*****************************************************************
06/12/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.139
*****************************************************************
   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 US: [NYTr] Perle reveals US War Plans in Iran
2 UN Atomic Watchdog Urges Iran To Cooperate; Says Little Progress On 
3 IPS-English POLITICS: Bush Iran Strategy Suffers Major
4 IPS-English POLITICS: Why China Blocks Sanctions on Iran,
5 IRNA: Saudi FM stresses Iran's inalienable N-right
6 IRNA: Iran's Larijani in Algeria for nuclear talks 
7 IRNA: Arab League chief stresses diplomatic solution to Iran's N-cas
8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Accepts Parts of Western Nuke Offer
9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., Europe Lobby to Put Pressure on Iran
10 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief: Little Iran Progress
11 Guardian Unlimited: China Opposed to Joint Statement on Iran
12 IRNA: Europe's package of incentives a "move forward" - Elham - 
13 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: EU proposals a move forward - Elham 
14 AFP: Iran says nuclear fuel work non-negotiable 
15 AFP: US lobbying to stop pro-Iran non-aligned nuclear statement -
16 AFP: UN atomic agency meets amid Iran nuclear crisis 
17 AFP: UN atomic agency meets: Iran giving first indications of nuclea
18 IRNA: Iran, Syria consider mutual defense ties as strategic 
19 IRNA: China welcomes Ahmadinejad's participation in SCO summit 
20 AFP: North Korea flexes missile muscle to grab US attention - 
21 New York Times: Russia Bargains for Bigger Stake in West's Energy - 
22 AFP: India, US to work out details of nuclear energy trade this week
23 US: Saratogian: Vietnam vet recalls threat of nuclear war
24 US: Las Vegas SUN: Western Governors Focus on Energy Issues 
25 IRNA: IAEA meeting opens in Vienna 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
26 US: [NukeNet] Aging nuclear plants pushed to the limit - from
27 US: NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Quad Cities 
28 US: NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Draft Environmental Report for Oy
29 US: BND: New law requires nuclear plants to report radioactive relea
30 US: AP Wire: Limerick plan: Store spent nuclear fuel outside
31 RIA Novosti: Sevmash to sign floating nuclear reactor contract on Ju
32 Sofia Echo: Belene NPP construction quickened in Bulgaria 
33 TheStar.com: McGuinty firm on nuclear power
34 TheStar.com: Ontario to build reactors
35 US: NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Uni
36 US: NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of U.S. Ar
37 globeandmail.com: Ontario in the market for more nuclear reactors
38 US: UPI: Experts urge speedy nuclear development
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
39 US: [NukeNet] Data on Nuclear Agency Workers Hacked: Lawmaker
40 US: Secrecy News -- 06/12/06
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
41 US: [NukeNet] Fatigue issues vex nuclear industry - Overtime on
42 US: SPI: Idaho activists want test at Nevada nuke site canceled
43 US: Tri-City Herald: Downwind Hanford workers still waiting 
44 US: review journal: OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS PROGRAM: Test site workers 
45 US: KTVB.COM: "Downwinders" demand lawmakers listen
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
46 US: Guardian Unlimited: Judge KOs Initiative on Waste Shipments
47 US: Australian Financial Review - 
48 US: The Mercury: Fuel rod storage still in question
49 US: RGJ.com: Paiute tribe allows consideration of new route for 
50 Reno News and Review: Dump junkets
51 Reno News and Review: At least they're consistent
52 Telegraph: Sellafield faces huge fine over 20-ton uranium leak
53 US: Las Vegas SUN: Paiute Tribe allows DOE waste transport
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
54 Knox News: Tritium-leak concerns keep analysts busy
55 FT.com: Cracks start to show in a nuclear power monopoly (USEC)
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] Perle reveals US War Plans in Iran
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:05:29 -0400 (EDT)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
sent by Rich Winkel (activ-l)

Center for Research in Globalisation - Jun 7, 2006
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CAR20060607&articleId=2596

Neocon Foreign Policy Architect 
Richard Perle reveals US War Plans in the Iranian Theater

by Dr. Michael Carmichael

 "I think of war with Iran as the ending of America's present role in the
 world. Iraq may have been a preview of that, but it's still redeemable if
 we get out fast. In a war with Iran, we'll get dragged down for 20 or 30
 years. The world will condemn us. We will lose our position in the world."
 -Zbigniew Brzezinski, Vanity Fair, 2006.

One US carrier task force is already in position in the Persian
Gulf. Two more task forces are moving swiftly to take up their
positions in the Iranian theatre.

The controversial neoconservative American bureaucrat, Richard
Perle, visited Britain on the eve of the papal audience between
Prime Minister Tony Blair and Pope Benedict XVI. Earlier in the
same week, the Iranian Nobel Laureate for Peace, Dr. Shirin Ebadi,
was in Britain to voice her concerns about a confrontation between
the west and Iran. In London, Metropolitan Police swooped down on
two suspected Islamist terrorists believed to be in the process of
building a chemical bomb. Summertime tensions are building.

In bland remarks delivered to a small audience of students at the
Oxford Union, Richard Perle outlined the Bush administrations
response to the crisis of 9/11 and the neoconservative doctrines
of pre-emptive war. In a droning monotone designed to anaesthetize
his keen academic audience, Perle explained the need for an invincible
American military apparatus and a foreign policy predicated on the
Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive war permitting direct and simultaneous
interventions into multiple theatres.

While Perle stated his hope that the need for military interventions
would be minimal, he left the impression that his definition of
excessive use of military power might well differ from that of the
average American or European citizen. Perle is on the public record
advocating pre-emptive strikes against North Korea, Syria, Iran and
a list of other countries. Some of his critics accuse Perle of
darkly malignant machinations. (Richard N. Perle, Sourcewatch)

Citing Iraq as a glowing example of an obvious need for direct
intervention, Perle admitted that he had long advocated military
solutions for regime change in that theatre. In his talk, he reminded
us that President Bush had launched the invasion on the basis of
several triggering factors including Nigerian yellow cake, WMDs,
terrorist connections, democracy-building and humanitarian issues.
Thus, Perle was finally reduced to justifying the Iraq War as a
humanitarian crusade  a theme that struck hollow in the midst of
reports of civil war, torture and US war crimes against innocent
civilians in Haditha.

Questioned by a largely supportive audience of admiring students
willing to attend a late lecture on a Friday night, Perle touched
upon the diplomacy between the West and Iran in the most insipid
terms he could muster. Taking into account the latest diplomatic
developments, he gave his Oxford audience the impression that the
outcome remains obscure in spite of the fact that he is one of the
principle architects  and the sternest - of the Iran negotiations.

Perle emphasised that President Ahmadinejad holds fanatical religious
beliefs involving the necessity for an Armageddonite conflict to
trigger the return of the Hidden Imam at the end of the world in
the Shiite tradition for the Last Judgement and the Islamic Apocalypse.
Perle singled out the fanaticism of Islamic terrorism as the most
serious threat to international security, and he praised the Israeli
air-strike against Saddams nuclear reactor in 1981 as a model of
pre-emptive military intervention. In his view, the threat of
precision air-strikes against the nuclear infrastructure of Iran
constitute the best negotiating option.

An Iranian student asked Perle whether he considered the Mearsheimer
and Walt paper, The Israel Lobby, to be, anti-Semitic. Castigating
the eighty-five page paper as, bad scholarship, Perle admitted that
he did not know what he was talking about when he confessed that
he had not read it in its entirety. This question put Perle on the
defensive, and he asserted that there was no secret agenda amongst
Americas plethora of, Jewish groups, that sought to place the
national security of Israel above that of the United States.

In the limited time available, no one was able to follow up Perles
pregnant point about the non-existence of a secret agenda with a
question about the Israeli spy scandal that shook his own office
at the Pentagon, when Larry Franklin was discovered to be the conduit
between the Office of Special Plans and two Israeli officials who
were later identified as espionage agents assigned to the embassy.
Neither was he questioned about the incident that took place in
1970, when an FBI wiretap revealed that Perle discussed classified
intelligence with an official at the Israeli embassy. Washington
insiders have long considered Perle to be, an Israeli agent of
influence.

Another fact fuels these suspicions swirling around Perle since he
serves as a director of Hollinger International which owns the
Jerusalem Post. Perle has been paid millions for his work for
Hollinger even though he is the only outside director on the Executive
Committee. Perles complicated business dealings have brought him
under suspicion for conflicts of interest and the charge that he
is attempting to profit from wars that he was strenuously working
to create and implement through his official capacity in the
Department of Defense. In 2004, Perles conflicts of interest resulted
in his resignation from the Defense Policy Board. (ibid)

When a perceptive student asked about his preferences for the next
president of the United States, Perle made some riveting remarks.
He immediately stated his hope that Senator Joseph Lieberman would
be the Democratic candidate. Failing that miracle, Perle hopes
former Governor Mark Warner will win the Democratic nomination.
Perle warmly praised both right-leaning Democrats who are doyens
of the Democratic Leadership Council. Richard Giuliani is Perles
favourite Republican. When asked about potential presidential
candidates who would cause him concern, Perle swiftly reeled off a
long list of Democrats led by Governor Howard Dean, followed closely
by Senator John Kerry, former Vice President Al Gore, former Senator
John Edwards, and he finished his list of neoconservative hate
figures with a revealing comment about Senator Hillary Clinton.

It is hardly secret that Senator Clinton has attempted to appeal
to the Israeli right. When she visited Israel, she condemned the
Palestinians, but Perle was not impressed. Quite the contrary, Perle
said that while she had made some smart moves in her attempt to
appeal to the right, the left did not believe her. This comment
gave the clear impression that Perle did not believe her, either.
Criticizing other Democrats, Perle said that Senator John Kerry,
did not understand power, and was not able to perform the duties
of the president of America. In his form of damnation by faint
praise, Perle said that Howard Dean was a much nicer man off the
podium than on it  and he gave him pride of place at the top of his
most worrisome Democratic politicians.

The love affair between Perles base in Likud on the hard line Israeli
right and the neoconservatives of both US political parties is alive
and kicking. Perle has long been associated with Likud that has
been reduced to a weak rump huddling around Benjamin Netanyahu in
the new Knesset. As a close associate of Netanyahu, Perle is seen
as Likuds top-ranking advocate in Europe and America with his
tentacles into both political parties, the Bush White House, the
Pentagon and many other leading institutions. Next year, it would
not be surprising to find Perles name on contributors lists to
Giuliani, Lieberman and Warner.

The morning after his Oxford talk, Perle appeared on the very
influential BBC radio programme, Today, where he was interviewed
by John Humphries, the ranking heavyweight commentator in Britain.
Admitting President Bushs political weakness, Perle made a revealing
comment when Humphries pressed him on US plans to bomb Iran. When
Humphries pointed out that a unilateral US bombardment of Iran would
be greeted with global howls of derision, Perle said,

No American president who believes that there is a last opportunity
to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state is going to
be deterred by derision. He will do what he believes to be in the
best interests of the protection of those who might come under
attack from an Iranian nuclear weapon including the United States.
(Today, BBC4, 3rd June 2006)

When Humphries pressed him harder by pointing out that the former
British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, had termed the US bombing
of Iran, inconceivable, Perle shot back with a revealing retort.
Well, its no longer conceivable that hes the Foreign Secretary.
Humphries then asked whether Straw had been sacked over his offence
putting Perle on the spot by asking, You think theres a link there?
Perle replied,

I dont know. He was expressing a view that the government had not
concluded yet in a way that diminished the leverage to produce a
political result, a diplomatic result. Thats obviously unwise.(ibid)

This response left the clear impression that Straw had been removed
specifically because he had ridiculed Washingtons negotiating
position and that Perle had been intimately involved in ordering
and engineering the surprise sacking.

While Perle was undergoing his public interrogation before six
million listeners on the BBC, Tony Blair was entering the Vatican
for his long-awaited audience with Pope Benedict XVI. Blairs last
papal audience occurred in early 2003 shortly before the launch of
the Iraq War, when he pleaded with the late pontiff. John Paul II,
to support the Crusade against Islamist terrorism.

The German Pope has been a strident critic of, fundamentalist terror,
the Vaticans code term for Islamism. According to the published
accounts, Blair and the pope discussed the current negotiations
with Iran. The Sunday Times reported, Pope Benedict XVI pressed
Tony Blair to find a diplomatic resolution to the Iran nuclear
crisis. The Pope is more than well aware of the escalation of the
military planning on both sides.

There can be little serious doubt that George Bush had given Tony
Blair his marching orders - the assignment of negotiating a papal
blessing for his pre-emptive bombing campaign against Iran. From
the Popes remarks, it is clear that Benedict dreads a new level of
violence in Bushs wars in the Middle East. As a very public supporter
of George Bush during the 2004 presidential campaign, the Pope
rightfully fears the political consequences he will suffer in the
aftermath of a new phase in what is seen globally as a western
religious crusade against Islam. Smarting from a punishing round
of criticism for ignoring the Anti-Semitic dimension of the Holocaust
during his visit to Auschwitz only one week ago, Benedict XVI is
praying to avoid any more political controversies that would undermine
his increasingly challenged papacy.

Last week, Ray McGovern, a former high-ranking CIA intelligence
analyst, appeared on the Alex Jones Show where he expressed his
fears that staged terrorist attacks in Europe and America are being
prepared to pave the way for public approval of pre-emptive air-strikes
against Iran. McGovern said,

There is already one carrier task force there in the Gulf, two are
steaming toward it at the last report I have at least - they will
all be there in another week or so. The propaganda has been laid,
the aircraft carriers are in place, it doesn't take much to fly the
bombers out of British and US bases - cruise missiles are at the
ready, Israel is egging us on."(Former CIA Analyst Says Iran Strike
Possibly Set For June Or July)

McGovern predicted dire consequences would result from Bushs policy
of pre-emptive war. In McGoverns opinion, Iran would retaliate with
a cruise missile attack against the US fleet then launch a military
invasion of Iraq and simultaneously activate a world wide ring of
terrorists that would make Al-Qaeda look like, a girls netball team.

McGoverns predictions may be unfolding already. The London police
raid that coincided with Perles visit to Britain netted two men
suspected of terrorist plotting to build a massive chemical bomb.
But, after four days of excruciating forensic examination of their
premises, the police found no evidence of bomb-building activities.
Whether this swoop was staged or not remains to be seen, but this
episode resonates with an official campaign to ratchet up the public
concern about terrorism. The non-productive raid has produced a
predictable backlash among the local residents who are demanding
some form of official confirmation that the raid was based on
credible evidence rather than a melange of Islamophobic paranoia.

Last week in Wales at the annual literary festival at Hay-on-Wye,
Dr Shirin Ebadi, the Iranian Nobel Laureate for Peace in 2003,
explained her opposition to western military intervention in Iran.

America says that Iran would pose a threat if it gains access to
nuclear weapons because it is not a democratic country, and because
its government is fundamentalist, and this could pose a danger to
the whole region, but America has forgotten that Pakistan has nuclear
weapons, and Pakistani Muslims are much more fundamentalist than
Iranian Muslims, and Pervez Musharraf did not come to power as a
result of an election. The only difference between Iran and Pakistan
is that Pakistan is friendly towards America and obeys America,
while Iran does not obey America. This double standard is something
that the Iranian people cannot understand."

Exactly as Richard Perle intimated to the BBC, the world is witnessing
the machinations in a game of geopolitical poker. The stakes are
high. In spite of his perceived weakness, George Bush holds a very
strong hand, The White House, the Pentagon, the Supreme Court and
both houses of Congress. Yet his political weakness with the American
public is the primary factor motivating him to launch a pre-emptive
attack against Iran. With his approval rating falling into the low
30s, Bush has too little  if anything - to lose to worry about
current public opinion.

Because of his chronic unpopularity, Bush is already in a complicated
political predicament. Bush is facing the loss of his American
political hegemony in the midterm elections this November. If Bush
loses even one house of Congress, he will face the immediate threat
of official probes led by partisan special prosecutors and a rising
demand for his impeachment. In his game of poker with Ahmadinejad,
Bush has nothing to lose by upping the ante and wrapping himself
in the American flag while dropping a massive bombardment onto the
primary vortex of his Axis of Evil, Iran.

However, if Bush were to attack Iran, he would instantaneously
transform Ahmadinejad into the most powerful figure in the increasingly
Anti-American world. With that transfiguration, Ahmadinejad would
have nothing to constrain him from launching attacks not only against
American targets as Ray McGovern suggests, but the Iranian Prime
Minister would be free to join forces with Hizbollah and Islamic
Jihad in an attack against Americas primary ally in the region,
Israel. Bristling with potential targets from its vulnerable nuclear
facility at Dimona as well as its major population centers including
Tel Aviv, Haifa and Elat, Israel would be in the frontline of any
potential counter-attack by Ahmadinejad.

With leaders like Bush, Ahmadinejad, Blair, Olmert and Benedict XVI
there can be little wonder why the world  driven by achingly inept
religious fundamentalists holding the reigns of power in Washington,
London, Tehran, Rome and Tel Aviv - is lurching forward into battle
toward what can, indeed, be called a new Perle Harbor.

Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty a
distinction not shared with three nuclear states, India, Israel and
Pakistan, who have declined to sign the document.

Michael Carmichael became a professional public affairs consultant,
author and broadcaster in 1968. He worked in five American presidential
campaigns for progressive candidates from RFK to Clinton. In 2003,
he founded The Planetary Movement, a nonprofit public affairs
organization based in the United Kingdom. He has appeared as a
public affairs expert on the BBC's Today, Hardtalk, and PM, as well
as numerous appearances on ITN, NPR and European broadcasts examining
politics and culture. He can be reached through his website:
www.planetarymovement.org

References

The War They Wanted, The Lies They Needed
http://www.vanityfair.com/features/general/articles/060606fege02

Richard N. Perle
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_N._Perle

Richard Perle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Perle

Former CIA Analyst Says Iran Strike Possibly Set For June Or July
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13481.htm

Terror raid: the backlash
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=389222&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5

Police 'had no choice' over terror raid
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1790820,00.html

'Trust at risk' after terror raid
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1791424,00.html

Intelligence behind raid was wrong, officials say
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1791110,00.html

Intelligence needed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1791188,00.html

A pantomime in Forest Gate
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1790984,00.html

Pope calls on Blair to end Iran stand-off
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2210005,00.html

The troublemaker
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1788781,00.html

Nobel Prize winner accuses US of double standards over Iran
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article624193.ece

A giant awakes
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1789542,00.html

       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 2 UN Atomic Watchdog Urges Iran To Cooperate; Says Little Progress On Nuclear Verification
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:00:11 -0400



 
UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG URGES IRAN TO COOPERATE; SAYS LITTLE PROGRESS 
ON NUCLEAR VERIFICATION
New York, Jun 12 2006  5:00PM
The United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the 
world body’s nuclear watchdog, has made little progress in verifying 
Iran’s nuclear programme, according to its latest report, which 
comes as the Agency again calls on the Islamic Republic to cooperate 
to resolve the international dispute over its nuclear ambitions.

In a <"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Statements/2006/ebsp2006n009.html">statement 
to the <"http://www.iaea.org/index.html">IAEA Board, 
which is meeting today in Vienna, the Agency’s Director-General, 
Mohamed ElBaradei, says that the report “makes it clear that 
the Agency has not made much progress in resolving outstanding 
verification issues.”

“I would continue to urge Iran to provide the cooperation needed 
to resolve these issues. I remain convinced that the way forward 
lies through dialogue and mutual accommodation among all concerned 
parties.”

Mr. ElBaradei also welcomed the recent efforts to reach a comprehensive 
agreement “that would address the need of the international 
community to establish confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature 
of Iran’s nuclear programme, while also simultaneously addressing 
Iran’s security, technology and economic needs.”

The report, entitled Implementation of the Non-Proliferation Treaty 
Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran, covers developments 
on the issue since April. 

Last week, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said that European Union-led 
talks with Iran over its nuclear ambitions had got off to a “reasonably 
good start,” and he was hopeful that this time it will 
lead to serious negotiations where all the parties will find themselves 
at the table.

The IAEA has repeatedly called on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment-related 
and reprocessing activities, the condition set by the 
United States for joining in the discussions with the Islamic Republic 
aimed at ensuring its nuclear programme is solely for peaceful 
purposes.

Iran says its activities are aimed at the production of energy but 
the United States and other countries insist it is clandestinely 
seeking to produce nuclear weapons. Last August, Iran rescinded 
its voluntary suspension of nuclear fuel conversion, which can produce 
the enriched uranium necessary either for nuclear power generation 
or for nuclear weapons.

The IAEA Board meeting, which will run from today until Friday, will 
also discuss various other Agency issues, including those related 
to nuclear safeguards in the Democratic People’s Republic of 
Korea (DPRK), something that Mr. ElBaradei also raised in his opening 
statement.

Noting that verification issues in the DPRK were terminated at the 
end of 2002, at the request of the Government, he said that the 
Agency “has been unable to draw any conclusions regarding the DPRK’s 
nuclear activities,” but remains ready to work toward a diplomatic 
solution.

“I continue to believe in the importance and urgency of finding a 
negotiated solution to the current situation. The Agency stands 
ready to work with the DPRK – and with all others – towards a solution 
that addresses the needs of the international community to 
ensure that all nuclear activities in the DPRK are exclusively for 
peaceful purposes, as well as addressing the security and other 
needs of the DPRK,” Mr. ElBaradei said.
 2006-06-12 00:00:00.000 


________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 3 IPS-English POLITICS: Bush Iran Strategy Suffers Major
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:51:27 -0700



<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS EU MM NA HD IP BW NU=20
POLITICS: Bush Iran Strategy Suffers Major Diplomatic Defeat
Analysis by Gareth Porter*

WASHINGTON, Jun 11 (IPS) - Despite claims that U.S. Secretary of State Co=
ndoleezza Rice has regained the diplomatic initiative from Iran with a co=
nditional offer to join multilateral talks with Tehran, the real story be=
hind the policy shift is that the administration has suffered a decisive =
defeat of its effort to get international sanctions for possible military=
  action against Iran.

U.S. officials and French and British diplomats have sought to obscure th=
e failure to get the agreement of Russia and China to a hardline U.N. Sec=
urity Council resolution making Iranian compliance mandatory if it refuse=
d to suspend its uranium enrichment activities. Nevertheless, details of =
the proposal finally given to Iran and Russia's subsequent statement both=
  confirm that the administration has had to accept a package without the =
threat of Security Council action it had counted on.

The list of =94possible measures in the event that Iran does not cooperat=
e=94 in the proposal, as revealed by Reuters on Jun. 9 based on the earli=
er draft of the proposal released by ABC news and interviews with Western=
  diplomats, includes 13 economic and diplomatic =94disincentives=94 to be=
  applied gradually, depending on Iran's behaviour. But the document makes=
  no reference to the possibility of an enforceable Security Council decis=
ion that the Bush administration could use to justify a military attack o=
n Iran.

Going into the crucial negotiations on Iran's nuclear programme between W=
ashington and the other five powers -- France, Britain, China, Russia and=
  Germany -- in early May, the Bush administration had regarded such an en=
forceable Security Council action as the key to its strategy for increasi=
ng the pressure on Iran.

The New York Times reported Apr. 30 that U.S. officials had described an =
administration plan by Rice to get agreement on a U.N. Security Council r=
esolution requiring that Iran cease enriching uranium that would be enfor=
ceable under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Chapter VII autho=
rises the use of penalties, and if those are ineffective, of military for=
ce.

It is now clear that Rice hoped to get the agreement of the five powers t=
o her plan by making a concession the administration had been resisting f=
or weeks -- the agreement to join the talks between the EU3 (Britain, Fra=
nce and Germany) with Iran. On her way to New York for the crucial meetin=
g with the other five powers May 8 and 9, Rice shared with aides her plan=
  to offer that concession at the meeting, as senior State Department offi=
cials later revealed to the Times.

In return, the United States wanted the five powers to call for U.N. sanc=
tions under Chapter VII.

