*****************************************************************
04/27/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.100
*****************************************************************
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 UN: SECURITY COUNCIL RENEWS COMMITTEE HELPING KEEP WMDS FROM TERRORI
2 [NYTr] Appeals for calm over Iran crisis
3 [NYTr] Iran has missiles that put Europe in range: report
4 IPS-English IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Rhetoric or real politick?
5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Leader Warns U.S. Against Attacking
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Issue Looms Over NATO Meeting
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Called on to Fulfill Nuke Obligations
8 IRNA: Iran's negotiations with IAEA officials concluded
9 IRNA: Ivanov: Diplomacy, most logical way to solve Iran's nuclear pr
10 IRNA: Ukraine's Ambassador: Nuclear technology, Iran's absolute righ
11 IRNA: Iran's negotiations with IAEA officials concluded
12 AFP: Iran shuns UN on eve of nuclear deadline
13 AFP: US says UN must act on Iran to uphold credibility
14 AFP: China urges all sides in Iran nuclear dispute to remain calm -
15 AFP: NATO talks clouded by Iran deadline
16 IRNA: Danish FM, Iranian envoy discuss Iran's nuclear program
17 US: The Nation: One More Insider Denounces Bush
18 Guardian Unlimited: Briton accused of central role in Libya's nuclea
19 Rediff: India has sold its nuclear soul to the US
20 RIA Novosti: Ukraine, Russia, Bulgaria sign nuclear transit agreemen
21 Pakistan Daily Times: India, Pakistan must get serious about nuclear
22 Jakarta Post: Our Mideast policy
23 AFP: Bush administration slammed in Senate over Indian nuclear deal
NUCLEAR REACTORS
24 [NukeNet] Chernobyl Killed 1,000 British Infants -- Report
25 US: [unplugsalem-announce] wilmington news journal on hope creek;
26 Caribbean Net News: In Cuba, Chernobyl kids get special care, and ho
27 Guardian Unlimited: Gorbachev in row on 20th anniversary of
28 AU The AGe: Safely, greenly nuclear -
29 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Callaway Nuclear Plant
30 MercuryNews.com: Reflections at a nuclear tomb
31 US: New York Times: Ex-Environmental Leaders Tout Nuclear Energy -
32 USDS: Chernobyl Focused World Attention on Improving Nuclear Safety-
33 BBC: Ukraine's strange love for nuclear power
34 The Herald: 20 years on: the horrors of Chernobyl still linger
35 US: Sheboygan Press: Nuke plant alert issued
36 US: Rockwell: Nuclear Regulatory Confusion
37 US: Rutland Herald: Vt. Yankee obtains key go-aheads
38 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Yankee gets OK for dry cask storage
39 US: Brattleboro Reformer: VY gets approval to complete its power boo
40 MSN: Chernobyl 20 years on
41 MercoPress: Flowers, tears in memory of Chernobyl
42 US: JS Online: Nuclear plant on alert, but no leaks are reported
43 Korea Times: Lesson From Chernobyl
44 WSJ.com: Measuring Chernobyl's Fallout
45 Belfast Telegraph: A new Chernobyl on our doorstep?
46 Canadian Press: Klein softens stand against nuclear energy in oilsan
47 SNA: Bulgaria, Russia, Ukraine Sign New Nuclear Fuel Transportation
48 US: NRC: Live NRC Meeting Webcast
49 AFP: World fails on Chernobyl aid pledges - Putin
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
50 US: Deseret News: Bennett seeks blast briefing
51 US: reviewjournal.com: Officials show off pit, offer assurances blas
52 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Feds on bomb test: Fret not
53 Xinhua: IAEA chief calls for co-op on global nuclear safety
54 US: NRC: Potentially Nonconforming HEMYC and MT Fire Barrier
55 US: starbulletin.com: Federal nuclear panel to study impacts of irra
56 US: Ceres Courier: Dealing with uranium traces a headache for city o
57 US: Rocky Mountain News: Flats challenge over cancer aid
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
58 [NukeNet] No Criminal Charges in Yucca E-mail Controversy
59 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear waste 'terror target
60 Guardian Unlimited: 'Safe' burial plan for waste may clear way
61 London Times: Imagine enough nuclear waste to fill five Albert Halls
62 US: PhysicsWeb: Nuclear waste should be buried
63 US: Bradenton Herald: Lockheed defends its efforts in Tallevast
64 BBC: Finland buries its nuclear past
65 BBC NEWS: Science/Nature | 'Deep disposal' for nuclear waste
66 BBC: Concerns over
67 BBC: Time for action on nuclear waste
68 Las Vegas SUN: Survey shows more residents fear Yucca Mountain impac
69 reviewjournal.com: Full disclosure on Yucca Mountain
70 Independent: Nuclear waste may be buried in caverns
71 US: UNR NevadaNews: Removing the conjecture about nuclear waste tran
72 Telegraph: Britain's nuclear waste 'vulnerable to terrorist attack'
73 US: PE.com: Sinkhole raises toxic-waste issue
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
74 Albuquerque Tribune: Nuclear industry needs engineers
75 KIFI: Highway 20 To Close Tonight
76 DOE: President Bush Names Arthur Rosenfeld the 2005 Enrico Fermi Awa
77 Hanford News: INL to look at nuke reprocessing plant plans
78 Hanford News: PNNL aids homeland security
79 DenverPost.com: Plea to hurry Flats cases: "I'm dying"
80 Rocky Mountain News: Board postpones decision on benefits for Rocky
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 UN: SECURITY COUNCIL RENEWS COMMITTEE HELPING KEEP WMDS FROM TERRORISTS
New York, Apr 27 2006 6:00PM
Calling for intensified efforts to boost States' cooperation with
measures to keep nuclear, chemical and biological weapons out of
the hands of terrorists and black marketeers, the United Nations
Security Council today extended the mandate of the committee
overseeing the issue for a period of two years.
Through a unanimous resolution, the mandate of the so-called
"<"http://disarmament2.un.org/Committee1540/">1540" Committee -
named after its 2004 Council resolution - which was due to expire
tomorrow, was extended until 27 April 2008.
Resolution 1540 directs governments to establish effective
accounting for and domestic controls of material that could be
used to make nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. It also
requires them to establish and maintain effective border and
trans-shipment controls and appropriate law enforcement.
The Security Council established the 1540 Committee to monitor
the implementation of the binding resolution, enacted under the
UN Charter's Chapter VII, which allows for enforcement measures.
All States are required to present reports on their efforts to
execute its provisions.
In February, the Chairman of the Committee told Council that some
70 States were delinquent in such reporting.
Today's resolution charges the Committee to intensify its efforts
to increase States' compliance through a new work programme that
includes outreach, dialogue and technical assistance.
In his recent appearance before the Council, Committee Chairman
Peter Burian urged total compliance with resolution 1540, warning
that "all States were vulnerable to being used by non-State
actors who might want to gain access to weapons of mass
destruction and their means of delivery." 2006-04-27 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/
*****************************************************************
2 [NYTr] Appeals for calm over Iran crisis
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:53:48 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
BBC News- Apr 27, 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4949914.stm
Appeals for calm over Iran crisis
China and Russia have urged all sides involved in the row over Iran's
nuclear activities to seek a peaceful solution.
The situation is at a "crucial stage" and all parties should "exercise
restraint", Chinese officials say.
The comments come the day before the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, the
IAEA, is to report on whether Iran has suspended its uranium enrichment
work.
Iran says it has the right to peaceful nuclear technology and denies Western
claims that it is seeking weapons.
Iran has been reported to the United Nations Security Council and the US has
been pushing for sanctions to be imposed.
China and Russia, who are both veto-holding members of the Security Council,
are opposed to sanctions.
Calls for restraint
Russian President Vladimir Putin said the IAEA needed to continue to play a
key role in the crisis.
"We believe it is the IAEA that must play a key role and not have this
weight unloaded on to the back of the Security Council," Mr Putin said.
In Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang issued an appeal for
calm.
"We hope the relevant parties can keep calm and exercise restraint so as to
avoid moves that would further escalate the situation," Mr Qin said.
He said the problem could still be "resolved through dialogue and diplomatic
means, which is the correct choice for all parties concerned".
The Security Council demanded on 29 March that Iran comply with the demands
of the IAEA for a "full and sustained suspension" of its uranium enrichment
work.
The head of the IAEA, Mohammed ElBaradei, is expected to report back to the
agency and the Security Council on Friday.
The US is trying to rally support from the Security Council for tougher
action, including sanctions, against Iran - and has not ruled out the
possibility of military strikes.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that Iran's
"enemies" would not be able to use the Security Council and the IAEA to
punish Iran.
"The illegitimate and right-nullifying decision could not get legitimacy
under cover of council and the agency," he said, according to a state TV
broadcast.
) BBC MMVI
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
3 [NYTr] Iran has missiles that put Europe in range: report
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:54:43 -0500 (CDT)
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
[Sound familiar? It's not Iraq with a 30-minute launch window to
Buckingham Palace. No, this time it's those crafty North Koreans
supplying evil missiles to wicked Iran. -NYTr]
Reuters - Apr 27, 2006
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2006-04-27T094011Z_01_L27159331_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-IRAN-MISSILES.xml
Iran has missiles that put Europe in range: report
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Iran has received a first shipment of missiles from
North Korea that are capable of reaching Europe, Israel's military
intelligence chief was quoted on Thursday as saying.
Known in the West as BM-25s, the Russian-designed missiles have a range of
around 1,500 miles, giving them a longer reach than the Iranian-made
Shihab-4 missiles which are capable of hitting Israel.
The intelligence chief, Major-General Amos Yadlin, was quoted by Israel's
Haaretz newspaper as saying in a lecture on Wednesday that some BM-25s had
arrived in Iran.
The BM-25 was originally manufactured in the Soviet Union, where it was
known as the SSN6, a missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, Haaretz
reported.
After the Russians decommissioned the SSN6, the missiles were sold to North
Korea, which adapted them to carry a heavier payload, the newspaper's
military affairs correspondent said.
In February, a German diplomat, citing his country's intelligence data,
confirmed a German newspaper report that said Iran had purchased 18
disassembled BM-25s from North Korea.
Israel has been urging the international community to pressure Iran to halt
its nuclear program as well as its efforts to obtain long-range missiles.
Iran, the world's fourth largest producer of crude oil, says its nuclear
program is a peaceful project to provide electricity.
Israel is widely believed to have more than 200 nuclear warheads. It
declines to comment on its atomic program, saying only it will not be the
first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East.
) Reuters 2006.
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
4 IPS-English IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Rhetoric or real politick?
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:46:16 -0700
AF HD DP=20
IRAN-NUKE PROGRAMME: Rhetoric or real politick?
Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)
ABU DHABI, Apr. 27 (WAM) - A major United Arab Emirates (UAE) English dai=
ly=20
today commented on the stand-off between the West and Iran on the latter'=
s=20
nuclear programme.
Commenting editorially on the issue under the title =94Rhetoric or rea=
l=20
politick?=94, the Dubai-based 'Khaleej Times' said: =94As tension over Ir=
an's=20
nuclear programme builds up, Teheran and Washington are talking tough. Bu=
t=20
frankly speaking, it's Iran that is really getting all worked up. Instead=
of=20
trying to calm nerves at home and address the genuine concerns of the=20
international community, Iran's leaders are adding to the tensions with=20
their rhetoric.
=94As if creating suitable atmospheres for the all-important UN meetin=
g to=20
determine Iran's fate tomorrow, Teheran has warned the world body that it=
=20
could walk out of the IAEA and push ahead with its nuclear agenda if=20
sanctions are imposed. This was followed yesterday by a warning by Ayatol=
lah=20
Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, who promised retaliation against the U.=
S.=20
if it attacked Iran.
=94What is really Iran up to? What can explain this sabre-rattling? Wh=
y is=20
Iran bent on antagonising world opinion with this absurd rhetoric when th=
e=20
majority of the international community sincerely wants this issue=20
peacefully resolved? Even Iran's sympathisers and friends in the Muslim=20
world are puzzled by the Islamic republic's behaviour.
=94Iran's tough posturing, especially the provocative speeches by Pres=
ident=20
Ahmadinejad, is being interpreted as far from reasonable. Many in the Mus=
lim=20
world, who want this issue resolved diplomatically in the interest of the=
=20
Middle East, believe that Iran's current policies and actions are harming=
=20
its own interests. But why? Can Iran be so incredibly naive?
=94There is one explanation. It is possible that Iran's hard-line post=
uring=20
is motivated by the reasoning that if it talks tough, the UN and West cou=
ld=20
work out a compromise, middle-of-the-road solution for its nuclear=20
programme. Another, alternate scenario suggests that Iran, by its nuclear=
=20
posturing, is hoping to draw out the U.S. forcing it to engage the Islami=
sts=20
and drop the idea of a regime change in Teheran.
=94This strategy appears to be already working. The U.S. has confirmed=
that=20
it is planning to engage Teheran to clear the mess in Iraq. Washington's=20
enterprising trouble shooter in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, is already in=20
touch with the Iranians. Even though formal talks between Washington and=20
Teheran are yet to take place, the effects of a thaw are discernible.
=94It's understood that it was Washington's persuasion, through=20
Farsi-speaking Ambassador Khalilzad, that led to Iran leaning on Iraq's S=
hia=20
alliance to pull out Ibrahim al Jaafari and prop up Jawad al-Maliki in hi=
s=20
place.
=94On the other hand, Iran is in negotiations with Russia to work out =
a=20
possible compromise formula on nuclear enrichment.
=94So all that talk of military strike and retaliation in Washington a=
nd=20
Teheran may be for the benefit of global gallery. Let's hope the second=20
scenario is closer to reality. In the interest of its people and the peop=
le=20
of the Middle East, Iran needs to avoid the path of confrontation and pay=
=20
attention to more pressing problems at home. All parties involved must do=
=20
their best to spare the Middle East and the world yet another catastrophe=
,=94=20
concluded the paper. (WAM)=20
=20
*****************************************************************
5 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Leader Warns U.S. Against Attacking
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday April 27, 2006 2:01 AM
AP Photo XHS114
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's supreme leader warned the United
States on Wednesday that his nation would hit back twice as hard
if America attacked its nuclear sites.
Even as it threatened to ravage U.S. global interests, Iran sent
its top nuclear official to Vienna, Austria, for talks with the
U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency ahead of a Friday Security
Council deadline for Tehran to halt its uranium enrichment
activities.
``The Americans should know that if they invade Iran, their
interests around the world would be harmed,'' supreme leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told workers gathered ahead of May Day,
the international workers' holiday, state television reported.
``Iran will respond twofold to any attack,'' Khamenei said.
The United States repeatedly has said it has no plans to attack
Iran but all options remain on the table as it pursues a
diplomatic solution to Iran's insistence on enriching uranium -
a process that can produce fuel for generators or fissile
material for nuclear bombs.
Britain on Wednesday ruled out military force against Iran.
``This is not Iraq. Nobody is talking about military action,''
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said in a speech in London.
But Straw said how the world deals with the standoff over
Tehran's nuclear program will be a test for the relevance of
international diplomacy.
The Security Council has given Iran until Friday to suspend
enrichment. If it does not, the council is likely to consider
punitive measures against the Islamic republic.
Iran has rejected the ultimatum, but senior negotiator
Gholamreza Aghazadeh was discussing the issue in talks Wednesday
with the International Atomic Energy Agency, which is preparing
a report on Iran's compliance with the Security Council demand.
In Vienna, diplomats were skeptical of any proposals that
Aghazadeh was carrying, saying they were unlikely to alter the
negative tone of the IAEA report to the Security Council. Still,
one of the diplomats - who demanded anonymity because he was not
supposed to be discussing the confidential talks - said the two
sides agreed to a second round of talks in the evening after an
afternoon meeting attended by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei.
The chief U.S. delegate to the IAEA, Gregory L. Schulte, has
said he expects a negative report from ElBaradei.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad shrugged off the
possibility of the council's penalizing Iran.
``The enemies could not impose their wrong decision against us
under cover of the Security Council and the IAEA,'' Ahmadinejad
said, according to state television.
Ahmadinejad said Iran remained committed to negotiations.
``We are ready to discuss (the nuclear program) to show that it
has not been diverted'' to military purposes, the president
said.
The United States has asked for the Security Council to meet May
3 to discuss how to respond to the report.
While the IAEA has found no ``smoking gun'' proving Iran wants
nuclear arms, a series of IAEA reports have revealed worrying
clandestine activities such as plutonium processing and
documents including drawings of how to mold weapons-grade
uranium metal into the shape of a warhead.
Iran deepened international concerns by announcing April 11 that
it had enriched uranium with 164 centrifuges. It has informed
the IAEA that it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges in the last
quarter of 2006 and later 54,000 centrifuges for large-scale
enrichment of uranium.
While tens of thousands of centrifuges need to be running in
``cascades'' for a full-fledged enrichment programs, experts
estimate that Iran could produce enough nuclear material for one
bomb if it had at least 1,000 centrifuges working for over a
year.
On Tuesday, Iran issued its toughest warning on the issue.
Nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said that if the Security
Council imposes sanctions, Iran would stop cooperating with the
IAEA and conceal its nuclear activities.
``If you take harsh measures, we will hide this program. If you
use the language of force, you should not expect us to act
transparently,'' Larijani said.
Iran appears to be drawing strength for its defiance from the
evident reluctance of Russia and China to endorse sanctions. The
two powers hold vetoes on the Security Council.
``We see no alternative to the negotiations process,'' Russian
Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Tuesday. China has
repeatedly urged all parties to show flexibility and pursue a
peaceful settlement.
---
Associated Press Writer George Jahn in Vienna, Austria,
contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Issue Looms Over NATO Meeting
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday April 27, 2006 11:16 AM
AP Photo VIE129
By PAUL AMES
Associated Press Writer
SOFIA, Bulgaria (AP) - Iran's nuclear standoff with the West is
expected to dominate talks Thursday between Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice and her counterparts from NATO and European
Union nations on the eve of a U.N. deadline for Tehran to halt
uranium enrichment.
The Iran question is not on NATO's official agenda and the
alliance's spokesman, James Appathurai, stressed ``NATO does not
have a formal role to play'' in the debate. However, the issue
will be discussed at an informal dinner bringing together NATO
and EU nations on the sidelines of the regular spring gathering
of NATO foreign ministers.
Iran has refused to comply with U.N. Security Council demands
that it suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce
fuel for nuclear reactors or material for warheads.
The United States, France and Britain say if Iran does not meet
the April 28 deadline, they will seek to make the demand
compulsory - despite opposition from Russia and China, the other
two veto-wielding council members. The three Western nations
have also warned that noncompliance could lead to sanctions, but
other allies are wary.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is due to join the NATO
talks Friday, ahead of the scheduled presentation to the
Security Council by Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International
Atomic Energy Agency, on Iran's compliance with its demands.
The opening session of the NATO meeting Thursday will focus on
bids by Ukraine, Georgia, Croatia and Macedonia to join the
alliance. NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on
Tuesday said NATO leaders would ``send a signal'' on the
countries' membership aspirations at a summit in November, but a
final decision was unlikely before 2008.
Pro-Western parties in Ukraine and Georgia are hoping NATO will
open ``membership action plans'' with them this year, but
further expansion of the Western alliance in the former Soviet
empire would face Russian opposition.
``The alliance is moving forward in support of Ukraine's
membership aspirations,'' Appathurai told reporters before the
meeting, but he declined to predict any timeline for membership
talks.
Thursday's meeting is also expected to discuss proposals for
NATO to develop closer ties with other democracies including
Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea to coordinate
political positions and peacekeeping operations.
Appathurai stressed the outreach to the Pacific nations did not
mean that NATO aspires ``to be a global policeman or a global
alliance, but said new partnerships were needed to deal with
global threats.
On Friday, Rice is expected to push NATO allies for more robust
support for African peacekeepers struggling to end political and
ethnic strife in Sudan's Darfur region. Ministers will also
discuss the expanding NATO mission in Afghanistan which is
moving into the country's volatile southern region in the face
of mounting attacks blamed on remnants of the ousted Taliban
regime.
Appathurai said the allies were prepared for mounting casualties
in Afghanistan and insisted ``the alliance is completely united
in its determination to take this mission forward.''
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
7 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Called on to Fulfill Nuke Obligations
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday April 27, 2006 12:01 PM
AP Photo MSC109
By ALEX NICHOLSON
Associated Press Writer
TOMSK, Russia (AP) - The leaders of Russia and Germany called on
Iran to fulfill its international nuclear obligations Thursday,
a day before a U.N. Security Council deadline for Iran to stop
enriching uranium.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and German Chancellor Angela
Merkel also told reporters Thursday in the Siberian city of
Tomsk that the crisis over Iran's nuclear program could be
resolved only through diplomacy.
``It's still too early to run ahead and say what decision we
might take together,'' he said. ``The main thing is ... that
whatever decision is taken is a consensus decision.''
The head of U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, will present a report Friday on Iran's
implementation of the Security Council demand. Uranium
enrichment can produce fuel for nuclear power or material for
nuclear warheads.
If Iran does not comply, the Security Council is likely to
consider punitive measures against the Islamic republic. Russia
and China, however, have been reluctant to endorse sanctions.
Iran has thus far rejected the demand and issued its toughest
warning on the issue Tuesday. Nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani
said that if the Security Council imposes sanctions, Iran would
stop cooperating with the IAEA and conceal its nuclear
activities.
``Our position is clear and well known. We are for the
nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction,'' Putin said.
``But we believe that Iran must have an opportunity to develop
modern technologies and peaceful nuclear energy.''
Earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the IAEA
report should not be seen as an ultimatum for Tehran.
``The procedure for referring and examining the report is not an
ultimatum,'' Lavrov said. ``It has a working character and
therefore, there is no time limit.''
Merkel also called for a diplomatic resolution.
``We are very interested for the world community, as it has been
from the start, to work together and show Iran that we want to
work by diplomatic methods,'' she said. ``But it is necessary
for Iran to keep to the agreements that it has committed itself
to.''
``We are not talking about banning Iran from using nuclear
energy for civilian goals, but it must keep to its obligations
and agreements,'' Merkel added.
China's Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, stressed the need for
restraint as the crisis reached a crucial stage.
``We hope the relevant parties can keep calm and exercise
restraint so as to avoid moves that would further escalate the
situation,'' said Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang.
Qin said the problem can still be ``resolved through dialogue
and diplomatic means, which is the correct choice for all
parties concerned.''
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
8 IRNA: Iran's negotiations with IAEA officials concluded
April 26, IRNA
--
Negotiations between Iran's senior atomic officials and IAEA
Chief Muhammad Elbaradei in Vienna were concluded Wednesday.
Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran Atomic Energy Organisation
for International Affairs, told IRNA the Iranian team was headed
by Gholamreza Aqazadeh, chief of of Iran Atomic Energy
Organization and included Ali-Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's
ambassador to the IAEA.
Saeedi added the meeting was a follow-up of negotiations
between Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali
Larijani and Elbaradei in Tehran.
Diplomats in Vienna predicted that the result of Wednesday's
two-hour-long talk will affect Elbaradei's report to be
presented to the United Nations Security Council on Friday.
*****************************************************************
9 IRNA: Ivanov: Diplomacy, most logical way to solve Iran's nuclear problem -
Dushanbe, April 27, IRNA
Iran-Russia-Nuclear
Secretary of Russia's National Security Council Igor Ivanov said
here on Wednesday that pursuing diplomatic talks is the best way
to solve Iran's nuclear problem.
Ivanov who was in Tajikistan to take part in Conference of the
Secretaries of National Security Councils of the Commonwealth of
Independent States made the comment in an interview with this
republic's Avesta News Agency.
Ivanov further reiterated, "Resorting to any non-diplomatic
measure for solving this crisis would cost all the Central
Asian, Caucasus, and Middle East countries dearly."
Referring to the unstable conditions in the region,
particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan today, the Russian security
official stressed, "All existing security problems in Central
Asian region have external source."
