 

"We now have to deal with people who are a lot weaker than their 
fathers and grandfathers were. 

"They're falling ill at an age when they really should still be 
quite fit." 

'Apples and oranges' 

The WHO said comparing the Chernobyl Forum and Greenpeace reports 
was like "comparing apples and oranges" when it spoke to the BBC 
News website. 

A tendency to attribute a health problems to exposure to 
radiation have led local residents to assume that 
Chernobyl-related fatalities were much higher Chernobyl Forum 
report, September 2005          

"The Greenpeace report is looking at all of Europe, whereas our 
report looks at only the most affected areas of the three most 
affected countries," said WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl. 

"The WHO felt it had recourse to the best national and 
international scientific evidence and studies when it came up 
with its estimates of [up to] 9,000 excess deaths for the most 
affected areas. We feel they're very sound." 

Mr Hartl rejected accusations of bias toward the nuclear industry 
in the report. 

"We acting as [neither] an apologist nor an attacker of the 
nuclear industry," he said. 

The original report found more than 600,000 people received high 
levels of exposure, including reactor staff, emergency and 
recovery personnel and residents of the nearby areas. 

		 	 		 	 	 



*****************************************************************
 46 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Catawba Nuclear Plant
 
News Release - Region II - 2006-02
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region II
  No. II-06-024   		        April 17, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Ken Clark (404) 562-4416
 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     E-mail:   
  

to discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance last
year at the Catawba nuclear power plant, located near York in
northwestern South Carolina. 

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin
at 1:00 p.m. in the Rock Hill, S.C., City Council Chambers. The
NRC staff will present the results of the assessment and be
available to respond to questions or comments from the public
before the close of the meeting. 

The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Catawba plant
and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities, NRC
Region II Administrator William Travers said. This meeting is a
chance for us to discuss that safety performance with the
company, with local officials and with people living near the
plant. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region II Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/cat_2005q4.pdf [PDF
Icon] . 

The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings and performance
indicators to assess nuclear plant performance. The colors start
with green and then increase to white, yellow or red, depending
on the safety significance of the issues involved. 

The NRC said the Catawba plant operated safely during 2005 with
all inspection findings being green, or very low safety
significance, and all performance indicators also indicating
performance at levels requiring no additional NRC oversight. 

As a result, the NRC plans to conduct only routine baseline
inspections at the plant for the rest of 2006. The NRC staff
will also conduct several non-routine inspections, including the
independent spent fuel storage facility, reactor vessel head and
head penetrations, containment sump blockage and initial reactor
operator licensing exams. 

Routine inspections are performed by NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by specialists from the Region II
Office in Atlanta, and the agencys headquarters in Rockville,
Md. 

Current information for the Catawba plant is available on the
NRC web site at:
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT1/cat1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT2/cat2_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 47 BBC: The Chernobyl nightmare revisited
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 April 2006
 
By Stephen Mulvey BBC News website   

The world's worst nuclear accident, at Chernobyl in April 1986, 
was all the more alarming for taking place under a veil of 
secrecy, behind the Iron Curtain. 

One of four reactors at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, 70 
miles (110km) north of Kiev, exploded at 0123 local time on 
Saturday 26 April. 

[View of reactors three and four]                               

A sarcophagus was erected over the ruins of Chernobyl's fourth 
reactor                                                
		
The radioactive fallout was detected in Sweden the following 
Monday morning, but all day the Soviet authorities refused to 
admit anything out of the ordinary had occurred. 

Only at 9pm, after Swedish diplomats gave notice they were about 
to file an official alert with the International Atomic Energy 
Authority, did Moscow finally issue a terse, five-sentence 
statement: 

"An accident has occurred at Chernobyl nuclear power station. One 
of the atomic reactors has been damaged. Measures are being taken 
to eliminate the consequences of the accident. Aid is being given 
to the victims. A government commission has been set up." 

The word "damaged" hardly reflected the truth of a reactor in 
meltdown, open to the sky, its graphite sections burning at 
2,500C, sending a column of radionuclides thousands of feet into 
the atmosphere. 

Few believed the reassuring Soviet reports which followed, and
the fear that gripped many in the path of the fallout plume, was
partly the fear of the unknown. 

May Day parade 

It was only two weeks after the explosion, when radiation
releases had dramatically tailed off, that the first Soviet
official gave a fully frank account. 

	 		
[Liquidators clearing radioactive rubbish in 1986] 
                                
Men were used to clear radioactive debris, when machines failed                                                          

"Until now the possibility of a catastrophe really did exist: A 
great quantity of fuel and graphite of the reactor was in an 
incandescent state," said nuclear physicist Yevgeny Velikhov. 

No-one was left more in the dark than the Soviet citizens most 
closely affected. At first, life continued as normal in Pripyat, 
the model town built to house power station staff and their 
families, just two kilometres (one mile) from the Chernobyl 
plant. 

Most people spent the Saturday outside, enjoying the unusually 
warm spring weather. Sixteen weddings took place. 

The town was only evacuated 36 hours after the accident, while 
the evacuation of nearby villages took several more days. 

Meanwhile in Kiev, citizens went ahead with their May Day parade, 
five days after the accident, completely unaware of the radiation 
bearing down on them. 

Horror stories 

The news vacuum also encouraged exaggeration and mistakes in the 
Western media. 

EVACUATION FIGURES               

[Map of the area aroun Chernobyl]               

From Pripyat 36 hours after accident: 49,000 Total evacuated in 
1986 (from 30km zone): 116,000 Others moved later: 220,000 Still 
living in contaminated areas of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine: 5 to 
8 million     

The UPI agency quoted a source in Kiev saying that 2,000 people 
had died, and the figure appeared on many front pages the next 
day. 

US officials, meanwhile, were led astray by satellite 
photographs, which, though confusing, were the main source of 
independent information. 

A Pentagon source told the US television network NBC on 29 April 
that the 2,000 figure "seemed about right, since 4,000 worked at 
the plant", while the next day officials suggested that another 
reactor was in trouble. 

CBS news anchor Dan Rather summed up events on 30th April citing 
"a much different, more dangerous view seen from western 
satellites above, enhanced eye-in-the-sky views that US 
intelligence says is a reactor-gone-wild accident still in 
progress and a second reactor possibly melting down." 

In reality, the threat of fire spreading to the third reactor had 
been dealt with on day one. 

Heroes 

But in the first days of May there was real alarm among the team 
battling the crisis on the ground. 

Radiation releases had begun rising again, and the fear was that 
the molten reactor core would either burn its way through the 
base of the reactor, or that the base would collapse, bringing 
the molten nuclear fuel into explosive contact with a reservoir 
of water beneath. 

Would we manage to keep t white-hot reactor core intact or would 
it go down into the earth? No-one in the world has ever been in 
such a complex position Yevgeny Velikhov, physicist     

Experts feared the second explosion would be bigger than the 
first, and that the core would continue sinking into the ground, 
possibly contaminating water supplies to Kiev, a city of 2.5 
million. 

"The reactor is damaged," Velikhov told Pravda on 13 May. "Its 
heart is the white hot core. It is as though in suspension... 
Down below, in a special reservoir, there might be water. 

"How would the white-hot core of the reactor behave? Would we 
manage to keep it intact or would it go down into the earth? 
No-one in the world has ever been in such a complex position." 

HOW MANY DIED?           

Acute Radiation Sickness (ARS deaths in 1986: 28 ARS patients who 
died later: 19 (some from other causes) Others who died during 
explosion: 2 Child thyroid cancer deaths (1992-2002): 15 (UN 
figure) Predicted extra cancer deaths: from 4,000 (UN) to 93,000 
(Greenpeace) Dozens killed in accidents building sarcophagus 
(according to an engineer) [ src=] Greenpeace rejects Chernobyl 
toll                               

         The heroes of the drama were those who battled the 
reactor, despite the intense radiation: People who put out the 
fires, who pumped water into the reactor or bathed it in liquid 
nitrogen, who dropped sand and lead from helicopters, dived into 
pools beneath the reactor to open sluice gates, or burrowed under 
the foundations to install a system of heat-exchanging pipes. 

And then the men who spent the summer erecting a vast concrete 
and steel sarcophagus above the reactor to seal it off from wind 
and rain. 

There was also the US doctor, Robert Gale, who rushed to Moscow 
to carry out bone marrow transplants on patients suffering from 
radiation sickness. 

The villains were the plant chiefs and senior operators, who were 
convicted of breaking safety rules, and jailed. 

Flawed design 

In the last 20 years a different story has emerged. 

[Work is under way to strengthen the sarcophagus] Work is under 
way in 2006 to strengthen the sarcophagus                         
			   		
It now turns out that none of the measures taken to halt the 
meltdown had any major effect. Most of the materials dropped from 
the helicopters missed their target, the liquid nitrogen 
operation was called off almost as soon as it started, the water 
accumulated below and some was still there when part of the fuel 
fell into it. 

Fortunately that created a pumice-like rock instead of a huge 
explosion. The rest of the fuel, too, ran into chambers beneath 
the reactor, and solidified there of its own accord. 

None of Dr Gale's bone marrow operations saved lives. 

Questions have also been asked about whether it was right to 
evacuate so many people, as the uprooted communities have 
suffered severe social problems, and the health of people living 
on contaminated land has so far proved better than expected. 

Most of the rules that the plant operators were accused of 
breaking, we now know, were only written after the accident. The 
chief problem, it is generally accepted, was the flawed design of 
the reactor. 

This is the first instalment in a week of reports shedding light 
on aspects of the Chernobyl disaster.                                                    



*****************************************************************
 48 WNYC: Indian Point Threatened With Lawsuit Over Leaks
 
April 19, 2006 [WNYC Home] 
 
WNYC Newsroom
 
NEW YORK, NY April 18, 2006 Environmentalists are threatening
to sue to get the EPA to investigate and clean up radioactive
leaks at the Indian Point nuclear power plant. The group
Riverkeeper says that Indian Point owner Entergy Nuclear
Northeast, did not notify the EPA of leaks discovered in
groundwater detected in august at the plant on the Hudson River.

REPORTER: Director of Riverkeeper's Indian Point Campaign, Lisa
Rainwater, says her organization has serious concerns.

RAINWATER: The fact of the matter is there is so little
information known at this point regarding where the leak is
coming from, how much has leaked, how to fix the leak, that it's
disingenious, at best, to be telling the public we should not be
concerned.

REPORTER: Entergy spokesman Jim Steets said the company "made
the appropriate and required notifications to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, which has jurisdiction over Indian
Point."

The EPA said it would not comment without seeing the suit but
confirms that the DEC does have jurisdiction in this case. 


�2006 WNYC Radio 
*****************************************************************
 49 Platts: Nine Mile Point-2 sets station record for shortest refueling
 
Washington (Platts)--17Apr2006
 
Nine Mile Point-2's 25-day refueling outage set a station record, 
operator Constellation Energy said April 14. 

The company attributed its long-range planning, which began more 
than a year ago, to the success of the outage. 

It said major outage work completed included inspections on two 
low-pressure turbine rotors, material improvement modifications 
to four service water valves, and replacement of a feedwater 
heater nozzle.
 

														Terms & Conditions 
Copyright � 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]       

  



*****************************************************************
 50 Platts: ANALYSIS: UK lawmakers say nukes won't fill energy gap, gas
could 

London (Platts)--18Apr2006 

New nuclear power plants cannot help the UK fill its generation 
gap over the next 10 years or help the UK reduce its carbon 
dioxide over that period, "as it simply could not be built in 
time," members of parliament from the House of Commons 
Environmental Audit Committee said in a report released Easter 
Sunday. 

However, the MPs said that a second "dash-for-gas" similar to the 
expansion of gas-fired power plants in the 1990s could be the 
answer. "The potential generating gap during this period will 
need to be filled--largely by an extensive program of new 
gas-fired power stations," the lawmakers said. Another 
"dash-for-gas" would result in "significant carbon savings," 
contrary to popular opinion, they said. 

By 2016 between 15 GW and 20 GW of electricity plant is set to be 
decommissioned, nearly a quarter of total UK generating capacity. 
About half of this capacity is existing nuclear and half is coal. 

Many commentators have questioned the wisdom of building new 
gas-fired power plants on security of supply grounds, especially 
after flows for gas from Russia to western Europe were 
interrupted during a dispute with Ukraine early in 2006. But the 
MPs' report said that security of gas supplies was probably a 
problem the UK would have to get over whether or not it had new 
gas-fired power plants. "We will in any case become highly 
dependent on foreign imports of fossil fuels for our total energy 
requirements--including over twice as much natural gas for 
industrial and domestic uses as we use for electricity 
generation," the MPs said. 

Senior industry figures have expressed similar views to the 
committee. Centrica Energy's MD Jake Ulrich said in March that 
nuclear "doesn't really hit the short-term or mid-term issues." 
Ulrich said gas-fired generation was still attractive and would 
be "favored" by the long-term trend for saving carbon dioxide 
emissions. Centrica is developing a new 1,000-MW gas-fired plant 
at Langage in Devon. Other major UK energy companies including 
Eon UK and RWE-Npower are also planning new gas-fired power 
plants. But no one yet has firm plans for nuclear power plants in 
the UK. 

The MPs in their report cast doubt over the future of nuclear. 
Before new nuclear could be built, long-term waste disposal, 
public acceptability, the availability of uranium and the threat 
of terrorism needs to be addressed, they said. "It is by no means 
clear whether investors will wish to commit themselves to 70 
years of nuclear generation," the committee said. 

The report argues that renewables and carbon capture and storage 
technologies deserve a lot more support than they are getting. It 
also said more action was needed to reduce demand. 

The Environmental Audit Committee called the government's energy 
review into question. "It does not appear to have resulted from a 
due process of monitoring and accountability," the MPs said. Some 
critics have called the review little more than a smokescreen for 
the government to launch a program of new nuclear, which Prime 
Minister Tony Blair is said to favor.

The government has said that the energy review would decide 
whether to go ahead with new nuclear. The committee was puzzled. 
The government has declared itself in favor of a market-based 
approach in which industry decides the forms of generation it 
wants to support. The MPs questioned what sort of decision the 
government could therefore make on nuclear. The report says the 
nature of the decision is "unclear." The suspicion is that the 
government--in making a decision on nuclear-- could break with 
its past declarations that it will not prescribe the UK fuel mix. 
Some commentators have said a "nuclear obligation" could be 
introduced, forcing companies to buy a set percentage of nuclear 
power. That would be "a major U-turn in energy policy," the MPs 
said. If government is going to make decisions on nuclear, they 
said it was unclear why the government should not make similar 
"decisions" on many other technologies, suggesting a much more 
interventionist role. 

Long-term the committee backs the White Paper of 2003. "We remain 
convinced that the vision contained in the White Paper--with its 
focus on energy efficiency and renewables as cornerstones of a 
future sustainable energy policy--remains correct." David Porter, 
CEO of the UK Association of Electricity Producers, said Sunday 
the UK faced a huge generation gap. Electricity companies "want 
to invest" he said but "they cannot invest in any new project, 
without taking account of the politics." He said government must 
complete its energy review on time, by summer 2006, and make sure 
it produces a framework for energy policy that lets the market 
make decisions. It has to be clear and long-lasting, he said. 
Long-term certainty is particularly needed over carbon emissions. 
A plant may have a life of 30 years or more, but today's carbon 
framework only runs until 2012. For more information, take a 
trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at 
http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ 

Copyright � 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved 

[The McGraw-Hill Companies] 
*****************************************************************
 51 AFP: Public opinion warming to nuclear power 

 Tue Apr 18, 5:36 AM ET 		 	 

LONDON (AFP) - Britons have softened their stance towards
nuclear power but most are still against building new reactors. 

 A survey for Tuesday's edition of the Financial Times newspaper
by consultants KPMG and pollsters YouGov, suggested that 45
percent of respondents want a reduction in the number of nuclear
reactors, against 36 percent who said they wanted an increase. 

Some 19 percent were either unsure or wanted nuclear capacity to
remain constant. 

Last year, the responses were 59 percent against, 29 percent in
favour and 13 percent undecided to the same questions. 

Support remained strong for renewable forms of energy like wind
power but 44 percent said they were not prepared to pay extra
for so-called "green" energy. 

The FT said the rise in opposition to higher charges -- 23
percent were against last year -- indicated that consumers were
feeling the pinch from recent rises in energy bills for
electricity and gas. 

Late last year, Prime Minister Tony Blair" /> Tony
Blairannounced a wide-ranging review of Britain's future energy
requirements in the light of dwindling reserves of North Sea oil
and gas and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

The review, which will be published in several months' time, is
widely expected to back the building of new nuclear reactors
combined with renewable energy provision. 

Just under 20 percent of Britain's electricity comes from
nuclear power stations, which were mainly built in the 1950s and
60s, but all but one of the plants will have been decommissioned
by 2023. 

The review is likely to heighten the debate between supporters
and opponents of the nuclear energy option. 

A total of 2,161 people were questioned between March 28 and
March 30. 

	 		 			
Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 52 SE: CLOSURE OF BULGARIA'S NPP MAY LEAD TO BALKAN ENERGY INSTABILITY
    
Sofia Echo                     
 Business news
 
:17 Tue 18 Apr 2006 

After the closure of the third and fourth reactors of Kozlodui
nuclear power plant, Bulgaria will stop exporting energy to the
other Balkan countries. 

EU insists the blocks are closed in December 2006, BGNES news
agency reported. 

Kozlodui executive director Ivan Ivanov said that 50 per cent of
the exported energy on the Balkans comes from Bulgaria. At
present, the country exports more than 900 kilowatts an hour to
Turkey, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia and Albania. 

Greece and Macedonia have already expressed their worries that
the closure of the reactors may lead to energy and social
instability in the region.  

Numerous inspections have proved the closure is unnecessary, as
the reactors are technically safe, Ivanov said. In June the NPP
will be renovated but if the verdict of the EU remains the same,
the reactors will be stopped in December and preserved. In case
Bulgarian politicians lobby to EU institutions, the reactors may
once again be brought back to life soon after their closure. 

However, some EU officials insist the reactors should be
destructed instead of preserved.                        

www.sofiaecho.com. Sofia Echo Media cannot be held responsible
*****************************************************************
 53 NRC: NRC Chairman to Visit Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant April 21, 
Press Conference Scheduled At Site At 11:00

News Release - Region II - 2006-025 - Media Advisory, 

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, 
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov   

  No. II-06-025                         April 17, 2006 CONTACT:     
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov  
  
Press Conference Scheduled At Site At 11:00
  
The Chairman of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Dr.
Nils J. Diaz, is scheduled to visit the Turkey Point nuclear
power plant, operated by Florida Power & Light Company near
Homestead, Florida, on Friday, April 21 to tour the site and to
discuss regulatory oversight at the facility with company
officials. He will hold a press conference for interested news
media representatives at the plant site from 11:00 to 11:40 a.m. 

Chairman Diaz has been a strong advocate of making sound
regulatory decisions while communicating those decisions in a
clear manner to the public and has played a leadership role in
security issues affecting NRC licensees. 

Before his NRC appointment, Dr. Diaz was Professor of Nuclear
Engineering Sciences at the University of Florida and served as
director of a national consortium of industries, universities
and national laboratories involved with nuclear power in space.
He also served as Associate Dean for Research at the California
State University in Long Beach and was at one time Principal
Advisor to Spains Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

He holds a Ph.D. and M.S. in Nuclear Engineering Sciences from
the University of Florida and a B.S. Degree in Mechanical
Engineering from the University of Villanova, Havana, Cuba. 

EDITORS: News personnel planning to attend the press conference
at the plant should plan to arrive at least 45 minutes prior to
11:00 a.m. in order to clear required security. Please notify
NRC public affairs officers Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 or Roger
Hannah (404) 562-4417 if you plan to attend. Take the Florida
Turnpike south to its last exit at Florida City, turn left at
the traffic light onto Palm Drive and follow that road to the
plant.   

Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006       
*****************************************************************
 54 Farmers Weekly: Chernobyl compensation in need of review as Welsh farmers suffer
 
18/04/2006 09:00:00

Farmers Weekly

Compensation payment rates for Welsh farmers whose land was
contaminated by the Chernobyl nuclear accident must be reviewed,
the Farmers Union of Wales has said. 

It is almost 20 years since the accident at the Chernobyl
nuclear power plant in the Ukraine. 

The explosion on 26 April 1986 threw a cloud of dust into the
atmosphere which later fell as radioactive rain on parts of
Europe. 

The resulting contamination led to widespread restrictions on
farming. In North Wales sheep grazing hill land on 359 farms
still have to be tested for caesium-137 radiation before they
can be sold into the food chain. 

Only sheep with less than 1000 becquerels of radio caesium can
be slaughtered. 

But animals can be retested after grazing non-contaminated land
for four weeks. 

Currently farmers are paid £1.30 for each animal monitored, a
figure that has not changed since testing started on 8914 UK
farms in the autumn of 1986. 

"The cost to farmers of rounding up, penning and handling sheep
from the 53,000ha (130,910 acres) of Welsh upland that is still
contaminated has increased greatly over the last 20 years," said
Gareth Vaughan, FUW president. 

"Monitoring is a consumer health issue and farmers should be
properly compensated for working closely with those who carry
out the radiation checks." 

On a visit to Dylasau Uchaf near Betws-y-Coed, farmed by FUW
vice-president Glyn Roberts, he forecast that restrictions were
likely to be in place for a considerable time in Wales. 

Mr Roberts and his brother Eryl, who farms nearby, told him that
they would never recover losses suffered when all sheep
marketing was banned for several months in 1986.

Testing scheme 

They recalled the farmer anger that led to Nicholas Edwards, the
then secretary of state for Wales, being held captive in a North
Wales hotel until he agreed that a testing and release scheme
would be introduced soon. 

"They were tough times, but we gradually recovered," said Glyn
Roberts, who explained that his management had adapted with very
few lambs turned to contaminated areas. 

"But I still have to test around 200 lambs each year and
breeding stock from the hill must be marked before moving under
licence. 

Consumer protection is very important, but we will certainly be
glad to see the day when normality returns." 

bobdavies@agrinews.fsnet.co.uk

by Robert Davies (About this Author)
Daily newsletters

*****************************************************************
 55 Greenpeace International: Chernobyl death toll grossly underestimated | 

+ Chernobyl Photo Exhibition schedule 

18 April 2006 

[In the cancer ward of a Kiev hospital in the Ukraine,
19-year-old  Elena is being treated for her second case of
thyroid cancer in just 3  years] 

In the cancer ward of a Kiev hospital in the Ukraine, 19-year-old 
Elena is being treated for her second case of thyroid cancer in 
just 3 years

Chernobyl, Ukraine  A new Greenpeace report has revealed that 
the full consequences of the Chernobyl disaster could top a 
quarter of a million cancers cases and nearly 100,000 fatal 
cancers. involved 52 respected scientists and includes 
information never before published in English. It challenges the 
International Atomic Energy Agency Chernobyl Forum report, which 
predicted 4,000 additional deaths attributable to the accident as 
a gross simplification of the real breadth of human suffering.
 
The new data, based on Belarus national cancer statistics, 
predicts approximately 270,000 cancers and 93,000 fatal cancer 
cases caused by Chernobyl. The report also concludes that on the 
basis of demographic data, during the last 15 years, 60,000 
people have additionally died in Russia because of the Chernobyl 
accident, and estimates of the total death toll for the Ukraine 
and Belarus could reach another 140,000. 

The report also looks into the ongoing health impacts of 
Chernobyl and concludes that radiation from the disaster has had 
a devastating effect on survivors; damaging immune and endocrine 
systems, leading to accelerated ageing, cardiovascular and blood 
illnesses, psychological illnesses, chromosomal aberrations and 
an increase in foetal deformations.
 
The real face of the nuclear industry
 
Each one of these statistics has a face.  Many people are paying 
a price for the negligence of a dirty and dangerous industry:
 
This is just a selection of pictures from a new photography 
exhibit . The exhibition features poignant portraits of 
individuals and families, and the stories of their suffering due 
to Chernobyl and other nuclear disasters. 

These powerful images are a timely reminder that human lives are 
more than just  numbers. For each statistic there is a person 
paying the ultimate price. Anyone who doubts the dangers of 
nuclear power should visit the exhibition and see for themselves 
one of the reasons why we oppose nuclear power. Twenty years on, 
every nuclear power plant bears the legacy of  the nuclear 
industry's victims; and every nuclear power plant represents the 
threat of becoming the next Chernobyl. 

  + Former Environmental Ministers call on UN to reform IAEA
mandate and End the Nuclear Age 
11 April 2006 
  + IAEA deliberately downplays Chernobyl death toll to pave way
for nuclear renaissance 
07 September 2005 
  + Whitewashing Chernobyl's impacts 
05 September 2005 
Related Reports
 
  + The Chernobyl Catastrophe - Consequences on Human Health 
18 April 2006 
*****************************************************************
 56 Vallejo Times Herald: Shiloh Wind Project bringing needed, clean energy

Vallejo, CA  

By RACHEL RASKIN-ZRIHEN, Times-Herald staff writer  

  Rolling blackouts; energy shortages; price gouging by
out-of-state producers. Common phrases from five summers ago
that helped bring down a California governor. 

A Solano County project built in response now helps reduce the
chance of such a thing happening again. 

Solano County's Shiloh Wind Project, the first energy generator
built in California since the statewide energy crisis of 2000,
recently began delivering power to PG, a spokeswoman for the
utility said Monday. 

"Very few energy generation sources were built after the energy 
crisis," said PG spokeswoman Lisa Randle. "Most of our energy is 
imported from other states. The Shiloh wind farm is the first 
newly constructed renewable energy generating source built since 
the crisis." 

Not only does the Shiloh wind farm contribute 75 megawatts of
energy to the thousands needed in Northern California daily, but
the power generated is clean and renewable, Randle said. 

