*****************************************************************
08/31/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.207
*****************************************************************
   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 [NYTr] I Am a Curious Yellowcake: The Black Op Behind Plamegate
2 [southnews] CIA used WMD search to try to justify Iraq war
3 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Iraq mess not critics' fault 
4 IPS-English GULF: Conference on nuclear proliferation to be
5 IPS-English POLITICS:: Diplomacy Intensifies on Iran's Nuke
6 [NYTr] Can the Iran Nuke "Crisis" be Defused?
7 Security UN Receives UN Watchdog's Report On Iran's Nuclear Activiti
8 [NYTr] Iran: France Insists on Talks; US Howls for Sanctions
9 IRNA: US unilateralism on Iran N-issue a "misassessment" - Greenstoc
10 IRNA: Report: EU to continue talks with Iran 
11 IRNA: US must stop meddling in Iran's affairs - UK daily
12 IRNA: Solana proposes meeting with Larijani before UN deadline expir
13 IRNA: EC chairman hopes ambiguities on Iran's nuclear issue will be
14 Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: No Doubt As to Iran's Intentions
15 US: Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: U.N. Must Now Focus on Sanctions
16 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Defies U.N. Deadline on Enrichment
17 Guardian Unlimited: The Next Steps in Iran Dispute
18 Guardian Unlimited: European Nations Will Try Again on Iran
19 Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: Unanimity Not Necessary on Iran
20 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Warns Iran Anew on Nuclear Program
21 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Ignores Powers, U.N. on Enrichment
22 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Holds Firm on Right to Nuke Program
23 Guardian Unlimited: Last-Ditch Meeting on Iran Scheduled
24 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Welcomes Showdown on Deadline Day
25 Guardian Unlimited: Iran 'united' in face of nuclear deadline
26 BBC NEWS: Iran defiant on nuclear deadline
27 AFP: EU seeks path out of Iranian nuclear impasse 
28 AFP: France still hopes Iran will agree to enrichment freeze - FM -
29 IRIB PERSIAN News: IRI intitled to nuclear technology 
30 AFP: Iran defiant as nuclear deadline expires
31 AFP: Iran defiant as nuclear deadline expires 
32 AFP: UN says Iran fails to stop uranium enrichment
33 AFP: Iran seen having problems with nuclear program 
34 AFP: Iran faces sanctions risk 
35 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] China's leverage   
36 Korea Herald: Nuke test worries cloud U.S. talks   
37 US: Guardian Unlimited: Bush Says U.S. in 'Ideological Struggle'
38 US: BBC: Bush pledges 'terror war' victory
39 AU ABC: Shoalhaven free from nuclear power in short term. 
40 IRNA: Envoy urges Japan to play wider role in resolving nuclear issu
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
41 [NukeNet] UK: Energy protesters blockade nuclear power station
42 US: NRC: Atomic Safety &Licensing Board Evidentiary Hearing on Vermo
43 US: NRC: In the Matter of: All Licensees Identified in Attachment 1 
44 US: Kansas City Star: U.S. not ready to boost reliance on nuclear po
45 US: San Luis Obispo Tribune: PG to appeal Diablo ruling
46 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Find
47 US: Green Bay Press-Gazette: Nuke plant looks into pipes for radiati
48 US: Palm Beach Post: FPL reports radioactive element in reactor pond
49 US: Cape Cod Times: Nuclear plant judge bows out 
50 US: PRN: TXU Corp. Announces Plan for Additional Nuclear Power 
51 SNA: Bulgaria's Nuke Reopens Unit After Repairs
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
52 US: PRN: State Police, NRC Searching For Two Stolen Nuclear Gauges 
53 US: WSJ: Bookshelf: Dangerous Merchandise - Gabriel Schoenfeld
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
54 [du-list] Eos report: UN priorities for investigating uranium
55 The Australian: Report highlights nuclear risk, says Greenpeace | | 
56 US: NRC: [Docket No. PRM-40-29] Petition denial to T. Hee
57 US: Journal Gazette: No bomb tests at Indiana quarry
58 US: reviewjournal.com: Nuclear exercise successful
59 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Divine Strake blast won't be detoured to Indi
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
60 US: Sydney Morning Herald: ALP members 'against nuclear expansion' -
61 BBC: Cumbria prepares for life after Sellafield
62 Letters: Response to Allison MacFarlane's Article
63 US: AU ABC: Darwin 'only port' for Honeymoon uranium exports. 
64 US: UPI: NRC, DoE feud over nuke waste
65 Whitehaven News: Nuclear-scrap firm plans to create up to 30 jobs
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
66 Charlotte Observer: S.C. defense firm to pay $1.8 million to U.S. to
67 Occupational Hazards: Beating the Heat at Hanford
68 DOE: Energy Department Announces Creation of New Health, Safety 
69 Hanford News: Sen. Cantwell to seek funds for anti-terrorism researc
70 Tri-City Herald: DOE combines 2 safety-related offices 
71 Carlsbad Current-Argus: Next Step: Community Discussion 
72 lamonitor.com: DOE recasts safety bureau 
73 DOE: Extension of Comment Period on the Draft Site-Wide Environmenta
74 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
75 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] I Am a Curious Yellowcake: The Black Op Behind Plamegate
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 04:51:10 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Counterpunch - Aug 30, 2006
http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff08302006.html

I Am a Curious Yellowcake

The Armitage Confession & the Niger Problem

By DAVE LINDORFF

Now that Dick Armitage has admitted to being the initial source of
right-wing columnist Robert Novak's news story outing Valerie Plame as a
covert CIA agent and wife of former ambassador Joseph Wilson, it's
important to remember what this story is really all about.

The mainstream media has focused on the scandal as a whodunit, all about
White House leaks and journalists' unidentified sources, but the real issue
has largely been left unaddressed, namely: Why did the White House go to
such lengths to try to attack and discredit Wilson, a career diplomat?

To answer that question we have to go back to 2002 and the march to war in
Iraq, and to 2003, when the Bush administration was starting to take the
heat for its evident failure to find any "weapons of mass destruction" in
the defeated land of Iraq, and for the fiasco of the occupation, which was
becoming obvious.

As I wrote in Barbara Olshansky's and my book, The Case for Impeachment
(St. Martin's Press, May 2006):

  "the Bush-Cheney administration, which had its sights set on Baghdad and
  'regime change' from the day it took office, was by 2002 well on the way
  to invading Iraq, and was only looking for ways, to borrow from the
  Downing Street memo, to 'fix the facts' so as to win public support for
  war. The game plan was to make Saddam Hussein look scary to Americans,
  and what better way to scare people than to say that this bloody
  dictator was trying to get The Bomb?"

This propaganda goal was accomplished with the help of a crude forgery of
documents which were presented as solid evidence of such an effort. The
documents-supposedly signed letters of intent to ship 400 tons of uranium
ore from Niger in Africa to Iraq, bearing the signature of Niger's mining
minister-had initially been provided to the White House by the sycophantic
and obliging Italian Prime Minister, S. Berlusconi, and his chief of
intelligence, Nicolo Pollari, back in October 2001. The documents were
immediately spotted by the CIA and the State Department's own intelligence
office as forgeries-the minister whose signature appeared on the sale
documents had been out of office for years by the time of the signing date.

This is where the plot thickens, though. A team of investigative reporters
in Italy, working for the respected newspaper La Repubblica, learned that a
group of people, allegedly including Michael Ledeen, Defense Department
Undersecretary for Policy Douglas Feith, Defense Intelligence Agency Middle
East analyst Larry Franklin, Pentagon Office of Special Plans member Harold
Rhode and convicted bank swindler and Iraqi National Congress leader Ahmed
Chalabi, met secretly in Rome. Also present, reportedly, were Pollari and
the head of the Italian Department of Defense. The La Repubblica reporters,
led by investigative reporter Carlo Bonini, claim that it was at this
unusual meeting that a plan was developed to recycle the bogus and
discredited Niger documents through British intelligence, so that they
would come back to the White House as "new evidence" of Hussein's nuclear
ambitions.

Ledeen, who was deeply involved in similar scheming during the infamous
Reagan-era Iran arms-for hostages stinger missile deal, which had been used
to raise secret funds for the CIA-backed Contras who were invading
Nicaragua, doesn't deny that meeting, but has denied any involvement in the
Niger scam. But the involvement of Feith (an architect of the whole Neocon
scheme to invade Iraq and overthrow Hussein), of Franklin, who later
pleaded guilty to passing classified information to the America Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), and especially of Rhode, who was working
in OSP, the Pentagon office Cheney and Rumsfeld created specifically to gin
up "evidence" to justify an Iraq invasion, makes this meeting suspicious in
the extreme.

On its face, it would appear that this was the start of a so-called "black
op," designed to create false evidence for the purpose of deceiving the
U.S. media, the Congress and the American public into believing that
America was at risk of a nuclear attack from Iraq.

And it worked. In his January 29, 2003 State of the Union address, with war
fever growing, Bush declared to the assembled members of Congress and a
watching nation, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein
recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

This, to most Americans, was the clincher. Never mind that it takes years
for a non-nuclear nation to go from buying uranium ore to producing a bomb.
The president was saying that was Saddam's evil plan. But the president,
when he said that, was lying through his teeth, since the British
government's "evidence," he knew, was the same set of forged documents that
had been discredited two years earlier by his own intelligence people. The
president knew it wasn't new, and it wasn't true.

This is where Wilson and Plame come in.

Back in 2002, with the White House continuing to promote the bogus Niger
uranium purchase story, the CIA reportedly decided it needed to get better
information. Plame, whose responsibility at the Agency was nuclear
proliferation, apparently suggested to the CIA director of operations that
her husband, who had served in Africa and had good relations with officials
in Niger, including the minister of mines, be sent over there to
investigate.

Wilson was dispatched, and returned reporting confidently that there was no
uranium there to sell (it had all been sold to Japanese and European
customers), and that any documents purporting such a sale "would not be
authentic."

Wilson's report went the rounds in the CIA, and that might have been the
end of it, but the White House, and especially Vice President Cheney and
the Pentagon Office of Special Plans, had other ideas. Talk of Saddam's
uranium purchases and nuclear ambitions began cropping up in administration
speeches in August, 2002, with both then National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice and Bush himself referring darkly to a "mushroom cloud"
threatening America, and ultimately with Bush's reference to the forged
documents in early 2003.

Wilson grew frustrated with the lies and deceit, and ultimately went public
in 2003 with what he knew, first in May to Congress and then on July 6 in
an opinion article in the New York Times.

Having a lowly former ambassador undermine a statement by the president
might anger a White House, but the attack that ensued, which appears to
have been orchestrated by the White House and the Vice President, was so
virulent, involving the criminal outing of Plame and the jeopardizing of
all her contacts and her critical work on nuclear proliferation, including
in countries like Iran, that clearly more was involved than just
administration pique.

The real concern, I suspect, was the possible discovery of who was behind
the document forgeries, and of a black-op scheme to recycle them through
British intelligence.

It appears that the investigation into the Plame outing scandal, which is
being conducted by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, has been
successfully obstructed by the White House, and, unless Fitzgerald has some
surprise in store, will be limited to the prosecution of Cheney aide I.
Lewis "Scooter" Libby on a charge of perjury and obstruction.

We cannot expect Fitzgerald to get to the bottom of this scandal, which
goes to the heart of a criminal war that has killed 2600, Americans and
100,000-plus Iraqis. Nor, sadly, does it seem we can count on the
mainstream media, which continues to treat the story as being all about
leaks and Valerie Plame.

Only an impeachment hearing can do the job. At such a hearing, the House
Judiciary Committee would not face the same hurdles regarding whom it would
call to testify, what questions it could ask, and what documents it could
demand to see as does a prosecutor operating under the rules of a federal
court.

[Dave Lindorff is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the
Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. His new book of CounterPunch columns
titled "This Can't be Happening!" is published by Common Courage Press.
Lindorff's new book is "The Case for Impeachment", co-authored by 
Barbara Olshansky. He can be reached at: dlindorff@yahoo.com ]
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 2 [southnews] CIA used WMD search to try to justify Iraq war
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:14:53 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

An Australian who took part in the hunt for weapons of mass destruction 
in Iraq revealed Thursday that he quit because he felt the CIA 
controlled the program and had dedicated it to justifying Washington's 
decision to go to war.

Australian chemical weapons expert, Dr John Gee, has made his concerns 
public today, two years after resigning from the American led Iraqi 
Survey Group.

He says he quit because he had lost faith in the process.

When he returned to Australia he told the Foreign Affairs Minister 
Alexander Downer about his view that the CIA had too much influence over 
the hunt for weapons and that the search was based on trying to justify 
the pre-war arguments for going to war.
__________________________________

CIA used WMD search to try to justify Iraq war, former Australian 
official says

Mainichi Daily News, Japan 4 hours ago

SYDNEY, Australia -- An Australian who took part in the hunt for weapons 
of mass destruction in Iraq revealed Thursday that he quit because he 
felt the CIA controlled the program and had dedicated it to justifying 
Washington's decision to go to war.

John Gee, a chemical weapons expert with Australia's Department of 
Foreign Affairs and Trade, quit the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group in March 
2004, months before it finally concluded that Saddam Hussein's regime 
had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs 
years before the U.S.-led invasion in early 2003.

His reasons weren't made public at the time, or during a parliamentary 
investigation last year into claims that U.S. officials censored 
investigators' reports on the search for weapons in Iraq to support the 
contention of U.S. President George W. Bush's administration that the 
weapons programs existed.

In letters and e-mails printed Thursday in The Sydney Morning Herald, 
Gee said he resigned because the Iraq Survey Group's activities were "to 
all intents and purposes determined by the CIA" and its methods and 
operations were "fundamentally flawed." He also explained his reasons in 
a radio interview.

The CIA analysts in teams searching for chemical and biological weapons 
were the same ones who concluded before the invasion -- officially 
called Operation Iraqi Freedom -- that they must exist, Gee wrote in his 
resignation letter to a senior diplomat assigned to the Australian 
government's Iraq task force.

"Much of the two teams' work is geared to trying to justify pre-OIF 
judgments rather than any attempt to establish the facts surrounding 
Iraq's WMD programs," Gee wrote in the later, dated March 2, 2004.

"This is reinforced by a marked reluctance in Washington to face up to 
the fact that Iraq almost certainly did not have WMD pre-OIF," he wrote.

Bush used the alleged threat posed by Iraqi weapons of mass destruction 
to explain his decision to go to war in Iraq. A massive U.S.-led 
investigation after the invasion revealed no such weapons, and the Iraq 
Survey Group concluded in its final report in September 2004 that 
Baghdad had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms 
programs under U.N. supervision in 1991. Bush's administration hasn't 
directly accepted the finding.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard is a staunch supporter of the Iraq 
war and sent a small number of Australian troops to the fight. The 
Australian government mirrored Washington's claims about Iraq's weapons 
to justify its participation.

Gee told Australian Broadcasting Corp. radio on Thursday that both 
Washington and Canberra had a "preconceived" view that weapons of mass 
destruction existed in Iraq, and that they didn't want to hear a 
different message.

"It didn't seem to me to be an intellectually honest process," Gee said. 
(AP)

August 31, 2006

http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/international/africa-oceania/news/
20060831p2g00m0in041000c.html
_________________________________________________

WMD search intellectually dishonest: inspector.

ABC News : Thursday, August 31, 2006. 1:34pm (AEST)

A former weapons inspector in Iraq says the process of searching for 
weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) was intellectually dishonest.

John Gee is an expert on chemical weapons who worked with the United 
States-led Iraqi Survey Group after the Iraq war.

Dr Gee resigned from the survey group in March 2004 because he had no 
confidence in the process.

He has now spoken out about his concerns.

"The advice I gave the Government was there was no WMD in Iraq," he said.

"I had lost confidence in the process that was being carried out in Iraq 
by the Iraq Survey Group.

"It didn't seem to be to be an intellectually honest process because it 
was based on a preconception that there was WMD there to be found rather 
than what I would term an intellectually honest process."

He says he had no choice but to resign.

Dr Gee says he explained his reasons in a report to the Foreign Minister 
Alexander Downer, but claims the Minister suppressed it.

"I found out on my return that he'd issued instructions that it not be 
distributed outside the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade," he said.

"I think there were some things in it that were uncomfortable for the 
Government."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1729679.htm
*****************************************************************
 3 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Iraq mess not critics' fault 

Today: August 31, 2006 at 7:27:21 PDT 

Bush administration should scrutinize the man leading the war, 
not the people criticizing it 

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld attacked perceived critics of
the Iraq war Tuesday in a speech to the American Legion in Salt
Lake City. 

He compared them to pre-World War II proponents of appeasement
with Hitler's Germany. 

Although the analogy does not work - a majority of Americans
criticize the lack of a coherent plan to win in Iraq, but there
is no call to negotiate an agreement with the country's
terrorists and insurgents - Rumsfeld obviously believes it will
set a strong tone for at least the next couple of weeks, during
observances of the fifth anniversary of 9/11. 

Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice are on the speaking circuit now in an apparent
attempt to temper an anticipated flood of analyses about Iraq as
the anniversary approaches. All made appearances at the Veterans
of Foreign Wars convention earlier this week in Reno. President
Bush is on the circuit, too, and is scheduled to speak today in
Salt Lake City. 

In reporting on Rumsfeld's Salt Lake City speech, The New York
Times noted that Rumsfeld specifically cited press reports and
comments by human rights groups as indicative of "moral or
intellectual confusion about who or what is right or wrong"
about Iraq. 

This is typical Rumsfeld-talk. While stubbornly clinging to a
war plan whose objectives are stalled amid daily tragedy in
Iraq, Rumsfeld likes to portray the war's reality as
misinformation being spread by liberal reporters and far-left
organizations and political opponents. 

"With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of
weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way,
vicious extremists can be appeased?" Rumsfeld asked his Salt
Lake City audience. 

Sometimes questions need to be answered with questions. 

Why is there growing lethality? 

Why is there an increase in weapons? 

In our view, neither of these situations would be dominating
Iraq after more than three years of U.S. military presence if
the Pentagon had a sound plan for fighting this war. 

The main issue in respect to Iraq is not the people who express
concern for our troops and who fear for our stated objectives
and the future of U.S. military missions around the world.
Rather, the issue is one of Rumsfeld's competence. 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 4 IPS-English GULF: Conference on nuclear proliferation to be
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:25:46 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
GULF: Conference on nuclear proliferation to be held in Bahrain next month

Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)

MANAMA, Aug. 31 (WAM) - The Kingdom of Bahrain will be hosting next
September a conference on the dangers and consequences of nuclear
proliferation in the Gulf region.

The conference, which will run from September 10 to 11, will be attended by
Undersecretaries at the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Ministries of
Interior, representatives of Defence Ministries of the GCC member states
and a number of Arab and world dignitaries and experts.

    The conference, which will be held in the Bahraini capital city of
Manama in collaboration between Bahraini Interior Ministry and Al Khaleej
Centre for Strategic Studies, will be discussing the issue of nuclear
proliferation and its political, economic, security and environmental
consequences in the Gulf region. (WAM)
                     (WAM)

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 5 IPS-English POLITICS:: Diplomacy Intensifies on Iran's Nuke
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:25:49 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS MM WD HD IP BW ML NU=20
POLITICS:: Diplomacy Intensifies on Iran's Nuke Programme
Haider Rizvi

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 31 (IPS) - As the U.N. Security Council deadline elap=
sed for Iran to halt its uranium enrichment-related activities Thursday, =
the United States renewed threats of a possible international economic bl=
ockade of Tehran.

However, indications are that it may not be able to obtain a unanimous de=
cision from the 15-member Security Council.

Accusing Iran of continuing to pursue a nuclear weapons capability, durin=
g an encounter with reporters at the U.N. headquarters, John Bolton, the =
U.S. ambassador, called for the Security Council to draw up sanctions aga=
inst Tehran.

=94Iran is defying the international community,=94 he said, citing the In=
ternational Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) report that concluded Iran had =
begun a new round of uranium enrichment in recent days.

Last month, the Security Council passed a resolution that urged Iran to i=
mmediately suspend all of its uranium-related activities and warned that =
Tehran could face =94additional appropriate measures=94 if it failed to a=
bide by the IAEA requirements.

Soon after adopting the resolution, Bolton and other U.S. officials state=
d that the phrase =94additional appropriate measures=94 meant nothing sho=
rt of economic sanctions, but Russian and Chinese diplomats said they did=
  not agree with such a reading.

Bolton told reporters that the Russian and Chinese foreign ministers were=
  committed to seeking sanctions, but acknowledged that there was the poss=
ibility that the two other key players in the Council might not go along.

=94It may happen that there is disagreement about the sanctions,=94 he to=
ld reporters. His statement seems to support speculation that the U.S. an=
d its allies might pursue a course outside the Security Council and impos=
e punitive measures of their own against Iran.

A source closely observing the Russian side in discussions on Tehran's nu=
clear programme told IPS that there was =94no change in the Russian posit=
ion at all.=94

Despite endorsing the resolution calling for the suspension of Iranian ur=
anium-related activities last month, both Russia and China repeatedly urg=
ed for patience and said they would not support economic sanctions.

Though critical of Iran's refusal to stop uranium enrichment, the IAEA re=
port, leaked to the Reuters news agency, does not validate the U.S. and i=
ts European allies' suspicions that Tehran is trying to develop technolog=
y to build nuclear weapons.

=94Although, this report does not fully satisfy us,=94 said Mohammed Saee=
di, deputy head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organisation, in a statement, =94=
it shows that America's propaganda and political ally-motivated claims ov=
er Iran's programs are baseless and based on American officials' hallucin=
ations.=94

Unlike India, Pakistan and Israel, three unofficial nuclear-armed states,=
  Iran has ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and thus is=
  obligated to abide by its rules. Theoretically, the treaty allows non-nu=
clear weapons states to pursue nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.

On Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reiterated his governm=
ent's assertion that its nuclear programme is meant for peaceful purposes=
  and that it had no intention of building nuclear weapons.

=94The Iranian nation will never abandon its obvious right to peaceful te=
chnology,=94 he said in a public speech Thursday, describing the Western =
claim that Iran's nuclear technology might be diverted as =94a big lie.=94

In Washington, U.S. President George W. Bush, who considers Iran part of =
=94the axis of evil,=94 commented on Iran's failure to meet the Security =
Council deadline as an act of =94defiance.=94

=94It's time for Iran to make a choice,=94 he told a meeting of veterans =
in Salt Lake City, Utah. He also warned Tehran of =94consequences.=94

Beyond the jingoistic remarks from both sides, multilateral diplomatic ef=
forts to resolve the dispute are likely to intensify next week when Javie=
r Solana, the European Union's (EU) political affairs chief meets with th=
e Iranian nuclear affairs negotiator, Ali Larjani.

The EU seems to be seeking clarification on questions about Iran's cool r=
esponse to a package of economic incentives that it had offered to Tehran=
  in return for the suspension of its uranium enrichment.

Last August, Iran resumed its uranium-related activities after Germany, F=
rance and Britain, also known as =94EU-Three=94, pressed Tehran for a bin=
ding commitment on fuel cycle activities.

Iran described that demand as =94illegal and unwarranted=94 and believes =
that it remains the sole reason for imposition of IAEA resolutions and Se=
curity Council demands. Part of the international efforts to resolve the =
issue through diplomacy involves U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan's visit to Teh=
ran, which starts Saturday. During his two-day stay, Annan is due to meet=
  Ahmadinejad and other leaders.

Diplomats say the Security Council is unlikely to take up the issue befor=
e discussing the outcome of Annan's meeting with Ahmadinejad and the face=
-to-face talks between Solana and Larjani.

=94We will wait until next week,=94 Bolton told reporters. =94We see what=
  happens at that meeting.=94
*****
+International Atomic Energy Agency (http://www.iaea.org/)
+POLITICS-US: Neo-Cons Denounce Khatami Visit as =94Appeasement=94 (http:=
//ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D34521)
+ IRAN: Tough Bargaining Ahead Over Nuclear Issue (http://ipsnews.net/new=
s.asp?idnews=3D34439)

(END/IPS/WD/MM/IP/HD/BW/ML/NU/HR/KS/06)



=20
=3D 09010134 ORP004
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 6 [NYTr] Can the Iran Nuke "Crisis" be Defused?
 
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 02:45:46 -0400 (EDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Counterpunch - Aug 31, 2006
http://www.counterpunch.org/macmichael08312006.html


Is War Inevitable?

Can the Iran Nuke Crisis be Defused?

By DAVID MacMICHAEL
Former CIA analyst

On Tuesday, August 22, Iran responded formally to the demand of the
European Union, represented by France, Germany and Great Britain of July 1,
that, in return for unspecified economic and other benefits, it permanently
give up the enrichment of uranium for its nuclear power plants and submit
to certain other limitations on its nuclear program or face possible United
Nations sanctions (unspecified) per Security Council Resolution 1696 of
July 31. The Iranian response, delivered to EU Foreign Secretary Javier
Solano, but not yet made public, reportedly declares Tehran's willingness
to negotiate on all points-including, apparently, uranium enrichment and
regional security issues-but pointedly rejects pre-conditions for talks.
This official response was repeated in public statements by Iranian
government figures and political and religious leaders. They emphasized
Iranian openness to negotiation but unwillingness to submit in advance to
European demands, seen as being of US origin, that would limit Iranian
international law and treaty rights.

It is important to note that the ostensible reason for the US and EU push
is fear, indeed for many, conviction, that Iran, although a signatory of
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which prohibits member states
from producing nuclear weapons, secretly intends to do so. Their government
spokesmen continue to argue this case despite the fact that since 2003
Iran, fearful that the US might subject it to the treatment given Iraq over
that country's supposed (but non-existent) nuclear weapons program, has
submitted to extraordinary inspections of its facilities by the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under an "Additional Protocol"
going far beyond its obligations under the NPT. These inspections have
resulted in repeated findings by the IAEA that Iran is in "substantial
compliance" with its NPT obligations. Granted, the IAEA has expressed
displeasure that some past Iranian nuclear activities were not disclosed
until establishment of the additional protocol, but IAEA chief Mohammed
al-Baradei, even under heavy pressure from the US and UK which tried to
have him removed from his post, has stuck to his conclusions, receiving a
Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of his integrity.

The Iranian answer, given precisely on the date Tehran had promised,
resulted in immediate expressions of disappointment from European leaders
and predictable cries of outrage from the United States, even though
Washington is, by its own decision not to deal directly with Iran, not
formally a party to the process. Notably, the New York Times, apparently
having learned little from its humiliating experience in leading the press
in making false charges about Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction
during the runup to the US invasion of that country, published a lead
editorial on August 25 commenting on the document just issued by the staff
of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI). The
editorial rightly condemns the ludicrous attempt by Chairman Peter Hoekstra
(R-Mich) and ex-CIA analyst and assistant to the US's Iranophobic UN
ambassador John Bolton, Frederick Fleitz, to use an ostensible critique of
US intelligence on Iran to whip up war frenzy against Tehran by '"helping
the American people understand" that Iran's fundamentalist regime and its
nuclear ambitions pose a strategic threat to the United States.' It then
astonishingly states: "It's hard to imagine that Mr. Hoekstra believes
there is someone left in this country who does not already know that."
Further on, the editorial, after more cautionary remarks about the dangers
of cooking intelligence to policy preferences says: "It's obvious that Iran
wants nuclear weapons, has lied about its programs and views America as an
enemy."

The Washington Post, if anything, waved the bloody shirt even more
vigorously. Its lead editorial of August 25 titled "Iran Stalls: A test for
Russia and China" rants: "It's been four years since the existence of
Iran's nuclear program was confirmed and since then Iran has succeeded in
stalling the world's efforts to ensure that the country's enriched uranium
is used exclusively for peaceful purposes."

The Post fails to acknowledge that Iran's nuclear program is of long
standing.: In the 1960s the US built for Iran-then ruled by the Shah who
had been made sole ruler of Iran by the United States after a CIA-directed
coup d'etat in 1953 over threw the elected parliamentary government of
Mohammed Mossadegh-its still functioning nuclear research reactor in the
center of Tehran. At the same time-forty not four years ago-the US provided
Iran with 10 pounds of weapons-grade enriched uranium. There is nothing
secret about the facility which trains nuclear engineers from Iran and
other countries.

Iran's NPT right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes is not
acknowledged and its submission to IAEA inspections, going even beyond its
NPT obligations, are scoffed at as mere attempts to stave off sanctions.
The Post deplores Iran's alleged ability to avoid meeting the demands of
the EU by proposing negotiations rather than merely accepting the package
of demands, and finds "scandalous" the possibility that Russia and China
might endorse this and thus prevent the UN from imposing sanctions, the
only way, in the Post's judgment, to "defuse the Iran crisis" and "an
eventual war over Iran's nuclear ambitions."

The official US public response, despite obvious undertones of anger, was
relatively low key. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said only that,
"their response falls short." UN Ambassador Bolton, evidently accepting the
near certainty that China and Russia will veto any attempt to have the
Security Council impose serious sanctions on Iran-and that France, if the
most recent statements of its foreign minister Philippe Dousty-Blazy about
the unwisdom of a confrontation with the Iranians and the need "to hold out
our hands to them" are any indication, no longer will back the US and
UK-muttered about having something like a coalition of willing nations
individually establish their own economic sanctions regimes on Iran. The
US, which essentially has allowed no trade with Iran since the Islamic
Revolution of 1978, is pressuring Japanese and European banks to freeze the
assets of Iranian leaders and refuse to handle Iranian transactions.
Already, a US Treasury spokeswoman, Molly Millerwise, told the Los Angeles
Times on August 26, that the Union Bank of Switzerland had cut off
relationships with Iran and that other financial institutions might not
want to be bankers for a country which had nuclear bomb ambitions and
supported Hezbollah.

Whether international banks or the economics ministries of European nations
currently doing business with Iran will be swayed by this moralistic
argument is questionable. France and Germany each currently export forty to
fifty billion dollars worth of goods to Iran annually and, of course, are
as reliant as anyone else for oil on the world's second largest producer of
petroleum. Even as pundits talked of the dire political consequences of
Iran's refusal to submit to the European demands, economists raised the
possibility of world oil prices soaring past $100 per barrel if no
compromise was reached. Italy, a country thoroughly disillusioned with US
Middle East policy and now rapidly pulling its troops out of Iraq, just
this past weekend demanded that it be made a party to the EU talks with
Iran to make sure that its own considerable economic interests there are
protected.

As to the "eventual war" with Iran predicted, and apparently even desired
by the Post, it is true that the Bush administration continues to maintain
that the unilateral military option "remains on the table." However, there
are clear signs that while use of that option was a strong probability back
last spring when the EU issued its ultimatum to Tehran and in July when
Resolution 1696 was passed by the Security Council Iranian diplomacy,
insufficiently reported on in the US press, has been enormously successful
both in the Islamic world broadly and in the Middle East, producing near
total opposition to the EU (read US) position. In addition, the war in Iraq
has so drained American ground force capabilities as to make very dubious
any successful attack against Iran by US forces alone or even with the
assistance of the only possible ally, Israel. This does not mean that US
air and naval power could not, as in Iraq, quickly eliminate Iran's very
limited air and armor forces. But, as in Iraq, Iran has the capacity and,
apparently, the will, as it showed in its 1980s war with Iraq, to employ
irregular infantry to great effect. According to Pentagon sources most
senior Army and Marine Corps officers are arguing strongly against any
military attack on Iran regardless of the outcome of the sanctions dispute.
(Some Air Force senior officers, according to the same sources, however,
appear eager to launch their bunkerbusters in another display of shock and
awe, believing somehow that this time, despite the historical lessons
showing the contrary, strategic bombing will win the day.)

Former CIA Middle East specialist Ray Close, however, is among those who
argue that Bush and his neo-con allies will not be swayed by logic.
Sometime prior to leaving office in 2009-after the inevitable international
compromise over Iran's nuclear program, the UN's refusal to impose punitive
sanctions on Iran, the unwillingness of the EU countries (with the possible
exception of the UK) to accept the US position-a frustrated Bush will
launch massive air attacks on Iran, possibly with Israeli participation,
ostensibly designed to destroy that country's oh-so-dangerous nuclear power
installations before they can be used against us.

The result of such action, Close concludes, will be utterly to the
disadvantage of the United States, not only in the Middle East and the
Islamic World, but globally. However, Close sees Bush as a maniac, who
believes such an outcome is preferable to the personal humiliation that
acceptance of a diplomatic solution he openly opposes would be.

On the other hand, more and more analysts are concluding that the
forthcoming negotiations with Iran will produce successful compromise. As
noted above, Iran has played its diplomatic cards well over the past few
months. The New York Times, and Washington Post and the large majority of
the American public which takes its opinions from them may, as the most
recent Angus-Reid poll shows, fervently believe that Iran has or is busy
making nuclear weapons However, the rest of the world, including such old
Iranian foes as Saudi Arabia and, ironically, most western intelligence
agencies, their credibility in tatters since 2003, accept the fact that
there is no substantial evidence to prove it.