He also proposed the initiation of an appropriate regional
security apparatus aimed at crisis prevention and ensuring the
national interests of the CIS that are currently at stake, or
might be endangered in the future.
The CIS Secretaries of National Security Councils, too, in
their conference titled "Joint Security Interest" held at
Tajikistan's Dushanbe on Wednesday emphasized the need to solve
Iran's nuclear crisis resorting to peaceful measures.
During the said conference, held behind closed doors, the
participating security officials considered resorting to force
for solving Iran's nuclear problem "quite hazardous for the
regional countries, and particularly for the CIS nations"
further stressing that the move would destabilize the national
security of all those countries.
The CIS Joint Security Organization that was established
fourteen years ago, is comprised of Armenia, Byelorussia,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
The organization's main objective is maintaining peace and
stability in the territory of the CIS, and its other objectives
include campaign against international terrorism, narcotic drugs
and trafficking and goods smuggling.
According to some regional affairs analysts, the Wednesday
session of the CIS security officials was of great significance,
due to the ongoing international and regional developments,
particularly Iran's nuclear crisis.
*****************************************************************
10 IRNA: Ukraine's Ambassador: Nuclear technology, Iran's absolute right
Algiers, April 27, IRNA
Ukraine-Iran-Nuclear
Ukraine's Ambassador to Algeria Segei Brovic here on Wednesday
emphasized that Iran's absolute right to benefit from nuclear
technology within the international regulations should be
respected.
Brovic who was speaking at a memorial service for the victims
of Chernobil nuclear disaster added, "Iran has singed the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and according to its articles,
is fully entitled to have the full cycle of the nuclear
technology within international rules for peaceful purposes."
Ukraine's Ambassador to Algeria meanwhile stressed, "Solving
Iran's nuclear crisis through diplomatic measures is a bare
necessity that would serve the interests of not only the Iranian
nation, but also the international community, and particularly
the regional nations."
The United States, whose moves in the region are the root cause
for most of the security concerns of all regional countries has
turned the dossier of Iran's peaceful nuclear program into a
pretext for causing further security problems for the region.
*****************************************************************
11 IRNA: Iran's negotiations with IAEA officials concluded
April 26, IRNA
--
Negotiations between Iran's senior atomic officials and IAEA
Chief Muhammad Elbaradei in Vienna were concluded Wednesday.
Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of Iran Atomic Energy Organisation
for International Affairs, told IRNA the Iranian team was headed
by Gholamreza Aqazadeh, chief of of Iran Atomic Energy
Organization and included Ali-Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's
ambassador to the IAEA.
Saeedi added the meeting was a follow-up of negotiations
between Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Ali
Larijani and Elbaradei in Tehran.
Diplomats in Vienna predicted that the result of Wednesday's
two-hour-long talk will affect Elbaradei's report to be
presented to the United Nations Security Council on Friday.
2328/1771
*****************************************************************
12 AFP: Iran shuns UN on eve of nuclear deadline
Thu Apr 27, 1:45 PM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> 's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
vowed that his country "will not bow to injustice and pressure,"
the day before a UN deadline to stop sensitive nuclear work
expires.
"Thanks to God, we are a nuclear state," the firebrand leader
said in a speech in the west of the country.
"We will not bow to injustice and pressure. If they want to
attack the rights of the Iranian people, we will stamp shame and
regret on them."
Iran insists it has a right to enrich uranium to make reactor
fuel, but the process can be extended to make nuclear weapons.
Western powers, led by the United States, are convinced Iran is
seeking either a nuclear bomb or the "strategic capacity" to
make one.
Iran's refusal to freeze enrichment by Friday in line with last
month's UN Security Council demand opens the door to sanctions,
despite opposition from Russia and China. The United States has
also not ruled out taking military action.
The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency" /> (IAEA), said it would release its report on Iranian
compliance to members of the IAEA board of governors and to the
UN Security Council on Friday afternoon.
And senior diplomats from the Security Council's five permanent
members plus Germany are due to discuss the next steps in a
meeting in Paris on Tuesday, although Ahmadinejad showed no sign
of worry.
"They think that by frowning, adopting resolutions and going
from one organisation to the other, they can hide their horrible
face and unjust decisions behind the agency and the Security
Council and make us back down," he said.
"We have obtained nuclear fuel technology by ourselves, and
nobody can deprive us of it."
Last-minute talks between Iran's nuclear chief Gholam Reza
Aghazadeh and IAEA director Mohamed ElBaradei on Wednesday
failed to make any headway, diplomats said.
One diplomat said Aghazadeh "just rattled around on Iran's
previously stated positions. He did not propose anything new."
The White House has warned the country was facing further
international isolation after supreme leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei threatened global retaliation to any American military
action.
"This is a regime that continues to defy the international
community. It continues to ignore and refuses to abide by its
obligations," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said
Wednesday.
In Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang issued
an appeal for calm.
"We indeed think the Iranian nuclear issue is at a crucial
stage," he said. "We hope all parties concerned can keep calm,
exercise restraint and create favourable conditions so as to
properly resolve this issue."
Russian President Vladimir Putin" /> also said the IAEA needed
to continue playing a key role in the crisis -- signalling his
reluctance to see the matter fully referred to the Security
Council.
"It is too early to run ahead and say what decisions we might
take together. The main thing is that any decisions that are
made must be made in agreement," Putin said at a joint news
conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the Siberian
city of Tomsk.
Merkel, whose country is Iran's largest European trading
partner, also called for a diplomatic resolution to the
standoff.
Speaking in the Bulgarian capital Sofia, NATO" /> chief Jaap de
Hoop Scheffer voiced concerns.
"Although it is not playing the first violin, what happens there
(in Iran) is a very NATO-relevant subject... I think I can
safely say Iran will be a subject of conversation at dinner
tonight," he said as he prepared to host talks among the
alliance's foreign ministers including US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice" /> .
German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said he expected
Iran "to allay world suspicions that its civil nuclear
operations are being used to develop a possible weapons
program."
Iran has already warned that sanctions could force it to halt
cooperation with the IAEA or even quit the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The IAEA has been investigating Iran for more than three years,
but it says it is still not in a position to judge the true
nature of the country's nuclear programme.
It is still seeking documents on dealings Iran had with a
nuclear black market network run by disgraced Pakistani
scientist Abdul Qadeer Kahn, the father of his country's atomic
bomb.
The Vienna-based watchdog also wants to interview military
officers who may have overseen secret enrichment or "dual-use"
activities and to find out if Iran hid work with sophisticated
P2 centrifuges, which can enrich uranium more quickly and
abundantly than earlier models.
And the IAEA is also seeking documents Iran has on making
uranium hemispheres that form the core of atom bombs and has
questions about work that could be aimed at designing missiles
with nuclear warheads.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
13 AFP: US says UN must act on Iran to uphold credibility
Thu Apr 27, 7:24 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States called for strong UN action
against Iran" /> for its nuclear activities and warned the world
body's credibility was at stake as the crisis headed towards a
showdown.
The US administration made its expectations clear a day before
the release of a crucial report on whether Tehran had complied
with UN Security Council demands that it halt sensitive work on
uranium enrichment.
Washington has been pressing for possible UN sanctions against
the Islamic republic unless it renounced suspected efforts to
build a nuclear bomb. But Russia and China have balked at any
punitive action.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> raised the stakes for
the United Nations" /> on Thursday, telling reporters at a NATO"
/> meeting in Sofia that "in order to be credible the Security
Council of course has to act."
"I sincerely hope that the Security Council is prepared to take
some action," she said, adding it was "highly unlikely that Iran
will accede to the demands of the international community."
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns kept up the pressure in
Washington, forecasting that Friday's report by International
Atomic Energy Agency" /> chief Mohamed ElBaradei would be
"strongly negative" for Iran.
"There's no question in my mind that we're going to have to see
a significant international response," Burns said. "And that
will be one of rebuke of the government of Iran for its
actions."
Burns is to meet Tuesday in Paris with political directors of
the other four permanent members of the Security Council --
Russia, China, France and Britain -- plus Germany to discuss the
next steps with Iran.
US officials said France and Britain could introduce a strong
resolution against Tehran soon afterward, and foreign ministers
of the "P-5" and Germany could meet in the second week of May.
Washington has pushed the idea of slapping UN sanctions on
Tehran's leaders such as a freeze on their assets or travel
restrictions, while avoiding any heavy-duty penalties on Iran's
oil and gas sector.
But the officials here also appeared increasingly aware of the
possibility that the Security Council would not be able to
surmount the objections of the veto-wielding Russians and
Chinese.
Indeed, Rice's reference to UN credibility carried echoes of the
US argument before the Iraq" /> war that the organization had to
move against Saddam Hussein" /> 's alleged weapons of mass
destruction or risk becoming irrelevant.
In recent days, the United States has stepped up its call for
other nations to consider action outside the UN framework, such
as trade sanctions against Iran or an embargo on sales of arms
or technology.
President George W. Bush" /> has also refused to exclude the use
of military force. Rice said pointedly last week the United
States did not need Security Council approval to assert its
"right to self-defense."
But Burns stressed Thursday that "we have not given up hope that
there can be a diplomatic solution ... and we're determined to
pursue that as aggressively as we can."
The State Department's number three official made his remarks at
a joint news conference with Pakistani Foreign Secretary Riaz
Khan during a break in a day of strategic talks between their
countries.
But if the United States and the mostly Muslim Pakistan are
allies in the war on terror, the press session highlighted their
differences when it comes to Iran.
Khan stressed that Islamabad was categorically opposed to the
use of force against its neighbor and showed little inclination
to back eventual coercive diplomatic measures.
"As a neighbor and a country which has very long-standing good
relations with Iran, we wish them well," he said.
+
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
14 AFP: China urges all sides in Iran nuclear dispute to remain calm -
Thu Apr 27, 4:24 AM ET
BEIJING (AFP) - China has urged all sides involved in the
dispute over Iran" /> 's nuclear program to remain calm and show
restraint, as the stand-off was at a crucial stage.
"We indeed think the Iranian nuclear issue is at a crucial
stage," foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang said.
"We hope all parties concerned can keep calm, exercise restraint
and create favourable conditions so as to properly resolve this
issue," he added
A day ahead of a deadline from the United Nations" /> Security
Council for Iran to freeze its uranium enrichment program, Qin
reiterated China's position that it hoped the issue could be
resolved through dialogue.
Tensions have escalated in recent days as the deadline has drawn
closer, with Iran warning the United States Wednesday it would
be "harmed" across the globe if it attacked the Islamic
republic.
"The Americans should know that if they launch an assault
against Islamic Iran, their interests in every possible part of
the world will be harmed," Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei warned.
"The Iranian nation will give a double response to any strike."
Iran has insisted it will ignore the UN's Friday deadline, and
maintains its uranium enrichment work is to enable civilian
nuclear reactors to generate electricity.
Western powers, led by the United States, are convinced Iran is
seeking the capacity to make a nuclear weapon.
The United States is pushing for a UN Security Council
resolution that would allow economic sanctions or even military
action.
However China and Russia, which are also permanent members of
the Security Council with veto-wielding powers, have
consistently opposed any such resolution, insisting that
negotiations can resolve the dispute.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
15 AFP: NATO talks clouded by Iran deadline
Thu Apr 27, 7:42 AM ET
SOFIA (AFP) - The escalating crisis over Iran" /> 's nuclear
plans is threatening to cloud a meeting of NATO" /> foreign
ministers including US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> ,
on the eve of a UN deadline.
Gathered in Bulgaria for regular talks, the NATO chiefs were set
to focus in officially on issues ranging from beefing up support
for peacekeepers in Darfur and expanding a NATO-led force into
more volatile parts of Afghanistan" /> .
But the discussions risk being overshadowed by a UN deadline
Friday for the Islamic republic to freeze uranium enrichment
work, with little or no sign of movement from Tehran.
Iran's supreme leader upped the stakes in the crisis Wednesday,
warning the United States it would be "harmed" across the globe
if it decided to attack the Islamic republic over the disputed
nuclear programme.
"Iran is on everyone's mind. Of course they will discuss it,"
said one source before the Sofia talks, also gathering European
Union" /> ministers, EU foreign policy head Javier Solana and
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
But NATO spokesman James Appathurai underlined that the
26-nation alliance "does not have a formal role," and forecast
that discussion on Iran would be limited to an informal dinner
Thursday night.
"I do not see NATO playing first violin in any way," he said,
briefing reporters hours ahead of the talks.
On Darfur, NATO has said it is ready to extend and increase its
support for an African Union-led peacekeeping force in the
violence-scarred Sudanese region, as well as for a UN force
expected to replace it later in the year.
The NATO spokesman underlined that a decision on prolonging
training and other help beyond May 31, when the current mandate
expires, depends on being asked by the African Union. "We will
not impose ourselves," he said.
The Bulgarian talks will also take stock of NATO's planned
expansion in coming months into the dangerous south of
Afghanistan, where it has led the International Security
Assistance Force (ISAF) since 2003. The expansion will see the
current 9,000-strong force beefed up to 16,000 troops.
The Sofia meeting will be the last such talks ahead of a
November summit in Latvia, where NATO leaders will notably
discuss expansion of the alliance further into ex-communist
lands.
Ukraine's NATO hopes will also be on the agenda, although the
spokesman downplayed a press report this week that Kiev could
soon be offered so-called membership action plan, which would
represent the clearest green light yet.
"Ukraine's aspirations to join the Alliance are welcomed by all
allies," said Appathurai. "What I cannot predict is timelines
for membership action plans," he told reporters.
But inevitably the Iran crisis will overshadow the talks, which
come a day after last-minute talks Wednesday between a top
Iranian official and the UN nuclear watchdog, the International
Atomic Energy Agency" /> (IAEA).
There was no sign of progress at the Vienna talks. IAEA head
Mohamed ElBaradei is to file Friday a report on Iranian
compliance. Non-compliance could lead to Security Council
sanctions against Iran.
And Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei issued one of
Tehran's toughest threats yet Wednesday.
"The Americans should know that if they launch an assault
against Islamic Iran, their interests in every possible part of
the world will be harmed," he said. "The Iranian nation will
give a double response to any strike."
Security is tight for the Sofia talks, with some 3,000 police
officers on the streets and around the National Palace of
Culture, which will host the meeting.
*****************************************************************
16 IRNA: Danish FM, Iranian envoy discuss Iran's nuclear program
April 27, IRNA
--
Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller and Iranian Ambassador
to Denmark Ahmad Daniali Wednesday held talks in Copenhagen on
international issues and Iran's peaceful nuclear program, an
Iranian embassy press statement said on Thursday.
Daniali updated Moeller on Tehran's ongoing close cooperation
with the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),
saying it is aimed at creating transparency and gaining the
trust of the international community with regard to the peaceful
nature of Iran's nuclear program.
Iran's top diplomat in Copenhagen reaffirmed that the IAEA was
the only proper forum to deal with Iran's nuclear issue.
Daniali further said his country was determined to continue its
peaceful nuclear research program while stressing Iran's right
to access peaceful nuclear technology.
Pointing to the continuing IAEA inspections on Iran's nuclear
facilities, Daniali stressed that the UN watchdog has not found
evidence showing nuclear material has been diverted for purposes
other than for nuclear energy development.
Iran's envoy also cautioned against moves to ignite tensions in
the Middle East, saying they would endanger global security and
peace.
Meanwhile, Moeller said a report that is expected to be
submitted by IAEA Director-General Mohammad ElBaradei to the UN
Security Council on Friday will be "important."
The Danish minister expressed hope the report would set the
basis for a peaceful solution to the Iran nuclear issue.
Referring to the need for a secure Middle East, Moeller voiced
concern over attempts to destabilize this sensitive region.
*****************************************************************
17 The Nation: One More Insider Denounces Bush
Truthdig | posted April 26, 2006 (web only)
Robert Scheer
Robert Scheer is editor of TruthDig, where this essay originally
was published.
Confession time: In fall 2004, during a crucial presidential
election campaign, I made the mistake of playing by corporate
media rules that amount to self-censorship.
Specifically, I joined other journalists in denying the public
the right to learn of a definitive investigative report by CBS'
60 Minutes on President Bush's disregard for the truth
concerning the weapons of mass destruction threat allegedly
posed to the United States by Iraq. Having received an advance
copy of the devastating segment, I honored CBS' proprietary
request not to write about the news it carried until after it
aired.
Only, it never aired. CBS got cold feet, probably because of Dan
Rather's troubles over an unrelated story critical of the
President. The suppressed story was solidly reported and, by
exposing the Bush Administration's utter disregard for the truth
concerning Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, should
have been made available to the public before the November
election. Now, no one seems to care.
The segment finally airedthis past Sunday, in a more robust
form. Unfortunately, the response has been tepid; it seems the
media, at least, have become jaded with all the endless examples
of the President's perfidy. But the CBS story remains very
important as further evidence of the depths of the Bush
Administration's deception.
Perhaps most damning is an interview, added for the broadcast
version, with Tyler Drumheller, a CIA veteran of twenty-six
years' service who was the agency's top spy in Europe until his
retirement a year ago. According to him, before the war
Hussein's foreign minister had been "turned" and was talking
secretly to US intelligence. At first excited by this rare
inside look at Hussein's regime, the top dogs at the White House
dropped the issue like a hot rock as soon as his information
contradicted their overheated rationale for "pre-emptive" war.
"The policy was set," Drumheller told CBS correspondent Ed
Bradley. "The war in Iraq was coming. And they were looking for
intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."
That's how now, more than three years later, after at least two
major governmental investigations into pre-war intelligence on
Iraq and countless journalistic post-mortems, we are only just
finding out that a highly-placed double-agent in Iraq was poking
a huge hole in the Hussein-as-WMD-bogeyman story.
"They were enthusiastic" at first, said Drumheller, "that we had
a high-level penetration of Iraqis." CIA Director George Tenet
reported the news that Hussein's Foreign Minister Naji Sabri was
working covertly for the United States to a White House meeting
attended by President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Their initial enthusiasm,
Drumheller says, quickly turned to cold indifference when Sabri
told them the opposite of what they wanted to hear.
"He told us that they had no active weapons of mass destruction
program," said the ex-CIA official. "The [White House] group
that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq war came back and
said they were no longer interested. And we said 'Well, what
about the intel?' And they said 'Well, this isn't about intel
anymore. This is about regime change.'."
The White House refused to comment for the 60 Minutes report,
but CBS noted that Rice has said Sabri was just one source, and
therefore not reliable. It was ironic, considering how heavily
the Bush Administration relied on the now infamous Iraqi
defector, "Curveball," whose statements so informed the main
Administration allegations concerning Iraq's bio-chemical
weapons.
Drumheller was in contact with the German intelligence agency
CIS that had detained the man with the apt code name, and says
he himself informed the top CIA officials that Curveball was an
outright fraud.
"They certainly took information that came from single sources
on the yellowcake story and on several other stories with no
corroboration at all," Drumheller said.
No wonder this man, who risked his life gathering intelligence
for our country, has become a critic of the Bush Administration.
He is clearly unwilling to allow what the President has
described as a permanent war to destroy our democracy. True
patriotism is not the blind acceptance of Presidential deceit.
Imperial ambition turns truth-tellers into enemies, by default,
because their goal is not the exaltation of the leader's power.
No wonder so many national security professionals, be they top
generals or intelligence officials, have gone public recently to
denounce how the Iraq war has been sold and fought: The Bush
Administration's willful ignorance and buck-passing mocks their
dedicated service to the nation.
"It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it's an
intelligence failure," Drumheller said. "This was a policy
failure."
nation@agenceglobal.com.
about Robert Scheer Robert Scheer, a contributing editor to The
Nation, is editor of Truthdig.com.He is a Puffin Writing Fellow
at The Nation Institute and the author, with Christopher Scheer
and Lakshmi Chaudhry, of The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us
About Iraq, published by Akashic Books and Seven Stories Press.
His weekly column, distributed by Creators Syndicate, appears in
the San Francisco Chronicle.
Copyright © 2006 The Nation
*****************************************************************
18 Guardian Unlimited: Briton accused of central role in Libya's nuclear bomb plan
Ian Traynor in Mannheim
Thursday April 27, 2006
A British businessman was named in court in Germany yesterday as
a key figure in what has been dubbed the world's worst nuclear
proliferation racket, alleged to have helped Libyan attempts to
build a nuclear bomb.
At the trial in Mannheim in south-west Germany of a businessman
accused of nuclear trafficking, the state prosecutor, Peter
Lintz, named Peter Griffin, a Briton, as one of a handful of
international members of the nuclear network masterminded by the
disgraced Pakistani metallurgist, Abdul Qadeer Khan.
Just over two years ago, Khan, hailed as the father of the
Pakistani bomb, was pardoned by Pakistan's president, Pervez
Musharraf, after confessing to running a nuclear trafficking
network that supplied crucial technology and, in at least one
case, a nuclear bomb blueprint to Libya, Iran, and North Korea.
Gotthard Lerch, 63, a German engineer accused of being a central
player in the Khan network, faces up to 15 years in jail if
found guilty of breaking Germany's weapons and exports laws. He
was extradited to Germany from Switzerland last July. He denies
the charges. It is clear that his defence team will seek to
prove Mr Lerch is the innocent victim of a western intelligence
plot.
Reading the charges against Mr Lerch, Mr Lintz argued that the
accused knowingly helped the Khan network to furnish Colonel
Muammar Gadafy with a uranium enrichment plant that would have
comprised more than 11,000 centrifuges manufacturing enough
weapons-grade uranium "for several nuclear warheads a month".
Col Gadafy renounced his secret nuclear programme in 2003 and
his officials have supplied copious information on the Khan
network from which the Libyan leader was said to be buying a
$100m (£52m) bomb-building kit.
"To produce and supply the goods needed by Libya, Khan used a
circle of proven helpers who had already been of service to him
for his own centrifuge programme," Mr Lintz said. He named these
"helpers" as a Sri Lankan businessman who was Khan's main aide,
a Swiss engineer also awaiting trial, Mr Lerch, and "the machine
tool supplier Peter Griffin".
Mr Griffin, 70, is believed to be retired and living in the
south of France after having been based in Dubai with his firm,
Gulf Technical Industries (GTI).
German investigators preparing the case against Mr Lerch have
questioned Mr Griffin in France and he is expected to be called
as a witness. Mr Griffin has in the past stated that he has
known Khan for years, but has strenuously denied knowingly
having anything to do with a Libyan nuclear programme. He has
never been charged with any offences in connection with the Khan
network.
Prosecutor Lintz claimed that all of those named yesterday were
tasked around 1999 with providing Libya with 10,000 advanced
centrifuges for enriching uranium.
While the Sri Lankan, BSA Tahir, coordinated the sub-contracting
and supply work, the Swiss engineer, Friedrich Tinner, Mr Lerch
and Mr Griffin supervised and facilitated the work, Mr Lintz
said. The Libyan contracts were farmed out to firms in South
Africa, Malaysia, Turkey and Switzerland for components
manufacture, the prosecutor alleged.
While UN investigators at the International Atomic Energy Agency
who have been trying to unravel the Khan network for three years
say that all of the men named yesterday were central players, Mr
Lerch denies the charges.
The prosecution suffered a severe setback yesterday when the
defence questioned the legal grounds for his extradition from
Switzerland. The presiding judge, Michael Seidling, ordered
clarification from the Swiss authorities. The prosecutor
conceded that the outcome could be that the Mannheim court is
not competent to try the case.
The Mannheim trial is the first in connection with the Khan
network. Further trials are expected in Switzerland and South
Africa. Gerhard Wisser, a German resident in South Africa and
colleague of Mr Lerch's, is awaiting trial on charges of
plotting to send the equipment to Libya.
The German charges allege that Mr Lerch arranged the South
African contracts and that Mr Lerch earned some 28m (£20m), half
of it profit, from the alleged Libyan business.
Mr Lintz alleged that all of those named in Mannheim yesterday
were aware that the machinery was being made for a uranium
enrichment centrifuge system for Libya and sought to mask the
real purpose by drawing up contracts for a water purification
plant for Jordan.
