*****************************************************************
11/22/06 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 14.277
*****************************************************************
   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 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: No proof on IRI interference in Iraq 
2 [NYTr] US could bomb Iran nuclear sites in 2007: analysts
3 US could bomb Iran nuclear sites in 2007: analysts 22 Nov 2006 
4 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Board Agrees to Deny Iran Nuke Aid
5 Xinhua: Ahmadinejad: Iran insists on nuclear program
6 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IAEA willing to give Techn help - MP 
7 AFP: UN atomic agency to turn down Iranian request for reactor help 
8 AFP: UN agency to turn down Iranian reactor request - diplomats -
9 Guardian Unlimited:  Report: N. Korea Won't Abandon Nukes 
10 Xinhua: U.S. negotiator to return to Asia for six-party talks   
11 AFP: US lifts sanctions against Russian firm Sukhoi -
12 Guardian Unlimited: Beckett backs keeping nuclear deterrent
13 BBC: India and China 'to double trade'
14 BBC: Blair fudges Trident vote
15 BBC: Blair backs UK's nuclear weapons
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
16 US: [NYTr] Tennesse Schools Evacuated after Nuke Plant Alarm
17 US: APP: Nov 21 Public doesn't appreaciate importance of Safety
18 Herald Sun: Nuclear power revolt by Libs 
19 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear costs just a drop in ocean - Environm
20 Sydney Morning Herald: States may be forced to go nuclear - legal ex
21 AU ABC: Mount Isa welcomes nuclear power
22 AU ABC: Come clean on nuclear reactor locations, WA Minister urges
23 AU ABC: Nuclear power stations by the sea? - 
24 Western Australian: WA threatens to block nuclear plants
25 US: JOURNAL NEWS: Anti-nuclear activists express alarm over Indian P
26 US: Gainesville Sun:The nuclear option 
27 SF Chron: India, China plan to expand civilian nuclear cooperation
28 US: Brattleboro Reformer: N.H. joins challenge to VY relicense bid
29 US: Reuters: India fears nuclear plant attacks over US deal
30 US: APP.COM: Public doesn't appreciate importance of full safety rev
31 FIA: Four Units of NPP Kozloduy To Work in Full Capacity by Year-end
32 FIA: NPP Kozloduy and Macedonian Minority in Bulgaria Discussed by
33 IHT: Brazil looking to expand nuclear program - 
34 ITAR-TASS: Putin chairs 2nd energy conference in a month, criticizes
35 The Australian: Peter Bradford: Nuclear not the answer | Opinion | 
36 Scoop: Australia's nuclear plans put New Zealand in peril
37 AU ABC: Labor challenges PM to reveal nuclear locations. 
38 AU ABC: Labor pledges to stop s-w Vic nuclear power plant. 
39 AU ABC: Nuclear power report won't help uranium industry in short te
40 AU ABC: Bracks to toughen no nukes legislation. 
41 AU ABC: Campbell won't rule out overriding states on nuclear power.
42 AU ABC: State leaders united in stance against nuclear power.
43 The Australian: Govt will secure energy future: Campbell | | 
44 UPI: Australia ponders building nuclear plants
45 The Australian: Editorial: Nuclear report is radioactive for ALP 
46 The Australian: Baillieu rejects N-power | Vic | 
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
47 Guardian Unlimited: Missing keys, holes in fence and a single padloc
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
48 [DU List] Further evidence of enriched uranium in the air in
49 Sydney Morning Herald: Uranium mine blamed for high Aboriginal cance
50 US: Smirking Chimp: In the wake of Divine Strake
51 US: Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Idea of testing a bomb in Nevada is distu
52 The Hindu: Depleted uranium: health effects and controversies 
53 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter: Nuke exercise slated Dec. 5
54 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Divine Strake mistakes
55 US: The Dispatch: Water Standard Scrutinized
56 AU ABC: Indigenous cancer rate 90pc higher in Kakadu region. 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
57 US: La Crosse Tribune: U.S. needs a nuclear fuel disposal site 
58 reviewjournal.com: Guinn urges documents' release
59 ENS: Governments Fear Nuclear Ship in British, French Waters 
60 US: MotherJones: Independent Panel Says Yes--Santa Susana Site Cause
61 RGJ.com: End of road for Yucca Mt.
62 US: AU ABC: Qld Govt not about to change uranium policy. 
63 Scotsman.com: Dounreay will utilise robots to clean up seabed
64 US: Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Apollo gets $750,000 for cleanup - 
65 US: Bangor Daily News: Maine's stand on nuclear waste prudent
 
                           PEACE
 
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
66 Update: DOE Seeks to Build New Nuclear Weapons
67 Courier News: Fermi asks public its views on collider
68 Rocky Mountain News: Auditor regains access to Flats' workers claims
69 DOE:  Office of Science; High Energy Physics Advisory Panel
70 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridg
71 Knox News: Munger: The threat of WMDs isn't going to go away
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: No proof on IRI interference in Iraq 

  2006/11/22   
  
Iraqi Ambassador to Iran Mohammad Majid al-Sheikh said on
Tuesday that there is no document to prove Iran's interference
in the internal affairs of Iraq. 

He made the remark while speaking to IRNA on the threshold of
the upcoming visit of President Jalal Talabani, who is scheduled
to leave for Tehran on Saturday. 

Turning to the rejection of such a claim by high-ranking Iraqi
officials, he underlined that Iraq can never overlook a
proponent such as Iran and predicted the prospect of a bright
future in mutual relations. 

"Iraqi government finds no impediment on the way of Iran's ties
with various groups and parties from his country." 

"We expect Iran to help our government to enter into favorable
relations with neighboring countries, given their close ties
with Iran. It is also expected to contribute to establishment of
stability and security as well as improvement of the situation,"
he added. 

Concerning the impact of the victory of democrats in America on
Iraq, he said, "Their general policy on withdrawal from Iraq is
not going to change. Just minor changes in their executive
approach may be effected, such as withdrawal of US troops from
Iraqi cities to military bases." 

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
*****************************************************************
 2 [NYTr] US could bomb Iran nuclear sites in 2007: analysts
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 13:33:30 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
AFP via Yahoo - Nov 21, 2006
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061122/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclear_061121231147

US could bomb Iran nuclear sites in 2007: analysts

by Jerome Bernard

WASHINGTON (AFP)--President George W. Bush could choose military action over
diplomacy and bomb Iran's nuclear facilities next year, political analysts
in Washington agree.

"I think he is going to do it," John Pike, director of Globalsecurity.org, a
military issues think tank, told AFP.

"They are going to bomb WMD facilities next summer," he added, referring to
nuclear facilities Iran says are for peaceful uses and Washington insists
are really intended to make nuclear bombs, or weapons of mass destruction
(WMD).

"It would be a limited military action to destroy their WMD capabilities"
added the analyst, believing a US military invasion of Iran is not on the
table.

US journalist Seymour Hersh also said at the weekend that White House hawks
led by Vice President Dick Cheney were intent on attacking Iran with or
without the approval of the US Congress, both houses of which switch from
Republican to Democratic control in January after the November 7 legislative
elections.

The New Yorker weekly published an article by Hersh saying that one month
before the elections, Cheney held a meeting on Iran in which he said the
military option would never be discarded.

The White House promptly issued a statement saying the article was "riddled
with inaccuracies."

Joseph Cirincione, Senior Vice President for National Security and
International Policy at the Center for American Progress, a
Democrat-friendly think tank, also believes the US government could decide
to attack Iran.

"It is not realistic but it does not mean we won't do it," he told AFP in an
interview. "It is less likely after the elections but it is still very
possible."

"If you look at what the administration is doing, it seems that it is going
to inevitably lead us to a military conflict," he said, adding that no
alternative solution was being sought, including discussions with Iran on
Iraq, which could lead to talks on Iran's nuclear program and role in the
region.

"Senior members of the (Bush) administration remain seized with the idea
that the regime in Iran must be removed," Cirincione said.

"The nuclear program is one reason, but their deeper agenda is this belief
that American military power can be used to fundamentally transform the
regimes in the Middle East," he added.

With the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, hardliners in the
government have lost one of their leading advocates, and his replacement,
former former Central Intelligence Agency chief Robert Gates, has in the
past favored direct talks with Iran, said the expert.

"But they remain within the administration at the highest level, the office
of the vice president, the national security council staff, perhaps the
president himself," Cirincione added.

He also accused neoconservative circles of promoting the military option
against Tehran.

In a Sunday op-ed piece in the Los Angeles Times, Joshua Muarvchik, resident
scholar at the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute, called for
getting tough with Iran.

"We must bomb Iran," he said. "The path of diplomacy and sanctions has led
nowhere ... Our options therefore are narrowed to two: we can prepare to
live with a nuclear-armed Iran, or we can use force to prevent it."

Israel has also been pushing Washington to get tough on Iran.

Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh did not rule out preventive
military action to stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, in a recent
interview with the English-language Jerusalem Post.

However, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seems unperturbed. On Monday
he said Israel was incapable of launching a military attack on Iran's
nuclear sites and called Israeli threats "propaganda."

Copyright ) 2006 Agence France Presse. 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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 3 US could bomb Iran nuclear sites in 2007: analysts 22 Nov 2006 
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:44:08 -0600 (CST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Innocent"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM

Breaking News and Commentary from Citizens for Legitimate Government
22 November 2006 http://www.legitgov.org/ All links to articles as
summarized below are available here:

http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news US could bomb Iran
nuclear sites in 2007: analysts 21 Nov 2006 President [sic] George
W. Bush could choose military action over diplomacy and bomb Iran's
nuclear facilities next year, political analysts in Washington
agree. "I think he is going to do it," John Pike, director of
Globalsecurity.org, a military issues think tank, told AFP.

Bomb Blasts Speaker's Car in Green Zone 22 Nov 2006 A bomb exploded
in an armored car among those belonging to the speaker of Parliament,
wounding the American security guard who was driving it out of a
parking area in the government Green Zone and disrupting a meeting
of lawmakers nearby, a parliamentary aide said.

U.S. troops blow up cars in Baghdad 21 Nov 2006 U.S. troops blew
up two cars Tuesday inside the heavily fortified Green Zone after
dogs indicated explosives were inside the vehicles that were used
in the motorcade of the parliament speaker, an adviser to parliament
said.

UN chief says U.S. is 'trapped in Iraq' 21 Nov 2006 The U.S. is
"trapped in Iraq" and the Bush administration needs to time any
withdrawal of its troops from the beleaguered country carefully to
avoid a deepening of violence there, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan
said Tuesday.

Kucinich Calls for Cutting Off Iraq War Funds "That's the only way
we're going to end this war." 15 Nov 2006 Congressman Dennis Kucinich
(D-Ohio) called Wednesday for cutting off funding of the Iraq war,
as the surest way out of Iraq. His statements were made in an
interview by Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman.

Syria, Iraq restore ties to combat militants 21 Nov 2006 Iraq and
Syria restored full diplomatic relations on Tuesday after a 24-year
rift in a move Iraq hopes can help stem what it says is Syrian
support for militants and encourage other Arab states to rally to
its aid.

Iran ready to help Iraq refurbish national grid: Fattah 21 Nov 2006
Iran-Iraq-Electricity Iranian Minister of Energy Parviz Fattah said
in Baghdad on Tuesday that Iran is ready to help Iraq rebuild its
electricity networks [destroyed by the US].

Two Canadians hurt in Afghanistan landmine blast 21 Nov 2006 Two
Canadian soldiers were injured during foot patrol on Tuesday when
an anti-personnel landmine detonated in southern Afghanistan.

US pharma-terrorists poised to make a *killing*: Polio vaccination
campaign targets children in south Afghanistan 21 Nov 2006 Afghanistan
has begun its latest drive to vaccinate millions of children under
five 'against' [*with*] the crippling polio virus, United Nations
Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) officials have said.

Report: Jewish Settlements Built on Palestinian Property 21 Nov
2006 An Israeli advocacy group has found that 39 percent of the
land used by Jewish settlements in the West Bank is private Palestinian
property, and contends that construction there violates international
and Israeli law guaranteeing the protection of property rights in
the occupied territories.

Is the CIA/Mossad a busy little bee? Gunmen assassinate Lebanese
minister 21 Nov 2006 The Lebanese Christian leader Pierre Gemayel,
an outspoken critic of Syria, has been shot dead in a suburb of
Beirut today.

Bush warns Syria, Iran after Lebanon killing 21 Nov 2006 US President
[sic] George W. Bush accused Syria and Iran of fomenting violence
and instability in Lebanon, as he condemned the [CIA/Mossad]
assassination of Lebanese cabinet minister Pierre Gemayel.

UN condemns murder of Lebanon minister 22 Nov 2006 The 15-nation
U.N. Security Council condemned the killing of a Lebanese Christian
Cabinet minister on Tuesday, deploring any attempt to destabilise
Lebanon through political assassination. [Cui bono? Bush and Olmert.]

U.S. citizen charged with terrorism in Uganda after being found
with unlicensed guns 21 Nov 2006 A U.S. citizen was charged with
terrorism Tuesday after being found with three unlicensed guns in
a volatile region of northern Uganda, officials said.

Chemical weapons' disposal delayed 20 Nov 2006 The Pentagon has
extended its timeline to destroy its aging chemical weapons arsenal
until 2023, despite concerns by Congress and watchdog groups that
the stockpiles raise the risk of an accident or theft by terrorists.

Reno Files Challenge to Terror Law 20 Nov 2006 Former Attorney
General Janet Reno and seven other former Justice Department officials
filed court papers Monday arguing that the Bush administration is
setting a dangerous precedent by trying a suspected terrorist outside
the court system. Former attorneys general rarely file court papers
challenging administration policy.

Tapes Provide First Glimpse of Secret Guantanamo Panels 21 Nov 2006
Audio recordings obtained by NPR provide the outside world with its
first window into the secret world of military tribunals at the
U.S. prison camp for terrorism suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba...
"They relied instead on secret evidence that was classified," Seton
Hall law professor Mark Denbeaux says.

"And the government's procedure was, anything in that secret evidence
was presumed to be valuable and valid. And then the detainee was
given the opportunity to rebut the secret evidence. But he was never
told what the secret evidence was."

Top-Secret Torture --The Bush administration claims detainees can't
disclose how they were treated. (The Washington Post) 21 Nov 2006
Mr. [Majid] Khan was one of the al-Qaeda suspects who was detained
in a secret prison of the CIA and subjected to "alternative"
interrogation tactics -- the administration's chilling phrase for
methods most people regard as torture. Now the government is arguing
that by subjecting detainees to such treatment, the CIA gives them
"top secret" classified information -- and the government can then
take extraordinary measures to keep them quiet about it. If this
argument carries the day, it will make virtually impossible any
accountability for the administration's treatment of top al-Qaeda
detainees. And it will also ensure that key parts of any military
trials get litigated in secrecy.

Your Papers Please --Passport, the new 'it' document 20 Nov 2006
For U.S.

travelers desiring to hop a plane going to Canada, Mexico, the
Caribbean, Bermuda, Central or South America, come Jan. 8, will
need a passport. And for the 73 percent of Americans who don't have
a valid passport, it's time to get with the program because everyone
will need one as identification by Jan. 1, 2008, when it will be
required for international land and sea travel as well as air.

U.S. to Require Passports for Nearly All 21 Nov 2006 Nearly all air
travelers entering the U.S. will be required to show passports
beginning Jan. 23, including returning Americans and people from
Canada and other nations in the Western Hemisphere. The date was
disclosed Tuesday by Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff
in an interview with The Associated Press.

Chertoff Praises Biometric Fingerprint System, 10 Point Capture is
Next 21 Nov 2006 The following are comments about biometric
fingerprinting and how is helps [sic] homeland security by Department
of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff: "One of the reasons
I wanted to come today was to acknowledge the substantial progress
that has been made in developing faster, high-quality 10-print
capture devices... What that will let us do, when we get the 10-print
capture device, is for any single foreigner who crosses into our
borders, get their 10 prints, and run them not only against our
existing databases to see whether they have been here before under
a different name or whether there is a criminal record in this
country or internationally against them, but to stand those 10
prints against latent prints lifted from around the world in terrorist
safe houses or in battlefields, to see whether the person crossing
the border has ever been involved in training in an al Qaeda training
or believed running an al Qaeda safe house."

Report Finds DHS Lax on Contracting Procedures 22 Nov 2006 Private
consultants hired by the Department of Homeland Security have found
widespread problems with its contracting operation, including nearly
three dozen contract files that could not be located. Files that
could be found often lacked basic documentation required under
federal rules, such as evidence that the department negotiated the
best prices for taxpayers, according to a copy of the consultants'
report obtained by The Washington Post.

New Orleans must hire public defenders 21 Nov 2006 The board
overseeing the city public defender's office, struggling after
Hurricane Katrina sent an already shaky system into crisis, has
been ordered to hire more attorneys to represent impoverished
criminal defendants. The order, issued Monday by judges in the
Criminal District Court, said mismanagement of the Orleans Parish
Indigent Defender Program has denied poor defendants their 6th
Amendment right to proper legal representation.

California court: websites not liable for libel in third-party
postings 20 Nov 2006 Websites that publish inflammatory information
written by other parties cannot be sued for libel, the California
Supreme Court ruled Monday.

US journalists afraid their jobs will be outsourced --A passage to
India By Nick Farrell 20 Nov 2006 Journos working for the US print
media are steaming with righteous indignation as their bosses start
outsourcing their jobs to India.

Unelected Mexican leftist claims office 20 Nov 2006 Leftist Andres
Manuel Lopez Obrador swore himself in as Mexico's "legitimate"
president Monday, launching a parallel government he hopes will
prevent President-elect Felipe Calderon from governing. [Well, the
US had a rightist swear himself in as America's "legitimate" president
in 2001 and 2005.]

Winner declared in Florida House race 21 Nov 2006 State officials
Monday certified Republican Vern Buchanan won the House seat being
vacated by Republican Rep. Katherine Harris, though the loser
immediately sued for a new election, arguing that touch-screen
'voting' machines had malfunctioned.

Democrat Christine Jennings contested her 369-vote loss in the 13th
District, asking a judge to order a new election because of problems
in Sarasota County, where more than 17,000 voters who cast ballots
in other races Nov. 7 failed to vote in the congressional contest.

Some Curbs on Sex Offenders Called Ineffective, Inhumane --Ga. rule
places nearly all homes in some counties off-limits, practically
amounting to banishment. 22 Nov 2006 As convicted sex offenders go,
they seem to pose little danger. One is 100 years old. Another can
barely walk and is in the late stages of Alzheimer's disease. Another
is dying of heart disease in a nursing home. Yet under a new Georgia
law, thousands of registered sex offenders, even the old and feeble,
could be pushed from their homes and hospices.

No-Bid School Contracts Draw City Council's Ire 22 Nov 2006 The New
York City Council Education Committee grilled and berated top city
education officials yesterday about hundreds of millions of dollars
in contracts awarded without the competitive bidding normally
required of city agencies.

Report: Hunger ['very low food security'] rising in New York City
21 Nov 2006 The number of city residents relying on food from
charities and unable to feed their families is rising, according
to a report issued by an advocacy group.

No class-action allowed against Monsanto 15 Nov 2006 A seed company
and a group of Midwestern farmers who sued [pharma-terrorists] Creve
Coeur-based Monsanto Co. for allegedly monopolizing the biotech
corn seed market were denied class-action status Monday in federal
court in Wilmington, Del.

Bush's Daughter Robbed in Argentina 21 Nov 2006 George W. Bush's
daughter, Barbara Bush, had her purse and cell phone stolen as she
had dinner in a restaurant in Buenos Aires, Argentina, even though
she was being guarded by a detail of Secret Service agents, according
to law enforcement reports made available to ABC News.

NASA looks at plan to blot out Sun 20 Nov 2006 The idea seems like
something out of a Superman comic: a machine or missile shoots
tonnes of particles into the atmosphere that would block the Sun's
rays, cool down the overheated Earth, and reverse global warming.

Please Contribute for November's expenses. Thank you!

[21 Nov lead stories:] Judge rejects request for NSA wiretapping
documents 20 Nov 2006 The National Security Agency is not required
to release details about its secret wiretapping program, a federal
judge said Monday.

War on terror could last 30 years: report 21 Nov 2006 The fight
'against' terrorism could last 30 years or more, according to a
report published by a British think tank that specialises in
international security. "There is every prospect of the 'war on
[of] terror' extending for 30 years or more," said the report by
the Oxford Research Group.

Fair trial for Hussein impossible: watchdog 20 Nov 2006 The Iraqi
court that sentenced Saddam Hussein to hang this month was guilty
of shortcomings so serious that a fair trial for the former president
was all but impossible, an international rights watchdog said today.
There were so many procedural flaws that the verdict could be viewed
only as unsound, New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a
97-page report on the trial.

Please forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be interested.
Those who'd like to be added to the Newsletter list can sign up:

http://www.legitgov.org/#subscribe_clg.

Please write to: signup@legitgov.org for inquiries.

CLG Newsletter editor: Lori Price, General Manager. Copyright )
2006, Citizens For Legitimate Government . All rights reserved.

*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Board Agrees to Deny Iran Nuke Aid

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday November 22, 2006 11:31 PM

By GEORGE JAHN 

Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency
effectively agreed Wednesday to deny Iran technical help in
building a plutonium-producing reactor but left room for Tehran
to renew its request in two years, diplomats said. 

A committee of the International Atomic Energy Agency forwarded
a summary of three days of deliberations on 832 requests for
technical aid to the full board, scheduled to meet Thursday. 

That gathering was expected to waive a decision on Tehran's
request for aid for its Arak reactor. That, in effect, would
deny IAEA money for Arak - at least for the next two years,
after which new requests will be considered. 

The two diplomats - from countries on opposing sides of the
issue - had different interpretations of what the expected
ruling would mean, reflecting the depth of the dispute. Both
demanded anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss
the topic with the media. 

A European diplomat said the tentative agreement effectively
meant that Iran's request was turned down. Another diplomat,
from a developing nation, said it meant that the issue remained
on the table because it could be revisited. 

``It certainly is not denied,'' he said. 

The committee summary noted that ``several members expressed the
need for caution regarding technical cooperation with the
Islamic Republic of Iran.'' They ``expressed particular
concern'' over Arak, saying they could not approve other Iranian
projects if aid for the reactor were approved, said the summary
of the closed meeting, obtained by The Associated Press. 

Gregory L. Schulte, the chief U.S. representative to the IAEA,
said his country had no choice but to oppose aid to Arak, given
past calls by the board for the project to be stopped, ``the
widespread distrust of Iran's nuclear program and the risk of
plutonium (being) diverted from this reactor for use in a
(nuclear) weapon.'' 

The full board on Thursday also will hear a report on the latest
stage of a nearly four-year IAEA investigation into Iran's
nuclear activities. 

That report essentially says the agency has been unable to make
headway in determining whether suspicions that Tehran is
interested in making nuclear weapons are well-founded. Schulte
said the report also shows that ``the mistrust of Iran is only
growing as Iran fails to cooperate with the IAEA.'' 

Iran, meanwhile, used the gathering to criticize Israel,
expressing ``deep concern as a result of the threat of armed
attack against Iran's nuclear facilities and installations.'' 

``Recently the Zionist regime has augmented the campaign and
threat,'' said a Nov. 13 letter from Iran's IAEA representative,
Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, obtained by the AP. The letter was
attached to an IAEA document issued for the meeting saying
Soltanieh had asked that his comments be circulated among
delegates. 

Still, the Arak dispute was the main focus of the meeting. While
the argument was over technicalities, it reflected the
politically charged atmosphere. 

Technical aid requests are normally approved without discussion
- but since the first committee meeting Monday, suspicions that
Iran might be seeking to make nuclear weapons led to diplomatic
tussling on what to do about the request. When it is completed
within the next decade, Arak will produce enough plutonium for
two bombs a year. 

Past IAEA resolutions have urged Iran to stop building the Arak
reactor, which Iran says it needs to produce radioactive
isotopes for medical purposes. 