A good brief summary of the way the situation might well play out is
provided by Trevor Royal, diplomatic editor of Australia's Sunday Herald in
his August 27th column, "Negotiated nuclear settlement a possibility."
Iran, he says, "may well be interested in a negotiated settlement. This
will be sold [to the Iranian and world publics] not so much as a climb-down
but as the introduction of some much-needed common sense, which will spike
US threats to push for sanctions. The most likely outcome is that Iran will
accept the [EU] offer in principle but question the small print in an
ettempt to win concessions. For example, they are desperate to have
international support for producing nuclear energy and they need the
technology, but before they do anything they require guarantees." When
Royal says "before they do anything they require guarantees" he obviously
refers to the EU demand for suspension of uranium enrichment, and he cites
Mark Fitzpatrick of the UK's International Institute for Strategic Studies
on the question of whether suspension in some form will occur early or
later on in the forthcoming negotiations.

>From the perspective of this writer it seems very likely that a negotiated
agreement will take something like the following form. Russia, currently
Iran's major nuclear energy supply source, involved in the building of at
least one nuclear energy plant in Iran, has long offered to construct a
nuclear fuel plant for Iran on Russian soil with its production going
exclusively for the Iranian nuclear power program if Iran gives up its own
attempts at fuel production. Iran has rejected this on grounds of its NPT
right to produce fuel and on the pragmatic argument that it cannot risk
having to rely entirely on a foreign supplier, even one as ostensibly
friendly as Russia. Moreover, Iran has argued that, by turning over nuclear
fuel supply to a foreign power (or powers) and abandoning its own efforts,
its ability to advance scientifically will be thwarted, relegating it
permanently to second class scientific status. This is something, Tehran
declares, represents a European and US policy to keep Islamic nations
subordinate and technically underdeveloped.

However, it is clear, and Iran grudgingly accepts this, that it cannot
within any reasonable period of time develop the uranium enrichment
capacity to fuel its power plants on its own. Therefore, Iran will probably
agree to the establishment of the Russian-proposed fuel plant provided that
Iranian scientists and technicians form a significant part of the
management and staff. Moreover, Iran will also insist that such an
arrangement does not cancel its NPT right to pursue nuclear fuel research
and development on its own. This would mean that, under IAEA supervision,
some sort of international nuclear research program be established on
Iranian soil also. Regardless of what arrangements are arrived at, it has
to be recognized by not only the negotiating parties but by the US as well
that any country of Iran's size and level of development with a functioning
nuclear energy program ipso facto will beable to produce nuclear weapons at
some point. Doubtless, whatever the safeguards built in to the agreement
suspicions about Tehran's ultimate intentions will remain. On the other
hand, while the US and EU declare that they have no intention of attacking
Iran or trying to cripple it economically, Iran on the basis of its
experience with the US and its allies over the past 50 years, has even more
reason for suspicion. It will take a while for real mutual trust to be
established among the parties.

It is certainly in Iran's interest to show its willingness to enter into
the bruited regional security arrangement. The details of this will
probably be negotiated separately from the nuclear issue and most surely
will involve dealing with the Israeli question, especially the informal
alliance between Israel and the US which is at the root of the current
Middle Eastern problem. It is too much to expect that there will be any
real change in either Washington or Tel Aviv as a result of the EU-Iran
talks but merely openly addressing the Israel and US-Israel relationship
issues would be a positive step.. However, as things look now, one can be
optimistic that the Iranian nuclear crisis-whether real or contrived-will
be satisfactorily concluded.

[David MacMichael, a former analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency, is
a member of the steering committee of the Veteran Intelligence
Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).]
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 7 Security UN Receives UN Watchdog's Report On Iran's Nuclear Activities
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:00:23 -0400

SECURITY COUNCIL RECEIVES UN WATCHDOG’S REPORT ON IRAN’S NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES
 
New York, Aug 31 2006  7:00PM
The International Atomic Energy Agency (<"http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2006/iran_compliance.html">IAEA) 
today sent a new report 
on Iran to the United Nations Security Council, which has threatened 
sanctions if the country does not suspend uranium enrichment 
and reprocessing activities and take steps to assure the world 

In announcing that the report went to the 15-member body, the Vienna-based 
UN nuclear watchdog said its circulation is restricted 
“and unless the IAEA Board of Governors and Security Council decide 
otherwise, the Agency cannot authorize its release to the public.” 

In a <"http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=s/res/1679(2006)">31 
July resolution, the Council said Iran had not taken required 
steps to assure the world it is not developing nuclear arms, 
demanded a suspension of the country’s nuclear enrichment and reprocessing 
activities, and threatened sanctions for non-compliance. 

The IAEA was requested to report on whether Iran had complied with 
the resolution within a month. In previous reports, the Agency 
has been unable to verify that Iran’s nuclear programme was peaceful, 
though it had not seen any diversion of material to nuclear 

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who is currently on a diplomatic tour 
of the Middle East, is likely to stop in Iran, according to his 

Earlier this month, Mr. Annan appealed to Tehran to respond positively 
to an offer made by China, France, Germany, the Russian Federation, 
the United Kingdom and the United States, with the support 

The so-called “EU-3 plus 3” proposals, which were endorsed by the 
Council in its July resolution, envisage a long-term comprehensive 
arrangement which would allow for the development of relations 
with Iran based on mutual respect and the establishment of international 
confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s 

“Iran's reply will, I trust, be positive and that this will be the 
foundation for a final, negotiated settlement,” the Secretary-General 
said in an appeal to the country’s Government on 20 August. 
 2006-08-31 00:00:00.000 


________________

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

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 8 [NYTr] Iran: France Insists on Talks; US Howls for Sanctions
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:10:25 -0500 (CDT)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com

France Insists on Talks with Iran

Paris, Aug 31 (Prensa Latina) France insisted Thursday on keeping an open
door for dialogue with Iran about its nuclear program, despite an
International Atomic Energy Agency report opposing that position.

After learning of the IAEA report, French Foreign Minister Philippe
Douste-Blazy deplored Tehran4s persistence in continuing its
uranium-enrichment work, although he said he was convinced of the efficacy
of dialogue.

The foreign minister said he will analyze, together with the four other
permanent Security Council members and Germany, the reaction demanded by
Iran4s attitude, based on Resolution 1696.

France4s position of holding talks with Tehran contrast with that assumed
in Washington by President George W. Bush, for whom Iran4s answer is a
challenge that must have consequences, and he did not discard the use of
force.

ef/ccs/iom/hav

                           ***

AP via Yahoo - Aug 31, 2006
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060901/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_nuclear_57

Iran defies U.N.; sanctions possible

By NASSER KARIMI and GEORGE JAHN
Associated Press Writers

Iran defied a U.N. deadline Thursday to stop enriching uranium, opening the
door for sanctions, but U.S. and other officials said no action would be
sought before a key European diplomat meets with Tehran's atomic chief next
week to seek a compromise.

Iran's hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, lashed out at the United
States, calling it "tyrannical" and insisting Tehran would not be "bullied"
into giving up the right to use nuclear technology. Other Iranian officials
said the country could withstand any punishment.

President Bush called for "consequences to Iran's defiance," saying the
"world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran."

"We must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon," Bush said in a speech
in Salt Lake City. He said Washington hoped for a diplomatic solution, but
insisted "it is time for Iran to make a choice" whether to cooperate with
the United Nations.

John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the Security
Council would wait to consider possible actions until after the European
Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, met with Ali Larijani, Iran's
top nuclear negotiator, sometime in the middle of next week.

"We're certainly ready to proceed here in New York when we're given the
instructions to do so," Bolton said.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan also was expected to raise the issue
during a visit to Tehran this weekend.

Midnight Thursday ? the last day of the Security Council deadline ? passed
with no change in the Iranian position.

The formal trigger for possible sanctions was provided by the International
Atomic Energy Agency, based in Vienna, Austria.

In a report Thursday, the U.N. agency confirmed Tehran had not halted
uranium enrichment as demanded by the Security Council and said three years
of IAEA probing had been unable to confirm "the peaceful nature of Iran's
nuclear program" because of lack of cooperation from Tehran.

Iran denies it is trying to acquire atomic weapons in violation of its
commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. Tehran insists its
nuclear program is peaceful, with the sole aim of producing electricity with
nuclear reactors.

The Security Council voted July 31 to impose the Thursday deadline for Iran
to suspend uranium enrichment and asked the IAEA to report on Tehran's
compliance, dangling the threat of sanctions if Iran refused.

Still, with permanent council members Russia and China opposed to quick and
harsh penalties, the council appeared ready to delay such action. Senior
U.N. diplomats told The Associated Press that Iran had agreed to meet with
European negotiators to try to find a compromise.

Confirming the plans, Bolton said the Security Council would wait to
consider any action until after European Union envoy Javier Solana met with
Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, sometime next week.

An official from one nation on the council said the meeting was tentatively
set for Tuesday in Berlin. The official said senior officials from the U.S.,
Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany would meet in the German capital
the following day. Those six nations offered rewards to Iran in June if it
gave up enrichment ? but warned of U.N. sanctions if it didn't.

Bolton told AP that while Washington "has extensive thoughts on what a
possible U.N. resolution would look like, such discussion will await the
outcome of the Solana meeting with Iran."

Still, he said the IAEA report added further weight to suspicions Iran is
"engaged in activities that are only consistent with a weapons program."

Bolton declined to specify what sanctions the U.S. might seek. But U.S. and
European diplomats have said they are focusing on low-level punishment at
first to win backing from Russia and China. Proposals include travel bans on
Iranian officials or a ban on the sale of dual-use technology to Iran.

More extreme sanctions would be a freeze on Iranian assets or a broader
trade ban, but those would likely be opposed by Russia, China and perhaps
others, particularly since it could cut off badly needed oil exports from
Iran.

In Tehran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off the
possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that Iran "will find
a way to avoid pressure eventually."

Ahmadinejad denounced the United States, accusing it of trying to impose its
will on Iran.

"They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most tyrannical
governments in the world to pursue their own interests," he told a crowd of
thousands in the northwestern town of Orumiyeh.

"The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and the violation
of its rights," Ahmadinejad said.

While stating "Iran has not suspended its enrichment activities," the
restricted IAEA report, obtained by AP, did not specifically say Iran was
carrying out enrichment Thursday. It said only that Tehran started work on a
new batch Aug. 24.

But a senior official close to the agency said Iran's pilot centrifuge plant
was processing small quantities of uranium gas for enrichment as late as
Tuesday, the last day IAEA inspectors reported back to headquarters on
Tehran's nuclear program.

Iran says it wants to develop a full-scale enrichment program to produce
reactor fuel, but there is growing suspicion the oil-rich country wants to
use enrichment to create fissile material for nuclear warheads.

The rest of the IAEA's report essentially documented a protracted stalemate
between agency inspectors trying to determine if Tehran is seeking to make
weapons and Iranian officials who have repeatedly refused to provide
information.

While the findings on enrichment were expected, they were important because
they provided the formal trigger needed for the Security Council to take up
sanctions.

IAEA officials said the six-page report was hand-carried to the council
chambers at the same time it was posted on the agency's intranet site for
the 35 nations on the IAEA's board of governors.

Other key findings in the report from IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei:

? New findings of minute particles of highly enriched uranium at an Iranian
technical university implicated in possible military work, although the
report did not specify whether the level was weapons-grade.

? A decision by the Iranians to cut off IAEA access to suspicious diagrams
apparently showing how to mold fissile material into the shape of a
warhead and to destroy notes taken on the document by agency inspectors.

? The temporary barring of U.N. inspectors from an underground facility
being built to house tens of thousands of centrifuges, the backbone of
Iran's future enrichment program.

? Protracted delays in granting multiple entry visas to IAEA inspectors.

U.N. officials told AP that even Olli Heinonen, deputy IAEA director-general
in charge of the Iran investigation, was left dangling. In an unprecedented
move, Iranian officials initially issued him only a one-month visa before
relenting and giving him the usual one-year entry pass Wednesday, a day
before the report was released.

[Nasser Karimi reported from Tehran and George Jahn from Vienna. Associated
Press writers Lee Keath in Cairo, Egypt, and Nick Wadhams at the United
Nations contributed to this report.]

Copyright ) 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 9 IRNA: US unilateralism on Iran N-issue a "misassessment" - Greenstock -

London, Aug 31, IRNA

UK-Greenstock-Iran 

Former British Ambassador to the UN Sir Jeremy Greenstock 
believes that the strong support for unilateral action by the US 
in the dispute over Iran's peaceful nuclear program is a 
"misassessment."

 "My instinct on this is that the US is not going to be able to 
settle the Iran question unilaterally," said Greenstock, who was 
Britain's top envoy in New York during the build-up to the Iraq 
war.

 "That must be done multilaterally," he said.

 In an interview with BBC Radio Four's Today program on Thursday, 
he also suggested that any thoughts by America to try and 
overthrow Iran's elected government by supporting dissidents was 
"not credible."

 The Iranian people "are persuaded, not without reason, that
there is an outside force against them," said the envoy, who
also served as the UK's special representative to Iraq following
the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime.

 "They are more united with the greater the pressure seems to be
from the US," he added.

 Speaking on the same program, former US assistant defence
secretary Richard Perle believed that the US would not get
support for "tough sanctions" to be imposed against Iran.

 Perle also served as the chair of the Defense Policy Board's
Advisory Committee during President Goerge W Bush's first term.

 Greenstock argued that cooperation from Russia was "extremely
important" as well as "diplomacy with Iran" to resolve the
stand-off as it was bigger than just the nuclear issue.

 Russia, he said, likes to be treated as an "equal partner" to
the US on this issue.

 He suggested that Moscow was "hankering again after some
elements of superpower status."

 The former British ambassador believed that Moscow "will
respond to a comprehensive, reasonable, diplomatic approach,"
but warned that this would be "difficult to construct."

 His comments came as the International Atomic Energy Agency was 
due to submit a report to the UN Security Council on whether Iran 
has complied with its demand to suspend uranium enrichment even 
though it is permitted under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
*****************************************************************
 10 IRNA: Report: EU to continue talks with Iran 

Brussels, Aug 31, IRNA

EU-Iran-Media 

The European Union is ready to continue discussions with Iran
over its nuclear program even though a United Nations deadline
for Tehran to restrict its nuclear activities expires on
Thursday (today), the European daily The Financial Times
reported Thursday.

 The lack of unanimity of the Security Council -- and the hope
that Tehran may yet agree to suspend enrichment -- are the chief
reasons why the EU is set to keep the contacts going, said the
paper quoting diplomatic sources.

 "The 31 August date is important because that was the date set
by the Security Council," said a senior European diplomat.

 "But that doesn't mean we can't continue any exchanges with the
Iranians. We will be available to talk to them, there are things
we are ready to pursue."
 He stressed that the EU would not enter into formal
negotiations with Iran while Tehran continued to enrich uranium,
and added that the EU would seek to pursue "two tracks in
parallel" -- continuing contacts while seeking to impose
"incremental" restrictive measures on Iran.

 Beijing and Moscow have agreed to "work for" economic sanctions
against Tehran if Iran fails to meet today's deadline, but in
recent days both have emphasized that such a step may be
premature, said The Financial Times, which is printed and
distributed simultaneously in several European cities including
Brussels.

 Ali Larijani, Iran's top security official, said on Sunday that
the passing of the UN deadline would not mean "the end of
diplomacy." 260/2321/1414
*****************************************************************
 11 IRNA: US must stop meddling in Iran's affairs - UK daily

, Aug 31, IRNA

- 

The US should learn lessons of its own experience and stop
interfering in Iran's affairs, Financial Times wrote on Thursday.

 "The main lesson the US should draw from its own experience of
Iran is that it is ultimately counterproductive to interfere in
this proud nation's domestic politics," said Scheherazade
Daneshkhu, the Iranian journalist of the daily.

 Her call came as the US has been pressing the UN Security
Council with the support of Britain to impose sanctions against
Iran in an attempt to force Tehran to give up its right under
the Non- Proliferation Treaty.

 "Today is the deadline set by the United Nations Security
Council for Iran to respond to the nuclear package put to it by
the US and Europe," Daneshkhu said.

 "But the US must accept that Iran has a right to enrich uranium
under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and refer its worries
about a nuclear arms programme to International Atomic Energy
Agency inspections," she said.

 In an article for the Financial Times, the economic
correspondent recalled some of the history of the west's
interference in Iran's affairs, including the 1953 engineered
coup by the CIA with the support of Britain.

 "For a century, this Middle East Muslim country has actively
sought to bring about democracy, only to see its attempts twice
stamped out by western powers," she said.

 "These national struggles make a nonsense of the self-serving
notion, favoured in rightwing circles, that Islam and democracy
are incompatible. Iran can do without lectures on the importance
of democracy from the US and others," Daneshkhu warned.

 She said that history, as well as the US current actions in the
Middle East region, "help to explain why President George W.
Bush's description of the US as 'freedom-loving' is regarded as
mere words." "For many Iranians, America's love of freedom stops
at its own borders," she pointed out.

 The journalist said that the US instead was regarded in Iran as
being in "ruthless pursuit of its own interests, be those
security of oil supplies or the promotion of its defence and
reconstruction industries."
 "Its heavily skewed support for Israel pitches it against the
Arab and Muslim world," she added.

 She believed that the US must forget about trying to win hearts
and minds in the Middle East as this "depends on actions, not
words." 2220/345/1416
*****************************************************************
 12 IRNA: Solana proposes meeting with Larijani before UN deadline expires
      
Tehran, Aug 30, IRNA

Iran-Nuclear-Solana 

The EU Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana has proposed a meeting
with Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani before the
week-end, when the UN Security Council's deadline for an end to
Iran's uranium enrichment activities expires.


 Paris-based daily `Figaro' on Wednesday wrote that while the US
is seeking conditions and chances of implementing imposed
sanctions on Iran, the EU hopes to solve the country's nuclear
problem through dialogue and strives for contacting the country.

 Iran is supported by China and Russia in the face of the US,
said Figaro.

 The daily then quoted Finnish Foreign Minister as telling
Iran's deputy foreign minister for Euro-American affairs Saeed
Jalili in Helsinki on Tuesday that Finland does not close the
doors for dialogue with Iran.

*****************************************************************
 13 IRNA: EC chairman hopes ambiguities on Iran's nuclear issue will be
solved through talks 

, Aug 30, IRNA

-- 

Expediency Council (EC) Chairman Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani in a
meeting with the former Spanish prime minister and head of
Spain's Socialist Party Phillipe Gonzales here Wednesday hoped
that the ambiguities on Iran's nuclear issue will be solved
through talks.


 According to a report released by EC secretariat, he declared
Iran's readiness to expand mutual relations in all fields.

 Turning to Spain's decisive role in the European Union, he
called for its more active participation in international
developments.

 He pointed to the multifaceted progress in bilateral ties in
various domains over the recent years and hoped for further
broadening of such bonds.

 Rafsanjani urged the need for solutions that will restore the
inalienable rights of the Palestinian nation, including the
homeless, and promote tranquility in the region.

 The EC chairman added that international bodies should condemn
the killing of innocent Palestinian people and Israel's
aggression on the Lebanese territory.

 For his part, Gonzales lauded Iran's culture and civilization
and said, "As a strategic and significant world country, Iran
can have a decisive role in promotion of international peace and
security."
 He referred to use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes as
Iran's inalienable right and underlined that the issue should be
solved through peaceful and diplomatic ways.

 The Spanish official dismissed any other approach on the ground
that it will not be in the interest of the world.

 The former prime minister pointed to Iran as a friend of his
country and said that such a meeting and exchange of views in a
friendly atmosphere pave the way for further expansion of ties.

 At the meeting, regional issues, in particular Lebanon,
Palestine and Iraq were discussed between the two officials and
both underlined that it is impossible to solve regional
problems, unless the issue of Palestine is settled, foreign
troops withdraw from the independent Iraq and Lebanon's
territorial integrity is respected.

 2326/2322/1412
*****************************************************************
 14 Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: No Doubt As to Iran's Intentions
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 8:46 PM

AP Photo VAH102 

By NICK WADHAMS 

Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iran has left no doubt it intends to seek
nuclear weapons now that it has violated a U.N. Security Council
deadline to suspend uranium enrichment, and the council must now
be ready to impose sanctions, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said
Thursday. Iran's president defiantly refused to compromise,
saying his country won't be bullied into giving up its right to
nuclear technology. 

Security Council unanimity was not needed before taking action
against Iran, Bolton said in a reference to continued Chinese
and Russian reluctance to move quickly on sanctions. 

He spoke shortly after the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the
International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran shows no signs of
freezing enrichment, adding that Tehran started work on a new
batch Aug. 24. 

Iran's refusal to cooperate fully with the IAEA and its
continued development of nuclear technology makes clear that it
is seeking a nuclear bomb, Bolton told reporters. Iran contends
its program is for peaceful purposes. 

``There's simply no explanation for the range of Iranian
behavior which we've seen over the years other than that they're
pursuing a weapons capability,'' Bolton said. 

Last month, the Security Council gave Iran until Aug. 31 to
suspend uranium enrichment, and warned that it would consider
sanctions if those activities weren't stopped. But it refused. 

Bolton said the Security Council will wait to take any action
until the foreign policy chief of the European Union, Javier
Solana, meets with Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator,
sometime in the middle of next week. 

``We're certainly ready to proceed here in New York when we're
given the instructions to do so,'' Bolton said. 

Despite statements from Russia and China expressing their
reluctance for sanctions, Bolton said the world should not
assume that they would not punish Iran. He underscored that the
two had agreed to the council resolution warning of possible
sanctions. 

``Russia and China, through their foreign ministers, committed -
committed - to seeking sanctions'' if Iran didn't comply, Bolton
said. 

In Tehran, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a large
crowd that ``the Iranian nation will not accept for one moment
any bullying, invasion and violation of its rights.'' 

He also said enemies of the country were trying to stir up
differences among the Iranian people, but ``I tell them: you are
wrong. The Iranian nation is united.'' 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he said, referring to the United States. ``They
talk about human rights while maintaining the most notorious
prisons. Those powers that do not abide by God and follow evil
are the main source of all the current problems of mankind.'' 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said an Iranian refusal to
freeze uranium enrichment by the deadline would be ``very
regrettable,'' and the international community would be unable
to ignore it. 

``We have made Iran a very, very good offer,'' she during a
visit to the Baltic Sea port of Warnemuende, alluding to a
package of incentives aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its
nuclear activities. 

If Iran does not accept, ``we will not slam the door shut, but
we cannot act as if nothing had happened,'' Merkel said, adding
that the next step would have to be discussed, but gave no
details. 

The State Department has not said publicly what type of
punishment it might seek. But U.S. and European officials have
indicated they might push for travel restrictions on Iranian
officials or a ban on sale of dual-use technology to Iran. The
hope is to start with relatively low-level punishments in a bid
to attract Russian and Chinese support, the officials have said. 

More extreme sanctions could include a freeze on Iranian assets
or a broader trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia,
China and perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it
could cut off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China, which have traditional economic and strategic
ties with Tehran, seem likely to resist U.S.-led efforts for a
quick response, which means sanctions do not loom immediately.
That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
its allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of
their own, independent of the Security Council. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off
the possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that
Iran ``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually.'' 

The deadline was widely reported on the front pages of major
Iranian newspapers. The daily Aftab said the showdown offers
``the enemies'' a chance to ratchet up pressure on Iran. Another
newspaper, Kargozaran, expressed doubt that the U.S. would
muster enough support within the Security Council for punitive
sanctions. 

It's not clear when exactly Thursday's deadline will run out.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said he
believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran - or 3:31
p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official urged Japan
on Thursday to help peacefully resolve the standoff without
sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 

--- 

AP correspondents George Jahn in Vienna, Nasser Karimi in
Tehran, and Nedra Pickler, covering President Bush's speech in
Salt Lake City, all contributed to this report. 
		 	 	   

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 15 Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: U.N. Must Now Focus on Sanctions
 
From the Associated Press        
	 
[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 7:01 PM

AP Photo UNMA107 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Iran has left no doubt it intends to seek
nuclear weapons now that it has violated a U.N. Security Council
deadline to suspend uranium enrichment, and the council must now
be ready to impose sanctions, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said
Thursday. Iran's president defiantly refused to compromise,
saying his country won't be bullied into giving up its right to
nuclear technology. 

Security Council unanimity was not needed before taking action
against Iran, Bolton said in a reference to continued Chinese
and Russian reluctance to move quickly on sanctions. 

He spoke shortly after the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the
International Atomic Energy Agency, said Iran shows no signs of
freezing enrichment, adding that Tehran started work on a new
batch Aug. 24. 

Iran's refusal to cooperate fully with the IAEA and its
continued development of nuclear technology makes clear that it
is seeking a nuclear bomb, Bolton told reporters. Iran contends
its program is for peaceful purposes. 

``There's simply no explanation for the range of Iranian
behavior which we've seen over the years other than that they're
pursuing a weapons capability,'' Bolton said. 

Last month, the Security Council gave Iran until Aug. 31 to
suspend uranium enrichment, and warned that it would consider
sanctions if those activities weren't stopped. But it refused. 

Bolton said the Security Council will wait to take any action
until the foreign policy chief of the European Union, Javier
Solana, meets with Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator,
sometime in the middle of next week. 

``We're certainly ready to proceed here in New York when we're
given the instructions to do so,'' Bolton said. 

Despite statements from Russia and China expressing their
reluctance for sanctions, Bolton said the world should not
assume that they would not punish Iran. He underscored that the
two had agreed to the council resolution warning of possible
sanctions. 

``Russia and China, through their foreign ministers, committed -
committed - to seeking sanctions'' if Iran didn't comply, Bolton
said. 

In Tehran, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a large
crowd that ``the Iranian nation will not accept for one moment
any bullying, invasion and violation of its rights.'' 

He also said enemies of the country were trying to stir up
differences among the Iranian people, but ``I tell them: you are
wrong. The Iranian nation is united.'' 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he said, referring to the United States. ``They
talk about human rights while maintaining the most notorious
prisons. Those powers that do not abide by God and follow evil
are the main source of all the current problems of mankind.'' 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said an Iranian refusal to
freeze uranium enrichment by the deadline would be ``very
regrettable,'' and the international community would be unable
to ignore it. 

``We have made Iran a very, very good offer,'' she during a
visit to the Baltic Sea port of Warnemuende, alluding to a
package of incentives aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its
nuclear activities. 

If Iran does not accept, ``we will not slam the door shut, but
we cannot act as if nothing had happened,'' Merkel said, adding
that the next step would have to be discussed, but gave no
details. 

The State Department has not said publicly what type of
punishment it might seek. But U.S. and European officials have
indicated they might push for travel restrictions on Iranian
officials or a ban on sale of dual-use technology to Iran. The
hope is to start with relatively low-level punishments in a bid
to attract Russian and Chinese support, the officials have said. 

More extreme sanctions could include a freeze on Iranian assets
or a broader trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia,
China and perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it
could cut off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China, which have traditional economic and strategic
ties with Tehran, seem likely to resist U.S.-led efforts for a
quick response, which means sanctions do not loom immediately.
That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
its allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of
their own, independent of the Security Council. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off
the possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that
Iran ``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually.'' 

The deadline was widely reported on the front pages of major
Iranian newspapers. The daily Aftab said the showdown offers
``the enemies'' a chance to ratchet up pressure on Iran. Another
newspaper, Kargozaran, expressed doubt that the U.S. would
muster enough support within the Security Council for punitive
sanctions. 

It's not clear when exactly Thursday's deadline will run out.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said he
believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran - or 3:31
p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official urged Japan
on Thursday to help peacefully resolve the standoff without
sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 

--- 

AP correspondents George Jahn in Vienna, Nasser Karimi in
Tehran, and Nedra Pickler, covering President Bush's speech in
Salt Lake City, all contributed to this report. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 16 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Defies U.N. Deadline on Enrichment
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 10:31 PM

AP Photo VAH103 

By NASSER KARIMI and GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writers 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran defied a U.N. deadline Thursday to stop
enriching uranium, opening the door for sanctions, but U.S. and
other officials said no action would be sought before a key
European diplomat meets with Tehran's atomic chief next week to
seek a compromise. 

Iran's hard-line president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, lashed out at
the United States, calling it ``tyrannical'' and insisting
Tehran would not be ``bullied'' into giving up the right to use
nuclear technology. Other Iranian officials said the country
could withstand any punishment. 

President Bush called for ``consequences to Iran's defiance,''
saying the ``world now faces a grave threat from the radical
regime in Iran.'' 

``We must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,'' Bush
said in a speech in Salt Lake City. He said Washington hoped for
a diplomatic solution, but insisted ``it is time for Iran to
make a choice'' whether to cooperate with the United Nations. 

John Bolton, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the
Security Council would wait to consider possible actions until
after the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana,
met with Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, sometime
in the middle of next week. 

``We're certainly ready to proceed here in New York when we're
given the instructions to do so,'' Bolton said. 

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan also was expected to raise the
issue during a visit to Tehran this weekend. 

Midnight Thursday - the last day of the Security Council
deadline - passed with no change in the Iranian position. 

The formal trigger for possible sanctions was provided by the
International Atomic Energy Agency, based in Vienna, Austria. 

In a report Thursday, the U.N. agency confirmed Tehran had not
halted uranium enrichment as demanded by the Security Council
and said three years of IAEA probing had been unable to confirm
``the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program'' because of
lack of cooperation from Tehran. 

Iran denies it is trying to acquire atomic weapons in violation
of its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Tehran insists its nuclear program is peaceful, with the sole
aim of producing electricity with nuclear reactors. 

The Security Council voted July 31 to impose the Thursday
deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and asked the
IAEA to report on Tehran's compliance, dangling the threat of
sanctions if Iran refused. 

Still, with permanent council members Russia and China opposed
to quick and harsh penalties, the council appeared ready to
delay such action. Senior U.N. diplomats told The Associated
Press that Iran had agreed to meet with European negotiators to
try to find a compromise. 

Confirming the plans, Bolton said the Security Council would
wait to consider any action until after European Union envoy
Javier Solana met with Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear
negotiator, sometime next week. 

An official from one nation on the council said the meeting was
tentatively set for Tuesday in Berlin. The official said senior
officials from the U.S., Russia, China, Britain, France and
Germany would meet in the German capital the following day.
Those six nations offered rewards to Iran in June if it gave up
enrichment - but warned of U.N. sanctions if it didn't. 

Bolton told AP that while Washington ``has extensive thoughts on
what a possible U.N. resolution would look like, such discussion
will await the outcome of the Solana meeting with Iran.'' 

Still, he said the IAEA report added further weight to
suspicions Iran is ``engaged in activities that are only
consistent with a weapons program.'' 

Bolton declined to specify what sanctions the U.S. might seek.
But U.S. and European diplomats have said they are focusing on
low-level punishment at first to win backing from Russia and
China. Proposals include travel bans on Iranian officials or a
ban on the sale of dual-use technology to Iran. 

More extreme sanctions would be a freeze on Iranian assets or a
broader trade ban, but those would likely be opposed by Russia,
China and perhaps others, particularly since it could cut off
badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

In Tehran, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged
off the possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television
that Iran ``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually.'' 

Ahmadinejad denounced the United States, accusing it of trying
to impose its will on Iran. 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he told a crowd of thousands in the northwestern
town of Orumiyeh. 

``The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and
the violation of its rights,'' Ahmadinejad said. 

While stating ``Iran has not suspended its enrichment
activities,'' the restricted IAEA report, obtained by AP, did
not specifically say Iran was carrying out enrichment Thursday.
It said only that Tehran started work on a new batch Aug. 24. 

But a senior official close to the agency said Iran's pilot
centrifuge plant was processing small quantities of uranium gas
for enrichment as late as Tuesday, the last day IAEA inspectors
reported back to headquarters on Tehran's nuclear program. 

Iran says it wants to develop a full-scale enrichment program to
produce reactor fuel, but there is growing suspicion the
oil-rich country wants to use enrichment to create fissile
material for nuclear warheads. 

The rest of the IAEA's report essentially documented a
protracted stalemate between agency inspectors trying to
determine if Tehran is seeking to make weapons and Iranian
officials who have repeatedly refused to provide information. 

While the findings on enrichment were expected, they were
important because they provided the formal trigger needed for
the Security Council to take up sanctions. 

IAEA officials said the six-page report was hand-carried to the
council chambers at the same time it was posted on the agency's
intranet site for the 35 nations on the IAEA's board of
governors. 

Other key findings in the report from IAEA chief Mohamed
ElBaradei: 

- New findings of minute particles of highly enriched uranium at
an Iranian technical university implicated in possible military
work, although the report did not specify whether the level was
weapons-grade. 

- A decision by the Iranians to cut off IAEA access to
suspicious diagrams apparently showing how to mold fissile
material into the shape of a warhead and to destroy notes taken
on the document by agency inspectors. 

- The temporary barring of U.N. inspectors from an underground
facility being built to house tens of thousands of centrifuges,
the backbone of Iran's future enrichment program. 