But the Russians and Chinese had other ideas. Before the crucial New York=
  meeting, Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki had gotten assurance=
s from both Russia and China that they would not support any Chapter VII =
resolution in the Security Council. On May 2, Mottaki had told the conser=
vative Kayhan newspaper, =94The thing these two countries have official t=
old us and expressed in diplomatic negotiations is their opposition to sa=
nctions and military attacks.=94

The Iranian foreign minister expressed confidence that =94no sanctions or=
  anything like that will be on the agenda of the Security Council=94.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and his Chinese counterpart Li Zha=
oxing were unmoved by Rice's sudden willingness to join the talks with Ir=
an. Reuters reported that night, =94China has made it clear that any refe=
rence to possible sanctions or war should be eliminated from the U.N. res=
olution order to Tehran to curb is nuclear program. Both Moscow and Beiji=
ng oppose invoking Chapter VII of the U.N. charter.=94

Steve Weisman of the New York Times confirmed in a May 19 report that Lav=
rov had made it clear in the May 8-9 meeting that Russia would not go alo=
ng with any Security Council resolution that made compliance mandatory. T=
he Europeans at the meeting, he observed, had been more realistic, hoping=
  only that the Russians would accept a threat of sanctions divorced from =
Chapter VII.

Thus the real story behind Rice's dramatic May 31 announcement and the pr=
oposal announced in muted terms the following day in Vienna is that the U=
nited States had backed down and accepted a package without the threat of=
  Security Council sanctions Rice and Bush had wanted going into New York.

It was a major defeat for the administration's policy, which Rice and oth=
er administration officials immediately began to cover up. The day after =
the fateful New York meeting, Rice admitted only to =94some tactical diff=
erences about how to express that in the Security Council=94, and suggest=
ed that those slight differences would all be ironed in =94a couple of we=
eks=94.

That same day, Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick assured members =
of Congress that China had =94agreed in principle=94 to go along with the=
  U.S. plan for sanctions -- something he most likely knew by then was not=
  the case. But a careful read-through of his testimony would have noted h=
is clear attempt to pressure China over the issue, saying China's relatio=
nship with the U.S. was =94going to be determined by how they act in Iran=
  in dealing with this nuclear issue=94.

Rice continued to maneuvre over the next three weeks, along with Britain =
and France, to get agreement on a Chapter VII resolution. The Associated =
Press reported May 20 that the three governments had agreed on a draft th=
at included the sentence, =94Where appropriate, these measures would be a=
dopted under Chapter VII, Article 41 of the U.N. Charter.=94

The administration's desperation to obtain Russian and Chinese support fo=
r the U.S. aim is indicated by the fact that President George W. Bush mad=
e a personal call to Russian President Vladimir Putin on May 30, accordin=
g to a Jun. 1 Los Angeles Times report.

Bush was unable to sway the Russian leader. As reported by RIA Novosti ne=
ws agency on Jun. 8, Foreign Minister Lavrov said Russia would back U.N. =
Security Council =94measures=94 against Iran only if =94Iran starts to ac=
t in contradiction to its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty=94=
  (NPT).

Iran's enrichment programme itself does not constitute a violation of the=
  NPT, much to the dismay of the United States, which has proposed changes=
  to the treaty that would outlaw such activities.

At her May 31 press conference, when asked whether she had agreement from=
  Russia and China for U.N. sanctions, Rice ducked the issue, saying, =94I=
  think there is substantial agreement and understanding that Iran now fac=
es a clear choice.=94

The defeat of the administration's plan for getting major power support f=
or the threat of potential military action does not mean the Bush adminis=
tration is incapable of going to war. But it makes the possibility of mil=
itary action increasingly difficult, adding another dimension to Rice's r=
efrain that =94Iran is not Iraq=94.

*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.
*****
+U.S./IRAN: Conditional Offer for Talks Seen as a Gamble (http://ipsnews.=
net/news.asp?idnews=3D33447)

(END/IPS/NA/EU/MM/NU/IP/HD/BW/GP/KS/06)

=20
=3D 06120136 ORP001
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 4 IPS-English POLITICS: Why China Blocks Sanctions on Iran,
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:51:34 -0700



<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS AP WD HD IF IP=20
POLITICS: Why China Blocks Sanctions on Iran, Sudan, Burma
Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS, Jun 12  (IPS) - The People's Republic of China, a veto-wi=
elding permanent member of the U.N. Security Council and one of the world=
's prolific arms producers, continues to remain a major stumbling block t=
o U.S. efforts to impose economic and military sanctions on three countri=
es: Sudan, Burma (Myanmar) and Iran.

=94The reasons are obvious,=94 says a Southeast Asian diplomat who closel=
y monitors the politics in the region. =94Just as much as the United Stat=
es and other Western powers protect their own political and military inte=
rests worldwide, so does China.=94

With the threat of its veto power, China has expressed strong reservation=
s over recent U.S. and Western attempts to either penalise or impose sanc=
tions against Sudan, Burma and Iran for various political reasons.

But the 15-member Security Council has been unable to take any action aga=
inst any of the three countries because of opposition from China or Russi=
a -- or both.

And according to a new report released by the London-based Amnesty Intern=
ational (AI), China is a key arms supplier to countries such as Sudan, Bu=
rma and Nepal, described as human rights violators.

Iran is also a longtime recipient of Chinese weapons, including Shenyang =
fighter planes, T-59 battle tanks, HY-2 Silkworm surface- to-surface miss=
iles and rocket launchers. China has strong economic interests in both Su=
dan and Iran which, in turn, are oil suppliers.

=94China's arms exports, estimated to be in excess of one billion dollars=
  a year often involve the exchange of weapons for raw materials to fuel t=
he country's rapid economic growth,=94 says the AI study.

But it is a trade shrouded in secrecy, the study points out, because Beij=
ing does not publish any information about arms transfers abroad and hasn=
't submitted any data to the U.N.'s annual Register on Conventional Arms =
in the last eight years.

=94As a major arms exporter and a permanent member of the U.N. Security C=
ouncil, China should live up to its obligations under international law,=94=
  says Helen Hughes, Amnesty International's arms control researcher.

=94China is the only major arms exporting power that has not signed up to=
  any multilateral agreements with criteria to prevent arms exports likely=
  to be used for serious human rights violations,=94 she said in a stateme=
nt released here.

Frida Berrigan, senior research associate at the New York-based World Pol=
icy Institute's Arms Trade Resource Centre, says that China seems to be t=
he largest and most flagrant violator of international norms on arms tran=
sfers but it is not a problem one country can hope to solve on its own.

=94In this globalised world where China's military trucks are powered by =
U.S. engines and U.S. fighter plans might have components made in Israel =
or South Korea, arms transfers to countries in conflict or with records o=
f egregious human right abuses cannot be blamed on one country alone,=94 =
Berrigan told IPS.

The only real solution, she pointed out, is to manufacture fewer arms and=
  sell to fewer nations. =94Unfortunately, all signs point toward the tren=
d going in the opposite direction -- towards greater arms proliferation, =
and more sophisticated tools for waging war and repressing rights,=94 Ber=
rigan added.

According to the AI study, more than 200 Chinese military trucks -- norma=
lly fitted with U.S. Cummins diesel engines -- were shipped to Sudan last=
  August, despite a U.S. arms embargo on both countries, and the involveme=
nt of similar vehicles in the killing and abduction of civilians in the p=
olitically-troubled Darfur.

The study, titled =94China: Sustaining Conflict and Human Rights Abuses=94=
, also cites regular Chinese military shipments to Myanmar, including the=
  supply in August 2005 of 400 military trucks to the Burmese army despite=
  its involvement in the torture, killing and forced eviction of hundreds =
of thousands of civilians.

Chinese military exports to Nepal in 2005 and early 2006, including a dea=
l to supply nearly 25,000 Chinese-made rifles and 18,000 grenades to Nepa=
lese security forces, were also badly timed, according to the AI report, =
because it was delivered at a time when =94Nepal was involved in the brut=
al repression of thousands of civilian demonstrators.=94

China is also complicit in an increasingly illicit trade in Chinese-made =
Norinco pistols in Australia, Malaysia, Thailand, and particularly South =
Africa, where they are commonly used for robbery, rape and other crimes.

The report also indicates how Chinese weapons have helped sustain brutal =
conflicts, criminal violence and grave human rights violations in countri=
es such as Sudan, Nepal, Myanmar and South Africa. But it also reveals th=
e possible involvement of Western companies in the manufacture of some of=
  these weapons.

=94China describes its approach to arms export licensing as 'cautious and=
  responsible', yet the reality couldn't be further from the truth,=94 sai=
d Hughes of Amnesty International.

=94They must introduce effective laws and regulations banning all arms tr=
ansfers that could be used for serious human rights violations or breache=
s in international humanitarian law,=94 she added.

Hughes said that Amnesty International is also calling on China to report=
  annually and publicly on all arms export licences and deliveries and to =
support a tough, comprehensive and enforceable international arms trade t=
reaty.

Ann-Louise Colgan, director for policy analysis and communications at Was=
hington-based Africa Action, says that both Russia and China continue to =
oppose sanctions, for their own economic and political interests.

=94China is the single largest investor in the oil industry in Sudan, and=
  Russia also has interests in continuing to sell weapons and other milita=
ry equipment to the Khartoum regime,=94 she added.

But neither China nor Russia wishes to antagonise the Government of Sudan=
, and neither one wishes to set a precedent for international interventio=
n (or even punitive action) based on human rights concerns because of the=
ir own internal repression of ethnic communities, Colgan told IPS.
*****
+China: Sustaining Conflict and Human Rights (http://web.amnesty.org/libr=
ary/index/engasa170302006)
+POLITICS: Bush Iran Strategy Suffers Major Diplomatic Defeat (http://ips=
news.net/news.asp?idnews=3D33573)

(END/IPS/WD/AP/IP/IF/HD/TD/KS/06)

=20
=3D 06121633 ORP005
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 5 IRNA: Saudi FM stresses Iran's inalienable N-right

Tehran, June 12, IRNA

Iran-S Arabia-Nuclear
 
Visiting Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal here Monday
stressed Iran's inalienable right to use nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes.

 Al-Faisal, who arrived here Monday for an official day-long
visit upon the invitation of his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr
Mottaki, made the remark while speaking to reporters upon his
arrival.

 The Islamic Republic of Iran is aware of its regional and
international responsibilities and has made clear it is not
after nuclear weapons, he said.

 He said that his current visit was in the context of regular
exchange of visits by officials of governments, saying these
visits help expand ties between countries.

 Mottaki, for his part, said that the Saudi foreign minister's
current visit was agreed upon by Saudi King Abdullah and Iranian
President Ahmadinejad during the latter's visit to Mecca, where
the two heads of state agreed Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal
would come to Tehran "promote Tehran-Riyadh cooperation on
regional and international issues."
 He added that Al-Faisal would hold talks with President
Ahmadinejad after meeting with him.

 Mottaki said the Saudi minister will also meet with Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei to convey a message from the
Saudi King for the ayatollah.

 "The visit (by the Saudi minister) will be a good opportunity
for the two sides to discuss bilateral, regional and
international cooperation," he further said.


*****************************************************************
 6 IRNA: Iran's Larijani in Algeria for nuclear talks 

Algiers, June 12, IRNA

Algeria-Iran-Larijani 

Iran's Supreme National Security Council Secretary Ali Larijani
arrived in the Algerian capital, Algiers, Monday heading a
high-ranking delegation to hold talks with Algerian officials on
Iran's nuclear case.

 Larijani arrived here from the Egyptian capital, Cairo, where
he held talks Sunday with Egyptian officials.

 On hand to welcome Larijani and his delegation upon their
arrival here was Algerian Foreign Minister Mohamed Bedjaoui.

 Talking to reporters at the airport, Larijani said he was in
Algeria, which he described as a "friend" of Iran, to hold talks
with senior officials of the country.

 He is scheduled to hold talks with Bedjaoui and Algerian
President Abdelaziz Bouteflika.

 Pointing to Algeria's deep-rooted history, culture and
historical ties with Iran, he praised "Algeria's support for the
Iranian nation under various circumstances."

 Algeria, he added, "enjoys a special position among the Iranian
people and government."

 He expressed optimism his Algiers visit would be "a very good
opportunity to continue consultations between the two countries
in all fields."

 On Sunday, in Cairo, Larijani met with Egyptian President Hosni
Mubarak, Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit and Arab League
Secretary General Amr Moussa during which he outlined Iran's
principled stance on Iran's peaceful nuclear activities.

 Egypt calls for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear
case in accordance with rules and regulations of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) while also stressing
on the international community to simultaneously address the
issue of Israel's nuclear weapons.

*****************************************************************
 7 IRNA: Arab League chief stresses diplomatic solution to Iran's N-case

Tehran, June 12, IRNA

Algeria-Iran-Larijani
 
Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa in Cairo on Sunday said
diplomacy would be the best solution to the Iran nuclear issue.

 Moussa made the remarks at a meeting with Iran's Supreme
National Security Council (SNSC) Secretary Ali Larijani before
the
 latter wound up an official two-day visit to Egypt on Sunday.

 He expressed support for Iran's position on the nuclear
standoff with the West, and said in his opinion all countries in
the Middle East region have the right to access nuclear energy
for development.

 Referring to the Islamic Republic of Iran as an "ally" and
"close friend" of the Arab world, he praised Tehran's support
for Palestine and the Arab world since the victory of the
Islamic Revolution in 1979.

 The Arab League secretary general urged Tehran and Arab
governments to continue their financial support to the popular
Palestinian government so that it can achieve its goals.

 Pointing to Iran's stance on developments in Iraq, he pointed
out that most Iraqis, either Shiites or Sunnis, are Muslims who
have been living alongside each other for centuries.

 Larijani, for his part, said providing assistance to the new
Iraqi government would be the only solution to end the country's
occupation and restore much-needed security.

 He urged Arab governments to strive to help the Iraqi
government to neutralize US plots aimed at fomenting and
supporting tribal wars in that country.

 He said the stance of certain Arab governments on the Iraqi
issue was the root of several problems in the country, and added
their attitude has led to expansion of insecurity and
continuation of Iraq's occupation.

 The SNSC secretary stressed the importance of bolstering ties
with Arab governments.

 While in Cairo, Larijani also held separate meetings with
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Foreign Minister Ahmed
Aboul Gheit, and outlined Iran's principled stance on the
country's legal nuclear activities.

 Egypt calls for a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear
case within frameworks of regulations of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), while stressing the international
community should also address the issue of Israel's nuclear
weapons.

*****************************************************************
 8 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Accepts Parts of Western Nuke Offer
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday June 12, 2006 5:16 AM
 	
AP Photo VAH109 
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran said Sunday that it accepted some parts
of a Western offer aimed at getting Tehran to drop its nuclear
program, but it rejected others while calling the central point
ambiguous. 

Iran said the key issue of uranium enrichment - a process that
can make nuclear fuel for a power plant or fissile material for
an atomic bomb - needed clarification. 

Although the government did not give specifics, the comments
were the first time Iran has said directly that it rejects or
accepts parts of the package. 

Top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said Iran would reject the
package outright if Western powers threatened the Islamic
republic with sanctions in the nuclear standoff. 

The comments came as the United States and Europe lobbied other
nations to join them this week in urging Iran to accept the
offer - and warning of U.N. Security Council action if it does
not - according to documents shared with The Associated Press in
Vienna, Austria. 

The package, presented by permanent Security Council members the
United States, Russia, China, France and Britain, plus Germany,
contains a series of incentives for Iran to suspend uranium
enrichment, which would allow negotiations over its nuclear
ambitions. 

The incentives include promises that the United States and
Europe will provide Iran nuclear technology and that Washington
will join direct talks with Tehran. 

Iran has not responded to the offer, and it underlined Sunday
that it would not be rushed. Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid
Reza Asefi insisted Iran was not stalling over the package and
would take ``as long as is necessary'' to study it. 

He told a press conference the package includes ``points which
are acceptable. There are points which are ambiguous. There are
points that should be strengthened, and points that we believe
should not exist.'' 

He did not give specifics. 

Larijani said the offer of nuclear technology was a ``positive
point'' but that ``there are also points that are unclear, such
as the uranium enrichment program.'' 

``This has not been made clear yet to Iran, so these are things
where the finishing touches must be made,'' he told reporters in
Cairo, Egypt, after talks with President Hosni Mubarak and Arab
League chief Amr Moussa. 

Egypt is one of the members of the U.N. watchdog nuclear
agency's board of directors, which the United States and Europe
are lobbying to pressure Iran to accept the deal. 

Larijani sharply denounced any threats of sanctions against Iran
in connection with the package. 

``We will not accept negotiations under pressure,'' he said. 

He said the package, as presented to Iran, did not contain any
threats of penalties. 

The five permanent Security Council members and Germany are said
to have worked out a set of possible sanctions if Iran rejects
the proposal, but these were not mentioned when EU envoy Javier
Solana presented the package to Iran last week to maintain a
positive atmosphere. 

The United States accuses Iran of seeking to develop nuclear
weapons, which Tehran denies, saying its program seeks only to
develop energy. 

But the package drops demands for an all-out scrapping of
enrichment, instead asking Iran to suspend such activity during
the duration of any negotiations. 

In two position papers shown to the AP, the United States and
Europe were lobbying hard for support of the package from
members of the 35-nation board of the International Atomic
Energy Agency before a Monday meeting of the body. 

``We are ... encouraging all board members to make firm
statements to call on Iran'' to negotiate on the six-power
offer, the U.S. position paper said. 

If Tehran declines, the text warned that the five permanent
Security Council members plus Germany ``have agreed to pursue
measures, including at the U.N. Security Council, (to) pressure
the Iranian regime to change course.'' 

The other text, issued by Britain, France and Germany, also
warned that if Iran remains defiant, ``the Security Council will
have no choice but to increase the pressure on Iran.'' 

The texts were shared with the AP by diplomats accredited to the
gathering. 
--- 
Associated Press reporters George Jahn in Vienna, Austria, and
Nadia Abou El-Magd in Cairo, Egypt, contributed to this report.	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: U.S., Europe Lobby to Put Pressure on Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday June 12, 2006 7:16 AM
 	
By GEORGE JAHN 
Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The United States and Europe are lobbying
other nations to join them this week in urging Iran to start
talks on its uranium enrichment program - and in warning of U.N.
Security Council action if it doesn't - documents shared with
The Associated Press show. 

Two position papers issued ahead of Monday's board meeting of
the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency reflect a concerted
Western effort to persuade members of the 35-nation board to
line up behind a six-nation offer to Iran to talk about its
nuclear ambitions. 

They also show Western commitment to secure a long-term Iranian
moratorium on enrichment - which can produce fuel or the fissile
core of nuclear warheads - even though Tehran initially is only
asked to suspend such activity during the duration of any
negotiations. 

The texts, which were circulated among board member nations
ahead of this week's meeting, were shared with the AP Sunday by
diplomats accredited to the gathering who demanded anonymity
because they were not authorized to show them to the media. 
``We are ... encouraging all board members to make firm
statements to call on Iran'' to negotiate on the six-power
offer, said the U.S. position paper. If Tehran declines, the
text warned that the United States, Russia, China, Britain and
France - the five permanent Security Council members - plus
Germany ``have agreed to pursue measures, including at the U.N.
Security Council, (to) pressure the Iranian regime to change
course.'' 

The other text, issued by Britain, France and Germany, also
warned that if Iran remains defiant, ``the Security Council will
have no choice but to increase the pressure on Iran.'' 

``The most important step for building international confidence
will be for Iran to refrain from all enrichment-related and
reprocessing activities until international confidence is
restored,'' said the European statement. 

The U.S. text said the full suspension of enrichment-related and
reprocessing activities was ``essential if Iran is to succeed in
building international confidence.'' 

Diplomats who have been briefed on the six-nation offer told the
AP that the emphasis on ``rebuilding international confidence''
is diplomatic language for demands for an enrichment freeze that
would last years beyond the conclusion of any successful
negotiations with Iran. 

Long-term, verifiable suspension of enrichment is a ``red line''
for the United States and its key Western allies, said one of
the diplomats. 

Still, said the diplomats, there could be divisions on
enrichment among the six powers that signed off on the Iran
package of incentives and potential punishments in Vienna
earlier this month. 

China, Russia, and potentially Germany, may be prepared to push
to allow Iran some tightly controlled small-scale enrichment
rather than to see negotiations founder. Additionally, Russia
and China might balk at enforcing the penalties part of the
package - selective U.N. sanctions imposed on Iranian officials
and activities. 

In Cairo, chief Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani told
reporters that Tehran would not accept the proposal if it
contains any threats of punishment in case of rejection. 

He also said the demands on enrichment are ``unclear,'' while
foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said some components
of the six-power package should be removed. 

One of the diplomats in Vienna said the U.S.-European lobbying
efforts were chiefly aimed at influential members of the
Nonaligned Movement - countries such as India, Egypt, Argentina
and Brazil, which carry great weight among other bloc members
and have broken ranks in recent months to support Iran's
referral to the Security Council. 

The Nonaligned Movement, the world's biggest bloc after the
United Nations, emphatically backed Iran in its nuclear standoff
with the West at a foreign ministers' meeting in Malaysia last
month. 

Iran insists it will not give up its right to enrich uranium and
produce nuclear fuel as allowed by the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty, to which it is a signatory. 

Delegates to the board meeting at the IAEA's Vienna headquarters
are not expected to focus on Iran until midweek, after they have
dealt with other matters, mostly technical. 

They will review the two latest reports by IAEA chief Mohamed
ElBaradei focusing on Iran's enrichment efforts and documenting
lack of progress by agency inspectors seeking information on
activities and documents that could be linked to a nuclear
weapons program. 

The board forwarded Iran's nuclear file to the Security Council
early this year and after a series of IAEA board resolutions
taking Iran to task for hindering probes into its nuclear
program and more recently urging it to re-impose a freeze on
enrichment. 

--- 
On the Net: www.iaea.org 
		 	 	   

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 10 Guardian Unlimited: U.N. Nuclear Chief: Little Iran Progress
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday June 12, 2006 5:31 PM
 	
AP Photo VIE103 
By GEORGE JAHN 
Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The head of the U.N. atomic watchdog
agency told a 35-nation meeting Monday he had made little
progress in his probe of suspicious aspects of Iran's nuclear
program. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency ``has not made much
progress in resolving outstanding verification issues,'' Mohamed
ElBaradei told board member nations, alluding to suspicions that
some of Tehran's nuclear activities could be used to develop
bombs. 

The United States and Europe are lobbying other nations at the
meeting to join them in urging Iran to accept a package of
rewards for freezing uranium enrichment - and in warning Tehran
of U.N. Security Council action if it refuses, according to
documents shared with The Associated Press. 

Chief U.S. delegate Gregory L. Schulte called on Iran to respond
positively to demands that it negotiate and suspend enrichment,
a process that can make nuclear fuel for a power plant or
fissile material for an atomic bomb. 

``The next decision needs to be taken not in Vienna but in
Tehran,'' he said. 

Iran insisted again Monday it had a right to uranium enrichment,
expressing reluctance to suspend it as a condition for
negotiations over the incentives offered by the five permanent
U.N. Security Council members - the United States, Britain,
China, France and Russia - plus Germany. 

Iranian spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham would not say whether the
Islamic republic would suspend enrichment for negotiations,
instead repeating the government line that enrichment was Iran's
``obvious right.'' 

``This is a nonnegotiable issue,'' Elham said. 

Iran has not responded formally to the incentives but said
Sunday that parts of the package were acceptable, others were
not, and the key issue of enrichment needed clarification. 

Elham gave no indication of when Iran would reply to the package
presented June 6. In Luxembourg, European Union foreign policy
chief Javier Solana said he expected an Iranian response this
week. 

Meanwhile, Israeli Premier Ehud Olmert said in London that his
country would not accept a nuclear-armed Iran. Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad repeatedly has questioned Israel's right to
exist and said in October the Jewish state should be ``wiped off
the map.'' 

Israel is believed to possess the world's sixth-largest nuclear
arsenal. Olmert sidestepped a question on whether Israel would
act alone against Iran's nuclear program - as it did when
Israeli warplanes destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility in
1981. 

Diplomats briefed on the six-nation offer told the AP it demands
an enrichment freeze that would last years beyond the conclusion
of any successful negotiations with Iran. 

