*****************************************************************
06/18/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.144
*****************************************************************
   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 Los Angeles CityBeat:  Ending the Nuclear Impasse--Put Tehran on Pro
2 IRNA: Iran to give "transparent" response to Europe's incentives pac
3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says Will Offer Nuke Package Changes
4 IRNA: EU leaders reaffirm Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy -
5 IRNA: Iran, China underline energy cooperation agreements
6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran: Incentive Package a 'Step Forward'
7 AFP: Emirati FM to visit Iran 'for talks on nuclear file' - 
8 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI to send EU clear-cut package 
9 AFP: Iran rejects 'preconditions' to nuclear talks 
10 Guardian Unlimited: Iran: U.S. Making Nuke Talks Difficult
11 [NYTr] N.Korea to Test Long-Range Missile; How Vulnerable Is US?
12 BBC NEWS: North Korea warned about missile
13 YONHAP NEWS: Why on earth a missile?
14 AFP: Japan, US warn NKorea against 'provocative' missile launch -
15 AFP: US expects North Korea to return to nuclear talks 
16 AFP: Japan warns N.Korea over any missile 'attack' 
17 AFP: North Korean delegates return home with warnings against missil
18 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Denies It's About to Test Missile
19 Guardian Unlimited: Report: N.Korea Preparing for Missile Test
20 US: The Observer: US chiefs honoured in secret by Britain
21 US: SF Chronicle: Reagan doctrine still influencing U.S. foreign pol
22 IPS-English POLITICS: Testing Times for Indo-US Nuclear Deal
23 Guardian Unlimited: Nations Discuss Conflict at Kazakh Forum
24 RIA Novosti: Asia trust summit participants sign raft of documents
25 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI, China to boost energy coop. 
26 AFP: Top US Senator warns Congress against putting off Indian nuclea
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
27 US: [NukeNet] Our Friend the Atom? The growing threat from nuclear
28 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear fear campaign won't work: Howard - 
29 US: Charlotte Observer: Revived interest in nuclear power taxing NRC
30 AU ABC: Nationals debate nuclear power
31 US: Washington Times: Nuclear power's 'renaissance'? 
32 The Hindu: Nuclear deal on course - Mulford 
33 NEWS.com.au: West 'in dark' on N-sites - WA - 
34 US: newsobserver.com: Slow burn at Harris
35 US: BBC NEWS: Three Mile nuclear fears revealed
36 Sunday Herald: Royal Society set to back nuclear - 
37 Green Left Weekly: Ordaining the outcome: the PM's nuclear task forc
38 GLW: Anti-nuclear forum
39 US: APP.COM: License renewal no slam-dunk | 
40 Independent: New blow to atomic authority 
41 US: APP.COM: N.J. wants NRC to weigh terror threat in licensing |
42 NEWS.com.au: Isotope supply rationed after reactor leak - 
43 US: Tulsa World: Nuke foe reloads 
44 TheStar.com: Liberals misleading on nuclear assessment
45 TheStar.com: New plan judged in haste
46 NEWS.com.au: PM claims nuclear opinions shifting - 
47 Ottawa Citizen: How to keep nuclear sites safe
48 Scotsman.com: British Energy ready to press nuclear button
49 Telegraph: Nuclear staff clean up with Ł1,000 bonus
50 Telegraph: Gazprom plans expansion into atomic energy
51 SNA: Bulgaria Shuts Nuclear Reactor for Repair
52 Telegraph: Technology that holds the key to world's demand for power
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
53 US: Las Vegas SUN: Security institute misses the mark 
54 AFP: India signs up for UN convention against nuclear terrorism -
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
55 US: Deseret News: Kanab rally targets Divine Strake
56 Independent Boom and Bust: The nuclear age and the bikini age 
57 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Kanab rally decries possible risks of blast 
58 US: Deseret News: No Nevada test blast for months, judge says
59 Japan Times: Film depicts double A-bomb victims
60 US: FOX: Non-Nuclear Test Postponed Again
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
61 Sydney Morning Herald: Group to go to Canberra over nuke dump 
62 US: Bradenton Herald: What's the cost of contamination?
63 US: reviewjournal.com: New look at nuke waste issue urged
64 US: Herald Tribune: Tallevast offered help 
65 US: The Dispatch: Olin Ends Bottled H2O
66 US: Daily Herald: Uranium mines to reopen in Utah, other states
67 Japan Times: Suit seeking closure of nuke waste disposal plant refus
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
68 Monterey County Herald: Energy contract up for grabs
69 Tennessean: Certain Y-12 workers may get benefits faster -
70 KnoxNews: Y-12 compensation urged
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Los Angeles CityBeat:  Ending the Nuclear Impasse--Put Tehran on Probation
 
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 21:09:59 EDT

Los Angeles CityBeat, June 14-21
http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=3914&IssueNum=158

Ending the Impasse:  Put Iran on Probation

Michael Collins Interview of Bennett Ramberg

The international dispute over Iran’s fledgling nuclear program has reached 
an impasse, and, shockingly, the Bush administration’s response has been more 
carrot than stick. Just a week ago, the U.S. offered Iran a package of economic 
and diplomatic incentives in the hopes that this would resolve the current 
flap. Tehran’s response continues to be defiance: It will not halt its nuclear 
enrichment activities. While the diplomatic dance must still play out, however, 
Washington has few remaining peaceful options. As the risk of a global 
showdown grows, CityBeat sat down with one of the country’s preeminent experts on 
nuclear proliferation and terrorism, Dr. Bennett Ramberg, to get an insider’s 
assessment of where we go from here. A Ph.D. in International Relations from the 
prestigious Johns Hopkins University’s School for Advanced International 
Studies, Ramberg is the author of a plethora of books and articles on nuclear 
issues. Most well-known for his classic treatment of the vulnerability of nuclear 
power plants to military attack and sabotage – Nuclear Power Plants  as Weapons 
for the Enemy (University of California Press) – Ramberg has been onn the 
faculty at Stanford, Princeton, and UCLA, consulted Congress on foreign policy, 
and worked in the State Department during the administration of George H.W. 
Bush. Over the last several years, Dr. Ramberg has become the country’s most 
published newspaper commentator on nuclear security issues, having authored over 30 
Op-Eds in major papers in his attempt to turn the world away from another 
nuclear arms race. 

–Michael Collins 





CityBeat: How do you see the Iran situation today?
Dr. Bennett Ramberg: Both Washington and Tehran appear to be playing 
“chicken.” Much like two cars careening toward each other, both are reluctant to step 
off the accelerator and avoid a disastrous collision. Washington’s current 
incentive package may do little to change the momentum, given Iran’s repeated 
commitment to continue its enrichment program. 

Could that result in a global crisis?
You bet it could. Iran sits at the pivot of the world’s oil resources. Were 
conflict to break out – were the United States to conduct a militaryy strike as 
Israel did in 1981 against Iraq to eliminate Tehran’s suspect nuclear weapons 
capacity – the world economy would be impacted dramatically. If you  think $70 
per barrel is a lot of money, think again; $100-$150 is the trajectory of 
petroleum pricing that we could see as a base plateau. Then there is the 
possibility of Iranian retaliation against U.S. interests in Iraq and elsewhere. That’s 
why we have to figure out a diplomatic formula that would both test Iran’s 
intentions and mobilize the international community to oppose its nuclear 
weapons development. I think I have found one in “nuclear probation.” 

Probation?
Yes. It is a unique means to resolve the conflict. It would grant Iran’s 
right to mature its nuclear fuel-cycle facilities, subject to the presence of 
residential inspectors and a “nuclear mousetrap” – aan automatic international 
enforcement mechanism endorsed by the Security Council that would spring into 
action were Iran to break a nonproliferation tripwire. It’s an idea based on 
accepting Iran’s position that it only wants to develop nuclear capability for 
peaceful purposes, but if it bolts from its nonproliferation vows the hammer 
would drop with predetermined sanctions culminating in military consequences 
without any of the dilly-dallying we see now at the U.N. 

That seems like a tall order. Is there a historical context that bears out 
the possibility that this could actually work?
This would be a novel approach that would reinforce international mechanisms 
to enforce nonproliferation generally. A review of history suggests why it is 
needed. Iran’s interest in nuclear weapons actually goes back to the era of 
the Shah. In the 1970s, the United States provided Tehran with nuclear 
assistance as part of our Atoms for Peace program. We believed that exports tethered to 
oversight would prevent countries from getting the bomb. 

So there were safeguards?
Oh, yes. In 1970, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty [NPT] went into force, 
requiring all signatories to reveal their nuclear activities, except the five 
acknowledged nuclear weapons states – the U.S., the USSR, Britain, FFrance, and 
China. However, the Shah hoped to use the peaceful program to shroud a 
parallel nuclear weapons effort. The ambition went up in smoke with the 1979 Iranian 
revolution that kicked him out of the country. 

So the Shah falls and then what happened?
Well, the revolutionary regime revived the possibility through an enrichment 
program. 

The enriched uranium could give them the bomb, right?
Well, it depends on the level of enrichment. Power reactors require 
uranium-35 enriched to about 3 percent. Recently Iran claimed that its experiments 
brought enrichment to over 4 percent. Nuclear weapons require enrichment of 90 
percent, although a lesser figure would suffice for a less-efficient bomb. 

But doesn’t Iran have the right to enrich uranium?
Yes, it does. Under the NPT, Iran has the right to peaceful technologies. And 
enrichment technology can generate fuel for power reactors. The problem is 
that Iran does not operate a power reactor. Although its Russian-built plant may 
go online next year, Iran’s proposed enrichment program would only make 
economic sense if it fueled a dozen reactors. Still, Iran claims it needs the 
program for energy independence. 

But Iran sits on a sea of oil.
True, but the government wants to extend the life of its oil and natural gas 
fields. The development of fuel substitutes, including nuclear energy, allows 
this. 

So let’s return to Iran’s enrichment plant. You imply that Iran had a secret 
enrichment program.
That’s right. In 2002, a London-based Iranian dissident group released 
information that Iran was building a large enrichment plant under the noses of 
international inspectors. The crap hit the fan. The IAEA [International Atomic 
Energy Agency] demanded that Iran come clean. Iran was very defensive at first. It 
called the demands of the Agency to reveal all selective and discriminatory. 
It stammered that the IAEA relied on false dissident claims and U.S. 
arm-twisting. 

Was the U.S. twisting arms?
Well, you might say Washington raised quite a fuss. After all, it was pretty 
clear that Tehran was violating its vows to provide the IAEA full nuclear 
transparency. Called on the carpet, the mullahs announced their full commitment to 
the NPT. However, in June 2003, drawing on international inspections and new 
documentation, the IAEA revealed its initial findings: Iran had failed to meet 
its obligations under its safeguards agreement with respect to reporting of 
nuclear material, the subsequent processing and use of that material and the 
declaration of facilities where the material was stored. In a nutshell, Tehran 
was cheating. 

What happened next?
The U.S. pressed for U.N. Security Council consideration. You see, the IAEA 
has no enforcement capacity. All it can do is report violations to the council. 
However, the agency’s board was unwilling to take the step. The Europeans, 
concerned that matters could get of control, pleaded with Washington to give 
diplomacy a chance. The Bush administration, burned by Iraq, reluctantly agreed. 

So Iraq had an impact on how we’ve handled Iran?
No doubt. Washington would have been far more aggressive in confronting the 
mullahs had it not been tied down across the Persian Gulf. 

What happened to the European initiative?
In October 2003, the foreign ministers of Germany, France, and Britain flew 
to Tehran and said, “Let’s work out a deal.” The EU3, as they are called, then 
met with Iranian delegates off and on for a period of years. At times – to 
promote “progress” – the Iranians would halt their eenrichment activities. But 
the negotiations stalled – the Iranians brushed aside European diploomatic and 
economic carrots. They refused to give up their enrichment program as the 
Europeans demanded. In the meantime, the IAEA issued periodic reports calling Iran 
on the carpet for failing to reveal all to inspectors. 

So diplomacy went nowhere?
That’s true. Iran used the time to bolster its enrichment experiments 
declaring that its objectives remained peaceful. The Bush administration declared 
repeatedly that it had had enough and demanded that the matter be forwarded to 
the Security Council. Finally, the IAEA did so. But here’s the rub: Both China 
and Russia are reluctant to press Tehran too hard. China has large gas and oil 
interests in Iran, and Russia seeks nuclear power plant contracts. Neither 
wants to apply sanctions. Both countries are “free riders,” meaning they are 
willing to have the U.S. take the heat. If things work out, they benefit; if they 
don’t, they still benefit. 

Where does that leave us today?
The Europeans are back at it. They have asked for another chance to buy Iran 
off. Washington has signed on and offered another carrot: it has agreed to sit 
down with Tehran as long as it suspends its enrichment program. Iran insists 
that it will not surrender its right to enrich uranium, but it has not 
commented on suspension. Washington remains wary and has not excluded the military 
option if Tehran refuses to bend. Indeed, the Bush administration may be laying 
the groundwork. The Los Angeles Times reported on May 20 that the United 
States has offered Iran’s neighbors air and missile defenses. The Times suggests 
that these systems will defend against Iranian coercion in the event Tehran 
becomes a nuclear weapons state. But the defenses also can shield these countries 
against retaliation in the event the U.S. conducts a military strike. 

This sounds ominous. How are we going to resolve this problem?
If we stay on the current “chicken” track things can get very ugly. 
Unfortunately the Bush administration has not thought out of the box. 

How would probation work?
The seeds for resolution can come from Iran’s persistent declaration that its 
nuclear objectives remain peaceful. “Nuclear probation,” trip-wired to an 
enforcement mousetrap, offers an unexplored option to put the peaceful 
proclamation to a final test. Given its history of safeguards violations, Tehran would 
agree to place resident international inspectors at all atomic sites of 
concern indefinitely. They’ve already said they would do this. In an April 6 New 
York Times op-ed, Iran’s ambassador floated a trial balloon which included this 
element. Washington should pocket this concession and others, including 
affirmations to open up suspicious facilities to snap inspections, ban nuclear 
weapons material and weapons, prevent unauthorized access to nuclear material, apply 
export controls, refrain from plutonium production, and convert all enriched 
uranium to fuel rods enriched to no greater than 3 percent power reactor 
grade, while accepting additional foreign commercial oversight. 

In addition, under probation, Iran would expand IAEA access to personnel and 
procurement documentation, dual-use equipment and military workshops, and 
research and development locations that the Agency demands. 

Now, here is the clincher: To avoid the dithering that now characterizes the 
Security Council’s enforcement, under my probation plan, Iran would tether 
itself to a tripwire that would automatically set in motion the nonproliferation 
mousetrap endorsed in advance by the Council were the mullahs to initiate a 
proliferation breakout. The compliance mousetrap would lay out an expeditious 
timetable for the imposition of increasingly dramatic punitive measures, 
including economic sanctions, travel restrictions, military blockade, and armed 
action to destroy suspicious nuclear facilities inventoried by the resident 
inspectors and other intelligence. Successful application will discourage other 
countries from violating their nonproliferation vows. 
Basically, probation pulls the Iranians in by taking their word about their 
peaceful nuclear intentions and eases the Security Council into adopting a more 
proactive stance in case Tehran fails to live up to this agreement. It’s a 
win-win for all sides. Furthermore, the time is ripe. Given the recent U.S. 
initiative, in the weeks and months to come we are going to see a lot of 
diplomatic back-and-forth. Probation provides the mechanism to resolve the dispute 
permanently. 




*****************************************************************
 2 IRNA: Iran to give "transparent" response to Europe's incentives package - FM - 

Tehran, June 17, IRNA

Iran-FM-Hakim 

Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Saturday said Iran would
give a quite transparent response to Europe's package of
incentives.

 Mottaki made the remarks while speaking to reporters after a
meeting with the leader of the United Iraqi Alliance and head of
the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI),
Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who is currently visiting Iran.

 "The Islamic Republic of Iran's response to the package of
incentives offered by Europe will be quite transparent just like
the country's enrichment work," the minister said.

 Early this month European Union foreign policy chief Javier
Solana visited Iran to hand over a package of incentives to
Tehran, prepared by the five permanent member states of the UN
Security Council -- Russia, China, Britain, France and the
United States -- plus Germany to convince it to give up its
uranium enrichment activities and resume talks to settle the
dispute over its nuclear program.

 "Europe's proposed package is a step forward. The Iranian
officials reached a consensus on the proposals.

 "We believe the new proposals (of the European side) are a move
and a step forward because it is supposed to take both sides'
views into consideration," Mottaki said.

 He suggested that Tehran could make a counter-proposal to the
new offer.

 "After the 5+1 Group had made known their views, Tehran would
seriously review them and announce our proposals to the European
side. The Europeans will also study them."
 Talks will proceed on this basis as it (the offer) "is not a
one-sided move," he said.

 "Apparently, the move is positive and the sides can cooperate
with each other. We will finalize our views and announce later."
Pointing to recommendations of various states and UN
 Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the minister reminded that
Iranian officials had been told "not to make haste and to study
the proposals meticulously before giving its views."

*****************************************************************
 3 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Says Will Offer Nuke Package Changes
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday June 17, 2006 4:01 PM
 	
AP Photo VM101 
By ALI AKBAR DAREINI Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's foreign minister said Saturday the
government likely would suggest amendments to a Western package
of incentives meant to persuade the Islamic republic to give up
its uranium enrichment program. 

Manouchehr Mottaki would not give any timing for Iran's
response. The Tehran regime previously has said some parts of
the package were acceptable while others needed to be changed,
and the central issue of uranium enrichment needed
clarification. 

``It is a step forward,'' he said. 

Mottaki said Iran would come up with its own amendments to the
package. 

``In the end, we will present our proposals. It's a two-way
street,'' he told reporters at a joint news conference with
Iraqi politician Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, who heads that country's
largest Shiite party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic
Revolution in Iraq. 

Mottaki's remarks echoed comments made Friday by President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. 

``Generally speaking, we're regarding this offer as a step
forward and I have instructed my colleagues to carefully
consider it,'' Ahmadinejad said after meeting Chinese President
Hu Jintao in Shanghai. 

Iran denies accusations by the United States and others that it
is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, saying its program would
only generate energy. 

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana presented the
package of perks and possible penalties, drawn up by the five
permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany, to
Tehran on June 6. It includes promises that the United States
and Europe would provide nuclear technology and that Washington
would join direct talks with Iran. 

Crucially, the package calls on Iran to suspend, not permanently
halt, uranium enrichment, a process that can make nuclear fuel
for a power plant or fissile material for an atomic bomb. 

But Iran has said it will not give up its right under the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce
nuclear fuel, though it has indicated it may temporarily suspend
enrichment to ease tensions. 

The United States and Europe support Security Council sanctions
if Iran refuses to accept the package. 

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said in remarks
published Saturday that Iran's consideration of the package was
a positive sign, although the international community was still
waiting for a ``solid answer.'' 

``So far, we have no solid signal, no real reaction,''
Steinmeier was quoted as telling the weekly Der Spiegel.	 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 4 IRNA: EU leaders reaffirm Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy -
     
, June 16, IRNA

Leaders of the 25-member European Union ended their two-day
summit in Brussels Friday afternoon reiterating the EU's
commitment to a diplomatic solution to Iran's nuclear issue.

 "The European Council reiterated its commitment to a diplomatic
solution which addresses international concerns about Iran's
nuclear programme while affirming Iran's right to the peaceful
use of nuclear energy in accordance with the NPT," they said in
a statement.

 The EU Council welcomed the important initiative of the EU High
Representative (Javier Solana), the Foreign Ministers of France,
Germany, the United Kingdom, China, the Russian Federation and
the United States, agreed in Vienna on 1 June 2006.

 EU leaders gave their "full support to the balanced approach
incorporated in the Vienna initiative, and encouraged "Iran to
take the positive path that is offered."
 The Council welcomed the meetings of EU High Representative
Javier Solana, accompanied by representatives of France,
Germany, the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation, with the
Iranian authorities in Tehran on 6 June, and the constructive
atmosphere in which this visit took place .

 The Council urged Iran to "give an early positive response to
this far-reaching initiative and to create the conditions
whereby negotiations can resume."
 Meanwhile, Austrian foreign minister Ursula Plassnik, whose
country holds the current EU Presidency, told a press conference
that "we are convinced that our position on Iran is the right
one." "It is Iran's issue to work in the right direction for new
prospects, " she added.

*****************************************************************
 5 IRNA: Iran, China underline energy cooperation agreements

Beijing, China, June 17, IRNA

Iran-China-Oil 

Iranian Oil Minister Seyyed Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh discussed
bilateral cooperation in the energy sector with Chinese Minister
of the State Development and Reformation Commission Ma Kai here
on Friday.

 Minister Kai, in the discussion, said the two countries
expressed their political will to develop ties in their
political and cultural as well as energy sectors.

 He further welcomed enhancement of cooperation in the oil and
gas sector and voiced his country's readiness to invest in
Iranian oil, gas and petrochemical projects.

 Kai futher said he would encourage Chinese companies to
increase their participation in Iranian projects.

 "The economies of China and Iran are closely tied together," he
said, and called for an increase in Tehran-Beijing transactions.

 Vaziri-Hamaneh said policies of Iranian political leaders
stress expansion of ties with China.

 He also expressed Iran's readiness to enter into joint projects
with China for energy development.

 He vowed his country would continue its cooperation with China
as a close ally and to meet China's growing energy demand.

 Vaziri-Hamaneh gave the assurance he would follow up execution
of agreements concluded between Chinese firms and Iranian
companies.

 The two sides reiterated their confidence in their countries'
high capability in the energy sector, and called for speedy
implementation of agreements concluded in the near future.

 Oil Minister Vaziri-Hamaneh and Foreign Minister Manouchehr
Mottaki were in the delegation of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
who recently concluded a three-day visit to China to attend the
6th summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

 Iran is an observer member of the organization.

*****************************************************************
 6 Guardian Unlimited: Iran: Incentive Package a 'Step Forward'
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday June 17, 2006 1:01 AM
 	
AP Photo XED108 
By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN Associated Press Writer 

SHANGHAI, China (AP) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
said Friday a U.S.-endorsed incentive package was a positive
step toward resolving the standoff over Tehran's nuclear
program. 

Ahmadinejad's remarks were the highest-level sign that Iran was
preparing to negotiate over the package, which calls for talks
with the U.S. and other incentives if Iran freezes its uranium
enrichment program. 

``Generally speaking, we're regarding this offer as a step
forward and I have instructed my colleagues to carefully
consider it,'' Ahmadinejad told reporters after meeting with
Chinese President Hu Jintao in Shanghai. 

In Washington, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called the
signals from Iran encouraging. 

``Certainly we have heard some positive statements from the
Iranians,'' Rice said following a meeting with her Italian
counterpart, Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema. 

Ahmadinejad also said Iran was not afraid of an Israeli attack
to stop its nuclear program. He also repeated assertions that
the Nazi Holocaust was unproven, saying it should be
independently investigated. 

``An event that has influenced so many diplomatic and political
equations of the world needs to be investigated and researched
by impartial and independent groups,'' Ahmadinejad said. 

The hard-line president has previously dismissed the Holocaust
as a ``myth'' and said Israel should be ``wiped off the map.''

His questioning of the World War II slaughter of 6 million Jews
in the past has drawn scorn and condemnation from the West and
Israel. 

Iran has sent mixed signals about the incentive package - also
backed by three European countries, Russia and China - ever
since it was offered last month. On Thursday, Iran's supreme
leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted on state television
as saying: ``The Islamic Republic of Iran will not succumb to
these pressures.'' 

Also Friday, Israeli Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Iran will
suffer deepening poverty and isolation if it spurns
international appeals to halt its nuclear activity. 

``Their choice is to keep the country poor and their arsenal
rich. It cannot go on forever,'' Peres told reporters on the
fringes of a conference in the Central Asian nation of
Kazakhstan. 

Attending the same meetings, Iran's deputy foreign minister,
Said Abbas Irakchi, told reporters that Tehran had some concerns
about the proposal. 

``We see a lot of positive things there, but there are some
things that we don't understand and that raise questions,'' he
said. 

Irakchi did not say what problems Iran saw with the incentives. 
Ahmadinejad's remarks in Shanghai capped his appearance at a
regional security summit dominated by Russia and China, two
countries that have argued strongly in the U.N. Security Council
against sanctions to compel Iran to stop uranium enrichment,
which can produce fuel for nuclear power plants or material for
atomic weapons. 

Iran denies accusations by the U.S. and others that it is
seeking to develop nuclear weapons, saying its program would
only generate energy. 

Also Friday, EU leaders at a summit urged Iran to give an early
positive response to the package of incentives and penalties.

They did not specify a deadline for Tehran's response. 

British officials said that although Tehran needs adequate time
to consider the offer, the position may harden if Iran does not
offer a formal response by the G8 foreign ministers' meeting in
Moscow on June 29. 

In Shanghai, Ahmadinejad said a response to the package will
come ``in due time in line with the international interests of
the Islamic Republic of Iran.'' 

The United States has said it will wait for a formal response
from Tehran to the E.U. foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, who
delivered the proposal earlier this month. 

``We need an answer, the international community needs an
answer, so that we know if in fact the negotiating track is
indeed one that is going to bear fruit,'' Rice said. 

``There is a very positive proposal on the table for Iran, and I
certainly hope that Iran is going to choose the path of
cooperation.'' 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 7 AFP: Emirati FM to visit Iran 'for talks on nuclear file' - 

  [Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahayan]   

DUBAI (AFP) - United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister Sheikh
Abdullah bin Zayed al-Nahayan will visit Iran next month for
talks expected to cover the row over Iran's nuclear program, a
newspaper reported.

Abdullah, who will also go to Yemen in July, told the daily
Al-Khaleej that his agenda in Tehran would feature "the Iranian
nuclear file and the issue of the three Emirati islands"
controlled by Iran.

Abdullah said earlier this month that the UAE and fellow Gulf
Arab states feared a potential "radioactive leak from an Iranian
nuclear power plant, which could cause an enormous ecological
catastrophe by polluting the waters of the Gulf."

Tehran dismissed the concerns, saying it had given the leaders
of the region "every assurance over the security of the Bushehr
plant", Iran's first nuclear power station which is being built
with Russian help at the port city on the Gulf.

Washington and its Western allies believe the Iranian nuclear
program is a cover for an attempt to build a nuclear weapon.

Iran insists it is a peaceful project, arguing that it only
wants to enrich uranium to make civilian reactor fuel and not
material for a nuclear weapon.

The UAE is Iran's largest trading partner in the Gulf, but the
two countries have a long-standing dispute over the islands of
Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb and Abu Musa.

The islands, seized by Tehran after British forces left the Gulf
in 1971, are claimed by Abu Dhabi. 

    Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP '); [ src=] 
*****************************************************************
 8 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI to send EU clear-cut package 

  2006/06/17   
  
Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Saturday that the
Islamic Republic of Iran will give a transparent response to the
European proposals. 

The minister made the remarks following his meeting with the
Head of the Iraqi United Alliance party Abdol Aziz Hakim.
 
Mottaki described the EU proposal as a positive step, adding
that the Iranian officials enjoy consensus over these proposals. 

"The European Union and the 5+1 member countries have sent their
proposals to us. We'll declare our proposals to the European
side after investigating their proposals and they will study
them for their part," Mottaki stated. 

The Foreign Minister reiterated that the two sides are
cooperating with each other in a positive way to settle the
case. 

SM   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: <font color="#ff0000" face>Webmaster@IRIBNEWS.ir</font> 
*****************************************************************
 9 AFP: Iran rejects 'preconditions' to nuclear talks 

 by Hiedeh Farmani Sun Jun 18, 8:23 AM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran" /> Iransaid it would not accept any 
"preconditions" for fresh international talks over its disputed 
nuclear programme, implicitly rejecting demands that the Islamic 
republic suspend sensitive uranium enrichment work. 

 "Dialogue must be without preconditions, because any
precondition limits the framework of the dialogue and does not
allow results to be achieved," foreign ministry spokesman Hamid
Reza Asefi told reporters. 

"The Islamic republic of Iran will not give up its rights. One
cannot fix preconditions to hold negotiations without taking
into account the position of the other party," he added. 

A suspension of enrichment is a non-negotiable precondition in a
proposal from the five permanent Security Council members --
Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- plus
Germany. 

