*****************************************************************
05/11/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.112
*****************************************************************
   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 IPS-English POLITICS: Iran Nuclear Conflict is about U.S.
2 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Head Welcomes Iran Resolution Delay
3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's President Says Nuke Talks Possible
4 Guardian Unlimited: Why Won't U.S., Iran Hash Out Differences?
5 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Says New Strategies Aimed at Iran
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran President Unconcerned With Sanctions
7 Interfax: Tehran, Moscow ready for nuclear fuel supplies to Bushehr 
8 Comment is free: Bait or ambush? (Iran)
9 Comment is free: Blundering on Iran
10 IRNA: Pak Senate committee chief for resolution of Iranian nuclear i
11 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI seeks peace in the world 
12 AFP: Iranian leader shrugs of threat of war and sanctions - 
13 AFP: Iranian leader ramps up anti-Western rhetoric
14 AFP: West gives Iran breather in nuclear row - Rice -
15 AFP: Military action in Iran could make region 'explode' - Russia -
16 AFP:  Iran unmoved by UN's 'carrot and stick' nuclear effort
17 IRNA: Pak defence analyst terms Iranian president's letter to Bush a
18 AFP: US ready to back European diplomacy on Iran 
19 IRNA: South Africa warns against undermining of Iran's nuclear right
20 IRNA: Iran's nuclear program: The way out
21 IRNA: Russian expert says Iran's nuclear program is irreversible
22 Guardian Unlimited: WFP Reaches Agreement With North Korea
23 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Roh's summit proposal   
24 Korea Herald: [NEWS FOCUS] Roh ups ante on North Korea   
25 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Looks Bent on Separate N.Korea Poli
26 Shanghai Daily : China pushes six nations to nuke talk
27 Korea Times: NK as a Temporary Nuclear State 
28 Korea Times: Second Summit 
29 US: Free Press: Divine strake
30 US: Deseret News: Senate panel OKs Kempthorne 
31 US: Las Vegas SUN: Planned blast at NTS is postponed 
32 Guardian Unlimited: Putin lashes out at 'wolf-like' America
33 Rediff: Friend of India wants to scuttle n-deal
34 ABC Asia Pacific: Australia downplays India uranium talks
35 AFP: Australia denies plan to lift uranium ban on India
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
36 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at River Bend Nuclear Plant
37 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Waterford Nuclear Plant
38 IBNLive: Nuke facilities separation plan tabled
39 US: San Luis Obispo Tribune: 2005 Diablo plane incident unlikely, NR
40 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Salem and Ho
41 US: NRC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology Divi
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
42 [NukeNet] DU Special In Review and World Wide Reaction
43 Radio New Zealand: War veteran drops bid for compensation
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
44 US: The Australian: PM denies deal on uranium 
45 Guardian Unlimited: Panel Limits Nuclear Reprocessing Funds
46 Guardian Unlimited: Washington feels warm glow over Sellafield
47 US: Reno Gazette-Journal: Dust capping wraps up at mine site
48 US: MercuryNews.com: Nuclear waste is the vexing issue
49 RIA Novosti: Russian court amnesties nuclear waste plant chief
50 US: Platts: NRC issues EIS for USEC enrichment plant
51 US: Platts: Vermont citizens request a berm around fuel storage faci
52 NRC: NRC Finds No Significant Environmental Impacts from Proposed Ce
53 Independent: US group 'will slash UK nuclear clean-up costs' 
54 US: toledoblade.com: NASA links tainted sediment to '68 leak
55 US: NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting
56 US: NRC:  Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Meeting on Planning a
57 US: LongmontFYI: Weld nuclear storage site hit with tornado drill
58 US: Press Information Bureau: Supply of Uranium by France
59 PRN: Washington Group International Clarifies News Reports
60 Whitehaven News: Doubts about Thorp as leak case looms 
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
61 KIFI: New Equipment To Help Test Efficiency of Nuclear Fuel
62 Tri-City Herald: Parliament member getting a sense of Hanford 
63 Idaho Statesman: INL director to head nuclear organization
64 Inside Bay Area: Officials: Lab needs to be like Los Alamos
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 IPS-English POLITICS: Iran Nuclear Conflict is about U.S.
 
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 15:32:49 -0700


<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS MM NA HD IP BW NC NU=20
POLITICS: Iran Nuclear Conflict is about U.S. Dominance
Analysis by Gareth Porter*

WASHINGTON, May 11  (IPS) - As the George W. Bush administration pushes f=
or a showdown over Iran's nuclear programme in the U.N. Security Council,=
  it has presented the issue as a matter of global security -- an Iranian =
nuclear threat in defiance of the international community.

But the history of the conflict and the private strategic thinking of bot=
h sides reveal that the dispute is really about the administration's driv=
e for greater dominance in the Middle East and Iran's demand for recognit=
ion as a regional power.

It is now known that the Iranian leadership, which was convinced that Bus=
h was planning to move against Iran after toppling Saddam Hussein in Iraq=
, proposed in April 2003 to negotiate with the United States on the very =
issues which the administration had claimed were the basis for its hostil=
e posture toward Tehran: its nuclear programme, its support for Hizbollah=
  and other anti-Israeli armed groups and its hostility to Israel's existe=
nce.

Tehran offered concrete, substantive concessions on those issues. But on =
the advice of U.S. Vice Pres. Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defence Donald=
  Rumsfeld, Bush refused to respond to the negotiating proposal. Nuclear w=
eapons were not, therefore, the primary U.S. concern about Iran. In the h=
ierarchy of the administration's interests, the denial of legitimacy to t=
he Islamic Republic trumped a deal that could provide assurances against =
an Iranian nuclear weapon.

For insight into the real aims of the administration in pushing the issue=
  of Iranian access to nuclear technology to a crisis point, one can turn =
to Tom Donnelly of the neoconservative think-tank the American Enterprise=
  Institute. Donnelly was the deputy executive director of the neoconserva=
tive Project for the New American Century from 1999 to 2002, and was the =
main author of =94Rebuilding America's Defences=94.

That paper was written for Cheney and Rumsfeld during the transition foll=
owing Bush's election and had the participation of four prominent figures=
  who took positions in the administration: Stephen A. Cambone, Lewis Libb=
y, Paul Wolfowitz and John Bolton.

Donnelly's analysis of the issue of Iran and nuclear weapons, published l=
ast October in the book =94Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran=94, mak=
es it clear that the real objection to Iran becoming a nuclear power is t=
hat it would impede the larger U.S. ambitions in the Middle East -- what =
Donnelly calls the administration's =94project of transforming the Middle=
  East=94.

Contrary to the official U.S. line depicting Iran as a radical state thre=
atening to plunge the region into war, Donnelly refers to Iran as =94more=
  the status quo power=94 in the region in relation to the United States. =
Iran, he explains, =94stands directly athwart this project of regional tr=
ansformation=94. Up to now, he observes, the Iranian regime has been =94i=
ncapable of stemming the seeping U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf and in=
  the broader region=94. And the invasion of Iraq =94completed the near-en=
circlement of Iran by U.S. military forces=94.

Donnelly writes that a =94nuclear Iran=94 is a problem not so much becaus=
e Tehran would employ those weapons or pass them on to terrorist groups, =
but mainly because of =94the constraining effect it threatens to impose u=
pon U.S. strategy for the greater Middle East=94.

The =94greatest danger=94, according to Donnelly, is that the =94realists=
=94 would =94pursue a 'balance of power' approach with a nuclear Iran, un=
dercutting the Bush 'liberation strategy'=94. Although Donnelly doesn't s=
ay so explicitly, it would undercut that strategy primarily by ruling out=
  a U.S. attack on Iran as part of a strategy of =94regime change=94.

Instead, in Donnelly scenario, a nuclear capability would incline those o=
utside the neoconservative priesthood to negotiate a =94d=E9tente=94 with=
  Iran, which would bring the plan for the extension of U.S. political-mil=
itary dominance in the Middle East to a halt.

What is really at stake in the confrontation with Iran from the Bush admi=
nistration's perspective, according to this authority on neoconservative =
strategy, is the opportunity to reorder the power hierarchy in the Middle=
  East even further in favour of the United States, by pursuing the overth=
row of the Islamic republic of Iran.

Meanwhile, Iran has not acknowledged its real interest in pushing its pos=
ition on nuclear fuel enrichment to the point of confrontation with the U=
nited States either. Instead it has focused in public pronouncements on t=
he enormously popular position that Iran will not give up its right to ha=
ve civilian nuclear power.

According to observers familiar with their thinking, senior Iranian natio=
nal security officials have long been saying privately that Iran should t=
ry to reach an agreement with the United States that would normalise rela=
tions and acknowledge officially Iran's legitimate role in the security o=
f the Persian Gulf.

Trita Parsi, a specialist on Iran's foreign policy at the John Hopkins Sc=
hool of Advanced International Studies, who conducted extensive interview=
s with senior Iranian national security officials in 2004, says Iran =94i=
s now primarily trying to become rehabilitated in the political order of =
the region=94.

Najmeh Bozorgmehr, an Iranian journalist now at the Brookings Institution=
  as a visiting scholar, agrees. Based on several years of covering Iran's=
  national security policy, she says, =94Iran wants to bargain with the Un=
ited States on Iran's regional role,=94 as well as on removal of sanction=
s and assurances against U.S. attack. Tehran has been looking for any sou=
rce of leverage with which to bargain with the United States on those iss=
ues, she says, and =94enrichment has become a big bargaining chip.=94

Bozorgmehr says the Iranians have become convinced that they have to do s=
omething to show the United States =94we can give you a hard time=94 to i=
nduce the Bush administration to negotiate. And Parsi says the prevailing=
  view among Iranian officials after the 2003 U.S. rejection of diplomacy =
was that they had to have the capability to inflict some pain on the Unit=
ed States in order to get their attention.

According to Parsi, that rejection confirmed Iranian suspicions that the =
U.S. problem is not with Iran's policies but with its power. That Iranian=
  conclusion precisely parallels Donnelly's insider analysis of the Bush a=
dministration's aims.

But what the Iranians really want, according to these observers of Irania=
n national security thinking, is not nuclear weapons but the recognition =
of Iran's status in the power hierarchy of the Persian Gulf. The Iranian =
demand for regional status can only be achieved through a broad diplomati=
c agreement with the United States.

The Bush administration's insistence on extending its dominance in the Mi=
ddle East even further can only be achieved, however, by the threat of fo=
rce, and if that fails, war against Iran.

*Gareth Porter is an historian and national security policy analyst. His =
latest book, =94Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to W=
ar in Vietnam=94, was published in June 2005.
*****
+POLITICS: Iran Pushes for Talks With U.S. on Nukes, Security (http://www=
.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D33070)

(END/IPS/NA/MM/IP/HD/BW/NC/NU/GP/KS/06)

=20
=3D 05112320 ORP013
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 2 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Head Welcomes Iran Resolution Delay
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 6:01 PM

AP Photo AMS104 

By FIA CURLEY 

Associated Press Writer 

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands (AP) - The head of the U.N. atomic
watchdog agency Thursday welcomed the delay in adopting a
Security Council on Iran and its nuclear program. 

More time is needed for negotiations with Iran to address
concerns about its program, said Mohamed ElBaradei, director of
the International Atomic Energy Agency. 

``I hope people will adopt a cool-headed approach,'' he told
reporters during a visit to the Netherlands. ``We need
compromises from both sides to ensure that Iran has the right
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.'' 

He said Iran needed to build confidence with the international
community, and would need ``a transitional period before
confidence is built.'' 

Key Security Council members agreed this week to postpone a
draft resolution, giving Iran another two weeks to reevaluate
its insistence on developing its uranium enrichment
capabilities. 

Under the proposed draft, the Security Council's demand in late
March for Iran to stop enrichment would be made mandatory, and
Tehran would be given a short period to comply. If Tehran
refuses, the resolution says the council intends to consider
``further measures'' to ensure compliance, which could include
sanctions. 

Britain, France and Germany will prepare a package of incentives
and sanctions, a European official said, speaking on condition
of anonymity because there has been no official announcement. 

The official said the package is likely to include issues
related to energy security and civilian nuclear power. The
package will be presented to European Union foreign ministers in
Brussels on Monday, and if approved will be presented to the
Iranian government, the official said. 

China and Russia have balked at British, French and U.S. efforts
to put a Security Council resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N.
Charter. Such a move would declare Iran a threat to
international peace and security and set the stage for further
measures if Tehran refuses to comply. 

``I think its a very good idea that the Security Council is
holding its horses,'' said ElBaradei, who was in the Netherlands
to receive an International Four Freedoms award on Saturday for
his work with the IAEA. 

``The more we can go back to the negotiating table, the more we
can address grievances from both sides, the more we have a
chance to have a durable solution,'' he said. 

The United States accuses Iran of seeking to develop nuclear
weapons, but Tehran says it aims only to generate energy. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran's President Says Nuke Talks Possible
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 11:01 PM

AP Photo JAK114 

By NINIEK KARMINI 

Associated Press Writer 

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - Iran's president said Thursday he was
ready to hold talks over his country's nuclear program, but he
warned that efforts to force Tehran to the negotiating table
with threats could backfire. 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also launched a scathing attack on
Israel and told more than 1,000 cheering Muslim students in the
Indonesian capital that the West was being hypocritical in
pressing Iran to stop its uranium enrichment program. 

``The big powers ... have a lot of nuclear weapons in their
warehouse,'' Ahmadinejad said during a visit to the world's
largest Muslim majority nation amid a deepening international
standoff over Tehran's nuclear program and suspicions it is
seeking atomic weapons. 

``We want to use technology for peace and the welfare of the
Muslim people around the world,'' he told students who gathered
at Islamic University on Jakarta's southern outskirts. ``But
they want to use it to invade other countries. This is the
difference between us and them.'' 

Ahmadinejad, known for his fiery rhetoric, has become a pariah
in the West. 

But he received a warm welcome in Indonesia, where his
willingness to criticize the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan - seen by many here as attacks on Islam - his
outspoken criticism of Israel, and his refusal to stand down to
international pressure on the nuclear dispute resonates with
many of its young people. 

``I think you are the man of the year,'' one student stood to
say. ``We will always be with you. You will never walk alone,''
said another. 

Key U.N. Security Council members agreed Tuesday to postpone a
resolution that would have delivered an ultimatum to Tehran,
giving Iran another two weeks to reevaluate its insistence on
developing its uranium enrichment capabilities. 

The Chinese and Russians have balked at British, French and U.S.
efforts to put the resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N.
Charter. Such a move would declare Iran a threat to
international peace and security and set the stage for further
measures if Tehran refuses to suspend its uranium enrichment
operations. Those measures could range from breaking diplomatic
relations to economic sanctions and military action. 

The Iranian leader brushed off the threat, saying in an
interview with Metro TV that the West had more to lose than
Tehran did if it was internationally isolated. Sanctions would
serve only to ``motivate'' Iran's nuclear scientists, he said. 

Asked what it would take to begin talks to resolve the standoff,
Ahmadinejad told the station Iran was ``ready to engage in
dialogue with anybody.'' 

``But if someone points a weapon at your face and says you must
speak, will you do that?'' 

Ahmadinejad also continued his verbal attacks on Israel - last
year he said the Jewish state should be ``wiped off the map''
and questioned whether the Holocaust was a myth - calling it a
``a tyrannical regime that one day will be destroyed.'' 

He repeated earlier allegations that European countries were
driven by anti-Semitism when they decided after the Holocaust to
establish a Jewish state in the midst of Muslim countries. They
wanted the Jews out of their own backyard, he said, and by
surrounding them with their enemies paved the way for their
ultimate destruction. 

Israeli officials - who have described Iran's nuclear quest as
the Jewish state's greatest threat - had no immediate comment on
Ahmadinejad's latest remarks, said Israeli Foreign Ministry
spokesman Mark Regev. 

Indonesia has cordial relations with Iran, supporting its right
to pursue nuclear technology for peaceful means. Like Tehran -
which recently announced plans to invest $600 million in the
Southeast Asian nation's oil and gas sector, a much-needed cash
infusion - Jakarta also refuses to recognize Israel. 

But President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono also enjoys good ties
with the United States, which considers him a close ally in the
war on terror. He offered this week to mediate the nuclear
dispute. 

The students who crammed into the auditorium at the Islamic
University - where U.S. envoy Karen Hughes received a grilling
last year over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East - were
enthusiastic supporters of the Ahmadinejad, clapping and
cheering throughout his 90-minute speech. 

He told the crowd every country should have the right to new
technology to meet energy needs. 

``If nuclear technology is such a bad thing, why do you (Western
countries) have it?'' Ahmadinejad said, drawing more applause. 

He got the same response earlier in the day when he addressed a
crowd of about 300 at the University of Indonesia, where
students held signs saying ``Iran in our Hearts,'' and ``Nuclear
for Peace.'' 

``I loved him, he was very charismatic,'' said a first-year
economics student who identified herself as Deslina. ``If it
comes to that, they should go to war. If I could, I would fight
the United States.'' 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: Why Won't U.S., Iran Hash Out Differences?
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 
 	 
Thursday May 11, 2006 8:46 AM

AP Photo JAK102 

By WILLIAM J. KOLE 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - As the United States toughens its stance
on Iran's nuclear program, and bitterness toward America hardens
on the streets of Tehran, many people can't help but wonder: Why
don't the two countries hold face-to-face talks to ease the
crisis? 

``The most effective way to resolve the international standoff
... is through direct talks between Tehran and Washington,''
said Lebanon's The Daily Star newspaper in an editorial. 

Experts say that a meeting between Iranian leader Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad and President Bush would seem an obvious follow-up
to Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush this week. But many doubt a
summit, even if arranged, could bridge the two nations'
virtually irreconcilable differences. 

Bush, they point out, doesn't want direct dialogue with the head
of a state he labeled part of an ``axis of evil,'' along with
Iraq and North Korea. Doing so would acknowledge Ahmadinejad's
legitimacy. 

And Ahmadinejad's letter was laced with old grievances against
an America that Tehran brands the ``Great Satan'' and included a
long list of Iranian demands. 

Shen Dingli, director of the Institute of American Studies at
Fudan University in Shanghai, China, said the countries regard
each other as enemies and approach the nuclear issue from
opposite directions. 

``Iran believes it must acquire nuclear weapons to ensure state
security. The United States does not want to have direct talks
with Iran, just like it does not want to talk with North
Korea,'' he said. 

Shahin Gobadi, spokesman for the Paris-based National Council of
Resistance of Iran, an exile group, said a Bush-Ahmadinejad
summit is implausible because Tehran ``has not been willing to
accept the norms and rules of conduct of the 21st century.'' 

``This regime is built on the concept of medieval religious
tyranny. It's not compatible with dialogue,'' he told The
Associated Press. 

If Ahmadinejad's 18-page menu of grievances sums up Iran's
position, then ``there is no prospect of negotiation,'' said
Steve Hoadley, associate professor of political studies at New
Zealand's Auckland University. 

``The countries are ideologically, politically, strategically
quite different,'' he said. ``They are on a collision course
because Iran has ambitions to regional leadership. Nuclear
weapons are part of that equation.'' 

Iran and the United States have had no diplomatic relations
since 1979, long before the nuclear standoff. That's when
Iranian students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and held its
occupants hostage for 444 days to protest Washington's refusal
to hand over the toppled shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. 

Deborah Elms of the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies
in Singapore said there still are no official channels for
U.S.-Iranian talks, and Washington doesn't want one. ``The Bush
administration has long-standing policy of what they call not
negotiating with blackmailers,'' she said. 

The long-standing rift between the United States and Iran is far
from unprecedented. For decades, Britain - bloodied by Irish
Republican Army bombings - refused to talk directly with Sinn
Fein, the IRA-linked party that represents most of Northern
Ireland's Catholics. 

But others have found ways past formidable political obstacles.
Spain has always rejected negotiations with ETA, the armed
Basque separatist group, unless it lays down it weapons. Yet
there were at least two rounds of talks between in the 1980s and
1990s. 

In a speech this week in Seattle, former Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright urged direct talks with Iran, saying: ``The
last thing we need is to invade another country.'' 

Fearing that the United States might resort to military force to
stop what it insists is a covert nuclear weapons program, world
leaders made fresh pleas this week for high-level dialogue. 

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, after talks
Wednesday with Ahmadinejad in Jakarta, said that he believed
Iran was willing to find a diplomatic solution. He offered to
help mediate. 

Malaysia, a moderately Muslim country which chairs the 57-nation
Organization of the Islamic Conference, also urged Washington to
seek an amicable solution with Iran at the negotiating table.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said he told Bush by
telephone last week: ``A diplomatic solution would be better
than another approach.'' 

China believes ``the best way to solve the issue is to go
through diplomacy and negotiation,'' said Foreign Ministry
spokesman Liu Jianchao. China and Russia have balked at U.S.
efforts to put forward a draft resolution under Chapter 7 of the
U.N. Charter. Such a move would declare Iran a global threat and
could lead to sanctions or possible military action if Tehran
does not suspend uranium enrichment. 

Konstantin Kosachev, the Kremlin-allied head of the Russian
State Duma's international affairs committee, said talks were
unlikely. He called on the international community to find a
unified position, to restrain ``the most radical forces in both
Washington and Tehran.'' 

Rasul Bakhsh Rais, professor of political science at Pakistan's
Lahore University of Management Sciences, said before talks
there must be trust. 

``Their strategic visions are so conflicting and their roles in
the Middle East, perceived by each other, are so antagonistic,''
he said. ``Even thinking that they will sit together at the
negotiating table ... is really irrational.'' 

--- 

Associated Press correspondents Joe McDonald in China, Ray
Lilley in New Zealand, Maria Danilova in Russia, Gillian Wong in
Singapore, Sadaqat Jan in Pakistan and Eileen Ng in Malaysia
contributed to this report. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Russia Says New Strategies Aimed at Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 2:46 AM

AP Photo JAK107 

By EDITH M. LEDERER 

Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia's U.N. ambassador said Wednesday
the confrontational approach to Iran over its nuclear program
has changed to a new strategy of offering Tehran broad
incentives to suspend uranium enrichment. 

Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said the change came about after the
meetings Monday and Tuesday involving the foreign ministers of
Russia, the United States, China, Britain, France and Germany. 

``The mood has changed completely,'' Churkin said. 

He said the key nations are now focusing on putting together a
package of incentives to try to achieve a peaceful solution
instead of talking about how many days Iran should be given to
halt enrichment or face possible further measures including
sanctions. 