Long-term, verifiable suspension of enrichment is a ``red line''
for the United States and its key Western allies, one diplomat
said. 

Still, the diplomats spoke of potential divisions on enrichment
among the six powers. They spoke on condition of anonymity
because the negotiations were confidential. 

China, Russia and potentially Germany may be prepared to allow
Iran some tightly controlled small-scale enrichment rather than
to see negotiations founder. Additionally, Russia and China
might balk at enforcing the potential penalties: selective U.N.
sanctions imposed on Iranian officials and activities. 

One of the diplomats said U.S. and European lobbying efforts
were chiefly aimed at influential members of the Nonaligned
Movement - countries such as India, Egypt, Argentina and Brazil
that carry great weight among other bloc members and have broken
ranks to support Iran's referral to the Security Council. 

The Nonaligned Movement, the world's biggest bloc after the
United Nations, has emphatically backed Iran. 

--- 
Associated Press reporters Veronika Oleksyn in Vienna and Ali
Akbar Dareini in Tehran, Iran, contributed to this report. 
^--- 
On the Net: 
International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 11 Guardian Unlimited: China Opposed to Joint Statement on Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Monday June 12, 2006 7:46 PM
 	
AP Photo VIE108 
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - China and Russia are holding back from a
united message with Western powers to insist that Tehran halt
uranium enrichment, a stance that could encourage Iranian
defiance, diplomats said Monday. 

Speaking outside a meeting of the International Atomic Energy
Agency's 35-nation board, the diplomats told The Associated
Press that China was opposed to signing a joint statement and
Russia was leaning against participating. 

Their reluctance reflected the East-West divide among the six
world powers that just two weeks ago appeared to be in agreement
about how to engage Iran over enrichment and to persuade it to
give up technology that could be used to make nuclear arms. Iran
says its program has the sole purpose of generating electricity. 

``China is not OK and Russia might follow'' Beijing's lead in
opposing the joint statement, said a diplomat accredited to the
meeting, who like other diplomats agreed to discuss the issue
only if not quoted by name because the information was
confidential. 

Another diplomat said China appeared to be feeling pressure from
the Nonaligned Movement, which last month emphatically backed
Iran in its nuclear standoff with the West. 

Russia's stance was less clear. But Moscow for months has
hindered attempts by the United States and its European allies
to turn up the heat on Iran in the U.N. Security Council. 

Resistance by Russia and China to tough U.N. action contributed
to Washington's decision last month to reverse decades of policy
and agree to join in multinational talks with Iran - if Tehran
accepts a package of rewards, freezes enrichment during the
talks and places a long-term moratorium on such activity. 

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett announced at the end
of high-level talks in Vienna on June 2 that all five permanent
Security Council members plus Germany supported the joint
approach on engaging Iran. 

But the signs of discord Monday reflected continuing differences
despite the public show of unity. 

One diplomat said Britain, France and Germany - the three
European nations participating in the six-nation Iran package -
were modifying a draft statement on Iran hoping to secure
Moscow's and Beijing's backing on a final version. 
Other diplomats spoke of more potential divisions. China, Russia
and possibly Germany might push to allow Iran some tightly
controlled small-scale enrichment rather than see talks founder.

Russia and China also might balk at enforcing selective U.N.
sanctions on Iranian officials and activities. 

But long-term, verifiable suspension of Iranian enrichment is a
``red line'' for the United States and its key Western allies,
one diplomat said. 

While the IAEA meeting is not expected to formally focus on the
Iranian nuclear standoff until Wednesday at the earliest, the
issue dominated the gathering on its first day Monday. 

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei told the meeting his agency had not
made much progress in resolving verification issues with Iran,
alluding to suspicions that some of Tehran's nuclear activities
could be used for the development of an atomic weapons program. 

He described the rewards offered to entice the Tehran regime
into negotiations as addressing ``the need of the international
community to establish confidence in the exclusively peaceful
nature of Iran's nuclear program.'' 

Chief U.S. delegate Gregory L. Schulte called on Iran to respond
positively to the offer for talks - and suspend enrichment,
which can be used both to produce fuel for nuclear reactors that
generate power and to create the core of atomic warheads. 

``The next decision needs to be taken not in Vienna but in
Tehran,'' Schulte told reporters. 

In Luxembourg, the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier
Solana, said he expected an Iranian response to the six-power
offer this week. 

But Iran suggested it was digging in its heels on enrichment.

When asked if Iran would suspend enrichment for the sake of
negotiations, spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham repeated the
government line that enrichment is Iran's ``obvious right.'' 

--- 
Associated Press writer Veronika Oleksyn contributed to this
report. 

--- 
On the Net: 
International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org 	 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 12 IRNA: Europe's package of incentives a "move forward" - Elham - 

Tehran, June 12, IRNA

Iran-Elham-Nuclear 

Government spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham, talking to domestic
and foreign reporters at his weekly press conference, said
Tehran considers the package of incentives presented to Iran by
the six powers as a "step forward."

 On June 6 European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana
paid a visit to Iran to hand over a package of incentives
approved by representatives of the five permanent members of the
United Nations Security Council -- Russia, China, Britain,
France and the United States -- plus Germany to Tehran and
convince it to suspend uranium enrichment and resume discussions
on guarantees over its nuclear activities.

 "We are discussing Europe's proposed package. We will examine
it in full and give our decision.

 "We will not negotiate with anyone on our inalienable and legal
rights but we are ready to hold talks on all international
issues and those of common concern," Elham said.

 He reiterated Iran's inalienable and legal right to nuclear
energy, saying "the government has repeatedly announced its
clear stance on the nuclear fuel cycle issue."

*****************************************************************
 13 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: EU proposals a move forward - Elham 

2006/06/12   
  
Tehran, June 12 - Government Spokesman Gholam-Hossein Elham
Monday described a package of proposals submitted to Iran by the
West as a step forward.
 
Speaking to domestic and foreign reporters, the Spokesman said,
"We are discussing Europe's proposed package. We will examine it
in full and give our decision."
 
"We will not negotiate with anyone on our inalienable and legal
rights but we are ready to hold talks on all international
issues and those of common concern," Elham said.
 
He reiterated Iran's inalienable and legal right to nuclear
energy, saying "The government has repeatedly announced its
clear stance on the nuclear fuel cycle issue." 

mk   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: Iran says nuclear fuel work non-negotiable 

 Mon Jun 12, 6:48 AM ET 
		 	 
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran " /> Iranhas said that its controversial 
nuclear fuel work was non-negotiable, in another sign the Islamic 
republic was unwilling to suspend sensitive uranium enrichment 
work. 

 "Iran has achieved nuclear fuel technology. This is our absolute 
right, and we will not negotiate our absolute right with anyone," 
Iranian government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told reporters 
Monday.
 
He was responding to a question on whether Iran was willing to
suspend enrichment work in line with an international proposal
that offers incentives and multilateral negotiations in return.
 
"In general terms, a legal and internationally-recognised
absolute right is not something on which we can negotiate, but
we can negotiate on common international concerns," Elham said.
 
"We are conducting a full examination of the offer, and then we
will give our opinion, but we consider that the fact that these
proposals have been made is a step forward," he added.
 
Tehran considers uranium enrichment to be its right under the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and says it only wants to use
it to make fuel for power generation, but the United States says
Iran is hiding work to develop atomic weapons.
 
The United States, European Union
" /> European Unioncountries Britain, France and Germany, as
well as Russia and China last Tuesday offered Iran a package of
benefits if it suspends uranium enrichment and begins talks on
guaranteeing it does not seek nuclear weapons, but threatened UN
sanctions if Tehran fails to comply.
 
US President George W. Bush
" /> President George W. Bushsaid Friday that Tehran had "weeks
and not months" to accept the international community's offer.
 
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: US lobbying to stop pro-Iran non-aligned nuclear statement -
     
 by Michael Adler Mon Jun 12, 12:57 PM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - The United States is trying to keep non-aligned 
states at the UN atomic agency from issuing a statement backing 
Iran " /> 's claims that it has a right to uranium enrichment, 
diplomats told AFP. 

 "People will be watching the NAM statement to see how positive 
or negative they are," said a European diplomat, who stressed the 
delicacy of current diplomacy, with world powers offering Iran a 
package of benefits if it suspends uranium enrichment that has 
raised fears that it is seeking nuclear weapons.
 
A Non-Aligned Movement diplomat said that "all the NAM is doing
is repeating the statement made in Kuala Lumpur" on May 30, a
week before the United States and five other world powers
produced their offer to Tehran in order to cool an escalating
standoff.
 
"The Americans are not happy with that statement and told that
to the NAM members" on the International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> 's 35-nation board, the diplomat said.
 
The diplomat said the United States would like the NAM, which
has some 16 member states on the IAEA board, to repeat an IAEA
resolution that has called on Iran to suspend uranium
enrichment, which makes nuclear reactor fuel but also atom bomb
material.
 
"The US point of view is that the Iranians should not be allowed
to feel relaxed about enrichment, that the goal is to keep the
pressure on them," the diplomat said.
 
A vigorous debate on the deadlock over Iran's nuclear program
was expected at an IAEA meeting that opened in Vienna Monday but
no resolution was planned, as diplomats waited to see how Iran
responds to the international benefits proposal, which also
threatened UN sanctions if Tehran fails to comply..
 
The communique issued by the grouping of 114 mostly developing
countries after two-day talks in Malaysia did not include any
criticism of Iran's nuclear activities.
 
Instead it emphasized the right of all nations "without any
discrimination" to nuclear technology for peaceful research and
energy production and warned against any attack on related
nuclear facilities.
 
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 16 AFP: UN atomic agency meets amid Iran nuclear crisis 

 by Michael Adler Mon Jun 12, 3:38 PM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - The United States stepped up pressure on Iran " /> 
Iranto curb its nuclear program as the UN atomic watchdog warned 
questions remained over Tehran's nuclear ambitions. 

 UN nuclear chief Mohamed ElBaradei opened the meeting of the 
International Atomic Energy Agency " /> International Atomic 
Energy Agencysaying a more than three-year IAEA probe had failed 
to resolve "verification issues" over Iran's nuclear work.
 
"I would continue to urge Iran to provide the cooperation needed
to resolve these issues," ElBaradei said.
 
Despite being unable to certify Iran is not seeking nuclear
arms, ElBaradei said he remained "convinced that the way forward
lies through dialogue and mutual accommodation among all
concerned parties."
 
Gregory Schulte, the US ambassador to the IAEA, pressed Iran to
honor international requests to suspend uranium enrichment,
which can make fuel for nuclear power reactors or the raw
material for atom bombs.
 
Tehran should "take advantage of the enormous diplomatic
opportunity that lays in front of the Islamic Republic," he said.
 
Six world powers -- the United States, Britain, France, Germany,
Russia and China -- last week offered Iran a package of
incentives in return for reining in its program.
 
Suspending uranium enrichment was the pre-condition for talks on
the benefits package.
 
The powers threatened UN sanctions if Tehran fails to comply.
 
But Iran seemed resolute.
 
"Iran has achieved nuclear fuel technology. This is our absolute
right, and we will not negotiate our absolute right with
anyone," Iranian government spokesman Gholam Hossein Elham told
reporters in Tehran.
 
Iran says it has a mandate to enrich uranium under the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty as it only wants to use it to make fuel
for power generation.
 
A vigorous debate on Iran but no resolution is expected at this
week's IAEA meeting of its 35-nation board of governors, with
the Iranian issue expected to come up Wednesday or Thursday.
 
In London, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert backed efforts to
end the stand-off with Iran.
 
"This is not an Israeli problem. It's a problem of every nation
in the world," the prime minister said after talks with his
British counterpart Tony Blair
" /> Tony Blairin London.
 
Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal arrived in Tehran
on Monday, saying he hoped for a speedy resolution to the crisis.
 
But the United States faced an 11th hour hurdle in its efforts
to ramp up pressure on Tehran.
 
Diplomats said Washington was fighting to prevent non-aligned
states on the IAEA board from issuing a statement supporting
Iran's right to uranium enrichment. 

Washington feared this would ease up the carefully orchestrated
pressure on the Iranians, they said. 

A non-aligned diplomat said the bloc was planning a statement
that would renew a message first issued May 30 in Malaysia, when
the the Non Aligned Movement affirmed the right to atomic energy
and opposed any attack on nuclear facilities. 

"The Americans are not happy with that statement and told that
to the NAM members," the diplomat said. 

The United States wanted the bloc, which numbers some 16 mostly
developing nations on the IAEA board, to stick to a February
IAEA resolution calling on Iran to suspend uranium enrichment. 

"The US point of view is that the Iranians should not be allowed
to feel relaxed about enrichment, that the goal is to keep the
pressure on them," the diplomat said. 

A senior US State Department official said Washington did not
want Tehran to press on with its enrichment activities while
drawing out negotiations with the rest of the world. 

With Iran being called on to answer the benefits offer within
weeks, "we don't want the Iranian authorities to be considering
this indefinitely," a senior US State Department official said. 

"We don't want to be back into a situation we've seen before
where they say they are prepared to negotiate but at the same
time they just continue with their nuclear activities," the
official said.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 17 AFP: UN atomic agency meets: Iran giving first indications of nuclear response - 

 by Michael Adler Mon Jun 12, 2:56 AM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - The UN nuclear watchdog meets in Vienna with the 
first indications coming of Iran " /> 's response to an 
international offer of benefits if Tehran reins in its nuclear 
program. 

 Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said in 
Tehran Sunday that Iran would not compromise on its nuclear 
"rights", signalling an unwillingness to cede to demands to 
suspend sensitive uranium enrichment work that has raised fears 
the Islamic Republic seeks the bomb.
 
Asefi said Iran was still studying the offer of incentives and
talks from six world powers if it agrees to an enrichment
freeze, adding that some elements of the package were
"acceptable" and others were not.
 
Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani said his country
would not accept any "threats" or preconditions in negotiations.
 
"The language of threat contradicts the language of
negotiations," Larijani told a press conference in Cairo.
 
Tehran considers uranium enrichment to be its right under the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and says it only wants to use
it to make fuel for power generation but the United States says
Iran is hiding work to develop atomic weapons.
 
In Vienna, a vigorous debate on Iran but no resolution or major 
initiative is expected at the regular meeting that kicks off 
Monday and could last several days of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency " /> 's (IAEA) 35-nation board of governors.
 
"The decision to be made is in Tehran, not at the board," a
European diplomat told AFP about the offer. The diplomat asked
not be named due to the sensitivity of the issue.
 
A second diplomat said: "I think that there is no stomach at all
from any country next week to posture or stir up any fires at
this delicate time in the political process."
 
The IAEA board set off the latest crisis when it in February
found Iran in violation of non-proliferation safeguards for
almost two decades of hiding nuclear activities. This opened the
door to possible punitive action by the United Nations
" /> Security Council.
 
The United States, European Union
" /> countries Britain, France and Germany, as well as Russia
and China last Tuesday offered Iran a package of benefits if it
suspends uranium enrichment and begins talks on guaranteeing it
does not seek nuclear weapons, but threatened UN sanctions if
Tehran fails to comply.
 
A senior Iranian official warned nations Friday to show
"self-restraint" at the IAEA meeting in order not to endanger
this diplomacy.
 
Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh said Iran has
a "positive approach" to possible talks and that nothing should
happen at the board "to affect this more or less positive
environment."
 
His comments came after the IAEA reported Thursday that Iran had
accelerated uranium enrichment on the same day that the six
world powers asked it to halt the work and open talks.
 
Iran stepped up enrichment on June 6 when EU foreign policy
chief Javier Solana was in Tehran to present the package of
benefits to be discussed if Iran suspends the work which makes
nuclear reactor fuel or in highly refined form atom bomb
material, the report said.
 
On June 6, it said, Iran started feeding feedstock uranium gas
into a connected series of 164 centrifuges -- known as a cascade
-- to produce enriched uranium.
 
Iran on Friday confirmed these facts.
 
Soltanieh said it was a "coincidence" and not meant as a
provocation that Iran re-started enrichment work the same day
that Solana was in Tehran. 

A Western diplomat said IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei "had been
quietly urging the Iranians to create the conditions necessary
to return to negotiations and one of these could have been
holding off from using any new nuclear material at this time." 

US President George W. Bush " /> said Friday that Tehran had 
"weeks and not months" to accept the international community's 
offer and warned the Security Council would act if Iran did not 
comply. Iran has given no timing for its response.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 18 IRNA: Iran, Syria consider mutual defense ties as strategic 

Tehran, June 12, IRNA

Iran-Defense-Syria 

Deputy Commander of Syria's Armed Forces and Defense Minister
Lieutenant General Hassan Ali Turkmani and Defense Minister
General Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar here Monday held talks on
defense and military ties, assessing them as strategic and a
model of regional cooperation.

 Palestine, Iraq, campaign against terrorism and US presence in
the region were high on the agenda of the meeting and the two
ministers underlined the sovereignty right of the Palestinian
people, the need to strengthen Iraq's government and territorial
integrity.

 Mohammad-Najjar stressed Iran's multifaceted support for Syria
under the present sensitive conditions and said, "Syria's
security is considered as part of the security and national
interests of Iran. We find ourselves bound to defend it.

 "Deeply rooted bilateral relations are in line with promotion
of regional peace, stability and security."

 For his part, General Turkmani appreciated Iran's approach to
and support for his country and said that for his part he
carried the message of his country's solidarity and support for
Iran.

 Stressing Syria's support for peaceful use of nuclear energy by
Iran, he said that the only way to solve Iran's nuclear crisis
is to recognize its rights officially.

 The Syrian minister hoped for further expansion of mutual ties
and cooperation between the two states during his stay in Iran.
He also hoped that the defense potentials of both sides will be
effective in promoting the security and stability of the region.

 Prior to the meeting of the two defense ministers, General
Turkmani was officially welcomed in a ceremony by Iran's senior
Defense Ministry officials.

 Turkmani heading a high-ranking defense delegation arrived in
Tehran on an official four-day visit on Sunday night in response
to the invitation of his Iranian counterpart.

 During his stay in Tehran, General Turkmani will confer with
high-ranking Iranian defense and political officials on
bilateral ties as well as the latest regional and international
developments.

 Besides, the Syrian defense minister and his entourage are
scheduled to inspect Iran's defense and military centers.


*****************************************************************
 19 IRNA: China welcomes Ahmadinejad's participation in SCO summit 

Beijing, June 12, IRNA

Iran-China-SCO 

China's Assistant Foreign Minister Li Hui on Monday welcomed the
scheduled visit of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to China to
attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit.

 The sixth SCO summit is scheduled to open in the port city of
Shanghai in eastern China on Thursday.

 The summit will be attended by the heads of states of Iran,
China, Russia, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan,
Pakistan and Mongolia as well as high-ranking representatives of
India, the United Nations and ASEAN.

 In response to a question whether Iran's nuclear issue will be
on the agenda of the upcoming event, he said that SCO has never
dealt with the issue.

 Hui said that during the summit, presidents of member and
observer states will exchange views on various common matters of
regional and international concern as well as the prospect of
the progress of the organization.

 He added that meanwhile, the attending officials will expound
on their stance.

 "President Ahmadinejad is expected to participate in the event.

 Meanwhile, a schedule on the activities of the presidents of
Iran and other represented states is being drawn up," he added.

 As an observer member of Shanghai Cooperation Organization,
Iran has so far attended two of the SCO meetings in July and
October 2005, which were held in Kazakhstan and Russia
respectively.

 Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which was founded by six
countries in 2001, aims to bolster cooperation among member
states including China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan,
Kazakhstan and Tajikistan.

 By accepting Iran, Pakistan and India as observer members in
2005, SCO expanded the scope of its activities. Meanwhile, it
stopped involvement in security matters within common borders
and promised a kind of new structure for regional convergence.

 At the sixth SCO summit, the heads of member states will
discuss the policy on expansion of the organization, cooperation
aiming to secure SCO members' mutual interests in political,
security and economic fields. Besides, they are expected to sign
important documents.

*****************************************************************
 20 AFP: North Korea flexes missile muscle to grab US attention - 

 by P. Parameswaran Mon Jun 12, 6:27 PM ET 
		 	 
WASHINGTON (AFP) - North Korea " /> North Korea's preparations 
for possible long-range missile tests -- its first in nearly a 
decade -- may be an attempt to grab the attention of a US 
government distracted by its nuclear row with Iran " /> Iran, 
experts said. 

There are "enough indications" to suggest that the Stalinist
state is getting ready to test-fire an intercontinental
ballistic missile, eight years after sending a missile over
northern Japan, a senior US official was quoted saying in a
weekend news report.
 
Current test preparations are reportedly far more advanced than
on previous occasions when North Korea appeared to be gearing up
for a missile launch.
 
Pyongyang, which claims to have nuclear bombs, has frequently
used missile tests and other provocative military activity to
spur either diplomatic efforts or to shake up what they view as
unfavourable diplomatic situations.
 
But Pyongyang's latest demonstration of a planned long range
missile test, against the backdrop of stalled nuclear talks, is
seen by some analysts as a plea for US attention.
 
"It is very likely that North Korea believes that with Iran
being offered a very reasonable package of incentives to abandon
their nuclear program, they too would like to ensure that they
are getting the appropriate attention and incentives from the
United States," said Jon Wolfsthal, a weapons expert at the
Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
 
North Korea's missile test preparations pre-date a US offer this
month to join in the negotiations between Iran and the European
nations to end a nuclear standoff with the Islamic republic.
 
But Wolfsthal said the hardline communist state's stepped up
missile activity could be an indication that Pyongyang "is very
frustrated with its inability to get political and economic
benefits from its nuclear program."
 
The United States had been involved with China, Russia, Japan
and South Korea
" /> South Koreain talks with North Korea to disband the
reclusive state's nuclear arms in return for security and
diplomatic guarantees and critical energy aid.
 
Six-party talks climaxed in September 2005, with North Korea
agreeing in principle to end its atomic weapons program.
 
But negotiations have collapsed since November, after the United
States imposed financial sanctions on Pyongyang for alleged
counterfeiting and money laundering activities.
 
During the impasse, Washington has been actively involved in
diplomacy to defuse the Iranian nuclear crisis.
 
It has offered to directly talk to the Iranians and provide
various incentives to encourage Tehran to suspend uranium
enrichment, a process that could lead to making nuclear bombs.
 
"The North Koreans do not like to be ignored and they are famous
for staging provocative actions to remind the United States that
they are still potentially dangerous," noted Joseph Cirincione,
a nuclear expert at the Center for American Progress.
 
He said that increased activity at a North Korean missile launch
site, being monitored by US satellites, may be aimed more at
"stimulating the six-party negotiating process than actually
developing a capability that could actually threaten the United
States."
 
Indications are that the North Koreans are itching for a nuclear
deal but are frustrated by the on-again, off-again negotiating
tactics of the United States.
 
US authorities have not directly linked North Korea's latest
missile activity to their nearly four-year nuclear standoff.
 
"Our concerns about missile activities in North Korea are
longstanding," State Department spokeswoman Amanda Rogers Harper
said, stressing that they "pose a threat to the region and the
world." 
Recently, the administration of President George W. Bush
" /> President George W. Bushsignalled it was prepared to
consider opening a parallel track of negotiations with North
Korea on a peace treaty to replace the 1953 armistice that ended
the Korean War. 

Some believe the move could result in a breakthrough to get
talks moving again. 

"But we haven't seen any results of the reported action yet, and
the North Koreans may be getting impatient and are sort of
puffing themselves up," Cirincione said.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 21 New York Times: Russia Bargains for Bigger Stake in West's Energy - 

By STEVEN R. WEISMANPublished: June 12, 2006 			 

WASHINGTON, June 11 — Russian, American, European and Japanese
officials are negotiating over whether Russiashould be allowed
greater latitude to invest in utilities, pipelines, natural gas
facilities and other infrastructure in the United Statesand
Europe. 

"Russia and the Post-Soviet Nations">Russia and the Post-Soviet 
Nations Wide-ranging coverage of Russia and the former Soviet 
republics, updated by The Times's Moscow bureau.
 
In a draft declaration for endorsement at a Group of 8summit
meeting next month in St. Petersburg, Russia, broadened Russian
access is paired with something the West wants: endorsement of
market principles and greater access for foreign investment in
the energy industry of Russia, one of the biggest oil and
natural gas producers in the world.