The offer, presented to Iran on June 6, involves incentives and
multilateral talks if Iran agrees to a temporarily halt the
sensitive nuclear activity and cooperate with the International
Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy
Agency(IAEA). 

Washington and its allies believe the Iranian programme is a
cover for an attempt to build a nuclear weapon. Iran insists it
is peaceful, arguing that it only wants to enrich uranium to
make civilian reactor fuel and not the core of a nuclear weapon. 

"If the European act with logic and reason, the chances for a
result are there. If the Europeans respect our rights, they will
have greater credibility. It is about logic, and not dignity,"
Asefi said. 

He did not explicitly mention enrichment, but Iranian officials
invariably refer to the activity as a "right" enshrined by the
nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). 

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki also refused to
explicitly say if Iran would agree or refuse to suspend
enrichment. 

"We have started to seriously examine the offer," he told
reporters. "After examining it, we will give our response." 

Western officials say they expect a response from Iran before
the end of June. 

Chinese Prime Minister Wen Jiabao meanwhile put fresh weight
behind the offer. 

"We believe the Iran nuclear issue needs to be resolved through
diplomatic channels," Wen told reporters after meeting Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak" /> Hosni Mubarakin Cairo. 

"We also believe that the six countries involved have already
put on the table a quite good proposal on a solution to the
Iranian nuclear issue (which) has certainly laid a foundation
for peaceful talks," said Wen, whose remarks were translated
from Mandarin into English. 

His comments came two days after a meeting between Chinese
leader Hu Jintao" /> Hu Jintaoand Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad, who also met Russian President Vladimir Putin" />
Vladimir Putina day earlier. 

Washington had expressed fears that Iran would seek to test the
unity of the major brokers in the nuclear crisis during the
talks with Beijing and Moscow, which have traditionally taken a
softer stance towards the Islamic republic and have so far
opposed the use of sanctions. 

"We believe that Iran is entitled to the right to a peaceful use
of nuclear energy. At the same time Iran also needs to honour
its due obligations and commitments," Wen said. 

"The parties need to seize this opportunity and display even
greater flexibility so as to resume the peace talks at an early
date," he added. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 10 Guardian Unlimited: Iran: U.S. Making Nuke Talks Difficult
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Sunday June 18, 2006 7:16 PM

AP Photo VAH103 

By NASSER KARIMI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran accused the United States on Sunday of
steering Europe away from a possible compromise on Tehran's
disputed nuclear program. 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said the U.S.
insistence on conditional negotiations over a Western package of
incentives has narrowed the scope of possible talks and made it
tougher for all parties to reach a solution. 

The incentives are meant to persuade Iran to stop enriching
uranium, a process that can make nuclear fuel for a power plant
or fissile material for an atomic bomb. 

``We feel that the Americans are trying to take Europe to a
point that the case could not be easily solvable,'' Asefi said.
``The U.S. said it gave a deadline to Iran to respond to the
package, but that is not correct. Again, they mix different
issues and that is not appropriate.'' 

Asefi reiterated that enriching uranium was his country's
unalienable right, and that talks must be unconditional. He said
Iranian officials were reviewing the package, and Iran would
propose amendments to the deal. 

``We have formed different committees to review the package.
When the committees have concluded, we will send our answer to
the Europeans immediately,'' Asefi said. 

Iran has called the package a ``step forward,'' saying some of
the incentives were acceptable and calling for changes in
others. It also said that the central issue of uranium
enrichment needed clarification. 

In Washington, White House spokesman Tony Snow said Iran must
take the next step if it wished to cooperate with the
international community and qualify for the incentives. 

``The Iranian government needs to suspend all uranium
enrichment-related and reprocessing activities,'' Snow told
CNN's ``Late Edition.'' ``Once they do that, once that is done,
they can sit down at the table.'' 

Iran denies accusations by the United States and others that it
is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, saying its program would
only generate electricity. 

European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana presented the
package of perks and possible penalties to Tehran on June 6. The
package was drawn up by the five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council - the United States, Britain, China, France and
Russia - and Germany. 

Crucially, the package calls on Iran to suspend, not permanently
halt, uranium enrichment as a condition for the start of talks,
although the negotiations are aimed at achieving Iranian
acceptance long-term moratorium on such activities. 

Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged Iran to accept the package. 

``I can see that they take the offer seriously and I hope they
will respond in a not too distant future,'' Annan said while
visiting Denmark. 

Iran so far has said it will not give up its right under the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to enrich uranium and produce
nuclear fuel, though Tehran has indicated that it may
temporarily suspend uranium enrichment to ease tensions. 

The package included some significant concessions by the United
States, including providing Iran with peaceful nuclear
technology, lifting some sanctions and joining direct
negotiations with Tehran. 

However, it also contains the implicit threat of U.N. sanctions
if Iran remains defiant. 

--- 

Associated Press reporter Jan M. Olsen in Copenhagen, Denmark,
contributed to this report.	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 11 [NYTr] N.Korea to Test Long-Range Missile; How Vulnerable Is US?
 
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 18:50:59 -0400 (EDT)

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
AP via MSNBC - Jun 17, 2006
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13361343/

Report: North Korea preparing for missile test

Long-range weapon has potential to strike mainland America, official says

The Associated Press

SEOUL, South Korea - North Korea loaded booster rockets onto a launch pad
and moved about 10 fuel tanks to a launch site in preparation to test-fire a
long-range missile that could reach as far as the U.S. mainland, a newspaper
reported Saturday.

South Korea and the United States made the assessment after analyzing
satellite images over the past few days, the Chosun Ilbo reported, citing an
unnamed high-level South Korean government official.

Also Saturday, the Japanese daily, Sankei Shimbun, reported that the missile
launch could take place as early as Sunday.

South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Choo Kyu-ho couldn't confirm the
report.

U.S. warnings

The report follows warnings by the U.S. government that the communist state
was accelerating preparations for testing a missile that has the potential
to strike the United States.

A U.S. government official said Friday that a test of the Taepodong-2
long-range missile may be imminent. The Washington official agreed to speak
but only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the
information.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters Friday that any
missile launch by the North Koreans would be a provocation and would violate
their 1999 moratorium on long-range missile tests.

The Taepodong-2 is a three-stage missile, but the warhead section hasn't
been loaded yet, the paper said. It said about 10 large tanks of liquid fuel
have been moved to the site, but it wasn't clear if the fuel had been
unloaded.

The North's missile program has been a major security concern in the region,
adding to worries about its pursuit of nuclear bombs.

North Korea sent shock waves through the region when it test-fired a
ballistic missile over northern Japan in 1998.

Violation of declaration

On Friday, Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said a launch would
threaten Japanese security.

"If North Korea launches the reported ballistic missile, which will directly
affect Japan's security, it would be a violation of the Japan-Pyongyang
Declaration," Abe said.

The declaration was signed in 2002 at a Japan-North Korea summit in
Pyongyang, and reaffirmed by the two nations in 2004, he said.

South Korea said earlier this week that it conveyed "grave concern" to North
Korea last month when signs first emerged that the North was preparing to
test-fire a missile.

North Korea has been under a self-imposed moratorium on long-range missile
tests since 1999. Still, it has since test-fired short-range missiles many
times, including two in March.

The reports of a possible launch come after a prolonged hiatus in six-party
nuclear disarmament talks designed to create a Korean Peninsula free of
nuclear weapons.

Persistent efforts by the United States and other members of the group to
persuade North Korea to resume the discussions have not been successful.
There have been no discussions since November.

North Korea is demanding that the United States revoke sanctions that
Washington imposed several months ago in response to alleged North Korean
counterfeiting of U.S. dollars and other currency violations.

© 2006 The Associated Press.
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 12 BBC NEWS: North Korea warned about missile
 
Last Updated: Sunday, 18 June 2006, 22:35 GMT 23:35 UK [
  		 		 		 
[North Korean Scud B missiles on display in a Southern museum]                                

North Korea's missiles are based on Soviet technology                                                              

Japan has warned it will lodge a "fierce" protest with the United 
Nations Security Council if North Korea test-fires a long-range 
missile. 

The untested Taepodong-2 is believed to have a range of up to
6,000km (3,728 miles) with a light payload, allowing it to reach
parts of the United States. 

North Korea reportedly ordered its people to raise the state
flag and expect a television message on Sunday. 

But the scheduled time passed without an address from the
government. 

Japanese Defence Agency officials concluded that a launch was
not imminent, but that monitoring would continue, Japan's Jiji
Press news agency reported. 

The Korea Central News Agency later issued a statement in which
it criticised the attitude of the US and Japan towards North
Korea. 

"The Korean army and people will do their best to increase the
military deterrent with sharp vigilance to cope with the moves
of the US, which is hell-bent on provocations for war of
aggression on the DPRK ( Democratic People's Republic of
Korea)," the statement said. No mention was made of a missile
test. 

'Signs of activity' 

Earlier, Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso had said Tokyo could 
impose sanctions on North Korea in response to a test, and he 
stressed that the necessary Japanese legislation already existed. 

[TV footage of a previous North Korean missile test]     

North Korea's missiles                          

"We've put together measures that would allow us to legally
respond, and what comes next is implementing them," he added. 

The report that North Koreans have been told to expect a message
on Sunday came in a Japanese newspaper, Sankei Shimbun, which
quoted unnamed Japanese government sources. 

However, speculation has been high that the North is preparing
for a test. 

South Korean daily Chosun Ilbo reported that booster rockets had
been loaded onto a launch pad and 10 fuel tanks moved to the
site in the north-east of the country in preparation for a
launch. 

The information came from US and South Korean satellite images
of the site, the daily said, citing an unnamed government
official. 

North Korea last tested a long-range missile in 1998, when it
fired the Taepodong-1 missile, with a range of 2,000km, over
northern Japan. The missile landed in the Pacific Ocean. 

Diplomats say that North Korean technicians are going through
the same procedures undertaken before the test in 1998. 

Range estimates published by the Federation of American
Scientists give the Taepodong-2 between 3,500km and 6,700km. 

If this is confirmed, it would have the potential to hit Alaska. 

	 		 			 			 				[ src=]  				 			 			 		 		
*****************************************************************
 13 YONHAP NEWS: Why on earth a missile?

  Monday, June 19, 2006                        

EDITORIAL from JoongAng Daily on June 19)
 
As word spread that preparations for a test launch of a North
Korean Taepodong-2 missile were in the initial stages, the state
of affairs among countries surrounding the Korean Peninsula is
changing rapidly. The United States and Japan are threatening to
take strong action, such as calling a session of the United
Nations Security Council. The Korean government is expressing
concern about the serious repercussions a launch could have on
North-South relations. 

If North Korea, in spite of the threats and repeated attempts at
dissuasion, nevertheless decides to continue with its plans for
a missile launch, all responsibility for any bad effects that
stem from that decision is its own. That much needs to be clear.
We cannot help but ask what sort of benefits North Korea could
possibly reap through a test launch of the Taepodong-2 missile,
which is known to have intercontinental range. 

Most people would guess that it is simply an act of brinkmanship
to break the deadlock in the six-party talks, which has
developed because of several factors, including financial
sanctions imposed by the United States. 

The Bush administration, already in hot water because of the
Iraq fiasco and the Iranian nuclear threat, no longer has the
flexibility to compromise. It simply has no choice but to
cooperate with the international community to increase the
pressure on North Korea. 

Even those in America who favor a moderate approach, who have
been critical until now of the administration's hard-line
tactics, have now muted that criticism. Thus, the voices of the
hawks only continue to get louder. 

Any missile launch will most likely have the unintended result
of helping the anti-North Korea hard-liners gain ground during
the November mid-term elections in the United States and the
selection by Japan's governing party of a new prime minister. To
make matters worse, North Korea would lose the support of people
in South Korea who have been sympathetic toward their neighbor
to the north. 

In spite of the North Korean nuclear threat, South Korea's
President Roh Moo-hyun has persistently tried to increase trade
and cooperation, including aid to the North, in the name of the
common heritage of Koreans. As criticism of the administration
escalates, an overall re-evaluation of South Korea's policy
toward North Korea will be unavoidable. 

Furthermore, it is certain that the leverage the South Korean
government has used to counter American and Japanese pressure on
North Korea would be weakened considerably. North Korea may
claim that it is simply exercising the prerogative of a
sovereign state. But they are surely aware that test-launching
intercontinental missiles is not a matter of sovereignty ˇŞ it
is a matter of international politics. Cards are only effective
when they are in your hand; they are of no use once they are
shown to your opponent. 

If North Korea ignores such self-evident principles and goes
forward with its plans for test-launching its new missile, it
would be demonstrating the stupidity of incurring a great loss
for the sake of a making a small profit. 

North Korea must immediately end its utterly destructive missile
gamble.

 (END)
   
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: Japan, US warn NKorea against 'provocative' missile launch -
     
 by Harumi Ozawa Sat Jun 17, 3:57 PM ET 
		 	 
TOKYO (AFP) - The United States and Japan warned North Korea " /> 
North Koreato drop plans for a long-range missile test, warning 
it would be "grave and provocative." 

Thomas Schieffer, the US ambassador to Japan, said there were
signs the self-declared nuclear power was preparing a missile
launch and Japanese media reports said the test could come this
weekend.
 
"This is a grave and provocative action that North Korea is
contemplating and we hope they turn back from launching a
missile," Schieffer told reporters after evening talks with
Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso.
 
"If they did that, it would be a very provocative act. The
United States and Japan agreed on that," he said.
 
"In the event where they will launch, I think all options are on
the table and I would consider many different alternatives to
dissuade them from doing that in the future," he said.
 
Schieffer declined to give a time-frame for a launch of a
Taepodong-2 missile, which could one day be able to hit the
mainland United States.
 
"There are indications that North Korea is preparing launching a
missile and I don't want to get into the specific details,"
Schieffer said.
 
North Korean officials, however, have denied plans to test-fire
a ballistic missile, according to a South Korean lawmaker quoted
by Yonhap news agency.
 
A group of North Korean officials and civilians returned home
after a four-day visit to South Korea
" /> South KoreaSaturday.
 
"I met a number of North Korean officials who said
missile-related concerns in South Korea were groundless," Yonhap
quoted Choi Sung, a ruling party lawmaker as saying.
 
"They also insisted that the US and Japan had in the past
floated lots of groundless rumors concerning North Korea."
 
A long-range test would be the first since the communist state
shocked the world in 1998 by firing a missile over Japan into
the Pacific Ocean.
 
North Korea last year declared it had nuclear weapons but also
reached a broad agreement to give up its program in exchange for
aid and security guarantees.
 
But negotiations, which have been conducted among six nations
including the United States and Japan, broke down in November,
with North Korea refusing to return to the table unless the
United States drops financial sanctions imposed over alleged
counterfeiting and money-laundering.
 
"The main message here is we hope that North Koreans will not
take this provocative action and we hope that they will return
to the six-party talks. Those talks can still be productive,"
Schieffer said.
 
Analysts have speculated that North Korea -- which US President 
George W. Bush " /> President George W. Bushin 2002 branded as 
part of an "axis of evil" with Iran " /> Iranand Saddam Hussein " 
/> Saddam Hussein's Iraq " /> Iraq-- is trying to regain the 
limelight at a time that the world is focused on curbing Tehran's 
nuclear drive.
 
Schieffer called on the international community "to speak with 
one voice" to North Korea.
 
South Korea, which has been working to reconcile with its
estranged northern neighbor, has also warned Pyongyang against a
missile launch. 

Aso, the Japanese foreign minister, said that Tokyo sent its
concerns to Pyongyang via China, the main ally of North Korea
and host of the stalled talks. 

"Japan has already given a warning through the Beijing route,"
Aso said. 

Japan's Jiji Press news agency, quoting government sources, said
that North Korea had completed assembling the inter-continental
Taepodong-2 missile and that Japan's navy had been ordered to
patrol waters around the country. 

The Taepodong-2 has a range of 3,500 to 6,000 kilometers (2,200
to 3,750 miles). 

In August 1998, North Korea tested a Taepodong-1 missile with a
range of up to 2,000 kilometers. At the time Pyongyang called it
a satellite launch, but in 2002 it agreed not to test further
long-range missiles in a declaration with Japan paving the way
to normalize relations.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: US expects North Korea to return to nuclear talks 

 Sun Jun 18, 4:32 PM ET                          

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States expects North Korea" /> 
North Koreato renew its moratorium on long-range missile tests 
and return to six-party talks aimed at ending its nuclear 
ambitions, the White House said. 

 Reports of an imminent North Korean missile test has drawn
warnings from the United States Japan and South Korea" /> South
Korea, but Japanese officials were quoted as saying Sunday that
a test was unlikely. 

"The Japanese government has announced, at least to the best of
its knowledge, that there's not going to be a launch today and
we hope there's not going to be a launch," White House spokesman
Tony Snow told the Fox News Sunday television program. 

In March 2005, Pyongyang ended a moratorium on long-range
missile that it had declared in 1999. It shocked the world in
1998 by launching a Taepodong-1 missile that flew over Japan
before crashing into the Pacific. 

"We expect them to maintain the moratorium," Snow said. 

"We do not want to have a missile test out of North Korea," he
added. 

The spokesman also said North Korea should return to the
negotiating table with five other nations trying to convince
Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons program. 

"We expect them to come back to the table," he said of the
six-party talks that include the United States, the two Koreas,
Japan, Russia and China. 

North Korea last year said it had nuclear weapons and since
November has boycotted the six-nation talks on its atomic
aspirations, saying it will not come back to the bargaining
table until the United States lifts sanctions against it. 

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 16 AFP: Japan warns N.Korea over any missile 'attack' 

 by Shingo Ito Sun Jun 18, 7:12 AM ET 		 	 

TOKYO (AFP) - Japan warned North Korea" /> it would regard any 
test-fired missile that landed on Japanese soil as an attack, 
after reports the secretive nation was preparing to jangle 
international nerves with a new missile launch. 

 Foreign Minister Taro Aso said Tokyo was ready to slap
sanctions on the North, which surprised the world by firing a
missile over Japan in 1998 without warning. He said any repeat
launch would lead immediately to the UN Security Council. 

"If they failed and the missile dropped on ... Japan, things
would be complicated," Aso said on Japanese television. "It will
be regarded as an attack." 

He also said that the legal procedures were already in place to
impose economic sanctions against North Korea. 

"The next step is to put that in motion," Aso said. 

Reports of the imminent test of a long-range missile with the
range to hit parts of the United States have drawn stiff
warnings from Washington as well as from Japan and South Korea"
/> . 

Japan's Sankei Shimbun newspaper, citing unnamed Japanese
government sources, said citizens of the Stalinist state had
been advised to raise the national flag earlier at 0500 GMT and
watch a message on television. 

But that time passed without word of any launch, and South
Korea's Yonhap news agency cited an official as saying that a
similar call to citizens was issued last year on June 18 as part
of an unrelated domestic anniversary. 

Senior officials of Japan's Defense Agency also said North Korea
was unlikely to test-fire the missile on Sunday, according to
Jiji Press news agency. 

"There won't be a launch today," one official was quoted as
saying without elaborating. 

Defense Agency chief Fukushiro Nukaga separately said the agency
had not observed "any particular change" that would indicate an
impending launch. 

But "we are taking every possible measure to collect information
for 24 hours a day," Nukaga said. 

Nukaga said he ordered the defense agency to be on alert,
hinting that its Aegis destroyers would remain deployed in the
Sea of Japan and the Pacific for surveillance activities. 

North Korea last year said it had nuclear weapons and since
November has boycotted six-nation talks on its atomic drive,
saying it will not come back to the bargaining table until the
United States lifts sanctions on it. 

Thomas Schieffer, the US ambassador to Japan, said Saturday
there were signs the North was preparing a missile launch and
warned that such a move would be "grave and provocative." 

But Schieffer declined to give a time frame for a launch of a
Taepodong-2 missile, which has a range of 3,500 to 6,000
kilometers (2,200 to 3,750 miles). 

In South Korea, a defense ministry spokesman declined to comment
on any North Korean preparations but said his country's military
alert level had not been changed. 

"The military is on the same level of alert as usual," the
spokesman said. 

In the six-nation talks -- which group North and South Korea,
China, Japan, Russia and the United States -- the North had
agreed to give up its nuclear program in exchange for aid and
security guarantees. 

But the talks have been stalled since Pyongyang said the United
States would first have to drop financial sanctions imposed over
alleged counterfeiting and money-laundering. 

Analysts have speculated that North Korea -- which US President
George W. Bush" /> in 2002 branded as part of an "axis of evil"
with Iran" /> and Saddam Hussein" /> 's Iraq" /> -- is trying to
regain the limelight while much international attention is
focused on Iran's nuclear program. 

South Korea, which has been working to reconcile with its
estranged northern neighbor, has also warned it against a
missile launch. 

In August 1998 North Korea tested a Taepodong-1 missile with a
range of up to 2,000 kilometers. 

At the time Pyongyang called it a satellite launch. But in 2002
it agreed not to test further long-range missiles in a
declaration with Japan paving the way for the normalization of
relations. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 17 AFP: North Korean delegates return home with warnings against missile test - 

 Sat Jun 17, 7:13 AM ET 
		 	 
GWANGJU (AFP) - North Korea " /> North Korea's delegates to a 
pro-unification festival have left Gwangju for their home country 
after being warned by South Korea " /> South Koreaagainst 
test-launching a ballistic missile. 

The North's 140-member delegation left this southwestern city on
a chartered flight at the end of four-day celebrations to mark a
historic inter-Korean summit in 2000, witnesses said.
 
South Korean officials said that the North Koreans had been
warned against a feared test-firing of a long-range missile.
 
"We made all efforts we should have done here (as to the
concerns over the missile test)," an official of the Unification
Ministry told journalists.
 
South Korea's Unification Minister Lee Jong-Seok held talks here
Thursday with Kim Yong-Dae, who led the North Koreans to the
cultural and sporting events, and expressed concerns over the
reportedly imminent missile test.
 
But the North Koreans did not give any assurances to their South
Korean counterparts that their country would not test-fire a
ballistic missile, Yonhap news agency said.
 
South Korean and US officials said that North Korea appeared to
be preparing to launch an inter-continental ballistic missile
capable of reaching the mainland United States.
 
South Korea has urged Pyongyang to abandon plans for the missile
test that would have a "negative impact on the international
geopolitical situation and the settlement of North Korea's
nuclear issue."
 
The United States on Friday sharply warned North Korea against
what it called a "provocative" ballistic missile test, promising
to protect itself.
 
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 18 Guardian Unlimited: N. Korea Denies It's About to Test Missile
 
From the Associated Press        
	 
[UP] 

Saturday June 17, 2006 5:31 PM
 	
AP Photo XITS105 
By CHISAKI WATANABE Associated Press Writer 

TOKYO (AP) - The United States and Japan urged North Korea on
Saturday not to proceed with reported plans to test-fire a
long-range missile capable of reaching the U.S. mainland. But
North Korean officials denied such preparations, the Kyodo News
agency reported, citing an unidentified South Korean official. 

U.S. Ambassador to Japan Thomas Schieffer and Japanese Foreign
Minister Taro Aso met Saturday night amid mounting speculation
the North could soon test a Taepodong-2 missile capable of
reaching the United States with a light payload. 

South Korean media reports said the North had loaded booster
rockets onto a launch pad in preparation for the test. 

After the meeting, Schieffer reiterated Washington's stance that
the test would be a dangerous act that would hurt North Korean
interests. The North has been under a self-imposed moratorium on
long-range missile tests since 1999. 

``We hope that the North Koreans will not take this provocative
action. We hope that they will return to the six-party talks,''
Schieffer said, referring to international talks aiming to get
North Korea to give up its nuclear program. 

Those talks - involving the United States, the two Koreas,
China, Japan and Russia - have been stalled by a North Korean
boycott. 

A launch ``will only isolate the North Koreans further from the
rest of the international community,'' he said. 

Schieffer said Washington was working with allies on how to
respond if North Korea goes ahead with the launch, but he
refused to be specific, saying only that ``all options are on
the table.'' 

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said a North Korean missile
launch would violate a moratorium on long-range missile tests
declared in 1999 by North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. 

``This would be yet another instance of North Korea violating
the international commitments it has made,'' she said. 

Aso told reporters that the situation was ``serious'' and that
North Korea had been warned not to fire the missile. ``How we
will respond depends on what North Korea does,'' he said. 

Japan has grown increasingly tense as news reports emerge that
Pyongyang could soon launch the missile. North Korea fired a
missile over northern Japan into the Pacific Ocean in 1998, and
the move spurred Tokyo to work with Washington on a missile
defense system. 

A U.S. government official told The Associated Press on Friday
that a test of the Taepodong-2 may be imminent. The Washington
official agreed to speak but only on the condition of anonymity
because of the sensitivity of the information. 

South Korean newspaper Chosun Ilbo reported Saturday that North
Korea also moved about 10 fuel tanks to the launch site in
preparation for the test. 

It said intelligence authorities from Seoul and Washington had
made the assessment, based on satellite images, that the North
had loaded booster rockets onto a launch pad and moved the fuel
tanks close by. The paper quoted an unidentified high-level
South Korean government official. 

South Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Choo Kyu-ho could not
confirm the report. 

Japan's conservative Sankei Shimbun, citing government officials
it did not name, said the Japanese government had dispatched two
Aegis destroyers to the Sea of Japan and the Pacific Ocean.

Hidetsugu Iwamasa, a Japanese naval official, said he could not
comment on the report, citing security concerns. 

North Korea plans to disguise the missile test as an attempt to
put a satellite into orbit, Kyodo News agency reported Saturday.
Pyongyang has been calculating an orbit for a fake satellite and
plans to announce its trajectory after firing the missile, Kyodo
reported from Beijing, citing military intelligence officials it
did not identify. 

North Korea said in 1998 that its launch then was an effort to
put a satellite in space, but Washington and Tokyo say that is
just a cover for a military program. 

--- 
Associated Press reporters Jae-Soon Chang in Seoul and George
Gedda in Washington contributed to this report.	 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 19 Guardian Unlimited: Report: N.Korea Preparing for Missile Test
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday June 17, 2006 7:16 AM
 	
By JAE-SOON CHANG Associated Press Writer 

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea loaded booster rockets
onto a launchpad as it prepared to test-fire a long-range
missile that could reach as far as the U.S. mainland, a
newspaper reported Saturday. 

South Korea and the United States made the assessment after
analyzing satellite images, the Chosun Ilbo reported, citing an
unnamed high-level South Korean government official. 

The report follows warnings by the U.S. government that the
communist state was accelerating preparations for testing a
Taepodong-2 missile. A U.S. government official, speaking on the
condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the
information, said Friday that a test may be imminent. 

Japan has sent two warships to the Sea of Japan and the Pacific
Ocean, a Japanese newspaper said Saturday. Hidetsugu Iwamasa, a
Japanese naval official, said he could not comment on the
report. 

The Sankei Shimbun newspaper, which said the test could come as
early as Sunday, also reported U.S. surveillance aircraft around
Japan's southernmost island, Okinawa. 

The North's missile program has been a major security concern in
the region, adding to worries about its pursuit of nuclear
bombs. 

North Korea sent shock waves through the region when it
test-fired a ballistic missile over northern Japan in 1998. 

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said any missile
launch by the North Koreans would be a provocation and would
violate their 1999 moratorium on long-range missile tests. 

Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe said a launch would
threaten Japanese security and violate an agreement North Korea
signed with Japan in 2002 and reaffirmed in 2004. 

The reports of a possible launch come after a prolonged hiatus
in six-party nuclear disarmament talks designed to create a
Korean peninsula free of nuclear weapons. 

Persistent efforts by the United States and other members of the
group to persuade North Korea to resume the discussions have not
been successful. There have been no discussions since last
November. 

North Korea is demanding that the United States revoke sanctions
that Washington imposed several months ago in response to
alleged North Korean counterfeiting of U.S. dollars and other
currency violations. 

--- 
AP writer George Gedda in Washington contributed to this report. 
		 	 	   
      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 20 The Observer: US chiefs honoured in secret by Britain
 
[UP] 

Antony Barnett, investigations editor

Sunday June 18, 2006

The Observer             

The government has been secretly awarding honours to senior
figures in the US military and foreign businessmen with
lucrative public sector contracts. The Observer has obtained a
Foreign Office list detailing all non-British citizens who have
been awarded honours since 2003 - the first time the complete
three-year dossier has been released.