The 75 megawatts PG now gets from Shiloh is enough to power
56,250 homes, Randle said. 

The state Pubic Utilities Commission requires the utility to
generate 20 percent of its power from a renewable source, and to
increase that amount by 1 percent annually, Randle said. She
added that PG "already provides 30 percent of our energy from
renewable sources." 

The rest comes from natural gas, hydroelectricity, nuclear power
and other sources, she said. 

Renewable, non-polluting energy sources like wind help PG stay
current with PUC rules and also ensures a healthy power supply,
said Randle and Vallejo-based energy expert Larry Asera. 

"This helps stabilize the grid capacity," said Asera, who was 
involved with the Shiloh project's design and permitting process. 
Despite the added power supply security, Randle said lowered 
utility bills likely won't result from the Shiloh project. 

There are three wind farm projects in the same Montezuma Hills
area between Rio Vista and Suisun City as Shiloh, Asera said.
Both the farms - one belonging to the Sacramento Municipal
Utility District and one to Florida Power and Light - are also
producing power and are connected to the power grid, Randle
said. 

The Shiloh farm was built in 2005 by the French firm enXco,
which sold it to ScottishPower. Portland, Ore.-based PPM Energy,
ScottishPower's United States competitive subsidiary, operates
the site, according to PPM's Web site. 

Solano County benefits from the Shiloh project through taxes and
permit, environmental mitigation and developer fees, as well as
from the knowledge it's producing clean energy, Asera said. 

But the main benefit is in building a hedge against a repeat of
the rolling blackouts of nearly six years ago, Randle said. 

"Our focus is to show our customers that we have adequate energy
available for our customers now and in the future, even as far
into the future as 2010," Randle said.   
                  
TimesHeraldOnline.com is a Copyright © 2006 product of The
Times-Herald, Vallejo, California, 94590
*****************************************************************
 57 NRC: Notice of Availability of Meeting Notice for Discussion of Draft 
 
                         FR Doc E6-5700 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19909-19910] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-97]                         
 
Interim Staff Guidance Document for Fuel Cycle Facilities AGENCY: 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Meeting notice and agenda.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Smith, Project Manager, 
Technical Support Group, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and 
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20005-0001. 
Telephone: (301) 415- 6459; fax number: (301) 415-5370; e-mail: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC) continues to prepare and issue Interim Staff 
Guidance (ISG) documents for fuel cycle facilities. These ISG 
documents provide clarifying guidance to the NRC staff when 
reviewing licensee integrated safety analyses, license 
applications or amendment requests or other related licensing 
activities for fuel cycle facilities under 10 CFR Part 70. 
Currently, the NRC has revised one of these documents, Draft 
ISG-FCSS-10, Rev. 2, based on comments received on Revision 1. 
The NRC plans to discuss the resolution of these comments at a 
public meeting to be held April 28, 2006, at the NRC Headquarters 
Auditorium in Rockville, Maryland.
 
II. Summary The purpose of this notice is to provide the public 
with a meeting notice and proposed agenda for a public meeting 
scheduled for April 28, 2006, at the NRC Headquarters Auditorium 
in which the NRC will discuss revision of the draft guidance 
document, FCSS-ISG-10, Revision 2, which provides guidance to NRC 
staff to determine whether the minimum margin of subcriticality 
is sufficient to provide an adequate assurance of subcriticality 
for safety to demonstrate compliance with the performance 
requirements of 10 CFR 70.61(d), and its resolution of comments 
received on Revision 1. Revision 2 of the draft ISG and the ADAMS 
accession number for an associated table of comment resolution 
were previously noticed in the Federal Register on March 20, 
2006. The agenda for the April 28, 2006, meeting is provided 
below.
 
III. Proposed Agenda Public Meeting, Scheduled for April 28, 
2006, To Discuss Draft FCSS- ISG-10, Revision 2, ``Justification 
for Minimum Margin of Subcriticality for Safety'' Rockville Pike 
8 a.m. Purpose of workshop, introductions, agenda, and discussion 
process 8:15 a.m. NRC presentation on context/intent of 
FCSS-ISG-10 8:30 a.m. NRC summary of major changes to current 
version of FCSS-ISG- 10 8:45 a.m. Section-by-section discussion 
of comments received and changes made 11:45 a.m. Meeting wrap-up 
12:30 p.m. Adjourn IV. Further Information The documents related 
to this action are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at .
 
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS ascension 
numbers for the documents related to this notice are provided in 
the following table. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if 
there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, 
contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to .
 
Interim staff guidance                 ADAMS accession No.
 
Draft FCSS Interim Staff Guidance-10,     ML060260479 Revision 2.
 
 
[[Page 19910]] Comments on Draft FCSS ISG-10, Rev.1 and  
ML060470150 Resolution.
 
This document may also be viewed electronically on the public 
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 6th day of April 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Melanie A. Galloway, Chief, Technical Support Group, Division of 
Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5700 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 58 NRC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Denver Federal Center, 
 
                         FR Doc E6-5702 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19907-19909] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-96]                         
 
Building 53: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of 
No Significant Impact for License Amendment AGENCY: Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Blair Spitzberg, Ph.D., 
Chief, Fuel Cycle and Decommissioning Branch, Division
 
[[Page 19908]] of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Arlington, Texas 76011. Telephone: 
(817) 860-8191; fax number: (817) 860-8188; e-mail: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an 
amendment to Material License No. 05-14892-01, as requested by 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the licensee), 
to authorize release of Building 53 at Denver Federal Center, 
Denver, Colorado, for unrestricted use. The licensee has been 
authorized by NRC to use radioactive material for instrument 
calibration and sample analyses at this location. On August 9, 
2004, EPA requested that NRC release the facility for 
unrestricted use. The licensee conducted radiological surveys of 
the facility and provided information to demonstrate that the 
site meets the license termination criteria specified in Subpart 
E to 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. The amendment will 
be issued if NRC determines that the request meets the standards 
specified in 10 CFR Part 20 and related NRC guidance documents.
 
II. Environmental Assessment (EA) Identification of Proposed 
Action: The proposed action is to remove Building 53 from License 
Condition 10 as a location of use. Once the building is removed 
from the license, the licensee will be free to use the building 
in any manner without NRC restriction.
 
The Need for the Proposed Action: The licensee no longer conducts 
licensed activities in this building. The EPA has vacated the 
building and desires to release the building for unrestricted 
use. If the site is properly decommissioned, the licensee would 
then be in compliance with the Timeliness Rule requirements of 10 
CFR 30.36, ``Expiration and Termination of Licenses and 
Decommissioning of Sites and Separate Buildings or Outdoor 
Areas.'' Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: Materials 
License No. 05-14892-01 authorizes EPA to possess small 
quantities of radioactive material, in both sealed and unsealed 
form, for instrument calibration and sample analysis. By letter 
dated August 9, 2004, EPA requested amendment of its license to 
remove Building 53 as a location of use. Radioactive materials 
were used in this building from about 1973 until 2003. All 
radioactive materials were relocated to Building 25 by August 
2003.
 
The licensee conducted a historical review and concluded that the 
radionuclides of concern were americium-241, strontium-90, 
natural uranium, radium-226, and radium-228. Based on the 
historical review, the licensee determined that radioactive 
materials were used in eight laboratories in Building 53.
 
A final status survey of the building was conducted during 
February-March 2004. The final status survey was conducted in 
five of the eight laboratories. Two rooms were excluded because 
only sealed sources had been used in these rooms. A third room 
was excluded because only radioactivity at background levels were 
stored in this room. (The NRC's confirmatory survey included all 
eight rooms.) A final status survey report was completed by the 
licensee, and a copy of the report was attached to the licensee's 
August 9, 2004, letter.
 
The EPA concluded in its report that ``Building 53 meets the 
criteria for radiological release * * * thus allowing the 
facility to be released for unrestricted use and to be removed 
from the EPA's NRC Radioactive Material License.'' The NRC 
conducted a confirmatory survey of the building during October 
2005. None of the confirmatory sample results exceeded the 
proposed derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) provided 
in the final status survey report.
 
In its final status survey report, the licensee stated that 
radioactive waste material from previously licensed operations in 
Building 53 was either transferred to an authorized recipient or 
placed into temporary storage. Solid waste disposal did not 
include on-site burial or incineration. Discharges to sewers were 
not allowed by the licensee's waste disposal program, and no 
record of disposal by sewer was identified by the licensee during 
its historical review.
 
Further, no incidents were recorded involving spills or releases 
of radioactive material.
 
To demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for 
unrestricted use as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402, the licensee 
developed DCGLs. The NRC compared the licensee's proposed DCGLs 
to the screening criteria provided in NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated 
NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' Volume 2. The NRC concluded that 
the proposed DCGLs were acceptable for use as release criteria.
 
In the final status survey report, the licensee states that 
radioactive materials were handled only within the eight rooms 
identified in the historical review. In addition, the licensee 
did not dispose of radioactive material through the sewer system, 
and no spills were documented. Accordingly, there were no 
environmental impacts from the use of radioactive material in 
Building 53. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and 
the final status survey report to identify any non-radiological 
hazards that may have impacted the environment. No additional 
hazards or impacts to the environment were identified.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action: 
The licensee seeks NRC approval of the amendment request. The 
alternatives to the proposed action are: (1) The no-action 
alternative, or (2) to deny the amendment request and require the 
licensee to take some alternate action.
 
1. No-Action Alternative: One alternative available to the NRC is 
to take no action by denying the amendment request. The no-action 
alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with the NRC's 
Timeliness Rule (10 CFR 30.36) which requires licensees to 
decommission their facilities when licensed activities cease.
 
2. Environmental Impacts of Alternative 2: A second alternative 
is to deny the licensee's request in favor of alternate release 
criteria as allowed by Sec.  20.1403 (criteria for restricted 
conditions) or Sec.  20.1404 (alternate criteria). However, the 
NRC's analysis of the final status survey data confirmed that the 
proposed DCGLs meet the license termination requirements of Sec.  
20.1402. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that the second 
alternative is not reasonable, and this alternative action is 
eliminated from further consideration.
 
Conclusion: Based on its review, the NRC staff concludes that the 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action do not 
warrant denial of the license amendment request. The staff 
believes that the proposed action will result in no environmental 
impacts. The staff has determined that approval of the license 
amendment is the appropriate alternative for selection.
 
Agencies and Persons Contacted: The NRC staff did not consult 
with the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer or the 
local U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service because licensed activities 
occurred only within Building 53. There was no evidence of use or 
release of radioactive material outside of the building. 
Accordingly, there was no impact to the cultural resources, 
endangered species, or critical habitats outside of Building 53. 
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 
Radiation Management
 
[[Page 19909]] Unit, was consulted about this EA. The State 
informed the NRC by letter dated March 6, 2006, that it had no 
comments on the EA.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared 
this EA in support of the proposed license amendment to release 
Building 53 for unrestricted use.
 
On the basis of this EA, NRC has concluded that there are no 
significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and 
the license amendment does not warrant the preparation of an 
environmental impact statement. Accordingly, it has been 
determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is 
appropriate.
 
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, 
including the application for amendment and supporting 
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at .
 
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document 
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession 
numbers for the documents related to this notice are: 1. NRC, 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking 
on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Licensed 
Nuclear Facilities,'' NUREG-1496, July 1997 (ML042310492, 
ML042320379, and ML042330385).
 
2. NRC, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' 
NUREG-1757, Volume 2, September 2003 (ML053260027).
 
3. Ossinger, Albert, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
License Amendment Request, August 9, 2004 (ML042510569, 
ML042570068, ML061000701 [Appendix D has been redacted because it 
contains confidential laboratory protocols], ML042570073, 
ML042570076, ML042570077, and ML042570080).
 
4. NRC Inspection Report 030-08219/05-001, November 14, 2005 
(ML053180267).
 
5. Tarlton, Steve, Colorado Department of Public Health and 
Environment, ``Request for Comments on Draft Environmental 
Assessment For Decommissioning of Building 53 at Denver Federal 
Center,'' March 6, 2006 (ML060790512).
 
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to .
 
These documents may also be viewed electronically on public 
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Arlington, Texas, this 30th day of March, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
D. Blair Spitzberg, Chief, Fuel Cycle & Decommissioning Branch, 
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5702 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 59 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting
 
                         FR Doc E6-5704 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19910] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-98]                         
 
on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting The ACRS 
Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures will hold a meeting on 
May 3, 2006, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.
 
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the 
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel 
matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and 
practices of the ACRS, and information the release of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
 
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: 
Wednesday, May 3, 2006, 10:30 a.m.-12 Noon. The Subcommittee will 
discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters. The 
Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and 
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as 
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
 
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, 
Mr. Sam Duraiswamy (telephone: 301-415-7364) between 7:30 a.m. 
and 4:15 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, 
so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the 
meeting that are open to the public.
 
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 
4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged 
to contact the above named individual at least two working days 
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in 
the agenda.
 
Dated: April 11, 2006.
 
Michael R. Snodderly, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5704 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 60 NRC: NRC Enforcement Policy: Extension of Discretion Period of
 
                         FR Doc E6-5706 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19905-19907] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-94]                         
 
Interim Enforcement Policy AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Policy Statement: Revision.
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is revising the 
NRC ``Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding Enforcement Discretion 
for Certain Fire Protection Issues,'' to extend the enforcement 
discretion period to 3 years for those licensees that commit to 
transition to 10 CFR 50.48(c), and to provide clarification and 
enhancements predominately in the areas of existing 
non-compliances and the treatment of non-compliances if a 
licensee withdraws from the transition.
 
 
DATES: This revision is effective April 18, 2006. Comments on 
this revision to the Enforcement Policy may be submitted on or 
before May 18, 2006.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, 
Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative Services, 
Office of Administration, Mail Stop: T6D59, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand-deliver 
comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, between 
7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal workdays. Copies of comments 
received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room, Room 
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. You may also 
e-mail comments to .
 
The NRC maintains the current Enforcement Policy on its Web site 
at , select ``What We Do,'' then ``Enforcement Policy.'' FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Johnson, Director, Office of 
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555- 0001, (301) 415-2741, e-mail .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 16, 2004, the NRC published, 
in the Federal Register, a final rule amending 10 CFR 50.48 (69 
FR 33536). This rule became effective on July 16, 2004, and 
allows licensees to adopt 10 CFR 50.48(c), a voluntary 
risk-informed, performance-based alternative to current fire 
protection requirements. The NRC concurrently revised its 
Enforcement Policy (69 FR 33684) to provide interim enforcement 
discretion during a ``transition'' period.
 
The interim enforcement discretion policy includes provisions to 
address: (1) Noncompliances identified during the licensee's 
transition process; and (2) existing identified noncompliances.
 
In accordance with the current Enforcement Policy, for those 
noncompliances identified during the transition to 10 CFR 
50.48(c), the enforcement discretion policy will be in effect for 
up to 2 years from the date of a licensee's letter of intent to 
adopt the requirements of 10 CFR 50.48(c). In addition, when the 
licensee submits a license amendment request to complete the 
transition to 10 CFR 50.48(c), the enforcement discretion will 
continue in effect until the NRC completes its review of the 
license amendment request.
 
The second element of the interim policy provides enforcement 
discretion for licensees that wish to take advantage of the rule 
to resolve existing noncompliances. The original rule required 
licensees wishing to take advantage of this interim policy to 
submit a letter of intent to adopt 10 CFR 50.48(c), within 6 
months of the effective date of the final rule. However, the 
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) (ADAMS Accession No. ML042010132) 
sent a letter dated July 7, 2004, requesting that the NRC extend 
the deadline for the letter of intent to be
 
[[Page 19906]] sent from 6 months to 18 months. Subsequently, the 
extension was granted and was published in the Federal Register 
as a revision to the interim enforcement policy regarding 
enforcement discretion for certain issues involving fire 
protection programs at operating nuclear power plants. The 
revision was effective on January 14, 2005 (70 FR 2662).
 
As a result, if a licensee submitted a letter of intent by 
December 31, 2005, in order to meet the second element of the 
interim enforcement policy, the NRC would exercise enforcement 
discretion for existing noncompliances that could reasonably be 
corrected under 10 CFR 50.48(c). The NRC is revising the 
Enforcement Policy to extend the current 2- year period of 
enforcement discretion, for the transition to this voluntary, 
performance-based regulation, to 3 years for licensees that 
commit, in their letters of intent, to adopt 10 CFR 50.48(c) 
requirements.
 
Many licensees have requested additional time, beyond the 2-year 
discretion period, to properly evaluate their existing fire 
analyses and to develop fire probabilistic risk assessments 
(PRA). Based on these requests, the staff considered the 
extension of the current enforcement discretion period from 2 
years to 3 years. The extension in time is appropriate in light 
of the level of effort required to transition to this 
risk-informed approach, including the implementation of plant 
modifications that may be required as a result of the licensee's 
evaluation. In addition, this change will not adversely impact 
public health and safety because the discretion policy does not 
apply to the most risk-significant findings (i.e., violations 
characterized as Red or Severity Level I). For those findings 
where the policy does apply, licensees are required to implement 
and maintain immediate compensatory measures to qualify for 
discretion. This extension would facilitate a regulatory approach 
that encourages licensees to find and resolve their own issues in 
ways consistent with Enforcement Policy goals. During the 
discretion period, licensees are required to maintain their 
current fire protection plans, including maintaining appropriate 
compensatory measures. In addition to the 3- year discretion 
period, the NRC staff may grant item-specific extensions, on a 
case-by-case basis, to the discretion policy, when the licensee 
provides adequate justification (e.g., a modification that can 
only be implemented during an outage).
 
Normal inspection and enforcement will continue to be applied to 
all plants that are not actively transitioning to 10 CFR 
50.48(c). Minor editorial changes have also been made to the 
current ``Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding Enforcement 
Discretion for Certain Fire Protection Issues'' (10 CFR 50.48), 
to provide clarification and enhancements predominately in the 
areas of existing non-compliances and the treatment of 
non-compliances if a licensee withdraws from the transition.
 
Paperwork Reduction Act This policy statement does not contain 
new or amended information collection requirements subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). 
Existing requirements were approved by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB), approval number 3150-0136. The approved 
information collection requirements contained in this policy 
statement appear in Section VII.C. Public Protection Notification 
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, collection of information, unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.
 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act In accordance 
with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a major rule 
and has verified this determination with the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB.
 
Accordingly, the NRC Enforcement Policy is amended to read as 
follows: NRC Enforcement Policy * * * * * Interim Enforcement 
Policies * * * * * Interim Enforcement Policy Regarding 
Enforcement Discretion for Certain Fire Protection Issues (10 CFR 
50.48) This section sets forth the interim enforcement policy 
that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will follow to 
exercise enforcement discretion for certain noncompliances of 
requirements in 10 CFR 50.48, ``Fire protection,'' (or fire 
protection license conditions) that are identified as a result of 
the transition to a new risk- informed, performance-based fire 
protection approach included in paragraph (c) of 10 CFR 50.48 and 
for certain existing identified noncompliances that reasonably 
may be resolved by compliance with 10 CFR 50.48(c). Paragraph (c) 
allows reactor licensees to voluntarily comply with the 
risk-informed, performance-based fire protection approaches in 
National Fire Protection Association Standard 805 (NFPA 805), 
``Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection for Light Water 
Reactor Electric Generating Plants,'' 2001 Edition (with limited 
exceptions stated in the rule language).
 
For those noncompliances identified during the licensee's 
transition process, this enforcement discretion policy will be in 
effect for up to 3 years from the date specified by the licensee 
in their letter of intent to adopt the requirements in 10 CFR 
50.48(c), and will continue to be in place, without interruption, 
until NRC approval of the license amendment request to transition 
to 10 CFR 50.48(c). This enforcement discretion policy may be 
extended on a case- by-case basis, by request, with adequate 
justification, from the licensee.
 
If, after submitting the letter of intent to comply with 10 CFR 
50.48(c) and before submitting the license amendment request, the 
licensee decides not to complete the transition to 10 CFR 
50.48(c), the licensee must submit a letter stating its intent to 
retain its existing license basis and withdrawing its letter of 
intent to comply with 10 CFR 50.48(c). After the licensee's 
withdrawal from the transition process, the staff, as a matter of 
practice, will not take enforcement action against any 
noncompliance that the licensee corrected during the transition 
process and should, on a case-by-case basis, consider refraining 
from taking action if reasonable and timely corrective actions 
are in progress (e.g., an exemption has been submitted for NRC 
review). Noncompliances that the licensee has not corrected, as 
well as noncompliances identified after the date of the above 
withdrawal letter, will be dispositioned in accordance with 
normal enforcement practices.
 
A. Noncompliances Identified During the Licensee's Transition 
Process * * * * * (1) It was licensee-identified, as a result of 
its voluntary initiative to adopt the risk-informed, 
performance-based fire protection program included under 10 CFR 
50.48(c) or, if the NRC identifies the violation, it was likely 
in the NRC staff's view that the licensee would have identified 
the violation in light of the defined scope, thoroughness, and 
schedule of the licensee's transition to 10 CFR 50.48(c) provided 
the schedule reasonably provides for completion of the transition 
within 3 years of the date specified by the licensee in their 
letter
 
[[Page 19907]] of intent to implement 10 CFR 50.48(c) or other 
period granted by NRC; * * * * * B. Existing Identified 
Noncompliances * * * * * (3) It was not willful; and (4) The 
licensee submits a letter of intent by December 31, 2005, stating 
its intent to transition to 10 CFR 50.48(c). After December 31, 
2005, as addressed in (4) above, this enforcement discretion for 
implementation of corrective actions for existing identified 
noncompliances will not be available and the requirements of 10 
CFR 50.48(b) (and any other requirements in fire protection 
license conditions) will be enforced in accordance with normal 
enforcement practices. However, licensees that submit letters of 
intent to transition to 10 CFR 50.48(c) with existing 
noncompliances will have the option to implement corrective 
actions in accordance with the new performance-based regulation. 
All other elements of the assessment and enforcement process will 
be exercised even if the licensee submits its letter of intent 
before the NRC issues its enforcement action for existing 
noncompliances.
 
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 11th day of April, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Acting Secretary of the Commission.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5706 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 61 NRC: Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Meeting Notice
 
                         FR Doc E6-5707 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19910-19911] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-99]                         
 
In accordance with the purposes of sections 29 and 182b. of the 
Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the Advisory Committee 
on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting on May 4-5, 
2006, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The date of this 
meeting was previously published in the Federal Register on 
Tuesday, November 22, 2005 (70 FR 70638).
 
Thursday, May 4, 2006, Conference Room T-2b3, Two White Flint 
North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks 
by the ACRS Chairman (Open)-- The ACRS Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
8:35 a.m.-10 a.m.: Final Review of the License Renewal 
Application for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (Open)--The 
Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with 
representatives of the NRC staff and Carolina Power and Light 
Company regarding the license renewal application for the 
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant and the associated NRC staff's 
final Safety Evaluation Report.
 
10:15 a.m.-12:15 p.m.: Final Review of the Extended Power Uprate 
Application for R.E. Ginna Nuclear Plant (Open)--The Committee 
will hear presentations by and hold discussions with 
representatives of the NRC staff and Rochester Gas and Electric 
Company regarding the extended power uprate application for R.E. 
Ginna Nuclear Plant and the associated NRC staff's Safety 
Evaluation.
 
1:15 p.m.-3:15 p.m.: Final Review of the Extended Power Uprate 
Application for the Beaver Valley Nuclear Plant (Open)--The 
Committee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with 
representatives of the NRC staff and FirstEnergy regarding the 
extended power uprate application for the Beaver Valley Nuclear 
Plant and the associated NRC staff's Safety Evaluation.
 
3:30 p.m.-5 p.m.: Proposed Revisions to 10 CFR Part 52, 
``License, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power 
Plants'' (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by and 
hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding 
proposed revisions to 10 CFR part 52, ``License, Certifications, 
and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.'' 5:15 p.m.-7 p.m.: 
Preparation of ACRS Report (Open)--The Committee will discuss 
proposed ACRS reports on matters considered during this meeting.
 
Friday, May 5, 2006, Conference Room T-2b3, Two White Flint 
North, Rockville, Maryland 8:30 a.m.-8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks 
by the ACRS Chairman (Open)-- The ACRS Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
8:35 a.m.-9:30 a.m.: NRC Staff's Response to ACRS Comments on the 
Draft Final Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide 1.97, ``Criteria for 
Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear Power Plants'' 
(Open)-- The Committee will hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding their 
response to ACRS comments included in its March 28, 2006 letter 
on the Draft Final Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide 1.97, 
``Criteria for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation for Nuclear 
Power Plants.'' 9:30 a.m.-9:45 a.m.: Subcommittee Report 
(Open)--The Committee will hear a report by and hold discussions 
with the cognizant Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on 
Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) regarding 
review of the PRA for the Economic Simplified Boiling Water 
Reactor (ESBWR) design.
 
10 a.m.-10:45 a.m.: Future ACRS Activities/Report of the Planning 
and Procedures Subcommittee (Open)--The Committee will discuss 
the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee 
regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee 
during future meetings. Also, it will hear a report of the 
Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the 
conduct of ACRS business, including anticipated workload and 
member assignments.
 
10:45 a.m.-11 a.m.: Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and 
Recommendations (Open)--The Committee will discuss the responses 
from the NRC Executive Director for
 
[[Page 19911]] Operations to comments and recommendations 
included in recent ACRS reports and letters.
 
11 a.m.-7 p.m.: Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee 
will discuss proposed ACRS reports.
 
7 p.m.-7:30 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will 
discuss matters related to the conduct of Committee activities 
and matters and specific issues that were not completed during 
previous meetings, as time and availability of information 
permit.
 