Developing countries - the key recipients of IAEA technical help
- are worried that denial of aid for any project would set a
precedent that would hurt their future chances of getting agency
support. 

Arak is one of seven or eight projects submitted by Iran - lists
circulating among diplomats have conflicting numbers. Most, if
not all, of the 35 nations had no trouble approving Iran's
request for help, along with the other far less contentious
projects, said the diplomats. 

Rebuffing Iran's request would not affect Arak's construction
and would also have no effect on the country's other potential
avenue to weapons production - uranium enrichment. 

Still, the denial would maintain at least symbolic pressure
while the U.N. Security Council is deadlocked over how to
sanction Iran for ignoring demands to stop enriching uranium. 

Among the other projects submitted by Iran, one asks for help in
developing nuclear capabilities for medical use. Another seeks
legal aid for the Russian-built Bushehr reactor, which even the
Americans acknowledge does not pose a threat of nuclear
proliferation. The other requests seek assistance in
administrative or safety aspects of nuclear power. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 5 Xinhua: Ahmadinejad: Iran insists on nuclear program

  www.chinaview.cn 2006-11-23 00:18:33   

Special report: Iran Nuclear Crisis 

    TEHRAN, Nov. 22 (Xinhua) -- Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that his country would press ahead
with its nuclear program despite the West's pressure, the
official IRNA new agency reported. 

    "We will first have to break the horn of the big head so
that justice can be done," Ahmadinejad said, referring to
pressure from the West over Iran's nuclear dispute. In Farsi, to
"break the horn of the big head" is an expression for blunting
arrogant behavior. 

    He also mentioned Iran's request for assistance from the UN
atomic agency to build a heavy water reactor in Arak, a central
city 300 km south of Tehran. However, diplomats at a 35-nation
meeting of the agency said on Tuesday that many members favored
denying the request. 

    He said that he believed people who opposed the Arak program
would fail to force Iran to abandon it, saying "enemies express
scattered words, they pose and humiliate but surely they will
not go far." 

    Iran has submitted an application to the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for technical assistance to build a
heavy water reactor in Arak, but the prospect is slim due to
objection by the United States and its allies. 

Iran's state radio says ready for Ahmadinejad-Bush live debate 

  [Head of Iran's state radio Hassan Khojasteh said on Monday
that his station was ready to arrange a live broadcasting debate
between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his U.S.
counterpart George W. Bush, local Fars News Agency reported.]   
  
Head of Iran's state radio Hassan Khojasteh said on Monday that
his station was ready to arrange a live broadcasting debate
between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his U.S.
counterpart George W. Bush, local Fars News Agency
reported.(File photo)

     TEHRAN, Nov. 20 (Xinhua) -- Head of Iran's state radio
Hassan Khojasteh said on Monday that his station was ready to
arrange a live broadcasting debate between Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his U.S. counterpart George W. Bush,
local Fars News Agency reported. 

    "Our media is fully prepared to arrange a debate between the
Iranian and U.S. presidents so as to provide its audience with
two completely contradictory and determining thoughts,"
Khojasteh was quoted as saying. Full story>> 

  Editor: Luan Shanglin   
*****************************************************************
 6 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IAEA willing to give Techn help - MP 

  2006/11/22   
  
Chairman of the Iranian Parliament's National Security and
Foreign Policy Committee Alaouddin Boroujerdi said on Tuesday
that the UN nuclear watchdog is in favor of giving Tehran
technical assistance in its nuclear program. 

"IAEA members, particularly Non-Aligned Movement states China
and Russia, agree on the agency giving assistance to Iran (on
its nuclear program," the lawmaker told IRNA. 

He also said that the offer of support has shifted the balance
in Iran's favor. 

Referring to America's pressure on agency members, especially
the European Union, Boroujerdi maintained that the opposition
refers to only a fraction of the membership, which is after a
"politically-motivated and illogical" decision. 

The Islamic Republic of Iran, which is a signatory to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty, tabled eight projects seeking
assistance from the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy
Agency during its three-day committee meeting which opened on
Monday, Boroujerdi said. 

The projects range from security guarantees for its Arak
research reactor and Bushehr nuclear plant to upgrading of
countrywide nuclear security, waste management and training. 

The continued antagonism of the US delegation towards Iran led
to divisions in the meeting on Iran's request for IAEA
assistance in those projects. 

The next Board of Governors session scheduled for November 23-24
is expected to decide on the matter.   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 7 AFP: UN atomic agency to turn down Iranian request for reactor help - diplomats - 

 by Michael Adler Wed Nov 22, 8:12 AM ET 		 	 

VIENNA (AFP) - The UN atomic agency has agreed to turn down an 
Iranian request for technical help in building a nuclear reactor 
that could provide plutonium for weapons, diplomats have said. 

 As the International Atomic Energy Agency" /> wrapped up talks
on technical cooperation, the issue of the Iraqi rector was to
be forwarded for consideration at a plenary session of the
IAEA's 35-nation board of governors that opens Thursday. 

The board is expected to approve a list of aid projects for the
coming year, but to drop the item requesting safety expertise
for the heavy-water reactor Iran" /> is building at Arak, 200
kilometres (120 miles) south of Tehran. 

"We expect that the board will approve the technical cooperation
program with the exception of Arak," a Western diplomat said. 

"A compromise has been struck," added a diplomat from a
non-aligned state. 

The technical session of the board, which opened Monday, was
marked by sharp differences. 

The United States and other Western states argued that Iran,
suspected of seeking nuclear weapons and threatened with UN
sanctions, had no right to aid for a reactor the IAEA has asked
it to "reconsider" building. 

But non-aligned countries, led by Cuba, said the aid should be
approved as the IAEA has certified that the cooperation project
for the heavy-water reactor at Arak is not a proliferation risk. 

The non-aligneds also invoked the principle of the transfer of
peaceful nuclear technology to developing countries. 

"G-77 nations (developing states) are saying that approving aid
is a technical decision but that removing a project is a
political decision," a Western diplomat said. 

The United States and the European Union" /> , as well as
Australia and Canada, are ready to accept a package of 832 aid
projects, including seven less controversial programs for Iran,
but have balked at help for the Arak reactor. 

"The reactor, once completed, will be capable of producing
plutonium for one or more nuclear weapons each year," US
ambassador to the IAEA Gregory Schulte told the board Monday. 

Schulte said the IAEA secretariat has assured Washington that it
will monitor the remaining projects in Iran to ensure they "will
not further Iran's efforts to develop enrichment, reprocessing
or heavy water projects," such as providing training that could
be used for such sensitive nuclear fuel work. 

A Western diplomat said that the IAEA board would avoid a
divisive vote, adopting the aid package minus Arak by consensus. 

Iran would have to wait two years to bring up the Arak project
again, a diplomat said, as a last-minute effort by non-aligned
countries to keep the issue pending was not accepted. 

France had insisted there be no such qualification, which would
have meant the Arak project was only postponed and not taken off
the 2007-2008 technical cooperation list. 

Western states have pledged to avoid incendiary rhetoric at
Thursday's board meeting as part of the compromise deal, the
diplomat said. 

Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 AFP: UN agency to turn down Iranian reactor request - diplomats -

 Wednesday November 22, 07:34 PM 

By Michael Adler 

  [A general view of a heavy water plant in Arak]   
    
VIENNA (AFP) - The UN atomic agency has bridged sharp
differences and is expected to turn down Iran's request for help
in building a nuclear reactor that the West fears could provide
plutonium for weapons, diplomats said.

The United States and the European Union argue that Iran,
suspected of seeking nuclear weapons and threatened with United
Nations sanctions, has no right to technical aid for the Arak
reactor.

But the Western states have struggled to persuade non-aligned
countries at Advertisement
[ src=]  an ongoing meeting in Vienna of the International
Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board of governors.

The non-aligneds, led by Cuba, say Iran should get the aid it
has requested as the IAEA has certified the project is not a
proliferation risk. They have also invoked the principle of the
transfer of peaceful nuclear technology to developing countries.

Divisions caused a deadlock from Monday to Wednesday at the
board meeting on technical cooperation, which has to recommend
an aid package that is then rubber-stamped by an IAEA board
political meeting.

But diplomats said that the board was now expected to approve
Thursday a list of some 800 aid projects for the coming two
years, but to drop the item requesting safety expertise for the
Arak reactor.

US ambassador Gregory Schulte told reporters the expected
consensus was due to "widespread mistrust of Iran's nuclear
program and the risk of plutonium being diverted from this
reactor for use in a weapon."

Another Western diplomat said that "Iran was very isolated," in
its request for technical help for a reactor to make medical
isotopes.

Many developing countries "didn't want Iran to jeopardize the
(IAEA's) technical cooperation program," the unnamed source said.

But several diplomats from developing countries disagreed,
saying that Iran had been "realistic" and could resubmit its
proposal for safety expertise for the heavy-water reactor it is
building at Arak, 200 kilometres (120 miles) south of Tehran.

"Iran has made it clear that they are proceeding with building
the reactor but wanted to make clear their concern about
safety," one non-aligned diplomat told AFP.

Iranian ambassador Ali Asghar Soltanieh had complained Tuesday
that a strictly technical matter was being politicized.

But a diplomat from a non-aligned state said: "A compromise has
been struck," namely to let the board handle the decision as a
political matter in order not to jeopardize the cooperation
program.

The United States and the European Union, as well as Australia
and Canada, are ready to accept the aid package, including seven
less controversial programs for Iran, but have balked at help
for the Arak reactor.

"The reactor, once completed, will be capable of producing
plutonium for one or more nuclear weapons each year," Schulte
told the board Monday.

Schulte said the IAEA secretariat had promised to monitor the
remaining projects in Iran to ensure they "will not further
Iran's efforts to develop enrichment, reprocessing or heavy
water projects," such as providing training that could be used
for such sensitive nuclear fuel work. 

AFP
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited:  Report: N. Korea Won't Abandon Nukes 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Wednesday November 22, 2006 8:01 AM

AP Photo TOK240 

TOKYO (AP) - A senior North Korean diplomat strongly indicated
that his country has no plans to abandon nuclear weapons,
despite its agreement to return to six-nation disarmament talks,
according to news reports Wednesday. 

North Korea's deputy foreign minister, Kang Sok Ju, speaking to
a group of reporters while passing through Beijing from Russia,
instead demanded that the United States lift financial sanctions
against the North, Japan's NHK television and Kyodo News agency
said. 

Kang said North Korea had not tested nuclear weapons only to get
rid of them, the reports said. 

``Why would we abandon nuclear weapons?'' NHK and Kyodo quoted
Kang as saying in a Japanese translation of his comments in
Korean. ``Are you saying we conducted a nuclear test in order to
abandon them?'' 

Asked if Pyongyang planned to demand the U.S. lift sanctions,
Kang said, ``of course,'' NHK and Kyodo reported. 

A nuclear test by North Korea on Oct. 9 triggered international
condemnation and sanctions. 

In September 2005, Pyongyang agreed to abandon its nuclear
program in exchange for security guarantees and aid, but it
withdrew from the talks with the U.S., China, South Korea, Japan
and Russia two months later, protesting Washington's financial
sanctions over suspected money laundering. 

Pyongyang agreed this month to return to the talks, which may
resume next month. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 10 Xinhua: U.S. negotiator to return to Asia for six-party talks   
    
  www.chinaview.cn 2006-11-23 05:19:49   


    WASHINGTON, Nov. 22 (Xinhua) -- U.S. Assistant Secretary of
State Christopher Hill will return to Asia on Sunday to continue
efforts to restart the long-stalled six-party talks aimed at
addressing the nuclear issue of the Democratic People's Republic
of Korea (DPRK), State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey
said Wednesday. 

    Moreover, the U.S. goal is to have the six-party talks
resumed in Mid-December, Casey said. 

    Hill, the top U.S. negotiator at the six-nation talks, met
with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wu Dawei on Monday to discuss
how to restart the six-party talks. 

    The six-party talks, involving the United States, the DPRK,
China, Russia, South Korea and Japan, are aimed at persuading
the DPRK to abandon its nuclear programs. However, the talks
have been stalled since last year as the DPRK refused to return
to the talks because of U.S. sanctions on the country. 

    The DPRK said on Nov. 1 that it had decided to return to the
six-party talks, but did not offer a specific date.   

  Editor: Luan Shanglin   
*****************************************************************
 11 AFP: US lifts sanctions against Russian firm Sukhoi -

 Wed Nov 22, 6:58 PM ET 		 	 

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States has lifted sanctions against 
Russian jetmaker Sukhoi that were imposed over its sales to Iran" 
/> , a State Department spokesman said. 

 "The sanctions on Sukhoi now have been effectively terminated,"
State Department spokesman Tom Casey told a press conference. 

The decision took effect Tuesday, the date when Congress was
formally notified, and President George W. Bush" /> had informed
his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin" /> during a meeting over
the weekend, Casey said. 

The sanctions, imposed on July 28, were lifted in light of
"additional information" provided by the company and the Russian
government, he said. 

Casey did not specify the nature of the information, citing
national security considerations. But a US official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, said the information showed Sukhoi had
not broken the law. 

But questions remained about certain employees, the official
said. 

"However I do think that the information provided left open
questions about whether there might be an individual or two that
had in fact done so. So this may not be the absolute final word
on this," the official said. 

The United States announced in August the imposition of
sanctions against seven foreign companies, including Sukhoi and
arms manufacturer Rosoboronexport, for having provided equipment
to Iran that could be used in the development of weapons of mass
destruction. The sanctions prompted an angry response from
Russia. 

The decision coincided with US diplomatic efforts seeking
Moscow's support for imposing UN sanctions against Iran after
Tehran refused to comply with demands for a freeze in its
uranium enrichment program. 

The United States is also working closely with Russia to enforce
sanctions on North Korea" /> aimed at ending that communist
country's nuclear weapons program. 

Copyright � 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 12 Guardian Unlimited: Beckett backs keeping nuclear deterrent

Patrick Wintour

Thursday November 23, 2006

The Guardian             

The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, said yesterday she
would support the retention of a British independent nuclear
deterrent, as the cabinet prepares to discuss a white paper
backing a retention.

Des Browne, the defence secretary, is expected to give a
presentation on the security risks facing the country. The
cabinet held a preliminary discussion on the management of the
issue last week.

Ms Beckett had been cited in the press as a sceptic on Trident's
replacement, but yesterday in the Commons she insisted she was a
supporter of retention.

Tony Blair said a white paper setting out the government's view 
would be published by the end of the year, and the government's 
decision will therefore have to be published by the middle of 
December, given the parliamentary recess.

The prime minister also confirmed the Commons will be given a
vote on the issue, but refused to say whether the vote would
cover a range of options or merely the principle of maintaining
a nuclear deterrent. It is likely to be seen as a whipped vote,
and the Conservatives will back deterrence.

Mr Blair has previously promised a full debate before a decision
is made, while the chancellor, Gordon Brown, has also said he
wants to keep Britain's "independent nuclear deterrent".

A few sceptics, including the Northern Ireland secretary, Peter
Hain, have been pressing for a full Treasury economic assessment
of the options and a party debate. But he has been told the
timetable will not allow a fullscale party debate.

Decisions have to be made soon as Trident needs to be replaced
by the mid-2020s. The government has a range of options,
including scrapping an independent deterrent, extending the
in-service life of the current deterrent capability, a direct
replacement for Trident in line with existing US-UK agreements,
or buying an entirely new system. The white paper will also have
to look at whether the missile system should be air-launched or
remain submarine-launched.
 
[UP] 

		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 13 BBC: India and China 'to double trade'
 
Last Updated: Tuesday, 21 November 2006
 
[Hu Jintao with Indian PM Manmohan Singh]

Can Delhi bury past ghosts?

Obstacles facing China
                                          
India and China have pledged to double trade to $40bn (�21bn)
a year by 2010 during talks between Indian PM Manmohan Singh and
Chinese President Hu Jintao. 

Mr Hu also said the two sides would continue efforts to solve
their long-running border disputes. 

He was speaking in the capital Delhi during the first visit to
India by a Chinese head of state for 10 years. 

China and India have overcome many hurdles in recent years but
differences remain, correspondents say. 

The BBC's Steve Schifferes says the two sides have different
objectives in the trade deal. 

China wants to boost its exports of manufactured goods to
developing countries, while Indian firms, which have a
comparative advantage in outsourcing of business and IT
services, want more investment in China. 

'Peace and tranquillity' 

Mr Singh said there was enough space for the two countries to
develop together in a "mutually supportive manner" after talks
with President Hu. 

We both believe that an ear settlement on the boundary question 
serves the fundamental interest of our two countries President Hu

"We will endeavour to raise the volume of bilateral trade to
$40bn by 2010 and encourage two-way investment flows," the
Indian prime minister told a joint news conference in Delhi. 

That objective was reinforced by Mr Hu, who said the two sides
would "sign an agreement on investment, promotion and protection
between the two countries". 

During their talks, the two leaders had decided "to speed up the
joint feasibility study on a regional trade arrangement", Mr Hu
said. 

Last year, China formally recognised the border state of Sikkim
as part of India. The two sides also agreed to continue to work
together to resolve other border issues. 

[Police detain Tibetan protester outside talks venue Hyderabad 
House in Delhi]                               

A Tibetan activist is detained outside the talks venue in Delhi

Mr Hu said that that work would continue. "Pending an eventual
solution to the boundary question, the two sides need to
continue their efforts to work together to maintain peace and
tranquillity in the border areas," he said. 

Meanwhile, more than 40 Tibetans have been arrested in various
parts of Delhi for protesting against President Hu's visit to
India and alleged Chinese atrocities in Tibet. 

Police in Delhi told the BBC that a group of 10 Tibetan
protesters were arrested when they were trying to approach
Hyderabad House, the venue of talks between Prime Minister Singh
and President Hu. 

Members of other Tibetan groups were held when they tried to
approach the hotel in which the president was staying. 

India now recognises Tibet as part of China, but still hosts
more than 100,000 Tibetans, including the Tibetan
government-in-exile led by the Dalai Lama. 

Old tensions 

Mr Hu arrived in Delhi on Monday evening. His four-day trip also
includes a visit to the financial capital, Mumbai (Bombay). 

[Flags of India and China being put up in Indian capital, Delhi]                                 
Ties have been strained despite growing trade

Rising trade between two of the world's fastest growing
economies is encouraging vastly improved ties, the BBC's Sanjoy
Majumder in Delhi says. 

Annual bilateral trade which was worth only about $250m as
recently as the 1990s has mushroomed in recent years. 

But our correspondent says that mutual economic interests are
often undermined by politics, given that the two countries have
ambitions of being the unrivalled regional superpower. 

The Asian giants fought a brief border war in 1962, which ended
with a decisive victory for the Chinese, an event which many
Indians still view as traumatic. 

India's border state of Arunachal Pradesh is still claimed by
China, while India lays claim to the Aksai Chin region in the
north of Kashmir, which is administered by China. 

Delhi is also suspicious of China's relationship with its
long-time rival Pakistan - which Mr Hu is due to visit after his
trip to India. 

China, meanwhile, is concerned about Delhi's growing ties with
Washington, especially a landmark nuclear agreement which allows
India access to civilian nuclear technology. 

Both India and China have produced staggering economic growth in
recent years, but India continues to lag behind on many fronts,
correspondents say. 

China has a literacy rate of 95%, compared with India's 68%.
Indian exports of manufactured goods in the financial year
ending last March were valued at $71bn, compared with $713bn for
China. 		 	 		 	 	 
*****************************************************************
 14 BBC: Blair fudges Trident vote
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 22 November 2006
 
Prime minister's questions sketch

By Nick Assinder Political correspondent, BBC News website   

The old Ming Campbell - and I mean that in the non-ageist sense - 
is back. 

[Sir Menzies Campbell]                                  

Sir Menzies demanded a vote on Trident options                                                                 

His early, shaky question time performances - which left some of 
his own backbenchers staring at the ceiling wondering, 
presumably, whether they had made a terrible mistake in electing 
him - have gone. 

For the past few weeks, we have instead been presented with 
something more akin to the elder statesman figure - an image 
which previously fitted Sir Menzies like one of his pinstriped 
suits. 

His choice of subject has also been spot on, as far as his own 
MPs are concerned at least. 

So his decision to challenge the prime minister over the possible 
replacement of the Trident nuclear deterrent was well aimed. 

This is classic Liberal territory, but it has the added advantage 
of helping rub salt into the open wounds on the Labour benches 
over an issue set to cause Mr Blair and his successor serious 
trouble. 

No vote 

Many Labour MPs believe Trident should not be replaced or, at the 
very least, that serious alternatives should be examined fully. 
They also want a vote on it. 

[Tony Blair]                            

Blair refused to offer Commons vote

And they are angry at suggestions Mr Blair has already made his 
mind up and will be announcing the government's preferred option 
- presumably replacement - before any Commons debate. 

So Sir Menzies' call for a promise from the prime minister that 
there would be a Commons vote on all the options went to the 
heart of it. 

And it worked. The prime minister confirmed the white paper on 
Trident would come before Christmas - as defence minister Lord 
Drayson told MPs on Tuesday - but he failed to pledge a vote on 
all the options. 

So Labour backbenchers, many of who have been confused by 
different messages coming from ministers, now know pretty much 
for sure that they will not get what they want. 

And that means the campaign can move up a gear. Until now, the 
lack of clarity has succeeded in stalling that campaign. 

That is no longer the case and this is an issue that will now 
loom large on the Labour benches for months to come. 
*****************************************************************
 15 BBC: Blair backs UK's nuclear weapons
 
Last Updated: Wednesday, 22 November 2006
 
[Trident nuclear submarine]                             

The government has yet to make a decision on Trident's 
replacement                                                                 

Prime Minister Tony Blair has told MPs it is "important" the UK 
maintains its independent nuclear weapons system. 

Lib Dem leader Sir Menzies Campbell asked for an assurance that 
MPs would have a vote on whether or not to replace the Trident 
system. 

Mr Blair confirmed that a White Paper outlining options would be 
published this year, adding that he was sure MPs would have a 
vote on the issue. 

The issue is due to be discussed when the Cabinet meets on 
Thursday. 

Mr Blair told Sir Menzies during the Commons question time 
exchanges: "I'm sure there will be an opportunity to vote on the 
issue. 

"But in the end I expect this is going to be an issue, not so 
much of process but of where you stand on this particular issue." 

Nuclear deterrent 

Mr Blair has previously promised a full debate before a decision 
is made, while Chancellor Gordon Brown has also said he wants to 
keep Britain's "independent nuclear deterrent". 

And Commons leader Jack Straw has said there will be a vote on 
the issue in the Commons, which would amount to an effective 
veto. 

TRIDENT MISSILE SYSTEM          

 [Trident]               

Missil length: 44ft (13m) Weight: 130,000lb (58,500kg) Diameter: 
74 inches (1.9m) Range: More than 4,600 miles (7,400km) Power 
plant: Three stage solid propellant rocket Cost: �16.8m ($29.1m) 
per missile Source: Federation of American Scientists How Trident 
works                               

Three Cabinet members - Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett, 
International Development Secretary Hilary Benn and Northern 
Ireland Secretary Peter Hain - are said to have concerns about 
replacing or extending Trident, the Times newspaper reported on 
Wednesday. 

The Conservatives are in favour of maintaining Britain as a 
nuclear power. 

Defence minister Lord Drayson has said the White Paper would 
discuss whether to replace the current submarine-based missiles 
with a land-based or aircraft-based system. 

It would set out options, including highlighting the government's 
preferred option. 

Critics say the estimated �25bn needed to replace Trident would 
be better spent on improving public services and boosting 
pensions. 

The Catholic Bishops of England and Wales have urged the 
government not to replace Trident nuclear weapons. 

Bishop of Portsmouth Crispian Hollis said if the UK developed a 
replacement, the aim of international disarmament would be 
undermined. 

Bishop Hollis said nuclear weapons could never be used because 
they were "so uniquely destructive" in that they killed 
indiscriminately - not just combatants. 