It has emerged that Riley Bechtel, billionaire boss of the
US-based Bechtel Corporation, which has won big transport and
nuclear contracts in Britain and made a fortune from the Iraq
war, was secretly awarded a CBE in 2003.

This award has never been made public either by the British
government or Bechtel. At the time Jack Straw, now Leader of the
House of Commons, was Foreign Secretary. Although there is no
suggestion of any wrongdoing, questions are being asked about
whether the Foreign Office kept the awards quiet for fear of a
political backlash.

But the Foreign Office says this is normal practice. On
releasing the information, the Foreign Secretary, Margaret
Beckett, said: 'Honorary awards to citizens where Her Majesty
the Queen is not head of state are not formally announced.'

According to the Foreign Office list the Queen approved
Bechtel's honour for 'services to UK-American commercial
relations' on 25 April 2003 - just a week after the company won
a bumper Ł430m contract to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure after
the invasion.

The honour to one of America's wealthiest citizens, a man with
intimate ties to the Republican administration, will reignite
the row over the secretive honours process.

The list shows that under Straw the Foreign Office awarded
honours to several senior US military personnel involved in the
Iraq invasion. These included the US military commander General
Tommy Franks, known as 'Mr Shock and Awe' for his role in
devising the battle plan for the 2003 invasion.

Others include Vice-Admiral Timothy Keating, who was in charge
of all maritime forces involved in Operation Iraqi Freedom; Rear
Admiral Barry Costello, commander of the Third Fleet and Task
Force 55 during the Iraq invasion; Lieutenant-Colonel Mark
Childress; and General Tad Moseley, chief of staff to the US Air
Force.

The row comes as protests mount at the CBE given to Andy Hayman,
the head of Scotland Yard's anti-terror operations who is at the
centre of investigations into the shooting of Jean Charles de
Menezes at Stockwell tube station last July and the raid at
Forest Gate, east London, earlier this month.

Bechtel, who has a personal fortune of more than $3bn (Ł1.62bn),
is 50th on America's rich list. British ministers have awarded
his company contracts for the London Underground, the upgrade of
the west coast main line, the Channel Tunnel rail link and the
Jubilee Line extension. Bechtel's nuclear subsidiary has
received almost Ł30m to help set up the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority.

Bechtel's contracts for US reconstruction work in Iraq have
caused the most controversy. One of the firm's key board members
is George Schultz, who was secretary of state under Ronald
Reagan and who, as chairman of the Committee to Liberate Iraq,
was one of the loudest cheerleaders for regime change.

The full list of awards to non-British citizens was only
disclosed after Beckett agreed to place the details in the House
of Commons Library following a series of parliamentary questions
by the Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker.

Baker said: 'This shows that what matters in Tony Blair's
Britain is those with power, money and a US accent. These awards
are supposed to be for good works and those that have helped
Britain. Instead it seems they are being handed out to those who
have supported Blair's misguided policies at home and overseas.'

Earlier this year The Guardian disclosed that Hans Rausing, the
Swedish billionaire and former head of Tetra Pak, was awarded an
honorary knighthood for philanthropy in January despite
questions over his use of legal loopholes to avoid paying tax.

A spokesman for the Foreign Office confirmed that Bechtel had
been awarded a CBE but said he could not give any details about
the nomination process.

   Useful links  

The British monarchy
The Prince of Wales
Royal archive
Kings and queens of England and Scotland

   Opponents  

Campaign for an elected head of state
Movement against the monarchy
Monarchy out

[UP] 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 21 SF Chronicle: Reagan doctrine still influencing U.S. foreign policy / 
His reliance on ideas over force brought to bear during 
negotiations with Soviets
 
John Arquilla 

Sunday, June 18, 2006
                     
For both good and ill, the 21st century world has been
profoundly shaped by ideas advanced during the presidency of
Ronald Reagan two decades ago -- so much so that the caricature
of him as a simple, shoot-from-the-hip cowboy must give way to a
far more complex portrait, that of a concept-driven man. 

Reagan's basic beliefs were: 1) The world could be made less
nuclear; 2) Tyrants are weak, especially when confronted by
freedom-seeking people; and 3) Ideas are ultimately more
powerful than military force. 

From these principles flowed everything else he did, especially
his drive for nuclear arms reduction, his strategy of
constructive engagement that sought to reform rogue states, and
his preference for waging wars of intellect rather than
conducting costly, bloody conflicts with soldiers, tanks and
planes. 

Today, almost every aspect of American foreign policy and
national security strategy bears his strong imprint. For
example, the notion of helping people in other nations to free
themselves -- what came to be called the Reagan Doctrine --
morphed into Bill Clinton's policy of "democratic enlargement"
and is now manifested in George W. Bush's effort to win the war
on terror by causing regime changes in various recalcitrant
countries. 

But Reagan's immediate successor, the elder George Bush, rushed
matters with his call for a U.S.-led new world order. Clinton
strayed from the Reagan Doctrine as well by trying to force the
pace of global democratic development with punitive economic
sanctions, imposing them on more than half the world's
population during his years in office. The younger Bush made the
mistake of relying far too much on military force to spread
liberal government, and has reaped the whirlwind of war and
insurgency. 

What has been missing in all these administrations is the Reagan
touch, whose hallmarks were the reliance on persuasion rather
than coercion, and on constructive rather than destructive
engagement. In Central Europe, East Asia and Latin America,
where the Reagan strategy has been more consistently adhered to
for the past 20 years, freedom has blossomed. 

Problems remain, of course. Sometimes countries exercise their
freedom to disagree with the United States, as in the case of
Venezuela. But the very fact that such opposition can be
legitimately manifested should be seen as healthy. It's far
better for our democratic soul than situations in which liberty
is repressed while terrorism and militancy are allowed to grow
attractive, sometimes putting us in the awkward position of
having to shore up authoritarian rule in the name of maintaining
order in places such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. 

Reagan's deft diplomacy was best displayed in his skillful
summitry with Mikhail Gorbachev. Over just a few years, Reagan
and Gorbachev replaced the decadeslong U.S.-Soviet antagonism
with arms-reduction agreements and laid the foundation for a
durable peace based on Russia's willing retreat from the edges
of its tattered empire. 

Sadly, each of the successors to the Reagan administration
stumbled in dealings with Moscow. The elder Bush's secretary of
state, James Baker, initially went so far as to speak out
against dissolution of the Soviet Union in his now-infamous
"Chicken Kiev" speech. Clinton failed to keep up the momentum on
nuclear arms control. And, most recently, Vice President Dick
Cheney has gone out of his way to provoke a war of words with
Russian President Vladimir Putin that threatens to revive the
old rivalry. 

Reagan's influence also continues to loom large in military
affairs. When he came into office a quarter century ago, one of
his principal goals was to restore the confidence and
capabilities of the U.S. armed forces, which had been shattered
in Vietnam. He did so with a number of initiatives. The
centerpiece was to increase the defense budget generously. This
was designed to ensure that U.S. forces could fight a protracted
conventional war against the Soviets without having to rely on
nuclear weapons to bail them out. 

And although the Soviet Union winked out of existence 15 years
ago, with the Red Army and Navy becoming shadows of their former
selves, Reagan's blueprint has been slavishly followed by each
of his successors. Indeed, the U.S. military has developed a
kind of philosophy of entitlement during the past two decades,
which resonates today to the ka-ching of defense spending in
excess of $1.25 billion per day; U.S. military expenditures
exceed those of the rest of the world combined. 

The worst part of this problem is that huge spending on arms
ensures continued dependence on big-ticket conventional weapons
-- aircraft carriers, main battle tanks, and advanced attack
aircraft. These are neither needed for our survival nor are they
effective against the threats now confronting us, or those
likely to imperil us tomorrow. 

Reagan's military legacy does have some bright spots, though,
especially his support for the creation of the Special
Operations Command. Formed 20 years ago -- against the wishes of
senior Pentagon leadership -- the command is finally taking the
lead in the war on terror. 

Instead of allowing our special forces to be bogged down in
Iraq, President Bush recently signed an executive order
authorizing them to deploy in small teams to track down and
eliminate al Qaeda cells around the world. We have Reagan to
thank for helping to nurture these forces, which we need in
order to have any hope of winning this conflict. 

Without Reagan's steadfast support for a greatly enhanced
commando capability a generation ago, we would now be in this
"war to change all wars" with even less ability to come to grips
with our wily, networked adversaries. 

By now the ironies of Reagan's legacy are clear. While Reagan
left us the best blueprints in the realm of statecraft, his
successors have strayed furthest from what worked well for him. 

On the other hand, while Reagan did less well overall in
preparing the military for a new era of conflict, both the elder
Bush and Clinton blindly followed the military-industrial policy
approach he left for them. And his successors seriously
neglected our special operations forces, an egregious error only
beginning to be corrected by George W. Bush. 

Clearly, it is time, as the football phrase goes, to "reverse
field." 

Instead of letting Reagan's imprint on foreign policy fade
further, a dual passion for arms control and constructive
engagement should be rekindled. And then, instead of simply
continuing to rubber stamp the Reagan approach to big-ticket
defense spending, current and future presidents should focus
more on his decision to nurture small, nimble special operations
forces. 

Given the proper care, these elite troops will be able to defeat
dispersed cells of terrorists and help handle any threats from
the balky, old-style militaries that remain among our potential
adversaries -- all at a fraction of current costs. 

If we take to heart the lessons of Reagan's legacy, there may
still be just enough time left on the clock to win this one for
the Gipper -- and for ourselves. 

John Arquilla is professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval
Postgraduate School. His latest book is "The Reagan Imprint:
Ideas in American Foreign Policy from the Collapse of Communism
to the War on Terror." Contact us at . 				
Page E - 1 			

The San Francisco Chronicle] 
*****************************************************************
 22 IPS-English POLITICS: Testing Times for Indo-US Nuclear Deal
 
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 11:51:21 -0700


POLITICS: Testing Times for Indo-US Nuclear Deal
Praful Bidwai

NEW DELHI, Jun 17  (IPS) - As the United States and India held 
yet anothe r round of intensive talks this week to flesh out the 
landmark nuclear de al they signed in July, it became clear that 
they will both explore how f ar they can push each other for 
concessions that would ease Congressional approval.


Both sides are bargaining hard as they test each other's will to 
implemen t the agreement quickly. They are mobilising their 
energies both in bilat eral talks and through media comments.


Under the deal, the U.S. has offered a one-time exception for 
India in th e existing global non-proliferation regime so that 
India can keep its nuc lear weapons without signing the Nuclear 
Non-Proliferation Treaty.


Meanwhile, India is coming under increasing pressure to 
demonstrate its l oyalty to a larger strategic partnership. Prime 
Minister Manmohan S ingh absented himself from an important 
meeting of the Shanghai Cooperati on Organisation, (SCO) this 
week, largely because the U.S. views the SCO with suspicion and 
New Delhi does not want to antagonise Washington.


The SCO includes China, Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, 
Kyrgyzstan and Ta jikistan.  Two of these, Russia and China are 
nuclear powers while India and Pakistan, which have observer 
status at the SCO, are aspiring nuclear powers having carried out 
weapon tests in 1998. 


Iran, which also has observer status and is accused by the West 
of trying to develop nuclear weapons, sent President Mahmoud 
Ahmadinejad to the Sh anghai summit.


While Indian nuclear hawks run a spirited campaign against the 
deal as a sellout and a coup to defang India, an impressive 
number of U .S. Nobel laureates have issued a strong statement 
against the agreement.


In the nuclear poker between Washington and New Delhi, two sets 
of issues have become critical for settling the agreement and 
getting it ratified by the Congress.


One set pertains to 91technical', but important, questions: What 
kind of safeguards must India accept on its civilian nuclear 
programme? Assuming India is allowed to import nuclear fuel, what 
criteria will determine ho w it is modified/processed, stored 
and/or reprocessed? What can guarantee that it will not be 
diverted to military uses? And under what terms the agreement can 
be terminated by either side?


The second issue concerns possible further nuclear testing by 
India. Must it sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, or a 
bilateral agreement with the U.S. not to conduct future tests? Or 
will a voluntary moratorium of the kind declared in 1998 and 
reiterated in the July 2005 accord do?


Ideally, the U.S. would like India to offer something more than 
the July assurance so that the deal can pass relatively smoothly 
through the Congr ess: e.g. a legally binding commitment not to 
conduct a nuclear blast.


But India flatly rejects this. It wants to keep the moratorium 
voluntary. Such a moratorium can easily be rescinded. Under 
existing U.S. laws, a c ountry that conducts a nuclear test 
automatically attracts sanctions and forfeits civilian 
cooperation with the U.S.


These issues will figure in the coming round of talks next month. 
Both si des are proceeding with cautious optimism.


India's options here are extremely limited. For all practical 
purposes, t he Manmohan Singh government cannot amend or go 
beyond its understanding of the nuclear deal recorded in the Jul. 
18 agreement, which notifies as civilian only 14 out of its 22 
power reactors (under operation or c onstruction).


However, the Bush administration may not find it possible to 
pilot the ag reement through unless it is seen to have extracted 
an additional assuran ce from India against further tests.


New Delhi is under pressure from its nuclear super hawks to test 
a hydrog en (thermonuclear or fusion) bomb so as to have a 
powerful deterrent not just against Pakistan, but against the 
major nuclear powers which have su ch weapons. It has conducted 
five tests of the less powerful, but immense ly destructive, 
fission bomb. But its May 1998 hydrogen bomb test is wide ly 
believed to have been a dud.


India, meanwhile, has opened yet another front in the 
negotiations. It de mands that it be allowed to build a stockpile 
of nuclear fuel for each of its civilian reactors. This would 
guarantee that supply of imported fuel would continue 
uninterrupted.


After India's first (1974) nuclear blast, the U.S. suspended 
supply of li ghtly enriched uranium to two of India's reactors at 
Tarapur. Although the Indian government cites this as the reason 
for demanding the 91stra tegic stockpile' guarantee, the real 
reason may be more complex, says Kamal Mitra Chenoy of the School 
of International Studies, Jawaharlal Neh ru University, and a 
member of the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace. India 
is desperately short of uranium. Its sole operating urani um mine 
is running out of ore and there is public opposition to opening n 
ew mines.


The current negotiations between the U.S. and India are focused 
on what i s called the 123 agreement, pertaining to an amendment 
of Section 1 23 of the U.S. atomic energy act dealing with 
nuclear exports. This is li kely to be marked up soon in the form 
of bills to be voted by both Houses. This is expected to set the 
stage for passing the substantive nuclear cooperation agreement 
inked last July.


The bill's passage may not be smooth. There is significant 
opposition to the deal in the House of Representatives and from 
non-proliferation exper ts. Indian-American groups as well as the 
Indian government's lobbying ag encies are working furiously to 
garner support for the deal.


Opposition to the deal has now been joined by eminent scholars 
and scient ists in the U.S. As many as 37 Nobel laureates have 
urged the Congress no t to approve the deal in its current form 
because it is a formul a for destroying American 
non-proliferation goals.


In a letter, supported by the pro-peace federation of American 
scientists , they argue that the agreement weakens the existing 
non-proliferation regime without providing an acceptable 
substitute. Since nothing is more important to U.S. security than 
blocking further proliferation and possi ble use of nuclear 
weapons, the lawmakers should withhold their seal of a pprovalE0


The laureates include the distinguished economist Kenneth J. 
Arrow and sc ientists Raul Christian Lauterbur, Alfred Goodman 
Gilman, Roger Guilemin and Donald A. Glaser.


Interestingly, their letter criticises Washington's nuclear 
weapons doctr ine too: the U.S. cannot continue to treat nuclear 
weapons as militari ly useful and politically salient while 
expecting to stop global nuclear proliferationE0 The Indian 
nuclear deal is just one symptom of a bigger problem.


It also holds that the rapid growth of civilian nuclear power 
would incre ase the amount of fissionable material stored 
worldwide, and the number o f facilities that could be used to 
build nuclear weapons.


Meanwhile, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
director-general Moh ammed El-Baradei has weighed in on the side 
of the deal, and termed it a creative break with the past. He 
says it would be illogical to deny civil nuclear technology to 
India --a country that has not violated an y legal commitment and 
never encouraged nuclear weapons proliferation and is a valued 
partner and a trusted contributor to international pea ce and 
security.


This only casts doubt on the impartiality and credibility of the 
IAEA as a global nuclear watchdog, holds academic and 
anti-nuclear activist Chenoy. *****
*****************************************************************
 23 Guardian Unlimited: Nations Discuss Conflict at Kazakh Forum
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Saturday June 17, 2006 10:01 AM
 	
AP Photo MOSB111 
By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA Associated Press Writer 

ALMATY, Kazakhstan (AP) - Players in some of the world's most
intractable conflicts sat in the same room Saturday at an
eclectic international forum hosted by the energy-rich Central
Asian nation of Kazakhstan. 

Iran sat near Israel - a country it says should be ``wiped off
the map'' - at the conflict resolution conference. Old foes
India and Pakistan, locked in stalemate over disputed Kashmir,
also attended. 

And although it is called the Conference on Interactions and
Confidence Building Measures in Asia, or CICA, the 18 members of
the group reach outside the continent to the Middle East as
well. Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Iran, Mongolia,
Turkey and Thailand are all on the list. The United States and
the United Nations are observers. South Korea joined this year. 

The leaders of Russia and China attended, lending stature to an
event whose last and only other meeting was in 2002. 

``This is an occasion where conflicts and dialogue and
animosities are being brought together to air them out and see
if there can be some steps of confidence-building,'' Israeli
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said. He described the group as a
``nice mix.'' 

Still, breakthroughs were unlikely, judging from the comments of
one participant. 

Israel's elder statesman said Iran was currently in more of a
mood to ``destroy rather than negotiate'' when asked if he was
willing to meet Iran's delegate, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas
Araghchi. 

As the summit began, delegates waited their turn to deliver
brief speeches, agreeing to seek regional cooperation on a host
of issues such as trade, the environment, AIDS, bird flu,
terrorism and humanitarian disasters. 

``China is not able to develop without Asia, so we once again
outline the importance of peaceful and cooperative policy in the
region,'' Chinese President Hu Jintao said. 

Four years ago, the Kashmir conflict threatened to explode into
full-scale war as the leaders of India and Pakistan joined
delegates at the CICA conference in Almaty. They exchanged stony
stares while sitting across from each other at a U-shaped table,
and stayed on opposite sides of the room after the session
ended. 

Ties between India and Pakistan have since improved, but a
solution to Kashmir eludes them. The two countries have fought
two wars over the Himalayan territory that is divided between
them but claimed by both. 

Another major Asian conflict festers on the Korean Peninsula,
where North Korea is suspected of developing nuclear weapons.
But the reclusive North is not involved in the Almaty meeting.
Nor is Taiwan, viewed by China as a breakaway province. 

The diversity of national interests across Asia makes it hard to
coordinate on security issues at a regional summit, in contrast
to Western security groups with a history of unity, said Robert
Karniol, Asia-Pacific editor for Jane's Defence Weekly. 

``During the Cold War period, when these structures were being
created in Europe, there was common cause among a wide range of
countries in countering Soviet influence, and deterring Soviet
attack if it ever did occur,'' he said. ``Those common factors
have always been lacking in Asia.'' 

One observer at the Almaty summit was the Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europe, a group with 55 member
states. It started in the mid-1970s as a forum for East-West
dialogue, and changed its mission after the collapse of the
Soviet Union to promote democracy and good governance. 

The CICA forum is a mishmash of nations lacking the pedigree of
more established groups, even if the goals of networking,
fighting organized crime and terrorism are similar. It was the
idea of Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev, who wants to
raise his country's stature in a region dominated by his
heavyweight neighbors Russia and China. 

Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan's only leader since independence from the
Soviet Union, might also want international legitimacy to offset
growing concerns about curbs on domestic political freedoms and
human rights, according to some observers. Longtime rulers in
the region are likely aware of the popular uprisings that ousted
governments in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan. 

Kazakhstan's market reforms and strong economic growth buoyed by
high oil prices could dampen political opposition. Its vast
energy reserves are also a potential alternative to Middle East
oil, a fact not lost on the leaders attending the summit in
Almaty on Saturday.	 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 24 RIA Novosti: Asia trust summit participants sign raft of documents
 
17/ 06/ 2006                                  

ALMATY, June 17 (RIA Novosti) - The states whose delegations
attended the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building
Measures in Asia (CICA) signed a raft of documents in
Kazakhstan's former capital Saturday. 

The summit's declaration pays attention to the global situation,
reflects the way the CICA states see key security problems,
cooperation in Asia and the whole world, including UN
reformation, nonproliferation, regional conflict resolution,
countering new modern challenges and threats and a further
development of a dialogue between civilizations. 

Foreign ministers and envoys of member states also signed an
agreement on the CICA secretariat, which should become the
forum's working instrument. 

The participating states confirmed that separatism remained "one
of the main threats and challenges to security and stability,
sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity." 

"The member states will not support any separatist movements and
organizations on the territory of another member state," the
declaration reads. 

The countries also confirmed the right of nations to
self-determination in line with the UN Charter and international
law, as well as to access to civilian uses of nuclear power. The
participants also said an agreement should be signed on a zone
free from nuclear weapons in Central Asia. 

The summit participants also urged a dialogue between energy
consumers and suppliers to ensure energy security. 

"We recognize that energy resource delivery security is one of
priority issues of the international agenda. So a dialogue and
cooperation between supplier and consumer countries have
acquired a special significance," the declaration reads. 

The third CICA summit will be held in 2010. 

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 25 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI, China to boost energy coop. 

  2006/06/17   
  
  
Oil Minister Seyyed Kazem Vaziri-Hamaneh discussed bilateral
cooperation in the energy sector with Chinese Minister of the
State Development and Reformation Commission Ma Kai on Friday. 

Minister Kai, in the discussion, said the two countries
expressed their political will to develop ties in their
political and cultural as well as energy sectors. 

He further welcomed enhancement of cooperation in the oil and
gas sector and voiced his country's readiness to invest in
Iranian oil, gas and petrochemical projects. 

"The economies of China and Iran are closely tied together," he
said, and called for an increase in Tehran-Beijing transactions. 

Vaziri-Hamaneh said policies of Iranian political leaders stress
expansion of ties with China. 

He also expressed Iran's readiness to enter into joint projects
with China for energy development. 

He vowed his country would continue its cooperation with China
as a close ally and to meet China's growing energy demand. 

Vaziri-Hamaneh gave the assurance he would follow up execution
of agreements concluded between Chinese firms and Iranian
companies. 

The two sides reiterated their confidence in their countries'
high capability in the energy sector, and called for speedy
implementation of agreements concluded in the near future. 

Oil Minister Vaziri-Hamaneh and Foreign Minister Manouchehr
Mottaki were in the delegation of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
who recently concluded a three-day visit to China to attend the
6th summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. 

SM   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
*****************************************************************
 26 AFP: Top US Senator warns Congress against putting off Indian nuclear deal - 

 Sat Jun 17, 1:14 AM ET 
		 	 
WASHINGTON (AFP) - A top US Senator warned Congress against
rejecting a nuclear accord with India as lawmakers move closer
to making a decision on the controversial accord after lengthy
debate. 

Richard Lugar, Republican chairman of the powerful Senate
foreign relations committee, said "a Congressional rejection of
the agreement -- or an open-ended delay -- risks wasting a
critical opportunity" for the United States to boost ties with
the world's biggest democracy.
 
It was the strongest statement Lugar has made to date regarding
the nuclear deal with India, the senator's office said.
 
The foreign relations committees of the House of Representatives
and Senate are expected to meet at the end of June to decide
whether to endorse the deal clinched by Bush and Indian Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh in March.
 
The panels' findings would then be submitted to the full Houses
for consideration.
 
Lugar, speaking at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode
Island, said both houses of Congress are satisfactorily "working
through language that would guide our policy toward India."
 
He described the nuclear pact as "the most important strategic
diplomatic initiative" undertaken by President George W. Bush
" /> and a departure "from the crisis management mentality that
has dominated foreign policy" in recent years.
 
The United States and India were in opposite camps during much
of the Cold War.
 
The nuclear deal, which requires mandatory support from American
legislators for implementation, would allow India, not a
signatory of the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT), access
to long-denied civilian nuclear technology in return for placing
a majority of its atomic reactors under safeguards.
 
But the agreement does not have the wide and bipartisan backing
in Congress.
 
Some legislators want to first have a look at a set of
international safeguards under which India and the United States
would implement the deal.
 
The safeguards would be incorporated together with other
technical details in another bilateral agreement, which the
lawmakers also wanted to study before endorsing the deal.
 
The safeguards are being negotiated between India and the global
atomic watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency
" /> (IAEA) while moves to frame the bilateral agreement
reportedly hit a snag after India refused to accept a provision
barring it from conducting atomic tests.
 
.(AFP/File/Abdelhak Senna)] AFP/File
*****************************************************************
 27 [NukeNet] Our Friend the Atom? The growing threat from nuclear
 
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 19:03:44 -0700


To those living in San Luis County or in the region of San 
Onofre; please pay close attention to the releases made by nuke 
plants on a daily basis. It's not only the waste we need to worry 
about!!  We need to close these plants down NOW because every day 
they run they release more poison and create more waste that must 
be stored indefinately on our coastline! Molly

Our Friend the Atom?

The growing threat from nuclear power.
by Helen Caldicott


The Bush administration and the nuclear industry are embarking on 
an ill-conceived "renaissance" of nuclear power, deploying the 
spurious message that it is emissions-free, green, safe, and will 
save the world from the effects of global warming. Wrong, on all 
counts!


Carbon dioxide gas-the increase of which is tied to global 
warming-is released at every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle: 
uranium mining and milling, uranium enrichment, construction of 
huge concrete reactors, and the transportation and long-term 
storage of intensely radioactive waste. Nuclear power plants 
currently generate "only" one-third as much carbon dioxide as a 
similar-sized energy plant fired by natural gas. But because the 
supply of highly concentrated uranium ore is limited, the energy 
eventually required to mine and enrich uranium will greatly 
increase. If global electricity production were converted to 
nuclear power, there only would be a three-year supply of 
accessible uranium to fuel the reactors.


Nuclear reactors routinely emit radioactive materials, including 
the fat-soluble noble gases xenon, krypton, and argon. Although 
not chemically reacting with biological compounds, they are 
inhaled by populations near reactors, absorbed into the blood, 
and concentrated in the fat pads of the abdomen and upper thighs, 
which exposes ovaries and testicles to mutagenic gamma radiation.


Tritium, a form of radioactive hydrogen, is also regularly 
discharged by reactors. Combining with oxygen to form tritiated 
water, it absorbs readily through skin, lungs, and gut. Tritium 
is a dangerous carcinogen that produces congenital malformations 
and genetic deformities in low doses in animals and, by 
extrapolation, in humans.


ADDITIONALLY, NUCLEAR reactors are potential terrorist targets. 
Reactor meltdowns could be induced by severing the external 
electricity supply, disrupting the 1-million-gallons-per-minute 
intake of cooling water, infiltrating the control room, or by a 
well-coordinated attack. Surprisingly, since Sept. 11 the U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission has failed to upgrade security at 
the nation's 103 nuclear reactors. A meltdown at the Indian Point 
reactors, located 35 miles from Manhattan, could render the 
region uninhabitable for thousands of years.


Nuclear waste is the industry's Achilles' heel. Currently 60,000 
tons of radioactive waste are stored temporarily in cooling pools 
beside nuclear reactors, awaiting final disposal. In 2002, 
Congress voted that the final repository for nuclear waste would 
be Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which is transected by 32 earthquake 
faults and consists largely of permeable pumice, and thus is 
unsuitable as a radioactive geological waste receptacle. The U.S. 
now has nowhere to deposit its expanding nuclear waste inventory.


In countries with nuclear reactors, radioactive elements are 
leaking into underground water systems, rivers, and oceans, 
progressively concentrating at each level of the food chain. 
Carcinogens including Strontium-90, recently found in the 
groundwater at the Indian Point reactors, and Cesium-137 are 
radioactive for 600 years. Food and human breast milk will become 
increasingly radioactive near waste sites. Inevitably cancers 
will increase in frequency within exposed populations, as will 
genetic diseases such as cystic fibrosis.