- Protracted delays in granting multiple entry visas to IAEA
inspectors. 

U.N. officials told AP that even Olli Heinonen, deputy IAEA
director-general in charge of the Iran investigation, was left
dangling. In an unprecedented move, Iranian officials initially
issued him only a one-month visa before relenting and giving him
the usual one-year entry pass Wednesday, a day before the report
was released. 

--- 

Nasser Karimi reported from Tehran and George Jahn from Vienna.
Associated Press writers Lee Keath in Cairo, Egypt, and Nick
Wadhams at the United Nations contributed to this report. 	 
		 	 	   

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 17 Guardian Unlimited: The Next Steps in Iran Dispute
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 8:01 PM

By The Associated Press 

Iran has ignored a U.N. Security Council deadline to suspend
uranium enrichment or face the possibility of sanctions. 

The next steps: 

- The 35 members of the International Atomic Energy Agency are
to study a confidential agency report outlining Iran's
compliance with U.N. directives. 

- If the report is negative, U.N. Security Council members will
begin consultations by mid-September on possible economic or
political sanctions. 

- U.S. officials are considering relatively mild sanctions such
as a travel ban as a first step in hopes of winning the support
of Russia and China, both of which have veto power on the
Security Council. 

- If Russia and China refuse any punishment, the U.S. is
considering asking its allies to impose sanctions or financial
restrictions of their own, independent of the Security Council. 
		 	 	   

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 18 Guardian Unlimited: European Nations Will Try Again on Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 6:16 PM

AP Photo VAH102 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Key European nations will meet with Iran
in September in a last-ditch effort to seek a negotiated
solution to the standoff over Tehran's refusal to freeze uranium
enrichment, a senior U.N. diplomat said Thursday. As a U.N.
deadline for Iran to halt uranium enrichment, the country's
defiantly refused to compromise, saying Tehran would not be
bullied into giving up its right to nuclear technology. 

The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his
information was confidential, said the U.N. Security Council
will await the results of that meeting before acting on
sanctions. 

President Bush said ``there must be consequences'' for Tehran,
adding that the war between Tehran-backed Hezbollah militants
and Israel demonstrated that ``the world now faces a grave
threat from the radical regime in Iran.'' 

The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy
Agency, said in a report obtained by The Associated Press that
Iran shows no signs of freezing enrichment, adding that Tehran
started work on a new batch Aug. 24. 

The confidential IAEA report will be given to its 35-nation
board. That is expected to trigger U.N. Security Council members
- by mid-September - to begin considering economic or political
sanctions. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a crowd of thousands
in the northwestern city of Orumiyeh that ``the Iranian nation
will not accept for one moment any bullying, invasion and
violation of its rights.'' 

He also said enemies of the country were trying to stir up
differences among the Iranian people, but ``I tell them: you are
wrong. The Iranian nation is united.'' 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he said, referring to the United States. ``They
talk about human rights while maintaining the most notorious
prisons. Those powers that do not abide by God and follow evil
are the main source of all the current problems of mankind.'' 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said an Iranian refusal to
freeze uranium enrichment by the deadline would be ``very
regrettable,'' and the international community would be unable
to ignore it. 

``We have made Iran a very, very good offer,'' she during a
visit to the Baltic Sea port of Warnemuende, alluding to a
package of incentives aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its
nuclear activities. 

If Iran does not accept, ``we will not slam the door shut, but
we cannot act as if nothing had happened,'' Merkel said, adding
that the next step would have to be discussed, but gave no
details. 

The State Department has not said publicly what type of
punishment it might seek. But U.S. and European officials have
indicated they might push for travel restrictions on Iranian
officials or a ban on sale of dual-use technology to Iran. The
hope is to start with relatively low-level punishments in a bid
to attract Russian and Chinese support, the officials have said. 

More extreme sanctions could include a freeze on Iranian assets
or a broader trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia,
China and perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it
could cut off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China, which have traditional economic and strategic
ties with Tehran, seem likely to resist U.S.-led efforts for a
quick response, which means sanctions do not loom immediately.
That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
its allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of
their own, independent of the Security Council. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off
the possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that
Iran ``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually.'' 

The deadline was widely reported on the front pages of major
Iranian newspapers. The daily Aftab said the showdown offers
``the enemies'' a chance to ratchet up pressure on Iran. Another
newspaper, Kargozaran, expressed doubt that the U.S. would
muster enough support within the Security Council for punitive
sanctions. 

It's not clear when exactly Thursday's deadline will run out.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said he
believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran - or 3:31
p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official urged Japan
on Thursday to help peacefully resolve the standoff without
sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 19 Guardian Unlimited: Bolton: Unanimity Not Necessary on Iran
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 6:16 PM

AP Photo VAH102 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Iran remained defiant Thursday as a U.N.
deadline arrived for it to halt uranium enrichment, and the U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations said unanimity among the
Security Council was not needed to take action against Tehran. 

Key European nations will meet with Iran in September in a
last-ditch effort to seek a negotiated solution to the standoff
over Tehran's refusal to freeze uranium enrichment, a senior
U.N. diplomat said Thursday. 

Presideger U.N. Security Council members - by mid-September - to
begin considering economic or political sanctions. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a crowd of thousands
in the northwestern city of Orumiyeh that ``the Iranian nation
will not accept for one moment any bullying, invasion and
violation of its rights.'' 

He also said enemies of the country were trying to stir up
differences among the Iranian people, but ``I tell them: you are
wrong. The Iranian nation is united.'' 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he said, referring to the United States. ``They
talk about human rights while maintaining the most notorious
prisons. Those powers that do not abide by God and follow evil
are the main source of all the current problems of mankind.'' 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said an Iranian refusal to
freeze uranium enrichment by the deadline would be ``very
regrettable,'' and the international community would be unable
to ignore it. 

``We have made Iran a very, very good offer,'' she during a
visit to the Baltic Sea port of Warnemuende, alluding to a
package of incentives aimed at persuading Tehran to curb its
nuclear activities. 

If Iran does not accept, ``we will not slam the door shut, but
we cannot act as if nothing had happened,'' Merkel said, adding
that the next step would have to be discussed, but gave no
details. 

The State Department has not said publicly what type of
punishment it might seek. But U.S. and European officials have
indicated they might push for travel restrictions on Iranian
officials or a ban on sale of dual-use technology to Iran. The
hope is to start with relatively low-level punishments in a bid
to attract Russian and Chinese support, the officials have said. 

More extreme sanctions could include a freeze on Iranian assets
or a broader trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia,
China and perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it
could cut off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China, which have traditional economic and strategic
ties with Tehran, seem likely to resist U.S.-led efforts for a
quick response, which means sanctions do not loom immediately.
That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
its allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of
their own, independent of the Security Council. 

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off
the possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that
Iran ``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually.'' 

The deadline was widely reported on the front pages of major
Iranian newspapers. The daily Aftab said the showdown offers
``the enemies'' a chance to ratchet up pressure on Iran. Another
newspaper, Kargozaran, expressed doubt that the U.S. would
muster enough support within the Security Council for punitive
sanctions. 

It's not clear when exactly Thursday's deadline will run out.
The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said he
believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran - or 3:31
p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official urged Japan
on Thursday to help peacefully resolve the standoff without
sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 20 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Warns Iran Anew on Nuclear Program
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 6:16 PM

AP Photo UTDP104 

By NEDRA PICKLER 

Associated Press Writer 

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - President Bush said Thursday that Iran has
responded with defiance and delay to demands to stop enriching
uranium and said ``there must be consequences'' for Tehran. 

Bush put the nuclear standoff with Iran in a larger context,
saying the violence in Lebanon this summer makes Tehran's
designs on the world stage clear. He blamed Iran for supporting
the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, for helping to
destabilize Iraq by sponsoring insurgents and supplying
components for improvised explosive devices, and for denying
basic human rights to millions of its own people. 

``The world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in
Iran,'' the president said. ``We know the depth of suffering
that Iran's sponsorship of terrorists has brought. And we can
imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were allowed to
acquire nuclear weapons.'' 

Bush delivered his starkest threat yet to Tehran in a speech to
thousands of veterans at the American Legion convention. 

``There must be consequences for Iran's defiance,'' he said,
``and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapons.'' 

Thursday was the deadline for Tehran to heed the U.N. Security
Council demand to stop enrichment. 

Bush discussed Iran in a speech dealing largely with the war in
Iraq. He said opponents of the war in Iraq who are calling for a
plan to bring home troops would create a disaster in the Middle
East. 

``Many of these folks are sincere and they're patriotic but they
could be - they could not be more wrong,'' Bush said. ``If
America were to pull out before Iraq could defend itself, the
consequences would be absolutely predictable, and absolutely
disastrous. We would be handing Iraq over to our worst enemies -
Saddam's former henchmen, armed groups with ties to Iran, and
al-Qaida terrorists from all over the world who would suddenly
have a base of operations far more valuable than Afghanistan
under the Taliban.'' 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 21 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Ignores Powers, U.N. on Enrichment
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 7:01 AM

AP Photo VAH106 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - A defiant Iran kept on enriching uranium
in advance of the U.N. Security Council's Thursday deadline for
Tehran to freeze such activity or face the threat of sanctions,
U.N. and European officials said. 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad urged European members of
the council against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment
would not dissuade his country from pursuing its disputed
nuclear program. 

``Sanctions cannot dissuade the Iranian nation from achieving
our lofty goals of progress. So it's better for Europe to be
independent (of the U.S.) in decision-making and to settle
problems through negotiations,'' Ahmadinejad said Wednesday,
according to state-run television. 

Iran could theoretically still announce a full stop to
enrichment before the deadline set by the Security Council. But
that appeared unlikely, considering Tehran's past refusal to
consider such a move and findings by the International Atomic
Energy Agency that it was enriching small quantities of uranium
as late as Tuesday. 

Iran's refusal to heed the Security Council up to now will be
detailed in a confidential IAEA report to be completed Thursday
and circulated among the Vienna-based agency's 35 board member
nations. The report also will include new details on Tehran's
research into advanced enrichment equipment, and other points,
diplomats accredited to the agency told The Associated Press. 

The report, also scheduled to go to the Security Council on
Thursday, would likely trigger council members to consider
economic and political sanctions. Some initial ideas that have
been touted are a travel ban on Iranian officials or a ban on
sale of dual-use technology to Iran. 

More extreme would be a freeze on Iranian assets or a broader
trade ban - although opposition to that would be strong,
particularly since it could cut off badly needed oil exports
from Iran. 

Russia and China, however, were likely to resist U.S.-led
efforts for a quick response, which likely means sanctions do
not loom immediately. 

An earlier resolution on Iran took weeks for the Security
Council members to negotiate, as did talks over a weaker council
statement earlier this year demanding that Iran suspend
enrichment. As well, the IAEA report may not be formally
considered by the Security Council before the agency's board
meets and approves it in mid-September. 

It's not even clear when exactly the deadline will run out. The
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said
Wednesday that he believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in
Tehran - or 3:31 p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New
York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

Bolton said the U.S. still has not decided how it will formally
respond once the deadline expires, though he will likely make
some sort of statement on Thursday afternoon. He repeated,
however, that Washington would seek sanctions if Iran disregards
the resolution. 

``That has been our intention for some months, it remains our
intention, it'll be our intention on September the first if the
Iranians don't comply with the resolution,'' he said. 

Even Moscow and Beijing, which have traditional economic and
strategic ties with Tehran, are increasingly vexed at what world
powers consider Iranian intransigence on enrichment - a process
that generates nuclear energy but also creates the fissile core
of warheads. 

In another sign of Iran's willingness to confront the
international community, a senior European government official
said Tehran had not responded to a recent European Union offer
on behalf of the five Security Council members plus Germany to
discuss Tehran's terms for new nuclear talks. Such behavior
would likely strengthen Washington's push to move more quickly
toward economic sanctions. 

IAEA inspectors remained in Iran on Wednesday, gathering
information to go into Thursday's confidential report. While
their most recent findings were not available by Wednesday
afternoon, a senior U.N. official said Wednesday that Iranian
centrifuges were enriching small quantities of uranium gas as
late as Tuesday. 

The latest enrichment - in a series of such activities over the
past few months - was first reported Wednesday by The Washington
Post. 

Iran insists it has a right to enrich for what it says is a
future nuclear power program. The concern, however, is that
Tehran could misuse the technology to aim for material enriched
to the level required for weapons. 

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany
offered Iran on June 1 a package of technological and political
incentives in exchange for a commitment from Tehran to freeze
enrichment before talks began. 

Tehran's response Aug. 21 has been characterized by heads of
governments and senior diplomats as inadequate because it makes
no mention of any willingness to suspend enrichment before
talks, let alone consider a long-term moratorium on such
activity. Senior diplomats have told The Associated Press it
will be rejected. 

Senior EU foreign policy official Javier Solana has nevertheless
offered to meet with Iranian nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani to
explore if there is common ground, the diplomats said. But up to
now Iran has snubbed that overture, a senior European official
said from outside Vienna. 

A European official in another capital agreed: ``Nothing has
moved over the past few days.'' 

The IAEA report will contain other information the U.S. and its
allies would likely seize on, diplomats said, including
confirmation that: 

- IAEA inspectors were recently refused onsite inspections of a
vast underground facility being built at Natanz to house up to
54,000 centrifuges, which spin uranium gas into enriched
material. While Tehran's centrifuge program is hamstrung by
technical problems, the Washington-based Institute for Science
and International Security has suggested that - if it were
interested in producing bombs - Iran could create a basic small
plant of 1,500 centrifuges to make enough bomb fuel for one
weapon within three years. 

- For now, Iran's known enrichment capabilities consist of 164
interconnected centrifuges at its surface pilot plant at Natanz,
which has been used to turn out small quantities of low-enriched
uranium. But the report will reveal new details of the country's
centrifuge program, including confirmation from Larijani that
scientists are doing computer-based research on a more advanced
type of centrifuge that works faster and turns out larger
quantities of enriched uranium. 

The report will also focus on lack of progress in investigating
suspicious findings - because of Iran's refusal to provide
information - such as diagrams showing how to mold fissile
uranium into the shape of warheads. 

Iran has been under IAEA investigation since 2003, with
inspectors turning up evidence of clandestine plutonium
experiments, black market centrifuge purchases and links to the
military of what Iran says is a civilian nuclear program. 

--- 

On the Net: 

International Atomic Energy Agency: http://www.iaea.org 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 22 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Holds Firm on Right to Nuke Program
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 9:31 AM

AP Photo VAH104 

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran's president made clear Thursday that he
would not compromise on the day of a U.N. deadline for the
country to stop enriching uranium, saying Tehran would not
accept bullying, invasion or a violation of its rights. 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not directly address the
deadline but maintained Iran's right to nuclear technology in a
speech to a cheering crowd of thousands in northwestern Iran. 

Iran could theoretically still announce a full stop to uranium
enrichment before the day is up, but that appeared unlikely,
given Ahmadinejad's speech and new findings by the International
Atomic Energy Agency that Iran was enriching small quantities of
uranium as late as Tuesday. 

``The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and
the violation of its rights,'' Ahmadinejad said. He added that
enemies of the country were trying to stir up differences among
the Iranian people, but said, ``I tell them: You are wrong. The
Iranian nation is united.'' 

Iran's refusal to heed the U.N. Security Council demand to stop
enrichment will be detailed in a confidential IAEA report to be
completed Thursday and given to the Vienna-based agency's 35
board member nations. That is likely to trigger council members
- by mid-September - to begin considering economic or political
sanctions. 

The U.S. State Department has not said publicly what it might
seek. But U.S. and European officials have indicated they might
push for travel restrictions on Iranian officials or a ban on
sale of dual-use technology to Iran. The hope is to start with
relatively low-level punishments in a bid to attract Russian and
Chinese support, the officials have said. 

More extreme sanctions could include a freeze on Iranian assets
or a broader trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia,
China and perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it
could cut off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China seem likely, in any case, to resist U.S.-led
efforts for a quick response, which likely means sanctions do
not loom immediately. 

That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of their
own, independent of the Security Council. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 

It's not clear when exactly the deadline will run out. The U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said Wednesday
that he believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran -
or 3:31 p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official was in Japan
on Thursday urging the country to help peacefully resolve the
standoff without sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Iran pursued a clandestine nuclear program for 18 years until it
was uncovered by the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency in 2003. 

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier expressed fresh
suspicion that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and said in
remarks published Thursday that Arab governments are equally
worried about Tehran's ambitions. 

``At the moment, Iran has no use whatsoever for enriched uranium
- unless it is planning to build the bomb,'' Steinmeier was
quoted as saying in the newspaper Bild. 

He also criticized the Iranian president for ``trying to play
the role of the leader of the Islamic world. .... Yet his Arab -
also Islamic - neighbors share our concern about and rejection
of a nuclear-armed Iran.'' 

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany
offered Iran earlier this summer a package of incentives in
exchange for a commitment from Tehran to freeze enrichment so
talks could begin. 

But Tehran's response earlier this month suggested the country
was not willing to suspend enrichment before talks, let alone
consider a long-term moratorium on such activity. 

The West has struggled for years over carrots and sticks to
persuade Iran to roll back its nuclear program. But Tehran has
time after time played the game by its rules and kept its eyes
constantly on a long-term prize: forcing the world to accept its
nuclear ambitions. 

Iranian leaders have indicated they are willing to bear the
economic blow of whatever sanctions are passed rather than give
up enrichment. 

That means Thursday will hardly be a climactic milestone in the
long-standing tussle between Iran and the West. Iran can go on
putting forward diplomatic initiatives to try to divide the big
powers and keep room for maneuver, said one analyst, Anthony
Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies
in Washington. 

``This deadline will invariably be followed by another deadline
and another,'' he said. ``This is a game that will play out over
five years, not a game that will play out tomorrow.'' 

--- 

Associated Press reporters Barry Schweid in Washington, George
Jahn in Vienna and Lee Keath in Cairo, Egypt, contributed to
this report. 	 
		 	 	   

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 23 Guardian Unlimited: Last-Ditch Meeting on Iran Scheduled
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 5:46 PM

AP Photo VAH101 

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Key European nations will meet with Iran
in September in a last-ditch effort to seek a negotiated
solution to the standoff over Tehran's refusal to freeze uranium
enrichment, a senior U.N. diplomat said Thursday. 

The diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity because his
information was confidential, said the U.N. Security Council
will await the results of that meeting before acting on
sanctions. 

The council had said the deadline for an enrichment freeze was
Thursday - the day that the International Atomic Energy Agency
reported that Tehran was continuing with the activity, opening
the path to punitive measures. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 24 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Welcomes Showdown on Deadline Day
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 12:46 PM

AP Photo VAH103 

By NASSER KARIMI 

Associated Press Writer 

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - U.S. and European officials appeared ready
to push for low-level sanctions against Iran like travel bans
Thursday as country's president made clear he would not
compromise on the day of a U.N. deadline. 

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did not directly address the
deadline but maintained Iran's right to nuclear technology in a
speech to a cheering crowd of thousands in Orumiyeh in
northwestern Iran. 

``The Iranian nation will not succumb to bullying, invasion and
the violation of its rights,'' Ahmadinejad told a crowd of
thousands. 

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi shrugged off the
possibility of sanctions, telling state-run television that Iran
``will find a way to avoid pressure eventually,'' 

The deadline was widely reported on the front pages of major
Iranian newspapers. The daily Aftab said the showdown offers
``the enemies'' a chance to ratchet up pressure on Iran. 

Another newspaper, Kargozaran, expressed doubt that the U.S.
would muster enough support within the Security Council for
punitive sanctions. 

Washington also continues to hold open the possibility that it
and its allies - as the next step - might pursue a course
outside the U.N. Security Council and impose penalties of their
own against Iran. 

Iran could theoretically still announce a full stop to uranium
enrichment before a late Thursday deadline to do so, set by the
Security Council. But that appeared unlikely, given
Ahmadinejad's speech and new findings by the International
Atomic Energy Agency that Iran was enriching small quantities of
uranium as late as Tuesday. 

In a speech devoted mostly to local issues, Ahmadinejad said
enemies of the country were trying to stir up differences among
the Iranian people, but ``I tell them: you are wrong. The
Iranian nation is united.'' 

``They claim to be supporting freedom but they support the most
tyrannical governments in the world to pursue their own
interests,'' he said, referring to the United States. 

``They talk about human rights while maintaining the most
notorious prisons,'' he said. ``Those powers that do not abide
by God and follow evil are the main source of all the current
problems of mankind.'' 

Iran's refusal to heed the Security Council demand to stop
enrichment will be detailed in a confidential IAEA report to be
completed Thursday and given to the Security Council. That is
likely to trigger council members - by mid-September - to begin
considering economic or political sanctions. 

The U.S. State Department has not said publicly what it might
seek. But U.S. and European officials have indicated they might
push for travel restrictions on Iranian officials or a ban on
sale of dual-use technology to Iran. 

The hope is to start with relatively low-level punishments in a
bid to attract Russian and Chinese support, the officials have
signaled. 

More extreme would be a freeze on Iranian assets or a broader
trade ban - although opposition to that by Russia, China and
perhaps others would be strong, particularly since it could cut
off badly needed oil exports from Iran. 

Russia and China seem likely, in any case, to resist U.S.-led
efforts for a quick response, which likely means sanctions do
not loom immediately. 

That has prompted the Bush administration to consider rallying
allies to impose sanctions or financial restrictions of their
own, independent of the Security Council. 

Tehran insists it wants to enrich uranium as fuel solely for
civilian nuclear power stations. However, the U.S. and other
Western countries suspect it wants to use it in nuclear
warheads. 

It's not clear when exactly the deadline will run out. The U.S.
ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said Wednesday
that he believed it would end at 12:01 a.m. Friday in Tehran -
or 3:31 p.m. Thursday at the Security Council in New York. 

But diplomats said the exact timing was not particularly
relevant for two reasons: They believe Iran already has given
its answer; and they would almost certainly abandon their
sanctions threat if Iran decides to suspend enrichment after the
deadline. 

On Wednesday, Ahmadinejad urged European members of the council
against resorting to sanctions, saying punishment would not
dissuade his country. Another top Iranian official was in Japan
on Thursday urging it, as an influential nation in Asia, to help
peacefully resolve the standoff without sanctions. 

Abbas Araghchi, deputy minister for legal and international
affairs of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, met with Japan's
foreign minister in a clear sign of Iran's continued efforts to
lobby countries worldwide against support for sanctions. 

``We are confident of the peaceful nature of our program. So if
there is also goodwill and sincerity in the other side, we are
sure that we can reach a good solution, a good conclusion
through negotiations,'' Araghchi said. 

Iran pursued a clandestine nuclear program for 18 years until it
was uncovered by the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency in 2003. 

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier expressed fresh
suspicion that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons and said in
remarks published Thursday that Arab governments are equally
worried about Tehran's ambitions. 

``At the moment, Iran has no use whatsoever for enriched uranium
- unless it is planning to build the bomb,'' Steinmeier was
quoted as saying in the newspaper Bild. 

He also criticized the Iranian president for ``trying to play
the role of the leader of the Islamic world. .... Yet his Arab -
also Islamic - neighbors share our concern about and rejection
of a nuclear-armed Iran.'' 

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany
offered Iran earlier this summer a package of incentives in
exchange for a commitment from Tehran to freeze enrichment so
talks could begin. 

But Tehran's response earlier this month made clear the country
was not willing to suspend enrichment before talks, let alone
consider a long-term moratorium on such activity. 

The West has struggled for years over carrots and sticks to
persuade Iran to roll back its nuclear program. But Tehran has
time after time played the game by its rules and kept its eyes
constantly on a long-term prize: forcing the world to accept its
nuclear ambitions. 

Iranian leaders have made clear they're willing to bear the
economic blow of whatever sanctions are passed rather than give
up enrichment. 

That means Thursday will hardly be a climactic milestone in the
long-standing tussle between Iran and the West. Iran can go on
putting forward diplomatic initiatives to try to divide the big
powers and keep room for maneuver, said one analyst, Anthony
Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies
in Washington. 

``This deadline will invariably be followed by another deadline
and another,'' he said. ``This is a game that will play out over
five years, not a game that will play out tomorrow.'' 

--- 

Associated Press reporters Barry Schweid in Washington, George
Jahn in Vienna and Lee Keath in Cairo, Egypt, contributed to
this report. 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 25 Guardian Unlimited: Iran 'united' in face of nuclear deadline
 
Sanctions nearer as Iran enriches new uranium 

David Fickling and agencies

Thursday August 31, 2006 Guardian Unlimited               

[The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at a press 
conference in Shanghai. Photograph: Elizabeth Dalziel/AP] 
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Iran will rebuff any attempt 
to stop its nuclear programme. Photograph: Elizabeth Dalziel/AP
   

 Iran has failed to halt its nuclear programme and is currently
at work on enriching a new batch of uranium, according to a
report presented to the UN that could open the way to sanctions
against Tehran. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report was issued
hours ahead of a deadline of midnight for Iran to give up its
uranium enrichment activities, with Iranian officials promising
to defy the threat of sanctions. George Bush warned of
"consequences" for missing the deadline. 

The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told a crowd of 
thousands in the western city of Orumiyeh earlier today that his 
country was united behind the programme and would defy any 
attempt to stop it.

"The Iranian nation will not accept for one moment any bullying,
invasion and violation of its rights," he said.

Speaking on a visit to Utah, the US president said: "It is time
for Iran to make a choice. We've made our choice. We will
continue to work closely with our allies to find a diplomatic
solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's defiance and
we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon."

Late last night Mr Ahmadinejad reiterated his opposition to the
sanctions proposals during a meeting with the former Spanish
prime minister Felipe González.

"Sanctions cannot dissuade Iranians from their decision to make
progress," he said. "On the contrary, many of our successes,
including access to the nuclear fuel cycle and production of
heavy water, have been achieved under sanctions. It would be
better for the European countries to make decisions
independently and settle the issue through negotiations."

Iran's nuclear programme has been a concern to western diplomats
since Tehran announced success in enriching uranium in April.

Iran argues that the programme is intended solely to produce
fuel for civilian nuclear reactors, but the same enrichment
process can be used to create material for nuclear bombs, and
diplomats fear that the civilian programme is being used as a
cover for developing atomic weapons.

Iran has turned down Russian offers to supply it with enriched
uranium for use in reactors, a deal that would allow it to
operate nuclear power plants without being able to develop
atomic weapons.

The New York Times yesterday quotedofficials who had seen the
report as saying that Iran had continued to enrich uranium,
though not to the level needed in nuclear bombs.

However, Reuters quoted the report as saying the IAEA inspectors
had found traces of bomb-capable uranium in a container at
Iran's Karaj waste storage facility. The IAEA asked Iran to
explain the source of the contamination.

Reuters also quoted diplomats as saying that in recent days Iran
had launched a heavy-water production plant and pressed ahead
with enriching uranium - albeit in small, insignificant amounts
- at its pilot centrifuge site in Natanz.

Despite the violation of the UN-imposed deadline, there are
doubts about whether there will be enough unity within the
security council to act decisively.

Washington is pushing for a swift imposition of sanctions, but
Russia and China have strong trade relationships with Iran and
are keen to avoid any damaging economic impact. Britain and
France, along with the key Iran negotiator, Germany, are thought
to favour sanctions but to be less enthusiastic than the US.

Those divisions are likely to have been exacerbated by Iran's
response on August 22 to a package of incentives offered by the
six countries in return for Tehran's suspending uranium
enrichment.

The incentives offered are understood to include direct talks
with Washington, as well as economic and scientific benefits.
But Iran is thought to have demanded talks as a precondition to
any suspension, an offer some western diplomats consider to be
an attempt to buy time.

The EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, today agreed to
further talks with Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani,
aimed at clarifying the details of Tehran's August 22 response.
The details of the meeting are yet to be decided.

Uncertainty over what will happen after the deadline passes
pushed oil prices on New York's Mercantile Exchange above $70 a
barrel yesterday, returning them to highs last seen during the
Lebanon war.
 
[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 26 BBC NEWS: Iran defiant on nuclear deadline
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 31 August 2006, 15:14 GMT 16:14 UK

[Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]                           

Mr Ahmadinejad maintains Iran has a right to a nuclear programme                                                                 

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has said Tehran will not 
yield to international pressure to stop its sensitive nuclear 
work. 

"Iran will not back down an inch... and will not accept being 
deprived of its rights," he said in a speech. 

The UN had set a 31 August deadline for Tehran to suspend uranium 
enrichment and re-processing activities. 

If Iran is found not to comply, the US wants UN powers to discuss 
a resolution which could impose sanctions on Iran. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is due to submit a 
report to the UN Security Council which is expected to say that 
Iran has not complied with the UN demand. 

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said the deadline had passed but 
he did not expect immediate action from the world body. 

"Even though the deadline has expired I don't think the Council 
is going to act tomorrow," he said, on a visit to Jordan. 

[Map of Iran's key nuclear site ] [ src=] Key nuclear sites

EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana and Iran's chief nuclear 
negotiator Ali Larijani are to holds talks in coming days. 

The two agreed in a telephone call "to have a face-to-face 
meeting soon", Mr Solana's spokeswoman said, adding that a date 
and venue has yet to be decided. 

US ambassador to the UN John Bolton has said Iran is well aware 
that ignoring the UN demands could trigger sanctions. 

He said the five permanent members of the Security Council had 
repeatedly warned that failure to meet the deadline would result 
in them seeking sanctions. 

US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said US 
Under-Secretary of State Nicholas Burns and senior officials from 
the UK, France, Russia, China and Germany would meet in Europe 
early next week to discuss the issue. 

What form any sanctions against Iran would take has yet to be 
determined. 

Russia and China, which can both veto action at the Security 
Council, have urged patience and said they would not support 
severe punishments. 

Iran maintains it has a right to a nuclear programme which, it 
says, has a purely civilian aspect. 

But Western powers accuse Iran of trying covertly to develop a 
nuclear bomb. 

US claims 

A senior White House official has told the BBC the US continues 
to detect low level uranium enrichment by Iran. 

Such activity would be in defiance of demands from both the UN 
and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the 
Iranians were trying "to familiarise themselves with the process 
of enriching uranium" and the technology associated with the 
product. 

However, the official said the end product was not of a superior 
enough quality to be used for nuclear weapons. 

On Saturday Mr Ahmadinejad inaugurated a new phase of a heavy 
water reactor project in Arak. 

Heavy water reactors produce plutonium which can be an 
alternative route to a nuclear device, the other being highly 
enriched uranium. 

Observers say the move was aimed at sending out a signal of 
defiance ahead of the Security Council's deadline. 

After inaugurating the heavy water plant, Mr Ahmadinejad again 
said Iran would never abandon its nuclear programme, but that 
nuclear weapons were not its goal. 

		 	 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 27 AFP: EU seeks path out of Iranian nuclear impasse 

  [Iranian technicians at the Isfahan Uranium Conversion
Facilities (UCF)]   

BRUSSELS (AFP) - European foreign ministers were set to meet to 
work out how to respond to Iran's refusal to suspend nuclear 
activities, an impasse which threatens to lay waste to long 
months of EU diplomatic efforts.

In two days of informal talks in southern Finland, the ministers 
will also take stock of developments in Lebanon and discuss ways 
to strengthen the EU's influence in the Middle East -- 
particularly with Israel.

The UN Security Council deadline for Iran to suspend uranium 
enrichment was set to pass Thursday. Iran has defiantly declared 
that it does not intend to comply.

The EU must now decide whether to respond to Tehran's offer for
new talks -- well aware that negotiations so far have proved
unsatisfactory -- or head down the path of sanctions, favored by
the United States.

Iran maintains that it is exercising its right to develop
civilian atomic energy, but many fear that it is really trying
to build a nuclear bomb.

EU powers Britain, France and Germany, along with EU foreign
policy chief Javier Solana, have led efforts to convince Iran to
accept a package of political and economic incentives in
exchange for suspending enrichment.

But with the deadline past, the United States believes it is
time to pass from the carrot to the stick. The State Department
said Wednesday that the major UN powers will meet in Europe next
week to discuss sanctions.

Security Council members China and Russia, however, are wavering
on sanctions, and could veto any such moves. At the same time,
Iran is again calling for dialogue, leaving the EU divided even
among its own 25 members.

"Iran is just laughing and winning," said Fraser Cameron,
analyst at the Brussels-based think-tank the European Policy
Centre.

"The EU would be wise to try and get the Americans to talk to
Iran. There are limits to what the Europeans can do alone," he
said.

"There is not going to be a UN resolution on sanctions because
Russia and China are opposed to sanctions," he said.

To draw attention away from its nuclear programme, some analysts
say, Iran has steadily armed the Shiite militia Hezbollah in
Lebanon and urging it to fight arch-foe Israel.

Following a month-long conflict in southern Lebanon, France and
Italy have contribute several thousand troops to a peacekeeping
force, increasing the EU's leverage with Israel and, indirectly,
the United States. 