``We are quite pleased that what started basically as something
which could be seen as trying to dictate matters has turned into
a process of dialogue, broad dialogue which hopefully will
involve Iran, and which will bring a political and diplomatic
solution to the problem,'' he said. 

But Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad scorned Western
concerns over its nuclear program ``as a big lie'' despite the
new approach by the key Security Council members to present
Tehran with a choice of incentives or sanctions in deciding
whether to suspend uranium enrichment. 

``They pretend that they are concerned about the nature of the
nuclear program of the Islamic republic of Iran,'' Ahmadinejad
said In Jakarta, Indonesia. 

The Russians and Chinese have balked at British, French and U.S.
efforts to put a new U.N. resolution requiring Iran to suspend
uranium enrichment under Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter, which
would declare Iran a threat to international peace and security.
That would set the stage for further measures if Tehran refuses
to halt enrichment that could include diplomatic, military or
economic sanctions and military action. 

Churkin said a revised resolution will include the package of
incentives and spell out the two directions that Iran can take. 

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton - who before the ministerial meeting
wanted a vote on the resolution with or without Russian and
Chinese support - said Wednesday the possibility of getting the
five permanent veto-wielding council members to agree on a
resolution ``is very important'' and that's the aim of the new
initiative spelling out incentives and disincentives. 

The British, French and Germans, who cut off more than two years
of negotiations with Iran earlier this year after Tehran said it
would resume its enrichment activities, are working on the
package and Churkin said Russia would all be involved. 

Political directors of the six countries are scheduled to meet
in London on May 19 to try to agree on the measures, said
France's U.N. Ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere, whose country
co-sponsored the resolution with Britain. 

European officials said the package is likely to include
provisions for Iran to have a civilian nuclear energy program
without enrichment, to ensure the country's energy security and
trade benefits. 

Asked about the package, China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya
called it ``a good idea because we are talking about carrot and
sticks, so there have to be carrots.'' 

Churkin said ``Iran needs to be cooperative and ... stop seeing
an enemy in the Security Council.'' 

``They should not be looking at the process in any kind of a
confrontational mode, because the process is not confrontational
to them,'' he said. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran President Unconcerned With Sanctions
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 2:46 AM

AP Photo JAK120 

By CHRIS BRUMMITT 

Associated Press Writer 

JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - Iran's president on Thursday accused
Western powers of double standards in their campaign against his
country's nuclear program, and declared the threat of sanctions
doesn't worry him. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made his comments after
key U.N. Security Council members agreed to present Tehran with
a choice of incentives or sanctions in deciding whether to
suspend uranium enrichment. 

The Iranian leader told Metro TV station in an interview that he
was unconcerned about talk of sanctions and said he was ready to
negotiate with any country to resolve the dispute. 

``If someone points an arm (a weapon) at your face and says you
must speak, will you do that?,'' he said. 

He said that Western nations with large stocks of nuclear
weapons were practicing ``double standards'' in pressing Iran to
stop its peaceful nuclear program, and dismissed the threat of
sanctions. 

On Wednesday, in a letter to Time magazine published on its Web
site, a representative of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
offered new options for solving the impasse with the United
States and its allies. 

Hassan Rohani, Iran's former top nuclear negotiator, said Tehran
would consider ratifying an International Atomic Energy Agency
protocol that provides for intrusive and snap inspections and
would also address the question of preventing a pullout from the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. 

Sean McCormack, the State Department spokesman, says of the Time
magazine letter, ``We've seen it. ... I think there really isn't
anything new in it.'' He said the letter does not deal at all
with enrichment. 

The current Iranian negotiator, Ali Larijani, said Tuesday that
Tehran had no intention of withdrawing from the treaty and
promised to cooperate if the U.N. atomic watchdog agency, rather
than the Security Council, dealt with the issue of its nuclear
program. 

Iran ended all voluntary cooperation with the IAEA in February,
including allowing snap inspections of its nuclear facilities. 

Ahmadinejad told reporters Wednesday in Indonesia's capital that
Iran will ``absolutely not back out'' of defending its right to
pursue new technology. 

``They (Western powers) pretend that they are concerned about
the nature of the nuclear program of the Islamic republic of
Iran,'' he said after meeting with Indonesian President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono. ``This is a big lie.'' 

``Today the people of Iran are not just defending their own
rights, but also those of other nations,'' he said. ``They (the
United States and other Western powers) want to prevent other
countries from reaching the pinnacle of science and
technology.'' 

At a meeting Tuesday, representatives of the United States,
Russia, China, Britain and France as well as Germany agreed to
tell Iran the possible consequences of its refusal to halt its
enrichment program and the benefits if it abandons it. 

The move will delay a U.S.-backed draft U.N. resolution that
could lead to sanctions and possible military action if Iran
does not suspend uranium enrichment. 

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Wednesday she and
her counterparts on the U.N. Security Council agreed to give
Iran another two weeks to reconsider its position. 

``We agreed to continue to seek a Security Council resolution
but that we would wait for a couple of weeks while the Europeans
design an offer to the Iranians that would make clear they have
a choice that would allow them to have a civil nuclear program,
if that is indeed what they want,'' Rice said on U.S. TV network
ABC's ``Good Morning America.'' 

The Chinese and Russians have balked at the British, French and
U.S. efforts to put the resolution under Chapter 7 of the U.N.
Charter. Such a move would declare Iran a threat to
international peace and security and set the stage for further
measures if Tehran refuses to comply. Those measures could range
from breaking diplomatic relations to economic sanctions and
military action. 

Representatives from the three European countries that had been
spearheading negotiations with Iran - Britain, France and
Germany - will now spend the next few days preparing a package
of incentives and sanctions, a European official said, speaking
on condition of anonymity because there has been no official
announcement. 

The official said the package is likely to include issues
related to energy security and civilian nuclear power. The
package will be presented to European Union foreign ministers on
the sidelines of an EU meeting in Brussels on Monday, and if
approved will be presented to the Iranian government, the
official said. 

The United States accuses Iran of seeking to develop nuclear
weapons, a charge Tehran denies, saying it aims only to generate
energy. 

Yudhoyono, speaking at a joint news conference after he met with
Ahmadinejad for about 90 minutes, said he believed Iran was
willing to resolve the nuclear standoff peacefully through
further negotiations, and offered to help mediate. Yudhoyono's
spokesman, Dino Pati Djalal, said Iran was very receptive to the
offer. 

``We need to breathe new life into the negotiations,'' he said. 

Ahmadinejad was in Indonesia for a three-day state visit
followed by a development conference on the resort island of
Bali. 

^--- 

Associated Press writer Edith M. Lederer contributed to this
story from the United Nations. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 7 Interfax: Tehran, Moscow ready for nuclear fuel supplies to Bushehr -

official

Interfax.com    Text version    Site map   

May 11 2006 4:35PM
 
MOSCOW. May 11 (Interfax) - Tehran and Moscow have finalized
legal and technical preparations for the Russian production and
delivery of nuclear fuel to the Bushehr power plant, Deputy
Director of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Mohammad
Saeedi said in an interview posted on the IRNA Iranian news
agency's website on Thursday. 

Saeedi, who is visiting Moscow, said that a place for storing
nuclear fuel had been prepared. 

© 1991-2006 Interfax
 All rights reserved
 



*****************************************************************
 8 Comment is free: Bait or ambush? (Iran)

> [Dilip Hiro] 
 
Ahmadinejad's letter to Bush should be taken seriously. Ignoring
it will make the US even more unpopular with the Muslim world. 

May 11, 2006 02:10 PM | 

There is much in common between Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad's recent to US President George W Bush and the
missive that Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the founder of the
Islamic Republic of Iran, addressed to Soviet leader Mikhail
Gorbachev in January 1987. 

In his epistle to the Kremlin's top official, Khomeini argued
that western capitalism had failed, and that communism would
soon be relegated to museums, a prescient comment which has been
almost universally overlooked by non-Iranian historians. The
Ayatollah then urged atheist Gorbachev to study Islam and - true
to his calling as a theological teacher - recommended several
books on the subject. 

In an uncanny parallel, Ahmadinejad concludes his 3,900-word
letter with the statement that both liberalism and western style
democracy have been unable to "help realize the ideals of
humanity" in the post-Cold War era. Noting the surge in
religious belief around the globe, he declares that "through
faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will
solve their problems". Going by Ahmadinejad's earlier references
to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Moses, Joseph and Jesus
Christ - followed in each case by PBUH (Peace Be Upon Him) - it
is obvious that the term "prophets" means the prophets of the
monotheistic faiths. 

If nothing else, Ahmadinejad's rhetorical question in the
penultimate paragraph to Bush - "Do you not want to join them
[those flocking around God]?" - deserves an answer from a
born-again Christian. Bush could simply tell his Iranian
counterpart: "On this subject, I am waiting for a word from
God". Since Bush is on record saying, "God told me to strike at
Al Qaida and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike
at Saddam, which I did." - his statement will likely be taken
seriously in Tehran. 

Besides the content and style of the Iranian president's letter
- which must have been cleared by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamanei - one should consider its timing and its underlying
motive. 

The missive was timed to coincide with the meeting of the
foreign ministers of the permanent five members of the United
Nations Security Council in New York. It clearly illustrated
Tehran's willingness to talk to the White House. It therefore
strengthened the hands of the Russian and Chinese foreign
ministers who are opposed to any resolution on Iran under
Chapter 7 of the UN Charter which opens the way for sanctions
and military action against Tehran. 

Ahmadinejad's ploy worked. Russia and China refused to back the
Anglo-French draft resolution invoking Chapter 7. 

By failing to respond to Tehran's overture, Bush will be
repeating the mistake he made in May 2003. At that time,
according to Flynt Leverett, a former Director for Middle East
Affairs at the US National Security Council, the Bush
administration received a credible Iranian offer of
comprehensive negotiations through its Interests Section at the
Swiss Embassy in Tehran. In the afterglow of his "Mission
Accomplished" photo-op in his Top Gun uniform abroad USS Abraham
Lincoln aircraft carrier on May 1, Bush never bothered to
respond. 

Unlike its previous initiative, which was taken in secret, this
time the Iranian regime has made its move public. Its gesture
has gone down very well among Muslims both inside Iran and
outside. It has put Iran on a high moral ground and made it
appear reasonable - with its hand stretched to make official
contact with the United States - to Muslims worldwide. 

Such is the political-cultural-diplomatic reality of the day.
The other equally important aspect of this reality is that the
issues of the Israel-Palestine relations and the Anglo-American
invasion of Iraq on false pretences, raised by Ahmadinejad in
his letter, are of paramount interest and concern to the global
Muslim community 

By turning a blind eye to these facts the Bush White House will
stoke up its already high unpopularity in the Muslim world. 


 
  Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006. 
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
 Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
 9 Comment is free: Blundering on Iran

> [Simon Tisdall] 
 
The Bush administration's blanket rejection of Iran's president, 
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter may prove to be a serious tactical 
mistake. 

May 11, 2006 01:08 PM | 

The Bush administration's blanket rejection of Iran's president,
may prove to be a serious tactical mistake. 

It's true that the Iranian president made no substantive
proposals. He referred only obliquely to the nuclear stand-off
with the US and its western allies. He did not offer to talk
about other stated American concerns such as his hostility to
Israel, Iran's behaviour in Iraq, and its support for groups
such as Lebanon's Hezbullah. 

It is also true that Mr Ahmedinejad's meandering and rhetorical
criticisms of American policy hardly represented an inducement
to the Americans to talk. His tone invited a rebuff - and it was
duly delivered by Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state,
backed by President Bush. 

But after 27 years of almost unbroken non-communication in any
meaningful, official sense, the letter was first and foremost a
symbolic gesture and should have been treated as such. It gained
added importance because it came from an Islamist hardliner who
has been outspoken in his criticism of Washington's policies. 

Despite being short on substance, it reinforced the impression
that Iran does not want a confrontation with the west and is
tentatively looking for ways out of the current impasse. 

Comments by senior Iranian officials, including Hassan Rowhani,
the country's former top nuclear negotiator, further indicate
that policy divisions within Iran's ruling circles persist. Mr
Rowhani is a close confidant of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei, who is notably less aggressive in his comments on
relations with the west. 

Washington's flat rejection of the letter could strengthen
hardliners inside the government who oppose any negotiation. 

International perceptions of the exchanges over the letter are
also important. Mr Ahmadinejad was feted in Jakarta yesterday as
a sort of Islamic hero at the start of a visit to Indonesia. 

By appearing to show flexibility, in contrast to President Bush,
the Iranian leader sends a message around the Muslim world that
he is a reasonable and right-minded person worthy of support. He
too is intent on building a "coalition of the willing". 

In Europe, too, Mr Bush's refusal to talk directly to the
Iranians is seen as increasingly hard to understand. The idea
that Iran's regime is some uniquely evil construct that should
not be countenanced, unlike the Soviet governments of the Cold
War era or the current North Korean regime, will not wash. 

Europeans find American militarism scary - and in the wake of
the Iraq fiasco, threatening to their own security. Speculation
about a US attack on Iran only adds to that unease. 

Before the neo-cons and their supporters start whingeing, this
is not an argument for appeasement. It is a common sense concern
that says that all reasonable steps must be taken to resolve a
given problem that affects us all. 

Petulantly and scornfully rejecting Mr Ahmadinejad's clumsy
approaches is not a mature way of proceeding. This should not be
Washington's last word. 

  Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006. 
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
 Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
 10 IRNA: Pak Senate committee chief for resolution of Iranian nuclear issue 
through talks

Islamabad, May 11, IRNA                                                                                                                  

Pakistan-Diplomatic 

The chairman of the Pakistan Senate's Standing Committee on
Foreign Affairs, Mushahid Hussain Syed, urged resolution of the
Iran nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiation.

 "If, God forbid, there was an attack on Iran the consequences
of such a folly would make the war in Iraq look like a picnic,"
he cautioned while talking to a 12-member delegation of teachers
and military officers from the American War College here on
Tuesday.

 The ruling Pakistan Muslim League Secretary-General Mushahid
said that the whole region was in turmoil and there was unrest
close to Pakistan's border with Afghanistan as well.

 The issues require a healing touch and there is a need to come
to the conference table, he emphasized.

 He expressed the hope the US would respond positively to the
overture of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who wrote a
letter to US President George W Bush on Monday expressing
concern over the current global situation.


*****************************************************************
 11 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI seeks peace in the world 

2006/05/10   
  
Athens, May 10 - Visiting Secretary of Iran's Supreme National
Security Council (SNSC) Ali Larijani said here on Tuesday that
Greece could play a major, constructive role in the
international arena.

 Speaking to representatives of the Greek press and mass media,
Larijani, who arrived in the Greek capital Wednesday morning
heading a delegation, said Iran's nuclear case had now reached a
critical stage and consultations with friendly countries like
Greece would be "highly important and effective."

 "America meddling in Iran's nuclear case has created tensions,"
Larijani said.

 He regretted that the America was trying to mislead world
public opinion by using its influence on the media.

 Asked what Tehran expected from Athens in its current nuclear
standoff with the West, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator said:
"We expect them to strike a balance between Iran's commitments
as a signatory to the Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and its
rights as guaranteed therein when deciding on the nuclear issue."

 Larijani stressed that Iran was seeking nothing more than its
legal rights under international law and IAEA rules and
regulations.

 Asked how Tehran would react if Athens allowed Washington to
use its military base in Souda, southeastern Greece, to launch
military action against Iran as reported, Larijani said: "As far
as I know, Greek Foreign Minister Theodora Bakoyianni has
dismissed the report." But he warned that the US was itself
"vulnerable in many points," and did not elaborate.

 The Souda Air Force base is located on a bay with the same name
in the village of Mouzouras in southeastern Greece. It is used
as a center for the US Naval Support Activity (NSA). 

Referring to President Ahmadinejad's letter sent to US President
George W Bush on Monday, Larijani said the letter showed the
Iranian president's desire for peace and stability in a world
threatened by many problems.

 "We support a rational and logical solution to Iran's nuclear
case," larijani added, and recalled the history of Iran's
nuclear program which, he said, was launched 40 years ago when
the US signed a contract with the then Shah of Iran to construct
nuclear facilities for the country capable of producing 20,000mw
of electrical power.

 The contract, he said, was cancelled by the Americans after the
victory of Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979.   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: <font color="#ff0000" face>Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir</font> 
*****************************************************************
 12 AFP: Iranian leader shrugs of threat of war and sanctions - 

 Wed May 10, 9:52 PM ET 		 	 

JAKARTA (AFP) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad brushed off 
the threat of war against his nation as a "joke" and said 
Iranians would welcome sanctions over their disputed nuclear 
program. 

 Ahmadinejad, beginning the second day of his visit to
Indonesia, told the country's Metro TV that military action
against Iran" /> Iranwould hurt the nations launching
hostilities more than Tehran. 

"First of all, actually, the idea of going to war is a joke,
it's like a joke. Why should there be a war? Can the voice of a
nation be violated so simply? We want to exercise our legal
rights," he said in an interview. 

The United States has refused to exclude possible military
action against Iran over its nuclear enrichment activities,
which Tehran insists is peaceful but Western nations fear may be
a cover for developing an atomic bomb. 

"This is just propaganda and psychological warfare against our
country. We also possess the technical and other capabilities to
defend our interests," the firebrand leader warned. 

"They do know that any mistreatment of the Iranian people will
actually cause more losses to them than for us. They need us
more than we do actually need them. This is just rhetoric." 

Ahmadinejad, who is on a five-day visit to Indonesia, the
world's most populous Muslim nation, also said that Iranians
would rise to the challenge of sanctions if they were imposed. 

"Many of our scientists and experts will be more than happy to
hear that we are put under sanctions by the West because this
will motivate a great leap in our industrial and economic
progress," he said. 

The United States has been unable to win support for sanctions
against Iran, and on Wednesday gave its European allies "a
couple of weeks" to draft a fresh approach to persuade Tehran to
drop its disputed nuclear program. 

Negotiators from the Security Council's five permanent members
plus Germany plan to meet in London on May 19 to weigh a package
of incentives as well as penalties if Iran does not halt
enrichment activities. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 13 AFP: Iranian leader ramps up anti-Western rhetoric

 by Samantha Brown Thu May 11, 7:53 AM ET 		 	 

JAKARTA (AFP) - Iran" /> Iran's hardline president ramped up his 
rhetoric against Israel" /> Israeland the West, labelling Israel 
a "cancer" that would "one day vanish" and shrugging off the 
threat of sanctions or war over Tehran's disputed nuclear 
programme. 

 In speeches to university students in the capital of Indonesia,
the world's most populous Muslim nation, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
also accused the West of peddling lies and oppression. 

"This regime one day will vanish," he said of Israel. 

"We believe that a government such as this one will not last
long because it is built on tyranny and tyranny will not last
long," he said. 

The Iranian president said in October 2005 the Jewish state
should be "wiped off the map". In April he said that Israel
"cannot survive" and that migrants to the Jewish state should go
back to where they came from. 

Ahmadinejad, who has already dismissed the Holocaust as a
"myth", again questioned its veracity. 

"Is it logical if (after) the annihilation of Jews by the West,
the territory belonging to the Palestine people is taken and
occupied for the building of a new nation and its people?" he
asked the students. 

"Is it logical to give compensation in the Middle East for an
incident that occurred in Europe, if this incident is indeed
true... by murdering thousands of local Palestinians and making
millions of Palestinian refugees?" 

Ahmadinejad said that the West had created Israel for its own
interests. 

"But at the moment, continuously, on a daily basis, Israel is
moving backwards and can no longer put pressure on countries in
the region, and has become a cancer that is continuously
swallowing funds from the West." 

Ahmadinejad, who is on a five-day visit to Indonesia, earlier
told Metro TV in an interview that any military action against
Iran would hurt any nations launching such hostilities more than
Tehran. 

The United States has refused to exclude possible military
action against Iran over its nuclear enrichment activities,
which Tehran insists are peaceful but Western nations fear may
be a cover for developing an atomic bomb. 

"The idea of going to war is a joke, it's like a joke. Why
should there be a war?" he said. 

"They do know that any mistreatment of the Iranian people will
actually cause more losses to them than for us. They need us
more than we do actually need them." 

Ahmadinejad also said that Iranians would rise to the challenge
of sanctions if they were imposed. 

"Many of our scientists and experts will be more than happy to
hear that we are put under sanctions by the West because this
will motivate a great leap in our industrial and economic
progress," he said. 

The United States has been unable to win support for sanctions
against Iran, and on Wednesday gave its European allies "a
couple of weeks" to draft a fresh approach to persuade Tehran to
drop its disputed nuclear programme. 

UN nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei said on Thursday he was
"optimistic" about the fact Washington had given its European
allies more time to seek a solution. 

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who met
Ahmadinejad on Wednesday, backed Tehran's claim that its nuclear
program was peaceful and also offered to help mediate in a bid
to reduce rising tensions over the programme. 

The Iranian leader will meet Indonesian and Islamic leaders on
Thursday and Friday, before flying to Bali for a summit of the
Developing-8 (D-8) group of large Muslim countries on Saturday. 

Iran's courting of Indonesia comes at a time when both the
United States and Britain are seeking ties with Jakarta and
holding up its moderate version of Islam and democratic
credentials as an example to other Muslim nations. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: West gives Iran breather in nuclear row - Rice -

 by Peter Mackler Thu May 11, 12:51 AM ET 		 	 

NEW YORK (AFP) - The United States, facing stubborn opposition to 
sanctions against Iran" /> , gave its European allies "a couple 
of weeks" to draft new incentives for Tehran to halt its 
controversial nuclear program. 

 US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> made the
announcement after two days of intensive consultations by the
United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany that
ended with no consensus on tough UN action. 

"We agreed that we will continue to seek a Security Council
resolution, but that we would wait for a couple of weeks while
the Europeans design an offer to the Iranians that would make
clear that they have a choice that would allow them to have a
civil nuclear program," Rice told ABC television. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday brushed off
the threat of war against his nation as a "joke" and said
Iranians would welcome sanctions over their disputed nuclear
program. 

Ahmadinejad, beginning the second day of his visit to Indonesia,
told the country's Metro TV that military action against Iran
would hurt the nations launching hostilities more than Tehran. 

"First of all, actually, the idea of going to war is a joke,
it's like a joke. Why should there be a war? Can the voice of a
nation be violated so simply? We want to exercise our legal
rights," he said in an interview. 

The United States has refused to exclude possible military
action against Iran over its nuclear enrichment activities,
which Tehran insists is peaceful but Western nations fear may be
a cover for developing an atomic bomb. 

"This is just propaganda and psychological warfare against our
country. We also possess the technical and other capabilities to
defend our interests," the firebrand leader warned. 

