*****************************************************************
10/17/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.246
*****************************************************************
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 AU ABC: Public needs to know nuclear site plans, says Labor.
2 [southnews] Jorge Hirsch: Voting against nuclear war with Iran
3 AFP: EU admits Iran nuclear talks have failed -
4 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI, no threat to any country
5 AFP: EU's Solana still hopeful Iran talks can be restarted
6 UPI: German FM says door for Iran still open
7 [NYTr] Gowans on North Korea's Nuclear Test
8 [NukeNet] N Korea Tells China It Plans Series Of N-Tests, Rice
9 North Korea's Nuclear Test
10 [NYTr] China Demands Japan Abide by Nuke Non-Proliferation Pledge
11 AFP: Doomsday clock counts down to nuclear Armageddon amid N Korea t
12 Japan Times: A clear message to Pyongyang
13 Korea Times: Korean, Russian Premiers Discuss Nukes
14 Korea Times: US Questions SeoulˇŻs North Korea Policy
15 Korea Times: No Plan to Send Envoy to North
16 Korea Times: Weakening Determination
17 AFP: Sino-NKorean trade to boom despite sanctions
18 AFP: Defiant NKorea says UN resolution 'declaration of war'
19 AFP: NKorean activities may signal nuclear test preparations - US of
20 AFP: Rice goes to Asia with sweeping plan for NKorea cargo inspectio
21 AFP: Fears of second NKorea nuclear test, US urges resolve -
22 AFP: Pressure mounts as NKorea warned over second test
23 Japan Times: Abe affirms that Japan will still shun nuclear weapons
24 Japan Times: Gird for reprisals by North, cops told
25 Japan Times: Kato hits Nakagawa's nuclear suggestion
26 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Seeks to Intensify NKorea Isolation
27 Guardian Unlimited: NKorea: Sanctions Are Declaration of War
28 US: GAO Questions $1.2B Nuke Test Contracts
29 US: TCS Daily: No, We Don't Need a Manhattan Project for Energy
30 Nuclear Weapon States Must Cut Arsenals, Us And Russia Should Lead:
31 AFP: Pakistan and India to resume peace talks next month
32 UPI: NNSA extends nonproliferation outreach
NUCLEAR REACTORS
33 US: Will Nuclear Power Destroy The World? The Obscene Destructivenes
34 US: [NukeNet] Many False Beliefs in Nuclear Power Remains!
35 US: [NukeNet] Will Nuclear Power Destroy The World? The Obscene
36 Bush's wars provoke nuclear crisis - Green Left Weekly, issue #687,
37 Toshiba Completes Purchase of Westinghouse & Expects Large Nuke Powe
38 Guardian Unlimited: Meltdown for Labour's nuclear dream
39 US: Arizona Republic: Palo Verde Unit 1 back in operation
40 US: Wichita Eagle: Nuclear plant seeks extension
41 US: Beacon Journal: Perry nuclear plant makes adjustments
42 The Herald: Hunterston reactor to shut down over safety fears
43 Hindustan Times.com: Pak finalises sites for China-aided N-plants -
44 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
45 US: APP.COM: Oyster Creek plant shuts down for inspection, fuel repl
46 thewest.com.au: Nuke power option 'probably not viable'
47 US: Rutland Herald: Police arrest 26 in nuclear protest
48 US: Brattleboro Reformer: Raucus crowd takes on VY
49 US: NRC: Nebraska Public Power District; Cooper Nuclear Station;
50 WA Business News: Fed govt should not go down nuclear path - Carpent
51 The Australian: Case for nuclear power 'difficult' - Minchin |
52 IHT: Czech nuclear power plant reconnected to the grid -
53 FOCUS Information Agency: Belene NPP Will Cover All World Safety Sta
54 US: Boston Globe: Vermont Yankee owner fights anti-nuke group's comp
55 The Australian: Nuclear 'unviable till coal price rises'
56 Telegraph: Nuclear closures threaten supply
57 Herald Sun: State rules out nuclear reactor |
58 AU ABC: 'Too early to know' where nuclear plants may be built.
59 AU ABC: MPs concerned over planned nuclear plant
60 AU ABC: McFarlane says Australia needs debate on nuclear energy
61 AU ABC: Minchin downplays Macfarlane's nuclear energy comments.
62 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear sell-off in trouble as defects revealed
NUCLEAR SECURITY
NUCLEAR SAFETY
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
63 US: DOE: State of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste
64 US: SF New Mexican: State revises WIPP permit to allow so-called 'ho
65 Platts: UK's Sellafield fined $929,000 over leaking nuclear pipe: pr
66 US: Carlsbad Current-Argus: Richardson signs WIPP waste permit
67 Telegraph: Sellafield fined over leaking nuclear pipe
68 News & Star: ...and still no senior manager has been sacked
PEACE
69 US: washingtonpost.com: Cracking the Arms Race -
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
70 Win in Livermore Lab BSL-3 Lawsuit-read our press release
71 Contra Costa Times, SF Chronicle, AP on bio-warfare agent
72 MercuryNews.com: Ruling stalls biodefense lab in Livermore
73 Hanford News: Hanford symposium set at WSU Tri-Cities
74 Hanford News: State revises WIPP permit to allow so-called 'hot wast
75 Hanford News: New Mexico to accept nuclear waste with more contamina
76 Hanford News: Sludge moving out of K East Basin
77 Hanford News: DOE fined $120,000 for chemical spills
78 SF Chron: Court blocks Lawrence Livermore research center
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 AU ABC: Public needs to know nuclear site plans, says Labor.
17/10/2006. ABC News Online
The Federal Opposition is demanding the Government reveal where
it would build nuclear power plants, as Labor expands its
campaign against Australia moving to nuclear energy.
There are increasing signals the Federal Government will
support nuclear power.
Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says if Labor wins
government he will reverse any decision to start building
nuclear power stations.
Federal Labor MP Peter Garrett says if the Government is serious
about introducing nuclear power within the next 10 years it
needs to publicly identify potential sites.
Yesterday the federal Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane said
Australians could be using nuclear energy within a decade.
Mr Garrett says he does not think the move would be supported
by the public and it may run into regulatory barriers.
"The only way in which the nuclear industry can rapidly advance
its agenda to put nuclear power plants around the country is for
the Federal Government both to identify the locations where
those power plants are going to be, and ensure that the
regulatory approvals process is much faster than it's been," he
said.
Opposition MPs are demanding their areas be ruled out.
Labor MP Jill Hall says people in her area north of Sydney
deserve to know.
"I'm calling today for him to give a guarantee that there won't
be a nuclear power station in Newcastle or central coast [New
South Wales]," she said.
Liberal MP Warren Entsch says Labor is running a scare campaign
and says he would be happy for a station to be built in his
electorate.
"I don't have an issue with it," he said.
The Prime Minister's task force on uranium and nuclear energy
is due to report by the end of the year.
*****************************************************************
2 [southnews] Jorge Hirsch: Voting against nuclear war with Iran
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:24:52 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
The outcome of the November election is likely to determine whether or
not the US goes to war with Iran before President Bush leaves office.
Voting against nuclear war with Iran
By Jorge Hirsch
10/16/06 "Information Clearing House " -- -- The outcome of the November
election is likely to determine whether or not the US goes to war with
Iran before President Bush leaves office. For multiple reasons recounted
below such war will with very high probability include the US use of
tactical nuclear weapons. In casting or not casting a vote in November,
each of us will contribute to determine events of potential consequences
immensely larger than local taxes, illegal immigration or even the Iraq
war. Crossing the nuclear threshold in a war against Iran will trigger a
chain reaction that in weeks, years or decades could lead with high
probability to global nuclear war and widespread destruction of life on
the planet.
The Bush administration has radically redefined America's nuclear use
policy [1], [2]: US nuclear weapons are no longer regarded as
qualitatively different from conventional weapons. Many actions of the
administration in recent years strongly suggest that an imminent US
nuclear use is being planned for, and this was confirmed by Bush's
explicit refusal to rule out a US nuclear strike against Iran. We have
all been put on notice. The fact that North Korea is now a nuclear
country does not change the agenda - quite the contrary.
There were fears that the US would use nuclear weapons in the Iraq
attack [1], [2], which did not materialize, hence some will argue that
the current fears of nuclear use against Iran may not materialize
either. Some will argue that there were many other occasions in the past
60 years where the US appeared to come close to using nuclear weapons
and did not [1], [2], that the threshold for using nuclear weapons
always was and remains extraordinarily high, and that the US nuclear
"saber rattling" is just trickery to scare our opponents ( "madman
theory"). These arguments are wrong. The US is much closer than it has
ever been since Nagasaki to using nuclear weapons again. This year for
the first time in its history the American Physical Society,
representing 40,000 members of the profession that created nuclear
weapons, issued a statement of deep concern on this matter: "The
American Physical Society is deeply concerned about the possible use of
nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states and for pre-emptive
counter-proliferation purposes".
In the case of Iraq, our adversary was so weak that there was no way a
US nuclear weapon use could have been justified in the eyes of the
world. Iran is different: it possesses missiles that could strike US
forces in Iraq and the Persian Gulf as well as Israeli cities, and a
large conventional army. 150,000 US soldiers in Iraq will be at great
risk if war with Iran erupts, and Americans will support a nuclear
strike on Iran once the administration creates a situation where it can
argue that such action will save a large number of American or allies'
lives.
In previous US wars, nuclear use did not occur because it carried an
unacceptably high risk of triggering a nuclear conflict with the Soviet
Union or China [1], [2], [3]. Because North Korea appears to have now a
nuclear deterrent, and because of the possibility that China could get
involved, there is no danger that the US will attack North Korea. In
fact, Bush will use the fact that North Korea has joined the nuclear
club, and charges that he was not "tough enough" on North Korea, as an
argument to "justify" attacking Iran before it achieves that status,
notwithstanding the fact that unlike North Korea Iran has stated no
intention to follow that path nor is there any evidence that it is doing
so. The nuclearization of North Korea only helps the plan to nuke Iran,
which is why the administration did everything it could to encourage it.
No nuclear country is likely to intervene nor threaten to intervene when
the US uses nuclear weapons against Iran, hence there is no military
deterrent to such use. The US has now achieved vast nuclear superiority,
and is about to demonstrate to the world that its 5-trillion nuclear
arsenal is not "unusable".
The US Nuclear Posture
The Bush administration has made sweeping changes in the nuclear weapons
policy of the United States during the past 5 years, singlehandedly
without consulting Congress nor the American people [1], [2], [3]. Under
the name of "New Triad", the key concept is "integration" of
conventional and nuclear forces. Don't be fooled by the rhetoric stating
that it means that some missions previously assigned to nuclear forces
will be taken over by conventional forces. What it really means is "a
seamless web of capabilities": there is no longer a sharp line, a sharp
distinction, between nuclear and non-nuclear weapons.
Why should there be such a sharp line? Because, as a newly set up
website from the Department of Defense kindly explains, "weight for
weight, the energy produced by a nuclear explosion is millions of times
more powerful than a conventional explosion". Consequently, it shouldn't
be difficult to understand, even for a Yale C-student, that a nuclear
conflict that gets out of hand will take a million times more lives than
a conventional conflict. The last global conventional conflict took over
50 million lives.
What is the benefit of making such policy declarations? The US has never
ruled out the use of nuclear weapons, and it carries a cost to remind
other countries of this fact, since it provides an incentive for others
to develop nuclear capability. There is no benefit in openly announcing
such ominous policy changes, unless the intention is to put them into
practice. Just like Bush announced in 2002 that "the United States will,
if necessary, act preemptively" in preparation for the "preemptive"
attack on Iraq.
The aforementioned Department of Defense website on "nuclear matters"
states that "there are a number of arms control agreements restricting
the deployment and use of nuclear weapons, but there is no conventional
or customary international law that prohibits nations from employing
nuclear weapons in armed conflict". That statement defines the "rules"
by which the U.S. government plays. No matter that it ignores (and the
website's list of "arms control agreements" also doesn't mention it) the
"negative security assurance" issued by the US in 1978 and reaffirmed in
1995 promising not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon
states. Nor that it ignores the 1996 ruling of the International Court
of Justice.
The reason the changes in declaratory policy were made is to gauge
public opinion, and to prepare the public for the implementation of this
policy. Because reaction to these radical statements [1], [2], [3], [4]
unfortunately has been rather muted, the administration will be able to
claim that the American people by and large have embraced the new
nuclear doctrine of "integration" of nuclear and non-nuclear
capabilities" and approve of the use of nuclear weapons when they
provide "the most efficient use of force". The November vote may be your
last chance to disagree.
The Rumsfeld "downsizing" transformation
The changes in nuclear doctrine did not occur in a vacuum. They were
accompanied by a strong push by the White House to develop new and more
usable nuclear weapons, and they are intimately tied and go hand in hand
with Rumsfeld's "transformation" of the military [1]. The overarching
goal of this transformation is "downsizing" [1], [2], [3], [4], [5].
What Rumsfeld did as CEO of Searle, he set out to do for the US military.
As Time Magazine reported in its Aug. 20, 1945 issue right after the
bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, "One hundred and twenty-three planes,
each bearing a single atomic bomb, would carry as much destructive power
as all the bombs (2,453,595 tons) dropped by the Allies on Europe during
the war". And this was before hydrogen bombs. To the extent that the US
military will be able to replace conventional weapons by nuclear weapons
to carry out its missions, it will have achieved the ultimate
"downsizing". That in a nutshell is the key to Rumsfeld's
"transformation of the military", everything else is window-dressing.
The principal vehicle to achieve this transformation is the radical
redefinition of the mission of USSTRATCOM, one of the nine U.S. Unified
Combatant Commands. Before Rumsfeld, STRATCOM's sole mission was nuclear
deterrence and if necessary the use of nuclear weapons. Since 2001,
"USSTRATCOM' nuclear focus broadened considerably with the latest
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR)". Now it is a "global integrator charged
with the missions of full-spectrum global strike...", and provides "a
range of options, both nuclear and non-nuclear, relevant to the threat
and military operations". And it is in particular "the lead Combatant
Command for integration and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in
combating weapons of mass destruction". A supporting role will be played
by the expanded USSOCOM, US Special Operations Command, providing
Rumsfeld with convenient "intelligence" and covert operations capabilities.
The new nuclear doctrine is the software, the new USSTRATCOM is the
hardware, and Rumsfeld is the driver, for the "downsizing" program that
is about to be launched. Brace yourself.
There have been many voices across the political spectrum calling for
Rumsfeld's resignation for the botched Iraq war [1], [2], [3], [4], [5],
[6], [7], yet he "retains the full confidence" of Bush. Why? Because
Rumsfeld cannot be fired until he demolishes the "nuclear taboo"
barrier, by detonating a small tactical nuclear weapon against a US
enemy. The US military is reluctant to even consider the use of nuclear
weapons against Iran, because it would provoke "an outcry over what
would be the first use of a nuclear weapon in a conflict since
Nagasaki". Only after a small tactical nuclear weapons strike against
Natanz or another Iranian facility will such a barrier no longer exist
for future US nuclear threats and uses, and Rumsfeld's transformation
will be a fait accompli.
Why is "downsizing" the military so important to the PNAC crowd? Because
the American public has no stomach for a draft nor large losses of
American military personnel. If it becomes possible to wage war "on the
cheap", without loss of American life, and in the process we can lower
the price of oil and spread "liberty" across the world, opposition will
be muted. Public opinion on the Iraq war was not turned by the enormous
number of Iraqi lives lost (of which there isn't even an effort to keep
a count), it is only affected by the number of American lives lost.
How it will happen
"The decision as to the employment of atomic weapons in the event of war
is to be made by the Chief Executive when he considers such decision to
be required" according to NSC 30 from 1948. According to the
Goldwater-Nichols Act, the chain of command flows from the President
through the Secretary of Defense to the geographic combatant commanders.
If Gen. John Abizaid (CENTCOM commander) or Gen. James Cartwright
(STRATCOM commander) ask authorization from President Bush to use
nuclear weapons, following the guidelines in the Doctrine for Joint
Nuclear Operations, what will Bush's response be? As he often repeats,
"I'm going to be listening to the people that know what they're talking
about, and that's the commanders on the ground in Iraq. They'll make the
decisions". The commanders on the ground will be driven by what they
perceive to be the immediate military necessity, without regard to the
larger issues such as the survival of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT).
Congress will not be asked in advance to authorize the Iran war.
Congress has already declared, in passing H.R.6198, that Iran should be
held accountable "for its threatening behavior" (which merely consists
in Iran's refusal to give up its rights under the Nuclear
Non-proliferation Treaty). The Iran war is likely to start with selected
bombing of a few Iranian facilities. Recall that on October 3rd, 2002,
over 5 months before the US invasion of Iraq, we learned that "Coalition
forces this morning struck an Iraqi air defense center after a coalition
plane in the area dropping leaflets was fired upon, defense officials
said". On December 16, 1998, Clinton informed the American people that
"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and
security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their
mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons
programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors". Neither
of these operations, nor many other US military operations, were done
with Congressional authorization.
Bush will threaten Iran with a massive attack if it responds to such a
bombing. Iran will certainly respond, and Bush will proclaim that this
constitutes Iranian "aggression" against the US, and that Iran has
"chosen" war. It will be less farfetched than in the case of Iraq, where
Bush stated shortly before the US invasion "war is upon us because
Saddam Hussein has made that choice" (speech of March 6, 2003), and as
the US was about to attack on March 17, 2003 "Should Saddam Hussein
choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure
has been taken to avoid war". Once war with Iran has started, Bush,
Cheney, Rumsfeld and their hand-picked nuclear advisors will find plenty
of convenient "surprising military developments" to seize on to
"justify" the use of nuclear weapons.
Consequences
The nuclear weapons that the administration is planning to use against
Iran are low yield earth penetrating weapons expected to cause "reduced
collateral damage". Their real purpose is not to destroy facilities that
are too deep underground to be destroyed by conventional weapons: it is
primarily to erase the nuclear taboo, and secondarily to shock-and-awe
Iran into surrender.
Of course the potentially disastrous consequences of this action cannot
be overestimated. Once the US has used its nuclear weapons against a
non-nuclear country signatory of the NPT, the NPT will fall apart. Many
more countries will strive to develop and test nuclear weapons, overtly
or covertly, as North Korea has just done. With no longer a nuclear
taboo many more countries will feel entitled to use their nuclear
weapons in aggression against or to defend against aggression from
nuclear and non-nuclear adversaries. Military conflicts inevitably lead
to escalation, and they usually end only when one side prevails. That is
not how a global nuclear conflict will end.
If the US attacks Iran and does not use nuclear weapons, it will incur
military losses that will vastly outweigh any benefit of such war. If
there is no Iran war, the Bush presidency will be remembered
predominantly for the disastrous Iraq war. Crossing the nuclear
threshold will overshadow all other events of the Bush presidency. To
the (however unlikely) extent that it results in an advantage to
America, Bush's achievement could conceivably be hailed by future
generations. The "rational" choice for the administration is clear.
Like desperate gamblers in a losing streak, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld
have nothing to gain and everything to lose by not attacking Iran with
nuclear weapons.
Why the November vote matters
On November 7th, 33 Senate seats and all 435 House seats will be
contested. There are many reasons why even Republicans may wish that one
or both Houses are won by Democrats, and the prospect of nuclear war
should be a dominant one.
The President can legally order the use of nuclear weapons under any
circumstance without asking Congress. However, Congress could block the
authority of the President to order the use of nuclear weapons against
non-nuclear-weapon countries by passing legislation under Article I,
Sect. 8, Clause 14 of the Constitution to "make rules for the government
and regulation" of the Armed Forces. If Congress passed such a law (see
an example for a bill here), it would in practice also impede a
conventional attack on Iran. Congress may also find other ways to derail
a presidential push towards using nuclear weapons, for example by
demanding that the Administration publicly discloses plans or
preparatory moves such as deployment of nuclear weapons in the Persian
Gulf. Which Congress is more likely to do this, a Republican or a
Democratic one?
Only Democratic congressmembers, however weakly, have questioned the
wisdom of the new US nuclear weapons policies [1], [2], [3]. Not a
single Republican in Congress has, nor have they questioned the fact
that the nuclear option against Iran is "on the table". This is not to
say that Republican candidates would necessarily approve of the use of
nuclear weapons against Iran, in fact many if not most are likely to
oppose it. And some Democratic candidates may be more hawkish than
Republicans in regard to Iran [1], [2], [3]. However, the principle of
"party discipline" applies to both Republicans and Democrats. And the
administration that is planning to use nuclear weapons against Iran is
Republican.
No matter how wise, moral, resolute, and independent of Bush a
Republican candidate appears to be, when push comes to shove he/she is
more likely than not to vote the party line. In the current Congress, as
reported by the non-partisan Hill Monitor website, Republican senators
voted for the White House position 92.57% of the time, Democratic
senators only 54.56%. In the House, the respective numbers are 88.50%
and 40.99%. On the October 2002 vote requested by the White House
authorizing the Iraq attack, a single Republican senator opposed it,
versus 21 Democrats; in the House, only 6 Republicans opposed it, versus
126 Democrats.
A US attack on Iran will lead to the US use of nuclear weapons and will
be disastrous for America. It is the path that Bush, Cheney and
Rumsfeld, with the advice of Kissinger [1], [2], are hell-bent on
pursuing. A military takeover of government is not likely, and military
refusal to carry out immoral orders is uncertain at best. Congress has a
role to play, perhaps the most important one in its history, and a
Republican Congress is likely to rubberstamp any White House plan on
Iran. Voting Republican in November is voting to wage nuclear war.
Jorge Hirsch is a Professor of Physics at the University of California
at San Diego, a fellow of the American Physical Society, and organizer
of a recent petition, circulated among leading physicists, opposing the
new nuclear weapons policies adopted by the US in the past 5 years. He
is a frequent commentator on Iran and nuclear weapons.
Email to: jorgehirsch@yahoo.com
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15318.htm
*****************************************************************
3 AFP: EU admits Iran nuclear talks have failed -
Tuesday October 17, 05:37
[Javier Solana]
LUXEMBOURG (AFP) - The European Union has admitted that its
nuclear talks with Iran have run into a dead end and that it has
been left with "no choice" but to return the matter to the UN
Security Council.
In a text adopted in Luxembourg Tuesday, EU foreign ministers
expressed deep concern that Iran had not suspended uranium
enrichment -- a process for fuelling a nuclear reactor but which
could also be used to make an atomic bomb.
Major world powers have been debating whether to sanction
(Advertisement)
[ src=] Iran for ignoring an August 31 UN deadline to suspend
the process, and preparations have been building for action at
the Security Council.
"The council (of EU ministers) believed that Iran's continuation
of enrichment related activities has left the EU no choice but
to support consultations on such measures," they said in
conclusions from their talks.
They "expressed deep concern that Iran has not yet suspended its
enrichment-related and reprocessing activities as required" by
the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Security Council.
However the EU left open its door for further diplomacy.
"It reaffirmed its commitment to a negotiated solution, and that
such a solution would contribute to the development of the EU's
relations with Iran. It urged Iran to take the positive path on
offer," the conclusions said.
EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana has been leading months of
talks to convince the Islamic republic to start negotiations on
suspending enrichment in exchange for a package of political and
economic incentives.
"Iran refused everything," French Foreign Minister Philippe
Douste-Blazy told journalists. "So we are returning to the
Security Council to find measures that can be phased in but
which are reversible."
He said that would allow a return to diplomacy if Iran was ready
for it.
For now that appears unlikely. Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad reaffirmed last week that his government would not
back down.
"We have decided to firmly insist on the Iranian nation's right
and move forward, step by step, with wisdom, calm, contemplation
and patience," he said, adding that "Iran is ready to negotiate
under a scientific, legal and reasonable framework."
Solana, for his part, said he remained hopeful that talks with
Iran could resume despite the move back to the Security Council,
and that he had held telephone talks Monday with top Iranian
nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani.
"It's up to the Security Council members to decide, but we want
to keep the door open (to negotiations) as long as possible," he
said.
But "it's up to Tehran to accept the conditions to start serious
negotiations," said Solana, who tried in vain during for three
months to convince the Iranians to stop uranium enrichment
activities.
Finland, which currently holds the EU's rotating presidency,
said the nature of any future sanctions had not been discussed
at the talks in Luxembourg.
So far China and Russia, which both wield veto power on the
Security Council, have balked at imposing the kind of punitive
measures sought by the United States, with the backing of
Britain.
AFP
*****************************************************************
4 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI, no threat to any country
2006/10/17
IR. of Iran is not a threat to any country in the egion but
wants to guarantee regional security in cooperation with
neighboring countries, said Air Force Commander General Karim
Qavami here Monday.
Speaking to reporters, General Qavami referring to the current
sanctions against Iran by the global arrogance said," We are
trying to reach self-sufficiency in different fields which we
are under sanctions."
On the issue of attracting young people to the air force, the
general said, "We have no problem in this concern and we employ
our needed manpower from young people annually."
On the establishment of flight schools for ordinary people, the
general said, "Air Force intends to establish private flight
schools and in this regard we have necessary facilities and
experts."
He added that the first steps for establishing such schools have
been taken.
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center.
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir
*****************************************************************
5 AFP: EU's Solana still hopeful Iran talks can be restarted
Tue Oct 17, 6:04 AM ET
LUXEMBOURG (AFP) - EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana has
voiced hope of restarting nuclear negotiations with Tehran even
though talks have moved on to the UN Security Council for
possible sanctions.
Solana, who spoke Monday with Iran" /> Iran's top nuclear
negotiator Ali Larijani, said Tuesday that there was "always
hope" to restart negotiations with Tehran, as he arrived for a
meeting in Luxembourg with EU foreign ministers.
But "it's up to Tehran to accept the conditions to start serious
negotiations," added Solana, who tried in vain during for three
months to convince the Iranians to stop their uranium enrichment
activities, as world powers demanded.
EU foreign ministers are due to acknowledge that talks with
Tehran about its nuclear ambitions have failed, leaving "no
choice" but to return the matter to the United Nations" />
United Nationsfor sanctions, according to a draft document seen
by AFP.
Major world powers have been debating sanctions to slap on Iran
for ignoring an August 31 UN deadline to suspend uranium
enrichment, which Washington and others fear could be subverted
to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons.
"Now negotiations are taking place at the UN security Council,"
Solana said.
"It's up to the Security Council members to decide, but we want
to keep the door open (to negotiations) as long as possible," he
added.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
6 UPI: German FM says door for Iran still open
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence -
10/17/2006 6:15:00 AM -0400
BERLIN, Oct. 17 (UPI) -- In a bid to keep the door for diplomacy
open, Germany's foreign minister said Iran is welcome back at
the negotiation table at "any time."
"We are willing at any time to return to the negotiating table,
if Iran declares itself willing to genuinely recognize the
preconditions for negotiations," Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the
German foreign minister, over the weekend told RBB Inforadio, a
Berlin radio station.
The preconditions include the cessation of uranium enrichment,
he added.
"Iran must understand that if we negotiate, the instalment of
further centrifuges has to stop," he said, referring to refining
machines that can be used to make atomic energy or fuel for a
nuclear weapon.
The West believes Iran is using its civilian atomic energy
program to secretly build a nuclear bomb, a charge Tehran
denies.
The members of the United Nations Security Council are currently
debating sanctions for the Islamic Republic.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
7 [NYTr] Gowans on North Korea's Nuclear Test
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:17:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
What's Left - October 16, 2006
http://gowans.blogspot.com/2006/10/north-koreas-nuclear-test.html .
North Korea's Nuclear Test
By Stephen Gowans
There were immediate reasons, and more distant causes, that compelled north
Korea to undertake a nuclear test earlier this month. All of them, I think,
are related to the need of north Korea to deter the United States from
carrying out its threats of war. According to the DPRK foreign ministry, the
test was conducted to protect north Korea's "sovereignty and right to
existence from the daily increasing danger of war from the United States."
Washington says it has no intention of attacking or invading north Korea, so
north Korea's claim that it is simply reacting to US threats and
intimidation is dismissed as pure paranoia, but anyone who claims north
Korea isn't being threatened either isn't paying attention or is playing at
propaganda.
North Korea has been trying for over 50 years to arrive at some kind of
peaceful co-existence with Washington, and its overtures of peace have been
repeatedly spurned. For example, not so long ago, then US Secretary of State
Colin Powel rejected one north Korean offer of peaceful co-existence by
saying "we don't do peace treaties, non-aggression pacts, things of that
nature." And it's true. The US doesn't do that. It tries to get what it
wants by intimidation.
So, Washington declares north Korea to be part of an "axis of evil," invades
and occupies another of the declared "axis of evil" countries, Iraq, and
then John Bolton, at the time US undersecretary of state for arms control,
warns north Korea and Syria and Iran to draw "the appropriate lesson."
North Korea has a history of being subjugated, plundered and exploited by
larger and more powerful countries. As a result, it is fiercely
anti-imperialist and committed to independence. It did draw the appropriate
lesson -- only it wasn't the one Washington wanted it to draw, though it was
one history predisposed north Korea to make.
No Danger
The only danger north Korea poses is the danger of disrupting US plans to
attack the country. It is not an offensive threat.
First, it's not clear that Pyongyang even has a workable nuclear device.
There's some question the nuclear test was successful. Second, it has no
reliable means of delivering a warhead. Its ballistic missile tests have
not been particularly successful. Third, it faces the considerable
technical challenge of making its bomb, if it is workable, small enough to
fit into a missile warhead or an artillery shell or aerial bomb.
Still, there's sufficient ambiguity about north Korea's nuclear
capabilities to make Washington think twice about an attack.
North Korea is very weak militarily. The US military budget is somewhere
around $500 billion per year. North Korea's is somewhere around $5 billion
per year -- one percent of the US budget. Its combat pilots get only two
hours of flying time a month, because they don't have enough aviation fuel
for their planes. Their equipment is old and inferior compared to that of
south Korea and the US forces stationed on the peninsula. And while it has
a million-man army, half of the army is engaged in agriculture and
construction.
The latest United Nations Security Council Resolution seeks to make north
Korea weaker still, by banning the sale to north Korea of military
equipment - battle tanks, artillery systems, warships. That's not to
undermine north Korea as an offensive threat, because it isn't one, but to
make it ripe for an easy invasion.
So, is north Korea a danger? As Bruce Cumings, perhaps the top US expert on
Korea, put it in the New York Times on October 12, north Korea's "not going
to commit suicide by attacking South Korea or Japan with nuclear bombs. It
knows it will lose. Their fundamental orientation is being hunkered down
for defense."
Consequences
The US will use the nuclear test to bolster its missile defense shield
plan, which will please the class of corporate rich in the US, who will
rake in huge profits, and Japan will use the nuclear test to shred its
pacifist constitution and take another step along the road to resurrecting
its militarist past.
A month before he became Japan's Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe wondered aloud
about building the capability to launch pre-emptive strikes on north Korea.
It's clear Abe would like to make-over the Japanese military from a
self-defense force to one capable of operating beyond its borders, in the
manner of the imperialist big boys, and in the way it used to, when it was
locked in a battle with the US over who would control the Pacific during
WWII. He's whipping up fear over north Korea to put the military apparatus
in place to build a robust Japanese imperialism.
Crisis Authored in Washington
Washington has repeatedly subjected north Korea to nuclear threat. After
the Korean War, it introduced battle-field nuclear weapons into south
Korea, to be used in the early stages of any war against the DPRK.
North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in the early
90s (but later re-joined) after the US announced that it was re-targeting
some of the strategic nuclear missiles it once had targeted on the Soviet
Union on north Korea.
In 1998, the US simulated long range nuclear attacks on north Korea. At the
same time, a Marine General said Washington was planning to overthrow the
north Korean government and install a south Korean puppet regime in its
place, possibly using a pre-emptive strike.
In its 2002 Nuclear Posture Review, Washington announced it reserved the
right to use nuclear weapons against north Korea.
One of the cardinal rules of non-proliferation is that nuclear countries
don't threaten non-nuclear countries with nuclear weapons. The US has
repeatedly broken the cardinal rule.
The Security Council
The UN's predecessor, the League of Nations, was once called a thieves'
kitchen, which is a pretty good description of the UN Security Council.
UNSC resolutions against north Korea are formulated to disarm and weaken
the country, so it can be easily subjugated and plundered. In fact, you can
generalize to other weak countries. UNSC resolutions don't benefit the
world as a whole, they benefit the permanent members of the UNSC, usually
at the expense of the bulk of humanity.
Beyond Hypocrisy
If the US, Britain, France and others can have nuclear weapons, why can't
north Korea? The answer, of course, is that the rich countries want to
preserve their nuclear monopoly so they can easily push around weaker
countries. Other countries can't have nuclear weapons, because that creates
the threat of potential self-defense. US-led anti-proliferation efforts
have nothing to do with safeguarding the world from nuclear war, but
safeguarding Washington's ability to intimidate and get its way by force.
Moreover, Washington isn't really against proliferation, only proliferation
involving countries that refuse to be subjugated. The US is talking about
transferring nuclear technology to India, and India isn't part of the
non-proliferation treaty. France transferred nuclear technology to Israel,
which Israel used to create an arsenal of hundreds of nuclear weapons.
Washington wants to use India as a proxy against China, and Israel acts as
a US proxy in the Middle East, so it's all right, from Washington's
perspective, to proliferate in favour of these countries. But north Korea,
which has sought to remain free from domination by other countries, is to
be denied an effective means of self-defense.
The Real Threat
The real threat is not north Korea. Indeed, the idea that north Korea is a
danger is laughable, if not, in its tenuous connection with reality,
insane.
The real threat is the whole rotten system of imperialism, by which a
handful of rich countries seek to dominate the majority of countries
representing the bulk of humanity for the benefit of oil companies,
investment bankers, defense industry contractors and the corporate rich.
That's what should really concern people; not north Korea's efforts to
throw a spanner into the works of a more than five-decades-long US effort
to take over from Japan as master of the entire Korean peninsula.
The longer north Korea holds out, the better for the rest of us. For this
reason, north Korea deserves our solidarity and support, in the same manner
Belgium, the Netherlands, France, the Soviet Union and so on deserved our
solidarity and support when they were menaced by another serial aggressor
hell-bent on dominating the world.
To be notified of updates, send an e-mail to sr.gowans@sympatico.ca and
write "subscribe" in the subject line.
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
8 [NukeNet] N Korea Tells China It Plans Series Of N-Tests, Rice
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:02:23 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Mothersalert: http://www.mothersalert.org
http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-korea-north-test.html?_r=1&oref=login
N.Korea Plans Series of Nuclear Tests: Report
a.. E-Mail
b.. Print
c.. Save
By REUTERS
Published: October 17, 2006
Filed at 7:50 p.m. ET
Skip to next paragraph
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. officials say North
Korea's military has informed China it intends to
carry out a series of underground nuclear tests,
NBC News reported on Tuesday.
No further details were provided in the report.
The United States said North Korea had moved
equipment into place that may indicate it plans a
second nuclear test, despite international
condemnation of its first underground nuclear
explosion on October 9.
North Korea has denounced U.N. sanctions over its
nuclear test as a declaration of war.
2.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-korea-north-usa.html
U.S. Suspects North Korea May Try Second Test
a.. E-Mail
b.. Print
c.. Save
By REUTERS
Published: October 17, 2006
Filed at 9:05 a.m. ET
Skip to next paragraph
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States would not
be surprised if North Korea attempts a second
nuclear test in order to be provocative, the White
House said on Tuesday.
Amid reports of activity near the site of North
Korea's first nuclear test, White House spokesman
Tony Snow would not discuss U.S. intelligence but
said:
``Well, let me put it this way. The North Koreans
have made no secret of their desire to be
provocative. The first test, while nuclear, did
have a low yield and perhaps it would not be
unreasonable to expect that the North Koreans
would like to try to something again.''
``It would not be a good thing for them, but it
certainly would not be out of character,'' he
added.
U.S. intelligence officials said on Monday they
had determined that the underground blast last
week in North Korea was a nuclear test.
Snow said it would be reasonable to expect that a
second test would be aimed at testing the will of
the United Nations, the U.N. Security Council and
the parties engaged in long-stalled talks with
North Korea -- the United States, China, Japan,
South Korea and Russia.
3.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-korea-north.html
N.Korea Defiant Amid Fears of New Nuclear Test
a.. E-Mail
b.. Print
c.. Save
By REUTERS
Published: October 17, 2006
Filed at 8:09 p.m. ET
Skip to next paragraph
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - North Korea denounced U.N.
sanctions over its nuclear test as a declaration
of war on Tuesday and the United States and others
suspected it might try a second bomb test despite
international condemnation.
U.S. officials said North Korea had moved
equipment into place that may indicate it plans a
second nuclear test. They differed on the timing
of another possible blast, but one senior official
with access to intelligence told Reuters it could
be ``imminent.''
``NBC Nightly News'' quoted U.S. officials as
saying North Korea's military had informed China
it intended to carry out a series of underground
nuclear tests.
Defiant in the face of sanctions backed by even
its closest ally, China, Pyongyang said it had
withstood international pressure before and was
hardly likely to yield now that it had become ``a
nuclear weapons state'' with the October 9 test.
``It is quite nonsensical to expect the DPRK to
yield to the pressure and threat of someone at
this time when it has become a nuclear weapons
state,'' official media quoted a Foreign Ministry
spokesman as saying.
``The DPRK wants peace but is not afraid of war,''
he said, referring to the country's official name,
the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il made his first
public appearance since last week's nuclear test,
taking in a song-and-dance performance, the
North's official KCNA news agency reported.
Kim has mostly been absent from the public eye
since North Korea test-fired seven missiles in
July, leading some to speculate the North's
actions over the past few months had put his
leadership to the test.
The Bush administration began a diplomatic
campaign to rally international support for the
sanctions, and said it would view another test as
``belligerent'' and ``provocative.''
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice left on a
trip to Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing and Moscow seeking
to bolster support for the sanctions and find
practical ways to implement them.
Rice's biggest challenge will be to get firm
assurances from China, worried over the possible
collapse of the impoverished, militarized state it
borders, that it will follow through on the U.N.
resolution.
Japan's Kyodo news agency, quoting a government
official, said Chinese President Hu Jintao had
voiced concern about how the sanctions are
applied. ``Things must be done in such a way that
they don't bring about an escalation of the
situation into something uncontrollable,'' he told
Japanese lawmakers.
Speaking to reporters on her way to Asia, Rice
said, ``It is our goal to see a de-escalation of
this,'' and stressed Washington had no plans to
invade the country.
Rice said her mission was intended in part to
reassure South Korea and Japan they had no need to
develop a nuclear deterrent of their own in
response to the North's weapons program.
SECOND BLAST?
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Washington
would not be surprised by a second North Korean
blast meant to test the will of the United Nations
and the states -- the United States, China, Japan,
South Korea and Russia -- engaged in long-stalled
talks with Pyongyang about its nuclear ambitions.
``The North Koreans have made no secret of their
desire to be provocative. The first test, while
nuclear, did have a low yield and perhaps it would
not be unreasonable to expect that the North
Koreans would like to try to something again,'' he
said in Washington.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov also said
he did not exclude the possibility of another
test. ``Russia's reaction in that case would be
exactly the same as it was to the first nuclear
explosion -- that is, negative,'' he told
reporters.
The U.S. government has confirmed the October 9
underground blast was a nuclear explosion and some
officials have said they have seen ``general''
activity near the site of the first test.
``This activity could represent prep for a second
test, but it doesn't necessarily mean definitively
that it is,'' one U.S. defense intelligence
official said.
One U.S. official said Russia and Japan expected
something soon, while Americans ``see ... a little
more heightened activity, but haven't been able to
sort it all out. In some ways it's reminiscent of
what was happening ... before the previous test.''
He confirmed the October 9 test was a
plutonium-based device and said it suggested that
if, as the United States suspects, Pyongyang also
has a uranium program, ``they have a long way to
go'' before that uranium program gets to the point
of testing.
4.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-korea-north-usa-talks.html
One Stop Not on Rice's North Asia Trip:
Pyongyang
a.. E-Mail
b.. Print
c.. Save
By REUTERS
Published: October 17, 2006
Filed at 3:06 a.m. ET
Skip to next paragraph
Politics Blog
News, updates and insights on the midterm
elections, the race for 2008 and everything
in-between.
a.. Go to Election Guide
b.. More Politics News
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - At each stop on a high
profile visit to Asia and Russia this week, U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will talk
about North Korea's nuclear program, but Pyongyang
itself will get the silent treatment.
During a brief thaw in relations in 2000, then
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright went to
North Korea and met the reclusive state's leader
Kim Jong-il, giving him a basketball signed by
star Michael Jordan.
There will be no such ceremony on this trip.
Except for Pyongyang, Rice, who leaves on Tuesday,
will meet all of the players involved in
negotiating with North Korea in moribund six-party
talks -- making stops in Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing and
Moscow.
The two Koreas, China, Japan, Russia and the
United States are involved in the talks, which
have been stalled for a year because of financial
restrictions imposed on North Korea by Washington.
The United States, from the president down, argues
that the six-party format is the right one and
that bilateral talks outside of this framework
would reward North Korea for its bad behavior,
particularly after last week's nuclear test.
While pushing ahead with an isolation strategy on
Iran and North Korea, the Bush administration is
coming under growing pressure to talk to its
enemies.
Even some of President George W. Bush's closest
advisers, including a Republican former secretary
of state, James Baker, have said Washington should
reconsider its policy. ``It is not appeasement to
talk to your enemies,'' Baker said in an interview
this month with ABC.
Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a key Republican on
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, echoed
Baker's views.
``We are the adult power in the world,'' he told
CNN. ``We always must engage our enemies, because
that is the only sure way to drive toward the core
of a resolution'' to the North Korean crisis.
NOT ELVIS PRESLEY
North Korea expert Daniel Pinkston said he did not
understand the logic that by talking to North
Korea, the United States somehow weakened its
hand.
``Unless you are Elvis Presley granting an
audience I don't think this should be seen as a
reward,'' said Pinkston, a proliferation expert
with the California-based Center for
Nonproliferation Studies.
``I would think that would give some confidence
that the United States would be magnanimous and
show flexibility as others have asked them to
do.''
Russia and China have backed direct talks between
Washington and Pyongyang and U.N.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan last week urged the
United States to deal directly with North Korea.
``There is a suggestion that there should be more
milk and cookies (for North Korea by having direct
talks). We are going to do what we think is right
and effective,'' State Department spokesman Sean
McCormack said.
>From a negotiating standpoint, McCormack said, the
United States was in a stronger position if it was
at the table with others in the six-party process.
Former U.S. ambassador to China, Winston Lord,
agreed with the administration's stand.
``I am absolutely 100 percent against bilateral
talks with the North Koreans outside of the
six-party framework. These other countries have as
much interest as we do. There is no way to
persuade North Korea to make a deal unless you
have the pressure and the incentives that several
countries can give,'' said Lord.
_______________________________________________________________________
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
*****************************************************************
9 North Korea's Nuclear Test
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 05:42:40 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
What's Left
October 16, 2006
North Korea's Nuclear Test
By Stephen Gowans
There were immediate reasons, and more distant causes, that compelled north
Korea to undertake a nuclear test earlier this month. All of them, I think,
are related to the need of north Korea to deter the United States from
carrying out its threats of war. According to the DPRK foreign ministry, the
test was conducted to protect north Korea's "sovereignty and right to
existence from the daily increasing danger of war from the United States."
Washington says it has no intention of attacking or invading north Korea, so
north Korea's claim that it is simply reacting to US threats and
intimidation is dismissed as pure paranoia, but anyone who claims north
Korea isn't being threatened either isn't paying attention or is playing at
propaganda.
North Korea has been trying for over 50 years to arrive at some kind of
peaceful co-existence with Washington, and its overtures of peace have been
repeatedly spurned. For example, not so long ago, then US Secretary of State
Colin Powel rejected one north Korean offer of peaceful co-existence by
saying "we don't do peace treaties, non-aggression pacts, things of that
nature." And it's true. The US doesn't do that. It tries to get what it
wants by intimidation.
So, Washington declares north Korea to be part of an "axis of evil," invades
and occupies another of the declared "axis of evil" countries, Iraq, and
then John Bolton, at the time US undersecretary of state for arms control,
warns north Korea and Syria and Iran to draw "the appropriate lesson."
North Korea has a history of being subjugated, plundered and exploited by
larger and more powerful countries. As a result, it is fiercely
anti-imperialist and committed to independence. It did draw the appropriate
lesson -- only it wasn't the one Washington wanted it to draw, though it was
one history predisposed north Korea to make.
Continued at
http://gowans.blogspot.com/2006/10/north-koreas-nuclear-test.html .
*****************************************************************
10 [NYTr] China Demands Japan Abide by Nuke Non-Proliferation Pledge
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:39:14 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com
China: No N-Proliferation for Japan
Beijing, Oct 18 (Prensa Latina) China calls for the Japanese government to
respect its commitment to the nuclear non proliferation treaty and to adopt
a responsible attitude to safeguard peace and regional stability.
The Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in his usual press
conference Japan must obey the so-called Three Non Nuclear Principles
approved by this country in 1971 as policy.
The origin of this official declaration is based on Japanese politicians
statements, mainly the government Democratic Liberal Party (DLP), stating
the archipelago must develop its own atomic weapons.
That would be the answer some groups propose to face the nuclear test the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) carried out in October 9.
"We hope Japan will strictly continue to fulfil its obligations as it
signed the Nuclear Weapons Non Proliferation Treaty and keep to the three
Non Nuclear Principles," expressed the official.
sus abo jhb mf
PL-21
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
11 AFP: Doomsday clock counts down to nuclear Armageddon amid N Korea talks -
Tuesday October 17, 06:35
By Mira Oberman
CHICAGO (AFP) - Just steps from the birthplace of nuclear power,
the Doomsday Clock is counting down to nuclear Armageddon and
North Korea could push it closer to midnight.