Each 1000-megawatt reactor produces some 500 pounds of plutonium 
each year in spent fuel rods. Plutonium is carcinogenic in 
amounts smaller than one-millionth of a gram and can cause liver 
cancer, lung cancer, bone cancer, and leukemia. It can cross the 
placenta to induce congenital deformities, and it has a 
predilection for the testicles where it may cause genetic 
abnormalities. Once released in the ecosphere, plutonium-with a 
half-life of tens of thousands of years-will affect biological 
systems essentially forever.


Critical mass for a nuclear explosion requires only 10 pounds of 
plutonium. Countries with nuclear reactors could therefore use 
radioactive waste to manufacture many nuclear bombs per year. The 
under-resourced International Atomic Energy Agency admits that it 
is physically impossible to prevent a determined country-whether 
a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty of Nuclear Weapons or 
not-from using imported uranium or plutonium to make nuclear 
weapons.


Time is short. A truly informed national debate about the 
efficacy of nuclear power is long overdue.


Dr. Helen Caldicott is founder of Physicians for Social 
Responsibility and founder and president of the Nuclear Policy 
Research Institute. Her book Nuclear Power is Not the Answer will 
be published in September 2006.
        
        


Our Friend the Atom? by Helen Caldicott. Sojourners Magazine, 
July 2006 (Vol. 35, No. 7, pp. 11). Commentary.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
- - "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


*****************************************************************
 28 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear fear campaign won't work: Howard - 

www.smh.com.au

June 18, 2006 - 4:39PM

Public opinion on nuclear matters had shifted and Labor's
current scare campaign would not be nearly as successful as it
might expect, Prime Minister John Howard said on Sunday. 

That was demonstrated by the ever-increasing number of voters
backing NSW Liberal Danna Vale, whose electorate of Hughes
includes the Lucas Heights nuclear research reactor, Mr Howard
said. 

The reactor was the scene of two incidents last week, both
involving release of small amounts of nuclear material. 

The accidents came as the government and community embarked on a
broader debate about the merits of nuclear power, expansion of
uranium mining or even enrichment of uranium in Australia. 

The government also is considering whether the proposed nuclear
waste dump in the Northern Territory will house waste from
nuclear fuel rods reprocessed in France. 

Mr Howard said he believed the Australian public was ready for a
mature nuclear debate. 

"My very strong view is that public opinion has shifted on this
issue and the Labor Party will not be nearly as successful in
running a fear campaign that they are running on this issue as
they think they might be," he told the Nine network. 

"Younger Australians in particular are saying, let's sit down
and have a look at this issue. Let's see whether nuclear power
might in time be a clean alternative to fossil fuels. 

"I am not saying that this will happen in the next couple of
years, but let's at least have a discussion and let's not have
such a stupidly emotional debate about it." 

The government gave the go-ahead for construction of the new
OPAL reactor at Lucas Heights in 1997, prompting strong
opposition from Labor and green groups. 

Mr Howard said despite that opposition, local people continued
to vote in ever increasing numbers for local member Danna Vale,
who fended off a ferocious challenge in 1998 from Labor
candidate David Hill, who specifically campaigned against the
reactor. 

Opposition science spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said Mr Howard
still needed to come clean on plans to dump nuclear waste in the
North Territory. 

She said Mr Howard could not have it both ways. 

"The prime minister is obsessed with secrecy on nuclear issues,
yet he keeps claiming that he wants an open public debate on
nuclear power and nuclear waste disposal," she said in a
statement. 

"John Howard is forcing a nuclear waste dump on the people of
the Northern Territory but won't tell the community what is
going to be dumped there." 

Opposition Leader Kim Beazley said uranium mining was one thing
but going down the road of nuclear power was another entirely. 

"It's not economic, it's not environmentally sensible, not
strategically sensible," he told the Ten network. 

"We're in this debate, but we want to see enter into the debate
a serious discussion of the renewable energy needs and
possibilities of this nation." 	

© 2006  AAP

| Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald. <img
*****************************************************************
 29 Charlotte Observer: Revived interest in nuclear power taxing NRC

| 06/17/2006 | 

Agency preparing to handle flood of requests

 TINA SEELEY Bloomberg News 

The number of companies that want to build nuclear reactors is
increasing faster than expected, threatening to rise beyond
regulators' capacity to process applications, the top U.S.
nuclear regulator said. 

"The number of applications, the number of players, keeps
changing," Nils Diaz, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, said at a news conference in Washington on Friday.
"There's a time in which we cannot do more. We are approaching
that level." 

The commission, known as NRC, is preparing to accept the first
applications to build new nuclear reactors since the 1979
accident at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania.
Utilities including Dominion Resources Inc., Southern Co. and
Duke Energy Corp. have told regulators they expect to begin
submitting applications next year. 

Diaz estimated the commission can handle 15 to 16 applications
for new nuclear plants at one time. The applications will take
about 30 months to review, he said. That time frame could drop
to 24 months as the commission and the industry gain experience
with the process. 

This week, Dennis Spurgeon, the Energy Department's assistant
secretary for nuclear energy, told lawmakers that the government
is expecting 12 applications from companies seeking to build as
many as 21 new nuclear reactors. 

Diaz said Friday that there may be 14 or 15 companies seeking to
build "somewhere around 25" reactors. 

"Next week, when I testify at the Senate, you will see a
different chart than I used three weeks ago" listing the
potential applications, he said. Diaz has asked the industry to
let him know of any more potential applications by Monday, when
he needs to have a 2008 budget for the agency ready for review
by the other commissioners. 

Utilities would pay about $15 million to have the first
applications reviewed. That cost could drop to $10 million or
$12 million for later applications, Diaz said. 

Those charges would come on top of a 17 percent increase in fees
the commission will levy on the plants it regulates this year to
help pay for new employees. To handle the new wave of
applications, the commission is expanding its staff by 550
people in the next two years, Diaz said. 

Construction of the new reactors could begin in 2010; they could
be operating by late 2014. 

Energy legislation signed into law in August offers incentives
for companies that build the first plants. Among the provisions
is risk insurance to protect the first six plants from costly
regulatory delays or legal challenges. The first plants will
also be eligible for as much as $125 million a year in tax
credits and loan guarantees for up to 80 percent of a plant's
costs. 

Diaz, 68, announced in April that he will not seek another term
at the commission, which regulates the 103 operating nuclear
reactors in the U.S. His term expires at the end of the month,
and he will be replaced by Pentagon official Dale Klein. 

The NRC's ability to handle the applications may help determine
future expansion of nuclear power, the chairman said. 

"If this first wave is successful, there are people talking
already of a second wave," said Diaz. "And the second wave is
year 2012, and what I'm hearing is the same number of companies,
take or give a little, and the same number of reactors, so
another 25." 

Duke Planning S.C. Reactor 

Duke Energy is planning to build a nuclear power plant in
Cherokee County, S.C. But the William States Lee III Nuclear
Station is still in the planning stages. The company plans to
apply for a construction license in 2008. 

Duke, one of the nation's largest electric utilities, provides
electricity and services to more than 2 million customers in
North Carolina and South Carolina. The company operates three
nuclear generating stations, eight coal-fired stations, 31
hydroelectric stations and numerous combustion turbine units.

*****************************************************************
 30 AU ABC: Nationals debate nuclear power
 
ABC Central West NSW | Local News | Story 

 Monday, 19 June 2006. 09:00 (AEDT)Monday, 19 June 2006. 08:00

 A motion about nuclear power put forward by the Dubbo branch
prompted heated debate at the National party state conference at
Ballina on the weekend. 

The Dubbo branch put forward the motion to adopt a policy to
support research into the development of commercial nuclear
power. 

David Strayhorn told the conference unrealistic fears about
nuclear energy and waste need to be allayed. 

"Nuclear power is our future, it's cheap, it's clean, it's
efficient and it can be safe," he said. 

But north coast nationals warned the policy would be political
suicide. 

Dianne Harris from Alstonville told the conference to look for
alternatives. 

"We should be instead giving our full support to the renewable
energy generators," she said. 

After lengthy debate the motion was withdrawn and no decision
was reached. 

*****************************************************************
 31 Washington Times: Nuclear power's 'renaissance'? 

By Joyce Howard Price

June 18, 2006                                                                                    

It's been 20 years since the deadly explosion and fire at
Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and with the passing of
two decades comes a time of renewed interest in nuclear energy,
given the high levels of safety and production at U.S. power
plants and the advancement of technology. 

    Industry leaders are calling this the "renaissance of
nuclear energy," and their only regret is that new nuclear power
plants can't come on line to fill the urgent need for more
electricity. 

    "We'll need additional energy in the Mid-Atlantic and
Northeast in 2009 to 2011, but the first new nuclear plants
won't come on line until 2014 or 2015 at the earliest," said
Mike Wallace, executive vice president of Constellation Energy,
which runs two reactors at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power
Plant on the Chesapeake Bay in Lusby, Md., and three other
reactors at two other U.S. locations. 

    Mr. Wallace acknowledges that a third reactor at Calvert
Cliffs is a "distinct" possibility. A partnership called UniStar
Nuclear, which includes Constellation Energy and Areva, a
nuclear plant manufacturer with offices in Bethesda, has told
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) it expects to submit
applications to build and operate reactors at both Calvert
Cliffs and a site in upstate New York in 2008 and 2009. 

    As for safety, Mr. Wallace said the "safety performance of
plants operating today has been exemplary." 

    "We have 103 nuclear plants in operation in the United
States, the oldest of which goes back 40 years," he said. 

    Things always haven't looked so good. "The outlook for
nuclear power was far bleaker in the final decades of the last
century," Mr. Wallace said. 
     
    Catalysts for change 

    The worst nuclear accident in U.S. history occurred March
28, 1979, at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. That event,
followed by the nuclear explosion at Chernobyl in Ukraine seven
years later that killed 30 persons initially and spread
radiation through a 20-mile radius, chilled many to the concept
of nuclear-produced electricity. 

    Those fears did not readily dissipate. 

    The sequence of certain events at Three Mile Island --
equipment malfunctions, design-related problems and human error
-- led to a partial meltdown of the TMI-2 reactor core, but only
very small off-site releases of radioactivity. The accident,
according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, brought
about sweeping changes involving emergency-response planning,
reactor operator training and radiation protection. 
					 					 						Page 1 of 2 next » | Email |						Print
Copyright 2006 The Washington Times 										 							   						
*****************************************************************
 32 The Hindu: Nuclear deal on course - Mulford 

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
 Monday, Jun 19, 2006     

U.S. is working on making some changes in the Congressional law   

+ "There is no need for suspicion regarding the agreement" 
+ U.S. looking forward to increased cooperation in defence,
aeronautics and space, says Mulford 

Kolkata: U.S. Ambassador to India David Mulford has reassured
that the India-U.S. civilian nuclear deal was on course and his
country was working on making some changes in the law to
implement it. 

"There is no need for suspicion regarding the agreement. It
remains the same as agreed in July 2005 in Washington and
concluded formally when President Bush visited India in March
2006," Mr. Mulford said during a web chat with a team of
reporters here last evening at the USIS here. 

"We are now engaged in negotiating certain detailed aspects of
the bilateral agreement necessary to implement the deal and to
seek the necessary change in law in the U.S. Congress," he said.

The U.S. was looking forward to increased cooperation with India
in defence, aeronautics and space. 

"No goalposts are being moved. No bars are being raised. It is
just plain steady work to get the job done," the Ambassador
clarified, asking all for patience. 

"Many of the complex problems left over from the period of
sanctions have been resolved. And looking at the type of
relationship the two countries are now developing, we should be
confident of more cooperation in these fields," he said. 

"Cooperation is already growing and with it confidence is
building on both sides, which will stand us well into the
future," he said, emphasising the departing speech of President
Bush in March, when he had called India "a global leader, as
well as a good friend." Mr. Mulford said India is an attractive
investment destination because it has a strong economy, a large,
articulate and well-educated population and democracy. 

To a question on Shashi Tharoor as a candidate for the post of
U.N. Secretary-General, Mr. Mulford said, "This is a decision
which India has made and we respect it fully." 

The Ambassador said his country supported democracy in Pakistan.

— UNI 

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of
*****************************************************************
 33 NEWS.com.au: West 'in dark' on N-sites - WA - 

By Joe Spagnolo

 June 18, 2006

SWANBOURNE and Bullsbrook could be prime sites for a nuclear
power station, State Planning Minister Alannah MacTiernan has
warned.
 Ms MacTiernan said yesterday the State Government was virtually
powerless to stop the Federal Government building whatever it
wanted on Commonwealth-owned property. 
Defence land in Swanbourne and Bullsbrook and Commonwealth land
at Perth Airport would be at the top of the list if the Prime
Minister wanted a nuclear plant in the West, she said. 

Ms MacTiernan said the Carpenter Government's almost complete
lack of say over a $75 million brickworks' planned for Perth
Airport by building magnate Len Buckeridge set a frightening
precedent. 

She said the State Government was kept in the dark about the
plan after Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell refused to
release a report on it before deciding whether to give it the go
ahead. 

"The constitution gave the Federal Government certain powers in
relation to Commonwealth places and they have control over
airports," Ms MacTiernan said. "That's fine, but they are using
airports for reasons completely unassociated with aviation. 

"On the same sort of precedent, they could build a nuclear power 
plant on an airport site or a defence site. They have big swags 
of defence land in Swanbourne and Bullsbrook and they could use 
Commonwealth powers to build a nuclear power station in those 
areas." 

A leaked submission to Federal Cabinet in July 1997 showed Perth
Airport was already being eyed for a nuclear reactor. 

Premier Alan Carpenter has followed his predecessor, Geoff
Gallop, in maintaining a ban on uranium mining or nuclear power
in WA. 

He said Canberra's handling of the brickworks plan showed it
would have no qualms foisting a nuclear reactor or world nuclear
waste dump on WA. 

But Mr Campbell said Mr Carpenter was trying to frighten the
public. "This is simply the Premier attempting to win brownie
points with his Federal ALP counterparts," he said. 

He said the brickworks report would be released once a decision
was made.
 		  		 		 		 			Search for more stories on this topic on
*****************************************************************
 34 newsobserver.com: Slow burn at Harris
 
June 18, 2006

Raleigh · Durham · Cary · Chapel Hill   

  
  Editorial:  Published: Jun 18, 2006 12:30 AM
  
With Progress Energy seeking to expand its Shearon Harris nuclear 
power plant in western Wake County, it's not comforting that the 
federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission would weaken standards for 
fire-retardant insulation at the current, one-reactor plant. 
That's the proposal, but the commission should drop the idea.

More of the insulation, called Hemyc, is used at Harris than at
any other U.S. plant. It is wrapped around 6,500 feet of
electrical cables, to protect them from damage in the event of
intense heat during a fire. In many cases at Harris, the cables
provide electrical power to backup cooling systems that help
protect the reactor from a meltdown. If the insulation fails,
the backups could fail, and a calamity could result.

NRC tests in recent years have shown that Hemyc doesn't
withstand high temperatures for as long as had been thought. But
Progress doesn't want to replace the material because of the
cost. Meanwhile, it has established 24-hour fire patrols on foot
in critical areas. but that's expensive, too. The NRC's solution
is to lower the heat-resistant standards in areas that have no
combustible material to keep a fire burning.

So here's the NRC's thinking: The way to correct faulty
insulation material is to lower the safety bar. That doesn't
seem like the most prudent route at a nuclear power plant. The
heat standard originally was set out of an abundance of caution,
and it's hard to say that enough has changed in the way of
nuclear safety to warrant a lowering.

Progress is supposed to tell the NRC next year how it would
implement the weaker rules. Instead, the commission ought to
require the company to spend the money to fix the problem
properly. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not
be published, broadcast or redistributed in any manner.   

 © Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company <img
*****************************************************************
 35 BBC NEWS: Three Mile nuclear fears revealed
 
Updated: Saturday, 17 June 2006, 14:30 GMT 15:30 UK [

Twenty seven years after the US suffered its worst nuclear 
accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, Martin Bell - who 
covered the story at the time for the BBC - looks at recently 
published archive interviews which reveal what the local 
community was thinking. 

[Three Mile Island reactor]                             

The power station's first reactor was undamaged                                                             

In 1979 the BBC office in Washington was not the great news 
factory that it is today, but a quiet little place, with just two 
journalists and a secretary. I was the TV correspondent, with the 
whole of North America as my beat, and a freedom that today's 
practitioners might well envy. 

So when, on 28 March that year, I heard of an accident at the 
Three Mile Island nuclear power station in Pennsylvania, I did 
not ask for anyone's authorisation. 

I just chartered a plane to Harrisburg, the state capital, and 
got there as quickly as possible. 

Nuclear power was the future then - the brave new world of clean 
energy. But on Three Mile Island something had gone seriously 
wrong. 

The first reactor (TMI One) on the power station on the 
Susquehanna river was closed for refuelling. 

The second, newer reactor was going at full capacity when two 
malfunctions occurred: first there was a release of radioactive 
water, then radioactive gas was detected on the perimeter. 

Could these be signs of the dreaded meltdown? 

The fear of a nuclear disaster was very much in the public 
consciousness at the time because of the movie The China Syndrome 
which was then in the cinemas. 

It depicted just such a nuclear accident with Jane Fonda as the 
investigative reporter trying to expose a cover-up. 

'Chaos' 

How closely real life came to mirror the film is partly revealed 
by a unique research project carried out at the time by the local 
university, Dickinson College, in nearby Carlisle. 
	
nuclear bombs exploding like in Hiroshima              
	 	Kay Flohr
 telephone company employee at the time   	

Twenty seven years on, it has released its own recordings of
that time: hundreds of interviews with local people. 

Ralph Desantis, one of the security staff at Three Mile Island,
was among those interviewed. 

He had just seen the film China Syndrome and had the plot
running through his head. 

"There was a line in the movie that said if there was a meltdown
it would affect an area the size of Pennsylvania. 

"It heightened people's sensitivities about nuclear accidents.
The movie portrayed the utility as covering up the accident and
the reporters were the good guys. People have a tendency to
relate it to real life." 

Behind the scenes, all was not well. 

"I think it's safe to say chaos was the best way to describe
it," says Samuel Walker, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
historian. 

"They knew something serious was happening but they didn't know
what and no one knew what until later in the day. 

"What they didn't realise is that an hour and a half or so after
the accident began... the core started to melt: the worst thing
that can happen to a nuclear power plant." 

Conflicting reports 

Initially, spokesmen for the power station's operators, Met-Ed
(Metropolitan Edison), were saying the risks were minimal. 

	
Stainless steel and control rods and the reactor had actually 
melted as if in a blast furnace

Harold Denton Nuclear Regulatory Commission           

They said TMI would be back on line in a couple of days but as
time passed, trust in the authorities eroded including for
Charles Sellers who worked at Dickinson College. 

"I did feel resentments about conflicting reports and what
seemed to me to be reassurances based on very little actual
evidence," Mr Walker adds. 

"There seemed to be evident attempts to say things carefully
always with concern with image in mind. It didn't take me long
to get the feeling that they didn't know what the heck they were
talking about." 

Kay Flohr, who worked for a local telephone company at the time,
described the frightening images that were running through
peoples minds: 

"I think I thought of the nuclear bombs exploding like in
Hiroshima. I think this was more frightening because you had so
many unknown conditions. With nuclear you're not quite sure what
to expect." 

Pennsylvania's governor at the time was Richard Thornburg, who
had been in office only 72 days. He too had not been getting a
clear picture of what was going on at the nuclear plant: 

"It was frustrating more than anything else because I'd been
trained as an engineer and a lawyer, two professions that rely
on the integrity of facts. 

"In order for me to carry out responsibilities I needed facts
and we simply weren't getting them. There was nobody more angry
than I that the utility had failed to honour their
responsibility to the community by running a safe nuclear
operation and more than that had attempted to mislead the public
about what the consequences were." 

On the third day of the crisis he ordered a limited evacuation. 

Public duty 

The accident was contained within days as was the panic arising
from it, thanks in large part to the reassuring presence of
Harold Denton from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who was
sent by President Carter as his personal ambassador to Three
Mile Island. 

Today he recalls how it was not until over two years after the
accident that the site was cleaned up enough to take the reactor
vessel head off and actually take a good look at what had
happened: 

"I remember we put a TV camera down into the container in order
to look at the core. 

"As we went one foot into core, we looked around and nothing was
visible, so we lowered it another foot - still nothing visible. 

"They lowered it about halfway down the reactor before they
discovered that beneath camera was a molten bed of reactor
material. Stainless steel and control rods and the reactor had
actually melted as if in a blast furnace." 

So long after the event, there are two things that make this
story worth re-telling. 

One is the access to all those contemporary interviews. 

The other is the insight it gives us into the present day
argument about whether nuclear energy might be - again - the
wave of the future. 

Martin Bell's documentary on Three Mile Island can be heard in
Radio 4's Archive Hour on Saturday 17 June at 2000BST or
afterwards online at Radio 4's <b>Listen again</b> page. 

*****************************************************************
 36 Sunday Herald: Royal Society set to back nuclear - 

Scotland's award-winning independent newspaper     Est 1999             
  				 
 By Rob Edwards, Environment Editor 
 
 Prime Minister Tony Blairs bid to build new nuclear power
stations will be backed by scientists in Scotland this week, the
Sunday Herald can reveal.

A long-awaited report by the Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) is
going to come out in favour of more reactors to replace those at
Hunterston in North Ayrshire and Torness in East Lothian when
they shut down.

 The RSE, established in 1783, is an independent club of 1400
scientists elected by their peers as experts in their fields.
The result of its year-long investigation into energy supply and
demand in Scotland up to 2050 is due to be published at a news
conference in Edinburgh tomorrow morning.

Insiders have told the Sunday Herald that as well as endorsing
new nuclear stations it will support wind farms. All energy
sources which are now technically and economically feasible
should be considered, said one of the reports authors. We havent
written this report to please people. If its unpopular, thats
too bad. 

Critics have claimed that the nine experts chosen by the RSE to
conduct the energy inquiry were biased in favour of nuclear
power. They include Dr Robert Hawley, the former chief executive
of the nuclear power company British Energy, and a member of the
lobby group Supporters of Nuclear Energy.

Others are known to be supportive of nuclear power, and none are
on record as critics. The energy inquiry committee was headed by
Maxwell Irvine, a physics professor from the University of
Manchester, who has previously warned that phasing out nuclear
power could lead to energy shortages.

Richard Lochhead MSP, the Scottish National Partys energy
spokesman, said: Ever since the Royal Society of Edinburgh first
mooted this inquiry, there has been the suspicion  given the
avowed support of some members for nuclear power  that they
would win the day. 

Dr Richard Dixon, director of WWF Scotland, said: It is
politically naive to say that we can have major investment in
nuclear power at the same time as new renewables.

 The RSEs conclusions, however, will be welcomed by some,
including the UK governments chief scientific adviser, Sir David
King. He believes that nuclear power, along with renewables and
energy efficiency, will all be needed to combat the threat of
global warming.

There are no energy generation solutions that do not have both
advantages and drawbacks, King told the RSE during the inquiry. 
The RSE would not comment on the contents of its report in
advance of publication tomorrow. However, the inquiry chair,
Maxwell Irvine, warned that energy may not be as abundant in the
future as it is now. 

18 June 2006 

 © newsquest (sunday herald) limited. all rights reserved 
*****************************************************************
 37 Green Left Weekly: Ordaining the outcome: the PM's nuclear task force

Justin Tutty 

The nuclear industry would be happy with PM John Howard’s June 6 
decision to appoint a task force to review uranium mining, 
processing and nuclear energy in Australia. Defending the 
composition of his pro-nuclear task force, he said, “You can’t 
have an investigation into something as technical as this without 
having a number of people on it who are whiz-bang nuclear 
physicists, because it’s a very complicated business and it’s an 
area where laymen tread very carefully”. 

It appears that the PM has already decided that ecological
impacts and community concern aren’t relevant to the proposal
for a major expansion of the nuclear industry in Australia. 

The inquiry’s terms of reference highlight the export potential
of Australian uranium, delve into the future viability of
nuclear power in this country, and propose the establishment of
uranium enrichment. Some observers suggest that the inquiry is
not about nuclear power, but about solidifying a fall-back
position of massively expanded uranium exports, while deferring
any decision on the more contentious proposals for building
reactors. 

However, anti-nuclear campaigners warn that nuclear fuel
production is already well advanced. 

A recent commercial agreement between US reactor builder General
Electric (which is looking forward to a reported $40 billion
windfall on the back of proposed nuclear trade with India) and
the Australian research company Silex — based at the Lucas
Heights site of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology
Organisation (ANSTO) — could allow for the Silex laser
technology for nuclear fuel enrichment to go into production
within three years. This, combined with Howard and US President
George Bush’s discussions about uranium leasing, could take
Australia down the path of leasing enriched uranium to
international customers, and taking back the nuclear waste to
dump in outback Australia. 

Former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski has been appointed as
chairperson of the task force. He was an experimental nuclear
physicist working at ANSTO and joined the ANSTO board last year.
ANSTO is the federal nuclear science body that runs the research
reactor program at Lucas Heights. It also houses the highly
secretive Silex uranium enrichment project. ANSTO would benefit
from any decision to embark upon commercial nuclear fuel
production or nuclear power reactors in Australia. 

Nuclear physicist Professor George Dracoulis from the Australian
National University, who is recognised as a leader in the field
of atomic nuclei research, has also been appointed. Dracoulis
was quick to claim an open mind on the question of nuclear
power. However, given he is a member of the reactor working
group of the Australian Academy of Science, a strong supporter
of the Lucas Heights program, this isn’t convincing. 

In this capacity, Dracoulis is associated with Jim Peacock,
Howard’s chief scientist, who will lead the peer review of the
task force. While Howard insists that Peacock is a cleanskin,
the latter made it clear upon his appointment last February that
he is in favour of nuclear power. 

Warwick McKibbin, an economist formerly at the ANU and now on
the Reserve Bank board, is also on the force. He has argued
against binding greenhouse targets but supports carbon taxes as
a mechanism for making nuclear power more competitive with
carbon-intensive energy production. 

Federal treasurer Peter Costello has said that new taxes are not
an issue, and environment minister Ian Campbell has labelled the
proposal “stupid”. Analysts suggest that without massive
subsidies, nuclear power will be too expensive. This, together
with statements from the PM, have led some to conclude that the
government’s objective is not to produce nuclear power, but
rather go for nuclear fuel leasing based on a massive expansion
of uranium mining, the establishment of enrichment plants and
the imposition of a nuclear dump. 

Arthur Johnston, another nuclear physicist, was a supervising
scientist at Kakadu and entrusted with the difficult task of
ensuring that the Ranger uranium mine was not seen to adversely
impact on the surrounding Kakadu National Park. For the last six
years, Johnson has told us that uranium mining in Kakadu is
safe, and helped Energy Resources of Australia hide an endless
stream of problems at the Ranger mine. Now he’s going to tell us
that nuclear power is safe, having already concluded that
Australia should develop enrichment capacities to a commercial
level. 

Sylvia Kidziak brings experience in engineering, occupational
health and nuclear safety. Formerly chairperson of Australian
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency’s (ARPANSA)
nuclear safety committee, she is chairperson of the Radiation
Health and Safety Advisory Council (RHSAC), which includes
Johnston, and advises John Loy, ARPANSA’s CEO. 

ARPANSA, a not-too-independent body, has overseen the
development of the research reactor program at Lucas Heights.
RHSAC is the body that has determined “acceptable limits” for
human exposure to radioactive contamination — bureaucratic
targets for pollution that institute an “acceptable” level of
fatal cancers in the impacted population. 

Martin Thomas is the chairperson of Dulhunty Power, which deals
in products and services related to power distribution and
transmission. This commercial interest is tied to the old model
of centralised power production, and is antithetical to the
evolving future of decentralised and diversified renewable
energy sources. Dulhunty’s business includes production in
China, targeted for expanded uranium exports from Australia.
Critics of nuclear trade with China point to its failure to sign
the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. 

Interestingly, an approach was made to Greg Bourne, the
Australian head of the World Wide Fund for Nature. Bourne caused
a stir in May when he was quoted in the Australian saying that
since we’re stuck with mining uranium, we should work out how to
minimise the impacts. Environmental organisations were angry
that his statement weakened the otherwise united opposition to
the nuclear industry, and they re-issued a strong statement of
opposition to every aspect of the nuclear industry. However,
Bourne refused Howard’s invitation, saying “this is really an
inquiry about the nuclear industry, and it’s about economics.
It’s not about the environment.” 