In November 2000, alleged Mr Lintz, the accused commissioned Mr
Griffin and GTI to purchase specialised lathes in Spain to be
sent to the South African contacts to manufacture high-quality
steel needed for centrifuge rotors.
The trial is due to resume next week.
Useful links
German government
German embassy in London
German embassy in Washington DC
Frankfurter Allgemeine (English version)
Deutsche Welle (English version)
Sign and Sight (in English)
Spiegel Online (English version)
Süddeutsche Zeitung (in German)
Goethe-Institut (in English)
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
19 Rediff: India has sold its nuclear soul to the US
PTI
Brahma Chellaney | April 27, 2006 19:57 IST
The US waiver bill to give effect to the nuclear deal with India
shows just how wide the gap is between what America promises and
what it sets out to do.
The July 18, 2005 nuclear deal promised India 'the same benefits
and advantages as other leading countries with advanced nuclear
technology, such as the United States'. But in implementing the
deal, Washington has maneuvered things in such a way that
India's status is to be frozen as a second-class nuclear power,
with none of the benefits and advantages that the US enjoys.
The concessions America has wrung out of India only underscore
New Delhi's naiveté. India continues to live up to Spanish-born
American philosopher George Santayana's saying: 'Those who
cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.' Wishful
thinking, personalised policy-making and reluctance to learn
from the past have made India relive history.
Complete coverage: The Indo-US nuclear tango
Without grasping all the nuances and implications, India rushed
into a US-drafted deal centered on the future of its nuclear
program. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh admitted in the Lok Sabha
August 3, 2005 that the deal's final draft was delivered to him
by the Americans after he reached Washington. Said the PM: 'I
hope I am not revealing a secret. I think when the final draft
came to me from the US side, I made it quite clear to them that
I will not sign on any document which did not have the support
of the chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. It held up our
negotiations for about 12 to 15 hours.'
The AEC chairman, who was not part of the PM's delegation, was
summoned to the US capital by the first flight. However, the
decision to go ahead had already been made, and the nuclear
chief's last-minute involvement was merely symbolic. Even the
Cabinet was presented a fait accompli by a nominated PM who came
to office without winning a single popular election in his
career. It is unthinkable that a US president would have entered
into a deal with another state so casually had the matter
involved the future of America's own nuclear program.
Whenever the Indian leadership has hurriedly entered into an
agreement with another state, without involving its
policy-making processes in the decision, it has proved to be a
blunder. The nuclear deal is a historic blunder in the making.
If it takes effect, it will prevent India from ever emerging as
a full-fledged nuclear-weapons state, and thus rank as serious a
blunder as Jawaharlal Nehru's decision to take the Kashmir issue
to the UN and accept a ceasefire, the return of Haji Pir to
Pakistan under the Tashkent Declaration, and the repeat
surrender of battlefield gains at Simla in 1972 without securing
a Kashmir settlement.
Complete coverage: George Bush in India
Such are the capability constraints and onerous, one-sided
obligations under the deal that India can forget about emerging
as a strategic peer to China.
The deal will reduce to less than one-third the number of Indian
facilities yielding fissile material for strategic purposes. The
US-dictated closure of the Cirus research reactor will alone
deprive the nuclear military program of 30 percent supply of
weapons-grade plutonium. That is on top of the 65 percent cut
that India will have to bear in the present production of
reactor-grade plutonium and tritium once a total of 14 power
reactors come under international monitoring in phases.
The Cirus decision hands non-proliferation zealots in the US and
elsewhere a cause to celebrate: not only is India tacitly
conceding that its 1974 nuclear test was born in sin, but that
it is willing to atone for it more than three decades later by
shutting down the reactor rather than subjecting it to
international inspections. The US had demanded that India either
close down the 40-megawatt Cirus, the source of plutonium for
the 1974 test, or open it to international monitoring.
Cirus was built with Canadian technical assistance and received
US heavy water under two separate 1956 contracts that predated
the 1957 establishment of the International Atomic Energy Agency
and the 1968 text finalisation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Because the concept of 'safeguards' (international inspections)
had not yet been devised, India gave no explicit undertaking to
abjure nuclear-explosive uses. Indeed, just after Cirus came on
line in 1960, Nehru declared: 'We are approaching a stage when
it is possible for us … to make atomic weapons.'
Complete coverage: Dr Singh in the US
The shutdown decision not only resurrects a ghost from the past
but also mocks various international legal opinions clearing
India of any wrongdoing. The US State Department, in a June 2,
1974 assessment to Congress, itself concluded that because heavy
water degrades at about 10 percent year and India's Nangal plant
had been producing heavy water since 1962, 'it is believed that
US-origin heavy water was replaced [in Cirus] from this source'.
The PM's decision to shut the recently refurbished Cirus and
also dismember Apsara, Asia's first research reactor, in order
to relocate its foreign-origin fuel core compromise national
dignity, underlining how the United States is forcing India
decades later to make amends for benefiting from facilities
belonging to the pre-safeguards era. The chilling message it
sends out is that Washington does not forgive and forget.
Similar concessions on national dignity and capability have come
from the PM's decision to open to permanent IAEA inspections a
number of Indian entities slapped with US sanctions on November
19, 1998 — five research institutions (such as the Tata
Institute of Fundamental Research, Board of Radiation and
Isotope Technology and Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics), three
heavy-water plants at Thal-Vaishet, Hazira and Tuticorin, and
the PREFRE reprocessing plant at Tarapur.
The decision will put under international monitoring three of
the Department of Atomic Energy's seven heavy-water plants, a
third of its reprocessing capability, one of its five core
research establishments (Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre) and
two-thirds of its affiliated institutions. In all, more than 31
Indian nuclear facilities will be placed under perpetual IAEA
inspections.
In addition to the quantifiable ceiling on India's deterrent,
the deal also seeks to impose a qualitative cap. The Bush
administration has cleverly used its waiver bill to drag India
through the backdoor into a pact rejected by the US Congress —
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Section 1(d) of the bill aims
to turn the present voluntary Indian test moratorium into a
legally binding obligation forever, through US legislation. To
achieve that objective, the proposed legislation has been
designed to keep the Damocles' sword of waiver termination
hanging perpetually over India's head.
Evidently, the deal will erode the very strategic autonomy that
enabled India to defiantly carry out a series of nuclear-weapons
tests in May 1998. In the absence of US leverage over India
then, New Delhi was also able to put up with sanctions and
indeed demonstrate that sanctions are an ineffectual instrument.
But now the deal will create a wrenching Indian dependency on a
US-led nuclear cartel and arm America with long-term leverage,
effectively foreclosing India's testing option even if China or
the US were to end their test moratorium.
An older, comparable US nuclear deal with China is free of such
provisions and actually stipulates in its Article 8(2) that even
bilateral safeguards 'are not required', with nothing to stop
Beijing from diverting US technology to 'all-weather ally'
Pakistan. In contrast, the pending bill seeks to impose eight
separate good-conduct conditions on India, constricting its
negotiating room and diplomacy and making it hostage to the
threat of US waiver termination. If India were to violate any of
the conditions contained in the legislation, all civilian
nuclear cooperation with it will cease, leaving its imported
power reactors bereft of fuel.
India is being entangled in a web of capability constraints, in
return for dubious benefits — the right to import uneconomical
power reactors. The deal's very rationale is fundamentally
flawed because generating electricity from imported reactors is
dependent on imported fuel makes little economic or strategic
sense. Such imports will be a path to energy insecurity and
exorbitant costs.
The PM is seeking to replicate in the energy sector the very
mistake India has pursued on armaments. Now the world's largest
arms importer, India spends nearly $6 billion dollars every year
on weapons imports, many of dubious value, while it neglects to
build its own armament-production base. Should a poor India now
compound that blunder by spending billions more to import overly
expensive reactors when it can more profitably invest that money
to commercially develop its own energy sources?
As former US President Jimmy Carter said in a recent op-ed,
'India so far has only rudimentary nuclear technology'.
According to Carter, while China now possesses 400 nuclear
weapons, India has the same number as Pakistan, '40 each'. Not
only will the deal ensure that the India-China nuclear gap
widens, but it will also enable Pakistan to overtake India on
nukes, as it has already done on missiles. It speaks for itself
that India still does not have a single Beijing-reachable weapon
system in its nuclear arsenal, yet it has entered into a deal
that, in the words of Joseph R Biden, the ranking Democrat on
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, succeeds in 'limiting
the size and sophistication of India's nuclear-weapons program
and nuclear power program'.
What US-inspired technology controls against India could not
achieve over three decades, the PM has been willing to do —
constrict the country's nuclear-deterrent capability — in order
to chase dreams. Instead of having a credible deterrent, India
could end up with a retarded deterrent.
The Indian government has come a long way since it claimed last
July that the US had reversed its decades-old non-proliferation
policy and accepted India as a nuclear-weapons state. Remember
the claims the PM made in Parliament? He said on July 29, 2005
that India is to 'acquire the same benefits and advantages' as
the other nuclear powers. He even assured: 'Predicated on our
obtaining the same benefits and advantages as other nuclear
powers is the understanding that we shall undertake the same
responsibilities and obligations as such countries, including
the United States. Concomitantly, we expect the same rights and
benefits'.
To squelch any skepticism, he replied to the debate in the Lok
Sabha saying he had secured 'an explicit commitment from the
United States that India should get the same benefits of
civilian cooperation as an advanced country like the United
States enjoys'.
Now, the PM and his aides concede that neither the obligations
India is undertaking nor the potential benefits are analogous to
those for a nuclear-weapons state. In fact, the foreign
secretary has publicly rationalised the different standards the
US has applied to India and China in its separate nuclear deals
on the specious ground that 'China is a nuclear-weapons state'
and India is not.
First, that claim is astonishing because the July 18, 2005 deal
is premised on India being treated as a nuclear-weapons state.
The foreign secretary had himself boasted in Washington after
the deal's signing that India was assuming the same rights and
responsibilities as the other nuclear powers, 'no more, no
less.' Now the foreign secretary is suggesting that either the
deal's central plank is just a charade, or he is learning the
hard way that the Americans don't keep their promises.
Two, the foreign secretary's reading of the 1984 US-China
nuclear accord is flawed. China was not even an NPT signatory
when the US Congress in 1985 passed the waiver bill to permit
full nuclear cooperation with Beijing. A nuclear-weapons state
under the NPT is a country that has conducted a nuclear test
before 1967 and acceded to the treaty. In 1985, China was merely
a de facto nuclear-weapons state, as India is today. It joined
the NPT only in 1992.
Clearly, India has put itself on a slippery slope, and its
second-class status is being institutionalised and endowed with
legal content, so that it stays put at that level permanently.
The PM himself provided the first evidence when he announced in
March that, contrary to his solemn pledge in Parliament 'never
to accept discrimination', he has accepted international
inspections on Indian facilities of a type applicable only to
non-nuclear states — perpetual and legally immutable. After
being the only nuclear power to accept permanent, enveloping
inspections, India now stands out as the only nuclear-weapons
state whose test moratorium will cease to be voluntary or
revocable.
Washington is also positioning itself to haul India into a
fissile-material production ban even before a multilateral
Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty has been negotiated. This
objective could be facilitated either through a Congressionally
imposed condition requiring New Delhi to halt all
fissile-material production or through what US Undersecretary
of State Robert Joseph has called 'additional non-proliferation
results' in 'separate discussions.'
The new bilateral civil nuclear cooperation accord currently
under negotiation offers yet another lever of pressure to the
US. In any case, once India places orders to import power
reactors and locks itself into an external fuel-supply
dependency, Washington will have the leverage to cut off further
Indian fissile-material production.
Fundamentally, the US aim is to deter the rise of a nuclear
India that can threaten US global or regional interests. By
playing to India's ego and desire for status, the nuclear deal
offers an attractive avenue to the US to get a handle on the
Indian nuclear program and influence Indian foreign policy.
Brahma Chellaney, a strategic affairs expert, is professor at
the Centre for Policy Research. He was one of the authors of the
nuclear doctrine submitted to the government for finalisation
© Copyright 2006 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or
Copyright © 2006 Rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
20 RIA Novosti: Ukraine, Russia, Bulgaria sign nuclear transit agreement
27/ 04/ 2006
KIEV, April 27 (RIA Novosti, Vladimir Suprun) - Ukraine, Russia
and Bulgaria on Thursday signed an intergovernmental agreement
on transit of nuclear materials.
The countries agreed to cooperate on transportation of fresh and
spent nuclear fuel and other materials used in the nuclear fuel
cycle from Russia to Bulgaria and back via Ukraine.
Yelena Mykolaichuk, the head of Ukraine's state nuclear
regulation committee, said, "We guarantee full security of
nuclear material transportation via Ukraine."
The agreement will be valid for 10 years, during which fuel will
be transported using the route in use since 2001 from Bulgaria
by sea to the Ukrainian port of Izmail, then on by railroad to
the village of Mikhailovsky near the border with Russia.
© 2005 RIA Novosti
*****************************************************************
21 Pakistan Daily Times: India, Pakistan must get serious about nuclear issues
Editorial:
Friday, April 28, 2006
EDITORIAL: India, Pakistan must get serious about nuclear issues
The fourth round of expert-level talks on nuclear CBMs between
Pakistan and India has been wrapped up with a joint statement on
Wednesday. There is some optimism, expressed by both sides, that
an agreement to reduce the risk of nuclear accidents would be
finalised during the July meeting of foreign secretaries in New
Delhi. In the joint press conference, the media was told that
while some small differences have prevented the finalisation of
the agreement, there is flexibility on both sides that will
hopefully lead to an agreement in the next round or during the
foreign secretaries’ meeting. The media was not told what the
differences are and whether they are technical or political,
which makes it difficult to figure out how soon or in what
manner they might be removed. But it is clear, diplomatic
language aside, that if those differences were not A-list
disagreements, the two sides would not have shied away from
placing them before the media.
Some conjecture can, however, be made. The basket that deals
with nuclear CBMs has, within it, various areas: nuclear risk
reduction measures, safeguards against accidental or
unauthorised use of nuclear weapons, a missile restraint regime,
conventional forces reduction, demilitarisation etc. On
virtually all these issues, the two sides have differences, in
some cases material ones.
Take, for instance, conventional forces reduction and
demilitarisation. Pakistan is conventionally weak and its
insistence on demilitarisation along the border, especially in
Indian-held Kashmir, plugs into its larger policy of making
India negotiate meaningfully on Kashmir. On both counts India is
largely uninterested, though it is prepared to go along because
talking doesn’t hurt it. Similarly, while Siachen does not form
a part of this basket, the back and forth on it means that other
issues like demilitarisation also come into the picture.
This seems to be the main problem. While baskets are created so
that bargaining and negotiations can be conducted on the basis
of separate issues rather than linkages, the two sides are still
stuck in linkages and use their comparative advantage in one
area to press the other side in another area. This is not
entirely unexpected but it does tend to get irritating after a
while, especially if issues that can be tackled more easily are
held hostage to the more intractable ones.
KC Singh, who was leading the Indian delegation, evaded the
question on differences and said that it was more a matter of
different opinions. But from his response to a question about
the no-first use (NFU) of nuclear weapons, it is clear that he
is either not aware of his country’s changed policy on the use
of nuclear weapons or was merely dissembling. India, it may be
noted, has moved away from NFU to a policy of retaliation with
nuclear weapons even in the case of an attack by
chemical/biological weapons and by any entity even if such an
entity were to use the soil of a non-nuclear state. Even
otherwise, NFU, without some verifiable parameters, means
nothing in operational terms. Similarly, the no-war pact offered
by Pakistan is different from Indian Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh’s treaty of peace and friendship since such a pact entails
technical and other parameters. Mr Singh chose not only to
conflate the two issues but parried the question by saying that
India had gone a step ahead by offering such a treaty.
While it is good that both sides are talking, there is need to
see something concrete at least on issues where agreement is in
the interests of both sides. Nuclear accidents or unauthorised
use of nuclear weapons is clearly one such area. It would be
good to see an agreement emerge on these counts and quickly. *
SECOND EDITORIAL: Nepal’s problems are not over
King Gyanendra of Nepal has finally backed down, surrendering
the absolute power he seized last year and the country is back
to where it was when he intervened. It took three weeks of mass
protest, the deaths of some 14 demonstrators and the fear of
imminent insurrection before the king submitted to the demands
of the opposition to restore democracy in Nepal. But does that
solve any major problem?
We believe the answer is in the negative, given the fractious
nature of the opposition. When the king struck, his action was
based on basically two broad issues. The Nepalese politicians
couldn’t get their act together and the sitting government had
failed to address the Maoist threat in the country. None of
those issues has been resolved. The opposition got together on
the basis of a single-point agenda, to get the king to restore
democracy, and while it has succeeded in doing so, there is no
other issue on which it can unite. The king, having conceded
that, is now trying to split the opposition and it looks like he
is succeeding. The moment he announced the restoration of
parliament, the politicians were all too happy to come forward
and join the government. But that is not what the street wants
and the street comprises young men and women who are as sick of
the established politicians as they are of the monarchy. This
means that we might be witnessing an interim lull before the
politicians begin to fall foul of the street. It seems that the
king wants to see that happen. If the politicians are
discredited, that makes space for him. On the other hand,
because the street is also against the king, the country may
fall into a bigger abyss.
Similarly, the government which has been restored has had to
negotiate with the Maoists and the problem of the guerrilla
movement is not about to go away simply because the king has
been humbled. If anything, it might well get worse. The Maoists’
first reaction was to denounce the politicians for kowtowing to
the king. They are now on board but they want “a free election
to a constituent assembly,” as the senior Maoist leader Baburam
Bhattarai said.
The king’s strategy now is to sow discord between the
politicians and the Maoists. He is hoping that the politicians
will go back to their old games, that the Maoists will resume
their violent armed struggle and the street will rise in revolt,
this time against the politicians. Under the circumstances,
Nepal doesn’t look like it is about to enter a period of
normalcy. *
Daily Times - All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
22 Jakarta Post: Our Mideast policy
The Journal of Indonesia Today
Opinion April 28, 2006
Wooing Arab investors is understandably one of the main goals of
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's tour of four Gulf states
this week and next. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates are all flush with windfall petrol dollars from
soaring global oil prices.
It is up to President Yudhoyono to court these countries and
convince them that Indonesia is an attractive location for their
money. Of course, once he returns home, the President will have
to sort out all the problems that have made Indonesia's
investment climate one of the least attractive in the region.
That much we know because many foreign investors have stayed
away from Indonesia.
The climax of the President's current overseas tour, however,
will be his stop in Jordan, which follows his tour of the Gulf
states, where he has a scheduled meeting with Palestinian
President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman.
This meeting will be closely watched, no only by the
international community but also by the domestic audience. It
will determine where Indonesia, the country with the world's
largest Muslim population, now stands in the complex problem
that is the Middle East.
Under President Yudhoyono, Indonesia has made clear its
aspirations to play a more active role in the search for a
lasting settlement to the conflict between Palestine and Israel.
For decades now, Indonesia has largely sat on the fence and
watched while others took the initiative. On the
Israel-Palestine conflict, our position has been consistent in
demanding the return of Palestinian lands and the creation of an
independent Palestine state. Indonesia has refrained from
establishing any kind of relationship with Israel as part of the
campaign to force it to comply with UN resolutions on the return
of Palestinian lands.
Here lies the problem. Without any kind of relationship with
Israel, Indonesia cannot play the role of mediator in the
conflict. Our position has thus been reduced to that of a
cheering supporter for one of the sides in the conflict. We can
be as loud as we want from up in our seats, but we will not make
much of a difference in the outcome of events out on the field.
That Indonesia is staking its claim for some kind of a role in
the Middle East conflict is understandable. As a democracy, and
one with the world's largest Muslim population, Indonesia should
have greater confidence in its foreign policy when addressing
issues such as democracy and human rights.
We have the credentials necessary to play the role of an honest
broker, and our Constitution demands that we have an active and
independent foreign policy that pursues peace in the world.
Indonesia has already publicly endorsed the two-state solution
that would recognize the legitimate existence of the states of
Israel and Palestine. That means that we are just one step away
from actually recognizing the state of Israel. The question that
remains is the timing of that recognition. One thing that is
sure, Indonesia will not be the first country with a
predominantly Muslim population to recognize Israel. Egypt,
Jordan, Turkey and Morocco have already done that.
Under current policy, it is clear Indonesia will not recognize
Israel until after a final solution to the conflict with
Palestine is found. But if Indonesia now wants to play a role in
the peace process, which is reaching the final and crucial
stages, a rethink of the policy is called for. We cannot have it
both ways: wanting to play the role of broker but not
recognizing one of the parties to the conflict. The choice could
not be clearer.
The government's desire to play a greater role in the Middle
East peace process unfortunately has not been accompanied by any
rational debate about our policy with regards to Israel. Voices
calling for a revision of the policy have always been drowned
out by emotional accusations of a betrayal to the Palestinian
cause.
Yet, a healthy debate about our Middle East policy is precisely
what we need at this stage if we seriously want to make a
difference on the world stage.
All contents copyright © of The Jakarta Post.
webmaster@thejakartapost.com
A CARING MEGA: Vice President Megawati Soekarnoputri (rights)
holds the hand of President Abdurrahman Wahid (center) as the
two, accompanied by Speaker of the People's Consultative
Assembly Amien Rais (left), enters the Assembly building in
Jakarta. The President presented his annual progress report to
the Assembly on Monday. JP/bay
*****************************************************************
23 AFP: Bush administration slammed in Senate over Indian nuclear deal -
Thu Apr 27, 2:39 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Senators criticised the US administration for
not being transparent with lawmakers on a controversial civilian
nuclear deal with India.
Legislators were particularly interested in an agreement being
negotiated with New Delhi detailing the landmark deal clinched
on March 2 by President George W. Bush" /> President George W.
Bushand Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
The deal would allow India, which is not a signatory of the
nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), access to long-denied
civilian nuclear technology in return for placing a majority of
its atomic reactors under international safeguards.
Speaking at a hearing on the deal, Democratic Senator Joseph
Biden charged that the administration had "reneged" on a promise
to share drafts of the bilateral nuclear agreement.
The United States had sought a provision in the agreement that
nuclear cooperation would be discontinued if India conducts a
nuclear test, but New Delhi has flatly rejected the suggestion,
officials have said.
Biden said the administration also had yet to answer a deluge of
questions posed by lawmakers, or share with them the full list
of India's civil nuclear facilities -- "even in classified
form".
He wanted the administration's "negotiating record" on the
question of international safeguards that Indian nuclear
reactors would be subject to.
The International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic
Energy Agency(IAEA), the UN global nuclear watchdog, is still
negotiating with India on the safeguards.
"All parties involved in the negotiations, including the Bush
administration, should facilitate the maximum amount of
transparency possible, so that Congress is better equipped to
make informed judgments," said Republican Senator Dick Lugar,
who heads the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee" />
Senate Foreign Relations Committeewhich held a hearing
Wednesday.
Lugar said he had himself submitted to the administration 90
questions -- aside from 82 questions that have already been
answered -- following extensive April 5 congressional testimony
on the deal by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" />
Condoleezza Rice.
"We appreciate the administration's attention to these questions
as the committee carefully works through the intricacies of the
nuclear agreement," he said.
For it to be effective, the nuclear agreement has to be approved
by Congress.
Until the administration answers lawmakers' questions and
provides them details on the deal, "we simply should not act on
its proposed legislation," Biden said.
Several American weapons experts have warned that forging a
civilian nuclear agreement with non-NPT member India would not
only make it harder to enforce rules against nuclear renegades
Iran" /> Iranand North Korea" /> North Korea, but also set a
dangerous precedent to other countries with nuclear ambitions.
"If we do this deal, ask how we will avoid offering a similar
one to Brazil or Argentina if they decide on nuclear weapons
acquisition, or our treaty ally South Korea" /> South Korea,"
Robert Gallucci of Georgetown University told the hearing.
"The deal would set a dangerous precedent," he said. "If we do
this, we will put at risk a world of a very few nuclear weapons
states, and open the door to the true proliferation of nuclear
weapons in the years ahead," he said.