The Korean peninsula is not even pictured on the map etched onto
the flat copper clock: only the Americas, Europe and Africa are
shown. But it will dominate the discussion when a group of
leading experts meet in Chicago next month close to the site
where nuclear fission was first achieved to discuss the global
nuclear threat.
"What (Advertisement)
[Click Here] [ src=] we are concerned about is the domino
effects from the test," said Kennette Benedict, executive
director of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which has
kept the clock since 1947 as a reminder of the dangers of
nuclear proliferation.
First set at seven minutes to midnight - a phrase that has
become part of pop culture - the clock has been moved 17 times
in response to global events.
The most recent shift was in 2002 when it moved two minutes
forward because the United States withdrew from the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and terrorists were known to be
seeking nuclear and biological weapons. It now stands back at
seven minutes to midnight, the closest to danger since the end
of the Cold War.
"The North Korean test will be important for the cascading
events that can happen and the incentives it provides for other
countries, and other people, to acquire them," Benedict told AFP
on a rainy afternoon in the book-lined conference room that
houses the Doomsday Clock.
There is "every reason to believe" that an impoverished and
isolated North Korea will sell bombs or the technology to
develop them in order to raise much-needed capital, Benedict
said, noting that al Qaeda has declared its desire for a nuclear
bomb.
Beyond the black market threat, however, is the impact of
further proliferation: should North Korea escape punishment
there will be little disincentive for other nations with nuclear
ambitions, such as Iran, to follow suit. It could also stimulate
an arms race in Asia, she warned.
While North Korea's fulfillment of its nuclear ambition is a
frightening development, there is still an opportunity for
diplomacy to win out, Benedict said.
"Other countries have shut down their nuclear weapons programs:
Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Libya," she said. "We like to
give the players a chance to have those options acted upon
before we move the clock hastily because of the test that has
taken place."
And ultimately, North Korea's possession of a nuclear bomb does
not radically tip the nuclear balance.
There are currently about 27,000 nuclear warheads the world,
down from around 70,000 at the height of the cold war, and 1,000
are ready to launch within 30 minutes, according to the Natural
Resources Defense Council's Nuclear Notebook.
About half of Russia's 16,000 warheads are not properly secured,
Benedict said, adding that "there are still places with just a
padlock on a fence."
Meanwhile, the global network of illicit trade in nuclear
technology developed by Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan
remains active and tensions in along the Pakistani borders with
Afghanistan and India remain high, she added.
"In an odd way, even though the numbers of weapons are down,
because the political dialogue and the diplomacy that's going on
is so limited we actually - I think all of us - have a sense of
foreboding and that's what makes this time so much more
difficult than others," Benedict said.
A short walk from the three-story brick house used as the
Bulletin's offices, the University of Chicago has erected a
monument to nuclear power at the site where nuclear fission was
first achieved on December 2, 1942.
It is a bronze Henry Moore sculpture of a mushroom cloud. As
world leaders struggled to convince North Korea to "take a
different course" a small black bird lay dead at its base, wings
stretched out in the rain.
AFP
*****************************************************************
12 Japan Times: A clear message to Pyongyang
Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006
EDITORIAL A clear message to Pyongyang
The sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council
against North Korea represent a unified message from the U.N.
member countries reprimanding the North for its underground
nuclear test on Oct. 9. The unanimous adoption of a resolution
imposing the sanctions less than a week after the test testifies
to the grave concern of the international community and how
united it is in its determination to resolve the issue. The
resolution is far more severe than the one the UNSC adopted
following Pyongyang's July 5 test-firing of seven ballistic
missiles. This is the first time that the U.N. has adopted
sanctions against Pyongyang since it joined the world body in
1991.
The resolution emerged from consultations among the five
permanent members of the security council -- the United States,
China, Russia, Britain and France -- and Japan, president of the
council for the month. After the 15 members of the council
adopted the resolution, North Korea called the it
"unjustifiable" and rejected it. North Korean ambassador to the
U.N. Pak Gil Yon said: "It is gangster-like for the Security
Council to have adopted today a coercive resolution while
neglecting the nuclear threat and moves for sanctions and
pressure of the U.S. against the DPRK (the Democratic People's
Republic of Korea)." But the fact that China and Russia, North
Korea's traditional allies, also supported the sanctions shows
that Pyongyang has further isolated itself from the
international community. It should now be clear to Pyongyang
that the international community will not tolerate North Korea's
nuclear-weapons program.
The binding resolution demands that North Korea does "not
conduct any further nuclear test or launch of a ballistic
missile." It says that the DPRK should suspend all activities
related to its ballistic missile program and re-establish its
pre-existing commitments to a moratorium on missile launching.
It calls on the North to "abandon all nuclear weapons and
existing nuclear programs in a complete, verifiable and
irreversible manner," and to return immediately to the six-party
talks without precondition -- negotiations among the U.S.,
China, Japan, Russia and the two Koreas to solve the issue of
the North's nuclear weapons program -- and to the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty. North Korea should respond to these
calls with sincerity. Pyongyang should note that the resolution
says the sanctions could be strengthened or lifted depending on
the North's future behavior.
In the negotiations among the five UNSC permanent member nations
and Japan, the U.S. originally called on the U.N. member
countries to act under the entire Chapter 7 of the U.N. Charter,
which provides for military options under the world body as well
as international economic sanctions. But concessions were made
to China and Russia, which were worried about possible use of
military force. Thus the member nations will act under Article
41 of Chapter 7 providing for economic sanctions.
Although the resolution rules out military action, its message
should be clear enough to North Korea. It bans trade in
materials that could contribute to Pyongyang's nuclear-,
ballistic missile- and other weapons of mass destruction-related
programs as well as in conventional weapons -- including war
planes, battle tanks and missile systems. It also bans trade in
luxury goods. Financial assets of individuals and institutions
linked to North Korea's weapons programs will be frozen and
those concerned will be prohibited from traveling abroad.
Earlier, Japan imposed tough sanctions on the North, banning
North Korean imports, North Korean ships entering Japanese ports
and entry by North Korean nationals.
To prevent illicit trafficking in nuclear and other WMD, the
resolution also calls on the U.N. members to take cooperative
actions including inspections of cargo to and from North Korea.
Although this is not mandatory, the U.S. is expected to carry
out such inspections. The Japanese government is reported ready
to provide logistic support to the U.S. forces carrying out the
inspections, by invoking a 1999 law dealing with emergencies in
Japan's vicinity. Utmost care, however, must be taken in this
matter because unforeseen developments could result. The
international community should not completely ignore Ambassador
Pak's statement that Pyongyang regards U.S. pressure as a
"declaration of war" and is prepared to take physical
countermeasures.
It is unrealistic to expect that the punitive measures included
in the UNSC resolution alone will induce North Korea to give up
its nuclear-weapons program. The U.S., Japan, China, South Korea
and Russia need to pursue diplomatic means while faithfully
executing the sanctions. In particular, they should seek ways to
open direct talks between the U.S. and North Korea -- something
the North wants most -- within the framework of the six-party
talks. The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved
japantimes.co.jp.
The Japan Times Ltd. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
13 Korea Times: Korean, Russian Premiers Discuss Nukes
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times
Seoul, Moscow Vow Cooperation on Nukes
Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook, right, shakes hands with Russian
Premier Mikhail Fradkov before holding talks at her office in
the Central Government Complex in Seoul, Tuesday./ Korea Times
Photo by Koh Young-kwon
The prime ministers of South Korea and Russia yesterday agreed
to faithfully implement the resolution adopted unanimously by
the U.N. Security Council to sanction North Korea for its
nuclear test, aides to South Korea's prime minister said.
In a meeting in Seoul, Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook and her
Russian counterpart Mikhail Fradkov expressed support for the
resolution, sharing the view that the North's nuclear test on
Oct. 9 poses a threat to stability and peace on the Korean
Peninsula and in Northeast Asia.
``I and Russian Prime Minister Fradkov expect our two countries
to closely cooperate to resolve the North Korean nuclear issue
in a peaceful manner, with the aim of denuclearizing the Korean
Peninsula,ˇ± Han was quoted as saying during the talks.
Fradkov said in a news conference after the meeting, ``Our
common goal is to make the North return to the six-party talks
on its nuclear programs at an early date and return to the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).ˇ±
Asked about the possibility of Pyongyang conducting the second
nuclear test, the Russian premier said, ``North Korea must not
do it. If it carries out the second one, it would make the
situation more complicated.ˇ±
Fradkov arrived in Seoul earlier in the day for a two-day visit.
On Monday night, President Roh Moo-hyun talked by phone to
Russian President Vladimir Putin. The two leaders reaffirmed
their commitment to a nuclear-free Korean Peninsula and to
resolving the current nuclear standoff through dialogue, the
presidential office said.
In yesterday's meeting, the two premiers also discussed ways of
implementing the U.N. resolution and boosting economic and
diplomatic ties and other issues of mutual interest, the aides
said.
After the meeting, Han and Fradkov observed the signing of five
agreements between the two countries, including accords on the
protection of space technologies and forest cooperation.
Before meeting with Han, the Russian premier paid a call on Roh
at Chong Wa Dae and exchanged views on the situation on the
Korean Peninsula following Pyongyang's nuclear test.
Roh and Fradkov agreed that the two nations will closely
coordinate responses to North Korea's provocative actions, the
presidential office said.
jckim@koreatimes.co.kr 10-17-2006 18:05
*****************************************************************
14 Korea Times: US Questions SeoulˇŻs North Korea Policy
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation
US Opposes Seoul's Mt. Kumgang Tours
By Park Song-wu Staff Reporter
U.S. State Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Christopher Hill, the United States' point man on North Korea,
suggested on Tuesday that Washington opposes an inter-Korean
tourism project at Mt. Kumgang by describing it a source of
revenue for the Pyongyang regime.
But he apparently gave Seoul the nod to carry on constructing an
industrial complex in Kaesong, another key project of South
Korea's ``sunshine'' policy of economically engaging North
Korea.
After holding a meeting in Seoul with his counterparts Chun
Yung-woo of South Korea and Alexander Alexeyev of Russia, Hill
told reporters that he finds ``two very different kinds of
projects'' are taking place on the Korean Peninsula.
"I think (the Kaesong complex) is designed to make a long-term
investment in human capital, and (the Mt. Kumgang project) seems
to be designed to give money to the North Korean authorities,''
he said. ``So I have my view that they are very two different
kind of projects."
Hill's assessment on the reconciliation programs, the most
explicit ever, came a couple of days before U.S. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice comes to Seoul to discuss how to
implement the U.N. Security Council's punitive resolution
resulting from North Korea's nuclear test on Oct. 9.
Rice is scheduled to arrive in Seoul on Thursday.
In a press briefing in Washington on Monday ahead of her
departure to Tokyo, Seoul, Beijing and Moscow, Rice said the
United States will wait for the results of South Korea's review
of its inter-Korea policies.
``This trip is an opportunity to reaffirm our reciprocal
obligations,'' Rice told reporters.
She indicated that Seoul, as a maintainer of regional security,
shares responsibility for pressuring North Korea.
``For the major powers of Northeast Asia, North Korea's behavior
has clarified the strategic interests that we share,'' she said.
``To advance these common interests, every country in the region
must share the burdens as well as the benefits of our common
security.''
A Seoul official declined to comment on Rice's remarks. But he
stressed that South Korea has faithfully conducted its role as
an ally of the United States.
Answering a question on South Korea's reluctance to suspend
Kaesong and Mt. Kumgang projects, Rice said Washington will see
what position Seoul takes ``in general'' concerning its
activities with North Korea.
``I suspect that a lot of it has to do with what North Korea
does and the South has been very clear that it is evaluating all
of its activities with North Korea and we will see where this
comes out,'' she said.
Seoul's two reconciliation projects have come under harsh
criticism because of the possibility that money from the two
projects might have been used by Pyongyang to fund its nuclear
programs.
As for Seoul's concern that a full-scale armed conflict could
erupt through inspecting North Korean cargo to prevent
trafficking in weapons of mass destruction (WMD), Rice said the
United States still needs to discuss how to implement the
punitive measure.
``I do hear states saying that they want to be certain that it
won't ratchet up conflict,'' she said. ``We have no desire to
ratchet up conflict either. But we'll have some discussions on
precisely how this will be carried out.''
She underlined that the U.N. resolution requires that states
make all efforts to prevent trade in dangerous materials.
``That's really what this requires,'' Rice said. ``And I fully
expect that everybody is going to do everything that they can to
prevent it.''
But South Korean Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook said ahead of
her meeting with Russia's Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov in
Seoul that the U.N. sanctions against North Korea should be done
in a way that brings Pyongyang to the negotiating table.
``There should never be a way that causes armed clashes,'' she
said.
President Roh Moo-hyun plans to meet with Rice at Chong Wa Dae
on Thursday to coordinate sanction measures on North Korea.
im@koreatimes.co.kr 10-17-2006 17:18
*****************************************************************
15 Korea Times: No Plan to Send Envoy to North
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times
By Ryu Jin Staff Reporter
With North Korea's nuclear standoff showing little sign of a
breakthrough, there are rising voices that President Roh
Moo-hyun should send a special envoy to Kim Jong-il.
Chong Wa Dae, however, said that there is no such plan being
considered at the moment.
South Koreans have been waging various diplomatic efforts to get
the stalled nuclear negotiation restarted. But they seem to have
few cards to play for the time being, as their reclusive
neighbor in the North has shut down communication since its
nuclear test on Oct. 9.
``We're not considering sending an envoy to Pyongyang at the
moment,'' presidential spokesman Yoon Tai-young said in response
to a question during a press briefing on Tuesday. ``As you know,
it is not a matter that could be pushed for single-handedly.''
Other officials in Seoul also said that Roh seems to thinks it
is ``inappropriate'' to send an envoy at a time when South
Korea, along with other countries, including China and the
United States, has joined the U.N. Security Council's move to
punish Pyongyang.
``Whether it be an envoy or an inter-Korean summit, there should
be something that could be discussed or at least offered,'' a
government official said. ``But unfortunately, we've got nothing
particular to tell or offer to the North at the moment.''
Between the North's missile test-firing on July 5 and its
nuclear test on Oct. 9, Seoul drew up a new proposal, which Roh
said would satisfy both North Korea and the United States, and
tried to sell it to other nations involved in the multilateral
nuclear negotiation.
But the ``common and broad approach,'' which U.S. President
George W. Bush also agreed upon, became a ``fifth wheel,'' when
Pyongyang went ahead with its plan to test a nuclear device.
Some suggested Roh send a special envoy to find a way to
breakthrough the impasse. ``Restoration of inter-Korean
relations can be a strong means to go between North Korea and
the United States,'' Rep. Im Jong-seok of the ruling Uri Party
said. ``South Korea should send a special envoy as early as
possible.''
Kim Yeon-cheol, a professor at the Research Institute for Asian
Affairs of Korea University in Seoul, also said that South Korea
needs to send an envoy to the North after mapping out a proposal
along with China.
Former President Kim Dae-jung also said in a recent interview
with the U.S. magazine Newsweek that Bush should send a
high-profile special envoy to get the bilateral talks restarted.
Officials say South Korea is now trying to invent a new proposal
to bring North Korea back to the negotiation table, while
keeping remaining in tandem with the resolution adopted by the
U.N. Security Council.
But some other experts say it is the U.S. rather than South
Korea that really needs to send an envoy to Pyongyang because
the nuclear problem is basically an issue between the two main
antagonists.
jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 10-17-2006 18:07
*****************************************************************
16 Korea Times: Weakening Determination
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion
Resolute Attitude Needed to Block Pyongyang's Nuclear Bid
The governmentˇŻs initial determination to strongly counter
North KoreaˇŻs test of a nuclear weapon shown after the blast is
being watered down. Despite supporting the U.N. resolution
calling for strong economic sanctions against Pyongyang, the
government and ruling camp have made it clear they will continue
the Kaesong Industrial Complex (KIC) and Mt. Kumkang tourism
projects, saying that they are not directly related to the U.N.
resolution.
However, the governmentˇŻs move to continue the engagement
policy confuses us. Over the past eight years, our North Korean
policy has been determined by the engagement policy in the hope
of encouraging Pyongyang to renounce its nuclear ambitions. But
the North reciprocated with a nuclear test, betraying the South
that has offered them astronomical amounts of cash and material
assistance. The only remaining option in the face of the nuclear
test is resolute punitive actions in coordination with the
international community.
The U.S. and Japan have already demanded the further
strengthening of pressure on the North after the U.N.
resolution. China, a staunch supporter of the North, has
reportedly stopped banking transactions with Pyongyang. However,
the government and ruling camp said that we have already
suspended the supply of rice, cement and daily necessities to
the North _ sanctions imposed after the missile test-firing last
July. They are all the actions that Seoul can also apply to the
North as a punishment for the nuclear blast, the lawmakers made
clear.
The ruling camp lawmakers are reluctant to slap on the U.N.
sanctions for fear of causing an armed confrontation with the
North. However, the sanctions are not aimed at provoking a war,
but at bringing back the North to the six-party talks to solve
the crisis peacefully and diplomatically. Nobody wants to cause
a war at this juncture. The U.S., Japan and other allied nations
are asking us to be more resolute, saying that firm attitudes by
South Korea and China are the key to the success of the U.N.
resolution.
For that reason, a flurry of diplomatic activities are taking
place in Seoul. On the heels of the arrival here yesterday of
RussiaˇŻs Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov, U.S. Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice will visit Seoul tomorrow for threeway
talks with her counterparts from South Korea and Japan. The
foreign officials are determined to pressure us into suspending
the engagement policy for the time being until the situation
gets better.
Many people here are bewildered at the governmentˇŻs move of
continuing the engagement policy as if nothing has happened.
Even the National Intelligence Service (INS) is believed to have
said that the government should no longer stick to the
engagement policy in a report filed to the National Assembly
last Friday.
10-17-2006 20:07
*****************************************************************
17 AFP: Sino-NKorean trade to boom despite sanctions
by Charles Whelan Tue Oct 17, 3:49 AM ET
BEIJING (AFP) - Trade between China and North Korea" /> North
Koreawill continue to boom despite UN sanctions against Pyongyang
for its nuclear test and stepped up Chinese border inspections,
traders and experts said.
Impoverished North Korea is heavily dependent on close ally
China both for direct bilateral trade and for access to global
markets.
The two nations share a 1,415-kilometer (880-mile) border and
more than half of all trade between North Korea and the outside
world comes by road and rail through Dandong, the northeast
Chinese border town on the Yalu River.
The rest of the cross-border trade comes through five other
small road links and three rail links, as well as limited
amounts via shipping lines from North Korean ports such as Nampo
and Wonsan.
North Korea's total trade with the outside world last year was
worth about four billion dollars, a drop in the ocean of
international trade and equivalent to about one day of US
imports.
But trade with China has risen dramatically in recent years,
with that trend seen to continue as the UN sanctions agreed to
on Saturday are largely aimed at curtailing Pyongyang's nuclear
ambitions rather than its general economy.
"There has been a big rise in (North Korea's) trade with China,"
said Xu Changwen of China's Commerce Ministry's Economy and
Trade Institute, writing in the twice monthly journal World
Affairs.
Bilateral trade shrank through the 1990s until it hit a low of
370 million dollars in 1999.
Then it took off and surged to 1.58 billion dollars in 2005,
with Chinese exports up 35 percent from the previous year to
more than one billion dollars.
Exports of manufactured goods from China to North Korea have
boomed in particular: to 130 million dollars in 2005 from 50
million dollars in 2001.
Roger Barrett, a British consultant on North Korean trade, said
the markets of Pyongyang were flooded with cheap Chinese goods
such as pots and pans.
Imported Chinese satellite dishes, televisions, liquor,
cigarettes and second-hand electronic goods such as DVDs are
hot-ticket consumer items.
North Korea also gets more than 90 percent of its oil from China
by way of a pipeline, while large amounts of food and chemical
fertilizer as well as machinery also come in from across the
border.
"The cross-border trade contains everything North Korea needs,"
said Barrett, who has been working on mining and other
development projects in North Korea for 12 years.
North Korea sends back coal, wood and iron ore and other raw
materials, although the volumes are not high and it still runs
an annual billion-dollar trade deficit with the outside world.
Because of China's importance, it has been the subject of
intense international focus following the UN sanctions as to how
heavily it will restrict its trade with North Korea.
"The United States is closely focused on the North Korean land
border with China, because nearly all North Korea trade with the
outside world takes that route," said Alexandre Mansourov, an
expert on North Korea at Hawaii's Asia-Pacific Center for
Security Studies.
The most hotly contested UN measure is a call for inspections of
cargo to and from North Korea, aimed at preventing its
cash-strapped government from selling material for an atomic
bomb to terrorists or rogue states.
China has so far given mixed signals as to how heavily they
intend to inspect cargo.
One Chinese trader in Dandong said he did not expect to suffer
from the sanctions, regardless of any heavier inspection regime,
because his business had nothing to do with North Korea's
nuclear programme.
"We mainly export goods for daily use, so we don't think that
the sanctions are going to affect us very much," Wang Zhanguang,
a trader with the Dandong Yongxinghe Trading Company, told AFP.
Mansourov also said cargo inspections and North Korea's nuclear
ambitions were largely unrelated.
The notion that North Korea could be caught proliferating
weapons of mass destruction via cross border cargo shipments was
far-fetched, said Mansourov.
"The plutonium core for a nuclear bomb is about the size of a
softball and fits neatly in a briefcase. Cargo inspections are
not relevant for that," he said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
18 AFP: Defiant NKorea says UN resolution 'declaration of war'
by Marc Carnegie Tue Oct 17, 8:41 AM ET
SEOUL (AFP) - A defiant North Korea" /> North Koreahas declared
that UN sanctions following its nuclear test were tantamount to a
"declaration of war" as Japan sounded the alert over a possible
second atom bomb test.
In its first government reaction since the UN Security Council
imposed the measures, the Stalinist regime warned it would strike
with "merciless blows" against any countries that impinged on its
sovereignty.
The statement came as the United States sought to tighten the
screws on the reclusive nation with a diplomatic drive aimed at
cutting off its lifeblood by ensuring the UN measures are
vigorously enforced.
Separately, China -- Pyongyang's closest ally -- promised to
abide by the sanctions and urged North Korea not to escalate
tensions.
"The important thing right now is that all parties concerned
should refrain from taking any action that may further escalate
the tensions," said Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Liu
Jianchao.
Pyongyang dismissed the Council's unanimous decision as "immoral
behaviour". It said having a nuclear weapon was its legitimate
right and lashed out at the United States, which it accused of
plotting to destroy the nation.
"The DPRK wants peace but is not afraid of war," the foreign
ministry said, referring to the country's formal name, the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
"We will watch US movements and take corresponding action," an
unidentified spokesman said, quoted by the secretive regime's
official KCNA agency.
"The UNSC 'resolution,' needless to say, cannot be construed
otherwise than a declaration of a war against the DPRK because
it was based on the scenario of the US, keen to destroy the
socialist system."
Impoverished and almost completely isolated from the outside
world, North Korea stunned the global community when it
announced October 9 that it had conducted an atom bomb test.
After initial doubts, US intelligence officials confirmed it was
a nuclear explosion but with an unusually low yield of less than
one kiloton, suggesting it had at least partially failed.
Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso earlier Tuesday said Tokyo
had received information of possible preparations for a second
test after US spy satellites reportedly picked up suspicious
movements of trucks and people near the blast site.
"I have received information on that, but can't disclose the
details," Aso said. He did not elaborate, and other officials
have cautioned there is little hard evidence to back up the
reports.
Christopher Hill, the lead US negotiator on the North's nuclear
programme, warned Pyongyang against a second nuclear test, as
China and Japan also told the regime to stand down if it was
considering such a move.
"I think we would all regard a second test as a very belligerent
answer on North Korea's part to the international community,"
Hill said. "I think the international community will respond
very clearly to the DPRK on this."
The US envoy, who was in Seoul as part of a swing through Asia
to shore up enforcement of the sanctions, said the North must
understand "that the international community is not going to
accept the DPRK as a nuclear state.
The package of sanctions against the North is aimed at curbing
the Pyongyang regime's nuclear and other weapons of mass
destruction programmes.
Most controversially, it also allows for inspections of cargo
going in and out of the country in an effort to prohibit any
illicit trafficking -- actions which China and South Korea" />
South Koreafear could provoke the regime.
Hill was in South Korea to lay the groundwork for US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza Rice, who arrives here
Thursday on a haul that takes her first to Japan and later to
China and Russia.
South Korea, which fears it will suffer dearly from any
conflict, warned the sanctions must not push Pyongyang too far.
"Sanctions against the North should be carried out in a way to
push North Korea back to the dialogue table," Prime Minister Han
Myeong-Sook said. "They must not be implemented in any way that
could spark an armed clash."
In Beijing, foreign ministry spokesman Liu said China would
implement the sanctions while taking its own commercial
interests into account.
"The Chinese side has always implemented the Security Council's
resolutions seriously and in a responsible manner. This time is
no exception," Liu said.
His comments came after the United States on Monday urged
Beijing to honor its "responsibilities and obligations".
The White House's comments came amid specific concerns that
Beijing might not carry out border inspections of cargo moving
in and out of North Korea.
The inspections aim to prevent the cash-strapped North Korean
regime from selling material for an atomic bomb to terrorists or
rogue states.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
19 AFP: NKorean activities may signal nuclear test preparations - US official -
by Jim Mannion Tue Oct 17, 4:09 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Activity detected at potential North Korean
test sites could be consistent with preparations for a second
nuclear test but not necessarily evidence a test is imminent, a
US intelligence official said.
The official said North Korea" /> North Koreacould conduct a
test "with little or no warning" but a decision to do so would
be "as much political as it is technical," said the official,
who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"How close they may be to pulling the chain or pressing a button
is what's not clear," the official said.
The United States and France on Tuesday warned North Korea,
which conducted its first nuclear test on October 9, not to
proceed with a second test. US intelligence confirmed only on
Monday that the first test was nuclear.
US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters the guessing
game about what North Korea might do next was "speculation," but
he observed that "we've seen them do things in multiples rather
than singles."
"There's speculation that they may want to do something
additional. There's also speculation they may not. So only time
will tell," he told reporters after meeting here with
Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew.
The unusually low yield of the first North Korean test, which
amounted to the equivalent of 200 tons of TNT according to some
US intelligence estimates, is widely regarded as evidence that
the nuclear device did not work as intended.
A failure in the first test might lead the North Koreans to
conduct a second test to correct what went wrong, and to put to
rest international doubts about the workability of its nuclear
weapon.
"Certainly nobody is discarding the possibility of a second test
for a whole lot of reasons," the US intelligence official told
AFP.
North Korea might conduct the test to thumb its nose at a United
Nations" /> United NationsSecurity Council resolution imposing
sanctions for its first test, he said.
"These are all real possibilities, and the activity observed
could be consistent with that, but it doesn't in and of itself
really get you there," the intelligence official said.
The official said activity has been observed at potential test
sites since the first test, but he would not describe it further
to protect sources and methods.
He said activity at the sites was "not the decisive bellwether.
And if people are working off activity alone, I'm not certain
that's enough to say something's imminent."
A second intelligence official, who also spoke on condition of
anonymity, said the activity involved the movement of cable and
people, and the appearance of a new structure at one of the
suspected test sites.
But he, too, said the activities were not necessarily indicators
that a test was imminent.
Unlike a North Korean long-range missile test in July, the
official said, there was no obvious checklist of things to be
observed that would indicate the timing of a second test.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
20 AFP: Rice goes to Asia with sweeping plan for NKorea cargo inspections -
Tue Oct 17, 6:07 PM ET
ELMENDORF AIR FORCE BASE, United States (AFP) - US Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza Riceflew to Asia bearing
an ambitious plan for inspections of North Korean shipments to
ensure the erratic regime does not sell its nuclear arsenal to
terrorists or rogue states, US officials said.
The plan would involve the inspection or monitoring of cargo
leaving or entering North Korea" /> North Koreaby sea, land and
air under the terms of UN Security Council resolution 1718,
adopted Saturday in response to Pyongyang's first nuclear test
explosion, they said.
"There are obligations for sanctions on North Korea, also
obligations to inspect certain cargos," Rice told reporters en
route for Japan, the first stop on a tour that will also take
her to South Korea" /> South Korea, China and Russia.
"It is extremely important to recognize that this is a set of
obligations under 1718 that I think all states are determined to
carry out," she said.
A senior official accompanying Rice said the new inspection and
detection regime would be a focal point of discussions with the
four nations, which have been Washington's partners in so-far
failed six-party talks aimed at convincing North Korea to disarm
in exchange for economic and political rewards.
"We believe there is now a legal obligation for states to give
very close scrutiny on their territorial borders, their
territorial waters and their national airspace to any North
Korean cargo," said a senior official accompanying Rice.
"The shipments that cross over land borders need to be
inspected, ships that go through the ports of other states need
to be inspected," said the official, speaking on condition of
anonymity due to the diplomatic sensitivity of the issue.
He said much of the authority, equipment and infrastructure
needed to carry out such searches existed through an informal
US-led alliance known as the Proliferation Security Initiative
(PSI) which has been carrying out naval and air inspections of
suspected illicit weapons shipments since 2003.
The task involving North Korea will be facilitated by the
limited number of land border crossings into neighboring China
and Russia, and the "limited number of airfields North Korea
uses for cargo shipments, he said.
But to be effective, the inspection regime will need to develop
more and better remote radioactivity detectors, notably to find
nuclear material aboard ships on the high seas.
"We believe we need to put in place in the region an
architecture that will give us high confidence that we'll be
able to detect transfers of fissile material," he said.
The UN resolution bans all trade with North Korea related to its
development of nuclear arms, ballistic missiles and other
weapons of mass destruction and imposes financial controls to
starve the North Korean military of funds.
The most controversial measure involves the inspection of North
Korean cargo, a demand that had been strongly resisted by China,
North Korea's main ally and trading partner.
But journalists at the main border town of Dandong reported on
Tuesday that Chinese authorities were inspecting vehicles
crossing from North Korea and Rice expressed confidence Beijing
would do its part in enforcing the sanctions.
"We and the Chinese actually have quite coincident interests
here," she said. "I think you now see that the potential for a
nuclear Korean penninsula has a very high priority in the
Chinese list of concerns about this region."
Rice played down as "totally to be expected" a North Korean
outburst Tuesday that the UN sanctions resolution was a
"declaration of war".
And she tried to soothe North Korean fears it could be targetted
by US military action.
"We have no desire to see this crisis escalate," she said,
adding that the door remained open for North Korea to return to
the six-party negotiations "without preconditions".
Amid fears North Korea's aggressive stance could prompt Japan
and South Korea to go nuclear, Rice said a key priority of her
trip would be reassuring the two allies Washington that they
remain covered by the US nuclear umbrella.
"The way to deal with the security threat that (North Korea)
poses is to draw on the very strong alliances that we have with
South Korea and Japan and on which they can fully rely for their
security".
She also said that any second nuclear test by Pyongyang would
"deepen their isolation, which is pretty deep right now."
"I think there are a number of states that are telling the North
Koreans that further escalation would not be in their interests
or in the interests of peace and security," she said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
21 AFP: Fears of second NKorea nuclear test, US urges resolve -
by Shaun Tandon Tue Oct 17, 12:59 AM ET
TOKYO (AFP) - North Korea" /> North Koreamay be preparing a
second nuclear test, Japan's foreign minister and media reports
say, just days after the Stalinist regime was slapped with UN
sanctions over its first trial.
Foreign Minister Taro Aso told reporters Japan had received
information of possible preparations after US spy satellites
reportedly picked up suspicious movements of trucks and people
near the site of the October 9 blast.
"I have received information on that, but can't disclose the
details," Aso said. He did not elaborate further, and other
officials cautioned that there was no hard evidence to back up
the reports.
Nevertheless, the alert underlined global jitters over
Pyongyang's nuclear activities and emerged as the United States
confirmed the October 9 test was a nuclear detonation as North
Korea had claimed, although relatively small at less than one
kiloton.
That test brought global condemnation upon Kim Jong-Il's regime,
including from its closest ally China, and triggered a unanimous
UN Security Council resolution imposing sanctions on the
reclusive nation.
As the United States launched a diplomatic drive to shore up the
sanctions, President George W. Bush" /> President George W.
Bushsaid Kim "is going to have some choices to make."
"I am deeply concerned about the starvation inside of North
Korea. I am worried about concentration camps inside of North
Korea. I am worried about the human condition inside North
Korea," he told Fox News television.
"And we are now making it clear -- not just the United States --
but other nations are making it very clear to North Korea that
there is a better way forward. And so, we'll be able to judge
his intentions and his motives as time goes on."
Bush also said he was confident China would enforce the
sanctions, despite Beijing's concerns that aggressive inspection
of cargo to and from North Korea could provoke the regime.
Earlier, the US intelligence establishment said air samples had
confirmed the October 9 blast was nuclear but with an unusually
low yield of less than one kiloton, indicating the detonation
may have partially failed.
A US intelligence official said new activity detected at
suspected North Korean test sites "doesn't necessarily lead one
in the direction of another test."
He told AFP on condition of anonymity that while no one could
rule out the possibility of a second test, "there isn't any
evidence one is imminent."
A government official in Seoul said South Korea" /> South
Koreawas also aware of the signs but cautioned they could be
part of unrelated military activities.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza Ricesaid
she would call on Japan, South Korea, China and Russia during
visits later this week to "share the burdens as well as the
benefits" of reining in Pyongyang.
The UN resolution bans trade with North Korea related to
dangerous weapons, calls for a freeze on financial assets and
imposes a travel ban on those tied to the country's nuclear and
other weapons of mass destruction programmes.
The most contested measure is the call for cargo inspections,
designed to prevent the impoverished state selling nuclear
material to terrorists or rogue states.
Rice said her talks in the various Asian capitals and Moscow
would include detailed discussions of "mechanisms" for the
searches without "ratcheting up" tensions.
Christopher Hill, the US pointman on North Korea, flew to Seoul
from Tokyo to lay the groundwork for Rice's visit, which will
include talks Thursday with her Japanese and South Korean
counterparts.
Also in Seoul was Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov, who
was due to meet his South Korean opposite number Roh Moo-Hyun"
/> Roh Moo-Hyunon Tuesday.
Russia is one of the six nations -- along with the two Koreas,
China, Japan and the United States -- involved in talks trying
to persuade Pyongyang to abandon its nuclear weapons programme.
The North, which says it needs nuclear weapons to defend itself
against a possible US attack, insisted in a speech Monday by the
regime's number two, Kim Yong-Nam, that it was "seriously
threatened" and urged its citizens to brace for "final victory."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
22 AFP: Pressure mounts as NKorea warned over second test
by Marc Carnegie Tue Oct 17, 3:29 PM ET
SEOUL (AFP) - International pressure was mounting on North Korea"
/> North Koreanot to conduct a second nuclear test after the
reclusive state said UN sanctions imposed after its first test
were tantamount to a "declaration of war".
As US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" /> Condoleezza
Riceheaded to Asia and Russia to firm up support for enforcing
those punitive measures, White House spokesman Tony Snow
indicated that Washington expected Pyongyang to carry out a
second test.
"The North Koreans have made no secret of their desire to be
provocative," he told reporters. "It would not be a good thing
for them, but it certainly would not be out of character."
France warned that the UN Security Council could take "further
measures" if Pyongyang went ahead with a second test.
"A new test by North Korea would constitute an act of
extraordinary irresponsibility, that could only push it into
further isolation," said foreign ministry spokesman
Jean-Baptiste Mattei.
"In that event, the Security Council would have to consider
further measures against North Korea," he added.
"We are warning North Korea very clearly about that," he said.
China, the North's closest ally, said it had no information
about a possible second test but urged Pyongyang not to escalate
tensions.
"We hope the DPRK (North Korea)... will come back to the track
of resolving the issue through dialogue and consultation,
instead of taking any action that will further escalate or
worsen the situation," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao
said in Beijing.
Liu said China, impoverished North Korea's biggest trade
partner, would abide by the UN sanctions.
The Security Council unanimously adopted sanctions against North
Korea after its first test explosion of a nuclear weapon on
October 9.
Pyongyang Tuesday said it regarded those measures as a
"declaration of war" and lashed out at both the United States
and the Security Council.
"The DPRK (North Korea) wants peace but is not afraid of war," a
foreign ministry spokesman said in the statement.
"We will deliver merciless blows without hesitation to whoever
tries to breach our sovereignty and right to survive under the
excuse of carrying out the UN Security Council resolution," he
said.
"The UNSC 'resolution', needless to say, cannot be construed
otherwise than a declaration of a war against the DPRK because
it was based on the scenario of the US, keen to destroy the
socialist system."
North Korea has repeatedly said the threat of attack from the
United States was the reason for its nuclear arsenal.
The announcement, dismissed by South Korean and US officials in
Seoul as nothing new, came as reports from Japan, South Korea"
/> South Koreaand the United States said the reclusive communist
state may be planning a second test.
A US intelligence official said that activity detected at
potential North Korean test sites could be consistent with
preparations for a second nuclear test but not necessarily
evidence a test was imminent.
"How close they may be to pulling the chain or pressing a button
is what's not clear," said the official, who spoke on condition
of anonymity.
Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso said Tokyo had information
about possible preparations for a second test after US spy
satellites reportedly picked up suspicious movements of trucks
and people near the blast site.
The UN resolution adopted after the first nuclear test calls on
Pyongyang to give up all weapons of mass destruction, bans
nations from sending heavy weapons or luxury goods to the North,
and calls for a freeze on any of the North's weapons-related
funds.
More controversially, it also allows for the inspection of cargo
going in and out of North Korea.
China and South Korea, while insisting they back the sanctions,
have said intercepting North Korean ships could make an already
tense situation even worse.
Rice, seeking to prepare an even tougher response to any second
nuclear test, was scheduled to hold talks with Japanese leaders
in Tokyo on Wednesday and then meet together with her Japanese
and South Korean counterparts in Seoul on Thursday.
The top US diplomat will then meet Chinese leaders in Beijing
before heading to Moscow.
China, Japan, Russia and South Korea have been Washington's
partners in trying to convince North Korea to give up its
nuclear weapons in exchange for economic aid and an end to its
international isolation.
North Korea walked away from the six-party talks in November
2005, after the United States imposed sanctions on an Asian bank
alleged to be acting as a clearinghouse for illicit North Korean
trade.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
23 Japan Times: Abe affirms that Japan will still shun nuclear weapons
japantimes.co.jp
Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006
Compiled from Kyodo, staff reports
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Monday the government will not
discuss the possibility of possessing nuclear weapons due to
Japan's three-point principle of not possessing, making or
allowing them on its territory.
Abe was commenting on a call by a senior ruling party lawmaker
for discussions on whether Japan should have nuclear arms.
He also denied the possibility of the government allowing the
U.S. to bring nuclear weapons to Japan as part of efforts to
maintain deterrence against North Korea.
Earlier in the day, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki
made a similar remark.
"Our policy of maintaining the three nonnuclear principles, the
principle of not possessing nuclear weapons, remains unchanged,"
Shiozaki said in reference to the comment Sunday by Shoichi
Nakagawa, chairman of the Liberal Democratic Party Policy
Research Council.
Japan "will possess no nuclear weapons in accordance with the
atomic energy basic law and the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty," Shiozaki said at a regularly scheduled news briefing.
Former LDP Secretary General Taku Yamasaki backed that view,
saying he's worried the discussion over North Korea may go in a
direction that leads the public to start believing it's natural
to go nuclear.
"What will happen if Japan becomes a nuclear power?" the dovish
lawmaker asked at a speech in Tokyo. "If Japan acts in
accordance with 'an eye for an eye,' it will lose its position
and standing in international society."
The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
24 Japan Times: Gird for reprisals by North, cops told
Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006
Compiled from AP, Kyodo
Japan must be on the alert for possible terrorist attacks by
North Korea in response to sanctions imposed against Pyongyang
over its nuclear test last week, a top police official warned
Monday as government leaders considered additional punitive
measures.
"There are concerns that North Korea may launch large-scale
terrorist attacks or sly and heinous activities in retaliation
to additional sanctions," said Hiroto Yoshimura, deputy director
general of the National Police Agency.
Yoshimura was addressing the first meeting of a security task
force that he heads since North Korea's Oct. 9 atomic test,
according to NHK.
Yoshimura told task force members to step up security and
intelligence efforts to head off possible retaliation by North
Korea.
On Friday, Japan closed its ports to North Korean ships and
banned trade with the North. The government is considering
further sanctions in line with a United Nations resolution
passed Saturday that authorizes sanctions in response to the
test.
The import ban is expected to hinder Pyongyang's efforts to gain
foreign currency and is aimed at disrupting its efforts to
develop nuclear arms.
The ban on the entry by North Korean citizens took effect
Wednesday after the steps were approved by the government's top
security panel. The ban on port entries and imports were
effective from midnight Friday.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki said Monday the
government is studying what else can be added to the sanctions
already in place.
"For sections under the UNSC resolution that have not been
carried out by Japan, we hope to consider them promptly and
decide on our future actions in line with the U.N. sanctions
committee," Shiozaki said. "It is our natural obligation to
fully implement the UNSC resolution."
Separately, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said Japan will consider
additional measures, "taking into consideration actions by the
international community."
The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
25 Japan Times: Kato hits Nakagawa's nuclear suggestion
Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2006
INTERNATIONAL OUTRAGE PREDICTED
By ERIC JOHNSTON Staff writer
OSAKA -- A close ally of former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi
on Monday criticized Liberal Democratic Party policy chief
Shoichi Nakagawa for suggesting Japan debate possessing nuclear
weapons.
Koichi Kato
"Nakagawa's remark that Japan should discuss acquiring nuclear
weapons because of North Korea's nuclear test is going to
provoke a strong international reaction. But Japan is the one
country that, above all others, does not desire nuclear
weapons," said Koichi Kato, a Lower House LDP lawmaker who once
served as the LDP's secretary general and is a good friend of
Koizumi.
Nakagawa's remark came a few days after Prime Minister Shinzo
Abe said Japan had no plans to possess nuclear weapons, and
after a week in which many in the international community,
including former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, warned
that North Korea's declared test of a nuclear weapon Oct. 9
might lead Japan to develop its own arsenal.
"Japan has the technology to make nuclear weapons," Kato said.
"But if, in the future, serious discussion takes place on
acquiring nuclear weapons, it will affect our nuclear power
industry, upon which we rely for much of our energy. Japan has
to import uranium for its nuclear power plants, and discussions
about acquiring nuclear weapons will impact international debate
on whether it's wise to supply Japan with uranium."
Speaking to a group of Osaka business executives, Kato said
North Korea's nuclear test has to be viewed in the context of
events of the past four years, especially since January 2002,
when U.S. President George W. Bush named North Korea part of an
"axis of evil."
"Since then, America invaded Iraq and is pushing for sanctions
on Iran for its enrichment program. North Korea has attempted to
negotiate bilaterally with the U.S. but has been rebuffed,
partially because the U.S. has been occupied with Iraq and
Afghanistan. Thus, North Korea's nuclear test can be seen as a
diplomatic move against the United States," Kato said.
"However, if the Democratic Party wins a majority in the U.S.
congressional election next month, maybe the idea of speaking
directly with North Korea will gain more currency in
Washington," he said.
Kato also criticized the Japanese media for whipping up an image
of North Korea as a military superpower when in fact it is weak.
The Japan Times (C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
26 Guardian Unlimited: Rice Seeks to Intensify NKorea Isolation
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday October 17, 2006 11:16 AM
AP Photo DCSA103
By BARRY SCHWEID
AP Diplomatic Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is
launching an uncertain diplomatic drive to persuade Asian allies
and Russia to intensify North Korea's isolation by enforcing
U.N. curbs on trade in dangerous goods.
Rice was scheduled to leave Tuesday for Japan, the first stop on
a four-nation trip, amid clear signs of unease in China and
South Korea about even the softened sanctions approved last week
by the U.N. Security Council. The U.N. resolution was aimed at
forcing North Korea to drop its nuclear weapons program.
Rice sought at a news conference on Monday to brace anxious
capitals with reassurances that the United States ``has both the
will and capacity to meet the full range of our security
commitments to allies like South Korea and Japan.''
She said she intended to reaffirm ``our reciprocal obligations''
on her trip but also said ``every country in the region must
share the burdens as well as the benefits of our common
security.'' She also plans to visit South Korea, China and
Russia.
The resolution was approved unanimously by the Council only
after the United States, the chief sponsor, accepted limitations
on inspections of cargo and agreed that only material linked
with unconventional and advanced weapons would be denied to the
insular Communist regime, which reported detonating a nuclear
device Oct. 9.
On Monday, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte's
office released the first definitive U.S. confirmation that
North Korea tested a nuclear device last week.
The statement said the explosion was smaller than a kiloton, the
force produced by 1,000 tons of TNT, smaller than many experts
had expected.
One intelligence official said the North Korean device was
believed to be roughly equivalent to 200 tons of TNT, suggesting
it was probably a partial failure. The official spoke on
condition of anonymity because of the sensitive situation with
Pyongyang.
U.S. intelligence has concluded that the North Korean device
likely used plutonium, as opposed to uranium.
South Korea, technically in a state of war with North Korea
since the 1950-53 Korean conflict ended in a cease-fire, is
jittery about confronting Pyongyang, while China and Russia have
preferred more diplomacy to sanctions.
China, which has been at the center of efforts to reverse North
Korea's nuclear weapons and missiles programs, has said it would
not stop and inspect cross-border shipments.
On Monday, Chinese customs officials inspected trucks at the
North Korean border, but China's U.N. ambassador, Wang Guangya,
indicated Chinese inspectors would not board ships to look over
equipment for weapons programs.
``I am not concerned that the Chinese are going to turn their
backs on their obligations,'' Rice said at her State Department
news conference. ``I don't think they would have voted for a
resolution that they did not intend to carry through on.''
South Korea, Japan, Russia and ``the rest of the international
system'' consider North Korea's nuclear program unacceptable,
Rice said.