Taking the lead of the peacekeeping mission is seen as a step
toward making Europe a real player in the Middle East rather
than simply being the biggest aid donor.

The ministers' task will be to work out what to step to take
next.

"I believe that it would be timely to evaluate the EU's role and
our own working methods in order to see whether there is
something we can do to enhance our impact," Finnish Foreign
Minister Erkki Tuomioja said in a letter inviting his European
counterparts to the talks, in the town of Lappeenranta.

Tuomioja, whose country holds the bloc's rotating presidency,
said it would be important for the ministers to discuss not only
Lebanon and Israel, but also Israel and the Palestinians. 

    Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP
*****************************************************************
 28 AFP: France still hopes Iran will agree to enrichment freeze - FM -

Thursday August 31, 12:07

TROYES, France (AFP) - France is still hopeful Iran will respond
positively to international demands that it freeze uranium
enrichment, Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said as a UN
deadline was set to expire.

"Today is August 31. August 31 was the last day for Iran to give
its response, which we hope until the last moment will be
positive," he told a press conference Thursday.

"In any case, we hope that we can have a dialogue because France
wants a dialogue, too, with the Iranians, while asking them to
suspend sensitive nuclear activities," Douste-Blazy said.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad refused Thursday to cede
"an inch" on the suspension of uranium enrichment, hours before
the Vienna-based UN nuclear watchdog was set to declare it in
defiance of the Security Council.

The United States, France, Britain and Germany were reportedly
drawing up plans for a three-stage system of international
sanctions designed to force Iran into compliance.

Western countries, led by the US, believe Iran wants to build
nuclear weapons, but the Islamic republic insists it only wants
to develop civilian nuclear power and has the right to master
the required technology.

A package of incentives backed by the five permanent members of
the UN Security Council -- the United States, France, Britain,
Russia and China -- plus Germany depends on Tehran first
agreeing to suspend enrichment. 

    Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
AFP
*****************************************************************
 29 IRIB PERSIAN News: IRI intitled to nuclear technology 

  2006/08/30   
  
Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad on Tuesday
declared support for Iran's right to peaceful use of nuclear
technology. 

In a meeting with the visiting Head of the Majlis National
Security and Foreign Policy Commission, Alaeddin Boroujerdi in
Kualalumpur, the former Malaysian prime minister said that Iran
is being prevented access to peaceful nuclear technology by the
very countries which possess the biggest nuclear arsenal. 

"They are opposing Iran because they believe that they have the
sole right to this knowledge," he pointed out. 

Condemning the double standards of the West in dealing with
Iran, he pointed out that the West is opposing Iran's peaceful
use of nuclear technology while it is assisting the Zionist
regime in building up its nuclear armaments stockpile. 

For his part, Boroujerdi referred to Iran's response to the
package of proposals presented by the 5+1 group and declared
Tehran's readiness to continue negotiations on its peaceful
nuclear program. 

He added that Iran has every right to conduct its nuclear
activities within the framework of international regulations and
IAEA protocols. 

Boroujerdi arrived in Malaysia early Tuesday. 

SM   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 30 AFP: Iran defiant as nuclear deadline expires

 Thursday August 31, 12:36 PM 

  [President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]   

TEHRAN (AFP) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has defiantly vowed
Iran would not back down "an inch" in the face of Western
pressure as time was running out on a UN deadline for Tehran to
halt sensitive nuclear work.

Ahmadinejad's message Thursday came hours before the UN nuclear
watchdog was expected to declare Tehran was defying the Security
Council by refusing to halt uranium enrichment, a process that
can be used both to make nuclear fuel and the explosive core of
a nuclear bomb.

"Iran will not back down an inch in the face of intimidation, 
aggression and will not accept being deprived of its rights," 
Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Orumiyeh, the provincial capital 
of West Azarbaijan province.

"Iran will never renounce peaceful nuclear energy and its
absolute right" to nuclear energy, state radio quoted the
president as saying during a later speech in the northern town
of Mahabad.

The United States, which accuses Tehran of using a nuclear
energy programme as cover for a drive to make atomic weapons,
has expressed confidence that the UN Security Council can agree
sanctions against Tehran in September.

Iran vehemently denies the US charges, maintaining that its
nuclear programme is peaceful and is aimed solely at providing
civilian nuclear energy.

Iran has not ruled out discussing the question of suspension of
uranium enrichment in talks even though it has also insisted it
has no intention of renouncing the activity.

Diplomats said Tehran had started another round of uranium
enrichment by putting small quantities of (feedstock) uranium
hexafluoride gas last week into a cascade line of 164
centrifuges just ahead of the deadline's expiry.

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said he was still
hopeful Iran will respond positively at the last minute to
international demands that it freeze uranium enrichment.

"Today is August 31. August 31 was the last day for Iran to give
its response, which we hope until the last moment will be
positive," he told a press conference.

The five permanent members of the Security Council, plus
Germany, have offered Iran a package of incentives if it halts
uranium enrichment. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani
is due to hold talks with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana
on the offer next week.

According to The New York Times, The United States and its
European allies are considering a three-tier system of sanctions
against Iran, beginning with low-impact measures like a travel
ban for Iranian nuclear officials.

Should Iran continue to resist compliance, the sanctions would
be ratcheted up to include restrictions on commercial flights
and on World Bank loans to Tehran, the paper quoted an official
as saying.

But Iran said it was ready for any UN sanctions that could be
imposed, adding to the existing wide-ranging US economic
sanctions that were imposed in the wake of the seizure of the US
embassy in Tehran in 1979.

"The Islamic republic is capable enough of confronting any
challenges arising from sanctions," foreign ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza Asefi was quoted as saying on state television.

"Sanctions will make the country stronger and the nation will
find the way out of these pressures," he said.

Ahmadinejad has late Wednesday called on European countries not
to follow "wrong and aggressive" policies of the United States,
which broke diplomatic ties with Iran in 1979, and hold talks
with Iran over its nuclear programme.

"The problem is that American leaders think they can solve all
the problems by using force and their arsenal," Ahmadinejad said
in his Orumiyeh speech, to cheers and chants from the thousands
gathered for the open-air address.

"But times have changed and we are in an epoch of culture,
thought and logic, and it is because of this that they refuse to
have a debate with us," he said.

The White House earlier this week rejected an offer from
Ahmadinejad to hold a live televised debate with US President
George W. Bush, rubbishing the proposal as a "diversion".

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said in an
interview published Thursday the proposal was "bizarre" and that
Ahmadinejad wanted to present himself as "the leader of the
Islamic world".

But he added: "Our hand remains extended. We want a diplomatic
solution." 
                                
    Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! UK Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 31 AFP: Iran defiant as nuclear deadline expires 

 by Hiedeh Farmani Thu Aug 31, 7:36 AM ET 		 	 

TEHRAN (AFP) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has defiantly vowed 
Iran" /> Iranwould not back down "an inch" in the face of Western 
pressure as time was running out on a UN deadline for Tehran to 
halt sensitive nuclear work. 

 Ahmadinejad's message Thursday came hours before the UN nuclear
watchdog was expected to declare Tehran was defying the Security
Council by refusing to halt uranium enrichment, a process that
can be used both to make nuclear fuel and the explosive core of
a nuclear bomb. 

"Iran will not back down an inch in the face of intimidation,
aggression and will not accept being deprived of its rights,"
Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Orumiyeh, the provincial capital
of West Azarbaijan province. 

"Iran will never renounce peaceful nuclear energy and its
absolute right" to nuclear energy, state radio quoted the
president as saying during a later speech in the northern town
of Mahabad. 

The United States, which accuses Tehran of using a nuclear
energy programme as cover for a drive to make atomic weapons,
has expressed confidence that the UN Security Council can agree
sanctions against Tehran in September. 

Iran vehemently denies the US charges, maintaining that its
nuclear programme is peaceful and is aimed solely at providing
civilian nuclear energy. 

Iran has not ruled out discussing the question of suspension of
uranium enrichment in talks even though it has also insisted it
has no intention of renouncing the activity. 

Diplomats said Tehran had started another round of uranium
enrichment by putting small quantities of (feedstock) uranium
hexafluoride gas last week into a cascade line of 164
centrifuges just ahead of the deadline's expiry. 

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said he was still
hopeful Iran will respond positively at the last minute to
international demands that it freeze uranium enrichment. 

"Today is August 31. August 31 was the last day for Iran to give
its response, which we hope until the last moment will be
positive," he told a press conference. 

The five permanent members of the Security Council, plus
Germany, have offered Iran a package of incentives if it halts
uranium enrichment. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani
is due to hold talks with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana
on the offer next week. 

According to The New York Times, The United States and its
European allies are considering a three-tier system of sanctions
against Iran, beginning with low-impact measures like a travel
ban for Iranian nuclear officials. 

Should Iran continue to resist compliance, the sanctions would
be ratcheted up to include restrictions on commercial flights
and on World Bank" /> World Bankloans to Tehran, the paper
quoted an official as saying. 

But Iran said it was ready for any UN sanctions that could be
imposed, adding to the existing wide-ranging US economic
sanctions that were imposed in the wake of the seizure of the US
embassy in Tehran in 1979. 

"The Islamic republic is capable enough of confronting any
challenges arising from sanctions," foreign ministry spokesman
Hamid Reza Asefi was quoted as saying on state television. 

"Sanctions will make the country stronger and the nation will
find the way out of these pressures," he said. 

Ahmadinejad has late Wednesday called on European countries not
to follow "wrong and aggressive" policies of the United States,
which broke diplomatic ties with Iran in 1979, and hold talks
with Iran over its nuclear programme. 

"The problem is that American leaders think they can solve all
the problems by using force and their arsenal," Ahmadinejad said
in his Orumiyeh speech, to cheers and chants from the thousands
gathered for the open-air address. 

"But times have changed and we are in an epoch of culture,
thought and logic, and it is because of this that they refuse to
have a debate with us," he said. 

The White House earlier this week rejected an offer from
Ahmadinejad to hold a live televised debate with US President
George W. Bush" /> President George W. Bush, rubbishing the
proposal as a "diversion". 

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said in an
interview published Thursday the proposal was "bizarre" and that
Ahmadinejad wanted to present himself as "the leader of the
Islamic world". 

But he added: "Our hand remains extended. We want a diplomatic
solution." 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 32 AFP: UN says Iran fails to stop uranium enrichment

 by Michael Adler Thu Aug 31, 6:07 PM ET 		 	 

VIENNA (AFP) - Iran" /> has defied a UN Security Council August 
31 deadline to halt uranium enrichment, the UN nuclear watchdog 
announced, setting the stage for possible sanctions. 

 "Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities," the 
watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency" /> said in a 
confidential report, filed to the Security Council and obtained 
by AFP. 

The Council had in July demanded that Iran suspend all uranium
enrichment related activities by August 31, spurred by US-led
concerns that Tehran's nuclear programme is a covert attempt to
produce nuclear weapons. 

Uranium enrichment makes fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but
in highly refined form can serve as the raw material for atom
bombs. 

Iran says its program is a peaceful effort to generate
electricity and on August 21 said it was ready to talk to world
powers about a package of incentives they were offering to get
Tehran's nuclear program under control. 

But Iran did not meet the requirement to stop enriching uranium. 

With the UN deadline past, Washington believes it is time to
pass from the carrot to the stick. The US State Department said
the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany
will meet in Berlin next Thursday to outline the exact steps to
take against Iran. 

This would be preceded by a last-ditch meeting to find a
negotiated settlement between European Union" /> foreign policy
chief Javier Solana and Iran negotiator Ali Larijani in the
German capital on September 6, a diplomat said. 

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, while ruling out even
indirect talks between the UN powers and Iranian envoy in
Berlin, said he expected before and after the Berlin meeting
"there will be diplomatic contacts with the Iranians to
encourage them to take the offer" and comply with the "just
demands of the international community." 

Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns, who will represent the
US in Berlin, said he expects the Security Council to adopt a
sanctions plan within a month. 

However, Council members China and Russia are wavering on
sanctions, and could veto any such moves. 

At the same time, Iran is again calling for dialogue, leaving
the EU divided even among its own 25 members. 

US Ambassador to the United Nations" /> John Bolton said the
report "provides ample evidence of (Iranian) defiance." 

Bolton, however, said the Council was not planning any immediate
response and would await the results of the meeting between
Solana and Larijani "and then we will be consulting here and in
capitals about where to go from there." 

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he refused to cede "an
inch" to the growing pressure and the report said Tehran had
started a new round of uranium enrichment only a week ago. 

"To resist in the face of international pressure and to defend
the nuclear achievements is Iran's best choice," Ahmadinejad
told state television. 

In another statement which also made no direct mention of the
IAEA report, he said on the state news agency IRNA: "They think
that by adopting resolutions they can force the Iranian people
to step back, but they are mistaken." 

US President George W. Bush" /> said: "It is time for Iran to
make a choice," in a speech to a US veterans group as the
deadline ticked by. 

"We will continue to work closely with our allies to plan a
diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's
defiance and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear
weapon," Bush said. 

"Inspectors have not uncovered any concrete proof that Iran's
nuclear program is of a military nature," a senior official
close to the IAEA told reporters on condition of anonymity. 

But the UN watchdog was getting little help from Iran in probing
additional questions, the official said. 

"There is a standstill with regard to the resolution of
outstanding issues which would clarify the peaceful nature of
Iran's program," the senior official said. 

The report said the IAEA was investigating a new case of
contamination by highly enriched uranium, which could be a sign
of weapons work, and that Iran has not been forthcoming about
its work with sophisticated P2 centrifuges to enrich uranium and
blueprints Iran possesses to make nuclear weapons parts. 

In addition, the IAEA documented cases this summer of Iran
blocking inspections authorised by the nuclear non-proliferation
treaty and not giving inspectors the multiple-entry one-year
visas they need, but said Iran was now complying with these
demands. 

The senior official close to the IAEA said it was
"counterproductive" for Iran to try to blackmail the agency by
linking "its ongoing political dialogue to its cooperation with
the IAEA, which is needed to clarify unresolved issues about its
past nuclear program." 

In Tehran, the deputy chief of Iran's nuclear agency Mohammad
Saeedi said the IAEA report was "not negative" and that
enrichment would "continue within the framework of research and
under the control of the IAEA." 

The report said Iran had started another round of small-scale
uranium enrichment, with plans to have running by September a
second 164-centrifuge line, or cascade, able to do this work. 

But the senior official close to the IAEA stressed that "the
inspectors findings indicate that the qualitative and
quantitative development of Iran's enrichment program continues
to be fairly limited." 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 33 AFP: Iran seen having problems with nuclear program 

 By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent Thu Aug 31, 7:19 PM
ET 		 	 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran" /> Iranappears to be encountering 
technical difficulties with its uranium enrichment but this does 
not diminish the fact that it has nuclear ambitions and is acting 
on them, U.S. officials and experts said on Thursday. 

"Have they encountered technical difficulties? Absolutely, 
because this is a very difficult thing to do," Undersecretary of 
State Robert Joseph, the top U.S. non-proliferation official, 
told Reuters. 

"But there is no sense -- in terms of what we see in the (U.N.)
report and the statements of Iranian leaders -- that there is
any intentional slowdown," he added. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency" /> International Atomic
Energy Agency, or IAEA, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, reported that
Iran failed to stop nuclear work by a Thursday deadline, thus
clearing the way for possible sanctions by the Security Council
due to Western fears Tehran could be trying to make atom bombs. 

Iran insists it is only trying to produce nuclear power for
electricity, although it hid sensitive research from U.N.
inspectors for almost 20 years and has since hindered U.N.
investigations. 

Drawing on the U.N. report and diplomatic sources, former U.N.
weapons inspector David Albright believes that Iran made
"limited progress" at its Natanz uranium enrichment plant,
installing and operating fewer gas centrifuges than expected. 

Centrifuges are rapidly rotating cylinders used for enriching
uranium for nuclear fuel. 

In a written analysis, Albright said U.S. and IAEA officials
expected Iran to have installed five cascades or networks, each
with 164 interconnected centrifuges, in a pilot plant at Natanz
by August 2006 but "it now appears Iran has not begun to operate
the second and third cascades." 

The second and third cascades "may be close to completion" but
the fourth and fifth cascades appear to be behind, he wrote. 

The one operating cascade has not been run consistently over a
sustained period, which Iran must do to achieve proficiency, he
wrote. 

Also, while Iran told the IAEA of plans to begin installing the
first 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz's underground halls by the
last quarter of 2006, "it now appears that Iran will also not
meet this deadline," he wrote. 

HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM FOUND 

Albright, who heads the Institute for Science and International
Security think tank, wrote that senior diplomats in Vienna
believe it is possible that Iran is deliberately delaying its
nuclear work while diplomacy is underway. 

But Jacqueline Shire, Albright's associate, told Reuters: "I
would put somewhat less stock today in Iran's slowing down for
political reasons because of the information in the IAEA that
they are continuing to enrich." 

The IAEA report said Iran fed uranium hexaflouride, the
feedstock for uranium enrichment processes, into the
164-centrifuge cascade for short periods in June, July and
August and recently launched a heavy-water production plant. 

Inspectors in mid-August found traces of highly enriched
uranium, of potential use for atom bombs, in a container at
Iran's Karaj Waste Storage Facility, the IAEA said. 

Given these developments and Iran's repeated refusal to forsake
its nuclear ambitions, the fact that Tehran may have technical
difficulties is "cold comfort," State Department spokesman Sean
McCormack told a news briefing. 

Determinations about Iran's level of nuclear capability are
crucial to decision-making by the United States and its
partners. U.S. intelligence has said it could be years before
Iran produces a weapon, but other experts say Tehran must not be
allowed to achieve its target of 3,000 operating centrifuges
because that would provide a critical capability. 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 34 AFP: Iran faces sanctions risk 

 By Irwin Arieff Thu Aug 31, 8:17 PM ET 		 	 

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Tehran has failed to dispel 
international doubts it wants nuclear bombs, the U.N. nuclear 
watchdog agency reported on Thursday, clearing the way for the 
Security Council to consider sanctions on Tehran. 

But council diplomats said they would proceed cautiously,
delaying deliberations until after a meeting between European
Union" /> foreign policy chief Javier Solana and top Iranian
nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani. 

After that, John Bolton, the U.S. ambassador to the United
Nations" /> , said he would meet with his French, British and
German counterparts to begin talks on a sanctions resolution. 

"We are certainly ready to proceed here in New York once we are
given the instruction to do so," Bolton told reporters. 

Western countries, including the United States and the European
Union fear Tehran is using a civilian nuclear energy program as
a cover for making atomic bombs. Iran" /> says it wants only to
generate electricity. 

The Security Council and the Vienna-based International Atomic
Energy Agency" /> , or IAEA, had demanded that Iran suspend its
enrichment of nuclear material by the end of August -- needed to
make fuel for both bombs and nuclear power plants -- so that
talks could begin on a way to resolve the crisis. 

But an IAEA report said Iran just last week resumed making
low-enriched uranium, suitable for power plant fuel, with a
cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot enrichment plant. 

It also said a lack of Iranian cooperation had crippled
three-year-old IAEA probes into the program. 

"Iran has not suspended its enrichment related activities," the
IAEA said. "Iran has not addressed the long outstanding
verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to
remove uncertainties associated with some of its activities." 

SECURITY COUNCIL HESITATIONS? 

Despite the findings, some members of the 15-nation Security
Council showed hesitation. 

"I do hope that even after the passing of the deadline, we
should talk to each other to find a way out," Chinese U.N.
Ambassador Wang Guangya said. 

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, while deploring
Tehran's "unsatisfactory response" to the proposal for
negotiations, said he remained convinced that "priority must
still be given to the path of dialogue." 

Solana said he had "a good conversation" with Larijani and was
trying to arrange a meeting soon to clarify a proposal from
Tehran that future talks center on the scope of its program. 

An EU diplomat said Solana tentatively planned to meet Larijani
in Berlin on Tuesday. 

President Bush" /> said Iran must pay a price. 

"We will continue to work closely with our allies to find a
diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's
defiance. We must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon,"
he told a convention of U.S. veterans. 

Washington said senior officials of the six world powers
handling Iran's case at the Security Council -- Britain, China,
France, Germany and Russia as well as the United States -- would
meet in Berlin next Wednesday to mull strategy. 

Iran shrugged off the threat of punishment, saying the IAEA
showed U.S. accusations about its plans were wrong. 

"Generally, although this report has not fully satisfied us, it
shows that America's propaganda and politically motivated claims
over (our) program are baseless and based on American officials'
hallucinations," Mohammad Saeedi, the deputy head of the Iranian
Atomic Energy Organization, told the official news agency IRNA. 

But Bolton said the IAEA report showed Iran's nuclear pursuits
could only be explained by military ambitions. 

"The report, short and to the point, concludes that after all
these years of trying, the IAEA is still unable to confirm the
peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program," he said. 

U.S. analyst David Albright said Iran's nuclear progress was
slower than expected and its plan to start installing 3,000
centrifuges later this year in a vast underground chamber being
built at Natanz looked unrealistic. 

U.S. officials acknowledged Iran may be encountering technical
difficulties but said this did not diminish the fact that it had
nuclear ambitions and was acting on them. 

Western diplomats say they want the U.N. sanctions to be imposed
on Iran in an incremental fashion, increasing the pressure over
time if Iran presses on with its nuclear programs. 

Bolton told CNN that Washington did not yet have a firm idea of
which sanctions should be imposed first, beyond a preference for
measures targeting Iran's leaders and its nuclear and ballistic
missile capabilities. 

"We don't have a quarrel with the Iranian people. We have 

a quarrel with the government and their pursuit of nuclear
weapons and that is what we are going to try and target." 

At the same time, Bolton said he hoped like-minded governments
such as Japan and European Union nations could work outside the
United Nations to clamp down on financial transactions and
investments in Iran. 

(Additional reporting by Mark Heinrich in Vienna, Louis
Charbonneau in Berlin, Mark John in Brussels, Carol Giacomo and
Jo-Anne Allen in Washington, Karolos Grohmann in Athens,
Francois Murphy in Paris and Parisa Hafezi and Edmund Blair in
Tehran) 	 		 			

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 35 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL] China's leverage   
        
Rumors have it that North Korean leader Kim Jong-il is visiting
China. But that cannot be easily verified, at least if past
experience is any guide. Both China and North Korea usually
acknowledge Kim's visits after he leaves the country.

 Kim has good reason to meet Chinese President Hu Jintao. They
need to mend bilateral relations that are in their worst shape
in recent years. The cause of tension is the North Korean test
launch of missiles in July, and China's endorsement of U.N.
sanctions against them.

 However, one of the bigger cards up Kim's sleeve is the threat
of a nuclear test. The South Korean intelligence agency believes
North Korea is technically capable of test-detonating a nuclear
device at any time, and that it is only a matter of Kim giving
the go ahead. 

It has been the desire of all parties concerned to prevent North
Korea from conducting a nuclear test. A peaceful resolution of
the nuclear standoff will serve the interests of North Korea as
well as South Korea, China, the United States, Japan and Russia.

 No other country has as much leverage on North Korea as China,
which is the staunchest ally and provider of economic assistance
for the communist nation. That is why U.S. President George W.
Bush called Hu earlier this month and asked him to put pressure
on North Korea to return to talks aimed at dismantling its
nuclear weapons program.

 If it chastised North Korea for its bad behavior by approving
the U.N. sanctions, China now needs to persuade and, if
necessary, pressure North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions
and return to the six-party talks. At the same time, it will do
well to try and broker a deal between North Korea and the United
States, which has been sanctioning the communist state for its
alleged forgery of U.S. dollar bills.

2006.09.01
*****************************************************************
 36 Korea Herald: Nuke test worries cloud U.S. talks   
        
South Korea's chief nuclear negotiator Chun Yung-woo met his
U.S. counterparts in Washington Wednesday to discuss how to
revive the stalled six-way talks on North Korea's nuclear
ambitions.

 During his meeting with Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns,
Chun said he "kept in mind" the possibility of North Korea's
nuclear test.

 "Although the nuclear test was not the focus of the talks, we
have it in mind when we say it is important to resume the
six-party talks as soon as possible," Chun told reporters.

 News reports have suggested North Korea is preparing for an
underground nuclear test in Kilju, Hamkyung province, citing the
movement of large cable reels to the area.

 Cables are usually used to link the underground tunnel with an
observatory during underground tests. 

But South Korean officials said the evidence was not enough to
conclude that a test was imminent.

 Seoul has repeatedly warned that North Korea would face grave
consequences if it conducted a nuclear test.

 No progress has been made since a joint statement outlining the
principles of how North Korea should be denuclearized was signed
almost a year ago by the two Koreas, the United States, China,
Russia and Japan. 

Conflict between the United States and North Korea deepened
earlier this year following Washington's measures against
Pyongyang's alleged international financial crimes. 

The two also remain at odds over the perceptions of
"compensation" cited in the joint statement.

 As part of its diplomatic steps, top U.S. envoy to the N.K.
nuclear talks Christopher Hill will tour Japan, China and Korea,
the U.S. State Department said.

 Hill will leave Sunday for Tokyo followed by another trip to
Beijing next Tuesday. While in China, Hill will visit Chengdu on
Wednesday and Thursday, Guangzhou on Friday and Shanghai on
Saturday. 

His next stop will be Seoul on Sept. 11 where he will stay for a
day before returning to Washington.

 Hill's Asia visit is aimed mainly at China, where he will spend
most of his time visiting U.S. consulates and meeting U.S. Peace
Corps volunteers.

 "He will hold discussions with senior government officials in
those countries on bilateral, regional and global issues of
mutual interest, including his meetings with counterparts in the
six-party talks," the department said.

 Presidents Roh Moo-hyun and George W. Bush are to meet for
summit talks in Washington on Sept. 14. 

(angiely@heraldm.com)

By Lee Joo-hee

2006.09.01
*****************************************************************
 37 Guardian Unlimited: Bush Says U.S. in 'Ideological Struggle'
 
From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Thursday August 31, 2006 5:16 PM

AP Photo UTEV102 

By NEDRA PICKLER 

Associated Press Writer 

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - President Bush on Thursday predicted
victory in the war on terror at a time of increasing public
anxiety at home, likening the struggle against Islamic
fundamentalism with the fight against Nazis and communists. 

With just over two months until Election Day, Bush said
opponents of the war in Iraq who are calling for a plan to bring
home troops would create a disaster in the Middle East. 

``Many of these folks are sincere and they're patriotic but they
could be - they could not be more wrong,'' the president said.
``If America were to pull out before Iraq could defend itself,
the consequences would be absolutely predictable, and absolutely
disastrous. We would be handing Iraq over to our worst enemies -
Saddam's former henchmen, armed groups with ties to Iran, and
al-Qaida terrorists from all over the world who would suddenly
have a base of operations far more valuable than Afghanistan
under the Taliban.'' 

The president chose a friendly audience in one of America's most
conservative states to begin his pre-election series of speeches
defending his war strategy. The three-week campaign is tied to
the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks. 

``The war we fight today is more than a military conflict,''
Bush told thousands of veterans at the American Legion
convention. ``It is the decisive ideological struggle of the
21st century.'' 

On the same day as a U.N. deadline for Iran to give up enriching
uranium, Bush said that Iran has responded with defiance and
delay to international demands and he said ``there must be
consquences'' for Tehran. 

Bush put the nuclear standoff with Iran in a larger context,
saying the violence in Lebanon this summer makes Tehran's
designs on the world stage clear. He blamed Iran for supporting
the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, for helping to
destabilize Iraq by sponsoring insurgents and supplying
components for improvised explosive devices, and for denying
basic human rights to millions of its own people. 

``The world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in
Iran,'' the president said. ``We know the depth of suffering
that Iran's sponsorship of terrorists has brought. And we can
imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were allowed to
acquire nuclear weapons.'' 

Bush delivered his starkest threat yet to Tehran. 

``There must be consequences for Iran's defiance,'' he said,
``and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapons.'' 

Only a third of Americans saying they approve of Bush's handling
of the war or his leadership overall - a figure that worries
Republicans who are hoping they have enough support to keep
control of Congress in elections just over two months away. 

A majority of Americans approved of the way Bush responded to
the Sept. 11 attacks nearly five years ago, according to an
AP-Ipsos poll that came out Thursday, and the president was
trying to remind them of that as the anniversary approaches. 

Bush described the current violence in the Middle East and the
recently thwarted attack to blow up planes over the Atlantic
Ocean as part of the same movement that resulted in the Sept. 11
attacks. 

``As veterans you have seen this kind of enemy before,'' Bush
said. ``They are successors to fascists, to Nazis, to communists
and other totalitarians of the 20th century. And history shows
what the outcome will be. 

``This war will be difficult. This war will be long. And this
war will end in the defeat of the terrorists,'' Bush said. 

He acknowledged the unsettling times - marked by sectarian
violence in Iraq, war along the Israel-Lebanon border and
terrorists allegedly plotting to blow up planes between Britain
and the United States. 

``The images that come back from the front lines are striking
and sometimes unsettling,'' Bush conceded. ``When you see
innocent civilians ripped apart by suicide bombs or families
buried inside their homes, the world can seem engulfed in
purposeless violence.'' 

But he also said that those responsible for bringing down the
World Trade Center are united with car bombers in Baghdad,
Hezbollah militants who shoot rockets into Israel and terrorists
who wanted to bring down the flights between Britain and the
United States. 

``Despite their differences, these groups form the outline of a
single movement, a worldwide network of radicals that use terror
to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian
ideology,'' he said. ``And the unifying feature of this
movement, the link that spans sectarian divisions and local
grievances, is the rigid conviction that free societies are a
threat to their twisted view of Islam.'' 

Even in Utah - which gave Bush a wider margin of victory than
any other state in the 2004 election - the president's
appearance was a source of dispute. Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky
Anderson, a Democrat, led thousands of anti-Bush demonstrators
on a march through the city Wednesday. He called Bush a
``dishonest, warmongering, human-rights-violating president.'' 

The White House countered by organizing a campaign-like rally at
the airport for Bush's arrival Wednesday night. A couple
thousand cheering supporters, who got tickets from the
governor's office and the congressional delegation, stood under
flood lights and cheered as Bush pledged to stay in Iraq. 

The pro-Bush American Legion did not have any anti-war speakers
or nationally prominent Democrats scheduled to speak at its
convention, which attracted at least 12,000 veterans. Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld addressed the group earlier this week as part of the
high-powered campaign to build support for the war. 

This is the third time in less than a year that Bush has made a
series of speeches on Iraq and terrorism. This time, it's an
all-hands-on-deck effort, with Vice President Dick Cheney, Rice
and Rumsfeld also touting the mission this week. 

While in Salt Lake City, Bush had a half-hour private meeting
with leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
He also planned to speak at a luncheon fundraiser for Republican
Sen. Orrin Hatch. 

--- 

On the Net: 

http://www.whitehouse.gov 

      Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 38 BBC: Bush pledges 'terror war' victory
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 31 August 2006
 
[President Bush (31 Aug)]               

President Bush i making a series of speeches ahead of the polls 
Bush speech                                       

President George W Bush has said victory in Iraq is essential to 
the US winning the "war on terror" against the Islamist groups 
ranged against it. 

The US would not leave Iraq until victory was achieved, he told 
military veterans in Salt Lake City, Utah. 

And he warned Iran of "consequences" if it continued to defy the 
international community over its nuclear programme. 

The speech is one of a series in which Mr Bush is defending his 
security strategy as mid-term polls approach. 

"The war we fight today is more than a military conflict," Mr 
Bush said. "It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st 
Century." 

'Twisted view of Islam' 

He said those who brought down the World Trade Center in New York 
five years ago were united with car bombers in Baghdad, Hezbollah 
militants who shot rockets into Israel, and terrorists who had 
recently attempted to bring down flights between Britain and the 
US. 

"Despite their differences, these groups form the outline of a 
single movement, a worldwide network of radicals that use terror 
to kill those who stand in the way of their totalitarian 
ideology," he said. 

This war will be difficul this war will be long - and this war 
will end in the defeat of the terrorists President Bush          

"And the unifying feature of this movement, the link that spans 
sectarian divisions and local grievances, is the rigid conviction 
that free societies are a threat to their twisted view of Islam." 

Mr Bush said agreeing to calls from within the US to bring the 
troops home would create a disaster in the Middle East. 

"Many of these folks are sincere and they're patriotic but 
they... could not be more wrong," he said. 

"If America were to pull out before Iraq could defend itself, the 
consequences would be absolutely predictable, and absolutely 
disastrous. 

"We would be handing Iraq over to our worst enemies - Saddam's 
former henchmen, armed groups with ties to Iran, and al-Qaeda 
terrorists from all over the world who would suddenly have a base 
of operations far more valuable than Afghanistan under the 
Taleban." 

He added: "This war will be difficult, this war will be long - 
and this war will end in the defeat of the terrorists." 

Warning to Iran 

The president also condemned the government of Iran, which he 
said was supporting terrorist groups like Hezbollah and defying 
the international community with its nuclear activities. 

