***************************************************************** 05/07/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.108 ***************************************************************** 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 Guardian Unlimited: Iraq Crisis Adds to Blair's Troubles 2 IRNA: MP: Return of nuclear case to its normal course will facilitat 3 [NYTr] Lavrov and Rice Talk on Iran 4 [NYTr] Criticism of UN Iran draft mounts 5 Guardian Unlimited: Russian Official, Rice Discuss Iran Nukes 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Threatens to Quit Nuclear Treaty 7 BBC: Iran threat to quit atomic treaty 8 IRNA: UNSC adopts no resolution against Iran 9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iran's nuclear program is civilian 10 AFP: Six major powers to meet Monday to seek unity on Iran 11 AFP: Iran warns UN of 'confrontation' over nuclear programme 12 AFP: Five major UN powers still far apart on Iran draft 13 IRNA: Zarif explains civilian nature of Iran's nuclear program to US 14 AFP: Russia and China press for changes to Iran draft 15 AFP: UN's Iran draft needs 'major changes' - Russia 16 IRNA: UNSC involvement in Iran N-case to foment confrontation - Asef 17 IRNA: Asefi cautions UNSC permanent states not to go to extremes 18 Korea Times: Is China Trying to Fool West on Korea? 19 US: [NYTr] Going Nukular 20 US: [NYTr] 1979 Vela Incident: Nuke Test or Meteorite? 21 US: Deseret News: Matheson still questions planned explosion 22 US: Spectrum: Stop blast for kids' sake 23 US: Spectrum: Just shooting the breeze in the nation's sacrificial z 24 [DU-WATCH] Use of depleted uranium weapons is 'illegal' 25 New York Times: Britain's Prime Minister Reshuffles Cabinet - 26 BBC: Foreign doubts after Straw's exit 27 BBC: Brazil joins world's nuclear club NUCLEAR REACTORS 28 US: [NukeNet]Petition to Stop the Salem (NJ) Nuke Fish Slaughter - 29 Guardian Unlimited: UK atomic agency boss plots £450m buyout 30 US: Bradenton Herald: Critics decry energy plan tax breaks 31 Daily Yomiuri: China seeks nuclear-powered energy security 32 US: toledoblade.com: Detroit Edison begins restart of Fermi II plant NUCLEAR SECURITY NUCLEAR SAFETY 33 US: Las Vegas SUN: Lawyer says date postponed for mushroom cloud exp 34 Sunday Mail QLD: Ammo dump danger 35 MiamiHerald.com: Clean up Navy's mess 36 US: ContraCostaTimes.com: DOE to stop pensions for new contract work 37 US: News Tribune: Port of Tacoma decides not to handle uranium dioxi 38 US: Salt Lake Tribune: There is nothing divine about a bomb test 39 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Defense officials try to allay fears of 40 US: Bridgwater Mercury: Radiation Levels Acceptable At Hinkley NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 41 [NukeNet] Scotland:Incinerator plans under attack 42 US: Guardian Unlimited: Truck With Radioactive Material Rolls Over 43 Guardian Unlimited: Brazil Unveils Uranium Enrichment Center 44 US: Bradenton Herald: County to revise Tallevast overlay 45 US: The State: Senate panel approves funds for MOX plant 46 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain a wreck 47 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Into the fray: We welcome LDS Church into fig 48 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Reps ask BLM to deny PFS' access 49 US: Daily Herald: LDS Church adds objection to nuclear waste in Utah 50 Japan Times: Japan offers to cooperate in U.S. nuke fuel program 51 US: Cape Cod Times: Perchlorate studied in food and beverages 52 News & Star: More Mox fuel assemblies delivered to Switzerland 53 US: Deseret News: Democrats applaud LDS stance on waste PEACE 54 US: Orlando Sentinel: U.S. should lead in disarming nukes - US DEPT. OF ENERGY 55 Knox News: Marines who guarded 'Birdcage' for years finally know its 56 Knox News: Fluorine leak at ORNL 57 Hanford News: Fluor's pipefitter suit appeal denied 58 Hanford News: Department of Energy to stop pensions for new contract 59 Inside Bay Area: Sandia plans to expand research 60 lamonitor.com: Nuclear workers compensation program faces cuts 61 KnoxNews: ORNL director outranks UT's Fulmer on business magazine's ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Guardian Unlimited: Iraq Crisis Adds to Blair's Troubles From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday May 7, 2006 3:46 AM AP Photo LKW101 By TARIQ PANJA Associated Press Writer LONDON (AP) - Critics of Britain's involvement in Iraq urged Prime Minister Tony Blair to step down Saturday after a helicopter crash killed four British soldiers, bringing jubilant Iraqis to the area to celebrate. The ugly confrontation that followed between British troops and Shiite gunmen left five Iraqi civilians dead and was the latest bad news for Blair, whose government has lurched from crisis to crisis in recent weeks. On Saturday, some members of his Labour Party - which suffered a severe setback in local elections on Thursday - called on the prime minister to issue a timetable for his departure. In the local council elections, Blair's Labour Party won 26 percent of the vote to the Tories' 40 percent. Stung by the election defeat, Blair shuffled his Cabinet and fired Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who had privately expressed doubts about the Iraq war to his boss and described military action against Iran over its nuclear problem as ``inconceivable,'' something neither Blair nor President Bush would say. The government also acknowledged on May 1 that officials had failed to screen 1,023 foreign criminals for deportation before freeing them from prison in the past seven years. Blair's administration was also embarrassed by the revelation that Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott had an extramarital affair with a civil servant in his office. Saturday's helicopter crash brought renewed criticism of Britain's role in Iraq. ``Increasingly, the issue of Iraq is a weeping sore for the Blair government,'' said Martin Bright, political editor at the New Statesman, a left-leaning magazine. ``The worse the situation gets in Iraq, the more likely it is that his party will move against him.'' Blair has said he will not stand in the next general election slated for 2010, and members of his own party have called on the prime minister to issue a timetable for his departure. ``To unify us, I think Tony Blair has got to be honest and tell us when he's going to stand down,'' lawmaker Geraldine Smith told the British Broadcasting Corp. Radio's Today program. Britain has about 8,000 soldiers in Iraq, most in or near the southern city of Basra. Since the start of hostilities 104 British service personnel have died, not counting Saturday's apparent downing of the helicopter by a missile. The government has promised a scaling down of British troops in Iraq, but so far there has been no timetable for withdrawal. ``I think we need to have a clear statement from the government as to where our policy in Iraq is heading, and what the mission is for our troops remaining in Iraq,'' said Andrew Mercer, security spokesman for the opposition Conservatives. In the latest poll on the war for the Daily Telegraph newspaper, 57 percent of Britons said they were against the war while 33 percent supported it. ``The public is growing impatient because it's just not at all clear what we are trying to do out there,'' said Nick Harvey, defense spokesman for the opposition Liberal Democrats. ``What is needed is a clear exit strategy to establish the basis upon which British troops would be returned home.'' Britain's Treasury Secretary Gordon Brown, a leading contender to replace Blair as prime minister, said in an interview to be broadcast Sunday that the local election results had been a wake-up call to the government. ``After a period in government you have got to renew yourself by being able to address not just the issues of the day but the issues of the future,'' he told GMTV's Sunday program. ---- Associated Press Writer Daniel Woolls contributed to this report. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 2 IRNA: MP: Return of nuclear case to its normal course will facilitate Majlis approval of Additional Protocol Tehran, May 6, IRNA Iran-Boroujerdi-Nuclear Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Commission Chairman Alaeddin Boroujerdi here Saturday said that if Iran's nuclear case returns to its normal course under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), grounds will be prepared for ratification of the Additional Protocol by Majlis. Speaking at a meeting with Chinese Ambassador to Tehran, Lio G. Tan, he referred to Iran's continuous cooperation with the IAEA and said that the most reasonable way to solve the country's nuclear issue is to turn it back to its normal course, namely it being supervised by the UN nuclear watchdog. "In such a case, the way will be paved for ratification of the Additional Protocol by Majlis," he added. Turning to Iran's confidence building measures and transparency in its peaceful nuclear activities, including acceptance of repeated inspections and IAEA's continued supervision over its nuclear program, he said that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's proposal on cooperation with other countries in enrichment process and formation of a consortium proves Iran's good intentions and full transparency. He added that besides, this will be the best way to control Iran's nuclear program and ensure that no deviation will take place. Boroujerdi welcomed Tan's suggestion on 'the need to establish a system in the world based on justice and mutual respect for one another by the world countries' and stressed the requirement for consensus, exchange of views and collaboration between the world states to materialize such a proposal. The MP pointed to Iran's nuclear issue and said that given the present sensitive situation, dialogue and reaching political accord based on international laws, in particular the contents of Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and IAEA regulations, are the only rational and appropriate ways to end the current situation and solve the nuclear case. He referred to reporting the dossier to the UN Security Council (UNSC) and the US insistence on approving a resolution based on Article 7 of the UN Charter against Iran as 'irrational and illegal'. Elsewhere in his remarks, Boroujerdi expressed satisfaction with the growing trend in Iran-China mutual ties and said that Iran is interested in further strengthening relations and further broadening of cooperation at bilateral, regional and international levels. For his part, Tan expressed satisfaction with the current level of relations and said that the parliaments of both states play a decisive role in preparing the proper grounds required for expansion of cooperation. He underlined his country's support for Iran's nuclear activities for peaceful use and said, "China believes that political talks between the two sides based on international laws and regulations and solving the issue through diplomatic ways and peacefully is the best way to deal with the matter." The Chinese envoy declared the opposition of Chinese officials to imposing sanctions and using force against Iran. Tan called for accord, cooperation and exchange of views among world states to create a modern system based on justice, and equality, mutual respect among countries and referred to its as a requirement in the present age. ***************************************************************** 3 [NYTr] Lavrov and Rice Talk on Iran Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 10:19:42 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Prensa Latina, Havana http://www.plenglish.com Lavrov and Rice Talk on Iran Moscow, May 7 (Prensa Latina) Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke over the telephone with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice about Iran4s nuclear record, according to a communiqui issued by the Russian Foreign Ministry on Sunday. The conversation, which took place at the initiative of the US official, focused on seeking a diplomatic solution to Iran4s nuclear record, says the document, quoted by Interfax. Moscow considers that essential changes must be made in the draft resolution submitted to the UN Security Council, the Russian Foreign Ministry said. The document, drawn up by European countries, does not please the Russian Federation, so substantial corrections must be made, said Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kisliak, quoted by RIA Novosti. This week, Lavrov highlighted the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Iran and urged to make efforts to resume that body4s works. Only that specialized body could accurately determine whether Tehran possesses nuclear armament, stressed Lavrov. Speaking on the Kremlin4s stance, the head of Russian diplomacy noted that it was based on the IAEA4s analysis, which neither confirms nor rules out the existence of military goals in Iran4s nuclear program. Moscow ruled out at the United Nations the possibility of supporting a Security Council resolution that may result in the use of force to solve the conflict generated by Iran4s atomic project. hr/jg/jpm * ================================================================ .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 [NYTr] Criticism of UN Iran draft mounts Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 10:26:00 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit BBC News - May 6, 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4979832.stm Criticism of UN Iran draft mounts Russia and China have criticised a UN Security Council draft resolution on Iran's nuclear ambitions. Russia says the draft needs rewriting with stronger emphasis put on building confidence between Iran and the UN. China says it is worried that the draft's Western sponsors have based it on UN rules that could open the way for the use of military force against Iran. The draft demands that Iran stop nuclear enrichment and threatens further measures if it does not do so. Chapter Seven threat Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful proposes only. However, Western nations are concerned it is seeking a nuclear weapons capability. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council are due to meet informally on Saturday to try to thrash out their differences over the draft, drawn up by Britain and France, with US backing. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak was quoted by Russian media as saying that the draft needed "major changes" and that negotiations over the text were "ongoing". Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin went further saying that Moscow opposes the push for the resolution to be adopted under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, which could, after further decisions, allow for sanctions or even military action. China also objects to the use of Chapter Seven, and is concerned by the phrasing of the draft which says that the "proliferation risk" posed by Iran is a threat to international peace and security. Veto power Russia and China have also complained about a section of the draft text which calls on countries to stop selling technology to Iran that could help its nuclear programme. This, they say, is sanctions by another name. The Security Council members backing the resolution had hoped the Council would adopt the resolution before foreign ministers meet in New York on Monday. But, the BBC's UN correspondent Laura Trevelyan says that the comments from Moscow and Beijing, who both wield a veto in the Security Council, make agreement very unlikely. On Friday Iran accused the US and its allies of creating an artificial crisis by tabling the UN resolution. Iran's envoy to the UN, Javad Zarif, called for a "serious, reasonable" debate instead while President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said his country was being "bullied". Mr Zarif told reporters the document was regrettable because there were a "multitude of possibilities for finding a peaceful resolution". Those who drafted it, he said, showed an "intention to create a crisis where a crisis is not needed". He reiterated Tehran's basic position, that it will not stop enrichment because it intends to produce electricity, not nuclear bombs. Speaking at a summit of mainly Muslim states in Baku, Azerbaijan, the Iranian president said that "certain bullies" were "insolently trying to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries". "We intend to continue our activity... until we manage industrial-scale production of nuclear fuel for our atomic power stations," Mr Ahmadinejad told the meeting of the 10-strong Economic Cooperation Organisation group. ) 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 ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 5 Guardian Unlimited: Russian Official, Rice Discuss Iran Nukes From the Associated Press [UP] Saturday May 6, 2006 10:16 PM By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV Associated Press Writer MOSCOW (AP) - Russia's foreign minister and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice talked about Iran's nuclear program on Saturday after Russia and China opposed the latest draft of a U.N. Security Council resolution that could eventually lead to sanctions of the Islamic republic. The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a terse statement that Sergey Lavrov's phone conversation with Rice ``focused, among other issues, on the search for a diplomatic solution of the Iranian nuclear problem.'' The State Department had no immediate comment on the discussion. The conversation came after Russia and China complained Friday about a draft Security Council resolution prepared by the United States, Britain and France. Under the proposed draft, the Security Council's late March demand for Iran to stop enriching uranium would be made mandatory, and Tehran would be given a short period to comply. If Iran refused, the resolution said, the council would consider ``further measures'' to ensure compliance. Enrichment can be used to develop fuel for a nuclear reactor or fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Russia's U.N. ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, said Friday that Moscow opposed the sponsors' push for the resolution to be adopted under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which can be enforced by sanctions or, if necessary, military action. ``It is too early to say which changes should be made to the draft resolution to satisfy Russia,'' Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said Saturday in Moscow, according to the RIA Novosti, ITAR-Tass and Interfax news agencies. ``At present consultations are ongoing.'' He did not elaborate. The draft also includes a declaration that the ``proliferation risk'' posed by Iran constitutes a threat to international peace and security. China and Russia both said they oppose putting the resolution under Chapter 7 or referring to Iran as a threat to international peace and security. The U.S., Britain and France had been hoping that the Security Council would adopt the draft before a meeting on Monday in New York between foreign ministers of six key nations trying to negotiate with Iran. Germany, which has been leading European negotiations along with Britain and France, helped draft the resolution. It became clear after meetings at the United Nations on Friday that Russia and China opposed the measure and bridging the divide would be difficult. The Security Council agreed to hold an informal meeting on Saturday afternoon to go over members' concerns about the text. The International Atomic Energy Agency last week said Iran had not complied with a Security Council call for it to abandon uranium enrichment. Russia has joined calls for Iran to stop its enrichment activities, and has proposed hosting the Iranian uranium enrichment effort. The plan is intended to dispel international fears that Iran could divert uranium to a weapons program. The Iranian Embassy in Moscow said Friday that it was still considering Russia's enrichment proposal, but Iran has refused the Russian proposal's link to a suspension of its domestic enrichment effort, and chances for a compromise appeared low. In Saudi Arabia, six of Iran's Persian Gulf neighbors urged Tehran on Saturday to be frank with them about its nuclear program. The kings and emirs of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates met privately in Riyadh in what a Gulf Cooperation Council statement described as a ``consultative'' summit. The gathering discussed developments in Iran, Iraq and combatting terrorism, United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheik Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan told journalists on behalf of the GCC leaders after talks ended. ``Iran should be transparent in dealing with the region,'' regarding its nuclear program, Al Nahyan said. The Gulf nations will seek guarantees against ``environmental hazards'' potentially posed by Iranian nuclear reactors, he added. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Threatens to Quit Nuclear Treaty From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday May 7, 2006 7:31 PM AP Photo NYDK114 By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's hard-line parliament Sunday threatened to pass legislation that would force the government to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The move, which would put Iran in company with North Korea, came as Washington and its allies pressed for a U.N. Security Council vote to outlaw Tehran's uranium enrichment program. In a letter to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan read on state-run radio, lawmakers said they would have ``no option'' but to ask the government to withdraw if the U.N. chief and the Security Council ``fail in their crucial responsibility to resolve differences peacefully.'' While the Iranians used the word ``peacefully,'' they were widely seen as referring to a diplomatic solution, short of a Security Council vote and possible sanctions. The U.S. is backing attempts by Britain and France to draw up a U.N. resolution that would declare Iran in violation of international law if it does not suspend uranium enrichment - a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors to generate electricity or, if sufficiently processed, to make atomic weapons. The Western nations want to invoke Chapter 7 of the U.N. charter that would allow economic sanctions or military action, if necessary, to force Iran's compliance. Russia and China, the other two Security Council members - all of whom have veto power - oppose such moves. The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said Sunday he believed the resolution would move to a vote this week, with or without support from Moscow and Beijing. He dismissed the Iranian parliament's threat, saying it would not deter a U.N. resolution. ``It shows they remain desperate to conceal that their nuclear program is in fact a weapons program,'' he said. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Sunday that Washington should consider direct nuclear talks with Iran, but added that ``there has to be some kind of glimmer of hope or optimism before we sit down and give them that kind of legitimacy.'' McCain, a possible presidential contender in 2008, told CBS' Face the Nation that Iran must renounce its call for the extinction of Israel. Direct talks, McCain said, are ``a tough decision, because here's a country whose rhetoric daily continues to be the most insulting to the United States and to democracy and freedom.'' But, he said, ``it's an option that you probably have to consider.'' The Iranian letter said parliament might pass legislation ordering President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government to review procedures for pulling out of the nuclear treaty, which signatories may do if they decide extraordinary events have jeopardized their ``supreme interests.'' The withdrawing nation must give fellow treaty members and the U.N. three months notice and a detailed explaination. Iran's threats recall the case of North Korea, which left the treaty in 2003. Last year Pyongyang declared it had nuclear weapons - unlike Tehran, which says its nuclear program is only for generating electricity. North Korea agreed last September to give up its nuclear program in exchange for U.S. aid and security assurances, but negotiations have been stalled since November, mainly because of Pyongyang's anger over U.S. sanctions for alleged currency counterfeiting and money laundering. North Korea escaped punishment by the U.N. Security Council, but Iran's possible departure from the treaty is likely to bring a tougher response. Ahmadinejad restated his readiness to jetison treaty membership. ``If a signature on an international treaty causes the rights of a nation be violated, that nation will reconsider its decision and that treaty will be invalid,'' he told the state news agency. He called threats of sanctions ``meaningless'' and vowed to ``smash their (U.S.-backed) illegitimate resolutions against a wall.'' Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said any U.N. resolution would be ``completely illegal'' and driven by politics. ``It's clear that any action by the U.N. Security Council will leave a negative impact on our cooperation with the IAEA,'' he said, adding that such action would ``change the path of cooperation to confrontation.'' The International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. watchdog for compliance with the treaty, declared in 2002 that Iran had been conducting secret nuclear activities for decades, though it has never said Tehran has a weapons program. Iran claims it has that right, including the privilege of enriching uranium, under its treaty membership, but its opponents claim it ceded that right by hiding parts of its nuclear program from the international community. In February, Iran barred intrusive inspections of its nuclear facilities by the IAEA after it was referred to the Security Council. Iran said it had been implementing the agreement since 2003 voluntarily but it had not won domestic approval, as necessary, from parliament and the Guardian Council, a powerful oversight body dominated by Islamic hard-liners. The Security Council then set a non-binding deadline for Iran to suspend all activities linked to enrichment by April 28. Iran refused, and a report that day by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Iran was blocking IAEA efforts to determine whether it had - or has - designs on building a nuclear arsenal. Iran declared yet again Sunday it would not give up uranium enrichment despite the building crisis. ``We won't give up our rights and the issue of suspension (of enrichment) is not on our agenda,'' Asefi said at his weekly briefing. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 7 BBC: Iran threat to quit atomic treaty Last Updated: Sunday, 7 May 2006 [Iranian nuclear facility] Tehran says the West is trying to bully it into action Iran's parliament has threatened to pull out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if Western pressure over its programme increases. The threat came in a statement made a day before key UN members discuss a tough draft resolution on the issue. Pulling out of the NPT is the ultimate threat of non-cooperation by Iran, says our Tehran correspondent. A withdrawal would mean the country's programme could no longer be inspected by the UN nuclear watchdog, the IAEA. The MPs' statement, which the Iranian news agency said had the support of 160 of 290 members of parliament, was addressed to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan. It said that unless the row was resolved peacefully, parliament would "have no choice but to call on the government to retract its signature of the Additional Protocol and to place on its agenda an examination of Article 10 of the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty]". The Additional Protocol allows snap inspections of nuclear facilities, while Article 10 covers the procedure for leaving the treaty. The threat was echoed by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who said the Non-Proliferation Treaty had no validity if it threatened the rights of a nation. Raised stakes Western nations are concerned Iran is seeking a nuclear weapons capability, though Iran denies this. Each party shall in exercisi its national sovereignty have the right to withdraw from the treaty if it decides that extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country Article 10, NPT Q: Iran nuclear stand-off Analysis: Confrontation looms The draft UN Security Council resolution threatens further steps if Iran does not stop uranium enrichment. But the draft - which was introduced by Britain and France - has been criticised by Russia and China, who oppose the fact the resolution is to be legally binding and could lead to sanctions or even military action if Iran does not comply. Iran says it is within its international rights to seek nuclear power and suspending its nuclear programme is not on the agenda. Though both the West and Iran say they want a diplomatic solution to this crisis, the hostile rhetoric is intensifying and there is no sign of negotiations to defuse the mounting tension, says our Tehran correspondent Frances Harrison. A withdrawal from the NPT - which requires a three-months' notice - would mean the outside world would have no idea what is going on inside Iranian nuclear sites. And it could be a precursor to starting a weapons programme, though Tehran strenuously denies that it wants a nuclear bomb, says our correspondent. Foreign ministers from the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany are meeting in New York on Monday to discuss the issue. It will also be the first major engagement for the UK's new Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett. On Saturday, the US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton - who wants tough action against Iran - said he would be willing to discuss another way of making the resolution compulsory, but added that he had not heard any new ideas yet. ***************************************************************** 8 IRNA: UNSC adopts no resolution against Iran New York, May 7, IRNA Iran-UNSC-Nuclear The United States on Saturday could not convince permanent and non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to approve its proposed resolution against Iran's peaceful nuclear program. The anti-Iran draft resolution was prepared by Britain and France and supported by the US. US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, on Friday called on the five permanent members of the Security Council -- China, Russia, France, Britain and the US -- to hold a session in New York on Saturday to ratify the resolution. In case of the approval of the resolution, ground would have been paved for voting on it by 15 members of the Security Council. Bolton had organized a meeting for Saturday night with participation of the council's members to accelerate adoption of the resolution but the meeting was cancelled since the permanent members did not reach a consensus on the resolution. US President George W Bush said he would not let Iranians pursue nuclear know-how. Washington, now confident that no other state except Britain and France would support it's proposed resolution, resorts to non-permanent members of the Security Council to approve the resolution. Washington is hopeful that it would gain nine votes in favor of the resolution by using the carrot-and-stick approach. A resolution needs 9 votes in favor if it is to be adopted at the Security Council provided that none of the five permanent members of the council vetoes it. However, Russia and China -- two of the five permanent and veto-wielding states in the Security Council -- believe Iran's nuclear case is a technical and not a political issue and therefore should be discussed at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). US media on Saturday said the resolution may be discussed following a meeting of foreign ministers of the five permanent members, slated to be held in New York on Monday on the Middle East issues. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she would use the opportunity to discuss Iran's nuclear case with her counterparts. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier is also scheduled to attend the Monday session. ***************************************************************** 9 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Iran's nuclear program is civilian 2006/05/07 New York, May 7 - Iranian ambassador to United Nations Mohammad Javad Zarif said in TV interview program "Talking to American People" on C-Span nationwide TV that the purpose of Iranian nuclear program is simple: Iran is a country that will become a net importer of energy in a couple of decades. "We need to invest in our sources of energy. We have invested a great deal in our alternative sources, including in hydroelectric power. Even in some areas of energy which have not yet developed well like wind energy and solar energy. We have invested in all areas of energy and nuclear energy is one area or alternative energy which is important and which have made investments in that area and we want to be able to have the technology for development purposes," he added. Asked if Iran's nuclear program is for the future generation or it has military implications, Zarif responded, "No, we in fact believe that a nuclear weapons program will not enhance Iran's security." He added, "It will in fact be detrimental to our security and the perception that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program is in our view detrimental to our security. Therefore, we have made it very clear that nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction have no place in our defense doctrine and we have been more than willing to cooperate with the international community to remove any doubt as to even the possibility of a weapons program in Iran." He recalled that the IAEA has now been in record at least five or six times that there is no indication of any activity that would direct to an illegal program or weapons program. kh Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. E-Mail: Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir ***************************************************************** 10 AFP: Six major powers to meet Monday to seek unity on Iran Sun May 7, 4:16 PM ET NEW YORK (AFP) - Foreign ministers of six major powers meet Monday in a fresh bid to map out a common strategy to force Iran " /> Iranto halt sensitive nuclear fuel work that could be used for bombs. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> Condoleezza Ricewas to host her counterparts from Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia as well European Union " /> European Unionforeign policy chief Javier Solana at a working dinner that will focus on Tehran's rejection of repeated UN demands that it halt uranium enrichment. The meeting will coincide with continuing bargaining in the 15-member UN Security Council on a Franco-British draft resolution that would legally require Iran to freeze all uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities. US Ambassador to the UN John Bolton told reporters Saturday that the ministers would "talk about the longer-term policy that we need to pursue to stop Iran from achieving a nuclear weapons capability". "I think they could have that discussion on the assumption that (the Franco-British) resolution will be adopted next week and that therefore they can look at what the next steps are," he said after an informal council meeting on the draft. "That avoids them getting down in the engine room with us working on this resolution. It allows them to stay up on the bridge and look ahead," he said. Western powers suspect Iran is using its civilian atomic program to hide efforts to develop nuclear weapons. But Iran insists that its aims are peaceful and claims it has the right to pursue uranium enrichment as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia and China adamantly oppose sanctions and the use of force against Iran, their key trading partner. They have veto power as permanent members of the Security Council along with Britain, France and the United States. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said Saturday the Franco-British draft, which is backed by the United States and Germany, "requires major changes". Moscow and Beijing object to the draft's reference to Chapter Seven of the UN charter and its suggestion that the Iranian nuclear program constitutes a threat to international peace and security. Chapter Seven can authorize economic sanctions or military action as a last resort. The proposed draft would oblige Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, the process creating fuel for nuclear reactors and -- potentially -- the core of an atomic bomb. It warns, in case of Iranian non-compliance, of unspecified "further measures" requiring another resolution. It needs at least nine votes and no veto from any of the council's permanent members. But Iran remains defiant against calls for it to stop enriching uranium. Iran vowed Sunday it would refuse to comply with any UN Security Council demand to halt its nuclear program and warned the crisis was heading toward a "confrontation". "We will not accept any resolution that is against our rights," said Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi, adding that "a suspension and pause (of enrichment) is not on the agenda at all." Ahead of Monday's high-level meeting, Rice telephoned her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov. Diplomats said Rice would use Monday's dinner to try to reassure her Russian and Chinese colleagues about US intentions. While insisting that it wants a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Tehran, Washington has pointedly not ruled out military action to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Russia and China say the nuclear standoff can only be resolved diplomatically, with the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) leading the process. Last Tuesday, foreign ministry political directors of the five permanent, veto-wielding security council members plus Germany met in Paris but failed to agree on how best to deal with Iranian defiance. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 11 AFP: Iran warns UN of 'confrontation' over nuclear programme Sun May 7, 7:12 AM ET TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran " /> has vowed that it would refuse to comply with any UN Security Council demand to halt its disputed nuclear programme and warned the crisis was leading the two sides towards a "confrontation". Asked how Iran would respond if the Council adopted a tough resolution drafted by Britain and France, foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Sunday that Iran "will certainly reject it and cannot carry it out". "We will not accept any resolution that is against our rights," he told reporters. The two European powers, backed by the United States, have asked the Council to approve a text that would legally require Iran to freeze all uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities. Iran says it only wants to enrich uranium to make nuclear fuel, though the process can be extended to make weapons. "Any action by the Security Council will have a negative influence on our cooperation with the agency," Asefi told reporters, repeating Iran's threat to halt International Atomic Energy Agency " /> (IAEA) inspections. "The involvement of the Security Council will direct the path of cooperation towards confrontation," he said, warning that the Security Council would not be able to enforce its demands. "It's obvious that the Security Council should not take any action that it is not capable of dealing with later, because we will not refrain from our rights," Asefi said. "A suspension and pause (of enrichment) is not on the agenda at all, and the Security Council should not do something that will get it into trouble later on." Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also signalled Iran could quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if the pressure mounted. "If the signature of a treaty threatens the rights of a nation, it has no validity for that nation," the ISNA news agency quoted him as telling a gathering of members of Iran's Basij militia. Iranian leaders have already signalled Iran could quit the NPT -- the cornerstone of the global effort against the spread of nuclear weapons -- if the country comes under more pressure to halt sensitive nuclear fuel work. Iran argues nuclear fuel work is authorised by the NPT, but the country is accused of seeking to exploit this loophole in the treaty. The hardline-controlled parliament also stepped in by warning it could force the government to definitively put an end to tough IAEA inspections and leave the NPT. "Should the UN secretary general and Security Council members not fulfill their crucial duties in settling arguments, there will be no choice for the Majlis but to demand the government withdraw the ratification of the additional protocol," said a letter signed by more than 160 deputies. It also said the Majlis could "put on the agenda the examination of article 10 of the NPT, which is about leaving the NPT". The moves from Tehran come a day before US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> hosts her counterparts from six major powers in a bid to find a consensus amid continued opposition to the draft from veto-wielding UN Security Council members. Russia and China adamantly oppose sanctions and the use of force against Iran, their key trading partner, with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak saying the draft UN resolution "requires major changes". Moscow and Beijing object to the draft's reference to Chapter Seven of the UN charter and its suggestion that the Iranian nuclear program constitutes a threat to international peace and security. Chapter Seven can authorize economic sanctions or military action as a last resort. US President George W. Bush " /> reiterated that he preferred a "diplomatic solution" to the conflict over Iran's nuclear ambitions and threats against Israel " /> , but said that "all options should be placed on the table". When Ahmadinejad says "that he wants to destroy Israel, the world should take that very seriously," Bush said. The Iranian president has repeatedly called for Israel to be "wiped from the map". "It's a specific threat against an ally of the United States and Germany," Bush told Bild am Sonntag. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 12 AFP: Five major UN powers still far apart on Iran draft Sat May 6, 2:33 PM ET NEW YORK (AFP) - The five veto-wielding UN Security Council members ended another round of talks that apparently failed to bridge differences over a draft resolution requiring Tehran to halt uranium enrichment. The ambassadors of Britain, France, China, Russia and the United States -- the so-called P5 -- huddled for two hours at the French UN mission here as Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak said in Moscow that the Franco-British draft "requires major changes." "All sides tried to propose language that could bridge the differences," Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya said after the meeting. He said sticking points remained the draft's reference to Chapter Seven of the UN charter and its suggestion that the Iranian nuclear program represents a threat to international peace and security. Chapter Seven can authorize economic sanctions or military action as a last resort in cases of threats to international peace and security. The P5 envoys were due to meet informally with their 10 non-permanent colleagues later in the day. In the absence of language acceptable to Russia and China, it was virtually certain that the draft would not be put to a vote before a meeting of foreign ministers from the P5 plus Germany here Monday. Ahead of that high-level meeting, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> Condoleezza Ricetelephoned her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss the Iranian nuclear issue, the Russian foreign ministry said. The draft would oblige Iran " /> Iranto suspend uranium enrichment, the process creating fuel for nuclear reactors and -- potentially -- the core of an atomic bomb. It warns, in cases of Iranian non-compliance, of unspecified "further measures" requiring another resolution. Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons capability under the cover of its civilian atomic program. Iran, however, insists its nuclear aims are peaceful and has defended its right to conduct uranium enrichment as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia and China, which have close trading ties with Tehran, adamantly oppose sanctions and the use of force against Iran. They say the nuclear standoff must be resolved diplomatically, with the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) leading the process. Earlier, US Ambassador John Bolton said he wanted to hear whether the Russians and the Chinese had new ideas on how to break the impasse. Wang also reiterated that Beijing did not see the need to invoke Chapter Seven since, in his view, all Security Council resolutions are binding. On Saturday, Kislyak also outlined the terms of a deal that would allow both the IAEA to carry out necessary checks and Iran to continue its nuclear program. Russia "has come forward with an offer, the essence of which is that Iran freeze uranium enrichment work for a time to work with the IAEA to restore trust in the character of Iran's nuclear program," Kislyak was quoted by ITAR-TASS as saying. Under Moscow's proposal, put forward in varying forms over the past few months, Russia would then enrich uranium on its territory on Iran's behalf for a certain period of time. The offer "remains on the negotiating table", Kislyak said. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 13 IRNA: Zarif explains civilian nature of Iran's nuclear program to US audience - New York, May 6, IRNA Iran-US-Talking To American People-TV Iranian Ambassador to United Nations Mohammad Javad Zarif said in TV interview program 'Talking to American People' on C-Span nationwide TV that the purpose of Iranian nuclear program is simple: Iran is a country that will become a net importer of energy in a couple of decades. "We need to invest in our sources of energy. We have invested a great deal in our alternative sources, including in hydroelectric power. Even in some areas of energy which have not yet developed well like wind energy and solar energy. We have invested in all areas of energy and nuclear energy is one area or alternative energy which is important and which have made investments in that area and we want to be able to have the technology for development purposes," he added. Asked if Iran's nuclear program is for the future generation or it has military implications, Zarif responded, "No, we in fact believe that a nuclear weapons program will not enhance Iran's security." He added, "It will in fact be detrimental to our security and the perception that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program is in our view detrimental to our security. Therefore, we have made it very clear that nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction have no place in our defense doctrine and we have been more than willing to cooperate with the international community to remove any doubt as to even the possibility of a weapons program in Iran." He recalled that the IAEA has now been in record at least five or six times that there is no indication of any activity that would direct to an illegal program or weapons program. 1416/2322/1412 ***************************************************************** 14 AFP: Russia and China press for changes to Iran draft Sat May 6, 7:06 PM ET NEW YORK (AFP) - Russia and China stuck to their demands for major changes to a draft resolution that would legally oblige Iran " /> Iranto halt uranium enrichment, as the UN Security Council held inconclusive consultations on the text. The council's 15 members met informally for two hours at Britain's UN mission here following a morning meeting of the body's five veto-wielding permanent members that apparently failed to bridge differences on the Franco-British draft. "We had a very constructive discussion," US Ambassador John Bolton told reporters after the afternoon meeting. "Some of the major issues are still outstanding." He said the council would meet again Monday in the hope that an acceptable draft could be put to a vote next week. His French colleague, Jean-Marc de La Sabliere, also said that, while there was some movement, "major sticking points remain... There's still a lot to do." Foreign ministers of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- the permanent members of the Security Council -- plus Germany are also to meet here Monday. Bolton said they would not be burdened with the draft and would instead focus on the longer-term strategy to deal with Tehran. Western powers suspect Iran is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons capability under the cover of its civilian atomic program. Iran, however, insists its nuclear aims are peaceful and has defended its right to conduct uranium enrichment as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia and China, which have close trading ties with Tehran, adamantly oppose sanctions and the use of force against Iran. Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya backed a comment by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak in Moscow earlier in the day that the tough draft "requires major changes". Wang said sticking points remained the draft's reference to Chapter Seven of the UN charter and its suggestion that the Iranian nuclear program represents a threat to international peace and security. Chapter Seven can authorize economic sanctions or military action as a last resort. The draft would oblige Iran to suspend uranium enrichment, the process creating fuel for nuclear reactors and -- potentially -- the core of an atomic bomb. It warns, in cases of Iranian non-compliance, of unspecified "further measures" requiring another resolution. Wang reiterated that Beijing did not see the need to invoke Chapter Seven since, in his view, all Security Council resolutions are binding. "If there's some other formulation that all would agree that the requirement on Iran to suspend its uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities would be mandatory, of course we'd take a look at it," Bolton said. "But let's be clear we are not prepared to extend these negotiations endlessly," he said. Tanzanian Ambassador Augustine Mahiga for his part said: "We've reached a point where we tried to incorporate some inducements for the Iranians to cooperate but also to remove whatever implication or threat that might be implied." He said the discussions also focused on the need to strengthen the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) and pursue cooperation between the IAEA and Tehran. Ahead of Monday's high-level meeting, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice " /> Condoleezza Ricetelephoned her Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, to discuss the Iranian nuclear issue, the Russian foreign ministry said. Russia and China say the nuclear standoff must be resolved diplomatically, with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) leading the process. On Saturday, Kislyak also outlined the terms of a deal that would allow both the IAEA to carry out necessary checks and Iran to continue its nuclear program. Under Moscow's proposal, put forward in varying forms over the past few months, Russia would then enrich uranium on its territory on Iran's behalf for a certain period of time. The offer "remains on the negotiating table", Kislyak said. Meanwhile the foreign minister of the United Arab Emirates said Saturday that Gulf Arab states were worried by Iran's nuclear energy program and were seeking greater assurances from Tehran that its intentions are entirely peaceful. Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nayhan, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the six-member Gulf Cooperation Council, was speaking after a summit of GCC leaders in Riyadh. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 15 AFP: UN's Iran draft needs 'major changes' - Russia Sat May 6, 6:05 AM ET MOSCOW (AFP) - The UN Security Council's draft resolution on Iran " /> , legally requiring Tehran to stop sensitive nuclear fuel work, needs to be fundamentally changed, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Kislyak has said. The draft resolution "requires major changes," he said, according to Interfax and RIA-Novosti. "It's too early to say what changes should be brought to the draft resolution to satisfy the Russian side. Consultations are ongoing," Kislyak was quoted by RIA-Novosti as saying Saturday. Members of the United Nations " /> Security Council were expected on Saturday to hold a new round of talks in New York on the resolution, which was put forward by London and Paris in response to international concern over the nature of Iran's nuclear programme. The resolution would legally oblige Iran, under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, to suspend uranium enrichment -- the process used to produce fuel for nuclear reactors and, potentially, the core material of an atomic bomb. If Iran does not comply the draft warns of unspecified "further measures", that would require the adoption of another UN resolution. Russia and China have firmly opposed talk of sanctions against Iran. Russia "has come forward with an offer the essence of which is that Iran freeze uranium enrichment work for a time to work with the IAEA ( International Atomic Energy Agency " /> ) to restore trust in the character of Iran's nuclear programme", Kislyak was quoted by ITAR-TASS as saying. The international community's call for Iran to halt uranium enrichment work, however, "is not an aim in itself but a tool for restoring trust in their nuclear programme", Interfax reported him as saying. Western powers suspect Iran is trying to build up a nuclear weapons capability under the cover of an atomic energy programme but Iran insists its nuclear aims are peaceful and has defended the country's right to develop civilian nuclear power. Diplomats said earlier that a vote on the draft resolution was unlikely until after a meeting in New York on Monday of foreign ministers from the five permanent members of the Security Council -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus Germany. Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 16 IRNA: UNSC involvement in Iran N-case to foment confrontation - Asefi - Tehran, May 7, IRNA Iran-Asefi-Nuclear Iran Sunday said involvement of the United Nations Security Council in Iran's nuclear case and adoption of incorrect decision by the council could turn the path of cooperation into confrontation. Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi made the remark while addressing domestic and foreign reporters at his weekly press conference. "Any measure by the Security Council will have adverse impacts on the trend of the Islamic Republic of Iran's cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)," he said. Asefi added a draft resolution prepared by Britain and France and backed by the US against Iran's nuclear program is politically motivated. "We think the IAEA should not be weakened." The US on Saturday failed to convince the 15 Security Council members to approve the proposed draft resolution against Iran's peaceful nuclear program. "Involvement of the Security Council in Iran's nuclear case is totally illegal," he said. The spokesman added the US and the West intend to take advantage of the Security Council politically. "In fact, certain countries have set trap for independent states through measures taken at the Security Council and the possibility of adopting a resolution (against Iran). "The issues of suspension and pause are not on Iran's agenda at all," he said. The spokesman added, "Iran should not be expected to continue its cooperation with the IAEA if its case is not to be discuss at the IAEA and the Security Council is to take it up." He noted that most Security Council members are against the US attitude but Washington pushes its demands forward by taking resort to the policy of intimidation. "The US has proved it does not believe in ethics and logic in international relations." Asefi said, "If the Security Council adopts a resolution which does not officially recognize Iran's right, Tehran will not implement it." ***************************************************************** 17 IRNA: Asefi cautions UNSC permanent states not to go to extremes Tehran, May 7, IRNA Iran-Asefi-Nuclear Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi here Sunday cautioned foreign ministers of five permanent states of the United Nations Security Council not to go to extremes in the face of Iran's nuclear case. Asefi made the remark while speaking to domestic and foreign reporters at his weekly press briefing prior to a meeting of foreign ministers of the five permanent states of the Security Council -- Russia, China, Britain, France and the United States -- along with Germany. The meeting is scheduled to be held in New York on Monday to discuss a draft resolution prepared by Britain and France and supported by US against Iran's nuclear activities. "If their measure and attitude are rational, they will receive a wise response," Asefi said. He also warned against involvement of the Security Council in Iran's nuclear case and adoption of incorrect decision by the council, saying, "In that case, cooperation could turn into confrontation. "The Islamic Republic of Iran regards the issue of its nuclear case being raised at the Security Council as illegal and is against the issue. "It will not come as a surprise to Iran if that they adopt a resolution making irrational demands from Iran. In that case, Iran will reject the resolution. "Iran will not accept a resolution falling short of officially recognizing its rights." The spokesman added, "We think the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) should not be weakened." The US on Saturday failed to convince the 15 Security Council members to approve the proposed draft resolution against Iran's peaceful nuclear program. Pointing to Iran's extensive cooperation with the IAEA, he said, "Reports presented by the IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei showed no diversion in Iran's nuclear activities. "Iran is ready to continue cooperation and talks with the agency and other countries. "If authors of the resolution are seriously determined to solve the case, they can focus on positive aspects of ElBaradei's report." The spokesman added the US and the West intend to take advantage of the Security Council politically. "In fact, certain countries have set trap for independent states through measures taken at the Security Council and the possibility of adopting a resolution (against Iran). "The issues of suspension and halt are not on Iran's agenda at all," he said. The spokesman added, "Iran will strive to restore its inalienable rights and believes the sides could reach a compromise through dialogue and negotiations. "It is now up to the opposite side which option to choose." 2327/1412 ***************************************************************** 18 Korea Times: Is China Trying to Fool West on Korea? Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion By Tom Plate Professor at University of California, Los Angeles Director of Asia Pacific Media Network LOS ANGELES _ China is acting in bad faith on the Korean nuclear issue. That¡¯s the provocative suggestion now coming from some Western intelligence circles. It¡¯s a scary, foul and ultimately upsetting thought. It may also be wrong. The nasty rumor re-surfaced in the aftermath of Chinese President Hu Jintao¡¯s official visit to Washington last month. During the 90-minute session of direct talks -- why only 90 minutes? -- at the White House between Hu and President George W. Bush the contentious question of North Korea¡¯s nuclear weapons program arose, as expected. But some accounts characterize Hu¡¯s response to the need to achieve denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula as far less emphatic than Bush¡¯s. If such alarming reports are true this would be curious, at best. The principle of a nonnuclear Korea, for both Koreas, whether divided or even (someday) united, is one of the core agreements of the statement of principles hoisted last year by members of the 6-party talks as evidence of diplomatic progress. Since 2003 these talks have been organized and hosted by China in Beijing. They became and have remained the principle vehicle of the dogged multinational effort to reduce North Korea-sourced tensions in the region. The September 19, 2005 agreement was significant. Among other things, North Korea committed itself to close any nuclear-weapons program and arsenal and rejoin, at an early date, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), and resubmit to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards, including readmitting international inspectors to its nuclear facilities. The United States promised it has no intention to attack or invade North Korea and has no nuclear weapons deployed in Korea. For its part, South Korea affirmed a no-nukes policy on its territory. This diplomatic accord has been described by some observers as at least a conceptual breakthrough. It was also viewed as a triumph for newly active Chinese diplomacy. To ink the deal, Beijing got signatures from Japan, Russia, the United States, South Korea and North Korea. Beijing¡¯s exhaustively patient diplomacy appeared to have born fruit of a new level of international consensus on an issue which, for the U.S. and Japan at least, was at the very top of the agenda. But now comes the intimation that China is being two-faced with everyone involved, except for North Korea. The prospect is almost too Machiavellian to contemplate without risking a heart attack. Beijing cultivates good relations not only with Washington but also with Seoul. Policy differences of all sorts bedevil and divide South Korea and the United States, but the two old allies who fought the Communists in the devastating Korean War have agreed on one thing over and again: Both Koreas should be completely free of nuclear weapons. Double-dealing by China on this core principle would befoul the core relationships of a peacefulrising China with some of the most important nations in its future. Trade and investment from Tokyo and Seoul has grown enormously; Russia and the United States are hugely important players in China¡¯s future. Would Beijing concoct a big lie by which all are to be fooled and humiliated just to allow North Korea to become a significant nuclear power? The permanent nuclearization of the Democratic People¡¯s Republic of Korea would be of little benefit to the North Koreans themselves if it led to international economic isolation and a slowing of growth. It would certainly complicate Seoul¡¯s already over-complicated relations with Tokyo. As far as anyone can tell, the main beneficiary of Beijing¡¯s duplicity -- of a secret, pro-nuclear understanding between Beijing and Pyongyang -- would be conservative circles in Japan. They have been increasingly restive about Japan¡¯s low military profile and more openly eager than in recent memory to have their country assume a higher military profile. It¡¯s hard to envision anyone else on the planet devoutly praying for a resurgent, militarized Japan, except perhaps those Americans who believe -- either deeply sincerely or for militaristic ulterior motives -- that war between America and China is inevitable. In that circumstance, they would want a well-armed Japan as a deterrent, or as an actual combat ally. And so, if Hu is some day unveiled as a secret double-dealer on the vital North Korean nuclear question then the Chinese president would be playing right into the hands of those factions in Japan and the United States that would wish his country the most harm. No one has ever said Hu is dumb. Therefore, the conspiracy theory by which China is playing Asia and the West for suckers on the Korean question makes no sense at all. It makes more sense to believe China means what it said and did when it helped formulate the statement of principles last year and then, to great fanfare, put its signature to the document. Any other scenario for China would be just plain dumb. 05-07-2006 19:00 ***************************************************************** 19 [NYTr] Going Nukular Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 10:20:23 -0500 (CDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Ed Pearl Truthout - May 5, 2006 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050506Z.shtml Going Nukular By William Rivers Pitt OK, I'm freaking out. It's a quiet freak-out, even a mellow one by comparison to ones I've witnessed first-hand and endured personally, but it is happening. I seize up like a poorly-oiled engine several times a day, and my teeth grate together so hard that it sounds like two icebergs colliding in the North Atlantic inside my head. It won't be long now before my body's ability to manufacture endorphins shorts out like an old fuse, and when that happens, I will probably collapse into a gibbering gob of pudding. Blame it on the movies I watch. You see, I like watching movies. Good ones, bad ones, scary ones, stupid ones, action and adventure and gore and mayhem and mystery, I don't care, but the DVD is in the player so I can unplug my brain for a while every day. My movie collection is on the verge of outgrowing the large shelf I bought to contain it. Yes, I buy movies instead of renting them. I'm that guy who can never return rented movies on time; I wind up paying $276.33 in rental fees to Blockbuster for a movie I could have bought for $14.99. Over the last few days, a strange theme has developed in my movie-watching. My ears perk up every time I hear a certain word. I heard it while watching "Deep Impact" the other day, again during "Seven," and again during "Thirteen Days." I hear the word, and that's when the freak-out kicks in. I can't control it, and all too often it sneaks up on me. Before we get into the word, I should explain what I am not freaking out about. I am not freaking out about the impending indictment of Karl Rove in the Valerie Plame investigation. I should be, but I'm not. The voices in my head tell me the indictment is coming soon, but I am holding it together. Hell, it's not like this is a big deal or anything. Valerie Plame was only running a CIA intelligence network dedicated to tracking the nuclear ambitions of Iran, and her exposure only annihilated a good portion of our ability to keep an eye on that situation. It's not like wrecking her career and exposing her position was a blow to national security or anything. I am not freaking out about the fact that the Abramoff scandal is widening into a pestiferous vat of bribery and prostitution. I should be, but I'm not. They have taken to calling this thing "Hookergate," and a lot of people are smelling blood on the wind. Former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham is currently enveloped by an eight-year prison sentence, and the scandal surrounding him looks to snare several other House members. It appears that a defense contractor was providing bribes and prostitutes to as many as fifteen Representatives so as to curry favor, including the Duke's favor. Ed Rollins, one of the GOP's heaviest strategists, was chewing the fat with George Stephanopoulos on the Charlie Rose show Tuesday night, and had this to say: "If this House scandal is as big as I think it is from talking to people that are around it - of course it started with Cunningham and it's moving beyond that. Duke Cunningham, a congressman from San Diego who took bribes. There was a real little cabal on the Defense Appropriations Committee in which a couple of people who basically made an awful lot of money off of defense contractors and basically rewarded a bunch of members, Republicans." If this thing widens in the way it seems to be, if the bribery allegations spread to House members swapping whores in the back of defense contactor limousines, well Ms. Lewinski will suddenly seem a piker by comparison, and the geometry surrounding the '06 midterms will be tossed into a cocked hat (pun definitely intended). Nope, not freaking out. Nor am I freaking out about a story from the Providence Journal about American soldiers going hungry in Iraq. I should be, but I'm not. After all, we are simply seeing the unfolding of Donald Rumsfeld's master plan: go to war on false pretenses by scaring the fudge out of the American people, lie with your bare face hanging out, and then send in too few troops with no armor and a bad tactical plan to guarantee utter failure and complete disgrace. American troops are now going door-to-door in Iraq begging the civilians for food, and writing home to their families asking them to send canned provisions. One troop wrote his mom that he and his squad dropped ten pounds in the first couple of weeks they were over there, and only get fed meager provisions twice a day while working 22-hour patrol shifts under combat conditions. Rumsfeld must think that hungry troops will fight harder. I am more convinced than ever that he is a Sith Lord. There are so many things I am not freaking out about, but should be. We get a Kewpie Doll talking-head natterbrain named Tony Snow as press secretary for the administration, on the heels of a hint from chief of staff Josh Bolten that the live, televised press conferences out of the White House may go the way of the dodo. Who cares? The same cocktail-pinkie clubhouse "journalists" in DC who ignored the historic hand grenades lobbed by Stephen Colbert, because he skewered them beneath the fifth rib, aren't likely to care much about limited access to administration spin. They've written it so much in the last few years that they know it by rote. Yeah, I'm only freaking out about one thing, one word. Perhaps I am freaking out in such a limited fashion, about such a narrow issue, because whatever portion of my brain that handles freak-outs over larger and more important issues has been reduced to gelatinous goo thanks to everything that has happened since these crazy fools got their hands on the main levers. Whatever the reasons, I am losing my mind over one word: nuclear. It popped up in those movies I've watched over the last few days. "Deep Impact" had astronauts planting "nuclear" devices on a comet; "Seven" had Morgan Freeman mentioning books about "nuclear" weapons in a passing conversation; and "Thirteen Days" had the Kennedy administration scrambling over "nuclear" missiles in Cuba. Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear. The word has been around for decades, and for the longest time, was at the center of American foreign policy and the deepest fears of the American people. Nuclear brinkmanship. Nuclear winter. Nuclear holocaust. Etc. It's a great, big, fat, important, and serious word. Its very existence has changed the face of the planet. In the last few weeks, the word has been bandied about regarding Iran. Do they have nuclear weapons? Will the Bush administration use our nuclear weapons to get rid of their nuclear weapons? How will this affect Pakistan and its nuclear weapons? The word has been getting around lately, and has been on the lips of Mr. Bush and his cronies, along with a whole galaxy of television talking heads. You hear it all the time. Sort of. Too often - and this is the nut of my freak-out - what you hear is "nukular." Phonetically, that version of the word spreads out to "noo-kyoo-luhr." I've heard a dozen people on supposedly-smart news shows blither that version of the word. It started with Bush, who could not pronounce "nuclear" properly if you promised him all the oil in the universe, and has spread like a dumb disease across the landscape. The people in the movies I've watched get it right, ya know, those Hollywood types, but neither the President of the United States nor most of his closest people nor the cream of the nabob crop on television can get this word past their teeth without sounding like hapless waterheads. So here's the thing. If we as a nation are going to be led by dangerous fools, if we are going to allow treason to stand in the highest ranks of government, if we are going to allow our Representatives to get wild with prostitutes and fat wads of cash, if we are going to allow our soldiers to slowly starve in Iraq while getting blasted out of unarmored Humvees during an ill-conceived occupation, the very least we can do is not sound stupid while doing it. The word is "nuclear." Noo-klee-urr. Work with me here. I'm freaking out. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 20 [NYTr] 1979 Vela Incident: Nuke Test or Meteorite? Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 15:31:05 -0400 (EDT) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit National Security Archive Update - May 5, 2006 http://www.nsarchive.org For more information: Jeffrey Richelson - 202/994-7000 The Vela Incident: Nuclear Test or Meteorite? Documents Show Significant Disagreement with Presidential Panel Concerning Cause of September 22, 1979 Vela "Double-Flash" Detection Washington, D.C., 5 May 2006 - Many U.S. government officials and scientists disagreed with the findings of a presidential panel that the double flash signal picked up by a U.S. nuclear detonation detection satellite (Vela 6911) in late September 1979 was possibly not a nuclear test, according to a number of studies posted today by the National Security Archive. The signal appeared to come from a 3,000 mile area that included the South Atlantic, Indian Ocean, tip of Africa, and part of Antarctica. A presidential panel concluded in May 1980 that the signal was more likely an artifact of a meteorite hitting the satellite and sunlight reflecting off particles ejected as a result of the collision. In addition to the report of the presidential panel, the posting includes reports produced by the DCI's Nuclear Intelligence Panel (completely redacted), and scientists and analysts at Los Alamos, SRI International, Sandia, the Intelligence Community, the Defense Intelligence Agency, Mission Research Corporation, and the Aerospace Corporation. Included are several reports which concluded that a nuclear test was the most probable explanation of the Vela detection and/or specifically questioned the presidential panel's explanation. Many of the reports were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by Archive Senior Fellow Jeffrey T. Richelson, while conducting research for his new book, Spying on the Bomb: American Nuclear Intelligence from Nazi Germany to Iran and North Korea (W. W. Norton). http://www.nsarchive.org THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals. * ================================================================ .NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems . Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us . .339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org .List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ .Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================ ***************************************************************** 21 Deseret News: Matheson still questions planned explosion [deseretnews.com] Saturday, May 6, 2006 Test isn't to develop a low-yield nuclear bomb, agency chief says By Stephen Speckman Deseret Morning News Rep. Jim Matheson met Thursday with Defense Threat Reduction Agency officials over a planned test explosion at the Nevada Test Site, but he still has questions about whether the test is a gateway to developing a new kind of nuclear weapon. "That's still the issue I've got to pursue," Matheson said Friday via telephone. Matheson, who supports continued research and development of conventional weapons, said he will ask for meetings with representatives of the Department of Energy's National nuclear Security Agency and the Department of Defense. At Thursday's meeting, Matheson learned that there will be air monitoring by helicopter before and after the so-called Divine Strake test. That decision on monitoring was made after a briefing of Washington officials last week at the Nevada Test Site. But Matheson said he still wants a test of surface soils to determine if any radioactive materials exist at the test site prior to the blast. "I think I'm going to get it, but we'll see," he said. The Utah Democrat also asked DTRA officials for underground monitoring beneath the detonation and off-site monitoring downwind from the site conducted through the University of Nevada's Desert Research Institute. And Matheson wants all of the results from the monitoring to be an open book. "For good or bad, let's put it all out there for the public to see," he said. "Transparency and openness is the only way we should be doing this." In an April 7 letter to DTRA Director James Tegnelia, Matheson said he was concerned that the public has not been given adequate assurances that the June 2 test is not a step toward "misguided attempts to build new low-yield nuclear devices." In 2003 Congress repealed a ban on research and development of low-yield nuclear devices. After the appeal, however, the Defense Department and National Security Administration, told Congress that no actual weapon was being "stealthily" developed, according to Matheson. The test in June will include the explosion of a 700-ton ammonium nitrate and fuel oil device to simulate an actual conventional bomb. The DTRA is justifying the test by saying it "will develop a planning tool that will improve the warfighter's confidence in selecting the smaller proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities while minimizing collateral damage." David Rigby, DTRA spokesman, said Friday his agency has been in contact with congressional staff members regarding town meetings in the near future on the Divine Strake experiment. "It is the agency's intention to participate in these meetings to be held in Nevada, as well as Utah, to address public concerns regarding the potential consequences of the Divine Strake experiment," Rigby said in an e-mail. Matheson said it appears the only obstacle toward going forward with the test is obtaining a permit from Nevada state officials, who have also asked for data from surface soil sampling at the test site. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. voiced their opposition last month to the test. Their concerns are that the explosion will stir up radioactive dust from previous nuclear tests and that the airborne particles will impact people who live downwind from the test site. With the same worries as Hatch and Huntsman, anti-nuclear activists and Salt Lake residents Peter Litster and Stephen Erickson last month joined members of the Nevada Indian tribe Winnemucca Indian Colony in a federal suit to stop the June test. Officials connected to the test claim there will be no danger to the population of Las Vegas and surrounding communities and that the mushroom cloud from the explosion will not be visible away from the Nevada Test Site. E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 22 Spectrum: Stop blast for kids' sake St. George UT. - www.thespectrum.com - I've got a beautiful grandson. He's only 2 1¼2, so the only parties he's acquainted with are birthday parties. He hasn't voted in an election, he has no influence. He's an innocent boy, dependent on those older and, supposedly, much wiser. All I want is for him to have the best shot at life he can get. Which is why my passions overflow when it comes to Divine Strake, the 700-ton bomb blast slated to detonate at the Nevada Test Site on June 2. We're coming full-circle on this national disgrace. Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, disclosed Friday that a defense department official reportedly confirmed that this large, conventional blast will provide data simulating the effects of a low-yield nuclear explosion. What that means is that the so-called bunker buster bomb lives. Why else would scientists model the impact of a low-grade nuclear device? Early on, Divine Strake was noted in the Defense Department budget as a simulation of a nuclear explosion. However, when eyebrows were raised, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency quickly backpedalled, stressing that this is a conventional explosion. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, skirted the issue when asked point blank if there is anything in the United States' arsenal similar to this bomb. He said the answer to that question is classified information he could not divulge. This June 2 test is not going to be a one-time scientific experiment. Already, officials at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico are preparing for a sled test of this weapon where it will be slammed into a huge concrete barrier to determine its power. Weapons-grade plutonium and uranium has been moved out of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico to the Nevada Test Site, the Y-12 National Security Complex in Tennessee and to Technical Area 55 in Los Alamos for greater security, according to the National Nuclear Security Administration. The U.S. Air Force has been given $4.5 million to study how to deploy a nuclear earth penetrator - bunker buster - from a B-2 bomber. We've been down this road before during the nuclear tests of the Cold War. This government killed innocent Americans who were lied to, told that the tests were safe, that they had nothing to fear from the clouds that rained poison on them. And, the shuck and jive continues from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the Bush administration, the military and the wing-nuts who claim radioactivity has no impact on the environment or the human beings who inhabit it. My grandson doesn't have a voice. He doesn't have a choice. Neither do your children or grandchildren. In the name of these innocents - in the name of God - we cannot let this test go forward. To contact city editor Ed Kociela call 435-674-6237 or e-mail ekociela@thespectrum.com. Originally published May 6, 2006 Copyright ©2006 The Spectrum. ***************************************************************** 23 Spectrum: Just shooting the breeze in the nation's sacrificial zone St. George UT. - www.thespectrum.com - I'd like to sit down with a cool, tall glass of lemonade and shoot the breeze with charismatic Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. That is if the breeze here in Southern Utah - the nation's sacrificial area - is free of radioactive particles from the Divine Strake bomb set to be detonated June 2 at the Nevada Test Site, the same location as the nuclear tests of 1945 to 1992. He took some time on April 20 to meet with the editorial board to discuss the upcoming blast planned by the U.S. Department of Defense's Defense Threat Reduction Agency. In that meeting Hatch said he had the same concerns we have with history repeating itself but believed the testing was paramount for the United States to maintain its arsenal advantage over threatening countries. From what I gathered, he advocated for the experimental test but apparently not at the site in Nevada. What was perplexing in the same conversation was that Hatch praised himself for the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 -and its revisions in 2000 - that granted The Radiation Exposure Screening and Education Program with expanded funding into fiscal year 2007. For Hatch to pat himself on the back for a "monumental accomplishment" with the passage of RECA - and the more than $1 billion paid out to Downwinders from Utah, Arizona and New Mexico - while at the same time favoring more experimental low-yield nuclear weaponry testing - was bewildering. Especially since he said there are no plans to expand RECA funding. "Once it's gone, there will be no more," he said. Downwinders are fortunate to get anything, according to Hatch. With the fight he had to battle against foes like Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., we're lucky the legislation exists at all, he told the editorial board. I'm extremely grateful for RECA, and to Hatch for sponsoring the legislation because my great-grandfather, Owen Davis, former Wayne and Kane County School District Superintendent, died from pancreatic cancer in 1975. After a long, hard fight to prove it was caused by nuclear fallout, my grandparents and great aunts and uncles received the $50,000 compensation given to anyone who has contracted specific cancers and can prove their residency in designated areas during the testing years. What caused me to crinkle my forehead in confusion is that Hatch said significant scientific analysis was the proven factor of RECA that covers maladies directly caused by low-level ionizing nuclear exposure. Yet, highly reliable scientific findings also claim explosive ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO) - what Divine Strake is - commonly used in mining and blasting operations, emits toxic fumes with deadly byproducts. RECA amendments compensate uranium miners who regularly used ANFO. While the obvious qualifier is the uranium exposure, both the shock waves and the blast wind - distinct to high explosives - affect the lungs, ears and gastrointestinal tract. Any miner will tell you they are as hazardous to your health as uranium. Keep in mind the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing was a 4,000-pound - the equivalent of 2 tons - ANFO blast that took down the entire Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. Divine Strake is a 700-ton ANFO bomb. Mix the aftermath of its detonation with soil contaminated with radiation from past blasts in a dust cloud stretching 10,000 feet in altitude, with even the calmest jet stream, and the inhalation of the polluted dust particles by people hundreds of miles away could manifest slowly over time into diseases yet unknown. Whether a new disease is from a terrorist and deliberate, from nature and accidental, or - God forbid - from experimental weaponry testing and unintentional, it is a real fear. Indulge me as I echo Hatch's words in regard to compensation for those inadvertently victimized by governmental experimentation: "Once it's (the funding) gone, there is no more." Yes, I'd love to talk to Utah's senior Senator about it further over a couple of glasses of lemonade. He is personable and I know he'd listen, but I wonder if he'd drink the refreshing beverage with the knowledge the water I used to make it came from my tap piped to an aquifer that may - or may not - be tainted. Only time will tell. Editorial page editor Jennifer Weaver can be reached at 435-674-6202 or e-mail . Originally published May 7, 2006 Copyright ©2006 The Spectrum. ***************************************************************** 24 [DU-WATCH] Use of depleted uranium weapons is 'illegal' Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 13:17:17 -0500 (CDT) Use of depleted uranium weapons is 'illegal' According to a August 2002 report by the UN subcommission, laws which are breached by the use of DU shells include: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the Charter of the United Nations; the Genocide Convention; the Convention Against Torture; the four Geneva Conventions of 1949; the Conventional Weapons Convention of 1980; and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, which expressly forbid employing 'poison or poisoned weapons' and 'arms, projectiles or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering'. All of these laws are designed to spare civilians from unwarranted suffering in armed conflicts. (To read the complete article - CLICK HERE ) Depleted Uranium Is A Real Danger! See The Photos CLICK HERE - Sign Our Petition CLICK HERE Rob McConnell The 'X' Zone RadioShow www.xzone-radio.com xzone@xzone-radio.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Protect your PC from spy ware with award winning anti spy technology. It's free. http://us.click.yahoo.com/97bhrC/LGxNAA/yQLSAA/Sj.0lB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> [Brought to you by HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK] ***************************************************************** 25 New York Times: Britain's Prime Minister Reshuffles Cabinet - By Published: May 5, 2006 LONDON, May 5 — Mauled in local elections, Prime Minister sought to re-establish political authority today, switching the most senior jobs in his cabinet in his biggest reshuffle since taking office and hoping to reverse an accelerating slide in his Labor Party's fortunes. Mr. Blair dismissed his home secretary, Charles Clarke, and ordered sideways moves or demotions for other ministers, including those responsible for foreign affairs, defense, trade, education and transport. With today's juggling, also gets its first female foreign secretary. John Prescott, the deputy prime minister mired in a sex scandal, kept his title and cabinet seat, but lost many of his responsibilities for housing, local government, regeneration, planning and urban and regional issues. Another high profile casualty was , the foreign secretary, who has played a leading role, along with Secretary of State and the foreign ministers of France and Germany, in the West's confrontation with Iran over its nuclear program. He was moved to the less prestigious post of leader of the House of Commons, responsible for maintaining Labor party discipline. Mr. Straw was replaced by Margaret Beckett, the environment minister, and Britain's first female foreign secretary. Word of the reshuffle emerged as it became clear that the results of Thursday's local elections — only the latest grim tidings after weeks of bad news — showed Labor in decline after Mr. Blair's nine-year term in office. The opposition Conservatives secured their biggest share of the vote since a national election in 1992. The reorganization was announced almost exactly a year to the day after Mr. Blair won a third term of office. But some Labor supporters openly called on their leader to hand over to his heir-in-waiting, the chancellor of the exchequer, . Frank Dobson, a former Labor health minister, said many Labor legislators "are saying now that we've got to get the party under new management. It ought to happen fairly soon." The speed and breadth of the reshuffle, however, suggests strongly that Mr.. Blair is determined to keep power on his own terms for as long as possible. Indeed, the maneuver seems designed in part to stave off pressure on the prime minister to name a date for his departure. Throughout the morning, a procession of ministers visited Mr. Blair at 10 Downing Street — his official residence and office — to hear news of their destiny. The most prominent minister to fall was Mr. Clarke, blamed for the authorities' failure to deport more than 1,000 foreign criminals after they served jail terms. Some of the criminals went on to commit offenses that included murder and rape. At least one of them currently faces terrorism charges. Until just a few days ago, Mr. Blair had publicly supported Mr. Clarke's continued tenure. But he was replaced as home secretary by John Reid, the defense secretary who has just overseen the deployment of 3,500 British troops in Afghanistan. Mr. Reid is nicknamed Mr. Blair's "rottweiler" because of his tenacity as a troubleshooter. Mr. Clarke did not go gently. In a BBC interview he said he had been offered other senior posts but had turned them down. "I have been sacked from this job as home secretary; not sacked from government as a whole, but sacked from this job as home secretary," he said. "And I regret that because I think I could have carried it through, but the prime minister not only has the right, he has the duty to make those kinds of judgments." Mr. Clarke will now return to the parliamentary benches as a Labor legislator. But many critics said the reshuffle was merely an attempt to divert attention from the deeper problems behind the local election results. Echoing Conservative opposition taunts, Mr. Dobson, the former health minister, compared Mr. Blair's reshuffle to "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." Referring to the prevalence of trusted aides in the reshuffle, Sir Menzies Campbell, the leader of the smaller opposition Liberal Democrats, who made only small gains in the election, said: "The prime minister is having to shuffle with an increasingly battered pack." With 4,360 local council seats and 176 of England's 388 local authorities in play, Labor lost 270 of the 1,768 council seats it was defending. It also lost direct control of 18 councils, according to near-complete official results. The big winner was David Cameron, for whom Thursday's vote was the first electoral challenge since he took over the leadership of the opposition Conservatives last December. The Conservatives gained 11 councils, according to preliminary results, including some in bellwether London boroughs, but failed to make inroads in the north of England. The vote did not directly affect the composition of Parliament in London, where Mr. Blair won a third successive — if reduced — majority in national elections a year ago. But, according to a projection by the BBC, the local election — in which 23 million Britons were eligible to cast a ballot — showed the Conservatives in the lead with 40 percent of the vote, the smaller opposition Liberal Democrats with 27 per cent and Labor lagging with 26 percent. The results also showed creeping gains by the small, anti-immigrant British National Party, particularly in the east London area of Barking and Dagenham, where 11 of its 13 candidates won seats from Labor incumbents. Though tiny in relation to the big parties, its gains provoked unease about the possibility of a extreme right backlash against immigrants. The results in local elections do not always mirror national polls: Labor also polled 26 percent in the last major local vote in 2004, but won power again in the national election last year, with 36 percent of the ballot. But, this time, national politics weighed heavily after a series of scandals, including Mr. Prescott's affair with a secretary; the questions over the government's failure to deport foreign criminals; worries about the future of the state-funded National Health Service, and accusations that Labor offered campaign donors places in the House of Lords in return for loans. The local council polling was the biggest electoral event before the next national vote, which must take place by 2010. The turnout was estimated at 36 percent — about 8.2 million people voting — down 3 percent on the 2004 local vote. Inside NYTimes.com ***************************************************************** 26 BBC: Foreign doubts after Straw's exit Last Updated: Saturday, 6 May 2006 By Paul Reynolds World Affairs correspondent, BBC News website [Jack Straw at PM's residence in Downing Street, London, on Friday] Mr Straw was central to the UK's policy on Iran The departure of Jack Straw from the Foreign Office has come as a considerable surprise. It is going to be an uncertain time for the presentation of British foreign policy. Mr Straw's successor, Margaret Beckett - incidentally Britain's first woman Foreign Secretary - will be immediately thrown into a growing crisis with Iran. She is due to join a dinner meeting of other foreign ministers in New York on Monday evening at which Iran and its nuclear programme is to be discussed. The others there - from the four other permanent members of the Security Council (the US, Russia, China and France) plus Germany - were confidently expecting the experienced Jack Straw and will now have to size up the new British representative. And she them. The point at issue is a Security Council draft resolution demanding that Iran suspend its enrichment of uranium. Britain is a sponsor of the resolution and the Western countries are right in the middle of the difficult task of getting Russia and China on board. Jack Straw had grown into the job and was extremely confident about the dossiers. Policy differences? He might have been expected to stay in office, especially as he had borne the heat and burden of justifying the invasion of Iraq, memorably having to try to match the display put on by the then French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin in the Security Council on the eve of the war. But beyond that, he had got used to arguing about the war and the future of Iraq and had also prepared the British policy on Iran. Mr Straw's absence will gi Tony Blair greater control over foreign policy He has been in favour of trying to stop Iran by demands, initially, and by sanctions if necessary; but he has been against a military attack. He told reporters that it could not be justified under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which allows for self-defence. If there is one area of apparent difference between himself and the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, it could be over this issue. There will be some who might interpret Mr Straw's departure as a sign that Mr Blair might be more willing to contemplate military action. That remains to be seen. But certainly in public statements, Mr Blair has been noticeably more reluctant to rule such action out, saying that to do so could send the "wrong message" at this time, presumably a message of weakness. New relationships [Margaret Beckett at PM's residence in Downing Street, London, on Friday] Mrs Beckett will have to re-establish relationships with allies Mr Straw's absence will give Tony Blair greater control over foreign policy. And it is not just British officials who will have been taken by surprise. The Americans did not expect this either. This is especially so because Jack Straw and Condoleezza Rice have spent a great deal of time and effort getting to know each other. Mr Straw went to Alabama, Dr Rice's home state and recently Dr Rice went to Blackburn, Mr Straw's constituency. That kind of personal contact is unusual in modern diplomacy, which moves at such a fast pace that people do not normally have time to pay house calls. All that has now been thrown out of the window and Mrs Beckett will have to develop her own relations. It is perhaps a rather brutal lesson to the Americans of how the parliamentary system works. Further impact There are implications from other moves in the reshuffle. Another Blair loyalist, Geoff Hoon, has been made Minister for Europe. This job is usually seen as quite a junior one. It nestles in the Foreign Office under the wing of the powerful Foreign Secretary. [A British soldier inspects an overturned military vehicle in Basra] A new defence secretary could also affect policy in Iraq Mr Hoon, Defence Secretary during the Iraq war, is likely to want to play a larger role than the occupant of this ministerial seat often does. Britain's relations with the rest of Europe are currently quite quiet, and the European Union itself is going through a period of re-assessment after the rejection of its proposed constitution. It is unclear as to whether Mr Hoon's arrival is designed to re-invigorate relations. Or has he has come to the Foreign Office because there was nowhere else for him to go? What will count is the absence of John Reid as Defence Secretary. That post has assumed huge importance with the future of British troops in Iraq always on the agenda and now troops are also engaged in what could be quite intense action in Afghanistan. The Afghan operation might need forceful justifying if things get tough and John Reid was always prepared to take on all comers. His successor Des Browne remains untested. ***************************************************************** 27 BBC: Brazil joins world's nuclear club Last Updated: Saturday, 6 May 2006 By Steve Kingstone BBC News, Sao Paulo [Science and Technology Minister Sergio Rezende speaking at the opening of the plant] Brazil says its technology is some of the most advanced in the world Brazil has joined the select group of countries with the capability of enriching uranium as a means of generating energy. A new centrifuge facility was formally opened on Friday at the Resende nuclear plant in the state of Rio de Janeiro. The Brazilian government says its technology is some of the most advanced in the world. The official opening follows lengthy negotiations with the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the IAEA. Brazil has some of the largest reserves of uranium in the world but until now the ore has had to be shipped abroad for enrichment - the process which produces nuclear fuel. z In future some of that enrichment will take place in Brazil. The government says that within a decade the country will be able to meet all its nuclear energy needs. Brazilian scientists insist their technology is superior to that of existing nuclear powers. They claim the type of centrifuge in use at Resende will be 25 times more efficient than facilities in France or the United States. Safeguards Sensitivity over that technology led to a standoff two years ago with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN watchdog. [Brazil's nuclear plant at Resende] The move came after discussions with the IAEA Keen to protect its commercial secrets, Brazil was reluctant to give inspectors full access to its facilities and politically