She sent Christopher Hill, the top U.S. nuclear negotiator, to
Japan ahead of her arrival, and directed him to go on to South
Korea as well.
Japan, more hawkish than most other countries on challenging
North Korea, issued a positive statement after Hill's talks in
Tokyo.
``We agreed to cooperate with other countries to swiftly
implement'' sanctions to get the North to abandon its nuclear
weapons program, senior Japanese negotiator Kenichiro Sasae
said.
Mindful of widespread reluctance to take a tough stand against
the unpredictable North Korean regime, Rice at times took a
conciliatory approach in her remarks Monday.
``If North Korea reverses course and embraces the path of
cooperation, if it makes the strategic choice to dismantle its
nuclear weapons completely, briefly and irreversibly, an
entirely new and better future would be open to it and to its
people,'' she said.
Rice said she was aware that some countries wished to be certain
that the sanctions ``won't ratchet up conflict.''
``We have no desire to ratchet up conflict, either,'' she said.
Meanwhile, North Korea has given no public indication it will be
influenced by the U.N. sanctions. It has accused the Security
Council of gangsterism and warned that anyope;)
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
27 Guardian Unlimited: NKorea: Sanctions Are Declaration of War
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Tuesday October 17, 2006 12:31 PM
AP Photo TOK801
By JAE-SOON CHANG
Associated Press Writer
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea on Tuesday blasted U.N.
sanctions aimed at punishing the country for its nuclear test,
saying the measures amount to a declaration of war and that the
nation wouldn't cave in to such pressure now that it's a nuclear
weapons power.
The bellicose remarks - the central government's first response
to the U.N. measures imposed last weekend - came as China warned
the North against stoking tensions and the American nuclear
envoy arrived in South Korea for talks.
The North broke two days of silence about the U.N. resolution
adopted after its Oct. 9 nuclear test, issuing a Foreign
Ministry statement on its official Korean Central News Agency.
``The resolution cannot be construed otherwise than a
declaration of a war'' against the North, also known as the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
The North warned it ``wants peace but is not afraid of war'' and
that it would ``deal merciless blows'' against anyone who
violates its sovereignty.
The communist nation ``had remained unfazed in any storm and
stress in the past when it had no nuclear weapons,'' the
statement said. ``It is quite nonsensical to expect the DPRK to
yield to the pressure and threat of someone at this time when it
has become a nuclear weapons state.''
China has long been one of North Korea's few friends, but
relations have been frayed in recent months by Pyongyang's
missile tests and last week's nuclear blast.
On Tuesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao
warned Pyongyang against aggravating tensions and said the North
should help resolve the situation ``through dialogue and
consultation.''
The verbal volley came as the U.S. pressed on with a round of
diplomacy in Asia aimed at finding consensus on how to implement
the sanctions. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was expected
to arrive in Japan on Wednesday before traveling to South Korea
and China.
After landing in Seoul on Tuesday, the U.S. nuclear envoy,
Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, said he couldn't
confirm media reports that the North may be preparing for
another test explosion.
But Hill stressed that the international community should make
the North pay a ``high price'' for its ``reckless behavior.''
Hill told reporters he wanted to talk to South Korean officials
about reports the North was getting ready for a second nuclear
test. Japan's government also had ``information'' about another
possible blast, Foreign Minister Taro Aso told reporters,
without elaborating.
But a senior South Korean official told foreign journalists that
despite signs of a possible second test, it was unlikely to
happen immediately.
``We have yet to confirm any imminent signs of a second nuclear
test,'' the official said on condition of anonymity because of
the sensitivity of the information.
China, whose support for the sanctions is key to whether they
will have any impact on neighboring North Korea, began examining
trucks at the North Korean border.
The measures ban trade with the North in major weapons and
materials that could be used in its ballistic missile and
weapons of mass destruction programs. They call for all
countries to inspect cargo to and from North Korea to enforce
the prohibition.
Hill planned to meet his South Koreanf halting key economic
projects with the North, despite concerns that they may help
fund the North's nuclear and missile programs.
``Sanctions against North Korea should be done in a way that
draws North Korea to the dialogue table,'' South Korean Prime
Minister Han Myung-sook said Tuesday ahead of her meeting with
Fradkov, according to Yonhap news agency. ``There should never
be a way that causes armed clashes.''
In Washington, U.S. National Intelligence Director John
Negroponte's office said Monday that air samples gathered last
week contain radioactive materials that confirm that North Korea
conducted an underground nuclear explosion.
In a short statement posted on its Web site, Negroponte's office
also confirmed that the size of the explosion was less than 1
kiloton, a comparatively small nuclear detonation. Each kiloton
is equal to the force produced by 1,000 tons of TNT.
It was the first official confirmation from the United States
that a nuclear detonation took place, as Pyongyang has claimed.
Meanwhile, the U.S. envoy on North Korean human rights, Jay
Lefkowitz, urged China and South Korea to rethink aid policies
to North Korea, saying unmonitored assistance could prop up a
``criminal regime.''
China and South Korea provide large amounts of badly needed
economic and energy aid. Both Beijing and Seoul worry that a
collapsed regime in Pyongyang could send refugees flooding over
their borders.
---
Associated Press writers Bo-Mi Lim and William Foreman in Seoul,
Audra Ang in Beijing and Kana Inagaki in Tokyo contributed to
this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
28 GAO Questions $1.2B Nuke Test Contracts
Oct. 17, 2006, 5:53PM
By DAN CATERINICCHIA AP Business Writer
© 2006 The Associated Press
WASHINGTON A government watchdog agency said Tuesday the
Department of Homeland Security used "incomplete and unreliable
data" to justify nearly $1.2 billion in contracts for
radioactive and nuclear material testing monitors at the
nation's borders.
The finding by the Government Accountability Office could mean a
delay in full-scale production funding for contractors Thermo
Electron Corp., Raytheon Co.'s Integrated Defense Systems unit
and Canberra Industries Inc.
The companies received the contracts in July to develop and test
radiation screening equipment for trucks and cargo containers.
The report concluded that DHS "relied on potential future
performance to justify the purchase" of the machines.
Congressional budget staffers said Tuesday that because they
were given a "heads-up" on the GAO findings, a provision was
added to the $35 billion Homeland Security spending bill
President Bush signed into law this month that prohibits
full-scale production until DHS certifies "a significant
increase in operational effectiveness."
A cost-benefit analysis had called for the monitors to identify
hidden highly enriched and depleted uranium 95 percent of the
time. But DHS test results showed the ID rates were never higher
than 53 percent and were as low as 17 percent. The cost-benefit
analysis also underestimated by about $181 million the
life-cycle costs of the monitors, according to the GAO.
In an Oct. 11 letter to the GAO, Vayl S. Oxford, director of the
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, defended the initial
detection rates, saying they "were not intended to determine the
absolute capabilities of deployed systems," but instead were
used to support initial contract awards. He added that the
monitors will undergo additional testing before full-scale
production "including the requirement for 95 percent probability
of detection."
The GAO also faulted Oxford's office for failing to consider the
machines' ability to detect nuclear and radioactive materials
other than highly enriched uranium. Oxford's letter said because
the uranium "poses the greatest challenge from a detection
standpoint," it served as a "reasonable threat baseline."
Oxford e-mailed a statement late Tuesday that said DHS plans to
comply with certification requests so that production can go
forward.
The GAO report did not mention a related DHS program, under
which $1.35 billion in contracts were awarded last month to
three companies to develop nuclear-detecting scanners for
containers at U.S. ports.
Shares of Thermo Electron rose 65 cents to $41.67 and Raytheon's
fell 49 cents to $50.31 in trading Tuesday on the New York Stock
Exchange.
[chron.com] Copyright Notice &Privacy Policy
*****************************************************************
29 TCS Daily: No, We Don't Need a Manhattan Project for Energy
[TCS Hosted by James K. Glassman]
By Martin Fridson
17 Oct 2006
"We need an all-out effort, a Manhattan Project, a man to the
moon, to become less dependent on fossil fuel and the Middle
East."
So said Representative Chris Shays (R., CT) following a trip that
included stops in Iraq, Jordan, and Israel. Few would dispute the
benefits of reducing America's reliance on energy produced in a
politically volatile region. Democratic strategist James Carville
reports that his polling currently identifies energy independence
as voters' number-one national security concern, surpassing even
the war on terrorism.
Congressman Shays's proposed strategy for achieving that
objective, however, is more debatable. Successful though they
were, the massive, government-directed initiatives of the past
are inappropriate models for bringing about energy independence.
The Manhattan and Apollo programs were essentially vast
engineering projects. They focused on specific, predetermined
goals, namely, the production of an atomic bomb and a lunar
landing. Scientists had already pointed the way by,
respectively, splitting the atom and launching vehicles into
space. The project chiefs were not charged with the more complex
objectives of defeating the Axis powers or achieving broad
technological superiority over the Soviet Union.
At present, no one can name a potential scientific breakthrough
that would single-handedly end U.S. energy dependence on fossil
fuels and the Middle East. It is not even clear that a wholesale
shift toward domestic, renewable sources is a realistic hope. If
significant strides are to be made, however, the solution will
probably involve a combination of approaches, such as nuclear
power, solar energy, biofuels, conservation, and amelioration of
the environmental problems associated with certain domestic
fuels.
Scientific advances on any of these paths could accelerate
progress toward greater energy independence. A centrally managed
program along the lines of the Manhattan Project, however, is not
the mechanism most likely to capitalize on scientists' creative
interaction. The top-down approach runs the risk of concentrating
research in some ultimately unproductive area.
As a nation that has built a vibrant economy through
market-driven innovation, the United States should not
underestimate its diverse network of profit-seeking research
organizations. Even if the major oil companies truly are
implacable foes of alternative fuels, as conspiracy theorists
contend, America has plenty of entrepreneurs with no vested
interest in preserving the status quo. The failure thus far of
market-driven efforts to produce a silver bullet for energy
independence does not necessarily prove that the profit motive is
unequal to the task. Perhaps it merely underscores how formidable
the challenge is.
Let us imagine, though, that it is possible to make a persuasive
case for market failure in the quest for greater energy
independence. That is, economic studies might show that private
research organizations, perceiving that they cannot capture
enough of the society-wide benefits to recoup their investment,
are devoting too few resources to the effort. That would give the
government a valid reason for intervening. It would not, however,
justify creating a centralized research behemoth in the style of
the Manhattan Project. A better strategy would be to harness the
power of many smaller, more nimble organizations.
The government's reflexive response to that suggestion will be an
approach just one step removed from a Manhattan Project.
Reluctant to relinquish control, Congress will allocate a massive
research budget and begin awarding grants. Unfortunately,
taxpayers can count on billions being wasted in the process.
Politically connected corporations will greet the launch of the
grand patriotic effort with stepped-up lobbying. They will
endeavor to steer the funding priorities toward their own
business priorities. The big companies will persuade Congress to
define their existing research initiatives as part of the battle
for energy independence, no matter how tangentially related.
Many of the dollars funneled into the project will have little
prospect of furthering the mission.
A more cost-effective course would be to pay for results, rather
than for activity. Congress could establish large monetary
rewards for inventing specific, commercially viable methods of
displacing imported oil. Separate bounties would be offered for
breakthroughs in technologies such as wind power, geothermal, and
oil shale. In exchange for the rich bounties, discoverers of
non-subsidy-dependent approaches would surrender the rights to
the public domain.
This sort of spur to technological progress was employed
successfully in the eighteenth century by the British Parliament,
which established a Ł20,000 award for a method of determining
longitude within half a degree. More recently, the magazine
Business 2.0 asked a group of venture capitalists and "serial
entrepreneurs" to name business ideas they would like to develop.
Their answers included a longer-lasting cellphone battery and an
in-dash computer that projects data onto a car's windshield. The
financiers offered inventors a total of $100 million worth of
encouragement.
In creating monetary spurs for innovation, Congress could consult
with disinterested scientific experts to identify the most
valuable technological milestones. Realistically, it would be
impossible to depoliticize the process entirely. Corporations
would be unable, however, to load the specs with lucrative
make-work projects.
Summing up, the fact that the Manhattan and Apollo Projects
accomplished their missions does not automatically make them
worthy of emulation for present purposes. If something beyond the
ordinary profit motive is required to bring forth the means for
greater energy independence, the government should follow two
principles:
1. Encourage scientific exploration on multiple fronts, rather
than put a thumb on the scale for any single technology.
2. Spend the taxpayers' money on outputs, rather than inputs.
Martin Fridson is author of Unwarranted Intrusions: The Case
against Government Intervention in the Marketplace(John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.).
©2000-2006 TCS Daily |
*****************************************************************
30 Nuclear Weapon States Must Cut Arsenals, Us And Russia Should Lead: UN Assembly Told
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:00:38 -0400
NUCLEAR WEAPON STATES MUST CUT ARSENALS, US AND RUSSIA SHOULD LEAD: UN ASSEMBLY TOLD
New York, Oct 17 2006 2:00PM
Despite significant reductions in nuclear arsenals, what remains
is ample enough to destroy the planet, the head of an independent
commission on weapons of mass destruction has warned the General
Assembly, calling on nuclear weapon States to reduce their stockpiles
and the United States and Russia to take the lead.
Lack of implementation by nuclear-weapon States of their commitments
to work toward disarmament has also undermined their moral authority
and left non-nuclear-weapon nations feeling frustrated and
cheated, Hans Blix, the Chairman of the Weapons of Mass Destruction
Commission <"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2006/gadis3328.doc.htm">told
the Assembly’s First Committee yesterday.
Had those commitments been kept, negotiations with the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and Iran would be less difficult,
he added, but said that despite such issues the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) was not on the verge
of collapse, although its safeguards needed strengthening.
Mr. Blix, a former UN arms inspector for Iraq and ex-head of the
UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), also urged nuclear-weapon
States to commit themselves to a policy of no first-use, and
in particular for the United States and Russia to take their weapons
off hair-trigger alert.
The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission was established on an
initiative by the late Foreign Minister of Sweden, Anna Lindh, acting
on a proposal by then UN Under-Secretary-General Jayantha Dhanapala.
The Swedish Government invited Mr. Blix to set up and chair
the Commission.
Also addressing the First Committee, which covers disarmament and
international security issues, was John Barrett, Chairman of the
UN Group of Governmental Experts on Verification, and he spoke in
relation to all forms of weapons: nuclear, radiological, chemical,
biological and conventional.
2006-10-17 00:00:00.000
___________________
For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/
_______________________________
To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
31 AFP: Pakistan and India to resume peace talks next month
Tue Oct 17, 8:37 AM ET
ISLAMABAD (AFP) - Pakistan and India will resume peace talks next
month in New Delhi after the process was put on ice by July's
deadly Mumbai bombings, the foreign office here said.
The foreign secretary-level meeting will be held on November 14
and 15 in the Indian capital New Delhi, Pakistan foreign
ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam told AFP on Tuesday.
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh had agreed at a breakthrough encounter in Havana,
Cuba last month to resume negotiations focusing on the disputed
territory of Kashmir" /> Kashmir.
"The governments of Pakistan and India have agreed to hold the
foreign secretary level review meeting of the composite dialogue
on 14-15 November 2006 in New Delhi," the Pakistani foreign
ministry added in a statement.
There was no immediate comment from India.
"Composite dialogue" is the name given by the nuclear-armed
South Asian nations for the peace process launched in 2004 by
Musharraf and then-Indian premier Atal Behari Vajpayee.
The dialogue however has moved slowly, with the only major
result being a bus link across the Line of Control, the military
ceasefire line dividing the Indian and Pakistani sectors of
Kashmir.
Kashmir was initially the major stumbling block but terrorism
has recently proved the biggest hurdle.
Singh said last week during a visit to London that New Delhi
would provide Islamabad with evidence of Pakistani involvement
in the serial blasts on commuter trains in Mumbai in July that
killed 186 people.
Indian authorities have alleged that Pakistan's elite spy
agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the
Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group helped plant the
bombs.
Pakistan has rejected the Indian claims and Lashkar-e-Taiba has
also denied any involvement. The group is fighting against
Indian rule in Kashmir.
Kashmir, claimed in full by rival neighbours, has caused two of
the three wars between India and Pakistan since their
independence from Britain in 1947, plus a major skirmish in
1999.
The two countries also massed hundreds of thousands of troops
along their borders in 2002 after an attack on the Indian
parliament that New Delhi blamed on Pakistani-based militants.
Both sides backed down under international pressure.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
32 UPI: NNSA extends nonproliferation outreach
United Press International - Security &Terrorism -
10/17/2006 6:16:00 PM -0400
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 (UPI) -- The National Nuclear Security
Administration has awarded $15,150,000 in grants to 10 U.S.
black colleges and universities and a Hispanic institution.
The NNSA, which is an agency under the U.S. Department of
Energy, said earlier this month that the grants would help to
support its national security and nonproliferation missions.
"The goal of NNSA's grant program is to increase the number of
minority students pursuing science and technology careers," the
agency said in a statement. "The grants will help NNSA to
establish a partnership with the next generation of creative and
committed leaders who will assist NNSA in meeting its national
security demands. The grants will also help to attract minority
graduates for employment within NNSA."
"In order for America to remain competitive in the world, we
need to continue providing the best training for our students in
the science and technology fields. The support from these grants
will allow minority institutions to train our future scientists,
engineers and leaders," said NNSA Administrator Linton F.
Brooks.
The NNSA said that its Office of Diversity and Outreach was
overseeing the development of the grant program. "The office
also assists with coordination between NNSA's program offices
and the institutions on execution and management of the
technical aspects of the program," the agency said.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
33 Will Nuclear Power Destroy The World? The Obscene Destructiveness Of Nuclear Power
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:08:41 -0400
X-Sender-Host-Name: elasmtp-banded.atl.sa.earthlink.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Fr those that think nuclear power is the solution
to global warming see NIRS work at:
http://www.nirs.org/climate/climate.htm
http://www.nirs.org
>The spread of nuclear technology is expected to
accelerate as nations redouble their reliance on
atomic >power. That will give more countries the
ability to make reactor fuel, or, with the same
equipment and a >little more effort, bomb fuel -
the hardest part of the arms equation.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ak Malten
To: Abolition 2000
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 10:41 AM
http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2006/10/15/news/arms.php
A 'race' to head off nuclear disaster
By William J. Broad and David E. Sanger
The New York Times TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2006
The declaration by North Korea that it has
conducted a successful atomic test brought to nine
the number of nations believed to have nuclear
arms. But atomic officials estimate that as many
as 40 more countries have the technical skill, and
in some cases the required material, to build a
bomb.
That ability, coupled with new nuclear threats in
Asia and the Middle East, risks a second nuclear
age, officials and arms control specialists say,
in which nations are more likely to abandon the
old restraints against atomic weapons.
The spread of nuclear technology is expected to
accelerate as nations redouble their reliance on
atomic power. That will give more countries the
ability to make reactor fuel, or, with the same
equipment and a little more effort, bomb fuel -
the hardest part of the arms equation.
Signs of activity abound. Hundreds of companies
are prospecting for uranium where dozens did a few
years ago. Argentina, Australia and South Africa
are drawing up plans to begin enriching uranium,
and other countries are considering doing the
same. Egypt is reviving its program to develop
nuclear power.
Concern led the International Atomic Energy Agency
to summon government officials and experts from
around the world to Vienna in September to discuss
tightening curbs on who can produce nuclear fuel.
"These dangers are urgent," Sam Nunn, a U.S.
expert on the politics of nuclear proliferation,
told the group. "We are in a race between
cooperation and catastrophe and, at this moment,
the outcome is unclear."
The International Atomic Energy Agency itself
exemplifies some of the underlying tensions
inherent in the development of nuclear energy. It
is the primary United Nations agency charged with
detecting proliferation, but it has another
mandate as well: to promote safe nuclear power.
For decades, it has done so by running technical
aid programs with roughly a hundred states. Some
of that knowledge could be useful in a weapons
program, though the aid is meant exclusively for
civilian use.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the
agency, has estimated that as many as 49 nations
now know how to make nuclear arms, and he has
warned that global tensions could push some over
the line. "We are relying," he said, "primarily on
the continued good intentions of these countries -
intentions which are in turn based on their sense
of security or insecurity, and could therefore be
subject to rapid change."
In the United States, Democrats and Republicans
spent the past week arguing over who lost control
of North Korea: Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.
But seeds of the problem were planted by President
Dwight Eisenhower, just months after the armistice
ended the fighting on the Korean Peninsula in
1953.
His program was called Atoms for Peace, and it
soon involved dozens of nations, all seeking to
unlock the magic of nuclear power.
Almost from the start, evidence accumulated that
countries were using civil alliances and reactor
technologies to make bombs. By 1960, France had
joined the United States, Britain and the Soviet
Union as a nuclear weapons state. China held its
first test in 1964. Israel had the bomb by 1967
(though it still does not admit to it), India by
1974, South Africa by 1982 (it has since given up
its weapons) and Pakistan by 1998.
Six of those countries built their weapons by
exploiting at least some technologies that were
ostensibly civilian, nuclear analysts say. They
enriched uranium beyond the low level needed for
power reactors. Or they mined the spent fuel of
civil reactors for plutonium - the path that North
Korea started taking in the late 1980s or early
1990s, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has worked
hard to fight this kind of cheating while also
helping with the basic technology. In the 1980s,
it aided Iran's hunt for uranium. Even now,
Iranian technicians fly to Vienna and agency
experts go to Iran to lend a hand.
The hardest part, experts agree, is not acquiring
the weapons blueprints but obtaining the fuel.
Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's
nuclear arms program, who went on to establish the
world's largest atomic black market, sold the
secrets of how to make centrifuges for enriching
uranium to Libya, Iran and North Korea.
Investigators are still trying to learn where else
Khan may have planted his nuclear seeds. They
discovered outposts of his network in Dubai,
Malaysia and South Africa and found that before
his fall in 2004 he had visited at least 18
countries, including Egypt, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan,
Syria and Saudi Arabia.
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
*****************************************************************
34 [NukeNet] Many False Beliefs in Nuclear Power Remains!
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:18:37 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Nukenet,
The current "big lie", that nuclear power is "clean and green",
is answered by Dr. Helen Caldicott's new book Nuclear Power is Not
the Answer. Nuclear power produces green house gases and will
not stop global warming.
Spent fuel for weapons is the aim of nuclear power, not electricity.
It is more radioactive after irradiation than going in as fresh fuel. The
need for 5 years of cooling ponds is obvious. It is the heat that makes
steam which drives the electric turbines. There are non-toxic ways
to make electricity.
Depleted uranium is "depleted" of weapons material, medical, and
etc. DU remains lethally radioactive when exploded. DU causes
many diseases and birth defects according to reports. If a foreign
power tainted your DNA with a "dirty bomb" that is multi-generational,
invisible, contaminates your air, food and water, what would you do?
DU is illegal under the Geneva War Convention.
There were 528 atmospheric atom bomb "tests" as of 1996 according
to a Brookings Institute book. Over 100 atom bombs in Nevada alone.
Most of the resultant world wide atmospheric contamination is DU
and remains lethal for 4.5 billion years. It is still floating around up
there from the 50's and 60's. We are all contaminated.