Although nuclear weapons had not been used in war since World War 
Two, Bishop Hollis said it was arguable nuclear weapons did not 
act as a deterrent given the "escalation of surrogate wars going 
on throughout the world".                                                          
*****************************************************************
 16 [NYTr] Tennesse Schools Evacuated after Nuke Plant Alarm
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 11:18:27 -0500 (EST)

X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY

Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
The New York Times - Nov 22, 2006
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/us/22nuclear.html

Pupils Evacuated After Warning at Nuclear Plant

By MATTHEW L. WALD

WASHINGTON, Nov. 21 In the first nuclear-related evacuation since the Three
Mile Island accident of 1979, a Tennessee school district sent all 1,800
pupils home on Tuesday morning because operators at a nearby nuclear
reactor believed they might have had a leak of radioactive cooling water
inside the plant.

The operators, at the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, owned by the Tennessee
Valley Authority, decided around 6:15 a.m. that instruments indicated a
possible leak and declared an unusual event, the lowest of four categories
of plant problems. They canceled the notification at 7:35 a.m., but by then
the children were boarding buses to go home.

The school district is in Meigs County, about halfway between Knoxville and
Chattanooga.

A T.V.A. spokesman, Gil Francis, said: Declaration of an unusual event does
not require an evacuation. They dont go hand in hand.

There have been 20 unusual events around the country this year, according
to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. One element of the definition is that
it does not pose a risk to people off-site or in the plant.

But the superintendent of schools, Robert W. Greene, said that at the time
he had to make a decision, the buses were still at the schools; if he had
let them discharge the children, he said, the drivers would have gone off
duty, and rounding them up would have taken a long time.

We could have been sitting there all day wondering what was the next step,
he said.

Mr. Greene said that some parents had heard on police scanners about the
problem at the reactor, and that parents had arrived at school to get their
children.

Watts Bar is the youngest reactor in the United States, having opened in
1996. The plant has been shut since September for refueling and other
maintenance.

While the problem that triggered the unusual event was not immediately
clear on Tuesday morning, nuclear experts said that in other cases when a
plant is shut down, workers have sometimes opened valves that allowed water
from the reactor to enter empty piping, and operators, observing the
resulting decline in the water level somewhere else in the system, have
become concerned that there was a leak somewhere.

Theo Emery contributed reporting from Nashville.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

                            ***

Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com

Tennessee Schools Fear Nuclear Accident

Washington, Nov 21 (Prensa Latina) An alleged accident at Watts Bar reactor
in Tennessee, spread fear at Meigs county where schools remained closed.

Tennessee Emergency Management Spokesman Jeremy Heidt said it was false
alarm sparked by routine drill at the plant that includes testing staff
reaction to water shortage at the cooling system.

However, County Education Superintendent Robert Greene told local TV
channel 9 that "an alleged leak reached the people" he recommended school
closure.

hr emw et

PL-39
       
                                *
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 17 APP: Nov 21 Public doesn't appreaciate importance of Safety
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:21:08 -0800

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)

Public doesn't appreciate importance of full safety review at Oyster Creek

Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 11/21/06



BY PEGGI STURMFELS



I was recently asked why there was no public outrage from the residents of 
Ocean County against the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey, its 
operations, its owners or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Being in the 
thick of the plant relicensing battle, my first thought was where have you 
been? But stepping back, the question is where have we all been?



Our coalition � STROC (Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek) has labored to 
educate the public, attend hearings, raise money and prepare for 
litigation. At the same time, most people have gone through the rush and 
tumble of their everyday lives, relieved that at the end of the day they 
can go home, curl up and watch "Dancing With The Stars," secure in the 
knowledge that the lights are on.



Many folks don't even know that a potentially dangerous, aged power plant 
is within miles of their living rooms. They don't know that the plant sucks 
in 1.6 billion of gallons of water each day from the Forked River, spitting 
it out at elevated temperatures into the Oyster Creek. This kills billions 
of shrimp and other aquatic life and compromises the life of the Barnegat Bay.



They don't know that it houses thousands of tons of radioactive waste in an 
aboveground storage pool, 70 feet high covered by a metal roof. They don't 
know that the results of an accident at this plant could have devastating 
effects that Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service 
described as "far worse than Chernobyl because of Oyster Creek's 36 years 
of waste stored as to only two years at Chernobyl."



Mayors and town councils acknowledge the danger with a resolution that is 
archived in the books and then move onto their agendas that are filled with 
ratable chasing, potholes and tax issues. Freeholders pass resolutions or 
write private letters to the NRC but never take the big leap of publicly 
standing up and demanding the answers to their questions.



And after the meetings, we climb in our cars and go home. We ferry kids to 
soccer, football, dance, etc., and are thwarted by congested, overcrowded 
and always-under-repair roads. And we don't think about a major accident or 
event that would put everyone on these same roads. But we should.



The Oyster Creek plant went back online last week after its scheduled 
refueling outage. Although we expected as much, we were nonetheless hopeful 
that the outage would be extended until many questions regarding safety 
were answered. We strongly believe � as do many of our elected officials � 
that an independent safety review of the plant is necessary and had hoped 
that such a review would have been completed. We had hoped the state 
Department of Environmental Protection or a consultant to the DEP would 
have conducted this safety review.



A safety review is needed at this time because until more precise 
structural modeling is done and the uncertainties in the analysis that were 
voiced by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards are evaluated, there 
can be no certainty that the plant meets safety requirements.



While doubt remains about the current safety of the plant, the plant should 
not have been allowed to restart from its current outage. If the 
independent review confirms there is a significant chance that the plant 
fails to meet safety requirements, the NRC and plant owner Exelon should 
either close the plant until it can be repaired or cease its operation 
completely.



Gov. Corzine has made a clear statement that if the plant cannot meet 
current safety standards, it should not operate at all and certainly should 
not be relicensed for another 20 years. But has he or will he use his 
office to shine a light on the preposterous machinations the federal 
regulators make the public go through to get accurate answers about the 
safety of the plant?



Many of our area congressional representatives have joined to ask the NRC 
for answers to a series of safety-related issues and for an independent 
review. These queries have been noted and brushed aside. But will the 
congressmen stand together in a bipartisan public event, demanding 
accountability from an agency they oversee?



And what about us? Do we wait for an event that would compromise the 
quality of life for the 1.2 million people who work, live or play in Ocean 
County.



Do we go about our daily routines and not question Exelon about its plant's 
role in the degradation of Barnegat Bay or its violation of the Clean Water 
Act for more than eight years?



Do we believe that the less than 1 percent of the energy supplied by Oyster 
Creek to the regional power grid is worth not having an independent review 
of a 40-year-old plant that uses the most dangerous technology known to man?



The coalition is outraged by the lack of accountability and will not stop 
until it is assured that the people of Ocean County and New Jersey are not 
in jeopardy. We will continue to write letters, attend hearings, raise 
money and demand answers and action.



How about you in Ocean County? Are you outraged?



Peggi Sturmfels, Jackson, is a program organizer for the New Jersey 
Environmental Federation, Belmar.

Text Size:A+|A|A-

E-mail E-mail Printer Print Subscription Subscribe Newsletters E-mail Alerts



Advertisement

Partners: Jobs: CareerBuilder.com � Cars: Cars.com � Apartments: 
Apartments.com � Shopping: ShopLocal.com

Copyright � 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.

Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Service and 
Privacy Policy. (Updated June 7, 2005)

Site design by Asbury Park Press / Contact us

USA Today � USA Weekend � Gannett Co. Inc. � Gannett Foundation
_______________________________________________________________________
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>
*****************************************************************
 18 Herald Sun: Nuclear power revolt by Libs 

Ben Packham and Michael Harvey 				

November 23, 2006 12:00am                                                                               Article from:                                                           

THE prospect of nuclear reactors in their own back yards has
sent government MPs running a mile. One declared: "Over my dead
body." 						 	

Others dismissed the prospect as unrealistic, despite Prime
Minister John Howard's backing of the power source. 

Three federal electorates east of Melbourne have emerged as
potential reactor sites under criteria set out by the Howard
Government's nuclear inquiry. 

The inquiry said 25 reactors could be operating by 2050, built
near water, energy markets and the national power grid. 

In Victoria, this points to towns such as Hastings and
Wonthaggi, and coastal sites near the Latrobe Valley. 

Liberal MP Russell Broadbent, the member for McMillan, said he
would not accept a reactor in his electorate. 

"Over my dead body," he said. 

"We don't even want wind turbines down there. 

"Why would we like a nuclear power station down there when we
are supplying the cheapest electricity in the world to the
Australian market?" 

Liberal Greg Hunt, the member for Flinders, said nuclear power
was "not a real option" in his area. 

"Western Port is crisscrossed by three fault lines . . . which
effectively rules it out," he said. 

National Party MP Peter McGauran, the Agriculture Minister and
member for Gippsland, said brown coal would sustain the
Victorian economy for years to come. 

"Nobody should be excited about nuclear (power) in the Latrobe
Valley as it is a distant prospect only," he said. 

The hostility from within government ranks came amid speculation
states could be forced to comply. 

Chairman of the nuclear inquiry Dr Ziggy Switkowski said he
believed the Federal Government could use its constitutional
powers to override state objections. 

"I'd be prepared to accept that judgment," he told ABC Radio. 

But he said he was confident Australians would see the merits of
nuclear energy given the facts and proper debate. 

Labor deputy leader Jenny Macklin said the Prime Minister had to
reveal whether he would impose nuclear power stations and waste
dumps on unwilling states and territories. 

"That's the real question for John Howard today," she said. 

Premier Steve Bracks has vowed to strengthen Victoria's
opposition to nuclear power if he wins re-election. 

Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said yesterday he did not believe
nuclear power was a real prospect for Victoria. It was a report
at this stage, he said. 

Russell Broadbent says he will not accept a reactor in his
electorate. 					 				 			  

� Herald and Weekly Times. All times AEDT (GMT + 10).
*****************************************************************
 19 Sydney Morning Herald: Nuclear costs just a drop in ocean - Environment - 

www.smh.com.au

[Coal from Newcastle &#133; ships wait to collect

coal this week as a government taskforce handed down its report
on a nuclear alternative to coal-fired power stations.] 

Coal from Newcastle � ships wait to collect coal this week as a
government taskforce handed down its report on a nuclear
alternative to coal-fired power stations.

Photo: Simone Depeak     

Wendy Frew Environment Reporter

November 23, 2006
       
THE full cost of adopting nuclear power in Australia would
probably be several hundred billion dollars and would be likely
to go even higher because of a history of cost blow-outs in
plant construction, decommissioning and waste storage, energy
experts say. 

Not only was there no guarantee costs and construction
timetables for the latest-model nuclear plants could be
controlled, other costs associated with the industry would
probably be passed from industry to taxpayers, and from current
to future generations, they said. 

The $75 billion figure estimated by a Federal
Government-commissioned report released on Tuesday covered only
the construction of 25 nuclear power plants. 

The nuclear industry was shocked last month by news the first
reactor being built in Western Europe for two decades, at
Olkiluoto in Finland, was running well over budget and causing
financial losses for the French builder, Areva. 

"It is hard to conceive that the Australian industry as a total
newcomer to nuclear power would do better than the largest and
most experienced builders in the world, and these builders
struggle getting one large project off the ground," said Mycle
Schneider, a French consultant on energy and nuclear policy. 

Estimated costs for the eventual decommissioning of nuclear
reactors have also blown out and there was little experience of
how much it costs to dispose of the highly radioactive waste
from a nuclear reactor, said Professor Steve Thomas, of the
University of Greenwich in Britain. 

"Even before there is actual experience of these operations,
estimates are going up rapidly and, for example, the estimated
cost of decommissioning Britain's oldest reactors has gone up by
a factor of about six in only 15 years," Professor Thomas said. 

"This could create huge problems for a plant owner that has
taken money from consumers to pay for these operations, only to
find halfway through the life of the plant that the cost is
dramatically higher than predicted," he said. 

In June, the British Government said the cost of cleaning up 20
nuclear facilities had risen to �90 billion ($220 billion), up
from an estimated �70 billion in 2005. 

An Australia Institute analyst, Andrew Macintosh, said other
costs for the Government included establishing an agency to
regulate the nuclear sector. Based on annual operating costs for
the federal environment department, that could cost between $30
million and $50 million a year, he said. 

It is also likely the Government would have to spend heavily on
an advertising campaign to assure voters nuclear energy was
safe, he said. Last year, the Howard Government allocated $55
million to advertise its industrial relations changes. 

The storage of radioactive waste would be another costly
exercise. The US Government's plan to build a nuclear waste
storage facility in the Nevada desert is expected to cost more
than $US40 billion ($52 billion). 

Mr Macintosh said there could also be intangible costs such as
damage to diplomatic relations with Asian neighbours worried
about Australia's nuclear build-up. 

 Copyright � 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 20 Sydney Morning Herald: States may be forced to go nuclear - legal experts - 

www.smh.com.au

Waste not ... Ziggy Switkowski

Photo: Paul Jones               

Latest related coverage
 	 
November 22, 2006 - 7:44PM

The states are warning the federal government it faces a fight
if it tries to force nuclear power plants onto them. 

Former Telstra chief Ziggy Switkowski yesterday released a
landmark report on the possible future of the nuclear energy
industry in Australia, concluding 25 nuclear reactors could
produce a third of the country's electricity by 2050. 

The Labor-controlled states strongly oppose the idea of a
nuclear reactor being built on their patch. 

Several, including Victoria and NSW, already have legislation in
place banning nuclear power. 

But some constitutional experts believe the commonwealth's
success in defeating the states in a High Court battle over the
new Work Choices laws means it has the power to put nuclear
power plants anywhere it wants. 

Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell today refused to say
whether Canberra would use its corporations power - which allows
the commonwealth to legislate over matters affecting
corporations - to build nuclear power stations. 

"The federal government will do what's required to ensure
Australia has a secure energy future and we will play our part
in addressing climate change," Mr Campbell said in Perth today. 

Dr Switkowski, a nuclear physicist, said today that, based on
the advice he had received, the states could be forced to house
nuclear power plants. 

"I'd be prepared to accept that judgment," he told ABC Radio. 

"However, as we have found around the world, where the nuclear
industry has been most effective is where there's alignment
between the interests of the federal government, the states, the
local councils and the communities." 

NSW Premier Morris Iemma said today he would fight any plans by
the federal government to build nuclear power plants anywhere in
the state. 

"We have legislation in NSW which bans nuclear power, nuclear
power stations and I have got absolutely no intention of
changing it," he said. 

South Australian Premier Mike Rann has said that if it ever
became necessary, his government would outlaw a nuclear power
station in SA, just as it blocked the building of a nuclear
waste dump. 

Western Australia does not have legislation outlawing nuclear
power, but the state's Environment Minister Mark McGowan said
the government would block any nuclear plant's access to
transmission lines to prevent power from entering and leaving
it. 

"So even if a private reactor was set up, we own the
transmission lines and they would not get access," Mr McGowan
said. 

Beattie lays down challenge to Nationals 

Queensland Premier Peter Beattie has challenged The Nationals to
use its numbers in the senate to block any move to allow nuclear
power in Australia. 

"If the National party is very serious about supporting the coal
industry and clean-coal technology ... then they should use
their numbers in the senate to block it," Mr Beattie said. 

"I don't want to see the slogan that basically says, 'Come to
Queensland - beautiful one day, nuclear-powered the next'," he
said. 

Mr Beattie said voters could also block nuclear power by taking
away the government's majority in the senate. 

Deputy federal Labor leader Jenny Macklin said the prime
minister must reveal whether he would impose nuclear waste dumps
and nuclear power stations on unwilling states and territories. 

Australian Greens leader, Senator Bob Brown, said Labor was
ineffective against the government on the issue. 

"(Prime Minister) John Howard sees 25 nuclear power plants as a
mission, and he has the power. He has the newly re-endorsed
corporations power, he has the ability to override state
governments," he told reporters in Melbourne. 

"That's why we need Greens in the parliaments, and in the
balance of power, to present a real opposition to what John
Howard is going to do. 

"The Greens are opposed to nuclear power here and around the
world, unlike Labor we do not support sending uranium to build
nuclear power plants in other countries - we don't think that's
moral" 

Nuclear waste 'would fill bathroom of small house' 

Dr Switkowski today attempted to quell community fears about the
disposal of radioactive junk, saying modern reactors generated
"very little waste". 

"A typical nuclear power station would probably produce as much
waste as would fill maybe a bathroom in a small house," he told
the Nine Network. 

"The design would be to keep that waste on-site at the reactor,
but eventually it would have to be relocated to a national
depository." 

Almost all parts of Australia were suitable for such a facility
as they were geologically stable and a long way from major
population centres, he said. 

Dr Switkowski said nuclear power had been around for about 50
years and was in use in more than 440 reactors in 31 countries. 

"Our observation of modern nuclear reactors is that they are
very impressive bits of technology, very safe, arguably safer
than alternative ... fossil fuel generators, and environmentally
(they) don't constitute a hazard," he said. 

"The world has had a long experience of nuclear electricity but
Australia has not." 

Dr Switkowski rejected Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane's
comments that nuclear power plants did not need to be built
close to towns or cities. 

"Reactors should be placed near the big markets ... tens of
kilometres away (from population centres)," he said. 

"They need to be located with access to the national electricity
grid. They use water, often sea water, so you'll find many
reactors located on the coast. 

"Some countries have decided to co-locate their reactors with
existing generating facilities such as coal power stations. 

"So that gives you a sense of where Australia's reactors ...
might be found." 

Dr Switkowski said he wanted his report to inform community
debate on whether nuclear energy had a role in Australia's
future, particularly as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. 

"If there is a price for greenhouse gases of moderate
proportions, all of a sudden nuclear and other renewables become
competitive," he said. 

AAP 

Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 21 AU ABC: Mount Isa welcomes nuclear power

ABC Queensland
 
 Wednesday, 22 November 2006. 12:49 (AEDT)Wednesday, 22 November

 The Mount Isa Mayor has welcomed a Federal Government report
supporting the use of nuclear power. 

The north-west Queensland city was considered as a possible site
for a nuclear power plant during a local debate on the storage
of nuclear waste in 1991. 

Ron McCullough says fossil fuels are contributing to global
warming and nuclear energy is a viable option. 

"There might be some opposition to it because there's still a
lot of terrible stories going around about nuclear energy but
the reality is things have changed, but I think the most
important thing is the alternative doesn't really bear thinking
about," he said. 

"If we can't get nuclear energy the alternative is the world is
going to have a lot more problems in the future." 

*****************************************************************
 22 AU ABC: Come clean on nuclear reactor locations, WA Minister urges
 
ABC Perth 

 Wednesday, 22 November 2006. 15:31 (AEDT)Wednesday, 22 November

 Western Australian Energy Minister Fran Logan has called on the
Commonwealth to reveal how WA would fit into a national nuclear
power program. 

A Federal Government review of uranium mining has found nuclear
power would be a practical energy option and Australia could
start producing it within the next 10 to 15 years. 

But Mr Logan says nuclear power is more expensive than most
other energy sources, and would also come to the detriment of
renewable energy supplies like wind and solar. 

He says the Commonwealth should come clean as to whether it
intends to build nuclear reactors in WA. 

"Any of the nuclear power stations have got to be within tens of
kilometres of a major city centre, either next to a river or by
the sea," Mr Logan said. 

"Well you can use your own imagination as to where that will be
in Perth. 

"That's the concern we've always had and those fears have been
confirmed by the Switkowski report." 


*****************************************************************
 23 AU ABC: Nuclear power stations by the sea? - 

22/11/2006

Anna Salleh ABC Science Online
   
  [Cooling towers]   

  Cooling towers are one option for getting rid of waste heat
from power plants (Image: iStockphoto)   

Any Australian nuclear power plants would most likely need to be
built on the coast where gigalitres of seawater could be used to
cool them, suggest experts.

"Because we've got a water shortage in this country it would be
best to place them on the coast," says nuclear power engineer
Professor John Price of in Melbourne.

Price's comments come in the wake of a from Prime Minister John
Howard's nuclear taskforce that proposes constructing 25 nuclear
power plants to meet Australia's future energy needs.

Price, who welcomes the new report, says "gigantic" amounts of
water are required to cool a nuclear power station.

"I'm talking about tonnes per second," says Price, who has
designed nuclear power stations in the UK.

According to the taskforce, headed by nuclear physicist Dr Ziggy
Switkowski, nuclear power plants are less efficient than
coal-fired plants and thus require more cooling.

One estimate, from a recent to the Queensland government,
suggests a 1400 megawatt nuclear power station would use around
25 gigalitres of water a year.

This is about 1.26 times the water used by an equivalent
coal-fired power station, says the report by Dr Ian Rose of Roam
Consulting, a Queensland-based company with expertise in energy
modelling.

Water cooling

While the Switkowski report does not consider specific locations
for nuclear power plants in Australia, it says they are often
located near existing power stations because this ensures ready
access to appropriate infrastructure and water for cooling.

Most nuclear power stations are cooled using water from a river,
lake or the ocean, the report says.

But the Rose report says a lack of reliable river water makes a
nuclear power station cooled by river water "not an option for
Australian conditions".

Both Rose and Price also raise the issue of environmental
effects of the warmer water discharged from nuclear power
stations on rivers.

"I wouldn't think that would be a good idea [siting a nuclear
power station on a river] in Australia because the river volumes
are not huge and you don't want to heat the river up," says
Price.

Price suggests power stations by the sea are preferable because
the sea can more easily dilute the heat of the discharge.

But Rose says it may be difficult to find suitable seaside
locations.

"The number of seaboard nuclear sites in areas close to a major
transmission grid in eastern Australia is likely to be limited,"
his report says.

The US says that discharge from nuclear power stations can also
contain heavy metals and salts that can harm aquatic life.

It also says removal of water upstream in the first place can
also damage river environments.

Cooling options

Instead of discharging warm water, some nuclear power stations
evaporate water into the air through cooling towers, Price says. 

While Rose says this is a preferred option, Price says this is a
waste of water.

According to the Switkowski and Rose reports, it is also
possible to use 'dry' cooling, which reduces water consumption
by using air as a coolant. But they say this would be more
expensive.

Another option, says Price, is to use waste heat from nuclear
power stations to desalinate water.

"That may be one of the most interesting outputs, as far as
Australia is concerned," he says.

The nuclear taskforce is inviting public submissions on its
draft report until 12 December and the final report is due at
the end of the year.
*****************************************************************
 24 Western Australian: WA threatens to block nuclear plants

22nd November 2006, 16:03 WST   

Western Australia has threatened to block power leaving any 
nuclear plant the federal government might force on the state.

WA Environment Minister Mark McGowan warned of the possibility
after his federal counterpart refused to rule out invoking its
corporations power to override the states and build nuclear
power plants on their land.

The corporations power in the constitution allows the
commonwealth to legislate on matters affecting corporations.

The states have said they will fight any move to have nuclear
power plants or waste dumps imposed on them.

Some already have legislation in place banning nuclear power.

WA does not have legislation outlawing nuclear power but Mr
McGowan said there were other strategies the state could use.

"The thing we have up our sleeves, (is) we own the transmission
lines," Mr McGowan said.

"So even if a private reactor was set up, we own the
transmission lines and they would not get access."

Refusing access to the transmission lines would prevent power
from entering and leaving the plant.

Earlier on Wednesday in Perth, federal Environment Minister Ian
Campbell refused to say whether Canberra would use its
corporations power to build nuclear power stations, saying only
that the government would do what it needed to secure the energy
future.

"The federal government will do what's required to ensure
Australia has a secure energy future and we will play our part
in addressing climate change," Mr Campbell said.

"That's our responsibility. It's a long-term view.

"It's going to take a few decades to fix it and if you play
short-term politics you won't save the planet from climate
change and you won't give Australia a secure energy future."
	AAP   

'The West Australian' is a trademark of West Australian
Newspapers Pty Ltd 2006. All Rights Reserved. 	 			 		 	 
*****************************************************************
 25 JOURNAL NEWS: Anti-nuclear activists express alarm over Indian Point radioactivity findings 

(Original publication: November 22, 2006)
 
Anti-nuclear activists are alarmed by government tests that
found more than seven times the amount of dangerous radioactive
material in groundwater near the Indian Point reactors than
reported by a laboratory hired by the power plants' owner.