Russian investment in Western energy facilities has been
relatively modest, like Lukoil'sinvestment in a chain of 2,000
filling stations in the United States. But earlier this year,
when Gazprom, the giant Russian natural gas monopoly, expressed
an interest in buying Britain's largest distributor of natural
gas, it raised a furor in Britain similar to reactions in the
United States to a Chinese bid for Unocal and a Dubai company's
arrangement to control operations at several American ports.

 The political maneuvering keeps a channel for progress open at
a time of fierce tensions between Russia and the West over
access to energy supplies. In January, Russia cut off natural
gas shipments to Ukraine during a price dispute, which shut down
deliveries in Europe. The move prompted denunciations from the
United States and Europe, and was seen as an effort to punish
Ukraine, long dominated by Russia, for its political
independence. 

More recently, Vice President Dick Cheneyand other American
officials have rebuked Russia for its increased state control of
the energy sector, its crackdown on dissent and what they say is
an effort to muscle out Western investments in oil and gas
pipelines in the Caspian Sea, where the United States has been
trying to secure energy supplies in ways that would bypass
Russia.

The goal of the energy negotiations, which are being held at the
highest levels, is to smooth over the most pointed differences
between Russia and the West with some mutually acceptable
language. "The U.S., Russia and Europe are trying to find their
way to common ground on the road to the summit," said Daniel
Yergin, president of Cambridge Energy Research Associates, who
talked with Russian and European officials in Europe last week.

 The negotiator for the United States is Faryar Shirzad, a
deputy national security adviser for economic affairs. For
France, it is President Jacques Chirac'sdiplomatic adviser,
Maurice Gourdault-Montagne. For Russia, it is Igor Shuvalov,
President Vladimir V. Putin'schief aide in planning the meeting.

Mr. Shuvalov said Russia was determined to get the Group of 8
summit meeting to endorse the principle that for Russia, "energy
security" meant greater access to investment in the West and to
the means of delivery of oil and natural gas. Mr. Putin has said
that energy security will be a main theme of the meeting. 

Mr. Shuvalov said Russia was prepared to use its leverage to get
that access, and had held up a decision on foreign bids for
exploring a potentially huge natural gas reserve off the Russian
coast in the Barents Sea until it was clear that the West would
be receptive to offering similar bids by Russia for ownership in
American and European energy facilities. 

Russian investment has in fact already begun, and it has begun
to stoke controversy. Rebuffing pressure from many in Britain,
Prime Minister Tony Blairsaid he would not try to stop the
Russian effort.

 Gazprom and Lukoil are not the only Russian entities looking
abroad. Now the Russians appear interested in investing in
pipelines and liquefied natural gas conversion facilities on the
East Coast, which some experts fear could reignite the passions
that swirled around Unocal and the Dubai port deals, both of
which fell through. Critics of those deals successfully argued
that they would have surrendered vital strategic economic assets
to foreign control. 

"Gazprom has not been specific on what it wants in North
America," said Thane Gustafson, professor of politics at
Georgetown University. "But what they want to do is replicate
what they've done in Germany and in varying degrees throughout
Eastern Europe, " he said, referring to investments by Russian
companies in European energy production and transmission. 

Mr. Putin aims to use the St. Petersburg summit meeting to
demand respect for Russia as a major energy producer. Russia
wants to rebut the argument, heard after the Ukraine natural gas
cutoff, that it is not a reliable producer, and to bury
suggestions from some critics in the United States that it
should be expelled from the Group of 8 nations.

 "The summit should recognize that Russia plays a key role in
providing energy security, and that Russia is ready to open its
energy reserves to foreign investment," said Mr. Shuvalov in a
telephone interview. "We think that after this summit, no one
will again question the membership of Russia in the G-8."

 The United States is looking to the meeting to endorse Mr.
Bush's vision of "energy security," particularly reduced
dependence on Middle East oil, greater variety of oil resources
and more nuclear power. One other important part of the American
vision is that, especially after the Ukraine cutoff, there
should be more efforts to bypass Russia for natural gas exports,
especially to Europe. 

Not surprisingly, the Russians have a different definition for
"energy security," interpreting the term to mean greater
guarantees of access of Russian energy to Europe, not less.
Ownership of European and American pipelines would support that
goal, Russians say.

 One area of Russian-American competition that could come up at
the summit meeting is the activity in the Caspian Sea, where at
least since the 1990's, after the collapse of the Soviet Union,
the United States has sought to encourage oil and gas pipelines
that would not go through Russia. Earlier this year, for
example, Secretary of State Condoleezza Riceurged Turkey and
Greece not to engage Gazprom as a partner in bringing natural
gas to southern Europe. Gazprom is viewed in the West as a
shadowy creature of the Russian state that has enriched the
people around Mr. Putin.

 Comments like those of Ms. Rice and Mr. Cheney challenging
Russian energy dominance in the region have hurt the atmosphere
for the summit meeting, Mr. Shuvalov said. But American
officials say it is in Russia's interest to encourage diversity
of supply.

 "Despite what they think, it's not that we want to shut Russia
out," said another senior administration official involved in
planning the summit meeting, who requested anonymity because he
did not want to speak publicly about issues still under
negotiation. "That's ridiculous. Russia will always be a major
energy exporter and transit route. What we're trying to do is
make sure there is no monopoly on energy, to avoid someone
manipulating the markets."

Copyright 2006The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************
 22 AFP: India, US to work out details of nuclear energy trade this week

Monday June 12, 11:30 AM
 
     Photo: AFP   
                                
NEW DELHI (AFP) - Diplomats from India and the United States
will begin negotiating details of a major nuclear cooperation
deal, officials said.
 
The deal would give energy-starved India access to long-denied
civilian nuclear technology in return for placing a majority of
its nuclear reactors under international inspection.
 
The deal was reached in March but the specifics of the plan
still have to be hammered out.
 
"This is the first official negotiation on the bilateral
agreement," US embassy spokesman David Kennedy told AFP.
 
"There have been a couple of early drafts exchanged back and
forth but this is the first time the two negotiating teams are
sitting down in formal talks," Kennedy said.
 
A team from the US State and Energy departments and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission arrived in New Delhi Sunday for three days
of talks, Kennedy said.
 
This week, both countries will try and work out differences over
a provision that bars New Delhi from conducting atomic tests,
officials said.
 
New Delhi has objected to a condition giving the United States
the legal right to halt cooperation if India tests a nuclear
weapon.
 
India tested nuclear weapons in 1974 and 1998 and has been
banned by the United States and other countries from buying fuel
for reactors and other related equipment as a result.
 
Once finalized, the deal will give India access to civilian
nuclear technology for the first time in three decades.
 
The deal also faces hurdles in the US Congress, which must give
a greenlight to change the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954. That
law prevents the US from trading nuclear technology with nations
that are not part of nuclear treaties.
 
Several US lawmakers have expressed concern over the deal given
that India has never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
 
The two countries first announced plans to share civilian
nuclear technology during the visit of Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh to the United States in July 2005 but formalized
an agreement in March when US President George W. Bush visited
India in March.
 
According to US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns,
Washington gave New Delhi a draft of the initial agreement in
March.
 
But several experts have warned that forging a civilian nuclear
agreement with India would not only make it harder to enforce
rules against nuclear renegades Iran and North Korea, but also
set a dangerous precedent to other countries with nuclear
ambitions.

Copyright © 2005 AFP. All rights reserved. All information
*****************************************************************
 23 Saratogian: Vietnam vet recalls threat of nuclear war
            
THOMAS DIMOPOULOS, The Saratogian

06/12/2006

SARATOGA SPRINGS -- Lee Nicholls stood on a patch of earth 
decorated with military stars and pointed his way around Congress 
Park to some of the projects he created for this city.                                                       

'That fountain over there,' he said, gesturing at a trickling 
waterfall. 'This planter at the top of the hill,' he said, 
nodding his head in the direction. 'The sign over there at the 
spring,' he offered, before turning his attentions to the plaques 
commemorating servicemen and women inside the octagon-shaped War 
Memorial. 

The one in particular that caught his eye honored those who
served from 1917-1918. Nicholls pointed out a name that read
Everett Lee.

'That was my grandfather,' he said. 

A few miles away, a different era was being remembered. One that
was in Nicholl's lifetime.

'That whole period had a certain amount of idealism to it.
America was young and thought that it could do anything in those
days,' he said. 'That's why we have a Peace Corps. That's why we
have special (operations) forces,' said Nicholls, who spent time
with both. 

After surviving the notoriously tough and extensive training of
Basic Underwater Demolition School (BUDS), he joined the
Underwater Demolition Team. The UDTs were the Navy Special
Warfare unit and a pre-cursor of the Navy SEALs.

'The SEALs were formed out of the Underwater Demolition Team in
January 1962. They were the brainchild of JFK,' Nicholls said.

'During the Cuban Missile crisis, I was in the Cuba area on a
submarine. During that whole period we were conducting training
missions, and I'll tell you from one day to the next, I didn't
know whether we would wake up and find ourselves in a nuclear
war,' he recalled. 'We didn't find this out until much later,
but the Russians already had tactical nuclear artillery weapons
ashore, which means all us froggies would have been crispy
critters.' 

'We were sending people to Vietnam since 1961,' said Nicholls,
who went into the Navy in 1959 and was honorably discharged in
1963 before serving another four years in the active reserves. 

'I wasn't in Vietnam but I had an instructor, and several of my
classmates who went. Out of the 840-something we sent to Vietnam
from my teams, 49 are dead and I couldn't tell you how many were
wounded,' he said. 'Sometimes when I go to the reunions and I
see these guys missing pieces of an arm or an eye, I feel like a
truant from school.' he said, flanked by eight columns
supporting the open-air War Memorial. 

'Here we sit at a monument of wars to end all wars. The nobility
is reflected in this monument, the way it is open on top and you
could see the stars at night,' he said. 

'After the war to end all wars, the war where my grandfather
died, they said: 'Never again.' And after Vietnam, I thought it
would never happen again, but in the midst of all this irony you
develop a certain amount of cynicism. I have a couple of buddies
I know were Vietnam. I asked one of them if he was going to go
see The Wall. He said no, he couldn't go through it all again.
For a lot of people, it's like that. It's just too painful.' 

©The Saratogian 2006                                    

 ©2006 Saratogian - a Journal Register Property. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 24 Las Vegas SUN: Western Governors Focus on Energy Issues 

Today: June 12, 2006 at 13:25:50 PDT 

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

SEDONA, Ariz. (AP) - 
Western states must work together to reduce greenhouse gasses in
the fight against global warming, California Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger said Sunday at the annual meeting of the Western
Governors' Association. 

"We are long past the time when we can just talk about this
problem," said the Republican, who is running for re-election.
"We must take action." 

The governors adopted three resolutions regarding energy issues.
The first approved a two-year report that recommends ways to
achieve a more clean and diversified energy portfolio in 10
years, including calling on Congress to pass federal tax credits
for energy efficiency investments. 

The second calls for more investment in ethanol, biodiesel,
electricity, natural gas and the transmission grid needed to
support it. That resolution was designed to call to attention
the country's dependence on foreign oil as a national security
risk and environmental concern. 

The third resolution calls on Western states to take steps to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The resolution urges federal
agencies to invest in climate change research and support
coordinated international research on the issue. 

The Western Governors' Association is a coalition of governors
from 18 states and three U.S.-flag Pacific islands. The group is
meant to identify Western interests, form policy and promote
regional concerns at the federal level. 

The governors are scheduled to discuss growth and conservation
strategies for the West on Monday, and immigration reform and
preparedness for a possible pandemic on Tuesday. 

-- 
         All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 25 IRNA: IAEA meeting opens in Vienna 

Vienna, June 12, IRNA

IAEA-Iran-Nuclear 

The 35-member Board of Governors of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) opened its season's meeting in Vienna,
Austria on Monday.

 IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei is to deliver the keynote address
and present a report on topics that are to be taken up in the
session.

 Although ElBaradei will be presenting a three-page report on
Iran's nuclear program to members of the board, diplomats said
no resolutions will be passed although the Iran nuclear issue is
on the agenda.

 Europe's latest offer to Tehran to resolve the nuclear standoff
would be discussed with the aim of reaching a common ground for
dealing with the dispute that would satisfy both sides.

 Last week, the six powers -- China, Russia, US, France and
England plus Germany offered Iran economic and security
incentives on condition it stop uranium enrichment and resume
negotiations on its nuclear activities.

 The IAEA seasonal meeting will also focus on issues including
technical cooperation, the agency's report for the year 2005 and
implementation of safeguard agreements with the IAEA.

 The IAEA Board of Governors may raise the issue of Iran's
nuclear activities on Wednesday.




*****************************************************************
 26 [NukeNet] Aging nuclear plants pushed to the limit - from
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:59:43 -0700


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0606110294jun11,1,1130165.story?page=1&coll=chi-travchicago-hotelsutility
Aging nuclear plants pushed to the limit

Increased power output raises safety concerns - (a quite long but very
informative article)

By Mike Hughlett and Robert Manor Tribune staff reporters

CORDOVA, Ill. - The Exelon nuclear plant here has suffered damaging
vibrations for years, the unintended effect of an industry effort to run
reactors harder, longer and faster than ever before.

When Exelon upped power output by nearly 18 percent at its Quad Cities
plant in 2002, key components began shaking so badly that vibration
monitors were thrown from their mounts and insulation fell from steam
lines.

Later, Chicago-based Exelon, the largest U.S. nuclear plant operator,
found that vibration in the steam system had caused gaping cracks in heavy
metal plates. Steel fragments ended up in places they decidedly shouldn't
be, like stuck in a key steam pipe and wedged in the bottom of the
reactor. "The plant literally began shaking itself apart at the higher
power level," said David Lochbaum, an expert on nuclear energy safety with
the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Regulators were concerned, too: Metal chunks should never course
haphazardly through a nuclear plant. They concluded, however, that the
incident was unlikely to cause an accident.

Further, Exelon, which experienced similar but less severe cracking at
another Illinois nuclear plant, believes it finally fixed the problem this
spring.

To Lochbaum and nuclear power critics, however, Quad Cities' quaking
raises a question: If the big power boost caused such severe vibrations,
what other less visible problems might it cause? After all, Quad Cities'
damage was relatively easy to spot.

The ratcheting up of power at Quad Cities, one of the nation's oldest
nuclear plants, is part of a trend. Utility companies are wringing more
from their aging reactor fleet.

Over the last five years, six U.S. plants have boosted power by 15 percent
to 20 percent beyond their originally licensed level. Regulators are
reviewing plans for 15 percent-plus boosts at two more plants, one in
Alabama and one in New York. Similar requests are likely in the next few
years.

Federal safety regulators and nuclear experts say power boosts like those
at Quad Cities are thoroughly reviewed for safety problems.

The nuclear power surge has been a quiet process with little public
debate. It comes at a time when deregulation of the electric utility
industry gives power companies the chance to profit by increasing
production as cheaply as possible.

New nuclear plants won't be built for years, if ever. So operators, with
regulators' blessings, devised ways to get more output from existing
plants.

"The incentives are in place to push people and machinery harder," said
Mark Sadeghian, a Morningstar utility analyst. "Everyone is doing it."

One way to do it is to increase production beyond the level for which a
plant was originally licensed, like at Quad Cities.

In a separate attempt to increase efficiency, nuclear plants are getting
more power from reactors by using uranium fuel containing more energy, and
then using that fuel for longer stretches of time. Exelon boasted in
February that its LaSalle Plant Unit 1 reactor had set a world record of
739 days between refuelings.

As the industry has powered up, most traditional safety measures have
improved or at least not eroded. For instance, forced plant shutdowns and
safety system failures are rare compared to the 1990s.

But unexpected side effects have appeared, such as Quad Cities' quaking
and less severe cracking at Exelon's Dresden plant 60 miles southwest of
Chicago. Exelon will spend at least $160 million to fix vibration issues
at the plants.

Meanwhile, uranium fuel began failing at an increasing pace four years
ago, cracking and leaking radiation into coolant water. Industry observers
say stress from increased demand over longer periods of use pushed the
fuel past its structural integrity.

Just last month, LaSalle's Unit 1 reactor had to cut power output for
several days because a fuel failure could have potentially leaked
radioactive material in the reactor. While not an immediate safety
problem, it could create problems for Exelon for months to come.

In March, Exelon found it couldn't fully insert a control rod--a key
safety component--into LaSalle's Unit 1 reactor. That problem may be
linked to the long run between refuelings, some nuclear experts say,
though Exelon says otherwise.

Fuel issues like LaSalle's have garnered scrutiny from the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, the nuclear safety regulator. As with Quad Cities'
shaking, the NRC says damaged fuel is not a safety problem but can be
expensive to fix.

Near-disaster haunts critics

Nuclear power watchdogs are still worried. Critics are haunted by a 2002
incident at FirstEnergy Corp.'s Davis-Besse plant in Ohio.

Workers at Davis-Besse found a pineapple-size cavity at the top of the
plant's reactor. Six inches of carbon steel had been eroded by acid,
leaving only a thin stainless steel lining. It was bulging and cracking.

Had the lining given way, a disastrous accident could have occurred. It
was the most serious nuclear safety problem since the 1979 partial reactor
meltdown at Three Mile Island.

It happened at a time when the industry's safety record looked good, and
it happened at a plant that regulators considered well run, meaning it
received fewer inspections.

Davis-Besse's problems didn't stem from boosting power. Instead, the plant
deferred maintenance and therefore missed a brewing problem. FirstEnergy
later acknowledged that its managers emphasized production over safety.

The NRC was criticized by its own internal investigative arm for weak
oversight that allowed FirstEnergy to put profits above safety. The
General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, agreed.

To critics of nuclear power, Davis-Besse reinforced long-held fears,
particularly in an era of deregulation.

"We have long been concerned that the nuclear industry has pitted profit
margins against safety margins," said Paul Gunter, of The Nuclear
Information and Resource Service, an anti-nuclear group.

But the nuclear power industry says it has a huge incentive to uphold
safety: Billions of dollars in assets and revenues are at risk if an
accident occurs.

"It is not to our benefit to run any of these billion-dollar assets into
the dirt," said Christopher Crane, president of Exelon's nuclear arm. "We
are confident of our safety margins."

Exelon has had a solid safety record for years. The company runs 11
nuclear plants, including six in Illinois.

While no new U.S. nuclear plant has been authorized for decades, the
industry has quietly boosted power output for years through "uprates"
granted by the NRC. Since uprates began in the late 1970s, the industry
has added the equivalent generating capacity of about four reactors.

Until 1998, uprates didn't exceed 7 percent of a plant's originally
licensed power level. At most plants, equipment tweaks handled those
increases, but for larger uprates, regulators require plant modifications.

That's because power boosts add stress to a plant's equipment. An 18
percent increase, for instance, leads to a roughly 18 percent stronger
flow of steam through a plant's pipes.

To some uprate critics, that's akin to pushing a 1970s vintage car 18
percent harder. But uprate proponents argue that with plant
modifications--like new turbines and reinforced steam lines--that "old
car" has had a major makeover.

The industry moved toward larger uprates because smaller boosts, which are
those of about 5 percent, had proven successful over the years, said
Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists, which is neutral on nuclear
power.

The NRC has no upper limit on uprates. But the larger the uprate, the more
costly to equip a plant for the greater stress.

Quad Cities was in the first crop of 15 percent to 20 percent uprates.
Quad Cities houses two boiling water reactors. Heat from the nuclear
reaction within the reactors creates steam to drive generators that
produce electricity.

Exelon sank "tens of millions of dollars" into upgrading the plant to
handle the power boost, said Tim Tulon, site vice president at Quad
Cities, which opened in 1972.

Excess steam results in hole

The first of its two reactors revved up power in March 2002. Five months
later a major problem was discovered.

Workers found a gaping hole in a "steam dryer," a 33-ton piece of
equipment the size of a garage that sits above the reactor. The dryer
extracts excess moisture from steam heading to a turbine that generates
electricity.

The increased steam flow from the power boost had caused vibration that in
turn caused the cracking. One dryer fragment was found wedged in a steam
line. Another piece was found in a screen in the plant's turbine room.
Lochbaum said that given the path the pieces traveled, they could have
become jammed in a key safety feature known as a "main steam isolation
valve."

In an accident, those valves are supposed to close. If held open by metal
fragments, Lochbaum said, radioactive steam could escape into the
environment.

The NRC concluded that Lochbaum's scenario was possible but improbable.

"There was a very low likelihood of any issues with the pieces coming
off," said Tom Scarborough, the NRC's senior mechanical engineer for
component integrity. "That said, we don't want to see loose pieces coming
off the dryer."

Exelon made repairs and restarted the reactor. But in May 2003, workers
found another large crack. Then, the steam dryer in the plant's other
reactor cracked, dislodging a chunk of metal 6 1/2 inches by 9 inches.

The missing piece was never found, but Exelon concluded that the piece
posed no safety threat. The NRC agreed.

In December 2003, more cracking was found, this time in a steam dryer at
Exelon's Dresden plant.

Dresden won permission in 2001 to raise power 17 percent at its two
reactors. Dresden's cracking was also caused by vibration from the power
boost.

Questions raised elsewhere

Exelon's problems helped spark the first challenge to a big power uprate:
a proposed 20 percent boost at the 33-year-old Vermont Yankee plant in
southern Vermont, which is owned by New Orleans-based Entergy.

"Quad Cities confirmed our suspicions," said Raymond Shadis, of the New
England Coalition, an anti-nuclear group. The coalition and the state
asked the NRC for assurances that Yankee could bear the stress of such a
big power boost.

Quad Cities' woes caused the NRC to look hard at vibration issues when it
studied Vermont Yankee, significantly lengthening the review process, the
commission said.

The New England Coalition never got the assurances it wanted, though the
state of Vermont withdrew its concerns in May, a few months after the NRC
approved Yankee's uprate.

Vibration problems are limited to Quad Cities and Dresden, the NRC says.
So why has Quad Cities shaken so badly?

"We're still looking at that," said the NRC's Scarborough. He thinks the
answer involves the layout of the plant's steam system.

Despite repairs, Quad Cities' vibration woes continued. So Exelon decided
to replace steam dryers at both Quad Cities and Dresden, an expensive task
never done before at a U.S. plant.

Even with new dryers, Quad Cities' problems continued. Last winter,
workers found that several safety valves had become worn and needed
replacement, apparently because of vibration, according to the NRC.

The valves release pressure in an emergency. Their degradation was of
"very low" safety significance, the commission said.

But Quad Cities was fortunate to discover the problem as the valves would
have likely degraded further, potentially resulting in the "unavailability
of a safety system," the NRC said.

Finally, workers this spring found one of Quad Cities' brand new steam
dryers had developed a 5-foot crack. Exelon blames the crack on
installation problems.

Quad Cities believes it recently solved the quaking through a complicated
$40 million revamp of the plant's steam-line system.

"It works beyond expectations," said Tulon, the site vice president.
Vibration levels are less than before the power uprate, he said.

Lochbaum said time will tell if this fix did the trick; Exelon has said
before it's solved the problem and "they were equally confident in the
past," he said.

Lochbaum worries about less visible problems caused by uprates. Steam
dryer cracking, after all, can be easily spotted during maintenance, he
said.

"If similar problems are out there in terms of safety systems, these
problems may not surface until an accident and they don't do what you want
them to do," Lochbaum said.

Exelon's Tulon noted, though, that Quad Cities' steam dryer cracking
caused the company to go back and reassess what could go wrong with myriad
safety system components.

"That's what good nukes do," he said.

Despite Quad Cities experience, some nuclear experts aren't worried by the
uprates.

Neil Todreas, a nuclear engineering professor at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, is one of them. "The bottom line is I don't think
they are pushing us to a dangerous limit or putting us towards the edge in
any way. They've been thoroughly reviewed [by the NRC]."

Refueling less frequently

While large uprates are perhaps the most dramatic way of boosting output,
the nuclear industry has wrung more production out of its fleet in several
other ways, not just running its plants harder but also running them
longer and hotter.