In a bizarre twist, Douglas Wood, the former Iraq hostage, has
offered to take Bourne’s place, saying Australia’s been good to
him and he wants to give something back. He claims 25 years’
experience with nuclear power reactors, including the patchwork
reconstruction at Chernobyl and the design of Australia’s
(failed) Jervis Bay reactor. 

The review’s terms of reference have been roundly criticised for
a predetermined conclusion to massively expand uranium mining,
develop commercial enrichment capacities and work towards
nuclear power reactors. Notably, the unresolved problem of
nuclear waste is not addressed. 

Australian Conservation Foundation executive director Don Henry
warned, “If the inquiry looks at the dirty, dangerous and slow
option of nuclear power and ignores safe, clean and immediate
solutions like renewables and energy efficiency, it will
constitute a serious failure of leadership”. 

Howard claims that renewable energy technologies, while an
inevitable feature of our future energy industries, are
currently not economically viable. More than one industry
representative has pointed out that the government should
conduct a review on that before coming to such a definite
conclusion. 

Environment groups are proposing the following alternative terms
of reference for the task force: 


  + What are the most effective policies to ensure we act early
to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 60% by 2050, and
by 20% by 2020? 


  + How do we dramatically cut energy waste and improve energy
efficiency in Australia? 


  + How can we rapidly increase the uptake of clean and safe
renewable energy, including solar, and establish Australia as a
leading exporter of renewable energy technology? 


  + What more can be done to increase the deployment of
low-emission energy technologies? 

[Justin Tutty is a member of Darwin’s No Waste Alliance.]

From Green Left Weekly, June 21 2006. 

 

Authorised by K. Miller, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, NSW   	 


*****************************************************************
 38 GLW: Anti-nuclear forum
 
CANBERRA — “The discussion we are having in Australia at the
moment about uranium has nothing to do with nuclear power for
energy. The whole debate is about mining, enrichment and taking
back waste, about generating export dollars from the sale of
uranium”, Greens Senator Christine Milne told an 80-strong
public forum on June 14 organised by the Canberra Region
Anti-Nuclear Campaign (CRANC). 

Friends of the Earth national anti-nuclear campaigner Jim Green
highlighted the dangers of nuclear-weapons proliferation from
Australia’s uranium exports. He argued that the only way to
ensure that Australian uranium does is not used in non-peaceful
programs is to leave it in the ground. 

Australian Conservation Foundation campaigns officer Dave Noonan
spoke of how BHP Billiton, the world’s biggest mining company,
is looking to transform its Olympic Dam mine near Roxby Downs in
South Australia into the world’s largest uranium mine. Christal
George from CRANC encouraged everyone to educate themselves and
others, and actively oppose the nuclear industry in its
entirety. 

Bess Harrison

From Green Left Weekly, June 21 2006. 

Authorised by K. Miller, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, NSW   	 
*****************************************************************
 39 APP.COM: License renewal no slam-dunk | 

Asbury Park Press Online
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
Saturday, June 17, 2006
  	 	 
A federal draft study has concluded that the environmental impact 
of the Oyster Creek nuclear generating plant in Lacey is 
"minimal" and should not preclude the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission from granting a 20-year license renewal.

For those concerned about the environment in the region, 
particularly the harm caused to aquatic life in the waters warmed 
by the plant, that conclusion is discouraging. Yet, despite the 
NRC's best efforts to ignore several of the legitimate health and 
safety concerns posed by the plant — the environment being just 
one of them — it is no longer a foregone conclusion that Oyster 
Creek will remain open after its 40-year license expires in 2009.

Last week, state Environmental Commissioner Lisa P. Jackson 
reiterated her position that a cooling tower should be built to 
mitigate the environmental damage caused by Oyster Creek. The 
state Department of Environmental Protection, not the NRC, is 
responsible for granting the water permits required for the plant 
to continue operating. If the DEP insists a cooling tower is 
needed — a costly investment plant owner AmerGen contends would 
force it to retire the plant — AmerGen either must comply or 
fight the decision in court.

Corrosion of Oyster Creek's drywell, the steel liner that serves 
as a barrier against the release of radiation in the event of a 
reactor accident, also could derail approval. Tests to measure 
the thickness of the drywell haven't been taken for nearly a 
decade, despite earlier evidence of corrosion. At least some 
scientists at the NRC now appear to be legitimately concerned 
about possible corrosion and the difficulty of gaining access to 
parts of the drywell needed to determine whether more corrosion 
has taken place.

Proposed legislation that would expand the criteria needed for 
relicensing beyond the present two — demonstrating the plant 
poses no environmental threat and that it can be operated safely 
— has gone nowhere. But a recent federal court decision in 
California could put an additional concern — the risk of a 
terrorist attack directed at on-site storage of spent nuclear 
fuel — in play.

A federal appeals court ordered the NRC to conduct a review of 
the possible consequences of a terrorist attack on the expansion 
of a nuclear plant near San Luis Obispo. In a 3-0 decision, the 
court ruled it was unreasonable for the NRC to declare that "the 
possibility of a terrorist attack is speculative" and 
"inconsistent with the government's efforts and expenditures to 
combat" such attacks at nuclear power plants.

The state also may challenge the validity and plausibility of 
Oyster Creek's evacuation plan — a plan most objective observers, 
and possibly the courts, would agree is a farce.

When we first concluded nearly two years ago, following a
multipart editorial series, that Oyster Creek's license should
not be renewed, we thought it would be a long shot. Today,
thanks to committed grass-roots activists and strong leadership
on the issue in Trenton, it's no sure bet the plant will stay
open another 20 years.

  Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 40 Independent: New blow to atomic authority 

By Tim Webb 

Published: 18 June 2006 

Civil nuclear site manager UKAEA, whose chief executive resigned
last week, is facing fresh uncertainty over the future of the
clean-up consortium it formed in January with Amec and CH2M
Hill, a US services company. 

CH2M Hill has expressed interest in buying British Nuclear Group
(BNG), UKAEA's much larger, state-owned rival. The Government
decided in March that it would auction BNG off later this year.
If CH2M Hill presses ahead with a bid, it could scupper the
venture with UKAEA.
 
The Government is unlikely to sanction the sale of BNG to CH2M
Hill while it is in a consortium with UKAEA, sources close to
CH2M Hill admit. The Government wants to create a competitive
market for the estimated Ł70bn of contracts to dismantle the
UK's nuclear facilities. If a company such as CH2M Hill - which
is in partnership with another state-owned company, such as
UKAEA - was to buy BNG, it would defeat the aim of privatising
the decommissioning work.
 
A spokesman for CH2M Hill declined to speculate on the impact on
the consortium of a possible bid for BNG. "We will cross that
bridge when we have to." CH2M Hill remained committed to the
consortium but could not rule out looking at BNG later in the
year, he said. "Down the road, once the NDA [Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority] releases the schedule, we may look at
it."
 
CH2M Hill and Amec have seconded staff to some of UKAEA's sites
in preparation for tendering of contracts to decommission them
in 2008. The alliance can bid for other decommissioning
contracts when the market opens later this year.
 
Dipesh Shah, the UKAEA chief executive who resigned last week,
looked at leading a management buy-out of UKAEA earlier this
year, but, ii is understood, was blocked by the Government. 

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited 
*****************************************************************
 41 APP.COM: N.J. wants NRC to weigh terror threat in licensing |
         
Asbury Park Press Online
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	
Sunday, June 18, 2006

BY TODD B. BATES ENVIRONMENTAL WRITER

Should the vulnerability of the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant 
to terrorist attacks be considered during its bid for a renewed 
operating license?

New Jersey thinks so and may get its wish granted, thanks to a
federal appeals court ruling this month.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's position that a federal
law "does not require a consideration of the environmental
impact of terrorist attacks" is unreasonable, according to a
decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on a
California nuclear plant dispute.

"Our concern was that . . . the design of this particular
reactor (Oyster Creek) and its spent fuel pool storage make it
particularly vulnerable to attack" and that should be considered
during the plant's relicensing review, said Lisa P. Jackson,
commissioner of the state Department of Environmental Protection.

NRC spokesman Neil A. Sheehan said it's "premature to say that
this (court decision) would have any implications for the Oyster
Creek license renewal application" because the NRC has not
decided whether to appeal it. The decision applies only to the
Diablo Canyon plant in California and not necessarily any other
facility at this point, he said.

Oyster Creek's vulnerability to terrorist attack is one of New
Jersey's prime concerns regarding the Lacey plant's quest for a
20-year license extension. The plant's current operating license
expires in April 2009.

Oyster Creek's vulnerability to aircraft attacks, especially the
vulnerability of its spent nuclear fuel pool, must be analyzed
before the NRC decides whether to renew the plant's license,
former state Environmental Commissioner Bradley M. Campbell said
in a letter to the NRC last year.

"You need to look at whether (a) plant that's configured the way
it is . . . is more vulnerable than others in a densely
populated area before you make a decision to keep it operating,"
Jackson said in an interview Friday.

A DEP nuclear engineer, when asked last year about the
possibility of a terrorist attack on Oyster Creek, said the
spent fuel pool would be the biggest concern.

"It's only logical that when you're evaluating a relicensing
application that you would take into account the risk of
terrorism and a . . . feasible evacuation plan," said Janet
Tauro, a Brick resident and member of Grandmothers, Mothers and
More for Energy Safety. The group is against Oyster Creek's
license renewal proposal.

Last year, the DEP requested a hearing before a federal Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board panel on three contentions, or
concerns. They are Oyster Creek's vulnerability to aircraft
attack, metal fatigue in nuclear reactor parts and back-up power
to safely shut down the reactor during a blackout.

The three-judge panel, a quasi-judicial arm of the NRC, rejected
the DEP's request for a hearing. The DEP has appealed the
decision to the NRC commissioners.

Last week, the DEP asked the NRC to "consider this controlling
precedent" — the appeals court ruling — when deciding on the
DEP's appeal, according to a state document.

The DEP also asked that "the NRC fulfill its legal obligation,
pursuant to this decision, to complete a (National Environmental
Policy Act) analysis of the potential environmental effects of a
terrorist attack at Oyster Creek," the state document says.

Earlier this month, the San Francisco-based appeals court ruled
in a dispute over an NRC license for an interim spent fuel
storage facility at the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in
California.

The NRC "contends that the possibility of a terrorist attack on
a nuclear facility is so remote and speculative that the
potential consequences of such an attack need not be considered
at all" in an environmental review, the court's opinion says.

"We find it difficult to reconcile the Commission's conclusion
that . . . the possibility of a terrorist attack on a nuclear
facility is "remote and speculative,' with its stated efforts to
undertake a "top to bottom' security review against this same
threat," the opinion says.

The possibility of terrorist attack is not so remote and highly
speculative that it is beyond the scope of the National
Environmental Policy Act, it says.

"They ought to give (the court's decision) a really good, close
look," said Michele Donato, a lawyer who lives and has an office
in Lavallette. She opposes Oyster Creek relicensing.

Oyster Creek spokeswoman Rachelle Benson said "we're evaluating
the (court) decision to determine its impact, if any . . . but
we don't believe that it has any impact on our application" for
license renewal.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the NRC required
nuclear plants to find ways to minimize the potential impacts of
attacks, including an airborne assault, according to an NRC rule
proposal. The NRC also depends on enhanced airport and airplane
security since the attacks.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, about $20 million has been spent on
security upgrades at Oyster Creek, plant officials have said.

Spent fuel pool

Oyster Creek's concrete-lined, water-filled pool for highly
radioactive spent nuclear fuel is 40 feet deep. It holds about
375 tons of spent fuel in the shape of long, thin rods.

The elevated pool is next to the reactor in a reinforced
concrete building topped by a metal roof, not a dome like at
many other plants.

The pool is outside the plant's containment system, which is
designed to prevent a release of radiation into the environment
if an accident happens.

But it's likely that at least some radiation would escape or be
vented to the outdoor air if the reactor core is damaged — a
remote possibility, according to a February e-mail from Exelon
to the NRC.

The core contains the nuclear fuel.

AmerGen Energy, a subsidiary of Exelon, runs Oyster Creek.

However, it is highly unlikely that an airplane crashing into
the reactor building would cause any significant damage to the
fuel in the fuel pool, according to a fact sheet on the Oyster
Creek license renewal Web site.

In a 2005 report to Congress, a National Academies' panel said
"successful terrorist attacks on spent fuel pools, though
difficult, are possible."

An attack leading to a certain kind of fire "could result in the
release of large amounts of radioactive material," the panel's
report says.

The NRC staff has considered the potential cumulative impacts of
Oyster Creek's operations, including a 20-year license
extension, according to a draft supplemental environmental
impact statement released this month.

And the staff concluded the potential cumulative impacts would
be small.

Plant opponents and environmental activists criticized the NRC
draft report, which is open to public comment.

Acts of terrorism are outside the scope of the environmental
review for license renewal applications, according to an NRC
document on the Web.

"The commission has been very clear that security matters need
to be dealt with on an ongoing basis," the NRC's Sheehan said.

And the NRC has been reviewing security issues involving spent
fuel pools, according to a subsequent e-mail sent by Sheehan.

The first of three phases required plants to identify, and later
implement, strategies that would maintain or restore cooling for
the reactor core, containment building and spent fuel pool after
explosions or fire, the e-mail says.

Phase two calls for assessments of plant resources that could be
used to mitigate damage to spent fuel pools and surrounding
areas, the e-mail says.

Phase three entails nuclear plants identifying ways to improve
the ability to protect the reactor core and containment from
terrorist attack, the e-mail says.

The NRC is in the second phase and reviewing information
provided by the companies, the e-mail says.

Last year, Brick Mayor Joseph C. Scarpelli, a plant opponent,
and others filed a petition with the NRC aimed at expanding the
number of issues the agency considers when it reviews license
renewal applications.

The NRC considers a plant's aging management program and
potential environmental impact during the license renewal
process.

Factors such as demographics, siting, emergency evacuation and
site security also should be considered, according to the
petition.

Because of the appeals court decision, Scarpelli said he feels
more confident that the NRC will have to consider the petition.

"I've been saying all along that their scope is too narrow," he
said.

This story includes material from previous Press stories. Todd
B. Bates: (732) 643-4237 or tbates@app.com		 		 		 [E-mail]

  Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 42 NEWS.com.au: Isotope supply rationed after reactor leak - 

From: By Samantha Maiden

 June 19, 2006

HOSPITALS will be forced to ration supplies of a vital component 
of diagnostic scans for cancer and heart and lung disorders as a 
result of an accident at Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor. 
As Science Minister Julie Bishop faces pressure to ensure the 
public is kept informed of the safety scares, the Australian 
Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation has confirmed 
supplies of isotopes are unlikely to return to normal for a 
fortnight. 

John Howard has also confirmed discussions are continuing to
determine whether Australia will agree to store in the Northern
Territory waste from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel rods in
France. 

"We have to find somewhere for our -- to place the waste for
which we have responsibility to dispose," he told the Nine
Network's Sunday program yesterday. "I mean we have certain
responsibilities." 

While the Lucas Heights accidents were minor according to
authorities, the pipe rupture that caused radioactive gas to
escape last week has resulted in delays in the production of
isotopes used in nuclear imaging. 

"Nobody can guarantee there won't be incidents in any facility,
including in mines, including in wind farms, including in all
sorts of things, and the experts say ... that all the
appropriate action has been taken and all the necessary
responses have been provided and people have not been injured or
their health damaged," Mr Howard said. 

ANSTO has confirmed urgent supplies of medical isotopes have been 
imported from Canada and South Africa to ensure demand is met. 

However, key hospitals in Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth and
Brisbane will only secure about half of their usual orders. 

"The good news is that there's an extra shipment coming early
next week," said ANSTO spokeswoman Sharon Kelly. 

"That's coming from South Africa. We usually produce our own.
But as a result of the rupture in the pipe, we have not been
able to produce radiopharmaceuticals for over a week. We're
working really hard to get 100 per cent demand." ANSTO is
increasing production of another radiopharmaceutical, thallium,
which can be used instead of technetium-99 in some heart scans,
to ease demand. 

Ms Bishop was ambushed in parliament by the ALP over the safety
scares last week and ANSTO later admitted she had not been
informed that a canister carrying radioactive material had been
involved in a scare on Wednesday. 

While ANSTO is required by law to report notifiable incidents to
the radiation protection and nuclear safety regulator, it
confirmed Ms Bishop was not briefed on the accidents when she
was asked for details during parliamentary question time. 

"Xenon and krypton leaked into the atmosphere around Lucas
Heights," Opposition environment spokesman Anthony Albanese
said. 		  		 		 		 			Search for more stories on this topic on ,

 Copyright 2006 News Limited. All times AEST (GMT + 10). 
*****************************************************************
 43 Tulsa World: Nuke foe reloads 

tulsaworld.com:

Carrie Dickerson talks about nuclear power while sitting on the
porch of her Claremore home recently. Dickerson was a leader in
the successful challenge to the planned construction of the
Black Fox nuclear plant in the 1970s and early '80s. She opposes
a new proposal by state officials to consider building a nuclear
facility.

STEPHEN HOLMAN / Tulsa World   

  [The abandoned site for the proposed Black Fox nuclear power
plant is now surrounded by a fence. The water in the middle
covers what was to be the plant's foundation.]     

[Carrie Dickerson leads the fight against the proposed Black Fox 
nuclear plant in this photo from 1981.]   

By RUSSELL RAY World Staff Writer 

6/17/2006 

Power plant push reignites safety debate 

CLAREMORE -- In a small gray house in this northeast Oklahoma
town lives one of the nation's best-known foes of nuclear power. 

Inside, Carrie Dickerson is on the phone talking to old friends
-- devoted opponents of nuclear power -- about state leaders who
say nuclear energy should be part of Oklahoma's future. 

"They're testing the waters," Dickerson said. 

The Bush administration is pushing nuclear power in the name of
cleaner air and energy independence. Ten new nuclear plants are
under consideration between Maryland and Mississippi, though no
company has yet applied for a construction permit. 

But Dickerson says nuclear power is as irresponsible today as it
was when she took on Black Fox, a proposed nuclear plant, 33
years ago. 

Dickerson sold her business, mortgaged her farm and spent nearly
a decade battling plans to build the plant near Inola, about 16
miles east of Tulsa. Dickerson delayed the project for years
until it was finally canceled in February 1982. 

"They said, 'You can't win, so why try?' " Dickerson recalled
during a recent interview. "I said, 'You can't win if you don't
try.' " 

Nuclear power plants don't pollute the air, but the amount of 
radiation they emit is a danger to those who live near them, 
Dickerson said. 

"More radiation is emitted from a nuclear power plant than from
any other facility of any kind," she said. "Because of this,
there are more birth defects, more spontaneous abortions, more
cancers than there are in the general populous." 

But the CEO of Enercon Services Inc., a Tulsa company working to
obtain construction and operating permits for new nuclear
reactors in three Southeast states, says he's convinced that
nuclear power plants are safe to be around. 

In fact, John Richardson's daughter lives just 10 miles from the
site of a proposed nuclear facility near Gaffney, S.C. 

"I haven't told her she needs to move," Richardson said. "I
firmly believe in the safety of these plants. I have no qualms
about it." 

Larry Miller, a nuclear industry consultant in Tulsa, said the
odds of a nuclear accident the scale of Chernobyl or Three Mile
Island are next to nil because of better technology and
additional layers of security. 

"The redundant safety systems are absolutely incredible," Miller
said. "The backup systems in a nuclear plant are almost fail
safe." 

With 104 nuclear facilities operating in 31 states, nuclear
power accounts for 20 percent of U.S. electricity. Demand for
power in the United States is expected to rise an estimated 50
percent over the next 25 years, according to the Department of
Energy. 

Building more nuclear capacity will help the United States meet
the rising demand for electricity without increasing greenhouse
gas emissions, industry proponents say. 

"It's the largest source of emission-free electricity," Miller
said. 

President Bush, during a speech last month at the Limerick
Nuclear Plant in Pennsylvania, said, "Without nuclear energy,
carbon dioxide emissions would have been 28 percent greater in
2004." 

Concerns about global warming and a sharp increase in the price
of natural gas, which is used at most new power plants, are
driving what's been described as a nuclear renaissance in the
United States. 

The federal energy bill that became law last August included
incentives worth billions of dollars for the nuclear industry,
including loan guarantees for the construction of reactors and
production tax credits. In addition, the bill added a 20-year
extension to the Price-Anderson Act, which limits the liability
of nuclear operators in the event of a nuclear accident. 

"If nuclear power was so safe, why would the federal government
need to put a liability cap on the cost of an accident or an act
of sabotage?" said Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and
Resource Service, a Takoma Park, Md.-based organization opposed
to nuclear power. 

Although industry polls indicate that public support for nuclear
power is growing, the results of independent polls show just the
opposite, Gunter said. 

"If you look at the industry polls, nuclear power is as
acceptable as apple pie," he said. "When you look at the polling
services that don't have a dog in this fight, the opposition
continues to grow." 

As U.S. companies pursue the construction of new nuclear plants,
the federal government has failed to designate a central
repository for nuclear waste. 

The uncertainty surrounding the storage of radioactive waste
could scuttle plans to build new reactors. The waste -- tons of
spent fuel rods that once powered nuclear plants -- is now
stored at scores of reactor sites nationwide, a tempting target
for terrorists. 

The plan is to bury the waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but
the national repository is years behind schedule and far from
being finalized due to strong opposition in that state. 

"There is no management strategy other than to put it out on the
back 40," Gunter said. "If this were a scientific process, you'd
be looking at at least three sites." 

Despite new incentives for the construction and operation of new
nuclear plants, the financial risks remain high for companies
that decide to apply for a permit. According to Standard
&Poor's, nuclear power could lead to lower credit ratings. 

"From a credit perspective, these legislative measures may not
be substantial enough to sustain credit quality," S said in a
recent report. 

Grunter agrees. 

"If an Oklahoma utility announced plans to build a nuclear power
plant, their stock would be reduced to junk bonds," he said. 

American Electric Power-Public Service Company of Oklahoma, the
state's second largest electric utility and the chief power
provider in the Tulsa area, said it has no plans to add nuclear
power to its generation mix. But AEP-PSO President Stuart
Solomon has said the utility is interested in nuclear power and
will be watching the progress of other companies. 

Columbus, Ohio-based AEP owns and operates one nuclear facility
-- the Cook Nuclear Power Plant in Bridgman, Mich. 

PSO proposed the Black Fox nuclear plant in 1973. The utility
canceled the project after costs skyrocketed amid numerous legal
challenges from Dickerson's nuclear opposition group -- Citizens
Action for Safe Energy - and the 1979 partial meltdown of the
Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania. 

"What could have been built for $1 billion suddenly was going to
be $5 billion or $6 billion," Miller said. 

Dickerson was 56 when she started the fight against Black Fox.
At 89, she isn't as spry as she once was, but she's still
passionate and knowledgeable about the safety of nuclear power. 

"Nuclear power is not safe," she said. "We have had a lot of
near accidents." 

A former school teacher and registered nurse, Dickerson sold her
nursing home and mortgaged her family farm to pay for the
nine-year campaign to stop Black Fox. She said she and her
supporters stand ready to fight again. 

"I can't walk very well, but I can sure mobilize people,"
Dickerson said. "I felt like God was with me all those nine
years, and I'm sure he'll be with us again." 

Russell Ray 581-8380 

Black Fox history 

On May 8, 1973, Public Service Company of Oklahoma announced
plans to build a $450 million nuclear power plant at a site
southwest of Inola. The project, known as Black Fox Station,
promised to create 500 to 1,000 jobs. 

Carrie Dickerson, a registered nurse and operator of Aunt
Carrie's Nursing Home in Claremore, formed a group known as
Citizens' Action for Safe Energy and launched a campaign to stop
Black Fox. 

CASE became an intervenor in the case at both the state and
federal levels, and managed to delay hearings on the project. 

The partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in
1979 and other incidents helped cause the cost of building a
nuclear plant to skyrocket. 

To cover the increasing cost of construction, PSO sought
permission from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission to
substantially raise electric rates. On Jan. 15, 1982, the
commission rejected the utility's request, saying the project's
cost was too high to be included in the utility's base rates. 

On Feb. 16, 1982, PSO announced it would not build the plant. By
then, $550,000 had been spent to stop the project, Dickerson
said. 

  © 2006 , World Publishing Co. All rights reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 44 TheStar.com: Liberals misleading on nuclear assessment
 
Failed to mention the environmental exemption

Jun. 17, 2006. 01:00 AM

IAN URQUHART

Premier Dalton McGuinty and his Liberal government have been
admirably straightforward on the nuclear question facing Ontario.

They could have handed the question of whether Ontario should
install more nuclear reactors to a task force to study and
report back after the next election, thereby neutralizing the
issue. 

But they decided, instead, to tackle it head-on as they rolled
out a $40 billion plan this week to replace the existing nuclear
fleet with refurbished or new reactors over the next 20 years.

When it comes to the question of an environmental assessment of
its nuclear plan, McGuinty and his government have been anything
but direct. Indeed, they have been downright misleading.

The provincial Environmental Assessment Act, passed in the
mid-1970s, provides for a review of any government "plan" to
ensure it would not compromise the "protection, conservation and
wise management" of the environment.

Surely a plan calling for new reactors (as well as more
gas-fired generating plants and windmills and so on) would fall
under the sway of this act.

But the Liberals bobbed and weaved on this question when it was
first raised in the Legislature 10 days ago by NDP Leader Howard
Hampton. Environment Minister Laurel Broten hid behind the
jurisdictional curtain and said that assessments of individual
reactors are a federal responsibility.

As for an assessment of the broader plan, she said she had not
yet made up her mind.

When NDP MPP Peter Tabuns, a leading environmentalist and former
head of Greenpeace Canada, asked Broten again this week about an
assessment of the plan, she upbraided him for not doing his
homework. If he had, she said, "he would understand that broad
government policy, abstract in nature, is not subject to the
Environmental Assessment Act."

In fact, the opposite is true. A previous mega-plan for more
nuclear and coal-fired plants  put forward by the old Ontario
Hydro  was subject to an environmental assessment in the early
1990s. (As the recession of that era deepened and the demand for
power dropped, Hydro quietly withdrew the plan before the
assessment hearings had concluded.)

Mindful of this precedent, cabinet last week quietly approved a
regulation specifically exempting its 20-year power plan from an
environmental assessment. But no mention of this exemption was
made on Tuesday in the media lock-up for the rollout of the plan
or subsequently in the Legislature.

When news of the exemption finally emerged later in the week,
the government offered the following explanations:


+ The overall plan is going to be subject to public hearings
anyway beginning early next year before the Ontario Energy
Board, and the government is asking the board to consider
environmental as well as economic issues. (Environmentalists say
the board has no experience in environmental assessment and will
likely give their concerns short shrift.)


+ Any specific project  be it a nuclear reactor or a
gas-powered plant or even a windmill farm  will be subject to
environmental assessments. In the case of nuclear reactors, the
assessments will be done by a federal body, the Canadian Nuclear
Safety Commission. (Environmentalists see the commission as too
friendly to the nuclear industry and its assessments as too
narrow in scope.)

Underlying the government's move is an unstated concern that
full-scale, provincial environmental assessments of both the
overall plan and individual nuclear reactors will hopelessly bog
down the process at a time when the need for new sources of
power is urgent.

That's a legitimate point. But the Liberals didn't make it
publicly. Instead, they tried to sneak through the exemption and
hope that no one was paying attention.

In the process, they handed a gift to Hampton and the
environmentalists who had been having trouble getting across
their message to a skeptical media and public that Ontario's
electricity needs over the next 20 years can be met entirely by
conservation and "green" power.

Now they have a new angle  a short-circuited environmental
assessment that makes it appear the government has something to
hide. "This was all done secretly behind closed doors,"
thundered Hampton in the Legislature on Thursday.

The weight of the criticism fell on Broten, a rookie politician
surprisingly promoted to cabinet a year ago by McGuinty.

This was Broten's first true test as a cabinet minister, and she
flunked it by responding with rote messages, often prefaced by
the phrase, "Let me be absolutely clear." That is a sure sign a
politician is about to get fuzzy.

As for the regulation that she somehow neglected to mention to
the media or the Legislature, she dismissed that as a purely
"administrative" issue.