Paul Gunter of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in
Washington, D.C., said yesterday that the conflicting numbers
raised questions about "where this poisoned water could be going
and the effect on public health as a result of that."

"Contaminated groundwater is an issue at reactors across the
country, and the fact that we now have this large disparity in
test results raises concern as to just how accurate any of these
testing results have been," Gunter said.

Lisa Rainwater, director of the Indian Point Campaign for the
Riverkeeper environmental group in Tarrytown, called the
findings "bad news on top of bad news."

A spokesman for Entergy Nuclear Northeast, which owns and
operates the Indian Point plants in Buchanan, downplayed the
discrepancy.

"This is a single error, apparently, in a laboratory that has
been reliable in the past, and it doesn't change our
understanding of the situation," Jim Steets said.

A spokeswoman for lab owner Teledyne Brown Engineering of
Huntsville, Ala., said the company was investigating its test
results, but declined to answer questions.

Radioactive material was discovered in groundwater under Indian
Point in August 2005. The substances include strontium 90, an
extremely hazardous type of nuclear waste.

Indian Point is the only active nuclear plant in the country
known to be leaking strontium 90, which can cause bone cancer
and leukemia. Federal regulations set the maximum level of
strontium 90 at fewer than 8 picocuries per liter of drinking
water. A picocurie is a measure of radioactivity.

Testing by Teledyne Brown on Indian Point groundwater samples
taken in August found far less radiation than did labs hired by
the state and federal governments. In one case, Teledyne Brown
found fewer than 4 picocuries per liter, but the government labs
found 30 picocuries per liter.

Marvin Resnikoff of Radioactive Waste Management Associates, a
New York City-based consulting company that works with
atomic-energy opponents, said he was surprised by the different
findings. He called Teledyne Brown "a reputable testing and
laboratory company."

Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the federal Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, said Teledyne Brown did testing for many of the
nation's nuclear power plants. He was unaware of any other
instances of conflicting results.

Teledyne Brown is a subsidiary of Teledyne Technologies Inc. of
Los Angeles, a publicly owned company formed in 1999 when
Pittsburgh-based Allegheny Teledyne, the world's leading
producer of specialty metals, spun off several businesses. They
included Water Pik Technologies, which manufactures shower heads
and dental-hygiene devices.

Teledyne Technologies' products include sophisticated electronic
components, instruments and communications products, including
defense electronics. In 2005, the company earned $126 million in
profits on $1.2 billion in sales, of which more than 40 percent
went to the federal government, according to its Web site.

Teledyne Brown specializes in defense, space, and environmental
engineering. On its Web site, the company says its products and
services were aimed at "protecting America, expanding national
interests in space, and improving environmental safety." 

Reach Bruce Golding at or 914-694-5012. 
                                
      This is so typical for every "accident" or problem at
Indian Point. As neighbors of this monstrosity for almost 30
years, we have been lied to and deceived every single time. We
are not told about spills or leaks until days after the fact,
and then they are always downplayed as "within limits". Entergy
needs to understand that they are NOT being a good neighbor. And
again, we are given another reason not to trust them.

Posted by: covegirl52 on Wed Nov 22, 2006 10:48 am   
  
      This speaks to the arrogance of industry and governmental
agencies bolstering their positions with what they want to
reveal,at the expense of the public's good. Where is the common
sense in arguing for the continued operation of a nuclear
facility that cannot contain or control safety measures, never
mind human error?
Here again, we must draw attention to the fact that United Water
New York is proposing to use Hudson River water as a drinking
water source. Given the ongoing leaks of strontium 90 and
tritium from Indian Point it is unconscionable that this is even
a thought, never mind a proposal. 
Does "and justice for all" really have to mean cheaper???

Posted by: dehalve maen on Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:54 am   
  
Copyright 2006 The Journal News, Inc. newspaper serving
  Westchester, Rockland and Putnam Counties in New York. Use of
 this site signifies your agreement to the and , updated June 7,
                             2005. 
*****************************************************************
 26 Gainesville Sun:The nuclear option 

Gainesville.com | Gainesville, Fla.
 
BY NATHAN CRABBE SUN STAFF WRITER                           

November 22. 2006 6:01AM

  A national trend to expand the use of nuclear power could mean
two new nuclear plants, including one near the existing reactor
in Crystal River

Push to expand the use of nuclear power in the U.S. could mean
two new reactors in Florida, including one near the existing
nuclear reactor in Crystal River

Crystal River is about 60 miles southwest of Gainesville, but
its political climate is a world away from the contentious
battle over a proposed coal-fired power plant here.

Progress Energy is considering building another nuclear reactor
to join its existing reactor and four coal-fired plants near
Crystal River. The long-delayed announcement on the location of
the new reactor is now expected before the end of the year.

Both the Citrus County Commission and Crystal River City Council
have unanimously passed resolutions welcoming a new reactor.
Crystal River Mayor Ronald Kitchen Jr. said the community's
nearly three-decade history with the plant has quelled concerns
about safety.

"Quite frankly, I think it's one of the most regulated and
overseen industries out there," he said.

The company's plans are part of a national trend that the
nuclear industry hopes closes the book on the story of Three
Mile Island. Since the Pennsylvania nuclear plant suffered a
partial meltdown in 1979, no new nuclear plants have been built
in the U.S.

Increasing demand for energy, concerns over greenhouse gases and
government subsidies could change that in the next several
years. Nationally, there are 103 existing reactors, and as many
as 31 more could be built under current proposals, including
plans by both Progress Energy and Florida Power and Light.

Nuclear provides energy that is cleaner than coal and less
expensive than natural gas, said Buddy Eller, spokesman for
Progress Energy. Cooling towers merely emit steam as compared to
greenhouse gases from a coal-fired power plant.

While the $5 billion in possible construction costs would bump
rates in the short-term, Eller said a new reactor could result
in lower rates over time.

But others say the investment in nuclear plants diverts money
from renewable energy, results in dangerous waste and creates
new terrorist targets. Radioactive waste is stored on plant
sites as the federal government has had continued difficulties
in establishing a permanent site.

"The biggest downside is nuclear power creates some of the most
dangerous waste known to mankind," said Holly Binns, field
director for the Tallahassee-based nonprofit Environment Florida.

Gainesville Regional Utilities gets 11 megawatts of power from
the Crystal River reactor, representing nearly 4 percent of the
energy in its system. Nuclear energy is the utility's least
expensive power and the first option when available, said Heidi
Lannon, managing utility analyst for GRU.

"It's serving your base level - your refrigerator, your lights,
the things that are always on," she said.

GRU bought 1.4 percent of the plant during construction, when
cost overruns forced then-owner Florida Power to sell off
pieces. The federal approval process has since been streamlined
to reduce overruns, said Garry Miller, project director for
Progress Energy's new plant.

The industry has also created a standardized technology that is
already approved by federal regulators, he said.

"We're getting all the work done in advance before putting lots
of money down on a potential plant," he said.

But it could still take a decade before the plant is fully
operational, Eller said. He also cautioned that plans could be
scrapped at any time.

"There are lots of off ramps in this process," he said.

The company has whittled down the list of possible locations to
fewer than 10, he said. The Crystal River site presents
advantages because of political support but provides downsides
due to the concentration of generation there, Miller said.

In addition to the reactor, there are four coal plants on the
site for a total of 3,200 megawatts of electricity. The size of
the new reactor hasn't yet been determined.

Plans for a new reactor come at a fortuitous time. In 2005,
Congress passed an energy bill providing $2 billion for cost
overruns associated with delays at the first six reactors that
get built and another $125 million in annual subsidies for new
nuclear production.

The Florida Legislature passed an energy bill this year that
makes it easier for utilities to get nuclear plants approved and
allows utilities to immediately pass construction costs to
customers.

Binns said such subsidies divert spending from renewable
energies such as solar. The push for more nuclear power comes as
the country still hasn't devised a long-term solution for
storing waste, she said.

"We still haven't figured out for several decades how to deal
with that," she said.

Currently, nuclear plants store waste in on-site pools. But
pools at the nuclear plants of both Florida Power and Progress
are expected to be filled over the next six years, forcing the
creation of above-ground dry storage sites.

The U.S. Department of Energy has long proposed building a
storage site in Nevada's remote Yucca Mountain and now plans to
open the site in 2017. But the elevation of Nevada Sen. Harry
Reid, a project opponent, to majority leader could stop those
plans, said Scott Cullen, director of the nonprofit GRACE Energy
Initiative in New York.

He said the potential for terrorist attacks on waste sites is
among the long list of reasons expanding nuclear energy is a bad
idea. The money and time spent building a nuclear plant would be
better spent developing renewable resources such as solar and
wind power.

"There are a lot of solutions out there that are a lot faster
and a lot cheaper," he said.

The efficiency of nuclear technology has dramatically improved,
and the industry has had a good safety record since Three Mile
Island, said Alireza Haghighat, chairman of nuclear and
radiological engineering at the University of Florida.

He said politics have long stunted the growth of nuclear power,
which he said he hopes will change as more people learn about
its advantages.

"We really need to look at this more logically rather than
emotionally," he said.

Kitchen shares that view. He said the plant long become accepted
in Crystal River, its looming cooling towers just another part
of the landscape.

"I sometimes forget there's a nuclear plant," he said.

Nathan Crabbe can be reached at 352-338-3176 or
crabben@gvillesun.com.

Copyright 2006, The Gainesville Sun.
*****************************************************************
 27 SF Chron: India, China plan to expand civilian nuclear cooperation
 
[San Francisco Chronicle] 
				 
Jehangir S. Pocha, Chronicle Foreign Service 

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

(11-22) 04:00 PST Beijing -- China and India agreed Tuesday to
increase civilian nuclear cooperation during President Hu
Jintao's four-day state visit to the South Asian giant that ends
Thursday, according to press reports. 

Even though the deal appeared to be more of a statement of
intent, an eventual agreement would foster the exchange and
purchase of nuclear technology between the two emerging Asian
powers, according to two Indian officials who asked not to be
named since they are not authorized to speak to the media. 

Hu and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also agreed to
double trade between the two countries to $40 billion during the
next four years. 

The terms of the China-India nuclear agreement are expected to
mirror the terms of the civilian nuclear agreement India
concluded with the United States last year, when Singh visited
Washington. A nuclear cooperation agreement would mark a new
stage in the increasing competition between China and the United
States for India's friendship. 

President Bush branded China a "strategic competitor" soon after
taking office in 2001. Since India's burgeoning economy and
strong military can tip the balance of power in Asia, both the
United States and China have been trying to build closer ties
with India, says Sun Shihai, deputy director of the Institute
for Asia Pacific Studies at the Chinese Academy of Sciences in
Beijing. 

"The U.S. always said it wants to use India to balance China,"
said Sun. "China feels it needs to engage India more (and)
develop some kind of Russia-China-India cooperation that can
balance U.S. hegemony. So there is some kind of competition
happening." 

Bush's willingness to provide India with new nuclear technology
-- while refusing to do the same with India's archrival Pakistan
-- was widely seen as a de facto acceptance of India as a
nuclear weapons state. 

Initially, China had criticized the Indo-U.S. deal, saying it
violated international nonproliferation principles. India and
China had fought a short but bitter war in 1962, and New Delhi
had pointed to the threat it faced from a nuclear-armed China
when it conducted its nuclear tests in 1998. 

But Sun said Hu persisted in repairing ties with India because
he is committed to a Russia-China-India alliance. And many
Indian officials want a deal with China to restore balance to
India's foreign policy. 

"Traditionally, India's always been nonaligned and had an
independent foreign policy," said an official in New Delhi
knowledgeable about the reported nuclear deal with China.
"Recently, India had been moving very close to the U.S., and
with this deal India will become equidistant between the U.S.
and China." 

Indian officials also hope closer relations with China will
dilute Beijing's close relationship with Pakistan. While Hu is
expected to sign a nuclear agreement with Pakistan when he
arrives there after his India visit, "the Pakistanis will get
much much less than what they want," an Indian official said.
				
Page A - 18 			
The San Francisco Chronicle] 

*****************************************************************
 28 Brattleboro Reformer: N.H. joins challenge to VY relicense bid

By KRISTI CECCAROSSI, Reformer Staff

Wednesday, November 22 BRATTLEBORO -- Federal officials are
moving forward with a challenge to Vermont Yankee's license
renewal bid. 

This week, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted the
state of New Hampshire party status in a quasi-judicial hearing
on relicensing. They join the state of Vermont and watchdog
group New England Coalition as participants. The town of
Marlboro and the Massachusetts attorney general have also been
invited to participate. 

That means New Hampshire officials will be allowed to
cross-examine witnesses and provide their own evidence in the
case -- but that's only if a hearing is granted. Federal
officials have yet to decide on that. 

Earlier this year, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, a
quasi-judicial branch of the NRC, accepted five formal
complaints against the plant's relicensing application. Four
complaints came from nuclear watchdog New England Coalition and
one from the state of Vermont. 

By accepting the contentions, the ASLB is acknowledging that the
coalition and the state have a valid challenge to a 20-year
license extension and one that should be vetted through a formal
hearing process. 

But Entergy Nuclear, owners of Vermont Yankee, appealed two of 
the complaints granted by the ASLB. The ASLB is an independent 
arm of the NRC, but the five commissioners at the top of the NRC 
can overrule the board's decisions. They have until Dec. 20 to 
decide whether there will be a hearing on relicensing. 

The ASLB agreed to hear complaints or "contentions" on how
Vermont Yankee's aging plant equipment will handle continued
operation, and whether releases of water from the plant will
damage the ecology of Connecticut River. 

Entergy is asking the NRC to outright reject the river-related
contention and reconsider a contention that questions how the
plant's steam dryer will hold up for an extra 20 years. Entergy
is pointing to previous reviews of the steam dryer -- conducted
during challenges to the plant's recent 20 percent power uprate
-- as evidence that it will be OK. 

In this stage, contentions could be struck down by the NRC
commissioners or they could be settled with agreements made by
Entergy or intervening parties. For example, Entergy could agree
to do additional testing on its impact on the Connecticut River
and the New England Coalition, if satisfied, could drop that
particular objection. 

But if the contentions survive the lengthy and exhaustive
process, they would be aired in a quasi-judicial hearing. 

Of the 44 license renewals the NRC has granted to nuclear power
plants across the country, only seven have been challenged as
Vermont Yankee is currently being challenged. None of those
challenges have made it to a hearing, according to Neil Sheehan,
spokesman for the NRC. 

Vermont Yankee is a 34-year-old reactor and among the oldest in
operation in the United States. Its current license expires in
2012. 

New England Newspapers, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 29 Reuters: India fears nuclear plant attacks over US deal
         
Wed 22 Nov 2006 13:00:22 GMT

 NEW DELHI, Nov 22 (Reuters) - Terrorist threats to India's
nuclear plants have increased after a landmark civilian nuclear
cooperation agreement with the United States, the Indian home
minister said on Wednesday.

 Security at India's nuclear facilities has been stepped up over
the last year after officials said they had information that the
sites were on the hit-list of Islamist militants.

 Several high-profile attacks on other targets across the
country, blamed on Pakistan-based militant groups fighting
against Indian rule in Kashmir, have also led to increased vigil
at government facilities.

 But Home Minister Shivraj Patil's comments were the first to
link the vulnerability of the nuclear plants to the civilian
nuclear pact with Washington which is in the final stages of
approval by the U.S. Congress.

 "Our critical infrastructure faces a serious threat from
terrorists," Patil told a conference of state police chiefs.

 "In view of the recent Indo-U.S. agreement on civil nuclear
energy cooperation, our atomic power plants have become highly
vulnerable," he said.

 Patil did not elaborate but a home ministry official said
security agencies feared the nuclear plants could be targeted by
Islamist militants opposed to American policies and U.S.
presence in South Asia.

 India has 15 nuclear power plants in operation, with an
installed generating capacity of 3,310 megawatts (MW). Seven
more plants with a capacity of 3,420 MW are under construction
and scheduled for completion by 2009.

 Fourteen of the 22 plants categorised as civilian facilities
would be allowed to access fuel and equipment from the United
States under the deal which overturns a three-decade ban on
nuclear trade.

 The deal was approved by the U.S. Senate last week and needs
approval jointly by the House of Representatives and the Senate,
besides the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and the
International Atomic Energy Agency.

 Patil said installations in the oil and natural gas sector,
defence, communications and the IT sector were also vulnerable,
adding "the enemy" was always looking for new targets.

 "The challenge of terrorism must be faced resolutely and the
police and security agencies cannot afford to lower their
guard," he said.

� Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

*****************************************************************
 30 APP.COM: Public doesn't appreciate importance of full safety review 
at Oyster Creek 

Asbury Park Press Online

Posted by the on 11/21/06 

BY PEGGI STURMFELS 		 		 		 

I was recently asked why there was no public outrage from the
residents of Ocean County against the Oyster Creek nuclear power
plant in Lacey, its operations, its owners or the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. Being in the thick of the plant
relicensing battle, my first thought was where have you been?
But stepping back, the question is where have we all been?

Our coalition � STROC (Stop the Relicensing of Oyster Creek) has
labored to educate the public, attend hearings, raise money and
prepare for litigation. At the same time, most people have gone
through the rush and tumble of their everyday lives, relieved
that at the end of the day they can go home, curl up and watch
"Dancing With The Stars," secure in the knowledge that the
lights are on.

Many folks don't even know that a potentially dangerous, aged
power plant is within miles of their living rooms. They don't
know that the plant sucks in 1.6 billion of gallons of water
each day from the Forked River, spitting it out at elevated
temperatures into the Oyster Creek. This kills billions of
shrimp and other aquatic life and compromises the life of the
Barnegat Bay.

They don't know that it houses thousands of tons of radioactive
waste in an aboveground storage pool, 70 feet high covered by a
metal roof. They don't know that the results of an accident at
this plant could have devastating effects that Paul Gunter of
the Nuclear Information and Resource Service described as "far
worse than Chernobyl because of Oyster Creek's 36 years of waste
stored as to only two years at Chernobyl."

Mayors and town councils acknowledge the danger with a
resolution that is archived in the books and then move onto
their agendas that are filled with ratable chasing, potholes and
tax issues. Freeholders pass resolutions or write private
letters to the NRC but never take the big leap of publicly
standing up and demanding the answers to their questions.

And after the meetings, we climb in our cars and go home. We
ferry kids to soccer, football, dance, etc., and are thwarted by
congested, overcrowded and always-under-repair roads. And we
don't think about a major accident or event that would put
everyone on these same roads. But we should.

The Oyster Creek plant went back online last week after its
scheduled refueling outage. Although we expected as much, we
were nonetheless hopeful that the outage would be extended until
many questions regarding safety were answered. We strongly
believe � as do many of our elected officials � that an
independent safety review of the plant is necessary and had
hoped that such a review would have been completed. We had hoped
the state Department of Environmental Protection or a consultant
to the DEP would have conducted this safety review.

A safety review is needed at this time because until more
precise structural modeling is done and the uncertainties in the
analysis that were voiced by the Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards are evaluated, there can be no certainty that the
plant meets safety requirements.

While doubt remains about the current safety of the plant, the
plant should not have been allowed to restart from its current
outage. If the independent review confirms there is a
significant chance that the plant fails to meet safety
requirements, the NRC and plant owner Exelon should either close
the plant until it can be repaired or cease its operation
completely.

Gov. Corzine has made a clear statement that if the plant cannot
meet current safety standards, it should not operate at all and
certainly should not be relicensed for another 20 years. But has
he or will he use his office to shine a light on the
preposterous machinations the federal regulators make the public
go through to get accurate answers about the safety of the plant?

Many of our area congressional representatives have joined to
ask the NRC for answers to a series of safety-related issues and
for an independent review. These queries have been noted and
brushed aside. But will the congressmen stand together in a
bipartisan public event, demanding accountability from an agency
they oversee?

And what about us? Do we wait for an event that would compromise
the quality of life for the 1.2 million people who work, live or
play in Ocean County.

Do we go about our daily routines and not question Exelon about
its plant's role in the degradation of Barnegat Bay or its
violation of the Clean Water Act for more than eight years?

Do we believe that the less than 1 percent of the energy
supplied by Oyster Creek to the regional power grid is worth not
having an independent review of a 40-year-old plant that uses
the most dangerous technology known to man?

The coalition is outraged by the lack of accountability and will
not stop until it is assured that the people of Ocean County and
New Jersey are not in jeopardy. We will continue to write
letters, attend hearings, raise money and demand answers and
action.

How about you in Ocean County? Are you outraged? 

Peggi Sturmfels, Jackson, is a program organizer for the New
Jersey Environmental Federation, Belmar.                                

  Copyright � 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights
*****************************************************************
 31 FIA: Four Units of NPP Kozloduy To Work in Full Capacity by Year-end   

FOCUS Information Agency

�Barcelona� in Sofia   

www.focus-radio.net -->     www.focus-radio.net 
      
  22 November 2006 | 15:42 | FOCUS News Agency   
    
  Sofia. Kozloduy nuclear power plant is ready for the
autumn-winter season, the deputy chairman of the Board of
Directors of NPP Kozloduy Yordan Georgiev informed during the
session of the Parliamentary Commission on Energy, a reporter of
FOCUS News Agency delivered.

 The total gross production of the plant for November and
December and Q1 of 2007 is envisaged to stand at 7,7 billion
MWh, which is half of the annual production output. 

Georgiev explained that in November and December units 3, 4, and
5 will be working in full capacity. Unit 6, which was
temporarily stopped for planned prophylactic repairs, is
expected to be launched at the end of the month and will also be
operating in full capacity. 

Units 3 and 4 will be shut down at the end of the year, and
units 5 and 6 will continue working in full capacity during the
first three months of 2007. 

A crisis staff to coordinate activities on eliminating
consequences in cases of hard winter conditions was formed on
October 20th with an order of the executive director of the
power plant. The municipality and the regional administration in
Vratsa have also expressed readiness to assist and take part in
activities in cases of hard winter conditions. 

As of November 15th the plant has also introduced teams on
shifts to take care for snow cleaning if necessary. 

NPP Kozloduy has produced 15,8 billion MWh of electricity for
the first ten months of 2006. Sales revenues are 5% more than
the planned figures. The plant�s expenses are in the frames of
the level envisaged in the business plan and currently the plant
has a positive financial result of BGN 14,9 billion, Georgiev
stressed and added that last year the plant had closed with a
negative financial result. 

Margarita KOLEVA
   
Focus Information Agency � 2006
*****************************************************************
 32 FIA: NPP Kozloduy and Macedonian Minority in Bulgaria Discussed by
the EUP Foreign Committee   

FOCUS Information Agency

www.focus-radio.net -->     www.focus-radio.net 
      
  22 November 2006 | 16:09 | FOCUS News Agency   
    
  Brussels. The two dominant issues discussed today at the
session of the Committee on Foreign Affairs at the European
Parliament during the discussions on the report of Geoffrey van
Orden on Bulgaria and the suggested amendments and addendum to
it, concerned the closure of the two units of Kozloduy nuclear
power plant and the existence of Macedonian minority in
Bulgaria, BNR reports. 

The Greens continued insisting that there is a Macedonian
minority in Bulgaria and that the rights of this minority have
been violated with the denial of Bulgarian authorities to
register the Macedonian nationalistic OMO Ilinden � Pirin as a
political party. 

MEPs from other political groups in the parliament, however,
stated that this is a synallagmatic and very sensitive issue.
They suggested that the report would better contain only a text
summoning for the respect of minorities� human rights in general
without further specifications. 

After all it was decided that tomorrow morning the general text
about the rights of minorities, and the text suggested by the
Greens be voted on separately.