"They do know that any mistreatment of the Iranian people will
actually cause more losses to them than for us. They need us
more than we do actually need them. This is just rhetoric." 

Ahmadinejad, who is on a five-day visit to Indonesia, the
world's most populous Muslim nation, also said that Iranians
would rise to the challenge of sanctions if they were imposed. 

"Many of our scientists and experts will be more than happy to
hear that we are put under sanctions by the West because this
will motivate a great leap in our industrial and economic
progress," he said. 

Washington has pushed for sanctions to punish Iran for its
suspected efforts to develop nuclear weapons, but has been
stymied by resistance by Russia and China, which hold veto
rights in the UN Security Council. 

Diplomats said negotiators from the Council's five permanent
members plus Germany would meet in London on May 19 to consider
new incentives as well as sanctions if Iran does not halt
suspected efforts to build a nuclear bomb. 

A Western envoy in Vienna said they hoped to finalize the
package within 10 days for presentation to Iran by Britain,
France and Germany, the so-called EU-3 which have taken the lead
in negotiations with Tehran. 

But Rice said Washington was not abandoning efforts to seek a
forceful response to Iran's rejection of a Security Council
injunction to stop its uranium enrichment activities. 

"We are all in agreement that the Security Council has got to
send a very strong message to Iran that it can't continue to
defy the international community. And that's what we're going to
do," Rice said. 

"And we felt that waiting a couple of weeks is the way to allow
diplomatic options to be fully pursued." 

She told NBC television the EU-3 would present Tehran with two
options: "Iran can either defy the international community and
face isolation and UN Security Council action; or Iran can
accept a path to a civil nuclear program that is acceptable to
the international community." 

Rice did not discuss the content of the proposals but said the
bottom line was that Iran could not have access to technologies
to make a bomb. "That means that enrichment and reprocessing on
their territory can't be permitted." 

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said early Tuesday
the carrots included civilian nuclear energy cooperation, trade
and technological exchanges "and, why not, in the area of
security." Washington has refused to give Iran security
guarantees. 

Rice held talks Monday night with her counterparts from the
other four permanent Security Council members plus Germany and
the European Union" /> . 

Their political directors followed up Tuesday with no consensus
in sight on a US push for a resolution under chapter seven of
the UN charter, which could authorize sanctions or military
force against Iran. 

Iran, which insists its nuclear program is peaceful, spurned
earlier efforts by the EU-3 to wean it off its alleged weapons
ambitions with economic and other incentives. 

It has also waffled at a proposal by Moscow to enrich uranium
for the Iranians on Russian soil. 

Tehran this week made an apparent attempt to open a direct
dialogue with Washington in a letter from its hardline leader to
President George W. Bush" /> . 

But Rice again dismissed the letter as falling short of a
serious attempt to address issues between Iran and the West. 

"It really doesn't offer a solution to the nuclear impasse," she
told ABC. "It doesn't talk about Iran's role in terrorism around
the world. And there really isn't anything there to consider it
a diplomatic overture." 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: Military action in Iran could make region 'explode' - Russia -

 Thu May 11, 8:02 AM ET 		 	 

MOSCOW (AFP) - Any military action against Iran" /> Irancould 
cause the regional situation to "explode", according to the head 
of Russia's Security Council Igor Ivanov. 

 Ivanov called for a diplomatic solution to the international
standoff over Iran's nuclear programme. 

"Any military action in Iran will lead to consequences that
could seriously explode the situation in the region and beyond,"
he was quoted as saying Thursday by ITAR-TASS and Ria Novosti. 

The United States and its European allies fear Iran is
disguising a secret military programme behind the building of a
civilian atomic power capacity. 

Iran insists its nuclear aims are entirely peaceful. 

They have been pushing for a binding UN resolution on Iran that
could open the way to economic sanctions, possibly escalating
towards military action, but have met resistance from Russia and
China, which are also permanent members of the Security Council
and have close ties with Iran. 

Ivanov described negotiations at the United Nations" /> United
Nationsas "fairly complicated." 

"Russia always stood for and stands for political-diplomatic
methods for resolving the problem," he was quoted as saying by
RIA Novovsti. "The most effective decision is one which is based
on consensus in the UN Security Council." 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 16 AFP:  Iran unmoved by UN's 'carrot and stick' nuclear effort

 by Stefan Smith Thu May 11, 6:29 AM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> appeared unimpressed by a new UN Security 
Council attempt to wield carrot and stick in the crisis over its 
nuclear ambitions, with a top official ruling out any halt in 
sensitive fuel work. 

 The influential head of Iran's hardline parliament also
repeated a warning that the regime could quit the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if it felt its "right" to have an
atomic energy programme was being violated. 

"The Islamic republic of Iran refuses to lose time and will in
no way accept a suspension of enrichment," Gholam Ali Hadad-Adel
was quoted as saying Thursday by Iranian news agencies. 

"The Islamic republic's policy is not to leave the NPT,"
asserted the official, who is close to Iran's supreme leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 

"If our relationship with the IAEA (International Atomic Enegy
Agency) is one of both obligations and rights, we will stay in
the NPT. If that is not the case, staying in the NPT would be of
no interest to us," he warned. 

Iran insists it only wants to enrich uranium to make nuclear
fuel, but the process can be extended to make weapons -- hence
Western demands for a moratorium. 

Hadad-Adel's comments came as the United States, unable to win
support for sanctions against Iran, gave its European allies "a
couple of weeks" to draft a fresh approach to persuade Tehran to
drop its disputed nuclear programme. 

Russia and China, which both hold a veto on the UN Security
Council, have made it clear they oppose coercive measures to
rein in Iran's nuclear activities. 

Diplomats said negotiators from the Security Council's five
permanent members plus Germany planned to meet in London on May
19 to weigh a new package of incentives as well as penalties. 

But the Islamic republic looks unwilling to be either coaxed or
beaten. 

Determined to enrich uranium on its own soil, Iran's clerical
regime has already vowed to ignore any UN Security Council
resolution obliging it to halt enrichment. 

"Many of our scientists and experts will be more than happy to
hear that we are put under sanctions by the West, because this
will motivate a great leap in our industrial and economic
progress," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in Jakarta
Thursday. 

In typically defiant form, he also brushed off the threat of
military action -- which the United States has not ruled out --
as a "joke", while adding Iran had "the technical and other
capabilities to defend our interests". 

The regime has also consistently asserted it cannot be coaxed by
incentives -- with domestic enrichment held aloft as an
"absolute right" and a previous European Union" /> offer of
trade and other incentives dismissed at the time as an "insult". 

The Europeans, backed by the United States, have been forced to
go back to incentives after they failed to win Russian and
Chinese support for a tough Council resolution. 

"We agreed that we will continue to seek a Security Council
resolution, but that we would wait for a couple of weeks while
the Europeans design an offer to the Iranians," US Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice" /> said Wednesday. 

But putting together an attractive offer for Tehran will be
difficult. 

"The challenge is this: the revised incentives have to be good
enough to persuade Russia and China that Iran has to accept them
but not too good to scare off the United States from endorsing
them," a Western diplomat told AFP. 

Several EU diplomats now acknowledge that their previous offer
to supply nuclear reactor fuel as well as security, technology
and trade guarantees was "lacking". 

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said it was "faulty,
empty", and famously said Iran would "not swap a jewel for a
lollipop". 

Any new package, an EU diplomat said, "would have to be
radically better if it stood a chance of not being rejected
outright". 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 17 IRNA: Pak defence analyst terms Iranian president's letter to Bush a "peace message" - 

Islamabad, May 11, IRNA                                                                                                                  

Pakistan-Analyst 

A leading Pakistani defence analyst and former director-general
of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence on Thursday hailed the
Iranian president's move of writing to his US counterpart,
calling his letter a "message of peace and friendship." In an
interview with IRNA here, Lieutenant General Hameed Gul (Ret'd)
said that the letter wrote of peace, love and friendship and
also contained Iranian teachings.

 He regretted the fact that US President George Bush was not in
favor of resolving the Iran nuclear issue through negotiation.

 Iran, after the Islamic Revolution, has always been extending
invitations of peace and friendship to anti-Islam forces, he
maintained.

 Referring to the late leader of the Islamic Revolution Hazrat
Imam Khomeni's letter to the ex-president of the erstwhile
Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, he said that the Iranian
president had made facts clear to Bush.

 "The letter by the Iranian president provides food for thought
for Bush."
 But the offer in the Iranian president's letter has been
rejected by America, he regretted.

 Nonetheless, the initiative of the Iranian president is a great
gesture, he said.

 He said the letter also made clear to the European Union that
its system and decisions were wrong and were bound to fail
vis-a-vis Iran's peaceful nuclear program.

 The analyst further called upon the United States to desist
from "spilling more innocent blood, stop supporting the Zionist
regime and pursuing anti-Islam and Muslim policies" which, he
said, are the major destabilizing factors in the world.

 He dubbed Bush as the "most barbaric and cruelest ruler," and
said there was no logic whatsoever in imposing war on Iran.

 Hameed Gul said that Bush's illogical policies were not
appreciated by the American people as shown by his very low
popularity ratings in polls, and suggested Bush unceremoniously
bow out.

*****************************************************************
 18 AFP: US ready to back European diplomacy on Iran 

NEW YORK (AFP) - The United States, unable to win support for
sanctions against Iran, has given its European allies "a couple
of weeks" to draft a fresh approach to persuade Tehran to drop
its disputed nuclear program.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made the announcement
Wednesday after failing to secure backing for tough action
against Iran's sensitive uranium enrichment work during two days
of talks with foreign ministers from Russia, China, Britain,
France and Germany.

 neither Rice nor any other top US official publicly acknowledged 
concessions, the decision appeared to be recognition that a drive 
for UN sanctions had stalled.

Russia and China, which both hold a veto on the UN Security
Council, have made it clear they oppose coercive measures to
rein in Iran's nuclear activities.

And even staunch US allies have signaled opposition to military
strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, which Washington
refuses to rule out as a last resort.

"We agreed that we will continue to seek a Security Council
resolution, but that we would wait for a couple of weeks while
the Europeans design an offer to the Iranians that would make
clear that they have a choice that would allow them to have a
civil nuclear program," Rice said in an interview with ABC
television.

Diplomats said negotiators from the Security Council's five
permanent members plus Germany planned to meet in London on May
19 to weigh a package of incentives as well as penalties if Iran
does not halt suspected efforts to build a nuclear bomb.

A Western envoy in Vienna said Britain, France and Germany would
hopefully present the package to Iran within 10 days. The
so-called "EU-3" have taken the lead in previous negotiations
with Tehran.

Rice told NBC television the Europeans would present Tehran with
two options: defiance leading to international isolation or "a
path to a civil nuclear program that is acceptable to the
international community."

Rice said above all Iran could not have access to technologies
to make an atomic bomb. "That means that enrichment and
reprocessing on their territory can't be permitted."

As world powers discussed how to approach Tehran, Iranian
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ramped up his rhetoric against the
West, warning that Israel will "one day vanish" as he shrugged
off the threat of war and sanctions.

Ahmadinejad, on a five-day visit to Indonesia, also told
university students in Jakarta that the West peddles lies and
oppression.

"Several powerful countries consider themselves higher than
other countries and they think they can treat those countries
unfairly," Ahmadinejad told the students.

As for Israel, "This regime one day will vanish," he said,
complaining that when elections were held in the Palestinian
territories "and supported by its people, liberalism did not
want to recognise it."

In October Ahmadinejad declared that Israel should be "wiped off
the map," and in April he said that Israel "cannot survive" and
that migrants to the Jewish state should go back to where they
came from.

In a television interview Ahmadinejad dismissed the idea of war
as "a joke," and dismissed Western threats as "just propaganda
and psychological warfare."

Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono supports Tehran in
its claim that the nuclear program is purely peaceful, and has
offered to help mediate in negotiations.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan urged Iran to drop its defiant
stance and expressed hope that the European initiative would
prove successful.

"It's important the Iranians remain open and that they back away
from this aggressive posture and be open to discussion," Annan
said.

The former chief negotiator for Iran on the nuclear issue,
Hassan Rohani, meanwhile called for renewed efforts to clinch a
negotiated agreement as part of broader non-proliferation
efforts.

"A negotiated solution still can and must be found if we intend
to strengthen the non-proliferation regime and avoid an unwise
and unnecessary conflict," Rohani wrote in a letter published in
Time magazine.

He said both sides had to set aside emotion and "the baggage of
immediate and long-past history of Iran-U.S. relations." 

    Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP '); [ src=] 
*****************************************************************
 19 IRNA: South Africa warns against undermining of Iran's nuclear right -

Pretoria, May 11, IRNA

Iran-S Africa-Nuclear issue 

Undermining international law and existing agreements on Iran can 
endanger prospects of other countries of engaging in peaceful 
nuclear programs, said a South African Foreign Ministry official 
here Wednesday.

 Foreign Ministry Director-General Ayanda Ntsaluba said 
"countries like South Africa should beware of the double-standard 
application of international laws on the right to access nuclear 
technology for peaceful purposes." His remarks were part of his 
address to the South African Parliament's Foreign Affairs 
Committee.

 For the time being, "there is no danger to our peaceful 
(nuclear) program," he said, referring to South Africa's nuclear 
activities in its Koeberg power station or plans to build a 
pebble-bed modular reactor.

 However, the official added, Pretoria should not be complacent 
and think that "if there is any undermining of international law 
and existing agreements on Iran it will not happen to us." 
Ntsaluba stressed that South Africa backed Iran's right to enrich 
uranium for nuclear fuel under the supervision of the 
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and in accordance with 
its commitments under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

 Noting that South Africa enjoyed the internation reputation of 
being a "responsible country," Ntsaluba nonetheless warned that 
things could turn out differently if tables were turned.

 "Once a country is prohibited from acting lawfully within NPT 
safeguards in terms of accessing nuclear technoloy for peaceful 
purposes the path down the road would become slippery because 
then other countries which are not suspected of any weapons 
programs could be restricted." When that time comes, "it would 
have implications for us," Ntsaluba feared.

 He stressed that Pretoria was taking no sides on the nuclear 
issue but "will stand on principle." South Africa will continue 
discussions with the five permanent members of the United Nations 
Security Council, the EU trio (Germany, Britain and France) and 
Russia on the issue "to realize any proposal on the table that 
holds the promise of moving the process of resolving the Iran 
nuclear crisis forward," he said.

*****************************************************************
 20 IRNA: Iran's nuclear program: The way out

May 11, IRNA                                                                                                           

Iran's former chief nuclear negotiator, Hassan Rowhani, has
proposed solutions to defuse the current standoff with respect
to Iran's peaceful nuclear activities.

 In an article published in the Time magazine, Rowhani called on
all sides to the issue to "dare to leave the motions aside and
avoid polluting the atmosphere with the baggage of immediate and
long gone history of Iran-US relations."
 The following is the full text of Rowhani's article:
 "A nuclear weaponized Iran destabilizes the region, prompts a
regional arms race, and wastes the scarce resources in the
region.

 And taking account of U.S. nuclear arsenal and its policy of
ensuring a strategic edge for Israel, an Iranian bomb will
accord Iran no security dividends. There are also some Islamic
and developmental reasons why Iran as an Islamic and developing
state must not develop and use weapons of mass destruction.

 "Three years of robust inspection of Iranian nuclear and non-
non-nuclear facilities by the IAEA (International Atomic Energy
Agency) inspectors led Dr. (Mohamed) ElBaradei (IAEA head) to
conclude and certify that to date there are no indications of
any diversion of nuclear material and activities toward making a
bomb.

 At the same time, ElBaradei has pointed out that the IAEA
cannot certify that Iran's program is exclusively peaceful.

 But the fact is that few among many states with a nuclear
program have received such a clean bill of health from the IAEA.
Such certification by the IAEA does and should take time and
effort. Iran is prepared and willing to invest the time and
effort necessary to receive the IAEA clean bill of health. The
IAEA is also ready to pursue its investigation of Iran's nuclear
activities. So should the states that have concern about it.

 What is, then, the motive for the rush to heighten the
situation and create a crisis? Could it be that the extremists
all around see their interests, however transient, domestic and
short-sighted, in heightened tension and crisis?
 This situation, if not contained with cool head and if
miscalculations continue, can easily turn into a crisis with
potentially global ramifications for the rule of law under the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and for the economic and security
interests of all concerned in the region and beyond.

 It is high time to cease sensationalism and war mongering,
pause and think twice about where we are heading.

 Iran is not accused of having the bomb. There are no
indications that Iran has a nuclear weapon program. If Iran were
to have a weapons program, the alarmists in the U.S. and Israel
have reportedly said that it would take at least another seven
to 10 years for Iran to make the bomb.

 What is often cited by American officials as 20 years of
Iranian secret nuclear military program turned out to be, as
declared by the IAEA, nothing more than the failure to declare,
in a timely manner, some experiments and receiving some material
and equipment.

 Such failures to declare are not uncommon among the NPT members.

 Remedial steps are envisioned in the Safeguards Agreement to
address them, and Iran has done so.

 Moreover, it was no secret that we were in the European,
Russian and Asian markets to purchase enrichment technology in
the late '80s and '90s.

 Therefore, an Iranian secret weapon program is only hype, and
the sense of urgency about Iran's nuclear program is rather
tendentious. The world should not allow itself to be dragged
into another conflict on false pretenses in this region again.

 Iran is intent on producing nuclear fuel domestically for
reasons both historic and long-term economic. The U.S. and some
Europeans argue that they cannot trust Iran's intentions. They
argue that they cannot accept Iran's promise to remain committed
to its treaty obligation once it gains the capability to enrich
uranium for fuel production.

 They ask Iran to give up its right under the NPT, and instead
accept their promise to supply it with nuclear fuel. This is
illogical and crudely self-serving: I do not trust you, even
though what you are doing is legal and can be verified to remain
legal, but you must trust me when I promise to do that which I
have no obligation to do and cannot be enforced. It is this
simple and this unfair.

 There must be a better way out of this than to top this
travesty with threatening Iran in the Security Council with
possible sanctions and perhaps even use of force. This path can
potentially cause harm and suffering at differing degrees to all
parties to the conflict.

 A negotiated solution still can and must be found if we intend
to strengthen the non-proliferation regime and avoid an unwise
and unnecessary conflict.

 To this end, we must dare to leave the emotions aside and avoid
polluting the atmosphere with the baggage of immediate and
long-past history of Iran-U.S. relations.

 A solution imposed on Iran by the Security Council is unlikely
to provide the assurances the US seeks about the Iranian nuclear
program.

 In my personal judgment, a negotiated solution can be found in
the context of the following steps, if and when creatively
intertwined and negotiated in good faith by concerned officials:

 *Iran would make an active contribution, provided that other
countries with similar sensitive fuel cycle programs also do the
same, to fixing the loopholes in the non-proliferation system
and to developing a technically credible international control
regime.


 *Iran would consider ratifying the Additional Protocol, which
provides for intrusive and snap inspections.


 *Iran would address the question of preventing break-out from
the NPT.


 *Iran would agree to negotiate with the IAEA and states
concerned about the scope and timing of its industrial-scale
uranium enrichment.


 *Iran would accept an IAEA verifiable cap on enrichment limit
of reactor grade uranium.


 *Iran would accept an IAEA verifiable cap on the production of
UF6 during the period of negotiation for the scope and timing of
its industrial scale enrichment.


 *Iran and the IAEA would agree on terms of the continuous
presence of inspectors in Iran to verify credibly that no
diversion takes place in Iran.


 *Iran's readiness to welcome other countries to partner with
Iran in a consortium provides additional assurance about the
peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program.

 It is not Iran's intention to disregard Security Council
decisions. The way out is for the Security Council to mandate
the IAEA to address this issue and establish a negotiating
process for a fixed period to formulate a credible plan taking
into account the suggestions I made in my personal capacity.

 Iran is prepared to work with the IAEA and all states concerned
about promoting confidence in its fuel cycle program. But Iran
cannot be expected to give in to United States bullying and
 non-proliferation double standards."
		 				 		 			
*****************************************************************
 21 IRNA: Russian expert says Iran's nuclear program is irreversible

Tehran, May 10, IRNA

Iran-Russia-Nuclear 

A Russian expert on Iran said in Moscow Wednesday that Iran's
nuclear program has reached an irreversible phase.


 Rajab Safarov told Interfax News Agency that Iranian officials
will not accept those proposals which prevent Iran's access to
nuclear program and will reject suspension of uranium enrichment
in the country.

 He also reckoned that there will not be consensus among the
five permanent members of the UN Security Council over the draft
resolution on Iran.

 The foreign minister of group of 5+1 after negotiations on Iran
nuclear activities agreed to offer constructive proposals to
Tehran in lieu of the country giving up part of its nuclear
program.

 The proposal is to be put forth by the European Troika of
-France, Germany and Britain. If it is turned down by Iran, then
the group will take up proposals for imposing sanction on Tehran.

 Iran as a member of the Non-Proliferation-Treaty (NPT) has the
right to have access to peaceful nuclear technology. Based on
international conventions Iran cannot be denied the right to
engage in peaceful nuclear activities.

 President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday that Iran will not
accept any illegal decisions made by the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) or the UN Security Council on the country's
nuclear program.

 Ahmadinejad, who arrived in Jakarta at the head of a
high-ranking politico-economic delegation, made the remark at a
press conference with his Indonesian counterpart, Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono.

 "The Iranian nation has made its decision. It will defend its
rights and will never give up its rights," Ahmadinejad said in
response to a question on Iran's reaction to future decisions of
the Security Council on Iran's nuclear case.

 "Iran's nuclear activities have been based on the
 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The Islamic Republic of Iran is
the only country whose nuclear activities are transparent.

 Ahmadinejad added, "Enemies are never concerned about our
nuclear activities and any diversion in this regard. It is a big
lie. They have no concerns about nuclear activities of any
country.

 "They, themselves, have non-peaceful nuclear program and
develop it day by day. On the other hand, they have equipped
certain states in the Middle East with nuclear weapons.

 "This shows they have no concerns about nuclear activities." He 
said, "They are concerned about development and progress of the 
Iranian nation. They intend to monopolize technology and sell it 
to other states at a high price.

 2324/1771

---> Iran-Russia-Nuclear 		 				 		 			

*****************************************************************
 22 Guardian Unlimited: WFP Reaches Agreement With North Korea
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 6:16 AM

By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN 

Associated Press Writer 

BEIJING (AP) - The World Food Program has reached agreement with
North Korea to resume food aid to the hunger-stricken country,
but the operation will be smaller than it was before its
suspension in December, the U.N. agency said Thursday. 