Regards,
Dennis F. Nester
----------------------
United States: 215 atmospheric tests + 815 underground tests = 1,030
USSR: 219 atmospheric tests + 496 underground tests = 715
UK: 21 atmospheric tests + 24 underground tests = 45
France: 50 atmospheric tests + 160 underground tests = 210
China: 23 atmospheric tests + 22 underground tests = 45
The grand total of global atmospheric tests = 528
Source: Page 52, "Atomic Audit, the Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear
Weapons Since 1940," Stephen Schwartz, Editor, Brookings Institution Press,
Washington D.C., 1998.
-------------------------
(Posted for educational and research purposes only,
in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107).
_______________________________________________________________________
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
*****************************************************************
35 [NukeNet] Will Nuclear Power Destroy The World? The Obscene
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:18:38 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)
Fr those that think nuclear power is the solution
to global warming see NIRS work at:
http://www.nirs.org/climate/climate.htm
http://www.nirs.org
>The spread of nuclear technology is expected to
accelerate as nations redouble their reliance on
atomic >power. That will give more countries the
ability to make reactor fuel, or, with the same
equipment and a >little more effort, bomb fuel -
the hardest part of the arms equation.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ak Malten
To: Abolition 2000
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 10:41 AM
http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2006/10/15/news/arms.php
A 'race' to head off nuclear disaster
By William J. Broad and David E. Sanger
The New York Times TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2006
The declaration by North Korea that it has
conducted a successful atomic test brought to nine
the number of nations believed to have nuclear
arms. But atomic officials estimate that as many
as 40 more countries have the technical skill, and
in some cases the required material, to build a
bomb.
That ability, coupled with new nuclear threats in
Asia and the Middle East, risks a second nuclear
age, officials and arms control specialists say,
in which nations are more likely to abandon the
old restraints against atomic weapons.
The spread of nuclear technology is expected to
accelerate as nations redouble their reliance on
atomic power. That will give more countries the
ability to make reactor fuel, or, with the same
equipment and a little more effort, bomb fuel -
the hardest part of the arms equation.
Signs of activity abound. Hundreds of companies
are prospecting for uranium where dozens did a few
years ago. Argentina, Australia and South Africa
are drawing up plans to begin enriching uranium,
and other countries are considering doing the
same. Egypt is reviving its program to develop
nuclear power.
Concern led the International Atomic Energy Agency
to summon government officials and experts from
around the world to Vienna in September to discuss
tightening curbs on who can produce nuclear fuel.
"These dangers are urgent," Sam Nunn, a U.S.
expert on the politics of nuclear proliferation,
told the group. "We are in a race between
cooperation and catastrophe and, at this moment,
the outcome is unclear."
The International Atomic Energy Agency itself
exemplifies some of the underlying tensions
inherent in the development of nuclear energy. It
is the primary United Nations agency charged with
detecting proliferation, but it has another
mandate as well: to promote safe nuclear power.
For decades, it has done so by running technical
aid programs with roughly a hundred states. Some
of that knowledge could be useful in a weapons
program, though the aid is meant exclusively for
civilian use.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the
agency, has estimated that as many as 49 nations
now know how to make nuclear arms, and he has
warned that global tensions could push some over
the line. "We are relying," he said, "primarily on
the continued good intentions of these countries -
intentions which are in turn based on their sense
of security or insecurity, and could therefore be
subject to rapid change."
In the United States, Democrats and Republicans
spent the past week arguing over who lost control
of North Korea: Bill Clinton or George W. Bush.
But seeds of the problem were planted by President
Dwight Eisenhower, just months after the armistice
ended the fighting on the Korean Peninsula in
1953.
His program was called Atoms for Peace, and it
soon involved dozens of nations, all seeking to
unlock the magic of nuclear power.
Almost from the start, evidence accumulated that
countries were using civil alliances and reactor
technologies to make bombs. By 1960, France had
joined the United States, Britain and the Soviet
Union as a nuclear weapons state. China held its
first test in 1964. Israel had the bomb by 1967
(though it still does not admit to it), India by
1974, South Africa by 1982 (it has since given up
its weapons) and Pakistan by 1998.
Six of those countries built their weapons by
exploiting at least some technologies that were
ostensibly civilian, nuclear analysts say. They
enriched uranium beyond the low level needed for
power reactors. Or they mined the spent fuel of
civil reactors for plutonium - the path that North
Korea started taking in the late 1980s or early
1990s, according to U.S. intelligence officials.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has worked
hard to fight this kind of cheating while also
helping with the basic technology. In the 1980s,
it aided Iran's hunt for uranium. Even now,
Iranian technicians fly to Vienna and agency
experts go to Iran to lend a hand.
The hardest part, experts agree, is not acquiring
the weapons blueprints but obtaining the fuel.
Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's
nuclear arms program, who went on to establish the
world's largest atomic black market, sold the
secrets of how to make centrifuges for enriching
uranium to Libya, Iran and North Korea.
Investigators are still trying to learn where else
Khan may have planted his nuclear seeds. They
discovered outposts of his network in Dubai,
Malaysia and South Africa and found that before
his fall in 2004 he had visited at least 18
countries, including Egypt, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan,
Syria and Saudi Arabia.
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
_______________________________________________________________________
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
*****************************************************************
36 Bush's wars provoke nuclear crisis - Green Left Weekly, issue #687, October 18, 2006***
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 21:26:35 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-Spam-Class: HAM
Green Left Weekly
RSS feed
Green Left Weekly, issue #687, October 18, 2006
Bush's wars provoke nuclear crisis
On October 9, North Korea announced it had successfully carried out its
first nuclear weapon test. The test was the culmination of nearly two
years of
hostility and provocation by the United States. [Full article]
* Follow the leader: Welcome to the nuclear club!
******************************************************************************
John Pilger: 'Support GLW!'
We can't do it on our own! Green Left Weekly $250,000 Fighting Fund 2006
Enjoy reading Green Left Weekly? Want to help support our work? Why not
make an online donation .
****************************************************************************
Israeli academic condemns ethnic cleansing in Palestine
Israel's war on Gaza, its continued colonisation of the West Bank, and
its construction of the apartheid wall represent the third wave of
ethnic cleansing in Palestine since the establishment of Zionist state,
Israeli academic Tanya Reinhart told 250-strong meeting in Melbourne on
October 12. [Full article]
* PALESTINE: Besieged and divided
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Click here to join the GLW discussion list
Visit the Socialist Alliance website
Resistance Books for all your radical literature
------------------------------------------------------------------------
International News
# KOREA: US provokes nuclear crisis
# Welcome to the nuclear club!
# PALESTINE: Besieged and divided
# IRAQ: US-led occupation kills 655,000
# UNITED STATES: Washington's terror hypocrisy
# UNITED STATES: Anti-racist protesters assaulted
# MEXICO: Fears of military intervention in Oaxaca
# BOLIVIA: Behind the 'tin war' in Huanuni
# BOLIVIA: When Cochabamba said 'Enough!'
# VENEZUELA: Opposition campaign: hollow populism and hype
# NEW ZEALAND: Unionists look forward
# SOLOMON ISLANDS: Canberra bid to oust PM fails
# INDONESIA: Pressure to release report on activist's murder
# SCOTLAND: SSP looks to 'future with confidence'
# Behind the Pope's push for Latin mass
Regular Features
# Write On: Letters to the Editor
Comment and Analysis
# Union leader: Guest worker exploitation must stop
# Israeli academic condemns ethnic cleansing
# Don't forget about Iraq
# Justice for Mulrunji!
# Socialist Alliance challenges pro-business Labor
# Gary Meyerhoff 1975-2006
# Traditional media still the one
# Howard hands media moguls more power
# Gay refugee released from Villawood
# Architects challenge greed and war
Australian News
# Cameron Doomadgee: 'Do right by my brother'
# Nuremberg and the 'war on terrorism'
# Packer protesters face trial
# March to de-stigmatise mental health
# Victory for Radio Rentals workers
# Green Left Weekly hits the Gold Coast
# Broad left ticket wins WUSA election
# National queer activist network launched
# Week of solidarity with Palestine
# NSW teachers refuse A-E reports
# SIEV X drownings remembered
# Free the Cuban Five!
# Will Canberra support indigenous rights declaration?
# Proposed environment law reforms slammed
# Pine Gap trial resorts to Cold-War law
# Hunger strike for Turkish political prisoners
# Refugees deported to danger
# Rally demands Bracks decriminalise abortion
Cultural Dissent
# Activist how-to guide
# The nightmare is now
# Would you like lives with that? The human cost of fast food
# Behind Fast Food Nation
Activist Calendar
# Check out the Activist Calendar here
.
Click here for Green Left Weekly's copyleft details.
About Green Left Weekly
Authorised by K. Miller, 23 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, NSW
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back issues
Distribution details
Links to other sites
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************************
37 Toshiba Completes Purchase of Westinghouse & Expects Large Nuke Power Expansion
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:56:38 -0400
X-Sender-Host-Name: elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Mothersalert: http://www.mothersalert.org
http://www.mothersalert.org/moreinfo.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/business/AP-Japan-Toshiba-Westinghouse.html
Toshiba Completes Purchase of Westinghouse
a.. E-Mail
b.. Print
c.. Save
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 17, 2006
Filed at 5:56 a.m. ET
TOKYO (AP) -- Toshiba has completed the purchase
of Westinghouse Electric Co., acquiring a 77
percent stake in the U.S. producer of atomic power
plant equipment for US$4.16 billion, the Japanese
electronics maker said Tuesday.
The Shaw Group Inc. of the U.S. bought a 20
percent stake for US$1.08 billion, it said.
Japanese heavy machinery maker Ishikawajima-Harima
Heavy Industries Co. purchased a 3 percent stake
for US$162 million, Toshiba said in a statement.
The move is key to strengthening Toshiba's nuclear
power generation operations as a global business,
it said.
Toshiba is a leading supplier of nuclear power
plants in Japan, with a 35 percent share of
generation capacity. The Westinghouse deal means
Toshiba will gain a 28 percent share of the global
market, according to the company.
By acquiring Westinghouse, Toshiba gains another
technology in nuclear plants. Toshiba's strength
is in boiling water reactors, while Westinghouse
specializes in pressurized water reactors.
Westinghouse Electric, which remains headquartered
in Monroeville, Pennsylvania, becomes a Toshiba
group company.
In February, British Nuclear Fuels PLC agreed to
sell its Westinghouse operations, along with its
U.S. unit, BNFL USA Group, to Toshiba for US$5.4
billion.
Tuesday's shares of investment were in line with
their agreement announced earlier this month.
Toshiba also said it will continue to hold talks
with other potential partners for running
Westinghouse.
By making Westinghouse its group company, Toshiba
expects the scale of its nuclear power business to
rapidly expand to 700 billion yen (US$5.9 billion;
euro4.7 billion) in 2015, and to 900 billion yen
(US$7.6 billion; euro6.1 billion) in 2020, from
200 billion yen (US$1.7 billion; euro1.4 billion)
today, Toshiba said.
Toshiba said earlier this month that it cleared
all antitrust reviews and completed all the
necessary regulatory filings in both the U.S. and
the European Union.
*****************************************************************
38 Guardian Unlimited: Meltdown for Labour's nuclear dream
Nils Pratley
Tuesday October 17, 2006 The Guardian
Bang goes the idea that the rescue of British Energy was a
financial triumph for Gordon Brown and the Treasury. There was
no government announcement yesterday, but the plan to sell the
state's 65% stake in the company this autumn is dead.
British Energy is not a serious investment in its current form
because nobody - least of all the company's management, it seems
- has an accurate picture of the bill for restoring its ageing
nuclear plants to a vaguely reliable state.
The stock market's response to the latest tale of broken boiler
pipes - the third in as many months - was to knock 24% off the
share price, but that is just a guess of the true value. Every
time British Energy makes an inspection of its plants it
discovers something worse than expected.
Safety, we are assured, has not been compromised but it is
remarkable to non-specialists that supposedly routine
inspections can highlight so many problems. That is just what
happens with 30 year-old plants built to an antiquated
gas-cooling design, says British Energy. Maybe, but the notion
that the lives of these plants can be constantly extended now
looks far less certain, which partly explains the savage stock
market reaction.
British Energy is now reduced to having only one of its eight
nuclear plants operating at normal levels of output. It will be
obliged to buy electricity in the wholesale market to meet
contractual obligations, which takes us back to the bad old days
of 2002 and financial chaos.
At the time, the state assumed clean-up liabilities, estimated
at Ł5bn, in return for a 65% share of British Energy's cash
flows, which it can convert into an equivalent equity holding.
Before yesterday, that 65% stake might have fetched Ł5bn, thanks
to strong electricity prices, but the moment has gone. As for
the decommissioning liabilities, don't expect them to fall. They
never do.
The real damage to the government's nuclear hopes may lie ahead.
The official plan is that any new generation of plants could be
funded privately and without public subsidy. It always appeared
optimistic; now it is a fantasy.
Rich Widows
It is odd now to recall that 10 years ago Lloyds TSB was
regarded as the smart one among Britain's high street banks.
Costs were being ripped out of TSB and Cheltenham &Gloucester,
and shareholders were enjoying the show.
Then, in 2000, Lloyds paid Ł7bn for Scottish Widows and has
regretted it ever since. It was a top-of-the-market deal, struck
just as the pensions and long-term savings market went into
decline. The good times disappeared.
Now the group has turned down an approach for Scottish Widows
from French group Axa and Swiss Re. It was reputedly worth Ł8bn
and Eric Daniels, Lloyds' reforming chief executive, must have
been tempted. A clean-break would have made the rest of Lloyds
an easier target for those US banks which are rumoured
constantly to be itching to buy a British bank. In other words,
there was a possible route there for Daniels to make himself the
investor's friend.
Yet his firm "no" to Ł8bn is the right response. The price is
about Ł2bn short of fair value, based on valuations of
independent life insurers such as Legal &General and Prudential.
Moreover, Scottish Widows is now returning cash to its parent,
and a sale might jeopardise Lloyds' dividend, which has been a
delicate flower for several years. You can't run a large bank,
or any company, on the hope that somebody might bid.
Cash is flowing from Scottish Widows because the much-derided
bancassurance model - pushing banking customers towards in-house
insurance products - finally shows signs of working. The high
hopes of old may out of reach, but it would dumb for Lloyds to
give up the struggle at this point.
Bad loser
First they were outraged. Now comes the sulk. As PartyGaming
stopped taking bets from the US this weekend, it pulled the plug
on the real-time ticker that used to trumpet the number of
players on its site at any moment.
Party Gaming said it didn't want to "give it on a plate to a
competitors". By "it" one assumes it means the claim to be the
world's biggest poker site. That title seems destined to go to
privately owned PokerStars, which is employing different lawyers
to everybody else in the sector and thinks it can carry on in
the US as before.
PokerStars must look out for itself, but poker players go where
the action is. That is why Party Gaming's loss of US players,
the bulk of its custom, could also hamper its efforts to hang on
to its Europeans. Dropping the ticker is a trivial act in the
scheme of things, but it hardly screams confidence in plan B.
nils.pratley@guardian.co.uk
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian
Newspapers Limited 2006.
Registered in England and Wales. No. 908396
Registered office: 164 Deansgate, Manchester M60 2RR
*****************************************************************
39 Arizona Republic: Palo Verde Unit 1 back in operation
October 17, 2006
Mechanical trouble had kept reactor idle
Mark Shaffer The Arizona Republic
Workers at Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station brought Unit 1
back online early Monday, nearly a month after mechanical
problems put the reactor on the shelf.
The reactor had been slowly ramped up to 12 percent of capacity
as of late Monday and was expected to be at full capacity by
midweek, said Betty Dayyo, a spokeswoman for Arizona Public
Service Co.
The unit had been shut down Sept. 19 because of recurring
problems with five of its 36 pressurizer heaters and was expected
to be out of service only about two weeks.
But while workers were repairing the heaters, a small leak was
discovered in a valve of the reactor and "there were some
indications that it might not have been seated properly," said
Jim McDonald, an APS spokesman.
At that point, the unit was taken into cold shutdown as the
valve was repaired, McDonald said. During that process, the
temperature falls below 200 degrees Fahrenheit in the coolant
system, so it takes several days for the unit to recoup the heat
necessary to generate power, McDonald said.
About $6.5 million worth of power had to be transmitted to
Arizona because of the unscheduled shutdown, he said.
Palo Verde, the nation's largest nuclear generation plant, has
been under increased scrutiny by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission because of problems with oversight issues during the
past two years.
Federal inspectors this month conducted a weeklong investigation
of the plant's emergency diesel generators after a Unit 3
generator did not activate during plant inspections July 25 and
Sept. 22.
Dayyo said that Unit 2, which has been inactive since late
September for refueling and maintenance, is expected to be back
in operation by mid-November.
Copyright © 2006, azcentral.com. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
40 Wichita Eagle: Nuclear plant seeks extension
10/17/2006 |
A 20-year license extension would let the Wolf Creek plant
operate until 2045 and could guard against rising electricity
rates.
BY DION LEFLER The Wichita Eagle [The Wolf Creek nuclear power
plant] File photo The Wolf Creek nuclear power plant
The Wolf Creek nuclear power plant near Burlington has applied
for a 20-year extension of its operating license, a move that
consumer advocates say will help keep southern Kansas'
electricity rates down.
The plant provides most of the electricity used by customers in
Wichita and other areas served by Westar Energy's southern
division, formerly known as KGE.
Several years ago, state officials reduced electric rates in
anticipation of Wolf Creek's service life being extended, said
Niki Christopher, a lawyer for the Citizens' Utility Ratepayer
Board.
Christopher said CURB, the state agency representing residential
and
small-business utility customers, favors the extension.
Rejection would probably mean higher power bills, because the $3
billion cost of building the plant would have to be paid off in
40 years rather than 60, she said.
And, because of the rising cost of fossil fuels, nuclear power
is becoming increasingly more economical compared with the
coal-fired generation that provides most of the electricity to
Westar's northern division, she said.
"Wolf Creek was expensive in the short run, but in the long run,
I think it's going to turn out to be pretty good," Christopher
said. "Every minute we are getting out of that plant is money in
the bank."
Wolf Creek spokeswoman Jenny Hageman said the proposed extension
would push back the plant's retirement date from 2025 to 2045.
It may seem odd to apply for an extension with 19 years left on
the current permit, but it makes sense because Wolf Creek is
part of an alliance of six similar plants around the country
that are all seeking renewals, she said.
Applying at the same time means they can share some of the
exhaustive technical work that is part of the renewal process.
"We try to work jointly, if at all possible," she said.
The application process is expected to take 20 to 22 months,
said Hageman and Scott Burnell of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, which licenses reactors across the country.
NRC inspections show that Wolf Creek is operating well in all
performance areas measured, and the NRC Web site lists no
significant violations since 1997.
In the renewal process, the agency will mainly be evaluating
Wolf Creek's plans and procedures to ensure that aging of the
plant won't compromise safety 20 to 40 years from now, Burnell
said.
One issue that won't be considered during the renewal process is
the storage of spent reactor fuel, he said.
Wolf Creek now has only enough space in its waste storage pool
for the fuel it will use through 2025, when its current permit
expires.
But operators are hopeful -- and the NRC assumes -- there will
be a national site for nuclear waste before then, Hageman and
Burnell said.
A proposal for a national nuclear waste repository at Yucca
Mountain, Nev., has been stalled for years by environmental
groups and Nevada officials, including influential U.S. Senate
Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
If no repository exists for high-level nuclear waste when Wolf
Creek runs out of storage space, the plant could switch to
dry-cask storage and keep the spent fuel on site indefinitely,
Burnell said.
In a dry-cask system, spent fuel is bundled and placed inside
sealed steel containers filled with an inert gas. The containers
are then placed in concrete bunkers to provide radiation
shielding.
Across the country, 44 nuclear plants have sought license
renewal. None have been rejected, Hageman said.
Reach Dion Lefler at 316-268-6527.
*****************************************************************
41 Beacon Journal: Perry nuclear plant makes adjustments
10/17/2006 |
FirstEnergy Corp. reduced power at its Perry nuclear reactor in
Lake County to make control-rod adjustments. The unit was
expected to return to full power late Monday, spokeswoman
Jennifer Young said. The rods control the fission process in the
reactor. Young said the adjustments were aimed at maximizing
fuel efficiency before a planned refueling next March.
AK Steel workers to vote on contract
About 1,800 union workers locked out of AK Steel's Middletown
Works for more than seven months are to vote Wednesday on a
contract the company has said is its final offer. Workers voted
down AK's last proposal Sept. 25. The lockout would end Oct. 26
if workers, represented by the International Association of
Machinists since a July election, accept the proposal, AK said.
Some 2,500 hourly production and maintenance workers represented
then by the Armco Employees Independent Federation were locked
out when their old contract expired Feb. 28.
U.S. gasoline prices are lowest of year
The price of gasoline has fallen to its lowest level of the
year. The federal Energy Information Administration said Monday
that U.S. motorists paid $2.226 a gallon on average for regular
grade last week, a decrease of 3.5 cents from the previous week.
Pump prices are now 50 cents lower than a year ago and have
plummeted by more than 80 cents a gallon since the start of
August.
Judge says airline can reject contracts
A bankruptcy judge ruled Monday that Mesaba Aviation Inc. can
reject its union contracts with workers, a legal step toward a
showdown that could result in a strike this week at the
Northwest Airlines Corp. feeder. Judge Gregory Kishel ruled that
Mesaba can impose terms at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, the day after
he's scheduled to hear the airline's request for an injunction
against a strike. Unions have said they will strike rather than
accept proposed work rule changes and pay cuts. Mesaba funnels
passengers to Northwest's hubs in Minneapolis, Detroit and
Memphis, Tenn., from nearly 100 airports in the United States
and Canada, including Akron-Canton.
Microsoft to release privacy guidelines
Microsoft Corp. is preparing to release privacy guidelines
Thursday based on its own internal practices in hopes of getting
companies to adopt more cohesive standards for safeguarding
people's personal information. The document urges common-sense
practices such as clearly telling customers why a company
collects personally identifiable information such as e-mail
addresses or phone numbers. The move comes as more people are
entrusting technology companies with their communications,
digital photos, business documents and other data, raising
concerns about how personal information might be used.
Oshkosh Truck plans to buy JLG Industries
Military and commercial vehicle maker Oshkosh Truck Corp. on
Monday said it is buying JLG Industries Inc., a maker of aerial
work platforms and booms, for about $3 billion in cash. Robert
G. Bohn, Oshkosh chairman, president and CEO, said the deal
continues Oshkosh's transformation into a global specialty
vehicle maker. The deal, which still requires the approval from
JLG shareholders and antitrust regulators, is expected to close
in 90 days.
Strike may affect chocolate industry
Cocoa farmers across Ivory Coast went on strike Monday, holding
back their crops to protest low retail prices and high export
taxes in a move that could affect the global chocolate industry.
The West African country is the world's top grower of cocoa
beans, producing 40 percent of global output each year,
according to government statistics, despite being split
following a civil war. Ivory Coast's 700,000 increasingly
impoverished cocoa farmers say they don't make enough cash from
cocoa to send their children to school.