 The texts referring to NPP Kozloduy will be voted separately
after it became clear that rapporteur Van Orden supports the
suggestion made by two MEPs for an 8-term extension of the
deadline for the closing of units 3 and 4 of the power plant,
and after a Finnish MEP has ardently defended NPP Kozloduy
stating that Bulgaria had been blackmailed to close a safe power
plant, insisting that the issue must be revised. 

The Greens and some Greek MEPs delcraed themselves �against�
this suggestion.   
    
Focus Information Agency � 2006   

*****************************************************************
 33 IHT: Brazil looking to expand nuclear program - 

International Herald Tribune
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
 The Associated Press Published: November 22, 2006 [

SAO PAULO, Brazil: Brazil's government intends to build four new
nuclear plants and increase oil and petrochemical refining
capacity as part of a strategic plan for the energy sector up to
2030, an official said Wednesday. 

Brazil still would remain reliant on hydroelectric power plants
for an overwhelming majority of its energy, said Mauricio
Tolmasquim, president of the government's energy research
agency. 

By 2030, hydroelectric power is expected to account for 70
percent of electric energy capacity compared with the current
level of 75 percent. Tolmasquim said the government will look to
promote alternative sources. 

Those include four new nuclear plants to be built in the
northeast and southeast of the country starting in 2015. Each is
projected to have generating capacity of 1,000 megawatts. 	 

The plan also includes the completion of the Angra 3 nuclear
power plant in Rio de Janeiro, which has been stuck in the
planning stage for a number of years. 

Brazil currently has two operating nuclear plants, Angra 1 and
Angra 2, with an installed capacity of about 2,000 megawatts.
Angra 3 would raise nuclear capacity would reach 3,300
megawatts. 

Tolmasquim told reporters in Brasilia that the country plans to
add 105,650 megawatts of electric energy capacity between 2015
and 2030 from diverse sources. 

Brazil recently raised international concern when it announced
it would begin enriching uranium for peaceful purposes but then
denied inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency
complete access to its centrifuges. Eventually, a deal for
limited inspections was reached. 

Average electric energy demand is expected to rise by 3.5
percent per year through 2030. 

Brazil will need to build five new oil refineries by 2030 to
keep pace with growing oil production, Tolmasquim said. The
first should have capacity of 250,000 barrels per day and would
come on line in around 2015, and one of the four others would be
a petrochemical refinery with capacity of 150,000 barrels per
day. 

He said two others would have a capacity of 250,000 barrels of
diesel each while the final, focused on gasoline, would be
capable of producing 250,000 barrels per day. 

Also Wednesday, Brazil's state-run oil company Petrobras said it
planned to spend US$780 million (�605 million) from 2007 to 2011
to develop renewable energy. 

Most of the spending will go toward biofuels, while the
remainder will be used for the production of electricity from
solar, wind and small hydroelectric power plants, Petrobras
chief financial officer Almir Barbassa said. 

Barbassa said planned investments for renewable energies are
still "small when compared to the company's total investments." 

Brazil already is a leader in alternative fuel with ethanol,
which is largely distributed by Petrobras. The country's
biodiesel industry is still in its infancy, but is growing fast. 

Petrobras also plans a 2-billion-real (US$923-million;
�716-million) upgrade to its oil pipeline system in Sao Paulo
state. Construction on new pipeline portions and the recovery of
existing parts will begin in the second half of 2008 and take
two years to complete. 				 			 	 	 

Copyright � 2006 the International Herald Tribune
*****************************************************************
 34 ITAR-TASS: Putin chairs 2nd energy conference in a month, criticizes govt

22.11.2006, 16.36

MOSCOW, November 22 (Itar-Tass) - Russian President Vladimir
Putin convened a conference in the Kremlin over fuel supply
problems, a second such meeting in a month. He also criticized
the government for the failure to fulfill his earlier
instructions. 

"I wish to note that practically nothing has been accomplished.
Let's discuss all these issues in a most serious way," the head
of state said before continuing the meeting behind closed doors. 

The officials are discussing problems of fuel /natural gas,
electricity/ supplies in medium-term perspective. 

Putin said he had convened the meeting "again over problems of
electric power generation and energy on the whole." 

"I requested all the government leaders to participate, because
this sphere is extremely important for all the branches of the
economy and for ordinary citizens," he said. 

The president noted that "the /government/ has plans, and
hopefully, it's making some headway, but no final fulfillment
has been scored on any points /of presidential instructions/. 

Putin recalled that his instruction issued in October listed a
range of measures, including guarantees of connection to the
grid infrastructure, the use of state guarantees to attract
loans, tax incentives, the streamlining of permit procedures at
all stages of investment projects and the co-funding of research
and development. 

"Budget-2007 envisions the largest investments in the past 16
years - 45 billion roubles for the development of power
generation; a number of capacities are due to be commissioned,"
Putin said. 

He is convinced however, that "the measures taken are
insufficient." "I ordered to specify the energy consumption
program and the dynamics of tariffs changes, come up with a more
precise prognosis of changes in the fuel balance, and work out a
number of regulations stimulating the development of power
generation," Putin reiterated. 

Taking part in the meeting are Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov,
Kremlin chief of staff Sergei Sobyanin, Deputy Prime Minister
Alexander Zhukov, Deputy Prime Minister, Defense Minister Sergei
Ivanov, presidential aide Igor Shuvalov, Economic Development
Minister German Gref, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, Minister
of Industry and Energy Viktor Khristenko, Head of the Federal
Tariffs Service Sergei Novikov, director of the Rosatom nuclear
agency Sergei Kiriyenko, head of the presidential expert
department Arkady Dvorkovich, Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller and RAO
UES electric utility chief Anatoly Chubais. 

Putin, at the previous conference in Novo-Ogaryovo on October
19, ordered the government to prepare estimates of the condition
of the country's fuel balance. 

Minister of Industry and Energy Viktor Khristenko told reporters
then that the president had "paid special attention not only to
the condition of the energy sector, but also to the state of the
whole fuel balance and prospects for its development in the
country," and instructed the government to prepare, "within two
weeks, the estimates of the fuel balance, which had to include
all energy components there - not only gas but also coal,
nuclear power, and hydro power." 

"The idea is to make use of hydro resources to the maximum
extent, as well as the resources of nuclear power generation and
coal-based generation, and back the proposed fuel balance with
projects and government decisions, including on prices,"
Khristenko said. 

During the conference, Putin severely criticized the government,
regional authorities and energy companies for power outages in a
number of provinces as the cold spell set in, and demanded quick
solution of all problems. 

"The outages we see today as we enter the winter period, show
that not enough is being done. If everything had been done
properly, there wouldn't have been power outages, people
wouldn't be suffering there, thousands of people remain without
heat and electricity," the head of state said. 

"I'm hoping everything will be rectified in the shortest
period," he said, "it's the task of regional authorities in the
first place, but energy companies and government should help as
well." 

The president said he was pleased to see that the energy sector
had begun to attract private investments. 

"Of course, the government has done much recently, a number of
programs have been approved on implementing the plans and tasks
we set when discussing electric power generation; and the
attraction of private investments has begun," Putin said. 

As an example, he noted the wholesale generation company OGK-5.
"Just one OGK-5 raised some 0.5 billion dollars in initial
public offering; the result has much exceed the expectations,
the initial positions have been exceeded by many times," Putin
said. 
    
� ITAR-TASS. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 35 The Australian: Peter Bradford: Nuclear not the answer | Opinion | 

+ NEWS.com.au | 		

  + November 23, 2006 
 
 Australia's power push won't stop global warming

THE draft nuclear taskforce report released this week presents
an unbalanced assessment of nuclear power's prospects. Like many
other such reviews, it is too optimistic about the price of
nuclear power and too quick to dismiss the potential of the
alternatives. The US has wasted a lot of money by relying on
similarly euphoric assessments through the years. Australia has
the chance to learn from that experience.

 The safety of nuclear power plants depends on vigilance,
careful engineering and construction. It can be seriously
compromised if a country freights the technology - as the US did
in the 1970s - with unrealistic expectations. What we are seeing
from many nuclear proponents today is their old five P game
plan: pushed power plants; postponed problems. Nuclear power's
asserted comeback in the US rests not on new-found
competitiveness in power plant construction but on an old
formula: subsidy, licensing shortcuts, risks borne by customers
and taxpayers, political muscle, ballyhoo and pointing to other
countries to indicate that the US is falling behind. Climate
change has replaced oil dependence as the bogeyman from which
only nuclear power can save us. 

But nuclear power cannot be a magic bullet answer to climate
change. Even if it is scaled up much faster than anything now in
prospect, it cannot provide more than 10 per cent to 15 per cent
of the greenhouse gas displacement that is likely to be needed
by mid-century. Not only can nuclear power not stop global
warming, it is probably not even an essential part of the
solution to global warming. 

Princeton University professors Stephen Pacala and Robert
Socolow introduce the useful concept of a wedge, defined as any
measure that will lead, during the next 50 years, to a global
reduction of 25 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions
relative to business as usual. The number of wedges required to
avoid dangerous climate change depends on many factors. Under
optimistic assumptions, seven wedges will be needed; this number
could increase significantly under less optimistic assumptions. 

The study lists 15 measures from technologies to public policy
initiatives that exist today and could be scaled up to become
one or more wedges. Energy efficiency and conservation comprise
three wedges, alternatives to business-as-usual,
gasoline-powered transport accounts for another four, and
increasing natural sinks, such as forests, provides two wedges.
Generating electricity in less carbon-intensive ways contributes
four wedges. Of these, at most one wedge would be contributed by
a worldwide tripling of nuclear power. 

Such a tripling would require other expenditures. There is also
fuel enrichment (perhaps an additional 15 plants), waste
repositories (perhaps the equivalent of 14 Yucca Mountains) and
perhaps reprocessing plants. The only effort to model the cost
of this undertaking that I have seen comes from the Natural
Resources Defence Council in the US and puts the total bill at
$2000 billion to $3000 billion. 

Prime Minister John Howard recently said: "Nuclear power is
potentially the cleanest and greenest of them all." Such
statements invite the nation into a la-la land in which nuclear
power will be over-subsidised and under-scrutinised while other
more promising and more rapid responses to climate change are
neglected and the greenhouse gases that they could have averted
continue to pollute the skies. 

Nuclear power has never been viable in any country with
competitive power supply procurement. No nuclear plant has won
an open competitive power supply auction. There is no reason to
think this would be different in Australia, a country with
abundant coal and no nuclear experience. So without a large
carbon tax, this proposition is nonsense. But even with a large
carbon tax, nuclear is not an assured winner against coal with
sequestration, and it is an assured loser against energy
efficiency and probably against combinations of fossil fuels
with renewables. 

A sensible approach to climate change would start with a trading
regime or a carbon tax that would put a significant price on
fuels according to their carbon content. It would offer
non-discriminatory governmental support to technologies in
accordance with their ability to achieve the needed reductions
rapidly, inexpensively and in a manner acceptable to the public.
It may well mimic the California approach to new electric
facilities, in which all practical efficiency and renewable
options are deployed before a new power plant is considered. 

For Australia to seek instead to achieve a set number of nuclear
plants by a particular time assumes that government is wiser
than markets in picking the most promising technologies; surely
an odd position for an economically conservative government to
embrace. 

Peter Bradford is a former member of the US Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and former chairman of the New York and Maine utility
regulatory commissions. He was commissioned to review the draft
nuclear taskforce report by Greenpeace Australia Pacific. 
*****************************************************************
 36 Scoop: Australia's nuclear plans put New Zealand in peril
 
Wednesday, 22 November 2006, 3:59 pm

Press Release: Green Party         

If Australia follows through on plans to build 25 nuclear plants
on its east coast, New Zealand would be squarely in the path of
fallout from any nuclear accident, Green Party Co-Leader
Jeanette Fitzsimons says. 

Ms Fitzsimons was commenting on proposals contained in a report
by a task force appointed by Australian Prime Minister John
Howard. 

"With the prevailing winds blowing from the west, New Zealand
would become the early warning system - the canary in the
coalmine - for an Australian-made disaster. 

In the event of an Australian Chernobyl, we could be the
equivalent of Sweden, in that the first that the world heard of
the Chernobyl accident was when radiation was picked up on
monitors in Sweden," Ms Fitzsimons says.

"The risk to health and to the economic livelihood of New
Zealanders would be real, and the impact from an accident would
be long lasting. Lamb from some parts of Wales is still too high
in radioactivity to be exported.

"There is also the problem that there is still no long-term
solution to the disposal of nuclear waste. It has to be
monitored indefinitely. No community ever wants to be near a
nuclear waste dump, so they are always imposed on the poorest
communities." 

" If he follows these plans, John Howard would be jumping from
the frying pan into the fire. Instead, he needs to control the
unsustainability of Australia's coal industry, and develop
renewables and energy efficiency, " Ms Fitzsimons says.

"After refusing to ratify Kyoto and by allowing Australia's
greenhouse emissions to increase even faster than New Zealand's
in recent years, Mr Howard must not be allowed to use climate
change as an excuse for a nuclear industry that would endanger
his own people, and the rest of the Pacific."

ENDS

*****************************************************************
 37 AU ABC: Labor challenges PM to reveal nuclear locations. 

22/11/2006. ABC News Online

Labor says the Government must say where nuclear plants would be
built. (ABC)

The Opposition is demanding the Federal Government explain how
it would decide where to put any nuclear power plants or waste
dumps.

 The Government will consider constructing 25 nuclear power
plants after a report found it was a viable alternative energy
source.

Dr Ziggy Switkowski's nuclear review has found that Australia
could start producing nuclear power within 15 years. 

But Deputy Opposition leader Jenny Macklin says Prime Minister
John Howard must tell people how and where. 

"Is he going to use his Commonwealth powers to impose either a
nuclear reactor or a nuclear waste dump on a state or territory
anywhere in Australia, against their wishes," she said.

 Dr Switkowski says nuclear industries work best where all sides
agree. 

"I'm quite confident that presented with the facts and given
enough time to have the debate, Australians will see the merits
of nuclear energy,' he said.

 Mr Howard says he wants to take the public with him on the
issue, not force it on them. 

In other developments:
 
  + A constitutional expert says the Federal Government could
override state legislation banning nuclear power plants. (Full
Story) 
  + Environmentalists fear the Northern Territory could end up
hosting a high level radioactive waste repository if a nuclear
energy industry is established in Australia. (Full Story) 
  + Australian consumers are being warned to expect a major
increase in the cost of electricity if nuclear power and clean
coal technologies are adopted. (Full Story) 

*****************************************************************
 38 AU ABC: Labor pledges to stop s-w Vic nuclear power plant. 

22/11/2006. ABC News Online

The Victorian Labor Party is promising to stop a nuclear power
station being built at Portland if it wins the state election.

 A Federal Government review of uranium mining and nuclear power
has found nuclear energy is a viable option for Australia.

 The Australia Institute has identified Portland as a suitable
place for a nuclear power plant.

 But Environment Minister John Thwaites says a plebiscite will
be held if the Commonwealth tries to put a nuclear plant in
south-west Victoria.

 "If we have nuclear power it raises major environmental
problems and means that renewable energy like wind that is so
important to the economy of Portland and the south-west is under
threat also," he said. 



*****************************************************************
 39 AU ABC: Nuclear power report won't help uranium industry in short term -
                           
Wednesday, 22/11/2006 

Australia's uranium sector says yesterday's positive review into
nuclear power will make little difference to the industry in the
short term.

 Although share prices in uranium explorers rose on the back of
the Switkowski report, the Association of Mining and Exploration
says Australia's uranium reserves are still under-utilised.

 Spokesman Ian Loftus says the public tends to confuse nuclear
energy with uranium mining. 

"We have some of the world's great resources in terms of uranium
in the ground and we have the ability here and now, subject to
government approvals of course, to dig up that uranium and use
it to provide fuel for clean electricity for other parts of the
world," Mr Loftus said.

 "It shouldn't be confused of course with the debate over
nuclear power in Australia, which is a longer term debate
subject to a lot more uncertainty and undeniably requires a lot
more consultation." 



*****************************************************************
 40 AU ABC: Bracks to toughen no nukes legislation. 

22/11/2006. ABC News Online
 	
Standing firm: Steve Bracks opposes nuclear power (file photo).

Victorian Premier Steve Bracks says there is no doubt a nuclear
power plant would be located in Victoria if the Federal
Government goes down that path.

 The Federal Government's nuclear inquiry says 25 nuclear power
stations could be built around Australia over 50 years.

 Mr Bracks opposes nuclear power, and says he will toughen
existing legislation that bans a nuclear station in Victoria.

 "We will also add onto that legislation further provisions that
any change will also require a plebiscite of Victorian people,"
Mr Bracks said. 

"We want to make it is as strong as possible, we resist, we
oppose nuclear power, we don't think it's the right way to go."

 But Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile says it is too early to
start looking at where nuclear reactors may be stationed across
Australia. 

Mr Vaile says the report has simply put the issue of nuclear
power on the table. 

"So we're not going to get into a debate about where a nuclear
reactor may or may not go, that is getting way ahead of the
game," Mr Vaile said. 

"What we are able to do now off the back of this report, this
review is have a balanced well informed debate about this in the
future." 

In other developments:
 
  + Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile says Australia needs to
invest more money in greener energy technology. () 

  + Western Australian Energy Minister Fran Logan has called on
the Commonwealth to reveal how WA would fit into a national
nuclear power program. () 

  + The Opposition is demanding the Federal Government explain
how it would decide where to put any nuclear power plants or
waste dumps. () 
*****************************************************************
 41 AU ABC: Campbell won't rule out overriding states on nuclear power.
                   
22/11/2006. ABC News Online
 	
Energy industry: A report says nuclear power is a practical
option for Australia (file photo). (ABC)   

Federal Environment Minister Senator Ian Campbell has refused to
rule out the Commonwealth overriding the states to develop a
nuclear energy industry in Australia.

 Some states have expressed concern that the Commonwealth could
overrule any state legislation banning nuclear power.

 Senator Campbell has criticised those opposed to nuclear
technology as having a 1960s mindset.

 He says state governments should tell their constituents how
they plan to address climate change without nuclear energy.

 "They should tell the truth to their constituents," Senator
Campbell said. 

"They can't have it both ways.

 "You can't say 'I care about climate change' on the one hand,
but say 'we're not going to look, even have a debate about
nuclear' on the other.

 "You can't get away with both, it's the most outrageous
hypocrisy that you can ever see." 

In other developments:
 
  + Victorian Premier Steve Bracks says there is no doubt a
nuclear power plant would be located in Victoria if the Federal
Government goes down that path. () 
  + Western Australian Energy Minister Fran Logan has called on
the Commonwealth to reveal how WA would fit into a national
nuclear power program. () 
  + The Opposition is demanding the Federal Government explain
how it would decide where to put any nuclear power plants or
waste dumps. () 
  + Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile says Australia needs to
invest more money in greener energy technology. () 
  + The Federal Government's review of uranium mining and
nuclear power has found nuclear energy is a practical option for
Australia. () 

*****************************************************************
 42 AU ABC: State leaders united in stance against nuclear power.
                   
22/11/2006. ABC News Online
 	
Last Update: Wednesday, November 22, 2006. 7:46pm (AEDT) 	 

Report fallout: Several state leaders have rejected any plans
for nuclear power stations (file photo). (ABC)
         
The nuclear energy review has sparked another stoush between the
states and the Commonwealth.

 The Federal Government will consider constructing 25 nuclear
power plants after a report found it was a viable alternative
energy source.

 Dr Ziggy Switkowski's nuclear review has found that there could
be a viable nuclear industry in Australia in 15 years. 

Several state leaders including Queensland's Premier Peter
Beattie have rejected any plans for nuclear power stations. 

"I don't want to see the slogan that basically says, 'come to
Queensland, beautiful one day, nuclear power the next'," Mr
Beattie said.

 The New South Wales leader, Morris Iemma, is also protective. 
"We've got laws in New South Wales that ban nuclear power," Mr
Iemma said. 

Victoria's Liberal leader Ted Baillieu says he is not interested
in going down that path.

 "I don't think it's about to happen in Victoria and I'm not
about to start promoting it," Mr Baillieu said. 

His New South Wales counterpart, Peter Debnam, takes the same
view. 

"We're not going to go for nuclear energy either, it's
50-years-old," Mr Debnam said.

 But federal Labor fears the Commonwealth will simply override
the states and the Environment Minister, Senator Ian Campbell,
has not ruled that out. 

"The Federal Government will do what's required to make sure
Australia has a secure energy future and that we play our part
in addressing climate change," Senator Campbell said. 
He says the states are not serious about tackling climate change.

 "They can't have it both ways," he said.

 "You can't say 'I care about climate change' on the one hand,
but say 'We're not going to even look, even have a debate about
nuclear' on the other." 

In other developments:
 
  + Federal Environment Minister Senator Ian Campbell has
refused to rule out the Commonwealth overriding the states to
develop a nuclear energy industry in Australia. () 

*****************************************************************
 43 The Australian: Govt will secure energy future: Campbell | | 

This story is from our network Source: AAP 

 November 22, 2006 

FEDERAL Environment Minister Ian Campbell has refused to say
whether the Government would use the constitution's corporations
power to override the states to build nuclear power plants
within their boundaries.

 The states have said they will fight any move to impose nuclear
power plants or waste dumps on them. Some already have
legislation in place banning nuclear power. 
 
The corporations power in the constitution gives the
Commonwealth the power to legislate on matters affecting
corporations. The extent of the power long has been uncertain,
but last week's High Court decision validating the Government's
Work Choices law has removed some of that uncertainty. 

In Perth today, Mr Campbell sidestepped the question as to
whether Canberra would use this power to locate nuclear power
stations, saying only that the Government would do what it
needed to secure the energy future. 

"The Federal Government will do what's required to ensure
Australia has a secure energy future and we will play our part
in addressing climate change,'' Mr Campbell said.
 
"That's our responsibility. It's a long-term view. 

"It's going to take a few decades to fix it and if you play
short-term politics you won't save the planet from climate
change and you won't give Australia a secure energy future.'' 

Privacy Terms � The Australian
*****************************************************************
 44 UPI: Australia ponders building nuclear plants
     
11/21/2006 8:06:00 PM -0500

SYDNEY, Nov. 21 (UPI) -- An Australian government inquiry has
found that 25 nuclear reactors could supply one-third of the
nation's electricity needs by 2050. 

The report, commissioned by Prime Minister John Howard, said the
reactors would cost about $2.3 billion each. 

But, the report declared, nuclear power would not be a viable
economic alternative to fossil fuel unless existing electricity
producers were made to pay for their greenhouse gas emissions. 

The nuclear review came amid the debate in Australia on some
form of price on coal pollution in the efforts to fight climate
change. 

Minister for Industry Ian Macfarlane, meanwhile, warned
consumers they can expect a major increase in their utilities
bill if nuclear power or clean coal technologies are adopted. 

He told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. the changes will "see
the cost of electricity rise by perhaps as much as 20 to 30
percent."

� Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 45 The Australian: Editorial: Nuclear report is radioactive for ALP 

+ NEWS.com.au | 		

 November 23, 2006 

Kim Beazley will suffer the fallout of the Switkowski report 

BARELY 48 hours after former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski
handed down his report on the future of the nuclear industry in
Australia, two things are abundantly clear: One, that it will be
at least a decade before ground is broken on any nuclear power
plant in Australia, if indeed it ever happens. And two, that the
mere question of doing so spells very big trouble for Kim
Beazley and the Labor Party. Despite overheated suggestions that
the next few decades will see 25 nuclear plants built around the
country as part of a fiendish plot by the Prime Minister to turn
us into a nuclear nation, the Switkowski report is in fact about
power of the electoral, rather than the electrical, kind. And
within its pages lurks a serious danger for Mr Beazley as he
heads into the next election. For in vehemently opposing nuclear
power for Australia after previously showing his enthusiasm for
carbon trading and the Kyoto Protocol, Mr Beazley risks being
seen not as a sensible centrist but as a slave to both the
Greens and the anti-coal wing of his own party. And in
signalling a scare campaign against nuclear energy, Mr Beazley
and the ALP risk being seen as out of touch with the sensible
centre of Australian politics that sees economic growth and
environmental preservation as mutually compatible, rather than
exclusive, goals and which is realistic about what it will take
to achieve them. 