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings 
were published in the Federal Register on September 29, 2005 (70 
FR 56936). In accordance with those procedures, oral or written 
views may be presented by members of the public, including 
representatives of the nuclear industry. Electronic recordings 
will be permitted only during the open portions of the meeting. 
Persons desiring to make oral statements should notify the 
Cognizant ACRS staff named below five days before the meeting, if 
possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made to allow 
necessary time during the meeting for such statements. Use of 
still, motion picture, and television cameras during the meeting 
may be limited to selected portions of the meeting as determined 
by the Chairman. Information regarding the time to be set aside 
for this purpose may be obtained by contacting the Cognizant ACRS 
staff prior to the meeting. In view of the possibility that the 
schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as 
necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons 
planning to attend should check with the Cognizant ACRS staff if 
such rescheduling would result in major inconvenience.
 
Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, as well as the 
Chairman's ruling on requests for the opportunity to present oral 
statements and the time allotted therefor can be obtained by 
contacting Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, Cognizant ACRS staff 
(301-415-7364), between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., e.t. ACRS 
meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are 
available through the NRC Public Document Room at pdr@nrc.gov, or 
by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from the Publicly 
Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's document 
system(ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ (ACRS & 
oc-collections/ (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas).
 
Videoteleconferencing service is available for observing open 
sessions of ACRS meetings. Those wishing to use this service for 
observing ACRS meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACRS 
Audio Visual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 
3:45 p.m., e.t., 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 videoteleconferencing link. The availability 
of videoteleconferencing services is not guaranteed.
 
Dated: April 11, 2006.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5707 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 62 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
 
                         FR Doc E6-5715 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19907] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-95]                         
 
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for U.S. 
Department of Agriculture Facility in Mission, TX AGENCY: Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Notice of availability.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sattar Lodhi, Materials Security 
& Industrial Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region 
I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406, 
telephone (610) 337-5364, fax (610) 337-5269; or by e-mail: 
asl@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the issuance of a 
license amendment to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for 
Materials License No. 19-00915-03, to authorize remediation 
activities at its radioactive waste burial site located at Moore 
Air Base (MAB) in Mission, Texas. The NRC has prepared an 
Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this proposed action 
in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. Based on 
the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant 
Impact (FONSI) is appropriate.
 
II. EA Summary The purpose of the proposed action is to authorize 
remediation activities at the licensee's radioactive waste burial 
site at MAB in Mission, Texas. USDA was authorized initially by 
the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in the mid 1950's and later by 
the NRC to use radioactive materials for research and development 
purposes at the site. On May 5, 2005, USDA requested that NRC 
authorize remediation activities at the burial site. USDA has 
submitted to the NRC a plan to remediate the burial site.
 
The NRC staff has prepared an EA in support of the license 
amendment. The NRC staff has reviewed the information contained 
in the licensee's remediation plan. Based on its review, the 
staff has determined that the licensee has developed adequate 
procedures to ensure that the digging, removing and transporting 
the waste from the burial site will not have a significant impact 
on the environment and the workers. The staff has also determined 
that no additional information is necessary to complete the 
proposed action.
 
Therefore, the staff considered the impact of the remediation 
activities at the facility and concluded that a Finding of No 
Significant Impact is appropriate.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared 
the EA (summarized above) in support of the license amendment 
request. On the basis of the EA, the NRC has concluded that there 
are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed 
action, and has determined not to prepare an environmental impact 
statement for the proposed action.
 
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, 
including the application for the license amendment and 
supporting documentation, are available electronically at the 
NRC's Electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can 
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System 
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for the documents related 
to this Notice are: USDA's plan to remediate the radioactive 
waste burial site at MAB (ML051300095), EA in support of the 
amendment request (ML060940281), review of EA by the State of 
Texas (ML053120414). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or 
who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 
(800) 397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 
These documents may also be viewed electronically on public 
computers located at the NRC's PDR, 01F21, One White Flint, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR contractor will copy 
documents for a fee.
 
Documents related to operations conducted under this license not 
specifically referenced in this Notice may not be electronically 
available and/or may not be publicly available. Persons who have 
an interest in reviewing these documents should submit a request 
to NRC under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Instructions 
for submitting a FOIA request can be found on the NRC's Web site 
at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/foia/foia-privacy.html .
 
Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this 6th day of April, 
2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
John D. Kinneman, Chief, Materials Security & Industrial Branch, 
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5715 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 63 NRC: NUREG-1842, ``Evaluation of Human Reliability Analysis Methods 
 
                         FR Doc E6-5736 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19912-19913] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-101]                         
 
Against Good Practices, Draft Report for Comment'' AGENCY: 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Notice of availability of NUREG-1842, ``Evaluation of 
Human Reliability Analysis Methods Against Good Practices, Draft 
Report for Comment,'' and request for public comment.
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing 
the availability of and is seeking comments on NUREG-1842, 
``Evaluation of Human Reliability Analysis Methods Against Good 
Practices, Draft Report For Comment.''
 
DATES: Comments on this document should be submitted by June 19, 
2006. Comments received after that date will be considered to the 
extent practical. To ensure efficient and complete comment 
resolution, comments should include references to the section, 
page, and line numbers of the document to which the comment 
applies, if possible.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Members of the public are invited and encouraged to 
submit written comments to Michael Lesar, Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Office of Administration, Mail Stop T6-D59, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. 
Hand-deliver comments attention to Michael Lesar, 11545 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, MD, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal 
workdays. Comments may also be sent electronically to .
 
This document, NUREG-1842, is available at the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site at under 
Accession No. ML060960216; on the NRC Web site at ; and at the 
NRC Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. 
The PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555; 
telephone (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4205; fax (301) 415-3548; 
e-mail .
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Erasmia Lois, Human Factors and 
Reliability Branch, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, 
telephone (301) 415-6560, e-mail 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NUREG-1842, ``Evaluation of Human 
Reliability Analysis Methods Against Good Practices, Draft Report 
for Comment, Draft for Comment'' The NRC is developing guidance 
for performing or evaluating human reliability analyses (HRAs) to 
support risk-informed regulatory decision-making and, in 
particular, the implementation of Regulatory Guide 1.200, ``An 
Approach for Determining the Technical Adequacy of Probabilistic 
Risk Assessment Results for Risk-Informed Activities,'' dated 
February 2004. The guidance is developed in two phases. The first 
phase focused on developing ``Good Practices for Implementing 
Human Reliability Analysis,'' that is documenting the processes 
and analytical tasks and judgments expected to have been 
performed in order for the HRA results to sufficiently represent 
the anticipated operator performance in risk-informed decisions. 
The good practices were submitted for public comment, NUREG-1792, 
Good Practices for Implementing Human Reliability Analysis, Draft 
Report for Comment,'' August 2004, and were published as a final 
NUREG-1792 in April 2005. The second phase, summarized in draft 
NUREG-1842, evaluated the various HRA methods that are commonly 
used in regulatory applications, with a particular focus on their 
capabilities to satisfy the good practices, as well as their 
respective strengths and limitations regarding their underlying 
knowledge and data bases.
 
The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback 
from the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that 
all information relevant to developing this document is available 
to the NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only and is 
not intended for interim use. The NRC will review public comments 
received on the document, incorporate suggested changes as 
necessary, and issue the final NUREG-1842 for use.
 
The NRC will hold a public meeting on May 23, 2006 at the NRC 
headquarters, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, Room: 
Commission Briefing Room (8:30 a.m.-5 p.m., preliminary agenda 
enclosed). The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the findings 
and conclusions documented in NUREG-1842 in order to allow 
stakeholders develop a better understanding of the contents of 
the report and ask clarification questions. The NRC is not 
soliciting comments on draft NUREG-1842 as part of this meeting. 
Public comments on the draft NUREG can be provided as discussed 
above.
 
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 11th day of April 2006.
 
 
[[Page 19913]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Farouk Eltawila, Director, Division of Risk Assessment and 
Special Projects, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
 
Agenda--Public Meeting on NUREG-1842 ``Evaluation of Human 
Reliability Analysis Methods Against Good Practices, Draft Report 
for Comment,'' May 23, 2006.
 
U.S. NRC Headquarters, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, 
Room Commission Briefing Room Preliminary Agenda 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
------- Morning                               Topic 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
------- 8:30-9................................  
Introduction/Overview. 9-10:30...............................  
Evaluation of Methods. --Approach and Summary of results.
 
--Brief discussion of each method.
 
10:30-10:45...........................  Break. 
10:45-12..............................  Evaluation of Methods 
(Continued).
 
--Comparison of methods against some key characteristics.
 
--Implications--What methods should be used when? Lunch.
 
Discussion on method evaluation (continued).
 
Questions and Answers (as needed).
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
------- [FR Doc. E6-5736 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 
7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 64 NRC: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the 
 
                         FR Doc E6-5743 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19904-19905] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-93]                         
 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review; Comment Request 
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice 
of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of 
public comment.
 
SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the 
following proposal for the collection of information under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an 
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not 
required to respond
 
[[Page 19905]] to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.
 
1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Extension.
 
2. The title of the information collection: Requests to Non- 
Agreement States for Information.
 
3. The form number if applicable: Not applicable. 4. How often 
the collection is required: 6 times per year. 5. Who will be 
required or asked to report: The 18 States (16 Non- Agreement 
States and 2 territories, the District of Columbia and the 
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico) that have not signed 274(b) 
Agreements with NRC. Note: Minnesota became an Agreement State 
effective March 31, 2006.
 
6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 108. 7. The 
estimated number of annual respondents: 18 States (16 Non- 
Agreement States and 2 territories, the District of Columbia and 
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico).
 
8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to 
complete the requirement or request: 891 hours.
 
9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Public Law 104-13 
applies: Not applicable.
 
10. Abstract: Requests may be made of States that are similar to 
those of Agreement States to provide a more complete overview of 
the national program for regulating radioactive materials. This 
information would be used in the decisionmaking of the 
Commission. With Agreement States and as part of the NRC 
cooperative post-agreement program with the States pursuant to 
section 274(b), information on licensing and inspection 
practices, and/or incidents, and other technical and statistical 
information are exchanged. Agreement State comments are also 
solicited in the areas of proposed implementing procedures 
relative to NRC Agreement State program policies. With the 
enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, specifically section 
651(e), NRC now has regulatory authority over use of 
accelerator-produced radioactive materials and discrete sources 
of radium-226 and other naturally occurring radioactive material 
as specified by the Commission. Therefore, information requests 
sought may take the form of surveys, e.g., telephonic and 
electronic surveys/polls and facsimiles. A copy of the final 
supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC 
Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests 
are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: .
 
The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 
days after the signature date of this notice.
 
Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer 
listed below by May 18, 2006. Comments received after this date 
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of 
consideration cannot be given to comments received after this 
date.
 
John A. Asalone, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
(3150-0200), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, 
Washington, DC 20503.
 
Comments can also be e-mailed to  or submitted by telephone at 
(202) 395-4650.
 
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo. Shelton, 301-415-7233.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of April, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Brenda Jo. Shelton, NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information 
Services.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5743 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 65 AFP: Gorbachev wants cleaner environment, help for Chernobyl victims
    
[A general viev to sarcophagus covering damaged fourth reactor
of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant]   

LONDON (AFP) - Mikhail Gorbachev, the final Soviet leader, is
launching a multi-billion-dollar drive to improve the
environment and help victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster,
a British newspaper said.

Gorbachev, who played a large part in ending the Cold War, is
appealing to the world's leading governments to earmark at least
50 billion dollars (41 billion euros) to develop more renewable
energy, the The Financial Times said after an interval with the
man who is on a speaking tour of (Advertisement)
<IMG height="250" width="300"
src="http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/bn/6028-31344-1843-6?mpt=114
5420310"  alt="Click Here" border="0"> [ src=] the United States.

The ex-Soviet leader is also seeking a further 50 million
dollars from the private sector to provide better healthcare for
the Chernobyl victims and guarantee clean water and sanitation
to the world's poorest people.

Gorbachev, who had only been in power for one year when
Chernobyl erupted on April 26, 1986, said he was not entirely
opposed to nuclear power.

"Even if we were to admit that nuclear energy is an 'evil', we
would also have to recognize that this 'evil' is inevitable: we
simply cannot do without it," he told The Financial Times.

At the same time, he noted: "Of all the energy options, nuclear
is the most capital-intensive to establish, decommissioning is
prohibitively expensive and the financial burden continues long
after the plant is closed."

Gorbachev is writing to the parliaments of the Group of Eight
richest countries that are due to meet in Russia in June under
Moscow's presidency of the G8 group, The Financial Times said.

He will urge lawmakers to lobby for a greater focus on renewable
energy rather than securing oil and gas supplies in their
respective nations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has put energy security at the
top of the agenda at the G8 meeting in St Petersburg.

Describing his overall feelings, Gorbachev told The Financial
Times in Florida: "We need a value shift to get people to put an
end to the superiority complex when man condescends to nature --
the idea that man is king of nature.

"This is a delusion that has to be overcome."

He hopes to raise money from his US tour for Green Cross
International, a non-governmental environmental pressure group
he has chaired since 1993, The Financial Times said.

Turning to his appeal for the Chernobyl victims and better water
supplies, Gorbachev said he wanted to convince the corporate
world that funding campaigns for the environment is in its
interests as well as being morally commendable.

"We want to appeal to the business community, to CEOs who can
make a real difference to help Green Cross achieve this goal,"
he said. 

AFP
*****************************************************************
 66 NRC: NRC, FERC Commissioners to Discuss Grid Reliability April 24 in Washington
 
News Release - 2006-05 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office 
of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 
20555-0001     E-mail: opa@nrc.gov No. 06-055     April 17, 2006   
  

and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will meet April 24
in FERCs offices to discuss the interrelationship between the
nations electricity grid and the operation of U.S. commercial
nuclear power plants. 

The blackout of Aug. 14, 2003, caused nine U.S. nuclear power
plants to shut down. Similar to non-nuclear facilities, when the
grid is lost or significantly degraded, the protective circuits
of the nuclear reactor and the turbine generator automatically
shut down the plant to protect equipment. Nuclear facilities are
designed with backup power sources, typically emergency diesel
generators, to provide power to essential safety systems. During
the blackout, diesel generators kept the nine plants in a safe
condition. 

Both the NRC and FERC participated in a joint U.S.-Canada task
force that reviewed the blackout. The agencies signed a
Memorandum of Agreement on Sept. 1, 2004, to facilitate their
collaboration concerning the nations electric grid reliability,
as well as addressing the task forces recommendations. 

The meeting will run from 2 p.m to 4 p.m. in FERCs Commission
Meeting Room at 888 First St. NE, Washington, D.C. In addition
to discussions between the Commissioners, NRC staff will discuss
issues including the concept of adding new reactors to the grid
and the recently issued Generic Letter 2006-02 on grid
reliability, while FERC staff will discuss issues including the
agencys recent Interpretive Order related to the Generic Letter.
The public is invited to attend the meeting, which will also be
available on FERCs Web site, http://www.ferc.gov.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 67 NewsDay: Riverkeeper threatens lawsuit to get EPA involved in Indian Point -- 

Newsday.com
 
AP New York             
 	
April 18, 2006, 4:50 PM EDT

TARRYTOWN, N.Y. --       Environmentalists threatened Tuesday to 
go to federal court to get the Environmental Protection Agency 
involved in the investigation and cleanup of radioactive leaks at 
the Indian Point nuclear power plants. 

Officials at Riverkeeper claimed at a news conference that 
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owner of the plants, did not notify 
the EPA of leaks discovered in groundwater under Indian Point, 
which is in Buchanan on the Hudson River, 35 miles north of 
midtown Manhattan. 

By failing to inform EPA as required, the environmentalists said, 
Entergy avoided "the involvement of EPA in the leak investigation 
and remediation process." 

The leak, first detected in August near a spent-fuel pool, has
allowed radioactive isotopes including strontium-90 and tritium
escape into the groundwater and probably into the river,
officials at Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have
said. In spots, levels of radioactive material have far exceeded
the amount permitted in drinking water, though there are no
drinking water sources nearby. 

In large amounts, strontium and tritium can cause cancer. 

The threatened lawsuit _ Riverkeeper and the two named
plaintiffs have to give 60 days' notice before filing _ "goes to
our core mission of protecting the Hudson River," said Philip
Musegaas, a Riverkeeper policy analyst. He said the
environmentalists could be dissuaded from suing "if Entergy were
to notify the EPA formally and the EPA got involved and
initiated its own investigation," he said. 

Jim Steets, an Entergy spokesman, said the company "made the
appropriate and required notifications to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation, which has jurisdiction over Indian Point." The DEC
acts as an arm of the EPA in such cases, he said. 

Musegaas agreed that EPA sometimes delegates jurisdiction to the
DEC but said it has not done so in cases of underground storage
of radioactive materials. He said it was the EPA that got
involved in the cleanup of contamination at the Brookhaven
National Laboratory on Long Island. 

EPA spokeswoman Bonnie Bellow said Tuesday the agency would have
no comment because it had not seen Riverkeeper's notice of
intent to sue. 

http://www.newsday.com.
*****************************************************************
 68 csmonitor.com: Should oldest US nuke plant stay on line? | 
 
from the April 19, 2006 edition         
 
[(Photograph)]

CONTROL ROOM: Chris Mitchell, a reactor operator, explains how 
the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant works. PETE SOUZA/CHICAGO 
TRIBUNE/FILE

New Jersey says the plant is too vulnerable to terrorist attack
to have its license renewed.

 By Alexandra Marks | Staff writer of The Christian Science
Monitor 

NEW YORK  In what could be a precedent-setting case, New Jersey
and a coalition of citizens are fighting renewal of the license
for the nation's oldest operating nuclear power plant. 

Their concern: The structural design of the 1960s-era Oyster
Creek nuclear generating station is a security risk because,
among other things, it stores highly radioactive spent fuel rods
above ground. They argue that makes it vulnerable in the event
of a terrorist attack from the air.	 	 	

A captive audience for salvation

Their contention, if proved, could lead the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to deny for the first time a nuclear generating
station's request for a license renewal after its original
40-year license expires. It could also set a new standard for
the NRC, which currently does not take terrorism into account
when it decides whether to renew a nuclear plant's license. 

In fact, the NRC recently ruled the "possibility of a terrorist
attack ... is speculative" and therefore "beyond the scope" of
relicensing proceedings. 

The state of New Jersey is appealing that ruling, arguing that
the threat of terrorism is not speculative at all but a danger
that must be addressed. Terrorism experts agree. 

"From a policy perspective, it's absolutely critical that the
relicensing procedures take into account the vulnerability from
man-made attacks," says Michael Greenberger, director of the
University of Maryland's Center for Health and Homeland Security
in Baltimore. "It's the height of folly ... for the [NRC] to say
that it's not going to consider seriously the vulnerability of
the oldest plants when everybody knows these facilities are
high-level targets." 

Oyster Creek is located in the densely populated Jersey Shore, a
fast-growing area in the most densely populated state. That's
one of the things that prompted Janet Tauro to join the fight to
close the plant when its license expires in 2009. 

"It's an obsolete design," she says. "There are almost 3,000
pounds of highly radioactive rods stored 70 feet in the air in a
cooling pool of water protected only by a thin metal roof. It's
way too vulnerable." 

The owners of Oyster Creek, who have applied for a license
renewal to operate another 20 years, deny the plant is obsolete
and note the metal roof above the spent fuel rods is "a heavily
reinforced steel structure." 

"Oyster Creek is required to meet every single safety standard
and regulation as every plant, no matter what the age," says
Oyster Creek spokesman Pete Resler. "The station has been
continually upgraded: We put in the most modern safety systems
and equipment." 

The clash hints at the challenge of addressing electricity needs
as well as environmental concerns about greenhouse gases, which
nuclear power plants don't emit. It also shows the challenges
faced in this post-9/11 world by the NRC, which has recently
come under fire from some members of Congress for what they see
as not taking the threat of terrorism seriously enough. 

NRC officials say they do take the threat extremely seriously
and since 9/11 have taken "numerous steps" to ensure all plants
are secure. It's something that is dealt with on a daily basis,
they say, not in the context of whether a plant is too old to
operate safely - which is what the relicensing procedure is
designed to address. 

[(Map)]                         RICH CLABAUGH - STAFF
 		   	 
"The fact remains that security at a nuclear power plant is
independent of the length of its license. It doesn't matter if a
plant operates for five years, 15, or 20: It will have to meet
the security requirements that are placed upon it by the NRC,"
says Scott Brunell, an NRC spokesman. "To attempt to address
security for a plant that is seeking relicensing is an attempt
to judge a plant on a snapshot that is not going to apply in the
future one way or another." 

The State of New Jersey sees things very differently. It argues
that Oyster Creek's age and design are the very things that
present serious security risks, and that those issues can best
be addressed during the relicensing process. In its appeal of
the NRC ruling, New Jersey's attorney general calls the design
"comparatively unreliable and vulnerable." The appeal also
argues that a terrorist attack is not just speculative and that
the NRC's own actions prove that. 

"There would be no need for the Commission to require extensive
steps to guard against terrorist attack if the chances of an
attack were only speculative," the appeal states. 

The NRC has yet to rule on the appeal. In the meantime, a
coalition of citizens' groups is lending its support to the
state's stand. 

"Security's not just a day-to-day concern. In this case, it is a
structural issue as well," says Richard Webster, an attorney at
the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic in Newark, which represents
the citizens' coalition. "The structure of the plant doesn't
protect against this type of attack. If it was being built from
scratch today, it could be designed to protect against one." 

Oyster Creek officials disagree, saying their plant can sustain
a direct hit by an aircraft. 

"We're certainly able to defend the facility," says Mr. Resler.
"The Electric Power Research Institute [a nonprofit company
backed by the power industry] also did a study and found that
even if such an event did occur, which is an extremely remote
possibility, that there would not be a catastrophic release of
radioactivity. These structures are designed for safety with
multiple barriers to protect the fuel." 

But Ms. Tauro is not convinced. She points to a recent study by
the National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council,
done at the request of Congress. It found that "successful
terrorist attacks on spent fuel pools [at some nuclear power
plants,] though difficult, are possible" and that "a propagating
fire in a pool could release large amounts of radioactive
materials." 

"Oyster Creek is within 10 minutes of seven airports, both local
and major," she says. "This plant should be retired. Its time
has come." 

  www.csmonitor.com | Copyright � 2006 The Christian Science
Monitor. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 69 AFP: Russian scientists downplay fallout from Chernobyl disaster -
                         
MOSCOW (AFP) - Russian scientists downplayed the impact of the
1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster, saying victims suffered more
emotional and sociological trauma than actual illness caused by
radiation.

"Most of those who took part in rescue operations at the plant
after the accident believe that the impact of radiation on
people's health is open to debate," the director of the
Institute of Nuclear Problems, Igor Lingue, said.

He was speaking at a news conference marking the 20th
anniversary of the worst nuclear accident in history.

"Compared to the radiation caused by Chernobyl, the other
factors triggered by the accident such as psychological stress,
the disruption of their lives and financial losses proved to be
greater problems for the population," he added.

Lingue said of the 600,000 so-called liquidators -- soldiers,
firemen and civilians who were deployed over the next four years
to clean up after the disaster -- "only 5,000 have died in the
past 20 years".

This meant that their mortality rate was no higher than that of
Russia's male population, he added.

Lingue said major social problems ensued however because of the
emergency evacuation of some 300,000 people after the fourth
reactor at Chernobyl blew up.

"We put them up in deserted towns, in makeshift housing.
Sometimes they were not accepted by the local populations."

A World Health Organisation report released in September
estimated the overall death toll from the catastrophe in what is
now a part of Ukraine on April 26, 1986, at 4,000.

The figure has been contested by anti-nuclear lobbies.

Greenpeace said on Tuesday that the radiation caused by the
explosion was likely to eventually cause an additional 93,000
cancer deaths in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.

But the French Nuclear Energy Society (SFEN) has come out in
support of the UN report, calling it "the most thorough ever
assembled on the consequences of the accident". 

AFP '); [ src=] 
*****************************************************************
 70 NRC: NRC Finds No Significant Environmental Impacts from Extended Operation of Brunswick Steam
Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2

News Release - 2006-05 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office 
of Public Affairs     Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 
20555-0001     E-mail: No. 06-056     April 18, 2006   
  

environmental impact statement on the proposed renewal of the
operating licenses for the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units
1 and 2. The report contains the NRCs finding that there are no
environmental impacts that would preclude license renewal for an
additional 20 years of operation. 

The Brunswick plant is located on the Cape Fear River,
approximately 15 miles south of Wilmington, N.C. The current
operating licenses expire Sept. 8, 2016, for Unit 1 and Dec. 27,
2014, for Unit 2. Carolina Power and Light, now doing business
as Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc., submitted an application for
renewal of the licenses Oct. 18, 2004. 

As part of its environmental review of the applications, the NRC
held public meetings near the plant to discuss the scope of the
review and the draft version of the environmental impact
statement. Comments were received from members of the public,
local officials, and representatives of state and federal
agencies. 

The Brunswick Final Environmental Impact Statement is available
on the NRCs Web site at this address:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437
/supplement25/index.html. Copies are also available for
inspection at the NRCs Public Document Room at One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Md, and the William
Madison Randall Library, located at 601 S. College Rd.,
Wilmington, NC, 28403.   



  


 	Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 71 icWales: MPs join opposition to nuclear move
         
Apr 18 2006
  
icWales    

MPs today joined campaigners in voicing their opposition to any
Government moves towards the building of new nuclear power
stations.

A petition signed by 2,350 people in Wales, underlining that
view, was presented to 10 Downing Street by a delegation of MPs
and representatives of Friends of the Earth, the Centre for
Alternative Technology and the Welsh Green Party.