The Bush administration says the deal offers a crucial energy
alternative to rapidly-growing India and would elevate relations
between the world's largest and oldest democracies to a new
strategic height.
Ashley Tellis from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a
Washington-based think tank, said a strong American partnership
with India was essential if the United States wanted a "stable
geopolitical order in Asia".
He said the partnership "represents a considered effort at
'shaping' the
emerging Asian environment to suit American interests in the
21st century".
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
24 [NukeNet] Chernobyl Killed 1,000 British Infants -- Report
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:53:24 -0700
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Chernobyl Killed 1,000 British Infants — Report
Created: 23.03.2006 15:01 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 15:01 MSK
MosNews
More than 1,000 British babies may have died as a result of the Chernobyl
nuclear disaster 20 years ago, epidemiologist and statistician John
Urquhart claimed Thursday. On the eve of the 20th anniversary of the
tragedy, health records show infant deaths increased in the years after the
Ukrainian reactor explosion in April 1986, Life Style Extra website reports.
And the biggest rise in deaths — babies under one year old — was in areas
where radioactive rain had fallen, the expert said. In contaminated areas,
including Bradford and Leicester, infant deaths increased by 11 per cent
during the years 1986 to 1989, and in other areas rose by 4 per cent. This
was at a time when infant mortality had been falling by an average four per
cent a year.
In the days that followed the nuclear disaster, in which an explosion tore
the roof off one of the four reactors at the Soviet power station, large
clouds of radiation swept westwards across northern Europe, including
Scandinavia, France and the UK.
Epidemiologist and statistician John Urquhart, who carried out the
research, said the Met Office had tracked several plumes of the radiation
moving across Britain, and radioactive particles fell as ’black rain’ when
the plumes met the patchy rain clouds overhead that day.
This meant showery parts of the country were contaminated much more than
dry areas. In most places the contamination hung around for only a few
weeks, but the highlands of Wales and Cumbria had very heavy rainfall that
day and sheep farmers there are still living with the radioactive dust in
the soil. Urquhart, a former advisor at a Cambridge University research
unit, examined more than 50,000 infant deaths from all causes in the UK
between 1983 and 1992 and compared mortality rates in different districts.
He found that a map showing highest mortality almost exactly matched a Met
Office map of contaminated areas.
In the most radioactive areas, which also included Merseyside, Bristol,
Northern Ireland and parts of Essex, infant mortality was more than 11 per
cent higher in the years 1986 to 1989 than in the preceding years.
Urquhart said the result was “highly significant” and the chance that the
increases were due to random fluctuations was about 1 in 4,000. He said:
“The long-term trend of infant mortality was declining at about 4 per cent
per annum, but that was interrupted by Chernobyl.” As well as the national
variations, there were very noticeable regional differences, he said.
For instance, Yorkshire received hardly any radioactive fallout, apart from
in the very far west. And infant deaths in Bradford were higher than in the
rest of the county.
He also found significant increases in ’neo-natal deaths’ — of babies up to
28 days old — which account for roughly half of all infant deaths.
Neo-natal deaths rose by 4 per cent in contaminated areas but fell by 5 per
cent in unaffected areas. When he looked only at cot deaths, he found huge
rises in some affected areas — 50 per cent in Bristol, 60 per cent in
Liverpool and 90 per cent in Cumbria — although this is based on a
relatively small number of deaths.
Urquhart, presenting his findings at the Nuclear Free Local Authorities
conference at City Hall in London, said there was clearly some “malign
influence” causing these “excess” deaths but apart from the radiation there
was no factor that applied only to the contaminated areas.
He said: “The question is, is that malign influence due to some disease
affecting the population or is it due to Chernobyl? But the malign
influence was three times stronger in the radioactive areas.”
Earlier research has shown that an increase in northern England of thyroid
cancer, associated with radioactive iodine, was probably due to Chernobyl
fallout. But Urquhart said no scientist has looked for a link to infant
deaths before because their ’models’ predicted no effect from the level of
radiation found in Britain after Chernobyl. He said these models were based
on a study of the aftermath of Hiroshima, with a much smaller population,
and the effect is only noticeable when looking at many thousands of infant
deaths.
He said: “There’s going to be a big controversy about this paper because
people have been trundling along for the last 50 years saying radiation
isn’t dangerous. These observations have got to pose a challenge to the
scientific establishment.” Urquhart called for more studies in other
European countries and changes to the way governments plan for nuclear
emergencies.
links to many other Chernobyl articles follow at site:
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2006/03/23/chernobylbabies.shtml
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
25 [unplugsalem-announce] wilmington news journal on hope creek
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:52:40 -0700
Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583
----------
From: unplugsalem-announce@yahoogroups.com [mailto:unplugsalem-
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 6:57 PM
Subject: [unplugsalem-announce] wilmington news journal on hope creek; norm
quoted
http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060425/NEWS/604250347/1006
Nuclear plant replacing critical pump
Environmentalists had warned of possible radiation release
By JEFF MONTGOMERY
The News Journal
04/25/2006
A troubled, vibration-prone water pump near the core of the Hope Creek
nuclear reactor has been removed and will be replaced, easing citizen
groupsconcerns about a crippling breakdown or catastrophic leak.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials ordered safety controls and special
monitoring for the 20-foot-high pump in January 2005 after investigating
complaints about risks posed by microscopic wobbles in a shaft that powers
the system. The pump, critical to reactor operations, can move 100 million
gallons of mildly radioactive cooling water each hour.
Hope Creeks principal owner, PSEG Nuclear, shut the plant for three months
beginning in late 2004 while federal regulators investigated the vibrations
and other safety concerns in the reactor, which stands along the Delaware
River in New Jersey, opposite Augustine Beach.
Environmental groups warned that a pump failure could disrupt reactor
cooling systems and strain backup equipment, potentially crippling the
20-year-old plant and increasing risks of a radiation release.
Probably the best news thats come in a long time is that [pump] shaft bent
or not is no longer in that plant,said David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer
and safety expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists. Had that been my
plant Id have replaced that shaft a year agoduring an extended shutdown
after an unrelated breakdown.
Federal regulators reviewed the concerns but ruled that PSEG could operate
safely under tight restrictions.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said the metal pump
shaft would be examined closely for damage. Regulators early last year
declared the system safe to operate until Hope Creeks next refueling
shutdown, which began April 6.
The good news is the pump made it through this operating cycle without
encountering any difficulties," Sheehan said.
Advertisement
image007.gif
Skip Sindoni, a spokesman for PSEG Nuclear, said the pump "performed as we
expected" before its removal.
Hope Creek and the nearby twin Salem Units I and II reactors rank as the
nation's second-largest nuclear generating complex, capable of reliably
producing more than 3,300 megawatts of electricity, or enough energy to
meet the needs of nearly 3 million homes.
One citizen group said Monday that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission failed
to go far enough in making PSEG Nuclear fix its aging Hope Creek system.
Norm Cohen of UNPLUG Salem said the company should have replaced both
reactor cooling water pumps at Hope Creek. The two pump systems play an
important role in fine tuning temperatures inside the radioactive core.
"The other pump has just as many hours as the one they're replacing," Cohen
said.
The commission began investigating safety problems at PSEG's nuclear plants
in 2003, after former PSEG senior manager Kymn Harvin raised concerns about
management practices that tended to discourage workers from reporting
unsafe conditions. The investigation eventually led to an agency order for
reforms in PSEG's maintenance practices and work environment.
Harvin, who was fired by PSEG in 2003, was scheduled to receive an award
for "Outstanding Service in the Public Interest" from the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers on Wednesday.
Commission officials plan to review PSEG Nuclear's performance at Hope
Creek and Salem Units I and II at a public meeting next month. A commission
report issued in March said regulators plan to end special supervision of
some maintenance management at the plants, but will continue to seek
reforms in plant work practices that affect employee reporting of safety
issues.
Contact Jeff Montgomery at 678-4277 or
jmontgomery@delawareonline.com.
Copyright © 2006, The News Journal. Use of this site signifies your
agreement to the
Terms
of Service and Privacy Policy
(updated 10/3/2005)
Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave,
Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583
Attachment Converted: image0072.gif: 00000001,684f1992,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
26 Caribbean Net News: In Cuba, Chernobyl kids get special care, and hope
Isabel Sanchez
Far from his native Ukraine, Mikhail -- his frail body tanned, a
sea breeze caressing his hairless head -- is one of many in Cuba
fighting after-effects of the Chernobyl disaster's fallout, in
the biggest such program of its kind.
Ukrainian children Yulia Adienko (8) late victim of the 1986
Chernobyl nuclear plant accident, under medical treatment at
Tarara Hospital, east from Havana, awaits 26 April, 2006 with
other children the beginning of a commemoration ceremony for the
20th the anniversary of the catastrophic radiation leak. The
blasts at the Soviet-era plant created a cloud of radioactive
dust that drifted over a large swathe of Europe and still haunts
millions of people in Ukraine and its neighbours. AFP PHOTO/
Adalberto ROQUE
He is one of 22,000 people -- including 18,546 children from
Ukraine, Belarus and Russia -- treated for radiation-related
pathologies since March 29, 1990 at the Tarara Pediatric
Hospital just outside Havana.
"All of my hair fell out, and it hasn't come back. I am in Cuba
trying to get it to grow again," the 12-year-old explains
matter-of-factly on the doorstep of his simple home near the
beach.
Every morning since he arrived in Cuba December 9, he has put
his bare head under a lamp that delivers infrared rays to his
scalp, slicked with pilotrophine, a Cuban product derived from
placenta used in alopecia treatments.
Dimitri, 14, explains how his treatment, for vitiligo, includes
melagenine -- also placenta-derived -- as well as a long daily
dose of sun, sand and sea.
They are Chernobyl kids who were not even born when the disaster
at reactor number four in Ukraine, near the border with Belarus
in the former Soviet Union, took place two decades ago.
Many suffer from thyroid cancer, leukemia, vitiligo, psoriasis,
scoliosis, muscular atrophy or neurological ailments; they get
treatment based on the seriousness of their illness, sometimes
45 days, sometimes three or six months, or even a year.
"We think that genetic malformations are going to start now.
Twenty years have gone by and we still don't know what all the
consequences will be. Many of them suffer from anxiety disorders
because they do not know how long they will live," explains
Maria Teresa Oliva, 51, a pediatrician in management at the
facility.
"But with effort and dedication, we are helping them," she says.
The program, which over 16 years has seen 15 people die, and
carried out six bone marrow transplants on leukemia patients,
was not abandoned even during Cuba's staggering economic crisis
of the 1990s after it lost all economic support from the former
eastern bloc.
"There are several programs to help these children, but none as
large or systematic as Cuba's. More than one half recover, and a
third improved their medical conditions," said Ukrainian Health
Minister Yuri Poliachenko.
On a visit to Havana weeks back, he renewed the agreement under
which Ukraine since 1998 has paid for the children's travel and
incidental expenses. The communist Cuban government funds the
program, but won't say how much it spends.
Joined by a parent or tutors, about 800 children come for
treatment at the hospital each year. They attend the "Russian
school" at the Tarara complex, from which they leave only to
visit other clinics around Havana, flanked by a doctor and a
guide.
"I feel good; I like to go to the beach, play chess and listen
to conga," says Viktor Vasiuk, a bit of a laugh at age 10
speaking Cuban Spanish with a Ukrainian accent.
His spinal malformation does not stop him from diving into the
ocean, under the watch of his grandmother Slava Kovalishina,
whose age of 60 he happily volunteered.
Next door to Viktor, Vitalic, 12, listens to his father speak
about atoms, explosions and a toxic cloud that spread over much
of Europe back on April 26, 1986, in the worst civilian nuclear
catastrophe.
"My son is just not aware of what Chernobyl represents for our
country," his father, 51, says privately. The man was one of
600,000 firemen, civilians and military staff mobilized to
respond to the emergency.
Mijail, more serious by nature, always has Chernobyl on his
mind.
"I hope this never happens again," he says, his blue eyes
intense under the trace of a line of eyebrows that he once had.
Back...
Click here to receive our daily Caribbean news headlines by
e-mail:
http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/subscribe.htm
Copyright © 2006 Caribbean Net News All Rights Reserved END
MasterWebpageMailer -->
Copyright © 2003-2006 Caribbean Net News All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
27 Guardian Unlimited: Gorbachev in row on 20th anniversary of
Chernobyl disaster
Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow
Thursday April 27, 2006
The Guardian
The thousands of people who died because of the world's worst
nuclear disaster at Chernobyl were mourned on the 20th
anniversary of the tragedy yesterday, as a Russian newspaper
published transcripts of a politburo meeting during which the
Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev suggested covering up the real
circumstances of the accident.
Ukrainian children holding candles were among hundreds of
mourners in the city of Slavutich who laid red carnations at a
memorial to the firefighters who died in the blaze that began at
1.23am on April 26 1986, spewing radioactive dust across Europe.
Izvestia newspaper yesterday published an extract from a new book
by Alla Yaroshinskaya, who in 1991 unearthed classified
transcripts of a meeting on April 29 1986 between Mr Gorbachev,
then the Communist party leader, and the rest of the politburo.
Mr Gorbachev was quoted as saying in the edited extract: "The
more honest we are the better." He then suggested giving out
inaccurate information on the disaster: "When we give out
information we need to say that the station was closed for
planned repairs, so as not to make our equipment look bad."
His colleagues persuaded him to admit that the nuclear station's
hermetic seal had been damaged by the fire, saying that US
president Ronald Reagan probably already had satellite
photographs of the disaster on his desk.
Mr Gorbachev told the Guardian in a recent interview: "A lot of
things were unclear [after the disaster]. We sent a commission
from the Academy of Sciences to investigate, but after 36 hours
they could not clarify what had happened. They were saying 'an
accident happened', but nothing about an explosion in the
reactor." He said information about the spread of radiation
first trickled in from northern Europe.
Useful links
Brama Ukraine Newstand
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
28 AU The AGe: Safely, greenly nuclear -
Opinion - theage.com.au
Illustration: Dyson April 28, 2006
There are no significant obstacles to the safe handling and
storage of civil nuclear wastes, writes Ian Hore-Lacy.
Last week Helen Caldicott regaled your readers with some
fantasising about nuclear power. This week Christine Milne warns
us not to risk repeating the Chernobyl accident as we sell
uranium to China. I agree.
Broadly, renewed world attention to nuclear power is driven by
three factors: improved basic economics, the prospect of
carbon-emission costs on fossil-fuelled alternatives, and energy
security. With growing electricity demand coupled with the need
to limit greenhouse gas emissions, most countries have nowhere
else to go for clean base-load electricity generation than
nuclear power. By and large, renewables such as wind cannot
deliver continuous reliable supply of electricity, let alone on
any scale.
Whereas 10 years ago the environmental lobby was noisy in
opposition, today some of the world's highest-profile
environmentalists speak clearly for nuclear power, because they
think it represents much less of a problem or threat than global
warming. In the United States, a new public coalition for Clean
and Safe Energy announced this week is being headed by
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore and former administrator of
the US Environment Protection Agency Christine Todd Whitman to
promote nuclear energy.
Internationally, the nuclear renaissance is gathering steam. At
present, 30 nations representing two-thirds of humanity use some
440 nuclear reactors to produce 16 per cent of global
electricity, from 368 GWe (gigawatt electric) of capacity - more
than seven times Australia's total. Twenty-seven more units are
being built in 10 countries because they make economic sense, 38
more are firmly planned, and more than 100 are further back in
the pipeline. Many of these are modern designs building on 50
years' experience with the technology.
While capital costs of nuclear plants are high, overall
generation costs are competitive in most parts of the world
today, though probably not in Australia due to our cheap and
abundant fossil fuels. Any costs imposed on carbon emissions
from fossil-fuel burning will improve nuclear power's economics
greatly and make it feasible practically anywhere.
Doubling the world's nuclear contribution would eliminate
one-quarter to one-third of the CO2 emissions from power
generation. The fond hopes of the green movement cannot match
this.
The main relevance of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster is that it
tragically showed why nothing like that kind of reactor could
ever be licensed or built outside the Soviet Union. In a
worst-case accident in the kind of reactors common in the West,
the neighbours would be unscathed - as at Three Mile Island in
the US seven years earlier. And today' reactors - including
China's - are improved on those.
Caldicott's assertion that it would be easy to cause a reactor
meltdown is wrong. But more importantly, it would not matter for
those nearby, even though it would be a disaster for the
operator. There is enough experience of melted cores to be
confident of this.
Nuclear wastes may be a bogy in the public mind due to
irresponsible fearmongering, but in fact they are arguably a
distinct positive due to their relatively low quantity and ease
of containment, storage and disposal, all fully funded by the
electricity customer.
Other than at the political level, there are no significant
problems with safe handling and storage of civil nuclear wastes
anywhere in the world. Caldicott's representation of the US
Yucca Mountain repository site is fanciful, e.g. the host rock
she called "permeable pumice" is actually welded tuffs - more
like glassy slag.
Audited data shows that the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by
the full life cycle of nuclear power is up to 5 per cent that of
gas-fired plants, but could rise to 7 per cent with the very
low-grade ores asserted by Caldicott as likely to be needed.
These levels are widely published and different from her
beliefs.
Radioactive emissions from nuclear plants are negligible -
giving far less exposure than the natural background radiation
we all happily live with.
The resource base for long-term - indeed indefinite - use of
nuclear power is excellent. With the new wave of mineral
exploration focused on uranium now getting under way after a
long slowdown due to ex-military uranium coming on the market, I
would expect known resources to double within a few years. And
that is only part of the story.
In Europe and North America energy security is a big issue. In
contrast with fossil fuels, several years' supplies of uranium
or fabricated fuel can be stored safely, unobtrusively and
relatively inexpensively if political circumstances make that
necessary or desirable. Energy security was a factor in
Finland's decision to build a fifth nuclear reactor, and it
comes even more to the fore in 2006 due to gas supply
constraints in Europe.
In addition to power generation, nuclear power has a prospective
role in providing for transport through the manufacture of
hydrogen.
"A truly informed national debate" such as called for will not
be helped by recycling folklore in the popular media. Let's see
what the House of Representatives Industry and Resources
Committee comes up with after spending a year looking at
Australia's uranium exports and related issues.
Meanwhile, Australia provides a quarter of the mined uranium for
a world increasingly concerned with the clean and reliable
production of large amounts of electricity.
We could do even more.
Ian Hore-Lacy is general manager of the Uranium Information
Centre, Melbourne.
The Age
2006-04-28
Safely, greenly
| Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd. ![]()
The Korea Times > Opinion
20th Anniversary of Accident Observed
The worst nuclear power accident in history took place at
Chernobyl, Ukraine, at 1:23 a.m. on April 26, 1986. Twenty years
have passed since the disastrous explosion. But the name
"Chernobyl" is a potent reminder of the devastation nuclear
energy can bring upon humanity whether in the form of bombs or
power generation.
The accident, triggered by a combination of operational error
and a disregard for safety procedures, blew off the reactor's
heavy steel and concrete lid. The two explosions caused the
release of radioactive material 500 times greater than that by
the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. The extent of the damage
by the contamination was so great and widespread that it is
almost impossible to estimate.
Some 350,000 people living within a 30 km radius of Chernobyl
were forced to evacuate. Some 550 towns and villages around
Chernobyl still remain deserted and are off-limits because about
200 tons of toxic radioactive materials still remain in the core
of the reactor.
It is hard to know the exact death toll from the disaster, as
the estimates of victims vary depending on the organization. A
recent report by the United Nations said that some 4,000 have
died or are likely to die from radiationrelated cancers and
leukemia. However, environment organizations like Greenpeace say
that the number will reach as many as some 90,000.
The miserable fact is that about 5,000 people who were children
at the time of the accident are now suffering from thyroid
cancer and other forms of cancers. A large number of deformed
children have been born to families affected by the
radioactivity.
The Chernobyl accident is said to have played a role in
expediting the collapse of the Soviet Union. Former Soviet
leader Mikhail Gorbachev admitted that the Chernobyl disaster
led him to recognize that it was not possible to run a country
in a secretive manner. It may not be too much to say that the
impact of the Chernobyl accident was so powerful as to cause the
demise of the Soviet Union.
While the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
demonstrated the horrific power of nuclear energy as weapons,
the Chernobyl accident showed catastrophic consequences the use
of nuclear power for peaceful purposes can cause when mishandled.
The construction of nuclear power plants is underway in many
countries. We are also heavily dependent on nuclear plants as a
source of energy. Our dependence on nuclear energy has markedly
increased in the last 20 years and recent skyrocketing oil
prices may drive us to build more nuclear plants. People in
positions of authority should not forget the lessons of
Chernobyl in the construction and operation of nuclear power
plants here.
04-27-2006 21:20
*****************************************************************
44 WSJ.com: Measuring Chernobyl's Fallout
[The Wall Street Journal Public Home Page] [ /]
April 27, 2006
How many people died because of the Chernobyl nuclear-reactor
explosion, which spewed radiation across northern Europe? Twenty
years after the accident, the death toll remains in dispute.
This month, the World Health Organization estimated "up to"
9,000 people died or will die of cancer because of the incident,
which unfolded in the early morning hours of April 26, 1986. The
number was 6,700 to 38,000 in a recent report published in a
peer-reviewed journal, from the Lyon, France-based International
Agency for Research on Cancer, an agency governed by the WHO and
16 member nations. Greenpeace International, which opposes
nuclear power, published its own report, based partly on papers
from former Soviet nations. Greenpeace estimates the death toll
is between 93,000 and 200,000, including cancer deaths and other
illnesses like immunity disorders.
The wide range reflects lingering uncertainty about the health
effects of such disasters. In the case of Chernobyl, the initial
blast, and efforts to contain it, killed 31 people. But, through
the air, food and water, the fallout exposed roughly 600,000
residents and relief workers to very high doses of radiation,
and six million more to lower but still severe doses.
Potentially hundreds of millions more were exposed to radiation
at some level, which is why some researchers study all 570
million Europeans at the time of the accident.
All the Chernobyl studies base death tolls on the health effects
from the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki -- where most people
suffered acute, short-term exposure. And even those bombings
remain poorly understood: Although survivors have been closely
tracked for most of the subsequent six decades, important data
were lost in the first years after the 1945 bombings. Other
information on radiation's effects, from U.S. veterans involved
in atomic testing and from medical patients who receive
radiation treatments, also reflects short-term, high-dose
exposure and therefore isn't fully applicable to Chernobyl.
"There is a very big controversy on the effects of low doses of
radiation," Elisabeth Cardis, head of the radiation institute at
the International Agency for Research on Cancer, told me. Her
group's estimate of deaths (between 6,700 and 38,000) has such a
wide range because it relied in part on data from the Japan
bombings, an imperfect model. (Her agency has looked for more
reliable statistics on the effects of radiation -- it recently
studied 400,000 nuclear-industry workers and found that their
cancer risk was reasonably well-predicted by the models based on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors.)
Because of this great uncertainty, the WHO didn't count any
possible deaths from low-dose exposure, focusing instead on the
six million people closest to Chernobyl. "Any time you're
looking at numbers that have to do with low-dose radiation, it's
speculative" because of the dearth of studies on the health
effects of low-dose radiation, WHO spokesman Gregory Hartl told
me.
An announcement last September from the Chernobyl Forum, a group
including the WHO, the International Atomic Energy Agency -- the
U.N.'s nuclear-energy agency -- and six other U.N. agencies put
the death toll at 4,000, though it only looked at the 600,000
people who were most exposed. Michael Repacholi, manager of
WHO's radiation program, said at the time, "the sum total of the
Chernobyl Forum is a reassuring message." That initial
announcement sparked criticism for excluding millions of people
who were also exposed. Since then, WHO has also acknowledged the
possibility of up to 5,000 more deaths that may be attributable
to Chernobyl.