Certainly the report by Dr Switkowski, who holds a PhD in
nuclear physics, shows nuclear power could be viable here. But
where the document is perhaps most useful is in putting to rest
once and for all the myths that have for decades been used to
shout down the idea of nuclear power in Australia. It points out
that nuclear power plants are commonplace throughout Asia,
Europe and the US and exist as far safer sources of electricity
than their conventional counterparts. Numbers marshalled by Dr
Switkowski show that the risk of death from the nuclear industry
is minuscule compared with that of dying due to electrocution,
drowning or cigarette smoke. Even excluding China with its
notoriously lax occupational health and environmental standards,
there have been 7090 deaths around the world directly
attributable to coal-fired generation since 1969. Yet taking
Chernobyl out of the mix one finds that there have been no
deaths attributable to nuclear power in that same period. The
report also pours cold water on the threat of proliferation from
the development of a local nuclear power industry, noting that
while Australia has in place one of the most stringent regimes
for controlling nuclear material, actual cases of proliferation
stem from illegal facilities and underground supply networks -
not the diversion of declared material. And while nuclear power
may not yet be economically competitive in a country sitting on
such vast coal reserves, the report also suggests that should a
carbon-tax - say, between $15 and $40 per ton of carbon
dioxide-equivalent - ever come into force, building reactors
would suddenly look a lot more attractive. 

But all this is secondary to the political manoeuvring taking
place around the report. Climate change and the environment are
set to be a major issue in the coming election and the task for
both major parties will be to convince voters that they can save
the planet without sacrificing jobs. Here John Howard is quite
open about his willingness to see nuclear power plants built to
cut greenhouse gasses, noting that "if you are fair dinkum about
the problem of addressing climate change you have got to
consider everything". This is exactly right, and Mr Howard's
management of the issue of climate change has seen the
Coalition's poll numbers eclipse Labor's on the subject of who
would better manage the problem. In contrast, Mr Beazley has
shut the door to atomic energy. But given that renewable energy
sources are decades away from providing reliable baseload power,
short of living in a mythical pre-industrial utopia, nuclear
power has to at least be put on the table if one is serious
about cutting greenhouse gasses. And after enthusiastically
picking up the ball handed to them by Nicholas Stern's
apocalyptic report on the worst-case scenarios associated with
climate change, it would only be logical for the party whose
first principle is the creation and preservation of jobs to
embrace a nuclear industry. With the exception of a hard core of
voters who can never be talked around on the subject of nuclear
power, such contradictory behaviour - to say nothing of the
sight of so many Labor stalking horses rubbishing the Switkowski
report before they even had a chance to crack its spine - will
leave many voters wondering whether Labor is more serious about
tackling climate change or winning over Green voters. 

As much as Mr Howard is credited with being a master wedge
politician, here it is Mr Beazley who has wedged himself. By so
actively courting Greens he exposes the fault lines within his
party between middle- and working-class voters who directly or
indirectly rely on coal for their livelihood and the likes of
the four ALP members on the Newcastle city council in NSW who
recently voted to cap coal exports from what is the world's
biggest coal-exporting port. Mr Beazley must watch that he is
not swept up in such campaigns lest he reprise Mark Latham's
disaster with the Tasmanian forestry workers, who derailed his
campaign in the week leading up to 2004's federal election. And
indeed similar fault lines exist within the Green movement
between those who acknowledge that nuclear power is far cleaner
than any conventional alternative and those who use
environmentalism as a hook from which to hang their
anti-capitalist prejudices. With a carbon-trading regime that
will be acceptable to Australia still on the distant horizon,
nuclear power is likely to remain a theoretical option and not
the economically viable one it is for Europe and Asia. In the
meantime, exploring clean coal and geosequestration technologies
makes far more sense for a country with our resources profile.
But in attempting to shut down the possibility of nuclear power
in Australia while trumpeting the need to do something about
greenhouse gas emissions, Mr Beazley is making a logical and
tactical error that voters will be quick to punish. Educating
Lindsay 
Sport and education  Australians like to celebrate both 

WHAT is wrong with cricketer Shane Warne receiving an honorary
doctorate in business administration from a British University?
For Labor's federal finance spokesman, Lindsay Tanner, it is a
pantomime of the absurd. A man who boasts he has never read a
book being dressed up in funny clothes for the uneducated masses
back home to laugh at. This says much about Mr Tanner, a very
bright politician who on this issue is out of touch with
mainstream Australian thinking. It's like Labor MP Peter
Garrett's choice of rugby league and Australian rules grand
final week to complain that Australians would rather watch sport
than ballet. In truth, a confident, modern Australia would be
equally at home doing both. It is no coincidence that two of
Australia's most popular prime ministers, Bob Hawke and John
Howard, both love cricket. Or that Australian of the Year Ian
Frazer is a leading Queensland scientist who has developed a
vaccine for cervical cancer. It simply does not fit with Mr
Tanner's thesis that Australia is one of the few countries in
the world where "academic" is a term of derision. That we
worship sports people and ignore intellectual achievers. And we
revere the practical and physical, and barely tolerate the
cerebral. Nor does the evidence support Mr Tanner's view that
Australian parents don't care about education or understand what
it does for their children's chances in life. But not all
children will share Mr Tanner's passion for academic pursuit or
choose a career that will indulge it. Mr Tanner told the
Institute of Public Affairs how his small country town did not
get television until he was 10, so he read books. He read them
at boarding school under the blankets after lights out. At
university, he did more subjects than he needed to. And he did a
Masters degree in history out of interest. He has been learning
Greek for many years and has written several books. Just your
average Australian, really. Mr Tanner is right to highlight the
importance of education. But in criticising the Government, Mr
Tanner ignores the fact that education is foremost a state
responsibility. It is Labor governments that have presided over
curriculum revisions at the expense of core skills. Parents have
not, as Mr Tanner suggests, been lulled into accepting education
as glorified babysitting. Rather, they have run, chequebook in
hand, to the private sector to which Labor was so hostile at the
last election. Further, it is the so-called progressive Left
within the university sector that is responsible for the view,
criticised by Mr Tanner, that learning history is no more
important than learning tapestry. Despite Mr Tanner's protests,
Labor's claim on being the party of education is taking a
beating, a fact borne out in last week's Newspoll. The evidence
is that the Howard Government better understands what parents
want and the folly of a one-size-fits-all approach. As such,
like many Australians, Mr Howard will no doubt put aside a
portion of today to watch Shane Warne put his Masters degree to
good use in the first Ashes Test against England in Brisbane. 

Privacy Terms � The Australian
*****************************************************************
 46 The Australian: Baillieu rejects N-power | Vic | 

+ November 23, 2006 
 
 Natasha Robinson 

THE building of nuclear power stations in Victoria "will not
happen" under a Liberal government, Ted Baillieu vowed yesterday.

 The Liberal leader's hardline position on the issue is in step
with the Labor premiers, but at odds with John Howard's
nuclear-friendly stance. 

Mr Baillieu yesterday downplayed the significance of former
Telstra chief Ziggy Switkowski's report on the viability of
nuclear energy. 

The draft report proposed that 25 nuclear power stations
supplying one-third of Australia's energy needs could be built
by 2050, within kilometres of major population centres on the
east coast. 

"I don't think it's an issue," Mr Baillieu said. "We have a
report on the table. All I can say is I don't think it's going
to happen in Victoria. I'm not going to promote it." 

Mr Baillieu said Victoria had an enormous resource in its La
Trobe valley coal reserves. 

"It's driven our economy and our industry and it's given
Victoria a competitive edge," Mr Baillieu said. "We turn our
backs on that at our own peril." 

Responding to the Switkowski report, the Prime Minister insisted
on Tuesday that "nuclear energy does come into the equation"
when considering the nation's energy needs. 

But Mr Baillieu distanced himself from the Prime Minister's
stance, and said he was not worried about the possibility the
federal Government could overrule state legislation that
currently prevents the building of nuclear power plants. 

"I don't speak for the federal Government," Mr Baillieu said. 

"I speak for Victorians, for the Liberal Party of Victoria." 

But Mr Baillieu stopped short of guaranteeing Victorians that
there would be no nuclear power stations under a state Liberal
government. 

"I don't think it's going to happen," he said. 

Privacy Terms � The Australian
*****************************************************************
 47 Guardian Unlimited: Missing keys, holes in fence and a single padlock

: welcome to Congo's nuclear plant 

Atomic watchdog fears radiation leak or terrorist attack at
reactor storing enriched uranium 

Chris McGreal in Kinshasa

Wednesday November 22, 2006

[A padlock keeps the gate shut at Africa�s oldest nuclear
reactor facility at the University of Kinshasa] 

Atomic gateway � Congo�s atomic energy commission has missed
every target on security and safety, but funding is coming in
and its officials believe that a bright future lies ahead for
the nuclear facility. Photograph: Jerome Delay/AP
 

 Amid the market stalls, hawkers and gridlocked cars on the road
out of Congos capital and into the Kinshasa hills there is
nothing to mark the way to a nondescript clutch of buildings a
few hundred yards down a side street.

The dilapidated concrete compound is protected by little more
than a low-slung rusted barbed-wire fence and a rickety gate
sealed by a single padlock. It would be easy enough to slip
through a hole in the fence but there is no need, as the main
entrance to what is supposed to be one of the best-guarded sites
in Congo is often unmanned.

 			 		 			 			Article continues
The armed police assigned to watch the compound were not to be 
seen at the weekend as visitors wandered the corridors of what is 
Africas oldest nuclear reactor facility - and the storage place 
for dozens of bars of enriched uranium - until finally challenged 
by a man in a tracksuit who called himself security.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has long viewed Kinshasas
experimental nuclear reactor as a disaster in the making, either
through an accident that releases radiation into the city or
because of lax security.

There are now three locks to gain access to the reactor and
uranium rods, because years ago the director handed over a set
of keys to a stranger that included the only key required to get
to the heart of the atomic plant. That carelessness is blamed
for the disappearance of two rods of enriched uranium in the
late 1970s. One is believed to have turned up in 1998 on its way
to the Middle East via the mafia; the other was never found.

But new locks aside, there is little outward recognition of
concern by the worlds nuclear watchdog and among western
governments at the prospect of Kinshasas reactor catching the
attention of terrorists scouring the globe for the right
ingredients for a dirty bomb.

The US - which helped found the reactor because Congo provided
the uranium used in the atom bombs dropped on Japan - cut off
the supply of spare parts to the reactor nearly 20 years ago due
to the plants decline. Washington has recently tried to persuade
Congo to hand over the 98 bars of enriched uranium stored in
triangular rods about 60cm (2ft) long and kept submerged in a
circular pool underneath a padlocked metal grate or in the
reactor.

But Congos nuclear scientists hope to fire up the reactor again
so that it can be put to a range of uses from medical research
to mine prospecting, eight years after it was placed on standby
because of war, poor maintenance and lax security.

At least the facility has entered the computer age. Little more
than a decade ago it didnt have phones and technicians worked on
blackboards.

We had to shut the reactor down because of the war, said
Alphonse Thiband-a-Tshish, a member of Congos atomic energy
commission. But now we have had elections and the war is over we
are very hopeful of starting it up again. All the uranium rods
are there. Now we have inspections from the International Atomic
Energy Agency. They find problems and tell us about them.

Congos nuclear plant was installed at the University of Kinshasa
in 1958. A second reactor was built in 1972, the first one
dismantled and its dozens of uranium fuel rods stored at the
site.

The newer reactor was put on standby in 1998 at the behest of
the IAEA, ostensibly because of the war with Rwanda. But the
agency had watched the reactor deteriorate for years .

Diplomatic sources said the IAEA feared that an accident could
send radiation into the city and contaminate the water supply.
Agency officials have been particularly worried that the reactor
is built in an area known for subsidence. Seven years ago one of
the walls was pierced by a piece of metal that was variously
identified as part of a missile or having fallen from a plane.

There is also concern that the Kinshasa plant could make an easy
target for terrorists. While it would be difficult to use the
uranium rods to manufacture a nuclear device, they would be
useful in building a more rudimentary dirty bomb that would
release radiation.

The disappearance of the uranium rods in the 1970s has never
been fully accounted for. The reactors director, Professor Felix
Malu Wa Kalenga, has said that a rod recovered from the Italian
mafia in 1999 was probably the one stolen from Kinshasa. The
Italian press reported that it was destined for an unnamed
Middle Eastern government.

For all the concerns, Congos atomic energy commission sees a
bright future. This month it signed an agreement with a British
firm, Brinkley Mining, for the nuclear facility to be used in
prospecting for uranium. Working conditions have improved since
the IAEA was given access for inspections and programmes focused
on safety. That has opened the way for funding from the agency
for repairs and new control rooms, which are now being put in
place, and from foreign universities for new laboratories.

But the IAEAs own reports say that Congos atomic energy
commission has failed to meet every target on security and
safety issues, such as radiation protection. Mr Thiband-a-Tshish
sees no security threat. We have three keys with three people to
get into the reactor. No one knows who has those keys. The
building has walls one metre thick. I dont think anyone could
get through those, he said.

At a glance


 Uranium was first discovered in Shinkolobwe, in the south of
what was then the Belgian Congo, in 1915

 In 1939, Albert Einstein wrote to the then US president,
Franklin Roosevelt, warning of the danger of Nazi Germany
getting its hands on Congos uranium

 As the single richest deposit in the world, uranium from Congo
was a primary source for American research on nuclear weapons
during the second world war

 The uranium was used in the atomic bombs dropped on Japan

 Congos Belgian rulers shut the Shinkolobwe uranium mine shortly
before independence in 1960, flooding its shafts with water and
capping them with concrete

 In the chaos of the past decade of foreign invasion and civil
war in Congo, the mine has been reopened illegally

 Thousands of Congolese make a living by using shovels and their
bare hands to hack at the black earth. Primarily they are
seeking cobalt, a mineral valuable as a component in mobile
phones

 Amid warnings that uranium is being distributed as a byproduct,
the international nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic
Energy Agency, has tried and failed to inspect the mine

 In 2000, Newsweek reported that a Kenyan middleman attempted to
sell Congolese uranium to Saddam Hussein but that the Iraqi
leader was under too much international scrutiny to buy it
 
	
Useful links
AllAfrica.com: Democratic Republic of Congo
L'Avenir
Friends of the Congo
Congo Sans Frontieres
UN Mission
RCD

[UP] 

Guardian Unlimited � Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
 48 [DU List] Further evidence of enriched uranium in the air in
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:21:22 -0800

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>

FURTHER EVIDENCE OF ENRICHED URANIUM IN THE AIR IN LEBANON FOLLOWING THE 
RECENT CONFLICT

See http://www.llrc.org for outline, full report and pictures.
Part of the message of this report is that citizen groups can use simple, 
affordable and reliable techniques to monitor for the presence of hot 
radioactive particles in the environment.

Green Audit recently reported the results of measurements carried out on 
samples from a bomb crater in Khiam Southern Lebanon. Measurements made by 
the Harwell laboratory in Oxford confirmed the existence of Enriched 
Uranium of activity 180Bq/kg and U238/U235 ratio of 108 in the sample.  The 
discovery, which was reported in 'The Independent' of 28th October, has 
caused some concern. The United Nations Environment Programme UNEP 
responded that its analyses have failed to detect Uranium. The Israel 
Defence Force has denied using Depleted Uranium weapons.  Further evidence 
of the widespread existence of enriched uranium in Lebanon is now reported 
in a new paper by Chris Busby and Dai Williams which has been accepted by 
the European Journal of Biology and Bioelectromagnetics and is available on 
the LLRC website www.llrc.org.
Since the first analysis of the Khiam sample (which used Mass Spectrometry) 
was reported, Green Audit commissioned a second analysis using different 
techniques. Alpha spectrometry carried out at the School of Ocean Sciences 
University of Wales has confirmed the presence of Enriched Uranium but also 
shown the absence of significant amounts of plutonium. In addition, gamma 
spectroscopy has shown that there is no Caesium-137 or other gamma emitting 
isotopes that would be expected if the sample originated in spent nuclear fuel.
There are significant and justified health concerns about exposure to the 
long lived and widely dispersed oxide particles formed when uranium weapons 
are used.
  In order to examine whether the Khiam bomb was a local contamination 
affair or whether there is more widespread distribution of uranium, Green 
Audit has commissioned an analysis for Uranium isotopes of a vehicle air 
filter taken by Dai Williams from an ambulance in the suburb of Haret Hreyk 
in South Beirut. The ambulance was hit on day 16 of the war but was active 
until then. The filter was examined using CR39 alpha tracking plastic and 
also sent to the Harwell laboratory for an analysis of uranium isotopes and 
also a routine 45 element analysis. The filter was dissolved in acid and 
examined using ICP Mass Spectrometry by the Harwell laboratory. Results 
confirmed the presence of enriched uranium. In three separate measurements 
the isotopic ratios U238/U235 found were 113, 123, 133 and total 
concentration in the filter element as supplied was 0.1mg/kg. The lower 
limit of detection of the Harwell measurement system was 0.0002mg/kg U238 
and 0.0001mg/kg U235. This concentration is significant given that the dust 
in the filter would have had only two weeks to accumulate and add to 
earlier dust from a year's usage in the engine. In addition, CR39 tracking 
techniques suggested the presence of at least two hot particles in the 
filter, the size and activity characteristics of which are consistent with 
Uranium. Although care should be taken in over-interpreting data based on 
only one filter, these results do suggest that there was widespread 
dispersion of enriched uranium over Southern Lebanon. We suggest that 
further vehicle filter measurements are made as a matter of urgency and 
that since there are political aspects, the issue is examined by or 
overseen by independent experts. We repeat here our earlier warning that 
the detection of weapons uranium in the environment is not straightforward 
and that conventional Geiger counters cannot be used. CR39 or sensitive 
beta scintillation counters followed by sampling and ICPMS is necessary 
before statements can be made about the presence or absence of uranium 
particles.

'Further evidence of enriched uranium in guided weapons employed by the 
Israeli military in Lebanon in July 2006; Ambulance filter analysis' Dai 
Williams and Chris Busby. European Journal of Biology and 
Bioelectromagnetics 2006 Vol 2 Issue 1. Published on the website 
<http://www.llrc.org/>www.llrc.org with permission of the Journal.


Notes:

The earlier Green Audit report on bomb crater samples is at 
http://www.llrc.org/du/subtopic/lebanrept.pdf
Independent report at 
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1935945.ece
ICP-MS is "Inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy".
European Journal of Biology and Bioelectromagnetics: see http://www.ebab.eu.com
Critics of Green Audit and LLRC have referred to the Human Rights Council 
report "Commission of Inquiry on Lebanon" 
(<http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/CoI-Lebanon.pdf>http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/CoI-Lebanon.pdf), 
claiming that it indicates depleted Uranium was not used in Lebanon. The 
relevant paragraph appears to be:
ii. Depleted uranium
257. The IDF has within its arsenal of weapons munitions that can be 
equipped with depleted uranium warheads. It is therefore possible that 
depleted uranium (DU) munitions were used by the IDF during the conflict. 
However, the preliminary findings of the Lebanese National Council for 
Scientific Research, which carried out a detailed field survey of several 
bomb sites, concluded that there was no indication of depleted uranium 
having been used in the conflict, with the caveat that some additional 
field work was still necessary to draw a final conclusion.
We note that we have already suggested enriched Uranium was deployed in 
order to disguise the depleted Uranium signature; that since no monitoring 
methods have been specified either by UNEP or OHCHR no-one can be confident 
that the forms of Uranium produced by Uranium bombs or armour piercing 
rounds would be detected; and that the findings are provisional.
We have sent you this email circular because you are on our database of 
people who are concerned about low level radiation and health. If you do 
not want to receive information from us please reply, putting "remove from 
LLRC" in the subject line.

Low Level Radiation Campaign
<Compose?To=bramhall@llrc.htm>bramhall@llrc.org

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
__._,_.___
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/message/603;_ylc=X3oDMTMyNnJsYTgyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBG1zZ0lkAzYwMwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjAEdHBjSWQDNjAz>Messages 
in this topic (1) 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJvOXVxbzU4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBG1zZ0lkAzYwMwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNycGx5BHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjA-?act=reply&messageNum=603>Reply 
(via web post) | 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlazgyNGJlBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE2NDE4NjEyMA-->Start 
a new topic
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZmlvZWFyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA21zZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTE2NDE4NjEyMA-->Messages 
| 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/links;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNm9na3NrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2xpbmtzBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjA->Links 

<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkMDNoNnV0BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMTY0MTg2MTIw>93677.jpg 

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcDkxcmE3BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3N0bmdzBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjA->Change 
settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: 
<mailto:pandora-project-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: 
Digest>Switch delivery to Daily Digest | 
<mailto:pandora-project-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery 
Format: Traditional>Switch format to Traditional
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project;_ylc=X3oDMTJkcXQ2M2s3BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2hwZgRzdGltZQMxMTY0MTg2MTIw>Visit 
Your Group | <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use 
| <mailto:pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=>Unsubscribe
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb29qbmlqBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTE2NDE4NjEyMA-->Visit 
Your Group
SPONSORED LINKS
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjMGxqM2pmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzEEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjE-?t=ms&k=Pandora+bead&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=wAXA1kxZMgf9IL04PQkoCA>Pandora 
bead
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjcTlqZ3FvBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzIEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjE-?t=ms&k=Government+software&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=NH9DtEIbCR2Q2atCOGKkOQ>Government 
software
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjbG50ZmxhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzMEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjE-?t=ms&k=Government+contract&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=vX23NAY2e9TKg7zQMb7mXg>Government 
contract
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjbzl0bmd0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzQEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjE-?t=ms&k=Pandora+jewelry&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=ZmZsuAb2o62bGOD8wdZqQw>Pandora 
jewelry
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjMDkwcTZpBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzUEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNjQxODYxMjE-?t=ms&k=Pandora&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=Kece1JQymj-CtxPGo3Sbsw>Pandora 

New web site?

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hqqm0qk/M=493064.8985663.9760769.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1164193321/A=3848642/R=0/SIG=131eshi2t/*http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/srchv2.php?o=US2004&cmp=Yahoo&ctv=Groups3&s=Y&s2=&s3=&b=50>Drive 
traffic now.

Get your business

on Yahoo! search.
Yahoo! Mail

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12hsnqdm7/M=493064.8985657.9760727.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1164193321/A=3848567/R=0/SIG=12jvenc9k/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42408/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers>Get 
on board

You're invited to try

the all-new Mail Beta.
Y! GeoCities

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12h41rv9f/M=493064.8985658.9760664.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1164193321/A=3848542/R=0/SIG=12ban20bv/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42416/*http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/y360/?v=f>Share 
More

Create a blog, web

site, and more.
.
93750.jpg
__,_._,___  
</x-flowed>


Attachment Converted: 93677.jpg: 00000001,715205aa,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: 93750.jpg: 00000001,715205ab,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
 49 Sydney Morning Herald: Uranium mine blamed for high Aboriginal cancer rate - 

www.smh.com.au
 
the Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu National Park.] 

Accused & the Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu National Park.
 	 Liz Minchin and Lindsay Murdoch

November 23, 2006
 	
CANCER cases among Aboriginal people living near Australia's
biggest uranium mine appear to be almost double the expected
rate, a study by the Federal Government's leading indigenous
research body shows. 

The study also found there had been no monitoring in the past 20
years on the Ranger mine's impact on local indigenous health.
Yet since 1981, there have been more than 120 spillages and
leaks of contaminated water at the mine, located in the world
heritage-listed Kakadu National Park. 

The Herald believes the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Studies paper will be submitted to the
Government's nuclear energy taskforce, led by Dr Ziggy
Switkowski, which this week released a draft report backing the
expansion of uranium mining.