the negotiations were complicated by simultaneous concerns about Iran's nuclear plans. But in the end Brazil and the IAEA agreed a system of safeguards to ensure that the new facilities would not be channelled into weapons production. Friday's opening at Resende is being hailed as a major step forward in Brazil's development and it comes amid renewed concerns about energy supplies in South America. Last week Bolivia announced plans to nationalise its gas reserves, prompting fears of price rises. As a big importer of Bolivian gas, Brazil sees nuclear energy as one of several strategic alternatives. ***************************************************************** 28 [NukeNet]Petition to Stop the Salem (NJ) Nuke Fish Slaughter - Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:34:45 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) Coalition for Peace and Justice; UNPLUG Salem Campaign, 321 Barr Ave, Linwood; NJ08221; 609-601-8583 -----Original Message----- From: Norm Cohen [mailto:ncohen12@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 8:53 AM To: savethefish@yahoogroups.com; UnplugSalem@yahoogroups.com; unplugsalem-announce@yahoogroups.com Cc: ncohen12@comcast.net Subject: FW: Petition to Stop the Salem (NJ) Nuke Fish Slaughter - please sign now We have 147 signatures. Should be 1000s !! Please take a minute and click on the URL to sign the petition: The 5 year permit that allowed PSEG to slaughter fish by not building a closed cooling system, is over. The permit is now up for renewal or even reversal. We're trying to gather 1000s of signatures both via the internet and on hard copy to help convince the NJ Department of Environmental Protection to finally do the right thing and Stop the Salem Nuke Fish Slaughter. Please click on the URL below and add your name to the list. Thanks Norm Cohen Click here ----- http://www.PetitionOnline.com/SaveFish/petition.html _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 29 Guardian Unlimited: UK atomic agency boss plots £450m buyout Richard Wachman Sunday May 7, 2006 The Observer Dipesh Shah, the chief executive of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, is plotting a management buyout of the public company, which has been valued at £450m. Shah is believed to have sounded out key members of staff and private equity backers for a bid. The UKAEA could also attract interest from trade buyers such as Bechtel of the US, Britain's Amec, or the multinational CH2M Hill. The UKAEA's future is expected to be scrutinised by Alistair Darling, the new Trade and Industry Secretary who replaced Alan Johnson in the Prime Minister's cabinet reshuffle on Friday. The government has made no secret of the fact that the public company could be privatised or sold at some point. A buyout led by Shah would be designed to prevent a sale to a competitor; it is thought to be backed by senior executives, some of whom are said to be growing increasingly impatient with the lack of progress towards privatisation. The UKAEA has recently begun to play a wider role in the private sector, forming joint ventures with private companies to compete for nuclear decommissioning contracts, both at home and abroad: the market is estimated to be worth more than £300bn. At present the company has £5bn of decommissioning work in the UK, which involves clean-up contracts for nuclear plants, including Sellafield in Cumbria and Dounreay in Scotland. UKAEA also operates the nuclear fusion project in Culham, Oxfordshire. A spokesman for the UKAEA said: 'Any change of ownership is entirely a matter for government, as the shareholder. We will need to consider options for the future in consultation with our staff and the shareholder ... all options are open.' The state-owned body's alliance with Amec and CH2M Hill, the UK and US civil engineering groups, is the first of a number of such partnerships expected to be announced over the next few months as the task of cleaning up the UK nuclear industry's legacy is opened to competition. That market is estimated to be worth £56bn over the next 75 years, and will offer lucrative returns for participating companies. The first contract - for the low-level waste facility at Drigg in Cumbria - will be put out to tender this year. By 2008, 13 of the 20 sites are due to be opened up to competitive tender. Market liberalisation is forcing stateowned companies to forge private-sector alliances to try to protect their existing contracts, as well as bid for decommissioning work in overseas markets such as eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, where business is booming. [UP] Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 30 Bradenton Herald: Critics decry energy plan tax breaks 05/06/2006 | ANDREA FANTA Associated Press TALLAHASSEE - While some hail the energy plan that lawmakers passed Friday as progress toward making the state more efficient in using power, others call it a gift to utilities that will reduce the public's say in electricity policies. Senators unanimously approved a measure Friday that the House had given its final nod to earlier this week. Gov. Jeb Bush will sign the legislation, his spokesman said. It will offer homeowners two tax breaks: a sales tax holiday from Oct. 5-11 on energy-efficient appliances, such as ceiling fans, light bulbs and dishwashers, and a year-round tax rebate of up to $5,000 for homeowners who buy solar-energy products, like water and pool heaters. The bill (SB 888) also will create an independent commission that advises lawmakers on an in-depth energy policy. Some senators complained that representatives had refused to be bold and specific enough in their requirements for the commission. But some environmentalists say the bill also eliminates a requirement for public hearings in communities where companies want to build nuclear plants. "They've given a gift to the nuclear industry," said Susan Glickman, a lobbyist for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Florida. The bill's sponsor, Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs, denied that. Instead, he said it allows local governments to decide how many hearings they'll hold in their own communities regarding applications to build nuclear plants. Glickman is perhaps most worried about the radioactive waste that new nuclear factories will produce. It lasts for thousands of years and can cause cancer. ***************************************************************** 31 Daily Yomiuri: China seeks nuclear-powered energy security Junichi Miura / Yomiuri Shimbun Staff Writer China is constructing or planning to build more than 30 nuclear reactors in a quest for energy security for its booming economy. At the same time, the world's most populous nation is working on a policy to establish a nuclear fuel cycle to ensure efficient utilization of uranium, including a spent-fuel recycling plant, while also constructing a fast-breeder reactor. China's nuclear development dates back to 1955 when it concluded an atomic energy cooperation agreement with the then Soviet Union. However, little progress was made regarding the peaceful use of nuclear energy in China for many years following the signing, due partly to an ensuing confrontation between the two communist powers. In 1982, the Chinese government inaugurated the China National Nuclear Corporation as an entity tasked with taking charge of nuclear energy development, thus actively promoting nuclear power generation. Subsequently, China began constructing nuclear reactors in the mid-1980s. The Daya Bay No. 1 and Qinshan No. 1 nuclear reactors went into service in 1994. Currently, there are nine nuclear plants, excluding experimental reactors, generating electricity in China. Two more are being built in Tianwan, Jiangsu Province, and are due to begin operating later this year, and the government has approved plans for eight more. Despite such a determined push to construct plants, nuclear power generation accounted for a mere 1.2 percent of China's electricity output in 2000, compared to 78 percent from coal-burning thermal power plants and 16 percent from hydroelectric stations. In March, the Chinese government mapped out its 11th five-year power development plan for 2006 through 2010, in which it pledged to actively promote nuclear power generation. China envisages increasing its nuclear power generating capacity to 40 million kilowatts by 2020. To realize this goal, about 40 reactors, each capable of generating at least 1 million kilowatts of electricity, will need to be built. When the plants are completed, China will become the world's third biggest nuclear power generating nation, behind France and Japan. === Privatization vs nationalization There are two main types of reactors--boiling-water reactors (BWRs) and pressurized-water reactors (PWRs). China's nuclear technology comes largely from Westinghouse Electric Co. of the United States, as well as French and Canadian companies all of which specialize in PWR technology. Toshiba Corp., which has been a leading supplier of BWRs, recently decided to acquire Westinghouse in a 5.4 billion dollars deal, apparently planning to make inroads into the huge and highly promising Chinese nuclear power market. But the risk involved in entering this market is high, due to the existence of two different factions that are struggling over the future of the nation's nuclear power sector. One is the so-called solid-course faction, which is seeking to foster China's own nuclear power technology, the other is the so-called expansion-course faction, which wants to accommodate a greater presence of foreign companies. Since the ninth five-year development plan (1996-2000), the solid-course faction apparently has gained the upper hand, demanding the transfer--or domestication--of technology from foreign companies. Negotiations over technology transfers between foreign companies and the Chinese have been making slow progress, delaying the selection of a bidder for the planned nuclear power plants in Sanmen, Zhejiang Province, and Yangjiang, Guangdong Province. To achieve its ambitious nuclear power goal--construction of more than 30 new reactors in less than 15 years--China is expected to have no choice but to rely on not only PWRs but also BWRs. On the other hand, a 20,000-kilowatt experimental fast-breeder reactor is under construction on the outskirts of Beijing. It is expected to be operational by 2010. In addition, China is moving steadily toward realizing a nuclear fuel cycle by building a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in Gansu Province, which is reportedly designed to process 50 tons of spent fuel annually. (May. 8, 2006) © The Yomiuri Shimbun. ***************************************************************** 32 toledoblade.com: Detroit Edison begins restart of Fermi II plant Article published Saturday, May 6, 2006 NEWPORT, Mich. — Detroit Edison Co. expects that its Fermi II nuclear plant in northern Monroe County will start producing electricity again this weekend and be back at full power sometime next week. John Austerberry, a spokesman for the utility, said yesterday that a deliberately slow and conservative restart began Thursday night. The reactor was at 10 percent power yesterday morning, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission records. Nuclear reactors have to be at about 20 percent power for plants to be synchronized to the grid and start producing electricity. FirstEnergy Corp.’s Davis-Besse nuclear plant in Ottawa County was listed at 100 percent power yesterday. Both plants had been offline for refueling and maintenance. Fermi II’s outage began March 25; Davis-Besse’s started March 6. The two plants are along the Lake Erie shoreline, each about 30 miles from Toledo. The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660 , (419) 724-6000 ***************************************************************** 33 Las Vegas SUN: Lawyer says date postponed for mushroom cloud explosion in Nevada May 05, 2006 By KEN RITTER ASSOCIATED PRESS LAS VEGAS (AP) - A lawyer for an Indian tribe opposed to a non-nuclear explosion expected to generate a mushroom cloud over the Nevada desert said Friday he expects the test will be postponed, although federal officials said it remains on schedule. Spokesmen for two federal agencies planning the Divine Strake explosion said it was still planned June 2 at the Nevada Test Site. Robert Hager, a Reno lawyer representing the Western Shoshone tribe and Nevada and Utah "downwinders" in a bid to block the explosion, said a Department of Justice lawyer told him it will be delayed to let the National Nuclear Security Administration and Defense Threat Reduction Agency revise safety data and environmental assessments. Hager filed court papers Friday in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas referring to the three-week delay, to June 23. David Rigby, a spokesman for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency at Fort Belvoir, Va., denied the date had been reset. "We don't have any postponement at this time," he said. Kevin Rohrer, an National Nuclear Security Administration official in North Las Vegas, said he had no immediate information about a date change. A revised environmental assessment distributed Friday to Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn and members of the Nevada and Utah congressional delegations "indicates that we're OK to go forward with the experiment, from an environmental perspective," Rohrer said. Nevada Division of Environmental Protection spokesman Dante Pistone said Friday his agency would review that document, but had not issued required authorization to allow the test to proceed. "We haven't given them a date certain when we'll be able to sign off," the state official said. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency claims the blast will help design a weapon to penetrate hardened and deeply buried targets. Critics have called the blast a surrogate for a low-yield nuclear "bunker-buster" bomb. A federal judge is scheduled May 23 to hear Hager's request, filed April 20 in U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the test. The 700-ton ammonium nitrate and fuel oil bomb will use materials similar to those that destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995, but some 280 times larger. It is expected to generate a mushroom cloud 10,000 feet high. Nevada state officials have expressed concerns that the blast will spew hazardous materials and kick up radioactive fallout left from nuclear weapons tests conducted from 1951 to 1992 at the vast Nevada Test Site, some 65 miles north of Las Vegas. -- All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 34 Sunday Mail QLD: Ammo dump danger [07may06] SAFETY WORRY: The locked site at the ammunition dump DARRELL GILES political editor A SUSPECTED World War II arms dump near Brisbane's Archerfield Airport remains uncleared – 14 years after researchers were banned from the area because it was too dangerous. The land at Mortimer Road Park in Acacia Ridge is fenced off because it is considered a drowning hazard for children and there are no plans to clean it up. Residents are concerned about the tonnes of weapons and munitions believed buried at the site, on one corner of the airport. "No one really knows what is down there . . . no one seems to want to do anything about it. Of course it is a worry," said one local. Historian Terry Kelly drained water from an old quarry next to the site in the early 1990s and uncovered the entrance to a bunker leading to a series of tunnels where he found more than 40 rifles and machine guns. He said the guns had been left behind by the United States Air Force. There were unconfirmed reports that drums of radioactive material were also dumped. Mr Kelly, who had permission from Brisbane City Council permission to pump out the quarry so he could delve further into the bunker, was later stopped by a court order after council officers considered it too big a risk. A council source told The Sunday Mail the site was a potential timebomb. "He was stopped from retrieving items because it was too dangerous," the source said. "If someone went digging there now, it could all go up." Council spokeswoman Kate Winter said the council acquired the site in 1963, aware it had been used by the USAF during WWII. But despite the council eventually blocking Mr Kelly's salvage bid on safety grounds, she said there was no evidence the site posed any danger to residents. "Council has not uncovered any facts that lead us to believe that the site poses any danger to the public from unexploded ordnances," she said. "The full content of this alleged tunnel system was not established by Mr Kelly. "No evidence has arisen from then or since to give council reason to be concerned for the site's safety." However, Ms Winter said the council would welcome any further evidence. She said the quarry was fenced because it was a drowning hazard. The Archerfield Airport Corporation said it had no concerns about the area. "There have been all sorts of stories over the years, but as far as we are concerned, it has never posed any problems," a spokeswoman said. "Brisbane City Council has fenced it off. It is on their land." © Queensland Newspapers ***************************************************************** 35 MiamiHerald.com: Clean up Navy's mess 05/06/2006 | VIEQUES By ED MORALES pmproj@progressive.org The U.S. Navy is not doing right by Puerto Rico. Three years after it left its bombing range in Vieques, the island off the eastern coast of Puerto Rico, the Navy has been slow to clean up its mess. Three years ago this week, the Navy abandoned the island after four years of protests that rocked the main island and frayed relations with Washington. Since then, Vieques has flourished as a tourist spot. But a last bit of business, the EPA-sponsored cleanup of toxic substances -- such as depleted uranium, mercury and napalm -- has not fully materialized. Last summer, the Environmental Protection Agency finally announced its plans for the cleanup. Unfortunately, the first step of the plan involves detonating numerous missiles and unexploded ordnance that have accumulated in the 50-plus years of the site's use. The Navy is using a process called ''open detonation,'' claiming that it is faster and cheaper to blow up the weapons where they are found than to remove them. Thus, Vieques residents, who thought they had heard the end of explosions when the Navy left, are now hearing them again. Find safer alternatives Even worse, according to a recent article in The Chicago Tribune, the EPA says no meaningful cleanup can take place until the remaining ordnance is exploded, and that the process may take up to eight years. Last August, 23 humanitarian and faith-based organizations in the United States sent a letter to Puerto Rico's Gov. Aníbal Acevedo, encouraging him to demand that the Navy find safer alternatives to the current practice of exploding the ordnance. They wrote that the detonations would release toxins into the air, water and soil. More exposure to such a variety of toxic chemicals is not what Vieques needs. It already has the highest cancer rate of any of Puerto Rico's 78 municipalities. The EPA and the U.S. government should reassess the policy of open detonation, and at the very least, offer full disclosure of their programs and policies to island residents. Three years later, the fight to stop the bombing of Vieques is not over. Ed Morales is author of Living in Spanglish. ***************************************************************** 36 ContraCostaTimes.com: DOE to stop pensions for new contract workers 05/06/2006 | The changes apply to contractors who run nuclear labs and research facilities for the federal Energy Department By Adam Geller ASSOCIATED PRESS NEW YORK - The Department of Energy has told contractors it will no longer pay for pensions for newly hired workers at nuclear laboratories and research facilities, including Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. The change, which follows the lead of a growing number of private employers, is drawing sharp criticism from labor unions, advocacy groups and some Senate Democrats. It comes as federal lawmakers are working on measures designed to shore up a listing pension insurance system, improve funding of pension plans and slow the move by employers away from the retirement mainstay. The DOE's decision is intended to cut costs and ensure the predictability of future retirement obligations, a department spokeswoman, Megan Barnett, said Friday. "This is an internal management policy and more consistent with sound business practices in the private sector to improve the predictability" of pension funding costs, Barnett said. The changes apply to contractors who run a number of projects and research sites on DOE's behalf including the Lawrence Livermore, Sandia and Los Alamos laboratories; Georgia's Savannah River nuclear weapons and materials site; and the Hanford nuclear waste cleanup site in Washington state. The move covers contractors employing about 100,000 workers on DOE's behalf, as well 100,000 retirees or their dependents. Those workers and retirees will continue to qualify for current existing benefits. The department says that for all new hires, it will pay for defined contribution retirement plan similar to a 401(k). "The new policy recognizes the contributions of current and retired contractor employees and, at the same time, ensure that future costs for pension and medical benefits are more consistent with market trends," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a written release announcing the change. The move was attacked by critics, who say it betrays the interest of workers and could encourage more employers to follow suit. "Given the fact that all the evidence is showing that 401(k)s can't do the job in providing an adequate supplement to social security for most workers, it's a very disconcerting move by a government agency," said Karen Ferguson, director of the Washington-based Pension Rights Center. In a letter sent to President Bush on Friday, eight Democratic senators urged the administration to immediately reverse the DOE decision. "This policy is a direct attack on Americans' retirement security," says the letter, signed by Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, and Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray of Washington. DOE has told contractors they have until March 1, 2007, to deal with its elimination of funding for traditional pensions for new hires. It has also set a shorter timetable, until July 26 of this year, after which DOE will reimburse contractors for "market-based" medical benefit plans for new hires, less generous than existing plans. ***************************************************************** 37 News Tribune: Port of Tacoma decides not to handle uranium dioxide TheNewsTribune.com | Tacoma, WA Published: May 5th, 2006 02:01 PM Nuclear fuel won’t be in the Port of Tacoma’s cargo mix anytime soon. Earlier this year a shipping company had proposed sending uranium dioxide, which is used to make fuel rods that power nuclear reactors, through the port on its way to Japan, Taiwan and Korea. Port, labor and fire officials traveled to the Hanford area in February to learn more about the substance from AREVA, the company that makes the uranium dioxide pellets and powder. Uranium dioxide is considered hazardous, though it’s of relatively low risk to the people who handle it. “We decided for the (small) volume of cargo and our other opportunities for handling cargo, let’s not get into this,” said Tim Farrell, the port’s executive director. “If we don’t have to take the risk, why bother. We have bigger fish to fry.” The port anticipated 50 to 100 containers of the uranium dioxide per year. The port handled 2.1 containers last year. 1950 South State Street, Tacoma, Washington 98405 253-597-8742 © Copyright 2006 Tacoma News, Inc. A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company ***************************************************************** 38 Salt Lake Tribune: There is nothing divine about a bomb test Article Last Updated: 05/05/2006 09:10:59 PM MDT Barb Guy The first I heard of Divine Strake was last month. I was standing a few feet from the Nevada Nuclear Test Site where the experiment will happen. Corbin Harney, a Western Shoshone elder, winkingly gave me permission to enter the U.S. government-run, restricted-access site as his guest, since, if you believe the treaty the government signed, his people still own the land. I declined his invitation - I didn't have time to go to jail. Still, he and I stood together, holding hands, our heads bowed in prayer, or in respect for the prayers of others, as a religious service was held in the nuclear dust. This Catholic mass welcomed the Shoshone spiritual leader, a Jewish man wearing a tallit and reading from the Torah, a Mennonite, an Episcopal priest, a Jesuit priest, a Zen priest, a Methodist minister, an elderly nun in microfleece pants and sneakers, a former Marine officer, a hibakusha (Japanese survivor of the Hiroshima atomic bomb), my husband Chris, and me. It was a fine American exercise in people of many faiths coming together, talking through difference, wishing for peace, and petitioning our government. Divine Strake is the code name for a massive non-nuclear test planned for June 2. An explosion of 700 tons of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil - ANFO - will