Keith Baverstock, a former WHO researcher who studies radiation
at the University of Kuopio in Finland, told me in an email,
"There is no excuse for the WHO/IAEA ignoring these fatal
cancers" outside the immediate vicinity of Chernobyl. He added,
"If we cannot believe that WHO tells us the truth about health
issues it is a pretty poor outlook for public health."
Greenpeace, sparked by the September announcement, brought
together more than 50 scientists -- mostly from Belarus, Ukraine
and Russia, the most-affected nations -- to write a report
compiling papers published in regional medical journals. Ivan
Blokov, leader of Greenpeace's Chernobyl project and an editor
of the report, told me that the report is "scientifically
based," with no political statements.
However, the report relied heavily on some questionable methods.
It assumed that Chernobyl was responsible for an overall
increase in cancer rates, but Chernobyl's effect on those rates
is difficult to isolate from other factors, such as changes in
smoking rates and improvements in the diagnosis of cancer. Also,
researchers wanted to estimate how many people exposed to
Chernobyl radiation developed cancer other than thyroid cancer,
which usually isn't fatal. To do so, they studied how cancer
rates rose in post-war Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and looked at the
ratio of thyroid cancers to other cancers in those cases. They
applied a similar ratio for Chernobyl. But Japan's overall
cancer rates differ from Europe's -- Japan has a higher rate of
stomach cancer but a lower rate of lung cancer, for instance --
so it's not clear the same ratios would hold true.
Mikhail Malko, a contributor to the Greenpeace report and a
researcher at the Joint Institute of Power and Nuclear Research
in Minsk, Belarus, outlined the ratios method to me in an email.
"According to my assumption, ratios of radiation risks have to
be similar for all ethnic groups of humans," he wrote,
acknowledging that this is a weakness of his approach. Dr.
Cardis said she needed to study Dr. Malko's approach further,
but based on her initial analysis, she called it "interesting,"
but "fairly crude." The WHO's Mr. Hartl, meanwhile, dismissed
the Greenpeace report, saying Greenpeace "took the reports that
we rejected."
*****************************************************************
45 Belfast Telegraph: A new Chernobyl on our doorstep?
By Marie Foy 27 April 2006
Local politicians should not put the people of Ireland at great
risk by allowing the operation of a nuclear power plant, it was
argued last night.
SDLP South Down MP Eddie McGrady was speaking on the 20th
anniversary of the horrific Chernobyl disaster.
The nuclear plant explosion - the world's worst industrial
accident - discharged radiation more than 250 times that
released by the Hiroshima bomb.
Two British scientists have estimated that Chernobyl could
eventually cause up to 66,000 deaths from cancer - 15 times more
than official figures released last September suggest.
Mr McGrady insisted: "The true horrors of Chernobyl were not
revealed at the time, despite Government knowledge.
"In terms of the damage done as far away as England, Wales and
Northern Ireland, this was played down at the time by the
government and treated as anecdotal. However, we know it was far
from that.
"20 years ago the world watched on as the greatest nuclear
disaster unfolded. For the past 50 years, we have lived with the
permitted and unpermitted discharge of radioactive waste from
the Sellafield site into the Irish Sea."
The politician said people thought Chernobyl would never happen
again.
"We only have to look at the catalogue of safety failures at
Sellafield - in May 2005, 20 tonnes of nuclear waste fuel at the
THORP Reprocessing Plant leaked.
"An investigation into the health and safety incident at the
time revealed that the leakage of this lethal substance went
unnoticed in safety checks in January 2005 and April 2005 and it
is thought that the leak may have begun as early as August 2004.
The potential for death and destruction is constant."
The Assemblyman said it was important not to forget the real
threat of nuclear power stations.
"We must continue our fight for the British Government to close
down the Sellafield plant, and strengthen our opposition to the
planned proliferation of new nuclear powers station in the UK
and Northern Ireland.
"We must remember the threat that Chernobyl so cruelly exposed."
© 2006 Independent News and Media (NI)
*****************************************************************
46 Canadian Press: Klein softens stand against nuclear energy in oilsands
Part of the canada.com Network
Published: Thursday, April 27, 2006
EDMONTON -- Premier Ralph Klein has softened his hardline stance
against any efforts to generate nuclear power in Alberta's
power-hungry oilsands region.
Klein told the legislature that "we have to consider nuclear
power'' as one of the energy options of the future.
The premier quickly added that he's not a proponent of nuclear
power, but he acknowledged that the French firm Total is
considering nuclear power as part of its new investment in the
oilsands.
Klein has vetoed any talk of nuclear reactors in Alberta in the
past, instead encouraging further research into so-called clean
coal to meet Alberta's future energy needs.
The premier again repeated in the assembly that he's a big fan
of coal, wind, hydro and solar power and any form of energy that
would not involve using Alberta's depleting reserves of oil and
natural gas.
Environment Minister Guy Boutilier has also taken a strong stand
against nuclear power, saying earlier this month that nuclear is
"at the bottom of the barrel'' as an energy option for Alberta.
 © Canadian Press 2006
© 2006 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest
*****************************************************************
47 SNA: Bulgaria, Russia, Ukraine Sign New Nuclear Fuel Transportation Deal
www.novinite.com
Sofia News Agency
Politics: 27 April 2006, Thursday.
Bulgaria, Russia and Ukraine are to re-sign an updated agreement
on the transit of nuclear fuel for Bulgaria`s Kozlodui nuclear
power plant.
The accord settles the route of fuel transit through Ukrainian
territory.
According to the new agreement concerning Russian and Ukraine
territory, the special loads will be transported via railway,
while those from Ukraine to Bulgaria would be via water route.
The nuclear fuel would be reloaded at the Ukrainian Danube
Harbour, Ismail.
The existing ten-year agreement for fuel transportation through
Ukraine and Moldova will be extended by another ten years.
The trilateral negotiations have stretched over three years
owing to the difficulty in finding agreement between Ukraine and
Russia.
novinite.com
All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright
&Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
48 NRC: Live NRC Meeting Webcast
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission broadcasts some
Commission meetings over the Internet as a means of improving
communications with the public. Upcoming webcasts are:
Date Subject 5/2/06
Briefing on Status of Emergency Planning Activities - Morning
Session - 9:30 A.M.
Briefing on Status of Emergency Planning Activities - Afternoon
Session - 1:00 P.M.
+ Slides
5/3/06 Briefing on Status of Risk Informed,
Performance-Based Regulation
9:00 A.M.
5/15/06 Briefing on Status of Implementation of Energy
Policy Act of 2005
1:00 P.M.
5/16/06 Briefing on Results of the Agency Action Review
Meeting - Reactors/Materials
9:30 A.M.
The following resources will assist you in participating:
+ Public Meeting Schedule - provides a complete listing of
agency meetings. Live meetings shown as [webcast]
+ Commission Meeting Schedule - lists all Commission meetings
for a six week period. Live meetings shown as [webcast]
+ Slides - available in advance of the meeting
+ Transcripts - available within 48 hours of the conclusion of
the live meeting
+ Meeting SRM - documentation of any Commission's decisions
from the meeting
To view a webcast you will need to download the RealOne plugin
[RealNetworks Media Streaming Player icon] .
You may also view previous webcasts at our Webcast
Archive.
Comments and Feedback
To help us determine the value of continuing to provide this
service, the NRC would appreciate your assistance by providing
comments and feedback on the usefulness, performance, and
frequency with which you might use this service or any other
items related to this service.
+ Contact Us About Webcasts
+ Webcast Interest Survey
Notes on Accessibility
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires equal access to
the Federal government's electronic and information technology.
In compliance with this Act, NRC is including text equivalents
(captioning) as part of the video image being shown over the
Internet during the Commission meeting. Although every effort is
made to assure the accuracy and completeness of this text, users
should be aware that errors may nonetheless occur. Expressions
of opinion in this text do not necessarily reflect final
determination or beliefs. No pleadings or other paper may be
filed with the Commission in any proceeding as a result of any
statement or argument contained in the text-equivalent
(captioned) material.
Last revised Thursday, April 27, 2006
*****************************************************************
49 AFP: World fails on Chernobyl aid pledges - Putin
Thursday April 27, 05:42
[The stricken Chernobyl nuclear reactor after a major
explosion occurred April 1986]
TOMSK, Russia (AFP) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has
charged that the world had failed to keep promises made over the
past two decades to help Ukraine cope with the effects of the
Chernobyl nuclear disaster which linger today.
"The international community, in spite of its promises, is doing
almost nothing to help Ukraine," Putin told reporters here
during a joint press conference with visiting German Chancellor
Angela Merkel.
The Russian president said he had spoken to Ukrainian President
Viktor Yushchenko by telephone on Wednesday, the day marking the
20th anniversary of the catastrophe at a Soviet-era nuclear
power station outside the town of Chernobyl in Ukraine.
"We discussed steps to take," Putin said without elaborating.
Yushchenko, who led somber commemorative ceremonies in Ukraine
marking the anniversary of the tragedy, called Wednesday for
more international help to deal with its consequences.
"We call on all signatories of the Ottawa memorandum to
compensate Ukraine for costs incurred in closing the Chernobyl
station," Yushchenko said, referring to a 1995 pact in which
Western nations pledged three billion dollars (2.4 billion
euros) in aid to Ukraine provided it closed the defunct plant by
2000.
Yushchenko said Ukraine had spent 15 billion dollars over the
past 20 years in dealing with Chernobyl after-effects and
projected it would spend another 170 billion dollars by 2015.
AFP
*****************************************************************
50 Deseret News: Bennett seeks blast briefing
[deseretnews.com]
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Sen. Bob Bennett wants more information, a spokeswoman said after
a briefing given to Bennett's staff members and others about the
planned Divine Strake non-nuclear blast planned for the Nevada
Test Site.
The briefing was held at the NTS Wednesday about the
explosion, planned for June 2.
Bennett sent staff members to the test site and other
members of the Utah congressional delegation have expressed
interest in the session.
Briefings were carried out Wednesday by the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency, which is behind the planned detonation.
Tours were to be held of Tunnel U16b, subject of the experiment,
and its three portals.
The site is on the Nevada Test Site, about an hour and 45
minutes' drive from Las Vegas.
Divine Strake is to explode 700 tons of explosive
ammonium nitrate and fuel oil on the surface of the desert above
an existing tunnel, according to the National nuclear Security
Administration. "The experiment is designed to assess the
capability of computer codes to predict the ground-shock
environment and associated tunnel response to the detonation,"
the group says in a press release.
After the briefing, Bennett's office released a statement
saying the senator believes every precaution is being taken to
ensure that the test will be carried out safely.
"However, before the test takes place, he's requested a
briefing in person by officials from the National nuclear Safety
Administration to review all aspects of the proposed test," said
spokeswoman, Mary Jane Collipriest.
"This personal briefing will help him determine whether
the test should proceed."
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
51 reviewjournal.com: Officials show off pit, offer assurances blast will be safe
Apr. 27, 2006
A worker pushes a cart Wednesday in the tunnel beneath a pit at
the Nevada Test Site where an explosives tests will take place
in June. The tunnel will simulate a location where weapons of
mass destructions could be buried.
Photo by Clint Karlsen.
NEVADA TEST SITE -- Miners took a break Wednesday from drilling
and blasting a large pit in which 700 tons of explosives is
scheduled to be detonated June 2.
With the 36-foot-deep pit only two-thirds finished, work halted
as Defense and Energy officials offered a tour of a tunnel 100
feet beneath the pit and assured reporters they can safely
conduct the Divine Strake bunker-buster test if all goes as
planned.
The massive detonation of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil set off
by C-4 explosives will give weapons scientists data on how shock
waves travel through a 100-foot-thick block of bedded limestone.
The tunnel will offer evidence of the blast's power to destroy a
buried cache of weapons of mass destruction.
The above-ground blast near the top of Syncline Ridge will send
a mushroom-shaped dust cloud 10,000 feet into the atmosphere and
release an explosive yield equivalent to detonating 593 tons of
TNT, 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas, said officials with the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency. That would be larger than the
430-ton yield produced by the Danny Boy nuclear bomb that was
set off in a basalt crater at the test site in 1962.
The $23 million Divine Strake test will be the culmination of a
decade of planning and experimentation aimed at fine-tuning
confidence in the ability of existing weapons to defeat deeply
buried, hardened targets.
One official, Doug Bruder, a civil engineer who leads the
agency's Counter Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate, denied
that the Divine Strake test is geared to developing a new
nuclear bunker-buster bomb as some independent scientists have
speculated.
Instead, he said, the effort is to assess the capabilities of
current weapons to penetrate a target through explosive shock
waves in a specific geologic setting -- in this case, a
limestone tunnel.
The test supports how officials can "best plan for those weapons
to be used if we ever have to," Bruder said. "What it also gives
us in the future is how high the bar needs to be in terms of our
future advanced explosives."
Aside from the Divine Strake test, he said the agency has a
large program to explore more powerful conventional explosives.
"We want those explosives to be as powerful as possible but
non-nuclear. So we need to know what does it take to actually
defeat a facility like that. Now we know what we actually have
to achieve in terms of power of the new explosive," he said.
Since construction of the 1,100-foot-long tunnel was completed
in 1999, the agency has conducted 45 tests, including live
munitions dropped by Air Force warplanes, he said.
That is in addition to small-scale laboratory experiments for
the project and a pair of medium-scale explosions at the
Mitchell limestone quarry, about 35 miles south of Bloomington,
Ind. Those tests in 2004 and 2005 were powered by 3,000 pounds
of nitromethane.
Officials for the National Nuclear Security Administration, a
branch of the Department of Energy that is hosting the test,
would not comment on a lawsuit seeking to block the test that
was filed last week by Western Shoshones and downwinders from
Utah.
Nevada environmental officials meanwhile, have asked the NNSA
for more information that demonstrates harmful pollutants won't
be released beyond the boundary of the 1,375-square-mile test
site.
Most above-ground contamination sites are more than four miles
away from the tunnel. A muck pile from six nuclear tests that
were conducted below ground is more than a mile away. Those
below-ground, weapons effects tests were conducted between 1962
and 1971, NNSA officials said.
The atmospheric, atomic bomb tests -- four each in two locations
-- were conducted during the 1950s.
During Wednesday's preview tour, Linda Cohn, an NNSA
environmental protection specialist, offered assurances that no
radioactive materials from past nuclear tests at the test site
would be injected into the atmosphere and carried beyond the
test site's boundary.
She said survey's conducted Tuesday confirmed that "there is no
radioactive contamination adjacent to this experiment site."
"The crater from this test is only about 98 feet in radius. It
will be a large cloud but it's not going to go off site," Cohn
said.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
52 Salt Lake Tribune: Feds on bomb test: Fret not
Article Last Updated: 04/27/2006 02:36:50 AM MDT
June 2 blast: The Pentagon says no nukes will be used, but is the
site tainted from previous blasts?
By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune
Under construction Wednesday, the blast pit is 37 feet deep and
about 90 miles north of Las Vegas. (Pool photo)
NEVADA TEST SITE - Utahns, the government says, have no cause to
fear an upcoming explosion at the Nevada Test Site.
Nuclear material won't fuel the June 2 blast. And air
currents won't carry contaminated fallout into Utah. Nor will
the massive explosion be practice for future nuclear tests.
Officials from the U.S. Energy Department's Nevada Test Site
and the Pentagon's Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA)
insisted on these points Wednesday. But aides from Utah
congressional offices, fresh from touring the test site,
reserved judgment until they get more information.
"We knew going in there would be more questions," said Alyson
Heyrend, spokeswoman for U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson, who viewed the
site along with other congressional aides from Utah and Nevada.
"Divine
Members of the news media walk one of the tunnels, which will
contain cameras and sensors to record the explosion in a pit
above. (Rick Egan/The Salt Lake Tribune)
Strake," as the Pentagon has dubbed the test, is scheduled for a
high-desert hilltop about an hour-and-a-half's drive north of
Las Vegas.
Its goal: to show the ripple effects, called "shock waves,"
of an explosion above a tunnel - the sort of bunker where
military leaders of an enemy nation might hide weapons of mass
destruction, key equipment or themselves.
DTRA will detonate 700 tons - roughly 37 truckloads - of an
explosive stew developed in Utah, ammonium nitrate and No. 2
fuel oil, in a 37-foot-deep, 32-foot-diameter pit. The pit is
about 100 feet above a 1,000-foot tunnel.
Scientists have posted super-high-speed cameras in the tunnel
and threaded more than 500 sensors in the surrounding rock to
measure the destructive forces from the blast above.
Test results will help them double-check their computer
estimates and determine how much explosive force is needed to
damage a similar bunker - maybe one in China, North Korea or
Iran. DTRA's Douglas J. Bruder said either a nuclear or
conventional bomb could be used to trigger the sort of explosion
being studied.
"There is no relationship between this test and any new
nuclear weapon," he told reporters.
Bruder's agency focuses on countering chemical, biological
and nuclear weapons. He added: "This experiment will allow us to
test any current or future weapon against this kind of
facility."
Utahns Steve Erickson and Peter Litster have joined with a
group of Western Shoshone Indians going to federal court to try
to stop the June 2 test. Tribal members say the test would be
another violation of their treaty with the U.S. government. Like
other Utahns, they fear Divine Strake is leading up to nuclear
"bunker buster" bomb tests.
Government officials declined to comment on the case, but
Erickson said the Pentagon has failed to show that Utahns will
not once again find themselves downwind of toxic nuclear
material.
"It's gigantic, and it's going to send a big cloud into the
air," Erickson said of the test. "That's our biggest worry about
this: Here we go again."
People even as far away as northern Utah and Idaho say the
government's testing programs in the 1950s and 1960s exposed
them to fallout, which caused illness, cancer and death.
Matheson's father, the late Utah Gov. Scott Matheson, died
from a downwind cancer. And, U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch helped
establish a federal fund, which has disbursed $1 billion to
downwinders and their families.
Both Hatch, a Utah Republican, and Matheson, a Utah Democrat,
have questioned how Divine Strake might affect Utahns and their
environment.
Aides emerged from their tour Wednesday with many of those
questions still unanswered.
A draft environmental assessment of Divine Strake contains no
details on the computer projections of how much dirt will shoot
into the air, how contaminated that dirt is from past nuclear
tests and exactly where the cloud is expected to drift.
But Linda Cohn, who plans to finish the environmental review
in the next few days, said she expects the test to be "ho-hum"
in terms of health and environmental effects. She said she had
"no idea" why some people are worried about it.
"There is literally no way this experiment can pick up
radioactive contamination," she said, "because it does not exist
here."
Underground nuclear tests were conducted in a tunnel just
over a mile away. Above-ground tests took place over four and
six miles to the north from the Divine Strake test site.
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
53 Xinhua: IAEA chief calls for co-op on global nuclear safety
www.xinhuanet.com
www.chinaview.cn 2006-04-27 09:43:29
Special report: A black memory: Chernobyl nuclear disaster
VIENNA, April 26 (Xinhua) -- Director-General of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei said
on Wednesday that the international community should strengthen
cooperation to ensure the safe use of nuclear energy.
In a special statement to commemorate the 20th anniversary
of Chernobyl nuclear accident, the world's worst civil nuclear
disaster in history, ElBaradei said IAEA has been studying the
accident and its consequences in a number of ways in the past
two decades.
"First, through a variety of programs designed to help
mitigate the environmental and health consequences of the
accident; second, by analyzing the lessons of what went wrong to
allow such an accident to occur at all; and third, by working to
prevent any such accident from occurring in the future," he
said.
"Building a strong and effective global nuclear safety
regime is a central objective of our work. We can not forget the
lessons that we learnt from Chernobyl accident," he stressed.
"The safety risks associated with nuclear and radiological
activities extend beyond national borders. International
cooperation on nuclear safety matters -- sharing information,
setting clear safety standards, assisting with safety upgrades,
and reviewing operational performance -- has therefore become a
hallmark of IAEA activity, particularly at a time when we are
witnessing an expansion of nuclear power to meet increasing
energy demands in many parts of the world," ElBaradei added.
In line with ElBaradei's initiative, the Chernobyl Forum was
created in 2001, which consists of experts from IAEA, the World
Health Organization (WHO) and seven other specialized UN
agencies, as well as the governments of Belarus, Russia and
Ukraine.
One of the most important purposes of this forum is to call
upon better international cooperation to "focus more effectively
on present and future needs."
The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in April
1986 remains a painful memory in the lives of hundreds of
thousands of people who were affected by the accident. But
according to the authoritative reports issued by Chernobyl Forum
last September, the living condition has been greatly improved
in the former accident area. Enditem
Editor: Nie Peng
Copyright ©2003 Xinhua News Agency. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
54 NRC: Potentially Nonconforming HEMYC and MT Fire Barrier
FR Doc E6-6342
[Federal Register: April 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 81)]
[Notices] [Page 24871-24872] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27ap06-75]
Configurations AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of issuance.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued
Generic Letter (GL) 2006-03 to all holders of operating licenses
for nuclear power reactors, except those who have permanently
ceased operation and have certified that fuel has been removed
from the reactor vessel. The NRC is issuing this GL to: (1)
Request that addressees evaluate their facilities to confirm
compliance with the existing applicable regulatory requirements
in light of the information provided in this GL and, if
appropriate, take additional actions. Specifically, although
Hemyc and MT fire barriers in nuclear power plants (NPPs) may be
relied on to protect electrical and instrumentation cables and
equipment that provide safe shutdown capability during a fire,
2005 NRC testing has revealed that both materials failed to
provide the protective function intended for compliance with
existing regulations, for the configurations tested using the
thermal acceptance criteria from the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) Standard 251, ``Standard Methods of Fire Tests
of Building Construction and Materials.'' The NRC staff applied
the supplemental guidance in GL 86-10, Supplement 1, ``Fire
Endurance Test Acceptance Criteria for Fire Barrier Systems Used
to Separate Redundant Safe Shutdown Trains Within the Same Fire
Area'' for
[[Page 24872]] the test details of thermocouple number and
location, and (2) Require that addressees submit a written
response to the NRC in accordance with NRC regulations in Title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 50.54(f). This
Federal Register notice is available through the NRC's Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession
Number ML061080011.
DATES: The GL was issued on April 10, 2006.
ADDRESSEES: Not applicable.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Daniel Frumkin at 301-415-2280
or by email dxf1@nrc.gov or Angie Lavretta at 301-415-3285 or
email axl3@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document
Room (PDR) at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site,
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. The ADAMS number for the
GL is ML053620142.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems in
accessing the documents in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document
Room reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737 or by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th
day of April 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Christopher I. Grimes, Director, Division of Policy and
Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-6342 Filed 4-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
55 starbulletin.com: Federal nuclear panel to study impacts of irradiation facility
Vol. 11, Issue 117 - Thursday, April 27, 2006
By Diana Leone dleone@starbulletin.com
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will study potential
environmental effects of a fruit irradiation facility proposed
for Honolulu Airport, an attorney for community groups seeking
the review said yesterday.
NRC staff will prepare an environmental assessment to evaluate
threats to Pa'ina Hawaii's proposed facility from airplane
crashes, tsunamis, hurricanes, floods and other accidents, said
David Henkin, an Earthjustice attorney representing Concerned
Citizens of Honolulu.
The order by the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board was
made yesterday in a conference call among attorneys, Pa'ina
Hawaii owner Michael Kohn said yesterday.
Kohn's company had asked to be excluded from conducting an
environmental assessment of its project. The company proposes
using radioactive cobalt-60 in underwater pools to rid fruits
and vegetables of bacteria and insects before out-of-state
shipment. Kohn maintains that the process poses no risk to
people or the environment.
The citizens group petitioned the NRC to do an environmental
assessment after the Hawaii-based company objected to doing one,
Henkin said.
"We applaud the board's decision, which recognizes the
compelling public interest in thorough environmental review of
this controversial proposal," Concerned Citizens member David
Paulson said in a statement. "We are particularly pleased the
people who would be threatened if this irradiator were built are
going to have the chance to have their voices heard and to
ensure the NRC takes a careful look at the many threats to
public health and safety and the environment."