It comes amid a growing clamour among environmental campaigners
for the Government to back more renewable energy sources such as
wave, wind and tidal power as an alternative to nuclear in the
battle to curb carbon dioxide emissions.

Jenny Willott, Welsh Liberal Democrat MP for Cardiff Central,
said: ?This petition shows there is widespread opposition to
nuclear power across Wales. Our message to the Government is
clear: nuclear power is not the answer to Wales? energy needs.

?Nuclear power is prohibitively expensive, has a terrible
environmental legacy and is a huge security risk. Wales has huge
natural resources to provide alternatives to nuclear power,
including tidal power, marine currents, solar and wind.

?There is widespread opposition in Wales to nuclear power. Even
the Secretary of State, Peter Hain, is anti-nuclear. Tony Blair
cannot simply impose a new generation of nuclear power stations
in Wales.?

Nia Griffith, Labour MP for Llanelli, said: ?Our opposition to
nuclear power stems from the horrific legacy of nuclear waste,
the enormous cost and the timescale which means that new nuclear
power stations could not be ready in time to fill the energy
gap. Far better to invest in the whole range of renewable
technologies such as marine turbines, solar energy and offshore
wind and create far more jobs locally.?

Roger Higman, Climate Campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said
nuclear power is a ?dirty dangerous technology. The solution to
our energy needs and the fight against climate change is energy
efficiency and clean renewable power?.

Asked if the Prime Minister was keen to press ahead with nuclear
as part of the Government?s Energy review, Mr Higman told a
Westminster news conference: ?We (Friends of the Earth)
commissioned a former Number 10 staffer to look at what was
actually going on inside Whitehall about this and there?s no
doubt that the Energy Review was promoted by a small clique of
four or five civil servants and David King (Professor Sir David
King, the Government?s Chief Scientist) and Tony Blair has gone
along with it, probably because he personally thinks that
nuclear power stations are needed.


?There is an enormous amount of work the Government would have
to do. No reactor design that is likely to be built has been
licensed in this country. No reactor is commercial. There are no
plans for dealing with the waste we have already got, let alone
the waste we would create in addition.


?So the biggest fear is that this whole thing is a distraction
and that the Government plans for nuclear will turn out on
analysis to be thin air and they won?t do the things they need
to do in terms of energy efficiency and renewables to tackle
climate change.?
   	
Copyright and Trade Mark Notice                                                         
� owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Plc 2006
icWalesTM is a trade mark of Trinity Mirror Plc.
*****************************************************************
 72 icNorthWales: Secrets of N-plant fallout revealed
              
Apr 18 2006

Daily Post     
  
A REPORT claims the Chernobyl nuclear accident caught the UK
government "unawares and unprepared". 

After the explosion at the nuclear power station in the old
Soviet Union, a radioactive cloud spread over western Europe. 
Dust contaminated hill land in North and mid Wales in early May
1986. 

Some farms are still under restrictions imposed by the
government at the time. 

And according to a report, papers documenting the Government's
reaction show how unprepared it was for such an incident. 

The documents were obtained by BBC Wales current affairs
programme Taro Naw under the Freedom of Information Act. 


A spokeswoman said: "They reveal panic amongst the public,
secret testing of sheep. "There was lack of equipment and
knowledge of how to deal with an event of this scale. 

"To safeguard the public, tests were carried out but the 
documents show that sometimes important details were forgotten.

"A letter from a senior adviser to the Welsh Office warned that 
it was impossible to test all food for safety from radiation 
contamination.

"The programme reveals the secrets, until now untold, of how the 
Government dealt with the incident and how that touched the lives 
of people then and now."

Chernobyl was the largest nuclear accident in history.

Secret KGB archives released in Ukraine show there were problems 
with the Chernobyl nuclear plant before the 1986 explosion.

The documents, dating from 1971 to 1988 and released three years 
ago, include a 1984 report which notes deficiencies in the third 
and fourth reactors and also the poor quality of some equipment.

Experts estimated about 4,000 people will die from the effects of 
the 1986 tragedy.

Although substantial this is fewer than the initial figure when 
tens or even hundreds of thousands of lives were feared to be at 
risk after the leak.

Taro Naw is broadcast on S4C at 8.25pm on Tuesday, April 18.
        
Copyright and Trade Mark Notice                                                         
� owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Plc 2006
icNorthWalesTM is a trade mark of Trinity Mirror Plc.
*****************************************************************
 73 icWales: Shockwaves of Chernobyl still felt 
         
Apr 18 2006
  
Steve Dube, Western Mail     
  
GLYN ROBERTS will not forget April 26, 1986. 

The Betws-y-Coed farmer and half a dozen mates were plotting to
maintain an old Welsh tradition by disrupting a friend's wedding
the following day. 

Instead the world's worst nuclear power accident set up a chain
of events that still disrupts life on his farm and 358 others in
Wales. 

Glyn was in Ruthin mart on the June day that news came through
that his livestock, and - at that time - the livestock on
another 5,100 Welsh holdings, could not be sold or even moved. 
"From then on it was quite devastating in terms of agriculture
in this area," said Glyn, the son of a council worker, who
started in farming at the age of 22 in 1977. 

"We had sheep and cattle to sell, but we were not allowed to
sell them, so we had no money coming in. 


"The animals, and our cash problems, accumulated. We had to
graze some of the silage fields, which meant we had less fodder
the following winter. 


"We still had some pigs to sell which we thought would level out
the burden of the calamity. So just imagine how we felt when the
company buying the pigs off us went bankrupt and we even lost
that money. 


"I know how much we suffered but I will never know exactly the
cost the disaster will have on people living in this area." 


It's something that is always at the back of his mind. Glyn and
his wife Eleri had married in 1982 and moved as tenants to the
National Trust-owned Dylasau Uchaf the following year. Their
eldest son Sion, now 19 and studying politics and history at the
University of Wales, Aberystwyth, was born soon after the
accident. 


And they have four other children - 17-year-old Llyr, who hopes
to study law, Heledd, 16, and Beca, 13, who are both pupils at
Ysgol Dyffryn Conwy, Llanrwst, and 10-year-old Mirain, who goes
to Ysbyty Ifan Primary School. 


"We've not noticed any problems, but I still worry slightly,"
said Glyn. 


The main problem is contamination by caesium 137. It is absorbed
by vegetation and ingested by sheep and has a half-life of 30
years. 


The contamination was measured at levels which would add 15% to
the annual human dose of background radiation. 


Once ingested, the particles dissolve and spread throughout the
body. Nobody is sure what damage they can do. 


"It's in the back of my mind that it could still have an
effect," said Glyn. 


The experience changed his mind about nuclear energy. 


"I'd rather live near a windmill because accidents do happen,"
he said. 


It also got him involved in farming politics, to the extent that
he is now vice-president of the Farmers' Union of Wales. 


"From June, when the restrictions were imposed, to September
what worried me was the apathy of the Welsh politicians and
officials," he said. 


"They were talking, but nothing concrete was coming out, and the
sad thing is that the farmers had to resort to force to get
anywhere." 


He remembers demonstrating outside the Eagle Hotel in Llanrwst
in September when Welsh Office officials turned up to talk to
farmers who had been unable to trade for three months. 


Talks over the restrictions and compensation became deadlocked
and there was a near riot as angry farmers stormed the building
and effectively forced a resolution. 


"It was at that time that I started going to union meetings,"
said Glyn. 


The then Secretary of State for Wales, Nicholas Edwards, had
visited Glyn and Eleri on their farm when he toured the stricken
area in August, 1986. 


"I remember telling him that if you are restricting farmers from
selling their produce you are restricting the whole
infrastructure of our communities because you can't isolate
agriculture from the wider rural community," he said. 


The interdependence of farming and the countryside is a message
that he continues to repeat and that he found endorsed by
representatives from other Europeans when he was a FUW delegate
at the second European Conference on Rural Development at
Salzburg in November 2003. 


"It was an eye-opener to see the different attitude the other
countries have towards farming and the countryside. 


"We went through tough times after Chernobyl, but we gradually
recovered, and we'll be glad to see the day when normality
returns to the farm. 


"But we all worry about the future and our Government's
commitment to farming. At the moment, we're viable on this farm.
But I sometimes feel this will be marginal in a few years' time. 


"It depends on the will of the politicians." 
  	
Copyright and Trade Mark Notice                                                         
� owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Plc 2006
icWalesTM is a trade mark of Trinity Mirror Plc.
*****************************************************************
 74 Online NewsHour: Exelon Corportaion Mishandles Nuclear Power Leak in Illinois -- 

April 17, 2006

  RADIOACTIVE LEAKS IN ILLINOIS   

Exelon Corporation didn�t publicly acknowledge at least six 
spills of water containing radioactive tritium until 
recently--even though the first one happened in 1996. Residents 
of Will County, Illinois are now outraged and worried about 
tritium's effect on their health.
  

JAMES GLASGOW, WILL COUNTY STATE'S LAWYER: It reminded me of a
Homer Simpson episode that I saw where Homer worked at the local
reactor and would put his jelly doughnut on the control panel.
It's that bad. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT, NewsHour Correspondent: What Jim Glasgow
says is that bad is the way Exelon Corporation handled the
leaking of at least six million gallons of water containing
radioactive tritium from its Braidwood plant in Braceville,
Illinois. 

Will County state's attorney Glasgow was outraged that the
country's leading nuclear power generator didn't publicly
acknowledge at least six spills until recently, even though the
first one happened in 1996. And he criticized the construction
and maintenance of an underground pipeline that allowed so many
spills of tritium, which is a byproduct of the nuclear process. 

JAMES GLASGOW: Do we have a company that had an accident, and
then immediately notified everyone, and tried to fix it, and
acted in good faith? We have just the opposite. We have an
absolute disregard for the health, safety and welfare of the
local people. They don't tell until they're caught. Then they
make promises that they don't fulfill. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Exelon promised Bob and Linda Keca that the
groundwater surrounding their home was safe, so they built their
dream home last year, even though the nuclear plant is right
next door. The Keca's new home is next to the house where they
raised their four children. 

ROBERT KECA, Resident Near Nuclear Plant: What were we swimming
in the pool, the kids showering in at anytime from when these
things happened? And that they never said a word about them for
all those years. By them not saying something, they flipped a
coin on my four kids, and my wife's, and mine, on our lives, on
our health. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Exelon Vice President Thomas O'Neill says
the company did what it was supposed to do in the 2000 leak,
notify the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Environmental
Protection Agency, though he admits no notifications were made
of earlier leaks. 

THOMAS O'NEILL, Vice President, Exelon: We did what we were
required to do at the time. We recognize now that reporting to
your regulators is perhaps not enough, that there's compliance,
but there's beyond compliance. And as we go forward, you know,
we understand that communications with the residents around the
plant, with the elected officials is important. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Federal regulations permit nuclear plants to
use pipelines to discharge diluted tritium into the nearest
river. Braidwood dumps its tritiated water into the Kankakee
River. There it's expected it will be diluted even further. 

But when a pipeline leaks into surface and groundwater, the
percentage of tritium is higher. It can enter the body through
the mouth, the lungs, or the skin. Chronic exposure to tritium
can increase the risk for cancer, birth defects, and genetic
damage. That's a big concern in areas like this, where most
people depend on well water. 

The Nuclear Information and Resource Service says accidental
tritium releases have contaminated groundwater at seven nuclear
plants across the country. 

Joe Cosgrove, park director in nearby Godley, started hearing
about tritium when he went after Braidwood in 2000 for a diesel
fuel leak that forced the park to start using bottled water.
That leak got him thinking. 

JOE COSGROVE, Park Superintendent: And I think probably at that
time we lost our naivete. You know, we live next to a nuclear
plant. You know, it's not a chocolate factory. And what other
things should we be concerned about? We did find out about a
tritium release that had happened several months after the
diesel fuel leak that was...

 ELIZABETH BRACKETT: How did you find that out? 

JOE COSGROVE: One of the reporters faxed me a document from the
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety about an inspection they
had made in 2000, based on this release of three million gallons
of water. That was our first knowledge of tritium; in fact, I
never even knew what the word was until that day.

 ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Cosgrove does admit the town has benefited
from the tax dollars generated by Exelon. His well-equipped park
district wouldn't exist without those tax dollars. The area's
schools per-pupil spending is nearly double the state average.
The high school boasts a magnificent auditorium, up-to-date
science and computer labs, and superior athletic facilities. 

	 But now, school superintendent John Asplund wonders about the
trade-off. 

	 JOHN ASPLUND, Superintendent of Schools: I've thought about
this a lot: Is there any amount of money that makes it OK to die
by cancer? Is there any amount of money that makes it OK to be
lied to, with something being potentially going to kill you? 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: At issue is just how much tritium is in the
soil and water and how dangerous it is. 

Right here is where the 1998 and 2000 spills occurred, dumping
more than three million gallons of water under the ground. It is
now where the highest levels of tritium are found in the
groundwater, at levels more than 10 times the national EPA
standards. 

COMMUNITY LEADER: Welcome to this special meeting. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: At a community meeting called to address
residents' concerns, Exelon's O'Neill argued that residents'
health and safety were not jeopardized by the tritium leaks. 

THOMAS O'NEILL: A key message here, people, a key message is
this: The tritium amounts that are in the ground are of such
concentrations that they are low and they are not a health
hazard to you. This tritium is not in the drinking water, except
for one well. 

And at that well, that drinking well was something called 1,550
picocuries per liter. The drinking water standard is 20,000
picocuries per liter, and the one drinking well that has tritium
in it is well, well below the drinking water standard. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: But physicist Arjun Makhijani, who has
studied the health effects of radiation for the last 25 years,
says even low amounts can be hazardous. 

ARJUN MAKHIJANI, Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research: Tritium in any amount would present a health and
safety standard. Just because there is a drinking water limit of
20,000 picocuries per liter doesn't mean that 5,000 or 1,000
picocuries per liter won't hurt you. They do pose a risk,
proportionately a lower risk, but it's not a zero risk. 

So I think Exelon should just cool it and stop telling people
that there is no harm from low levels of tritium, because it's
contrary to the established science, and the official scientific
guidance, and the basis of all regulations. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Makhijani believes tritium acts like a
bullet inside the body's cells, breaking the DNA strands,
leaving damaged cells that can develop into cancers. Those most
vulnerable are pregnant women and children. 

ARJUN MAKHIJANI: Tritium has higher risks for children, because
they're growing faster and their cells are multiplying faster.
So whenever you have that kind of situation, radioactivity
generally will have a greater impact, and tritium especially
because it crosses the placenta. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Many residents of Wilmington, just
downstream from the Braidwood plant, say this is the first they
had heard that Braidwood was allowed to release diluted tritium
three times a week into the Kankakee River. 

City officials say the levels in the water supply are very safe.
Exelon insists the regulated releases are up to code and says it
will do all it can to clean up the accidental spills and make
nearby landowners whole if they can't sell their property for
what they expected. 

THOMAS O'NEILL: We have an obligation to clean up the mess we
made, and we will do that. We have an obligation to earn your
trust back because of the failures that we had in communicating,
and we will attempt to do that. 

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: But the crowd at the meeting was a hard
sell. 

COUNCIL MEETING ATTENDEE: Personally, I have no trust whatsoever
for anyone who has anything to do with Exelon at all. 

	 ELIZABETH BRACKETT: And they were even more worried when
Exelon announced there had been another spill. Tritium they had
been holding in these open containers at the plant while the
pipelines were being examined spilled during a windstorm. 

Homeowners living near the plant have filed private lawsuits
against Exelon. The Kecas are also considering suing, knowing
their dream of retiring on land they once considered pristine is
gone.   


Copyright �2006 MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 75 UPI: Group predicts 100,000 Chernobyl deaths
     
 United Press International - NewsTrack - 

4/18/2006 3:07:00 AM -0400                              
										Newstrack:						The Chicago Art Institute wants to
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, April 18 (UPI) -- Radioactivity from the
Chernobyl nuclear disaster may cause as many as 100,000 more
cancer deaths than earlier predicted, environmental group
Greenpeace says. 

In a report released Tuesday, Greenpeace says most of the deaths
will be in Ukraine, the site of the nuclear power plant
explosion of April 26, 1986, and in nearby areas of Belarus and
Russia, the BBC reported. 

The environmental organization says the International Atomic
Energy Agency's prediction of just a few thousand casualties
grossly underestimates the effects of the radioactive particles
released by the explosion, which spread across a large part of
Western Europe. 

Several million people still live in contaminated areas. 

Greenpeace says that radiation affects the immune, circulatory
and respiratory systems, and causes an increase in fetal
abnormalities and birth defects. 

Dr. Oxana Lozova, who works at a children's hospital about 190
miles west of Chernobyl, said, "I think the fallout from
Chernobyl has affected the immunity of those who were young
children at the time of the disaster. 

"We now have to deal with people who are a lot weaker than their
fathers and grandfathers were. They're falling ill at an age
when they really should still be quite fit."

� Copyright 2006 United Press
International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 76 Pacific Magazine: Nuclear Security Official Postpones Visit Indefinitely 
 
Pacific Islands: PINA and Pacific 

  FRENCH POLYNESIA: 

Tuesday: April 18, 2006 

Tahitipresse reports that a French nuclear security official has
indefinitely postponed a scheduled visit to Tahiti due to the
"current social-political" situation, French daily newspaper Les
Nouvelles de Tahiti reported Saturday. 

The situation involves the French Polynesia Assembly's election
last Thursday of a new speaker, Philip Schyle, a pro-autonomy,
pro-French centrist party leader who defeated incumbent Speaker
Antony G�ros from the independence party of Tahiti's president,
Oscar Temaru. 

Marcel Jurien de la Gravi�re, an official with France's
Delegation for Nuclear Safety and Radioprotection for Activities
and Installations Relating to Defense (DSND), was scheduled to
arrive in Tahiti on Monday. 

It was to have been a follow-up to his February visit when he
met with Temaru government officials involved in the debate over
the consequences of French atmospheric nuclear tests between
1966 and 1974 at two remote Tuamotu atolls. That visit coincided
with a French Polynesia Assembly inquiry commission's public
presentation of the results of a six-month investigation into
the nuclear tests. 

At the end of his February visit, de la Gravi�re said the French
state wished from then on to follow a policy of total
transparency when it involved the consequences of nuclear
testing. 

During his return visit in April he was scheduled to organize a
trip to the former nuclear testing site atoll of Moruroa, a
nearby atoll of Tureia and the Tuamotu atoll of Hao, when the
French military used as a forward base during the nuclear
testing program from 1966 to 1996. The trip, organized by the
French Defense Ministry in Paris, was to have included French
Polynesia elected officials, military veterans associations
representing those who worked at the testing sites and the local
news media. 

De la Gravi�re was also scheduled to bring with him documents on
the 41 French atmospheric nuclear tests conducted at Moruroa and
the adjacent Tuamotu atoll of Fangataufa from 1966 to 1974.
French Polynesia's elected officials had hoped to find the
answers to their questions about the meteorological conditions
during the testing period, radioactive fallout and health risks
linked to the tests.   

Pacific Magazine: 

- Publisher Floyd K. Takeuchi Tel: 808-534-7522 Fax: 808-537-9522 

EDITORIAL 

- Editor-in-Chief Samantha Magick Tel: (61) 2 9571-1595 Cell: 
(61) 439-485-179 

-Managing Editor, Web Richard F. Coleman Tel: 808-534-7509 Fax: 
808-537-9522 

*****************************************************************
 77 [DU Information List] Is Doomsday coming for u.s forces in iraq
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:11:29 -0700


<x-flowed>

<http://groups.yahoo.com/>11ee53.jpg <http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups>My 
Groups | <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project>pandora-project 
Main Page



Is Doomsday Coming For U.S. Forces In Iraq?

<javascript:void(0)>11ee5f.jpg

<javascript:void(0)> <javascript:void(0)>11ee68.jpg<javascript:void(0)> 
<javascript:void(0)>11ee70.jpg<javascript:void(0)>
Written by Magus
Thursday, 13 April 2006
Having many cherished friends, from many walks of life, a good listener 
hears many different voices from many different sources. Let this listener 
share with you those things he has been told of late from many whom he 
dearly loves and does not want to lose. They, all those human beings who 
dare to Be and to Love, in this brief whirl of endless doubts we think of 
as life, are precious, and the Shadow now falling over far too many of them 
on the blood soaked sands of Iraq seems very dark and dire.
It is not yet possible to provide enough hard data to fully support the 
following speculations. It is all told by way of "scuttlebutt" from rank 
and file, military-on-the-job rumors, and old fashioned soldiers' and 
sailors' gossip and intuitions. It is offered in that "for what it's worth" 
category, in the hopes that it will make a few more folks think about the 
hell on Earth that is the day to day reality for U.S. "boots on the ground" 
in Iraq.

In general, my experiences over many years of close friendships with 
honorable, career military and National Guard members, from among both 
officers and non-commissioned personnel, have proven that the "scuttlebutt" 
is often more accurate than the official line being handed out from the 
current CentCom. That was certainly true in Vietnam, and the similarities 
between Iraq and "The Nam" are abundant.

Remember, however, this is only "scuttlebutt." Do not take it as fact but 
as food for thought, and perhaps as a warning.

In Iraq, many, perhaps most, of the American forces in the forward 
operations areas are essentially pinned down. They stay huddled for safety 
within their small, fortified (as best possible) bunkers and camps, both 
rural and urban, emerging only upon direct commands, to conduct their 
assigned patrols and sweeps while looking first and ever more exclusively 
to their own survival in all regards. They are literally stressed and 
terrified out of their minds, and most of them are also physically ill, 
many seriously so, from the effects of Depleted Uranium poisoning. Many of 
them, especially with their psychopathic "leaders" giving them almost carte 
blanche to do such, have taken on a "kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" 
modus operendi, at all times and in all circumstances when they're outside 
of their bunkers.

The truth of this "scuttlebutt" is now being born out by numerous Iraqi 
eyewitnesses and by the latest statements and sworn testimony coming from 
members of Iraq Veterans Against the War and in a Canadian courtroom where 
an American army deserter is pleading for political asylum to keep from 
returning for another tour of duty in Iraq. Those soldiers who do still 
have empathy and conscience alive within themselves post Iraq War will 
suffer hell's own psychological and spiritual torments for the rest of 
their lives, as have a majority of Vietnam combat veterans. Their having 
either engaged in or witnessed daily massacres of civilians, including 
women and children, will leave them broken for life in the deepest parts of 
themselves. But, their having been driven to the point of unflinching 
barbarity in Iraq is also very understandable, just as it was among combat 
troops in Vietnam where the "kill 'em all" sobriquet originated.

These days, the areas they "patrol and sweep" are growing smaller, and 
their unit actions becoming shorter and more perilous, as they go about the 
impossible task of "clearing" each day's designated areas of IEDs and 
"insurgents." The conditions of their daily lives are deplorable. The rate 
of suicides among them is astronomical, setting an all time record for any 
U.S. military deployments, in any war or other combat action ever. Some of 
the oldest among National Guard members now in Iraq were forced back into 
active duty after having been retired for years. Their ages go up to and 
include some members who are in their fifties and even a few field medics 
and nurses in their early sixties. Thus some now in Iraq were there, in The 
Nam. They know of what they speak, and they say it is even worse in Iraq 
now than it was in Vietnam in the months before the end.

In many of the Forward Operations Bases or Camps, American soldiers do not 
dependably receive enough daily drinking water, let alone water enough for 
washing, and for many there are still no regular showers. For the most 
remote locations, there are no showers at all, not even with the foul, 
recycled and often unsafe "yellow water" that has become notorious among 
U.S. troops' Iraq war tales. Many bivouacs have no air conditioning and 
most are in areas where there is no electricity for most of the time, which 
is true throughout nearly all of Iraq outside of the Green Zone.

Having their own generators doesn't help them much when the fuel supplies 
can't and often don't get through the heavy fields of fire and explosives 
from the Iraqi resistence. Some U.S. troops in Iraq even lack for adequate 
supplies of MREs episodically, let alone of fresh foods. They are sometimes 
left hungry at the end of their long, desperate days, an awful insult added 
to all the other dangers and deprivations of their days and nights. They 
are often without laundry facilities, without real beds as opposed to cots, 
and even without flush toilets in some isolated camps.

They are supposedly rotated out of the grueling forward positions to the 
large, new bases already finished, (almost 8 of them now) every two to four 
weeks, but the operative phrase on that is always "if possible." Their 
successful rotation to more tolerable conditions largely depends on the 
current "heat" of the resistence around a particular forward base. Some 
units deployed, especially in the more remote and heavily resistence 
dominated areas, have now been virtual prisoners, out in the deserts, for 
several months.

Rumor has it that upwards of 5,500 U.S. combat troops have walked out of 
Iraq, into adjacent countries such as Turkey, Iran and Syria, and have kept 
on going from there to places in Europe and elsewhere. They were largely 
from among those units stuck in the farthest, most isolated positions, and 
the scuttlebutt says that the Iraqi resistence fighters have even helped 
some of them to get across the borders and have provided them with food, 
water, contacts and money for the journey. On several occassions, by the 
time the transport helicopters came in to take them out to one of the big 
new bases for a break, the entire unit was gone but for one or two die hards.

It was the U.S. occupation's own "back" that really got broken at Fallujah. 
Please note the steadily shrinking sizes and numbers of cleverly named U.S. 
military assaults and initiatives that have taken place since then. The 
annihilation of Fallujah, and the U.S.'s massive slaughter of innocent 
civilians there, increased support for the resistence to almost 100% among 
the Iraqi people. It is most accurate to say that the American combat 
forces in Iraq are now largely fighting a defensive war. Those with a 
knowledge of military tactics and history will recognize that to be the 
worst possible position an invading and then occupying army can get into. 
To have that be the case this long after the initial invasion, when neither 
the troops nor their equipment are able to operate at anywhere near to peak 
condition and efficiency, is even worse.