Bankrupt oil giant hears takeover offer
Bankrupt Russian oil company Yukos has received notification of
a takeover offer from Deutsche Bank, the company's liquidator
said Monday, in a move analysts said could represent a bid by
state-controlled Gazprom to acquire the remaining assets of
Yukos. Once Russia's top oil producer, Yukos was brought to its
knees by a government campaign that saw it crushed by back taxes
totaling nearly $28 billion and its founder Mikhail Khodorkovsky
jailed on tax evasion and fraud charges.
Wachovia earnings rise in third quarter
Wachovia Corp., the nation's fourth-largest bank, on Monday
reported a nearly 13 percent rise in third-quarter earnings from
a year ago as interest and fee income grew despite a challenging
interest rate environment. Net income rose to $1.88 billion, or
$1.17 per share, in the July-September period from $1.67
billion, or $1.06 per share, a year ago. Results dipped slightly
from second-quarter profit of $1.89 billion, or $1.17 per share.
Total revenue climbed to $7.04 billion from $6.7 billion a year
ago, but declined from $7.26 billion in the second quarter.
*****************************************************************
42 The Herald: Hunterston reactor to shut down over safety fears
Web Issue 2652 October 17 2006
CALUM MACDONALD October 17 2006
A nuclear reactor at Hunterston in Ayrshire is to be shut down
because of safety fears.
The decision by British Energy, the UK's biggest power
generator, to shut down the Scots reactor and another at Hinkley
in Somerset wiped Ł800m off its value as its shares fell by 25%.
It followed the discovery of cracked pipes at two other power
stations. British Energy also said it was also examining a
"significant leak" in the cooling systems of a third power plant.
The Department of Trade and Industry insisted that the reactor
closures would not leave the country short of electricity.
The decision to prepare to shut down reactors at Hunterston and
Hinkley was taken after an inspection at the Hinkley Point B R3
plant found cracking which was "at the high end of the range
previously experienced". Boiler tube cracking had been
discovered at Hunterston in September.
The discoveries prompted British Energy to prepare to shut down
one reactor at Hunterston and one at Hinkley for early
inspection. The output of both reactors has been lowered while
plans are made to shut them down ahead of inspections.
It was also revealed that a leak had been discovered in an
underground pipe at the company's power station in Hartlepool,
but it insisted last night that this was non-nuclear. Repair and
assessment work is being carried out.
British Energy, which can generate one-fifth of the UK's energy
requirements from eight nuclear power stations and one
coal-fired plant, will now have to buy electricity on the
wholesale market to fulfil its contracts, according to its
finance director.
A DTI spokeswoman said: "National Grid is there to balance
supply and demand. We would expect the market to respond by
bringing on other sources of generation to fill this gap."
Output problems have dogged British Energy in recent years,
after previous boiler unit closures at one of its plants at
Heysham in Lancashire and other supply breaks at Hartlepool.
Meanwhile, another nuclear power generator, British Nuclear
Group, was fined Ł500,000 yesterday for an incident in which
around 83,000 tonnes of acid containing 20 tonnes of uranium and
160kg of plutonium escaped from a broken pipe into a sealed
concrete holding site at its Sellafield nuclear reprocessing
plant.
Opponents of nuclear power said the current problems of British
Energy highlighted its unreliability.
Copyright © Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
43 Hindustan Times.com: Pak finalises sites for China-aided N-plants - South Asia
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Press Trust of India
Ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao's visit next month,
Pakistan has reportedly selected sites to set up six
Beijing-aided 300-MW nuclear power projects.
The Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) has selected six
sites for nuclear power plants in line with the recommendations
of the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA) and the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a media report said
on Tuesday.
The new plants were part of plans to increase the country's
capacity to generate 8,800MW nuclear power by 2030, it said.
Earlier reports in both Pakistan and China said the two
countries have reached an understanding to set up six nuclear
power plants with Chinese help, details of which were expected
to be announced during Hu's visit.
The six sites included Qadirabad-Bulloki link canal near
Qadirabad headworks, Dera Ghazi Khan canal near Taunsa Barrage,
Taunsa-Punjnad canal near Multan, Nara canal near Sukkur, Pat
Feeder canal near Guddu and the Kabul river near Nowshera, The
News daily reported on Tuesday.
Pakistan Foreign Minister Khurshid M Kasuri said on Monday that
Hu Jintao will visit Pakistan next month.
Pakistan has two Chinese aided nuclear power plants at Chashma
in Punjab. While one 350 mw project is operational the other one
is getting ready.
In addition to this it has a Canadian nuclear power reactor at
Karachi.
Prior selection and evaluation of sites for nuclear power plants
is mandatory for the implementation of the long-term nuclear
power expansion programme which envisages a total nuclear
capacity of 8,800MW by 2030, a senior official said.
The official said after the first phase of identifying the
sites, the government will launch preliminary studies or
investigation and in the last phase detailed investigation about
the sites would be carried out.
"This process will cost Rs 150 million to be approved by the
Central Development Working Party (CDWP) which is to meet on
October 19," he said.
China reportedly agreed to build the six more new nuclear power
plants after the US spurned Pakistan's direct requests for an
agreement similar to the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal.
Pakistan wanted US and the EU to help it to construct 1000 MW
nuclear power plants. It currently has the capacity to build
plants of only 300 MW.
Tension persists with India over Kashmir and a nuclear arms race
began after 'Pokhran nuclear explosions', though CBMs are in
full swing.
*****************************************************************
44 NRC: Sunshine Act Meeting Notice
FR Doc 06-8740
[Federal Register: October 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 200)]
[Notices] [Page 61075] From the Federal Register Online via GPO
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17oc06-132]
Agency Holding the Meetings: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
DATE: Weeks of October 16, 23, 30, November 6, 13, 20, 2006.
Place: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Status: Public and Closed.
Matters to be Considered: Week of October 16, 2006 Monday,
October 16, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Status of New Reactor
Issues--Combined Operating Licenses (COLS) (morning session).
1:30 p.m. Briefing on Status on New Reactor Issues--Combined
Operating Licenses (COLS) (afternoon session) (Public Meetings)
(Contact: Dave Matthews, 301-415-1199).
These meetings will be Webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
Friday, October 20, 2006 2:30 p.m. Meeting with Advisory
Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) (Public Meeting) (Contact:
John Larkins, 301-415-7360).
These meetings will be Webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
Week of October 23, 2006--Tentative Tuesday, October 24, 2006
9:30 a.m. Briefing on Transshipment and Domestic Shipment
Security of Radioactive Material Quantities of Concern (RAMQC)
(Closed--Ex. 3) (morning session).
1:30 p.m. Briefing on Transshipment and Domestic Shipment
Security of Radioactive Material Quantities of Concern (RAMQC)
(Closed--Ex. 3 & 9) (afternoon session).
Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:30 a.m. Briefing on
Institutionalization and Integration of Agency Lessons Learned
(Public Meeting) (Contact: John Lamb, 301-415- 1727).
These meetings will be Webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
1:30 p.m. Briefing on Resolution of GSI-191, Assessment of Debris
Accumulation on PWR Sump Performance (Public Meeting) (Contact:
Michael L. Scott, 301-415-0565). These meetings will be Webcast
live at the Web address--http://www.nrc.gov .
Week of October 30, 2006--Tentative There are not meetings
scheduled for the Week of October 30, 2006.
Week of November 8, 2006--Tentative Wednesday, November 8, 2006
9:30 a.m. Briefing on Digital Instrumentation and Control (Public
Meeting) (Contact: Paul Rebstock, 301-415-3295).
This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
Thursday, November 9, 2005 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Draft Final
Rule--Part 52 (Early Site permits/Standard Design
Certification/Combined Licenses) (Public Meeting) (Contact: Dave
Matthews, 301-415-1199).
This meeting will be Webcast live at the Web
address--http://www.nrc.gov .
Week of November 13, 2006--Tentative There are not meetings
scheduled for the Week of November 13, 2006.
Week of November 20, 2006--Tentative There are not meetings
scheduled for the Week of November 20, 2006.
* * * * * *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to
change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more
information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662.
* * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the
Internet at:
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html. * * *
* * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from
the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator,
Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis.
* * * * * This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred
subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive, or would like to
be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition,
distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is
available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission
meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic
message to dkw@nrc.gov. Dated: October 12, 2006.
R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06-8740 Filed 10-13-06; 10:12 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
*****************************************************************
45 APP.COM: Oyster Creek plant shuts down for inspection, fuel replacement |
Asbury Park Press Online
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
BY NICHOLAS CLUNN STAFF WRITER
LACEY — The Oyster Creek Generating Station was shut down safely
by its operators on Monday in a planned outage, as workers
prepared to conduct inspections related to the nuclear plant's
bid for 20-year renewal of its operating license.
While the main purpose of the planned outage is to replace about
one-third of the reactor's uranium fuel, the biennial event
takes on greater importance this year, as it might be the
second-to-last-time operators will have an opportunity to
inspect critical areas before beginning the proposed period of
extended operations.
To enter that period, plant operator AmerGen Energy Co. needs a
license renewal from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Without it, the plant will close in 2009.
Among the most-watched inspections is that of the drywell liner,
a radiation barrier that rusted — and became thinner because of
it — during the early 1980s.
Shaped like a light bulb with its stem facing up, the liner
surrounds the chamber in which atoms are split to make heat.
During a serious emergency, the liner would contain highly
radioactive steam and push it down into a water-filled cooling
pool.
Renewal opponents say the 100-foot-tall steel liner could
collapse if rust is again allowed to eat away at its lower
portion. Such a collapse, they say, would rip down safety
components and cause a serious radiological accident.
The liner's condition — and whether AmerGen has effective plan
to find signs of aging on it before a problem arises — also is
being looked at by three separate departments within the NRC.
AmerGen officials hope to ease those concerns during the
refueling outage with measurements of the liner's thickness.
Using ultrasound, workers will measure the thinnest areas in the
lower region to determine the vessel's overall thickness.
According to AmerGen, the measurements should show that
corrosion has not occurred in the sand bed region since the
early 1990s, when workers brushed off the rust and coated the
outside of the liner with an epoxy coating.
Workers also will check the entire surface of the coating for
signs of deterioration.
Both the measurements and the coating inspection will be
scrutinized by the NRC, which will decide whether the plant is
safe enough to operate under a 20-year renewal.
Considering the infrequency in which nuclear power plants are
shut down, operators plan thousands of maintenance jobs around
the refueling event.
Oyster Creek brought in 1,200 additional workers to help perform
about 9,000 jobs, according to the plant. They started to arrive
several weeks ago, as evidenced by the makeshift parking lot set
up in a grassy field along Route 9, across from the plant.
The number of workers using the lot compelled the plant at times
to assign crossing guards to the two-lane state highway.
Staff writer Erik Larsen contributed to this story.
Copyright © 2006 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
46 thewest.com.au: Nuke power option 'probably not viable'
17th October 2006, 16:22 WST
A senior government minister says nuclear power is probably not
viable in Australia, but it is sensible to consider whether it
may have a future role in meeting energy needs.
Finance Minister Nick Minchin said Australia's abundance of
cheap coal and gas meant it was difficult to assert the economic
viability of establishing a home-grown nuclear industry.
Prime Minister John Howard on Monday continued to back the
benefits of nuclear power.
As he announced $350 million in drought aid, Mr Howard talked up
the role nuclear power could play in easing the problem of
global warming and climate change.
The government has commissioned former Telstra boss Ziggy
Switkowski to head a taskforce examining the pros and cons of
nuclear power in Australia.
Senator Minchin insisted the government had not made a decision
to go down the nuclear path.
"The government does not have a policy to have nuclear power,"
he told question time.
"The government has a policy, clearly enunciated, to properly
investigate that question under the expertise of Ziggy
Switkowski and to report back to the government on the
feasibility or otherwise of nuclear power.
"At this stage the economic case would have difficulty being
made, because this country has a significant advantage in
low-cost coal and gas which supply the mainstay of our base-load
power.
"Nuclear power would have to become significantly, relatively
cheaper than it is at the moment for it to be able to compete in
this country with either coal or gas."
Nuclear energy could be a key part of efforts to tackle global
warming by reducing the build-up of greenhouse gases caused by
burning fossil fuels, Senator Minchin said.
"If you are worried about human-induced greenhouse gas emissions
causing the globe to warm then you must ... contemplate the
possibility that nuclear power has a part to play in Australia's
future," he said.
He criticised Labor for ruling out nuclear energy in Australia.
"Typical of the Labor Party - stick your head in the sand,
ignore the issue, rabbit on about climate change ... but oh,
let's not talk about nuclear power," he said. AAP
thewest.com.au
Pty Ltd 2006. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
47 Rutland Herald: Police arrest 26 in nuclear protest
Rutland Vermont News & Information
Tuesday October 17, 2006
Entergy hires city officers
By Herald Staff
BRATTLEBORO — More than two dozen protesters from Vermont and
Massachusetts were arrested Monday afternoon as they walked
across the lawn of Entergy Nuclear's corporate headquarters in a
vain attempt to shut down Vermont's only nuclear power plant.
The arrests, at the culmination of a three-hour march through
downtown Brattleboro, drew more than 180 protesters, carrying
signs and protesting the continued operation of Vermont Yankee
nuclear power plant.
Activists who lined Old Ferry Road, banging drums and chanting
"Shame on you" and "Shut it down," watched as 26 men and women
headed for Entergy's front door, but were quickly intercepted by
Brattleboro police officers, who had been hired by the
corporation to provide security.
The protesters were immediately handcuffed or thumb-cuffed in
pairs, or flipped onto their fronts with their hands handcuffed
behind their backs. Police chased one young woman and grabbed
her while applying plastic ties.
One woman, Becky Coffey of Putney, a documentary filmmaker, who
had one arm in a sling, said she was arrested because she had
knelt and put a knee on Entergy property.
Coffey was carrying an anti-nuclear sign.
Bob Belenky of Cabot and Montpelier, said his 73-year-old wife,
Mary, was arrested. He said his wife had last been arrested 40
years ago during a protest against the Vietnam War.
Belenky said his wife, a retired psychologist, had done some
research and realized their daughter and grandchildren lived
within the nuclear shadow of Vermont Yankee, which is in Vernon,
close by the Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont borders.
Belenky, a retired child psychologist himself, said the protests
were "theater."
The idea is to get the attention of the public," Belenky said,
noting he felt just as strongly as his wife did about the
dangers of nuclear power.
"If there's a meltdown here, that's the end of New England," he
said.
It was the largest arrest of the anti-nuclear protesters since
regular protests began last November, and organizers said at
least half the people arrested were from Vermont, particularly
the Montpelier-Burlington-Rutland area.
Deb Katz, executive director of Citizens Awareness Network, said
more people from northern Vermont were joining the protests, a
sign that unhappiness over the future operation of Vermont
Yankee was growing.
"This is a new beginning for people in northern Vermont," said
Katz, who lives about 10 miles from Vermont Yankee in Shelburne
Falls, Mass.
Katz said those who chose to be arrested had undergone civil
disobedience training, and she said more nonviolent protests
would follow.
The protesters were joined by members of the Bread and Puppet
Theater.
Early Monday evening, Brattleboro police still hadn't issued a
press release about the arrests, which occurred just before 1
p.m.
Capt. Gene Wrinn, who had supervised the arrests, said
mid-afternoon that officers were still processing those
arrested, who had been charged with trespassing. He said some of
those arrested were not participating fully in the police
process, such as giving their accurate names.
Laurence Smith, a spokesman for Entergy Nuclear, said the
company would not comment on the protest.
"We're not in the protest business, we're in the
electricity-generating business," Smith said.
Smith said Entergy Nuclear had hired the Brattleboro police to
provide security rather than their usual security forces Hunter
North and Wackenhutt.
Windham County State's Attorney Dan Davis refused to say whether
he would prosecute the latest group of protesters, but in the
past year he has refused to do so.
"They want to use the courts as a forum for their political
beliefs and our criminal justice system is not designed to give
people a forum. That's what the media and politicians are for,"
Davis said.
Davis watched the protesters as they marched through downtown
Brattleboro from his office. The march started in the southern
end of town at Brattleboro Memorial Hospital and ended three
miles north at the corporate headquarters.
Contact Susan Smallheer
*****************************************************************
48 Brattleboro Reformer: Raucus crowd takes on VY
By DARRY MADDEN, Reformer Staff
Tuesday, October 17
BRATTLEBORO -- Madam Nuke, aka Ginger Cakes, cracked a long
leather whip over the bare prosthetic buttocks of Old Grey
Vermon, aka Waffles T. Clown, on the traffic roundabout at Exit 3
Monday morning.
Waffles wore a horse head on top of a bicycle helmet and was
hunched over a fake drum of nuclear waste, begging for mercy.
Traffic slowed to a crawl.
"I'm too old! Someone talk to the brute! Talk to the Madam!," he
screamed. "Mommy! Mommy!"
Waffles T. Clown and Ginger Cakes were among more than 150
nuclear protesters at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee's corporate
headquarters. Most protesters marched from Brattleboro Memorial
Hospital to the Old Ferry Road office, strolling down Putney
Road like a Halloween party in search of a house.
Twenty-six protesters were arrested by Brattleboro police
officers for trespassing after they threw themselves on
Entergy's property and laid down, prayed or attempted to hang a
giant "closed" sign on the company's front door.
A few were chased down by police. Most played dead as officers
struggled to lift their limp bodies into cruisers. All were
released on citation to appear in court at a later date.
One woman who is writing a book about nuclear power was
arrested as she stood with the rest of the media circus and
dropped one knee on Entergy's property as she tried to take a
photograph.
"I genuflected and the guy arrested me," said Rebecca Coffey, a
Putney resident.
A police officer shouted for her to move when she kneeled down
with her camera. She did and then moved back across the street
where the rest of the protesters were standing. There, she was
pulled from the crowd.
She explained to police she was there for research purposes, but
she was told the charges would not be dropped.
This is the seventh protest at Entergy's corporate headquarters
over the last year. Groups have been hosting demonstrations
nearly every month in opposition to the plant's recent 20
percent power uprate and its pending relicensing for 20 years
past 2012, when its current license expires.
Dozens of people have been arrested at the recent Vermont Yankee
protests, but formal charges against the activists have been
consistently dropped.
"I'll wait and see what the police tell me with regard to these
events," Windham County State's Attorney Dan Davis said Monday.
"I'm not taking any position yet until I've spoken to officials
in police department."
Entergy had hired six original officers to oversee the protest,
said Capt. Steve Rowell of the Brattleboro Police Department. An
additional seven officers were called in to help make arrests,
contain the crowd and transport protesters, he said.
Rob Williams, spokesman for Vermont Yankee, declined to comment
on the protest, or how much Entergy paid the police department
for its services Monday.
The protesters were drawn from geographically disparate places
in what organizers called a "uniting of north and south."
"These are people from the area all saying 'no' to nuclear
power," said Deb Katz, director of the Massachusetts-based
Citizens Awareness Network.
When the marchers reached the intersection of Old Ferry Road,
Katz called a brief meeting.
"It's not the regular situation up there," said Katz, of the
beefed-up police presence at the office. "There are six or eight
cops up there. The places where people park their cars have been
blocked. The police are very, very nervous."
Katz warned anyone who was not willing to risk being arrested to
stay on the opposite side of the road, saying that the police
"want to intimidate."
Darry Madden can be reached at dmadden@reformer.com, or (802)
254-2311, ext. 273.
New England Newspapers, Inc. » (802) 254-2311 » 62 Black Mountain
Road » Brattleboro, VT 05301-9242
*****************************************************************
49 NRC: Nebraska Public Power District; Cooper Nuclear Station;
FR Doc E6-17245
[Federal Register: October 17, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 200)]
[Notices] [Page 61074-61075] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17oc06-131] [[Page
61074]]
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance
of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), paragraph 50.54(o), and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J, for
Facility Operating License No. DPR-46, issued to Nebraska Public
Power District (NPPD or the licensee) for operation of the Cooper
Nuclear Station (CNS), located in Nemaha County, Nebraska.
Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt NPPD from requirements to
include main steam isolation valve (MSIV) leakage in (a) the
overall integrated leakage rate test measurement required by
section III.A of Appendix J, Option B, and (b) the sum of local
leak rate test measurements required by section III.B of Appendix
J, Option B. The proposed action is in accordance with the
licensee's application, dated March 15, 2006, for exemption from
certain requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(o) as defined in 10 CFR part
50, Appendix J.
The Need for the Proposed Action Paragraph 50.54(o) of 10 CFR
part 50 requires that primary reactor containments for water
cooled power reactors be subject to the requirements of Appendix
J to 10 CFR part 50. Appendix J specifies the leakage test
requirements, schedules, and acceptance criteria for tests of the
leak tight integrity of the primary reactor containment, and of
systems and components which penetrate the containment. Option B,
section III.A requires that the overall integrated leak rate not
exceed the allowable leakage (La) with margin, as specified in
the Technical Specifications (TSs). The overall integrated leak
rate, as specified in the 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J definitions,
includes the contribution from MSIV leakage. By letter dated
March 15, 2006, the licensee has requested an exemption from
Option B, section III.A, requirements to permit exclusion of MSIV
leakage from the overall integrated leak rate test measurement.
Option B, section III.B of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J, requires
that the sum of the leakage rates of Type B and Type C local leak
rate tests be less than the performance criterion (La) with
margin, as specified in the TSs. The licensee's letter also
requests an exemption from this requirement, to permit exclusion
of the MSIV contribution to the sum of the Type B and Type C
tests.
The above-cited requirements of Appendix J require that MSIV
leakage measurements be grouped with the leakage measurements of
other containment penetrations when containment leakage tests are
performed. These requirements are inconsistent with the design of
the CNS and the analytical models used to calculate the
radiological consequences of design-basis accidents. At CNS, and
similar facilities, the leakage from primary containment
penetrations, under accident conditions, is collected and treated
by the secondary containment system, or would bypass the
secondary containment. However, the leakage from the MSIVs is
collected and treated via an Alternative Leakage Treatment (ALT)
path having different mitigation characteristics. In performing
accident analyses, it is appropriate to group various leakage
effluents according to the treatment they receive before being
released to the environment (i.e., bypass leakage is grouped,
leakage into secondary containment is grouped, and ALT leakage is
grouped), with specific limits for each group defined in the TSs.
The proposed exemption would permit ALT path leakage to be
independently grouped with its unique leakage limits.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has
completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes
that the environmental impacts would not be significant. The
proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the
types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation
exposure.
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historical sites.
It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no
other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant
non- radiological impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no action''
alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change
in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of
the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use
of any different resources than those previously considered in
the Final Environmental Statement dated February 1973 for CNS.
Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated
policy, on September 26, 2006, the NRC staff consulted with the
Nebraska State official, Ms. Julia Schmitt the Nebraska
Department of Public Service, regarding the environmental impact
of the proposed action. The State official had no comments on the
environmental impact of the proposed exemption.
Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the
environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed
action.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
licensee's letter dated March 15, 2006. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publically available
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the NRC Web site,
http://[fxsp0]www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/[fxsp0]adams.html. Persons
who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC
PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of
October 2006.