According to Henkin, NRC staff will hold at least one public
meeting in Honolulu where people can comment on the draft
environmental review, which is expected to be completed in
December. The agency will also accept written comments.
When the company announced last summer that it would build the
facility, Pa'ina President Kohn said he hoped to have the
facility in operation by February. He said the facility could
process 80 million pounds of produce a year and would be safe to
both workers and the nearby area.
» Pa'ina Hawaii's application can be seen in part at
www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/ regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing-
license-applications.html.
© Honolulu Star-Bulletin -- http://starbulletin.com
*****************************************************************
56 Ceres Courier: Dealing with uranium traces a headache for city officials
The presence of excessive amounts of uranium in two city wells
have sent city department blazing a new trail within the state
bureaucracy.
Apparently Ceres is the first city in the state to be required to
obtain a permit for wellhead treatment for uranium.
"This is a new new thing for a city to have uranium treatment.
There's some red tape to wade through," said Steve Wilson,
director of Ceres Municipal Utilities Division, "but we're doing
that."
Traces of uranium exceeding federal drinking water quality
standards were detected in Paramount and Rockefeller wells in
November. The element is known to cause cancer. City officials
disconnected the wells from the city's drinking water system but
are trying to get them back into service so the city can keep up
with water demands.
In February the Ceres City Council c ontracted with a Memphis, T
enn. company, Mobile Process Technology, to remove the harmful
element and dispose of it. The process calls for running the
water through a filter filled with resin, which retains the
uranium. Wilson said the Rockefeller well will be equipped with
five vessels of 90 cubic feet apiece while Paramount gets three.
"They're like six foot in diameter, maybe seven feet tall." When
the filter is filled with the harmful element, it is removed as
hazardous waste.
"I don't think that technology has been available for too long,"
said Wilson.
Ceres doesn't have much of a choice than to treat the wells and
keep them in operation, said Wilson. Recent attempts to drill new
wells to produce water that meet federal water quality standards
have failed. And it will be years before Ceres is hooked up to a
regional surface water plant being developed by the Turlock
Irrigation District.
Before the work on a contract for uranium r emoval and disposal
proceeds, the state Depar tment of Health Services must issue a
permit to the city. The state won't issue the permit until the
project meets regulations of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). City Public Works Director Joe Hollstein believes
that a long and drawn-out environmental review process is not
required, saying it is categorically exempt due to it being a
minor alteration of an existing well. The City Council is
expected to approve a declaration that t he process will not have
an impact on the environment on May 8.
City Manager Brad Kilger called navigating through the state
permit process "extremely complicated."
For Mobile Process Technology to be able to transport the
uranium-saturated filters on public highways, the state may also
require a radioactive materials license. The company estimates
that the filter won't be filled for 490 days.
"That's some of the red tape we are wading through. We have to
apply for a radioactive materials license, eve n though we're
just dealing with trace amounts of uranium."
A Utah transport company which will haul out the material also
must have a license to handle radioactive materials.
Uranium appears naturally in the underground water table. Wilson
feels the standards set by the federal government are overkill.
"It's just that it was above what they call the maximum
contaminant level, which is a level they say if you were to drink
two liters of water over 7 0 years you might have one in a
million chance of developing cancer. This is the same water
people have been drinking for a hundred years and they're not
dropping like flies."
After learning of the failure of the two wells last year, the
City Council declared an emergency with the municipal water
system to move quickly to award a contract to drill new wells and
have them on line before summer arrives. The city wants to remove
all city parks from the domestic water supply to save 2,000 gal
lons per minute during peak periods. Hol lstein said the city is
drilling wells at each park site since water of any quality can
be applied to park lawns without a permit.
Without reducing water demand or developing more wells, the city
faces the consequences of low water pressure and reducing
pressure at fire hydrants throughout Ceres.
Meanwhile, the city of Ceres' water conservation program is in
effect year round, said Wilson. Water restrictions are as
follows:
€ Houses with even-numbered addresses may water only on Tu
esdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.
€ Houses with odd-numbered addresses may only water on
Wednesdays, Fridays and Sundays.
€ No outside watering is allowed on Mondays.
€ Every day has an outdoor watering prohibition between noon and
7 p.m. Those who absolutely need to water in those hours, such as
for the establishment of sod, may call the Municipal Utilities
Department at 538-5732 to get a water waiver.
€ Washing of cars must be done with a shut-off nozzle to prevent
runoff.
€ Washing of driveways and sidewalks and the sides of buildings
is prohibited. Persons can, however, call MUD twice a year and
obtain a waiver.
Wilson said water pressure in Ceres would improve if all
residents followed these rules. - By JEFF BENZIGER /
Managing editor of the Ceres (Calif.) Courier
Ceres Marine given loving send-off at Lakewood Hundreds who stood
at the graveside service of Marine Lance Cpl. Juana Navarro
didn't know her. But they felt compelled to show up to pay their
respects Wednesday afternoon to the Ceres woman who loved her
country enough to die for it.
Ceres Relay for Life set for June 24-25 Survivors of cancer in
Ceres are being called on to enlist in a battle against the
deadly disease by participating in the upcoming first-ever Ceres
Relay for Life. Those who have beat cancer will be honored by
walking the first lap of the American Cancer Society event set
for June 24-25 at the Ceres High School track.
*****************************************************************
57 Rocky Mountain News: Flats challenge over cancer aid
Former workers cite monitoring conflict, missing, wrong data
Rocky Mountain News
April 27, 2006
Sick former Rocky Flats workers begged federal officials
Wednesday to give up trying to calculate their radiation
contamination and just pay for their health care before they die.
Michelle Dobrovolny, who comes from a family of ill and dead
former workers at the demolished nuclear weapons plant, told the
federal Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health that none
of her family members has been paid under a 6-year-old federal
program to provide help to atomic-bomb makers sickened on the
job.
"My life expectancy is nine to 10 years and I am 41 years of
age," Dobrovolny told the radiation board. She said the last
Rocky Flats contractor admitted her liver ailment was due to her
work, yet she still can't get paid under the convoluted
calculations of the federal aid program.
Though many Rocky Flats workers have won $150,000 in
compensation and medical benefits under the program, hundreds
more have seen their claims denied by the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health.
Workers say radiation exposure records are missing and wrong, so
it's impossible to prove a connection between their work and
their illnesses. Dobrovolny and others told of repeated
exposures being recorded as zero and of radiation badges
routinely worn under lead aprons or left in drawers.
They argue that they should be allowed to join cancer patients
from four other weapons plants who have been grandfathered into
the aid program because of a lack of records.
The exemption provision applies only to workers with certain
cancers, not the many other ailments among the weapons plant
workers.
But NIOSH says there is no need for the exemption because it has
all the records it needs.
"We have pretty complete dosimetry records," showing the level
of radioactivity inside individual workers, said Brant Ulsh, the
NIOSH scientist who recommended against the grandfathering.
These include urine, fecal, lung and body counts of radiation.
Ulsh said his team checked about 10 cases of missing records
cited by workers and the steelworkers union, and "we just aren't
seeing the kind of gaps the workers are telling us about."
The board will hear more testimony today, and then could make a
recommendation on grandfathering some workers to Secretary of
Health and Human Services Michael Leavitt, who will make the
final ruling.
But Colorado U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and U.S. Rep. Mark Udall,
whose congressional district includes Rocky Flats, asked for a
postponement because the board's consultant had not yet reviewed
the workers' request.
Meanwhile, Salazar, Udall and other members of Congress are
outraged at a White House budget memo that suggested such
grandfathering decisions should be denied to keep the budget
down - even though workers have been promised compensation under
the law.
"This is not just about money. This is about the government's
honor," Udall said last month.
Also Wednesday, the board was told NIOSH has no way of
calculating the radiation exposure of construction workers who
moved around the plant. Knute Ringen said some 5,000 claims from
construction workers around the country are untouched as a
result.
Larry Elliott, the head of the dose calculation program for
NIOSH,said Wednesday he is confident that no worker who deserved
compensation had been denied. --> Subscribe | |
| | 2006 © The E.W. Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
58 [NukeNet] No Criminal Charges in Yucca E-mail Controversy
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:52:44 -0700
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/042606EC.shtml
No Criminal Charges in Yucca E-Mail Controversy
By Erica Werner
The Associated Press
Wednesday 26 April 2006
Washington - The US attorney's office will not pursue criminal charges
over allegations of paperwork fraud by government scientists on the Yucca
Mountain nuclear waste dump in Nevada, the Energy Department's inspector
general announced.
In a memo released Tuesday, Inspector General Gregory H. Friedman said
he concluded his criminal investigation in December and turned the results
over to the US attorney's office for the District of Nevada. The US
attorney declined to pursue criminal prosecution, the memo said.
"Nonetheless, the actions of those involved - which have been
described by observers as irresponsible and reckless - have had the effect
of undermining public confidence in the quality of the science associated
with the Yucca Mountain Project," the memo said.
Testifying at a congressional hearing Tuesday, Friedman said
prosecutors had told him they "could not show intent and the actions did
not rise to the level of criminality."
At issue were e-mails exchanged among US Geological Survey
hydrologists between 1998 and 2000 that suggested they were falsifying
documentation of their work to satisfy quality assurance standards.
Yucca Mountain is planned as the first national repository for nuclear
waste and is meant to hold at least 77,000 tons of the material. Political
opposition, money shortages and other problems - including the e-mail
controversy - have delayed the project, and Energy Department managers now
can't say when the site will open.
The Energy Department revealed the existence of the e-mails a year
ago. Portions of the e-mails that were made public indicated that
scientists made up dates, deleted inconvenient data and kept one set of
documents for themselves and another for quality-assurance officials.
"This is as good as it's going to get. If they need more proof, I will
be happy to make up more stuff," one scientist wrote.
A scientific review by the Energy Department concluded in February
that the scientists' work was sound, but it is being redone anyway - at
cost of millions of dollars - because quality-assurance requirements were
flouted.
The scientists were studying how water moves through the dump site 90
miles northwest of Las Vegas, a key factor in how much radiation can be
released.
Despite the decision not to prosecute, Friedman was sharply critical
Tuesday of Energy Department internal controls, particularly the six-year
delay from when the e-mails were written to when they became known to top
Energy Department managers.
"We could not find a satisfactory explanation," his report said,
noting that at least one supervisor was aware of the e-mails around when
they were written.
Bechtel SAIC contractors found the e-mails in November 2004 while
conducting reviews required for DOE to apply for a Nuclear Regulatory
Commission license. Even after that it took another four months for top
managers to see them.
That delay was partly due to "the disruption of work during Bechtel's
holiday season shutdown," according to an internal DOE report quoted by the
inspector general.
Chairing a hearing Tuesday of a House Government Reform subcommittee,
Nevada Republican Rep. Jon Porter said Yucca is "consistently failing." But
he said the decision on whether to prosecute "is for the US attorney's
office to determine."
-------
(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. t
r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this
article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and
allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are
often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO
may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to
Original" links.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net
*****************************************************************
59 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear waste 'terror target
From Press Association
[UP]
Press Association
Thursday April 27, 2006 3:08 AM
Government advisors on nuclear waste have highlighted a warning
by security specialists that Britain's nuclear waste is
vulnerable to terrorist attack, Friends of the Earth said.
The message coincides with Thursday's announcement by the
Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) of its draft
recommendations for dealing with Britain's dangerous nuclear
legacy.
Friends of the Earth said the Government must take urgent action
to deal with the threat.
Papers prepared for CoRWM, which will unveil its recommendations
for the long term management of nuclear waste, show that
"security specialists" have warned it about the terror threat.
The specialists told the committee that "it is our unanimous
opinion that greater attention should be given to the current
management of radioactive waste held in the UK, in the context
of its vulnerability to potential terrorist attack.
"We are not aware of any UK Government programme that is
addressing this issue with adequate detail or priority, and
consider it unacceptable for some vulnerable waste forms such as
spent fuel, to remain in their current condition and mode of
storage."
The experts urge the Government to instruct the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA) to make the radioactive waste
safe from terrorists.
They say the NDA should be told "to produce an implementation
plan for categorising and reducing the vulnerability of the UK's
inventory of radioactive waste to potential acts of terrorism,
through conditioning and placement in storage options with an
engineered capability specifically designed to resist major
terrorist attack".
Friends of the Earth said CoRWM may recommend that the most
radioactive and long lived wastes are buried deep underground,
despite concerns that waste would leak from its containers
within 500 years.
Friends of the Earth said it believes the immediate priority
should be to ensure waste is safely stored so that long term
options can then be properly investigated.
© Copyright Press Association Ltd 2006, All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
60 Guardian Unlimited: 'Safe' burial plan for waste may clear way
for new nuclear plants
· Experts say underground bunker is right approach
· Critics voice security fears over existing sites
David Adam, environment correspondent
Thursday April 27, 2006
Britain will move a step closer today to building more nuclear
power stations, when an influential group of experts reports
with the advice that the radioactive waste produced could be
safely disposed of underground.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (Corwm) will
recommend that an underground bunker is built to house the worst
of the UK's existing mountain of nuclear waste, as well as
material produced by any new reactors.
The move would clear one of the main political obstacles to the
construction of new stations - that Britain has no long-term
plan for handling the deadly waste, which can remain radioactive
for tens of thousands of years.
Corwm, an independent committee set up by the government in 2003
to determine the best way to dispose of the UK's existing nuclear
stockpile, will make its recommendations after an open meeting of
its 11 members in Brighton this morning.
A draft statement agreed yesterday says: "Corwm considers deep
geological disposal to be the best available approach." A final
report will be presented to the government in July, after a
further month of consultation.
Earlier this month, the group said that the majority of its
experts were satisfied that an underground repository would be
safe and represent a "fair burden to pass to future generations".
Today's announcement comes as ministers consider whether to
restart Britain's controversial nuclear power programme in order
to help meet the growing energy demands.
A review of the government's energy policies is widely expected
to give new nuclear reactors the green light when it reports
this summer, although ministers have said that the question of
how to dispose of the waste must be resolved first.
Gordon MacKerron, chairman of Corwm, would not comment ahead of
today's decision, but he said earlier this year: "We have looked
at whether the options on our shortlist could accommodate
new-build wastes, and concluded that they could."
The underground repository would hold the UK's high-level and
intermediate-level nuclear waste, as well as the spent fuel from
reactors. The committee will advise that the storage design
needs further work, specifically to determine whether or not the
site should be sealed straight away or left open for future
generations to deal with. It has not named any possible
locations.
There are several places in Britain where the geology could be
suitable for storage, including parts of Wales, central
Scotland, the Lake District and the east coast of England, the
industry says. In the 1990s scientists planned to build an
underground laboratory near the Sellafield plant in north-west
England to test the concept, but work was halted after an
acrimonious public inquiry.
To avoid a repeat of that, the waste committee has asked groups,
including schools, for their views. Critics, including the Royal
Society, have accused the committee of pursuing public
consultation at the expense of scientific advice.
Roger Higman, of Friends of the Earth, said: "This is a massive
decision that could lead to very large amounts of nuclear waste
buried deep under the UK in a way that is very difficult to get
it back again. It must not be rushed."
He added that the government's priority should be to increase
the security of existing nuclear waste stores. Security experts
have told Corwm that the current approach is "unacceptable" and
is vulnerable to terrorism.
More than 350,000 cubic metres of high-level and
intermediate-level waste are stored around the UK at the moment.
Official figures show that spent uranium fuel rods from new
power stations would almost triple the radioactivity in the
current UK waste inventory.
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
61 London Times: Imagine enough nuclear waste to fill five Albert Halls ...
Where will you store it? -
April 28, 2006
By Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent
BRITAIN'S stockpile of nuclear waste, which is large enough to
fill the Albert Hall five times over, should be buried deep
underground, a government advisory panel recommended yesterday.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), which was
commissioned three years ago to find a long-term disposal
strategy, has concluded that the safest option is to store it in
a concrete bunker at least 300m (985ft) underground in stable,
solid rock.
The proposal, which has been urged by radiation experts and the
nuclear industry for decades, promises to clear an important
barrier to commissioning a new generation of nuclear power
stations, which the Government is considering in its energy
review. Though a solution to the existing stockpile of
radioactive waste is needed, a long-term disposal strategy is
widely agreed to be an essential precursor to building new
nuclear plants.
At present, an estimated 470,000 cubic metres of radioactive
waste, including 2,000cu m of the most hazardous, high-level
material, is stored in surface tanks at 37 facilities. The lack
of a long-term storage facility has alarmed many experts, who
believe that the current arrangements are potentially vulnerable
to an accident or terrorist attack. After extensive consultations
with the public and the scientific community, CoRWM has now
decided that underground burial or "deep geological disposal" is
the only viable option in the long term.
It rejected the alternative of storage in purpose-built
facilities on or near the surface, and had previously ruled out
several more outlandish proposals, such as firing waste into
space or sinking it under the Antarctic ice-cap.
The panel, however, has yet to decide whether a deep geological
depository should be sealed permanently, or kept accessible so
that waste could be retrieved should new technology offer safer
solutions. It added that, as it will be decades before such a
facility can be built, interim surface storage tanks will still
be needed for the foreseeable future. The report does not
recommend any potential sites for the proposed depository, though
it points out that about a third of Britain would be geologically
suitable. It advises that it should be chosen with the consent of
local communities, rather than imposed from on high.
The public is now being given a further month to offer views on
this draft recommendation, before final proposals are made to the
Government in July. Ministers are expected to respond next year,
though site selection and investigation is then likely to take at
least a decade before work can begin.
Deep geological disposal has been chosen by most other countries
with nuclear waste legacies, including the US, France, Finland
and Sweden.
The recommendation was welcomed by scientific groups, even those
who have previously expressed their scepticism about CoRWM. Sir
David Wallace, vice-president of the Royal Society, said: "The
scientific evidence is that deep geological disposal offers a
feasible and low-risk way of dealing with some types of
radioactive waste. We now need to see the establishment of a
body, independent of both the nuclear energy industry and of the
Government, to take forward the development and implementation of
an integrated strategy."
Some environmental groups, however, rejected the panel's
conclusion. Roger Higman, of Friends of the Earth, said: "A
better long-term solution than dumping the waste deep
underground, where it is expected to eventually leak out of its
containers, is required."
Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times.
Copyright 2006 Times Newspapers Ltd.
*****************************************************************
62 PhysicsWeb: Nuclear waste should be buried
27 April 2006
After three years of deliberation, a government-commissioned
inquiry has concluded that the UK should bury its nuclear waste
deep underground. The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management
(CoRWM) laid out its solution to the decades-old waste problem
in a press conference held today. But it told reporters that
because it will take many years to dispose of the waste in this
way, the construction of a permanent repository must be
complemented by a robust system of interim storage.
CoRWM was appointed in 2003 to recommend what to do with the
roughly 470,000 cubic metres of waste in the UK for which there
is no agreed long-term disposal strategy. This includes both
existing waste and waste that will be generated over the next
few decades.
The 11-strong committee, which is made up of both scientists and
non scientists, is chaired by economist Gordon MacKerron. Last
year, after discarding more exotic solutions such as sending the
waste into space or putting it at the bottom of the sea, the
panel drew up a shortlist of four options. These included two
types of "geological disposal" in which the waste is buried
several hundred metres underground -- in either a sealed
repository or one from which the waste can be retrieved for up
to several hundred years after it is put in the ground. The
other two options were continuous temporary storage just above
or below the Earth's surface and the burial of waste just below
the surface.
The committee has now discounted the last two options,
preferring instead geological disposal. But it says that this
approach must be complemented by secure interim storage,
pointing out that a repository might not be ready for perhaps 50
years if there are technical difficulties in developing the
repository or objections from the local community.
However, CoRWM has not stated which type of geological disposal
should be used. In fact, it has yet to decide whether or not it
will state a preference in its final report, which it is due to
release in July. It has also not said where the geological
repository should be located -- this was not part of its remit
-- but it believes that no matter where the dump is located it
must have the blessing of the local residents. "The key
decisions must involve potential host communities and they
should have an equal footing in all relevant decision making,"
says MacKerron.
The committee says that in reaching its decisions it has
examined the technical, scientific, ethical and social aspects
of all the potential options, having consulted over 200
technical experts and listened to thousands of members of the
public and other people with an interest in the plans. But the
panel has not had a smooth ride. Last year, one of its members,
Keith Baverstock, was dismissed from the group and another,
David Ball, walked out. Ball reportedly became disenchanted with
what he saw as the panel's emphasis of public consultation over
expert advice.
Edwin Cartlidge is News Editor of Physics World [ width=] [
Tel +44 (0)117 929 7481 | Fax +44 (0)117 925 1942 | E-mail
info@physicsweb.org
© 1996-2006. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
63 Bradenton Herald: Lockheed defends its efforts in Tallevast
| 04/27/2006 |
Posted on Thu, Apr. 27, 2006
Company responds to written concerns of citizens group
DUANE MARSTELLER Herald Staff Writer
TALLEVAST - Lockheed Martin Corp. defended its handling of
underground contamination in Tallevast, in response to community
leaders who questioned the company's integrity.
In a recent letter to two community leaders, Lockheed said it
has "done everything that the law requires of us and more," in
dealing with a 131-acre toxic plume linked to a former beryllium
plant. As owner of the plant when the contamination was
discovered, Lockheed is responsible for cleaning it up.
"Let me reaffirm that our company is committed to doing the
right thing for the residents and has acted responsibly to
uphold that commitment," Kenneth H. Meashey, Lockheed's vice
president of energy, environment, safety and health, wrote in
the April 17 letter.
Meashey was replying to a March 10 letter to Lockheed chief
executive Bob Stevens from Laura Ward and Wanda Washington,
president and vice president of Family Oriented Community United
and Strong (FOCUS), a residents' advocacy group.
The FOCUS letter accused Lockheed of not keeping promises to
residents, questioned whether the company's ethics were a
"charade" and said Lockheed appeared more concerned with
repairing its public image than addressing residents' concerns.
The two leaders also called for open dialogue with Lockheed
officials the community could trust.
In its reply, Lockheed outlined its previous and current efforts
in Tallevast, including connecting residents with drinking wells
to public water; installing 150-plus monitoring wells; opening a
local information office and launching a Web site; and paying
for an independent consultant, additional soil and groundwater
sampling and a more in-depth health-risk assessment study at
residents' request.
"In light of all this activity over and above the legal
requirements, we fail to understand FOCUS's continued criticism
and apparent dissatisfaction," Meashey wrote in Lockheed's
reply.
"Most disconcerting is your allegation that Lockheed Martin is
not living up to its own high standards for integrity and
ethical behavior. I would urge you to review our company's
record on environmental issues, which clearly shows our approach
is truthful, forthright and fair-minded. We have a commendable
record and we intend to maintain it. While we regret any
confusion you may have over what Lockheed Martin has committed
to do, we reject the notion that we have failed to honor our
commitments."
Ward called the company's reply inadequate.
"The letter didn't address our concerns or say anything we
hadn't heard before," she said.
The written sparring is just the latest in a widening gulf of
mistrust between the company and residents, who are jousting in
court as well. Ward and Washington are among hundreds of
Tallevast residents who have sued Lockheed over the
contamination. A smaller group of residents has filed a separate
but similar suit.
Duane Marsteller, transportation and growth/development
reporter, can be reached at 745-7080, ext. 2630, or at .
*****************************************************************
64 BBC: Finland buries its nuclear past
Last Updated: Thursday, 27 April 2006
By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News website
[Entrance to the Onkalo tunnel. Image: BBC]
The Onkalo entrance is set in low woods near Finland's coast
An unprepossessing tunnel entrance set in low forest on the
western coast of Finland marks the probable final resting place
of the country's most dangerous nuclear waste.
While British authorities agonise over what to do with the
legacy of half a century of nuclear power, Finland is one of a
handful of countries which has embarked on the journey towards a
"final" waste solution.
Enter the 6.5m-high, 5m-wide (20ft-high, 16ft-wide) Onkalo
tunnel, and you would drive down a spiralling track which will
eventually stretch 5km (3miles) through solid rock, reaching a
depth of 500m (1,600ft).