In addition to the other shortages the troops on the front lines face in 
these bases, they are also short on ammunition. Despite all of the Bush 
administration's propganda to the contrary, the resistence owns the 
highways and roads of Iraq, with the possible exceptions of a very few and 
very shaky stretches in and around the "Green Zone" and, maybe, maybe not, 
the main airport road out of Baghdad. The military's ability to resupply 
its forward troops is rapidly approaching nil. The remote troops are being 
kept alive by air drops delivering almost everything that does reach them now.

Unfortunately, the anti-aircraft fire from the resistence, always present 
and heavy, from at least small arms, surrounds the U.S. forward bases and 
is especially strong near the most remote and smallest ones. For that 
reason, the drops of supplies to forward combat units are not as precise as 
they need to be in order to keep supply levels adequate, and some things 
like diesel fuel, gasoline and ammunition cannot be air dropped regularly 
or at all. Again, despite the official reports, the recent increases in 
helicopter "crashes" shows the growing prowess of the Iraqi fighters in 
bringing them down.

Note too that, except for numerous and frequently fatal vehicular 
"accidents," there has been scant media or press mention lately of the U.S. 
military's huge convoys of transport trucks that were formerly hauling 
supplies to the U.S. troops from the depots and distribution centers in 
Kuwait and at the Baghdad airport and the new air bases. They have not been 
rolling very reliably since just after Fallujah. The U.S. troop and supply 
convoys cannot safely travel in Iraq these days, nor keep any kind of a 
regular schedule, partly due to the increasing resistence skills in 
stopping them by causing roll overs and other "accidents," and partly 
because the vehicles themselves are worn out beyond any safe usage.

The military's equipment is all used up, and there is not a steady stream 
of replacement materiels coming in, quite the contrary. While the mercenary 
companies have grown richer than Croesius, the National Guard, Reserves and 
regular military have gone broke. In person-power, weapons, vehicles, 
tanks, ammunition, body armor, ordinance, and all else, the U.S. military 
is drained dry and used up, even to being short on replacement uniforms for 
active duty combat troops. U.S. soldiers are often caught on camera these 
days in heavily patched uniforms. Close scrutiny of the next cable or 
network news clips of frontline soldiers may prove quite revealing.

Much of what is air-dropped in for the most remote U.S. troops is promptly 
grabbed up by the Iraqi resistance fighters surrounding their encampments. 
Thus, CentCom, which is well aware of this precarious situation, often does 
not dare to air drop ammunition, ordinance, replacement weapons or parts, 
and much else. The troops are being gradually deprived of even their most 
basic capacity for self-defence against the increasingly numerous, better 
armed, better organized and often cleaner and better fed "insurgency."

It is an intolerable situation for any soldier to live in, day after day, 
for weeks and months on end, and it is not going to get better. The 
conditions currently being denied by the brass and stoically, depressively 
endured, with no hope of a say in the matter, by the "grunts" in the 
forward operations zones, is not unlike that faced by soldiers in the 
trenches of WW I. In fact, if the U.S. does not soon withdraw its forces, 
it may have very few left to withdraw. Of course, this too may be far from 
coincidental. Only such a massive and "unforeseen" troop loss will avoid 
the full, horrible truth from eventually reaching the American public. Most 
of the U.S. military personnel who have done duty in Iraq are now so 
radioactive, from their constant and ultimately lethal exposures to the DU, 
Depleted Uranium, present in all of the U.S. munitions, and the heavy 
armored assault vehicles in use in Iraq and in Afghanistan as well, that 
they really cannot be safely returned to home soil in large numbers.

They themselves are literally toxic. The very cells of their bodies are 
heavily, permanently contaminated with ceramic uranium oxide gases and 
particulates that can and will spread from their own flesh into everything 
and everyone they touch, breathe upon or even stand near to, from other 
human beings to plants, soil, buildings, furnishings and onward. This is 
not a rumor but a tragic, brutal fact.

A strong and persistent rumor, told by Iraqi civilians and a few old Iraqi 
soldiers as well, has it that a comprehensive, post-invasion military 
strategy was designed and implemented well before the U.S. and "coalition" 
forces ever arrived. With years of advanced planning by the best military 
minds of Saddam Hussein's armed forces and intelligence services, the 
Iraqis were well prepared for Bush's war when it came. Remember that George 
W. Bush had openly stated his wishes, and his PNAC friends had widely 
published their "scholarly" position papers, which included plans to 
re-invade Iraq, well before the 2000 "election." From the December 12, 2000 
appointment of Bush to the presidency until the Iraq invasion began, the 
planning and implementation went into high gear in both Iraq's career 
military and in its civilian high command. They made preparations for just 
such an invasion as did occur in March of 2003. In fact they planned for a 
much larger invasion force than was deployed, having anticipated some 
300,000 to 500,000 U.S. troops.

Much of Iraq has been honeycombed with miles upon miles of fortified 
tunnels, virtual super highways and cities built deep underground, shielded 
against electronic and aerial detection, with hospitals, support staff, 
dormitories, kitchens, and several years worth of supplies. The plan, then 
and now, was to lure the American command, by using huge initial successes 
against token military resistence as bait, into spreading the U.S. troops 
throughout Iraq, and thereafter breaking them up into ever smaller, less 
unified groups, sub groups and so on over a period of several years.

Eventually, without their ever having noticed it was happening, by the 
artful use of an "insurgency" constantly stinging at the U.S. forces like 
wasps, they would gradually be drawn awry and herded, stationed here, there 
and everywhere, willy nilly, in Baghdad, at their brand new but largely 
unmanned military and air bases, around the oil fields and the pipelines, 
in their fortified city and rural bunkers, in a helter-skelter pattern of 
troop concentrations all widely separated from each other. And that is 
exactly how it now is with the positional deployments of the majority of 
American and other coalition forces in Iraq. They are now, worst of all, 
very far removed from the means to withdraw them quickly if they should 
become overwhelmed by a superior force. Just as the large transport 
helicopters and cargo planes cannot dependably get in to keep them well 
supplied, they cannot dependably get in to bring the troops out either.

This was the Iraqi strategy from the start. Once they got the U.S. forces 
sufficiently scattered and pinned down, they could, and will, at the time 
of their choosing, close the traps, bring the still unaccounted for 
majority of the pre-invasion Iraqi army out of hiding, and wipe out or 
capture the American forces in a very brief and total sweep.

Let us now consider some of the facts and matters of record closely related 
to this "hypothesis" of the pre-war Iraqi planning for the defeat of the 
U.S. invasion and occupation.

No post invasion censuses, nor any other registrations of Iraqis, were ever 
conducted, and such dared not to be conducted in order to hide the massive 
numbers of civilian deaths and wanton massacres. There was no orderly, 
immediate U.S. take over and no exercise at all of any necessary civil 
control. Any such would have stifled the rampant graft and pillaging 
planned and done by the Coalition Provisional Authority. There still is no 
broad and stable civil order in Iraq today, except in the delusions and 
propaganda of the Bush administration, and in the desperate attempts to 
keep up appearances being provided by the very carefully selected Iraqi 
"government" and its puppets. Not even the corporate media and press is, 
for the most part, any longer able to pretend that Iraq has a functional 
and effective civil control structure in place, not anywhere.

There is literally no record at all of where Iraq's huge, pre-war standing 
army, nor its equipment and materiels really went. Whatever truly did 
become of them, the U.S. command and the Bush government have no idea of 
it, not one way or the other. All they have ever had, told and sold as 
"facts," were their own irrational assumptions, fixed ideas, wishful 
thinking and deceitful PR, to put it bluntly, their own wild and not very 
bright guesses and stories for a gullible public and a compliant media and 
press. The possibilities shared here are based on a good deal more reason 
and fact than all of that, having at least good, solid "scuttlebutt" behind 
it.

Remember too that there were vast caches of UN-sealed conventional weapons 
that the U.S. troops opened and then left abandoned and unguarded when they 
went tearing through Iraq in a patently chaotic fashion, during and 
immediately after the invasion. All of those massive caches of arms, 
ordinance, tanks, missiles, aircraft yet unaccounted for, high yield 
conventional explosives, detonators and tons upon tons of ammunition, ALL 
of the munitions caches, got emptied out by the same unknown, faceless, 
trackless hoardes of Iraqi men who also stripped every last Iraqi military 
base bare, right down to the concrete blocks, the windows and frames, the 
electrical wiring, the lamps, the plumbing fixtures and even the pipes. To 
have been executed so quickly and thoroughly, that task alone had to have 
been well planned, in great detail and in advance. That the Bush 
administration called it "looting" is ludicrous. It was far too systematic 
and well organised to have been mere looting.

It is impossible to forget the bizarre scene that appeared on the 
televisions of the world, in the live, real time broadcasts coming from the 
Iraq war, on BBC, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CBS, ABC, BBC, etc., et al, immediately 
after the fall of Baghdad to U.S. forces. For three, entire, mind bending 
days the cameras revealed, from dawn until dark, the sight of thousands, 
upon tens of thousands, upon literally uncountable numbers of unarmed, 
unburdened Iraqi men, all able bodied and roughly of military age, all 
clean and in civilian clothing, all walking casually in an endless stream 
down the main highway of Iraq, from North to South.

They were many miles out in the middle of nowhere, without so much as a 
backpack on their shoulders or a hobo's bindlestiff in their hands, heading 
South. That is all we really ever knew for sure of their destination, just 
South, despite the speculations of reporters that they were going home to 
Baghdad, and all we ever really knew for sure of their origin was that they 
had mysteriously appeared from the North. They were miles from any town or 
city when the first TV camera crews spotted them. All we really heard about 
them was the speculation from the cable and network news reporters.

Not one U.S. military unit came to question them, nor did the media do so 
effectively. The few questions asked got smiling, friendly replies in 
suspiciously "broken" English, utterances of "going home" or "no more 
fighting now" which were devoid of real factual content, and skillfully so. 
No slightest attempt was made to stop or detain any of them, and it was 
obvious, at least to this viewer, that they were behaving in a planned and 
very orderly manner. Smiling and cheerful, as if on some kind of a grand, 
holiday lark of a walkabout, they walked on and on and on in their 
countless thousands, an endless stream. The oddest part of all was that no 
one detected any noticeable influx of tens of thousands of men, or more, 
into Baghdad during the 3 days that the march continued. Although network 
camera crews in Baghdad and other cities to the south of the march had been 
alerted to watch for their arrivals, and did so, they were never seen.

They just vanished into the sands of Iraq, somewhere, in the middle of 
nowhere, after staging a masssively distracting march down the main highway 
between Tikrit and Baghdad for three days, days in which that single 
distraction might well have hidden many another action from view. Countless 
Iraqi males of the right ages and fitness to have been soldiers simply 
disappeared at points unasked then and unknown still.

They vanished overnight. Come the dawn of day four, the highway was empty. 
Not so much as a scrap of paper marked their passing. Not so much as a 
shoe, or a rag, or a food wrapper had been left behind. Oddly, one reporter 
and camera crew, from CNN, briefly went into the desert for a few yards on 
either side of the highway that strange, silent, fourth dawn, and could 
find not one set of tracks leading away from the highway that had, as of 
dark the night before, been covered by an endless file of walking men.

Bear in mind that Iraq's standing army at the time of the Bush invasion was 
over 2.5 million strong. Make no mistake, they were not delighted to have 
the U.S. armed forces invade their country and take control of it away from 
Saddam Hussein. Let's face it, with males above the age of 10 in Iraq being 
allowed to own an unlimited number of guns of all kinds if they so chose, 
had the domestic opposition to Saddam ever been even so high as a full 50% 
of the Iraqi people, especially had it been so among the Iraqi military 
forces and men, then Saddam would have been long gone. He wasn't. That 
alone should have given any reasonable person the idea that there was much 
more to the political situation in Iraq than the extremely simplistic 
picture of an intolerably oppressive and despotic regime as was promoted by 
Bush Sr., the Clinton administration, Bush Jr., the neocons of the PNAC and 
the corporate media and press.

Now is that terrible circumstance and time when the U.S. troops themselves, 
somehow sensing that they have all been long since written off as 
expendable, must continue to hunker down in terror, abandoned by a 
government of, by and for their pathologically selfish, greedy, amoral, 
psychopathic rulers. A war that had no justifiable cause for its beginning 
may very possibly, and very soon, have a very well justified ending imposed 
upon it.

But, again, the true price will not be paid by those who created that war 
for their own selfish gains in power, prestige and wealth. The only ones 
who'll pay for it, in the highest measures of all, are those American 
soldiers who were either idealistic enough, foolish enough, obedient 
enough, or all three, to have gone to the faraway land of Iraq and fought 
in it, and those Iraqis who have either been killed by the U.S. invaders or 
forced to fight them to the death so that their nation and people could 
again live in freedom from occupation by foreign forces, and hopefully, 
someday, in peace.

The ultimate truth about all wars, on all sides, for all those who fight in 
them, for all those who love the fighters as friends and kin, and for all 
those civilians who are the innocent victims of "collateral damage" is that 
there are no real winners, and the losers are always the maimed, the dead, 
and the bereaved.
http://www.sibernews.com/the-news/world-news/is-doomsday-coming-for-u.s.-forces-in-iraq?-200604134189/


Switch an email account to Yahoo! Mail, you could 
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/fifa_truswitch/*http://eur.i1.yimg.com/java.europe.yahoo.com/uk/mail/fu/trueswitch/index.html>win 
FIFA World Cup tickets.

----------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    *  Visit your group 
"<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project>pandora-project" on the web.
    *
    *  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    * 
<mailto:pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 

    *
    *  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the 
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.


----------

</x-flowed>


Attachment Converted: 11ee53.jpg: 00000001,245d5bff,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 11ee5f.jpg: 00000001,245d5c00,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 11ee68.jpg: 00000001,245d5c01,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 11ee70.jpg: 00000001,245d5c02,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
 78 "Dummies" Irving Wesley Hall on TV
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:13:14 -0700


<x-flowed>

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Irving Wesley Hall, the author of "Depleted Uranium For Dummies," will be 
interviewed Monday and/or Tuesday on INN World Report TV.  Dish Satellite 
TV Channel 9415 Free Speech TV,



For details:

We're Not in Kansas Anymore

<http://www.notinkansas.us/>www.notinkansas.us

To remove your name from this mailing list reply to this email with 
"unsubscribe-L" in the subject box.


</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 79 [du-list] Depleted uranium in The Daily Reckoning, Mogambo
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:35:34 -0700


<x-flowed>
A Metal to Unite Them All
http://www.dailyreckoning.com/Writers/Mogambo/DREssays/MG040806.html

Excerpts:

"- From the pile of stuff on my desk labeled "Very
good reasons why more and more people hate America,
and will for a long, long time," we have this item
from AmericaHeraldSun.news.com, which reports:
"Vietnam War veterans and activists from six countries
urged the U.S. government today to compensate millions
of people they say are victims of toxins in the
military defoliant Agent Orange. Three decades after
the war ended, Washington has yet to admit that the
lethal chemical dioxin had harmed Vietnamese villagers
and foreign soldiers through illness and birth
defects."

They then trotted out a guy named Professor Nguyen
Trong Nhan, of the Vietnam Dioxin/Agent Orange Victims
Association, who said, "This toxic chemical has
destroyed the environment...and the lives of millions
of Vietnamese people. From 1961 to 1971, U.S.
'Operation Ranch Hand' dropped more than 80 million
litres of defoliants, half of it Agent Orange, on
southern Vietnam, exposing between 2.1 million to 4.8
million people to harm."

Well, I say, "boo hoo hoo!" And, I say that not
because I dismiss the horror of what has happened to
them, but because you ain't seen nothing yet! Even as
we speak, the United States military is having a Field
Day Of Horror (FDOH) in Iraq and Afghanistan,
expending lots and lots of depleted-uranium rounds.
When these rounds burst, they explode into a huge
spray of radioactive particles, contaminating
everything. And, we are using tons and tons, thousands
and thousands, of these things! So, while Agent Orange
is old history, now completely dissolved into whatever
biodegradable hell these things devolve to and washed
out to sea, the half-life of this radioactive
contamination is 11,000 years!

If you want to see real horror and an angry
population, wait until our Iraq and Afghanistan
veterans start dying from the teensiest, weensiest
little speck of that radioactive "depleted uranium"
crap that has gotten into their lungs, in their guts,
into their clothes, and has burned its way permanently
into their tissues.

It is not just them, either! According to Karl W. B.
Schwarz, Rense.com, co-author of the Aldermaston
Report released in February, "The effects of those
bombing attacks were registered as far away as the
UK." Hahaha! Congratulations, war criminal Pentagon
buttheads! Having fun blowing up stuff with
depleted-uranium munitions is contaminating millions
of people and the entire continent, permanently!

What does this have to do with Agent Orange? Well, not
much. It has to do with money, and just as the Agent
Orange victims are moving toward litigation, Mr.
Schwarz envisions a huge class-action lawsuit as a
result of this demonic depleted-uranium thing.  "It
would sort of be," he says, "The Citizens of the
United States, Active Duty and Veterans of the US
Armed Services v. The United States Government,
certain Defense Contractors, Certain Individuals. My
guess is the true price tag for their criminal
negligence could easily top $1 trillion in damages the
Plaintiffs should be entitled to."

And now, think about the coming generations, for the
next tens of thousands of years, as whole populations
of people want to be compensated because of the
radioactive contamination that resulted from the
irresponsible, despicable way the America military
acted today! Hahaha! And yet, you want another reason
why I am recommending gold?  Ugh."



	

	
		
___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da
10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


		
___________________________________
Bolletta salata? Passa a Yahoo! Messenger with Voice
http://it.messenger.yahoo.com




To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 80 [du-list] Aid urged for vets exposed to Uranium
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:35:36 -0700


<x-flowed>
Democrat & Chronicle: Local News

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060413/NEWS01
/604130359/1002/NEWS

Aid urged for vets exposed to uranium


NICK REISMAN
Albany bureau


(April 13, 2006) — ALBANY — While it's unknown how many former servicemen
and -women have been exposed to depleted uranium used in weaponry, the side
effects need to be studied before many U.S. veterans become seriously ill, say
some state lawmakers.
"Uranium is in a lot of these weapons that a lot of our servicemen and -women
use — it's the junk weaponry that may, whatever, be the problem," said Sen.
Thomas Morahan, R-New City, Rockland County. "I say 'may' because we're not
sure. If it is (a) developing (problem), we need to make sure the people of 
New
York state we have that serve in Iraq get the treatment."
Read the rest of the article:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060413/NEWS01
/604130359/1002/NEWS


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 81 [du-list] Depleted uranium could damage DNA
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:35:39 -0700


<x-flowed>

http://stripes.com/article.asp?article=36500&section=104
Study: Depleted uranium could damage DNA
DOD officials say exposure not a health risk to troops
By Leo Shane III, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Saturday, April 15, 2006

WASHINGTON � Depleted uranium, used to harden vehicles and
armor-piercing munitions, might cause damage to DNA in ways previously
not understood by health officials, according to a recently released
study from Northern Arizona University.

The research could again raise questions about the military�s use of
depleted uranium, a practice Defense Department officials insist does
not present health risks to troops. The dense metal is a by-product of
the nuclear fuel enrichment process.

Theories connecting Gulf War Syndrome to radiation exposure from
uranium-laced battlefields have persisted for years. Defense Department
studies show no lingering exposure danger, officials said.

A 2004 study by the Defense Department concluded that the health risks
from inhaling airborne particles of depleted uranium are �very low� in
combat situations.

But the new study, conducted by biochemist Diane Stearns shows that,
separate from any radiation risks, cells exposed to uranium can bond
with the heavy metal particles. That biochemical reaction can cause
genetic mutations, which in turn can curtail cell growth and
potentially cause cancer.

Stearns said the research is too preliminary to prove that
uranium-treated ammunition can cause harmful side effects.

�But it does raise the question of whether we�re testing for the right
things when we look at the health effects,� she said. �If we�re not
seeing radioactivity in people being tested, maybe that�s not what we
should be looking for.�

If bullets coated with DU are used on a battlefield, their impact on a
target could potentially send miniature metal fragments into the air.
Stearns said her work shows the long-term effects on what those
particles could do to the human cellular system have not been fully
researched.

A statement from the Defense Department on Friday said the department
has investigated the toxic properties of uranium as a heavy metal, and
that no evidence exists to show that that Gulf War veterans have
suffered any chromosomal or genetic damage from DU exposure.

�(Stearns�) studies add another piece to the puzzle, but there is
already a lot of information in this area,� the statement said.

Past studies reviewed by the Pentagon have shown that uranium at high
levels can cause kidney damage in animal experiments, but have not
shown a link between the lower levels of exposure from DU munitions and
veterans� health.

A Baltimore Veterans Affairs Medical Center research team has been
tracking 80 soldiers from the first Gulf War whose vehicles were
peppered with DU rounds during combat, all of whom had some inhalation
exposure to the heavy metal.

Officials said that, to date, none of them has developed kidney
problems or uranium-related cancers. In addition, the group has
fathered 68 children, none of whom has birth defects.

Still, Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., has been petitioning for more
extensive testing on DU for more than a year, and recently called on
Congress to renew discussions on the issue at a rally featuring
Physicians for Social Responsibility and the punk-rock group Anti-Flag.

�All I�m really asking for is an independent study,� he said in an
interview earlier this month. �It�s clear this issue about the health
effects is out there and floating around. But it�s also clear the
Pentagon does not want to study it.�

Last summer, McDermott introduced legislation which would mandate a
series of research projects on the material�s effects on troops,
civilians and the environment. The bill hasn�t moved since then.

A Defense Department spokeswoman said a number of independent groups �
including the United Nations, researchers from the New England Journal
of Medicine, and the Rand Corporation � have all published studies in
recent years supporting the Pentagon�s conclusion that depleted uranium
munitions are not a health risk for U.S. troops.

Misinformation about the supposed dangers continues to be a problem,
the spokesman said, despite the department�s own extensive testing of
troops.

Since May 2003, 2,122 troops who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and who
may have been exposed to DU have undergone radiation screenings. Only
eight showed elevated levels, all of whom were still within prescribed
health standards, and all of them had munitions fragments in their body
at the time.

Defense officials said they have no plans to phasing out the use of DU
munitions or a ban on its use.
==============
***NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this
material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes.***
==============

		
---------------------------------
   Switch an email account to Yahoo! Mail, you could win FIFA World Cup 
tickets.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 82 [du-list] Iraq Mess Is Literally Making People Sick (April 10,
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:36:30 -0700


<x-flowed>
Iraq Mess Is Literally Making People Sick (April 10, 2006)
Despite severe health problems facing both Iraqis and US military veterans 
exposed to depleted uranium (DU) during the 1991 Gulf War, the US military 
has fired an even greater quantity of DU munitions - over 2,200 tons - on 
Iraqi cities and people since the 2003 invasion. As a radioactive 
substance, DU "wreaks havoc" on DNA and RNA, causing cancer and genetic 
mutations over longer periods, along with numerous painful symptoms 
following immediate exposure. Nonetheless, the Pentagon denies that DU 
causes severe harm, and continues to use DU munitions in Iraq. (Uruknet)
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2006/0410sick.htm 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 83 [du-list] Cantwell demands Rumsfeld answer DU questions; Stars
 
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 15:36:50 -0700


<x-flowed>
Google Alert for: Depleted Uranium
Cantwell sends letter to Rumsfeld demanding answers on depleted ...
http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2006/04/cantwell-sends-letter-to-rumsfeld.
html

Northwest Progressive Institute Official Blog - Redmond,WA,USA
Today, Senator Maria Cantwell sent a letter to Donald Rumsfeld on the
question of medical research on servicemembers exposed to depleted uranium 
(DU)
aerosols ...

Study: Depleted uranium could damage DNA
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=36500
Stars and Stripes - Washington,D.C.,USA
WASHINGTON — Depleted uranium, used to harden vehicles and armor-piercing
munitions, might cause damage to DNA in ways previously not understood by 
health
...
See all stories on this topic


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 84 Guardian Unlimited: Fallout
 
  Fallout: the human cost of nuclear catastrophe


April 26 2006 marks the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl
nuclear disaster. Award-winning Dutch photographer Robert Knoth
has visited the area worst hit by radioactive fallout - Ukraine,
Belarus and western Russia - to document the toxic legacy of
Chernobyl and other nuclear accident sites of the former Soviet
Union. The Fallout exhibition, which is free, runs from April 18
to May 14 at the Oxo Tower in London.

More on the exhibition from Panos Pictures

More on the exhibition from Greenpeace
Oxo Tower: Fallout exhibition
Special report: Russia
Special report: nuclear industry




      Guardian Unlimited � Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
 		 		 		 	 	 		 		 		 	 	 		 	 	 		 	 	 	 		 	 	 	 		 		 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 85 NRC: NRC Proposes $3,250 Civil Penalty Against Firm in Puerto Rico for Loss of Portable
Nuclear Gauge

News Release - Region I - 2006-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-025                          
April 18, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  

against a San Juan, Puerto Rico-based company for violations
associated with the loss of a portable nuclear gauge in August
2005. The gauge, which contains radioactive material, is used
for industrial purposes such as measuring soil density. 

On Aug. 16, 2005, an employee of GEO-EXPLOR, Inc., was using the
gauge at a temporary job site in Dorado, Puerto Rico. When
finished with the work, the employee placed the device in the
open bed of a pickup truck but failed to secure it to the
vehicle or to close the tailgate. After traveling for less than
a mile on a public highway, the driver realized the container
holding the gauge had fallen off the truck. Although the
employee retraced his route, he was unable to locate the device.
It was subsequently recovered  intact and undamaged  by a member
of the public, then stored in a commercial warehouse before
being returned to the company on Aug. 22, 2005. 