The new program will feed 1.9 million of the ``most needy''
people in the North, Tony Banbury, the agency's Asia regional
director, said at a news conference in Beijing. That is down
from the 6.5 million people the agency was feeding in past
years. 

The agreement was signed Wednesday in Pyongyang, Banbury said. 

``We would have liked to see a bigger operation, but that was
not possible at this time,'' he said, citing North Korean
government objections. 

Those cut off from food distribution - about 4 million mainly
elderly people - would be fed through state grain subsidies,
North Korean authorities told the WFP. But Banbury said that
without additional food from family members or other sources
they could ``face a very difficult situation.'' 

Banbury said North Korea justified the smaller program by saying
they needed less aid because of improved harvests and didn't
want to foster a ``culture of dependency'' after a decade of
foreign assistance. 

He said the WFP supported those goals but still believed a
larger program was needed. Grain donations from the group will
fall to just 75,000 tons this year, down from the 512,000 tons
that had been planned for last year, he said. 

Banbury said food distribution would begin by the end of next
week, but it could take much longer to bring the program up to
full speed. 

The program will supply vitamin-enriched biscuits to children
and high-nutrition porridge to pregnant women, infants and new
mothers. Food supplies will also be given to needy families in
exchange for work on community development projects, he said. 

The WFP will be allowed 10 foreign staff members in North Korea
and an office in Pyongyang, the capital, Banbury said. In the
past, the agency had 32 foreigners in the country and five
regional offices in addition to the capital. 

But he said the agency would supply food aid only in areas where
it could monitor distribution in order to assure foreign donors
that the aid was reaching its intended beneficiaries. The United
States and other donors want to ensure food isn't diverted to
the North's huge military or to reward ruling party supporters. 

Efforts to avert starvation in the North have coincided with
lengthy disarmament negotiations aimed at persuading the
government to give up nuclear development. 

The United States, South Korea and Japan, who are pushing the
North to return to talks on its secretive nuclear program, are
among the North's main food donors. They say they have kept aid
decisions separate from the nuclear talks. 

The North has relied for more than a decade on foreign donations
to feed its people. But the secretive Stalinist regime of North
Korean leader Kim Jong Il has restricted activities of foreign
aid agencies and pressed them to reduce the size of their
foreign staffs in the country. 

The WFP suspended aid in December after the North asked the
agency to shift its focus to economic development aid. The two
sides have been negotiating since then. 

Late last year, the North expelled all private aid groups in
apparent retaliation for the European Union's decision to
sponsor a United Nations resolution criticizing its human rights
record. 

The WFP says it has spent about $1.7 billion over the past
decade on aid to North Korea, the agency's biggest single aid
project to date. 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 23 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] Roh's summit proposal   
        
President Roh Moo-hyun on Tuesday offered to meet Kim Jong-il at
any place, at any time, and on any agenda the North Korean
leader may choose. In addition, Roh sweetened his proposal for a
second inter-Korean summit with "many concessions" and
"unconditional institutional and material support" that he said
he was ready to provide for the poverty-stricken North. 

The proposal appears to mark a clean break with his earlier
low-key approach to talks with Kim. He used to say he had no
intention of pushing for talks with the reclusive North Korean
leader when he was either unwilling or unable to meet him. 

But by offering to meet Kim Jong-il at a location of his choice,
Roh was saying he would not insist on diplomatic formality and
demand Kim Jong-il return former President Kim Dae-jung's 2000
Pyongyang visit by visiting Seoul. Instead, he was saying he was
willing to visit Pyongyang himself if so desired by the North
Korean leader. 

There is no arguing against Roh's pursuit of early talks with
Kim Jong-il. Actually, they are long overdue. Still, his
proposal is perplexing, not because he has now turned
enthusiastic about the talks, but because he has dropped his
long-held conditions for them, including denuclearization. 

As he said in the past, there is no point in holding an
inter-Korean summit for the summit's sake. It should help induce
North Korea to give up its nuclear ambitions and help bring
South and North Korea closer. He was right to say in July, "A
South-North summit per se cannot be a goal. A summit will only
be of use if it helps solve the nuclear problem and improve
South-North ties." 

But now he says he is willing to meet Kim Jong-il on any agenda
of his choice, a remark that may prove to be a grave mistake. It
is tantamount to a promise to meet him even if North Korea's
nuclear weapons program, the major obstacle to improving
inter-Korean relations, is excluded as an agenda item. 

The summit agenda would have to include a return to the 1992
joint nuclear declaration, which bans South and North Korea from
testing, manufacturing, producing, possessing, storing,
deploying or using nuclear weapons. Roh will have to use all
leverage available to bring North Korea back to the six-party
talks on denuclearization. 

Another issue that needs to be included in the summit agenda is
human rights violations in North Korea. The Roh administration
claims it has not taken up the issue for fear that it could
result in aggravating rather than improving human rights in the
communist North. But the international community, not convinced
by this argument, is putting increased pressure on South Korea
to assert itself in the protection of this universal value in
the North. 

It is not clear what Roh meant when he referred to "many
concessions" and "unconditional institutional and material
support" for North Korea. His aides said concessions would be
provided on the principle of reciprocity but failed to explain
how they would be related to "unconditional institutional and
material support." 

Roh will have to clarify all of those ambiguous terms if he
wishes to avoid making himself misunderstood in the South as
well as sending the wrong signal to the North Koreans. He cannot
blame the main opposition Grand National Party for
misunderstanding him when it accuses Roh of attempting to
provide North Korea with massive aid for partisan gains, as it
is doing now. 

Roh will have to build a national consensus on what concessions
and support will be provided, and on what scale, before offering
them to the North. Otherwise, their provision will run the risk
of generating divisions in the South and thus undermine his
effort to promote inter-Korean integration. 

2006.05.12
 
*****************************************************************
 24 Korea Herald: [NEWS FOCUS] Roh ups ante on North Korea   
        
Opposition fears widening fissure with Washington

 By Lee Joo-hee

 

President Roh Moo-hyun's strong message toward North Korea
Tuesday night implied a sweeping change in Seoul's policy toward
Pyongyang.

 Not only did he directly comment on how he wished to meet North
Korean leader Kim Jong-il, but also said Seoul was now ready to
yield more to North Korea.

 For progressive observers here, the remarks meant a scurry of
inter-Korean interchanges, for Seoul to take the lead in
tackling the stale nuclear standoff. For more conservative
observers, the comments suggested scooping yet more onto the
communist state at the cost of a shaky alliance with the United
States. More cautious watchers hinted that Seoul may have been
holding off Pyongyang's requests and now decided to use them as
a negotiating tactic. 

Most government officials stood by the president's comments,
conspicuously leaving the impression that drastic developments
are set to arrive on Korea's doorstep.

 "President Roh seems to have thrown the inter-Korean relations
into an overhaul where Seoul will be taking the lead, deviating
from how the exchanges were previously conducted mainly on a
give-and-take level," said professor Koh Yu-hwan of Dongguk
University.

 President Roh, while talking with ethnic Koreans in Mongolia,
said that he hoped former President Kim Dae-jung's trip to
Pyongyang in June would pave the way for the North Korean leader
Kim Jong-il to become more flexible. 

Adding that he was willing to meet Kim Jong-il at any time, any
place and on any subject, Roh said his government will yield
more to the North. 

Kim Dae-jung is scheduled to visit Pyongyang next month, six
years after the first-ever inter-Korean summit in 2000. 

But government authorities were quick to deny that the comments
meant Seoul will be giving another grand present to the North.

 "Although I am not in a place to add to the president's
comments, his remarks did not mean there would be another
important proposal," Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok said.

 South Korea had half succeeded at breaking down the nuclear
talks that were stalled last year.

 It offered to send 2 million kilowatts of electricity to the
North as part of the compensation for the nuclear program.
Seoul's proposal, accepted by all the negotiating partners,
helped the talks resume after a three-week suspension in
September. The talks ended with a much-hailed Joint Statement of
principles but has been in deadlock ever since.

 The second summit between the leaders of the two Koreas has
long been suggested by experts as one of the most effective ways
to break the impending nuclear standoff.

 But Roh's blunt offer to the North evoked a much-anticipated
protest from the conservative bloc, which has never been happy
with the president's foreign policy leaning away from the United
States.

 The main opposition Grand National Party criticized that Roh
was pandering to his predecessor's Pyongyang visit to seize
popularity ahead of the crucial local elections on the last day
of this month.

 GNP Chairwoman Park Geun-hye voiced concern over a widening
fissure with the United States.

 "The GNP's tone toward the North is based on three big
principles that are transparency, public consent and cooperative
moves with the United States," she said during the party's
executive meeting. She said Roh should refer to the GNP's policy
and proceed with his in a transparent manner.

 The ruling Uri Party, in a rhetorical effort to protect Roh,
said the president was only talking about the fundamentals and
that the GNP should not use it as a political offensive.

 "President Roh's comments were in line with the hope for former
President Kim Dae-jung's trip to the North to become successful
and with a determination to continue the relations with the
North without hurting the main principle," Uri spokesman Woo
Sang-ho said.

 It is becoming old news that the once omnipotent alliance
between South Korea and the United States has been heading into
a less reliant relationship.

 The George W. Bush's second administration turning tougher on
the North also contradicts Roh's intention to foster wider
exchanges with the North.

 In addition to last year's financial sanctions, Washington
stepped up pressure against Pyongyang recently by accepting six
defectors seeking asylum. 

"It appears a viable observation that the Bush administration
may be waiting for the South Korean government to be changed
with a more conservative lot before moving on with its policies
on North Korea," professor Koh said.

 He added that it may go the same route for North Korea which
could be waiting for the Washington administration to change
before making the next move.

 Roh's decision may have derived from such circumstances - to
take the lead between the two hostile partners - and such a
decision would also inevitably bring different opinions
domestically in the South, Koh said. 

Kim Dae-jung's side, for the meantime, remained distant from the
hype. "(Former President Kim) is not in a place to evaluate what
the incumbent president has said," said a personal aide to Kim.

 Kim Dae-jung once said to Unification Minister Lee that it was
inappropriate for his "personal visit to the North to be
excessively linked with pending agendas."

 (angiely@heraldm.com) 

2006.05.10
 
*****************************************************************
 25 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: Seoul Looks Bent on Separate N.Korea Policy 
 
  Home> National/Politics    Updated May.11,2006 20:25 KST   
 
Roh Hints at Greater Urgency for Summit With N.Korea 
A Pointless Proposal 

The Proper Place to Announce Drastic Policy Shifts 
  
The government appears intent on making attempts independent of
Washington to bring North Korea back to stalled six-nation talks
on its nuclear program. Some critics fear that any move from
Seoul that would go against a U.S. strategy to box in the North
from all sides could strain relations between the two allies. 

President Roh Moo-hyun was quoted as saying Seoul will exercise
greater leadership in breaking the deadlock in the six-party
talks. Roh was said to have made the remarks in a meeting with
senior officials in security departments before embarking on his
current overseas trip. ¡°The idea is that since the six-party
talks play a very important role in determining the fate of the
Korean Peninsula, we can¡¯t just leave such critical decisions
in the hands of the U.S.,¡± a high-ranking government official
said Thursday. 

Meanwhile, a senior Cheong Wa Dae official accompanying the
president offered a further gloss on Roh¡¯s remarks Wednesday
that he will meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-il ¡°anytime and
anywhere¡± and ¡°make many concessions.¡± The official said the
remarks ¡°are a manifestation of the president¡¯s intention to
suggest solutions as president of South Korea, a concerned party
that takes the heaviest responsibility in resolving matters on
the peninsula.¡± The Foreign Ministry's special envoy on
international security, Moon Chung-in, told a seminar here the
comments, which came in a meeting with Korean residents in
Mongolia, ¡°show that Roh is losing patience with U.S. President
George W. Bush.¡± 

(englishnews@chosun.com ) 

  
*****************************************************************
 26 Shanghai Daily : China pushes six nations to nuke talk
 
Wenhui-Xinmin United Press Group 

Zhang Liuhao 

2006-05-11 

CHINA continues to wait for the six-nation nuclear talk to 
resume, as the United States and Korea's differing financial 
views have placed it on hold, said Liu Jianchaoa, spokesman for 
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Xinhua news agency reported.

China has been continously striving to push forward the
six-nation talk on nuclear issues, and expects the participants
to be more flexible and practical in removing the barriers to
resume the talks as soon as possible, Liu said.

The United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
hold different financial issues, which is majorly handicapping
the talks from resuming, for the second phase of the fifth-round
meeting, Xinhua reported.

The six nations, also including South Korea, Japan and Russia,
opened the first phase of the fifth-round meeting in Beijing
last November. The six participants agreed to have the second
phase of talks soon after the conclusion of the first.

The first-round, six-nation talk took place in Beijing on August
2003.

Shanghai Daily Home | Copyright © 2001-2005 Shanghai Daily
*****************************************************************
 27 Korea Times: NK as a Temporary Nuclear State 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion   

By Michael Breen

 With the 6-nation talks aimed at removing North Korea¡¯s
nuclear weapons all but dead, it is time to admit that North
Korea is now a nuclear-armed state.

 Efforts by the international community, as we now call
ourselves, to head off this conclusion have not worked. 

The reason for failure is quite simple. As much as we might be
tempted to blame America for being too aggressive or China and
South Korea for being too wet, North Korea is a nuclear power
because it wanted to be. Its leaders approached their nuclear
program as if their survival depended on it. Short of bombing
facilities, nothing would have stopped them, and that course of
action was ruled out by the fear of unintended consequences.
Their determination outweighed our options.

 So, how can we live with this?

 One small comfort is that this situation is not for ever. North
Korea is going down sooner or later. After it does, its weapons
will be scrapped, despite the fantasy entertained by some in the
South of inheriting the ``Korean bomb.¡¯¡¯ 

We may therefore consider North Korea as a ``Temporarily
Nuclear-armed State.¡¯¡¯ 

This is a useful category because it allows governments to avoid
having to admit that policies have totally failed and that North
Korea has been rewarded for bad behavior.

 This is hardly comfort for those downwind of the DMZ.

 But before we dive under our desks, we should acknowledge that
nuclear weapons don¡¯t get used. The only country that has
dropped them in earnest is America, which, fortunately, is on
our side. 

Kim Jong-il won¡¯t use his. They exist as a deterrent. As soon
as they are used, the deterrent is lost. He knows that if he
were to launch one, his country would only have a few more
minutes left. 

Of course, I could be wrong. 

It might be useful to also acknowledge, in case you find
yourself thinking that America¡¯s belligerent non-proliferation
policy is unfair, that, in matters of destruction, fairness is
not the issue. What matters is whether we win. In this context,
the fact that our allies have weapons is good. That our enemies
have them is bad. And North Korea is everyone¡¯s enemy, even its
own. 

The real problem is not the actual firing of nuclear weapons. It
is the innate idiocy of the North Korean state. If you look at
North Korean behavior over the last several decades, the common
theme is attention-seeking. To stay relevant, it always raises
the stakes. 

My money is on Kim Jong-il raising the specter of nuclear sales
to terrorists. It would fit his pattern.

 And it could happen quite soon. The ingredients are already in
the test-tube and the mix is starting to smoke. The North Korean
military is mightily annoyed that the United States has launched
an all-out war to liberate the US dollar from counterfeits, and,
as we speak, may be looking for a way to vent its anger, to
maintain the upper hand over the wimps in the foreign ministry,
and to pressure the US to back off.

 However, North Korea has a weak spot. Unlike the development of
weapons themselves, which, from Pyongyang¡¯s perspective, are to
deter people in South Korea and the United States who might want
regime change, consorting with terrorists would almost certainly
be designed to win concessions. North Korea has no real common
cause with bearded weirdoes and will not risk all for its right
to such a relationship.

 If there is the hint of suspicion that the bearded ones are
doing nuclear business with Pyongyang, America would feel its
own survival threatened. The US nightmare after September 11,
2001, is the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction by terrorists
against an American city. North Korea may provide such weaponry.
If it does, America could go berserk.

 Please note that I said ``suspicion,¡¯¡¯ not ``clear
evidence.¡¯¡¯ At this level of warfare, the means and the motive
are enough to justify action. You can¡¯t afford to wait to build
a case. If there is a policy that can offer more than hope
things won¡¯t come to that, we should pursue it. 

05-11-2006 21:29         
  
*****************************************************************
 28 Korea Times: Second Summit 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion   

 Only Transparent Process Wins Popular Approval   

President Roh Moo-hyun's virtual offer for another inter-Korean
summit Tuesday marks a complete about-face from his previous
stance. In a meeting with ethnic Koreans at a Mongol restaurant,
Roh removed all preconditions for a tete-a-tete with his North
Korean counterpart, Kim Jong-il. Despite the casual atmosphere
and some unrefined phrases, the proposal itself is both timely
and appropriate to break the deadlock in the nuclear standoff
and other diplomatic issues. At stake is how to attain maximum
results with popular support. 

Roh said he was ready to meet Kim ``anytime, anywhere to talk
about anything,'' adding he had made this proposal dozens of
times. This was a far cry from his previous position that a
summit would be meaningless unless it leads to breakthroughs in
the nuclear weapons issue and improvement in South-North ties.
It also raises questions on whether the two Koreas conducted
under-the-table bargaining for another diplomatic drama. If Roh
made the offer after a careful calculation, the government
should first explain the background.

 It should then proceed toward realizing another inter-Korean
summit as persistently and transparently as possible. Washington
appears ready to abandon the tedious dialogue over the North's
nuclear blackmail, while pressuring Pyongyang on human rights,
currency counterfeiting and drug trafficking issues. The
government has only two options: Join the U.S. hardball tactics
or seek its own way out through closer inter-Korean contacts.
Now that Seoul has opted for the latter, it should persuade the
audience here and abroad that this is appropriate.

 Already, the conservative political opposition and media
outlets are attacking Roh's offer as ``begging for a summit''
for theatrical effect in domestic politics. Roh's offer for
unconditional aid and concessions might have caused such
suspicions. But political parties in both camps should know
voters have grown too shrewd to be deceived by a political show,
which was proved as early as 2000 when the first summit
occurred. Getting popular endorsement in inter-Korean
breakthroughs requires careful planning based on a long-term
vision. 

Roh's move, timed with his unification minister's pledge to make
the inter-Korean economic project an astounding success, runs
squarely counter to the recent U.S. strategy of strangling the
North. There are views that only Seoul's closer cooperation with
Washington can change the North, while enhancing the South's
diplomatic leverage. If Roh's bold initiatives fail to win a big
concession from Kim, the damage will not be limited to his
political influence but sharply erode the two Koreas' room in
multilateral diplomacy.

 This leaves the casting vote _ once again _ to North Korea.
Whether and why Pyongyang is willing to accept the offer will
likely determine not just the inter-Korean relationship but
Northeast Asian geopolitics for a long time. It is vital for the
two Koreas _ governments and peoples _ to have trust in each
other. 

05-11-2006 21:30         
  
*****************************************************************
 29 Free Press: Divine strake

Independent News Media - National Issues
 
 by Robert C. Koehler, Tribune Media Services

 May 11, 2006

 Will residents of Las Vegas be seeing a mushroom cloud over
their city next month? 

As I write this, "Divine Strake," the big bang with the macabre
and vaguely blasphemous name (the military-industrial complex is
playing God again), has been postponed from June 2 to June 23,
thanks to legal proceedings against the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency and the National Nuclear Security Administration, related
to unanswered environmental-impact questions. Maybe the delay
will be enough of a wedge to allow the passionately bitter
opponents of the blast - and they are legion - to build the
necessary momentum to stop it altogether. 

I hope so. Nothing good can come of this retempting of fate,
this re-engaging of the human-annihilation machine known as the
U.S. nuclear weapons program. Divine Strake is not itself a
nuclear blast, but it's so big that many observers "have said
that the new test is simply an attempt to defy the congressional
ban and advance Defense Department research into nuclear
weapons," according to the Las Vegas Sun. Specifically, it's
seen as a covert way for the government to research the
killed-in-Congress Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, a.k.a., the
bunker buster. 

Divine Strake would be the mother of all fertilizer bombs (eat
your hear out, Tim McVeigh): 700 tons of ammonium nitrate and
fuel oil, which the DoD wants to set off above a limestone
tunnel at the infamous Nevada Test Site, where 928 above- and
below-ground nuclear tests were conducted between 1951 and 1992,
and downwind of which millions of people continue to reap the
horrific consequences of the fallout. 

The blast would be big enough to simulate a nuclear weapon; it
will raise a 10,000-foot mushroom cloud of debris, some of which
may be radioactive. Indeed, one known hot spot is only 1.1 miles
from the blast site. Despite this, Defense and Energy Department
spokesmen have assured people there will be "no significant
impact" to the environment. Yeah, sure. 

It's all the worst sort of deja vu for the "downwinders" of
Nevada, Utah, Idaho and other states (the whole country is, in
fact, downwind of the site): not just the idea of a mushroom
cloud - or, as an editorial cartoon in the Las Vegas
Review-Journal put it, "a very large, extended middle finger" -
blocking out the sun again, for the first time since 1962, but
the insidious governmental assurances that the public has
nothing to worry about. The feds, after all, stonewalled the
downwinders about the lethality of the Cold War-era testing for
four decades, as radiation-related cancers and other illnesses
claimed loved one after loved one. 

In other words, the bomb makers are also liars. Think about this
for a moment, especially those of you with Strangelovian
sympathies, who regard WMD capability - and a reckless
willingness to use that capability - as crucial to U.S.
security. Building and testing a nuclear arsenal is guaranteed
to destroy the health - to kill - many of our own citizens. The
government has decided this domestic price is worth it, but lies
to those it has written off as expendable. This combination of
ruthlessness and cowardice is what characterizes the "security
state," and to my mind its ascendancy can only diminish real
national security. 

What's happening with Divine Strake right now is a head-on
confrontation with the arrogant and contemptuous security state
- in rural Utah, Nevada, Idaho, among the reddest of the red
regions of the country. Opposition to the blast - both out of
immediate concern over dirty fallout and the even greater fear
that it will just open the door to more nuclear testing, more
lies and more deaths - is widespread. 

"I think (the delay) clearly shows the clout of the opposition,"
Preston Truman, director of Downwinders, an organization
representing Cold War-era nuclear-testing victims, told me.
"Even more important is the other thing the feds had to give in
hopes of defusing the opposition downwind, and that is to have a
couple of town-hall meetings in Nevada and in St. George, Utah
to explain the test. . . . (This will lead to) escalating
demands for hearings from Las Vegas to Boise. 