send a mushroom cloud perhaps 10,000 feet into the Nevada sky. This gigantic experimental blast will use 280 times the amount of ANFO that demolished Oklahoma City's Murrah Federal Building in 1995, killing 168 people and damaging or destroying more than 300 buildings. Some experts worry the test is a precursor to developing a nuclear bunker-buster bomb. I suppose reasonable people can disagree about whether to test, but Utahns, downwind from so many nuclear tests that were supposed to be safe, yet turned out to be deadly, can be forgiven if they're wary. After Sept. 11 nearly five years ago, some Americans began to wonder why people in other countries hate us. They don't all hate us, of course, but suddenly many Americans were shocked at the image of ourselves we saw reflected in infuriated eyes. Historically, America has enjoyed international goodwill, never more so than on Sept. 12, 2001. But that has slipped through our fingers. A strake, by the way, is a metal strap that holds boats or planes together. Odd. But what makes me go nuclear is the use of "Divine" in the name. I've really had it with the Bush administration positioning things like they were ordered up by God. And this isn't the first time. There are at least nine other divine tests on the books, including Divine Warhawk and, to really prove the point, Divine Hates. Up close, each day, Americans are doing lovely, honorable things, but I wonder how we look as a group from far away. We ignore poor people and people stricken with unrelenting illness and pain, we turn our backs on genocide, and we spend our vast wealth and waste our sharp minds on war. Then we name the effort after deity. As if this experiment is ordained by God. The appalling arrogance, the blind blasphemy, the colossal chutzpah, in essentially naming this test after God! Could this be why people hate us? We make bad choices. We choose to enrich the already wealthy, making everyone else poorer; we ignore the sick and starving; we invent wars but give them very real death tolls; we ruin the only land the world will ever get; we spend sinful amounts of money to create a better way to wage war; and, more and more, we literally do it in God's name. The Bush administration acts like God prefers us to other countries. Like God isn't also God to Iceland and Bhutan and France and Rwanda. With President Bush in charge, we surely look like we think we're special. A little too special for some people. We see people across the globe possessed by such a religious vehemence that their humanity is ruined. Crazed with bloodlust, they must destroy human life, American life, to prove God is on their side. Americans find this indefensible - that's not how reasonable people behave. Then why is President Bush's team putting the language of the holy to our war efforts? To imply that God approves of our actions? I can only wonder what God might really think of America's "Divine" projects. Who would Jesus bomb? First and foremost, no one. If we fail to grasp that lesson, if we keep confusing the unholy with the sacred, our jihad looks a lot like theirs. --- Barb Guy writes a regular column for these pages. © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 39 Salt Lake Tribune: Defense officials try to allay fears of stirring up nuclear debris Article Last Updated: 05/06/2006 02:53:07 AM MDT Not just conventional? By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune WASHINGTON - A Defense Department official told Rep. Jim Matheson that data gathered at a major explosion in Nevada in June could be used for nuclear-weapons development as well as for chemical munitions, Matheson said. "It's going to look at shock value from a conventional weapon, but it also gives data that would reflect a nuclear weapon as well," Matheson said. "Let's call it what it is. It's a dual-use test. They should've said that all along." The Pentagon plans to detonate 700 tons of explosives at the Nevada Test Site as part of a test called Divine Strake. Matheson also said he received assurances Thursday that there will be additional air-quality testing conducted at the test site, including helicopters to monitor airborne particulates. Meanwhile, Nevada environmental officials have demanded more information on surface and subsurface radiation contamination at the test site, and reiterated their contention that the test cannot proceed until the Pentagon gets permission from the state. Once the state gets the information, it will need time to analyze the results, wrote Michael Elges, director of the Nevada Bureau of Air Pollution Control. "Based on the time required to evaluate the data to be provided, BAPC cannot ensure being able to provide a final determination" before the scheduled June 2 test date. But a spokesman for the agency overseeing the test site expressed optimism that all the required information will be turned over in time to allow the project to stay on schedule. "For the last several weeks, we've been aggressively working with the state of Nevada to provide them with the data they need to make a decision on the air permits," said Kevin Rohrer, National Nuclear Security Administration spokes- man. He said it has provided additional computer models to show the explosion and air particulates would comply with the existing air permit, and are working to provide additional data and modeling. On Friday, the National Nuclear Security Administration issued a revised environmental impact for the Divine Strake test. The new assessment notes that earlier information on the test was sent to numerous officials and none commented, except the state of Nevada, which said the test "is not in conflict with state plans, goals or objectives." The revised environmental document also corrects an earlier discrepancy in the distance from where the explosion would be conducted and another network of tunnels where nuclear tests had been conducted. The document had listed 1.5 miles, but the revised distance is 1.1 miles, a discrepancy raised by staff to Sen. Orrin Hatch. Nonetheless, additional radiological surveys "confirm there is no radiological contamination within the impact area of Divine Strake; therefore, no contamination could be resuspended into the environment." Monitors will gather data on ground shaking and damage to a below-ground tunnel to help make computer models for weapons development. A Defense budget document said the test would help develop computer models to allow war planners to pick the smallest nuclear weapon possible to destroy a buried target, although defense officials later said the inclusion of "nuclear" in the document was a mistake. Matheson said he now wants to have meetings with policymakers at the Defense Department and the National Nuclear Security Administration to find out if there are plans for any nuclear-weapons development. In 1994, Congress banned development of low-yield nuclear weapons, but the Bush administration successfully argued for the partial repeal of that prohibition in 2003. The explosion would be nearly 50 times larger than the biggest conventional weapon in the U.S. stockpile. Matheson said the Defense Department's James Tegnelia committed to have helicopters in the air to monitor the test site, as well as monitors on the ground at the test site and outside the installation. Matheson has also asked for monitoring in the tunnel and for soil samples beneath the blast site to make sure the explosion does not stir up radioactive remnants from past weapons tests. Tegnelia also told Matheson the agency is considering holding public meetings or open houses before the test. "If all of these things happen, I think there's going to be an ability of a lot of folks to get more comfortable with the potential health effects of this specific test," Matheson said. "I like to think we're making some progress in terms of ensuring health and safety." © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 40 Bridgwater Mercury: Radiation Levels Acceptable At Hinkley Part of the This Is The West Country Network By Simon Angear EXTENSIVE monitoring of radiation levels on beaches near Hinkley Point nuclear power station has shown radiation levels are "within acceptable limits", the Environment Agency revealed this week. Monitoring was stepped up last year after a member of the public took his own radiation readings at Kilve beach when his pet dog died after being exercised in the area. Officers from the EA visited the beach with the man last September to take readings, but no trace of the levels he claimed could be found either by him or EA experts. However, as a precautionary measure, the EA has carried out a programme of monitoring from October until March, and this week revealed that both radioactivity and gamma rays were within the normal range. "The Strontium-90 was present at extremely low levels and within normal limits." Environment Agency spokesman Anil Koshti Hinkley Point is authorised by the EA to discharge small amounts of radioactivity into the Bristol Channel in liquid effluents. These discharges are closely monitored. Testing since these allegations came to light has taken in beaches at Weston, Burnham, Steart and Watchet, as well as Hinkley Point itself and the River Parrett. No activity above background radiation levels was detected. Routine checks by the station's operator, The British Nuclear Group, showed slightly elevated levels of Strontium-90 in two sediment samples, but the level was still within safe limits. The EA says it posed no threat to environmental or human health. Spokesman Anil Koshti said: "The Strontium-90 was present at extremely low levels and within normal limits. "However, as a precaution we have advised Hinkley A site operators to cease certain pond operations until we are satisfied that sufficient measures are in place to ensure levels of radioactivity are kept to a minimum." 9:00am Saturday 6th May 2006 Newsquest Media Group ***************************************************************** 41 [NukeNet] Scotland:Incinerator plans under attack Date: Sat, 06 May 2006 22:34:49 -0700 NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net) http://www.sundayherald.com/print55576 Sunday Herald - 07 May 2006 Incinerator plans under attack By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor ---------- AS many as 10 large waste incinerators are being planned by local authorities across Scotland, the Sunday Herald can reveal. The plans, put out by the Scottish Executive alongside new recycling figures on Friday, include three plants in the Glasgow area. Another two waste-burners are destined for the north of Scotland, plus one each in Ayrshire, Lanarkshire, Tayside, Fife and Lothian. In the past, any move to build new incinerators has provoked fierce public opposition, raising concerns about toxic pollution. As a result, the new proposals are regarded within government as highly sensitive. Yesterday, the plans were attacked by environmentalists, who called on ministers to reject them. Under European law, Scotland must cut the amount of biodegradable municipal waste dumped in landfill sites from 1.6 million tonnes to 0.6m tonnes by 2020. To date, progress has been achieved by increasing the amount being recycled or composted. But in local authorities’ latest sub-missions to the Scottish Executive, made available under the Freedom of Information Act, they say they will need new furnaces in the next few years. Critics now claim incinerators have been renamed “gasification”, “energy from waste” or “combined heat and power” plants in a bid to make them more acceptable to the public. The most ambitious plans cover seven councils in the Glasgow area and Clyde Valley, proposing gasification plants to handle a total of 540,000 tonnes of waste a year at Polmadie, Linwood and Queen-slie, with a reserve site at Shieldhall. The siting of two energy from waste plants in the north of Scotland, covering four councils, is recognised as being “contentious”. A further two potential sites “in Moray” and two “near Aberdeen” have been shortlisted, though their exact whereabouts are not specified. The plan for Ayrshire, which covers three councils, does not specify a site for its combined heat and power (CHP) plant. Tayside, covering three councils, wants an energy from waste plant for Perth and Kinross . Fife says it will need “one or two” CHP plants “at sites to be determined”. No details of the plans for Lanarkshire and Lothian are available. Just one group of three local authorities in Forth Valley says it can manage to cut the amount of waste going to landfill without a new incinerator. It proposes to maximise recycling and build a “mechanical biological treatment plant” instead. Environmental groups say other authorities ought to follow this good example. Stuart Hay from Friends of the Earth Scotland said: “Local councillors and environment ministers need to be aware that a headlong rush to incineration will be bad not just for the environment but for their electoral fortunes. “This incineration shopping list demonstrates that most of Scotland’s local authorities are adopting a lazy and half-baked approach to waste management, naively believing there won’t be a public backlash.” And Dr Dan Barlow, head of policy with WWF Scotland, called for the plans to be “sent back to the drawing board”. Local authorities’ waste plans will now be assessed by the Scottish Executive. Nobody from the Cosla was available to comment yesterday. ---------- Copyright © 2006 smg sunday newspapers ltd. no.176088 Back to previous page _______________________________________________________________________ Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/ Change your settings or access the archives at: http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net ***************************************************************** 42 Guardian Unlimited: Truck With Radioactive Material Rolls Over From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday May 7, 2006 10:31 PM SELIGMAN, Ariz. (AP) - A tractor-trailer carrying low-level radioactive items rolled over Sunday on Interstate 40 near this northern Arizona community when it rear-ended another vehicle. The accident, which killed a passenger in the tractor-trailer, was not threatening public health, said Officer Tim Mason, spokesman for the Arizona Department of Public Safety. The truck driver was critically injured and flown to a hospital. No other injuries were reported. The truck was carrying protective clothing, towels, tools and other items used in processing radioactive material. The final destination of the items, which contained low-levels of radioactive solid metal oxide, wasn't known, Mason said. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 43 Guardian Unlimited: Brazil Unveils Uranium Enrichment Center From the Associated Press [UP] Sunday May 7, 2006 4:31 AM By PETER MUELLO Associated Press Writer RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (AP) - Brazil has inaugurated a uranium enrichment center capable of producing nuclear fuel for the South American country's power plants. Brazil's enrichment center will save millions of dollars the country now spends to enrich fuel at Urenco, the European enrichment consortium, Science and Technology Minister Sergio Rezende told the government news agency Agencia Brasil Saturday. Iran is seeking to produce the same fuel, but is facing international pressure against doing so. Brazil - like Iran - has signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and Brazil's constitution bans the military use of nuclear energy. Brazil has the world's sixth-largest uranium reserves, but has been unable to use the fuel for energy without shipping it to and from Urenco. Rezende stressed Brazil's commitment to the peaceful use of nuclear energy at a ceremony Friday at the plant built on a former coffee plantation in Resende, 90 miles west of Rio de Janeiro. In 2004, the Brazilian government drew attention when it refused unrestricted inspections by the International Atomic Energy Association, arguing that full access to its centrifuges would put it at risk of industrial espionage. Inspectors said they were satisfied after monitoring the uranium that comes in and out of the centrifuges. Brazil's nuclear program began during a 1964-85 military dictatorship, and the ruling generals had secret plans to test an atomic bomb underground in the Amazon jungle. The idea was scrapped in 1990. Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006 ***************************************************************** 44 Bradenton Herald: County to revise Tallevast overlay 05/06/2006 | HERALD WATCHDOG Whitfield residents say designation hurt their property values DONNA WRIGHT Herald Staff Writer TALLEVAST - The county will likely draw a new Tallevast Overlay District that will not include Whitfield Estates, County Administrator Ernie Padgett said Friday. But Padgett was adamant that the newly revised overlay district imposing stringent environmental review will include all properties within the 200-acre plume of contamination stemming from an underground leak at a former beryllium company in Tallevast. The new overlay also will include properties within a buffer zone, Padgett said. On April 13, some Whitfield residents and business owners near Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport complained bitterly to county planning officials who were considering including them in the first Tallevast Overlay District map released last month. County staff drew the first overlay map large so it could later be reduced if the final plume map shrank, said Karen Collins-Fleming, head of the Manatee County Environmental Management Department. While a proposed overlay map could be scaled down once the public review process started, it could not be expanded, Collins-Fleming explained. The proposed district included an area bordered by Whitfield Avenue, U.S. 301, University Parkway and U.S. 41. Revisions to the proposed overlay zone were prompted by a new plume map released April 27 by Lockheed Martin Corp. that shows the contamination zone has increased by more than 50 percent but in directions leading away from the Whitfield area. As the former owner of the American Beryllium Co. plant when the underground contamination was discovered in 2000, Lockheed has the responsibility for cleaning up the mess. Lockheed first estimated the contamination covered only the five-acre factory site. Later tests revealed that the contamination stretched over 50 acres. That second plume map was revised one year ago when new tests showed the plume covered more than 131 acres. The latest estimate of 200 acres, Lockheed claims, is the final delineation, but some Tallevast residents mistrust those findings and predict the map will grow once again. The new plume map, Padgett said, will likely mean the overlay project announced in early April will be scrapped and staff will start over to design a new district and ordinance to safeguard the public and property owners. "I don't know the outcome," Padgett said. "But I would suspect that the next overlay district will be pulled back and not extend into Whitfield." That news pleased Whitfield resident Dennie Innis, who along with many of his neighbors, complained to the county planning commission on April 13 that no scientific data exist to include their neighborhood in the overlay district, which will ban the installation of wells and require a stringent review process for future development to ensure the contamination is not released or spread. But Padgett's announcement that Whitfield will likely be excluded from future overlay maps comes too late, according to Innis. The damage to property values, he said, has already been done "People will remember we were included," Innis said. "When people hear they're in an environmental problem, that is what they are going to remember." Innis cited a slow-down in property sales in his neighborhood. In March, houses on his street were selling the first week they were listed on the market, Innis said. "But now, nobody can get anybody to come to an open house," Innis said. "It was bizarre the way this was done. This has damaged this entire district. They should never have released that first drawing." The new overlay map, Padgett said, will correspond to the final plume map once it is approved by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Commissioner Ron Getman who represents District 4, which includes Whitfield and Tallevast, said it looks promising that Whitfield Estates can be excluded based upon the latest Lockheed data. "Lockheed is now confident that the extent of the groundwater contamination has been delineated," Getman said. "However, we do not want to bring the overlay district back until we get final approval of the new plume map from DEP." DEP is expected to complete its review of the latest Lockheed report with 60 days, said Pamala Vazquez, department spokeswoman. "We want to expedite the review" Vazquez said. "We know there is a community of concerned residents involved." The new overlay district, once finalized, will go before the county planning commission and through a public hearing process before it is voted upon by the county commission. That process will not likely begin before mid-summer, Padgett said. Tallevast residents are worried about continued development in the area, said Laura Ward and Wanda Washington, leaders of the Tallevast advocacy group, Family Oriented Community United Strong or FOCUS. Tallevast residents say they cannot understand why other property owners within the plume area can continue to use their wells and go forward with development when they cannot, Ward said. The same risk for disturbing the contamination exists throughout the area defined by Lockheed's map, Ward said. "Why are some people treated differently from others?" Washington asked. "It seems like there are rules for us but different rules for everybody else." Padgett said he expects that Lockheed or DEP will require that all existing wells within the known 200-acre plume area be capped to prevent pumping that might spread the contamination. Tallevast residents have already been told by the county and Lockheed that they will have to abandon their wells. But Vazquez said that while DEP does not want anyone using a contaminated well, state regulators do not have the authority to require anyone to cap a well. DEP has encouraged Lockheed Martin to cap as many wells as possible within the plume area, Vazquez said. Gail Rymer, Lockheed's spokeswoman, said that the defense giant does not have a blanket approach to well closures. "As we have been conducting our investigation to characterize the nature and extent of the plume, we have been working with property owners on a case-by-case basis," Rymer said in e-mail response to The Herald. "The state has been kept advised of our findings and our discussions with well and property owners." Innis said that while he is glad Whitfield is not within the plume area, he can understand Tallevast residents' concerns. "They should have been relocated years ago," Innis said. "Instead, people have had their heads in the sand and left Tallevast residents in danger. They should be moved somewhere safe." Donna Wright, health and social services reporter, can be reached at 745-7049 ***************************************************************** 45 The State: Senate panel approves funds for MOX plant 05/06/2006 WASHINGTON  The U.S. Senate has been much kinder than the U.S. House to the long-awaited MOX plant at the Savannah River Site. A House subcommittee, dissatisfied with progress on the proposed plant, last week slashed $150 million and froze $450 million from the approximately $600 million for MOX programs requested by the Bush administration. But the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday fully funded an S.C. MOX plant in the fiscal 2007 defense budget bill, setting aside $368.2 million. The Senate committee action far from guarantees the money, however. The House and Senate in coming months will have to agree upon a final budget figure. MOX, short for mixed-oxide, describes the process in which weapons-grade plutonium is processed into commercial-grade nuclear fuel. • Upgrade possible at Georgetown mill CHARLESTON  International Paper Co., the worlds largest paper and forest products company, announced Friday it might invest up to $200 million to modernize equipment at its mill in Georgetown. The upgrade is part of the companys plan to focus on manufacturing uncoated paper and packaging products, said spokeswoman Stephanie Mangini. The capital investment over the next five years is to upgrade and modernize the equipment, she said. The last big upgrade was in 1983. There is not one particular project per se. She said the modernization would not create any new jobs at the mill, which currently employs more than 700 people. The mill began operations in 1937. • Hampshire Group reports rise in sales ANDERSON  Hampshire Group Ltd. reported its first-quarter sales increased by 17 percent, to $68.1 million from $58.1 million a year ago. But the company reported a loss of $176,000 during the quarter compared with a profit of $748,000 a year ago. The textile company also announced it is repurchasing up to 1 million shares of its stock. Shares closed Friday at $20.83, up 64 cents. Hampshire Group Ltd. 1st quarter ended April 1 2006 2005 Revenue $68.1 million $58.1 million Net income ($176,000) $748,000 Per share ($0.02) $0.09 Traded: Nasdaq; symbol: HAMP • Agency, company try to boost S.C. exports The S.C. Commerce Department has formed a relationship with Greenville-based Export Financial Services Inc. to help South Carolinas businesses sell products and services abroad. Export Financial Services will market Commerce programs that connect businesses with foreign customers. In return, the agency will refer businesses to Export Financial Services for help financing international transactions, said Commerce official Clarke Thompson. Export Financial Services has been a partner of the federal Export-Import Bank of the United States since 1996, Thompson said. That bank finances and insures transactions between U.S. merchants and international customers when private institutions avoid the countries or credit risks involved. Inside Job creation nationwide shifted into a slower gear in April. ***************************************************************** 46 reviewjournal.com: Yucca Mountain a wreck Opinion - FROM OUR READERS: May 07, 2006 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Authorities can't ignore inquiries that detail recklessness, irresponsibility By BOB LOUX SPECIAL TO THE REVIEW-JOURNAL Two separate, independent federal investigations, both reported on April 25, paint a devastating picture of the untrustworthiness of the U.S. Department of Energy's scientific case for putting a nuclear waste repository inside Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. The results confirm much of what Nevada has been saying for years. Basically, the Energy Department is now in a deep morass from which, as a practical matter, it's not likely ever to extricate itself. The first report came from the Energy Department's inspector general's office. It performed a criminal investigation into whether U.S. Geological Survey scientists working on the Yucca Mountain Project had falsified research data, as indicated in a series of e-mails that came to light in March 2005. The scientists' results on how much water would get to the nuclear waste packages were central to the Energy Department's scientific case for a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license, which the department needs to move forward with the dump. Of course, water facilitates corrosion and then transports leaking radioactive material to the human environment. The inspector general characterized the actions as ones "which have been described by observers as irresponsible and reckless." When the U.S. attorney declined to prosecute anyone in connection with the e-mails, the inspector general took the highly unusual step of writing a public memorandum to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, outlining the project's severe failings "that were pertinent to the core allegations." The second report, which overlaps in content with the first, was the Government Accountability Office's April 25 congressional testimony on the Energy Department's chronic and continuing quality assurance failures. Quality assurance is checking that work has been done properly and that the results are correct. As GAO put it, "DOE has had a long history of quality assurance problems at the Yucca Mountain Project." It is a history of repeated failures and one new managerial fix after another, without getting to the underlying problems. Despite public protestations and promises by the Energy Department's top brass, the repeated failures indicate a deep-seated organizational unwillingness to conform to the discipline of quality assurance. The Energy Department and its contractors apparently haven't thought doing things right was very important because they expect to bully their way through, as they have in the past. In fact, GAO questions whether the Energy Department has the managerial capacity to overcome this state of affairs and to cope with the enormous effort it would involve. Among other things, the Energy Department has yet to review 14 million e-mails to check the extent to which the quality assurance failures that allowed the U.S. Geological Survey falsifications to fester have infected other parts of the Yucca Mountain Project. That the e-mails were not an isolated problem seems to have been accepted even by Secretary Bodman, who said on April 12 that the culture of the Yucca Mountain organization was "reflected in" the e-mail affair. To say this is to admit clearly that the public cannot have confidence in the scientific underpinnings of the entire project. Bob Loux is the executive director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006 ***************************************************************** 47 Salt Lake Tribune: Into the fray: We welcome LDS Church into fight against nuclear waste Article Last Updated: 05/05/2006 09:11:20 PM MDT Tribune Editorial If anyone had doubts about where Utah stands on storing high-level nuclear waste in the state, they won't have them now. That is because many in Washington and elsewhere believe, rightly or wrongly, that when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints speaks on matters of public policy, Utah has spoken. The LDS Church hit the mark Thursday with a terse objection that correctly cited the "health, safety and environmental concerns" raised by the plan of a consortium of electric utilities to bring trainloads of highly radioactive debris to the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation. The state's secular power players have already said what Church President Gordon B. Hinckley and his two counselors wrote. But when the LDS Church asks "the federal government to harness the technological and creative power of the country to develop options for the disposal of nuclear waste [that don't involve transporting it to Utah and storing it here]," the request carries considerable weight. One need only recall how the church's strongly worded opposition a generation ago played a decisive role in killing a plan that would have based the MX intercontinental ballistic missile on rail cars hidden in the vast Great Basin desert of Utah and Nevada. There is a substantial number of Utahns who believe the LDS Church oversteps its bounds when it takes a position on public policy issues. We believe otherwise. Although we don't always agree with its positions, the LDS Church, like any other organization or individual, has a constitutional right to express an opinion on any issue - religious, moral or political. The LDS Church has a unique history, having overseen a theocracy that ruled the Great Basin for decades in the 19th century before it was broken by the federal government. As one price of statehood, the church was forced to remove itself one step from partisan politics. That history has made subsequent church leaders reluctant to make public statements on issues that cannot be strictly defined as moral issues, such as abortion and same-sex marriage. Rare exceptions have included issues perceived as vitally important to the safety of the church's headquarters and its members. Storage of high-level nuclear waste clearly falls into that category, which is why, to those who understand Utah's unique politics and history, the church's welcome statement carries resounding force. © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 48 Salt Lake Tribune: Reps ask BLM to deny PFS' access Article Last Updated: 05/06/2006 01:18:14 AM MDT By Justin Hill The Salt Lake Tribune Utah's three members of the House of Representatives on Friday joined the chorus of opposition to applications that would facilitate the shipment of spent nuclear fuel to a proposed storage site in Tooele County. In a letter to Pam Schuller of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management's Salt Lake Field Office, the House members - Rob Bishop, Chris Cannon and Jim Matheson - encouraged the bureau to deny Private Fuel Storage's applications for right-of-way across public lands and for access to public lands for the construction of a train-to-truck transfer facility. "BLM must not act in a way which facilitates the shipment or storage of [spent nuclear fuel] to and in Utah's West Desert," they write. "It is imperative that BLM safeguard the public's trust on this matter. A violation of this trust could have long-standing negative consequences for BLM in the State of Utah." The lawmakers highlighted the dissenting opinion of Peter Lam, an admistrative judge on the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. Lam had argued against the board's determination that the risk of an F-16 crash was so remote - less than one in 1 million per year - that it should not prevent the licensing. PFS, a consortium of utility companies with nuclear plants, have received a license to build the Skull Valley site from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The site would be a kind of parking lot on the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation big enough to hold nearly all the reactor waste ever produced by the nation's 103 nuclear power plants. PFS needs approval from the bureau for a right of way to build a transfer station on the north side of I-80. Another pending request, for a 32-mile rail spur, was PFS's first option but appears to be dead because of wilderness legislation Congress passed last year. PFS spokeswoman Sue Martin said Friday night that she had not seen the legislators remarks and was unable to comment on them. Utah's senators, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and more than 100 local and national conservation and social justice organizations also have sent letters to the bureau during the ongoing public comment period, voicing their opposition. The BLM can't consider whether to OK the applications until the Bureau of Indian Affairs grants its final approval of the agreement between the Goshutes and PFS. jhill@sltrib.com © Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. ***************************************************************** 49 Daily Herald: LDS Church adds objection to nuclear waste in Utah Saturday, May 06, 2006 ALAN CHOATE - Daily Herald A proposal to store spent nuclear fuel rods on the Goshute Indian Reservation has met heated opposition, with everyone from Utah's U.S. senators and governor to thousands of residents to the LDS Church denouncing the idea. On Thursday, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints asked the federal government to look for other options for the disposal of nuclear waste. "The transportation and storage of high-level nuclear waste create substantial and legitimate public health, safety and environmental concerns," the First Presidency of the church said in a statement. "It is not reasonable to suggest that any one area bear a disproportionate burden of the transportation and concentration of nuclear waste." But the fallout (so to speak) from an ongoing storage project in New Mexico could be used to bolster the case that a nuclear storage center will have little impact -- though that case is also being used to criticize the current proposal. Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of energy companies, has been licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to store up to 44,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel rods at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation. The Bureau of Land Management, however, also must approve a request to build either a new rail line or a transfer facility to allow the waste to reach the storage site. Public comments on that request are being accepted until Monday. In the late 1980s, a similar furor erupted involving the Waste Isolation Pilot Project in Carlsbad, N.M. -- and a new highway that was to be built so the nuclear waste would bypass Santa Fe. One couple who owned land crossed by the bypass sued, claiming -- successfully -- that they were owed not only for the land that was taken, but for the lost value of the rest of their property because of the radioactive waste that would be passing nearby. The Utah Association of Realtors is using a similar argument to oppose the Skull Valley project. Nuclear waste headed for that facility would be transported on rail lines. "Our rail line goes through about 100 miles of Wasatch Front real estate," said Christopher Kyler, chief executive officer with the UAR. "In some cases, it's right next to houses." Through opinion surveys and an assessment of property values in areas around rail corridors, the Realtors association arrived at what was called a "conservative" estimate of the effects of nuclear waste transport on property values, which was presented to federal officials. "The number was in the billions of dollars. It was $5 billion, as I recall, due to the PFS proposal," Kyler said. Since the project requires government approval to proceed, "this is clearly government action," he continued. "Is the federal government going to pay us just compensation for our devalued property?" But it's not a given that property would be devalued. A study of real estate sales figures in Santa Fe indicates that property values along the once-controversial bypass have not suffered. The 2003 study was prepared by E.J. Bentz and Associates, a Virginia environmental consulting firm, and an environmental studies professor at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. The analysis of real estate sales in Santa Fe County found that "the construction and subsequent operation of the Route 599 bypass has not negatively affected real property values along the bypass route." Instead, both the number of sales and the average selling price of land and houses has increased substantially. "The bypass appears to have 'unlocked' areas for residential development which previously had limited accessibility," the report says, resulting in "more homes ... being sold at significantly higher prices than previously in the area." Santa Fe Association of Realtors President Denise DeValle said the fact that nuclear waste is transported on the highway is "a consideration," but that it doesn't stop the development of new homes. One new project has homes priced between $400,000 and $1 million, she said. The Santa Fe area has limited developable land, DeValle noted, and people perhaps are more familiar with nuclear issues because of the proximity of Los Alamos National Laboratory. "We have made the best of a bad situation," she said. "The bypass was needed, as opposed to nuclear waste coming through town. It's enabled the surrounding area to be developed." Kyler said those findings are "completely irrelevant" to the argument about a potential impact on property values. "The fact of the matter is it may be that those properties might have been even more expensive than they are today, or may have developed faster," if the nuclear waste wasn't being transported nearby. "Value is based on perception. People perceive it as less valuable, so it's just a matter of determining, 'How much less?' " The federal Bureau of Land Management will accept comments on the Private Fuel Storage proposal until 5 p.m. Monday. Send comments to: Pam Schuller BLM - Salt Lake Field office 2370 S. 2300 West Salt Lake City, UT 84119 FAX: (801) 977-4397 E-mail: This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it PRO AND CON Among the arguments against allowing nuclear waste to be stored on the Goshute Indian Reservation: Utah doesn't produce nuclear energy and shouldn't store any of its byproducts. It could be a target for terrorist attacks. The site is close to a military testing area for planes and bombs. Radioactive waste should not be allowed to cross public lands. Private Fuel Storage has put forth the following arguments to promote the storage site: It has a willing host in the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians, who will benefit economically. It meets safety requirements set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Transportation will be by dedicated trains with specially designed rail cars. No radioactive material has been lost, nor have members of the public suffered radiation injuries, in 40 years of transporting these materials. This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1. Copyright © 2006 Daily Herald and Lee Enterprises ***************************************************************** 50 Japan Times: Japan offers to cooperate in U.S. nuke fuel program WASHINGTON (Kyodo) Japan is offering to cooperate in five areas with a U.S.-initiated international program aimed at providing nuclear fuel to developing nations and advancing technologies for recycling and protecting nuclear fuel and waste. Science minister Kenji Kosaka said he made the offer during a meeting with U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in Washington on Friday. Japan proposed conducting joint fuel development using its Joyo experimental and Monju prototype fast-breeder reactors. U.S. officials had been pressing Japan to cooperate in this area for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP. The U.S. Energy Department announced the GNEP program in February, asking Japan, China, France, Britain and Russia to join. The program is designed to develop new and more efficient ways to produce nuclear fuel and provide it to other countries, while also safeguarding against nuclear proliferation. The Japan-proposed joint work includes designing U.S. fuel cycle facilities, developing structural materials to make nuclear reactors smaller and developing large main equipment for sodium-cooled reactors. The Japan Times: Sunday, May 7, 2006 (C) All rights reserved Article 5 of 10 in National news The Japan Times] The Japan Times Ltd. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 51 Cape Cod Times: Perchlorate studied in food and beverages (May 6, 2006) By AMANDA LEHMERT STAFF WRITER A Western Massachusetts association of water suppliers is urging the state to carefully consider all possible sources of perchlorate, including food, as they set a safe drinking water standard for the chemical. Food and perchlorate Foods that have tested positive for perchlorate: milk and lettuce Foods to be tested by the FDA: corn meal, oat meal, spinach, carrots, cantaloupes, tomatoes, broccoli, oranges, orange juice, apples, apple juice, grapes With a week left in the public comment period for the state's proposed 2 parts per billion drinking water and hazardous waste standards for perchlorate, the state Department of Environmental Protection has received mostly kudos from clean water advocates on its plans. If it is approved, Massachusetts would be the first state to set such a standard. Perchlorate, found in rocket fuel, fireworks and other explosives, has been found in groundwater flowing under the Massachusetts Military Reservation on the Upper Cape. The chemical, when ingested, interferes with the thyroid, which regulates metabolism in adults and development in children. Perchlorate has been found in drinking water supplies in about three dozen states, but state and federal regulators have yet to fully examine its pervasiveness in food. The Defense Department, which is a major consumer of perchlorate, proposed a 24 parts per billion cleanup standard for its military installations in January. Department officials, who have suggested perchlorate can be safely ingested in much higher amounts, have not yet commented on the proposed Massachusetts standard. If adopted, the proposed state standard would dictate the level to which perchlorate polluters must clean tainted soil and water. About eight plumes of perchlorate are flowing through the aquifer under the Massachusetts Military Reservation in concentrations of up to 700 parts per billion. The aquifer is the largest source of drinking water on the Cape. The state recommended the 2 parts per billion standard - one of the lowest in the nation - in part because of uncertainty surrounding how much perchlorate is ingested through food. The standard considers that only 20 percent of a person's overall consumption of perchlorate comes from drinking water. The federal Food and Drug Administration found perchlorate in lettuce up to 29 parts per billion and in milk up to 11 parts per billion in 2004. A second round of testing will evaluate corn meal, oat meal, and several vegetables and juices. The FDA is trying to determine how the food became tainted. It could be from plants irrigated with water containing perchlorate or through exposure to perchlorate-laced fertilizer, according to the FDA Web site. With Massachusetts water suppliers being asked to meet such strict standards, they are asking the state to be just as strict with food that may contain perchlorate. Public water suppliers must notify residents when perchlorate is found in the water above the reporting limit of 1 part per billion. But foods are not currently tested for perchlorate. ''We just want to be on the same playing field,'' said John Sasur Jr. of the Western Massachusetts Waterworks Association, who submitted a letter to the state on behalf of the association. ''People have to realize you have to be concerned about all the sources.'' In his letter, Sasur said a drinking water standard is ''premature, improper and ineffective in addressing the overall contamination problem that affects all the citizens of the Commonwealth.'' Massachusetts tested bottled water from 50 bottling companies in 2004 and found no products with detectable levels of perchlorate. Officials from the Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Public Health said there are no plans to expand testing or to label foods that may contain perchlorate. ''They have tested bottled water. It would seem prudent, if this is a toxic pollutant, that DEP or DPH would at least look into testing the things coming into the Commonwealth,'' said Dan Mahoney, head of both the Sandwich Water District and the Upper Cape Water Cooperative. The comment period ends at 5 p.m. May 12. The standards could become law before the end of the year. Amanda Lehmert can be reached at alehmert@capecodonline.com. (Published: May 6, 2006) Copyright © 2006 Cape Cod Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 52 News & Star: More Mox fuel assemblies delivered to Switzerland Published on 06/05/2006 By Andrea Thompson FOUR more Mox fuel assemblies have been shipped from Sellafield to Switzerland. Fuel from the controversial £470 million plant has been helping to power a nuclear plant there since last year. British Nuclear Group said four Mox fuel assemblies have been delivered to its customer, NOK in Switzerland. They were transported using high security vehicles and the Atlantic Osprey ship, which is based at Workington. Four fuel assemblies were shipped to Switzerland in July last year. It was the first commercial Mox fuel to be manufactured at the taxpayer-supported plant following fears that it could be closed down before even completing a contract. The Mox plant has encountered fierce opposition from anti-nuclear protestors and legal challenges from Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the Irish Government. It is designed to process plutonium and uranium from used nuclear fuel rods to power reactors of overseas customers, who send their spent fuel to be reprocessed at Sellafield. Their plutonium is recycled and returned to them in form of the new Mox fuel which can be loaded into conventional nuclear reactors to generate electricity. ***************************************************************** 53 Deseret News: Democrats applaud LDS stance on waste [deseretnews.com] Sunday, May 7, 2006 Democrats are applauding the statement Thursday from the leadership of the LDS Church opposing nuclear waste. A day after the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a statement opposing storage of nuclear waste in Utah, state Democratic Party chairman Wayne Holland thanked the church leaders in a prepared statement. The church opinion was a "welcome addition to the thousands of Utah citizens who have been fighting the reckless disregard" of Private Fuel Storage, which wants to store high-level nuclear waste in the West Desert. "Democrats have a long history of environmental care and protection," he said. "Our advocacy for environmental stewardship is a decades-long struggle to protect the citizens of this state, and our country, from any and all hazards that will affect their health, their well-being, and the quality of their lives." © 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 54 Orlando Sentinel: U.S. should lead in disarming nukes - Orlando Sentinel : Opinion Alexander Hart | Posted May 6, 2006 Finally, nuclear proliferation is in the news. The situation with Iran draws attention to a danger that few Americans knew or seemingly cared anything about. As the world's largest owner of nuclear weapons, the United States should be leading the charge toward nuclear disarmament. But we're not. By concealing a nuclear-weapons program, Iran is in violation of the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; however, our own blatant disregard for the treaty and lack of interest in other disarmament measures make it difficult to decry similar behavior by the Iranians. American words will forever ring hollow on the global stage until we end our own nuclear hypocrisy. With its entry-into-force in 1970, the treaty obligated the five nuclear states to cease the nuclear-arms race at "an early date" and to create "a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." From 1970 to 1990, the United States dismantled approximately 4,900 nuclear warheads, about 18.8 percent of its stockpile. Our nuclear stockpile