The first travellers to go down the tunnel will be investigators
aiming to demonstrate that the rock is structurally sound enough
to proceed with the disposal of spent fuel rods containing
plutonium and other unpleasant materials.
If they were to turn up a positive result, and if government
agencies grant the necessary licences, the first canisters of
spent fuel would begin rolling down the tunnel about 15 years
from now.
As things stand, Finland is on course to become the first
country in the world to entomb its most troublesome nuclear
waste in a designated final resting place.
Click here to see a visual representation of deep disposal
'Multiple barriers'
The Onkalo facility is run by the company Posiva, and the system
it uses is a Swedish concept called KBS3, which Sweden's proposed
repository would also implement.
[Schematic of Onkalo tunnel. Image: Posiva Oy]
The Onkalo tunnel will spiral to a depth of 500m
The other country close to solving its problem, the US, is
exploring a different technology at its Yucca Mountain site.
"The safety concept is based on so-called 'multiple barriers',"
says Timo Aikas, Posiva's vice-president in charge of
engineering.
"One barrier is of course the solid stable crystalline rock. The
remaining barriers are engineered barriers, the most important of
which is long corrosion-resistant copper canisters, inside which
we put the actual fuel rods."
In this vision, the bottom of the Onkalo tunnel would sprout a
grid of horizontal shafts.
Canisters containing the spent fuel rods would be deposited into
holes in the bottom of each shaft.
The canisters would nest in a bed of bentonite clay, which
swells when it absorbs water. This comes with twin benefits;
cushioning the cargo from geological movement, and ensuring
there are no voids where substantial quantities of water can
penetrate, corroding the canisters and carrying away their
radioactive contents.
As each canister goes in, the tunnels would be filled up again
with yet more clay and rock.
I would not want this market as 'waste issue solved', because
it's not Kaisa Kosonen, Greenpeace
By 2100, the repository would be complete, access routes would be
filled and sealed. What to do next would be a decision for Finns
of that era; but the concept is designed to allow them, if they
want, to cover the tunnel mouth, landscape it and walk away,
leaving no entrance into the rock and no sign of the material
buried underneath.
A granite curtain would have descended on the first civilian
nuclear epoch.
Through the ice age
Some of the radionuclides - atoms with unstable nuclei that
undergo radioactive decay - in spent fuel rods remain
radioactive for more than 100,000 years. In that time, could not
even the tiny quantities of water which the bentonite allows
through penetrate the copper canister shells, allowing
dangerously active isotopes to escape?
Timo Aikas believes not. "We have seen that the copper canister
will not be corroded away," he says.
"We have native copper in the Finnish and Swedish bedrock, which
means we have good conditions for such things. We know from
corrosion testing that 1.5cm [thickness] of copper would be
enough from the corrosion standpoint for times longer than
100,000 years, but we have 5cm (two inches) copper."
The time period is so mind-bendingly long that it will almost
certainly take the world through another ice age; which, if
history is a guide, would bury Finland and Sweden under 2-3km of
ice.
[Schematic of cylinders. Image: Posiva Oy/Afore Oy] Fuel rods
are placed inside a steel cylinder cased in copper
The huge pressures created by this ice will certainly deform even
bedrock, compressing the copper canisters and fuel rods which lie
inside (the rods are contained within channels bored into a steel
cylinder).
So concerned have European authorities been about this that the
European Commission's Institute for Energy in the Netherlands
commissioned pressure tests on the steel cylinders.
"The maximum [ice] thickness is 3km, which equates to a pressure
of 30 megapascals (MPa)," says the engineer in charge, Kalle
Nielsson.
Combined with pressure from groundwater and the tight embrace of
bentonite clay, the cylinders would experience a total pressure
of 45 MPa, which corresponds to the pressure you would have
4,500m (15,000ft) down in the ocean.
In tests, the cylinders stood up to a pressure three times that
value before failing.
"I would say that it's safe," is Kalle Nielsson's conclusion.
"And we have made a probabilistic calculation - 'what is the
probability that it would fail at this 45 MPa?' - and it is less
than one out of a million canisters that would fail. So I would
say as a concept that it's safe."
Far-sighted funds
Technology is only one part of the Finnish solution; the other
vital component is finance.
"Our current cost estimate for this 'funeral' is about 3bn
euros," says Timo Aikas.
When you make a decisi concerning this kind of thing, you have to
have trust Timo Aikas
Three billion euros is a significant sum of money. Is this
another example, then, of the state having to pay vast sums to
clean up a nuclear industry which has in the past generated
profit for private ends?
The signs point in a different direction. The advent of
commercial nuclear power to Finland in the late 1970s saw the
establishment of a fund to pay for the eventual clean-up.
"Every year, we have re-calculated the fund based on the amount
of spent fuel accumulated," says Timo Aikas, "and at the moment
the fund is approximately 1.4bn euros."
The money has come from generating companies through a small
levy on the price of nuclear electricity.
It is, perhaps, the sort of measure which current British
leaders looking at a waste disposal facility bill in the region
of £10bn (14bn euros) would wish their predecessors had chosen
to implement.
Rocky site
Even if the KBS3 concept is sound, even if Finland has the money
to implement it, there is a question over whether Eurajoki is
the best place to put it into action.
Greenpeace, which has been spearheading a campaign against the
new Olkiluoto-3 nuclear reactor taking shape just a kilometre
from the Onkalo site, is concerned that the local geology may
not be the soundest available.
[Construction site. Image: BBC]
Construction work on Finland's new reactor proceeds nearby
"When the site selection started in Finland, the nuclear industry
said they would find the best geological site," says energy
campaigner Kaisa Kosonen.
"And, eventually, they chose the site on sociological reasons,
because eventually Eurajoki was the first municipality to say
'ok, we can take it', and there wasn't an active nuclear
opposition in this area."
That lack of local opposition may be down to the fact that
nuclear reactors have stood in the area for three decades,
gaining acceptance for an industry which has maintained a good
local safety record and brought employment.
"It boils down basically to trust," comments Timo Aikas.
"When you make a decision concerning this kind of thing, which
takes us to 2100 when the final sealing takes place, there will
always be uncertainty. So you have to have trust."
Kaisa Kosonen urges caution; the case for Onkalo, she says, is
not proven.
"I would like to see much more research done and not having this
hasty process," she says. "And I would not want this marketed as
'waste issue solved', because it's not."
But Timo Aikas believes his system and his team deserve the
trust they have found in Eurajoki, and that Onkalo will prove as
safe a resting place for highly active radionuclides as can be
found, barring any surprises with the local geology.
And he urges other countries, Britain included, to take a
decision and find a solution.
"Nuclear waste doesn't go away," he reflects.
"And if we just keep it in stores above ground we just push the
problem to the next generation. It's much more responsible now
to develop solutions on how to take care of it."
[Deep disposal of nuclear waste (BBC)]
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
*****************************************************************
65 BBC NEWS: Science/Nature | 'Deep disposal' for nuclear waste
Updated: Thursday, 27 April 2006, 12:24 GMT 13:24 UK
By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News website
[Sizewell B (BBC)]
The committee is concerned only with the current nuclear
programme
The best long-term solution for the disposal of the UK's nuclear
waste should be to bury it deep in the ground, an advisory group
has said.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) has
released draft recommendations after three years of investigation
and consultation.
It says the time taken to develop deep facilities means that
robust interim storage measures are also needed.
CoRWM was not asked to identify places in the UK where disposal
should occur.
This contentious issue will be addressed in a separate process
initiated by the government - although CoRWM believes this
process can only succeed if host communities are identified on
the basis of a "willingness to participate" and they are fully
and openly involved in key decisions.
UK NUCLEAR WASTE - VOLUMES AS PACKAGED FOR DISPOSAL
[Storage containers for vitrified waste, BNF] High-level waste -
2,000 cubic metres Intermediate-level waste - 350,000 cubic
metres Low-level waste - 30,000 cubic metres Spent fuel - 10,000
cubic metres Plutonium - 4,300 cubic metres Uranium - 75,000
cubic metres
"For 50 years, the UK has been creating radioactive waste,
without any clear idea of what to do with it. Whether we like it
or not, waste exists and we have to deal with it," said CoRWM
chairman, Gordon MacKerron.
"The committee has confidence that geological disposal is the
best end point for managing our waste. It is the option that
should perform best in terms of security, and protecting the
public and the environment."
Preventing leakage
The final disposal facility, or facilities, would be located
several hundred metres underground. The waste would be encased in
tough materials and would use the surrounding rock as a barrier
to prevent radioactive leakage into the environment.
Around one-third of the land in the UK is thought to be
geologically suitable for this purpose.
The committee says such stores could take several decades to
develop. This may happen because technical problems arise in
their construction, or simply because public agreement on the
best locations is impossible to achieve.
[Deep nuclear storage facility (Posiva)] The UK would be
following the lead of other European countries [ src=] Finland to
bury nuclear waste
CoRWM says this means a robust interim storage strategy is
absolutely essential.
These "temporary" storage facilities must be safe and secure,
particularly against terrorist attacks; and they should be built
with the prospect of being used for many decades.
CoRWM says that from its discussions with stakeholders and the
public, the interim strategy should also aim to minimise the
re-packaging and unnecessary transport of wastes.
The UK's radioactive inventory from the current nuclear programme
is expected to include 470,000 cubic metres of materials.
This includes the highly active waste from fuel re-processing and
the irradiated remains of decommissioned reactors (it also
includes the uranium and plutonium in spent fuel rods, although
these are not technically classed as waste at the moment because
the materials could be re-cycled into more nuclear fuel).
CoRWM's extensive investigation of the issues has dismissed other
disposal options, such as putting the waste on the ocean floor or
flying it into the Sun.
Selecting sites
The committee also stressed that it had no view on the current
debate about whether Britain should begin building new nuclear
power stations.
[Electricity calculator (BBC)]
UK generation - you choose
Dr Richard Shaw, principal scientific officer at the British
Geological Survey, commented: "Deep geological disposal is the
preferred method for the long-term management and eventual
disposal of high activity and long-lived radioactive waste
adopted by many countries, including Finland and Sweden, and
offers a safe option for the management of these wastes in the
UK, now and into the future.
"The majority of earth scientists believe that geological
disposal in a well-chosen geological environment is the right
means of dealing with these wastes."
However, Jean McSorley, senior nuclear campaigner at Greenpeace
UK, said: "We believe there should be a policy of long-term
storage above ground, because we know that when they put this
stuff below ground, it leaks.
"CoRWM itself has tried to do the best job it can but it has
become enmeshed in the debate about new reactors even though it
didn't want to. I guess the strongest criticism we have of CoRWM
is that if nuclear waste is such a big issue [CoRWM] has to speak
out against new reactors."
Sir David Wallace, vice-president of the Royal Society, the UK's
academy of science, said: "We now need to see the establishment
of a body, independent of both the nuclear energy industry and of
the government, to take forward the development and
implementation of an integrated strategy.
"This body will need to include a strong representation from the
scientific community, as well as wider public interests. Among
its tasks should be to determine the criteria through which sites
for deep geological disposal will be selected."
CoRWM will deliver its final report to the government in July.
[Deep disposal of nuclear waste (BBC)]
*****************************************************************
66 BBC: Concerns over
Last Updated: Thursday, 27 April 2006
[Dounreay]
Dounreay is expected to be one of the favoured sites for waste
Environmentalists in Scotland have criticised a key interim
recommendation from a government advisory committee on nuclear
waste disposal.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management said that the UK's
nuclear waste should be buried several hundred metres
underground.
Friends of the Earth (FoE) Scotland warned that leaks from buried
waste could go unnoticed.
WWF Scotland said the proposals should be treated with caution.
Green light
The first minister said the Scottish Executive would only
consider building a new nuclear power station north of the border
if the waste issue was resolved.
Nora Radcliffe, environment spokeswoman for the Scottish Liberal
Democrats, said: "This report must not be seen as giving a green
light to new nuclear build in Scotland.
"Whatever the committee finally proposes, we must protect
Scotland from becoming the dumping ground for the UK's
radioactive waste."
Although the draft document does not name potential sites where
the waste could be buried, it is expected that Dounreay will be a
likely option.
If we have one single store would have to transport large
quantities of nuclear waste round the country Duncan McLaren
Friends of the Earth Scotland
The waste management committee - which will make its final
recommendations to the UK Government in July - favoured the deep
burial option, although the government will have the final say.
However, FoE Scotland's chief executive Duncan McLaren said: "It
(nuclear waste) tends to get treated as out of sight, out of mind
and if it starts leaking, which it inevitably will if it's left
there, then it's less likely that we will take the remedial
action that's necessary.
"And if we have one single store we would have to transport large
quantities of nuclear waste round the country and that's probably
the most risky part of the operation when it comes to the issue
and concern of terrorism."
Dr Richard Dixon, director of WWF Scotland, said: "Today's report
cannot be used as an excuse by the government to rush to build a
new round of nuclear power stations.
'Enormous challenges'
"It clearly does not provide a 'solution' to the waste issue,
only the first step towards finding the least-bad option for the
stuff we've already got.
"No doubt the nuclear industry will jump up and down and say that
this is the solution to the nuclear waste problem. Jack McConnell
must not make the same mistake."
Mike Weir, the SNP's environment spokesman in the House of
Commons, said that the nationalists would oppose any attempts to
store nuclear waste in Scotland.
Shiona Baird, the Scottish Greens' energy spokeswoman said the
"enormous challenges" in managing nuclear waste typified the
unsustainability of nuclear power.
A spokesman for the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) said: "We
would welcome a decision fairly soon, but one that was subject to
extensive public consultation."
*****************************************************************
67 BBC: Time for action on nuclear waste
Last Updated: Thursday, 27 April 2006
ANALYSIS By Richard Black Environment Correspondent, BBC News
[Spent nuclear fuel in a cooling pond a Sellafield, UK]
We have a 50-year history i this country of not finding any
long-term management option for very high-level, relatively
dangerous radioactive waste
Gordon McKerron, CoRWM chair
"We are convinced that government will need to act with all due
speed and urgency, because the problem has been hanging around
for too long."
Gordon McKerron, chair of the Committee on Radioactive Waste
Management (CoRWM), could not have been clearer in his message to
government as CoRWM released its draft recommendations on how to
deal with Britain's burgeoning nuclear waste stockpile at a
meeting in Brighton.
It is an issue which administration after administration has
either ducked, or failed to push through.
As Professor McKerron put it, "we have a 50-year history in this
country of not finding any long-term management option for very
high-level, relatively dangerous radioactive waste."
The resulting situation, which sees waste stored in various
forms on a multiplicity of sites, is one which almost every
informed observer from academia, industry and the environmental
movement finds unacceptable; and one which CoRWM was set up
three years ago to help resolve.
NUCLEAR WASTE MAP
Where waste is produce and stored around the UK
It has been exhaustive in its trawl of global scientific
expertise, and has taken discussions into the public domain with
openness unprecedented in Britain's notoriously secretive
nuclear history.
So following the release of its draft recommendations, are we
any nearer to knowing when the first batch of "high-level,
relatively dangerous radioactive waste" will be consigned to its
final resting place?
Not really; though we do have, assuming the government follows
CoRWM's advice, a clearer idea of what the final resting place
might look like.
Twin track
It will be a deep hole in the ground, at least 500m (1,640ft)
below the surface. There would probably be a few sites, though
where they might be and whether they would be sealed or left
accessible is an open issue.
But there will also need to be "robust interim facilities" which
would store material before it was sent for disposal. These
facilities would need a lifetime of about a century.
[Sellafield]
Much of Britain's waste i stored at the Sellafield site CoRWM
goes for deep option
The clearest recommendation comes on the social side, where CoRWM
is in no doubt that the old approach - find a disposal site and
tell people living nearby they are going to have to lump it -
must be consigned to the disposal bin of history.
Public resistance was the key factor in the abandonment of
proposals for deep disposal conceived in the 1980s by the
Conservative government and the company Nirex.
"We believe there must be a willingness on the part of
communities to participate," commented Andrew Blowers, a CoRWM
member and Open University social scientist.
"Indeed, the basis of participation can only be that those
communities get an enhancement of their well-being.
"It is the complete obverse of the decide-announce-defend
strategy which has been tried before and failed."
We have
been struck by h those who already deal in this business are not
scared of it [ src=] Fiona Walthall, CoRWM member
This approach would see communities actively choosing to
host disposal or storage facilities in return for some as yet
unspecified reward.
But would any communities make that conscious choice to put
highly radioactive material beneath their feet, compromising
house prices, raising fears of water contamination and terrorist
attack?
In CoRWM's consultations around the UK, hinted Fiona Walthall,
there have been signs that some just might. "We have been struck
by how those who already deal in this business are not scared of
it," she said.
Long stretch
There are other important stakeholders who will want an ongoing
say as the years go by, not least the companies who will
presumably operate disposal and storage facilities and the
regulatory body which will oversee the process, whatever that
body may turn out to be.
On the political side, commitment will have to be far-sighted and
far-reaching, because this is clearly an issue which stretches
well beyond conventional political timelines; identifying sites
for deep disposal and interim storage would only be the beginning
of the end.
Only about one-fifth of the estimated 470,000 cubic metres of the
waste which will result from Britain's existing nuclear power,
research and military programmes already exists as waste; the
rest is tied up in the fabric of nuclear installations as spent
fuel, reactor vessels, contaminated structures, and such like.
OLD NIREX PROPOSED SITES
Bradwell, Esse Potton Island, Essex Two sites at Sellafield,
Cumbria Dounreay, Caithness Altnabreac, Caithness Fuday, Hebrides
Sandray, Hebrides Killingholme, South Humberside Stanford,
Norfolk Offshore site near Redcar Offshore site near Hunterston
It will take decades to emerge, as reactors and other facilities
are decommissioned.
Some of the material will then have to be stored for further
decades while it cools down and loses its most intense
radioactivity; hence the need for interim storage facilities
enduring for a century.
Meanwhile, the geology of any proposed disposal site would have
to be studied to ensure it will provide robust containment.
Consultations will have to continue between industry operators,
regulators and communities without any parties pulling out of the
deal.
Even as all that is going on, further decisions will have to be
made, some of which come with major ethical and economic
considerations.
Should the repository be locked off or left open? Should spent
fuel rods be reprocessed to remove fissile uranium and plutonium?
When does it become acceptable to cart large quantities of waste
around the country?
And at any stage, the waste management issue can become entangled
- as it is just now - with the thornier question of building new
nuclear facilities.
No quick fix
CoRWM acknowledges that other countries are moving faster.
Finland is heading for a mere 20-year gap between deciding on
deep disposal and seeing the first canisters buried.
[Deep nuclear storage facility (Posiva)] src=] Finland buries its
past
But Britain, the committee maintains, is different; the geology
is more complex, the waste more varied, and the social questions
more difficult.
If everything went without a hitch, it believes the first batch
of waste could find its way into deep disposal sites within a few
decades.
The last delivery would almost certainly be made in the early
years of the 22nd Century.
The problem and the solution are daunting in their scale and
duration.
In fact, what the CoRWM process has demonstrated most clearly is
that there is no single solution and no quick fix.
The committee will now take its draft recommendations for further
discussion, presenting them finally to government in early July.
Then, it hopes, government will finally grasp the nettle
bequeathed by previous administrations and take some concrete
first steps towards the century-long solution.
Given the size of the task and the political challenges, there
must be a danger that it chooses the path of least short-term
risk and, like its predecessors, does nothing; in which case the
entire CoRWM process will have been a waste of time and money.
"We're not asking them to do it tomorrow," said Gordon McKerron.
"But certainly we hope at the beginning of July, government will
endorse our recommendations and start moving with much greater
speed than it has in the past."
[Deep disposal of nuclear waste (BBC)]
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
*****************************************************************
68 Las Vegas SUN: Survey shows more residents fear Yucca Mountain impact
Today: April 27, 2006 at 7:50:51 PDT
By Tony Cook Las Vegas Sun
A recent Clark County survey shows that more residents than ever
fear that the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository
will negatively affect their quality of life.
The survey - the results of which county officials will make
public in a few days - revealed that more than two-thirds of the
randomly surveyed 609 residents fear that Yucca will harm their
quality of life. That's up from 59 percent in a survey taken
last summer.
About one-third of the respondents also said they disagree that
the Energy Department can be trusted to ensure the public's
safety in terms of transportation and storage of nuclear waste.
Beyond the disposition of their constituents, Clark County
commissioners have personal reasons to be concerned about the
Energy Department's plan to ship radioactive waste to Yucca
Mountain, said Robert Halstead, transportation adviser to the
Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects.
He told former Sen. Richard Bryan, D-Nev., and other members of
the state board Wednesday that the federal government's
preferred rail route would result in the Clark County Government
Center getting zapped with low levels of radiation.
That's because at least 6 percent of the shipments - and
potentially up to 89 percent - would run through downtown Las
Vegas, next to the Government Center, on the Union Pacific
mainline, he said.
Although transport containers are designed to hold in
radioactivity, a small amount escapes, Halstead said, resulting
in "measurable doses of radiation" equivalent to one or two
medical X-rays within about a half-mile of the tracks.
As County Commissioner Myrna Williams' eyes got big, Halstead
attempted to reassure the group.
"Mainstream medical thinking is that these very small doses are
not significant," he said. "We would not expect significant
health effects."
His concern, however, is with "the perception of risk and the
ability to maintain a robust gaming and tourism economy ¦ This
will definitely have an impact on property values."
All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
69 reviewjournal.com: Full disclosure on Yucca Mountain
Opinion - EDITORIAL:
Apr. 27, 2006
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
Officials must provide more information on e-mail inquiry
Critics of the Yucca Mountain Project have long maintained that
the federal government will do anything to keep its heavy
equipment humming northwest of Las Vegas.
As research has uncovered flaws in designs of the planned
nuclear waste repository, the Department of Energy has spared no
expense in attempting to remedy them, insisting each fix would
be good enough to meet arbitrary health and radiation standards.
Over the years, even as congressional audits exposed shoddy
management, wasted resources and questionable science, the
federal government has stuck to its assumptions that nuclear
waste is best kept inside a mountain, and that Southern Nevada
has the only mountain suitable for the repository.
But last year's disclosure that U.S. Geological Survey employees
might have fabricated and falsified data to satisfy quality
assurance bureaucrats took the project's reputation to a new
low. E-mail messages sent by government hydrologists between
1998 and 2000 suggested they made up dates, deleted some
information and submitted official documents with data that did
not match their own records related to water infiltration at the
repository.
The allegation that well-paid federal scientists and contractors
were using bogus information to prop up a project that already
has cost billions of dollars hinted at a massive fraud against
taxpayers. Congressional hearings and an inquiry by the Energy
Department's inspector general followed. In December, the
inspector general finished its investigation and forwarded its
findings to the U.S. attorney's office in Nevada.
On Tuesday, Energy Department Inspector General Gregory Friedman
announced that the e-mails "did not meet the level of
criminality," and that the U.S. attorney's office "could not
show intent" to commit crimes. As a result, no criminal charges
would be pursued.
Case closed.
Details of the evidence that supported the U.S. attorney's
decision could have gone a long way toward restoring public
confidence in the scientists tasked with developing a safe
storage site for the nation's most dangerous nuclear waste.
But Tuesday's announcement was hollow. It provided no meaningful
supporting information for the U.S. attorney's decision, nor any
details about the interviews and research conducted during the
inquiry.
As a result, the decision stinks of collusion. How can taxpayers
be certain that the probe, like the allegations it was supposed
to investigate, wasn't loaded with fabrications? Considering how
badly the Bush administration wants to move forward with the
Yucca Mountain Project, how can the public be sure the probe was
conducted free of partisan influences? Has the work environment
that allowed these e-mails to be ignored for years been
improved?
Allegations surrounding the e-mails were serious enough to halt
work on project design and research on canister corrosion and
have the hydrologists redo their work, but not serious enough
for complete public disclosure?
News of the decision to not prosecute wasn't even announced by
Nevada's U.S. attorney, Daniel Bogden -- it was issued by the
Department of Energy.