"Instead of quieting the ticked-off natives," he said, "the
delay is only going to give the downwinders that much more time
to organize and pressure their elected representatives and show
this isn't just some noisy activists and anti-nukers, but the
region's residents across the board drawing a line in the sand
and saying NO, there are enough of us - downwinders - already
and we will not allow another generation of us to be created." 

Are you listening, Rummy? W? The electorate is mad as hell, and
they're forcing even the most conservative of their reps, such
as Utah's Sen. Orrin Hatch, to stand up and demand answers from
the defense establishment. 

The Divine Strake controversy comes at a crucial juncture, with
the Bush administration threatening not only war but nuclear war
with Iran, and in doing so inevitably inflicting the arms race
on the Third World, as developing nations come to see, in the
words of Dr. Kurt Gottfried, chairman of the Union of Concerned
Scientists, that "the only way for a country to deter nuclear
attack is to acquire its own nuclear arsenal." 

Humanity's future remains hostage to the nuclear demon. But as
the downwinders know, the place to stop it is not in Iran. It's
here in the U.S., where the demon was unleashed. 

---
 Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is
an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated
writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com
or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com. © 2006 Tribune Media
Services, Inc. 

['1240 Bryden Road Columbus, Ohio 43209 Ph/Fx 614.253.2571 Email
truth@freepress.org']                

All content © 1970-2005 
The Columbus Free Press
*****************************************************************
 30 Deseret News: Senate panel OKs Kempthorne 

[deseretnews.com] 

Thursday, May 11, 2006 

By Suzanne Struglinski 

Deseret Morning News 

WASHINGTON — Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne moved closer to becoming 
Interior secretary Wednesday when the Senate Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee approved his nomination. 

Kempthorne still awaits a full Senate vote before taking 
charge of the Interior Department. A vote is expected by the end 
of the month. 

Kempthorne testified before the Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee last week where members, largely made up of 
those from the West, reminded him of everything from water 
rights, payment in lieu of taxes, Indian issues, to again 
opening the Statue of Liberty to tourists. 

"One of the things that I pledged to the president is 
that, if confirmed, I would reach out to constituent groups, to 
seek bipartisan support, to find common ground and to build 
consensus," Kempthorne said. 

Environmental groups have criticized the Bush 
administration for its strong desire to drill for oil in the 
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and have said Kempthorne will 
not change the White House's plan. 

"All I can pledge is that, if confirmed, I will do my 
best," Kempthorne said. "This nation, its people and natural 
beauty are well worth all of our collective efforts to preserve 
and protect." 

If confirmed, Kempthorne would be in charge of the 
country's public land holdings, wildlife protection efforts and 
a host of other responsibilities important to the West — where a 
majority of government-owned land is located. 

Bush nominated the Idaho governor, who is a former U.S. 
senator for the state, shortly after former Interior Secretary 
Gale Norton resigned in March. 

"The many challenges facing the Interior Department and 
its agencies demand that the Senate act swiftly to confirm a 
successor to Secretary Gale Norton," said Committee Chairman 
Pete Domenici, R-N.M. "This department plays a central role in 
managing many issues critical to the country, including much of 
our energy production and all of our natural resources. Interior 
needs a new leader immediately." 

When Bush nominated Kempthorne in March, Utah reaction 
was varied. Republican leaders, a cattlemen's association, a 
rural county commissioner and a four-wheel drive advocacy group 
endorsed him, while environmentalists were either neutral or 
critical. 

Brent Tanner, executive vice president of the Utah 
Cattlemen's Association, based in Salt Lake City, said the 
organization feels strongly that Kempthorne is "someone who is 
familiar with those lands." 

But Merritt Frey, executive director of the Utah Rivers 
Council, said the nomination continues the Bush administration's 
"focus on short-term exploitation of rivers, rather than 
long-solutions to our problems." 

Members of Utah's congressional delegation said the Idaho 
governor understands issues facing Western communities affected 
by public lands, including the controversial Private Fuel 
Storage nuclear waste storage site proposed for Tooele County. 

The Bureau of Land Management has to approve land PFS 
would need to use to build a transfer facility to take waste to 
the proposed site. 

The department also has to maintain the new Cedar 
Mountain Wilderness Area approved by Congress late last year 
that protects the Utah Test and Training Range but also blocks 
off a portion of land PFS wanted to use to start a rail line 
that would move waste to the site. 

Hatch and Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, sent their own 
comments to the BLM last week outlining why PFS is not in the 
public interest. 

The senators focused on the transfer facility because the 
new wilderness area blocks the rail option. 

"The public has an interest in maintaining normal access 
to the Skull Valley Road, and that access would certainly be 
harmed were the BLM to approve PFS's ITF (intermodal transfer 
facility) application," the senators wrote. 

The BLM stopped taking comment on Monday on whether 
approving the PFS right away for a transfer facility or a rail 
line is in the public interest. The governor and the state's 
congressional delegation have been urging residents to write BLM 
to say it is not. 

Contributing: Joe Bauman 

E-mail: suzanne@desnews.com 

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company 	 		 		 	 		 		 		 		 		 
*****************************************************************
 31 Las Vegas SUN: Planned blast at NTS is postponed 

Today: May 11, 2006 at 8:59:3 PDT 

By Launce Rake <lrake@lasvegassun.com> Las Vegas Sun

The federal government has agreed to delay its scheduled blast
of 700 tons of explosive at the Nevada Test Site. 

Federal officials confirmed that the detonation, originally
scheduled for June 2, would be delayed by at least three weeks
to provide time to resolve a legal challenge filed by opponents
last month. 

The move also gives the federal Defense Threat Reduction Agency,
which is planning the explosion as a military test, and the
National Nuclear Security Administration, which runs the Test
Site northwest of Las Vegas, time to respond to requests for
information from Nevada air quality officials, and to schedule
the town hall-style meetings in Nevada and Utah requested by
congressmen. 

Reno attorney Robert Hager said Friday that the government had
agreed to the delay. Hager represents the group challenging the
blast - including the Winnemucca Indian Colony, "downwinders"
affected by above-ground nuclear bomb tests in the 1950s and
1960s and others. The group is asking the federal courts to stop
the bomb because of environmental concerns. 

Darwin Morgan, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security
Administration, which prepared a revised environmental
assessment requested by the state, said the test blast is
delayed, not canceled. He said it will not occur before June 23. 

Hager said the postponement shows "the inadequacy of the safety
of this project ¦ They still don't get it." 

Although the blast would be with conventional, non-nuclear
explosives, peace activists and nuclear nonproliferation
advocates are concerned that it could lead to the development or
use of small nuclear weapons for "bunker busting." The test
could be used to develop conventional or nuclear weapons to
knock out buried structures, according to the Defense
Department. 

Sharon Hejazi, assistant chief counsel to the National Nuclear
Security Administration, said Monday that the government
believed that there would be no significant environmental
impacts from the test and that the delay was needed only to
respond to the legal challenge. Launce Rake can be reached at
259-4127 or at lrake@lasvegassun.com. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 32 Guardian Unlimited: Putin lashes out at 'wolf-like' America

Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow and Ewen MacAskill in Washington

Thursday May 11, 2006

The Guardian             

[Journalists are reflected on a television screen showing the 
Russian president, Vladimir Putin, delivering his annual address 
to the nation] Journalists are reflected on a television screen 
showing the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, delivering his 
annual address to the nation in the Kremlin, Moscow. Photograph: 
Sergei Chirikov/EPA
   

 Relations between the US and Russia sank to the lowest point in
a decade yesterday when Vladimir Putin harshly rebuked
Washington for its criticism last week and compared the US to a
hungry wolf that "eats and listens to no one".

Mr Putin, stung by an attack from Dick Cheney, the US
vice-president, used his annual state of the nation address to
denounce US expansionism and military spending. He also
questioned Washington's record on democratic rights. Although he
refrained from mentioning the US by name, it was clear that the
"wolf" in question referred to Washington.

The deterioration in relations is risky for the US at a time when 
it is trying to persuade Russia to support a United Nations 
resolution against Iran over Tehran's nuclear programme.

The acrimony will also encourage senior US Republicans such as
John McCain to renew calls for Mr Bush to boycott this year's
meeting of the Group of Eight, the world's wealthiest countries,
which is scheduled to be held in Russia for the first time.

The war of words is a long way from the optimism with which
George Bush said, after his first face-to-face meeting with Mr
Putin in 2001, that he had looked into the Russian president's
soul and liked what he saw.

Mr Cheney, reflecting Washington's growing disenchantment, told
a conference in Vilnius, Lithuania, last week that Russia was
sending "mixed signals" over democracy, as well as using its
energy resources to "intimidate and blackmail" neighbours.

Mr Putin, in his speech, noted that the American military budget
was 25 times the size of Russia's and said the US had turned its
home into a castle.

"Good for them," the Russian president said, looking up from his
notes, directly at his audience, "but this means we must make
our own home strong and reliable. Because we see what is
happening in the world. We see it."

He added, in what appeared to be a reference to the US-led
invasion of Iraq and its approach to Iran: "As they say,
'comrade wolf knows whom to eat. He eats without listening and
he is clearly not going to listen to anyone'." He accused the US
of hypocrisy over its criticism of Russia's patchy human rights
record.

"Where is all this pathos about protecting human rights and
democracy when it comes to the need to pursue their own
interests?"

In another veiled reference to Washington's approach to Iraq and
Iran, he said: "Methods of force rarely give the desired result
and often their consequences are even more terrible than the
original threat." He added that Russia was "unambiguously"
against the spread of nuclear weapons.

In another apparent jibe aimed at the US, he said countries
should not use Russia's negotiations over membership of the
World Trade Organisation to make unrelated demands.

"The negotiations for letting Russia into the WTO should not
become a bargaining chip for questions that have nothing in
common with the activities of this organisation," Mr Putin said.

US senators visiting Moscow last month said Congress would
consider its application in the light of Russia's behaviour on
human rights and Iran.

Mr Putin said Russia had to resist foreign pressure by
bolstering its army, which is currently a ragtag group of a
million conscripts galvanised by special forces and nuclear
weapons. "We must always be ready to counter any attempts to
pressure Russia in order to strengthen positions at our
expense," he said. "The stronger our military is, the less
temptation there will be to exert such pressure on us."

Much of his hour-long address was dedicated to Russia's
demographic plight, which some forecasts have suggested could
see the population fall from 142 million to 100 million by 2050.
"The number of our citizens shrinks by an average of 700,000
people a year," he said, promising to double state payouts for a
first child to £30 a month, with £60 for a second one. He said a
healthy population, free from the vices of smoking and drinking,
was vital for a healthy army to protect the state.

Boris Makarenko, deputy head of the Centre for Political
Technologies, said the speech marked the beginning of a new
approach in which Russia, bolstered by high oil and gas prices,
had stopped discussing democracy and other issues with the west
and had said instead: "We are strong, we have wealth and we'll
use it in a way we consider necessary."

Mr Makarenko said the bitter exchange between Washington and
Moscow during the past week was designed to get their mutual
criticisms out of the way prior to Russia chairing the G8 summit
in St Petersburg in July.
 
Useful links
Itar-Tass news agency
Moscow Times
Russia Today
St Petersburg Times
Caucasian Knot

[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 33 Rediff: Friend of India wants to scuttle n-deal

Aziz Haniffa in Washington, DC |        

May 11, 2006 11:36 IST

 While United States Congressman Tom Lantos, the senior-most
Democrat on the powerful House International Relations
Committee, is supportive of the India-US civilian nuclear
agreement and has pledged to lead the charge for approval of the
legislation that could ultimately lead to the implementation of
the deal, Congressman Howard Berman -- the next-most senior
Democrat on the Committee and a member of the Congressional
Caucus on India and Indian Americans -- does not simply oppose
the accord but is leading efforts to scuttle it. 

He has started circulating a 'Dear Colleague' letter, serving
notice that he will introduce legislation on this issue that
could address many concerns that lawmakers have with the
India-US nuclear deal and calls on them to co-sponsor his bill
when he introduces it. 

In his letter, a copy of which was obtained by rediff India
Abroad, Berman declared, 'I am unabashedly pro-India. I am a
member of the India Caucus, consider myself a good friend of the
Indian-American community, and strongly support efforts to
deepen our strategic partnership with the world's largest
democracy.' 

But he wrote, 'I am also realistic. I accept the fact that India
has nuclear weapons and will never sign the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty.' 

Berman mentioned his concerns about 'the specific deal we are
being asked to support', and attaches recent Washington Post
articles and editorials that question President Bush's rationale
for entering into such an agreement with India a non-signatory
of the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty and warns it will only
help India increase its nuclear arsenal and trigger an arms race
in South Asia. 

The lawmaker alleged that the Bush administration conceded on
almost every major point in negotiating this agreement with
India. Even worse, he said, the administration essentially
ignored the concerns of its nonproliferation experts and kept
Congress in the dark until after the agreement was concluded. 

Berman challenged the Bush administration's contention that the
agreement, as currently conceived is 'a net plus for
nonproliferation' and argues that 'on the contrary, one can make
a strong argument that changing long-established and almost
universally accepted rules of accommodate one country' without a
compelling nonproliferation 'gain on the other side of the
ledger' could undermine US efforts to prevent the spread of
sensitive nuclear technology. 

He noted that 'this view is shared by a vast majority of
nonproliferation experts, both liberal and conservative,
including important officials from the Reagan, George H W Bush
and Clinton administrations.' 

Berman reiterated that the agreement does not pin down India to
halt its production of fissile material, and warns that the deal
is permitted to go through, it would enable India to
significantly expand its production of plutonium, because 'by
allowing India to import uranium to fuel its civilian nuclear
plants' India could devote all of its scarce domestic uranium
supply to weapons production. 

The Congressman said his bill, for starters, 'will be
country-neutral,' in other words, it would apply not only to
India, but to other countries that have never signed the NPT. 

He stated that 'this approach is more defensible than an
India-specific carve-out, which would likely encourage Russia
and China to cut special deals with their friends, and this lead
to the unraveling of nonproliferation norms.' 

'Second,' he noted, 'my legislation will establish a set of
objective conditions that a non-NPT country must meet to become
eligible for civilian nuclear cooperation with the US.
Admittedly, some of these conditions will be difficult to meet.' 

Berman said although it is likely the administration and New
Delhi would undoubtedly claim they are 'deal-breakers,' he
predicted that given India's 'desperate need for fuel to power
its civilian nuclear reactors, I suspect there is some
flexibility in their negotiating position, a proposition that
was never put to the test by the administration.' 

Finally, he noted his bill would 'preserve the prerogative of
Congress to examine the details of a nuclear cooperation
agreement and approve it by majority vote before it goes into
effect.' 

Berman cautioning his colleagues, said, 'By contrast, under the
administration's legislative proposal, Congress could only block
even a deeply flawed nuclear cooperation agreement with India by
passing a resolution of disapproval by a veto-proof two thirds
majority.' 

He asserted that the legislation he intends to introduce is not
an attempt to 'kill' the deal, but 'rather, it is a good-faith
effort to strike an appropriate balance between two compelling
US national interests: enhancing our relationship with this
growing power, and preserving meaningful,
internationally-accepted rules on nuclear nonproliferation.' 
7333: The Latest News on Your Mobile!

 Copyright © 2006 Rediff.com India Limited. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 34 ABC Asia Pacific: Australia downplays India uranium talks
 
    Mr Howard (left) and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
met in March to discuss uranium exports. [AFP]     Australian
Prime Minister John Howard has played down speculation that his
government is preparing to sell uranium to India.

Two minor opposition parties have seized on reports of a meeting
between Australian and Indian officials in New Delhi to discuss
nuclear issues.

However, Mr Howard says the talks do not indicate a change in
Australia's policy.

"Our policy is that we don't sell to anybody who's not a party
to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," he said.

"We currently don't have any intention of changing that."
 
ABC Asia Pacific TV / Radio Australia   




*****************************************************************
 35 AFP: Australia denies plan to lift uranium ban on India

 Thu May 11, 1:27 AM ET 		 	 

SYDNEY (AFP) - Australia has denied it had plans to lift a ban
on selling uranium to India even if nuclear-armed New Delhi
refused to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). 

 Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, responding to a newspaper
report that a deal could be on the cards, said Australia's
policy of only supplying the nuclear fuel to countries which
have signed the NPT had not changed. 

The Australian newspaper had reported that a meeting of senior
officials in New Delhi last week explored how Australia could
change its ban if there was "suitable reciprocal movement" from
India. 

"Our position hasn't changed," Downer told reporters. "I've
checked that out with the officials, because the newspaper
report surprised me, and the officials have assured me that
that's not correct." 

A spokesman for Downer confirmed that the meetings had taken
place on May 2-3, telling AFP it was "a fact-finding exercise to
learn more about the US-India civil nuclear cooperation
agreement". 

US President George W. Bush" /> signed a deal with Indian Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh in March on sharing civilian nuclear
technology, despite the fact that India has nuclear weapons and
has not signed the NPT. 

Singh followed up by asking Australia, which has the world's
largest known deposits of uranium, to sell it the nuclear fuel. 

Australia is a close ally of Washington and has supported the
US-India deal, but Downer told visiting US Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice" /> in March that Australia had "legal issues"
over selling uranium to India. 

Downer said Thursday that the officials who held the meetings in
New Delhi would now also "talk to the Americans about the
agreement so that we have a better understanding of it all". 

Australia agreed in April to sell uranium to China after saying
it had secured safeguards to ensure that the fuel would not be
used in weapons. 

Unlike India, China has signed the NPT. Australia already
supplies 11 other nations with uranium. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at River Bend Nuclear Plant
 
News Release - Region IV - 2006-01
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV
  No. IV-06-011           May 11, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Victor Dricks
Phone: 817-860-8128
     E-mail:   
  



Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Entergy
Operations officials on May 17, to discuss the NRCs annual
assessment of safety performance at the River Bend Station
nuclear plant during 2005. 

The 6:00 p.m. meeting at the River Bend Station Training Center
Auditorium, 5485 U.S. Hwy. 61N, St. Francisville, La., is open
to public observation. Before the session ends, NRC staff will
be available to answer questions on the plants safety
performance, as well as the agencys role in ensuring safe plant
operation. 

Each year, the NRC assesses the performance of all of the
nations commercial nuclear power plants, said Region IV
Administrator Bruce S. Mallett. The meeting gives us an
opportunity to discuss our findings with the company, local
officials and members of the public. We look forward to meeting
with members of the community and answering any questions they
may have about our oversight. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during 2005 and will
serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available
on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/rbs_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] . 

Overall, River Bend operated safely during the period. The NRC
uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators
to assess nuclear power plant performance. The colors start with
green and then increase to white, yellow or red, commensurate
with the safety significance of the issues involved. Because all
of the inspection findings and performance indicators for the
plant during the last quarter of 2005 were determined to be
green, River Bend will receive a baseline (or routine) level of
inspections during the upcoming assessment period. 

Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the
Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas. Among the areas of plant
operations to be inspected during the next year by NRC
specialists are emergency preparedness and radiological safety. 

Current performance information for River Bend is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/RBS1/rbs1_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Thursday, May 11, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 37 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance at Waterford Nuclear Plant
 
News Release - Region IV - 2006-01
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV
  No. IV-06-012           May 11, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Victor Dricks
Phone: 817-860-8128
     E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov  
  



Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Entergy
Operations officials on May 18, to discuss the NRCs annual
assessment of safety performance at the Waterford 3 nuclear
plant during 2005. 

The 6:30 p.m. meeting at the James M. Cain Energy Education
Center, 4224 Hwy. 3127, Killona, La., is open to public
observation. Before the session ends, NRC staff will be
available to answer questions on the plants safety performance,
as well as the agencys role in ensuring safe plant operation. 

Each year, the NRC assesses the performance of all of the
nations commercial nuclear power plants, said Region IV
Administrator Bruce S. Mallett. The meeting gives us an
opportunity to discuss our findings with the company, local
officials and members of the public. We look forward to meeting
with members of the community and answering any questions they
may have about our oversight. 

A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during 2005 and will
serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available
on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wat_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] . 

Overall, Waterford 3 operated safely during the period. The NRC
uses color-coded inspection findings and performance indicators
to assess nuclear power plant performance. The colors start with
green and then increase to white, yellow or red, commensurate
with the safety significance of the issues involved. Because all
of the inspection findings and performance indicators for the
plant during the last quarter of 2005 were determined to be
green, Waterford 3 will receive a baseline (or routine) level of
inspections during the upcoming assessment period. 

Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors
assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists from the
Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas. Among the areas of plant
operations to be inspected during the next year by NRC
specialists are emergency preparedness and radiological safety. 

Current performance information for Waterford 3 is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WAT3/wat3_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Thursday, May 11, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 38 IBNLive: Nuke facilities separation plan tabled
 
Press Trust Of India                       

Posted Thursday , May 11, 2006 at 14:28  

New Delhi: The Separation Plan of India's nuclear facilities that 
was presented to the US under the civil nuclear agreement on 
March two last was tabled in Parliament on Thursday. 

The Plan was tabled in Lok Sabha by Minister of State for 
Personnel Suresh Pachauri and in Rajya Sabha by Minister of State 
in PMO Prithviraj Chavan. 

Under the Plan, India agreed to open 14 out of 22 of its nuclear 
establishments to international safeguards. 

After signing the historic agreement during US President George W 
Bush's visit here, government had said that the Prime Minister 
will share details of the Separation Plan with Parliament. 

India has emphasised that despite the agreement, it had not given 
up its strategic nuclear programme and retained the right to 
determine the future reactors to be put in the civilian side. 

"The Separation Plan has been drawn up in such a manner that it
will not adversely affect our strategic programme," the Prime
Minister had told Parliament in March while making a statement
on the deal. 

He had said there was "no question of India accepting a cap on
our deterrent potential" and "based on assessment of threat
scenario, government have ensured that there would be adequate
availability of fissile material and other inputs to meet both
current and future requirements of our strategic programme." 

Copyright © IBNLive.com. All rights reserved.

2006, Global Broadcast News. All Rights Reserved                 
*****************************************************************
 39 San Luis Obispo Tribune: 2005 Diablo plane incident unlikely, NRC official says

05/11/2006 | 

It was alleged that a private plane dove toward the nuclear
power plant

 By David Sneed dsneed@thetribunenews.com

  +  Federal report that found an alleged dive-bombing incident
at Diablo Canyon never happened (PDF)

A Nuclear Regulatory Commission investigator has determined that
a report of a private airplane diving toward Diablo Canyon
nuclear power plant a year ago is probably untrue. 