To summarize, the Liberals finished the week on the defensive on
the nuclear file. Whether they can regain the initiative remains
to be seen.

Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
 45 TheStar.com: New plan judged in haste
 
Jun. 17, 2006. 01:00 AM
 
Prudent blueprint for Ontario energy

Editorial June 14.

I wish that you had not rushed to judge the government's plan
for more nuclear power as a prudent, balanced plan. I am sure
you are misleading many who have not had time to read or study
the sensible plan of the six major environmental organizations
that produced a summary called "Smart Green Energy."

I am certain that we need neither coal nor nuclear. We have a
unique opportunity to gradually phase out both. The problem is
that the public has not yet had time to give conservation and
energy efficiency a chance. The nuclear decision need not be
made now anyway.

You quoted Dalton McGuinty: "We must ensure that we are
providing the best technology at the best price ..." Many are
positive that nuclear is not it. An actuary or two could provide
what no government has yet provided  a definitive, public,
detailed answer to what has been the cost of nuclear in Ontario. 

Actuaries would have some skill at adding up nuclear-caused
federal and provincial debts, future waste-handling costs,
future medical costs, etc. and translating them into a number
that we could understand to be the current cost of nuclear
electricity.

I guess that it would be well over 15 cents per kilowatt hour. 

William L. Shore, Sutton West, Ont.

Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All
*****************************************************************
 46 NEWS.com.au: PM claims nuclear opinions shifting - 

From: AAP                       

June 18, 2006                                                    

PUBLIC opinion on nuclear matters had shifted and Labor's
current scare campaign would not be nearly as successful as it
might expect, Prime Minister John Howard said today. That was
demonstrated by the ever-increasing number of voters backing New
South Wales Liberal Danna Vale, whose electorate of Hughes
includes the Lucas Heights nuclear research reactor, Mr Howard
said. 

The reactor was the scene of two incidents last week, both
involving release of small amounts of nuclear material. 

The accidents came as the Government and community embarked on a
broader debate about the merits of nuclear power, expansion of
uranium mining or even enrichment of uranium in Australia. 

The Government also is considering whether the proposed nuclear
waste dump in the Northern Territory will house waste from
nuclear fuel rods reprocessed in France. 

Mr Howard said he believed the Australian public was ready for a
mature nuclear debate. 

"My very strong view is that public opinion has shifted on this 
issue and the Labor Party will not be nearly as successful in 
running a fear campaign that they are running on this issue as 
they think they might be," he told the Nine network. 

"Younger Australians in particular are saying, let's sit down
and have a look at this issue. Let's see whether nuclear power
might in time be a clean alternative to fossil fuels. 

"I am not saying that this will happen in the next couple of
years, but let's at least have a discussion and let's not have
such a stupidly emotional debate about it." 

The Government gave the go-ahead for construction of the new
OPAL reactor at Lucas Heights in 1997, prompting strong
opposition from Labor and green groups. 

Mr Howard said despite that opposition, local people continued
to vote in ever increasing numbers for local member Danna Vale,
who fended off a ferocious challenge in 1998 from Labor
candidate David Hill, who specifically campaigned against the
reactor. 

Opposition science spokeswoman Jenny Macklin said Mr Howard
still needed to come clean on plans to dump nuclear waste in the
NT. 

She said Mr Howard could not have it both ways. 

"The Prime Minister is obsessed with secrecy on nuclear issues,
yet he keeps claiming that he wants an open public debate on
nuclear power and nuclear waste disposal," she said. 

"John Howard is forcing a nuclear waste dump on the people of
the Northern Territory but won't tell the community what is
going to be dumped there." Opposition Leader Kim Beazley said
uranium mining was one thing but going down the road of nuclear
power was another entirely. 

"It's not economic, it's not environmentally sensible, not
strategically sensible," he told the Ten network. 

"We're in this debate, but we want to see enter into the debate
a serious discussion of the renewable energy needs and
possibilities of this nation." 		  		 		 		 			Search for more

*****************************************************************
 47 Ottawa Citizen: How to keep nuclear sites safe

Part of the canada.com Network
 					 					 						 					 				 				 				 				 				 					 					
         
Stage mock terror attacks: Chalk River considers U.S.-style
security drill
 	 	 		 				 				 				 				 				 				 			 			 				 					 						 
Ian MacLeod, The Ottawa Citizen
                        
Published: Saturday, June 17, 2006                               

CHALK RIVER - Mock terrorist drills are being considered for the 
nuclear laboratories in Chalk River where a stockpile of highly 
enriched uranium -- enough for at least one nuclear bomb -- is 
pitting the benefits of nuclear medicine against the risks of 
nuclear terrorism.

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is examining the 
feasibility of staging "force-on-force" security drills at all 
major Canadian nuclear sites, similar to mandatory drills at key 
U.S. nuclear facilities in which military units "attack" and test 
private in-house security forces.

The commission disclosed the idea in response to Citizen
questions about renewed and critical attention over the use of
highly enriched uranium (HEU) exported from the U.S. to the
Chalk River site, two hours northwest of Ottawa, where it is
used to make life-saving medical isotopes for Ottawa's MDS
Nordion.

As the world's leading medical isotope producer, Nordion's use
of HEU is expected to come under renewed scrutiny today in
Norway at an international conference of arms control, security
and nuclear experts, the latest in a long-running international
effort to reduce and eventually eliminate "civilian" HEU
commerce.

The meeting follows a major report delivered to the United
Nations this month by an independent weapons of mass destruction
commission led by Hans Blix, the UN's former chief weapons
inspector.

It, too, singled out the need for enhanced security of HEU used
for isotope production, though it did not mention specific cases
of concern.

An estimated 20 tonnes of civilian HEU is stored around the
world, primarily to fuel more than 100 research reactors
including four in Canada and dozens in other countries, some
with questionable security. Others, like Nordion, use HEU as
"target" material in the cores of nuclear reactors to produce
medical isotopes.

An estimated 45 kilograms of HEU exported from the U.S. is
believed to be stored at Chalk River -- no HEU is kept at
Nordion's March Road plant in Kanata -- awaiting the commercial
startup of two isotope-producing nuclear reactors intended to
maintain Canada's dominance in the $3-billion global molecular
imaging and radiotherapeutics market.

Some non-proliferation experts believe the stockpile and
Nordion's continued use of HEU presents a tempting target for
terrorists conspiring to either steal it to build a weapon of
mass destruction or to carry out radiological sabotage at the
heavily guarded Chalk River site.

Instead, they say Nordion and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., the
Crown corporation that owns and operates the facility, should
convert their production process to use low-grade uranium (LEU),
which is unsuitable for nuclear weapons.

Nordion and AECL characterize a terrorist threat as improbable.
The federal nuclear safety commission agrees.

"There is no proliferation risk to the use of this material in
Canada," because of the strict national and international
regulations and safeguards governing its transport, storage and
use, says Aurele Gervais, a commission spokesman.

Even so, commission staff is "reviewing the experience of other 
countries such as the United States in their FOF (force-on-force) 
program at nuclear sites to identify key areas that must be 
considered if such exercises were put in place," he says.

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the U.S., 
Chalk River and other Canadian nuclear facilities have beefed up 
security dramatically. AECL now spends about $7 million annually 
on security measures at Chalk River, including for its own highly 
trained and heavily armed paramilitary "nuclear response force."

The force routinely conducts joint exercises with various police 
agencies and, at least once a year, with the military. But based 
on the commission's statement, the performance testing does not 
included force-on-force exercises.

The nuclear response force is "formidably trained and armoured to 
counter the design basis threat and any other potential threats," 
says Brad Perrin, Chalk River's chief of security. "The 
effectiveness of the security response is tested regularly and 
the results are provided," to the nuclear safety commission, but 
kept classified.

In the U.S., the Department of Energy requires all major nuclear 
facilities to undergo a mandatory FOF exercise at least once 
every three years.

The facilities are expected to be able to defend against theft of 
nuclear materials or radiological sabotage by a few terrorists 
using surprise and readily available weapons and explosives, as 
well as against the theft of nuclear secrets.

The results have been revealing.

An eight-month investigation by the independent U.S. Project on 
Government Oversight found:

* Private security guards contracted to guard facilities housing 
thousands of tons of HEU and plutonium "lost" against the 
"attackers" in more than half the exercises.

* In October 2000, during a force-on-force drill at the Los 
Alamos, New Mexico, nuclear facility, the mock terrorists gained 
control of sensitive nuclear materials which, if detonated, would 
have endangered significant parts of New Mexico, Colorado and 
downwind areas.

* In 1998, the fall of 1999, and again in the spring of 2000, two 
force-on-force exercises were run to test the Rocky Flats 
protective force. A "criticality alarm" -- warning that a nuclear 
chain reaction is potentially imminent -- was set off, creating 
confusion and allowing the mock terrorists to access to special 
nuclear materials. The alarm required everyone to immediately 
leave the building. Hoping to "kill" the "adversaries," the 
protective force indiscriminately shot employees, controllers and 
each other as they were exiting the building in response to the 
alarm.

Even though many deficiencies have been found with the U.S. 
exercises -- the protective forces, for example, are given at 
least two hours notice an "attack" is imminent -- the tests are 
still crucial, says Ed Lyman, senior scientist with the Union of 
Concerned Scientists global security program. He also is past 
president of the watchdog U.S. Nuclear Control Institute.

"You can meet every (security) regulation on paper, but when it 
comes to actually implementing a strategy there could be severe 
problems. It depends on the size of the (protective) force 
relative to the attacking force and what you assume about the 
capabilities of the attacking force.

"A relatively small tweak to the type of strategy that the 
attackers use could totally overwhelm the defence force. So 
without performance testing that is realistic ... then I don't 
take at face value the fact (Chalk River) has some guards with 
guns running around. The key is force-on-force exercises."

And speculation that nuclear terrorists would have more success 
attacking poorly guarded nuclear facilities in eastern Europe, 
for example, is dangerous, he says.

"Obviously the weak links of the chain have to be protected. But 
the complacent attitude of some of the western facilities is 
probably a bigger vulnerability than places where there's more 
attention, like the eastern bloc.

"The fact is that in the West this attitude that 'We're 
invulnerable,' which obviously Sept. 11 should have shaken up, 
doesn't seem to have sunk in. We still have HEU at (U.S.) 
university reactors where there's virtually no security.

"I haven't been to Chalk River. All I know is in a highly 
defended facility like Oakridge, like Los Alamos, FOF testing 
demonstrated that there could be a rapid commando attack that 
could successfully escape with material."

Senior writer Ian MacLeod is national security and terrorism 
editor.

imacleod@thecitizen.canwest.com
c The Ottawa Citizen 2006
                                                                         
		   			  			 				 				
© 2006 CanWest Interactive, a division of . All rights
*****************************************************************
 48 Scotsman.com: British Energy ready to press nuclear button
 
Sun 18 Jun 2006    

GUY DIXON 

BRITISH Energy boss Bill Coley is expected to give further
impetus to the nuclear lobby this week by revealing he is now in
a position to invest in a new generation of power stations. 

While he is likely to disappoint investors hoping for news of an
early reintroduction of dividend payments, he will use the
company's financial turnaround to say BE can play a key role in
meeting the UK's future energy needs if the government backs
nuclear. 

Tony Blair recently declared that nuclear power is "back on the
agenda with a vengeance" and the results of his energy review
are due shortly. 

Livingston-based BE, which generates around 20% of the UK's
electricity, was narrowly saved from falling into administration
in 2003 by a ÂŁ5bn government rescue package after being hit by
falling power prices and high operating costs. 

Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank last week produced
research asking whether BE may use this week's annual results to
say it is to bring forward plans to start paying a dividend -
pencilled in for after the 2006/7 financial year - on the back
of an upturn in the company's fortunes. 

Citigroup said: "A key area of interest will be whether BE has
changed this stance. However, we think it is unlikely [that the
dividend payment will be resumed] until the UK government has
sold down some of its economic interest." 

Brokers are forecasting EBITDA of between ÂŁ825m and ÂŁ894m. The
operating EBITDA last year was ÂŁ94m. 

BE operates eight nuclear plants - including Torness in East
Lothian and Hunterston B in Ayrshire - and its coal-fired plant
at Eggborough in Yorkshire. There has been speculation the
Eggborough plant may be split from the rest of the company. 

Shares in BE have risen sharply on the back of higher energy
prices and, in the longer term, the expectation that the
government may give its backing the construction of the next
generation of nuclear power stations. Shares which were worth
263p in January 2005 closed on Friday at 669.5p. 

This week, analysts will focus on the amount BE receives for
selling its electricity. Citigroup expects BE to have forward
sold around 75% of its output for the 2006/07 period at an
average price of around ÂŁ45/MWh (mega watt hour). In the third
quarter of 2005/6, BE achieved a price of ÂŁ37.60/MWh. Citigroup
said: "We will also be looking to see if BE has secured any
further long-term deals." 

One legacy of the government's bail-out of BE is a complicated
financing system, which results in 65% of BE's earnings above a
certain level being paid to the Nuclear Decommissioning Fund. 

The fund is supposed to cover the billions needed to pay for the
time-consuming and costly process of decommissioning the nuclear
generators. 

Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, said in March that the government
was prepared to sell part of its stake in BE and a decision
would be made after the six month-long energy review. 

In a research note, Deutsche Bank said: "With the issue of new
nuclear build back on the agenda 'with a vengeance', any
thoughts on BE's possible involvement would also be of interest
to shareholders." 

Coley told Scotland on Sunday in December that institutions are
waiting until this summer - when Tony Blair will announce the
outcome of the government's review of the nuclear industry -
before deciding whether to pump billions into building the next
generation of nuclear reactors. 

He said: "If people can have a degree of certainty that the way
is clear to make an investment and build assets, the energy
business can find the money. 

"I don't believe that there's a shortage of money if investors
are certain that the assets can be built. They need signals that
would take uncertainty out of the way. I have heard people talk
very favourably about nuclear investment." 

©2006 Scotsman.com| contact
*****************************************************************
 49 Telegraph: Nuclear staff clean up with Ł1,000 bonus
 
  [telegraph.co.uk]     <img
  
By Sylvia Pfeifer (Filed: 18/06/2006)

Thousands of workers at British Nuclear Group and UKAEA, the two
main clean-up contractors to British Nuclear Fuels, have each
received a cash bonus of Ł1,000 this month after meeting certain
performance milestones. 

Under targets set by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, the
body set up by the Government last year, the contractors had to
save at least Ł145m - or 7 per cent - of the decommissioning
budget for the past financial year. "This is our first year and
we wanted to make an impact," the NDA said. "It was about making
savings in order to do more decommissioning than we would
otherwise have done." 

The NDA is in the process of finalising the internal audit of
its first year, but the results have already shown that the two
contractors have exceeded the target. The bonus scheme does not
include any of the senior managers at either BNG or UKAEA. The
financial targets for the coming year will be set by the
Government. 

Separately, BNG will next month unveil pre-tax profits of
between Ł70m and Ł80m. In previous years, the group's nuclear
liabilities have outstripped any profits it has generated. 

 © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. | Terms &
*****************************************************************
 50 Telegraph: Gazprom plans expansion into atomic energy
 
  [telegraph.co.uk]     <img
  
By Edmund Conway (Filed: 19/06/2006)
 
Russian gas giant Gazprom is planning to branch into the nuclear
power industry, according to its chairman. 

The news is the latest sign of the company's growing ambitions
to become one of the world's biggest energy groups. It may also
cause disquiet among Gazprom's international investors and
customers that the company is increasing its risks. 

Chairman Alexei Miller said that he had already commissioned
experts to look at the potential of expanding into the nuclear
sector. "Nuclear power is one of the potential directions of our
work in the near future," he said at a recent conference on
global energy. 

Mr Miller explained that the company would then be free to
export more of its gas. 

President Vladimir Putin is reportedly planning to increase the
number of nuclear reactors in Russia from 29 to 59 and to
upgrade old power stations to extend their lives. Mr Putin is
expected to provide more details of the rebirth of nuclear at
the forthcoming G8 summit of leading economies in St Petersburg
next month. 

Gazprom intends to become involved in this expansion, though Mr
Miller said it was not yet clear whether private investment is
possible in the construction of nuclear reactors. 

Although 2006 marks the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl power
station disaster, hostile attitudes towards nuclear generation
have been thawing of late. 

Prime Minister Tony Blair said recently that the prospect of
building atomic plants was "back on the agenda with a
vengeance''. 

However, European consumers may be worried that Gazprom is to
become involved in the sector. Trust in the group plummeted last
winter, when it shut off the gas supply to Ukraine, helping to
send energy prices in the UK to record highs. 

Russian finance minister Alexei Kudrin attempted at the G8
meeting of finance ministers last weekend to soothe European
concerns, promising that the country will be a stable supplier
of energy in the future. 

Gazprom is the world's largest gas producer. Although part
privately-owned, the company is in effect controlled by the
state. 

Mr Miller said Gazprom was intent on expanding into utilities.

However, one gas analyst said: "I'm not sure how the new
international investors would take that diversification news. It
sounds like unpalatable cocktail of risks to me." 

 © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. 
*****************************************************************
 51 SNA: Bulgaria Shuts Nuclear Reactor for Repair
     
Business: 17 June 2006, Saturday.

Unit 5 of Bulgaria's only nuclear power producer, Kozloduy, was
switched off on Saturday.
 
The planned works on the reactor include prophylactic and
repair, as well as reloading with nuclear fuel.
 
Meanwhile, units 3 and 6 are working at full capacity, because
reactor 4 is also off for a scheduled repair.
 
Unit 5 should be switched back on in early September.
 
Bulgaria has shut some of the plant's reactors under pressure
from the EU, and should do so with the rest of the power plant
in order to be accepted into the bloc.
 
A new nuclear power producer should open in Belene to take over
from Kozloduy, but it would not be before 2013 for the first
unit of the new facility to become operational.

novinite.com    

 All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright

Bulgaria news Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency -
www.sofianewsagency.com) is unique with being a real time news
provider in English that informs its readers about the latest
Bulgarian news. The editorial staff also publishes a daily
online newspaper "Sofia Morning News." Novinite.com (Sofia News
Agency - www.sofianewsagency.com) and Sofia Morning News publish
*****************************************************************
 52 Telegraph: Technology that holds the key to world's demand for power
 
  [telegraph.co.uk]     <img

(Filed: 17/06/2006)

Steep oil prices have fuelled rising interest in alternative
sources of energy. Investors willing to accept high risks may
consider following the founder of one of Britain's biggest firms
of independent financial advisers into a tiny energy company.

Peter Hargreaves explains why he has put some of his own fortune
at stake

The world found a very convenient source of energy in fossil
fuels and has been too lazy to look seriously elsewhere. Anyone
today who envisages a world without transport, heat and
electricity needs to know just one fact. 

[Turbine] 
  
Force of nature: wind farms may be the way forward
  
According to BP Solar: "If all the sunlight hitting the earth's
surface in one hour was harnessed and converted into electrical
power, it would be enough to fulfil mankind's energy needs for a
complete year." 

The problem with vegetation is that it takes millions of years
to convert agricultural material into the fossil fuels on which
we have become reliant. It is amazing that intelligent people
believe we can fulfil our energy requirement by growing
agricultural products today and using them as a source of power
- biofuels are a complete non-starter. 

Indeed, if you planted every piece of agricultural land in the
entire world it wouldn't start to provide for our energy
requirements. Biofuels are also certainly not the answer to
reducing carbon emissions - they produce the same amount of
hydrocarbon as fossil fuels. 

However, if we could take that energy from the sun either
directly or from the rainfall it produces or the winds it
creates and convert it directly into a usable source, the
world's energy future would be secure. 

Solar panels and wind turbines unfortunately do not create power
in a timely manner. You need electricity to light your house at
nights when the sun doesn't shine. The wind doesn't blow every
day and during windy days 90 per cent of the available power is
wasted. 

We need to be able to take the power that is currently being
unused and convert it into an easily storable source of power.
If it was one that when used created no pollution whatsoever the
world would have its answer. 

Excess electricity generated from renewable resources could be
quite simply passed through electrolysers, a technology that has
been around since scientists observed the effect of passing
electricity through water well over a century ago. You get
hydrogen at one terminal and oxygen at the other. 

The only difficulty is creating a commercial electrolyser which
will generate these two gases from electricity, keep them
separate and store the usable one - hydrogen - conveniently. 
The whole world right now should be exploring how we can use all
this wasted power from the sun and store it in the form of
hydrogen. Hydrogen would power your central heating boiler but,
more important than that, it will work perfectly well in an
internal combustion engine. The difference being that the only
thing that would come out of a car's exhaust run on hydrogen
would be water vapour. Yes - harmless, odourless, clean steam. 

Many people in the world think that the fuel cell will be the
world's saviour. There is no doubt that fuel cells will be part
of the future and an important one but currently most hydrogen -
one of the two important gases required to power a fuel cell -
is made predominantly from reformed fossil fuels. In other
words, instead of the greenhouse gases pouring out of car
exhausts, the greenhouse gases would pour out of the chimneys of
a huge factory. 

Only a small amount of hydrogen is generated from electrolysers,
predominantly ones connected to hydroelectric power plants in
places like Norway and Finland. These electrolysers are
exceedingly expensive, complicated and require constant
maintenance and supervision. The only way hydrogen will be
harnessed is if hydrogen was easy to generate. 

No one knows exactly how the "hydrogen cycle" will work. It
could be that people have small wind turbines on the top of
their garage generating hydrogen to use in their cars - and
using the excess to heat their house. In hot countries, solar
cells could deliver the same service. However it may be that
hydrogen is generated centrally perhaps in what are now petrol
stations or perhaps as a by-product of wind farms. 

There is. however, one company which claims to have already
demonstrated that it has the technology to generate hydrogen
much more cheaply and conveniently. 

More importantly, if this hydrogen is generated from electricity
wasted when the wind blows too strongly or the sun shines too
brightly or when electricity is not needed, in effect the power
is completely free. 

A small company in Cambridgeshire called ITM Power is probably a
world leader in electrolyser technology; it may also be the
world leader in fuel cell technology, too. It has developed a
method which in commercial production will make both
electrolysers and fuel cells economic. It has already
demonstrated that this technology has good longevity. 

Interestingly, hydrogen is also complementary to the other
likely way forward - that is, nuclear power. The problem with
nuclear power stations is you can't shut them down and
electrolysers could collect the energy when there are troughs in
demand for electricity. 

Is hydrogen the future? Well, no one has come up with a better
suggestion yet and if electrolysers can be made conveniently and
cheaply they are a major part of the solution to the problem of
finding alternative sources of energy.

+ Peter Hargreaves is the chief executive of Hargreaves Lansdown
IFAs and a non-executive director of ITM Power with a
substantial shareholding in this company. Nobody should invest
any money in Aim stocks which they cannot afford to lose. Aim
stocks are high-risk investments and you may get back less than
you invest. 


 © Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006. | Terms &
*****************************************************************
 53 Las Vegas SUN: Security institute misses the mark 

 Photo: Photo 

Today: June 18, 2006 at 9:18:52 PDT 

UNLV's Institute for Security Studies has received $8.9 million
- money that has come mostly from taxpayers. But in three years,
The Sun found, the ISS hasn't provided much bang for those bucks.

 By Jeff German <> and Steve Kanigher <>, Las Vegas Sun 


INSIDE THE ISS 

The UNLV Institute for Security Studies is not short on colorful
figures. Some key staffers from over the years: 

Lee Van Arsdale: A former Delta Force commander and consultant
for the movie, "Black Hawk Down" - was the institute's founding
executive director. With his top secret clearance, he once
helped run the emergency response team at the Nevada Test Site
for its managing contractor, Bechtel Nevada. 

Thomas F. Williams: A recently named associate UNLV vice
president with strong Energy Department ties - is the man in
charge of the institute today. As a senior executive for the
National Nuclear Security Administration, he used to coordinate
all defense-related programs for the government at the Nevada
Test Site. 

James Sudderth: An Army special forces veteran with expertise in
chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction - is the No.
2 man at the institute. He ran counterterrorism operations for
Bechtel Nevada at the Test Site from 2000 to 2004 and once
served on United Nations weapons inspection teams. 

Harry Bostick: A former top lab researcher for Bechtel Nevada
who specialized in nuclear emergency responses - oversees the
institute's advanced technology lab. He has expertise in
counterterrorism technology and radiation detection and once had
a hand in the security design of the U.S. embassies in Moscow
and Beijing. 

Michael Gillette: An ex-Army paratrooper and SWAT commander who
has expertise in counterterrorism training and several black
belts in martial arts “ runs the institute's training and
readiness office. He once provided threat training for the
airline industry. 

Wade Ishimoto: A member of the nation's first counterterrorism
force and a top expert in special operations - is listed as
deputy director of planning and development for the institute.
But he spends his time working at the Pentagon under a special
government program. He was a Delta Force intelligence officer in
the 1980 failed attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran, and
he served as a security consultant to the U.S. Olympic Committee
in 1984. 

Charles Madsen: A former Bechtel Nevada employee who designed
electromagnetic technology for concealed weapons detection and
through-wall imaging “ is the institute's principal engineer. He
has had ties to the Central Intelligence Agency and National
Security Agency. 

Douglas Seastrand: A former senior engineer at Bechtel Nevada -
is a principal computer scientist at the institute's lab. He
left his job as a university regent last year to take the
position. 

Some former instructors: 

David Binney: An ex-FBI deputy director who once oversaw the
worldwide security program for IBM. 

Castle Nishimoto: A former Army infantry commander and tactical
response instructor and a career FBI agent who once served at
the U.S. embassy in Tokyo. 

Kenneth Walther: An undercover CIA operative for three decades
who had assignments overseas in 101 countries. He has expertise
in electronic spyware, including radio transmitters, receivers
and antennas. 

John Whitney: A former Secret Service assigned to presidential
details and an ex-FBI SWAT Team sniper and hostage negotiator
who has experience teaching tactical operations. 

Lewis Subelsky: A former police officer, FBI supervisor and
Energy Department counterterrorism expert who specialized in
weapons of mass destruction.

Nineteen months after 9/11, Nevada's largest university won
approval for a promising new step in the fight against
terrorism. Using federal money, UNLV would create an institute
devoted to counterterrorism research and training. 

Sen. Harry Reid hailed the undertaking as a "bold step forward."
Over the next three years, the new Institute for Security
Studies received $8.9 million, more than three-quarters of it in
federal money the Nevada Democrat steered its way. Congress also
has agreed to send the institute another $5 million. 

The institute opened as scheduled in 2003 and has since grown to
14 full-time employees, mostly from a circle of former Nevada
Test Site executives and military veterans living in Nevada.
They are paid salaries ranging from $79,500 to $160,000. 

Beyond the payroll, however, the institute has little to show
for the money, the Sun found in a detailed review of the
program. 

Ambitious mission 

Three years ago, as the institute sought approval from the state
Board of Regents and federal funding from the Energy Department,
it outlined a mission it promised would turn UNLV into a leading
think tank and academic authority on homeland security and place
it on the leading edge of anti-terrorism laboratory research.
The affiliation with UNLV was a major factor in securing the
federal money. 

The status today of its seven major objectives: 


+ The institute planned to create an academic program offering a
master's degree and eventually a bachelor's and a doctorate. 

Three years later no academic program exists. The institute
drifted away from its ties with the university. Its employees
have not produced reports or analysis typical of academic think
tanks. 


+ The institute planned to conduct laboratory research and
testing to create counterterrorism technology. 

Today, the institute's leaders cannot cite any advances in
technology. They do say the institute is working on a sensor
device to seek out snipers, doing infrared testing to detect
heat from a human body and studying electromagnetic waves that
measure energy from a nuclear blast. They also say the institute
has developed a research program for concealed weapons that can
see through walls. 


+ The institute said it would study psychological and social
ramifications of terrorism. 

It no longer has that as an objective. 


+ The institute planned to study the relationship between
terrorism and the Internet. 

That, too, is no longer an objective. 


+ The institute said it would team with the university's
outreach division to provide professional training and
continuing education credits to emergency workers in a terror
attack. 

The institute cut ties with the outreach division 16 months ago.
It says its biggest accomplishment is providing an eight-hour
course on terrorism awareness to 149 law enforcement and private
security officers. It also has participated in several other
short training programs, including one at University Medical
Center, involving small numbers of emergency workers. 