Reactors used to refuel annually. Now they refuel every two years, on
average, with fuel containing more powerful uranium, reducing the interval
when plants produce no electricity.

That has led to its own problems.

Reactors are powered by uranium pellets contained in thousands of
zirconium tubes called fuel rods. The zirconium cladding is the first
barrier to the release of radioactivity, and it must remain intact.

Beginning in 2002, increasing numbers of fuel rods suffered structural
failure.

Under longer use in an environment of intense radioactivity and furiously
boiling water, the fuel rods increasingly grew brittle and cracked, the
first step toward structural failure.

Too often, cracks expand into holes in the rod and the fuel within spills
into the reactor.

"The longer you put [fuel] in the reactor, the likelihood of failure is
greater," said Rosa Yang, a fuel expert at the Electric Power Research
Institute.

In 2000, the NRC counted 58 fuel failures. In 2003, the number rose to
147. Failures declined to 72 last year, still far above the industry's
goal of zero defects.

Nuclear engineers say failing fuel is not a safety issue, as the uranium
is contained within the reactor's heavy steel vessel. But failed fuel is
expensive to clean up and can force a nuclear plant to shut down. It is a
basic principal of nuclear safety that no barrier to radioactive material
can be allowed to fail.

NRC Commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield has raised the alarm about fuel
failures.

"This is a trend we can neither ignore nor tolerate," Merrifield said at a
commission meeting last year.

Merrifield now says the situation may have stabilized, as fuelmakers work
to design more durable fuel rods. He said the total amount of failed fuel
is very small in comparison with the amount of uranium consumed by the
nation's 103 power generating reactors.

Meanwhile, the longer use of nuclear fuel appears to have aggravated a
problem involving control rods, a vital reactor safety feature.

The chain reaction within reactor fuel is managed by control rods.
Inserting the dozens of control rods through channels into the fuel
reduces power output; withdrawing the rods increases power production.

Under bombardment by radiation, the channels can distort, making it more
difficult to move the control rods.

That phenomenon appeared in February at Exelon's LaSalle Unit 1 reactor in
Seneca, which is about 75 miles southwest of Chicago. During a reactor
shutdown there, one control rod failed to fully insert and a distorted
channel was found in the fuel.

"We are definitely seeing an increase" in fuel channel problems, said Jim
Malone, vice president of nuclear fuels for Exelon, adding that the
company is working to reduce the problem.

Malone doesn't believe fuel failures are the fault of nuclear operators.
He blames nuclear fuel manufacturers for not making their product more
durable.

Areva NP manufactures nuclear fuel and is working to make its product
stronger.

"We don't understand how all these effects work together," said John
Matheson, senior vice president for fuel at Areva. "Clearly the fuel is
being challenged more."

----------

mhughlett@tribune.com

rmanor@tribune.com


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"If sunbeams were weapons of war, we would have had solar energy centuries 
ago": Sir George Porter, quoted in The Observer, 26 August 1973

"The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that refuse military
service": Albert Einstein

"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have
acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence 
of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible 
for evil to triumph": Haile Selassie

Molly Johnson
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA  93451

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________________________________
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>
*****************************************************************
 27 NRC: NRC to Discuss 2005 Performance Assessment for Quad Cities Nuclear Power Plant
 
News Release - Region III - 2006-02 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region III 801 Warrenville 
Road, Lisle IL 60532 No. III-06-025           June 12, 2006 
CONTACT:     Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 
829-9662     E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov  
  

  
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
representatives of Exelon Generation Co. on Wednesday, June 14,
to discuss the agencys assessment of safety performance for last
year at the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is
located near Cordova, Ill.
 
The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin
at 6 p.m. at Best Western Steeplegate Inn, 100 West 76th Street,
in Davenport, Iowa. The NRC will respond to questions or
comments from the public before the close of the meeting.
 
The NRC continually reviews the performance of the Quad Cities
plant and the nations other commercial nuclear power facilities,
NRC Region III Administrator James Caldwell said. This meeting
will provide an opportunity for a discussion of our annual
assessment of safety performance with the company and with local
officials and residents who live near the plant. Our goal is to
explain the NRC oversight process and make as much information
as possible available to the public regarding our regulation of
these facilities.
 
A letter sent from the NRC Region III Office to plant officials
addresses the performance of the plant during the period and
will serve as the basis for the meetings discussion. It is
available on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/quad_2005q4.pdf .
 
The NRCs assessment concluded that the Quad Cities plant
operated safely during the period. The NRC uses color-coded
inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear
plant performance. The colors start with green and then increase
to white, yellow or red, commensurate with the safety
significance of the issues involved. 

All of the inspection findings and performance indicators for
Quad Cities during 2005 were determined to be green. 

However, the assessment also states that equipment degradation
related to extended power upgrade continues to be a major issue.
As a result, in addition to normal, baseline inspections, the
NRC will continue to monitor and review this issue in 2006.
 Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident
Inspectors assigned to the plant and by inspection specialists
from the Region III Office in Lisle, Ill. Among the areas of
plant operations to be inspected this year by NRC specialists
are access control to radiologically significant areas, fire
protection, emergency preparedness exercise evaluation, alert
and notification system testing, and identification and
resolution of problems.
 
Current performance information for Quad Cities is available on
the NRCs web site at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/QUAD1/quad1_chart.html
 and
 http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/QUAD2/quad2_chart.html.
   



  


 	Last revised Monday, June 12, 2006 	
*****************************************************************
 28 NRC: NRC Seeks Public Input on Draft Environmental Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant
License Renewal; Meetings July 12

News Release - Region I - 2006-03 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, 
King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 No. I-06-037                          
June 12, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail:   

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is seeking public
comment on its preliminary conclusion that there are no
environmental impacts that would preclude renewal of the
operating license for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station in Lacey Township, N.J. 

The information is contained in a draft supplemental
environmental impact statement on the proposed license renewal
issued this month. As part of its license renewal application,
AmerGen submitted an environmental report. The NRC staff
reviewed the report and performed an on-site audit. The staff
also considered comments made during the environmental scoping
process, including comments offered at public meetings held
November 1 in Toms River. Based on its review, the NRC staff has
preliminarily determined that the adverse environmental impacts
of license renewal for Oyster Creek are not so great that
preserving the option of license renewal for energy planning
decision-makers would be unreasonable.
 
The draft supplemental environmental impact statement is open
for public comment until September 8, and will also be the
subject of public meetings on Wednesday, July 12 at the Quality
Inn, 815 Route 37 in Toms River, N.J. There will be two
sessions, one at 1:30 p.m., and one at 7:00 p.m.. In addition,
the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour prior to
each meeting. NRC staff members will be available to answer
questions and provide information about the process during those
informal sessions, but no comments on environmental issues will
be accepted then.
 
The two sessions will begin with identical overviews, including
a discussion by NRC staff and its contractors of the contents of
the draft supplement to the GEIS. The meeting will then be
opened for public comment.
 
For planning purposes, those interested in attending are
encouraged to pre-register by contacting Dr. Michael Masnik of
the NRC by telephone at 800/368-5642, extension 1191, or by
e-mail at no later than July 5. Interested persons may also
register to speak before the start of each session. Time for
individual comments at the meetings may be limited to
accommodate all speakers. 
Written comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS will also
be considered by NRC staff. Comments should be submitted either
by mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of
Administrative Services, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail
to .
 
The NRC has been reviewing the Oyster Creek license renewal
application since AmerGen submitted it on July 22, 2005. Under
NRC regulations, the original operating license for a nuclear
power plant has a term of 40 years. The license may be renewed
for up to an additional 20 years if NRC requirements are met.
The current operating license for Oyster Creek is due to expire
on April 9, 2009.
 
The possible environmental effects of an additional 20 years of
nuclear plant operation are described in the NRC's Generic
Environmental Impact Statement, or GEIS (NUREG-1437). The NRC
issues a site-specific supplement to the GEIS on each plant
requesting license renewal to address the potential
environmental impacts. Issues specific to Oyster Creek are
addressed in Supplement 28. 

The draft supplement to the GEIS, along with other related
documents, is available electronically for public inspection in
the NRC Public Document Room at NRC headquarters, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or
electronically through the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible through the NRC
webpage at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams/web-based.html. The
accession number of the draft Supplement 28 to the GEIS is
ML06152031. In addition, the Lacey Public Library, 10 East Lacey
Road in Forked River, has agreed to make the draft supplement to
the GEIS available for public inspection.
 
At the conclusion of the public comment period the NRC staff
will consider and address the comments received and issue a
final supplement to the GEIS. That supplement will contain a
recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability for
license renewal.
   
Last revised Monday, June 12, 2006      
*****************************************************************
 29 BND: New law requires nuclear plants to report radioactive releases

Belleville News-Democrat

06/12/2006 | 

A new law requires power plants to report releases of
radioactive contaminants into the soil, surface water or ground
water to the state of Illinois. 

Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed the law Sunday in response to a
series of leaks of water contaminated by radioactive tritium
from the Exelon Nuclear's Dresden, Braidwood and Byron nuclear
power plants, according to a news release. 

Prior to the bill, nuclear facilities in Illinois were only
required to report releases to the federal Nuclear Regulatory
Commission when the release was at a high concentration. 

The owner and operator of the Exelon plants failed to report the
release to state officials in a timely manner, according to the
news release. While the levels of tritium found in the
groundwater was relatively low, and did not pose a health risk,
groundwater was contaminated, which violates Illinois'
groundwater protections laws. 

The state became aware of the spills only after being informed
by local officials near the nuclear facility. The leaks did not
constitute an immediate threat to human health, the long-term
effects of radioactive contamination in the surrounding
groundwater and soil could ultimately create an environmental
hazard to the residents nearby. 

The law requires nuclear power plants to notify the state of any
unpermitted releases of radioactive materials to the Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency and Illinois Emergency
Management Agency within 24 hours. It also requires the agencies
to conduct quarterly inspections at each of the state's six
nuclear power plants, in Braidwood, Byron, Clinton, Cordova,
Dresden and La Salle.

*****************************************************************
 30 AP Wire: Limerick plan: Store spent nuclear fuel outside

06/12/2006 | 

 Associated Press 

LIMERICK, Pa. - Planning commissioners are scheduled to vote
Thursday on a proposal to store spent nuclear fuel in outdoor
casks at Exelon's Limerick Nuclear Generating Station. 

Township solicitor Joseph McGrory, however, says planners still
do not have all the information they need to make a decision. He
said the company has not responded to questions from township
engineer Khaled R. Hassan of Pennoni Associates Inc. 

Exelon has proposed temporarily storing used nuclear fuel on a
concrete pad because the generating station, like many other
nuclear plants, has begun to run out of room in the tanks where
it stores spent fuel. 

Mike Stokes, assistant director of the Montgomery County
Planning Commission, said his staff had concerns similar to
those of Hassan. 

Staff members say a final decision by township supervisors must
be made by July 17 unless Exelon seeks an extension of the
90-day deadline. 

--- 
*****************************************************************
 31 RIA Novosti: Sevmash to sign floating nuclear reactor contract on June 14
 
12/ 06/ 2006                                  

ST. PETERSBURG, June 12 (RIA Novosti) - Sevmash shipyard company
will sign a contract with state-owned nuclear power generating
monopoly Rosenergoatom to construct and test a floating nuclear
reactor on June 14, the president of the Kurchatov research
institute said Monday. 

"This week, we, together with Kiriyenko (head of the Federal
Agency for Nuclear Power) will be in Severodvinsk where a
contract on construction of the first floating nuclear power
plant will be signed," Yevgeny Velikhov said. 

Sevmash has won a tender on the floating nuclear reactor for a
low-power thermal and electric power plant in May this year. 

"The first station will provide electric and thermal energy to
Sevmash [shipyard in Severodvinsk]," the company said. "It is
planned to construct such plants in remote regions of [Russia's]
Far North and Far East." 

The project to construct a low-power nuclear power plant was
developed under a federal target program on effective energy
usage. 

The Sevmash plant in the Arkhangelsk Region is also building two
Borey-class nuclear submarines to be equipped with Bulava
missiles. The first submarine, the Yury Dolgoruky, will be
commissioned in 2006 and the second, the Alexander Nevsky, in
2007. 


© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 32 Sofia Echo: Belene NPP construction quickened in Bulgaria 
 
http://www.sofiaecho.com/

09:00 Mon 12 Jun 2006 

The period for the construction of Belene Nuclear Power Plant
(NPP) was shortened by two years. Skoda Alliance is able to
construct Belene NPP in eight years, instead of the initially
planned ten, Miroslav Fiala, general director of Skoda JS said
on May 31 in an interview with the Bulgarian-language daily
Pari. Fiala’s comment referred to the recently reported
information in Bulgarian-language media that Bulgaria’s national
power grid operator National Electricity Company (NEC) asked
Skoda Alliance to shorten its commissioning plan to six years
for the first unit and eight years for the second. Skoda
Alliance is one of the two bidders in the tender for building a
two GW nuclear plant at Belene.
 
The other bidder is Russia ‘s AtomStroyExport, which envisages
even quicker construction terms in some of its alterative
proposals. NEC is expected to name the winner in the tender by
the end of June and to sign a final contract shortly thereafter.
Construction is expected to start before the end of the year,
given that the project does not face any administrative or court
barriers.
  				 				 				 				 				 	 	 	 [Printer friendly version]     
www.sofiaecho.com   
*****************************************************************
 33 TheStar.com: McGuinty firm on nuclear power
 
Mon. Jun. 12, 2006. | Updated at 09:19 PM 

STEVE ERWIN CANADIAN PRESS

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty says he's ready to be judged by
voters about the need to spend billions of dollars on nuclear
power over the next decade.

 "We will not duck this issue. Governments have done that in the
past. I refuse to do that," McGuinty said Monday, a day before
his energy minister was expected to confirm plans to proceed
with up to $40 billion in nuclear power projects.

 The plan will include calls by the province to proceed with
refurbishments of old reactors but almost certainly at least one
new station. 

Details of sites won't be confirmed until a report due later
this year by the Ontario Power Authority, though sources say the
province is eyeing an expansion of the Darlington station east
of Toronto.

 Past nuclear projects went billions of dollars over budget. But
McGuinty said he won't do what past governments do: put off the
controversial nuclear subject to another government down the
road, even if it turns the October 2007 election into a kind of
referendum on nuclear power.

 He said such delays by previous governments have left the
province facing energy shortages without new supply.

 But environmentalists argue McGuinty is steering the government
down a dangerous path by pursuing an expensive and
environmentally unfriendly nuclear option, noting past cost
overruns that taxpayers are still paying off on their hydro
bills.

 "There is no reason to believe the nuclear industry's promise
that it won't happen again," Shawn-Patrick Stensil of Greenpeace
Canada said at a Monday news conference.

 Stensil and representatives from other environmental
organizations, including WWF Canada, the Pembina Institute, the
Sierra Club of Canada, Ontario Clean Air Alliance and the David
Suzuki Foundation, all urge McGuinty to pursue more conservation
projects to reduce demand. 

They're also warning about concerns over the storage of nuclear
waste and the potential, even if unlikely, of a catastrophic
event such as the Chernobyl disaster. 

Government officials maintain that only nuclear power — which
already provides half of Ontario's electricity — can provide
dependable, mass amounts of baseload power without polluting the
air. 

The pressure on the province to build more new electricity
plants increased last Friday when Energy Minister Dwight Duncan
confirmed the government will have to delay the closure of its
two biggest coal plants.

 Duncan wants to close them to reduce smog.

 Four landmark smokestacks of the Lakeview Generating Station in
Mississauga, which was shut down last year, came down in a
series of controlled explosions early Monday.

 Former Lakeview employee David Bloor was one of hundreds of
people who gathered on the shores of Lake Ontario to watch the
stacks implode.

 He questioned the wisdom of the Ontario government's decision
to cut coal-fired electricity from the power supply.

 "That plant could have kept going for a few more years," said
Bloor.

 "There's nothing to replace it with, it would take 600
windmills to replace this," he said, nodding at the dusty rubble
where the stacks had stood. 


Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of
*****************************************************************
 34 TheStar.com: Ontario to build reactors
 
DICK LOEK/TORONTO STAR FILE                           

The Pickering A nuclear generating station is pictured in this 
file photo.                 

Premier ready to unveil plan, sources say

New plants would ease province's electricity crunch

ROBERT BENZIEQUEEN'S PARK BUREAU CHIEF

The provincial government will announce tomorrow that Ontario is
embracing more nuclear power plants, sources told the Toronto
Star.

Premier Dalton McGuinty has privately spoken of his government's
plans to confidants for days, insiders say.

In an off-the-record speech on Saturday night in Ottawa to the
secretive Bilderberg group, McGuinty discussed the pros and cons
of more nuclear plants. 

While he did not divulge the government's plans to that audience
of 160 business and political leaders, the premier privately
admitted the public will officially learn of the plans tomorrow
when his government announces its long-awaited response to the
Ontario Power Authority's report on the province's energy supply
mix.

 Last December, the OPA, an arm's length agency, recommended in
its 1,100-page report that Ontario spend up to $40 billion over
the next 20 years to produce 12,400 megawatts of electricity
from new or refurbished nuclear plants.

 The authority said nuclear power would have to be 50 per cent
of the province's energy mix through 2025.

"The government will soon announce our response to the Ontario
Power Authority report," an aide to the premier said last night.
"The premier repeated on Saturday what he has always said
publicly, that we cannot take new nuclear off the table as we
prepare Ontario's long-term energy plan."

Despite claims from his office that his speech was no different
from one he delivered in Niagara Falls a year ago, insiders told
the Star he was unequivocal in private conversations about his
support for the controversial electricity source.

Ontario is already home to many nuclear facilities. There are
six nuclear units at Tiverton's Bruce plant, plus two more being
refurbished; four at Darlington in Bowmanville; six at
Pickering, plus two that have been mothballed, and one
decommissioned Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. reactor at Deep
River.

To meet the OPA recommendations, Ontario would need about a
dozen more reactors, which would take years to build.

Ever since the OPA report was made public Dec. 9, opponents of
nuclear power have been attacking McGuinty for leaning toward
that option.

The Sierra Club has called the nuclear option "insanity" and
Greenpeace called it a leap backward at a time when alternative
sources should be sought. 

McGuinty's staff deliberately omitted any mention of his speech
Saturday to the Bilderberg session — held at the Brookstreet
Hotel in the Ottawa suburb of Kanata — from his public
itinerary. 

The group, named for the Dutch hotel the organization first met
at in 1954, holds its sessions behind closed doors amid tight
security.

 In the past, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and former prime
ministers Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien have addressed the
organization.

Because participants in Bilderberg sessions are sworn to secrecy
under threat of ex-communication from the group, politicians
tend to lower their guard and speak candidly.

Insiders say McGuinty gave a "marvellous" Ontario-boosting
speech interspersed with revelations about the province's need
to move forward with more nuclear plants.

"He gave a stump speech on how great Ontario is and then
(privately later) he said we're going to announce this week
we're building new nukes," a source said.

Among those reportedly attending the Ottawa session were Ahmad
Chalabi, former deputy prime minister of Iraq and a key
proponent of the U.S.-led invasion of that country; Globe and
Mail publisher Phillip Crawley; Coca-Cola chairman George A.
David; Power Corp. CEO Paul Desmarais; Richard Holbrooke and
Vernon Jordan, long-time top advisers to former U.S. president
Bill Clinton; Henry Kissinger, former U.S. secretary of state;
former New Brunswick premier Frank McKenna; Queen Beatrix of The
Netherlands; New York Governor George Pataki; Iraq war architect
Richard Perle; Heather Reisman, chair and CEO of Indigo Books
and Music; Torstar president and CEO J. Robert S. Prichard and
tycoon David Rockefeller, among many others. 

It was the kind of power-broker audience the premier, who sat
with Pataki, Reisman and Queen Beatrix, would want to reach when
delivering a message about investing in Ontario — and massive
investment will be required to pay for $40 billion in nuclear
plants.

His address came one day after Energy Minister Dwight Duncan
confirmed that the Liberal government was being forced to break
its 2003 election promise to close all of Ontario's coal-fired
generating plants by 2007. That promise was later amended to
2009. 

On Friday, Duncan said that even the 2009 date could not be
achieved.

As for the nuclear option, Jack Gibbons, executive director of
the Ontario Clean Air Alliance, denounced the OPA's call for
more nuclear power as "1950s-style solution to meet our
electricity needs in the 21st century."

NDP Leader Howard Hampton, author of a book on Ontario's
electricity history, has railed against nuclear power because of
environmental concerns and cost overruns.

But Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory has said Ontario
needs a diverse energy supply to keep its manufacturing-reliant
economy stable.
  
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
 35 NRC: Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Unit 1; 
 
                         FR Doc E6-9058 
[Federal Register: June 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 112)] 
[Notices] [Page 33777-33778] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jn06-116] [[Page 
33777]]
 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance 
of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) Section 50.54(o) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, for 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-33, issued to the Tennessee 
Valley Authority (TVA, the licensee) for operation of the Browns 
Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Unit 1, located in Limestone County, 
Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is 
issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact.
 
Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action 
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from requirements 
to include main steam isolation valve (MSIV) leakage in (a) the 
overall integrated leakage rate test measurement required by 
Section III.A of Appendix J, Option B, and (b) the sum of local 
leak rate test measurements required by Section III.B of Appendix 
J, Option B. The proposed action is in accordance with the 
licensee's application dated July 9, 2004.
 
The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action would reduce 
the frequency of MSIV rebuilds during outages that are required 
to achieve the leakage rates specified in the current Technical 
Specifications (TSs). Section 50.54(o) of 10 CFR part 50 requires 
that primary reactor containments for water-cooled power reactors 
be subject to the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR part 50. 
Appendix J specifies the leakage test requirements, schedules, 
and acceptance criteria for tests of the leak tight integrity of 
the primary reactor containment and systems and components that 
penetrate the containment. Option B, Section III.A requires that 
the overall integrated leak rate must not exceed the allowable 
leakage (La) with margin, as specified in the TSs. The overall 
integrated leak rate, as specified in the 10 CFR part 50, 
Appendix J definitions, includes the contribution from MSIV 
leakage. By letter dated July 9, 2004, the licensee requested an 
exemption from Option B, Section III.A, requirements to permit 
exclusion of MSIV leakage from the overall integrated leak rate 
test measurement. Option B, Section III.B of 10 CFR part 50, 
Appendix J requires that the sum of the leakage rates of Type B 
and Type C local leak rate tests be less than the performance 
criterion (La) with margin, as specified in the TSs. The 
licensee's July 9, 2004, letter also requested an exemption from 
this requirement, to permit exclusion of the MSIV contribution to 
the sum of the Type B and Type C tests.
 
The above-cited requirements of Appendix J require that MSIV 
leakage measurements be grouped with the leakage measurements of 
other containment penetrations when containment leakage tests are 
performed. These requirements are inconsistent with the design of 
the Browns Ferry facility and the analytical models used to 
calculate the radiological consequences of design-basis 
accidents. At BFN, and similar facilities, the leakage from 
primary containment penetrations, under accident conditions, is 
collected and treated by the secondary containment system, or 
would bypass the secondary containment. However, the leakage from 
MSIVs is collected and treated via an Alternative Leakage 
Treatment (ALT) path having different mitigation characteristics. 
In performing accident analyses, it is appropriate to group 
various leakage effluents according to the treatment they receive 
before being released to the environment (i.e., bypass leakage is 
grouped, leakage into secondary containment is grouped, and ALT 
leakage is grouped, with specific limits for each group defined 
in the TSs).
 
The proposed exemption would permit ALT path leakage to be 
independently grouped with its unique leakage limits.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff has 
completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and finds 
that the proposed exemption involves a slight increase in the 
total amount of radioactive effluent that may be released off 
site in the event of a design-basis accident. However, the 
calculated doses remain within the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 
part 100 and Standard Review Plan Section 15, and there is no 
significant increase in occupational or public radiation 
exposure. The proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents. The NRC staff, thus, 
concludes that granting the proposed exemption would result in no 
significant radiological environmental impact.
 
The proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant 
effluents or historical sites, and has no other environmental 
impact.
 
Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological impacts 
associated with the proposed exemption.
 