San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace activist Jane Swanson made the
allegation at an NRC public hearing in San Luis Obispo after she
received an anonymous call from a man who claimed to be riding
in a private plane May 14 or 15 of last year when the pilot made
a steep dive on the power plant, passing 500 feet over the
containment domes. 

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. officials discounted the allegation
because no one at the plant observed the incident. 

"It would have been impossible for that incident to have
occurred as described without us knowing about it," said Jeff
Lewis, plant spokesman. 

The NRC referred the incident to PG for further investigation
and concurred with the utility’s finding that it is unlikely a
dramatic incident such as a plane swooping down on the plant
would have gone unnoticed. 

"Based upon the established reporting threshold, it was
determined there was no reason to conclude that an event, such
as the one alleged, would not have been identified and responded
to properly," NRC senior allegation coordinator Harry Freeman
wrote in a letter to Swanson. 

Swanson said she accepts the NRC’s conclusions. 

"I will always be puzzled why anyone would make up such a
story," she said. "It doesn’t appear to be for attention, as the
source remains unknown." 

Swanson also asked the NRC to explain why federal regulators
have not established a no-fly zone over nuclear plants as it has
done over other locations, such as Disneyland. 

Freeman responded that no-fly zones are the responsibility of
the Federal Aviation Administration. Instead, the FAA has issued
a "Notice to Airmen" recommending that pilots avoid flying over
or loitering near nuclear plants. The agency will warn pilots
who disregard the notice, if they can be identified. 

Reach David Sneed at 781-7930. 
*****************************************************************
 40 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Salem and Hope Creek Nuclear Power
                             Plants
News Release - Region I - 2006-03
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I
  No. I-06-032   		        May 10, 2006   
  CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330
 		Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331   		   E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  
  

representatives of PSEG Nuclear LLC on Wednesday, May 17, to
discuss the agencys annual assessment of safety performance at
the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants. The period of
performance to be discussed is Jan. 1 to Dec. 31, 2005. 

PSEG Nuclear owns the plants, which are located in Hancocks
Bridge (Salem County), N.J. 

The meeting, which will be open to the public for observation,
is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. at the Bridgeport Holiday Inn,
One Pureland Drive in Swedesboro, N.J. The hotel is located off
Exit 10 of Interstate 295. The NRC staff will present the
results of the assessment and be available to respond to
questions or comments from the public before the close of the
meeting. 

As we do every year, we have carefully reviewed the safety
performance of the Salem and Hope Creek nuclear power plants
during the previous calendar year, NRC Region I Deputy
Administrator Marc Dapas said. The meeting on May 17th will
afford the public a chance to learn more about the results of
our assessment and to pose any questions they might have
regarding plant performance or our oversight activities. 

Overall, Hope Creek and Salem Units 1 and 2 operated safely
during the period. The NRC uses color-coded inspection findings
and performance indicators to assess nuclear power plant
performance. The colors start with green and then increase to
white, yellow or red, commensurate with the safety significance
of the issues involved. 

All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for
the Salem units during 2005 were determined to be green. While
Hope Creek inspection findings and performance indicators were
green during the last quarter of last year, the plant did have a
white (low to moderate safety significance) finding open during
the first three quarters. Identified in the fourth quarter of
2004, the finding involved inadequate evaluation and corrective
action for a degraded level control valve for a moisture
separator drain tank that resulted in the separation of a drain
line. The NRC staff completed a supplemental inspection in
response to the finding in June 2005 and concluded that a
satisfactory root cause analysis of the issue had been performed
and appropriate corrective actions implemented. As a result, the
finding was closed out as of the end of the third quarter of
last year. 

In the agencys 2005 mid-year assessment for the Salem units and
Hope Creek, the NRC continued a substantive cross-cutting issue
in the area of problem identification and resolution (PI&R). A
cross-cutting issue is one that affects several different areas
of performance. Based on progress the agency has seen in this
area since then, as well as ongoing corrective actions, the NRC
concluded in the end-of-year assessment letter for the plants
that the issue could be closed out. 

The NRC staff has determined that a cross-cutting issue in the
area of safety conscious work environment will remain open for
the plants, with the NRC continuing to monitor the companys
progress. The issue, which involves maintaining an environment
in which workers feel free to raise safety concerns, was noted
in the agencys mid-cycle assessment letter for the plants,
issued last Aug. 30. Last September, the NRC completed a team
inspection at the plant that focused on the safety conscious
work environment. The inspectors determined that progress had
been made, but they also noted some issues requiring additional
action and attention. Therefore, the cross-cutting issue
remained open. The company recently completed an assessment of
the safety conscious work environment at the site, and the NRC
will perform an inspection of this area in June. 

Under a memo issued by the NRCs Executive Director for
Operations, additional inspection resources remain available for
the site. The agency will also conduct baseline, or routine
inspections, at the plants. Routine inspections are performed by
four NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the site and by
inspection specialists from the Region I Office in King of
Prussia, Pa. Among the areas of plant operations to be inspected
during the next year by NRC specialists are radiological safety,
fire protection and dry cask storage of spent nuclear fuel. 

Letters sent from the NRC Region I Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the facilities during the period
and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. The
letter regarding the Salem units is available on the NRC web
site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/salm_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] . The letter regarding the Hope Creek plant is
available at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/hope_2005q4.pdf
[PDF Icon] . 

The meeting notice, with the meeting agenda attached, is
available in the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) under accession number ML061090274. ADAMS is
accessible via the agencys web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in using ADAMS is
available by contacting the NRCs Public Document Room at
1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at PDR@NRC.GOV. 

Current performance information for Salem Unit 1 is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SALM1/salm1_chart.html. 

Current performance information for Salem Unit 2 is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SALM2/salm2_chart.html. 

Current performance information for Hope Creek is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/HOPE/hope_chart.html.   



  


 	Last revised Wednesday, May 10, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 41 NRC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology Division, 
 
                         FR Doc E6-7163 
[Federal Register: May 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 91)] [Notices] 
[Page 27521-27523] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11my06-116]                         
 
Corvallis and Newport Facilities, OR: Issuance of Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License 
Amendment AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact for license amendment.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Blair Spitzberg, Ph.D., 
Chief, Fuel Cycle and Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear 
Materials Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, TX 76011. Telephone: 
(817) 860-8100; e-mail: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an amendment to 
Material License No. 36-12343-02 issued to the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division (EPA or 
the licensee). This license pertains to the following three EPA 
facilities located in Oregon: (1) Corvallis Environmental 
Research Laboratory; (2) Willamette Research Station (also in 
Corvallis); and (3) the Pacific Coastal Ecology Branch facility 
in Newport.
 
Granting the amendment request would authorize the release of 
these facilities for unrestricted use, and would terminate the 
license as requested. In accordance with conditions in its 
license, the EPA was authorized to use radioactive material at 
its three facilities to conduct tracer studies involving marine 
organisms and plants (excluding animal studies); perform sample 
analysis; conduct tests for soil moisture; and for instrument 
calibration.
 
On November 30, 2004 (as supplemented by letter dated December 
27, 2005), EPA requested that NRC release the three facilities 
for unrestricted use and to terminate the license. The licensee 
conducted radiological surveys of the subject facilities and 
concluded that the license termination criteria specified in 
subpart E to 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release have been 
met. The amendment will be issued if NRC determines that the 
request meets the standards specified in 10 CFR part 20 and 
related NRC guidance documents.
 
II. Environmental Assessment (EA) Identification of Proposed 
Action: The proposed action is to enable the licensee to use its 
subject facilities in any manner without NRC restriction. The NRC 
proposes to accomplish this by terminating NRC License No. 
36-12343-02 because the licensee has permanently ceased all 
licensed activities and transferred or disposed of all licensed 
radioactive materials.
 
The Need for the Proposed Action: The licensee has permanently 
ceased all licensed activities at its subject facilities. The EPA 
desires to release these facilities for unrestricted use. The 
facilities will continue to be used for research with 
non-licensed materials. When the licensing action is complete, 
the licensee will be in compliance with the requirements of 10 
CFR 30.36, ``Expiration and Termination of Licenses and 
Decommissioning of Sites and Separate Buildings or Outdoor 
Areas.'' Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action: NRC 
Materials License No. 36-12343-02 authorizes the EPA to possess 
small quantities of radioactive material, in both sealed and 
unsealed form. Under its license, the EPA's use of licensed 
material included the performance of tracer studies involving 
marine organisms and plants (excluding animal studies), use in 
gas chromatographs for sample analysis, use in Troxler Model 4300 
Series gauges to measure soil moisture, and use in a liquid 
scintillation counter for instrument calibration. By letter dated 
November 30, 2004, EPA requested that NRC release the subject 
facilities for unrestricted use and terminate the license.
 
A final status survey report (FSSR) was completed by the 
licensee, and a copy of the report was attached to the November 
30, 2004, letter. During the November 2005 NRC inspection, EPA 
identified additional previous locations of use that had not been 
documented in
 
[[Page 27522]] the November 2004 FSSR submittal. An addendum to 
the FSSR was attached to a letter from EPA dated December 27, 
2005. As discussed below, the EPA concluded that all three 
facilities were sufficiently free of radioactive material to 
permit unrestricted release of the facilities.
 
As part of its amendment request, the licensee conducted a 
historical review of its three facilities and found that the 
radionuclides of concern were carbon-14, calcium-45, chromium-51, 
hydrogen-3, phosphorus-32, sulfur-35, nickel-63, americium-241, 
and barium-133. Radioactive materials were used at the two 
Corvallis facilities from 1977 to 2004. Radioactive materials 
were used at the Newport facility from 1987-1995 under NRC 
License No.
 
36-23261-01. (This license was terminated in July 1995 after NRC 
License No.
 
36- 12343-02 was amended to bring the Newport facility within its 
scope). To demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria 
for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402, the 
licensee developed derived concentration guideline levels 
(DCGLs). The NRC compared the licensee's proposed DCGLs to the 
screening criteria provided in NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS 
Decommissioning Guidance,'' Volume 2. The NRC concluded that the 
proposed DCGLs were acceptable for use as release criteria.
 
The EPA's historical assessment identified two incidents that may 
have involved leaking sealed sources at the Corvallis 
Environmental Research Laboratory. One event occurred in March 
1979 involving a sealed source containing a tritium-scandium 
foil. At the time of the event, the laboratory was cleaned and 
decontaminated.
 
Significant remodeling had taken place since the laboratory had 
been cleaned and decontaminated, so additional NRC confirmatory 
surveys were not performed in this area. A second event occurred 
in June 1982 involving either a leaking nickel-63 sealed source 
detector or radiotracers injected into a gas chromatograph. The 
licensee believed that the detector did not leak and that the 
contamination was tritium, not nickel-63. The laboratory was 
decontaminated and the event reported to the NRC at the time.
 
The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the FSSR to 
identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the 
environment. No additional hazards or impacts were identified. 
The licensee's radiation safety program allowed unrestricted 
release of previous locations of use once the areas were shown to 
be free from residual contamination. Final status surveys of the 
former locations of use were conducted when the laboratories were 
removed from service. Additional limited final status surveys 
were performed in 12 previous locations of use within the three 
subject facilities during November 2004, because the historical 
survey records were not adequate or complete to show that the 
locations were free from residual contamination. Final status 
surveys on remaining locations of use that had not been 
previously released were also performed during June 2004, 
November 2004 and December 2005. These final status surveys were 
conducted in buildings and laboratories identified during the 
historical assessment as previous locations of use with licensed 
radioactive materials.
 
The NRC conducted a confirmatory survey of 26 separate locations 
in the subject facilities during the NRC's November 2005 
inspection. The NRC focused these confirmatory surveys in 
previous locations of use that were identified in the licensee's 
historical assessment as locations that potentially used licensed 
material in unsealed form. The confirmatory survey included the 
site at the Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory where a 
leak from a sealed source may have occurred in June 1982. These 
confirmatory surveys also included the licensee- identified 
previous locations of use that were not in the original FSSR 
submittal dated November 2004. The surveys included ambient gamma 
exposure rate measurements, as well as, fixed and removable 
surface contamination measurements. The removable surface 
contamination measurements included measurements for hydrogen-3 
and carbon-14.
 
None of the confirmatory sample results exceeded the proposed 
DCGLs identified in the FSSR.
 
In its FSSR, the licensee stated that radioactive waste material 
from previously licensed operations was transferred to an 
authorized waste contractor. All other previously licensed 
radioactive materials were transferred to authorized recipients. 
Solid waste disposal did not include on-site burial or 
incineration. Discharges to sewers were reviewed by inspectors 
during routine inspections to ensure compliance with the release 
limits specified in 10 CFR part 20.
 
Accordingly, the NRC finds that surface and groundwater sources 
were not impacted by previous EPA operations involving licensed 
material at the subject facilities.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives of the Proposed Action: 
The licensee seeks NRC approval of the license termination 
request. The alternatives to the proposed action are: (1) The 
no-action alternative, or (2) to deny the license termination 
request and require the licensee to take some alternate action.
 
1. No-Action Alternative: One alternative available to the NRC is 
to take no action by denying the license termination request.
 
The no- action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts 
with the NRC's regulation (10 CFR 30.36(d)) requiring licensees 
to decommission their facilities when licensed activities 
permanently cease.
 
2. Environmental Impacts of Alternative 2: A second alternative 
is to deny the licensee's request in favor of alternate release 
criteria as allowed by Sec.  20.1403 (criteria for restricted 
conditions) or Sec.  20.1404 (alternate criteria). However, the 
NRC's analysis of the final status survey data confirmed that the 
proposed DCGLs meet the license termination requirements of Sec.  
20.1402. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that the second 
alternative is not reasonable, and this alternative action is 
eliminated from further consideration.
 
Conclusion: Based on its review, the NRC staff concludes that the 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action do not 
warrant denial of the license termination request. The staff 
believes that the proposed action will result in no significant 
environmental impacts. The staff has determined that the proposed 
action, approval of the license termination, is the appropriate 
alternative for selection.
 
Agencies and Persons Contacted: The NRC staff did not consult 
with the local U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or the State Historic 
Preservation Officer because licensed activities occurred only 
within the three EPA facilities in Corvallis and Newport, Oregon. 
There was no evidence of use or release of radioactive material 
outside of these facilities. Accordingly, there was no impact to 
historic properties or the cultural resources, endangered 
species, or critical habitats outside these facilities. The State 
of Oregon notified the NRC by telephone on March 29, 2006 that it 
had no comments on the EA.
 
This conversation was documented in a Memorandum to the Docket 
File dated March 29, 2006. EPA notified the NRC by letter dated 
March 29, 2006 that it had four clarification comments on the EA. 
These comments have been incorporated.
 
 
[[Page 27523]] III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC 
staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed license 
amendment to release the subject facilities for unrestricted use 
and terminate the license. On the basis of the EA, the NRC has 
concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts 
from the proposed action, and the license amendment does not 
warrant the preparation of an environmental impact statement. 
Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of No 
Significant Impact is appropriate.
 
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, 
including the application for amendment and supporting 
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at .
 
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document 
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession 
numbers for the documents related to this Notice are: 1. NRC, 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking 
on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Licensed 
Nuclear Facilities,'' NUREG-1496, July 1997 (ML042310492, 
ML042320379, and ML042330385).
 
2. Gile, Jay D., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western 
Ecology Division, Cessation of Licensed Activities and Request 
for License Termination, November 30, 2004 (ML043620316, 
ML043620322, ML043620325, ML043620321).
 
3. Gile, Jay D., Environmental Protection Agency's Western 
Ecology Division, NRC Form 314 Certificate of Disposition of 
Materials, December 1, 2004 (ML043620317).
 
4. McBride, Kathy, Environmental Protection Agency's Western 
Ecology Division, NRC Form 314 (Certificate of Disposition of 
Materials) Retraction Memo, December 14, 2005 (ML060110330).
 
5. Burr, Dave, Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology 
Division, Decommissioning Audit Response, Addendum to the Final 
Status Survey Report, Certificate of Disposition of Materials and 
Request for License Termination, December 27, 2005 (ML060110298, 
ML060110337, ML060110472, ML060110496).
 
6. NRC Inspection Report 030-05976/05-001, January 10, 2006 
(ML060120525).
 
7. Burr, Dave, Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology 
Division, EPA Comments on the draft Environmental Assessment, 
March 29, 2006 (ML060890410).
 
8. Schlapper, Beth A., Memorandum to Docket File 030-05976, State 
of Oregon Telephone Response Of No Comment For Comments On The 
Draft Environmental Assessment, March 29, 2006 (ML060880514).
 
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to .
 
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public 
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 19th day of April, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
D. Blair Spitzberg, Chief, Fuel Cycle & Decommissioning Branch, 
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV.
 
[FR Doc. E6-7163 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 42 [NukeNet] DU Special In Review and World Wide Reaction
 
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 20:14:39 -0700


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w = 
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 = 
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags">
Friday, May 12 2006 - 11 PM - 12 AM - DU Special In Review and World Wide 
Reaction



SPECIAL DEPLETED URANIUM SHOW FOLLOW UP : LEUREN MORET and BOB NICHOLS join 
Rob McConnell to review the world wide reaction to The 'X' Zone Radio 
Show's three hour DU Update Special that was broadcast live Wednesday, May 
10th from 11 pm - 2 am Eastern. An hour you won't want to miss!



The archives for this show are available at 
<http://www.xzone-radio.com/may2006.htm>www.xzone-radio.com/may2006.htm .



If you haven’t already signed out DU Petition – go to 
<http://www.xzone-radio.com/petition.htm>www.xzone-radio.com/petition.htm !



PLUS!!!!



LEUREN MORET will be Rob McConnell’s guest on Monday May 29th from 9 – 10 
pm Pacific. If you have Diabetes, or know someone who does, you will not 
want to miss this hour!



Please send this e-mail to people that you know!



It’s OUR World! Be part of the solution! Your voice counts!



Rob McConnell,

Executive Producer,

The 'X' Zone Radio Show,

A Division of REL-MAR McConnell Media Company,

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Satellite Teleport - White Springs, Florida.

Contact Information:

Office Tel: (905) 575-5916

Studio Tel: 1-877-528-8255

E-mail: xzone@xzone-radio.com

Website: www.xzone-radio.com

Video-Casting on Yahoo IM - xzonestudio

MSN Messenger: talkstarradio@hotmail.com

AOL IM: xzonestudio

Yahoo IM: xzonestudio

ICQ: 6272860



Monday – Friday, Broadcast LIVE 10 PM – 2 AM Eastern, Network Re-feed 2 AM 
– 6 AM Eastern.



The ‘X’ Zone Radio Show is heard throughout North America, Central America. 
The Caribbean, South America and the Pacific Rim on Galaxy 4R (C-Band 
Satellite) and Intelsat Americas 7 (KU Band Satellite) and the rest of the 
world on www.xzone-radio.com streaming audio.



"Working together as one, we can solve the mysteries of life." Rob 
McConnell, 2005










_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 43 Radio New Zealand: War veteran drops bid for compensation
 
Radio New Zealand - Te Reo Irirangi o Aotearoa
 
11 May 2006                                                                      

A Wanganui war veteran has abandoned his legal battle with the
New Zealand government over exposure to radiation during nuclear
testing in the 1950s. 

Trevor Humphrey says he was the last of a group of veterans who
witnessed tests at Christmas Island, to persist with legal
action against the government. The men had sought compensation
for ill-health. 

Mr Humphrey says he considers the outcome a victory, as he has
sufficiently embarrassed the government. However, he says the
government has not apologised to him or other war veterans. 

A Crown Law spokesperson says the Defence Force is not seeking
costs from Mr Humphrey. 			 						

Copyright © 2006 Radio New Zealand                                                                               
 
*****************************************************************
 44 The Australian: PM denies deal on uranium 

 NEWS.com.au

This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP 

 May 11, 2006 

The Government has doused concerns that Australia is planning to
sell uranium to India while it refuses to sign the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty.

 Prime Minister John Howard said Australia had no immediate
intention to change its policy which prevents it selling uranium
to countries who are not signatories to the nuclear
non-proliferation treaty.

 "We are not currently disposed to change our policy in relation
to selling uranium to countries that aren't parties to the
nuclear non-proliferation treaty," he told Reuters.

 Australian officials were in Delhi last week to be briefed on a
deal which will see the United States provide India with uranium
and nuclear technology.

 They reportedly told their Indian counterparts that Australia
would consider selling uranium to Delhi even if it refuses to
sign the NPT.

 The trip by officials was arranged when Mr Howard visited India
in March.

 "We want more information about the deal between America and
India," Mr Howard said.

 "And of course we remain, as one of the major exporters of
uranium, we remain interested in sales of uranium subject to
proper safeguards."

 Foreign Minister Alexander Downer stressed that Australia was
in no way planning to relax its strict policy.

 "Our position hasn't changed," Mr Downer told reporters.

 And Mr Downer said it appeared India had no intention of
signing the NPT any time soon.

 "The Indians have made it clear that they have no intention in
the foreseeable future of signing the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty," he said.

 "Now our policy has always been that we'd be prepared to
negotiate nuclear safeguard agreements with countries that have
signed up to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

 "That is our position and we've not indicated to the Indians
any planned change to that position."

 Labor called on the Government to use its international clout
to force a review of the NPT, while Greenpeace said it should
stick with its current strict policy.

 Greenpeace chief executive Steve Shallhorn said it would be
reprehensible for Australia to sell uranium to a country that
was a nuclear proliferator.

 "I think that the nuclear proliferation treaty is there for a
reason and that is to prevent countries using nuclear power
technology to develop a nuclear weapons program, and clearly
India has already done that," Mr Shallhorn said.

 The Australian Democrats warned that to make an exception for
India could be the beginning of the end for the NPT.

 "Australia should not risk this important treaty and our
international reputation for a few extra uranium dollars and the
approval of the US," Democrats leader Lyn Allison said. 

 The Australian 
*****************************************************************
 45 Guardian Unlimited: Panel Limits Nuclear Reprocessing Funds
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday May 11, 2006 11:16 PM

By H. JOSEF HEBERT 

Associated Press Writer 

WASHINGTON (AP) - A proposal for the United States to resume
reprocessing nuclear fuel ran into trouble Thursday in Congress,
undermining President Bush's plans to revamp how the nuclear
industry deals with its waste. 

The plan is part of an international effort to promote nuclear
energy, especially in developing countries, as a source of
electricity and to control the waste generated. 

A House Appropriations subcommittee cut the Bush
administration's spending request of $250 million by nearly $100
million. 

The president envisions the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership as
essential to the future of nuclear energy in the United States. 