"It is time for Iran to make a choice. We've made our choice - we 
will continue to work closely with our allies to make a 
diplomatic solution, but there must be consequences for Iran's 
defiance and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon," 
he said. 

Mr Bush is to make several more speeches on Iraq and security in 
the next two weeks. 

Correspondents say his Republican Party fears unease over the 
Iraq war could damage its standing in mid-term polls on 7 
November. 
*****************************************************************
 39 AU ABC: Shoalhaven free from nuclear power in short term. 

31/08/2006. ABC News Online
 	
Last Update: Thursday, August 31, 2006. 11:52am (AEST) 	 
 
Shoalhaven City Council, in south-eastern New South Wales, is
pleased with a response it has received from the Federal
Government on the issue of possible sites for nuclear facilities.

 The council wrote to the Government after the Prime Minister,
John Howard, set up a task force to investigate the use of
nuclear power in Australia.

 The council asked for an assurance that a nuclear power station
would not be considered for land in the Shoalhaven Council area,
or on Commonwealth territory around Jervis Bay.

 The Mayor, Greg Watson, says it has received a response from
the Industry Minister, Ian Macfarlane, saying the current review
is not considering any nuclear sites, and he is happy with that
response.

 "As far as a response goes, yes, I think it indicates to me
that they are not going to really look at us seriously," he said.

 "I know he hasn't said definitely no, but as far as I'm
concerned I think its a positive step forward." 

*****************************************************************
 40 IRNA: Envoy urges Japan to play wider role in resolving nuclear issue
     
, Aug 31, IRNA                                                                                                           

Visiting Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and
International Affairs Abbas Araqchi here on Thursday called for
more negotiations to resolve the nuclear issue and for Japan to
play a wider role in negotiations.

 His call was made during a meeting with Japanese Foreign
Minister Taro Aso during which he also presented a copy of
Tehran's response to the 5+1 Group's package of incentives.

 At the meeting, the Iranian envoy spoke briefly of latest
developments in Iran's nuclear case.

 The Japanese foreign minister reiterated the need to continue
negotiations between Iran and the 5+1 Group in order to remove
concerns of the West over its nuclear programs notwithstanding a
UN deadline for Iran to suspend uranium enrichment which expires
today.

 Araqchi said Iran's call for more negotiations showed it had
the "good intentions" and called on opposing countries to
reciprocate this goodwill.

 Japan, which is dependent on the Middle East for most of its
oil needs, signed a two-billion dollar contract with Iran in
2004 to develop the Azadegan oil field, Iran's largest onshore
oil field.

 Iran has insisted it will not back down "an inch" on its right
to develop nuclear energy for peaceful ends, insisting that
sanctions threatened by the West would hurt the US and its
allies more.

 Araqchi arrived in Tokyo on Wednesday after winding up a
one-day visit to China. During his three-day stay in Japan he
will discuss Iran's nuclear case with senior Japanese officials.

 Upon his arrival at Tokyo's Narita airport Wednesday evening,
he told IRNA that his visit to Japan was within the framework of
Tehran-Tokyo consultations on issues of mutual interest,
including the Iran nuclear issue.

 Referring to Iran's response to the package of incentives
offered by the world's six powers, he said Tehran believed it
was important that its friends -- Japan and China -- be briefed
on different dimensions of the response, which it gave on Aug 22.

 Tehran believes its response is positive and paves the way for
peaceful settlement of the nuclear case, Araqchi said.

 "The atmosphere is suitable for reaching a fair solution if the
parties are willing to return to the negotiating table," he
added.
*****************************************************************
 41 [NukeNet] UK: Energy protesters blockade nuclear power station
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:27:30 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

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

Energy protesters blockade nuclear power station

David Ward
Wednesday August 30, 2006
The Guardian

Activists yesterday blockaded the front and rear entrances of a
nuclear power station in Hartlepool, Teesside, to protest at the
government's recently proclaimed support for a new boost for nuclear
energy. About 20 arrived at 8am as a shift was starting work, draped
a banner reading "No More" on a fence, locked themselves to
welded-together tubes, and lay down on access roads.

Earlier this year the government said nuclear power could make a
"significant contribution" to future energy needs. The Hartlepool
action is part of a campaign to highlight the drawbacks of
traditional sources of power and to stress the need for a global
reduction in energy use and the development of renewable sources.

The protesters are based at a 10-day camp set up by the action group
Reclaim Power a mile from the giant coal-fired Drax power station at
Selby, North Yorkshire. Drax, the largest plant of its kind in
Europe, generates 7% of Britain's electricity. But Reclaim Power
claims it is also the single biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in
the UK, pumping out 20.8m tonnes of carbon dioxide every year.

Tomorrow, those camped in what has been dubbed "megawatt valley" -
site of Eggborough and Ferrybridge power stations as well as Drax -
will march on the power station and attempt to close it by direct
action. One of the protesters at Hartlepool, Kathryn Tulip, said:
"People have entered this site on foot but no vehicles or heavy
equipment has gone in. We had expected cutting crews to have come out
to us by now but no one has turned up yet. We hope we'll be back for
the big day at Drax."

She added that the group wanted to tell British Energy, the
government and the public that they did not want a new generation of
nuclear power stations: "Hartlepool is due to be decommissioned in
2014 but it is likely that this could be the site for another nuclear
station if the industry has its way. The government's recent energy
review says that nuclear power is the answer to climate change. But
nuclear power is not fossil fuel-free and we have to reduce our
consumption of power." At the camp in the shadow of the Drax towers,
Emma Pegg, 29, from Leeds, said: "We are already feeling the
destructive effects of a climate which is in crisis. I urge people to
come to the camp, learn more about climate change and ways to live
sustainably. And perhaps even to help shut down Drax."

A spokesman for British Energy said of the Hartlepool protest:
"British Energy respects and recognises people's right to protest
about what is a vital issue for all of us and have no objection to
peaceful and lawful demonstration. Our prime concern is to safeguard
our staff, the power station and the protesters themselves."


_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 42 NRC: Atomic Safety &Licensing Board Evidentiary Hearing on Vermont Yankee Power
Uprate Scheduled for Sept. 13-15 in Newfane, VT.

News Release - Region I - 2006-04 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 
COMMISSION 

Office of Public Affairs, Region I No. I-06-049                          
August 31, 2006 CONTACT:     Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. 
Sheehan (610) 337-5331                     E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov  
  


An evidentiary hearing regarding the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant 
power uprate will be held starting at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 
13, at the Windham County Courthouse, 7 Court St. in Newfane, Vt. 
The sessions will continue, if necessary, on Sept. 14 and 15. 

The hearing will be conducted by a three-judge panel from the 
NRCs Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB), which is a 
quasi-judicial arm of the agency that handles licensing matters. 
Its purpose is to allow the New England Coalition (NEC), a public 
interest group, to present testimony on a contention it submitted 
in opposition to a 20-percent power increase implemented at the 
Vernon, Vt., reactor earlier this year. 

Portions of the hearing will involve proprietary information and 
will therefore be closed to the public. Also, all three days may 
not be needed for completion of the hearing and sessions may 
extend into the evening to facilitate completion. 

The plants owner, Entergy Nuclear, applied to the NRC for the 
power uprate in September 2003. Subsequently, the Vermont 
Department of Public Service (DPS) and NEC filed requests for a 
hearing on the proposal. An ASLB panel formed to hear the 
requests ruled in November 2004 that the DPS and NEC had 
established standing and that each had submitted two admissible 
contentions. Subsequently, the DPS withdrew its contentions and 
NEC withdrew one of its contentions. Accordingly, the only 
contention left to be considered at the hearing will be NECs 
argument pertaining to whether large transient testing should be 
performed as a condition of uprate. 

More information about the hearing is available in the NRCs 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS), which 
is accessible via the agencys web site at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Help in using ADAMS is 
available by contacting the NRCs Public Document Room at 
1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail at PDR@NRC.GOV.   

 	Last revised Thursday, August 31, 2006 	   
*****************************************************************
 43 NRC: In the Matter of: All Licensees Identified in Attachment 1 and 
 
                         FR Doc 06-7283 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Notices] [Page 51861-51864] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-97]                         
 
All Other Persons Who Seek or Obtain Access to Safeguards 
Information Described Herein; Order Imposing Fingerprinting and 
Criminal History Check Requirements for Access to Safeguards 
Information (Effective Immediately) I The Licensees identified in 
Attachment 1\1\ to this Order hold licenses issued in accordance 
with the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, by the U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) or Agreement 
States, authorizing them to engage in an activity subject to 
regulation by the Commission or Agreement States. On August 8, 
2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) was enacted. Section 
652 of the EPAct amended Section 149 of the AEA to require 
fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 
identification and criminal history records check of any person 
who is to be permitted to have access to Safeguards Information 
(SGI) \2\. The NRC's implementation of this requirement cannot 
await the completion of the SGI rulemaking, which is underway, 
because the EPAct fingerprinting and criminal history check 
requirements for access to SGI were immediately effective upon 
enactment of the EPAct. Although the EPAct permits the Commission 
by rule to except certain categories of individuals from the 
fingerprinting requirement, which the Commission has done (see 10 
CFR 73.59, 71 FR 33989 (June 13, 2006)), it is unlikely that 
licensee employees are excepted from the fingerprinting 
requirement by the ``fingerprinting relief'' rule. Individuals 
relieved from fingerprinting and criminal history checks under 
the relief rule include Federal, State, and local officials and 
law enforcement personnel; Agreement State inspectors who conduct 
security inspections on behalf of the NRC; members of Congress 
and certain employees of members of Congress or Congressional 
Committees, and representatives of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA) or certain foreign government organizations. 
In addition, individuals who have a favorably-decided U.S. 
Government criminal history check within the last five (5) years, 
and individuals who have active federal security clearances 
(provided in either case that they make available the appropriate 
documentation), have satisfied the EPAct fingerprinting 
requirement and need not be fingerprinted again. Therefore, in 
accordance with Section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, 
the Commission is imposing additional requirements for access to 
SGI, as set forth by this Order, so that affected licensees can 
obtain and grant access to SGI. This Order also imposes 
requirements for access to SGI by any
 
[[Page 51862]] person \3\, from any person, whether or not a 
Licensee, Applicant, or Certificate Holder of the Commission or 
Agreement States.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and 
will not be released to the public.
 
\2\ Safeguards Information is a form of sensitive, unclassified, 
security-related information that the Commission has the 
authority to designate and protect under section 147 of the AEA.
 
\3\ Person means (1) any individual, corporation, partnership, 
firm, association, trust, estate, public or private institution, 
group, government agency other than the Commission or the 
Department of Energy, except that the Department of Energy shall 
be considered a person with respect to those facilities of the 
Department of Energy specified in section 202 of the Energy 
Reorganization Act of 1974 (88 Stat. 1244), any State or any 
political subdivision of, or any political entity within a State, 
any foreign government or nation or any political subdivision of 
any such government or nation, or other entity; and (2) any legal 
successor, representative, agent, or agency of the foregoing.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11, 
2001, the NRC issued Orders requiring certain entities to 
implement Additional Security Measures (ASM) or Compensatory 
Measures (CM) for certain radioactive materials. The requirements 
imposed by these Orders, and certain measures licensees have 
developed to comply with the Orders, were designated by the NRC 
as SGI. For some materials licensees, the storage and handling 
requirements for the SGI have been modified from the existing 10 
CFR part 73 SGI requirements for reactors and fuel cycle 
facilities that require a higher level of protection; such SGI is 
designated as Safeguards Information--Modified Handling (SGI-M). 
However, the information subject to the SGI-M handling and 
protection requirements is SGI, and licensees and other persons 
who seek or obtain access to such SGI are subject to this Order.
 
II The Commission has broad statutory authority to protect and 
prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of SGI. Section 147 of the 
AEA grants the Commission explicit authority to issue such Orders 
as necessary to prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of SGI.
 
Furthermore, Section 652 of the EPAct amended Section 149 of the 
AEA to require fingerprinting and an FBI identification and a 
criminal history records check of each individual who seeks 
access to SGI. In addition, as required by existing Orders, which 
remain in effect, no person may have access to SGI unless the 
person has an established need-to-know and satisfies the 
trustworthy and reliability requirements of those Orders.
 
In order to provide assurance that the Licensees identified in 
Attachment 1 are implementing appropriate measures to comply with 
the fingerprinting and criminal history check requirements for 
access to SGI, all Licensees identified in Attachment 1 shall 
implement the requirements of this Order. In addition, pursuant 
to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that in light of the common defense and 
security matters identified above, which warrant the issuance of 
this Order, the public health, safety and interest require that 
this Order be effective immediately.
 
III Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 147, 149, 161b, 161i, 
161o, 182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 
and the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR parts 30 
and 73, it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that all 
licensees identified in attachment 1 to this order and all other 
persons who seek or obtain access to safeguards information, as 
described above, shall comply with the requirements set forth in 
this order.
 
A. 1. No person may have access to Safeguards Information unless 
that person has a need-to-know the SGI, has been fingerprinted or 
who has a favorably-decided FBI identification and criminal 
history records check, and satisfies all other applicable 
requirements for access to SGI. Fingerprinting and the FBI 
identification and criminal history records check are not 
required, however, for any person who is relieved from that 
requirement by 10 CFR 73.59 (71 FR 33989 (June 13, 2006)), or who 
has a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history check 
within the last five (5) years, or who has an active federal 
security clearance, provided in either case that the appropriate 
documentation is made available to the Licensee's NRC-approved 
reviewing official.
 
2. No person may have access to any Safeguards Information if the 
NRC has determined, based on fingerprinting and an FBI 
identification and criminal history records check, that the 
person may not have access to SGI.
 
B. No person may provide SGI to any other person except in 
accordance with Condition III.A. above. Prior to providing SGI to 
any person, a copy of this Order shall be provided to that 
person.
 
C. All Licensees identified in Attachment 1 to this Order shall 
comply with the following requirements: 1. The Licensee shall, 
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, establish and 
maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the requirements of 
Attachment 2 to this Order.
 
2. The Licensee shall, within twenty (20) days of the date of 
this Order, submit the fingerprints of one (1) individual who 
currently has access to SGI in accordance with the 
previously-issued NRC Orders, who continues to need access to 
Safeguards Information, and who the Licensee nominates as the 
``reviewing official'' for determining access to SGI by other 
individuals. The NRC will determine whether this individual (or 
any subsequent reviewing official) may have access to SGI and, 
therefore, will be permitted to serve as the Licensee's reviewing 
official.\4\ The Licensee may, at the same time or later, submit 
the fingerprints of other individuals to whom the Licensee seeks 
to grant access to SGI. Fingerprints shall be submitted and 
reviewed in accordance with the procedures described in 
Attachment 2 of this Order.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- \4\ The NRC's determination of this individual's 
access to SGI in accordance with the process described in 
Enclosure 3 to the transmittal letter of this Order is an 
administrative determination that is outside the scope of this 
Order.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------- 
---------- 3. The Licensee may allow any individual who currently 
has access to SGI in accordance with the previously-issued NRC 
Orders to continue to have access to previously-designated SGI 
without being fingerprinted, pending a decision by the 
NRC-approved reviewing official (based on fingerprinting, an FBI 
criminal history records check and a trustworthy and reliability 
determination) that the individual may continue to have access to 
SGI. The Licensee shall make determinations on continued access 
to SGI by November 20, 2006, in part on the results of the 
fingerprinting and criminal history check, for those individuals 
that were previously granted access to SGI before the issuance of 
this Order.
 
4. The Licensee shall, in writing, within twenty (20) days of the 
date of this Order, notify the Commission, (1) if it is unable to 
comply with any of the requirements described in the Order, 
including Attachment 2, or (2) if compliance with any of the 
requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances. The 
notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for 
seeking relief from or variation of any specific requirement.
 
Licensee responses to C.1., C.2., C.3., and C.4. above shall be 
submitted to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555. In addition, Licensee responses shall be marked as 
``Security-Related Information--Withhold Under 10 CFR 2.390.'' 
The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, 
may in writing, relax or rescind any of the above conditions upon 
demonstration of good cause by the Licensee.
 
 
[[Page 51863]] IV In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee 
must, and any other person adversely affected by this Order may, 
submit an answer to this Order, and may request a hearing on this 
Order, within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. Where 
good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the 
time to request a hearing. A request for extension of time in 
which to submit an answer or request a hearing must be made in 
writing to the Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555, and include a statement of good cause for the extension. 
The answer may consent to this Order. Unless the answer consents 
to this Order, the answer shall, in writing and under oath or 
affirmation, specifically set forth the matters of fact and law 
on which the Licensee or other person adversely affected relies 
and the reasons as to why the Order should not have been issued. 
Any answer or request for a hearing shall be submitted to the 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 
Washington, DC 20555. Copies also shall be sent to the Director, 
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant 
General Counsel for Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the 
same address, and to the Licensee if the answer or hearing 
request is by a person other than the Licensee. Because of 
possible delays in delivery of mail to United States Government 
offices, it is requested that answers and requests for hearing be 
transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either by means of 
facsimile transmission to 301-415-1101 or by e-mail to 
hearingdocket@nrc.gov and also to the Office of the General 
Counsel either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 
or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. If a person other than the 
Licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with 
particularity the manner in which his/her interest is adversely 
affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth 
in 10 CFR 2.309. If a hearing is requested by the Licensee or a 
person whose interest is adversely affected, the Commission will 
issue an Order designating the time and place of any hearing. If 
a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing 
shall be whether this Order should be sustained.
 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(I), the Licensee may, in addition 
to demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or 
sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate 
effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order, 
including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on 
adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, 
or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written 
approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing, 
the provisions as specified above in Section III shall be final 
twenty (20) days from the date of this Order without further 
order or proceedings. If an extension of time for requesting a 
hearing has been approved, the provisions as specified above in 
Section III shall be final when the extension expires if a 
hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for 
hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order.
 
Dated this 21st day of August 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Jack R. Strosnider, Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety 
and Safeguards.
 
Attachment 1: List of Applicable Licensees--Redacted Attachment 
2: Requirements for Fingerprinting and Criminal History Checks of 
Individuals When Licensee's Reviewing Official is Determining 
Access to Safeguards Information General Requirements Licensees 
shall comply with the requirements of this attachment.
 
A. 1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment 
shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted 
access to Safeguards Information (SGI). The Licensee shall review 
and use the information received from the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) and ensure that the provisions contained in 
the subject Order and this attachment are satisfied.
 
2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the 
fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal 
history record and inform the individual of the procedures for 
revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as 
specified in the ``Right to Correct and Complete Information'' 
section of this attachment.
 
3. Fingerprints need not be taken if an employed individual 
(e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor, manufacturer, or 
supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting requirement by 10 
CFR 73.59, has a favorably- decided U.S. Government criminal 
history check within the last five (5) years, or has an active 
federal security clearance. Written confirmation from the 
Agency/employer which granted the federal security clearance or 
reviewed the criminal history check must be provided. The 
Licensee must retain this documentation for a period of three (3) 
years from the date the individual no longer requires access to 
SGI associated with the Licensee's activities.
 
4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this 
Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the 
FBI.
 
5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the 
FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthy and 
reliability requirements of the previously-issued NRC Orders, in 
making a determination whether to grant access to Safeguards 
Information to individuals who have a need-to-know the SGI.
 
6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a 
criminal history records check solely for the purpose of 
determining an individual's suitability for access to Safeguards 
Information.
 
7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination 
whether to grant access to SGI.
 
B. The Licensee shall notify the NRC of any desired change in 
reviewing officials. The NRC will determine whether the 
individual nominated as the new reviewing official may have 
access to Safeguards Information based on a previously-obtained 
or new criminal history check and, therefore, will be permitted 
to serve as the Licensee's reviewing official.
 
Prohibitions A Licensee shall not base a final determination to 
deny an individual access to Safeguards Information solely on the 
basis of information received from the FBI involving: an arrest 
more than one (1) year old for which there is no information of 
the disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in 
dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.
 
A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal 
history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that 
would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First 
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the 
Licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate 
among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national 
origin, sex, or age.
 
Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks For the purpose of 
complying with this Order, Licensees shall, using an
 
[[Page 51864]] appropriate method listed in 10 CFR 73.4, submit 
to the NRC's Division of Facilities and Security, Mail Stop 
T-6E46, one completed, legible standard fingerprint card (Form 
FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where practicable, other fingerprint 
records for each individual seeking access to Safeguards 
Information, to the Director of the Division of Facilities and 
Security, marked for the attention of the Division's Criminal 
History Check Section. Copies of these forms may be obtained by 
writing the Office of Information Services, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by calling 
(301) 415-5877, or by e-mail to forms@nrc.gov. Practicable 
alternative formats are set forth in 10 CFR 73.4. The Licensee 
shall establish procedures to ensure that the quality of the 
fingerprints taken results in minimizing the rejection rate of 
fingerprint cards due to illegible or incomplete cards.
 
The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for completeness. 
Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing omissions or 
evident errors will be returned to the Licensee for corrections. 
The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one 
re-submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI 
because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified. The one 
free re-submission must have the FBI Transaction Control Number 
reflected on the re-submission. If additional submissions are 
necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will 
require a second payment of the processing fee.
 
Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application. 
Licensees shall submit payment with the application for 
processing fingerprints by corporate check, certified check, 
cashier's check, money order, or electronic payment, made payable 
to ``U.S. NRC.'' [For guidance on making electronic payments, 
contact the Facilities Security Branch, Division of Facilities 
and Security, at (301) 415-7739]. Combined payment for multiple 
applications is acceptable. The application fee (currently $27) 
is the sum of the user fee charged by the FBI for each 
fingerprint card or other fingerprint record submitted by the NRC 
on behalf of a Licensee, and an NRC processing fee, which covers 
administrative costs associated with NRC handling of Licensee 
fingerprint submissions. The Commission will directly notify 
Licensees who are subject to this regulation of any fee changes.
 
The Commission will forward to the submitting Licensee all data 
received from the FBI as a result of the Licensee's 
application(s) for criminal history checks, including the FBI 
fingerprint record.
 
Right to Correct and Complete Information Prior to any final 
adverse determination, the Licensee shall make available to the 
individual the contents of any criminal records obtained from the 
FBI for the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. 
Written confirmation by the individual of receipt of this 
notification must be maintained by the Licensee for a period of 
one (1) year from the date of the notification.
 
If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is 
incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change, 
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any 
matter in the record, the individual may initiate challenge 
procedures. These procedures include either direct application by 
the individual challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law 
enforcement agency) that contributed the questioned information, 
or direct challenge as to the accuracy or completeness of any 
entry on the criminal history record to the Assistant Director, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification Division, 
Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR 16.30 through 
16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge to the 
agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to verify 
or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an official 
communication directly from the agency that contributed the 
original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any 
changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by 
that agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten (10) days for 
an individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an 
FBI criminal history records check after the record is made 
available for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final SGI 
access determination based upon the criminal history record only 
upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or correction of 
the record. Upon a final adverse determination on access to SGI, 
the Licensee shall provide the individual its documented basis 
for denial. Access to SGI shall not be granted to an individual 
during the review process.
 
Protection of Information 1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal 
history record on an individual pursuant to this Order shall 
establish and maintain a system of files and procedures for 
protecting the record and the personal information from 
unauthorized disclosure.
 
2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal 
information collected and maintained to persons other than the 
subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have 
a need to access the information in performing assigned duties in 
the process of determining access to Safeguards Information. No 
individual authorized to have access to the information may 
re-disseminate the information to any other individual who does 
not have a need-to-know.
 
3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a 
criminal history record check may be transferred to another 
Licensee if the gaining Licensee receives the individual's 
written request to re- disseminate the information contained in 
his/her file, and the gaining Licensee verifies information such 
as the individual's name, date of birth, social security number, 
sex, and other applicable physical characteristics for 
identification purposes.
 
4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained 
under this section, available for examination by an authorized 
representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the 
regulations and laws.
 
5. The Licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history 
records received from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file 
has been transferred, for three (3) years after termination of 
employment or determination of access to SGI. After the required 
three (3) year period, these documents shall be destroyed by a 
method that will prevent reconstruction of the information in 
whole or in part.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7283 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 44 Kansas City Star: U.S. not ready to boost reliance on nuclear power

08/31/2006 | 

Posted on Thu, Aug. 31, 2006

Safe disposal of waste is top priority
 
Some U.S. utilities and elected officials are pushing hard to
increase the countrys reliance on nuclear power. They havent
made their case. 

The federal government has yet to show that high-level nuclear
waste can be safely kept at a long-delayed permanent storage
area in Nevada. The waste currently is kept at reactors around
the nation, including one each in Missouri and Kansas. Its a
risky way to stockpile such hazardous materials. 

But supporters of nuclear power have friends in high places.
Last year, Congress approved tax credits and guaranteed loans
for utilities to pursue more reactors. President Bush backs new
plants, too. 

Nuclear power does not contribute to global warming. And high
prices for natural gas and oil have boosted the cost of running
many power plants. 

But the government more than 20 years ago promised to develop a
place to keep nuclear waste, which remains dangerous for many
years. Utilities have collected billions from their customers to
build the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada. 

Once scheduled to open in 1998, it wont start taking waste for
at least another six years. Given that dismal track record,
immediately expanding the use of nuclear power cant be
justified. 

*****************************************************************
 45 San Luis Obispo Tribune: PG to appeal Diablo ruling

08/31/2006 | 

Posted on Thu, Aug. 31, 2006 email this print this 
 
Utility taking case to U.S. Supreme Court; SLO Mothers for Peace
had originated the suit

 By David Sneed 

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme
Court a ruling that requires federal regulators to analyze the
effects of a terrorist attack on an above-ground,
radioactive-waste-storage facility now under construction at
Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. 

The utility and the chairman of the federal Nuclear Regulatory
Commission announced Wednesday the challenge of a lower court
ruling. 

At a briefing in Washington, D.C., NRC Chairman Dale Klein said
PG has opted to take the case to the Supreme Court, rather than
appeal it back to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San
Francisco. 

Jeff Lewis, Diablo Canyon spokesman, confirmed the utility’s
intention to appeal to the Supreme Court. 

"PG believes that the (appeals) court erred in its decision and
the U.S. Supreme Court should have an opportunity to correct
it," he said. 

An appeal to the Supreme Court will give the Diablo Canyon case
greater national significance. 

Legal experts have said the appeals court ruling is already
causing government agencies to reconsider the amount of public
involvement they allow in defending against terrorist attacks. 

The Supreme Court has given PG until Sept. 29 to file the
appeal. Details of the appeal will not be made public until it
is filed, Lewis said. 

Justice Anthony Kennedy rules on motions related to the 9th
Circuit, said Diane Curran, attorney for the San Luis Obispo
Mothers for Peace, the group that originated the lawsuit. 

The anti-nuclear group argues that PG’s dry-cask storage for
highly radioactive spent reactor fuel needs more scrutiny
because it could be vulnerable to terrorists. Those casks, made
out of concrete and steel, would be mounted above ground on a
hillside behind the power plant. 

In the past, the NRC and PG have argued that federal law does
not require such an environmental review because the possibility
of a terrorist attack is too speculative. 

NRC spokesman David McIntyre said his agency will not join PG in
the lawsuit. 

"We will most likely file an amicus brief in support of it," he
said. 

Crews at Diablo Canyon are constructing thick concrete pads upon
which the large dry-cask cylinders loaded with used reactor fuel
assemblies will be mounted. The legal wrangling does not stop
work on the project, Lewis said. 

Mothers for Peace sued the NRC in federal court over its refusal
to examine the potential environmental impacts of a terrorist
attack on the storage facility. 

The Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled in favor of the
group and has directed the agency to go back and do the
analysis. 

PG is running out of room to store used fuel rods in its two
waste storage pools. The federal repository for such spent fuel,
Yucca Mountain in Nevada, is nowhere near ready for shipments.
So PG has come up with the dry-cask method as an interim way to
store the used fuel. 

Reach David Sneed at 781-7930.
*****************************************************************
 46 NRC: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
 
                         FR Doc 06-7285 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Notices] [Page 51859-51861] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-96]                         
 
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Byproduct 
Materials License No. 29-30390-01, for Unrestricted Release of 
the SFBC Taylor Technology, Incorporated Facility Located at 107 
College Road East in Princeton, NJ AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.
 
ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact for License Amendment.
 
[[Page 51860]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven R. Courtemanche, Health 
Physicist, Commercial and R Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials 
Safety, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, 
Pennsylvania 19406-1415; telephone (610) 337-5075; fax number 
(610) 337-5269; or by e-mail: SRC@nrc.gov.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the issuance of a 
license amendment to Byproduct Materials License No. 29- 
30390-01. This license is held by SFBC Taylor Technology, Inc. 
(the Licensee), for its locations of use located at 107 and 301D 
College Road East in Princeton, New Jersey. Issuance of the 
amendment would authorize release of the location of use at 107 
College Road East in Princeton, New Jersey (the Facility) for 
unrestricted use while retaining authorization to conduct 
licensed activities at the 301D College Road East location of 
use. The Licensee requested this action in a letter dated May 1, 
2006. The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in 
support of this proposed action in accordance with the 
requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 
51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that 
a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate with 
respect to the proposed action. The NRC plans to take this 
proposed action following the publication of this FONSI and EA in 
the Federal Register.
 
II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action 
The proposed action would approve the Licensee's May 1, 2006, 
license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility 
for unrestricted use. License No. 29-30390-01 was issued on June 
5, 1997, pursuant to 10 CFR part 30, and has been amended 
periodically since that time. This license authorized the 
Licensee to use unsealed byproduct material for purposes of 
conducting research and development activities on laboratory 
bench tops and in hoods.
 
The Facility consists of 10,000 square feet of office space and 
laboratories and is located in a commercial area. Within the 
Facility, use of licensed materials was confined to the Mass 
Spectroscopy Laboratory (1,000 square feet), the Wet Laboratory 
(1,000 square feet), the Sample Log-In Area (350 square feet), 
and the Waste Storage Area (150 square feet).
 
On June 6, 2005, the Licensee ceased licensed activities in these 
areas and initiated a survey and decontamination of the Facility. 
Based on the Licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the 
conditions of the Facility, the Licensee determined that only 
routine decontamination activities, in accordance with their 
NRC-approved, operating radiation safety procedures, were 
required. The Licensee was not required to submit a 
decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker cleanup activities 
and procedures are consistent with those approved for routine 
operations. The Licensee conducted surveys of the Facility and 
provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that it meets the 
criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release.
 
Need for the Proposed Action The Licensee has ceased conducting 
licensed activities at the Facility and seeks the unrestricted 
use of its Facility.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The historical 
review of licensed activities conducted at the Facility shows 
that such activities involved use of the following radionuclides 
with half-lives greater than 120 days: hydrogen-3 and carbon-14. 
Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee 
conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas 
of the Facility affected by these radionuclides.
 
The Licensee conducted a final status survey on April 11, 2006. 
This survey covered the Waste Storage Area, the Sample Log-in 
Area, the Wet Laboratory, and the Mass Spectroscopy Laboratory. 
The final status survey report was attached to the Licensee's 
amendment request dated May 1, 2006. The Licensee elected to 
demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for 
unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by performing 
radiological surveys and determining that the contamination in 
the Facility areas where licensed material was used would not 
expose an individual to 25 millirem per year of radiation by 
inhalation or ingestion. The Licensee thus determined the maximum 
amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, 
and materials that will satisfy the NRC requirements in Subpart E 
of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. The Licensee's final 
status survey results were below 200 disintegrations per minute 
for a wipe of 100 square centimeters for the isotopes of 
Carbon-14 and tritium (Hydrogen- 3), and are thus acceptable.
 
Based on its review, the staff has determined that the affected 
environment and any environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking 
on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed 
Nuclear Facilities'' (NUREG-1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, 
ML042320379, and ML042330385). Accordingly, there were no 
significant environmental impacts from the use of radioactive 
material at the Facility. The NRC staff reviewed the docket file 
records and the final status survey report to identify any 
non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment 
surrounding the Facility. No such hazards or impacts to the 
environment were identified. The NRC has found no other 
radiological or non- radiological activities in the area that 
could result in cumulative environmental impacts.
 
The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the Facility for 
unrestricted use is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on 
its review, the staff considered the impact of the residual 
radioactivity at the Facility and concluded that the proposed 
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the 
human environment.
 
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action 
Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action, 
its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only 
alternative the staff considered is the no-action alternative, 
under which the staff would leave things as they are by simply 
denying the amendment request. This no-action alternative is not 
feasible because it conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d), requiring 
that decommissioning of byproduct material facilities be 
completed and approved by the NRC after licensed activities 
cease. The NRC's analysis of the Licensee's final status survey 
data confirmed that the Facility meets the requirements of 10 CFR 
20.1402 for unrestricted release. Additionally, this denial of 
the application would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed 
action and the no-action alternative are therefore similar, and 
the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered.
 
Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action 
is consistent with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria
 
[[Page 51861]] specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because the proposed 
action will not significantly impact the quality of the human 
environment, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action is 
the preferred alternative.
 
Agencies and Persons Consulted NRC provided a draft of this 
Environmental Assessment to the State of New Jersey's Department 
of Environmental Protection for review on June 13, 2006. On June 
29, 2006, the State of New Jersey's Department of Environmental 
Protection responded by letter. The State agreed with the 
conclusions of the EA, and otherwise had no comments.
 
The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a 
procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical 
habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under 
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also 
determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity 
that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. 
Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 
of the National Historic Preservation Act.
 
III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared 
this EA in support of the proposed action. On the basis of this 
EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental 
impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an 
environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the 
NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is 
appropriate.
 
IV. Further Information Documents related to this action, 
including the application for license amendment and supporting 
documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can 
access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management System 
(ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. The documents related to this action are listed below, 
along with their ADAMS accession numbers.
 
1. NRC License No. 29-30390-01 inspection and licensing records 
[ADAMS Accession Nos. ML031130227, ML031250277, ML042980018, 
ML060890371, ML060960381, ML060960391, and ML060960509]; 2. 
Request for unrestricted release of the facility at 107 College 
Road East, Princeton, New Jersey with survey results for SFBC 
Taylor Technologies, Inc., dated May 1, 2006 [ADAMS Accession No. 
ML061280123]; 3. Request for Additional Information (RAI) issued 
May 18, 2006, by the U.S. NRC [ADAMS Accession No. ML061390010]; 
4. SFBC Taylor Technology, Inc.''s response dated May 26, 2006, 
to U.S. NRC's RAI [ML061510154]; 5. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated 
NMSS Decommissioning Guidance''; 6. Title 10 Code of Federal 
Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, ``Radiological Criteria for 
License Termination''; 7. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, 
Part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic 
Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions''; 8. NUREG-1496, 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking 
on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC- Licensed 
Nuclear Facilities.'' If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if 
there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, 
contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. These 
documents may also be viewed electronically on the public 
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
 
Dated at Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia this 23rd 
day of August 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
James P. Dwyer, Chief, Commercial and R Branch, Division of 
Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7285 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 47 Green Bay Press-Gazette: Nuke plant looks into pipes for radiation leak
 
Posted August 31, 2006

KEWAUNEE — An investigation of radioactive groundwater under the 
Kewaunee Power Station is focusing on stainless steel pipes below 
the flooring of the nuclear plant, owners said. 

"Our team of experts continues looking at the source," said Rick 
Zuercher, spokesman for Dominion Resources Inc. of Virginia. "The 
team is focusing on floor-drain systems that are designed to 
capture and recycle water that spills on floor during 
operations." 

The company announced Aug. 11 it had discovered tritium, a 
radioactive isotope of hydrogen, in the groundwater near the 
plant foundation through a voluntary testing program. One test 
found tritium at a level five times higher than the federal 
drinking water standard. But the company and the federal Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission said there was no indication the radiation 
traveled off-site or posed any threat to human health. The plant 
is one of several in the U.S. to report tritium in on-site 
groundwater. 

Dominion bought the plant last year from Wisconsin Public Service 
Corp. and Wisconsin Power &Light/Alliant Energy. Zuercher said 
the plant expects to have a better idea of the source and history 
of the leak in three or four weeks. 

— Paul Brinkmann/Press-Gazette 
  
Contact us at 920-435-4411.        greenbaypressgazette.com is
*****************************************************************
 48 Palm Beach Post: FPL reports radioactive element in reactor pond

Staff and Wire Reports           

Thursday, August 31, 2006                

FPL Group Inc., owner of Florida's largest utility, told federal 
regulators it found tritium, a radioactive element, in a pond at 
its St. Lucie nuclear reactor in Florida. 

The pond is not part of any drinking water source, and the 
tritium poses no risk to employees or the public, the Juno 
Beach-based company told the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

"We believe we've not only found the source but stopped it," FPL
spokesman Tom Veenstra said. 

He said there was no estimate about the amount of tritium-laced
water that leaked, calling it "drips." 

St. Lucie marks the 11th of 65 U.S. plant sites to report a
tritium leak. Plant owners established new reporting
requirements for tritium discoveries after Chicago-based Exelon
Corp. was criticized for not notifying state and local officials
of numerous tritium leaks at its Illinois reactors. 

Tritium is a naturally occurring form of hydrogen that is also
produced in commercial nuclear reactors and used to illuminate
exit signs and wristwatches. 

In large quantities, tritium can increase the risk of cancer,
according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Plant owners
must monitor the controlled release of tritium from reactors. 

FPL said the tritium was found in a settling pond at the site of
the plant on Hutchinson Island. The pond holds water runoff from
a concrete vault at Unit 1, Veenstra said. 

He said the tritium may have come from a leaking valve on a pipe
that recirculates water used during refueling outages. The valve
was replaced a week before the tritium was discovered Aug. 22,
Veenstra said. 

FPL monitors the pond on a monthly basis. It was last tested
July 20, said Veenstra, adding that the commission-posted report
stating the last check was done in 2000 is wrong. 

"I'm curious to see know well-protected their containment pond
was," said Holly Binns, policy advocate for Environmental
Florida, based in Tallahassee. 

The level of tritium found is below the EPA's standards for
drinking water and is less than 2 percent of the commission's
standards, the company said. 

FPL notified state and local authorities of the discovery
Friday. 

"We're going to look at this on our next scheduled inspection of
St. Lucie, now set for November," said Ken Clark, a spokesman
for the NRC. "It's something that was reportable, but it's not a
health and safety issue." 

Binns said the NRC "is not known for enforcing precautionary
safety measures." 

"They have a reputation for letting things slide," she said. 

Both units at St. Lucie continue to operate at full capacity,
according to commission data. The plant can generate 1,678
megawatts of power, enough for about 1.3 million typical homes,
according to U.S. Energy Department estimates. 

Binns said she wasn't shocked by the news from FPL and the NRC,
but expressed concern. 

"It doesn't sound encouraging for sure, particularly because
there may be one or more new nuclear plants for Florida in the
next couple of years," she said. 	 
 		 	 	 	 		 		 		 		 
Copyright © 2006, The Palm Beach Post. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 49 Cape Cod Times: Nuclear plant judge bows out 

(August 31, 2006)

 By KEVIN DENNEHY STAFF WRITER

A key player in Entergy's quest for a 20-year license extension
at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station yesterday recused himself
from the federal license review after revealing he was once a
paid consultant for the plant owner.

Administrative Judge Nicholas Trikouros was on a three-member
panel of jurists poised to decide whether Entergy's license
request should go through an extended legal hearing. If
approved, a legal hearing would bump the review period from 22
months to 30 months and give petitioners something stronger than
just the right to comment.

 While Trikouros said yesterday his earlier role with Entergy
would not affect his judgment as a member of the Atomic Safety
Licensing Board, the administrative judge said he wanted to
avoid ''an appearance of partiality.''

 The three-member panel is considering a request by Attorney
General Tom Reilly and a local watchdog group that would subject
Entergy to a legal hearing.

 Earlier this month, both Reilly and the group Pilgrim Watch
requested that Trikouros be disqualified from the license review
after admitting his role as an Entergy consultant during a
conference call.

 ''You could have heard a pin drop,'' Mary Lampert, a Pilgrim
Watch founder from Duxbury, said of Trikouros' revelation.
''That sounds like a conflict of interest to me.

 ''Actually, I was surprised it took so long in the game for it
to come forward. Someone was pretty sloppy.''

 Entergy officials opposed Trikouros' removal from the license
review panel, and the NRC did not take a position.

 Trikouros, a full-time technical member of the NRC's licensing
board, has more than 30 years experience in the nuclear
industry, including employment as president and founder of
Panlyon Technologies. The consulting firm is involved in nuclear
plant design, licensing and safety analysis, according to the
NRC Web site.

 From early 2004 until 2005, he was paid by Entergy Northeast to
provide ''management overview'' of a project looking at spent
fuel storage maintenance.

 In his formal notice of recusal, Trikouros called the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board ''perhaps the most unique
administrative adjudicatory body'' in the federal government
since two of the three panel members must be technical experts
in the nuclear industry. ''It must be understood and accepted by
parties to (licensing board) proceedings,'' he wrote, ''that to
be technically expert in the nuclear field, one must have worked
extensively in the nuclear field.''

 Nonetheless, Reilly has called Trikouros' role an
''unacceptable'' conflict of interest.

 For years, the question of how decades worth of spent fuel
would be stored at the Plymouth plant has been a source of
public concern. In his legal motion for a full license hearing,
Reilly contended the NRC has not spent enough resources studying
the threats posed by spent fuel stored at the plant for three
decades.

 ''The re-licensing of a nuclear power plant should only come
after an objective review of both the application and concerns
we have raised about public safety,'' Reilly said in a statement
yesterday.

 Whenever a nuclear plant is up for a license extension, the
public has a right to petition for a legal hearing.

It's easier said than done.

 The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an arm of the NRC that
decides whether a public hearing is necessary, has granted a
legal hearing only once.

 Trikouros will be replaced by Paul B. Abramson, the panel's
special associate chief administrative judge. The panel is still
expected to decide within a month whether Entergy should be
subject to a full legal hearing, NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said
yesterday.

 Kevin Dennehy can be reached at kdennehy@capecodonline.com. 

(Published: August 31, 2006)           

Copyright © 2006 Cape Cod Times. All rights reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 50 PRN: TXU Corp. Announces Plan for Additional Nuclear Power 

PR Newswire
     
    DALLAS, Aug. 31 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- To help meet Texas' 
need for power beginning in the latter part of the next decade, 
TXU Corp. (NYSE: TXU) announced today that it plans to develop 
applications to file with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC) for combined Construction and Operating Licenses (COLs) for 
two to six gigawatts (GW) of new nuclear-fueled power generation 
capacity at one to three sites.

TXU expects to submit the COL applications in 2008, which would 
facilitate bringing the new capacity on line between 2015 and 
2020. Combined with its previously announced 9.1 GW of coal power 
generation capacity that is expected to be on line by 2010, the 
nuclear power generation capacity would allow TXU to continue to 
deliver the dependable energy supply, low prices and cleaner 
environment its Texas consumers demand.

    "While new nuclear generation cannot come on line in time to 
meet the growing power needs of Texas for the next 10 years, TXU 
continues to aspire to be a leader in the commercialization of 
the next generation of low-cost, clean technology," said C. John 
Wilder, TXU Corp. chairman and CEO.

"Nuclear generation offers the potential to deliver our customers 
lower, stable prices and continue to reduce Texas' over-reliance 
on natural gas. Based on top decile performance at our Comanche 
Peak nuclear power facility and strong knowledge of the Texas 
market and customers, TXU is uniquely positioned to commercialize 
this technology in Texas." TXU Power's Comanche Peak is an 
industry leader in nuclear operations and is a recipient of the 
"Clean Texas, Cleaner World - National Leader Award" from the 
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency for its efforts above and beyond 
compliance in environmental excellence and overall environmental 
stewardship.

    TXU plans to partner with others to take full advantage of 
the benefits of scale while sharing the risk of such large 
investments with long-term investors. TXU has had preliminary 
discussions with the Lower Colorado River Authority and the City 
of San Antonio's CPS Energy, and will also invite other electric 
cooperatives and municipalities to partner in the plan.

    TXU's recently announced 9.1 GW of new coal-fueled power 
generation capacity is needed to meet near-term demand. By 2013 
further demand growth is expected to absorb the proposed new 
coal-fueled capacity and reserve margins could again approach 
levels the Electric Reliability Council of Texas considers 
insufficient to maintain reliability. This growth and Texas' 
heavy reliance on natural gas make nuclear power a logical 
long-term solution. The proposed new nuclear units could give 
Texas consumers the added fuel diversity necessary for a 
low-cost, efficient supply of safe, reliable power. In addition, 
nuclear power is the lowest emission source of baseload power 
generation available.

    TXU's plan includes using its existing asset base where 
possible to bring on the new capacity, including adding over two 
GW of new capacity at its Comanche Peak nuclear facility. The 
combination of geology, hydrology, property and community support 
make it an ideal site for expansion. TXU is reviewing its 
inventory of sites that were identified for nuclear power 
development over the last 30 years along with potential new sites 
in Texas and in other states.

    TXU is currently working with GE, Westinghouse, AREVA and 
other nuclear suppliers to select a preferred technology 
incorporating the newest designs and safety features. The new 
generation of reactors employs advanced and passive safety 
systems that further enhance already safe existing plants. In 
addition, they are designed for quick and efficient refueling 
outages to provide maximum production of low-cost power for 
customers.

    Today, nuclear power generation capital costs are not 
competitive with other technologies. However, TXU believes there 
is a strong opportunity for improvement. The same project 
management, lean design, and global supply chain expertise that 
is helping to drive at least 30 percent improvement in the TXU 
coal power generation development program versus industry 
benchmarks should translate to the nuclear power generation 
development as well. TXU intends to employ a technical and 
economic feasibility process with nuclear original equipment 
manufacturers (OEMs) to design the optimal solution for Texas 
consumers. TXU's objective is to design and construct a safe and 
reliable generation facility, while driving down capital costs by 
30 to 40 percent from average public industry estimates of 
approximately $2,100 per kW. TXU will also look to partner with 
suppliers to share some of the risks and rewards of the program. 
After a complete examination and optimization of each design, TXU 
will select its final design.

    "TXU recognizes that industry leadership requires excellence 
across a portfolio of technologies," said Wilder. "The option to 
deliver our customers the most efficient power across both coal- 
and nuclear-fueled power generation moves us one step closer to 
this goal." 

By filing for a COL before December 31, 2008, TXU expects to 
participate in nuclear production tax credits, nuclear risk 
insurance and federal loan guarantees specified in the 2005 
Energy Policy Act. Such credits available to the industry are 
estimated to total $6 billion and would be allocated among 
qualifying facilities. The estimated costs of preparing and 
filing COLs for up to six GW are estimated to be $50 million to 
$150 million.

    Additional details will be provided periodically. Table 1 
shows the current high-level milestones.

    Table 1:  High-level milestones
    06E-11E
    #    Milestone                                            
Date
    1    Kickoff technical and economic feasibility
          process with nuclear OEMs                           
Q3 06
    2    Enlist partners for Texas nuclear consortium      
On-going
    3    Select design technology for COL application         
Q4 06
    4    Identify potential sites                             
Q4 06
    5    File COL applications with NRC                       
Q4 08
    6    Receive first approved COLs from NRC             
2010-2011

    As previously announced, on Wednesday, September 6, 2006, C. 
John Wilder, chairman and CEO of TXU Corp., will speak with 
investors and financial analysts at the Lehman Brothers CEO 
Energy/Power Conference in New York. The presentation is expected 
to start at 7:45 a.m. (Eastern), and will include a discussion of 
the company's business strategy and power generation development 
program. A live web cast of the presentation will be available on 
TXU Corp.'s website at http://www.txucorp.com in the Investor 
Resources section.

    TXU Corp., a Dallas-based energy company, manages a portfolio 
of competitive and regulated energy businesses primarily in 
Texas. In the competitive TXU Energy Holdings segment (comprised 
of electricity generation, wholesale marketing and retailing), 
TXU Energy provides electricity and related services to more than 
2.2 million competitive electricity customers in Texas, more 
customers than any other retail electric provider in the state. 
TXU Power has over 18,300 megawatts of generation in Texas, 
including 2,300 MW of nuclear and 5,837 MW of lignite/coal-fired 
generation capacity. TXU Wholesale optimizes the purchases and 
sales of energy for TXU Energy and TXU Power and provides related 
services to other market participants. TXU Wholesale and its 
affiliate, TXU Renew, are the largest purchasers of wind- 
generated electricity in Texas and fifth largest in the United 
States. TXU Corp.'s regulated segment, TXU Electric Delivery, is 
an electric distribution and transmission business that 
complements the competitive operations, using superior asset 
management skills to provide reliable electricity delivery to 
consumers. TXU Electric Delivery operates the largest 
distribution and transmission system in Texas, providing power to 
three million electric delivery points over more than 100,000 
miles of distribution and 14,000 miles of transmission lines. 
Visit http://www.txucorp.com for more information about TXU Corp.

    This release contains forward-looking statements, which are 
subject to various risks and uncertainties. Discussion of risks 
and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ 
materially from management's current projections, forecasts, 
estimates and expectations is contained in the company's SEC 
filings. In addition to the risks and uncertainties set forth in 
the company's SEC filings, the forward-looking statements in this 
release could be affected by, among other things, the company's 
ability achieve sufficient cost savings to develop nuclear 
facilities economically; delays in, or failure to receive, 
approvals for licenses and other permits necessary to develop and 
operate nuclear generation facilities; regulatory or other 
impediments to construction of new nuclear generation facilities; 
the ability of the company to identify partners willing to invest 
in new nuclear generation; the ability of the company to raise 
capital necessary to fund the construction of new nuclear 
generation facilities; unavailability of appropriate disposal 
facilities for spent nuclear fuel; availability of sites that 
provide adequate access to water and meet the geotechnical and 
geological requirements for nuclear facilities; changes in ERCOT 
and other competitive electricity market rules; changes in 
environmental laws or regulations; changes in electric generation 
and emissions control technologies that make technologies other 
than nuclear more advantageous; incidents or changes in the 
operations of existing nuclear generation units that affect the 
regulation or permitting of nuclear generation facilities; 
changes in projected demand for electricity in Texas; inability 
to obtain the benefits provided for new nuclear generation by the 
Energy Policy Act of 2005; and changes in wholesale electricity 
prices or energy commodity prices. SOURCE TXU Corp.

Related links:

+ http://www.txu.com + http://www.txucorp.com
 
        Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
Reserved. A United Business Mediacompany. 
*****************************************************************
 51 SNA: Bulgaria's Nuke Reopens Unit After Repairs

Sofia News Agency

Sofia Morning News

Business: 31 August 2006, Thursday.

Bulgaria's Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRA) has allowed the 
country's only Nuclear Power Plant to reopen Unit 5, which was 
closed for its scheduled annual repairs.
 
The Agency has checked the unit and has nodded starter 
operations, allowing the plant in Kozloduy to plug the unit into 
the power grid until the next scheduled repairs. 

NRA has run extensive checks on the unit's recently replaced
control rods, which malfunctioned in the beginning of March in
an event rated level 2 according to the 0-7 International
Nuclear Events Scale (INES). 

The probes showed that the theoretical cause of the event has
been located and the pre-emptive measures that the NPP has
introduced will most certainly guarantee the safe work of the
plant's Unit 5. 

Back in March, the event caused arguments in Bulgaria and the
NRA and the plant's management admitted that they might have not
delegated information to the media clearly enough. Tension
around the accident along with certain views on EU demands to
close Units 1-4 of the plant cost the chair of the plant's
Manager Ivan Ivanov in June.

novinite.com    

 All Rights Reserved © Novinite Ltd., 2001-2006 - Copyright
&Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
ISO 9001:2000 Certified
 
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 PRN: State Police, NRC Searching For Two Stolen Nuclear Gauges 

PR Newswire

    HARRISBURG, Pa., Aug. 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Two companies from 
Pennsylvania and New Jersey have informed the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission that two moisture density gauges have been stolen from 
a temporary job site in Stroudsburg, Monroe County.

    JBC Associates of King of Prussia and SITE-Blauvelt Engineers 
of Mt. Laurel, NJ, reported the theft to the NRC on Wednesday.

    Authorities are searching for a Humboldt moisture density 
gauge (model 5001EZ, serial number 3451) and a Troxler moisture 
density gauge (model 3440, serial number 35144). The gauges were 
stored in a locked shed and each gauge was also locked in their 
own yellow transportation containers. Investigators say the chain 
attached to the lock for the shed was cut and the shed was broken 
into.

    "It is critical for anyone who has information about, or 
witnessed the apparent theft, to immediately contact the NRC 
Operations Center or Pennsylvania State Police," said 
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency Director James R. 
Joseph. "As long as the devices are not tampered with or damaged, 
the gauges present no hazard to the public."

    The Humboldt device contains approximately 10 millicuries of 
Cesium-127 and 40 millicuries of Americium-241 while the Troxler 
gauge contains approximately 8 millicuries of Cesium-137 and 40 
millicuries of Americium-241.

    Any attempt to tamper with the radioactive sources in the 
devices could subject the person to radiation exposure. Handling 
of the unshielded sources outside their containers would carry a 
risk of potentially dangerous radiation exposure.

    The companies that own the gauges are offering a cash reward 
of $500 to any individual that contributes to the immediate 
return of the devices.

Anyone who finds any of the gauges should leave them alone and 
report their locations to the NRC's Operations Center at (301) 
816-5100, the Pennsylvania State Police Swiftwater Barracks at 
(570) 839-7701 or the Stroud Area Regional Police at (570) 
421-6800. In the event of an emergency, dial 911.

    CONTACT: Maria A. Smith (PEMA) (717) 651-2009 SOURCE 
Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency

Related links:

+ http://www.state.pa.us
 
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights 
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 53 WSJ: Bookshelf: Dangerous Merchandise - Gabriel Schoenfeld
 
Wall Street Journal 
Wednesday, August 30, 2006 

Shopping For Bombs

 By Gordon Corera

 (Oxford University Press, 288 pages, $28) 
Bookshelf / By Gabriel Schoenfeld 

Dangerous Merchandise 

At the dawn of the nuclear age, it was exceedingly difficult to
construct an atomic bomb. The Manhattan Project, begun in 1940,
was, a famously heroic effort, gathering together some of the
world's most brilliant minds, costing mere than $20 billion (in
today's dollars) and moving forward at maximum speed in the race
against Hitler's scientists. Yet still it took years to
construct a workable device. 

Six decades later, a lot has changed. With the rise of a
nuclear-power industry, more and more scientists and engineers
throughout the world possess the technical skills for building a
bomb. The physical materials, toomost notably an array of
specialized machine tools and high-speed centrifugesare more
easily possessed. If we count North Korea, the world's "nuclear
club" includes eight countries. Several others are eager to
build the most fearsome weapons ever devisedor to buy them.

(Iran is already well on the way.) It is all too easy to see an
end to the long hiatus since Hiroshima and Nagasaki and to
imagine nuclear weapons being used in anger once again. 

If such a cataclysm happens, the Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan
may well figure prominently in the judgment of history. His name
is not as familiar as those of, say, Robert Oppenheimer and
Enrico Fermi, two of the scientists who paved the way for
America's atomic success; and his talents are nothing like their
genius. But he has played a major role in the 20th-century
history of the bomb. From the 1970s through the 1990s, Khan
secretly, disseminated nuclear technology to a number of rogue
states around the world. 

The full story of Khan's activities cannot yet be fully
toldmuch information is under lock and key in Pakistan, if it
has been preserved at allbut a persuasive preliminary account
has been prepared by Gordon Cotera, a correspondent for the BBC
who has followed the rise and fall of the Khan network.

"Shopping for Bombs" tells a disturbing tale. 
A metallurgist by training, not a physicist as is commonly
assumed, Khan was born in Pakistan and educated in the
Netherlands, where he began his career in a subsidiary of
Urenco, the European nuclear-power consortium. Although not
originally a spy, Khan enjoyed access to secret documents and
developed a keen interest in the nuclear reactor at the Urenco
site. By 1974in the wake of Pakistan's defeat at India's hands
three years earlier and India's test of a nuclear devicehe
offered his services to Pakistan's intelligence service. 

The race was on to build a "Muslim bomb" to counter the Hindu
one. It wouldn't be easy,. given Pakistan's poverty. As Khan
himself told an interviewer in the early 1990s: "A country which
could not make sewing needles, good and durable bicycles or even
ordinary durable metal rods was embarking on one of the latest
and most difficult technologies." 

Over time, Khan became a key player in the project, first by
stealing designs for key components, like centrifuges, from his
Dutch employer. When European authorities began to suspect his
illicit activities, he returned to Pakistan to become the
project's manager. His contacts in Europe served him well,
helping him to acquire a range of materials, including a
custom-built uranium conversion plant. By 1987, Pakistan had the
bomb. It is now thought to have dozens of them. 

But the story isn't limited to Pakistan's nuclear-club
membership. By the late 1970s, as Mr. Corera reports, Khan's
operation began to function in reverse gear. What had been a.
procurement network became a proliferation one as well:

Desperately poor Pakistan began to supply nuclear technology to
other countries. Khan himself was an effective salesman,
exploiting his access to technology and his ability to move
things aboard military transport planes. He soon developed a
"network" of avid customers. Mr. Corera argues (but is not
entirely sure himself) that Khan was mostly a freelancer, acting
out of a mixture of nationalist zeal and personal cupidity and
providing guidance and materials beyond what the Pakistani
government was willing to sell on its own. 

In chapters devoted to Pakistan's chief customersIran, North
Korea and LibyaMr. Corera traces the outflow of blueprints and
materials, particularly intense in the 1990s. Alas, the U.S.
intelligence services at the time, although supposedly devoted
to preventing nuclear proliferation, were almost completely in
the dark about the biggest proliferation racket going. Their
analysts were aware that Pakistan was importing nuclear
technology. They failed to grasp that such purchases were often
intended for re-export. 

By the close of the 1990s, the CIA started to scrutinize Khan's
activities and travels, still without realizing their full
importance. One of the more curious details in Mr. Corera's book
is that the agency turned to Joe Wilson, the husband of CIA
officer Valerie Plame, to investigate some of Khan's - African
visits. To this end, Mr. Wilson traveled to uranium-rich Niger
in 1999, a full three years before he went there to investigate
Saddam Hussein's possible attempts to buy "yellowcake" uranium.

Mr. Wilson found nothing worried some in Niger either time. 

Unsurprisingly, 9/11 changed everything. Documents captured by
the U.S. in Afghanistan suggested Pakistan-Taliban nuclear
cooperation, alarming the CIA. The agency pressed harder for
clues to Pakistan's nuclear export activities. More and more
evidence implicated Khan. The decisive moment came in 2003, when
Libya turned its nuclear program over to the U.S. and Britain.

Libyan documents supplied direct proof of Khan's dealings. 

Not that his network was shut down overnight. Only Khan's
televised "confession" in February 2004, followed by his house
arrest in Islamabad, marked its end. By then a great deal of
damage had been done: We know about only a portion of what Iran
acquired from him during those busy years. And all the while,
the government of Pakistan, our sometime ally, had turned a
blind eye. 

What are the lessons of this episode? Mr. Corera mounts no
soapbox, leaving the reader to draw his own conclusions. Here is
one: The CIA has been appallingly ineffective for far too long.

We have already paid a high price for this. One day, we may pay
a higher price still. 

Mr. Schoenfeld is the senior editor of Commentary   
*****************************************************************
 54 [du-list] Eos report: UN priorities for investigating uranium
 
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 15:50:28 -0700

X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST

<x-flowed>
I have posted a new report on my website today 
at  www.eoslifework.co.uk/pdfs/u26leb806.pdf .



UN priorities for investigating uranium and other suspected illegal weapons 
in the Israel/Lebanon conflict. August 2006


Summary

On 11 August 2006 the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) and other organisations 
called for UN investigation of suspected illegal weapons and other war 
crimes during the Israel / Lebanon conflict.  Carbonised bodies and large 
fireballs indicate that Israeli forces may have used uranium bunker buster 
warheads or other weapons of indiscriminate effect.  Suspected weapons and 
their hazards are described. Procedures for forensic investigation and 
priorities to protect Lebanese and international personnel are recommended.

Environmental radiation testing is an immediate priority in Lebanon and 
neighbouring countries.  Previous UN post-conflict inspections in the 
Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq were long delayed and prevented from 
analysing any bomb or missile targets for uranium.  But increased uranium 
dust was measured in other countries e.g. in Hungary and in the 
UK.  International support is needed to ensure fast and effective 
scientific investigations in Lebanon and to prevent delays or subversion of 
UN and any other environmental testing.

Dai Williams, independent researcher, Eos, Surrey, UK

eosuk@btinternet.com
==========================

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






To unsubscribe from this groups send a message to 
du-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com.  In the body of the message type 
unsubscribe and send.
*****************************************************************
 55 The Australian: Report highlights nuclear risk, says Greenpeace | | 

This story is from our news.com.aunetwork Source: AAP 


 August 31, 2006 

A REPORT warning of the risks of nuclear proliferation if 
Australia develops a uranium enrichment industry highlights why 
the government must not continue down the nuclear path, says 
Greenpeace.

In a paper released today, the Australian Strategic Policy
Institute said creating an Australian uranium enrichment
industry would speed up development of nuclear weapons and could
encourage regional nations to follow. 

The study warned the safest path for an expanded Australian
uranium industry would be to sell the substance only to nations
who had their own enrichment capabilities and were nuclear
non-proliferation treaty signatories. 

Prime Minister John Howard set up a task force in June to
investigate whether Australia should establish a nuclear energy
industry. 

Australia is one of the world's largest uranium exporters but
there is no local industry to enrich the substance for use in
power stations or atomic weapons. 

Greenpeace today said the report confirmed that increasing flows
of nuclear materials raised the risk of terrorists or
governments using them to make nuclear weapons. 

We can't have a debate about nuclear power and uranium without
examining the direct links with nuclear weapons, rogue states
and terrorism, Greenpeace CEO Steve Shallhorn said. 

Anything less than a 100 per cent guarantee that uranium exports
cannot fuel nuclear terrorism or weapons is an unacceptable risk
to Australia and its interests. 

This is the debate the Prime Minister does not want to have. 

If Australia expanded its nuclear role to include enrichment, it
would make it harder to argue against other countries doing so,
Mr Shallhorn said. 

Privacy Terms © The Australian 
*****************************************************************
 56 NRC: [Docket No. PRM-40-29] Petition denial to T. Hee
 
                         FR Doc 06-7284 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Proposed Rules] [Page 51786-51788] From the Federal Register 
Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-22]                         
 
Terrence O. Hee, Ion Technology; Denial of Petition for 
Rulemaking AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: 
Denial of petition for rulemaking.
 
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying 
a petition for rulemaking (PRM-40-29) submitted by Terrence O.
 
Hee, Ion Technology. The petitioner requested that the NRC amend 
its regulations regarding unimportant quantities of source 
material to exempt end users of a catalytic device containing 
thorium from the NRC's licensing requirements.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Publicly available documents related to this petition 
may be viewed electronically on the public computers located at 
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O1-F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Selected 
documents, including comments, may be viewed and downloaded 
electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at: .
 
The NRC maintains an Agencywide Document Access and Management 
System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's 
public documents. These documents may be accessed through the 
NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at .
 
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC PDR 
Reference staff at: 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail 
to: .
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Torre Taylor, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-7900, 
e-mail: .
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petition On October 15, 2003, (68 
FR 59346), the NRC published a notice of receipt of a petition 
for rulemaking filed by Terrence O. Hee, Ion Technology. The 
petitioner requested that the NRC amend its regulations in 10 CFR 
40.13, ``Unimportant quantities of source material,'' to exempt 
end users from NRC's regulatory requirements to the extent that 
such person receives, possesses, uses or transfers, any patented 
catalytic device containing thorium.
 
The petitioner stated that the device is part of a ``new 
technology for the reduction of air pollution chemicals'' 
produced by mobile and industrial combustion processes and that 
granting his petition would contribute to the reduction in air 
pollution. Mr. Hee also identified his monetary interest, as his 
company has secured distribution rights for this patented 
catalytic device in the United States.
 
The petitioner asserts that there are potentially millions of 
users for this device, and that obtaining ``an individual license 
for each application would prove to be burdensome for the state 
agencies issuing the individual licenses and to those wishing to 
use the devices.'' The petitioner requested an exemption in 10 
CFR 40.13(c) for his product, a catalytic device containing 
thorium. Thorium is a type of source material licensed by the 
NRC. The exemptions in 10 CFR 40.13(c) apply to the end user, who 
is exempt from the licensing requirements set forth in section 62 
of the Atomic Energy Act. The petitioner suggested the following 
language be added to 10 CFR 40.13(c) for the requested exemption: 
Any patented catalyst used in the treatment of fuel, gas or air 
streams for combustion processes, or other processes provided 
that the thorium content does not exceed 6 percent by weight. The 
weight percentage to be calculated for either a homogeneous 
mixture or as a coating on a substrate base, with the base and 
the coating being considered the same as a homogeneous mixture, 
and the finished product is constructed in a manner that will 
prevent the exposure of the public to any radiation during the 
normal application and use of this technology.
 