Based on an inspection conducted on Nov. 15, 2005, the NRC has
identified three violations of agency requirements with regard
to the event. Specifically, a company employee failed to
maintain control and constant surveillance of the gauge when it
was lost on the highway and kept in the commercial warehouse;
the employee failed to use two independent physical controls to
secure the container in which the gauge was being transported
even though there were two available chains in the trucks bed;
and the employee placed the case holding the gauge in the truck
bed without securing it in any way and without closing the
vehicles tailgate.

 Although the gauge was locked in the shielded condition and it
was in a locked transport case at the time it was found by the
member of the public, these violations are of concern to the NRC
because (1) the gauge was in the public domain for approximately
6 days, and (2) such sources can result in unintended radiation
exposure to an individual if the (radioactive) source is not in
the shielded position, NRC Region I Administrator Samuel J.
Collins wrote in a letter to GEO-EXPLOR regarding the
enforcement action. 

The company was given an opportunity to respond to the apparent
violations identified by the NRC by either submitting a written
response or attending a predecisional enforcement conference. In
a letter dated March 6, GEO-EXPLOR wrote that it agreed with the
information regarding the apparent violations and described
steps it had taken to prevent a recurrence, including retraining
its entire staff on gauge use and transportation. The NRC
concluded that the corrective actions were comprehensive.
However, a civil penalty was proposed consistent with the NRC
policy for cases involving the loss of such materials. 

The firm is required to provide the NRC with a written reply to
the enforcement action within 30 days.   

Last revised Tuesday, April 18, 2006       
*****************************************************************
 86 icWales: Radiation tests continue on 359 farms
         
Apr 18 2006
  
Steve Dube, Western Mail     

IT IS 20 years since an explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear
reactor sent a cloud of deadly radioactive dust westwards across
Europe. Heavy rain washed it to earth in North Wales, Cumbria
and South West Scotland. 

Radiation levels led to restrictions on the movement or sale of
4.2m sheep on 9,000 farms, including 2m sheep on 5,100 Welsh
holdings within 2,500 square miles of North Wales. 

And 20 years on, restrictions remain on the movement and sale of
sheep on nine farms in England, 14 in Scotland and no fewer than
359 in Wales. 

Farmers' Union of Wales vice-president Glyn Roberts and his
family at Ysbyty Ifan in the Conwy Valley run one of the
affected farms. 

"We farm the old Hafod and Hendre system - an upland farm and a
hill farm - and all the sheep on the upland farm are scanned for
caesium levels by Welsh Assembly staff at least once a year,"
said Glyn. 

"Breeding stock are not scanned but must be marked with red paint 
on their neck before they can be moved under movement consent. 
These sheep cannot be slaughtered for human consumption or for 
use in the preparation of foodstuffs. 

"However, the farmer may sell marked sheep following monitoring
- and be compensated for the resulting loss of value - or move
them to less contaminated land to enable radio caesium
concentrations in the meat to decline. 

"After four weeks the sheep can be re-monitored, and if levels
have fallen below the 1,000 becquerels per kilogramme limit of
radio caesium they are ear-tagged and may then be slaughtered
for the food chain. We assist the Assembly staff with the
penning and monitoring of the sheep and receive �1.30 per animal
monitored - the same amount of compensation that we received 20
years ago." 


As well as his flock of Welsh Mountain sheep, Glyn has a herd of
mostly Charolais suckler cows on his holding, which extends to
400 acres with additional mountain grazing rights. 


Glyn's wife Eleri operates a small bakery as part of the Cwlwm
wedding service co-operative at a former grain mill at Ysbyty
Ifan. 
  	
Copyright and Trade Mark Notice                                                         
� owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Plc 2006
icWalesTM is a trade mark of Trinity Mirror Plc.
*****************************************************************
 87 Herald Sun: Beattie won't budge on uranium 

[18apr06]

  This story is from our news.com.au network     Source: AAP   

PREMIER Peter Beattie has refused to back down on his opposition 
to uranium mining in Queensland, despite growing calls for debate 
on the issue.

Uranium is fast becoming a thorn in the side for Mr Beattie, with 
rising interest among his Labor MPs and unions over whether to 
allow mining of uranium deposits in the state. 

Mr Beattie last week admitted he had struck uranium off the
agenda for Labor's state conference in June, deferring the
debate to the party's national conference in April 2007. 

This is despite rising concern among his caucus and union
leaders, culminating in the launch of an online petition last
week by Labor backbencher Ronan Lee calling on the premier to
maintain his existing ban on uranium mining. 

But several other Labor figures, including Speaker Tony McGrady
and union heavyweight Bill Ludwig, have called for the
development of a uranium industry. 

Mr Beattie recently appeared to relax his long-held view against
uranium mining by ordering an investigation into the impact it
would have on the state's lucrative coal industry. 

Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg, who supports uranium
mining, said it was time Mr Beattie faced up to the issue. 

"The Premier needs to stop straddling the barbed wire fence and
end ongoing confusion about Labor's position," Mr Springborg
said. 

"State governments issue mining permits and state governments
have to have a position about what is mined. 

"This Labor government has been issuing exploration permits that
cover uranium for years, why don't they openly admit it?" 

Mr Springborg said Mr Beattie should "grow up" and support those
in Labor who wanted to open up Queensland's significant uranium
reserves. 

But, mindful of a potentially divisive internal debate ahead of
next year's state election, Mr Beattie has refused to budge. 

"No decision will be made at caucus, no decision will be made at
our state conference, it will be made at the national
conference," he said. 

"Because that is where the party will make a decision on a
matter that relates to the whole nation. 

"This is like defence - defence issues are determined at the
national conference, and so is uranium." 
		 
� Herald and Weekly Times   
*****************************************************************
 88 Salt Lake Tribune: Goshute nuke plan foes urge public response 

Article Last Updated: 04/18/2006 12:31:47 AM MDT 

By May 8: Hatch says deluge of comments is the best chance to 
keep Utah from becoming a nuclear dump 

By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune 

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has fielded more than 1,000 
comments so far on its application to allow high-level nuclear 
waste to be hauled over federal land in Tooele County. 

Pam Schuller, the agency employee who is processing the 
comments, said she has seen an increase in comments recently. 
Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch and the Salt Lake Area Chamber 
of Commerce have stepped up their public campaign to generate 
more comments before the BLM ends its comment period on May 8. 

Hatch, the chamber and other opponents of the Skull Valley 
waste storage, have made a point of reminding Utahns about the 
deadline and what they say is the last best chance to derail the 
waste project. 

"Wherever he goes, he talks about it," said Heather Barney, a 
spokeswoman for Hatch. "This is a very important opportunity 
that Utahns have been given to influence the outcome of this 
situation." 

Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of utility companies that 
have nuclear plants, received a license to build the Skull 
Valley site last fall from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission. If built as planned on the Skull Valley Goshute 
Reservation, the site would be a kind of long-term parking lot 
for steel and concrete containers of used but highly radioactive 
reactor rods, up to 44,000 tons of them. 

Six of the eight PFS members said last fall that they do not 
need the temporary storage and plan to dispatch their waste 
directly to Yucca Mountain, the long-stalled underground 
repository being proposed by the U.S. Energy Department. 

But PFS is pushing forward with its plans. And it needs 
approval from the BLM for a right of way to build a transfer 
station on the north side of Interstate 80. Another pending 
request, for a 32-mile rail spur, was PFS's first option but 
appears to be dead because of wilderness legislation Congress 
passed last year. 

In a recent opinion article, Hatch once again urged Utahns to 
weigh in the BLM, even giving out Schuller's contact information 
and e-mail address. 

"This is a threat to our security in Utah," he said. 

"We have a solid case, but we need to make it - repeatedly 
and resoundingly." 

Although PFS is a Chamber of Commerce member, chamber leaders 
issued a position statement earlier this month denouncing the 
waste-storage plan. 

"The chamber also urges all businesses, community, civic, and 
religious leaders, and local, state, and federal elected and 
appointed officials to likewise oppose the siting on or storage 
of, temporary or otherwise, PFS nuclear waste upon or through 
BLM land [ . . . and urges them . . . ] to contact the BLM 
immediately and express their opposition directly and in plain 
terms," the policy statement said. 

Sue Martin, PFS spokeswoman, noted that some Utahns have 
contacted her to note they will be submitting comments to BLM in 
support of the storage project. She said chamber leaders had not 
requested a presentation on the project. 

"We do encourage people to send comments one way or the 
other," she added. 

The BLM's Schuller noted that her agency will be looking at 
six specific criteria to determine whether the application 
should be granted. The criteria include such questions as 
whether the request is compatible with BLM laws, regulations and 
the public interest. 

"There's just an awful lot to be considered," said Glenn 
Carpenter, BLM's Salt Lake City office manager. 

fahys@sltrib.com 

© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 89 NRC: RIN 3150-AH86 Spent fuel casks

 
                         FR Doc E6-5705 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Proposed Rules] [Page 19831-19832] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-15]                         
 
List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: FuelSolutions\TM\ Cask 
System Revision 4 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Proposed rule.
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to 
amend its regulations revising the BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation 
(FuelSolutions\TM\) cask system listing within the ``List of 
Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks'' to include Amendment No. 4 to 
the Certificate of Compliance. Amendment No. 4 would revise 
Technical Specification (TS) requirements related to periodic 
monitoring during storage operations. Specifically, the amendment 
would revise the TS to permit longer surveillance intervals for 
casks with heat loads lower than the design basis heat load and 
permit visual inspection of the cask vent screens or measurement 
of the cask liner temperature to satisfy the periodic monitoring 
requirements that govern general design criteria for spent fuel 
storage casks. TS 3.3.1 would be deleted to remove daily 
monitoring requirements. TS 3.3.2 would be revised for the W21 
and W74 canisters to permit either visual inspection of vent 
screens or liner thermocouple temperature monitoring. Also, TS 
5.3.8 would add a section to the Periodic Monitoring Program 
which establishes intervals for periodic monitoring that are less 
than the time required to reach the limiting short-term 
temperature limit. This program would establish administrative 
controls and procedures to assure that the licensee will be able 
to determine when corrective action is required. In addition, the 
amendment would update editorial changes associated with the 
company name change from BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation to BNG 
Fuel Solutions Corporation and make other administrative changes.
 
 
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or 
before May 18, 2006.
 
 
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following 
methods. Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AH86) in 
the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings 
submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available 
for public inspection.
 
Because your comment will not be edited to remove any identifying 
or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including 
personal information such as social security numbers and birth 
dates in your submission.
 
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff.
 
E-mail comments to: . If you do not receive a reply e- mail 
confirming that we have received your comments, contact us 
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the 
NRC's rulemaking Web site at . Address questions about our 
rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail . 
Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
.
 
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays 
[telephone (301) 415-1966].
 
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 
(301) 415-1101.
 
Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be 
viewed electronically on the public computers at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Selected documents, 
including comments, can be viewed and downloaded electronically 
via the NRC rulemaking Web site at .
 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after 
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, the public can gain 
entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management 
System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's 
public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there 
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact 
the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by e-mail to . An electronic copy of the proposed Certificate of 
Compliance (CoC), TS, and preliminary safety evaluation report 
(SER) can be found under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML053420606 (CoC), 
ML053420632 (TS-W100/W150), ML053420626 (TS-W21), ML053420617 
(TS-W74), and ML053420638 (SER).
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6219, 
e-mail .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the 
direct final rule published in the final rules section of this 
Federal Register.
 
Procedural Background This rule is limited to the changes 
contained in Amendment No. 4 to CoC No. 1026 and does not include 
other aspects of the FuelSolutionsTM cask system design. The NRC 
is using the ``direct final rule procedure'' to issue this 
amendment because it represents a limited and routine change to 
an existing CoC that is expected to be noncontroversial. Adequate 
protection of public health and safety continues to be ensured. 
The direct final rule will become effective on July 3, 2006. 
However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by May 
18, 2006, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws the 
direct final rule and will subsequently address the comments 
received in a final rule. The NRC will not initiate a second 
comment period on this action.
 
A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter 
explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including 
challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would 
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is 
adverse and significant if: (1) The comment opposes the rule and 
provides a reason sufficient to require a
 
[[Page 19832]] substantive response in a notice-and-comment 
process. For example, in a substantive response: (a) The comment 
causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position 
or conduct additional analysis; (b) The comment raises an issue 
serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or 
complete the record; or (c) The comment raises a relevant issue 
that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC staff.
 
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and 
it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable 
without incorporation of the change or addition.
 
(3) The comment causes the NRC staff to make a change (other than 
editorial) to the CoC or TS.
 
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 72 Administrative practice and 
procedure, Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, 
Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Penalties, 
Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing.
 
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority 
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy 
Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC 
is proposing to adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72.
 
PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF 
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND REACTOR- 
RELATED GREATER THAN CLASS C WASTE 1. The authority citation for 
part 72 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 51, 53, 
57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 
Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as 
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 
2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2234, 
2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688, 
as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); 
Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102- 
486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. 
L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 
135, 137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, 
sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 
10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 
2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); sec. 651(e), Pub. L. 109-58, 119 
Stat. 806-810 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2021, 2021b, 2111). Section 
72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 
100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 
10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also issued under sec. 189, 68 
Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 
2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 
145(g), Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). 
Subpart J also issued under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 
141(h), Pub. L. 97- 425, 96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2224 
(42 U.S.C. 10101, 10137(a), 10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also 
issued under sec. 133, 98 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 
218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 U.S.C. 10198). 2. In Sec.  72.214, 
Certificate of Compliance 1026 is revised to read as follows: 
Sec.  72.214  List of approved spent fuel storage casks. * * * * 
* Certificate Number: 1026.
 
Initial Certificate Effective Date: February 15, 2001.
 
Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: May 14, 2001.
 
Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: January 28, 2002.
 
Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: May 7, 2003.
 
Amendment Number 4 Effective Date: July 3, 2006.
 
SAR Submitted by: BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation.
 
SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the FuelSolutionsTM 
Spent Fuel Management System.
 
Docket Number: 72-1026.
 
Certificate Expiration Date: February 15, 2021.
 
Model Number: WSNF-220, WSNF-221, and WSNF-223 systems; W-150 
storage cask; W-100 transfer cask; and the W-21 and W-74 
canisters.
 
* * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of April, 
2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5705 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 90 Washington Post: The Debate: The Toxic Waste Version of Shrinky Dinks
            
+ Posted at 04:52 PM ET, 04/18/2006 
 
AP Photo/Kyodo News, Yumi Ozaki 

At this nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in northern Japan, more
than 10 gallons of water containing plutonium and other
radioactive material leaked inside the compound on March 12. The
plant's operator announced that no radioactivity was released
into the atmosphere. 

One of the dominant themes in the comments yesterday was the
safety of nuclear energy. Today's nuclear plant designs are much
safer than in the past, notes . Point well taken. But for many
debaters, the plants are -- it's what to do with the highly
radioactive waste they produce. for disposal? Can we reduce the
waste's ? How about its toxicity? 

says reprocessing reduces radioactivity, but he doesn't say by
how much. Reprocessing separates the unused uranium and
plutonium from the waste left behind. So it extracts the useful
bits to reuse for electricity or whatever else, but we're still
left with some seriously toxic waste. 

No problem, writes . When reprocessed, Chris Ford says, the
waste quite literally shrinks, losing 95 percent of its volume.
"Nuclear waste is amazingly compact," so it wouldn't take too
large an area to hold all the waste generated over many years of
providing electricity. 

Possible uses of spent fuel (nuclear waste that has not had the
uranium and plutonium extracted from it) are by Australia's
Uranium Information Centre. But even that very pro-nuclear
organization -- it's funded by uranium mining companies --
classifies the leftovers from reprocessing as "unequivocally
waste" having "no conceivable future use." 

Reprocessing also raises , as the materials extracted can be
used to make nuclear weapons, and there's a bunch of this stuff
in storage around the world. Some opponents of nuclear energy
say releases , and are higher around these reprocessing plants. 

The United States currently does not reprocess spent fuel -- at
least, . But it still produces a fair bit of spent fuel that
needs a home. A very, very, very secure home, where nothing will
be able to get in or out for at least a thousand or so years. 

Some of you believe increasing reliance on nuclear energy . But
how do you address the toxic waste problem? 

Misc. -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 11:05 AM ET,
04/18/2006 
Nuclear Power: Think Smaller?

Among many thoughtful comments on the last post, asks us to
consider scaled-down plants that power just one small city,
saying they would be "safer and easier to control." 

It's an intriguing suggestion. So, let's consider. 

Regardless of whether Sully's assumption about safety is
accurate, the primary issue is cost. Seems like it would be more
difficult to build several than one large one; in a large plant,
the reactors would share infrastructure, such as the water
source, while multiple smaller plants would require
infrastructure to be built many times over. 

Then again, perhaps it is just as expensive to construct and
maintain reactors regardless of their size or concentration.
Anyone have any insights into this? 

Another consideration would be that more sites would mean more
objections. Picture the overflowing city council meetings, the
neighborhood petitions, the lawsuits. In the face of such
resistance, finding suitable sites for these reactors could take
years. 

Debaters, what do you think of the idea? 
Your Take -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 10:56 AM ET,
04/17/2006 
This Week's Debate: Nuclear Power
 

In an eye-opening piece in the Post's Sunday Outlook section, a
founder of Greenpeace explains why he's changed his mind about
nuclear power. The former Greenpeace activist who wrote the
article, Patrick Moore, discusses his views in a live online
chat today -- should be an interesting exchange. 

Moore argues that Three Mile Island was a "" because the
containment structure did precisely what it was supposed to: it
contained the radiation and no one was hurt. He explains why he
believes that nuclear power is safe, cost effective and reliable
-- and necessary, if we are to avert the catastrophic effects of
global warming. Greenpeace, however, with Moore's conclusion. 

This week, we'll debate , including how to handle rogue nations
with uranium enrichment capabilities () and overcoming the
not-in-my-backyard mentality that could hinder the construction
of new nuclear power plants in the United States. 

Read the and see what you think. Then, let's debate! 

[Paging Chris Ford: As I recall, this is your area of expertise.
!] 
This Week's Issue -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 12:04 AM
ET, 04/16/2006 
Missiles, Pigs and a Punishment Fit for a King
 

Over the course of the week, I've found no shortage of creative
punishments for those convicted of involvement in terrorism. 

Strapping terrorists to and aimed at [insert Middle Eastern
country here] is a pretty popular theme, as is just about
anything relating to and . Forcing a comes up a fair bit in
relation to Osama bin Laden -- often in conjunction with the
observation that it would be a sweet irony to make him live as a
woman under his own brand of fundamentalist Islam. 

In the case of Moussaoui, some say to throw him in prison and
let take care of the punishment, assuming that they would
terrorize and/or eventually . Another suggestion that has
surfaced involves the method purportedly used to murder . (The
argument is made , but don't read it unless you're prepared to
be grossed out, deeply offended, or both. You have been warned.) 

Given the of punishing terrorists, these unconventional
approaches present a moral dilemma. Could torture -- or -- ever
be an appropriate punishment for convicted would-be suicide
terrorists? 

This is a separate question from whether torture is as a method
of from people who have not been convicted of any crime. It's a
and deterrence. Could humiliation and suffering be a deterrent
in a way the death penalty could not? Or would the cruelty just
incite more hatred, spawning still more terrorists? 
Looking Ahead -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 03:11 PM ET,
04/14/2006 
Endangering Americans From Inside a Jail Cell?
 

Over at USA Today's On Deadline blog, a raises the possibility
that if Zacharias Moussaoui were sentenced to life in prison,
Islamic extremists might one day try to use hostages as leverage
to win his freedom. Earlier this week, suggested such a scenario
would indeed be likely if Moussaoui weren't put to death. 

This idea of Moussaoui being the target of a is a fairly common
argument from those who favor executing the 9/11 conspirator.
Let's take a closer look. 

If Moussaoui is dead, is it any less likely that terrorists will
take Americans prisoner? The , for one, doesn't think the lack
of a prisoner to bargain over is too much of an obstacle for
hostage takers. 

Even if Moussaoui is alive and ripe for a convict-for-hostage
deal, do the followers of fanatical Islam really care about him
all that much? Would they go out of their way to rescue him?
Given that 9/11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has described
Moussaoui as a , it doesn't seem terribly likely. (That's in
spite of Moussaoui's stubborn insistence that President Bush
before leaving office.) 

observes, Moussaoui "sounds like that co-worker everyone has
that you're happy to share credit with ... just so long as you
don't actually have to work with him." If any forced exchanges
were to be attempted, it's much more likely they'd be aimed at a
top-ranking al Qaeda leader, like Mohammed, rather than a foot
soldier. 

But would a life sentence for Moussaoui set a precedent for
future sentencing of convicted terrorists -- ones who might be
of more value to organizations like al Qaeda? Ones who might
inspire the kind of prisoner swapping so feared? Bottom line: If
Moussaoui gets life without parole, should we be worried? 

Misc. -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 03:57 PM ET,
04/13/2006 
Enigma in an Orange Jumpsuit
 

Moussaoui today, denying claims -- including those by his own
lawyers -- that he's actively seeking martyrdom via execution. 

He lambasted defense attorneys for not requesting a . He accused
them of being more concerned with keeping the high-profile case
than with saving his life -- a feat he says would have been more
easily accomplished farther away from the Pentagon, in a state
that doles out the death penalty a . 

In light of these latest statements, could it be that Moussaoui
really would prefer life in prison over ""? Or has he been
baiting the court -- trying to into choosing capital punishment? 

If the latter, today's testimony could indicate that he realized
people were catching on, and he's now trying to that a death
sentence would devastate him. Then again, maybe he really is
just . 

Any thoughts on which possibility is most likely? 
Misc. -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 05:06 AM ET,
04/12/2006 
Moussaoui to FBI: I Plead the Fifth
 

wonders how the government could have reasonably expected
Moussaoui to tell the FBI everything he knew about Al Qaeda's
plans. "Doesn't the Fifth Amendment right against
self-incrimination apply in this case and, if not, why not?" 

An intriguing question. 

The defense has , arguing that Moussaoui was under no legal
obligation to confess anything. 

. He can't see how increasing "Moussaoui’s legal liability
because he refused to confess his crimes and fully cooperate
with the FBI" would not be a violation of the Fifth Amendment. (
that the government attorney caught improperly coaching
witnesses in the Moussaoui case has invoked her constitutional
right not to incriminate herself.) 

The relevant clause of the reads: "no person ... shall be
compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against
himself...." Of course, Moussaoui wasn't a witness until about a
week ago (at which point, granted, he did not seem particularly
concerned with avoiding self-incrimination) and he was not
indicted until . Was it a criminal case when he was interrogated
months prior? Given these circumstances, did the Fifth Amendment
even apply? 

Peter G, , says the amendment -- specifically, the right to
remain silent that is derived from it -- doesn't apply because
Moussaoui did not remain silent; he lied to the FBI. Defense
attorneys contend the FBI failed to use the information , which
they say was significantly more than their client knew. So how,
they ask, can Moussaoui be put to death for those investigative
lapses? 

I appeal to those Debaters with expertise in the legal field to
shed more light on this role of the Fifth Amendment in this
case. 
Your Take -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 05:15 AM ET,
04/11/2006 
Moussaoui: Dead or Alive?
 

I admit I was surprised when , "what is the controversy?" when
it comes to punishing terrorists. responded to in no uncertain
terms: There's nothing murky about it, he said -- terrorists
should definitely be punished. 

Thanks for clearing that up, D. 

Okay, obviously we're not debating whether terrorists should be
punished or simply given a lollypop and sent on their way. The
question this week is how they should be punished and under what
judicial framework should they be tried. 

Will, for his part, answered his own question by opining that
Zacharias Moussaoui should be put in prison for life. 

That is indeed the controversy. Unlike Will, many Americans
believe Moussaoui should pay the ultimate price for his
involvement in the 9/11 plot -- and for withholding potentially
life-saving information from the FBI. As of this writing, a and
a both show a clear majority in favor of execution. In the ,
less than one quarter of respondents think Moussaoui should be
kept alive. came up with roughly the same results. Then there's
, which has entirely opposite results, with 70 percent of
respondents favoring life in prison. 

On the side advocating life in prison, we have , the , the
(which is against the death penalty, period), the ... let's just
say there's no shortage of editorials and op-eds arguing against
the death penalty for Moussaoui, many based on the idea that he
should not be granted his wish of martyrdom. 

Daniel Freedman, blogging for the , refutes this familiar
argument. He points to , the accused terrorist leader who is so
popular that he once decided to run for the Palestinian
presidency from inside his Israeli prison cell. He says
terrorists who get executed are considered embarrassments and
are quickly forgotten. The members agree that capital punishment
is the right answer here, but for them, it's more a matter of
justice. Moussaoui killed -- if indirectly -- so he deserves to
be killed. 

Debaters -- if you were on the jury in the Moussaoui case,
deciding whether to sentence him to death or to life in prison
without parole, which way would you go? What factors would
influence your decision? 
National Politics -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 07:37 PM
ET, 04/10/2006 
The Facts: Punishing Terrorists
 

It's not terribly easy to find straight facts on the punishment
of terrorists -- most essays on the subject have distinct points
of view. Here's a bit of background material to provide context
for the debate: 

Start with this quick Q from the Council on Foreign Relations on
in post-9/11 America. Next, skim this pre-9/11 overview of and
the legislative responses to it. details U.S. law relating to
the death penalty, with specific references to how terrorism is
treated as a capital offense. 

Also influencing our laws on dealing with terrorists are the and
the . In the case , the Supreme Court found that a detainee who
is a U.S. citizen held on U.S. soil as an enemy combatant
"should have a meaningful opportunity to offer evidence that he
is not an enemy combatant." 