``We will continue to explain the importance and need for full
funding of the president's priorities,'' Energy Department
spokesman Craig Stevens said in an e-mail. 

It is unlikely the House will add money, but senators may look
at it more favorably. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., whose Senate
Appropriations subcommittee has spending control over energy
projects, has strongly supported the initiative. 

Rep. David Hobson, chairman of the House Appropriations
subcommittee on energy, said he supports finding ways to recycle
used reactor fuel. But Hobson, R-Ohio, also said he has
``serious policy, technical and financial reservations'' about
the partnership plan. 

Hobson said the administration proposed paying for it by cutting
money from essential energy programs. 

Critics of the initiative say resuming reprocessing - abandoned
in the 1970s for proliferation reasons - can make it easier for
terrorists or enemy states to obtain weapons-usable plutonium. 

Administration officials view the program as a way to control
nuclear waste, especially with developing countries turning
increasingly to nuclear energy as an electricity source. 

Under the plan, the United States and other countries that have
the technology for uranium enrichment would lease reactor fuel
to other counties and retrieve the spent fuel for reprocessing. 

Nonproliferation activists oppose the reprocessing because it
separates out plutonium, raising concerns the material - which
can be easily transported without detection - could be diverted
to make a bomb. 

The program envisions reprocessing using a technique where pure
plutonium is not separated, but mixed with highly radioactive
isotopes, lessening the proliferation danger. 

But this process involves as yet unproven technologies and is
likely to take decades to advance to the point of having a
commercial facility. The Energy Department has targeted 2025 for
having a full-scale reprocessing facility in operation. 

Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a leading
critic of fuel reprocessing, said Hobson's subcommittee `is
sending a clear message to the administration that it has failed
to demonstrate that (GNEP) is ready for prime time.'' 

But Leonor Tomero of the Center for Arms Control and
Proliferation said while the action ``reflect Congress'
wariness'' of the program ``it leaves the door open for the
Department of Energy to begin preparation for demonstration
projects.'' 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 46 Guardian Unlimited: Washington feels warm glow over Sellafield
 
Terry Macalister

Thursday May 11, 2006 The Guardian             

Washington Group International yesterday became the first US 
business to state categorically it wants to take over management 
of Sellafield and build new atomic plants in Britain.

Just weeks ahead of an expected recommendation for a new 
generation of nuclear power stations in the UK, Washington 
directors said they planned to put in a bid for British Nuclear 
Group, the operating arm of the state-owned BNFL. The group will 
be sold in 2007 for an expected price of £500m to £1bn.

The US firm, stock-listed on Nasdaq in New York, is also 
interested in managing the intermediate atomic waste site at 
Drigg in Cumbria. It could also volunteer to manage any 
high-level repository, deep underground, should that solution get 
the final authority from government.

Other US firms such as Bechtel, Fluor and Halliburton are also
known to be jostling for nuclear work, but only Washington has
stuck its head above the parapet.

Washington has already talked to AMEC, Costain and even
Rolls-Royce about the possibility of their cooperation in the
clean-up work that forms the core of any takeover of Sellafield,
which is operated by BNG. Among the ideas it has been looking at
would be to build a new nuclear reactor that could provide
electricity and hydrogen for fuel-cell cars. Washington is
already working with Toyota and General Motors in the US on a
scheme with $1.2bn (£640m) of investment over five years to try
to produce a cost-effective fuel cell for cars by 2020.

Washington is already engaged in new atomic plant construction
in the US. Asked about a similar programme in Britain,
divisional president Preston Rahe said: "We would certainly be
interested in newbuild here."

Mr Rahe, head of Washington's energy and environment business,
said it made sense to find a UK partner. "It would be wise for
us and help us ensure the kind of change management we would
like would be executable. Every country has its cultural
uniqueness," he said.

Washington has opened talks with all the companies it has worked
with in Britain, said Mr Rahe, including AMEC, UKAEA, Serco,
Balfour Beatty, Rolls-Royce and Aker Kvaerner. His company has
been working as a clean-up contractor for BNFL and others since
1999.

Washington will bid for the contract to manage the Drigg
facility, which is expected to go out to tender this autumn. The
firm will stress in any application its experience operating the
US's only deep geological waste site at Carlsbad, New Mexico.
"We are interested in Drigg but also BNG and Sellafield because
we manage the clone of Sellafield at Savannah River, which is on
a 350 square mile site - the size of a county," said Mr Rahe.

Washington claims to be the biggest nuclear clean-up operator in
the US. It says it wins $2bn of the $6bn annual spending on this
by the US department of energy.

The company, which reported an 18% rise in first-quarter profits
to $19m on Tuesday, says it will be able to help the UK
government cut its spending on clean-up and the time taken to
achieve this. It says it has cut the cost of dealing with
Savannah River by around a quarter - around $16bn - and has
brought forward the closure date of the plant from 2050 to 2025.

Backstory

 A huge new industry worth £70bn over the next 50 years is
poised to open up as the British government hands the clean-up
of former nuclear power stations to the private sector. Tony
Blair's energy review is likely to call for building a new
generation of nuclear power stations as the old ones are
decommissioned.

Only a few European utilities such as EDF of France have
expressed interest in building new plants in Britain. The US
companies Fluor, Washington Group International and Bechtel have
long been seen as favourites to win clean-up work.

A huge new industry worth £70bn over the next 50 years is poised
to open up as the British government hands the clean-up of
former nuclear power stations to the private sector. Tony
Blair's energy review is likely to call for building a new
generation of nuclear power stations as the old ones are
decommissioned.

Only a few European utilities such as EDF of France have
expressed interest in building new plants in Britain. The US
companies Fluor, Washington Group International and Bechtel have
long been seen as favourites to win clean-up work.
 
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
HSE nuclear glossary
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute

[UP] 
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 47 Reno Gazette-Journal: Dust capping wraps up at mine site

May 11, 2006 Reno, Nevada, USA  775-788-6200  

Patrick Abanathy MVN

Posted: 5/11/2006 10:42 am 

Emergency dust capping at the Anaconda Mine site has completed
well ahead of schedule with work finishing up this week. 

Tom Dunkleman, EPA Superfund on-scene coordinator for the
Pacific Southwest region, said Monday was the final day of
capping sulfide tailings with vat leach tailings. The second
phase of the dust capping effort was to spray a temporary soil
sealant on other dust prone areas, which need only temporary
remedies at this point. The latter was to be completed as early
as Wednesday.

He explained it is important to realize the Anaconda Mine is not
the only dusty area in the high-desert valley. Onsite workers in
recent weeks have witness dust from other sources blowing around
including agricultural areas and from the old Bluestone Mine
site south of Weed Heights. 

“This (Anaconda work) is not going to cure the dust problem (in
the Valley),” Dunkleman said Monday as key speaker at Monday
night’s meeting of the Yerington Community Action Group (CAG).

It has been previously noted in a media tour the dust prone
areas on-site seemed to originate from the sulfide tailings. In
fact, Dunkleman showed pictures Monday illustrating migratory
dust dunes lining several sulfide tailing berms. 

The good news is: Most air monitoring conducted during the
recent capping efforts has shown little in the way of
particulate matter and radiological assessment on the sulfide
tailings has shown nearly non-detect. Also, workers used
respirators during capping work and little dust was raised, he
said.

The originally estimated eight-week soil capping effort began
April 5 with material left on-site when Anaconda left in 1978.
This was an answer to several community concerns of large,
potentially hazardous dust plumes leaving the site in peak wind
events. In fact, applause erupted Monday night as Dunkleman
indicated the capping effort had wrapped successfully. 

He explained the capping material had been spread in some areas;
however, Anaconda left other areas uncapped, as they were too
wet when the operation shut down. 

The capping material of choice, both by Anaconda and,
subsequently, by the EPA emergency response group, was vat leach
tailings left over from the copper leaching process. He
explained these were the remnants left after sulfuric acid
leached copper from the rock. The course material is much
heavier than the fine, loose powder-like texture of the sulfide
tailings and it compacted nicely to about one foot thick, he
said. 

Some voiced concern of the vat leach tailings producing adverse
effects on groundwater. Dunkleman said Anaconda had already used
the tailings for capping on nearly 1,000 acres and the
additional 75 acres capped in the past four weeks would have no
significant further impact to groundwater. 

Some of the capping material came from berms placed in the
sulfide tailings area to help reduce waves when water still
filled the area as well as unused capping material left behind
by Anaconda. 

The sulfide tailings are located in the northeast portion of the
site, though the evaporation ponds at the far north portion also
pose airborne contaminant concern. This is part of the second
dust-capping phase, which will see a soil sealant similar to
that used by NDOT in road maintenance. Dunkleman said the
evaporation ponds, though more firm than the sulfide tailings,
do have some evidence of wind erosion. 

These ponds are where concentrated yellowcake uranium was (and
continues to be) stored when Anaconda examined the leaching
byproduct as an economic venture in the 1970s. Since future
cleanup of the evaporation ponds will likely have to address the
radiological element of the uranium, the temporary soil sealant
to control potentially hazardous dust for the time being has
been deemed best. 

This seal will likely break down in a matter of a couple of
years; however, this gives the EPA time to look at proper
remediation action before a permanent cap is put in place. If a
permanent cap were placed now and testing later shows a need to
remove material from the evaporation ponds, the permanent cap
would become part of the problem rather than the solution. 

Dunkleman, who described the sealant as a kind of latex paint,
said all onsite potential dust areas, save for the gravel-capped
sulfide tailings, are to be sprayed. This includes areas of red
dust and areas previously found to contain high radiological
contamination regardless of dust concerns.

Dunkleman also touched upon the recent completion of PCB
container (transformers) removal from the site. Noting the 120
removed were of different sizes and PCB concentration, he said
the operation did not reveal any significant stains. 

This indicates the transformers had likely not leaked much if
any of the hazardous substance. In any case, he noted the
transformers were placed on plastic pads and on concrete
foundations when stored in the two warehouses. 

“That’s a thing of the past now,” Dunkleman said adding it was
pretty much a “load and go” effort.

The PCB removal and dust capping were completed as emergency
measures by the EPA following site managers Atlantic Richfield
Company’s refusal to perform work requested in an action
memorandum from the EPA. 

 Copyright Reno Gazette-Journal, a Gannett Co.
Inc.Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 48 MercuryNews.com: Nuclear waste is the vexing issue

05/11/2006 | 

Nowhere in Eric McErlain's entire opinion piece was any mention 
of the most troublesome aspect of nuclear power: what to do with 
the toxic waste (Op-ed, May 8). Preoccupied with global warming 
and other potential threats, we have lost sight of the real 
radioactive material seeping into the groundwater in Hanford, 
Wash., and the inconclusive debate about Nevada as a nuclear 
dump. 

Certainly the costs of fossil fuels are great. But we cannot
conduct an intelligent debate about energy sources until we
include the poisonous waste products from nuclear power plants,
which must be secured and contained for hundreds of years. 

Beth Erickson 

Sunnyvale 



Mercury News | Mercury News
*****************************************************************
 49 RIA Novosti: Russian court amnesties nuclear waste plant chief

11/ 05/ 2006                                  

YEKATERINBURG, May 11 (RIA Novosti) - A court in Russia's Urals
region closed Thursday a case against the director of a major
local nuclear facility under the terms of an amnesty, a court
spokesman said.

 Vitaly Sadovnikov, general director of the Mayak plant in West
Siberian Chelyabinsk Region, had been charged with breaching
regulations on the disposal of hazardous waste. Prosecutors said
large amounts of radioactive waste had been dumped into the
Techa River during Sadovnikov's tenure and with his knowledge.

 But today proceedings were closed. "The case is closed under an
amnesty," the spokesman said, referring to a reprieve approved
by parliament to mark the establishment of Russian first
national legislature 100 years ago. 

Urals Federal District prosecutors launched a criminal case on
the dumping charges last year. A Chelyabinsk court stripped
Sadovnikov of the immunity from prosecution he had enjoyed as a
regional lawmaker and suspended him from his post March 2.

 Prosecutors said Mayak pumped about 10 million cubic meters of
radioactive materials into the Techa every year. Environmental
group Ecodefense has put the figure as high as 15 million cu m.

 UN reports said that the Chelyabinsk Region, and in particular
the town of Ozersk, where the Mayak plant is located, is one of
world's most radioactive areas as a result of environmental
pollution by the plant for almost half a century.

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 50 Platts: NRC issues EIS for USEC enrichment plant
 
Washington (Platts)--10May2006
 
NRC has issued the final environmental impact statement (EIS) for 
USEC's planned centrifuge enrichment plant, saying the expected 
benefits of the facility outweigh any adverse effects. 

In the EIS, the NRC says the environmental impacts "are generally 
small, although they could be as high as moderate in the areas of 
air quality, socioeconomics and transportation." 

In a press release today, USEC senior vice president Philip 
Sewell called the issuance of the document a "major step 
forward." 

USEC expects to receive a license for the uranium enrichment 
plant in early 2007 and begin construction later that year, the 
release said. The EIS is on the NRC's web site 

(/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1834/index.html#intro) 

Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 51 Platts: Vermont citizens request a berm around fuel storage facility
 
Washington (Platts)--10May2006
 
Entergy should be required to construct a berm around Vermont 
Yankee's proposed dry spent fuel storage facility, two groups 
argued today in a regulatory filing. 

The New England Coalition and Citizens Action Network asked 
Vermont regulators to reconsider their April 26 order approving 
Entergy's plans for the spent fuel facility. 

In a petition to the Vermont Public Service Board, the groups 
asserted that a berm or some other type of structural wall "of 
earth, sand or other similar material" would add protection in 
case of a terrorist missile attack or aircraft crash. 

The groups said there is "at least 200 feet between the edge of 
the proposed concrete pad and the top of the river bank." They 
argued that Entergy failed to demonstrate why it was not possible 
to build a berm.

For similar news, take a trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at 
http://nucweek.platts.com.
 
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
 [The McGraw-Hill Companies]       
*****************************************************************
 52 NRC: NRC Finds No Significant Environmental Impacts from Proposed Centrifuge Enrichment Plant
in Ohio
News Release - 2006-06

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs     
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-0001     E-mail: 
opa@nrc.gov No. 06-064     May 10, 2006   
  
environmental impact statement on a proposed gas centrifuge
uranium enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio, concluding there
would be small to moderate impacts on traffic, air pollution and
the local economy, but that anticipated benefits of the facility
would outweigh any adverse effects. 

USEC Inc. submitted its application to construct and operate the
American Centrifuge Plant in August 2004. The plant would be
located on land leased from the U.S. Department of Energy at
DOEs Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant site in Piketon. 

The environmental impact statement categorizes potential impacts
of the plant in three ways: Small impacts are not detectable or
are so minor that they would neither destabilize nor noticeably
alter the environment; Moderate impacts are sufficient to
noticeably alter but not destabilize a resource; while Large
impacts are clearly noticeable and sufficient to destabilize a
resource. 

The environmental study describes small-to-moderate
socioeconomic impacts of the proposed plant. Specifically, an
estimated 3,362 full-time jobs would be created in the area from
2006 to 2010 as a result of plant construction. During operation
from 2010 to 2040, about 1,500 jobs would be created in the
Piketon area. The study also notes moderate socioeconomic
impacts to Paducah, Ky., where USEC is expected to terminate
operations at its gaseous diffusion enrichment plant once the
Piketon centrifuge plant begins production. 

The study also notes small-to-moderate impacts on traffic along
the two main roads in the Piketon area, especially during
construction of the centrifuge plant. Air quality may also be
affected by dust and other particulate matter kicked up in an
area that already sees similar impacts from agriculture. The
study also examines impacts on geology, water resources,
cultural resources, noise and public occupational health and
safety, among others. The staff determined that the
environmental impacts of the proposed facility in all areas
other than those specifically discussed above would be small. 

The NRC published a draft environmental impact statement in
September, and held a public meeting in Piketon to receive
public comments. The final report addresses the nearly 300
individual comments the NRC staff identified from letters,
facsimile transmittals and e-mails received from approximately
15 individuals, and from oral comments given by 17 individuals. 

The final environmental impact statement is available for public
viewing on the NRCs Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1834
/.   



  


 	Last revised Thursday, May 11, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 53 Independent: US group 'will slash UK nuclear clean-up costs' 

By Michael Harrison, Business Editor 

Published: 11 May 2006 

America's leading nuclear clean-up company has said it could cut
the £70bn cost of decommissioning Britain's civil nuclear sites
by as much as a quarter. 

Washington Group, which controls about a third of the US nuclear
clean-up market, also said it would consider bringing American
nuclear waste into the UK for reprocessing if it succeeds in
buying British Nuclear Group, the state-owned company with
contracts to operate nuclear sites in the UK including the giant
Sellafield fuel reprocessing plant in Cumbria.
 
The Government aims to privatise BNG, part of British Nuclear
Fuels, by the end of next year. Bidders will be selected this
autumn and invited to submit tenders next spring. Washington is
likely to face stiff competition from a potential buyers
including Bechtel and CH2M Hill of the US and Amec, the British
engineering contractor.
 
The UK clean-up programme will involve 20 nuclear sites, of
which Sellafield is by far the biggest, and is expected to
generate revenues of £2bn a year.
 
Estimates of the likely proceeds from the BNG sale vary wildly,
with figures ranging from £250m to more than £1bn. But Preston
Rahe, the president of Washington Group's energy and environment
division, said the deciding factor in selecting a bidder would
be the cost savings it could achieve rather than the price being
offered.
 
Washington has the clean-up contract for the Savannah River site
in South Carolina - a very similar facility to Sellafield - and
claims to have cut the cost to the US government by $16bn (£9bn)
or 25 per cent and shortened the time it will take to
decommission the plant by 23 years.
 
Mr Rahe said savings of a similar magnitude could be achieved in
the UK. Sceptics claim the huge cost savings in the US have come
partly through reducing the scope of the clean-up programmes.
But Washington insists it has achieved the improvements through
greater operating efficiency and better use of facilities. For
instance, it says it has saved the US taxpayer $450m by turning
an old reactor at Savannah River into a plutonium storage site
rather than building a new store.
 
Mr Rahe said if Washington succeeded in buying BNG, it would
reopen the Thorp reprocessing plant at Sellafield, which has
been closed since last year after a radioactive leak. It would
also continue commercial production at Sellafield's Mox plant,
which makes mixed oxide fuel for civil reactors using plutonium
and uranium from reprocessed nuclear waste.
 
US legislation introduced during the Carter administration
prevents the export of US nuclear waste on grounds that it could
encourage nuclear proliferation. But these restrictions are
expected to be relaxed, and Mr Rahe said it would be "an
interesting and creative" idea to ship waste to the UK for
reprocessing. 

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited 
*****************************************************************
 54 toledoblade.com: NASA links tainted sediment to '68 leak

Article published Thursday, May 11, 2006
 
By BLADE STAFF WRITER

SANDUSKY - NASA believes radioactive sediment in a creek called
Plum Brook stemmed from a pinhole leak in a fuel rod removed
from the core of the space agency's old nuclear test reactor
here in October, 1968.

 
Keith Peecook, a senior NASA engineer overseeing the site
investigation, told The Blade last night something was amiss in
the reactor coolant water of the agency's Plum Brook station
eight months before the leaky rod was found.

 In February, 1968, officials knew they had to start looking for
a leak because radioactive isotopes of Iodine and Cesium 137
were found in the reactor's coolant water at levels that were
elevated, yet still within the acceptable range, he said.

 "It threw up red flags," Mr. Peecook said.

 The problematic rod was discovered and removed that October
during a shutdown. The information was discovered during a
search of the plant's archives, he said.

 In another development, NASA yesterday filed requests with the
Ohio Department of Health and Nuclear Regulatory Commission to
have the same cleanup threshold that applies to its property be
used for determining whether any cleanup should be done off-site.

 The two agencies, which are expected to review NASA's proposal
for months, have said it's possible that dirt beyond NASA's
fence line now, after 38 years of decay, has such low levels of
radiation that it would be better off left alone.

 Cesium 137 is the hardiest of the radioactive isotopes.

 The greatest on-site contamination is 1,200 picocuries of
Cesium 137 per gram of sediment. The regulatory threshold for
the site is 14.7 per gram, Mr. Peecook said.

 NASA has pulled 1,200 dirt samples from portions of Plum Brook
outside its property since discovering in the fall of 2005 that
contamination migrated beyond its property line.

 Fewer than 20 of the samples exceed the on-site regulatory
threshold. The highest off-site hit is 50 picocuries of Cesium
137 per gram of sediment. Two off-site parts of the creek have
38 picocuries per gram. Six to eight samples were in the range
of 20-some picocuries per gram, Mr. Peecook said.

 NASA's proposal is to excavate known hot spots off-site.

 Mr. Peecook said the agency is making plans to dig up 48
million pounds of contaminated soil on its property. All tainted
dirt will be buried in a landfill licensed to accept it, he said.

 He also said NASA is more convinced now that traces of
radioactive dirt likely made their way out to Lake Erie. A
hydrologist has been hired by the space agency to help plot
historic flow patterns and estimate how much likely was captured
by marshes near Lake Erie's Sandusky Bay.

 NASA's Plum Brook test reactor, named after a Sandusky creek
that flows into Lake Erie, was built in 1958 at a cost of $15
million. The agency's last estimate for decommissioning the site
was $160 million, but Mr. Peecook has said that figure has grown
by unknown millions.

 The reactor, in service from 1961 to 1973, was once one of
America's 10 largest for nuclear research, with a focus on
nuclear-powered rocket propulsion.

 Contact Tom Henry at:
thenry@theblade.com
or 419-724-6079.

 The Toledo Blade Company, 541 N. Superior St., Toledo, OH 43660
, (419) 724-6000 
*****************************************************************
 55 NRC: Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Notice of Meeting
 
                         FR Doc E6-7161 
[Federal Register: May 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 91)] [Notices] 
[Page 27523-27524] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11my06-117]                         
 
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) will hold its 
170th meeting on May 23-26, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
 
The schedule for this meeting is as follows: Tuesday, May 23, 
2006 ACNW Working Group Meeting on Low-Level Radioactive Waste 
(LLW) Management Issues 8:30 a.m.-8:40 a.m.: Greeting and 
Introductions (Open)--The ACNW Chairman, Dr. Michael Ryan, will 
state the purpose and objectives for this Working Group Meeting. 
He will also provide an overview of the planned technical 
sessions for Day 1 and introduce invited panelists and speakers.
 
Purpose of ACNW Working Group Meeting. The purposes of this ACNW 
Working Group Meeting are to: --Obtain current information on 
commercial LLW management practices.
 
--Identify emerging LLW management issues and concerns.
 