The petitioner offered the following rationale in support of the 
petition: (1) The ``environmental and quality of life benefits'' 
derived from the application of this technology are ``currently 
enjoyed by the citizens of Japan.'' The petitioner stated that 
this technology is proposed for license in China as a way to 
reduce air pollution; (2) Implementation of these devices can 
reduce the cost of air emissions pollution control to U.S. 
industry over the cost of current methods, thus enhancing the 
ability of industry to meet strict air emission standards; (3) 
Workers involved with the devices will be protected from the low 
levels of radiation exposure by a metal housing encasing the 
thorium-bearing material; (4) The devices are manufactured in 
Japan, so no U.S. workers will have direct contact with the 
thorium-bearing material; and (5) The long-term effect on the 
environment would be ``reduced emissions of air pollutants from 
mobile and stationary combustion sources.'' The petitioner also 
stated that the device ``could also lead to a reduction in the 
volume of hydrocarbon fuels used.'' In addition, the petitioner 
explained that the public is protected by housings shielding the 
radiation-emitting material, and that the housings are designed 
not to be ``readily disassembled by the curious.'' The petitioner 
stated the product will have warning labels which instruct users 
in the proper disposal method, which is only by return of the 
product to the distributor. The petitioner anticipated that these 
labels would prevent long-term negative effects on the 
environment. The petitioner noted that disposal instructions 
would also be in the ``Material Safety Data Sheet'' delivered 
with each device. The petitioner projects the product to have a 
30-year life cycle, and expected no short-term negative effects 
on the environment from disposal of the devices. The petitioner 
believes that the product is a safe and cost-effective method for 
contributing to the reduction of air pollution chemicals in the 
air in the United States and claims that it poses no adverse risk 
to the public or to workers involved in installing or removing 
the devices.
 
The petitioner stated that Honda Motor Company is currently 
installing
 
[[Page 51787]] the technology as a factory-installed device on 
their diesel-powered vehicles, and claims use of this technology 
in Japan has demonstrated a reduction of air pollution chemicals 
and a reduction in fuel consumption. The petitioner submitted 
test data showing reductions of soot emissions after installation 
of the device on diesel bus engines on the Okayama Bus Line 
company and a Caterpillar/Mitsubishi diesel- powered shovel. The 
petitioner also submitted data showing reductions in nitrogen 
oxides, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons for a 1989 
gasoline-fueled Mercedes Benz, and similar data for a 1998 
Mitsubishi van. The petitioner also presented ``fuel usage 
reduction examples'' comparing various makes and models of 
vehicles before and after installation of the catalytic device.
 
The petitioner believes that the proposed change to the 
Commission's regulations to allow the use of catalytic devices 
containing thorium in the United States is appropriate because it 
will benefit citizens by increasing the efficiency of combustion 
processes, reducing the use of hydrocarbon fuels, and lowering 
air pollutant emissions. The petitioner concludes that this 
technology poses no hazard to users or the public.
 
Public Comments on the Petition The notice of receipt of the 
petition for rulemaking invited interested persons to submit 
comments. The comment period closed on December 29, 2003. NRC did 
not receive any comments on the petition.
 
Reasons for Denial The petition is being denied because the 
petitioner did not submit information of sufficient scope and 
depth for NRC to find that authorizing this exemption would 
adequately ensure protection of public health and safety and the 
environment.
 
The NRC staff evaluated the technical merits of the petition for: 
(1) The appropriateness of this product for distribution to 
persons exempt from licensing and regulatory requirements; (2) 
Whether public health and safety would be adequately protected; 
and (3) The potential environmental impacts. After reviewing the 
petition, NRC has determined that there are unresolved questions 
related to technical aspects of the device, safety, and the 
potential impact to the environment.
 
These questions would have to be resolved before the petition 
could be granted.
 
To fully evaluate a product designed for distribution to persons 
exempt from licensing and regulatory requirements, NRC needs for 
its review detailed descriptions and drawings that clearly 
illustrate the components of the product, materials of 
construction, dimensions, assembly methods, source containment 
and shielding, operation of the product and tamper resistance. 
NRC also needs to review prototype testing that demonstrates the 
integrity of the product during normal use and likely accident 
conditions (physical testing, engineering analysis, or 
operational history). A quality assurance program is also needed 
to ensure that the product will be manufactured and distributed 
in accordance with the information provided in the application.
 
This information was not provided by the petitioner, or was not 
of sufficient detail for NRC to conduct a thorough evaluation. 
For example, while the petitioner provided a description and 
drawings of the catalytic device, NRC could not determine the 
exact materials of construction, assembly methods, source 
containment and shielding, operation of the product and tamper 
resistance features.
 
Prototype testing, both methodology and results, was not 
submitted.
 
Additionally, the petition did not include any information 
regarding a quality assurance program.
 
The petition did not contain support for all uses of the device 
requested in the petition (i.e., buses and industrial 
facilities). NRC could not determine the actual isotope of 
thorium or the amount of thorium to be used in the device, as 
different percentages by weight concentrations were given in 
different sections of the information provided.
 
The petitioner provided statements on the benefit of catalytic 
converting devices to substantially reduce air pollution 
chemicals. However, there was no data to support the results 
provided. Additionally, there was not enough detailed information 
to support the claim that the metal housing enclosure which 
prevents access to radioactive material is sufficient protection 
from radiation exposure. There were statements that the device is 
designed for a 30 year working life, with no repair. However, 
information was provided regarding 5, 10, and 15 year maintenance 
cycles with no description of what the maintenance involves.
 
The petitioner provided a description of the worst case scenario 
for an accident condition but did not include a description of 
other possible accident conditions during installation and normal 
use.
 
There was a summary of radiological impacts under normal and 
accident conditions, but there was no description of how this 
information was obtained.
 
As part of the petitioner's request, the petitioner included 
language for the proposed amendment to the regulations that 
limited the exemption to ``Any patented catalyst * * *'' It is 
not NRC's practice to authorize exemptions that are limited to a 
certain patented device/ product. If NRC determined that a 
catalytic device containing thorium was appropriate for 
distribution to persons exempt from licensing and regulatory 
requirements, the exemption would authorize distribution of such 
a device/product, regardless of the manufacturer or patent 
status. Therefore, anyone that developed a catalytic device that 
met the required criteria and any technical and licensing 
requirements for the exemption would be authorized to distribute 
that device/product.
 
Because the petitioner is requesting an amendment to add an 
exemption in 10 CFR 40.13(c), an environmental report is required 
in accordance with 10 CFR 51.68. Section 51.68, ``Environmental 
report-- rulemaking,'' requires petitioners for rulemaking 
requesting amendments of certain parts of the regulations 
concerning exemptions from licensing and regulatory requirements 
of any device, commodity or other product containing source 
material to submit with the petition a separate ``Petitioner's 
Environmental Report.'' The purpose of an environmental review is 
to identify and evaluate the potential environmental impacts 
associated with a request. NRC's evaluation relies on information 
provided by the petitioner, as well as staff's own independent 
assessment. As part of the environmental review, several issues 
are evaluated: (1) Why is the action proposed and what need will 
it meet; (2) How can the need be met; and (3) What aspects of the 
environment would be impacted? Alternatives to a proposed action 
are also evaluated. Radiological and non-radiological impacts, as 
well as direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts are part of this 
environmental review. Staff requested an environmental report 
from the petitioner by letter dated May 12, 2004. The 
environmental report was submitted by the petitioner in January 
2005.
 
This report failed to include detailed information related to: 
(1) Testing conditions and supporting data to evaluate the 
short-term and long-term impacts and benefits of the device; (2) 
Supporting data for accident analysis, such as accident rates, 
device failure rates and modes; (3) Supporting data for 
assumptions, such as market penetration and recovery rate; and 
(4) Data to support how the product would be more effective or 
efficient than alternative products. NRC must be able to 
independently assess the data
 
[[Page 51788]] submitted in support of a petition. NRC was not 
able to do this with the information submitted.
 
The petitioner also stated that there would be label warnings on 
the device that instruct any person who handles, uses or comes in 
contact with the product to dispose of it only by returning it to 
the distributor for safe disposal. Products that are distributed 
under an exemption must meet health and safety requirements 
without any regulatory requirements on the end user. Therefore, 
the petition must address the environmental aspects of disposal 
of the catalytic device presuming that none of the devices would 
be returned to the distributor for disposal.
 
In summary, the petitioner did not submit information of 
sufficient scope and depth for NRC to determine the adequacy of 
this product to be distributed to persons exempt from licensing 
and regulatory requirements. NRC could not ensure that the public 
health and safety, and the environment, would be protected based 
on the information submitted in support of the petition.
 
For the reasons cited in this document, the NRC denies this 
petition.
 
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of August, 2006.
 
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
Luis A. Reyes, Executive Director for Operations.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7284 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 57 Journal Gazette: No bomb tests at Indiana quarry

08/31/2006 | 

 Associated Press 

MITCHELL  A southern Indiana limestone quarry will not be used
by the U.S. military as the testing site for a powerful new bomb
intended to penetrate solid rock formations, a congressman and
the sites owner said. 

Rogers Groups Mitchell Quarry, 30 miles south of Bloomington,
had been mentioned as a possible site for a test, named Divine
Strake, that would involve detonating 700 tons of explosives. 

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency has declined to say whether
the site was under consideration for the test, but Greg Gould, a
vice president of Nashville, Tenn.-based Rogers Group, said no
immense military bomb blasts would take place there. 

We do not intend to have any blast beyond what we typically
have for our mining operations, Gould said. Rogers Group has
not been in contact with the DTRA about Divine Strake, and we do
not expect to be. 

U.S. Rep. Steve Buyer, R-4th, said this week he had been told by
the agency that the Divine Strake test would not be conducted in
Indiana. 

The test had at first been planned for June at the Nevada Test
Site as part of an effort to design a weapon that can destroy
bunkers in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other
weapons of mass destruction. 

Environmentalists and some residents had objected to moving the
Divine Strake test to southern Indiana. The military has
confirmed testing up to 1.5 tons of explosives at the Mitchell
Quarry in detonations between July 2004 and March 2005. 

Mitchell Mayor Morris Chastain said he was relieved by word that
the quarry would not be the large bomb test site. 
*****************************************************************
 58 reviewjournal.com: Nuclear exercise successful
 
  Aug. 31, 2006

Scientists from New Mexico's Los Alamos National Laboratory 
detonated the 23rd U.S. subcritical nuclear weapons experiment 
Wednesday at the Nevada Test Site despite opposition from a 
statewide environmental group. 

Darwin Morgan, a spokesman for the Department of Energy's 
National Nuclear Security Administration, said the experiment 
known as Unicorn went off as planned at 11 a.m. in a deep, 
underground chamber at the test site, 85 miles northwest of Las 
Vegas. 

He said the experiment went "very well" and no problems were
reported by the Los Alamos team. 

A Nevada environmental group, Citizen Alert, released a
statement questioning the need for such experiments. 

"It is our understanding that these subcriticals are not even
necessary. That is a question that must be answered before we
allow our beautiful desert to be compromised, yet again," the
statement read. 

Like previous subcritical experiments, Morgan said, Unicorn
involved detonating chemical high explosives around a tiny
amount of plutonium, not enough to erupt into a self-sustaining
nuclear chain reaction. 

Since 1997, government scientists have relied on subcritical
experiments to check how the stockpile ages and to certify its
safety and reliability by using data from the experiments in
combination with other high-tech physics tools and
supercomputers. 	   

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
*****************************************************************
 59 Salt Lake Tribune: Divine Strake blast won't be detoured to Indiana

  Article Last Updated: 08/31/2006 01:12:43 AM MDT  

  By Robert Gehrke The Salt Lake Tribune  
     
  WASHINGTON - Indiana is out as a potential alternative for the
Divine Strake test, the massive detonation the Pentagon
originally planned for the Nevada Test Site, but that now has
been put on hold because of opposition. 

   A limestone quarry in Indiana had been mentioned in news
reports as a possible site after officials from the Defense
Department's Defense Threat Reduction Agency told Utah Sen.
Orrin Hatch that they were looking at relocating the test.      

In a letter Tuesday to Indiana Sen. Dick Lugar, the acting 
director of the agency, Michael K. Evenson, wrote that "DTRA has 
no plans to conduct Divine Strake in the State of Indiana. Any 
discussion to the contrary is incorrect." 

         The Divine Strake test entails detonating 700 tons of
explosives at the Nevada Test Site to measure the damage done to
a tunnel by the blast and the 3.4-magnitude earthquake it would
create. 
   	 Pentagon budget documents said the test was designed to
help war planners choose the smallest possible nuclear weapon to
destroy underground targets, but Pentagon officials later said
the reference to nuclear weapons was a mistake. 

         The Divine Strake explosion would be roughly 50 times
larger than the blast from the largest conventional weapon and
on par with small nuclear weapons. 

   The test had been scheduled for June 2, but was postponed 
after members of Congress questioned the planning and a lawsuit 
was filed by a Nevada Indian tribe and a group of Downwinders, 
individuals who say their cancers and other illnesses were caused 
by Cold War nuclear tests in Nevada. 

         Earlier this month, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
notified Congress that the test would not proceed until several
months into 2007, at the earliest, and that the agency would
look at other potential sites. 

        Several similar blasts, some several times larger than
Divine Strake, were conducted between 1977 and 1991 at the White
Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. 

   Also on Wednesday, the new chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Dale Klein, said he supports the Divine Strake test.
Klein, a former Defense Department official who worked on
nuclear, chemical and biological defense programs, said the
Divine Strake test would improve computer models designed to
calculate how much force is needed to destroy an underground
target. 

         He also reiterated earlier statements that some renewed
nuclear tests might help improve nuclear weapons reliability. 
    
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 60 Sydney Morning Herald: ALP members 'against nuclear expansion' - 

www.smh.com.au

August 31, 2006 - 2:24PM
 	 	
Federal Labor's environment spokesman Anthony Albanese, an
opponent of expanded Australian uranium mining, says most ALP
members are with him on the issue. 

But the left winger says he will accept the majority decision at
next year's ALP national conference, where the issue will be one
of the hottest for debate. 

Mr Albanese's views do not sit comfortably with those of his
party leader Kim Beazley who has called for an end to the `no
new mines' policy, switching the focus instead to stronger
export terms and conditions. 

"I'm confident that we're able to have a mature debate and have
a decision," he told ABC TV. 

"I'll accept the outcome of that conference but it's pretty
clear to me that an overwhelming majority of ALP members don't
want Australia to be further involved in the nuclear fuel
cycle." 

Mr Albanese said the ALP presidential ballot, beginning next
week, would be a chance for members to express that opinion in
supporting candidates John Faulkner and Linda Burney, who are
opposed to a further expansion of uranium mining. 

He questioned the acceptance by South Australian Premier Mike
Rann that the announced opening of a new uranium mine,
Honeymoon, was within ALP policy. 

"The SA government argues that the approval was in place
beforehand, so they argue it's consistent with the policy," Mr
Albanese said. 

"I'm not a lawyer, but I think it's questionable whether it is
in line with policy or it's a breach. 

"It's a very small mine but nonetheless they're arguing it's
within the platform." 

Mr Albanese said Australians were as far into the nuclear fuel
cycle as they wanted Australia to be. 

"(That's) because whilst you can guarantee that uranium mining
will lead to nuclear waste, you can't guarantee it won't lead to
nuclear weapons," he said. 	
© 2006 	AAP

| Copyright © 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 61 BBC: Cumbria prepares for life after Sellafield
 
Last Updated: Thursday, 31 August 2006

By Toby Poston Business reporter, BBC News, in west Cumbria   

[Sellafield nuclear site in Cumbria]

  The Sellafield plant employs thousands in west Cumbria

West Cumbria is an area proud of its manufacturing heritage, with 
much of the workforce traditionally earning money from the steel, 
shipbuilding and chemicals industries. 

Jobs have been lost in all of these sectors, but for more than 50 
years there has been one saving grace for the region - 
Sellafield. 

The sprawling site has created thousands of well paid nuclear 
industry jobs at the power station, decommissioning plants or 
waste reprocessing and storage facilities. 

Sellafield employs 12,000 people, representing 52% of the 
manufacturing jobs in west Cumbria's two main boroughs. 

Nuclear decline 

In the Borough of Copeland, where Sellafield is situated, half of 
the working population is dependent on it for work. 

Unfortunately, the local community's reliance on the nuclear 
business has reached its peak just as the industry has entered a 
period of massive upheaval and uncertainty. 

We are not going to attract major car plant to Cumbria, so there 
is no point chasing Nissan or Toyota Terry Ponting, Cumbria 
Vision           

A 2003 report estimated that the region could lose 8,000 jobs by 
2011/12 as parts of the Sellafield site are decommissioned and 
fuel reprocessing comes to an end. 

The same report said that the changes would result in a wider 
overall loss of 17,000 jobs by 2017. 

It is a daunting prospect for West Cumbria, which already has the 
least productive economy of any region in the UK. 

External investors 

Local MPs, the Department of Trade and Industry and the North 
West Regional Development Agency have commissioned a 
"masterplan", due to be published this October, that will attempt 
to deal with these job losses and help the West Cumbrian economy 
diversify. 

"We need an economy that is vibrant, that will grow and attract 
external investors and make people want to come and work here," 
says Terry Ponting, a consultant with Cumbria Vision, which has 
been charged with overseeing the production of the plan. 

[Whitehaven harbour]                            

Whitehaven has spruced up its harbour to attract tourists

The team recognises that the jobs lost at Sellafield will be high 
paying ones, salaries that cannot just be replaced by more 
recruitment from the lower paid public sector or leisure and 
tourism industries. 

Attracting new highly paid jobs will be tough, with numerous 
business surveys in the region highlighting barriers, including a 
lack of relevant skills, poor transport links and road 
congestion. 

"We have to be realistic," says Mr Ponting. "We are not going to 
attract a major car plant to Cumbria, so there is no point 
chasing Nissan or Toyota." 

The masterplan is expected to call for improved rail, air and 
road links, the creation of a Cumbria University and the greater 
exploitation of the region's coastal areas and countryside - all 
key factors in attracting and maintaining a skilled workforce. 

But the plan is expected to rely heavily on one particular 
industry for future job growth. 

You've guessed it...the nuclear industry. 

Nuclear waste 

SELLAFIELD'S IMPORTANCE                  

Generates 22% o Cumbria's economic productivity The 8,000 job 
losses predicted will take an extra 5,800 dependent jobs 
elsewhere in the economy These jobs would knock Ł1bn from the 
Cumbrian economy Source: Cumbria Vision

The government's recent Energy Review announced that nuclear 
power was back on the agenda, and with a sizeable nuclear 
footprint already, Sellafield seems a likely destination for any 
new reactors. 

It also seems an obvious choice for the government's planned 
underground nuclear waste repository. 

Whitehall has decided that burial is the best solution for the 
UK's estimated 470,000 cubic metres of nuclear waste, but it 
needs to find a local community willing to back the idea. 

As most of this waste is already stored above ground at 
Sellafield anyway, the decision would appear to be a simple one. 

Clean-up 

Along with Sellafield, much of the UK nuclear industry's 
infrastructure needs to be dismantled and cleaned-up, a Ł72bn 
business that the region wants a big chunk of. 

[Nexia headquarters in Sellafield]                              
Could Nexia's HQ be the home of a new National Nuclear 
Laboratory?

It has already achieved a major success with the government's 
decision to base the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), the 
body that will oversee this task, in the area. 

Much of the clean up bill will be spent at Sellafield anyway, but 
the NDA is also working with nearby universities, research 
organisations and government bodies to boost the nuclear skills 
base in the region. 

It is investing Ł20m in a new Nuclear Institute and a national 
Nuclear Skills Academy to attract world-class research 
professionals and provide vocational training and apprenticeships 
for people wanting to work in the industry. 

New recruits and expertise are essential for the UK nuclear 
industry, which has haemorrhaged skilled workers in the decade 
since the country's last new nuclear power station was built. 

"Twenty years ago there were 9,000 skilled nuclear technicians in 
the UK, but most of these people have now gone, along with the 
companies they worked for," says Peter Bleasdale, managing 
director of Nexia Solutions, the research and technology sister 
company of British Nuclear Group (BNG), which manages the 
Sellafield site. 

"This figure has now shrunk to about 500 and we are it." 

Nuclear lab 

BNG and Nexia are state-owned, and both face uncertain futures. 

BNG is being sold, but bosses at Nexia hope their firm will form 
the basis of a new National Nuclear Laboratory, which could 
undertake research projects related to the UK clean-up as well as 
work from other nuclear plants around the world. 

Nexia has invested Ł300m on new headquarters close to Sellafield, 
which includes some of the most advanced nuclear laboratories 
anywhere in the world. 

The company is recruiting at all levels and Mr Bleasdale is 
confident that the National Nuclear Laboratory will centre on 
Nexia's operations, and West Cumbria. 

"I think it is highly unlikely that it will not go ahead - the 
issue is more one of ownership, governance and the scope of work 
it will look at," he says. 

As for the long term job prospects within West Cumbria's all 
important nuclear industry, even Nexia's high-powered microscopes 
cannot see that far. 

"I can't see a big decrease over the next ten years, but beyond 
that things are a bit hazy." 

This is the third in a series of features about the Cumbrian 
economy.                                                         
*****************************************************************
 62 Letters: Response to Allison MacFarlane's Article

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 

September/October 2006 
Letters: 

Mounting debate 

"The decision-making process must be fair, open, and transparent. 
Yet, the drive for a Yucca Mountain repository has exhibited none 
of these attributes." 

In "Stuck on a Solution" (May/June 2006 Bulletin), Allison
MacFarlane provides an insightful and notably clear discussion
of the factors contributing to the continued troubled status of
the proposed national nuclear waste repository at Yucca
Mountain, Nevada. It's always gratifying to those of us in
Nevada when someone with a scientific background faithfully
researches and reports the policy and technology quagmire that
is Yucca Mountain. Unlike our European and Canadian
counterparts, the United States has yet to engage in critical
reassessments about potential nuclear waste disposal options. 
In 1999, as governor-elect, I joined my predecessor, Governor
Bob Miller, in reiterating the site's unsafe nature to Energy
Secretary Bill Richardson. With the benefit of seven more years
of scientific investigation, it remains clear that Yucca
Mountain should have been disqualified as a repository under the
Energy Department's Site Recommendation Guidelines. Instead,
Energy revised the guidelines, eliminating Yucca Mountain's
preestablished disqualifying conditions from the site
suitability evaluation. 

In 2002, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham recommended Yucca
Mountain to President George W. Bush as a suitable repository.
Hence, Congress, overriding my statutory Notice of Disapproval,
designated the site for a license application to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. 

To succeed in the essential task of protecting people and the
environment from the unprecedented dangers of nuclear waste now
and in the future, the unqualified safety of a repository is
paramount. The decision-making process must be fair, open, and
transparent. Yet, for the past 20 years, the drive for a Yucca
Mountain repository has exhibited none of these attributes. 

Kenny C. Guinn 
Governor, State of Nevada 

"Stuck on a Solution" gives a thorough analysis of the effort to
bury nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain. It identifies many of the
problems with the science underpinning the proposed repository
including the impossibility of forecasting geochemical
interaction and threats posed by the area's water flow and
volcanic activity. 

Unfortunately, from the moment my home state of Nevada was
designated as the recipient of our nation's nuclear waste, the
process has ignored such science. The Energy Department
overlooks the science because it wants to open Yucca Mountain at
any cost, eschewing all safety and efficiency concerns. In
Nevada, we do not take the health and security of our families
lightly, and we will not stand silent in this battle. 

Nor are we alone in questioning Yucca Mountain's feasibility.
Most scientists agree that a viable, safe, and secure
alternative to a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain
could be a reality within a decade. Already, on-site dry cask
storageone possible alternativeis in use at 34 sites
throughout the country. The Nuclear Energy Institute projects
that 83 of the 103 active reactors will possess dry cask storage
by 2050. With this in mind, I've introduced the Spent Fuel
On-Site Storage and Security Actalong with Senate Minority
Leader Harry Reid. The act mandates that nuclear waste remain
stored at its production facility and requires the federal
government to take responsibility for possession, stewardship,
maintenance, and monitoring of the waste while searching for a
solution predicated on solid science. The choice is clear. We
can either spend an additional $60 billion on a mountain filled
with unpredictable seismic activity, or we can allocate a
fraction of that money to safely store nuclear waste on-site
while investing in recycling technology to turn one of the
world's most toxic substances into a clean energy alternative. 
Sen. John Ensign 
Republican, Nevada 


Allison Macfarlane misplaces the emphasis in her skepticism
about performance assessment modeling at Yucca Mountain.
Macfarlane rightly criticizes this repository project; but
rather than sweepingly dismiss performance modeling, she should
have pointed out the Energy Department's failure to craft a
repository design that exploits the site's natural
characteristics and employs well-understood diffusion phenomena. 
In "Proof of Safety at Yucca Mountain" (October 21, 2005
Science), we addressed Energy's missed opportunity. Since the
site resides 200-300 meters above the water table, movement of
water in the rock is slight and occurs only through fractures.

But the presence of high humidity and oxygen in repository
tunnels means waste containers need protection from corrosion. 
Modeling the complex corrosion process over many tens of
thousands of years as it affects key elements in Energy's most
recent designsa nickel-alloy outer layer for the waste
container and a titanium "drip shield" over the containeris not
a credible undertaking. We advocate a capillary barrier concept.

First, a layer of coarse gravel is placed around waste
containers; then a layer of fine sand is draped over the gravel.
Strong capillary forces in the sand would seize any water
dripping from the tunnel ceiling and move it slowly away. Proof
of safety turns on the gravel layer, however, where capillary
forces are absent. 

Ultimately, the containers fail by corrosion from the
omnipresent water vapor and oxygen. But the radioactive elements
that emerge to form a thin coating on gravel particles would
diffuse so slowly within the gravel that they're effectively
trapped. Compared to corrosion chemistry, such diffusion serves
as a far simpler physical process that lends itself to
laboratory mockups and extrapolations over vast periods of time.
Although absolute proof of safety remains beyond reach, the
capillary barrier concept deserves urgent attention and testing. 

Luther J. Carter
 Independent journalist, author
 Washington, D.C. 
Thomas H. Pigford
 Professor emeritus of nuclear engineering
 University of California  at Berkeley
 Berkeley, California 

Allison Macfarlane correctly concludes that a geologic
repository at Yucca Mountain serves as "the best solution to the
nuclear waste problem." However, Macfarlane errs in arguing that
science does not prove Yucca Mountain's viability as a
repository. Twenty years of study by more than 2,500 scientists
at the most prestigious U.S. national laboratories and at the
world's leading universities has overwhelmingly proved its
viability. 

Macfarlane similarly misses the mark in contending that
performance assessment isn't a valid tool for appraising
repository safety. For years, scientists have understood that
they must account for a wide range of complex factors when
considering the long-term isolation of nuclear waste. To do so,
they've developed an analytical methodology known as safety
assessment, also called performance assessment. These assessment
tools include comprehensive models of all repository systems
that simulate how these systems interact during a broad range of
future scenarios. 

The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose work Macfarlane
cites to support her assertion that performance assessments
don't work, actually reached the opposite conclusion. The agency
devoted an entire chapter to the subject in its 2003 report,
"Scientific and Technical Basis for the Geological Disposal of
Radioactive Wastes," deducing, "Safety can be evaluated ...
using Safety Assessment/Performance Assessment as the main
tools." Based on this comprehensive scientific research, the
nuclear energy industry believes quite confidently that Yucca
Mountain meets the requirements for safely disposing of used
nuclear fuel. 

Rod McCullum
 Director for Yucca Mountain Project,
 Nuclear Energy Institute
 Washington, D.C. 

ALLISON MACFARLANE RESPONDS: 

I appreciate Governor Guinn and Senator Ensign's sentiments, but
I disagree with Senator Ensign's suggestion that reprocessing
solves the nuclear waste problem. Though it might decrease the
volume of high-level waste, reprocessing does not decrease its
heat productionand therefore the volume required for waste
disposal. Reprocessing also creates huge amounts of low- and
intermediate-level waste that will require disposal at separate
waste sites. Moreover, reprocessing costs more than direct
disposal and creates a proliferation threat. 

Rod McCullum is incorrect when he writes that I believe Yucca
Mountain provides "the best solution to the nuclear waste
problem." I stated that a geologic repository is the best
solution, not Yucca Mountain. Moreover, his defense of Yucca
based on the amount of time and money the Energy Department has
spent on the project is specious. Time and money don't
necessarily equal meaningful results. McCullum also
misunderstands my objections to the use of performance
assessment to determine Yucca's compliance with EPA standards.

On thermodynamic grounds it's impossible to validate performance
assessment models; therefore Energy's case supporting
performance assessment results falls apart. 

Finally, though interesting, Luther Carter and Thomas Pigford's
idea of a capillary barrier reflects another engineered solution
for a proposed nuclear waste repository with inadequate geology.
Wouldn't it make more sense to select a more suitable site
instead? 

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2006 BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS 
*****************************************************************
 63 AU ABC: Darwin 'only port' for Honeymoon uranium exports. 

01/09/2006. ABC News Online

Australia's newest uranium mine may use the Port of Darwin to
export its products after it begins production in early 2008.

 The board of mining company Uranium One has approved the
Honeymoon mine, in South Australia's far north-east.

 It is waiting on final environmental approval but the company
is confident of getting that before production starts.

 Northern Territory Minerals Council chief executive Kezia
Purick says it is likely yellowcake will be put on a train from
Adelaide to Darwin, to be exported out of the Top End's main
port.

 "I'm sure it'll be welcome business to the Port of Darwin," he
said.

 "I don't know exactly what quantities we're talking about but
I'm sure the port would be adequately equipped with the relevant
facilities and have the shipping companies come in to collect
the commodity."

 "This company's product, the uranium oxide, may well have to be 
put on the train from Adelaide through to Darwin and be exported 
over our port, because Darwin's habour, Darwin's port is the only 
port in Australia that can export uranium product, the uranium 
oxide." 
*****************************************************************
 64 UPI: NRC, DoE feud over nuke waste
     
  United Press International - Energy - 

	8/31/2006 2:56:00 PM -0400 	 	 				 				 					 

 By BEN LANDO UPI Energy Correspondent

WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 (UPI) -- A meeting between U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and Energy Department officials, scheduled
for Thursday morning, was cancelled Wednesday in an ongoing row
over which agency has what authority over nuclear weapons waste
disposal. 

The rift is over interpretation of a 2004 defense bill that
split the responsibility of disposing millions of gallons of
high-level radioactive waste between the two. 

The Energy Department doesn't like the NRC's proposal for how to
consult with and monitor the department's efforts and General
Counsel David R. Hill sent a letter July 31 asking the NRC to
nix it and meet to come up with new guidelines. 

"I was surprised at the tone of the letter that Hill sent," NRC
Chairman Dale Klein said Wednesday at a news conference at the
Washington offices of leading energy news service Platts. 

But, Klein said, that letter was sent as part of the public
comment over the guidelines and so any meeting needs to be held
in public. 

Klein, who is two months into the chairman post, said the
guidelines would remain on the table and that though "discussing
and brainstorming" meetings could be closed, an NRC-Energy
Department meeting on the issue "if it's held, will be open." 

The matter has taken a strenuous turn, with two prominent
Congressmen condemning the Energy Department's private meeting
efforts and allegations that a top department official pushed
for closed sessions himself. 

Congress addressed the weapons waste debate in the Ronald Reagan
National Defense Authorization Act of fiscal year 2005, after
the department's original plan was overturned in court. 

Now constitutional, the department wants to empty the tanks of
high-level, radioactive waste at various sites, fill them with
concrete grout and call it low-level waste. Opponents say it
still poses a risk and should only be housed with other highly
radioactive waste in a permanent repository (which has yet to be
built). 

Two provisions in the bill are at the crux over Energy
Department and NRC's at-odds interpretation. It states the
Energy Secretary, "in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission," will determine if its methods lower the threat
enough and the NRC will "monitor disposal actions." 

The NRC's Standard Review Plan was a draft proposal for how that
would happen, which Hill writes in the letter is "a fundamental
misreading" of the law by usurping the Energy Secretary's
authority and in effect make the NRC a regulator of the
department. 

The two sides will have to settle these qualms to move forward;
the Thursday meeting was intended to do that. Megan Barnett, a
spokeswoman for the Energy Department, said the meeting was for
purely technical discussions and didn't warrant being open. 

No final decisions would have been made, she said, those would
be public. 

"This department is focused on moving forward and getting work
done," Barnett said. 

An Aug. 25 article in Inside Energy, a Platts publication, said
the insistence on a private meeting came all the way from the
top of the Energy Department. It cited an anonymous NRC source
that Deputy Energy Secretary "Clay Sell was over here in April
lobbing [the NRC commissioners] personally." 

This prompted Reps. John Dingell, D-Mich., ranking member of the
House Energy and Commerce Committee and John Spratt, D-S.C.,
ranking member of the House Budget Committee to urge Klein to
open up the meeting. 

"This is a matter of enormous public interest, and we believe
the public should not be barred from meetings on the subject
unless a significant national security concern is being
discussed," the Congressmen wrote in an Aug. 29 letter to Klein. 

"Even then, only that portion of the meeting dealing with
sensitive issues should be closed," they wrote, adding public
participation in this process was what Congress wanted and the
absence of it would set a trend of secrecy for future nuclear
waste disposal they warned against. 