This isn't about jailing scientists so Yucca Mountain Project
opponents can have their pound of flesh. This is about bringing
at least some perception of integrity to a project plagued by a
culture of dysfunction.
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Mr. Bogden should come clean
with the public on these issues. And if they won't, Nevada's
congressional delegation should force them to.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
70 Independent: Nuclear waste may be buried in caverns
By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Published: 28 April 2006
Britain's nuclear waste should be buried in deep underground
caverns that could take many decades to build, according to the
official body set up to advise the Government.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management said that until
the underground repository was built, the waste should be stored
in high-security facilities on the surface which are protected
from terrorist attack.
About a third of the land in Britain is geologically suitable
for such an underground nuclear waste site but the committee was
not asked to recommend which once should be chosen.
"Experience suggests that the development of a disposal facility
could take several decades or possibly one or two generations,"
the committee said in a statement issued yesterday.
Gordon MacKerron, the chairman of the committee, said Britain
had been generating nuclear waste for 50 years without any clear
idea of what to do with it.
He said: "It means taking action now over the waste we have
created and not leaving it for future generations to deal with."
Britain has 10,000 tons of nuclear waste, mainly stored at
Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant in Cumbria and Dounreay in
Scotland. The waste can remain radioactive for centuries.
© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
71 UNR NevadaNews: Removing the conjecture about nuclear waste transportation
University of Nevada, Reno
Story by: Marketing and Communications
4/26/2006
The safety of nuclear disposal and transportation has been a
major concern in Nevada for the last decade. However, the
Universitys nuclear transportation research team is working to
remove the conjecture surrounding the issue and definitively say
what would happen if a nuclear waste transport were involved in
an accident.
For the past 13 years Miles Greiner, a mechanical engineering
professor, and his team have performed research to predict the
response of nuclear waste transport casks in severe fire
accidents. In June, the University will receive a $750,000 grant
to expand these efforts.
We are independent so we have no agenda or preconceived notion
about whether proposed transportation systems are safe or not,
said Greiner. All we want to do is perform impartial,
quantitative research. That data can be used rationally by
policy makers and the public.
Hundreds of nuclear waste shipments have been made on the
nations highway and railway system during the past 40 years
without any severe accidents or public health consequences. The
nuclear waste is shipped in massive metal casks that shield the
public from its radiation during both normal and accident
conditions.
Before a transport cask is licensed by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, the manufacturer must demonstrate that it
will survive the following sequence without any loss of
function: a 30-foot drop onto an unyielding surface, a 40-inch
drop onto a puncture fixture, full engulfment in a fire for 30
minutes, and then submersion in water. This sequence is more
severe than almost all transportation accidents.
If Yucca Mountain becomes the nations nuclear waste repository
many more nuclear waste shipments will be made each year than
have been performed in the past, Greiner said. This requires
that the likelihood of all possible accidents and their public
health consequence be evaluated. After these quantitative
assessments are completed, a judgment must be made as to whether
the entire transportation system is safe enough to use, or must
be redesigned.
During the past several years, Greiner and his students have
evaluated the response of transport casks in fires. Former
student, Alex Kramer, measured the response of a truck cask
surrogate in fires at the Sandia National Laboratories in
Albuquerque N.M. Several engineering students at the University
have used this data to test the validity of computer programs
that are used to predict fire behavior. They then used these
programs to predict the response of real casks in fires. The
team is currently performing research that will allow more spent
fuel to be safely loaded into a transport cask. This will reduce
both the number of shipments and the risk to the public.
In the past these projects have been funded by a mix of
agencies, including the U.S. Department of Energy, the Nevada
Nuclear Waste Project Office, Sandia National Laboratories and
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The new funding that will start in June will be used to predict
the response of much larger railcar-sized casks in fires. It
will also be used to study potential problems that may occur
when spent nuclear fuel is removed from water storage pools at
reactor sites and placed into dry transportation packages.
Its great to be training students and performing research of
scientific and national interest at the same time, Greiner
said.
*****************************************************************
72 Telegraph: Britain's nuclear waste 'vulnerable to terrorist attack'
The warning is contained in a paper presented to the Committee
on Radioactive Waste Management which will today announce its
draft recommendations for disposing of the nuclear industry's
radioactive legacy.
The paper highlights the danger posed by liquid waste from the
reprocessing of nuclear fuel at Sellafield in Cumbria.
It adds that security specialists said: ''It is our unanimous
opinion that greater attention should be given to the current
management of radioactive waste in the United Kingdom, in the
context of its vulnerability to potential terrorist attack.
"We are not aware of any UK Government programme that is
addressing this issue with adequate detail or priority, and
consider it unacceptable for some vulnerable waste forms, such
as spent fuel, to remain in their current condition and mode of
storage."
The experts urge the Government to instruct the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority "to produce an action plan for
categorising and reducing the vulnerability of the UK's
inventory of radioactive waste to potential acts of terrorism,
through conditioning and placement in storage options with an
engineered capability specifically designed to resist major
terrorist attack''.
High level liquid waste stored at Sellafield was estimated in a
report to the European Parliament to contain 40 times the
radioactive compound caesium 137 that was released in the
Chernobyl nuclear accident.
The committee has been examining a list of options for dealing
with nuclear waste, including firing it into space, but it is
expected to recommend today some form of underground storage.
This is opposed by environmental groups such as Friends of the
Earth, which supports an accelerated programme of conditioning
high level waste, by placing it in "vitrified" solid form, but
opposes placing it underground as it believes that the
containers could leak within 500 years.
Roger Higman, of Friends of the Earth, said: "Britain's nuclear
waste is a serious hazard, but it must not be dumped deep
underground. Ultimately all ways of disposing of nuclear waste
are fraught with risk. This means we shouldn't create any more."
A spokesman for the Office for Civil Nuclear Security, based at
the Department of Trade and Industry, said it was convinced that
the procedures for protecting civil nuclear installations and
processes were "robust and fit for the purpose''.
However it also recognised that some other issue such as
conditioning of waste could "make a positive contribution to
safety."
Sellafield already has a no-fly zone overhead and RAF fighters
have instructions to scramble if an aircraft enters the zone.
It also has a succession of other security measures, some
imposed after the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade
Centre in New York, and is patrolled by its own armed police
force.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. Terms &Conditions
*****************************************************************
73 PE.com: Sinkhole raises toxic-waste issue
Inland Southern California | Inland News
STRINGFELLOW: A state official says the gap in Riverside County
isn't a threat to the public.
10:00 PM PDT on Wednesday, April 26, 2006
By JENNIFER BOWLES The Press-Enterprise
The state has launched tests to determine the source and
solution to a 5-foot-deep sinkhole that has developed at the
Stringfellow acid pits, one of the Inland region's most infamous
toxic cleanup sites, officials said Wednesday.
Penny Newman, longtime Stringfellow activist, said the
sinkhole's location at the edge of the southern pit makes her
uneasy because it was filled with hazardous waste from the
adjacent northern pit before it was capped.
"We've been told over and over again, as long as the cap is
intact there's no problem," she said by telephone after a
meeting in Glen Avon.
She said she hopes the state covers it up to prevent any
releases of chemicals into the air.
The two pits make up what was the 17-acre Stringfellow acid pits
in northwestern Riverside County.
They were closed in 1972 after an estimated 35 million gallons
of toxic waste from area companies were dumped into unlined
evaporation ponds over a 16-year period.
Some of the waste, including the rocket-fuel chemical
perchlorate, sunk into the ground and contaminated a basin used
downstream as drinking water.
For years, tainted water has been extracted to clean up the
basin, and residents no longer use the water.
Allen Winans, supervising engineering geologist with the
California Department of Toxic Substances Control, said seven to
nine feet of fill and kiln dust were placed atop the hazardous
materials in the southern pit.
He said there is no danger to the public because they can't get
near the sinkhole, which is behind a fenced area.
Workers at the site will be restricted from getting close to it.
The sinkhole -- a gap stretching 4-feet-wide by 4-feet-long at
its largest-- will remain open at least until mid-May when radar
tests are scheduled to give a better underground picture.
"If necessary," Winans said, "we'll do a forensic excavation."
If that's the case, he said, crews will wear protective gear and
air monitoring will be continuous because there would be
concerns of chemical releases with digging efforts.
After discovering the sinkhole, Winans said workers inserted a
video camera into a nearby underground drain line that was
patched in 1994 and discovered it was bent, although it is
unknown if that caused the sinkhole.
Reach Jennifer Bowles at (951) 368-9548 or jbowles@PE.comMore
headlines...
Protesters want gate shut at Mira Loma rail facility
Stroll about town for charity Saturday
State earmarks funds for Inland roads
Police say man hit other banks
Mumps suspected in two elementary school studentsMore... ARTICLE
2006, The Press-Enterprise Company
*****************************************************************
74 Albuquerque Tribune: Nuclear industry needs engineers
By Scripps Howard News Service
April 27, 2006
As the nuclear industry stirs with the first plans in 30 years
to build new power plants in the United States, there's an
unexpected hurdle to be overcome: There might not be enough
nuclear engineers around to build and run them.
What's worse, the generation that built and ran America's
nuclear plants is aging and headed toward retirement, taking
away decades of know-how that have kept the reactors operating
safely.
"This is a huge problem for the nuclear industry, because it
goes without saying it can't afford to make a single mistake,"
said David DeLong, a research fellow at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology's AgeLab.
DeLong said 28 percent of the 58,000 workers in the U.S. nuclear
power industry will be eligible to retire within five years,
representing a huge loss of institutional memory.
He said Albuquerque's Sandia National Laboratories and the
Tennessee Valley Authority are both looking at urging potential
retirees to stay on their jobs longer.
At the other end, America isn't producing enough new nuclear
engineers to fill the ranks of the retirees.
The Defense Science Board says the number of engineers produced
at U.S. universities has declined 10 percent since the Cold War
ended in 1990. That poses national security concerns, many say,
because the military will need a new generation of engineers to
design and run the successors to America's long-range nuclear
strike systems like the Peacekeeper and Trident missiles.
Industry leaders say they are already taking steps to encourage
universities to attract more students into engineering.
"We're watching this area very carefully," said Carol Berrigan,
senior project manager for advanced reactors at the Nuclear
Energy Institute.
She said a low point came in 1998 when some universities
threatened to close nuclear programs because so few had
enrolled. The number of students has since increased, but "this
is a gathering storm for science and engineering nationally,"
Berrigan said.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it also is feeling the
pinch as it looks for engineers who can oversee regulation of
the nation's 103 nuclear power plants already operating.
"The overall available crop of scientists and students is not
what it used to be," commission spokesman Scott Burnell said.
He said the agency gives grants to encourage students into
engineering.
"We are aware we need a continuing stream of science and
engineering expertise," he said.
The engineering shortage comes as the nuclear industry is
preparing the first construction of power plants in 30 years.
Construction of new nuclear power plants stopped because of
safety concerns after the 1979 Three Mile Island accident.
Legislation adopted by Congress last year provides more than $3
billion in incentives to the industry for new plants and limits
damage awards from lawsuits in the event of nuclear incidents.
2006 © The Albuquerque Tribune | |
*****************************************************************
75 KIFI: Highway 20 To Close Tonight
www.localnews8.com
April 26, 2006
A ten mile stretch of US Highway 20 west of Idaho Falls will be
closed early tomorrow morning.
The Idaho National Laboratory will be transferring waste drums
to the former Argonne site, now called the Materials and Fuels
Complex.
The closure will be from 1:30 am to 3:30 am from milepost 266 to
276.
According to the transportation department, Idaho National
Laboratory has been authorized to stop traffic for about an hour
and 20 minutes so they can move the waste from the Radioactive
Waste Management Complex without other traffic getting in the
way.
*****************************************************************
76 DOE: President Bush Names Arthur Rosenfeld the 2005 Enrico Fermi Award Winner
April 27, 2006
WASHINGTON, DC The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today
announced that President Bush named Arthur H. Rosenfeld as the
winner of the Enrico Fermi Award, the governments oldest award
for scientific achievement. The presidential award carries an
honorarium of $375,000 and a gold medal. DOE administers the
Fermi Award on behalf of the White House.
Dr. Rosenfelds career provides an example of the breadth of
science -- from the fundamental to the practical -- that the
Department of Energy supports, Secretary of Energy Samuel W.
Bodman said. Dr. Rosenfeld is one of the founding fathers of
energy efficiency, and the legacy of his research and policy
work is an entire new energy efficiency sector of our economy,
which now yields an astounding annual savings of around $100
billion, and growing.
Dr. Rosenfeld, 79, is a Commissioner at the California Energy
Commission, where he serves as chairman of the Research and
Development Committee and as the second member of the Energy
Efficiency Committee. He will receive the Fermi award in
recognition of a career of scientific discoveries in particle
physics, pioneering innovations for the efficient use of energy.
Rosenfeld received his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in
1954 and was Nobel Laureate Enrico Fermis last graduate
student. In 1955, Dr. Rosenfeld joined the physics group led by
Nobel Laureate Luis Alvarez at the University of California,
Berkeley. During the next 18 years, he was a key developer of
bubble chamber physics, particularly the hardware and software
for photographing, measuring and analyzing data.
In 1973, when OPEC embargoed oil sales to the West, Dr.
Rosenfeld redirected his career. He recognized the potential
for energy savings in the building sector, which uses one third
of U.S. primary energy and two-thirds of our electricity. In
1975, he founded a program which grew into the Center for
Building Science at DOEs Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
There he brought together a multi-disciplinary group of
researchers with basic science backgrounds. The Center
developed a broad range of energy efficiency technologies,
including electronic ballasts for fluorescent lighting, a key
component of compact fluorescent lamps; and low-emissivity
windows, a coating for glass that allows light in but blocks
heat from either entering (summer) or escaping (winter). Dr.
Rosenfeld was personally responsible for developing DOE-2, a
computer program for building energy analysis and design that
was incorporated in Californias Building Code in 1978. These
codes have served as models for the nation, copied by Florida
and Massachusetts, and other states are beginning to adopt them
as well. DOE-2 is used to calculate codes and guidelines for
energy efficient new buildings in China and many other
countries.
The U.S. National Research Council (NRC) has estimated that
energy efficiency improvements developed solely at DOEs
National Laboratories, saved the U.S. $30 billion between 1978
and 2000, with electronic ballasts contributing $15 billion and
low-emissivity windows contributing $8 billion, a combined
three-fourths of the total savings. The NRC also acknowledged
the contributions of DOE-2, then used in an estimated 15
percent of all commercial construction in the U.S., which has
yielded average energy savings of 22 percent compared to designs
made without this program.
From 1994 to 1999, Rosenfeld was senior advisor to DOEs
Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
Since joining the California Energy Commission in 2000,
Rosenfeld has been implementing the demand-side technology and
incentives he advocated for the previous 30 years. For example,
working with the California Public Utilities Commission, he has
instituted time-dependent prices for electricity, that is,
prices which are lower most of the time but higher at peak
times, and smart meters to record electric use hour-by-hour.
Rosenfeld has also championed utilities funding and creative
use of rebates to encourage purchase of efficient products.
Dr. Rosenfeld will receive the Fermi Award at a ceremony in
Washington, D.C., at a date to be announced.
The Fermi Award, which dates to 1956, honors the memory of Nobel
Laureate Enrico Fermi, leader of the group of scientists, who,
on December 2, 1942, achieved the first self-sustained,
controlled nuclear reaction. Among the first recipients were
physicists John von Neumann, Ernest O. Lawrence, Hans Bethe,
Edward Teller and Robert Oppenheimer. The award was given most
recently in 2003 to the late John N. Bahcall, and to Raymond
Davis, Jr., and Seymour Sack.
Additional information about the Fermi Award is available at
Additional biographical information about Dr. Rosenfeld is
available at [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 |
*****************************************************************
77 Hanford News: INL to look at nuke reprocessing plant plans
This story was published Wednesday, April 26th, 2006
By The Associated Press and Herald staff
BOISE, Idaho - The Bush administration will rely on the Idaho
National Laboratory for technical review of proposals by
businesses and local government groups seeking to build a new
plant to reprocess spent reactor fuel, a practice the U.S.
discontinued in the 1970s because of concerns it was spurring
the nuclear arms race.
Benton County Commissioner Claude Oliver has sent a letter to
the Department of Energy asking that the resources at Hanford be
reviewed for the project. He will be talking with other
community groups and organized labor to gather support, he said.
"There's a good bit of technology that we need to be a lot more
sure of, and some good solid technical work that needs to be
done before we would be in a position to make a decision to
proceed with such a facility," Assistant Secretary for Nuclear
Energy Dennis Spurgeon said Tuesday after touring INL. "Idaho is
the lead laboratory for nuclear energy and they are in effect my
right arm when it comes to providing that technical analysis."
But environmental watchdogs say the administration's renewed
push to reclaim radioactive material from fuel used in
commercial power reactors could be the beginning of a new
generation of nuclear waste.
Although the Department of Energy has not decided where
demonstration projects to test the advanced fuel recycling
technologies will be located, Jeremy Maxand of the Snake River
Alliance said Idaho still bears the pollution legacy of the
now-defunct reprocessing of U.S. submarine and battleship
reactor fuel at the eastern Idaho compound.
"We have some very serious contamination of the Snake River
aquifer that will never be completely cleaned up and was the
direct result of fuel reprocessing," said Maxand, director of
the Boise-based group. "The people of Idaho have learned the
lesson that reprocessing does not work, but our political
leaders and DOE apparently have not."
Congress allocated $20 million this year for DOE to begin
evaluating proposals for a new reprocessing facility somewhere
in the U.S. The goals would be to reduce the amount of nuclear
waste that must be sent to a repository and reclaim some of the
spent fuel for reuse in commercial reactors.
The Bush administration now is seeking $250 million in DOE's
fiscal 2007 budget request to Congress to pursue development of
a test project to show that fuel recycling can be done on a
large scale with processes that create less waste and contain
radioactive isotopes that decay to background levels of
radioactivity at a faster rate.
An Energy Department request for "expressions of interest" by
private companies, individuals and local governments seeking to
build one of the new nuclear fuel reprocessing plants drew 35
replies this month, in addition to the letter from Oliver. The
replies included Columbia Basin Consulting Group of Richland;
Boise-based Washington Group International; Idaho Falls-based
Regional Development Alliance Inc.; and Salt Lake City-based
EnergySolutions.
President Bush wants to revive reprocessing of spent fuel as
part of his package of initiatives to encourage greater use of
nuclear power.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
78 Hanford News: PNNL aids homeland security
This story was published Wednesday, April 26th, 2006
By John Trumbo, Herald staff writer
Drive-bys have a new meaning for the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, thanks to technology perfected by the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory in Richland.
Mobile radiation portal monitors mounted on Ford trucks are the
latest tool offered to enhance homeland security. The rolling
rigs can drive through seaports and scan for radiation emitted
from closed shipping containers or vehicles without having to
stop or open the containers.
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection received the first two of
the mobile radiation portal monitors Tuesday in Washington,
D.C., and will station them at Newark, N.J. The devices will
help monitor an estimated 11 million cargo containers entering
U.S. seaports each year.
About 200 Ford truck radiation scanning rigs will be placed at
ports of entry around the U.S. during the next 18 months. The
estimated cost of purchasing and outfitting the trucks is $30
million.
Bruce Carlisle, project manager and chief designer for the
project while it was in development at PNNL, said each truck has
two large radiation sensor panels on the driver's side that
detect gamma-ray and neutron radiation. By parking two trucks -
facing in opposite directions and about 20 feet apart - a
drive-through portal can be created, making it easier to check
truck or rail traffic in or out of a port.
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) of San
Diego is making the scanning equipment, and a company near
Detroit is mounting the equipment onto the trucks.
"We are looking for any kind of elicit radioactive materials.
What we are concerned about is people bringing materials that
they are not disclosing, things that could be used in dirty
bombs or a nuclear device," Carlisle said.
SAIC has been providing the stationary radiation monitoring
portals for the government for the past two years. Most of that
equipment has been placed at land-based entry points around the
country's borders, Carlisle said.
The overlapping detection panels provide the capability to scan
containers on the ground or vehicles as they are driven past the
mobile RPM. Output from the detection panels is displayed for
the operator, along with critical operating parameters, such as
speed and distance.
"Keeping our nation's seaports safe by using cutting edge
technologies is a critical component in securing America's
borders," said CBP Assistant Commissioner Jayson Ahern.
"Radiation portal monitors are bridging the gateways to a
radiation and nuclear-free global environment by allowing highly
trained CBP officers to better deter, detect and defend
Americans from a potential terror attack."
Carlisle said PNNL began working on a prototype mobile radiation
portal monitor about 18 months ago for the federal government.
With the first two units ready to go, he expects 60 trucks to be
outfitted with the scanning devices this year, with the
remaining units installed by the end of 2007.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
79 DenverPost.com: Plea to hurry Flats cases: "I'm dying"
Article Launched: 04/27/2006 01:00:00 AM MDT
denver &the west
Former workers are seeking medical coverage and payments after
being exposed to radiation.
By Kim McGuire Denver Post Staff Writer
Kay Barker, whose husband, Larry, died of colon cancer in 1994,
speaks Wednesday to the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker
Health. Larry Barker worked at Rocky Flats for 28 years. His
widow says a panel that denied her claim for compensation used
incorrect dates for his employment. (Special / Bill Ross)
Former Rocky Flats workers and their families on Wednesday told
a panel of experts evaluating the federal compensation claims
process that time is running out for many of them.
"I'm dying," said George Barrie, a former machinist at the
plant, suffering from a pre- cancerous stomach condition. "You
guys have got to get this straightened out."
Barrie and other former employees made their pleas for help to
the Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health, which is in
Denver this week to begin evaluating a petition filed by the
United Steelworkers Local 8031 seeking compensation for Rocky
Flats workers who were exposed to radiation and have certain
cancers.
The petition claims that the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health cannot adequately calculate radiation
exposures for workers as required by the federal government.
Missing records, workers who didn't wear their dosimetry badges
(measuring radiation) in "hot" parts of the plant, and exposure
to a unique form of plutonium that went undetected are among the
reasons workers can't get a fair assessment, union members say.
If the workers' petition is granted, claimants will receive
medical coverage for their ailment and a $150,000 cash payment
in exchange for their promise not to sue the government.
Many workers believe the petition is their best and last chance
to receive compensation.
"All we have ever really asked for is to be treated fairly and
to have medical coverage, should we get sick from our exposures
during the decades of employment at the site," said Tony
DeMaiori, the union's past president. "I have workers - friends
coming down with breast cancer, brain cancer, lymphoma and
numerous other horrible ailments, and those people and their
families deserve compensation."
DeMaiori and representatives of Colorado's congressional
delegation have asked the panel to delay making a decision until
an independent auditing firm has the chance to review it.
Already, the institute has ruled that it can adequately
calculate radiation exposures for workers of the former nuclear
bomb factory.
Workers and the survivors of deceased Rocky Flats employees,
however, say they've found inconsistencies in the data the
institute uses to calculate the exposures.
Kay Barker, whose husband, Larry, died of colon cancer in 1994,
said documents used by the institute to deny her claim indicate
her husband was exposed to radiation two years before he ever
went to work at the plant.
"How can NIOSH claim they can do dose reconstruction when they
can't even get the dates of employment correct?" she asked.
Staff writer Kim McGuire can be reached at 303-820-1240 or .
All contents Copyright 2006 The Denver Post or other copyright
*****************************************************************
80 Rocky Mountain News: Board postpones decision on benefits for Rocky Flats workers
By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News
April 27, 2006
The federal Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health today
postponed its recommendation on whether all Rocky Flats workers
with cancer should be given $150,000 and medical benefits.
The board is wrestling with the question of whether records of
radiation contamination at the former nuclear weapons plant are
accurate enough to prove the cancers were caused by radiation
exposure on the job.
Workers say the records are missing and wrong, and therefore they
should qualify for an exemption from the requirements to prove
the work caused their illnesses.
| | | | | Subscribe
| | 2006 © The E.W. Scripps Co.
and
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************