--Solicit stakeholder views on what changes to the regulatory 
framework for managing LLW should be recommended for Commission 
consideration.
 
--Solicit stakeholder views on actions the NRC can take to ensure 
a stable, reliable and adaptable regulatory framework for 
effective LLW management.
 
--Identify specific impacts, both positive and negative, of 
potential staff activities.
 
8:40 a.m.-9:40 a.m.: Existing LLW Licensee Operational Experience 
and Perspective (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by 
representatives of Chem-Nuclear Systems, LLC and EnergySolutions, 
LLC.
 
9:40 a.m.-10:40 a.m.: Alternative Disposal Options and Practices 
(Open)--The Committee will hear presentations by Waste Control 
Specialists and U.S. Ecology--American Ecology. 11 a.m.-11:30 
a.m.: NRC's Current LLW Program: Challenges (Open)-- The 
Committee will hear a presentation by a NRC staff representative 
regarding the current LLW program.
 
11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m.: NRC's 10 CFR Part 61: Historical 
Perspective (Open)--The Committee will hear presentations from 
former NRC staff regarding the development of NRC's LLW 
regulatory framework.
 
2 p.m.-3:30 p.m.: State/Compact Disposal Experience (Open)--The 
Committee will hear presentations from representatives of the 
Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission and the South 
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.
 
3:30 p.m.-4 p.m.: LLW Definitions and Decommissioning Experience 
(Open)--The Committee will hear a presentation by a 
representative from the Nuclear Energy Institute.
 
4 p.m.-4:30 p.m.: New License Application Perspectives 
(Open)--The Committee will hear a presentation by a 
representative from Waste Control Specialists, LLC.
 
4:30 p.m.-5:30 p.m.: Stakeholder and Public Comments (Open). 
Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:30 a.m.-8:40 a.m.: Greeting and 
Introductions (Open)--Dr. Ryan will provide an overview of the 
planned technical sessions for Day 2 and introduce the invited 
panelists and speakers.
 
8:40 a.m.-11 a.m.: Industry Roundtable Discussion 
(Open)--Scheduled participants are expected to include 
representatives from Entergy,
 
[[Page 27524]] the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the South 
Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Harvard 
University, and U.S. Ecology--American Ecology.
 
12:30 p.m.-3 p.m.: Panel Discussion Concerning NRC's LLW 
Strategic Assessment (Open)--Scheduled participants are expected 
to included representatives from the Washington State Department 
of Health, the NRC staff, Chem-Nuclear Systems, the Texas Council 
on Environmental Quality, and the California Radioactive 
Materials Management.
 
3 p.m.-4:30 p.m.: Stakeholder and Public Comments (Open). 4:30 
p.m.-5 p.m.: Closing Remarks (Open)--By Dr. Ryan. 5 p.m.-5:30 
p.m.: ACNW Working Group Meeting Impressions-- Discussion of 
Letter Report (Open)--The Committee will discuss the impressions 
of the Working Group Meeting and proposed ACNW letters.
 
Thursday, May 25, 2006 8:25 a.m.-8:30 a.m.: Opening Remarks by 
the ACNW Chairman (Open)-- The ACNW Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
8:30 a.m.-10:30 a.m.: National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report 
on the Management of Certain Tank Wastes at U.S. Department of 
Energy (DOE) Sites (Open)--Representatives of the NAS staff and 
an NAS Committee will brief the ACNW on the findings of a 
Congressionally- mandated study of radioactive waste streams 
stored in tanks at three DOE sites.
 
10:45 a.m.-12:15 p.m.: NRC Standard Review Plan (SRP) for Waste 
Determinations (Open)--NMSS representatives will update the 
Committee on progress in the development of the SRP to be used by 
the NRC staff to review DOE waste determinations.
 
1:30 p.m.-3 p.m.: Review of International Commission on 
Radiological Protection (ICRP) Draft Report, ``The Scope of 
Radiological Protection Regulations'' (Open)--Briefing by and 
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the 
ICRP draft report for comment titled, ``The Scope of Radiological 
Protection Regulations.'' 3:15 p.m.-5:30 p.m.: Discussion of 
Draft Letters and Reports (Open)--The Committee will discuss 
proposed ACNW letters.
 
Friday, May 26, 2006 10 a.m.-10:10 a.m.: Opening Remarks by the 
ACNW Chairman (Open)-- The ACNW Chairman will make opening 
remarks regarding the conduct of the meeting.
 
10:10 a.m.-11:45 a.m.: Overview of NRC Spent fuel Storage Program 
(Open)--NMSS representatives will provide an overview of NRC 
spent fuel storage program.
 
11:45 a.m.-4 p.m.: Discussion of Draft Letters and Reports 
(Open)-- The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW letters.
 
4 p.m.-4:30 p.m.: Miscellaneous (Open)--The Committee will 
discuss matters related to the conduct of ACNW activities and 
specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, 
as time and availability of information permit. Discussions may 
include future Committee Meetings.
 
Procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACNW meetings 
were published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2005 (70 FR 
59081). In accordance with these procedures, oral or written 
statements may be presented by members of the public. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the 
meeting that are open to the public. Persons desiring to make 
oral statements should notify Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (Telephone 
301-415-6927), between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, as far in advance 
as practicable so that appropriate arrangements can be made to 
schedule the necessary time during the meeting for such 
statements. Use of still, motion picture, and television cameras 
during this meeting will be limited to selected portions of the 
meeting as determined by the ACNW Chairman.
 
Information regarding the time to be set aside for taking 
pictures may be obtained by contacting the ACNW office prior to 
the meeting. In view of the possibility that the schedule for 
ACNW meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to 
facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend 
should notify Mr. Snodderly as to their particular needs.
 
Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the 
meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, the Chairman's ruling 
on requests for the opportunity to present oral statements and 
the time allotted, therefore, can be obtained by contacting Mr. 
Snodderly. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter 
reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) 
at pdr@nrc.gov, or by calling the PDR at 1-800-397-4209, or from 
the Publicly Available Records System component of NRC's document 
system (ADAMS) which is accessible from the NRC Web site at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ (ACRS & 
collections/ (ACRS & ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas).
 
Video Teleconferencing service is available for observing open 
sessions of ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use this service for 
observing ACNW meetings should contact Mr. Theron Brown, ACNW 
Audiovisual Technician (301-415-8066), between 7:30 a.m. and 3:45 
p.m. ET, at least 10 days before the meeting to ensure the 
availability of this service. Individuals or organizations 
requesting this service will be responsible for telephone line 
charges and for providing the equipment and facilities that they 
use to establish the video teleconferencing link. The 
availability of video teleconferencing services is not 
guaranteed.
 
Dated: May 4, 2006.
 
Andrew L. Bates, Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-7161 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 56 NRC:  Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Meeting on Planning and 
 
                         FR Doc E6-7162 
[Federal Register: May 11, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 91)] [Notices] 
[Page 27524-27525] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11my06-118]                         
 
Procedures; Notice of Meeting The Advisory Committee on Nuclear 
Waste (ACNW) will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on May 
26, 2006, Room T-2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 
The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the 
exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss organizational and personnel 
matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and 
practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
 
The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Friday, 
May 26, 2006--8:30 a.m.-9:30 a.m. The Committee will discuss 
proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this 
meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and 
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as 
appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee.
 
Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, 
Mr. Michael R. Snodderly (Telephone: 301/415-6927) between 8:15 
a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, 
so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be
 
[[Page 27525]] permitted only during those portions of the 
meeting that are open to the public.
 
Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8:15 a.m. and 
5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to 
contact the above named individual at least two working days 
prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in 
the agenda.
 
Dated: May 3, 2006.
 
Michael R. Snodderly, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
 
[FR Doc. E6-7162 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 57 LongmontFYI: Weld nuclear storage site hit with tornado drill
 
Publish Date: 5/11/2006 

By Ben Ready 

The Daily Times-Call 

PLATTEVILLE — Two private Idaho companies specializing in
nuclear fuel have in recent years provided Weld County’s former
nuclear power plant with the following:

 An earthquake, an exploding propane truck, an improvised
explosive device dropped from a small plane, a nuclear fuel
spill and — on Wednesday — a tornado.

 “There are people up there with twisted minds to come up with
this stuff,” joked U.S. Department of Energy spokesman Chris
Powers.

 The DOE and its Idaho contractors have supplied mock-disaster
training every two years for the Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation (ISFSI) since it began housing used nuclear fuel in
1991. 

The 822 kilograms of spent uranium and 13,903 kilograms of spent
thorium it shields behind 6-foot-thick concrete walls came from
the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Power Plant on the same site just
northwest of Platteville.

 Cracks found in a steam generator and other mechanical problems
caused the plant to close in 1989. Officials say the plant’s old
fuels are almost incapable of reaching critical mass or
exploding, but even depleted radioactive materials — especially
uranium — emit gamma radiation waves that are dangerous to
people. And the DOA mandates all facilities under its watch —
whether they are laboratories, weapons plants or administrative
buildings — to suffer the morbid machinations of disaster
managers.

 Under Wednesday’s scenario, a stealth tornado tore through
central Weld, its funnel cloud striking first between the
abandoned nuclear power plant and Xcel’s on-site and still
operational natural gas-fired power plant.

 It then ripped metal roofing off part of the nuclear storage
building, leaving the fuel untouched but injuring five people,
killing power and scattering five radioactively charged tools
around the four-acre site. 

The exercise ran from 9 to 11:30 a.m. and called upon a
real-life response from the Milliken and Johnstown police
departments, Platteville/Gilcrest Fire Protection District, Weld
County Dispatch, Office of Emergency Management and Paramedics,
Milliken Fire Department and Fort St. Vrain Security among
others.

 “We had tremendous support from local facilities. I’d give it
an A-minus,” said Jay Newkirk, an emergency coordinator who
works with the DOE.

 Medical crews transported two actor-victims off in ambulances,
but only pretended to fly out a third victim by helicopter.
After the training, emergency officials reported minor trouble
communicating over radio channels, but said they were pleased
with their work to secure the facility, aid the victims and find
and secure the radioactive tools.

 “You’d have to come up with a really wild scenario for that
fuel to be disturbed,” Powers said. “Maybe if you hit it with a
jet.”

 Ben Ready can be reached at 303-684-5326, or by e-mail at
bready@times-call.com.   

All contents Copyright © 2006 Daily Times-Call. All rights
*****************************************************************
 58 Press Information Bureau: Supply of Uranium by France

PIB Press Release

Thursday, May 11, 2006   
  
Ministry of External Affairs           

Lok Sabha

India and France signed a Declaration on the Development of
Nuclear Energy for Peaceful Purposes during the visit of
President Jacques Chirac on February 20, 2006 which underlines
the need to develop international cooperation in promoting the
use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This declaration
envisages that such cooperation will be ‘in accordance with
their respective international obligations and commitments’. The
international cooperation in civilian nuclear items and
technology is controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG)
guidelines, which at present preclude such cooperation with
India. France is a member of the NSG. As such the cooperation
with France would be possible only after NSG Guidelines are
suitably adjusted. 

As part of the India-US understanding on civilian nuclear
cooperation as stated in July 18, 2005, the US has undertaken to
work with its partners in the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) for
adjusting its Guidelines to enable full civilian cooperation
between India and the international community. The Government
has also actively engaged with a broad range of NSG member
states including France with a view to seek their support for
enabling international civilian nuclear cooperation with India.
France has expressed support for India’s position. 

This information was given by the Minister of State in the
Ministry of External Affairs, Shri Anand Sharma, in reply to a
question by Shri S.G. Indira. 

AK/NSD/Hb   

  Site Content Administered by : Y.S.R. Murthy Director, PR(PM 
&Web Administration Cell) Press Information Bureau "A" - Wing, 
Shastri Bhawan, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi - 110 001
yy
*****************************************************************
 59 PRN: Washington Group International Clarifies News Reports
Regarding Its Interest in U.K. Nuclear Activities 

PR Newswire 

BOISE, Idaho and LONDON, May 11 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- 
Washington Group International (Nasdaq: ) supports the U.K. 
government and U.K. Nuclear Decommissioning Authority initiatives 
to deal with nuclear waste legacy issues. Washington Group is 
considering a variety of options to support those efforts, 
including serving as a direct contractor, as Washington Group 
does now in the United States as a leading provider of nuclear 
waste management services to the U.S. Department of Energy. 

Despite some news reports to the contrary, the company has made 
no decision on whether to bid to purchase British Nuclear Group. 
A final decision will be dependent on many factors including the 
procurement process, associated liabilities and risks, and terms 
and conditions, which have yet to be announced by the seller. 

The company has decided to pursue the contract to operate the 
Drigg low-level waste facility where it would leverage its site 
knowledge and experience working at Drigg the past five years as 
well as its expertise in operating the only deep geological waste 
repository in the United States. 

As to reported comments about importing U.S. nuclear material 
into the United Kingdom for reprocessing, Washington Group is not 
advocating any such action. 

Washington Group International ), with headquarters in Boise, 
Idaho, provides the talent, innovation, and proven performance to 
deliver integrated engineering, construction, and management 
solutions for businesses and governments worldwide. Its long 
history of successful DOE operations includes management and 
operation contracts at the Savannah River Site, Waste Isolation 
Pilot Plant, and West Valley Demonstration Project. It also is 
the lead contractor at Hanford River Corridor Closure Project; is 
part of the management teams at the Idaho National Laboratory, 
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Idaho Cleanup Project, and 
Miamisburg Closure Project; and provides technical support and 
consulting at Lawrence Livermore, Sandia National Laboratories, 
DOE's Hanford Site, the Pantex Plant, and the Oak Ridge complex. 

This news release contains forward-looking statements within the 
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 
which are identified by the use of forward-looking terminology 
such as may, will, could, should, expect, anticipate, intend, 
plan, estimate, or continue or the negative thereof or other 
variations thereof. Each forward-looking statement, including, 
without limitation, any financial guidance, speaks only as of the 
date on which it is made, and Washington Group undertakes no 
obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect 
events or circumstances after the date on which it is made or to 
reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events or 
circumstances. The forward-looking statements are necessarily 
based on assumptions and estimates of management and are 
inherently subject to various risks and uncertainties. Actual 
results may vary materially as a result of changes or 
developments in social, economic, business, market, legal, and 
regulatory circumstances or conditions, both domestically and 
globally, as well as due to actions by customers, clients, 
suppliers, business partners, or government bodies. Performance 
is subject to numerous factors, including demand for new power 
generation and for modification of existing power facilities, 
public sector funding, demand for extractive resources, capital 
spending plans of customers, and spending levels and priorities 
of the U.S., state and other governments. Results may also vary 
as a result of difficulties or delays experienced in the 
execution of contracts or implementation of strategic 
initiatives. For additional risks and uncertainties impacting the 
forward-looking statements contained in this news release, please 
see "Note Regarding Forward-Looking Information" and "Item 1A. 
Risk Factors" in Washington Group's annual report on Form 10-K 
for fiscal year 2005. 

	 SOURCE Washington Group International 

Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
Reserved. A company. 
*****************************************************************
 60 Whitehaven News: Doubts about Thorp as leak case looms 
						
Published on 11/05/2006

BRITISH Nuclear Group will be prosecuted over the Thorp leak, 
which has thrown the future of the flagship Sellafield 
reprocessing plant into doubt.
 
At an initial hearing before Whitehaven Magistrates Court on June 
8, the company is to be charged with three breaches of the 
Sellafield site licence conditions.
 
The conditions require BNG as Thorpâ€™s operators to make and 
comply with written instructions; to ensure safety systems are in 
good working order and to ensure radioactive material is 
contained and if leaks occur to make sure they are detected and 
reported.
 
Magistrates have limited powers to fine BNG up to Â£15,000 but 
the penalties would be unlimited if sentencing is transferred to 
crown court.
 
The governmentâ€™s Health &Safety Executive, who are bringing the 
prosecution, say there is no current evidence of any harm to 
workers or the public.
 
HSE were notified of the incident on April 20 last year. Although 
it was discovered the previous day, the leak of 83 cubic metres 
of radioactive liquor into a heavily shielded cell had gone 
undetected for several months.
 
Thorp has remained closed since the incident was reported but
BNG is still confident it will re-open, sometime this summer,
subject to permissions from the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority and ultimately the government.
 
In a statement, BNG said: â€œWe have co-operated fully with the
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate throughout its investigation
and continue to make good progress against the measures needed
to enable the Thorp facility to become operational again,
subject to regulatory and NDA approval.â€
 
SINCE the incident which is estimated to have cost Â£50 million,
BNG has been given Thorp staff training in â€œbehaviour and
technical matters.â€
 
						 					 				 				 					
*****************************************************************
 61 KIFI: New Equipment To Help Test Efficiency of Nuclear Fuel

www.localnews8.com   
      
 May 10, 2006

The Idaho National Laboratory has new state-of-the-art equipment
that could improve the efficiency of nuclear fuel.

It is called the Eddy Current Measurement System and its job is
to measure electrical currents.

It is a form of non-destructive testing that can detect material
defects in nuclear fuel rods.

The INL will use this equipment to extend the life of the fuel
rods and that will create economic and environmental benefits.

INL officials say that extending the life of nuclear fuel rods
will mean less fuel spent for storage and disposal. That will
allow for more efficient use of time, money and resources.

The laboratory says that keeping this fuel within the country is
a big boost to the United States nuclear industry.
 
*****************************************************************
 62 Tri-City Herald: Parliament member getting a sense of Hanford 

Published Thursday, May 11th, 2006 

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer 

Jamie Reed traveled across an ocean and a continent to reach the
Tri-Cities, but the trip still felt like coming home. 

In the United Kingdom, he is a member of Parliament who
represents an area that includes the Sellafield site. 

Like Hanford, the site once made plutonium for nuclear weapons.
And like Hanford, the economy of the nearby communities is tied
to the nuclear site and the approximately 12,000 jobs it
provides. 

This week he toured Hanford, stopping at the K Basins where
spent nuclear fuel was left to decay after Hanford stopped
producing plutonium. Same problem at Sellafield, he said. 

Employees at both remote sites worked hard to protect their
countries during the Cold War, and hazards were not always well
understood, he said. 

"The legacy is a vast one," he said. 

Sellafield has the biggest inventory of radioactive materials in
Europe, and Hanford has been called the most contaminated site
in the Western Hemisphere. 

Much of Reed's interest in arranging with Fluor Hanford to tour
Hanford and the Tri-Cities stemmed from his concern over the
need to regenerate the economy of the area near Sellafield, West
Cumbria. 

"If the site sheds jobs, it affects schools, hospitals," he
said. "It's a big organic matrix." 

Here Reed saw booming construction of buildings and roads,
stable and rising property values and good jobs available -- the
hallmarks of a stable economy, he said. 

It reinforced his confidence in the approach he's pushed in West
Cumbria, getting towns with rival interests near the site to
work together and encouraging public and private partnerships,
he said. 

His tour of Hanford left him impressed with how fortunate the
United Kingdom is to have a stable national budget for cleanup
of its nuclear sites. At Hanford, he saw projects where cleanup
work had slowed or stopped because of lack of money this year
under a system that sees the budget bounce up and down annually
with little notice. 

While Hanford is 586 square miles, Sellafield measures just 1
mile by 1 mile, which includes past weapons work for which
cleanup is beginning and work to reprocess fuel to be used again
in nuclear power plants. 

"People live right next door," he said. Stopping cleanup midway
through projects there is not an option, he said. 

He visited Hanford days after an article was published in his
local paper, The Whitehaven News, about the problems at
Hanford's vitrification plant. Work has slowed and the cost has
risen dramatically to build the Hanford plant to turn
radioactive waste into a stable glass form. 

Sellafield also has a waste treatment plant, which made news in
the Herald last year when a leak of thousands of gallons of
liquid nuclear waste inside the plant went undiscovered for
months. 

Criminal charges, which Reed believes are justified, were filed
this spring. 

"(The leak) shouldn't have happened," said Reed, a former
nuclear worker, like his father and grandfathers. "That plant
should have been kept in a condition of flawless maintenance." 

But when the leak was identified, it was found by the work
force, cleaned up immediately and no radioactive material leaked
to the outside environment, he said. 

"It illustrates the safety systems in place were robust and
effective," he said. 

Reed is spending the end of the week in Washington, D.C., where
he'll meet with Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash.; Rep. Doc Hastings,
R-Wash.; Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash; and organized labor leaders. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 63 Idaho Statesman: INL director to head nuclear organization

05-11-2006                

Harold McFarlane, director of Space Nuclear Systems and
Technology Division at Idaho National Laboratory, will begin his
tenure as president of the American Nuclear Society in June.

While maintaining his duties at INL, McFarlane will lead the
10,000-member international organization of engineers,
scientists and educators for the next year.

McFarlane has been at the Idaho lab for more than 30 years. In
addition to Space Nuclear Systems and Technology Division
director, he is deputy associate laboratory director for nuclear
programs.

As the president of ANS, McFarlane will head the organization in
unifying the professional activities within the diverse fields
of nuclear science and technology. He has served the past year
as ice president.

The president is "the face of the society to many organizations
— giving him the opportunity to meet fascinating people from
around the globe while spreading the nuclear message," McFarlane
said.   

*****************************************************************
 64 Inside Bay Area: Officials: Lab needs to be like Los Alamos

Updated: 05/11/2006 03:16:06 AM PDT  

Livermore would mirror management in New Mexico
 			 			 			 			 			 			 
FROM STAFF REPORTS  
    
  Federal weapons officials are suggesting that new management
of Lawrence Livermore nuclear-weapons lab should look a lot like
new management at its sister lab, Los Alamos in New Mexico. 

No more pure academic atmosphere, no more membership in one of
the nations largest, best-funded pension plans. 

As at Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is
unlikely to be operated solely by the University of California,
as it has been for the past 54 years. 

Officials at the National Nuclear Security Administration are
calling for a new contractor team, separated from its corporate
parents but drawing on their private-industry experience, to run
Livermore. 

The new management team must create at least two pension plans,
one of which must be substantially equivalent to the UC
Re-tirement Plan, offering the same age factors and benefits but 
with fewer members and assets. 

UC officials already have said they will team up with Bechtel 
National, as they do at Los Alamos, if UC regents give a green 
light to a bid on Livermore lab. So far, only one serious 
competitor — Battelle Memorial Institute, operator of several 
Energy Department labs — has emerged. 

The government is collecting comments on the proposed new 
contract specifications through June 5 and then will take bids in 
August, with a new manager to be named early in 2007.   
                  
Insidebayarea.com | Subscriber Services | Contact Us

 © 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers |   

    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************