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
 
The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in 
the license amendment that will be issued as part of the letter 
to the licensee approving the license amendment.
 
The proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being 
made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. 
There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent 
released off site. There is no significant increase in 
occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are 
no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed action.
 
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites.
 
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 
other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant 
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.
 
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action 
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff 
considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' 
alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change 
in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of 
the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
 
Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use 
of any different resources than those previously considered in 
the Final Environmental Statement for the Browns Ferry Nuclear 
Plant dated September 1, 1972 for BFN Unit 1.
 
Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated 
policy, on May 4, 2006, the NRC staff consulted with the Alabama 
State official, Kirk Whatley of the Office of Radiological 
Control, regarding the environmental
 
[[Page 33778]] impact of the proposed action. The State official 
had no comments.
 
Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the 
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed 
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the 
human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to 
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed 
action.
 
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated July 9, 2004. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be 
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on 
the Internet at the NRC Web site, . Persons who do not have 
access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the 
documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference 
NRC staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send 
an e-mail to .
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of May 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Margaret H. Chernoff, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 
II-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
 
[FR Doc. E6-9058 Filed 6-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 36 NRC: Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In the Matter of U.S. Army 
 
                         FR Doc E6-9060 
[Federal Register: June 12, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 112)] 
[Notices] [Page 33776] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr12jn06-115] [[Page 33776]]
 
(Jefferson Proving Ground Site); Notice (Notice of Opportunity To 
Make Oral or Written Limited Appearance Statements) June 6, 2006.
 
Before Administrative Judges: Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman, Dr. 
Paul B. Abramson, and Dr. Richard F. Cole. This proceeding 
involves the application submitted by the Department of the Army 
for an amendment to its NRC materials license (License No. 
SUB-1435). The amendment would authorize an alternate schedule 
for the submittal to the NRC Staff of a decommissioning plan for 
Licensee's Jefferson Proving Ground (JPG) site located in 
Madison, Indiana. Such a plan is required because there is 
currently amassed on that site a considerable quantity of 
depleted uranium (DU) munitions, the result of the Licensee's 
conduct, between 1984 and 1994 and under the auspices of the NRC 
materials license, of accuracy testing of DU tank penetration 
rounds. On February 2, 2006, this Atomic Safety and Licensing 
Board granted a petition to intervene and request for hearing 
filed by Save the Valley, Inc., and deferred any hearing pending 
the completion of the NRC Staff's technical review. LBP-06-06, 63 
NRC 167, 185-86. On April 27, 2006, after completion of its 
technical review, the NRC Staff issued the requested license 
amendment. As a consequence, on May 1, the proceeding was 
restored to fully active status.
 
Licensing Board Memorandum and Order (Scheduling Further 
Proceedings) (May 1, 2006) (unpublished). This Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board hereby gives notice that, in accordance with 10 
CFR 2.315(a), the Board will entertain oral limited appearance 
statements from members of the public in connection with this 
proceeding.
 
A. Date, Time, and Location of Oral Limited Appearance Statement 
Session The session will be held on the following date at the 
specified location and time: Date: Tuesday July 18, 2006.
 
Time: 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Location: Madison-Jefferson County 
Public Library, 420 W. Main Street, Madison, Indiana 47250. (812) 
265-2744. B. Participation Guidelines for Oral Limited Appearance 
Statements Any person not a party, or the representative of a 
party, to the proceeding will be permitted to make an oral 
statement setting forth his or her position on matters of concern 
relating to this proceeding. Although these statements do not 
constitute testimony or evidence, they nonetheless might help the 
Board and/or the parties in their consideration of the issues in 
this proceeding.
 
Oral limited appearance statements will be entertained during the 
hours specified above, or such lesser time as might be necessary 
to accommodate the speakers who are present.\1\ In this regard, 
if all scheduled and unscheduled speakers present at the session 
have made a presentation, the Licensing Board reserves the right 
to terminate the session before the ending time listed above. Any 
members of the public who wish to make an oral statement are 
advised to be present at the limited appearance session at 
precisely 6:30 p.m. The time allotted for each statement normally 
will be no more than five (5) minutes, but may be further limited 
depending on the number of written requests to make an oral 
statement that are submitted in accordance with Section C below 
and/or the number of persons present at the designated time.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \1\ During the limited appearance session signs no 
larger than 18'' by 18'' will be permitted, but may not be 
attached to sticks, held up, or moved about in the room.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- C. Submitting a Request To Make an Oral Limited 
Appearance Statement Persons wishing to make an oral statement 
who have submitted a timely written request to do so will be 
given priority over those who have not filed such a request. To 
be considered timely, a written request to make an oral statement 
must either be mailed, faxed, or sent by e-mail so as to be 
received by 5 p.m. EDT on Friday, July 7, 2006. Written requests 
to make an oral statement should be submitted to: Mail: Office of 
the Secretary, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax: (301) 
415-1101 (verification (301) 415-1966).
 
E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov. In addition, using the same method 
of service, a copy of the written request to make an oral 
statement should be sent to the Chairman of this Licensing Board 
as follows: Mail: Administrative Judge Alan S. Rosenthal, c/o: 
Debra Wolf, Esq., Law Clerk, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
Panel, Mail Stop T-3 F23, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001. Fax: (301) 415-5599 (verification 
(301) 415-6094).
 
E-mail: daw1@nrc.gov. D. Submitted Written Limited Appearance 
Statements A written limited appearance statement may be 
submitted to the Board regarding this proceeding at any time, 
either in lieu of or in addition to any oral statement. Such 
statements should be sent to the Office of the Secretary using 
the methods prescribed above, with a copy to the Licensing Board 
Chairman.
 
E. Availability of Documentary Information Regarding the 
Proceeding Documents relating to this proceeding are available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room 
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or electronically from the 
publicly available records component of NRC's document system 
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (Electronic Reading 
Room). Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should 
contact the NRC PDR reference staff by telephone at (800) 397- 
4209 or (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. F. 
Scheduling Information Updates Any updated/revised scheduling 
information regarding the limited appearance session can be found 
on the NRC Web site at 
http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/public-meetings/index.cfm or by 
calling (800) 368-5642, extension 5036, or (301) 415-5036.
 
Dated June 6, 2006, in Rockville, Maryland.
 
For the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.\2\ 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \2\ Copies of this Notice were sent this date by 
Internet electronic mail transmission to counsel for the parties.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- Alan S. Rosenthal, Chairman, Administrative Judge.
 
[FR Doc. E6-9060 Filed 6-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 37 globeandmail.com: Ontario in the market for more nuclear reactors

POSTED AT 7:27 PM EDT ON 12/06/06 
			 						 			
Canadian Press
 	 	 		 	 
Toronto — Some six sites in Ontario will be considered for new
nuclear reactors as the government embarks on a controversial,
multi-billion dollar strategy to protect the province from
future electricity shortages, sources say.
 
On Tuesday, the government will finally bless the Ontario Power
Authority's December recommendation that roughly half the
province's electricity should be powered by nuclear reactors 20
years from now  the same share nuclear holds today.
 
Keeping that share will require refurbishments of existing
reactors, but at least one new plant with twin reactors is being
considered, sources say.
 	 		 			 				 			 		 	 
The Liberal government won't tell the OPA where they think a new
nuclear plant should be built.
 
However, they will direct the agency to identify which sites
among up to a half-dozen locations should be nominated for
environmental assessments that precede any construction,
government sources say.
 
Four of the sites already have nuclear facilities  Pickering and
Darlington, east of Toronto; Tiverton, home to Bruce Power's
reactors; and Rolphton in eastern Ontario, site of a
decommissioned unit.
 
Another potential site is at Nanticoke in southwestern Ontario,
the site of North America's biggest coal-burning plant. It
already has significant transmission lines to carry nuclear
power to other areas of the province.
 
A sixth site is Wesleyville, further east of Darlington. It was
selected as a site for a nuclear station two decades ago but
never developed.
 
Sources say the Liberals prefer an expansion at Darlington,
which has adequate land for new reactors and a willing host
community anxious for the economic spinoffs that would come from
the multibillion-dollar project.
 
But one source said the government wants to hedge its bets by
seeking environmental assessments on more than one site in case
its preferred option doesn't win approvals.
 
The OPA will nominate multiple sites for environmental
assessments in a subsequent report expected later this year or
early next year.
 
Also Tuesday, the government will confirm that its promise to
close its remaining coal plants due to air pollution concerns
will be delayed for at least three years, if not longer.
 
Figures released Friday indicate the province has 3,000
megawatts less supply than it had previously thought, forcing
the government to keep the Lambton and Nanticoke coal-fired
plants operating well past their scheduled closures of 2007 and
2009, respectively.
 
Reports suggest Nanticoke will stay open until the middle of the
next decade, though that will be reviewed three years from now.
 
Premier Dalton McGuinty said Monday he's willing to take the
political risks of an electricity strategy critics argue breaks
an election promise on coal and costs taxpayers billions on
nuclear.
 
Darlington, completed 12 years ago, went nearly $10-billion over
its original budget and taxpayers are still paying off that bill.
 
He accused his predecessors of delaying important decisions and
instead leaving them for future governments to deal with, amid
concerns about an electricity supply crisis after 2013.
 
We will not duck this issue. Governments have done that in the
past. I refuse to do that, he said.
 
He acknowledged his energy strategy could have some influence on
voters during the October 2007 election.
 
That's fine. I look forward to being judged on that, he said.
 
But McGuinty and his energy minister, Dwight Duncan, are already
facing plenty of criticism over a strategy critics say is too
expensive and environmentally unfriendly.
 
New Democrat Leader Howard Hampton compared spending billions on
nuclear instead of conservation and renewable energy such as
wind to doing brain surgery to cure a headache.
 
Dalton McGuinty should learn from the mistakes of the past, he
said.

globeandmail.com and The Globe and Mail are divisions of Bell 
Globemedia Publishing Inc., 444 Front St. W., Toronto, Canada M5V 
2S9 Phillip Crawley, Publisher -->                                     
*****************************************************************
 38 UPI: Experts urge speedy nuclear development
     
    United Press International - Energy - 

6/12/2006 7:29:00 PM -0400                              

WASHINGTON, June 12 (UPI) -- If U.S. lawmakers have their way,
nuclear power will soon become a staple of the country's energy
diet. 

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources heard
testimony from Department of Energy officials and industry
experts Monday that encouraged speedy development of a new
generation of nuclear plants to help relieve U.S. dependence on
foreign fuel sources. 

"We want large amounts of clean, carbon-free energy," said Sen.
Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn. "The technology that has the best
chance of doing that is nuclear power." 

Experts testified about the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which
includes tax credits and loan guarantees for companies that
invest in the development of new nuclear plants. Under the law,
the Energy Department will develop a nuclear plant for hydrogen
fuel production at the Idaho National Laboratory by 2021. 

But according to some experts who testified Monday, developing
new nuclear facilities cannot come soon enough. 

"A [next generation nuclear plant] completion date of 2021
greatly decreases the chances of substantial industrial and
international contributions," said Douglas Chapin, the principal
officer of Virginia-based engineering firm MPR Associates.
Chapin served on a task force that advised the Senate Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources about nuclear energy research. 

Instead, Chapin recommended that the Department of Energy build
nuclear facilities as soon as possible, then upgrade as new
technologies emerge.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 39 [NukeNet] Data on Nuclear Agency Workers Hacked: Lawmaker
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:59:46 -0700


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

<http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061106X.shtml>http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/061106X.shtml
Data on Nuclear Agency Workers Hacked: Lawmaker
     By Chris Baltimore
     Reuters
     Saturday 10 June 2006
     Washington - A computer hacker got into the U.S. agency that guards 
the country's nuclear weapons stockpile and stole the personal records of 
at least 1,500 employees and contractors, a senior U.S. lawmaker said on 
Friday.
     The target of the hacker, the National Nuclear Safety Administration, 
is the latest agency to reveal that sensitive private information about 
government workers was stolen.
     The incident happened last September but top Energy Department 
officials were not told about it until this week, prompting the chairman of 
the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee to demand the 
resignation of the head of the NNSA.
     An NNSA spokesman was not available for comment.
     The NNSA is a semi-autonomous arm of the Energy Department and also 
guards some of the U.S. military's nuclear secrets and responds to global 
nuclear and radiological emergencies.
     Committee chairman Rep. Joe Barton said NNSA Administrator Linton 
Brooks should be "removed from your office as expeditiously as possible" 
because he did not quickly notify senior Energy Department officials of the 
breach.
     "And I mean like 5 o'clock this afternoon if it's possible," Barton, a 
Texas Republican, said in a statement.
     Earlier this week the Pentagon revealed that personal information on 
about 2.2 million active-duty, National Guard and Reserve troops was stolen 
last month from a government employee's house.
     That comes on top of the theft of data on 26.5 million U.S. military 
veterans, the Department of Veterans Affairs has said.
     A spokesman for Energy Secretary Sam Bodman declined comment on the 
call for Brooks' resignation but said the secretary was "deeply disturbed 
about the way this was handled internally" and would make it a priority to 
notify workers about the lapse.
     The "vast majority" of those workers were contractors, not direct 
government employees, said the spokesman Craig Stevens.
     According to Barton, the NNSA chief knew about the incident soon after 
it happened in September but did not inform Energy Department officials, 
including Bodman, until Wednesday.
     "I don't see how you could meet with (Bodman) every day the last seven 
or eight months and not inform him," Barton said.
     He said Brooks cited "bureaucratic confusion" to explain the reporting 
lapse.
     "It appears that each side of that organization assumed that the other 
side had made the appropriate notification," Brooks told the House energy 
panel's oversight and investigations subcommittee, according to a record 
provided by Barton's office.
     "Just as the secretary just learned about this week, I learned this 
week that the secretary didn't know," Brooks said. "There are a number of 
us who in hindsight should have done things differently on informing."
_______________________________________________________________________
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>
*****************************************************************
 40 Secrecy News -- 06/12/06
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:50:16 -0400


SECRECY NEWS
from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2006, Issue No. 69
June 12, 2006

Secrecy News Blog:  http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

Support Secrecy News:
http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp


**	AGENCIES PURSUE STANDARDIZED POLICY FOR "SENSITIVE" INFO
**	ARMY MEMO ON OVERSIGHT OF SENSITIVE ACTIVITIES
**	NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN
**	PREPAREDNESS FOR A DIRTY BOMB ATTACK IN NEW YORK
**	WHY DOES THE WASHINGTON POST PUBLISH CLASSIFIED INFO?


AGENCIES PURSUE STANDARDIZED POLICY FOR "SENSITIVE" INFO

An interagency report on proposals to streamline controls on
so-called "sensitive but unclassified" (SBU) information is due
to be presented to the White House this month.

Efforts to promote information sharing among government agencies
and others involved in homeland security have been stymied by the
growing use of over sixty different types of access controls on
unclassified information, such as For Official Use Only, Law
Enforcement Sensitive, Limited Official Use, and many more.  Such
controls are often poorly defined and mutually incompatible.

Last December 16, the White House initiated an ongoing review that
began with preparation of an inventory of all of the various SBU
access controls used in the federal government, which was
completed in March.  The next step was to formulate
recommendations for standardizing SBU policies related to
terrorism, homeland security and law enforcement, which are now
due.

See Guideline 3, "Standardize Procedures for Sensitive But
Unclassified Information," in the December 16 White House memo
here:

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2005/12/wh121605-memo.html

As of last week, a report to the President on those
recommendations was awaiting the signatures of the Attorney
General and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

The pending report sets forth principles upon which SBU policy
should be based, but stops short of the crucial task of defining
exactly how those principles ought to be implemented, government
officials said.

One of those principles is that each type of control on
unclassified information should have a uniform, public and
government-wide definition so that it is employed the same way by
all agencies.  That is not the case today.

The proposed principles include provisions for oversight of how
SBU controls are used, officials told Secrecy News.

They also include a proposed moratorium on the creation of new SBU
categories.

The new report to the President has not been released.  But a 2005
report prepared for the Department of Homeland Security provides
one detailed perspective on the complexity of the information
sharing problem and some options for addressing it.

See "Information Sharing and Collaboration Business Plan,"
Institute for Defense Analyses, June 2005 (205 pages, 1.5 MB
PDF):

     http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/dhs/ida2005.pdf


ARMY MEMO ON OVERSIGHT OF SENSITIVE ACTIVITIES

Some agencies treat oversight of their programs as a burden or a
threat to be avoided or evaded.  But that is a shortsighted view.

The paradox of oversight is that when properly performed it
actually serves the interests of the overseen program by building
confidence in its legitimacy and integrity.

Perhaps with that in mind, U.S. Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey
recently issued a memo to senior Army leaders stressing the
importance of effective oversight, especially when it comes to
classified "sensitive" activities.

"I expect my oversight team to have an informed understanding of
the Army's conduct of, or support to, sensitive activities,"
Secretary Harvey wrote.

"Sensitive activities may include intelligence activities and
military operations, organizational relationships or processes,
and technological capabilities or vulnerabilities."

See "Oversight of Sensitive Activities," May 18, 2006:

     http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/army/harvey051806.pdf


NSA DECLASSIFICATION PLAN

"The National Security Agency is committed to declassifying
national security information as instructed in Executive Order
12958, as amended," the NSA declared in a 2005 declassification
plan.

"The Agency will use all available resources to successfully
accomplish the provisions of the E.O. within the required time."

See "NSA Declassification Plan for Executive Order 12958, as
Amended," January 13, 2005 (obtained by Michael Ravnitzky):

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/declass/nsa.pdf

"The fact that the U.S. Army and Navy mounted a [World War II]
effort called Project BOURBON against certain Soviet
cryptosystems can be released," according to a newly disclosed
2001 NSA notice on declassification policy.

"Most details beyond this statement, as well as the cooperation
with the British in this effort, remain classified."

See selected NSA declassification guidance, released June 2006:

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/nsa/misc.pdf

Other agency declassification plans, including newly posted plans
of the Army and Navy, may be found here:

     http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/declass/index.html


PREPAREDNESS FOR A DIRTY BOMB ATTACK IN NEW YORK

"Is New York City adequately prepared for a 'dirty bomb' attack?"
asked John Sudnik, a deputy chief at the New York Fire Department
in a recent master's thesis on the prospects of a terrorist
incident involving a radiological weapon.

In response to this question, the author provided an assessment of
the threat, the consequences of an attack, and the possibilities
of mitigating such consequences.

See "'Dirty Bomb' Attack: Assessing New York City's Level of
Preparedness from a First Responder's Perspective" by John
Sudnik, Naval Postgraduate School, March 2006:

     http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/sudnik.pdf


WHY DOES THE WASHINGTON POST PUBLISH CLASSIFIED INFO?

"Why does The Washington Post willingly publish 'classified'
information affecting national security?" wrote former Post
editor Robert G. Kaiser in a Sunday Outlook piece.

"Should Post journalists and others who reveal the government's
secrets be subject to criminal prosecution for doing so? These
questions, raised with new urgency of late, deserve careful
answers."

He proposed some thoughtful answers in "Public Secrets,"
Washington Post, June 11:

     http://tinyurl.com/hhbop




_______________________________________________
Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
     secrecy_news-request@lists.fas.org
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to
     secrecy_news-remove@lists.fas.org

OR email your request to saftergood@fas.org

Secrecy News is archived at:
     http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/secrecy/index.html

Secrecy News is available in blog format at:
     http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/

SUPPORT Secrecy News with a donation here:
     http://www.fas.org/static/contrib_sec.jsp

_______________________
Steven Aftergood
Project on Government Secrecy
Federation of American Scientists
web:    www.fas.org/sgp/index.html
email:  saftergood@fas.org
voice:  (202) 454-4691
*****************************************************************
 41 [NukeNet] Fatigue issues vex nuclear industry - Overtime on
 
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:59:45 -0700


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0606110327jun11,1,5965771.story
Fatigue issues vex nuclear industry
Overtime on rise as worker pool shrinks

By Robert Manor
Tribune staff reporter
Published June 11, 2006

The nuclear power industry is so shorthanded that workers often put in
numbingly long hours on the job, with critics warning that safety at
nuclear plants could be endangered by employee fatigue.

Union officials and plant workers say that overtime, sometimes a
remarkable numbers of hours, has increased in recent years as the pool of
skilled employees shrinks. The workload has grown so onerous that the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, giving consideration to safety issues, is
weighing whether to tighten regulations on how long people can work.

In an official document issued recently, the staff of the NRC states that
industry work scheduling policies do not ensure "that personnel are not
impaired by work-related fatigue."

Concerns about overwork date to the late 1990s, when the Union of
Concerned Scientists and others asked the commission to limit work hours
to prevent excessive fatigue that could compromise safety.

"The NRC must establish clear requirements for working hours that reduce
the potential for weary workers making grave mistakes," the Union of
Concerned Scientists said in 1999. The group says it has the same concerns
today as it did then.

The overtime stems from a declining workforce.

The Nuclear Energy Institute says nuclear plant workers, excluding
security personnel and contractors, numbered 56,400 in 2002. In 2003 that
dropped to 55,700. In 2004 it dropped again, to 53,750.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which represents
nuclear workers in Illinois and other parts of the country, said staffing
has been declining for years.

An official at IBEW Local 15 said, for example, that at the plants it
represents in Illinois, its membership has fallen from 2,175 members in
2000 to 1,525 this year.

The NRC has been studying the issue of worker fatigue since 1999, with no
certain indication of when a decision will be made. The long delay is
attributed in part to the agency having to deal with security concerns at
nuclear plants after the Sept. 11 attacks.

A nuclear plant is a remarkably complex machine that runs full speed, 24
hours a day, seven days a week. It demands constant human attention and
meticulous maintenance.

The plant sets the schedule for the people who operate it.

The lights in a reactor control room are never turned off because people
are always at work there. The safety response team must be on the job at 3
a.m., just as it is at 3 p.m. The worker whose job is to make sure no one
is overexposed to radiation can't leave work until his replacement
arrives, no matter the time of day or night.

Todd Newkirk studies fatigue and work-hour issues for the IBEW, and he
says overtime is increasing.

"It's a fallout of electrical deregulation," he said. "It is doing more
with less."

Mark Sadeghian, a Morningstar utility analyst, said utilities are under
pressure to get as much profit as they can from their plants and workers
to satisfy shareholders. In the past, the benefits would have gone to
ratepayers.

Just as the nuclear fleet is aging, so are its workers.

The average nuclear plant operator is 48. New workers are difficult to
hire because for decades, nuclear power was seen as a dying industry.
Training new employees is an expensive, time-consuming process that many
would-be workers fail.

Goodnight Consulting Inc., which tracks nuclear employment, says the
number of workers fell 20 percent between 1997 and 2004 but has since
leveled off. The company declined to provide details.

As a result of tight staffs, nuclear workers can put in remarkable amounts
of overtime, up to 600 hours a year, the NRC says. It is not unusual for a
plant employee to work 12 hours a day, with no day off, for several weeks
at a time, according to the commission.

Consider the workload at the 10 nuclear plants in Illinois, Pennsylvania
and New Jersey owned by Chicago-based Exelon Corp.

The company says its nuclear workforce has held steady at about 7,000 for
the past three years. During that time each worker's average annual
overtime has risen from approximately 157 hours to 173. Because some
workers are not needed for overtime, that means other employees in
critical jobs work 300 hours or more of overtime each year, employees at
Exelon say.

While 300 hours or more annually is already a significant amount of
overtime, those extended shifts also can come in intense weeks-long bursts
during refueling.

Exelon Nuclear spokesman Craig Nesbit said the company complies with
current NRC guidelines and is careful not to overwork its employees.

And in most cases, Nesbit said, employees like the overtime because of the
money it yields. "Very little of our overtime is involuntary. You have
some people who work a whole lot of overtime because they want to."

The industry's practice of extensive overtime has the NRC concerned.
Commission staff wrote that nuclear operators need "controls to prevent
situations where fatigue could reduce the ability of operating personnel
to keep the reactor in a safe condition."

Numerous studies prove what common sense predicts: People make mistakes
when they are tired. For example, the NRC examined several studies,
including one by the Department of Transportation, which found that
extended overtime and lack of time off impairs performance.