+ The institute planned to develop a microbial defense lab to
study organisms that have potential to be used as weapons of
mass destruction. 

That no longer is an objective. 


+ The institute pledged to serve as a forum for domestic
preparedness to encourage public discussion on homeland security
issues. 

That remains part of its mission. 

While the institute has not added any new objectives, the
institute did land a $500,000 contract from the Nevada
Commission on Homeland Security to study the state's
vulnerability to terrorism and natural disasters. Records show,
however, that the institute handed off the majority of that
work, about $387,000 worth, to a defense consulting firm
headquartered in New Mexico. 

That contract is indicative of the institute's operating method.
As federal money poured in to the institute under UNLV's name, a
large portion was paid out to contractors and security
consultants with ties to the Test Site. The man who spearheaded
the work on the vulnerability study for the New Mexico company,
James Sudderth, once ran counterterrorism operations for Bechtel
Nevada, the private firm that manages the Test Site. Sudderth is
now the deputy director of the institute. 

When asked to provide a list of accomplishments, the institute
named several federal research grants it said it had received.
But when pressed for details by the Sun, the institute admitted
misrepresenting some of those claims, as well as other claims
about its role in some university research projects. 

Thomas Williams, the institute's interim director, said that
even though the institute may have veered off course, "I think
we've been very successful in the last couple of years. You're
far from perfect when you start up. You make mistakes. You have
growing pains. But I'm feeling very positive about this
organization." 

Jerry Bussell, who served as Nevada's first homeland security
adviser from November 2002 to June 2004, doesn't share that
view. 

"What's over there now is not what it was supposed to be in any
way, shape or form," said Bussell who, after retiring, worked as
a paid consultant for the institute to help establish the
agency. "It was supposed to be an honest broker, an independent
voice assisting on the homeland security effort. But it has
fallen short of that. So far, the taxpayers are being cheated." 

UNLV also has fallen behind other universities that started
similar homeland security academic programs - a development that
Williams, a former senior government manager at the Test Site,
acknowledged was a setback for UNLV. 

"This hiccup is of concern because I think we've lost momentum,"
Williams said. "At the time we started, there were only two or
three universities that were offering these executive masters
courses. Now, there are probably 50 or 60 out there." 

UNLV President Carol Harter acknowledged that the academic end
has faltered. 

"We might have been slightly overambitious," she said. "But
academic programs take years to develop." 

Reid, however, is taking a dim view of the use of the federal
money. 

After the Sun described its findings to Reid, the senator said
he was "very concerned" that the institute may not be producing
what it promised. 

"Unless they have some deliverables that I can see, they're not
going to get any more money," Reid said. "I don't want this to
be a boondoggle or a waste of taxpayer money. They've got to do
something rather than just sit down and talk to each other." 

Shrouded in secrecy 

The institute is a product of the nation's mobilization after
9/11 to prevent future terrorist attacks. 

Reid envisioned that it would feed off the national resources
being poured into a high-tech counterterrorism training facility
the senator championed at the Test Site, 65 miles northwest of
Las Vegas. 

The list of those who have either worked or have been associated
with the institute over the past three years looks like the cast
of a Hollywood spy thriller. 

At the top of the list is Lee Van Arsdale, the institute's
founding director, a former Delta Force commander and Defense
Department counterterrorism chief who left 16 months ago, 

The roster includes a former Central Intelligence Agency
operative who said he worked undercover in 101 countries, as
well as a special forces expert involved in the ill-fated rescue
attempt of the American hostages in Iran, a counterterrorism
consultant who helped design security for American embassies in
Moscow and Beijing, an engineer who has worked on imaging
mechanisms that can see through walls and a former United
Nations weapons inspector. 

But their work is shrouded in secrecy. 

The institute refused, for example, to provide details about a
$550,000 contract it said it obtained to design a
counterterrorism curriculum for a "major entertainment and
resort complex." It wouldn't even confirm information obtained
by the Sun that showed that the contract was with the Walt
Disney Co. Much of the work on the contract was turned over to
consultants. 

Even the institute's off-campus location gives rise to intrigue. 

Its rented offices and 600-square-foot technical research lab
are housed on two underground floors of the Alexander Dawson
Building, a security conscious facility at Flamingo Road and
Spencer Street that posts warnings that visitors are being
monitored by surveillance cameras. Individuals can enter the lab
area only by punching in a security code. 

Little is known about the institute within UNLV and the
university system. The agency offers no information, other than
its mission statement, on its Web Site, which hasn't been
updated since August. 

University Regent Steve Sisolak, who was among those who voted
to approve the institute three years ago, said he had difficulty
getting information from UNLV and pinning down Williams about
the institute's mission. 

"I have no idea what they're doing," Sisolak said. "They're
flying under the radar. Whatever they're doing is secretive in
nature. They don't want people to be aware of it." 

After inquiries by the Sun, Sisolak said he expects the
institute will be brought before the Board of Regents in August. 

"We want to find out what they've done with all the money they
got," Sisolak said. "I'm concerned that it's not doing what it
was approved to do. It was supposed to be an academic program,
and there's no academic program." 

Those involved in the homeland security effort here also have
trouble understanding what the institute has been trying to
accomplish. 

"I haven't seen where they fit in," said Clark County Emergency
Manager Jim O'Brien. "I haven't seen them participating in the
regular day-to-day emergency management and homeland security
preparedness activities." 

The institute also has failed to attract national attention. 

It is barely known outside the state by members of the National
Domestic Preparedness Consortium - a five-member group of
institutions considered the nation's leading providers of
training for emergency workers in situations involving weapons
of mass destruction. 

"While we are aware of the institute, we do not have enough
information about the organization to comment further regarding
its training programs and other homeland security-related
initiatives," Texas A University spokesman Jason Cook said. 

Texas A's National Emergency Response and Rescue Training Center
in College Station, Texas, specializes in helping government
agencies develop plans to address events involving weapons of
mass destruction. 

Fellow consortium member Louisiana State University, which
trains emergency personnel in biological incidents at its
Academy of Counter-Terrorist Education in Baton Rouge, La., also
doesn't know much about UNLV's program. 

LSU spokeswoman Jennifer Hughes said she spoke with three
academy directors at the university involved in counterterrorism
education and asked them about UNLV's institute. 

"One of our directors had heard of the institute but didn't know
what it was doing, and the other two said they had never heard
of it," Hughes said. 

Van Romero, vice president of research at another consortium
member, the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, said
the UNLV institute once provided the consortium with a useful
"train the trainers" curriculum. 

But Romero, the consortium's former chairman, said the institute
needs to develop some specialized expertise in homeland security
to establish a national reputation. Romero's university has a
research center that offers training in live explosives, such as
car bombs. 

"UNLV has some connection to the Test Site, so radiation
detection and monitoring is one thing I would look for them to
do," Romero said. "And I would look for them to do things like
security in casinos and at big events where there are lots of
people." 

Part of the reason why educators and emergency management
professionals cannot figure out the institute's role in
combating terrorism is that the institute itself is still
searching for an identity. 

"Over a year period, this organization may be completely
changed," Williams said. "We're trying to go where the
priorities are." 

Today, the institute has only two divisions, down from the six
it described in the plan approved by the Board of Regents. One
is the Office of Advanced Technologies, intended to perform
laboratory research related to homeland security and
counterterrorism. The other is the Office of Education, Training
and Readiness, designated primarily to provide training to
emergency workers and conduct seminars. 

Williams said the downsizing was deliberate and part of his
management style since assuming the reins from Van Arsdale, who
left in March 2005 to take a job as chief executive officer of
Triple Canopy Inc., a fast-growing security company based in
Virginia. 

"I'm trying to streamline the organization because, if you have
too many tentacles out there, you start losing control and
losing sight of what you're supposed to be doing," Williams
said. "Even though it looks like a much-reduced organization, a
lot of those functions may function well within just two
different business lines." 

Roles reversed 

When UNLV officials brought the idea of creating the institute
to the regents in May 2003, they trumpeted the academic side,
saying it would be part of the Graduate College, where it would
fall under the watchful eye of the university. 

Instead, it wound up as part of the UNLV Research Foundation, a
private and wealthy offshoot of the UNLV Foundation, the
university's chief fundraising arm. 

The Research Foundation, which was run by Williams at the time,
was supposed to play only a supporting role by promoting the
institute's commercial and nonacademic features. 

But as it turned out, the university ended up playing the
supporting role. 

Harter said the institute was put under the Research Foundation
simply because officials at the time thought that was the best
place for it. 

"We had many moving parts all at once," she said. "You're trying
to get it structured in a way that makes the most sense." 

Williams said the Research Foundation had the background and
experience to take the institute. 

"There wasn't a lot of base at the university to support the
wide diversity of programs we expected," he said. 

Bussell found those words troubling. 

"I have never understood why the institute was placed under the
Research Foundation," he said. "It was clearly defined by the
regents that it would be an integral part of the university,
linked at the hip." 

Since the Sun began inquiring about the institute's role at
UNLV, its leaders said they now intend to put it under the
university's wing, as originally planned. They also said they
plan to re-establish ties between the institute and the
educational outreach division. 

The master's program has been on hold since May of last year,
when it graduated a pilot class of 15 students, including
Sheriff Bill Young, all of whom received full $31,596
scholarships from the university. Records show that the pilot
program was underwritten in part by Bechtel Nevada. The company
provided UNLV with a $315,916 check to pay for several of its
executives to participate. 

The quality of the pilot program received mixed reviews. 

"Some of the professors were high quality and others were not,"
said Young, who added that overall he found the program
challenging. 

But Bussell, who was one of the instructors, said the curriculum
lacked a strong academic foundation. 

"At the time, it didn't seem to have the academic standards that
it needed," he said. "I recommended that it needed to be
significantly improved." 

Students, for example, received graduate credits for spending a
week observing how the Test Site deals with emergencies and
another week in Washington hearing presentations from Homeland
Security officials. One two-credit course listed in the catalog
is called "Cyber Security for non-Nerds." 

Public Administration Department Chairman Lee Bernick, who ran
the pilot master's program last year, acknowledged that
curriculum needs to be strengthened. 

"There were some very good things, and there were some things we
want to change," he said. "We want to structure it so it's more
traditionally academic." 

Bernick said collaborating with the institute was rocky at
times. 

"It was a learning process for them to understand what a
master's degree program should have in it," he explained. 

In hindsight, Williams said, both he and Van Arsdale learned a
lot in their dealings with academia. 

"We realized over time that the higher education side is a
different culture that neither one of us were used to," he said.
"They just don't have a business sense in terms of priorities,
speed and meeting deadlines." 

The pilot program went into its stall after the 2005 graduating
class when Bernick decided he did not have enough time to devote
to both his duties as chairman of the department and director of
the program. 

The university, Bernick said, has had a difficult time finding
his replacement, but it expects to hire someone this summer and
re-launch the program in January. 

Bernick conceded that UNLV might now be lagging behind other
universities in this fast-growing field, but added: "We'd rather
have a good product than a bad product." 

Something else missing at the institute is an effort to position
itself as a homeland security think tank. 

Bussell said he has not seen the institute conduct any scholarly
research on homeland security issues or publish any major
papers. 

"They should be a center of information to the outside world,"
he said. "They should be holding seminars and conferences and
doing some real scholarly work that can be applied to the
homeland security effort. That's the kind of stuff the community
needs." 

Van Arsdale said the academic side of the institute was
important to him when he was at the helm. 

"There are a lot of people doing a lot of things, but the
universities haven't been brought to bear here," he said. "I'm
proud of what we accomplished, but there's a lot of work
remaining to be done." 

First, however, the institute may need to clarify exactly what
it has accomplished. 

Exaggerated claims 

Institute officials acknowledged that they exaggerated the
institute's achievements in written information provided to the
Sun. 

In a four-page summary of its goals and accomplishments,
Williams listed several grants for projects totaling more than
$1.1 million that officials later admitted were never received. 

Those false claims included a $220,000 grant to develop a
"launched listening device," a $446,000 grant to produce a
surveillance camera and a $447,000 grant to work on a project
dubbed "vehicle borne improvised explosive device defeat." 

The summary also claimed that the institute had been teaming
with the UNLV College of Engineering's Transportation Research
Center to analyze the safety and risks of transporting
high-level nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. But when pressed,
Williams admitted the institute is not participating in the
project. 

Also on the list was a claim that the institute is working with
Qualcomm Inc., a wireless communications company based in San
Diego, on a project to improve the tracking of hazardous waste
shipments and states' response to accidents. 

But Williams said the institute is merely administering a
$992,000 Energy Department grant for the project and that the
actual campus research is being handled by the College of
Engineering. 

One area in which the institute has excelled is in providing
jobs and contracts to former Test Site executives, several of
whom worked with Williams when he was at the Test Site. 

Of the $8.9 million the institute has budgeted since its
inception, $3.1 million has been allocated to salaries and
fringe benefits. Another $2.8 million has been set aside for
consultants, who often have close ties to the institute's
managers. 

Van Arsdale and six of the 14 current salaried employees at the
institute came from Bechtel Nevada, which has a written
agreement with the institute to collaborate on funding requests
for federal research related to homeland security. 

Former Bechtel employees hold the key management positions at
the institute. Sudderth, who once headed Bechtel's
counterterrorism operations at the Test Site, was named deputy
director under Williams last month. Harry Bostic, a former top
counterterrorism lab researcher for Bechtel, runs the
institute's Office of Advanced Technologies. 

How Sudderth wound up as the No. 2 man at the institute is an
example of the nature of the organization. 

On Sept. 10, 2003, while he managed Bechtel's Counter Terrorism
Operations Support Project at the Test Site, Sudderth gave the
institute and UNLV a company check for $315,960 to pay for the
tuitions of Bechtel employees looking to participate in the
pilot master's program. 

By the time the class graduated in May 2005, Sudderth, a former
Delta Force member with extensive experience in counterterrorism
and special operations, had left Bechtel and was employed at
Keystone International Inc., a New Mexico-based private security
firm. 

While heading up Keystone's Las Vegas office, Sudderth helped
the company land a subcontract from the institute to do the
majority of the work on the $500,000 contract that the agency
had received from Nevada to study the state's vulnerability to
terrorism. 

Keystone, records show, also has done other work for the
institute, receiving a total of $680,000 over the last couple of
years. 

But Sudderth soon got restless at Keystone. 

While spearheading the vulnerability study for the institute, he
applied for the agency's deputy director's job. On May 15, less
than three weeks after the institute delivered the study to the
Homeland Security Commission, Sudderth was named to the post.
Keystone, meanwhile, still has an ongoing contract with the
institute. 

For months before he was hired, sources familiar with the
institute said, there was speculation within the agency that
Sudderth was coming on board. 

But Williams said Sudderth won the job fairly over 18 other
candidates. 

"I'd stack James Sudderth's qualifications up against anybody in
the United States," Williams said. "I'm glad we have him." 

Sudderth said he hopes to shape the institute into a real
resource for the community in the fight against terrorism. 

"I've got some strong feelings about what needs to be done in
Nevada to get us prepared," he said. 

His most ambitious project is to position the institute at the
center of plans to create a Terrorism Early Warning Group, a new
concept in homeland security aimed at improving intelligence
sharing between local, state and federal agencies. 

Sudderth said the institute, which has worked with Metro Police
early in the effort, hopes to tap into the state's share of
federal homeland security funding for the project, which will be
designed to create what he calls a "social network of trust"
among the various agencies. 

The institute, Sudderth said, also has applied for about $6
million in Department of Homeland Security funding to set up
counterterrorism training for local police. 

As the institute works to add some heft to its resume, Williams
defends the institute's practice of maintaining close ties to
his former Test Site associates. 

"It's a small world," he said. "The more you deal in this, the
more you find out that a lot of the same personalities have run
into each other over the years. 

"Although it may look like inside politics, I just think we're
trying to bring in the best in the business to get the job done
here." Jeff German is the Sun's senior investigative reporter.
He can be reached at 259-4067 or at german@lasvegassun.com.
Steve Kanigher can be reached at 259-4075 or at
steve@lasvegassun.com. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 54 AFP: India signs up for UN convention against nuclear terrorism -
     
 Sat Jun 17, 4:17 AM ET 
		 	 
NEW DELHI (AFP) - India has acceded to an international 
convention against nuclear terrorism drafted by the United 
Nations " /> , a government statement said. 

India's cabinet Friday gave its approval for signing and
ratifying the International Convention for the Suppression of
Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, the statement said.
 
By signing up, "India will strengthen its credentials as a
responsible partner in the fight against terrorism," said the
statement, issued late Friday.
 
The convention was adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly last April and opened for signature last September.
 
It is designed to strengthen the international legal system to
fight terrorism by providing the basis for transnational
cooperation "in the investigation, prosecution and extradition
of those who commit terrorist acts involving radioactive
material or a nuclear device," the statement said.
 
India and arch-rival Pakistan were amongst the first to sign up
for the US-led war against terror in the aftermath of the
September 11 attacks.
 
New Delhi is battling a number of insurgencies, most notably in
Kashmir
" /> .
 
India's parliament passed legislation in May last year banning
the proliferation of nuclear technology, seven years after the
South Asian giant shocked the world with a series of nuclear
tests.
 
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 55 Deseret News: Kanab rally targets Divine Strake
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Sunday, June 18, 2006                            

About 30 residents of Kanab rallied on Saturday to express their 
concerns over the federal government's plan to detonate 700-tons 
of non-nuclear explosives in the Nevada desert, about 130 miles 
northwest of St. George.

       "Some of the people who came had just moved to the area
and had no idea this was going on," said Karen Tobin, who
organized the meeting about the proposed blast called Divine
Strake. "We also had a lot of locals who have lived here for
decades come out to support us."

       Residents listened to St. George downwinder Michele
Thomas and Mike Empey, who represents Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah,
in southern Utah. A petition against the proposed test was also
signed by those who attended, Tobin said.

       The federal Defense Threat Reduction Agency postponed the
massive blas, first scheduled June 2 and then June 23 — after
the public and political representatives in Utah, Nevada and
Arizona raised numerous health and safety concerns.

       DTRA officials recently cited concerns that summer
lightning could detonate the explosive mix of ammonium nitrate
and fuel oil slurry. The agency plans to gather data about
ground motion and shock waves in hardened and deeply buried
targets from the experiment. Critics say the explosion would
loosen and release contaminants from previous nuclear tests
conducted near the proposed blast site

© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company

*****************************************************************
 56 Independent Boom and Bust: The nuclear age and the bikini age 
From a tiny island in the Pacific Ocean to the beaches of the
world: the summer of 1946 unleashed the power of mass
destruction - and mass distraction 

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington and John Lichfield in Paris 

Published: 17 June 2006 

The nuclear age
 
At precisely 9am on 1 July 1946, a huge orange yellow fireball
exploded in the sky above Bikini Atoll, 500ft above a fleet of
ships waiting like tethered goats before a tiger. Conducted by
the United States and codenamed Abel, it was the fourth atomic
explosion in history. And with it, a tiny slice of paradise in
the remote Pacific Ocean became a metaphor for the nuclear era.
 
These days, if you have a taste for exotic holidays and funds to
match, you may travel to this same north-western corner of the
Marshall Islands, now part of the Federated States of
Micronesia. There you may don a swimsuit - one or two pieces, it
does not matter - and enjoy some phenomenal scuba diving among
the ghostly sunken warships.
 
Or you may indulge a passion for game fishing. Or, if you are of
an indolent disposition, you may sunbathe in a setting described
thus by Condé Nast Traveller magazine not so long ago: "There
are not many places on earth that could look more like the
Garden of Eden". Sixty years ago however, Armageddon was a
better comparison.
 
How the name of Bikini Atoll became co-terminous with a
revolution in beachwear is a quirk of history - but an apposite
quirk nonetheless. If the swimwear bikini gave a new post-war
meaning to sexiness, power is its own kind of aphrodisiac. And
in the years between 1946 and 1958, when the US carried out 23
nuclear tests on the atoll, Bikini witnessed the greatest
displays of destructive military might on the planet.
 
They began with Operation Crossroads, a new series of nuclear
tests to develop the weapon used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki 11
months earlier. The first was Abel - the fourth explosion thus
far, after the original test at Alamogordo, New Mexico, in July
1945, and the two bombs dropped in anger on Japan that August.
With planned yields of around 20,000 kilotons, Abel and Baker
were twice as large as their predecessors. A dozen
decommissioned American and Japanese warships were moored nearby
to measure their effect.
 
In early 1946, the governor of the Marshall Islands had asked
the 167 inhabitants of Bikini to leave their home "temporarily",
so that the US could try out atomic bombs "for the good of
mankind and to end all world wars". Given that the Cold War
nuclear balance kept the peace for 50 years, that promise may be
said to have been kept. Not so however the promises to the
Bikinians. For two years they were shunted around the Marshalls,
scattered over 357,000 square miles of ocean. Once they almost
starved. Their way of life was effectively destroyed, and it
took an international outcry in 1947 for the US to treat them
decently.
 
Back in the US, Abel was causing much trepidation. A few years
later tourists would flock to Las Vegas to watch nuclear tests
in the Nevada desert from their hotel roof as they sipped their
cocktails. Back in late June 1946 however, some feared that
Operation Crossroads would unleash earthquakes and tsunamis.
Others predicted radioactive waves would sweep the US.
 
In the event, the first blast at Bikini, observed by armies of
American scientists, military specialists, analysts as well as
reporters from around the world, did relatively little damage.
Baker, the second explosion on 25 July, was a very different
matter. Detonated underwater, it sent every nearby vessel to the
bottom.
 
But the worst of the horrors visited on Bikini Atoll came in
1954, when the US began a new series of tests of the new-fangled
hydrogen bomb tests at the atoll. The "Bravo" test, on 1 March
that year, was reckoned to measure 13 megatons, more than 1,000
times as powerful as Hiroshima. That morning, inhabitants of the
atoll remembered, "two suns rose in sky". What fell back to
earth was gritty ash, white like snow, that irradiated everyone
and everything it touched.
 
By then the native Bikinians had been moved on yet again, to
Kili island in the southern Marshalls, where they nearly starved
and which became known as "prison island". In the late 1960s, a
clean-up programme began. The original inhabitants were awarded
$325,000 in compensation, and in 1974, the first families were
allowed to return to Bikini Atoll. Four years later they were
again evacuated after fresh tests showed an "incredible"
increase in levels of radioactive strontium-90 and cesium-137.
 
In a small act of compensation, the US agreed in 1985 to make
over the sunken warships to the people of Bikini, and these
provide some of the most spectacular underwater tourism
anywhere. The largest are the Second World War aircraft carrier
USS Saratoga, and the Nagato, the infamous flagship of Admiral
Yamamoto who masterminded the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbour.
 
The extraordinary blend of eco-tourism and war-tourism has given
Bikini a new life. You can breathe there, walk there, and swim
there - in fact you can do everything except eat the local food,
which remains contaminated.Meanwhile, the financial wrangling
continues. The Bikinians sought further compensation and in 2001
the US Nuclear Claims Tribunal awarded them $563m. The money has
not been forthcoming, and two months ago they filed a new claim
for $724m. In the meantime, a defiled Garden of Eden on the
other side of the world is there to be marvelled at, in a bikini
if you will. As for the obscenities of half a century ago, they
are not even a shadow in the sky.
 
The bikini age
 
Sixty years ago, a Frenchman sitting on a beach in the south of
France decided that less was more. All along the beach, young
women were rolling up, or down, their clunky, two-piece
swimsuits to expose themselves to the sun and to other people's
sons. It occurred to Louis Réard that money could be made from
navel-gazing.
 
A few days later, on 5 July 1946, at an open-air swimming pool
in Paris, he displayed the first truly skimpy swimming costume.
Réard called it the "bikini", hoping that his invention would be
as explosive as the US nuclear test on Bikini Atoll in the
Marshall Islands four days earlier. It was lucky for Réard that
the Americans chose that tiny atoll, rather than one of its many
neighbours. Bikini is a perfect name for a minuscule two-piece
swimsuit. It might have been harder to persuade women to wear
the Ailinglaplap or the Enewetak.
 
In truth, the bikini was originally a flop. It took 10 years for
the tiny garment to become successful, even in France. Réard, a
car engineer, who also worked for his mother's lingerie company,
never managed to make much money from it. He spent many years
before his death in 1984 pursuing manufacturers who had pirated
his invention.
 
The bikini found its place in - and became synonymous with - the
explosion of sexual liberation in the 1960s. Whether it was an
instrument for liberating women - from something other than
clothes - is disputed to this day. The bikini can be blamed for
the homogenisation of the female body; for the modern obsession
with a slender female form; for anorexia among teenage girls.
 
Its triumph runs, however, almost exactly parallel to the rise
of women's freedoms and rights. A few months before Réard
launched the bikini, French women won the right to vote for the
first time. A couple of years later, Simone de Beauvoir
published the seminal feminist work, The Second Sex.
 
Peggy Moffitt, one of the first American models to dare to pose
in a bikini, believes in retrospect that the garment should be
seen as an icon of liberation, not repression. "It was
prophetic," Moffitt says. "It was about a changing culture
throughout all society, about freedom and emancipation. It was
also a reaction against something particularly American: the
little boy snickering that women had breasts." There is nothing
uniquely American about that.
 
The pro and anti arguments can go around forever, but the bikini
is more than just an icon of male prurience. Most women remember
their first bikini, as they remember their first date - even if
they were three years old when they first wore one.
 
Modest, two-piece swimsuits existed before the bikini. They
became common in the US during the Second World War, when
Washington ordered savings on the amounts of scarce material
used in swimming costumes. Skimpier two-piece dance outfits were
seen in revues on Broadway from the 1920s. You can glimpse one
in the pre-war Marx Brothers movie A Night at the Opera.
 
There are even bikinis - or something very like them - on
Grecian urns and Roman frescoes from 1400BC onwards. The idea
is, after all, rather an obvious one. It seems to have been the
standard athletic costume for young Greek women in ancient times.
 
It was Réard who liberated the female navel for the first time.
His first bikini looks remarkably modern. The top is skimpy. The
bottom is cut away sharply up to the hips, almost like a
loincloth. Both parts were printed with a collage of newspaper
headlines.
 
Réard found he was unable to persuade any reputable model to
wear it in public. He hired a nude dancer called Micheline
Bernardini, who became the first woman ever to wear a bikini, in
a showing for the press at the fashionable Piscine Molitor in
the 16th arrondissement of Paris (since closed).
 
The garment was banned in Belgium, Italy and Spain, and -
implausibly - Australia. Bikinis were declared sinful by the
Vatican as late as 1964. By then, they had been popularised on
screen by Marilyn Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, and, above all,
Brigitte Bardot, in the 1956 movie And God Created Woman.
Everyone tends to forget that Brigitte Bardot also appeared nude
in this movie. There could be no better demonstration of the
power of the bikini - to draw attention to what it covers up.
 
Sales of bikinis in Britain and the US boomed only after 1960,
with the success of Brian Hyland's song "Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny
Yellow Polka Dot Bikini". The whole point of the lyrics -
written as late as 1960 - was that the bikini was still
something exciting, weird and devastatingly sexy. It also gave
the bikini a kind of apple-pie innocence, describing a young
woman "afraid to come out of the locker" in a bikini that she
"had worn for the first time that day".
 
In 1962, Ursula Andress brought a more feminist aura to the
bikini by emerging from the sea in a weapon-draped white bikini
in the James Bond movie Dr No. A Channel 4 survey named that
scene the sexiest scene in the history of cinema. Ms Andress
recently sold her 1962 bikini for Ł44,000.
 
The advent of the thong, topless bathing - and going in the
other direction - long shorts and cycling pants means that
bikinis no longer have a monopoly on summer fashion. The bikini
was once lost to mankind for more than 1,000 years. Could that
happen again? Not very likely. 

© 2006 Independent News and Media Limited 
*****************************************************************
 57 Salt Lake Tribune: Kanab rally decries possible risks of blast 

Article Last Updated: 06/18/2006 12:22:07 AM MDT 

Divine Strake: Locals say the Nevada weapons test may create a 
new group of downwinders 

By Mark Havnes The Salt Lake Tribune 

KANAB - St. George resident Michelle Thomas was born at the 
beginning of nuclear-weapons testing at the Nevada Test Site in 
1951. She has seen friends and family members die from what she 
attributes to the effects of radiation fallout from those 
explosions. 