did not fall below its 1970 size until 1976. Today, our stockpile holds about 10,000 nuclear warheads. The dismantling of about 16,000 warheads over 35 years seems like an accomplishment, but when one considers that the remaining 10,000 nuclear weapons can easily destroy the world, our efforts seem insincere. Our pathetic disarmament efforts bring this question in Iran: If the Americans won't disarm quickly and totally, why shouldn't we develop nuclear weapons to protect ourselves? Surely if they're keeping them, nuclear weapons have some political or military value. And Iranians would be correct to wonder. Again, if the United States wants to keep other nations out of the nuclear club, it must also demonstrate progress toward removing itself from that club. Nuclear policy is all about transparency of intention. A lack of it is the reason we're having all these problems with Iran. If Tehran would only open all facilities to inspection, we could verify the veracity of Iran's claims of peaceful intentions. However, our nuclear intentions are just as unclear as theirs are. On one hand, we ratified the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and abjured the use of nuclear weapons. On the other, we have refused to ratify the CTBT, suggested developing "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons, and held onto the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons. What is the rest of the world supposed to think of us? Let's make our intentions clear and restore our status as the international disarmament leader. First, we have to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The nuclear weapons we have work, as we proved in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and we certainly should end this ridiculous talk of building any more. Pledging not to test any nuclear weapons would build international confidence in the goals of our nuclear program and make nuclear developments elsewhere appear more suspect and unjustifiable. The other step is more radical. We need to get rid of our nuclear weapons. All of them. Nuclear weapons are obsolete relics from the Cold War that should perish alongside the duck-and-cover drill. If necessary, we could keep 100 of them to placate those who still believe in nuclear deterrence. A hundred nuclear weapons would leave us with a highly limited first-strike capability while preserving a retaliatory ability great enough to inflict considerable damage upon aggressors. By restricting our nuclear program to something small and promising not to test new nuclear weapons, we send a message to the rest of the world: We will never wage a nuclear war of aggression. You do not need nuclear weapons to protect yourselves from us. Disarm if you have nuclear weapons. Don't develop them if you don't already have them. From that framework, complete, global and total disarmament is finally possible. Nuclear proliferation is a bad thing anywhere. In Iran, it scares me even more. We need to send a clear message to Iran and the rest of the world that a nuclear program is unnecessary and unjustifiable. As it stands, reasons exist for Iran to pursue one. By ending its nuclear hypocrisy, the United States can help lead the rest of the world into a safer, nuclear-free era. Copyright © 2006, Orlando Sentinel| ***************************************************************** 55 Knox News: Marines who guarded 'Birdcage' for years finally know its secrets By THOMYA HOGAN, The (Clarksville) Leaf-Chronicle May 7, 2006 CLARKSVILLE, Tenn. - For many years, they were the guardians of one of Fort Campbell's biggest secrets. They didn't know the secret, only that it had to be protected at all costs. The "secret" was the storage of atomic weapons and components at Clarksville Base nicknamed the "Birdcage" because of the wires and fences that surrounded it, and "they" were the U.S. Marines tasked with guarding it. From 1952 to 1969, hundreds of young men stood in "pillboxes" - concrete-style bunkers with nothing but a slit opening to peer through or to fire a weapon - to keep strangers out of the classified area in the woods of Fort Campbell. Last week, many of them were back at Fort Campbell to reunite with friends and former comrades. Some haven't seen each other in more than 50 years. It was the fourth reunion, and the biggest so far. More than 90 people - former Marines and their spouses - came back to Fort Campbell for the reunion. For many, this reunion offered a first for them - a chance to peer inside the place they spent so many years guarding. The Birdcage covers 3.2 square miles of Fort Campbell and was for the Armed Forces Special Weapons Project. Opened in 1948, it was one of 13 nuclear weapons stockpile sites, and the biggest of the 13. The site originally was operated by the Air Force. In 1952, control of Clarksville Base was given to the Navy, which in turn brought in the Marines to guard it. It was a job the Marines took seriously until Clarksville Base was shut down in 1969. The land was given to the Army as "surplus" property in 1969. Today, Clarksville Base is a National Register-eligible historic district because of its role during the early years of the Cold War. Hidden in plain sight, the Birdcage is a series of underground bunkers with thick iron doors built into the hillside. The surrounding area itself, beautifully wooded, doesn't convey anything unusual except for the concrete pillboxes spaced at intervals along the road. Some stand as tall as 5 feet, while others only appear to be 18 inches or so. Marines on guard duty in the pillboxes were not allowed to have entertainment of any kind, including a newspaper, book or even a radio. They had specific orders to protect the Birdcage. At one time it was surrounded with at least three fences - one electric and another barbed-wire. "If someone was coming, you yelled 'Halt' and fired a warning shot. If they didn't stop, you'd shoot," said former Marine Jim Thompson, who lives in Clarksville. "We were sent here with one mission - to safeguard whatever was down here. We didn't play around." Across from the pillboxes are the iron doors that guarded the series of underground bunkers. The bunker the Marines toured Friday as part of their reunion went 60 feet into the hillside. With a cavernous entrance and thick concrete walls (now covered with graffiti), the bunker had fluorescent lights overhead and ended with a huge iron gate. Through the gate was another area with a vault-like door, and then there were several storage rooms also with vault-like doors. During their heyday, the rooms might have been filled with atomic warheads or components to make weapons. Today, the passageways are dark, except for random slivers of light from the outside. Floors are covered with broken glass. "I have goose bumps," said Jim Owens of Pennsylvania, who was stationed at the Birdcage from 1953 to 1955. Isaac Fulton, who now lives in Bristol, Tenn., said he learned more about the Birdcage during the reunion tour than he ever knew while working there. "Now I'm scared," he said. Those who worked at the Birdcage were sworn to secrecy for at least 50 years, so it is only recently that they have opened up about their service. Owens said when he was first contacted about the reunions a few years ago by organizer Jim Shipley, he wasn't sure if he could trust anyone. "He asked if I worked at the Birdcage, and I said, 'Who wants to know?' I just clutched up," Owens said. "I wouldn't talk to him over the phone about it. Fifty-two years later, and I'm still scared someone will come get me." Many of the former Birdcage guards said they never talked about their time at Fort Campbell because of the secrecy oath they took. Shipley said he recalled members of the CIA masquerading as guards just to see if the Marines would talk about their jobs or the Birdcage. Owens said he often was asked about the Birdcage and what was there when he went into town during his time off. "I told people we had the only virgin in the state of Tennessee," he said. Secret oaths, barbed-wire fences and guard dogs made the Birdcage a ripe target for rumors and local lore. For instance, when he was asked about the nuclear submarine that was supposedly at Clarksville Base, Shipley just laughed. "No, there was not a nuclear submarine out there," he said. "That's definitely not true." They did confirm the electrocution of at least one person on the electric fence. A soldier who was in the stockade attempted an escape. Thinking he was getting off post, he was instead climbing a fence into the Birdcage. Some secrets the Marines were sworn to guard have been declassified, making them rich fodder for people like Debbie Bratton, who is working on a book about the Birdcage and the people who worked there. She spent time with the Marines during their reunion, interviewing and videotaping them. "They really are the unsung heroes, the secret patriots," she said. "Their primary duty was to patrol the area many of them didn't even know what was going on inside." Rick Ashley, who was at the Birdcage in 1952-55, said he "knew there was something here," but he wasn't sure exactly what. He didn't know until two or three years ago. His wife, Shirley, said Rick has talked about the friends he made but not about the details. Some of the Marines have been back to Fort Campbell since their tour of duty, but few had been inside the bunkers until the reunion. Bill Yates, who was stationed at Clarksville Base 1959-62 and now lives in Clarksville, said he had been back to the Birdcage once. "I never talked about the places I left," he said. "I came back one time to see what it was like. It brings back some fond memories." © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 56 Knox News: Fluorine leak at ORNL May 7, 2006 Fluorine leak leads to evacuation at ORNL facility OAK RIDGE - A fluorine leak prompted the evacuation of between 15 and 20 people from the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment facility at Oak Ridge National Laboratory on Saturday afternoon, officials said. There were no injuries, no medical treatments given, and no impact outside the building, said Department of Energy Spokesman John Shewairy. The leak, from a 5-pound cylinder, was discovered at 12:50 p.m. The workers present, mostly contract employees of Bechtel Jacobs, were sent to a nearby cafeteria while the contents of the cylinder were allowed to dissipate. A hazardous materials team was called in to examine the situation. The facility is in the process of being decommissioned as part of an environmental cleanup effort. © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 57 Hanford News: Fluor's pipefitter suit appeal denied This story was published Saturday, May 6th, 2006 By Mary Hopkin, Herald staff writer A group of 11 Hanford pipefitters won a second round against Fluor Federal Service on Friday when a Benton County judge turned down an appeal from the Hanford contractor. Superior Court Judge Carrie Runge also ordered Fluor to pay attorney's fees of $1.4 million to Jack Sheridan and the Government Accountability Project, the pipefitters' counsel. "The plaintiffs are very satisfied with the judge's ruling today, which sends a message to large employers like Fluor that there is a price to be paid for retaliating against workers who raise safety and health concerns," Sheridan said in a statement. Attorneys for Fluor could not be immediately reached for comment Friday. In September, more than six years after filing the lawsuit, the pipefitters were awarded more than $4.8 million in damages when a jury unanimously agreed with their claims that the company had retaliated against the workers for raising safety concerns. The case revolves around seven pipefitters, who were laid off after refusing to install an unsafe valve in the tank farm system that holds approximately 53 million gallons of high-level nuclear and toxic waste underground. Later, when a settlement was reached requiring Fluor to rehire the workers, the construction foremen were told they would have to lay off seven other workers to make room for the pipefitters to be reinstated, causing resentment. © 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 58 Hanford News: Department of Energy to stop pensions for new contract workers This story was published Saturday, May 6th, 2006 By Adam Geller, AP Business Writer NEW YORK (AP) - The Department of Energy has told contractors it will no longer pay for pensions for newly hired workers, following the lead of a growing number of private employers. The change is drawing sharp criticism from labor unions, advocacy groups and some Senate Democrats. It comes as federal lawmakers are working on measures designed to shore up a listing pension insurance system, improve funding of pension plans and slow the move by employers away from the retirement mainstay. The DOE's decision is intended to cut costs and ensure the predictability of future retirement obligations, a department spokeswoman, Megan Barnett, said Friday. "This is an internal management policy and more consistent with sound business practices in the private sector to improve the predictability" of pension funding costs, Barnett said. The move covers contractors employing about 100,000 workers on DOE's behalf, as well 100,000 retirees or their dependents. Those workers and retirees will continue to qualify for current existing benefits. The department says that for all new hires, it will pay for defined contribution retirement plan similar to a 401(k). The principal difference between the two types of benefit are that pensions offer a guaranteed retirement benefit in which all risk is born by the employer. Defined contribution plans shift the risk to workers, requiring them to save part of their earnings and invest them wisely. There is no guaranteed benefit. "The new policy recognizes the contributions of current and retired contractor employees and, at the same time, ensure that future costs for pension and medical benefits are more consistent with market trends," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a written release announcing the change. The move was attacked by critics, who say it betrays the interest of workers and could encourage more employers to follow suit. "Given the fact that all the evidence is showing that 401(k)s can't do the job in providing an adequate supplement to social security for most workers, it's a very disconcerting move by a government agency," said Karen Ferguson, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Pension Rights Center. Bill Samuel, legislative director for the AFL-CIO, said that unions will push the Bush administration to reverse the policy. "It certainly calls into question their support for strong pensions," Samuel said. "I suppose the message is watch what we do, not what we say." The administration has said it supports efforts to shore up the pension system. In a letter sent to President Bush on Friday, eight Democratic senators urged the administration to immediately reverse the DOE decision. "This policy is a direct attack on Americans' retirement security," says the letter, signed by Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Max Baucus of Montana, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland, and Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray of Washington. "You have assured us that your position is to strengthen the defined benefit system, not to dismantle it. Yet your credibility is called into serious question when you Department's stated policy prevents even those employers who want to provide defined benefit (pension) plans to their workers from doing so," the senators wrote. DOE has told contractors they have until March 1, 2007, to deal with its elimination of funding for traditional pensions for new hires. It has also set a shorter timetable - until July 26 of this year - after which DOE will reimburse contractors for "market-based" medical benefit plans for new hires, less generous than existing plans. The changes apply to contractors who run a number of projects and research sites on DOE's behalf including the Sandia, Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore national laboratories in New Mexico and California; Georgia's Savannah River nuclear weapons and materials site; and the Hanford nuclear waste cleanup site in Washington state. © 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 59 Inside Bay Area: Sandia plans to expand research Article Last Updated: 05/07/2006 02:59:23 AM PDT Laboratory prepares to study weapon threats, combustion By Rebecca F. Johnson, STAFF WRITER LIVERMORE — For 50 years, Sandia National Laboratories has been fulfilling the request of then-President Truman to operate a lab that would complement Los Alamos by under- taking the engineering and weaponization of nuclear explosives. Sandia is a smaller lab than its neighbor, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, with the equivalent of about 900 full-time employees and a budget of between $275 million and $300 million. While Sandias mission to ensure weapons are reliable and safe remains paramount, the labs work and plans for the future will expand into new roles and scientific endeavors, said Mim John, lab vice president. John told the Livermore Rotary Club that following the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, national laboratories were called on to help execute the departments mission. In the long-term future, we believe that this will be as strong a mission for us as our nuclear weapons mission has been historically, she said. John said a significant portion of the work is seeking countermeasures to threats of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. Sandia also is heavily pursuing combustion research, as it has done for 25 years. John said the research could have implications for energy by addressing efficiency standards and alternative fuel sources to help reduce the nations dependence on foreign oil. To effectively conduct its research and pursue ideas, Sandia is expected to continue to form partnerships on projects. Partnerships have been a key part of our work ethic for many, many years, not only with our sister laboratories but increasingly with the rich intellec-tual community we live in the Bay Area, with the universities and with our high-tech industry neighbors as well," John said. Currently, Sandia is partnering with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to look at a new weapons system for the nation's stockpile, although the plans are still very preliminary and are expected to undergo fierce opposition, John said. "We fully expect that there will be a lot of stops and starts to this particular program," she said. John acknowledged the political resistance to building weapons, she said the replacements are necessary because existing weapons are aging. and not all that relevant anymore. © 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers | Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 60 lamonitor.com: Nuclear workers compensation program faces cuts The Online News Source for Los Alamos ROGER SNODGRASS, , Monitor Assistant Editor The Bush administration has proposed nearly 50 percent cuts in a compensation program for workers with illnesses related to Cold War nuclear weapons programs. Congressional Democrats, Sen. Jeff Bingaman and Rep. Tom Udall expressed concerns last week that the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICP) had been targeted for hundreds of millions of dollars of reductions for next year. Sen. Pete Domenici, traveling in New Mexico this week, said he agreed. "One of the items I'm not pleased with is a proposed cut to the program that takes care of worker health issues at LANL," Domenici said. "Let me stress that this is merely a proposal. Congress will be drafting a budget, and I will have significant input in lab funding issues." Last week, Udall asked the chairman and ranking member of a House subcommittee on claims to hold hearings on the proposed cuts. Udall asked to join the committee for the hearings, "on behalf of the many employees of Los Alamos National Laboratory located in my district who were exposed to beryllium, radiation and other hazards," he wrote. "As a result, many of them have died and others are suffering to this day without seeing any compensation from the program." On Thursday, Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., the subcommittee chair, announced a series of hearings that will begin on Wednesday. Bingaman was instrumental in establishing the program in 2000. Under the original bill the Energy Department was supposed to provide a one-time lump sum payment of $150,000 and medical expenses to nuclear workers under certain conditions. But the program floundered and DOE's ability to manage such a program for its own claimants was called into question. Bingaman and Domenici joined together in 2004 to streamline the process by transferring the administration of the act to the Department of Labor and establishing an Ombudsman to look out for the claimants and rule on appeals. As last year began, the program revisited a backlog of 25,000 claims that were left over or denied by DOE. DOL held out the prospect that the program would help most employees of the nuclear weapons complex with work-related illnesses. Last week, as the budget issue was raised, the Ombudsman Daniel Shalhoub presented his "First Annual Report to Congress," summarizing comments and concerns from program participants and town halls across the country. "A common thread in these comments is general confusion regarding a complex statutory program," he concluded, calling for better and more responsive communication. Workers also complained about the slow pace of the proceedings and problems in obtaining records from the employers when the burden of proof is on the employees. During the budget preparations, a communication between the Office of Management and Budget and DOL surfaced in which OMB commended the agency in charge for identifying the potential for "a large expansion" in EEOICPA benefits. In the document made available to the Monitor, the reviewers offered recommendations for containing costs by, among other suggestions, forestalling a provision in the law that allows workers to apply for a special status ("Special Exposure Cohort") when radiation monitoring has not been adequate. Under the special cohort provision, benefit requirements would be somewhat relaxed if workers were exposed to radiation for a year and developed any one of 22 cancers. At the end of last year, the Government Accountability Project charged that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) had weakened their conflict of interest standards for subcontractors working on radiation dose assessments. Hostettler's call for oversight hearings promised to examine charges that OMB was trying to influence the independent review process. "DOL was tasked with running a non-adversarial claims process," Hostettler said in the committee's press release. "Their role in efforts to impact the outcomes of (NIOSH's) scientific evaluations to reduce benefit costs could taint perceptions about the agency's neutrality as the claims administrator." Current statistics from LANL, five years into the compensation program under the basic provisions of the act, known as Part B, show 2,771 claims filed, 1,432 denied by final decision, and 110 claims paid for $11,700,000 A total of $596,103 has been paid in medical expenses. © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 61 KnoxNews: ORNL director outranks UT's Fulmer on business magazine's Power 100 list You don't have to be a football hero By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com May 6, 2006 OAK RIDGE - Score one for the Ph.Ds. In the latest ranking of Tennessee power players, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Director Jeff Wadsworth rose to No. 56 on the Power 100 list compiled by Business Tennessee magazine. That's 10 spots higher than last year and far ahead of University of Tennessee football coach Phillip Fulmer, who dropped more than 25 positions and barely clung to the list (at No. 100) following his team's 5-6 season in 2005. In his analysis for the April edition, magazine editor Drew Ruble said of Wadsworth: "Perhaps the only recruiter in Tennessee whose work (recruiting scientists) is even more important than that of Phil Fulmer's. Heads globally significant facilities that house the world's fastest computer (the Cray supercomputer) and the world's largest science project (the $1.4 billion Spallation Neutron Source). With Wadsworth in the captain's chair, ORNL has emerged as America's most relevant lab." Wadsworth became ORNL director in August 2003, but didn't make the power rankings in 2004 - the first year it was published - because he was still adjusting to his position. The list reflects current times, according to Ruble, who said, "This shouldn't be a lifetime achievement award." Indeed, ORNL's stature has grown considerably in recent years, thanks to a grand-scale modernization program and the influx of big research projects such as the SNS. The lab is clearly on a roll. The relative rankings of Wadsworth and Fulmer came up during a recent spring retreat for ORNL managers. It apparently was a light-hearted look at things, but the message was clear: Don't have a losing season. Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329. © 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************