12-hour shifts routine

David Leonardi works at the Pilgrim nuclear plant, located a few miles
from Plymouth Rock in Massachusetts. He knows what happened when Entergy
purchased the plant as deregulation of the utility industry began in the
late 1990s.

"The overtime started to increase," Leonardi said. "We are a deregulated
entity now."

Fewer workers means higher profits for nuclear operators.

The workday shifted from 8 hours to 12, as it has at nuclear plants across
the country. The 12-hour shift is popular with some employees because, in
theory at least, it would lead to extra days off. But Leonardi, a plant
operator for 20 years, said time off from work was elusive.

"I worked on the order of 300 to 600 hours of overtime a year," he said.
"One time in a [refueling] outage, I worked 50 12-hour shifts in a row."

During that work marathon several years ago, Leonardi said an alarming
event happened on his 47th consecutive day on the job. He bungled a simple
equipment installation, a mistake he says he never would have made if he
were rested. He said it was fatigue that caused his error.

Another worker quickly caught the mistake, which would not have caused a
dangerous situation. Leonardi was not comforted, however, because the goal
in a nuclear plant is not to minimize errors but to eliminate them.

"Any mistake you make is important," he said.

Leonardi has since taken a job training workers at Pilgrim because it
requires no overtime.

Entergy, owner of the Pilgrim plant, said it follows NRC guidelines on
overtime.

Critics, like the Union of Concerned Scientists, say that is the problem.
The NRC issues guidelines but does not impose restrictions on the hours a
nuclear plant employee can work.

Stricter rules in other fields

That stands in stark contrast with other federal agencies, which regulate
the hours of workers in such critical occupations as air traffic
controllers or interstate bus drivers.

There are hard and fast rules for commercial truck drivers. The
Transportation Department prohibits truckers from working more than 14
hours in a shift or 60 hours in a week.

The comparable NRC guidelines call for nuclear operators to work no more
than 16 hours a day and no more than 72 hours in a week. Exceptions are
freely granted.

The NRC says no serious incident in a nuclear plant has been the result of
worker fatigue. But the agency also warns it doesn't know whether fatigue
is a factor in problems that do occur.

"The number of events attributable to fatigue could not be reported with
certainty," the commission said in a report on the issue.

Leonardi, the nuclear worker, says the industry isn't overly curious about
the role of fatigue in causing problems.

"Nobody ever asks that question," Leonardi said. "I don't think they want
to know."

No mandates on horizon

Since 1999, Barry Quigley, a worker at Exelon's Byron nuclear plant has
been pushing the NRC to tighten its rules on overtime. He says fatigue as
a threat is hard to determine, and in any case, the nuclear industry isn't
looking.

"The problem with fatigue is that it is hard to detect" he said. "In the
nuclear industry, we don't dig that deep."

The NRC is continuing its study of overtime and employees so weighed down
by fatigue that they are unfit for duty. It has drafted a proposal that
would encourage nuclear operators to limit overtime among workers but has
yet to formally approve it. The agency isn't considering turning its
regulations into mandatory rules on hours, and nuclear plant operators
could still easily obtain waivers from the guidelines.

In the meantime, the nuclear industry opposes tighter restrictions on
workers' hours.

Jack Roe, director of operations support for the Nuclear Energy Institute,
says his organization, which represents the nuclear industry, is willing
to consider monitoring work hours to determine how it affects performance.
But he said limiting overtime would drive skilled workers into other
industries where they could make more money.

Regulation on work hours isn't needed in the nuclear industry anyway, Roe
said.

"In my view, they are not working people too hard," he said.

----------

rmanor@tribune.com



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"If sunbeams were weapons of war, we would have had solar energy centuries 
ago": Sir George Porter, quoted in The Observer, 26 August 1973

"The pioneers of a warless world are the youth that refuse military
service": Albert Einstein

"Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have
acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence 
of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible 
for evil to triumph": Haile Selassie

Molly Johnson
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA  93451

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________________________________
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>
*****************************************************************
 42 SPI: Idaho activists want test at Nevada nuke site canceled
     
[seattlepi.com] [Seattle Post-Intelligencer]   

Monday, June 12, 2006 · Last updated 10:46 a.m. PT
 
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
 	 		
EMMETT, Idaho -- A group of Idahoans who attribute their health
problems to radioactive fallout from open-air nuclear tests in
Nevada rallied to demand medical compensation and a stop to a
massive non-nuclear explosion that is currently on hold.
 		
About 80 Idaho downwinders gathered Sunday, including many who
said they had lost family members to cancer caused by exposure
to radiation from the fallout and some who said they were
fighting cancer themselves.
 		
The nuclear bomb tests were carried out in the Nevada desert in
the 1950s and 1960s at the Nevada Test Site. More than $440
million in compensation has been paid to downwinders and their
survivors in Nevada, Utah and Arizona, but none to downwinders
in Idaho.
 		
"If we can't get our representatives to stop being lieutenants
to the executive branch, we need to replace them even if it
means voting for the other party," Tom Gatfield told the crowd,
The Idaho Statesman reported.
 		
Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, said in a speech last year that Gem,
Blaine, Custer and Lemhi counties in Idaho ranked in the
nation's top five in having the highest per capita thyroid
dosage for radiation.
 		
Doris Pattenger of Eagle said the testing made 13 of her family
members ill.
 		
 [advertising] "We've been nice, now we need to get mad," she
said.
 		
A non-nuclear test called Divine Strake was set for June 23 but
has been postponed amid concerns that radioactive dust from
previous nuclear tests could be put in the atmosphere. A new
date has not been set for the explosion.
 		
The Defense Threat Reduction Agency says the test is intended to
help design a weapon to penetrate hardened and deeply buried
targets.
 		
"When I heard they were going to do another test, it made me
absolutely sick not for myself but for my grandchildren," said
Patricia Cluff, who grew up on a dairy farm near Emmett.
 		
Cluff said that she, her siblings and her children have had such
a high incidence of cancer that the University of Connecticut is
doing a study on them.
 		
Tona Henderson, who organized the event, said the nuclear tests
created generations of downwinders.
 		
"And now they're trying to do it again," she said. "We don't
want to be their lab rats."
 		
---
 		
Information from: The Idaho Statesman, 
	                 
[Seattle Post-Intelligencer] 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 
98119 (206) 448-8000
 
©1996-2006 Seattle Post-Intelligencer
*****************************************************************
 43 Tri-City Herald: Downwind Hanford workers still waiting 

Published Monday, June 12th, 2006
 
By The Associated Press 

At the Hanford nuclear reservation, workers continue clearing
debris, tearing down buildings and freeing soil and ground water
of the toxic and radioactive materials left behind by more than
40 years of plutonium production for nuclear weapons. 

Residents who have lived downwind of the site continue their
work as well -- the work of waiting. 

Since 1990, more than 2,300 people have sued over health
problems they believe were caused by exposure to radioactive
emissions from Hanford over the years. 

A judge dismissed six of the 12 initial cases. A jury rejected
four more during two trials last year. Just two people, who
suffered from cancer, won damages against the government and the
contractors that managed the federal site at the time. The
awards totaled about $550,000. Both sides have appealed all of
the rulings.
 
The government, meanwhile, has spent millions of dollars
defending the cases. For some, that point -- and the plaintiffs'
lack of success at trial -- would raise questions about the
viability of the remaining cases. 

But Darlene Martin, whose husband of 45 years died from cancer,
said the two victories give her hope. The losses are a "slap in
the face" to the people who are sick or who lost loved ones, she
said. 

"Why not take those millions of dollars and make restitution to
these people?" Martin asked. "I want them to say yes, we did it,
and yes, it did cause this cancer, and yes, it did kill your
husband." 

The federal government created Hanford in 1943 as part of the
top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb.
Contractors operated reactors and other facilities that
historical documents say resulted in intentional and accidental
releases of toxic chemicals and radiation. 

Residents gained a clearer picture of the scope and number of
those emissions when the government declassified thousands of
documents in 1986. 

People in Arizona, Nevada, Utah and the Marshall Islands have
received compensation for being exposed to radiation during the
atomic buildup. Downwinders at the Hanford site have had a more
difficult time. 

"Most of the people who have been harmed by the nuclear weapons
program in the United States have received some kind of
compensation, one way or another," said Louise Roselle,
plaintiffs' attorney based in Cincinnati. 

But in Eastern Washington, "the government refuses to recognize
the harm and has not compensated them," she said. "That's hard
to explain." 

Health studies have offered differing opinions on whether
Hanford downwinders suffered substantial or chronic exposures
that threatened their health. 

The downwinder cases are largely based on the release of
iodine-131, a radioactive byproduct of nuclear weapons
production. 

Iodine-131 concentrates in the thyroid, which regulates the
body's metabolism. Most of the plaintiffs have thyroid
conditions, such as cancer, hypothyroidism or hyperthyroidism.
To succeed at trial, plaintiffs had to prove they were "more
likely than not" harmed by radioactive iodine gases released
from Hanford. 

That can be difficult to prove, in part because thyroid
disorders are not caused only by exposure to radiation. 

Richard Eymann, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the two
victories show downwinders with cancers can win their cases. And
attorneys learned a great deal from the losses, particularly
that they need to simplify their case. 

"We're very confident in retrying those cases and additional
cases, that we can prevail," he said. 

Attorneys for the contractors have said all along it is not
possible to link their clients' activities to the downwinders'
health. The government, which indemnified the contractors under
the Price-Anderson Act, must pay any damage awards. 

The verdicts proved that most of the claims have no merit, said
Kevin Van Wart, whose Chicago law firm is representing General
Electric Co., E.I. DuPont de Nemours Co. and UNC Nuclear Inc. 

"For us, the prospect of a successful defense is only going to
get stronger -- and the score is already 10-to-2," Van Wart
said. 

A new wrinkle was added in March, when a jury awarded more than
$553 million to more than 12,000 residents near the Rocky Flats
nuclear site outside of Denver. The jury ruled that Energy
Department contractors allowed plutonium from the weapons plant
to contaminate nearby land. 

Attorneys have said state and federal laws will likely limit the
payout to $352 million. The defendants plan to appeal. 

Roselle, who also was a plaintiffs' attorney in the Rocky Flats
case, said the Colorado verdict should change the way the
federal government views its risk in downwinder cases. 

If it were a corporation instead of the federal government, the
defendant might say, "Maybe I need to limit my risk. Maybe I
need to settle these cases," he said. 

But Van Wart countered that nothing in the Colorado case applies
to Hanford. The Rocky Flats case was a class-action case
involving property damage, while Hanford involves a series of
personal injury claims where the key issue is causation. 

A settlement offer remains on the table, Van Wart said. Under
the proposal, those with thyroid cancer who had met a set
threshold for exposure would receive $150,000. Those with
thyroid diseases or nodules would receive less, he said. 

Eymann called the settlement offer unworkable. By his
estimation, the total offer amounts to about $15 million --
nowhere near enough to cover his clients' medical bills.
 
© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
 
*****************************************************************
 44 review journal: OCCUPATIONAL ILLNESS PROGRAM: Test site workers shortchanged
 
Jun. 12, 2006
                
Many still wait for compensation from exposure to hazards        

Health physicist Lynn Anspaugh says former Nevada Test Site
workers are not getting the same benefits as others for
work-related illnesses from other federal projects.

Photo by Ruben D. Luevano/Review-Journal


Six years ago, former Nevada Test Site workers packed an
auditorium in North Las Vegas to hear the encouraging news from
federal officials that they would be compensated for illnesses
they blamed on exposure to radiation and hazardous materials.
 
Today, many of them still wait to receive the $150,000 checks
and medical reimbursements they were told about, first by
officials from the Department of Energy and a few years later by
the Department of Labor. Congress stripped DOE of the program's
administration in 2004 in hopes the Labor Department could catch
up on a backlog of cases.
 
Even with that change, the program, in the eyes of a Henderson
health physicist, remains "seriously flawed" and lacks equity
between the sites where nuclear bombs were detonated below
ground, the Nevada Test Site and Amchitka Island, Alaska.
 
Of the more than 300 facilities and sites listed for claims
under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program, those are the only two places where three or more
nuclear devices were detonated below ground, not counting five
plutonium dispersal tests on Nellis Air Force Range.
 
In short, health physicist Lynn Anspaugh said, Congress and
certain federal agencies "have created a monster."
 
The effort to reconstruct doses that workers received is
expected to cost about $200 million by the time it's done, far
in excess of the $70 million, five-year contract for the project.
 
"I don't think Congress intended to spend $200 million to do
dose reconstructions. I think they wanted to spend $200 million
to compensate people," Anspaugh said Wednesday.
 
A former Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory scientist who
studied the test site's mix of radionuclides, Anspaugh now is a
research professor for the University of Utah. 

The problem, in his view, boils down to disparity between the
way compensation is awarded.
 
In the case of Amchitka, where three underground nuclear weapons
tests were conducted, those who worked there and have cancers
that can be linked to radioactive materials have been granted a
"special exposure cohort" status.
 
That means they aren't required to have their workplace exposure
doses reconstructed through a time-consuming process run by a
contractor for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health, or NIOSH.
 
Instead, they must only show they worked there before 1974 "and
were exposed to ionizing radiation in the performance of duty
related to the Long Shot, Milrow, or Cannikin underground
nuclear tests," according to the institute's Web site.
 
Long Shot, an 80-kiloton nuclear test detection experiment
conducted in 1965, was the smallest of the three Amchitka tests
and the only one that left radioactive, tritium-laced water in
mud pits and wells at ground zero, according to National Nuclear
Security Administration records.
 
Milrow, a seismic calibration test, and Cannikin, a Spartan
missile warhead test with an explosive yield equivalent to 5
million tons of TNT, were conducted in 1969 and 1971,
respectively.
 
By comparison, 828 underground nuclear tests were conducted at
the Nevada Test Site. Most of those happened after atmospheric
tests were banned in 1963 and until full-scale below-ground
tests were put on hold indefinitely in 1992.
 
A Department of Energy report on radiological releases from U.S.
nuclear tests shows that, after the 1963 ban on atmospheric test
shots, 401 out of 723 released some level of radioactivity,
either through containment failures, back drilling or planned
operations.
 
Anspaugh said of all those tests, most were very small releases
except for nine unplanned episodes that he said sent out "really
big" releases. One of those was the much-publicized 1970
Baneberry test that vented a plume of radioactive contaminants.
Despite those more serious, documented releases that affected
many more workers at the Nevada Test Site than the single,
tritium episode at Amchitka, test site workers have only been
given special exposure cohort status for the era of above-ground
atomic tests from 1951 through 1962. Even with that designation
in February, former employees must prove they worked there 250
days.
 
But Anspaugh said there are cases in which laborers might have
worked only a couple of weeks but were present when releases
occurred.
 
"This defies all logic," he said. "In terms of fairness, this is
a dramatic divergence from Amchitka. ... Anybody who worked at
the Nevada Test Site up to 1992 deserves to have any
compensation that Amchitka workers got."
 
Pam Bonee, spokeswoman for Oak Ridge Associated Universities,
said all dose reconstruction work is assigned by NIOSH. "We have
never overrun a budget. Everything has been authorized by NIOSH."
 
As of last week, a Web site for NIOSH's Office of Compensation
Analysis and Support showed that the Department of Labor has
submitted 20,268 cases for dose reconstruction. Of those, 13,913
have been completed and sent back to the Department of Labor for
review and final decisions on awarding compensation.
 
Among those, the Department of Labor has sent in 1,236 Nevada
Test Site cases and 651 have been returned for administrative
review. 

An analysis in August by the Review-Journal of six sites where
radioactive and toxic materials were used to make or test
nuclear warheads showed only 6 percent of Nevada Test Site
workers had been approved for claims.
 
That's compared to 26 percent for workers at the Oak Ridge,
Tenn., gaseous diffusion plant; 25 percent at the Portsmouth,
Ohio, plant; 18 percent at the Paducah, Ky., plant; 8 percent at
the Savannah River, S.C., site; and 7 percent at the
government's Hanford, Wash., facility.
 
The Labor Department's figures for June 5 show there have been
617 Nevada Test Site cases with dose reconstruction and 429 have
been denied. Fifty-three cases have resulted in payments to 68
former workers and survivors for a total of $7.65 million.
 
That represents less than 2 percent of the $407.41 million paid
to a combined 3,827 individuals in 2,844 dose reconstruction
cases nationwide.
 
"This whole process is seriously flawed," Anspaugh said. "I
don't think Congress realized how complicated the process was
going to be and how it would have to be done over and over again.
 
"If Congress would have studied this more carefully, they would
have done something different. Hopefully they'll do something
different yet."
 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
 45 KTVB.COM: "Downwinders" demand lawmakers listen

Boise Idaho News, 

05:04 PM MDT on Monday, June 12, 2006 
[Ysabel Bilbao/KTVB] 

EMMETT -- The group that calls itself the "downwinders" is
demanding that Idaho legislators stop a potential exposition
that it says will stir up nuclear dust. The same dust many claim
caused Gem County residents to suffer from various cancers. 

A group of Idahoans claims they were affected by nuclear tests
in Nevada in the 1950s and want to be compensated by the
government.
 

Sunday's meeting was the second time the group has met to
discuss issues such as compensation for their medical
difficulties and stopping the divine strake testing. 

It was more than five decades ago that the first tests were
conducted in the Nevada desert, and while a non-nuclear test is
scheduled now.  The victims say it could cause more problems. 

"We lost two family members at quite an early age.  They could
find no reason, just suddenly they died.  Autopsy showed
nothing.  I believe it was part of the fallout, said a woman
giving testimonial to the crowd. 

The group of more than 50 people says they are victims of the
nuclear testing that took place in Nevada back in the 1950s. 

They claim the nuclear fallout increased their likelihood to get
cancer, and today they worry a proposed explosion in the same
Nevada desert will stir up nuclear dust that will blow the
contaminated particulars to Gem County once again. 

The divine strike blast was scheduled for June 2nd and June
23rd, but both dates were postponed indefinitely until the
Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of
Defense can prove to U.S. legislators that the once contaminated
dirt, won't pose a threat with the next blast.     

More than a dozen people, who believe to have been affected from
the 1950 blast, took to the microphone to discuss their family
medical history. 

It was an emotional afternoon, as the group demanded local
lawmakers listen to their needs and concerns. 

"Thyroid cancer and I had leukemia, and I might not be
compensated because I grew up in Payette County, but I am
convinced that it was a result of ingesting a lot of house while
working in the packing houses, said Ed Mordhorst. 

"We feel a serious environmental needs to take place to make
sure that if there is a test, that the health and safety of all
Idahoans are protected, said William Hart, Sen. Larry Craig's
representative. 

Video Clip Watch Ysabel Bilbaos report 

Hart and Otter representative, Carlos Bilbao, also addressed the
crowd - each making a promise to take the concerns of the pubic
to the respective lawmakers. 

Sen. Mike Crapo, with the backing of Sen. Craig, are working to
get Idahoans affected by the alleged fallout some sort of
compensation. 

According to this group, people from Idaho and Montana have not
received any money.  Those living in Nevada and Utah have. 

[KTVB.COM - Idaho's #1 website since 1995] [KTVB News Group]
2004, 2005 &2006 Edward R. Murrow award winner for best regional
*****************************************************************
 46 Guardian Unlimited: Judge KOs Initiative on Waste Shipments
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 
 	 
Tuesday June 13, 2006 12:31 AM
 	
By SHANNON DININNY Associated Press Writer 

SEATTLE (AP) - A federal judge on Monday struck down a
voter-approved initiative that bars the government from sending
radioactive waste to the most contaminated nuclear site in the
nation. 

Washington voters overwhelmingly approved the initiative in
2004. It barred the government from sending more waste to the
Hanford nuclear reservation until all existing waste is cleaned
up. 

The federal government immediately filed suit, arguing that the
initiative violated its authority over nuclear waste under the
Atomic Energy Act, as well as its authority over interstate
commerce. 

U.S. District Judge Alan McDonald in Yakima agreed Monday and
granted the government's request to throw out the law. 

``The court does not intend in the slightest to diminish the
concerns of Washington voters regarding the present and future
management of nuclear waste at Hanford. These are very
legitimate concerns in light of the volume of waste already at
Hanford and the existing contamination problems,'' McDonald
wrote. 

But, he said, Congress made the federal government responsible
for the safety of nuclear waste cleanups. 

The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s in 
south-central Washington. The facility was part of the top-secret 
Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb and for 40 years 
produced plutonium for the nation's nuclear arsenal. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 47 Australian Financial Review - 

  June 13 2006

Letters-->      Nuclear issue
 
So John Howard has finally discovered that climate change is a
serious issue and is championing nuclear energy as a "clean"
alternative to coal.
 
What he doesn't mention is that nuclear power is a non-renewable
power source that can never save us from global warming. There
is more energy produced worldwide by hydro than nuclear power
and China's purchase of Australian uranium is only set to meet 6
per cent of its energy needs.
 
Why doesn't our government bite the bullet and commit to
investment in truly renewable energy choices of wind, solar and
wave? These are the sane ways of the future.
 
Karen Sawyer, Neutral Bay, NSW.
 

*****************************************************************
 48 The Mercury: Fuel rod storage still in question
             
Monday 12 June, 2006

Lindsay Moyer, lmoyer@pottsmerc.com

Although the planning commission is set to vote Thursday on the 
proposal to store spent nuclear fuel in outdoor casks at Exelon’s 
Limerick Nuclear Generating Station, planners still do not have 
all the information they need to make a decision, the township 
solicitor said this week.                                                      

A June 1 meeting on the proposal was over quickly when Exelon 
officials told the planners they did not yet have answers to 
questions and concerns posed by the township’s engineer, Khaled 
R. Hassan, P.E., of Pennoni Associates Inc.

In his May 23 review of Exelon’s application, submitted April
18, Hassan addressed several areas of concern and recommended
against approving the plan until those concerns and questions
were addressed. As of June 9, Exelon still had not responded to
Hassan’s concerns, said township solicitor Joseph McGrory.

"Exelon has not resubmitted," McGrory said Friday. "If they do,
there won’t be time at this point to review (the submission).

"It’s the applicant’s obligation to respond to the review
letters. If the applicant chooses not to respond, the planning
commission will take action on what we saw before," he said,
referring to the April submission.

McGrory said he expects a representative from Exelon to vocally
address concerns in the review letter during the meeting
Thursday.

"The planning commission considers everything presented before
them before voting," McGrory said.

After the commission votes on a recommendation, township
supervisors make the final decision. According to township
staff, that decision must be made by July 17, unless Exelon
seeks an extension of the 90-day deadline.

Pete Resler, nuclear communications director for Exelon, said
Friday he did not know how much progress Exelon had made in
responding to Hassan’s review letter. Project managers were on
vacation until Tuesday, he said.

The project those managers submitted is a plan to temporarily
store used nuclear fuel on a concrete pad because the generating
station, like many nuclear plants across the country, has begun
to run out of room in the tanks where it stores spent fuel.

Hassan’s letter advised the planning commission to vote against
the proposal unless Exelon resubmits complete plans and
addresses his concerns.

Mike Stokes, assistant director of the Montgomery County
Planning Commission, said his staff had concerns similar to
Hassan’s.

"The plans we got in were pretty simplistic," he said in an
interview Friday. "The plans didn’t show any of the
specifications for the actual containers that they’re going to
store the waste in, and they didn’t really go into any details
as to how the site would be managed and maintained."

The commission has requested more detailed plans, Stokes said,
to ensure that the project is carried out in a safe manner.

"The submission was rather cryptic in that it basically just
involved moving some buildings and putting in a storage pad," he
said, "but (as to) how the waste goes from the plant to the
container and how the containers are operated and maintained,
there was really no information."

To further examine the safety of the project, McGrory said, the
township will be hiring a dry cask storage expert in the next
few days. McGrory said the commission plans to charge Exelon for
the expert’s services, which will include advising the
supervisors about the safety of the plan.

"We’re going to charge Exelon, but we don’t know if they’ll pay
it," he said.

McGrory said the planning commission usually charges all costs
of reviewing a project to the applicant, but "Exelon has been
resistant to paying those bills."

Resler said Exelon would discuss any such requests with the
planning commission. "That’s certainly not a normal part of the
process," he said.