She talked about her experiences - and those of her mother, 
who never trusted the government's assurances of safety - at a 
rally Saturday at the Kanab City Library. She opposes plans for 
a non-nuclear blast - known as Divine Strake - planned for the 
test site later this year. 

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency wants to detonate 700 
tons of ammonium nitrate and diesel fuel at the same site where 
the government conducted above-ground nuclear tests from 1951 
until 1962 and underground tests until 1992. 

The government in the 1990s tacitly acknowledged that fallout 
from the nuclear tests was responsible for causing cancer in 
some southwest Utah residents, and now residents are afraid the 
latest proposed blast would stir up and disperse contaminated 
soil over the region causing the same medical problems. 

The test, originally scheduled for June 2, has now been 
postponed until at least September. 

"I never wanted to be a poster child for the downwinders," 
said Thomas, referring to the group that has advocated for those 
affected by nuclear testing. "When I was a girl, I wanted to be 
a dance teacher but traded one profession for another." 

She now uses a wheelchair because of illnesses she believes 
was caused by 1950s-era fallout and said it is important for 
people to organize against September's blast. 

Thomas and the other 25 people at the Kanab rally fear such 
explosions will graduate to tests involving nuclear "bunker 
busters" designed to destroy underground enemy targets. 

"What is so ridiculous is that they [the government] said the 
nuclear testing [in the 1950s] was to protect us from Russian 
bombs, and our own government ended up bombing the hell out of 
us," Thomas said. "They told us it was safe, that it was a 
beautiful thing to look at. Many did, but I didn't." 

She said she is surprised that Utah, a state that claims to 
sanctify life and importance of families, is not expressing more 
opposition to Divine Strake. 

"Many think it is unpatriotic to speak against the 
government," she said. 

The rally was organized by Karin Tobin, who moved to Kanab 
from Connecticut six months ago when she learned of the proposed 
test. 

"We need to draw attention to the issue and get it canceled," 
she said. "We don't need another downwinders generation." She 
speculated that information gathered from earlier testing 
probably could be used to solve the riddles that Divine Strake 
is intended to answer. 

Michael Empey, the area field representative for Rep. Jim 
Matheson, D-Utah, who is opposed to the blast without assurances 
of its safety, said the National Nuclear Security Administration 
has withdrawn its Finding of No Significant Impact from the test 
- and that shows concerns over safety. 

He said while Matheson believes a conventional weapon is 
needed to destroy bunkers that contain command posts or weapon 
caches, the nuclear type of weapons the Divine Strake test could 
lead to are impractical. 

"Even generals in the field cannot conceive where to use the 
weapon," Empey said. "The danger to our troops and civilians is 
too great." 

He said the test's postponement will give people a window of 
opportunity to become more informed of the blast and to attend 
public hearings in St. George and Las Vegas that the Nuclear 
Security Administration has agreed to hold. Hearing dates have 
yet to be announced. 

"This is not just a southern Utah issue," said Empey. "This 
is a national issue." 

mhavnes@sltrib.com 

© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 58 Deseret News: No Nevada test blast for months, judge says
 
[deseretnews.com] 

Saturday, June 17, 2006                                  

By Ken Ritter

 Associated Press                                             

LAS VEGAS — A non-nuclear explosion expected to cast the first 
mushroom cloud over the Nevada desert in decades won't happen at 
least until September, a government lawyer told a federal judge 
Friday.

      The "Divine Strake" defense experiment "will not occur
due to weather reasons during July or August," Justice
Department lawyer Carolyn Blanco in Washington told U.S.
District Judge Lloyd George in Las Vegas during a telephonic
hearing.

       "We have agreed at this hearing to provide notice to the
court and plaintiff if this test is authorized to proceed,"
Blanco said.

       National nuclear Security Administration and the federal
Defense Threat Reduction Agency officials have cited concerns
that summer lightning could detonate 700 tons of explosive
ammonium nitrate and fuel oil slurry that the government plans
to pour into a huge pit for the blast. Designers said the blast
would be of the same material but some 280 times larger than the
bomb that destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City in 1995.

       Robert Hager, the Reno-based lawyer representing the
Winnemucca Indian Colony and Utah and Nevada "downwinders" who
earlier persuaded the judge to temporarily postpone the
experiment, worried the government might reschedule the blast
and provide short notice before going ahead.

       But George said he was satisfied there would be time to
hear legal and scientific arguments about whether the explosion
would kick up radioactive fallout left from atmospheric and
below-ground nuclear weapons tests. From 1951 to 1992 the
government conducted 928 such tests at the Nevada Test Site,
about 85 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

       Announcements about the blast — first scheduled for June
2 and then June 23 — raised complaints from Nevada and Utah
congressional representatives and rekindled fears of illness
among downwind residents in Nevada, Utah and Arizona, who
recalled government assurances that nuclear tests posed no risk.

       The federal government postponed the massive explosion to
allow time to answer legal and scientific questions about it
effects.

       The Defense Threat Reduction Agency said the Divine
Strake blast would produce data about ground motion and shock
waves about penetrating hardened and deeply buried targets.
Critics have called the planned blast a surrogate for a
low-yield nuclear "bunker-buster" bomb.
 			  		 		   
© 2006 Deseret News Publishing Company  
*****************************************************************
 59 Japan Times: Film depicts double A-bomb victims
 
Sunday, June 18, 2006

NAGASAKI (Kyodo) A new documentary depicts the agony of eight 
people who were exposed to both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic 
bombs.
 
  [News photo]   
  Nagasaki resident Tsutomu Yamaguchi, who appears in a new
documentary, speaks of experiencing both atomic bombs in August
1945.   

The film titled "Niju Hibaku" ("Double Irradiation") includes
the testimony of the eight, some of whom are now deceased. 

"We hope the inhumane nature of the atomic bomb will be conveyed
to the world beyond differences in race and language," the
producers said in a statement.
 
There are practically no data, both at the central and local
government level, on how many people were exposed to both of the
1945 blasts.
 
"I wanted to ask the question why the atomic bomb was dropped
twice," said Hidetaka Inazuka, 55, a TV producer who planned and
made the documentary.
 
In the film, the main character, Tsutomu Yamaguchi, 90, of
Nagasaki, speaks of the horror of being exposed to the two
nuclear blasts.
 
"I thought I had been chased by the mushroom cloud from
Hiroshima to Nagasaki," he said.
 
Yamaguchi, who worked as an engineer at the Nagasaki shipyard of
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd., sustained severe burns from
the first explosion on a street about 2 km from ground zero when
he was in Hiroshima on business.
 
Yamaguchi returned to Nagasaki two days later by train and was
exposed to the second blast, this time in his office about 3 km
from the epicenter.
 
The film includes comments by citizens and students of the
United States, France and China who have heard of people exposed
to the two bombs. 

The film will be shown in Nagasaki, Osaka, Tokyo and other
cities this summer.

 The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved 

*****************************************************************
 60 FOX: Non-Nuclear Test Postponed Again

12 Boise - 

Boise, Idaho - A non-nuclear explosion, called the Divine Strake, 
expected to cast the first mushroom cloud over the Nevada desert 
in decades has been postponed again.  The bomb was supposed to go 
off at an underground tunnel at the Nevada nuclear test site late 
this month.  A government lawyer told a federal judge Friday the 
event won't occur due to weather reasons during July or August.  
Now the date looks like it will be sometime in September.  Many 
downwinders, who were affected by nuclear fallout from testing 50 
years ago, are from Emmett and have been fighting the test 
explosion.   

.gif">    All content © Copyright 2000 - 2006 WorldNow and KTRV.
All Rights Reserved.







*****************************************************************
 61 Sydney Morning Herald: Group to go to Canberra over nuke dump 

www.smh.com.au

June 19, 2006 - 5:14AM

A delegation of indigenous women and environmentalists will
visit Canberra this week to voice concerns over federal
government plans for a nuclear waste dump in the Northern
Territory.

Traditional owner Kath Martin said the women had decided to go
to Canberra on Wednesday after Federal Science Minister Julie
Bishop had rejected several invitations to visit the proposed
sites.

"We wanted Julie Bishop to come and see that these sites are not
in the middle of nowhere," Ms Martin said.

"There are communities living and gathering bush tucker and
water nearby.

"We are concerned that we are not being given the full story
about safety and that one day our country might become an
international waste dump."

The delegation has arranged to meet a number of opposition MPs
and the coalition senator for the Northern Territory, Nigel
Scullion.

A meeting with Ms Bishop has not yet been scheduled.

Anti-nuclear campaigner Nat Wasley, from the Arid Lands
Environment Centre in Alice Springs, said he had visited some of
the proposed sites and could not believe the government was
considering putting a nuclear dump on any of them.

"The sites are all obviously inappropriate and chosen purely for
political, not scientific reasons," Mr Wasley said.

The federal government is considering three sites in the NT for
the waste dump: Harts Range, 100km north-east of Alice Springs,
Mt Everard, also in central Australia, and Fisher's Ridge, near
Katherine. 	

© 2006  AAP

Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 62 Bradenton Herald: What's the cost of contamination?
: Plume's effect on Tallevast property values at issue

06/17/2006 | 

 NICHOLAS AZZARA Herald Staff Writer 

MANATEE - Exactly what is the value of a home with a giant plume
of chemical contamination beneath it? 

That's the latest topic some Tallevast residents and Lockheed
Martin Corp. could do battle over. 

Lockheed recently unveiled its Property Value Protection Program
to help Tallevast property owners understand the fair market
value for their homes and land. The program attempts to "provide
peace of mind about the value" of Tallevast homes, according to
Lockheed. 

FOCUS Advocacy group President Laura Ward questioned the value
of the program and said Lockheed has fallen short of what they
should be willing to offer. 

"It would appear that we would not expect to get a true value
for what our property is worth at this point," Ward said. "What
value is this program to us at this point? 

The program is being handled by Cartus, a Connecticut relocation
company with offices in Sarasota. If a homeowner decides to use
the program, he or she may choose two private property
appraisers from a Cartus-supplied list. The fair market value of
the home is figured by taking the average of the two appraisals,
so long as the higher value is not more than 10 percent of the
lower value. 

If the appraisals differ by more than 10 percent, a third
appraiser will be contracted and an average of the two higher
appraisals will be considered fair market value. 

Also, if a home sells for less than the fair market value within
180 days of the appraisal, Lockheed will pay the difference,
less the estimated seller expenses. 

Appraisal and inspection costs are covered under the program.
For the next five years, the program will be available to the
owners of about 200 parcels located atop a 200-acre plume of
chemical contamination. The program also applies to some parcels
located outside the plume. 

"Lockheed Martin has listened to those in the community who have
expressed concerns about the potential impact of the
environmental cleanup on their property values," said Lockheed
spokeswoman Gail Rymer. 

Later, she added, "We are trying to answer residents' questions
to best of our ability and we want to continue working with them
in restoring their faith in the land and the water." 

The program does not interfere with residents' rights to sue
Lockheed over the pollution. 

The 11-member Tallevast residents' advocacy group, Family
Oriented Community United Strong, received information on the
program on Thursday night, but others in the area received the
information earlier this month. 

Tallevast residents do not know whether their homes worth have
been devalued, and no group members have tried to sell their
homes since the contamination was discovered in 2000, Ward said. 

Ward said that if a typical Tallevast home is appraised at
around $150,000, the homeowner could not find a similarly-sized
home elsewhere in Manatee or Sarasota for that amount. 

"When you're looking at the cost of homes and property in
Manatee County, we're really going to have to step back and look
at what's being offered to us," Ward said. "The program, as far
as I can see, doesn't offer the community anything near the
appropriate price for us to be able to relocate in Manatee or
Sarasota county." 

• Offers payment for the difference, if any, between the
property's actual sale price and the appraised fair market value
calculated as if there were no groundwater pollution. 

• Provides assistance, if desired, with residential seller
support services such as appraisals, home inspections, brokerage
service and home marketing assistance. 

• Supports continued community confidence that neighborhood
property values will not be adversely affected by the impacted
groundwater associated with the former Loral American Beryllium
Company site, for which Lockheed Martin has taken
responsibility. 

*****************************************************************
 63 reviewjournal.com: New look at nuke waste issue urged
 
Jun. 17, 2006

Diaz completing 10 years as NRC chief    

By STEVE TETREAULT <br/>STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
	
WASHINGTON -- The departing chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission said Friday that leaders should re-examine policies 
for nuclear waste and radioactive material can remain stored 
safely at power plants for years in the meantime.
 
"The country needs to look at this entire process," said Nils 
Diaz, who is completing 10 years as commissioner at the federal 
agency that regulates nuclear power and nuclear waste, and the 
handling of nuclear materials. He has been principal executive 
officer since 2003.
 
Diaz said he continues to support geologic disposal for nuclear 
waste. But as far as what exactly would be stored at an 
underground repository, "there is a real need to provide some 
answers."
 
When Diaz joined the NRC in 1996, the focus was on burial of 
highly radioactive spent fuel rods from power plants, and the 
Department of Energy was preparing to put forward Yucca Mountain 
as a repository site. 

More recently, the Bush administration and key members of 
Congress have promoted reprocessing technologies, which would 
alter the composition of the waste while extracting more energy 
from the spent fuel.
 
The chairman of the Senate energy committee, Sen. Pete Domenici, 
R-N.M., has suggested Yucca Mountain be recast at least in part 
as a destination for reprocessed fuel, which could be smaller in 
volume and less toxic. 

Diaz said he did not expect progress on nuclear waste policy
during an election year. 

"I am hopeful that by next year there will be a much clearer
picture," he said. "There are many people who realize a solution
has to be put in place."	
 
Diaz said there is consensus that waste from military nuclear
weapons production should be first in line for disposal. Beyond
that is less clear, he said.
 
In the meantime, Diaz said radioactive spent fuel can continue
to be stored safely at nuclear power reactors. 

"I am a firm believer that civilian nuclear waste at reactors is
safe right now in spent fuel pools and dry casks and can be
safely stored for a number of years," he said. 

While the Energy Department continues to work on Yucca Mountain,
the program has been delayed for eight years and some experts
say it could be another decade at least before it can open.

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
 64 Herald Tribune: Tallevast offered help 
                
 By CORY SCHOUTEN
 
cory.schouten@heraldtribune.com

MANATEE COUNTY -- Residents of Tallevast worry that the
ground-water pollution in their neighborhood is depressing the
value of their homes.

So the corporation responsible for cleaning up the mess has
offered to make up the difference if residents aren't able to
sell their properties or refinance at fair market value.

Lockheed Martin said Friday it will pay residents if they can't
sell their homes at appraised values. The program, which
includes assistance with home inspections and appraisals, will
last through June 2011.

"There's no current evidence there's a problem with homes
selling at fair market value," said Gail Rymer, a spokeswoman
for Lockheed. "But it's a concern raised by the residents, so
we've put this program in place."

Residents like Wanda Washington, vice president of community
group FOCUS, are skeptical. She says the program won't address
the real problems.

"It's a joke," she said. "Pretty much they have killed our
dream."

The dream, she said, was building an improved Tallevast
community where homes would be worth at least the county's
median value. Now she doesn't see how that will be possible.

"You can't put an appraisal value on a dream," Washington said.
"They're not listening to us."

A flier for the new program, dubbed Tallevast Property Value
Protection Program, says it's designed "to provide peace of mind
about the value of your property and the stability of your
neighborhood."

For decades, an American Beryllium plant polluted soil and
ground water in the community of about 100 homes east of the
Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport.

American Beryllium operated for nearly 40 years before Lockheed
Martin bought it in 1996 and shut down the plant.

Lockheed later sold the property, but not before discovering
soil and ground-water pollution on and around the site. In 2000,
Lockheed notified county and state officials about the pollution.

But residents, many of whom were not hooked up to county water
lines and relied on well water, were not told of the problem
until nearly four years later.

Lockheed is conducting tests to determine the extent of the
pollution, but the company has said it could take 20 years to
clean up the community. 

Last modified: June 17. 2006 6:00AM 
*****************************************************************
 65 The Dispatch: Olin Ends Bottled H2O

 Thursday, June 15, 2006
 By 

Gilroy - Road flare manufacturer Olin Corporation plans to stop
providing free bottled water over the next month to hundreds of
households between Gilroy and Morgan Hill.

The move, expected for more than a year, comes as the company
prepares to release a study about its role in creating a
9.5-mile plume of perchlorate contamination stretching south
from its former Tennant Avenue plant. The company has argued
increasingly in recent months that perchlorate, a sodium that
can cause thyroid dysfunction in high enough levels, could have
come from other sources.

Olin notified 1,200 households at the beginning of the month
that their bottled water shipments may end in coming weeks.

Between 600 and 800 households, most of them lying on the edges
of the plume, are expected to lose their supply by the end of
next month, according to Olin project manager Rick McClure.

In May 2005, the State Water Resources Control Board ruled that
Olin could discontinue water shipments to homes with water
supplies found to have perchlorate levels of 6 parts per billion
or less over four straight quarters.

"I think this is good news for the people," McClure said. "They
want to be reassured that their water is safe."

But he urged residents to have their water tested for other
harmful substances such as nitrates, which Olin measured at
above-minimum safety levels in numerous wells in the last year.

Since the perchlorate plume stretching from its former plant was
discovered in 2003, the company has provided bottled water at a
monthly cost of $65,000 - or more than $2 million over the life
of the program.

The company plans to provide a two-week window before phasing
out the shipments for hundreds of households in the next four
weeks. The first letters are expected to begin arriving early
next week.

Sylvia Hamilton, a San Martin resident and chair of the
Perchlorate Community Advisory Group, said the decision has been
a long time coming.

"One of the good things about it is that they'll be giving
people two weeks so that they have time to check it out and make
sure the data from the samplings is accurate," Hamilton said.

"Certainly the regional (water) board will need time to check
out all the data. I'm very pleased that they're giving some time
so the residents can make sure they are being correctly
terminated. That's good news."

The company plans to release a major "feasibility" study at the
end of the month detailing what it believes are the sources of
perchlorate contamination in the area, along with potential
methods for clean-up. McClure would not comment on the substance
of the report before its official release.

In recent months, the company has sought to pin some portion of
existing contamination on a variety of unrelated sources,
including local mushroom farms. Meanwhile, Olin representatives
have argued against the need for extensive clean-up based on
claims that the natural flow of groundwater is lowering
perchlorate levels.

For the moment, regulators at the Central Coast Water Quality
Control Board are retaining a healthy dose of skepticism.

"Exactly how much of the clean-up they're responsible for is
what we're trying to address," said Hector Hernandez, a water
board engineer. "They contend some of the contamination was
caused by other sources. … Until they can prove that other
sources are contributing to the impact, we're assuming it's
Olin's."

  Serdar Tumgoren
	Serdar Tumgoren, Senior Staff Writer, covers City Hall for The
Dispatch. Reach him at 847-7109 or stumgoren@gilroydispatch.com.
  
*****************************************************************
 66 Daily Herald: Uranium mines to reopen in Utah, other states
              
Saturday, June 17, 2006
                
The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY -- International Uranium Corp. has announced that
it intends to begin reopening its mines in the western states,
including its Henry Mountain property west of Blanding in
southeastern Utah.

"We've been considering reopening our mines for a couple of
years now," said Ron Hochstein, president of International
Uranium of Vancouver, British Columbia. "And with uranium now
trading around $43 a pound -- the highest it's ever been -- the
economics are right for us to start producing again."

International Uranium holds properties on the Colorado Plateau,
the Arizona Strip between the Grand Canyon and Utah's border and
in the Henry Mountains.

The company will begin mining immediately on the Colorado
Plateau. Production on its Henry Mountain property is expected
to start late next spring, after the company acquires state
permits, Hochstein said.

"Once we have the Henry Mountain property in full production
we'll probably be employing about 500 miners there," he said
this week.

International Uranium anticipates its properties in Arizona will
be online by late summer 2007.

Ore from International Uranium's mines will be stockpiled at its
White Mesa mill south of Blanding until late next year, when
processing can begin.

Although there has been a lack of raw ore to process in recent
years, International Uranium kept its mill operating by
periodically processing waste containing small quantities of
uranium. Much of that material comes from the cleanup of old
nuclear-weapon research and production sites.

During the first year of mining and milling, International
Uranium projects it will produce about 3.4 million pounds of
refined uranium and 5.9 million pounds of vanadium., which is
often alloyed with steel and also has nuclear applications.

Susan White, mining program coordinator at the Utah Division of
Oil, Gas and Mining, said International Uranium could have its
permit within six months.

She said that in the past year, the state has granted six
permits for uranium exploration, with nine more applications
under review.

"Prior to those permits, there hadn't seen much activity for
years," she said.
 This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page D6. 				   			
			
Copyright © 2006 Daily Herald and Lee Enterprises
*****************************************************************
 67 Japan Times: Suit seeking closure of nuke waste disposal plant refused
 
Saturday, June 17, 2006

 Suit seeking closure of nuke waste disposal plant refused 
AOMORI (Kyodo) The Aomori District Court on Friday turned down a
demand by a citizens' group that the government rescind its 1990
approval for Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd. to operate a low-level
radioactive waste disposal plant in the village of Rokkasho,
Aomori Prefecture.
 
In handing down the ruling -- the first on the safety of an
underground nuclear facility -- presiding Judge Norio Saiki
dismissed claims by the citizens that radioactive material may
leak from the plant, and mostly accepted the state's argument
that the plant is safe. 

In the suit, filed in 1991, the plaintiffs -- 138 citizens --
had claimed that the state, before approving the operation of
the plant, did not check the risk of radioactive leakage that
may occur from groundwater erosion, a major earthquake or the
possibility of a jet fighter crashing into it.
 
"Even if the facility gets eroded and radioactive material leaks
in the future, the amount of exposure to citizens is too small"
to cause any harm to their health, Saiki said. 

The judge also said that of the 138 citizens, only 16 who reside
in Rokkasho are eligible as plaintiffs.
 
The plant -- the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Center --
began operating in 1992 as part of a nuclear fuel-cycle complex
in a village with a uranium enrichment plant and a spent nuclear
fuel reprocessing plant. 

The citizens opposed to the complex have filed a series of
lawsuits over each plant.
 
In the 1991 suit, the group claimed that the concrete wall of
the facility may be eroded by groundwater, eventually leading to
leakage of radioactive material.
 The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved 

*****************************************************************
 68 Monterey County Herald: Energy contract up for grabs

| 06/18/2006 | 

UC lab expected to join with corporate partners on bid

 By ERIC STERN The Sacramento Bee 

SACRAMENTO - Last year, the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory demolished an Olympic-sized swimming pool that the
staff had been using for fun since the 1950s. 

The pool was designed as a training facility for pilots when the
lab was a naval air station. 

Officials at the nuclear weapons lab determined that the cost of
continued upkeep and replacing the aging pool wasn't a good use
of taxpayer dollars. It was a culture shift at the University of
California-run lab, which has been under pressure by Congress
for overruns and delays on a multibillion-dollar superlaser. 

UC has operated the historic labs in Livermore and Los Alamos,
N.M., since their inception. But after concerns in recent years
about security lapses and financial irregularities, the U.S.
Department of Energy has forced the university to compete for
the lab management contracts. 

UC joined the Bechtel engineering company and other firms to
beat out a University of Texas team last year to continue
running the Los Alamos lab -- seen as a major victory in
maintaining UC's status as a pre-eminent research school. 

Competition for the Lawrence Livermore lab begins this summer.
The contract expires Sept. 30, 2007. 

On the eve of the bidding process, a handful of regents from
UC's governing board traveled Thursday to tour the high-security
campus in Livermore. Once spread across rural ranchland, the
square mile of lab buildings is now tucked in the middle of a
Bay Area boomtown rimmed by the Altamont windmills. 

A formal decision to enter the competition has not been made,
but UC is expected to submit a bid by joining forces with
corporate partners as it did to retain the Los Alamos contract.
Regents Chairman Gerald Parsky said UC's potential partners --
with ''strong business and facility-management experience'' --
should be dedicated to the lab's research mission. 

''The university will keep science and research as the
cornerstone of this great lab,'' Parsky said. 

With a $1.7 billion annual budget and about 8,500 employees,
Lawrence Livermore is a ''crown jewel of American science,''
said lab director George Miller. 

The lab, named after UC-Berkeley physicist Ernest O. Lawrence,
has expanded from its atomic-bomb beginnings in 1952 to work on
climate change, medical breakthroughs and space dust. 

After the Sept. 11 attacks, homeland security projects took
center stage. Nuclear technologies for measuring radiation are
being converted into detection systems for cargo shipping
containers at ports and baggage screening at airports. 

Lawrence Livermore scientists have worked with UC-Davis
researchers to develop a more rapid test for foot-and-mouth
disease in cattle. 

The lab is planning a biohazard facility on the site to study
micro-organisms, and is eyeing another near Tracy. A community
watchdog group, Tri-Valley CARES, has sued to slow down the
process, and a federal appeals court is reviewing the group's
request for more environmental studies. 

The big-ticket item for the lab remains the nuclear stockpile
and determining if any aging weapons are duds. 

Explosive testing has been banned since 1993, and the lab was
tasked in 1997 with building a superlaser that can mimic a
nuclear detonation for scientists to study. A new, stadium-sized
facility houses a maze of laser beams that lead to a giant,
suspended sphere. 

However, congressional auditors have slammed the fusion project
for being more than six years behind schedule and likely to pass
$4 billion in costs. The original price tag was $1.2 billion. 

Ron Cochran, the lab's executive officer, said the management
team has been switched out and the project is meeting benchmarks
for experiments to begin in 2009. ''We've been on track since
2000,'' he said. 

*****************************************************************
 69 Tennessean: Certain Y-12 workers may get benefits faster -
State briefs

Nashville, Tennessee - Saturday, 06/17/06 - Tennessean.com

OAK RIDGE 

Some sick Tennessee nuclear-weapon workers may soon be getting
the federal help they've been seeking.

A scientific advisory board unanimously recommended Friday that
the government give workers from the Y-12 nuclear-weapon plant
in Oak Ridge automatic benefits under a five-year-old program.

Getting automatic benefits means the workers would not have to
go through a long and often frustrating process in which
officials try to estimate how much radiation they were exposed
to on the job.

Under the program, workers get $150,000 plus medical benefits.
Workers' survivors are eligible for the lump sum payment only.
Friday's recommendation by the Advisory Board on Radiation and
Worker Health covers some workers at Y-12 from 1948 to 1957.
The workers must have cancer linked to radiation. They also must
have worked in buildings where they were exposed to thorium or
worked around the facility's cyclotron, an accelerator involved
in making isotopes.

— ASSOCIATED PRESS

  Copyright © 2006, tennessean.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 70 KnoxNews: Y-12 compensation urged

Board: Sick workers should get benefits automatically

By NANCY ZUCKERBROD, Associated Press 
                                
June 17, 2006
                                  
WASHINGTON - Some sick Tennessee nuclear weapons workers may soon 
be getting the federal help they've been seeking. A scientific 
advisory board unanimously recommended Friday that the government 
give workers from the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge 
automatic benefits under a five-year-old program. 
			 			
Getting automatic benefits means the workers would not
have to go through a lengthy and often frustrating process in
which officials try to estimate how much radiation they were
exposed to on the job. 

Under the program, workers get $150,000 plus medical benefits.
Workers' survivors are eligible for the lump sum payment only. 
Friday's recommendation by the Advisory Board on Radiation and
Worker Health covers some workers at Y-12 from 1948 to 1957. 

The workers must have cancer linked to radiation. They also must
have worked in buildings where they were exposed to thorium or
worked around the facility's cyclotron, an accelerator involved
in making isotopes. 

The board's recommendation follows a previous one that resulted
in automatic compensation for people who worked at Y-12 in the
mid-1940s. 

In addition, uranium enrichment workers at the Oak Ridge nuclear
reservation were granted automatic compensation. 

Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt makes the final
decision on compensation. He is expected to go along with the
board's recommendation. 

Tennessee Republican Sens. Bill Frist and Lamar Alexander sent a
letter to the board earlier this month urging automatic
compensation. 

"Y-12 was among our nation's first nuclear production facilities 
and began operating at a time when there was very limited 
knowledge about the effects of radiation exposure and little or 
no monitoring of workers," the senators wrote.
 					
Copyright 2006, Associated Press. All rights reserved.                                                               

© 2006 - Knoxville News Sentinel
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************