Klein told reporters "the burden will, in my view, have to be on
DOE to justify it being closed." 

(Comments to energy@upi.com)

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
 65 Whitehaven News: Nuclear-scrap firm plans to create up to 30 jobs

Published on 31/08/2006

DOZENS of new jobs will be created in west Cumbria if plans for a 
metal recycling facility at Lillyhall get the go-ahead.
 
International nuclear services company, Studsvik UK, Limited
wants to open a plant which would decontaminate and then recycle
steel and scrap metal from Sellafield and other UK nuclear sites.
 
The plant would create up to 30 high-quality jobs in the first
12 months.
 
Gateshead-based Studsvik says it will also be using local
contractors to create the multi-million pound facility.
 
The firm has stressed that the plant will not be a nuclear waste
dump or a nuclear licensed site. 

Radioactive waste would not be stored there.
 
Its work would significantly reduce the amount of contaminated
scrap which is ultimately dumped at the low level waste
repository at Drigg.
 
The proposed facility on the Lillyhall Industrial Estate, would
be solely for the recycling of low level radioactive metallic
scrap originating from the UK nuclear industry.
 
About 60 per cent would come from Sellafield and Chapelcross
with the remainder from other nuclear plants the government is
to decommission.
 
Studsvik says the metal to be treated will be so slightly
contaminated that workers at the plant will just need to wear
regular overalls and gloves to handle it.
 
Mark Lyons, president of Studsvik UK, said: “What we are
proposing is a modern, environmentally-friendly industrial
recycling facility based on proven technology.
 
The facility could be operational by the late summer of 2007 if
planning and regulatory permissions are granted. It would be
fitted with state-of-the-art controls and monitoring systems and
is expected to be regulated by the Environment Agency.
 
Scrap would be brought in by sea through Workington Port, by
rail and by road in containers. The vast majority would be
cleaned up on site and then recycled to the global steel
industry. 

A small amount of metal that may need further treatment will be
transported overseas to Studsvik’s facilities in Sweden.
 
Residues of low-level radioactivity removed from the metal would
be sent to Drigg for safe disposal.
 
Because the scrap metal will be cleaned and recycled the total
volume of waste that would normally be sent to Drigg would be
hugely reduced – removing hundreds of lorry journeys from the
county’s roads.
 
Studsvik says it could divert 96 per cent of containers of scrap
metal away from Drigg each year – so only the equivalent of
seven out of 130 containers would have to go to the repository
for storage.
 
No scrap metal from countries outside the UK, or hospital waste,
would be treated by Studsvik at Lillyhall.
 
The company said: “Our policy is and has always been to be
open to the public and we hope to be able to reassure everyone
living in Allerdale and west Cumbria that this is a positive
investment for the area with lots of economic and environmental
benefits for the UK and local population.”
*****************************************************************
 66 Charlotte Observer: S.C. defense firm to pay $1.8 million to U.S. to settle suit

08/31/2006 | 

Whistleblowers sparked case against firm that makes armored
vehicles

 Associated Press 

COLUMBIA - An S.C. defense contractor that makes armored
vehicles for the Pentagon has agreed to pay the government $1.8
million to resolve allegations brought in a whistleblower
lawsuit, U.S. Attorney Reginald Lloyd said Wednesday. 

The suit claimed Force Protection Inc. of Ladson "failed to
advance payments to expedite production of armored vehicles for
the U.S. military," Lloyd said in a news release. 

The company, whose vehicles are used in Afghanistan and Iraq to
find and remove bombs, denied wrongdoing. 

The case was filed in U.S. District Court in South Carolina on
behalf of two former employees of Force Protection, Lloyd said.
He identified the two as Perry Chomyn and Robin Swain. 

"The settlement resolves Force's potential liability under the
False Claims Act arising from the whistleblower's complaint,"
Lloyd's release said. 

The two former employees "will receive $315,000 as their share
of the proceeds of the settlement" and got "and additional
$105,000 in attorney fees and settlement of their
employment-related claims," the statement said. 

Company Vice President Mike Aldrich told The (Charleston) Post
and Courier that the company agreed to the settlement over an
accounting technicality. 

The company said it took a charge of $1.93 million in the second
quarter to cover the settlement and interest charges, plus legal
fees for the former employees who filed the lawsuit.
*****************************************************************
 67 Occupational Hazards: Beating the Heat at Hanford
 
THE AUTHORITY ON OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY, HEALTH AND LOSS PREVENTION                                                         

Beating the Heat at Hanford - 08/31/2006 				

Worker safety in the heat of summer can be a challenge on any 
outdoor project, even under the best of circumstances. But what 
happens when the circumstances turn challenging?                                

by Mike Berriochoa 

For CH2M HILL, concern about the heat takes on new dimensions as 
employees perform their work on the Department of Energy's 
Hanford site in the hot and dry Columbia Basin of Eastern 
Washington. Workers often find themselves involved in challenging 
projects wearing multiple layers of protective clothing as well 
as respiratory protection, including self-contained breathing 
apparatus (SCBA). 

While physical conditioning, proper planning and preparation go
a long way toward warding off problems caused by the heat, often
extra measures to keep workers safe and productive are required. 

The Hanford site is home to the nation's largest volume of
radioactive and chemical waste, a byproduct of producing nuclear
materials for the nation's defense. While the defense mission at
Hanford ended more than two decades ago, the site is now one of
the largest environmental restoration projects in the world.
Teams of workers are aggressively cleaning up and disposing of
the radioactive and chemical waste. 

Daily tasks might range from routine surveillance activities to
heavy industrial work that includes operation and setup of
cranes and rigging, erection of scaffolding and equipment
maintenance. These tasks can be physically demanding under the
best conditions, but add in the conditions found at the Hanford
site, and worker protection becomes even more important. 

The Mission 

CH2M HILL's responsibility is to safely manage more than 53
million gallons of highly radioactive and chemical waste stored
in 177 underground tanks, grouped in 18 "farms." Each farm
usually includes 12 to 15 tanks buried under 10 feet of soil and
connected to the surface by pipes. These pipes, or risers, allow
for the insertion of various monitoring instruments, pumps and
leak detection equipment. 

Unlike the wet, rainy climate of the coastal areas of western
Washington, the eastern half of the state is an arid land of
sagebrush and irrigated farms, receiving an average annual
rainfall of less than 7 inches and plenty of clear, blue sky. 

Spring comes early to the Columbia Basin. An early spring is
good for local farmers but always gives way to a hot summer,
which brings with it unrelenting heat that seems to last for
months. For much of June, July, August and September,
temperatures can range from the high 80s to low 90s under clear
skies. In late July through early August, daytime temperatures
typically exceed 100 F. Add in low humidity, which rapidly
strips away moisture, and the ever-present wind caused by being
down-slope of the Cascade Mountains, and working outside can
swiftly change from being uncomfortable to being hazardous to a
worker's health. 

"Most of our work managing Hanford's radioactive and chemical
waste is performed outdoors," says Fran Ito, CH2M HILL vice
president for safety, health and quality assurance. "Some can be
done in shirt sleeves, but other work requires the use of
personal protective equipment that can include heavy coveralls,
hoods, rubber gloves and supplied air respirators, all of which
take a toll on a worker's stamina, especially when the summer
sun is beating down." 

To beat the heat, CH2M HILL sometimes changes schedules to
conduct work on swing or graveyard shifts to take advantage of
the cooler nighttime temperatures, says Ito, adding, "but
workers don't like it as well as working in the daylight." 

The company always has stressed hydration while working, and
provides drinking water both during and after all outdoor
projects. Large quantities of bottled water are delivered to
worksites on a regular basis to make sure workers have access to
all they need. But the company didn't stop there. 

Input from Employees 

Ito put together a team of workers and managers and gave them
the freedom to brainstorm ideas that could help workers beat the
heat. 

"We looked at three types of solutions, recognizing that every
option has positive and negative aspects," Ito remembers. 

The first solution is to avoid the heat. Second is to change the
work environments. Third, look at good practices, knowing
different tasks are going to require a choice of several
different solutions. 

"Our first priority is to ensure that the heat stress program
requirements for engineering controls, personal hydration, good
communication, work/ rest regimens and self-monitoring are
clearly understood and followed by all," says Bill Smoot, CH2M
HILL's Heat Stress Program manager. 

One of the team's first recommendations was to install a
cool-down tent just inside the fence of a tank farm if work was
going to take place for an extended period. Since workers have
the potential to come in contact with radioactive contamination,
the cool-down tents give them a place to take a break, drink
water and get out of the sun without having to remove all of
their protective clothing for the duration of their break. 

"We also installed misters in some of the cool-down tents to
help cool the workers, and installed air conditioners to provide
a constant flow of cool air," Smoot says. 

In addition to the cool-down tents, this year's efforts also are
aggressively addressing the actual work environment. To control
the potential spread of radioactivity in certain projects,
large, temporary structures are routinely erected from
scaffolding and plastic. Workers refer to them as greenhouses,
and as their name implies, they turn into hot, confined work
areas. To mitigate the heat, recirculation air conditioning
units with HEPA filters are being installed inside containment
tents where the work is actually being performed. 

"Lessons learned from Hanford as well as other sites have also
underscored the value of installing netting over the containment
tents to break the sun, resulting in lowering the ambient
temperature of the worksite," Ito says. 

The team also recommended special cooling vests be provided to
workers. The vests use a type of hydrated gel that is designed
to hold any temperature it is exposed to for extended periods.
It weighs a mere 2 pounds and by freezing the vests, they can
provide cooling for up to 2 hours. This is a far cry from the
old-style vests that used up to 30 pounds of ice and restricted
movement due to their bulk. 

"There is another type of vest available to workers that use ice
water. It lasts about 3 hours, and can be recharged in less than
1 minute," says Smoot. 

Another recommendation made by the group has brought about a
change in the type of coveralls being used. Some protective
clothing is heavy and not well-suited to hot, dry climates.
Other types work well in dry climates but quickly become
uncomfortable under misters in the cool-down tents. 

"We did some research and found coveralls that are lightweight
and perform well under a variety of conditions. Workers like
them and they get the job done," Ito says. 

Ito says CH2M HILL is developing a toolbox of options for its
heat stress program, so managers and field work supervisors are
able to select the right options for the existing conditions.
Through the use of new engineering controls, revised
administrative procedures and updated personal protective
clothing, CH2M HILL is making summer work in the desert
environment much safer. 

Mike Berriochoa is a communications specialist at CH2M HILL at
the Hanford site in Richland, Wash., and has been writing about
Hanford cleanup progress and challenges since 1989. 

Sidebar: Protecting Yourself from Heat Stress 

When the body is unable to cool itself by sweating, heat-induced
illnesses such as heat stress or heat exhaustion and the more
severe heat stroke can occur, and can by deadly. 

Factors leading to heat stress include high temperature and
humidity, direct sun or heat, limited air movement, physical
exertion, poor physical condition, some medicines and inadequate
tolerance for hot workplaces. 

Symptoms of heat exhaustion include: 
  + Headaches, dizziness, lightheadedness or fainting. 
  + Weakness and moist skin. 
  + Mood changes such as irritability or confusion. 
  + Upset stomach or vomiting. 
  + Symptoms of heat stroke include: 
  + Dry, hot skin with no sweating. 
  + Mental confusion or losing consciousness. 
  + Seizures or convulsions. 

The best way to "treat" heat stress is to prevent it. Know the
signs and symptoms of heat-related illnesses and monitor
yourself and co-workers. Block out direct sun or other heat
sources, and use cooling fans and air conditioners. Remember to
rest regularly and drink lots of water – about 1 cup every 15
minutes – and avoid alcohol, caffeinated drinks and heavy meals.
Wear lightweight, light colored, loose-fitting clothes. 	 

If a co-worker appears to be suffering from heat-related
illness, call 9-1-1 (or local emergency number) at once. While
waiting for help to arrive: 
  + Move the worker to a cool, shaded area. 
  + Loosen or remove heavy clothing. 
  + Provide cool drinking water. 
  + Fan and mist the person with water. 

Source: OSHA				

- Mike Berriochoa 				
 			 						 		   	 	   			 Quick Links
Occupational Hazards   |   © 2004                             
*****************************************************************
 68 DOE: Energy Department Announces Creation of New Health, Safety 
and Security Office
 
  August 30, 2006
 
WASHINGTON, DC  The Department of Energy (DOE) today announced
the creation of a new office to strengthen and improve the
health, safety, and security of the DOE workers, facilities and
the public.  The new office, called the Office of Health, Safety
and Security (HSS), will help formulate and implement health,
safety and security policy for the Department, provide
assistance to DOE sites, conduct oversight through rigorous
field inspections, and carry out enforcement activities
previously carried out by the Offices of Environment, Safety and
Health (EH) and Security and Safety Performance Assurance (SSA).
 This move builds on a number of actions the Department has
taken over the past 18 months to increase safety of DOE workers. 

As Secretary of Energy, ensuring the safety of workers across
the DOE complex is my top priority and this new office will go a
long way in strengthening our safety and security organization,
Secretary Samuel W. Bodman said.  We must be world class not
only in how we carry out our mission, but in the safe, secure,
and environmentally responsible way in which we manage
operations at our facilities across the country. 

Through an integrated policy and oversight approach in the new
HSS office, policy and field assistance personnel will work more
closely with site managers to identify potential weaknesses and
develop corrective actions to prevent workplace accidents before
they happen.  In the previous DOE organization model, EH
developed safety policy guidance and provided support to DOE
sites, while SSA conducted safety oversight.  This bifurcation
of responsibility led to gaps between theory and practice and
some overlap in functions between the two offices.  Clearer
guidance, early identification of risks, and management
accountability will help reduce accident and injury rates and
improve the Departments safety performance in operations. 

The new HSS office will be led by a Chief Health, Safety and
Security Officer, who, as a career professional, will provide
continuity of leadership to a strong health, safety and security
organization while maintaining institutional stability through
changes in political leadership.  The Chief Health, Safety and
Security Officer will report directly to the Office of the
Secretary. 

The new HSS office will have nine offices dedicated to health,
safety and security, which include the Office of Health and
Safety; Office of Nuclear Safety and Environment; Office of
Corporate Safety Analysis; Office of Enforcement; Office of
Independent Oversight; Office of Security Policy; Office of
Security Technology and Assistance; Office of Classification;
and National Training Center.  The Office of the Departmental
Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
(DNFSB) will be a part of HSS and report to the Chief Health,
Safety and Security Officer, as will the Office of Security
Operations, which manages headquarters security personnel. 

Functions that were performed by EH or SSA but are outside the
core mission of health, safety and security will be transferred
to other DOE program offices performing similar or related
functions.  The Departments continuity of government program
and support for technical review of authorization basis
documents previously performed by SSA will be transferred into
the existing functions in the Departments National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA).  Support on safety regulations
for newly constructed facilities and new start projects will be
performed by the Office of the Under Secretary of Energy (US-E)
and NNSA.  Additionally, management of the Radiological
Environment Science Laboratory will transfer to the Office of
Nuclear Energy (NE) and management of the New Brunswick
Laboratory will transfer to the Office of Science (SC) to better
align with their current programmatic functions.  The Office of
Management will assume non-safety related quality assurance
program elements and the management of the Departments foreign
travel and exchange visitor program.  The Office of National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Policy and Compliance will be
transferred to the Office of the General Counsel (GC). 

Glenn Podonsky will lead the new office as the Chief Health,
Safety, and Security Officer.  He has served the Department as
the Director of the Office of Security and Safety Performance
Assurance (SSA) since 2004. 

All funding requested for Fiscal Year 2007 will be spent on the
functions for which it was authorized.  For more information on
the Departments new office of Health, Safety and Security,
please visit http://www.hss.energy.gov. 

Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940     [ ]   

  U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | 
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
 69 Hanford News: Sen. Cantwell to seek funds for anti-terrorism research
 
This story was published Wednesday, August 30th, 2006 

By John Trumbo, Herald staff writer 

Democratic U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell promised to push for more
money for research on anti-terrorism technologies Tuesday after
getting a sneak peek at the work being done at the Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory in Richland. 

The Washington senator said she is asking Congress to restore
$200 million for research that was chopped from this year's
Department of Homeland Security budget. 

Cantwell said the funding would help PNNL and other national
labs continue to refine technologies such as the millimeter wave
and radiation portal monitoring that already work, as well as
develop new systems to detect explosives like the ones behind
the recent plot uncovered in England. 

"We have to make the home front more secure," she said during a
two-hour tour of the Richland lab. 

Cantwell said she was impressed by how the millimeter wave
technology can detect concealed objects and how radiation portal
monitoring can screen cargo and passengers. The millimeter wave
technology is being used in the Green Zone in Iraq and at
checkpoints and airports in Israel, while radiation portal
monitoring is being set up at dozens of ports around the country
with help from PNNL. 

"We need to be working on this cutting edge technology," she
said. "It is best we continue to be a leader in the country
using the resources we have here," she added. 

"Everywhere you tour at PNNL, they are working on developing new
technologies," she noted. 

The senator said in a prepared statement that she was sending a
letter to leaders of the House and Senate Appropriations
committees calling for an increase in DHS' budget for research
funding. She noted that in 2005 Congress provided $1.3 billion
for research and development for homeland security, but this
year the appropriations was $1.1 billion. 

Cantwell's letter calling for restoration of the funding, noted
Homeland Security's science and technology director has a new
leader with Undersecretary Jay Cohen. She said Cohen is asking
for breakthrough technologies for detecting explosives and
flammable liquids at passenger checkpoints. 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 70 Tri-City Herald: DOE combines 2 safety-related offices 

Published Thursday, August 31st, 2006 

By Les Blumenthal Herald Washington, D.C., bureau 

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Energy announced Wednesday
that it will proceed with a major internal restructuring, saying
the change will improve safety for tens of thousands of workers
at DOE sites across the nation. 

The department has 114,000 workers at dozens of sites, including
Hanford. And DOE also operates a string of national
laboratories, including Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in
Richland. 

Despite congressional concerns, the Energy Department plans to
combine the Office of Environment, Safety and Health with the
Office of Safety Performance Assurance. 

The new Office of Health, Safety and Security will help form
health, safety and security policies for DOE, provide help to
department field offices, conduct oversight including "rigorous"
field investigations and enforce department regulations. 

"As secretary of energy, ensuring the safety of workers across
the DOE complex is my priority, and this new office will go a
long way in strengthening our safety and security organization,"
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said in a statement. 

In a 17-page report explaining and justifying the
reorganization, the department said the new office would bring a
more "focused and integrated organizational approach" to the
issues of worker safety and security and would be led by a
career professional rather than an appointed assistant secretary
to provide continuity even when administrations change. 

Critics, however, said the restructuring was a step backward
when it came to protecting worker safety and health and was
being rushed into effect without proper congressional oversight. 

"Today, the Bush administration took another step to weaken the
health and safety protections our workers rely on," Sen. Patty
Murray, D-Wash., said in a statement. 

"It ignored the expertise of safety professionals and many of us
in Congress who strongly object to this flawed plan. Thousands
of Hanford workers rely on the Department of Energy to ensure
their safety on the job, and this makes their safety a lower
priority." 

Other DOE critics agreed. "This is a huge mistake," said Tom
Carpenter of the Hanford watchdog group Government
Accountability Project in Seattle. "They are downgrading the
safety function even as the secretary says it is a top
priority." 

Carpenter said the reorganization showed a lack of commitment to
cleaning up energy department sites like Hanford and protecting
the safety and health of workers. "They want to shove it into a
back corner," he said. 

Other lawmakers are taking a wait-and-see attitude. 

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., said in a statement that federal
agencies should always be looking for ways to improve but that
worker safety must be the top priority "regardless of the
administrative framework or what you call the office." 

He said, "On many occasions I've been the first to say that DOE
is not perfect -- no agency is, and sometimes changes are
warranted. Worker safety requires continual vigilance, and I'm
going to carefully monitor this, like I always have, and see if
it has the results that DOE believes it will." 

DOE officials contend that critics of the change are wrong and
that the goal is to enhance worker protections. 

"This decision is very important to the health and safety of our
workers, to our contractors and to our neighboring communities,"
Clay Sell, the agency's deputy secretary, said in a conference
call with reporters Wednesday. 

Sell said Bodman has long been concerned about the department
"lapsing into complacency" when it comes to these issues. And
the reorganization will guard against that happening. 

Sell rejected any suggestion that the department is downgrading
its commitment to worker safety and health, adding "Secretary
Bodman and I believe this will be a sufficient improvement over
the status quo." 

© 2006 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press 
*****************************************************************
 71 Carlsbad Current-Argus: Next Step: Community Discussion 

Representative John Heaton was right on the money last Monday,
when he cited the need for more public education about a pending
proposed interest in Global Nuclear Energy Partnership proposal. 
Heaton made the pronouncement at a meeting packed with local
elected officials and staff members with Washington Group
International. 

At the meeting, Washington Group International and Areva
announced a partnership with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance. The
groups are preparing a site study to potentially bring nuclear
recycling facilities to the area. Officials were quick to laud
the area's community support of nuclear projects as an essential
asset. 

Do most Carlsbad and Hobbs residents support expanding the
area's nuclear interests and bringing thousands of jobs to the
area? Almost certainly they do. But a bird in the hand, in terms
of evidence of public support, is rapidly becoming worth more
than two in the bush. 

It's time to start holding town hall meetings. These meetings
should naturally include an educational element, where WGI staff
members and elected officials explain some of the scientific and
economic implications of GNEP. These meetings should also
include a question and answer session and, yes, a period for
public comment. 

Public input and education needs to go beyond the scope of just
meeting with Carlsbad Department of Development members and the
country club circuit. 

The lack of a public forum up to this point is understandable
for two reasons: 1. The entire process has been very rushed.

Deadlines have been rapidly approaching in a manner that is
highly unusual in the federal system, 2. It's still fairly early
in the game. At this point, communities have just expressed
interest in potentially being involved. 

Nevertheless, the scope of this project, even this early in the
game, demands a rapid increase in information provided to the
community. The elected bodies of Eddy County, Lea County,
Carlsbad and Hobbs recently formed a limited liability
corporation. This is an extremely rare endeavor that indicates
the seriousness of this issue. 

Local officials have continually stressed the support of area 
residents for the nuclear industry. Some officials may prefer the 
clean boardroom illusion of absolute support to what is more 
likely the actual reality — that the vast majority of people in 
the area support expanding the area's nuclear portfolio, but a 
few do not. Yet, these individuals have an absolute right to 
submit their concerns and opinions, and all individuals in the 
community have a right to ask questions. 

Concrete evidence of majority support for a consolidated fuel
treatment facility and an advanced burner reactor will be more
effective in impressing the Department of Energy than
unsubstantiated claims of absolute support. 

Outreach efforts at this point will also make steps down the
road, including environmental impact studies, easier. A
community that feels adequately educated and informed will be
more likely to publicly support the project. A community that
feels its support was simply assumed by elected bodies may be
more prone toward apathy and even rebellion. 

Several years ago, Carlsbad residents objected to the proposed
sale of the civic center partially because they felt their
representative body did not communicate with them at the time. 

In 2001, voters also rejected a proposed infrastructure gross
receipts tax hike where money would have gone toward a sports
complex and economic development incentives. Public meetings
were held for the project, but many voters felt there was some
level of coercion involved. There was a feeling that overtures
for public education and feedback were complete facades. 

Veterans of either issue know that Carlsbad residents want to be
informed and honestly offered a chance to comment fairly early
in the game. The time for increased public discussion, education
and feedback is now.   
            
  Copyright © 2005 Carlsbad Current Argus, a MediaNews Group
Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 72 lamonitor.com: DOE recasts safety bureau 

The Online News Source for Los Alamos
 
ROGER SNODGRASS, roger@lamonitor.com, Monitor Assistant Editor

The freshly minted web page for the Office of Health, Safety and
Security (HSS) at the Department of Energy says, "News...coming
soon." 
That's because the new office just opened on Wednesday and
there's not much news yet, apart from a DOE communiqu/
announcing and describing the office that has been created.

The move is part of a controversial restructuring that has been
fiercely opposed by worker safety proponents and public interest
groups in Washington since DOE's intention was made public in
June. 

DOE plans to replace the former Assistant Secretary of the
Office of Environment, Safety, and Health with an HSS chief who
will be charged with overseeing health, safety and security. The
office now includes responsibilities from the former Security
and Performance Assurance office, but some health and safety
functions will be dispersed to five other offices at the
department.

The transfer will be implemented over the next year, according
to an accompanying planning document, "Strengthening the
Department of Energy Worker Health, Safety and Security
Functions," that lays out the groundwork and some of the details
of the new structure. 

"As Secretary of Energy, ensuring the safety of workers across
the DOE complex is my top priority and this new office will go a
long way to strengthening our safety and security organization,"
Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said, announcing the decision to
proceed with the plan.

""Through an integrated policy and oversight approach in the new
HHS office, policy and field assistance personnel will work more
closely with site managers to identify potential weakness and
develop corrective actions to prevent workplace accidents before
they happen," Bodman said in the release. 
Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., immediately expressed disappointment
at the decision.

"I'm very disappointed by this decision. I believe the safety
and health of DOE employees should be a top priority, and that
the responsibility for health and safety should rest with an
assistant secretary," Bingaman said in an announcement.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., was traveling in Albuquerque this
morning and had no comment this morning by press time.

The proposed changes have been criticized by a number of
organizations.

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Chairman A.J.
Eggenberger wrote to Bodman on June 26 expressing concerns about
risks of eliminating even redundant safety functions, which may
provide "important defense in depth."

He used language from a previous board admonition about
modifications to organizational structures related to safety,
saying "The board needs to be sure that any fundamental
reorganization does not degrade nuclear safety, and that the
likelihood of a serious accident, facility failure, construction
problem or nuclear incident will not be increased as a result of
well-intentioned changes."

Danelle Brian, Executive Director of the Project on Government
Oversight, urged Bodman to reconsider in a letter on Aug. 15, in
which she called the shake-up a distraction from what she
considered, "the real problem: the lack of qualified safety
personnel, and inadequate support from DOE for the few safety
personnel who are qualified."

She added, "This deteriorating situation will not be solved by
reorganizing the deck chairs in Washington."

Another letter the same day, signed by four Democrats in the
House of Representatives called for the Government
Accountability Office to do a full review of the proposed
changes.

"The proposed dismantling of the Office of Environment, Safety
and Health would return the nation to the previous policies of
putting nuclear weapons production over safety and the
environment that has cost our country so much already," wrote
Reps. John Dingell, D-Mich; Bart Stupak, D-Mich.; Sherrod Brown,
D-Ohio; and Ted Strickland, D-Ohio.   

  © 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.   
*****************************************************************
 73 DOE: Extension of Comment Period on the Draft Site-Wide Environmental 
 
                         FR Doc 06-7298 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Notices] [Page 51810] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-45]                         
 
Impact Statement for Continued Operation of Los Alamos National 
Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy 
(DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).
 
ACTION: Notice of comment period extension.
 
SUMMARY: On July 7, 2006, NNSA published a Notice of Availability 
for the Draft Site-wide Environmental Impact Statement for 
Continued Operation of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los 
Alamos, New Mexico (LANL Draft SWEIS) (DOE/EIS-0380) (71 FR 
38638) and announced a 60-day public comment period ending 
September 5, 2006. Subsequently, in response to requests for 
additional time to review and comment on the document, NNSA is 
extending the public comment period until September 20, 2006.
 
 
DATES: Comments should be submitted to NNSA no later than 
September 20, 2006. NNSA will consider comments submitted after 
this date to the extent practicable.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Comments, or requests for copies of the LANL Draft 
SWEIS should be sent to: U.S. Department of Energy, National 
Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Site Office, Attn: 
Ms. Elizabeth Withers, SWEIS Document Manager, 528 35th Street, 
Los Alamos, New Mexico, 87544; or by facsimile (1-505-667-5948); 
or by e-mail at:

 
LANL_SWEIS@doeal.gov. Requests for copies of the LANL Draft SWEIS 
or recorded comments may also be made by calling 1-877-491-4957. 
Please mark all envelopes, faxes and e-mail: ``LANL Draft SWEIS 
Comments''. The LANL Draft SWEIS and its reference documents are 
available for review at: the Robert J. Oppenheimer Study Center 
Research Library, Technical Area 3, Los Alamos National 
Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico; the Office of the Northern 
New Mexico Citizens Advisory Board, 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite 
B, Santa Fe, New Mexico; and the Zimmerman Library, University of 
New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Draft SWEIS is available 
on the DOE Los Alamos Site Office's NEPA Web site at: 
http://www.doeal.gov/laso/nepa/sweis.htm .
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. Department of Energy, Los 
Alamos Site Office, Attn: Ms. Elizabeth Withers, SWEIS Document 
Manager, 528 35th Street, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544; or 
telephone 1-505-845-4984.
 
Issued in Los Alamos, NM, this 24th day of August, 2006.
 
Edwin L. Wilmot, Manager.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7298 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 74 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Paducah
 
                         FR Doc 06-7303 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Notices] [Page 51809] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-43] [[Page 51809]]
 
AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Paducah. The 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the 
Federal Register.
 
DATES: Thursday, September 21, 2006, 5:30 p.m.-9 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: 111 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky 
42001.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Murphie, Deputy 
Designated Federal Officer, Department of Energy 
Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, 1017 Majestic Drive, Suite 
200, Lexington, Kentucky 40513, (859) 219-4001.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Agenda: 5:30 p.m. Informal Discussion. 6 p.m. Call to 
Order. Introductions.
 
Review of Agenda.
 
Approval of August Minutes.
 
6:15 p.m. Deputy Designated Federal Officer's Comments. 6:35 p.m. 
Federal Coordinator's Comments. 6:40 p.m. Liaisons' Comments. 
6:50 p.m. Public Comments and Questions. 7 p.m. Task 
Forces/Presentations. Environmental Protection Agency Economic 
Development-- David Williams.
 
Waste Disposition/Water Quality Task Force.
 
8 p.m. Review of Action Items. 8:05 p.m. Public Comments and 
Questions. 8:15 p.m. Break. 8:25 p.m. Administrative Issues. 
Preparation for October Presentation.
 
Budget Review.
 
Review of Work Plan.
 
Review of Next Agenda.
 
8:35 p.m. Subcommittee Report. Executive Committee `` Chairs'' 
Meeting Review.
 
8:50 p.m. Final Comments. 9 p.m. Adjourn. Public Participation: 
The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements 
pertaining to agenda items should contact David Dollins at the 
address listed below or by telephone at (270) 441-6819. Requests 
must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable 
provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. 
The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the 
meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be 
provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also 
be available at the Department of Energy's Environmental 
Information Center and Reading Room at 115 Memorial Drive, 
Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. on 
Monday through Friday or by writing to David Dollins, Department 
of Energy, Paducah Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS-103, 
Paducah, Kentucky 42001 or by calling him at (270) 441-6819.
 
Issued at Washington, DC on August 24, 2006.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7303 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 75 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Idaho 
 
                         FR Doc 06-7304 
[Federal Register: August 31, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 169)] 
[Notices] [Page 51809-51810] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31au06-44]                         
 
National Laboratory AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Idaho National 
Laboratory. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 
92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting 
be announced in the Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Tuesday, September 19, 2006, 8 a.m.-6 p.m.; Wednesday, 
September 20, 2006, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. Opportunities for public 
participation will be held Tuesday, September 19, 2006, from 1 to 
1:15 p.m. and 4 to 4:15 p.m.; and Wednesday, September 20, 2006, 
from 11:45 to 12 p.m. Additional time may be made available for 
public comment during the presentations.
 
These times are subject to change as the meeting progresses, 
depending on the extent of comment offered.
 
 
ADDRESSES: Ameritel Inn, 645 Lindsay Boulevard, Idaho Falls, ID 
83402.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shannon A. Brennan, Federal 
Coordinator, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 
Fremont Avenue, MS-1216, Idaho Falls, ID 83415. Phone (208) 
526-3993; fax (208) 526-1926 or e-mail: 
Shannon.Brennan@nuclear.energy.gov or visit the Board's Internet 
home page at: http://www.inelemcab.org.
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 
the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of 
environmental restoration, waste management, and related 
activities.
 
Tentative Topics (agenda topics may change up to the day of the 
meeting; please contact Shannon A. Brennan for the most current 
agenda): Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project Baseline.
 
Tank Farm Soils Cleanup.
 
Citizens Advisory Board Budgets, Operating Procedures, Annual 
Work Plan.
 
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public.
 
Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or 
after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral 
presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Shannon 
A. Brennan at the address or telephone number listed above. The 
request must be received five days prior to the meeting and 
reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in 
the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to 
conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly 
conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment 
will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their 
comments.
 
Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes 
will also be available by writing to Shannon A. Brennan, Federal
 
[[Page 51810]] Coordinator, at the address and phone number 
listed above.
 
Issued at Washington, DC on August 24, 2006.
 
Carol Matthews, Acting Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. 06-7304 Filed 8-30-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
    
*****************************************************************

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> 
    
*****************************************************************