Frequently confused with Hamdi is -- the big case on military
tribunals. For some background on the case, . The found for the
government, with now Chief Justice Roberts on the majority of
that decision. (Note: Because he decided the case in the circuit
court, he has recused himself in the Supreme Court, which heard
at the end of March.) 

Here's prescribing military tribunals to try terrorists. The
Council on Foreign Relations offers -- it's two years old, but
still useful -- and for a good look at both sides of the
tribunal question, see of the case for and the case against. 
Facts -->By Emily Messner | * | Posted at 09:46 AM ET,
04/10/2006 
This Week's Debate: Punishing Terrorists
 

What is the ? Should he be put to death for his involvement in
the 9/11 plot? Or would it be a more severe punishment to put
him in prison for the rest of his life, denying him the
martyrdom he so desires? 

We'll debate the Moussaoui case and related issues this week as
we examine the complexities of punishing terrorists. 

How should suspected terrorists be tried? By military tribunals?
In the U.S. justice system? By an international court designed
specifically for this purpose? 

What sort of punishment would serve as an effective deterrent
against terrorism? (Can any punishment deter terrorists?) 

I will be relying heavily on your discussion as we try to
navigate these murky waters. Any other big questions we should
debate while we're on this subject? 
This Week's Issue -->By Emily Messner | * | 	 	 � 

� 2005 The Washington Post Company                                                                                                              
*****************************************************************
 91 PRN: Most Contaminated Counties in California Shown to be the Most
Populated: New Study From Environmental Data Resources 

PR Newswire 

Levels of Environmental Risk with Los Angeles, Alameda and San 
Diego Topping the List 

MILFORD, Conn., April 18 /PRNewswire/ -- A new study reveals that 
the counties with the greatest number of residential inhabitants 
also have the most widespread problems with contamination. The 
finding is derived from a study conducted by Environmental Data 
Resources (EDR), a leading national provider of environmental 
information, which provides a county-by-county examination of 
environmental hazards that could have a negative impact on 
everything from personal health to property values for residents 
located in proximity to the toxic sites. 

Of the ten most populated counties in California, Contra Costa 
County ranked lowest in incidents of contamination. The least 
contaminated county in California is Modoc, a rural county in the 
extreme northeast corner of the state. 

"It's important that people understand that they may be living 
near significant environmental hazards," said Rob Barber, CEO of 
Environmental Data Resources. "Today, it is a common practice 
when buying a home to look for hazards like asbestos and radon, 
but other environmental threats could exist as well, such as 
leaking underground storage tanks or contaminates effecting soil 
and groundwater such as perchlorate. This study suggests that 
environmental hazards are widespread in the most populated parts 
of the state, which is why we're working with California real 
estate agents to arm home buyers with as much pre-purchase 
information as possible." 

The study aggregates environmental data from federal, state and 
local government sources as well as tribal information to rank 
the counties in the state that have the highest and lowest risk 
of contamination. The counties in California that pose the lowest 
environmental risk are Modoc, Sierra, Mariposa, Inyo, Tehama, 
Calaveras, Mono, Trinity, Tuolumne and Colusa. The highest risk 
counties are Los Angeles, Alameda, San Diego, Santa Clara, 
Orange, Kern, Riverside, San Bernardino, Fresno and Sacramento. 

While the study includes nine different types of environmental 
hazards that exist in California and almost 36,000 contaminated 
sites in total, three categories of hazards that are critical to 
the rankings include: 

* Leaking Underground Storage Tanks: Leaking underground storage 
tanks are 

a significant source of contamination and may pose the following 

potential threats to health and safety: exposure from impacts to 
soil 

and/or groundwater; contamination of drinking water aquifers; 

contamination of public or private drinking water wells; 
inhalation of 

vapors. There are currently over 20,665 known leaking underground 
tanks 

in California that are awaiting remediation. 

* Perchlorate Count in Drinking Wells: Perchlorate contamination 
is 

derived from the California Drinking Water Quality Database and 

indicates if the chemical has been found in concentration levels 
above 

the allowed amount in groundwater. Perchlorate can interfere with 
iodide 

uptake by the thyroid gland and can lead to a host of development 
and 

growth problems. There are 2,212 sites of perchlorate water

contamination in California. 

* State and Federal Superfund Sites: Superfund sites are the 
Federal and 

state governments' programs to clean up uncontrolled hazardous 
waste 

sites. Under the Superfund program, abandoned, accidentally 
spilled, or 

illegally dumped hazardous waste that pose a current or future 
threat to 

human health or the environment are cleaned up. The sites noted 
in the 

report are those that are still in the process of remediation. 
There 

are currently 428 sites classified in state and federal databases 
as 

superfund sites in California. 

The county rankings in the study are based on the quantity of 
identified hazards in each county, which is then weighted by the 
remediation costs for each type of hazardous site found. These 
clean up costs are based on estimates and averages from the 
Federal Environmental Protection Agency and are an important 
factor to consider, as the more expensive the cleanup, the more 
severe the environmental hazard. 

Disclosure of these types of environmental hazards has been 
identified as an important issue by the California State 
Legislature as it garners more attention from local communities 
across the state. Environmental Data Resources is supporting a 
bill, AB 2228, which has been introduced in the State Assembly by 
Assemblywoman Noreen Evans that would make all home buyers aware 
of the option to buy an environmental report that discloses if a 
property is in proximity to various types of environmental 
hazards. 

"Environmental disclosure reports are quickly becoming a standard 
practice for home buyers and sellers in parts of California," 
Barber continued. "We support this bill because it will increase 
awareness of the importance of environmental disclosure to all 
residents in California and ensure everyone has the ability to 
access a standardized, professional report should they so 
choose." 

About EDR 

Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) is the nation's premier 
provider of environmental risk information services and reports. 
The company offers current, prior use and regulatory compliance 
information services tailored to either a specific property 
address or company name. EDR offers these services to all 
participants in a real estate transaction, including the lender, 
environmental engineer, buyer, seller, attorney and insurer. The 
company's Market Research Group provides strategic data and 
analysis on environmental due diligence trends, including market 
surveys, newsletters, and workshops. Established in 1991, EDR's 
headquarters are in Milford, Connecticut; regional offices are 
located throughout the United States. EDR is wholly owned by DMG 
Information Inc., the business information division of Daily Mail 
and General Trust, plc (DMGT). 

For more information, visit . MEDIA CONTACT: On Behalf of EDR 
Jesse Danzig 212-279-3115 x213 

	 SOURCE Environmental Data Resources Inc. 

Copyright � 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 92 NRC: RIN 3150-AH86 List of Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks: 
 
                         FR Doc 06-3651 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] [Rules 
and Regulations] [Page 19806-19810] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-3]                         
 
FuelSolutionsTM Cask System Revision 4 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.
 
ACTION: Direct final rule.
 
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations revising the BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation 
(FuelSolutionsTM) cask system listing within the ``List of 
approved spent fuel storage casks'' to include Amendment No. 4 to 
Certificate of Compliance Number 1026. Amendment No. 4 will 
change Technical Specification (TS) requirements related to 
periodic monitoring during storage operations. Specifically, the 
amendment will revise the TS to permit longer surveillance 
intervals for casks with heat loads lower than the design basis 
heat load and permit visual inspection of the cask vent screens 
or measurement of the cask liner temperature to satisfy the 
periodic
 
[[Page 19807]] monitoring requirements that govern general design 
criteria for spent fuel storage casks. TS 3.3.1 will be deleted 
to remove daily monitoring requirements. TS 3.3.2 will be revised 
for the W21 and W74 canisters to permit either visual inspection 
of vent screens or liner thermocouple temperature monitoring. 
Also, TS 5.3.8 will add a section to the Periodic Monitoring 
Program which establishes intervals for periodic monitoring that 
are less than the time required to reach the limiting short-term 
temperature limit. This program will establish administrative 
controls and procedures to assure that the licensee will be able 
to determine when corrective action is required. In addition, the 
amendment will update editorial changes associated with the 
company name change from BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation to BNG 
Fuel Solutions Corporation and make other administrative changes.
 
 
DATES: The final rule is effective July 3, 2006, unless 
significant adverse comments are received by May 18, 2006. A 
significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter 
explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including 
challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would 
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. If the rule is 
withdrawn, timely notice will be published in the Federal 
Register.
 
 
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following 
methods. Please include the following number (RIN 3150-AH86) in 
the subject line of your comments. Comments on rulemakings 
submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available 
for public inspection.
 
Because your comments will not be edited to remove any 
identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against 
including personal information such as social security numbers 
and birth dates in your submission.
 
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff.
 
E-mail comments to: . If you do not receive a reply e- mail 
confirming that we have received your comments, contact us 
directly at (301) 415-1966. You may also submit comments via the 
NRC's rulemaking Web site at . Address questions about our 
rulemaking Web site to Carol Gallagher (301) 415-5905; e-mail . 
Comments can also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal 
.
 
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm Federal workdays 
[telephone (301) 415-1966].
 
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 
(301) 415-1101.
 
Publicly available documents related to this rulemaking may be 
viewed electronically on the public computers located at the 
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O-1F21, One White Flint North, 
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Selected documents, 
including comments, can be viewed and downloaded electronically 
via the NRC rulemaking Web site at .
 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after 
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at . From this site, the public can gain 
entry into the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management 
System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's 
public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there 
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact 
the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by e-mail to . An electronic copy of the proposed Certificate of 
Compliance (CoC), TS, and preliminary safety evaluation report 
(SER) can be found under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML053420606 (CoC), 
ML053420632 (TS-W100/W150), ML053420626 (TS-W21), ML053420617 
(TS-W74), and ML053420638 (SER).
 
CoC No. 1026, the revised TS, the underlying SER for Amendment 
No. 4, and the Environmental Assessment (EA), are available for 
inspection at the NRC PDR, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. 
Single copies of these documents may be obtained from Jayne M. 
McCausland, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, 
telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail .
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of 
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6219, 
e-mail .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 218(a) of the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA), requires 
that ``[t]he Secretary [of the Department of Energy (DOE)] shall 
establish a demonstration program, in cooperation with the 
private sector, for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at 
civilian nuclear power reactor sites, with the objective of 
establishing one or more technologies that the [Nuclear 
Regulatory] Commission may, by rule, approve for use at the sites 
of civilian nuclear power reactors without, to the maximum extent 
practicable, the need for additional site-specific approvals by 
the Commission.'' Section 133 of the NWPA states, in part, that 
``[t]he Commission shall, by rule, establish procedures for the 
licensing of any technology approved by the Commission under 
Section 218(a) for use at the site of any civilian nuclear power 
reactor.'' To implement this mandate, the NRC approved dry 
storage of spent nuclear fuel in NRC-approved casks under a 
general license by publishing a final rule in 10 CFR Part 72 
entitled ``General License for Storage of Spent Fuel at Power 
Reactor Sites'' (55 FR 29181; July 18, 1990). This rule also 
established a new Subpart L within 10 CFR Part 72, entitled 
``Approval of Spent Fuel Storage Casks,'' containing procedures 
and criteria for obtaining NRC approval of spent fuel storage 
cask designs. The NRC subsequently issued a final rule on January 
16, 2001 (66 FR 3444) that approved the FuelSolutionsTM cask 
system design and added it to the list of NRC-approved cask 
designs in 10 CFR 72.214 as CoC No. 1026. Discussion On June 30, 
2005, the certificate holder, BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation, 
submitted an application to the NRC to amend CoC No. 1026 to 
modify the TS requirements related to periodic monitoring during 
storage operations. Specifically, the application requested TS 
changes to permit longer surveillance intervals for casks with 
heat loads lower than the design basis heat load and permit 
visual inspection of the cask vent screens or measurement of the 
cask liner temperature to satisfy the periodic monitoring 
requirements of 10 CFR 72.122(h)(4). TS 3.3.1 will be deleted to 
remove daily monitoring requirements. TS 3.3.2 will be revised 
for the W21 and W74 canisters to permit either visual inspection 
of vent screens or liner thermocouple temperature monitoring. 
Also, TS 5.3.8 will add a section to the Periodic Monitoring 
Program which establishes intervals for periodic monitoring that 
are less than the time required to reach the limiting short-term 
temperature limit. This program will establish administrative 
controls and procedures to assure that
 
[[Page 19808]] the licensee will be able to determine when 
corrective action is required. In addition, the amendment will 
update editorial changes associated with the company name change 
from BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation to BNG Fuel Solutions 
Corporation and make other administrative changes. No other 
changes to the FuelSolutionsTM cask system were requested in this 
application. The NRC staff performed a detailed safety evaluation 
of the proposed CoC amendment request and found that an 
acceptable safety margin is maintained. The NRC staff also has 
determined that there continues to be reasonable assurance that 
public health and safety and the environment will be adequately 
protected.
 
This direct final rule revises the FuelSolutionsTM cask system 
listing in 10 CFR 72.214 by adding Amendment No. 4 to CoC No. 
1026. The amendment consists of changes to the requirements to 
permit longer surveillance intervals for casks with heat loads 
lower than the design basis heat load and permit visual 
inspection of the cask vent screens or measurement of the cask 
liner temperature to satisfy the periodic monitoring requirements 
of 10 CFR 72.122(h)(4). The particular TS which are changed are 
identified in the NRC staff's SER for Amendment No. 4. The 
amended FuelSolutionsTM cask system, when used under the 
conditions specified in the CoC, the TS, and NRC regulations, 
will meet the requirements of Part 72; thus, adequate protection 
of public health and safety will continue to be ensured.
 
Discussion of Amendments by Section Section 72.214 List of 
Approved Spent Fuel Storage Casks Certificate No. 1026 is revised 
by adding the effective date of Amendment Number 4.
 
Procedural Background This rule is limited to the changes 
contained in Amendment No. 4 to CoC No. 1026 and does not include 
other aspects of the FuelSolutionsTM cask system. The NRC is 
using the ``direct final rule procedure'' to issue this amendment 
because it represents a limited and routine change to an existing 
CoC that is expected to be noncontroversial. Adequate protection 
of public health and safety continues to be ensured. The 
amendment to the rule will become effective on July 3, 2006. 
However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by May 
18, 2006, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws 
this action and will address the comments received in response to 
the proposed amendments, published elsewhere in this issue of the 
Federal Register, in a subsequent final rule. The NRC will not 
initiate a second comment period on this action.
 
A significant adverse comment is a comment where the commenter 
explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including 
challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would 
be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. A comment is 
adverse and significant if: (1) The comment opposes the rule and 
provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in 
a notice-and-comment process. For example, in a substantive 
response: (a) The comment causes the NRC staff to reevaluate (or 
reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis; (b) The 
comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive 
response to clarify or complete the record; or (c) The comment 
raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or 
considered by the NRC staff.
 
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and 
it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable 
without incorporation of the change or addition.
 
(3) The comment causes the NRC staff to make a change (other than 
editorial) to the CoC or TS.
 
Voluntary Consensus Standards The National Technology Transfer 
and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113) requires that 
Federal agencies use technical standards that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless the use of 
such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. In this direct final rule, the NRC will revise the 
FuelSolutionsTM cask system design listed in Sec. 72.214 (List of 
NRC-approved spent fuel storage cask designs). This action does 
not constitute the establishment of a standard that establishes 
generally applicable requirements.
 
Agreement State Compatibility Under the ``Policy Statement on 
Adequacy and Compatibility of Agreement State Programs'' approved 
by the Commission on June 30, 1997, and published in the Federal 
Register on September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46517), this rule is 
classified as Compatibility Category ``NRC.'' Compatibility is 
not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations.
 
The NRC program elements in this category are those that relate 
directly to areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), or the provisions of Title 
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Although an Agreement 
State may not adopt program elements reserved to NRC, it may wish 
to inform its licensees of certain requirements via a mechanism 
that is consistent with the particular State's administrative 
procedure laws but does not confer regulatory authority on the 
State.
 
Plain Language The Presidential Memorandum dated June 1, 1998, 
entitled ``Plain Language in Government Writing,'' directed that 
the Government's writing be in plain language. The NRC requests 
comments on this direct final rule specifically with respect to 
the clarity and effectiveness of the language used. Comments 
should be sent to the address listed under the heading ADDRESSES 
above.
 
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability 
Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, 
and the NRC regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC 
has determined that this rule, if adopted, will not be a major 
Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is 
not required. The rule will amend the CoC for the FuelSolutionsTM 
cask system within the list of approved spent fuel storage casks 
that power-reactor licensees can use to store spent fuel at 
reactor sites under a general license. Amendment No. 4 will 
modify the present cask system design to revise the TS 
requirements related to periodic monitoring during storage 
operations. Specifically, the amendment will revise TS to permit 
longer surveillance intervals for casks with heat loads lower 
than the design basis heat load and permit visual inspection of 
the cask vent screens or measurement of the cask liner 
temperature to satisfy the periodic monitoring requirements of 10 
CFR 72.122(h)(4). TS 3.3.1 will be deleted to remove daily 
monitoring requirements. TS 3.3.2 will be revised for the W21 and 
W74 canisters to permit either visual inspection of vent screens 
or liner thermocouple temperature monitoring. Also, TS 5.3.8 will 
add a section to the Periodic Monitoring Program which 
establishes intervals for periodic monitoring that are less than 
the time required to reach the limiting short-term temperature 
limit. This program will establish administrative controls and 
procedures to assure that the licensee will be able to determine 
when corrective action is required. In addition, the amendment 
will update
 
[[Page 19809]] editorial changes associated with the company name 
change from BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation to BNG Fuel Solutions 
Corporation and make other administrative changes.
 
The EA and finding of no significant impact on which this 
determination is based are available for inspection at the NRC 
Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. Single 
copies of the EA and finding of no significant impact are 
available from Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail .
 
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This direct final rule does not 
contain a new or amended information collection requirement 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget, Approval Number 3150- 0132.
 
Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or 
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request 
for information or an information collection requirement unless 
the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control 
number.
 
Regulatory Analysis On July 18, 1990 (55 FR 29181), the NRC 
issued an amendment to 10 CFR Part 72 to provide for the storage 
of spent nuclear fuel under a general license in cask designs 
approved by the NRC. Any nuclear power- reactor licensee can use 
NRC-approved cask designs to store spent nuclear fuel if it 
notifies the NRC in advance, spent fuel is stored under the 
conditions specified in the cask's CoC, and the conditions of the 
general license are met. A list of NRC-approved cask designs is 
contained in 10 CFR 72.214. On January 16, 2001 (66 FR 3444), the 
NRC issued an amendment to Part 72 that approved the 
FuelSolutionsTM cask design by adding it to the list of NRC- 
approved cask designs in 10 CFR 72.214. On June 30, 2005, the 
certificate holder, BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation, submitted an 
application to the NRC to amend CoC No. 1026 to modify the TS 
requirements related to periodic monitoring during storage 
operations. Specifically, the amendment will revise the TS to 
permit longer surveillance intervals for casks with heat loads 
lower than the design basis heat load and permit visual 
inspection of the cask vent screens or measurement of the cask 
liner temperature to satisfy the periodic monitoring requirements 
of 10 CFR 72.122(h)(4). TS 3.3.1 will be deleted to remove daily 
monitoring requirements. TS 3.3.2 will be revised for the W21 and 
W74 canisters to permit either visual inspection of vent screens 
or liner thermocouple temperature monitoring. Also, TS 5.3.8 will 
add a section to the Periodic Monitoring Program which 
establishes intervals for periodic monitoring that are less than 
the time required to reach the limiting short-term temperature 
limit. This program will establish administrative controls and 
procedures to assure that the licensee will be able to determine 
when corrective action is required. In addition, the amendment 
will update editorial changes associated with the company name 
change from BNFL Fuel Solutions Corporation to BNG Fuel Solutions 
Corporation and make other administrative changes. The 
alternative to this action is to withhold approval of this 
amended cask system design and issue an exemption to each general 
license. This alternative would cost both the NRC and the 
utilities more time and money because each utility would have to 
pursue an exemption.
 
Approval of the direct final rule will eliminate this problem and 
is consistent with previous NRC actions. Further, the direct 
final rule will have no adverse effect on public health and 
safety. This direct final rule has no significant identifiable 
impact or benefit on other Government agencies. Based on this 
discussion of the benefits and impacts of the alternatives, the 
NRC concludes that the requirements of the direct final rule are 
commensurate with the NRC's responsibilities for public health 
and safety and the common defense and security. No other 
available alternative is believed to be as satisfactory, and 
thus, this action is recommended.
 
Regulatory Flexibility Certification Under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC certifies that 
this rule will not, if issued, have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. This direct final rule 
affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power plants, 
independent spent fuel storage facilities, and BNG Fuel Solutions 
Corporation. The companies that own these plants do not fall 
within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set 
forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business 
Size Standards set out in regulations issued by the Small 
Business Administration at 13 CFR Part 121.
 
Backfit Analysis The NRC has determined that the backfit rule (10 
CFR 50.109 or 10 CFR 72.62) does not apply to this direct final 
rule because this amendment does not involve any provisions that 
would impose backfits as defined. Therefore, a backfit analysis 
is not required. Congressional Review Act Under the Congressional 
Review Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is 
not a major rule and has verified this determination with the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 
Management and Budget.
 
List of Subjects In 10 CFR Part 72 Administrative practice and 
procedure, Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, 
Nuclear materials, Occupational safety and health, Penalties, 
Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Security measures, Spent fuel, Whistleblowing.
 
0 For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority 
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy 
Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553; 
the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR part 72.
 
PART 72--LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INDEPENDENT STORAGE OF 
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL, HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND REACTOR- 
RELATED GREATER THAN CLASS C WASTE 0 1. The authority citation 
for part 72 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 51, 
53, 57, 62, 63, 65, 69, 81, 161, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 68 
Stat. 929, 930, 932, 933, 934, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as 
amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2071, 
2073, 2077, 2092, 2093, 2095, 2099, 2111, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2234, 
2236, 2237, 2238, 2282); sec. 274, Pub. L. 86-373, 73 Stat. 688, 
as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021); sec. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88 
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); 
Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102- 
486, sec. 7902, 106 Stat. 3123 (42 U.S.C. 5851); sec. 102, Pub. 
L. 91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332); secs. 131, 132, 133, 
135, 137, 141, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2229, 2230, 2232, 2241, 
sec. 148, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10151, 
10152, 10153, 10155, 10157, 10161, 10168); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 
2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); sec. 651(e), Pub. L. 109-58, 119 
Stat. 806-810 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2021, 2021b, 2111). Section 
72.44(g) also issued under secs. 142(b) and 148(c), (d), Pub. L. 
100-203, 101 Stat. 1330-232, 1330-236 (42 U.S.C. 10162(b), 
10168(c), (d)). Section 72.46 also
 
[[Page 19810]] issued under sec. 189, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 
2239); sec. 134, Pub. L. 97-425, 96 Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10154). 
Section 72.96(d) also issued under sec. 145(g), Pub. L. 100-203, 
101 Stat. 1330-235 (42 U.S.C. 10165(g)). Subpart J also issued 
under secs. 2(2), 2(15), 2(19), 117(a), 141(h), Pub. L. 97-425, 
96 Stat. 2202, 2203, 2204, 2222, 2224 (42 U.S.C. 10101, 10137(a), 
10161(h)). Subparts K and L are also issued under sec. 133, 98 
Stat. 2230 (42 U.S.C. 10153) and sec. 218(a), 96 Stat. 2252 (42 
U.S.C. 10198). 0 2. In Sec.  72.214, Certificate of Compliance 
1026 is revised to read as follows: Sec.  72.214  List of 
approved spent fuel storage casks. * * * * * Certificate Number: 
1026.
 
Initial Certificate Effective Date: February 15, 2001.
 
Amendment Number 1 Effective Date: May 14, 2001.
 
Amendment Number 2 Effective Date: January 28, 2002.
 
Amendment Number 3 Effective Date: May 7, 2003.
 
Amendment Number 4 Effective Date: July 3, 2006.
 
SAR Submitted by: BNG Fuel Solutions Corporation.
 
SAR Title: Final Safety Analysis Report for the FuelSolutionsTM 
Spent Fuel Management System.
 
Docket Number: 72-1026.
 
Certificate Expiration Date: February 15, 2021.
 
Model Number: WSNF-220, WSNF-221, and WSNF-223 systems; W-150 
storage cask; W-100 transfer cask; and the W-21 and W-74 
canisters.
 
* * * * * Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of April, 
2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations.
 
[FR Doc. 06-3651 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 93 BBC: ON THIS DAY | 18 | 1960: Thousands protest against H-bomb
     
1960: Thousands protest against H-bomb  Tens of thousands of 
people marked the end of the Aldermaston "ban the bomb" march 
this afternoon with a rally that built up to a tremendous climax 
this Easter weekend in London. 

At least 60,000 protesters gathered at Trafalgar Square. 
Organisers said the crowds numbered at least 100,000. 

But there was no doubt this was the largest demonstration London 
has seen this century. 

It is the third annual Easter march from the Atomic Weapons 
Research Establishment at Aldermaston, Berkshire, to the capital 
organised by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)> 

Canon John Collins, who founded in 1958 with Bertrand Russell, 
introduced various speakers. 

They included the Bishop of Southark, Dr Mervyn Stockwood who 
praised Prime Minister Harold Macmillan for his efforts to bring 
about world peace. 

He added: "I hope that just as he has spoken for all that is best 
in Britain by condemning apartheid in South Africa, so he will 
set an example to the world by renouncing the hydrogen bomb." 

'Military dictatorship' 

Prominent Labour MP Michael Foot also spoke out against the
bomb. He said nuclear weapons threatened the very existence of
democracies around the globe because decisions were gradually
being removed from elected bodies to military advisers. 

He said the Aldermaston march was a democtratic protest against
"military dictatorship". 