Exelon requested seven waivers when submitting plans in April,
and Hassan recommended granting three of these waivers and
discussing another - Exelon’s request that the commission waive
its requirement for a buffer around the dry cask storage area.

"You always try and buffer land uses from other adjacent
property owners," McGrory said, "but the township is
investigating whether there’s a better way to lay out this
project so that it’s not so visible. That’s why we’re hiring an
expert to tell us what’s appropriate."

The meeting Thursday will be at 7 p.m. in the Limerick township
building. 


©The Mercury 2006                                       
*****************************************************************
 49 RGJ.com: Paiute tribe allows consideration of new route for 
nuclear waste transport

Nevada, USA  775-788-6200    June 12, 2006 		 		 		 		 			 			
		 	 
SCHURZ -- The Walker River Paiute Tribe has agreed to allow the
Department of Energy to consider a new rail route across its
land for transportation of Yucca Mountain nuclear waste.

But tribal leaders stressed they will not approve the route
unless all safety issues are studied in detail and a ban of
waste transportation on U.S. 95 is considered. The highway
bisects the reservation.

"Let me make it clear that we have not said 'yes' to the route
through our reservation until we fully evaluate comprehensive
studies on a new rail route," said Tribal Chairman Genia
Williams.

"I do not like the idea of Nevada being a dumping ground for
nuclear waste, but this may be a chance to make my tribal
community safer from nuclear waste that may come through our
community on the highway," Williams said.

Current plans call for placing the rail route through the
northern portion of the reservation, miles away from its main
population center.
 


 Reno Gazette-Journal network: | | | 
*****************************************************************
 50 Reno News and Review: Dump junkets

June 08, 2006
 
 Congressional trips paid for with private money raise more 
questions about Yucca Mountain
 
By Dennis Myers

Yucca Mountain in Nye County is apparently a sought-after
tourist destination, at least on Capitol Hill.

 Courtesy Of Nevada Nuclear Projects Office

Yucca Mountain is becoming ensnarled in the congressional
lobbying scandal.
 
And the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has published a
scientific study of the proposed dump for high level nuclear
wastes at Yucca Mountain, the very existence of the book
testifying to the unlikelihood of any early resolution of the
scientific issues surrounding the project.
 
These are two of the most recent developments surrounding the
increasingly moribund dump project.
 
Yucca's name in connection with lobbying came up in a study that
said the nuclear power industry's lobbyists have spent $1.1
million in the past six years taking lawmakers and their staff
members on tours of nuclear plants in Spain, France, Japan and
to Yucca Mountain.
 
The study, Power Trips, was done by the Center for Public
Integrity.
 
"We take these people to these places to educate them," Nuclear
Energy Institute spokesperson Mitch Singer told the Center.
"They discuss the policies of the host countries. And they find
it incredibly valuable to them, especially when they come back
to this country to discuss legislation."
 
"Education through travel is important," said American
University Professor James Thurber. "But it's just totally being
abused. They give a one-hour speech and spend three days playing
golf or tennis with their families."
 
Visitors to Yucca Mountain presumably stayed in Las Vegas, a
world-class resort destination.
 
The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), which paid for the trips,
"spent almost $10 million on lobbying from 1998 to 2004 and
issued news releases and policy briefs on everything from power
plant security to environmentalism," according to the Center.
"The organization has more than 250 corporate members, a diverse
group including construction firms, electric utilities and
research universities."
 
Jim Morris, honcho of the study, said there is nothing wrong
with congressional travel to study public issues, but there is
no accountability surrounding privately financed trips.
 
"A number of these trips are legitimate," Morris said. "We're
certainly not implying that they're all vacations or junkets,
but it was pretty obvious when we looked at all these records.
It's pretty easy to see the difference between what most of us
would call a legitimate fact-finding trip--you know, visiting a
hurricane-ravaged part of Louisiana or going to Iraq or
something--contrasted with a four-day trip to Las Vegas that is
built basically around a one-hour speech."
 
MIT’s study of Yucca Mountain issues includes papers by nearly
three dozen scientists.
   

Because the dump has become doubtful as a result of scientific
questions, environmental safeguards, state opposition and
regulatory issues, the nuclear lobby is now seeking legislation
to circumvent those processes.
 
Even eliminating the French, Spanish and Japanese junkets, a
substantial portion of the U.S. Congress has made trips to Yucca
Mountain--67 members of the House and 23 members of the Senate.
 
"This is the way the nuclear industry operates," said Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects director Robert Loux. "With very
deep pockets, they have the ability to sponsor travel all over
the world in their effort to promote nuclear power, and
promoting Yucca Mountain is a part of that effort."
 
Morris said that some analysts and academics say that if
congressional research is important enough to merit travel--and
it may be--then public funds should pay for it. 

"Of course, when you take a government-paid trip, you've got to
do a lot more accounting; you've got to account for your actions
a lot more thoroughly," he says. "It's certainly more
transparent than this system. If you spent $5,000 of the
taxpayers' money to go somewhere, you've got to be prepared to
justify it. But with these private trips, nobody knows about
them. So that's why some of these folks are willing to take a
$25,000 trip."
 
Closer to home

Loux said it doesn't stop at Congress, and it unbalances the
playing field in the debate over Yucca Mountain.
 
"Unfortunately, local elected officials often get caught in
ethical and other problems when they get home. One only has to
look at the situation of Caliente Mayor Kevin Phillips, who with
his wife has been on many of these trips overseas to tour
various nuclear facilities--paid for by NEI--who now faces
ethical complaints before the state Ethics Commission. Trips and
tours have long been one of the tactics employed by NEI to lobby
and otherwise promote their agenda, something that the state and
others opposed to Yucca Mountain simply don't have the ability
to do."
 
The MIT study of Yucca, Uncertainty Underground, was edited by
MIT researcher Allison Macfarlane and Rodney C. Ewing and
contains chapters by 32 scientists, including the two
editors.The book has sections on the hydrology of the mountain,
the thermohydrology, the earth science, the forms in which waste
can be stored, packaging for storage, uncertainties and U.S.
nuclear waste policy.
 
It is relatively technical (and priced at $29), but one of its
authors says it was not written either for the scientist or for
ordinary members of the public.
 
"The target audience was something in between that, I guess,"
says UNLV geologist Jean Cline. Cline wrote chapter 10, "Hot
Upwelling Water: Did It Really Invade Yucca Mountain?"
 
"Maybe people involved in working on Yucca Mountain or who are
involved in the whole [public] process of understanding Yucca
Mountain, maybe bureaucrats, for one, non-technical people who
are involved in trying to understand the pros and cons ...
non-scientists who are involved, maybe politicians ... In
essence, I would say lay people, but perhaps lay people with
some involvement or some understanding of the project."
 
In other Yucca news, the Nevada site is becoming an issue in
India, where critics of George Bush's Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership say the GNEP would create a Hitlerian status of have
and have-not nations and that India would be the only nation
denied indigenous waste reprocessing. Indian columnist M.D.
Nalapat suggested that Bush is in no position to be planning any
other nation's energy future since Congress last month slashed
his budget for the troubled Yucca Mountain project by half. 

  © Copyright 2006 Chico Community Publishing, Inc.   

*****************************************************************
 51 Reno News and Review: At least they're consistent

June 08, 2006
 
Guest comment By Bob Loux
 
Bob Loux is director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects.
   
Whatever else one may say about the U.S. Department of Energy's
handling of the proposed Yucca Mountain high-level nuclear waste
dump project, you must give DOE credit for being consistent.
Consistently wrong and incompetent.
 
The new group in charge of DOE's Yucca Mountain program is no
exception. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman and his hand-picked
Acting Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management, Paul Golan, have managed in a few short months to
take an already teetering project and push it off the
scientific, political and fiscal abyss.
 
For years, the Yucca project has been plagued by problems (or
more accurately, realities that DOE refuses to face) that have
brought the program to a halt. These include Yucca Mountain's
inability to meet health and safety standards, corrosion-prone
waste containers, failure to develop and submit a license
application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, inability of
the site to meet hazardous waste regulations, a seriously inept
radioactive waste transportation program, conflicts with western
states' water law (i.e., Nevada's denial of water for Yucca
Mountain), serious land use conflicts, risks posed by military
aircraft, and many other factors that make Yucca entirely
unsuitable and unlicensable. 

Golan and Bodman's solution is to ignore the central problem
with Yucca (the fact that the site is inherently unsafe and
unsuitable) and attempt to get Congress to bail DOE out by
riding roughshod over federal and state health, safety,
transportation and environmental requirements. DOE submitted
legislation to Congress in early April to do just that.
 
The Bodman-Golan debacle gets more bizarre. A few months ago,
Golan announced that DOE was completely restructuring the Yucca
program in an attempt to turn the repository into a "clean"
facility. Golan claimed his "Transportation, Aging and Disposal"
(TAD) system would simplify the design and operations of a
repository by allowing deadly spent fuel and high-level waste to
be transported, stored and disposed of in the same canister,
without having to handle the waste again once it has been loaded
into the TADs at the reactor location. Great idea, except that
it was rejected in the 1990s as impractical and too costly.
 
To make this problem go away, Golan and his team invented a
whole new geology for the site by concocting very low water
infiltration rates and slow water movement. Great idea, but the
science doesn't support such assumptions.
 
What these initiatives have in common is a fundamental and
fraudulent denial of the simple fact that Yucca Mountain is a
wholly unacceptable place to dispose of deadly and long-lived
nuclear waste. Bodman's proposed legislation and Golan's
restructuring plan cover up this fact, continuing a long string
of failed DOE initiatives over two decades that have sought to
fashion a silk purse out of this Yucca Mountain pig's ear. 


  © Copyright 2006 Chico Community Publishing, Inc.   
*****************************************************************
 52 Telegraph: Sellafield faces huge fine over 20-ton uranium leak

  [telegraph.co.uk]

(Filed: 12/06/2006)
 
British Nuclear Group faces an unlimited fine after pleading
guilty to safety breaches that allowed radioactive material to
leak from the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant for up to
eight months. 

A broken pipe was discovered at the Thermal Oxide Reprocessing
Plant (Thorp) in April last year. By then acid containing 20
tons of uranium and 350lb of plutonium had escaped without staff
noticing. 

Yesterday BNG pleaded guilty at Whitehaven magistrates' court,
Cumbria, to three counts of breaching the conditions of its
licence under the Nuclear Installations Act 1965. 

Lesley Latham, for the Health and Safety Executive, which
brought the prosecution, said: "This is a very serious case. BNG
fell well below the standard required." 

Andrew Carr, for BNG, said the leak had presented no risk either
to health and safety or the environment. 

Thorp is still closed, costing the company Ł50 million in lost
revenue and wages. 

Local magistrates could fine BNG no more than Ł15,000, so
referred the case to Carlisle Crown Court, where it is due to be
dealt with on July 8. 

 © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. | Terms &
*****************************************************************
 53 Las Vegas SUN: Paiute Tribe allows DOE waste transport

Latest news in brief from northern Nevada 

June 11, 2006 

ASSOCIATED PRESS 

SCHURZ, Nev. (AP) - The Walker River Paiute Tribe has agreed to
allow the Department of Energy to consider a new rail route
across its land for transportation of Yucca Mountain nuclear
waste. 

But at the same time, tribal leaders stressed they will not
approve the route unless all safety issues are studied in detail
and a ban of waste transportation on U.S. 95 is considered. The
highway bisects the reservation. 

"Let me make it clear that we have not said `yes' to the route
through our reservation until we fully evaluate comprehensive
studies on a new rail route," said Tribal Chairman Genia
Williams. 

"I do not like the idea of Nevada being a dumping ground for
nuclear waste, but this may be a chance to make my tribal
community safer from nuclear waste that may come through our
community on the highway," Williams said. 

Current plans call for placing the rail route through the
northern portion of the reservation, miles away from its main
population center. 

The government has been working on plans to locate the nation's
nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest
of Las Vegas. 
-- 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 54 Knox News: Tritium-leak concerns keep analysts busy

Monitoring boosted at nuclear sites; officials say no health 
threat found 

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com June 12, 2006 

OAK RIDGE - Increased concern about leaks of radioactive tritium 
at the nation's nuclear power plants is generating a lot of 
business for a little-known analytical laboratory in Oak Ridge. 
The radiochemistry lab, a part of the Oak Ridge Institute for 
Science and Education, provides support to the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission. It verifies the results of groundwater 
sampling done at reactor sites. 
			 			
Since late last year, the Oak Ridge laboratory has
received about 450 groundwater samples from nuclear plants
around the nation. About 30-40 new samples arrive each week. 
Dale Condra, the lab's director, said the recent influx of work
for the NRC was such that the laboratory purchased a second
"liquid-scintillation analyzer" - equipment that can measure the
low-energy beta radiation associated with tritium. 

ORISE has done work for the NRC since the 1980s, but the
sampling analysis picked up a few years ago when the regulatory
agency closed a couple of its own labs. Now the workload is
taxing the efforts of the Oak Ridge facility's four-person
staff. 

In 2005, the radiochemistry lab here did about $180,000 in
analytical work for the NRC. This year, that's expected to top
$500,000. 

Reports of surprisingly high levels of tritium at reactor sites
- particularly the Braidwood plant in Illinois, where a
radioactive leak was tracked to wells off the site - spurred
federal authorities to take a closer look at the issue. 

In March, the NRC created an expert task force to study
"inadvertent, unmonitored releases" of radioactive liquids from
commercial power plants and to determine if the situation
warranted further action. 

NRC officials said available data indicated no health threat to
the public, but monitoring has increased throughout the nuclear
industry. Critics have suggested that higher tritium levels may
be associated with aging power plants, inadequate testing or lax
oversight in some cases. 

TVA last year filed two special reports to the regulatory agency
identifying tritium groundwater contamination in excess of
standards at its Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. 

For the first quarter of the year, groundwater at one sampling
station had an average tritium concentration of 397,600
picocuries per liter of water. That's more than 10 times the
limit of 30,000 picocuries for tritium in non-drinking-water
samples, and it apparently was higher than any of the tritium
levels reported by Exelon, the Chicago-based nuclear utility
that owns the Braidwood power plant. 

Maureen Brown, a TVA spokeswoman, emphasized that tritium was
not found in drinking-water supplies. She said levels of
radioactivity had declined at Watts Bar since repairs were made
to a water-discharge system and a spent-fuel pool transfer
canal. 

TVA's July 2005 report to NRC showed that the quarterly average
at another monitoring point was 80,300 picocuries per liter of
water, still above the limit but down considerably from the
earlier report. 

In its letter to NRC, TVA said elevated levels of tritium were
likely associated with a plume from a previous leak that had
been repaired. The utility said the migrating material was
headed toward the Tennessee River "and does not pose a risk for
contamination of off-site groundwater sources." 

Brown said a Watts Bar sampling report in November 2005 showed
the tritium concentration at 4,000 picocuries. That went up to
9,000-11,000 picocuries in the latest report at the end of
March, but Brown said there was a declining trend in general. 

Tritium is a form of hydrogen that occurs naturally and is
produced during reactor operations. Because it emits a
relatively weak form of radiation, it is not considered among
the more dangerous radioactive elements. Tritium is usually
found in water and tends to exit the body quickly - along with
the water - after ingestion. 

Nonetheless, tritium is a potential hazard, especially at high
exposures, and that's why standards are in place to limit the
concentration in drinking-water supplies and to control its
release into the environment. 

The NRC said it is reviewing the releases at various U.S. sites
to make sure plant operators have responded appropriately and
"to determine what, if any, changes are needed to the agency's
rules and regulations." 

David McIntyre, a spokesman at NRC offices in Rockville, Md.,
said the tritium situation at Watts Bar "wasn't particularly
alarming, mostly because of the nature of the spill and where
the contamination was and because there was no threat to
anybody's drinking water." 

McIntyre also said TVA reported the tritium at Watts Bar in an
appropriate time frame, unlike some of the other plants being
evaluated by regulatory staff. 

The Oak Ridge analytical lab receives samples directly from NRC.
Typically, regulators will split the samples taken by the
reactor operators and send one set to Oak Ridge to validate the
on-site reporting quality. It takes about a week to do the
analysis. 

Condra said the radiochemistry lab had not received any samples
from TVA's nuclear sites but that there have been plenty from
other plants - at least 11 different ones in recent months -
because of the heightened attention on tritium. 

"Our sense is that it will go on for awhile, but we don't think
the sample load will continue at the same level as it has
initially," Condra said. 

The lab is part of the Oak Ridge institute's Independent
Environmental Assessment and Verification Program, which
provides analyses for the U.S. Department of Energy, NRC and
other customers, mostly in the federal government. 

Eric Abelquist, a health physicist who manages the program, said
a lot of utilities are taking "a closer look" at their reactor
releases. 

The tritium issue comes at a time when industry proponents are
pushing for a new generation of nuclear reactors to meet future
power needs and shift away from greenhouse gases tied to climate
change. 

"It's certainly not good news," Abelquist said of the reactor
concerns. 

In addition to samples of groundwater, the Oak Ridge lab
evaluates the radioactive content of contaminated soils or swabs
taken from surfaces inside reactor buildings. Besides tritium,
the lab has analyzed samples for other radioactive elements,
such as nickel-63 and strontium-90, Condra said. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set a tritium
standard of 20,000 picocuries per liter of water as the limit
for safe drinking. Most of the elevated readings at the power
plants have occurred on-site, away from drinking-water sources.
Stepped-up monitoring, repairs and cleanup efforts are designed
to keep contamination away from drinking supplies. 

John Moulton, a TVA spokesman, said the utility "aggressively"
monitors the environment at its three nuclear sites but plans to
expand sampling operations by the end of the year. "We're
definitely going to participate in the industry efforts," he
said. 

At the Browns Ferry and Sequoyah nuclear sites, tritium was
detected during on-site groundwater sampling but at levels below
reportable levels, Moulton said. 

In late 2000, Oak Ridge National Laboratory reported tritium
contamination at the lab's High Flux Isotope Reactor, a research
facility that was built in the 1960s. 

The research reactor was undergoing maintenance and equipment
upgrades when the tritium was discovered. The leak was tied to
an underground process drain, not the reactor itself, lab
officials said, but the contamination issue caused significant
delays. 

"There was no leak from the reactor vessel or from the reactor
pool," said Jim Roberto, the lab's deputy director for science
and technology. 

Since then, ORNL has expanded its monitoring operations at the
research reactor, and there have been no additional tritium
concerns in the nearby environment, Roberto said. 

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.
 					
OAK RIDGE ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES 				
 				
Wade Ivey, of the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, 
measures a water sample from one of the nuclear power plants 
suspected of leaking tritium.                                                                                                                                                    
		 		 				  
© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
*****************************************************************
 55 FT.com: Cracks start to show in a nuclear power monopoly (USEC)

By John Dizard 

Published: June 12 2006 16:10 | Last updated: June 12 2006 16:10

The United States Enrichment Corporation, which for now has a 
national monopoly on the enrichment of uranium for nuclear power 
reactors, is at risk of turning into the Impoverishment 
Corporation for its shareholders.

USEC is the trust fund baby of the American nuclear industry. It
was born in 1998, inheriting leases on the ageing and
power-hungry plants that the government had built to separate
out the radioactive fraction of uranium that can be used for
nuclear reactors or weapons.

It also inherited contracts with the utility industry, a
stockpile of uranium, and the economic benefits of an agreement
with Russia that allowed the company to sell diluted Russian
bomb material. Off the balance sheet, it inherited political
influence, partly completed designs for new equipment, and the
conviction on the part of the government that the country needed
what Europeans would call a “national champion” in uranium
separation.

In the tradition of overindulged rich children, it has proceeded
to squander this patrimony like a playboy at St Tropez. However,
Darwin’s laws may well catch up with USEC, which, to maintain
its position, is effectively betting the entire company on a set
of defence contractors’ ability to deliver a complex,
little-tested technology on a tight schedule and within budget.
The odds could be better.

The utilities hate USEC. The Russians hate USEC. The DOE 
[Department of Energy] hates USEC,” says a west coast investor. 
Much of the investing public, however, has rather liked USEC. It 
has a market capitalisation of just about $1bn, based on a 
price/earnings ratio of 17. This is based on the notion of a 
headline in USEC’s annual report – “Pure Play in Nuclear 
Power = USEC”.

To begin with, the uranium stockpile that, effectively,
constituted one of its trust funds is nearly gone. “They’re
down to seeds and stems there,” as that west coast investor
puts it. So some of those earnings are really a monetisation of
inventory.

The economics of the legacy gaseous diffusion plants, about as
energy efficient as a 1970 Cadillac limousine, were further hit
by the Hurricane Katrina-related increases in electricity costs,
along with a long-anticipated 50 per cent increase in base
electricity costs that hit this year.

Finally, and, perhaps, most ominously, the Russians who supply
about half the “separative work units” that comprise
USEC’s enrichment service are increasingly annoyed that USEC
refuses to adjust its purchase price to reflect current market
prices for SWUs.

While the company will not reveal the terms for the Russian
contract, one of its bond dealers estimates USEC pays the
Russians about $90 per SWU, while the world market price is
between $120 and $125 per SWU. That, apparently, represents
better than $100m in extra profit for USEC. “Its margins are
about 2 per cent on [the production from the gaseous diffusion
plant] and 20 per cent on the Russian contract,” says another
analyst.

Last month, Sergei Kiriyenko, the former Russian prime minister
who is head of Rosatom, the federal nuclear energy agency, went
to Washington to see about ending USEC’s effective monopoly on
sales of Russian low enriched uranium. The alternative to sales
through USEC is assuming the burden of a 112 per cent tariff,
which is in place to prevent the “dumping”, or, to consumers
of power, low cost sale, of uranium. According to Russians, Mr
Kiriyenko was given a lecture on the sanctity of contracts;
USEC’s Russian contract to be the executive agent runs until
2013.

The Russian suspension agreement that underpins the economics of
the Russian contract was struck in 1992 between the Russian
Federation and the US government. Russia can terminate that
agreement on 60 days’ notice. When Russia made the agreement,
it was broke and demoralised. Now, it has a substantial current
account surplus and foreign exchange reserves, the desire to
export nuclear reactors with attached fuel contracts, and a
prospective uranium shortage. 

“They [the Russians] have not expressed to us a desire to
renegotiate the contract,” says John Welch, the president and
chief executive of USEC. “They would certainly like to have
more access [to the US market] and sell directly to the
utilities. [But] the industrial base of the country is going
through a transition, investing billions of dollars, and now is
not the time to open the market.”

But one Russian diplomat with responsibility for the nuclear
fuel trade says: “We want to change the conditions of the
suspension agreement and open the gates more widely for the
export of Russian uranium. The US utilities very much support
the Russian attitude.” While Russia wants to keep a political
deal with the US on uranium, “we want to change the conditions
of the contract [so as to be] closer to the real conditions of
the nuclear market.”

Keeping the profitable Russian contract in place is key to the
financing of USEC’s American centrifuge plant, which the
company estimates will cost $1.7bn, excluding capitalised
interest. Wisely, the company’s disclosures say: “We will
continue to refine total cost estimates . . . ”

The main contractors for the plant are Boeing, ATK (the
munitions maker), Honeywell, and Fluor.

A nuclear engineer for the electric utilities says: “We in the
industry need the production from the plant. We want them to be
successful.” He and his colleagues are concerned, however,
that: “The bigger the centrifuge, the harder it is to build.
This is a really big one.

“If it was my money, I wouldn’t give it to them unless I
knew it had been working for a couple of years at
least . . . if you had 1,000 [centrifuges] operating for
three or four years, then you would have the operating data you
would need to be comfortable.”

Again, the industry people want USEC to succeed. But, as the
engineer says, “I don’t see why the stock is trading where
it is today.” And USEC needs to make another successful stock
offering this year, both to meet the terms imposed by its
lenders, and to start the financing of the new plant.

I wouldn’t buy it. The $150m or so of outstanding bonds are a
better value. They pay about 7 per cent, and are only 30-month
paper. 

USEC won’t be allowed to collapse but let them bet the company
with someone else’s money.

johndizard@hotmail.com

© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2006. "FT"
and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
    
*****************************************************************

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> 
    
*****************************************************************