The study compared the number of Aboriginal people diagnosed
with cancer in the Kakadu region with the cancer rate among all
Aboriginal people in the Northern Territory from 1994 to 2003.
It found the diagnosis rate was 90 per cent higher than
expected, with 27 cases reported.

While the study's authors stressed it was only a preliminary
finding, they concluded the higher cancer rate was "a cause for
serious concern and further investigation is clearly warranted". 

They also called for ongoing health monitoring for all
indigenous communities living near current and proposed uranium
mines, at a cost of $450,000 a year. 

Energy Resources of Australia, which operates Ranger, yesterday
denied that people living in Jabiru and other communities near
the mine were being exposed to abnormal levels of radiation. 

Last month ERA, which is majority-owned by mining giant Rio
Tinto, announced it would extend the life of Ranger by six years
to 2020, so it could extract an additional 11,000 tonnes of
uranium from low-grade ore stockpiles. 

In 2003, a Senate committee found that regulation of the Ranger
mine was "flawed, confusing and inadequate".

Three years on, the Howard Government has still not responded to
the committee's recommendations.

Last night the traditional owners of the land backed the need
for independent monitoring of the mining's health effects. 

A spokesman for the Mirarr people said that while the federal
Office of the Supervising Scientist monitors the mine's
environmental impacts, "scant attention has been paid to the
health effects of this development". 

A spokeswoman for the federal Health Minister, Tony Abbott, said
the study's findings on cancer rates were "questionable". 

The Northern Territory health department's chief executive,
Robert Griew, also said the report did not prove any link. "The
excess cancers found are not typical of cancers caused by
radiation but rather cover the range of cancers that reflect
lifestyle issues such as smoking, diet and infection.

Copyright � 2006. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 50 Smirking Chimp: In the wake of Divine Strake

 by Ed Kociela | Nov 21 2006 - 9:16am |  permalink

The witless drive to develop a next-generation nuclear weapon is
in the embryonic stages as the shadow of Divine Strake draws
nearer and nearer to the Nevada Test Site where the detonation
of 700 tons of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil would replicate the
strength of a low-yield nuke. 

But, what would happen if a real next-generation mini-nuke was
unleashed? 

According to a report by Robert W. Nelson, Council on Foreign
Relations and Princeton University, a bunker buster with a 0.34
kiloton yield --  only 2 percent of the bomb burst over
Hiroshima --  dropped on an enemy target with a population of
15,000 people per square mile and driven 50 feet into the ground
would send a base surge cloud with a diameter of 10,000 feet
about 3,000 feet into the air. 

Oh, yeah, 10,000 to 50,000 people would receive a fatal
radiation dose within 24 hours. 

You can rest assured that there would be multiple targets, "to
be sure we got 'em all." 

And, if the bunker busters do, by luck, strike a real target? 

It could be even worse. 

According to Nelson's report, the heat from the burst would be
swallowed up mostly by the ground and not destroy radioactive or
chemical-biological weapons, which would then be spewed into the
atmosphere. 

The unholy Crusaders would, of course, find the need to test
these devices once, twice, God knows how many times at the
Nevada Test Site. 

And, this from a civilized country. 

Don't worry, it's coming. 

The U.S. Air Force has already awarded funds to investigate
retrofitting the B-2 bomber to carry ground-penetrating weapons.
Test bombing runs, using the B-2, have already taken place in
Alaska. Of course, the weapons were only mock-ups. 

But, somewhere, somehow, you can be sure these babies will be
deployed. 

And, when they do, won't we all be proud? 

Contact your local representatives. Tell them you want America
to still be a country with a conscience. 

Then call Irene Smith, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency
spokeswoman, at (703) 767-5870 and voice your disapproval. 

Finally, contact the White House at (202) 456-1414 or (202)
456-1111. 

Tell your Mom, tell your Dad, tell your friends and have them
jam those phone lines, too. 

Let your government know you're mad as hell and you're not going
to take it.
 _______
 
About author Ed Kociela the City Editor of southern Utah's The
Spectrum. He blogs at www.edkociela.com. ed@edkociela.com. Vote

� 2006 Smirking Chimp Media
*****************************************************************
 51 Las Vegas SUN: Letter: Idea of testing a bomb in Nevada is disturbing 

 Photo: 1953 nuclear testing 

Today: November 22, 2006 at 7:12:54 PST 

I am responding to your Nov. 19 story about how plans are back
on the table for the explosion of a 700-ton bomb at the Nevada
Test Site. I am very disturbed at this planned bombing of Nevada
(after all, that is what it is). 

Are we crazy? This bomb has the magnitude of a 3.0 earthquake. I
wonder if James Tegnelia, the director of the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency, the federal agency in charge of testing the
bomb, is going to be present in our state for any length of time
to see for himself the effects of this bomb. Will his children
live here and feel what happens to our children in the next few
years when they are breathing the dust from this explosion? 

My suggestion to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency is to test
this bomb in Iraq, or better yet, Afghanistan. After all, that
is where our enemies are hiding and killing our boys. And if it
doesn't want to go all that way, then the agency should test the
bomb in Texas, near President Bush's house, not ours. 

Harriet Stein, Las Vegas 

All contents copyright 2005 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 52 The Hindu: Depleted uranium: health effects and controversies 

 Thursday, Nov 23, 2006     
  
THE USE of depleted uranium (DU) containing munitions in the
Gulf war, the Balkan conflict and more recently in Iraq has
provoked intense controversy. 

Depleted uranium (DU) contains less concentration (0.2 to 0.4
per cent) of uranium-235. It is a relatively cheap product left
when the proportion of U-235 atoms found in natural uranium is
increased by a process called `enrichment.' 

DU is 1.7 times denser than lead and is used at the tip of
armour-piercing shells. Noting that DU contamination has
potential health consequences, the World Health Organisation
(WHO), prepared and released an independent report on the topic
in 2001. 

Studies suppressed 

Dr. Keith Baverstock who was one among the 15-member review and
oversight group claimed that WHO deliberately suppressed
research indicating the carcinogenic risk from DU munitions. Dr.
Mike Repacholi, the WHO scientist who oversaw the production of
the report refused to include any mention of the research
emerging from the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute
of the US Department of Defence (The British Medical Journal ),
he complained. 

Dr. Repacholi told BBC on November 1, this year that he had
excluded the research because other reports did not corroborate
the findings. 

In 2004, in an interview given to Rob Edwards, Dr. Baverstock
claimed that while he was a member of the staff, WHO refused to
give him permission to publish a study with Professor Carmel
Mothersill from Macmaster University and Dr. Mike Thorme, a
radiation consultant (Sunday Herald, 22 April). 

Baverstock believed that WHO censored and suppressed the study
because they did not like its conclusions. WHO officials were
bowing to pressure from the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), a pronuclear agency, he felt. 

WHO's reactions 

WHO dismissed the allegation. "The article was not approved for
publication because parts of it did not reflect accurately, what
a WHO-convened group of international experts considered the
best science in the area of depleted uranium" Dr. Repacholi
clarified.(Sunday Herald, 22 April 2004). Professor Allen
Brodsky, Adjunct Professor of Radiation Science, Georgetown
University, who wrote a seminal book titled `Review of radiation
risks &uranium toxicity' responded thus to my e-mail: "I do not
think that the depleted uranium has been shown to have any
effects on troops or citizens, as a result of the research that
I reviewed in my book." 

Impact of DU munitions 

The British and US forces fired about 320 tonnes of DU munitions
in the Gulf war and may have used up to 2000 tonnes during the
Iraqi invasion in 2003. The BMJ noted that reports from southern
Iraq have documented a steep rise in the incidence of cancers
since the 1990s especially in children. 

"There is no scientific or medical evidence to link DU with the
ill health of people living in the Gulf region" BBC quoted the
UK Ministry of Defence. 

"Although 90 per cent of the inhaled or ingested uranium is
excreted within 24 to 48 hrs, about 10 per cent remains to form
a long term radiological hazard" Sir Hugh Beach formerly Master
General of the Ordnance and Warden of St. George House, Windsor
Castle wrote in a candid report to the International Security
Information Service (ISIS),UK.

K.S. PARTHASARATHY FORMER SECRETARY, AERB 

(ksparth@yahoo.co.uk) 

: thehindu@vsnl.com  Copyright � 2006, The Hindu 
*****************************************************************
 53 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter: Nuke exercise slated Dec. 5
 
Posted November 22, 2006

MANITOWOC � Manitowoc County response agencies, several municipal 
departments, local radio stations, Two Rivers School District, 
Silver Lake College, volunteer organizations, and Aurora Bay Care 
Medical Center will participate in a full-scale emergency 
response exercise with the Point Beach Nuclear Plant on Dec. 5. 

The exercise will be evaluated off-site by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Point Beach Plant operations will be
evaluated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Federal regulations require local and state government agencies,
in whose jurisdiction a nuclear plant is located, to biennially
demonstrate they can protect the health and safety of people
potentially at risk in the 10-mile radius of the plant. 

Nancy Crowley, Manitowoc County emergency management director,
said more than 100 Manitowoc employees and volunteers will
participate in the exercise. Similar staff operations occur
simultaneously in Kewaunee County and Madison, where state
government response is coordinated.
 
One of the demonstrations will be a simulated evacuation of
sectors in the 10-mile radius of Point Beach with volunteers
�acting� as evacuees. Members of the county�s Hazmat Team will
monitor the �evacuees� at the county�s Reception Center (in the
Highway Department building located on Highway 310) for
radiological contamination with specialized instruments,
decontaminate if necessary, and arrange to shelter the
�evacuees� in a school referred to as a congregate care center. 

�It is highly unlikely we will ever have to implement the
complex procedures in the county�s Emergency Operations Plan for
a nuclear plant incident,� Crowley said. �However, practicing
the principles we apply to respond to a nuclear plant accident
pays dividends in our overall response to all hazards.�

�The residents of Manitowoc County are fortunate to have highly
skilled personnel and state-of-the-art equipment and facilities
ready in the event of a nuclear power plant incident. The money
we receive from the utilities each year to support the emergency
management program and our annual exercise benefits our County
in all areas of emergency preparedness.� 

  Contact us at 920-684-4433.        htrnews.com is a Gannett
Companywebsite.
   
*****************************************************************
 54 Salt Lake Tribune: Divine Strake mistakes

Article Last Updated:11/21/2006

In "New Mexico out; Nevada most likely site for test explosion"
(Nov. 16), the article said the Pentagon called the inclusion of
the word "nuclear" in the Divine Strake documents a "mistake." 

    The mistake is not that Divine Strake isn't a precursor to
nuclear weapon testing. No conventional weapon can deliver from
air an explosion 280 times larger than the Oklahoma City federal
building. Only a low-yield nuclear weapon can do that. The
Pentagon's real "mistake" is attempting to restart a nuclear
weapon program. 

    And they still haven't explained why they refuse to detonate
Divine Strake when the wind is blowing toward Las Vegas. If the
remaining radiation at the test sites didn't pose a threat of
being released by Divine Strake, why would they care which
direction the wind is blowing? 

    Maybe the Pentagon doesn't think we are paying attention to
the fine print. That is another "mistake" on their part. 
    
    Stewart N. Thorpe 
    Salt Lake City 
   

© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune. 
*****************************************************************
 55 The Dispatch: Water Standard Scrutinized

 Tuesday, November 21, 2006

State health officials may revisit the "public health goal" for 
perchlorate in drinking water after reviewing recent research 
that shows even minute traces of the rocket-fuel chemical lowers 
essential thyroid hormones in women causing metabolic problems 
and neurological damage to fetuses.

The study, released in October by the Centers for Disease Control 
and Prevention, is under review at the California Office of 
Environmental Health Hazard Assessment.�

Based on that review, the environmental agency could lower the 6 
parts per billion standard it set in 2004, said spokesman Alan 
Hirsch.�

"This is a very important study," Hirsch said, adding a 
full-scale review of the public health goal would likely take a 
year to complete. "The department would have to put together a 
whole new document, hold public review and peer review from 
independent scientists."

The decision could affect the longevity of a "Maximum 
Contamination Level" being forged by the California Department of 
Health Services. The state cannot legally set the MCL lower than 
the public health goal.

"Our number one goal is to get a safe drinking water standard out 
there. What we don't want to do is delay the process," said Patti 
Roberts, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Health 
Services. 

A public comment period on the proposed MCL of 6 ppb ended Nov. 
3. The regulation could be adopted in February 2007, Roberts 
said.

In July, Massachusetts set the nation's first drinking water 
standard for perchlorate of 2 ppb.

Santa Clara Valley Water District Director Rosemary Kamei said 
there is too much evolving research to assume 6 ppb is a safe 
long-term standard for Californians.

"I'd rather err on the side of being more conservative than
liberal when it comes to health effects," Kamei said.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study found a
significant link between exposure to perchlorate at levels as
low as 3 ppb and reduced thyroid levels in women. �

Assemblyman John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, in October encouraged the
California Department of Health Services to act quickly should a
lower public health goal be established in the future. In a
letter to the department, he also applauded efforts to set a 6
pbb standard "considering the lengthy delay."

  Tony Burchyns

Tony Burchyns is a staff writer for South Valley Newspapers. He 
can be reached at (408) 779-4106 or at 
tburchyns@svnewspapers.com.   
*****************************************************************
 56 AU ABC: Indigenous cancer rate 90pc higher in Kakadu region. 

23/11/2006.
                         
The cancer rate among Indigenous people in the Kakadu region,
which surrounds the Ranger uranium mine, is almost double that
of the wider Northern Territory Aboriginal population.

 A report from the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) examined the health effects of
uranium mining on the people of the Kakadu region. 

The report found the incidence of Indigenous cancer was 90 per
cent higher in Kakadu than elsewhere. 

The report's authors have not drawn a direct link between the
statistics and the neighbouring Ranger mine, but say more
research is needed. 

The mine's operator, Energy Resources of Australia (ERA), says
data from the Office of the Supervising Scientist shows doses of
radiation to residents of Jabiru and surrounding communities
have always been well below recommended limits.

 The NT Health Department says the high cancer rate is lifestyle
related. 

*****************************************************************
 57 La Crosse Tribune: U.S. needs a nuclear fuel disposal site 

www.lacrossetribune.com

Wednesday, November 22, 2006
    
By L. DEL BUTTERFIELD | De Soto, Wis. . Because it happened so
uneventfully, its easy to forget that almost 20 years has
passed since the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor nuclear plant
in Genoa, Wis., shut down. But 38 metric tons of highly
radioactive spent fuel, which is usually referred to as nuclear
waste, is still stored at the plant site. Why hasnt the spent
fuel been carted away for permanent disposal?

The short answer is that the federal government has failed to
meet its legal obligation under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to
take possession of spent fuel from nuclear power plants as it
was supposed to do beginning in 1998.

A plan to store the spent fuel temporarily at the Goshute
reservation in Utah seems to have fizzled. And although the
spent fuel is being stored safely and securely at the La Crosse
plant, Dairyland Power Cooperative is in the business of
producing electricity, not radioactive waste management.

Nationally, there is more than 50,000 metric tons of spent fuel
stored at 131 nuclear-plant sites in 39 states. Whats troubling
about this is that an estimated 160 million Americans live
within 75 miles of one of the waste facilities, and many of the
facilities are close to lakes and rivers.

If the long-delayed Yucca Mountain waste repository in Nevada
were actually open, much of the spent fuel would have been
shipped there years ago. But after $7 billion and at least two
decades of scientific study, the repositorys future is in
jeopardy, threatened by funding shortfalls that are hampering
its licensing and construction. Now the facility is not expected
to open until 2017.

Establishing a geologic repository is not a new idea. As early
as 1957, the National Academy of Sciences determined that
isolating radioactive waste in a deep, underground repository
would be safe.

For the past seven years, long-lived radioactive waste from the
defense program has been deposited in an underground repository
known as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southeastern New
Mexico. Since WIPP opened in 1999, more than 80,000 containers
of so-called transuranic waste, which contains plutonium, have
been placed in its chambers. Most importantly, in 5,000 truck
shipments of the radioactive waste to WIPP from defense nuclear
installations hundreds of miles away in the Southeast and
Northwest, there hasnt been a single release of radiation
thats harmed the public.

Congress needs to address the waste issue, and it should direct
the government to establish an interim waste facility in Nevada
for spent fuel from eight decommissioned nuclear plants,
including the La Crosse plant. Also, it needs to pass
legislation introduced by Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., head of
the Energy Committee, that would provide assured funding for the
Yucca Mountain project, drawing on the $800 million a year that
goes into the Nuclear Trust Fund.

Its past time that the government met its obligations to take
title to the spent fuel now stored at dozens of sites around the
country. A good start would be to focus on the decommissioned
plants, since theyre not producing any electricity.

Resolving the waste problem deserves high priority so we can
renew the operating licenses of nuclear plants and proceed with
the construction of new plants. Here in Wisconsin and elsewhere,
more nuclear power will be needed to provide clean base-load
electricity and limit global warming.

L. Del Butterfield is a retired nuclear engineer. .   
  
 Comments �
  

Michael Welch: Light 'Em Up!... wrote on November 22, 2006 10:52
AM:"Crawford, Texas would be a good site, don't you think? Or
Dick Cheney's 'bunker'? 'Mein Fuehrer! I can walk!!!!'..." 

Can't argue with that wrote on November 22, 2006 10:16
AM:"Nuclear power needs a serious expansion. In the process of
expanding nuclear power, hopefully we can get some better
renewable energy to replace oil, coal, and gas electricity." 

The real world wrote on November 22, 2006 9:24 AM:"One more
example of government can't do anything right! We also need to
stop producing electricity with oil and gas, move back to
nuclear and work on new sources. Ethanol is a joke, research
it!" 
  
 Copyright � 1997 - 2006 The La Crosse Tribune. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 58 reviewjournal.com: Guinn urges documents' release
 
  Nov. 22, 2006

Yucca Mountain materials at issue        

By STEVE TETREAULT <br />STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
	
WASHINGTON -- A dispute between Nevada and the federal
government over Yucca Mountain flared anew Tuesday when Gov.
Kenny Guinn accused the Department of Energy of hiding more than
2 million documents concerning the nuclear waste site. 

The agency has prepared science and engineering documents for
placement on a licensing database for the planned Nevada nuclear
waste repository but has declined to make them public until the
database is certified, Guinn said. 

Certification is scheduled for Dec. 21, 2007, giving the state,
environmental groups and the nuclear industry six months to
review and respond to them by a licensing deadline, state
officials said. 

The database is expected to contain as many as 6.8 million
documents. 

Federal law does not require the documents to be made public
until the database is officially certified, Nevada officials
said. 

But Guinn said the wait until certification was "needlessly
punitive." 

"There is no justification for withholding public access to
these documents now when the task of reviewing them is so
overwhelming later," Guinn said in a letter to Energy Secretary
Samuel Bodman made public Tuesday. 

The database administrator "literally with the flip of a switch
could make these additional 2 million-plus documents publicly
available," Guinn said. 

He asked Bodman's help on "lifting the embargo" on material that
could be made public now and others when they are indexed for
public use. 

A spokesman for Bodman had no comment on Guinn's letter.	 

Nevada has feuded with the Energy Department over access to
documents backing the government's choice of Yucca Mountain for
nuclear waste burial. 

A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit the state filed in federal
court in Reno is challenging the agency's refusal to supply
Nevada officials with a copy of a draft repository license
application. 

Energy Department lawyers have said the document is legally
shielded. 

"With DOE's lawyers it is clearly the motivation to give the
state as little time as possible to raise objections," said Bob
Loux, executive director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear
Projects. 

"If DOE says this is the most open program in the world, why are
they not letting people look at the documents?" Loux said. 	   

Copyright � Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2006
 Stephens Media GroupPrivacy Statement
*****************************************************************
 59 ENS: Governments Fear Nuclear Ship in British, French Waters 

Environment News Service (ENS)
 
GRANTFIELD, Lerwick, Shetland, November 21, 2006 (ENS) - The
Shetland Islands Council is worried about the safety of its
coastal communities during the next few days when a shipment of
highly radioactive nuclear fuel is shipped from British to
French waters in a vessel the Council says is inadequate for the
job. 

A former roll-on roll-off ferry, the Atlantic Osprey, owned by
the British Nuclear Group, will transport 1.25 metric tons of
mixed oxide fuel, MOX, from a UK nuclear reprocessing facility
to Swiss power utility Nordostschweizerische Kraftwerke. 

MOX is mixed uranium-plutonium fuel for nuclear power plants,
and this shipment contains about 90 kilograms of highly
radioactive plutonium. 

The MOX will be transported by sea from Sellafield on the Irish
Sea in Cumbria, UK to Cherbourg, France before it is delivered
overland to the Beznau plant in Switzerland. 

[ship] The Atlantic Osprey is a former ferry, not a
purpose-built nuclear transport vessel. (Photo courtesy ) The
Atlantic Osprey has a single hull, just a single engine and will
travel unescorted throughout its journey. 

By contrast, when MOX is transported to and from Japan by
British Nuclear, purpose built vessels are used - vessels with
twin engines, double hulls and naval armament. Two vessels
travel together to provide support in case of an attack. 

The Council reflects the fears of a wider group to which it
belongs - KIMO, the international environmental organization of
local governments in 10 European countries. 

KIMO International President Councillor Angus Nicolson said,
"The arrangements surrounding these proposed shipments are
flawed and second rate." 

"It is absolutely irresponsible in this day and age," he said,
"where we are requiring super tankers carrying oil to have
double hulls to protect our marine environment that these
dangerous cargoes are being transported in an ex-roll-on
roll-off ferry with a single engine and single hull through some
of the most populated areas of Europe with no escort." 

[Nicolson] KIMO International President Angus Nicolson serves on
the Western Isles Council on Scotland's Isle of Lewis. (Photo
courtesy ) The route will pass close to one of the most densely
populated areas in the world and will cross some of the busiest
shipping lanes. Nicolson points out that the ship is therefore
at increased risk of collision or terrorist attack. 

There has been a lack of emergency planning in the event of a
marine accident involving nuclear material, warns KIMO, which
also has concerns about "the questionable integrity of the
flasks used to transport nuclear fuel." 

KIMO officials say fires aboard ship "last longer on average and
at a more intense heat than the safety criteria used in flask
stress." 

KIMO takes the position that the transport of nuclear materials
should be halted and that nuclear materials should be stored at
the point of production. 

Speaking for the KIMO Secretariat, Rick Nickerson said the
potential impact on coastal communities from an accident or
terrorist attack on the Atlantic Osprey would be devastating. 

"Many coastal communities, including KIMO�s members, depend on
an environment that provides fresh, clean and healthy
resources," he said. "The irreparable damage to the environment,
public health and economy that could arise as a result of an
accident involving a ship carrying nuclear waste would have
disastrous consequences." 

Nickerson says KIMO members are worried because shipments of MOX
to Switzerland, of which this is the second, are using the
Atlantic Osprey. 

[Sellafield] The MOX fuel is fabricated at the Sellafield
nuclear complex on the Irish Sea. It will be shipped south to
Cherbourg, France. (Photo courtesy ) If an attack by terrorists
succeeds in an incident involving a severe long-term fire,
breaching shipping casks and/or sinking a nuclear transport
vessel," Nickerson says, "the consequences would be comparable
to the most severe accident that authorities insist is too
improbable to be considered." 

KIMO hopes to brings its concerns to the attention of the many
other organizations in which it participates. KIMO holds
nongovernmental organization status at the North Sea Ministerial
Conferences, the Committee of North Sea Senior Officials, the
Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the
North East Atlantic, and the International Maritime Organization
as part of the WWF delegation. 

KIMO counts 128 local authorities as members in 10 countries -
the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands,
Belgium, and the Republic of Ireland with associate members in
Germany, the Faeroes Islands and the Isle Of Man. 

Formed to clean up marine pollution in North Sea, Irish Sea,
ArcticSea and the Northeast Atlantic, the organization has links
with the European Parliament and Commission and sends
representatives to stakeholder dialogue processes in many
countries. 