In spite of the huge crowds, there were few disturbances. Police
divided the marchers into sections when they arrived at the end
of Whitehall and moved them into areas around the main crowd
already in the square. 

At the head of the march, protesters carried a banner that read
"Aldermaston to London". The slogans on the banners showed the
marchers came from towns around the country and from all
backgrounds, representing trade unions, local government and
students. 

Demonstrators came from all over the world - Pakistan, Sweden,
India, Cyprus , Iraq, Malta, South Africa, France, Ghana and
Nigeria. Among the religious groups represented were Quakers,
Unitarians, Methodists and Roman Catholics. 	 	

Watch/Listen                   
[CND campaigners gather outside Atomic Weapons Research 
Establishment at Aldermaston]                                   
Hundreds of CND campaigners began their march three days ago
 		 	 	   
  In Context   		 		 		 			
                                                                                                 

The last Aldermaston march took place in 1963, the same year the 
international test ban treaty was signed, which partially banned 
nuclear tests. 

From then on, CND fell out of favour but re-emerged under the
chairmanship of Bruce Kent in the 1980s when Prime Minister
Margaret Thatcher allowed new nuclear weapons to be deployed in
Britain by the US. 

Throughout the 1980s there was a continuous peace demonstration
outside the US airbase at Greenham Common in Berkshire. 

When the Cold War ended in 1990, CND went into decline once
more. 

Stories From 18 Apr              
                1956: Macmillan unveils premium bond scheme
 	 	1955: Albert Einstein dies
 	 	1988: 'Ivan the Terrible' guilty of war crimes
 	 	1994: Killing spreads in Rwanda
 	 	1996: Greek tourists killed by Egyptian gunmen
 	 	1978: Carter wins Panama Canal battle
 	 	1960: Thousands protest against H-bomb
 	 
*****************************************************************
 94 DOE: Extraordinary Contractual Actions
 
                        FR Doc 06-55515 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] [Rules 
and Regulations] [Page 19829] From the Federal Register Online 
via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-12]                         
 
CFR Correction In Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 
Chapters 7 to 14, revised as of Oct. 1, 2005, on page 368, part 
950 is corrected by removing sections 950.7000 and 951.7001, and 
reinstating sections 950.7000 and 950.7001 in their place to read 
as follows: Sec.  950.7000  Scope of subpart. This subpart 
describes the established policies concerning indemnification of 
DOE contractors against public liability for a nuclear incident 
arising out of or in connection with the contract activity.
 
[49 FR 12039, Mar. 28, 1984, as amended at 56 FR 57827, Nov. 14, 
1991] Sec.  950.7001  Applicability The policies and procedures 
of this subpart shall govern DOE's entering into agreements of 
indemnification with recipients of a contract whose work under 
the contract involves the risk of public liability for a nuclear 
incident or precautionary evacuation.
 
[49 FR 12039, Mar. 28, 1984, as amended at 56 FR 57827, Nov. 14, 
1991] [FR Doc. 06-55515 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 
1505-01-D

 
*****************************************************************
 95 Knox News: Happy neutron dance

$1.4 billion OR science project nears completion after 7 years

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 
                                
April 17, 2006                                                          

OAK RIDGE - It's almost show time at the Spallation Neutron 
Source. 

The big science project is zooming toward completion, and the 
first neutrons likely will be produced during a series of tests 
next month. 

The end of seven years of construction is a prelude to research 
experiments that should advance the knowledge of materials, lead 
to life-bettering products or maybe someday win a Nobel Prize. 

Ninety-eight percent of the project's $1.4 billion budget has 
been spent, but there's enough money left to finish the job - 
even with $400,000 taken from this year's construction fund to 
help pay for the damages caused by Hurricane Katrina. 

"Fortunately, we were able to absorb it without doing anything 
crazy to the scope of the project," SNS chief Thom Mason said of 
the across-the-board budget rescission that affected government 
spending in all areas. 

To many observers, it appears the Spallation Neutron Source has 
sailed along without a hitch in recent years. 

That's not really the case, according to Mason. There have been 
leaks in vacuum systems, poor-fitting equipment, dents and dings, 
and a string of things that just didn't work right - at least not 
when first installed. 

As the foundations for newly constructed facilities began to 
settle on Chestnut Ridge, workers had to adjust the equipment - 
actually jacking up beam lines in some locations with soil 
subsidence - to make sure things work as planned. More 
adjustments may be needed in the future. 

"We've had problems continuously. It's inevitable," Mason said. 
"The measure of success is not the absence of problems. The 
measure of success is whether or not you fix the problems." 

Contingency planning is a big deal on big projects, whether it's 
anticipating surprises, setting aside money to pay for cost 
overruns, or having the know-how to solve technical problems on 
the fly. 

Mason doesn't want to declare success prematurely or jinx the 
project's startup, but at this point he doesn't have any doubts 
that the SNS will work. Most of the major components already have 
been commissioned and thoroughly tested. The challenges ahead 
will be to fine-tune systems for maximum efficiency and good 
research results. 

The Spallation Neutron Source is an extraordinary complex of 
scientific equipment spread across 90 acres, with enough power 
and electronics to run a little city. It seems almost 
unimaginable that so many different systems can work in a precise 
way needed to produce unprecedented pulses of neutrons for 
experiments. 

At the Front End, negatively charged hydrogen ions are formed 
into a beam and accelerated through the linear accelerator, the 
Linac. The beam reaches a sustained peak of 1 billion electron 
volts, almost 90 percent of the speed of light. Upon exiting the 
Linac, the ion beam is stripped of its neutrons, and the 
remaining protons are loaded into a circular track called the 
Storage Ring, where protons are wrapped in an arrangement that 
looks like a twisted rope. 

Once fully loaded, the ring's timing mechanism releases the 
protons down a track toward a mercury target. This action is 
repeated over and over again - 60 times a second. 

The Storage Ring was commissioned earlier this year. That was a 
major milestone, a test of capabilities, and it went stunningly 
well. 

"There were skeptics who said the ring would never work, and 
there were optimists who said we'll get it to work, but I don't 
think anybody would have predicted that within a couple of days 
we'd have beam circulating around the ring," Mason said. "It 
really went very, very well." 

The final commissioning step is to put the proton beam on the 
mercury target, and that's coming up soon. 

In the initial stages of the SNS operation, the particle beam is 
about the circumference of a finger. By the time pulses of 
protons are unleashed on the target, the beam has the girth of a 
watermelon. 

Upon impact, trillions of neutrons are released - or "spalled" - 
from the mercury. Those neutrons are diverted to beam tubes that 
carry them into the experimental chambers, where neutrons flood 
the premises and bombard research samples. Sensitive detectors 
monitor the energy and angle of the neutrons as they interact 
with materials, ultimately providing a unique picture of the 
atomic structure and details of the properties and behavior. 

A scientific review team will return to Oak Ridge to evaluate the 
target operations in the weeks ahead. The technical experts will 
determine if the SNS produces a sufficient number of neutrons and 
if it meets other requirements to certify that construction of 
the project is complete. 

Three of the instrumented beam lines - eventually there'll be 24 
experimental stations in the Target Building - will be online 
during the early testing. One of those will be maintained at high 
temperature and high pressure to study minerals under conditions 
that simulate those as you move toward the center of the Earth. 

During actual research operations, the beam lines and test 
chambers will be off-limits because of the radiation. But 
scientists will have sealed "cabins" where they can work during 
the experiments. 

Most of the SNS staff and visitors will be at the nearby research 
office buildings, which are several stories high and shaped like 
back-to-back bananas. 

The project's construction work force is winding down after 
several busy years, but the scientific and operations staff of 
the SNS continues to grow. It's at about 350, and Mason said 
hiring would continue at about 50 per year through 2008. 

Although neutron production will begin this summer, SNS officials 
emphasized that it'll be a couple of years before the place is 
ready for optimum research. Nonetheless, Mason was reluctant to 
call it a test period. 

"We'll be doing science. Even if we're running at 20 percent, 
we're still the most powerful source (of neutrons) in the world." 

Scientists from around the world are expected to visit the Oak 
Ridge facilities, but early research slots will be set aside for 
veteran scientists with experience in neutron experiments and 
those willing to put up with erratic beam schedules while systems 
are debugged. 

"We don't want people traveling long distances on nonrefundable 
airplane tickets when the facility might not run," Mason said. 

The first experiments will duplicate experiments that have been 
done before, measuring things that have previously been measured 
"to make sure you're not getting garbage," he said. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

Copyright Permissions] Copyright 2006, Knoxville News Sentinel 
*****************************************************************
 96 Knox News: First refurbishment of B-61 bomb components finished at Y-12 plant

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 
                                
April 18, 2006

OAK RIDGE - Workers at the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant have 
completed the first refurbishment of B-61 bomb components, 
setting the stage for a two-year production program that will 
extend the life of the strategic weapon system. 

Tom D'Agostino, a high-ranking official with the National Nuclear 
Security Administration, was in Oak Ridge on Monday for a 
ceremony honoring Y-12 employees for the "major milestone." 

According to information distributed to the news media, Y-12 
completed its work on the "first production unit" of the B-61 in 
late March. 

"Y-12's role involves the manufacture of the canned subassembly 
or secondary - the second stage of modern thermonuclear weapons," 
the plant said in a press release. "The canned subassembly is 
shipped from Y-12 to Pantex (near Amarillo, Texas) for final 
assembly." 

Pantex will complete its work and ship the unit for redeployment 
in June, a federal spokesman said. 

The refurbishment program of the B-61 is expected to make the 
nuclear bombs useful for another 20 years, officials said. 

Steven Wyatt, a Y-12 spokesman, said he could not discuss how 
many B-61 bombs will be refurbished, but the work is supposed to 
be completed by late 2008. 

In a prepared statement, D'Agostino said the production milestone 
at Y-12 "is the culmination of several years of cooperative 
planning, development, engineering and testing" by two national 
laboratories and four production plants. 

The B-61 program has come under criticism in recent years. The 
U.S. Department of Energy's Inspector General last year issued a 
report that said the production schedules were in jeopardy 
because of technical problems and project management issues at 
several sites - including Y-12. 

Dennis Ruddy, the former general manager in Oak Ridge, said one 
of the issues involved replacing a material that no longer could 
be used in the nuclear weapons. Other issues were raised by new 
computer analyses of aging materials and warhead parts, he said. 

He said he thought it was unfair to blame Y-12 for the problems. 

George Dials, the new general manager at the Oak Ridge warhead 
facility, said in a prepared statement that Y-12 is on schedule 
and "moving forward" with the B-61 life-extension program. 

"Y-12 is proud of this achievement, and we congratulate the 
employees who have worked hard to make this happen," Dials said. 

Full production of B-61 components will begin in fiscal year 
2007, a plant spokesman said. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

[Get Copyright Permissions] Copyright 2006, Knoxville News 
Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
 97 Knox News:Wamp says agency using Y-12 funds at other facilities

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 
                                
April 18, 2006                                                          

OAK RIDGE - The National Nuclear Security Administration is 
openly defying congressional authority by spending - or 
attempting to spend - tens of millions of dollars earmarked for 
Y-12 at other weapons facilities, U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., 
said Monday 

"It's a fight," Wamp said in a telephone interview. "It's a 
struggle like I haven't seen in my 10 years on the Appropriations 
Committee I've been a team player, but this is fisticuffs." 

According to Wamp, the dispute has been ongoing for a couple of 
months, but it came out publicly in a March 30 hearing of the 
energy and water subcommittee of the House Appropriations 
Committee. NNSA Administrator Linton Brooks appeared before the 
subcommittee, which is chaired by U.S. Rep. David Hobson, R-Ohio. 

Wamp said Hobson made a point of reading from articles of the 
Constitution that give Congress the role of funding the federal 
government and its operations. The point was to underscore 
concerns about the NNSA's spending habits. 

"It really flies in the face of the Constitution. It's not up to 
their discretion," Wamp said of the NNSA, a semi-independent unit 
of the U.S. Department of Energy that manages the nation's 
nuclear weapons research and production facilities - including 
Y-12 in Oak Ridge. 

Julianne Smith, a spokeswoman at NNSA headquarters in Washington, 
D.C., said in response to questions, "Zach Wamp is a great 
champion of the Y-12 National Security Complex, and we are 
grateful for his support. We follow the law and do our best to 
honor congressional intent. We are aware of Congressman Wamp's 
concerns." 

Wamp declined to discuss all details of the dispute, saying it's 
still being negotiated. But he said there are three spending 
accounts for operations and maintenance at Y-12 that are 
affected: safeguards and security; facilities and infrastructure; 
and readiness in technical base and facilities. 

The Tennessee Republican said the situation is complicated by the 
fact that Congress is trying to review 2007 funding requests at 
the same time trying to straighten out the spending of money 
appropriated for the current fiscal year. Y-12 is also trying to 
deal with funding uncertainties while carrying out its defense 
missions and several modernization projects, including 
construction of a new storage facility for bomb-grade uranium. 

"It's almost like Charles Dickens - it's the best of times and 
the worst of times all at the same time," Wamp said. "It's not 
just Oak Ridge, it's across the country." 

He said the NNSA is on the wrong side of this fight and will 
eventually lose, even if it successfully diverts money in the 
short term. The dispute also could have an impact on future 
activities and appropriations, he said. 

"Quite frankly, they are getting sideways with Congress on this," 
Wamp said. 

Wamp said he and others are working to recover some of the 
federal funds that were designated for Y-12 but sent elsewhere. 

He said Y-12 still will receive more money than originally 
proposed in the Bush administration's 2006 budget, but probably 
less than the amount earmarked by Congress during the 
appropriations process. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

[Get Copyright Permissions] Copyright 2006, Knoxville News 
Sentinel Co.

*****************************************************************
 98 reviewjournal.com: Reid endorses UNLV bid for DOE contract
 
Apr. 18, 2006

Initiative focused on reprocessing used nuclear fuel     

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid on Monday endorsed efforts by 
scientists at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas to participate 
in the Energy Department's newest nuclear waste program. 

Reid, D-Nev., said he supported officials associated with UNLV's 
environmental research arm who have said they might bid for a 
contract from the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, a DOE 
initiative for reprocessing used nuclear fuel. 

"This is an open process. People from all over the country will
be bidding on this," Reid said. "I don't see why they shouldn't
do research. I think they should try to get (grants) if they are
there to be gotten." 

Reid said involvement by Nevada entities in the so-called GNEP
program "gets a little more touchy down the road" if DOE were to
focus on the state to play a larger role in the project. 

But for now, he said, "we need to do more research on
reprocessing until we can find out what can be done" with the
technology. 

The UNLV research arm carries Reid's name -- it is the Harry
Reid Center for Environmental Studies. Through his seat on the
Senate Appropriations Committee, the senator has earmarked funds
to support work administered by its researchers, including at
least $10 million last year in an energy and water bill. 

In February, the center's nuclear science division director,
Anthony Hechanova, and Donald Baepler, who was the center's
original director and who now is retired, were among the
principals in a new research entity that Baepler said might bid
for an upcoming GNEP contract. 

The Energy Department is expected later this spring to invite
bidders for contracts of about $5 million apiece to conduct site
studies for a test-scale nuclear waste reprocessing factory. The
Nevada Test Site has been among the rumored locations, along
with sites in Idaho, South Carolina and Tennessee. 

The possibility that Nevada researchers might participate in
GNEP has raised eyebrows among some opponents of Yucca Mountain
who said it could complicate their efforts to keep nuclear waste
out of the state. 

But although he is an ardent critic of Yucca Mountain, Reid said
that in his view research-only does not cross the line to
compromise the state. He said it was nothing new for Nevada
institutions to take part in nuclear waste research with the
Energy Department. 

"We have been doing research stuff for years dealing with
nuclear waste," Reid said. "It doesn't mean just because they do
research that it is bad." 

The Reid Center for Environmental Studies administers a
cooperative agreement between DOE and Nevada schools for Yucca
Mountain research. 

In 2005, scientists affiliated with the center and with UNLV,
the University of Nevada, Reno, and the Desert Research
Institute worked on 21 projects valued at $43.2 million,
according to DOE figures. 	   


Copyright � Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
 99 Hanford News: FFTF gets historic landmark designation
 
This story was published Tuesday, April 18th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

The leaders who made Hanford's Fast Flux Test Facility a reality
came back to walk beneath the reactor's dome Monday. 

"I've frequently said it is a beautiful reactor," said former
Rep. Mike McCormack, D-Wash., who fought a tough battle for
money for FFTF. "And its mission was spectacularly successful." 

It was a bittersweet commemoration of the 400-megawatt research
reactor, the federal government's largest and most modern
reactor. 

Those who led efforts to pay for, design, build and operate the
reactor gathered to celebrate the designation of the reactor as
a National Nuclear Historic Landmark by the American Nuclear
Society. 

But work is continuing to permanently shut down the reactor,
after Democratic and Republican administrations decided it has
no financially viable mission. 

"Totally depressed," was how Gene Astley, head of the design
effort for the reactor, described his feelings as he walked
through the reactor building. 

But what supporters of FFTF see as a premature end to the
reactor does not diminish its accomplishments. 

Mike Lawrence, a former Department of Energy Hanford manager,
said the reactor seemed to be one of the few things that didn't
cause problems at the nuclear reservation during its years of
operations. 

Radiation exposure to operators was 1/100th of commercial power
reactors, according to the American Nuclear Society. It had the
best conduct of operations record of any reactor in the DOE
complex. And it established a world record for fuel performance. 

Its production, measured in isotopes and research knowledge,
also was remarkable. 

It produced high quality, rare radioactive isotopes for medicine
and industry. It advanced the fuels and materials development
for nuclear power for space missions. And, in what may be its
most timely contribution, advanced knowledge about nuclear
reactor components, materials and fuels. 

If the nation is going to move forward with a nuclear energy
program, it will be a breeder reactor program, McCormack said. 

"And the work done here at FFTF will be a critical step toward
that program," he said. 

FFTF was built to develop fast flux breeder reactor technology,
which would allow reactors to use fuel to produce energy and
also to produce more fissionable materials for more fuel. 

Getting it built was a battle. 

Astley was assigned by the national laboratory in Richland to
come up with a plan that would be submitted as an unsolicited
proposal to DOE's predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission. 

But the head of the AEC already favored building the Fast
Reactor Test project, or FARET, a small reactor similar to the
Experimental Breeder Reactor II in Idaho, Astley said. 

It was a proposal that lacked vision, Astley believed. 

He took his proposal to the commission that ran the AEC, with
Glenn Seaborg as it chairman, and won its support. After he
showed the commission a letter that ordered him to stop all work
toward the FFTF, the head of the AEC resigned within weeks,
Astley remembered. 

Astley received a new letter authorizing him to proceed with the
FFTF project. 

McCormack led the congressional battles for money for the
reactor during an intense struggle to keep the nation's breeder
reactor program alive in the 1970s. 

He helped keep the breeder reactor program alive through
President Jimmy Carter's administration, even though Carter
opposed it. But it was killed in the 1980s during the Reagan
administration - with McCormack no longer in office - when
President Ronald Reagan did not want to commit to any long-term
expenses, he said. 

FFTF was authorized under President Lyndon Johnson, appropriated
under President Richard Nixon, built under Presidents Ford and
Carter and went critical under Reagan. 

Although the nation no longer supported the breeder reactor
program after its first year of operations, FFTF continued to
operate for a decade, performing research and producing
isotopes. 

"Even its shutdown was accomplished with grace," said John
Nolan, Westinghouse Hanford Co. president during FFTF
operations. 

The designation of the reactor as a National Nuclear Historic
Landmark is a tribute to those who created the design and
followed a disciplined operations approach, Nolan said. 

"I think closing it, terminating its operation, was a great loss
to the people of this country," McCormack said. 

No sooner had a hole been drilled through the core support
structure of the reactor, than President George W. Bush began
talking about the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership program,
said Harold McFarlane, president-elect of the American Nuclear
Society. The drilling makes a restart of the reactor highly
unlikely. 

There's been a sudden revival in the West of interest in
sodium-cooled, fast reactors, he said. 

"A lot is known because of FFTF, but a lot of research needs to
be done," he said.

� 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 100 DOE: Office of Environmental Management; Site-Specific Advisory
 
                         FR Doc E6-5781 
[Federal Register: April 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 74)] 
[Notices] [Page 19880] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr18ap06-48]                         
 
Board; Renewal Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), in accordance with Title 
41, Section 102-3.65(a) of the Code of Federal Regulations, and 
following consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, 
General Services Administration, notice is hereby given that the 
Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board is being 
renewed for a two-year period beginning May 16, 2006. The 
Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board will 
provide advice and recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for 
Environmental Management (EM).
 
The Board provides the Assistant Secretary for EM with 
information, advice, and recommendations concerning issues 
affecting the EM program at various sites. These site-specific 
issues include clean-up standards and environmental restoration; 
waste management and disposition; stabilization and disposition 
of non-stockpile nuclear materials; excess facilities; future 
land use and long-term stewardship; risk assessment and 
management; and clean-up science and technology activities.
 
Furthermore, the renewal of the Environmental Management Site- 
Specific Advisory Board has been determined to be essential to 
the conduct of Department of Energy business and to be in the 
public interest in connection with the performance of duties 
imposed on the Department of Energy by law and agreement. The 
Board will operate in accordance with the provisions of the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, and rules and regulations issued 
in implementation of those Acts.
 
Further information regarding this Advisory Board may be obtained 
from Ms. Melissa A. Nielson at (202) 586-0356. Issued in 
Washington, DC, on April 11, 2006.
 
James N. Solit, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-5781 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 101 Paducah Sun: Whistle-blower: DOE after his job - 

Paducah, Kentucky 

Vander Boegh alleges that the Department of Energy is cutting
jobs and benefits as a new contractor takes over at the Paducah
Gaseous Diffusion Plant. 

By Joe Walker jwalker@paducahsun.com 270.575.8656 

Tuesday, April 18, 2006 

Longtime whistle-blower Gary Vander Boegh has filed a complaint
with the U.S. Department of Labor alleging the Department of
Energy and its cleanup firms are trying to force him out of his
landfill manager�s job in retaliation for his complaints about
potential radiation problems at the landfill. 

He said that in gathering information for the complaint, he
learned DOE is cutting jobs and benefits because new cleanup
contractor Paducah Remediation Services underbid by more than
$100 million. PRS will take over for Bechtel Jacobs at midnight
Sunday. 

�That�s what most of the employees are being told, he said,
noting that a woman in his department applied for 20 jobs and
was allowed to interview for only two. �They�re interviewing
people off the street rather than giving her a chance for a job.

She�s going to be unemployed by Friday night. 

About 560 people work for Bechtel Jacobs and its various
subcontractors. Bechtel Jacobs and WESKEM have notified the
Hopkinsville-based West Kentucky Workforce Investment Board that
as many as 346 workers could be laid off with the ending of
their contracts. Officials of the board, which handles
unemployment benefits, are awaiting word as to the actual number
of cuts. 

Filed late Friday, Vander Boegh�s complaint names DOE, PRS,
Bechtel Jacobs, Dura Tec and WESKEM, his current employer. He
claims the defendants denied him the right to bid for the work
as a grandfathered employee and ignored his qualifications and
experience. He has been landfill manager at the Paducah Gaseous
Diffusion Plant for 14 years. 

DOE has a �robust and extensive bidding process, and the new PRS
contract gives preference in hiring incumbent workers, said
Megan Barnett, spokeswoman for DOE headquarters in Washington,
D.C. She said the contract �goes to great lengths to protect
benefit transfer. 

�We�re dedicated to the safe cleanup of the site and taking
appropriate action for the environment and the taxpayers, she
said. 

The complaint�s allegations include: 

  + 
Vander Boegh led development of a 25-acre solid waste landfill
that opened in 1996. In late 2001, he filed a complaint with DOE
regarding the potential overflowing of leachate storage tanks,
and he subsequently claimed WESKEM and Bechtel Jacobs retaliated
by trying to demote and fire him. DOE�s Office of Hearings and
Appeals ordered that his job be protected for a year, but the
firms appealed that decision. The case remains on appeal. 

  + 
In May 2004, DOE began accepting radiologically contaminated
waste into the landfill on a �health risk basis. Rain
infiltrates the landfill cover and contacts the waste, resulting
in �radiologically contaminated leachate. 

  + 
Vander Boegh told PRS officials last Feb. 14 that the leachate
facility would only treat organic contaminants and not
radionuclides or heavy metals. A week later, he filed an amended
complaint against DOE, PRS and Bechtel Jacobs alleging
retaliatory actions against him and other key workers if they
did not accept the unauthorized waste. The complaint cited a
�hostile work environment for the employees and said they were
entitled to a smooth transition to PRS. 

  + 
When Vander Boegh was interviewed April 12 for continuing work,
he was told it would exclude his being landfill manager. He
learned later that PRS/Dura Tek officials �were informing job
applicants that all overtime pay would cease, and pay, benefits
and vacation would be reduced, including the elimination of two
paid holidays. 

In an interview, Vander Boegh said he confirmed through several
DOE Paducah employees that jobs and benefits were being cut
because of PRS� underbidding the contract. He said DOE has
refused to pay PRS the $300 million the firm now says it needs
to do the work. A contract worth about $192 million was awarded
in December and runs through Sept. 30, 2009. 

Vander Boegh said his alleged mistreatment ironically comes amid
renewed emphasis by DOE to take employee concerns seriously. He
provided a copy of an April 11 memorandum by Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman saying all DOE and contractor personnel �have the
right � and the responsibility � to identify and report concerns
associated with safety, quality, environment, health, security,
or management of operations without fear of reprisal. 

Based on Vander Boegh�s concerns, the Kentucky Division of Waste
Management has asked DOE for more information about the
landfill, including how much leachate is being generated and how
it is being managed, division spokesman Chuck Wolfe said. 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************