A full report on the Transport of Mixed Oxide Fuel and other
Radioactive Cargoes by Ship in Europe is available on the KIMO

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2006. All Rights
Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 60 MotherJones: Independent Panel Says Yes--Santa Susana Site Caused Cancer

Commentary: 

A report released yesterday indicates that a nuclear reactor
meltdown at the in 1959 may indeed have caused hundreds of
cancers to appear in the surrounding community. Santa Susana is
located in eastern Ventura County, California. 

An independent advisory panel reported that radiation released
during the meltdown caused about 260 cancers within a
60-square-mile radius. The panel also said there was an outside
chance that 1,800 cancers could have been caused by the
meltdown. 

, the company which owned Santa Susana at the time of the
meltdown, has joined the federal government in refusing to
release many key details of the incident, so the panel relied on
technical modeling to gather its results. The result of the
meltdown has been a controversy for many years, with Rocketdyne
repeatedly declaring that the amount of radioactive released was
insignificant. 

The panel concluded that local groundwater and soil has also
been contaminated because of the Santa Susuana site.
Perchlorate, a factor in the development of thyroid problems,
was found in a nearby well, but Boeing says that the substance
did not come from its lab. Boeing did, however, pay $30 million
in damages last year when residents declared that pollutants had
given them cancer. 

Posted by Diane E. Dees on 10/06/06 at 10:49 AM | E-mail | Print

� 2005 The Foundation for National Progress 
*****************************************************************
 61 RGJ.com: End of road for Yucca Mt.

November 22, 2006         

End of road for Yucca Mt. RENO GAZETTE-JOURNAL-->

[U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman tours Yucca Mountain on 
April 13.] 

TOPIC: Nuclear waste repository

OUR VIEW: With Nevada Sen. Harry Reid in the Senate majority
leader's office, it will be nearly impossible to overcome the
state's opposition. 

The biggest loser in this month's election may well have been
the federal government's plan to store high-level nuclear waste
at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

Controversial and long-delayed, the nuclear repository already
faced an uphill battle in Nevada, where the congressional
delegation and statewide office holders have been united in its
opposition to the plan.

That opposition will take on renewed strength thanks to the
Democratic Party's victory in the Nov. 7 congressional
elections. When Nevada Sen. Harry Reid becomes majority leader
in the U.S. Senate in January, he will control the upper house's
agenda, and the repository isn't likely to find a place on that
agenda.

Reid, in fact, has pledged to seek approval of a proposal to
store nuclear waste right where it's produced, at the nation's
nuclear power plants. If the Department of Energy takes the time
to read the tea leaves, it, too, will agree that the opposition
facing the plan will be difficult, if not impossible, to
overcome and begin the work necessary to develop a feasible
alternative.

It's an important issue for the nation. Experts are convinced
that a new generation of nuclear power plants, cheaper to build
and safer to operate than the previous plants, will be built in
the United States. It's just a matter of time, they say, before
the first one receives its license to begin construction.

There can be no new nuclear power plants, however, if there is
no plan for getting rid of the radioactive waste they generate.

Supporters of Yucca Mountain continue to insist that it is the
best solution to the problem, and the DOE insists that it will
submit an application for a license for the repository by
mid-2008, with the goal of opening the project by 2017.

That appears to be wishful thinking, however. So far, the DOE
and its contractors have been their own worst enemy in the
project. There have been serious allegations that data was
falsified and a court forced it to go back to develop new
standards for the project, among a host of other problems that
have helped Nevada in its efforts to prevent the repository from
being built.

Now, the project is facing new opposition as a result of its
proposed transportation routes to Yucca Mountain, which could
take trains laden with radioactive waste through the heart of
Reno and a host of smaller Nevada towns.

It's well past time to get serious about trying to find an
acceptable alternative to the Yucca Mountain plan. If it wasn't
apparent before, it should be quite obvious now that Sen. Reid
is about to become majority leader of the Senate. 

 Reno Gazette-Journal network
*****************************************************************
 62 AU ABC: Qld Govt not about to change uranium policy. 

22/11/2006. ABC News Online

Queensland Natural Resources Minister Craig Wallace says there
are no plans to make uranium deposits such as Ben Lomond, west
of Townsville, operational mines.

 The federal review of uranium mining and nuclear power has
found the energy source to be a practical option for Australia.

 There has been speculation within the industry that the
Queensland Labor Party will reverse its ban on uranium mining at
its next Caucus meeting.

 Mr Wallace says the Government's position on uranium has not
changed and is unlikely to in the near future. 

"We've always fought against that particular facility opening
up. It's not part of our policy and I know I'll be making a
stand against any mining at Ben Lomond and, of course, nuclear
power in the northern region," he said.
 


*****************************************************************
 63 Scotsman.com: Dounreay will utilise robots to clean up seabed

>Wed 22 Nov 2006    

JOHN ROSS 

DOUNREAY officials are planning to use robots to help remove
radioactive particles from the seabed at the Caithness plant. 

The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) yesterday announced it is
to carry out trials of remotely operated technology to remove
"substantial numbers" of the so- called hotspots. 

An advertisement has been placed in the Official Journal of the
European Union seeking interest from companies capable of
detecting and removing the fragments of irradiated nuclear fuel
known to be buried in the offshore sediment near the site's old
effluent outlet. 

In recent years, divers have spent about 1,500 hours mapping
500,000 square metres of seabed and recovered 929 particles. 

Companies will be invited to demonstrate their technology off
Dounreay next summer to see if the area of seabed where the
largest and most hazardous particles are thought to be could be
cleared without the risks linked to continued diving. 

Earlier this month Dounreay published a shortlist of 11 options
for tackling the ongoing problem of particles on beaches and
offshore. Experts said that some form of particle retrieval from
the seabed should feature in all the options. 

It is thought that retrieval might reduce the number of
particles that could be transported on to beaches. However, it
is also recognised that disturbance of the seabed may lead to a
short-term increase in the number of particles on the Dounreay
foreshore and on the beach at Sandside, which is open to the
public and where 74 particles have been found. 

Radioactivity has led to a fishing ban within a 2km radius of
the old effluent discharge point at Dounreay. 

�2006 Scotsman.com| 
*****************************************************************
 64 Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Apollo gets $750,000 for cleanup - 

By Tribune Review News Service

 Wednesday, November 22, 2006 

Apollo officials believe a $750,000 state grant is key to the 
borough�s environmental and economic health. 

It will be combined with $200,000 in federal money to remediate 
the former Metal Services site between Warren Avenue and the 
Kiski River. The 14 acres were contaminated decades ago by a 
neighboring nuclear fuel-processing plant. 

The state departments of Environmental Protection and Community 
and Economic Development this month announced the award under the 
Industrial Sites Reuse Program. The program is designed to 
decontaminate brownfields so they can be redeveloped. 

�It�s part of the puzzle to cleaning up this site,� Council 
President John Ameno said. 

Apollo and county officials want to attract businesses to the
land, which has sat dormant since the 1980s when operations
ended at the nuclear fuel plant. 

Thousands of tons of radioactive debris have been removed from
the adjoining property, which was deemed decontaminated by the
federal government in 1995. That land was home to the former
Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp., and later was operated by
ARCO and Babcock &Wilcox. 

However, neighboring Metal Services and its predecessors �
Raychord and Apollo Steel Co. � operated in buildings connected
to NUMEC and uranium dust from NUMEC settled onto the Metal
Services property. 

Ameno said removing radioactive soil and encapsulating lead will
be included. The DEP said the remaining soil will be tested to
ensure no radioactivity remains. 

The DEP estimated the project will cost $1 million. In addition
to the $750,000 state grant, U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Penn
Hills, last year announced he had secured $200,000 in Economic
Development Initiative money for the cleanup. 

Council also has other possible sources that can be tapped to
round out the funding. 

�Whoever has money, we�ll go get it,� said Councilman Bill
Whitlinger. 

Council approved the grant agreement at the last board meeting.
Ameno said Butler-based engineering firm Olsen and Associates
will begin working on the plans. 

The Industrial Sites Reuse Program money is the latest grant the
borough received this year. The state awarded Apollo $700,000 to
improve the sidewalks and shopping plaza parking lot in the
borough�s main business district. Olsen and Associates also are
working with the borough to implement that project. 

Tribune-Review Publishing Co.   
*****************************************************************
 65 Bangor Daily News: Maine's stand on nuclear waste prudent

By Bangor Daily News Staff

Wednesday, November 22, 2006 - 

Maine and other states last week properly opposed continued
federal attempts to identify dozens of long-term storage sites
for spent nuclear fuel. Maine, under federal law, has paid
billions of dollars over decades to help develop a single,
secure repository for this waste, and Congress no longer has the
confidence of state officials to do anything else. 

Gov. John Baldacci has joined with 17 other governors in
protesting a plan by Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico that would
transfer some of the money to pay for local storage at what are
supposed to be interim sites. It is encouraging that the federal
government recognized the cost of storage, but what states want
is the facility they were promised. 

Sen. Domenici, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee, proposed the interim sites because he was
facing the unwelcome fact that the permanent facility at Yucca
Mountain is not expected to be ready to accept waste until 2017
? 19 years late. Even then decades will be needed before all the
waste is moved there, if there is room for it all. Meanwhile,
the senator points out in a letter to governors, "The nation?s
electric ratepayers and your constituents are paying twice ?
both for Yucca and for storing waste at reactor sites." 

Sen. Domenici?s proposal would be reasonable if governors had
any reason to trust the federal government on this issue.
Unfortunately, they do not. High-level nuclear waste storage has
been marked by delay, cost overruns, obfuscation and more delay. 

Last July, Gov. John Baldacci told Sen. Domenici, "I strongly
believe your proposal creates a very high potential for
indefinite delays in achieving a safe and permanent nuclear
waste repository, and will feed a growing lack of confidence in
government in general." 

Clearly, many other governors feel similarly. The proposal in
the Senate might work under a better atmosphere than has been
created through frustrating years of inaction. But now, when
Congress says, "Trust us," governors on this issue
understandably are saying "No."                          

Bangor Daily News PO Box 1329 491 Main Street Bangor, ME 04401
        Switchboard: In-State Long Distance 1-800-432-7964 or 
207-990-8000 ©2005 All rights reserved.      
*****************************************************************
 66 Update: DOE Seeks to Build New Nuclear Weapons
 
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:23:11 -0800

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>
CCNS NEWS UPDATE

Runs 11/24/06 through 12/1/06

This is the CCNS News Update, an overview of the latest nuclear safety 
issues brought to you every week by Concerned Citizens for Nuclear 
Safety.  Here is this week's top headline:

�     DOE Seeks to Build New Nuclear Weapons

The Department of Energy (DOE) will hold four public scoping hearings in 
New Mexico in early December for the Notice of Intent to prepare a 
programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) for its proposed Complex 
2030.  DOEs plans under Complex 2030 include a massive reorganization and 
refurbishment of the nuclear weapons complex.  This giant shift in 
operations is being offered as a supplemental environmental impact 
statement to the 1996 Stockpile Stewardship and Management PEIS in what 
activists see as an attempt to mask the scale of the proposed changes.

The public scoping process provides local residents with the opportunity to 
express their concerns or questions through written or oral comments to DOE 
officials.  Joni Arends, of CCNS, strongly encourages local residents to 
attend these important hearings as DOEs new mission will greatly impact the 
public health and environmental safety of New Mexicans.

We who live next to the DOE sites experience the historical and current 
environmental and health impacts from the development of nuclear weapons. 
We say, Clean up the existing mess, dont make new ones,said Arends.

DOE claims that the production of new nuclear weapons is necessary because 
the current stockpile is aging and may no longer be certifiable for future 
use. Specifically, DOE is referring to the plutonium pit of a warhead. The 
pit is the core component or trigger of a nuclear bomb.  Currently, DOE 
estimates a pit lifetime of 45 to 60 years.  However, an independent review 
of this estimate was mandated by congress and is due to be released 
shortly.  Scientists and government officials familiar with the study state 
that the reports authors have extended the estimate to 90 years or more.

In addition, Nuclear Watch New Mexico has calculated that the average age 
of the planned enduring stockpile is currently under 21 years.  Jay 
Coghlan, of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said The oldest nuclear weapons in 
the planned U.S. stockpile are 28 years old.  There are increasing signs 
that plutonium pits last around a century.  This means the U.S. simply 
doesnt need new nuclear weapons, especially while we preach to others that 
they cant have weapons of mass destruction.

Instead of building new nuclear weapons, activists support taking 
significant steps to diminish the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. military 
doctrine and foreign policy.  By doing so, the United States would take the 
lead in moving all nuclear nations toward the goals of the Nuclear Non- 
Proliferation Treaty.

Sadaf Cameron, of CCNS, said, The hearings are our opportunity to bring 
forth our vision of the nuclear weapons complex in 2030, one where the 
United States meets its Non-Proliferation Treaty agreements by the year 
2030, if not before. Do as I say and not as I dois not a viable foreign 
policy and will only make the world more dangerous.

The Complex 2030 public scoping hearings will be held in early December at 
four locations around New Mexico. They will be held in Socorro on the 4th, 
in Albuquerque on the 5th, in Los Alamos on the 6th in the morning and in 
Santa Fe, on the 6th in the evening.



This has been the CCNS News Update.  For more information about these or 
other nuclear safety issues, please visit our web page at 
www.nuclearactive.org.

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list, please reply to this email with 
Unsubscribein the subject line.

-----------------------------------------------
Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety
107 Cienega Street
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Tel (505) 986-1973
Fax (505) 986-0997
www.nuclearactive.org
----------------------------------------------- 

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 67 Courier News: Fermi asks public its views on collider

November 22, 2006               

By STAFF WRITER

BATAVIA -- The next step in the evolution of particle physics
could be coming to Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in the
near future -- and officials there want to know what you think
about it.

Fermilab is one of four sites in contention to host the
International Linear Collider, a 20-mile-long particle
accelerator that is hoped will bring scientists to the next
level in their understanding of the universe.

A team of international physicists is working on designing and
funding the collider, which would be built about 500 feet below
ground.

If Fermilab is chosen, the collider would stretch beyond the
borders of the lab's property, to the north and south. The
project also would bring with it several new buildings, which
would affect the local landscape.

For that reason, officials at the lab have decided to start a
task force of residents from Batavia and surrounding towns,
including Geneva, St. Charles, North Aurora, Warrenville,
Naperville and others.

According to Judy Jackson of Fermilab's public affairs office,
the lab is looking for people with concerns to come and speak
their minds.

"We're not looking for a rubber stamp," she said. "We're looking
for people who might have issues."

Jackson said the lab is shooting for 20 volunteers to discuss
the local impact of the collider, should Fermilab win its bid to
host it.

While details of cost and design still are being discussed,
Jackson said enough is known about the collider to start having
conversations about its potential effects on the Fox Valley.

And although Jackson said she expects to hear concerns about the
collider's location and size, as well as the process of its
construction and the possible economic benefits for the region,
she didn't want to speculate on the public's thoughts.

"We've learned not to second-guess the public," she said. "We
have some ideas, but we want to hear from them, and hopefully
they'll want to talk.

"We want them to help us with the planning and decision-making,"
she said. "This has to work for both Fermilab and the community."

Simply put, the ILC will hurl beams of particles at one another
at phenomenal speeds, and scientists hope to use the resulting
data to answer questions about other dimensions and the dark
matter of space.

"We've started understanding in the past decade that the
universe is far more mysterious and wonderful than we ever
knew," Jackson said. "The ILC will take us to territory and
discoveries an order of magnitude beyond what we have seen so
far."

The stakes are high for Fermilab, the only strictly particle
physics lab in the United States. Without the ILC, the lab no
longer will be a world leader in the particle physics field. The
European Organization for Nuclear Research's CERN facility in
Switzerland plans to bring its own device, the Large Hadron
Collider, online next year. 		 		 		 
	 
couriernewsonline.com: Feedback | Contact Us | About Us | | |

� Copyright 2006 Sun-Times News Group 
*****************************************************************
 68 Rocky Mountain News: Auditor regains access to Flats' workers claims 

By Ann Imse, Rocky Mountain News

November 22, 2006

An auditor who was blocked from checking on compensation claims 
by former Rocky Flats workers with cancer has regained access 
following publicity and congressional complaints. 

The auditor is trying to find out if records of radiation
exposure at the now-demolished nuclear weapons plant outside
Denver are so scarce that workers cannot prove that
contamination caused their cancers. They must prove the
connection to qualify for $150,000 of federal compensation and
medical care. 

The workers say that's impossible, so they have petitioned for
all Rocky Flats workers with cancer to be approved for the aid
program. 

Auditor John Mauro, of SC&A, told a congressional committee last
Wednesday that he'd been blocked from access to the workers'
claims by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and
Health. 

NIOSH said it acted to ensure the workers' privacy. 

But NIOSH's decision came shortly after SC&A spot-checked 12
claims denied by NIOSH and found five lacked complete radiation
records for a decision. 

House members at the hearing expressed dismay. The next day,
Colorado Democrats Sen. Ken Salazar and Rep. Mark Udall issued a
statement saying, "This delay and obfuscation reinforces our
conclusion" that records do not exist. They called for immediate
approval of the workers' petition. 

Mauro said NIOSH gave his team access again the next day. 

"On Friday, the pipeline was open," he said. His team is now
tearing into the claims files to do a much larger examination,
he said. 

If they find records missing for a certain period of time,
workers from that era and building might be accepted for
compensation, he said. Or officials might assume everyone
received the maximum contamination for their job during that
period and decide claims on that basis, he said. 				 				 	

*****************************************************************
 69 DOE:  Office of Science; High Energy Physics Advisory Panel
 
                        FR Doc E6-19767 
[Federal Register: November 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 225)] 
[Notices] [Page 67551] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22no06-50]                         
 
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
 
ACTION: Notice of open meeting.
 
SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the High Energy 
Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP). Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(Public Law 92- 463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of 
these meetings be announced in the Federal Register.
 
 
DATES: Thursday, February 22, 2007; 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Friday, 
February 23, 2007; 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: Hotel Palomar, 2121 P St., NW., Washington, DC. FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kogut, Executive Secretary; 
High Energy Physics Advisory Panel; U.S. Department of Energy; 
SC-25/ Germantown Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-1290; Telephone: 301-903-1298.
 
 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice 
and guidance on a continuing basis with respect to the high 
energy physics research program.
 
Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the 
following: Thursday, February 22, 2007, and Friday, February 23, 
2007.
 
Discussion of Department of Energy High Energy Physics Program.
 
Discussion of National Science Foundation Elementary Particle 
Physics Program.
 
Reports on and Discussions of Topics of General Interest in High 
Energy Physics.
 
Public Comment (10-minute rule).
 
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you 
would like to file a written statement with the Panel, you may do 
so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make 
oral statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you 
should contact John Kogut, 301-903-1298 or 
John.Kogut@science.doe.gov (e- mail). You must make your request 
for an oral statement at least 5 business days before the 
meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the 
scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the 
Panel will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct 
of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule. 
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available for public 
review and copying within 90 days at the Freedom of Information 
Public Reading Room; Room 1E-190; Forrestal Building; 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
 
Issued at Washington, DC on November 17, 2006.
 
R. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-19767 Filed 11-21-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 70 DOE: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Oak Ridge 
 
                        FR Doc E6-19768 
[Federal Register: November 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 225)] 
[Notices] [Page 67550-67551] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr22no06-49]                         
 
Reservation 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), Oak Ridge 
Reservation. 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: Wednesday, December 13, 2006; 6 p.m.
 
ADDRESSES: DOE Information Center, 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee.
 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pat Halsey, Federal Coordinator, 
Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, P.O. Box 2001, 
EM-90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Phone (865) 576-4025; Fax (865) 
576-5333 or e- mail:  or check the Web site at .
 
 
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: The main presentation topic will be Plans for 
Independent Cleanup Verification at East Tennessee Technology 
Park.
 
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 the agenda item should contact Pat Halsey at the 
address or telephone number listed above. 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.
 
 
[[Page 67551]] Minutes: Minutes of this meeting will be available 
for public review and copying at the Department of Energy's 
Information Center at 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, TN 
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, or by writing 
to Pat Halsey, Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Office, 
P.O. Box 2001, EM-90, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, or by calling her at 
(865) 576-4025.
 
Issued at Washington, DC on November 17, 2006.
 
Rachel M. Samuel, Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 
[FR Doc. E6-19768 Filed 11-21-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
*****************************************************************
 71 Knox News: Munger: The threat of WMDs isn't going to go away

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com 

November 22, 2006                                                               

Weapons of mass destruction are the principal threat facing the 
American people over the next 25 years, and a nuclear bomb is at 
the top of the worry list - whether it's from a nation state, a 
terrorist group or a mad scientist in Russia who gets his hands 
on a 10-kiloton device. 

That's the view of Gen. Barry McCaffrey, a retired four-star 
general and terrorism expert, who visited Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory last week. 

Do terrorist organizations already have the fissile materials 
necessary to build a nuclear bomb? 

"It is unknowable ," McCaffrey said. "We know a third-rate 
university physics lab could make a nuclear device in a year if 
you gave them some fissile material." 

It's unlikely that a nation state would do the deed, the general 
said. 

"I think you'd have to be completely mad - and there's an 
argument, by the way, that the chief of government of North Korea 
and Iran are borderline-unstable people. But mostly I think that 
if you're a nation state - and tip this administration, one of 
the good things they've done - you would know that if you get a 
successful strike on the American people and kill 25,000 of us 
this time around, we'll do forensic analysis for three days or 
three years and if we track it back to a nation state, they're 
gone. Whether that's Cuba, Libya, Sudan, North Korea, you name 
it. 

"The bottom line is, if you're part of a successful strike on the 
American people, I think the consequences would certainly end 
your government, your armed forces, so I don't think it's very 
likely. So, the question is: Can private organizations construct 
these devices, and I think the answer is yes." 

Critics, such as the Project On Government Oversight, have said 
U.S. nuclear facilities - including the Y-12 National Security 
Complex, which houses the nation's stockpile of bomb-grade 
uranium - are vulnerable to terrorist attack. They've even 
suggested terrorists could assemble and detonate an improvised 
nuclear device on the spot. 

"I think that's very difficult to do with a nuclear detonation," 
McCaffrey said. "Extremely difficult to do. That's not to say 
it's not achievable." 

A much more likely scenario involves a radiological dispersal 
device, a so-called dirty bomb, because of the broad 
accessibility of radioactive sources at hospitals and other 
sites, he said. 

From one point of view, it's a surprise that al-Qaida or some 
other terrorist group hasn't pulled off "a terrible lick" as a 
follow-up to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, McCaffrey said. "I 
think that's one of the great mysteries," he said. 

It may be partially attributed to the U.S. investment in homeland 
security and roundup of terrorist suspects on a global basis, 
McCaffrey said. There's reason to think that al-Qaida is waiting 
on a chance for a major strike, and the United States has just 
made it tougher on them, he said. 

"To be blunt, if you and I had $25 million and a year (to work on 
it), a year from now we'll have three radiological devices that 
we could blow on three American cities in a day," McCaffrey said. 
It wouldn't have to kill many people to have an enormous effect, 
he said. 

"Let's say we kill 100. We sicken 3,000. And how about if we 
drove 3 million people into flight and had a 10-year 
waste-management (problem), an $80 billion wrap-up? So, again, I 
think WMD is the principal threat to the American people over the 
next 25 years." 

McCaffrey said it's important for the United States to organize 
the international community in the fight against terrorism. 

"We're not even the principal target," he said. "I think if I was 
Putin, I would think the likelihood of those weapons being 
employed against the Russian Federation are much higher than 
against us . There are all sorts of angry Muslims, outrageously 
repressed populations inside the Russian Federation. 

"I think our allies are at risk. The North Koreans, who now may 
have eight nuclear devices - take it forward 10 years and say 
they have 100. Who's most at risk? It's not going to be the 
United States. It's going to be a huge threat to Japan, South 
Korea, parts of China." 

Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for 
the News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at 
munger@knews.com.

    
*****************************************************************

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> 
    
*****************************************************************