[[Page 61075]] For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian Benney, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-17245 Filed 10-16-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
50 WA Business News: Fed govt should not go down nuclear path - Carpenter -
17-October-06 by AAP
Uranium Oil and Gas debuts in negative territory - 18 Oct,
11:25am International Goldfields to raise $3m for potential
acquisition - 18 Oct, 10:56am State Govt launches Wungong
housing project master plan - 18 Oct, 09:57am WBC/MI leading
index points to strong growth ahead - 18 Oct, 08:54am Government
slashes TAB tax by $12m - 18 Oct, 08:14am Seven says WAN stake
part of long-term strategy - 18 Oct, 08:04am Household debt a
major source of concern for Australians - poll - 18 Oct, 08:03am
Today's business headlines - updated - 18 Oct, 08:00am [''
title='' border='0'] ['']
The federal government should support Western Australia in its
bid to secure 15 per cent of its gas reserves for domestic use
instead of going down the nuclear path, WA Premier Alan
Carpenter says.
The federal government has ratcheted up its support for nuclear
power, with Prime Minister John Howard unambiguously coming out
in favour of the energy source.
Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane yesterday predicted Australia
could have its own reactor within 10 years.
Western Australia has been suggested as a possible site for the
first reactor.
Mr Carpenter today said he did not believe Western Australians
wanted to pursue a nuclear future.
"We don't need it, we have got abundant gas supplies," Mr
Carpenter told ABC radio.
Mr Carpenter last week released the WA government's domestic gas
reservation policy, which aims to set aside for domestic use the
equivalent of 15 per cent of the gas available from any future
offshore development.
"I'm locked in a policy debate about securing sufficient
quantities of our own clean domestic gas to fuel our economy for
a long time in the future, that's the pathway that we should be
going down," he said.
"The federal government should be supporting us in that policy
direction, not trying to impose upon us by stealth conditions,
which will lead to uranium-fired nuclear power plants in (Perth)
or in the south-west of Western Australia.
"We don't need to go down that path and we shouldn't."
The full text of an announcement from the office of the Minister
for Energy, Fran Logan, is pasted below
Western Australians should be horrified that Perth has been
identified as a potential site for Australia's first nuclear
power plant, Energy Minister Francis Logan said today.
Mr Logan said the Federal Government's push to develop nuclear
power in Australia was gathering momentum and it was clear WA
was seen as the perfect site for a nuclear reactor or dump.
"However, all Western Australians can take comfort that the
Carpenter Government will not allow this to happen," the
Minister said.
"We do not allow uranium to be mined in WA and will not allow a
nuclear reactor to be built in this State. We will also oppose
any move to make WA the dumping ground for the world's nuclear
waste."
Federal Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane has been quoted in
media reports today as saying that the construction of nuclear
reactors could begin in Australia within 10 years.
Australian Nuclear Association head Clarence Hardy has
identified the coast south and north of Perth as a potential
site.
This comes only a few months after three prominent WA Liberal
MPs supported a nuclear waste dump for WA.
"It is completely illogical for us to be even considering
nuclear energy," Mr Logan said.
"We already have an abundance of clean natural gas that is far
cheaper and more efficient.
"This is why the Premier has spent so much time and effort
trying to guarantee a share of this gas for the domestic market
in WA.
"The Federal Government would do better by supporting Mr
Carpenter's efforts rather than promoting this nuclear nonsense."
| | | © 2005 | All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
51 The Australian: Case for nuclear power 'difficult' - Minchin |
October 17, 2006
A SENIOR government minister says nuclear power is probably not
viable in Australia, but it is sensible to consider whether it
may have a future role in meeting energy needs.
Finance Minister Nick Minchin said Australia's abundance of
cheap coal and gas meant it was difficult to assert the economic
viability of establishing a home-grown nuclear industry.
Prime Minister John Howard yesterday continued to back the
benefits of nuclear power.
As he announced $350 million in drought aid, Mr Howard talked up
the role nuclear power could play in easing the problem of
global warming and climate change.
The government has commissioned former Telstra boss Ziggy
Switkowski to head a taskforce examining the pros and cons of
nuclear power in Australia.
Senator Minchin today insisted the government had not made a
decision to go down the nuclear path.
"The government does not have a policy to have nuclear power,"
he told question time.
"The government has a policy, clearly enunciated, to properly
investigate that question under the expertise of Ziggy
Switkowski and to report back to the government on the
feasibility or otherwise of nuclear power.
"At this stage the economic case would have difficulty being
made, because this country has a significant advantage in
low-cost coal and gas which supply the mainstay of our base-load
power.
"Nuclear power would have to become significantly, relatively
cheaper than it is at the moment for it to be able to compete in
this country with either coal or gas."
Nuclear energy could be a key part of efforts to tackle global
warming by reducing the build-up of greenhouse gases caused by
burning fossil fuels, Senator Minchin said.
"If you are worried about human-induced greenhouse gas emissions
causing the globe to warm then you must ... contemplate the
possibility that nuclear power has a part to play in Australia's
future," he said.
He criticised Labor for ruling out nuclear energy in Australia.
"Typical of the Labor Party - stick your head in the sand,
ignore the issue, rabbit on about climate change ... but oh,
let's not talk about nuclear power," he said.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
52 IHT: Czech nuclear power plant reconnected to the grid -
- International Herald Tribune
Associated Press
OCTOBER 17, 2006
PRAGUE, Czech
Republic Workers reconnected the first unit of a nuclear power
plant near the border with Austria to the Czech Republic's power
grid, following a shutdown caused by a minor malfunction in the
unit's non-nuclear part, an official said Tuesday. A spokesman
for the Temelin plant, Milan Nebesar, said the unit was
reconnected to the grid late Monday and was working at full
capacity Tuesday morning.
An automatic security system disconnected the unit from the grid
early Monday because of excessive moisture near the generator.
The plant's second unit is off the grid due to annual refueling.
Construction of the plant's two 1,000-megawatt units, based on
Russian designs, started in the 1980s. The reactors were later
upgraded with U.S. technology, but they have remained
controversial because of frequent malfunctions.
The station, 60 kilometers (35 miles) north of the Austrian
border, has been a source of friction between the two countries.
Environmentalists in Austria demand it be closed, while Czech
authorities insist it is safe.
Copyright © 2006 the International
Herald Tribune All rights reserved [IHT]
*****************************************************************
53 FOCUS Information Agency: Belene NPP Will Cover All World Safety Standards
Nuclear Regulatory Agency Chair
Severe Battle for Compliance with EU Norms
17 October 2006 | 14:59 | FOCUS News Agency
Sofia. Some of the statements in the Romanian press about
Belene Nuclear Power Plant are absolutely unacceptable, the
chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Agency Sergey Tsochev said with
regard to the publications in the Romania press which say that
the NPP will have safety problems, FOCUS News Agency informs.
“The reactor, which is to be built in Bulgaria, will be
constructed in such a way that it will be in line with all
European and world safety standards,” Mr. Tsochev assured.
He pointed out that the statements in the Romanian press that
the reactors at NPP Kozloduy are the same as in Chernobyl are
not true.
According to the Agency chair the committee, which is still
holding procedures for choosing an executor for Belene NPP, must
choose among various types of reactors but they will not be the
Chernobyl kind.
Focus Information Agency © 2006
*****************************************************************
54 Boston Globe: Vermont Yankee owner fights anti-nuke group's complaints -
October 17, 2006
BRATTLEBORO, Vt. --Owners of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power
plant are fighting complaints filed by an anti-nuclear group as
they seek to extend the plant's operating license for another 20
years.
Entergy Nuclear filed an appeal with the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission asking it to reject and objections to the license
renewal.
The complaints were filed by the nuclear watchdog group New
England Coalition and will be considered as part of the review
of the plant's license extension.
The NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has agreed to hear
complaints about the plant's equipment and whether water
released from the plant will harm the ecology of the Connecticut
River.
Entergy wants the NRC to dismiss the water-related concerns and
reconsider questions about the plant's steam dryer. Previous
reviews of the steam dryer show that the equipment will last,
Entergy says.
The contentions could be rejected, settled with conditions or
aired in a public quasi-judicial hearing.
The Vermont Yankee license renewal is one of seven that have
been challenged out of the 44 renewals the NRC has approved.
None of the challenges have been the subject of a hearing, said
Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC.
------
Information from: Brattleboro Reformer[ /] © Copyright 2006
Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
55 The Australian: Nuclear 'unviable till coal price rises'
Matthew Warren October 18, 2006
NUCLEAR power is too expensive to be developed in Australia and
would only become viable through a massive spike in future coal
and gas prices or a significant government-imposed impost on
carbon emissions.
Energy generators claim current nuclear technology is between
50 to 100 per cent more expensive than conventional coal-fired
power, and faces a range of political and technical hurdles
before the first nuclear plant could be built.
Opposition resources spokesman Martin Ferguson yesterday accused
the Howard Government of playing wedge politics between sections
of the Labor Party by suggesting Australia could start building
nuclear plants within a decade.
John Howard this week deliberately put nuclear power back on the
political agenda as a potential low greenhouse-emissions energy
solution, a month before his taskforce is due to report its
draft findings on nuclear energy, reprocessing and uranium
mining.
Mr Ferguson told The Australian that nuclear power was a
distraction from the Government's unwillingness to properly
engage in the energy security debate.
"There's no doubt the Prime Minister's fancy with nuclear power
has been consistent with his 11 years of wedge politics," he
said. "If he's not careful he's going to wedge himself because
nuclear power does not stack up in Australia."
At an international nuclear conference in Sydney yesterday,
Energy Supply Association chief executive Brad Page said that
while nuclear power might be part of Australia's future energy
mix, it would require either a significant rise in coal and gas
prices or a regulatory constraint on carbon to be viable.
The Howard Government has consistently opposed carbon regulation
without Australia being part of a global scheme.
Mr Page said as well as overcoming relatively higher costs, an
Australian nuclear industry would need the support of the
community and governments, the development of a skilled nuclear
workforce and an established regulatory regime. He said energy
investors would also want to minimise the political risk of
investing in an expensive and politically sensitive investment
such as a nuclear power plant.
"The assets that our industry builds are fixed in nature, very
long-lived, and they cost billions of dollars when you are
building base-load (power generators)," he said. "You cannot
afford for an investment of that size to become stranded for
what is seemingly an arbitrary political act."
Mr Page said a more rational perspective on nuclear energy was
that it was one of a number of higher-cost, low-emission
technologies and might be available by about 2030 as part of a
composite of energy solutions to climate change.
"You'd be a very brave person today to say there was a silver
bullet to greenhouse and it was any individual technology," Mr
Page said.
Globally there are about 30 new nuclear plants under
construction and more than 200 planned or proposed, with the
World Nuclear Association forecasting a doubling of uranium
demand by 2020. Australia holds the world's largest uranium
reserves.
Privacy Terms © The Australian
*****************************************************************
56 Telegraph: Nuclear closures threaten supply
Wednesday 18 October 2006
[telegraph.co.uk]
By Roland Gribben (Filed: 17/10/2006)
+ The questions hanging over British Energy's nuclear fleet
Britain's nuclear power industry almost ground to a halt
yesterday just hours after Tony Blair heralded a new era in
energy supply security with the opening of a new gas pipeline
from Norway.
The discovery of more cracks in boiler tubes forced British
Energy to shut down two plants, Hunterston B in Scotland and
Hinkley Point B in Gloucestershire. The company also disclosed
for the first time that only one of its eight plants is
currently operating at full output.
The closure of the ageing 30-year old plants and the extent of
the supply cutbacks sent British Energy shares into free fall
and raised renewed fears about winter supply shortages. It also
dealt a further blow to Government hopes of selling its 65pc
holding in the company.
The shares slumped almost 24pc or 133.5p to 427p after sliding
to 400p at one stage, slashing the company's market
capitalisation by Ł800m to Ł2.44bn in the process.
Nuclear power accounts for around 20pc of electricity output but
the catalogue of problems listed by British Energy posed fresh
questions over the reliability of the plants at a time when the
Government is planning an expansion of atomic power.
Only the Torness plant in Scotland is operating at normal
output. Hartlepool, Dungeness B, the two plants at Heysham and
the newest nuclear station, Sizewell B have either stopped or
are operating well below capacity because of extensive leaks of
cooling water, repairs and maintenance.
British Energy has told investors and the Trade and Industry
Department it is unable to provide a firm timetable about when
its plants will be making a bigger contribution to power
supplies.
Stephen Billingham, the finance director, said the unplanned
shutdowns meant the company would have to buy supplies from the
wholesale market to meet contracts. The market duly responded by
pushing up the price of baseload electricity from 4.3p a unit to
4.5p.
Analysts say the company is paying the penalty for failing to
invest enough to maintain plants now operating well beyond their
planned lifespan. Both Hunterston B and Hinkley Point B are
scheduled for closure in 2011.
British Energy has enjoyed a profit and shares recovery since
being bailed out by the Government in 2002. The upsurge in
electricity prices on the back of the surge in oil and gas has
boosted profits and had ministers considering an earlier than
planned share sale.
The nuclear setback overshadowed the opening ceremony of the
Norwegian Langeled pipeline which is capable of providing 20pc
of Britain's winter gas needs. The 700-mile long pipeline, the
world's longest undersea link, brings gas from Norwegian fields
to feed into the gas network at Easington, East Yorkshire.
It was hoped the new link would avoid a re-run of last winter's
tight energy market and help arrest the sharp jump in prices but
the nuclear power headaches are upsetting the calculations.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006.
*****************************************************************
57 Herald Sun: State rules out nuclear reactor |
October 17, 2006 05:13pm Article from: AAP
A NUCLEAR reactor will not be built in Western Australia while
the current state Government is in power, WA's energy minister
says.
Frances Logan said today the Federal Government's push to
develop nuclear power was gathering momentum and it was clear WA
was seen as the perfect site for a nuclear reactor or dump.
"We do not allow uranium to be mined in WA and will not allow a
nuclear reactor to be built in this state," Mr Logan said.
"We will also oppose any move to make WA the dumping ground for
the world's nuclear waste."
Australian Nuclear Association head Clarence Hardy had
identified the coast south and north of Perth as a potential
site, he said.
Earlier today, WA Premier Alan Carpenter said the Federal
Government would do better to support WA in its bid to secure 15
per cent of gas reserves for domestic use instead of going down
the nuclear power path.
Mr Carpenter said he was trying to secure sufficient quantities
of domestic gas to fuel the economy for a long time in the
future.
"And the federal government should be supporting us in that
policy direction," Mr Carpenter said on ABC Radio.
"Not trying to impose upon us by stealth conditions which will
lead to uranium fired nuclear power plants in (Perth) or in the
south-west of Western Australia.
"We don't need to go down that path and we shouldn't."
© Herald and Weekly Times. All times AEST (GMT + 10).
*****************************************************************
58 AU ABC: 'Too early to know' where nuclear plants may be built.
17/10/2006. ABC News Online
The federal Industry Minister, Ian Macfarlane, says it is too
early to say where any nuclear power plants would be built in
Australia.
Some Labor MP's say the Government has decided to turn to
nuclear generation and have demanded the Prime Minister rule out
their electorates as sites for possible power plants.
Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley says if Labor wins
government he will reverse any decision to start building
nuclear power stations.
Yesterday, Mr Macfarlane said Australians could be using
nuclear energy within a decade.
But he denies the Government has made a decision on whether it
will go nuclear.
"No, we haven't and the opportunity is there now for Australia
to participate in the debate based on facts not fear and the
Labor Party keep running away from that," he said.
"They keep running out their hearty annuals in terms of trying
to frighten [the] population away, but I think the population
[is] actually too smart for that now and Australians are ready
for the debate."
The Federal Government has put nuclear power firmly on the
national agenda, with Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane
predicting that construction of a power plant could begin within
a decade, but questions are being raised over the location of
such a facility. [RealMedia 28k+] [WinMedia 28k+] [MP3]
Industry and Resources Minister Ian Macfarlane says Australia
needs to have a debate on nuclear power as a response to global
warming, and the decision on where to locate a nuclear power
plant will be made after the debate. [RealMedia 28k+] [WinMedia
28k+] [MP3]
*****************************************************************
59 AU ABC: MPs concerned over planned nuclear plant
The World Today - Tuesday, 17 October , 2006 12:30:00
Reporter: Gillian Bradford
ELEANOR HALL: But now to Canberra and the Federal Government
has put nuclear power firmly on the national agenda with
Industry Minster Ian Macfarlane predicting that construction of
a power plant could begin within a decade.
So Labor is asking the inevitable question, just where should
this plant be built? And several MP's have today asked the Prime
Minister to rule out putting a nuclear plant in their backyard.
In Canberra, Gillian Bradford reports.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: Even a year ago nuclear power was barely on
the political radar. But now both the Prime Minister and his
Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane are both converts, talking it
up as part of the answer to global warming.
Queensland Liberal MP Warren Entsch says he senses there's also
been a shift in the public mood.
WARREN ENTSCH: You're always going to get a group that'll say
no. But I think that there's a growing awareness of value of
nuclear power, particularly in relation to alternatives.
And I think that there is certainly a very, very strong support.
Let's have a look at what it's going to cost us to do it, and
let's see what the benefits are.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: The obvious question though is where would a
power plant be built. Mr Entsch, possibly with the knowledge his
own far north Queensland electorate is not a likely site, says
he'd welcome such a project
WARREN ENTSCH: I don't have an issue with it.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: Labor MPs though are not so welcoming. Just
yesterday the President of the Pacific Nuclear Council suggested
a few sites including north of Newcastle in New South Wales and
the coast south of the La Trobe valley in Victoria.
So this morning at Parliament, out came the local Labor members
to say their piece. First Jill Hall.
JILL HALL: Well I'd like to call on John Howard to assure the
people of Newcastle, Hunter, Central Coast, that there won't be
a nuclear power station in that area.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: Then Sharon Bird.
SHARON BIRD: Now the question for the Prime Minister, and you
can't avoid this, is where will these power stations be? And
today, I'm calling on him to rule out the Illawarra region for
one of these power stations, thanks.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: The Opposition's problems with the
Government's nuclear zeal are much deeper than the "not in my
backyard" syndrome.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: Labor's leader Kim Beazley.
KIM BEAZLEY: Well it's not the solution to global warming,
that's a nonsense. It's an obsession with an old technology when
what we've got to be about is new renewable technologies. That's
what we've got to concentrate on.
GILLIAN BRADFORD: Labor's resources spokesman Martin Ferguson
says Australia has urgent decisions to make about its energy
requirements. And nuclear power need not be part of the mix.
MARTIN FERGUSON: Beyond Australia, nuclear power is a fact of
life for a range of countries. For those countries, do not have
the energy richness that Australia has.
We actually have a capacity to guarantee our future by making
the right decisions with the respect to our future energy
sources, but also engaging in new debates such as where we go on
transport fuels, the issue of energy security, whether investing
gas to liquids and coal to liquids, synthetic diesel, which
takes our reliance off oil.
These are the debates that Australia has to have now. These are
the debates that the Prime Minister has been running away from
for the last couple of years.
Every other nation in the world at the moment is consumed at the
moment with the energy security debate. Nuclear power doesn't
stack up in Australia economically.
Australia will make energy decisions based on the economics of
what is right for Australia.
ELEANOR HALL: And that's Labor's Martin Ferguson ending that
report by Gillian Bradford.
*****************************************************************
60 AU ABC: McFarlane says Australia needs debate on nuclear energy
The World Today - Tuesday, 17 October , 2006 18:34:00
Reporter: Chris Uhlmann
ELEANOR HALL: So has Federal Government already made up its
mind on nuclear power?
Chris Uhlmann spoke to the Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane in
our Canberra studio a short time ago and asked him where any
power plant would be built.
IAN MACFARLANE: Well that's a decision to be made after we've
had the debate. The reality is that Australia needs to have the
debate on nuclear energy, not just on the basis of how we
produce our energy in the future.
But also in terms of ensuring we have a full suite of greenhouse
gas lowering emission programs. Nuclear can play a role in that,
and Australians are now ready for that debate.
CHRIS UHLMANN: You say, "let's have a debate", but have you
already made up your mind?
IAN MACFARLANE: No we haven't, and the opportunity is there now
for Australia to participate in a debate based on facts, not
fear.
And the Labor Party keep running away from that, they keep
running out their hardy annuals in terms of trying to frighten
the population away.
But I think the population are actually too smart for that now.
And Australians are ready for the debate.
CHRIS UHLMANN: Your expert committee hasn't yet reported, yet it
sounds from the noises that you and the Prime Minister were
making yesterday as though you have a fairly clear path, you
know what you want to do.
IAN MACFARLANE: Look I think what's changed is that we need to
have a structured approach to lowering greenhouse gas emissions.
And whilst this Government has done more than any.
In fact, we've spent almost $2 billion in lowering greenhouse
gas emissions, or investigating technologies to do that, we need
to have the full suite.
Now we haven't seen the report, which Ziggy Switkowski is
preparing. But the reality is that Australians are ready for
this debate.
It is a technology that is used around the world. It is a
technology that is in fact, saving billions of tonnes of CO2
(Carbon Dioxide) emissions per year. And it's one that I think
we should have a full discussion on.
CHRIS UHLMANN: There's an old saying, "Never have an inquiry,
unless you know the outcome". Do you know the outcome?
IAN MACFARLANE: No, I don't know the outcome, but I do know that
in terms of Western developed countries, nuclear energy plays a
very important role in that.
We see countries like France, Japan, Finland, the United
Kingdom. Of course, the United States, all using nuclear energy,
all using it as part of their energy mix.
Australia will continue to rely on coal, we will continue to use
more and more renewables. But we need to have a full set of
options if we're going to seriously address our greenhouse gas
emissions.
CHRIS UHLMANN: You'd be more than well aware that Australia has
been searching for a place to bury low-level nuclear waste since
the 1970s.
If we can't find a place to bury that, how are we going to find
a place to bury waste from a nuclear plant?
IAN MACFARLANE: Well again that is part of the debate, based on
facts not fear. The reality is that CSIRO have the technology to
store nuclear waste, but that technology will ensure that it's
safely stored away.
Countries like Sweden have addressed those issues, and are
dealing with them and producing nuclear energy and storing their
own waste. But until we have a debate, and until the Labor Party
has the courage to come out from behind its ideology and
participate in that debate, then these issues can't be resolved
in the minds of Australians.
ELEANOR HALL: And that's Industry and Resources Minister Ian
Macfarlane was speaking to Chris Uhlmann in Canberra.
*****************************************************************
61 AU ABC: Minchin downplays Macfarlane's nuclear energy comments.
17/10/2006. ABC News Online
The Federal Finance Minister, Nick Minchin, has cast doubt on a
prediction by one of his colleagues that Australia will have a
nuclear power station within a decade.
The Industry Minister, Ian Macfarlane, yesterday told a
conference that the construction of a nuclear plant could begin
in the next 10 years.
The Government is waiting on a report from a task force on the
feasibility of nuclear power in Australia.
Senator Minchin has told the Senate that nuclear power would
have to become significantly cheaper to compete with Australia's
coal and gas generated electricity.
"What Mr Macfarlane was pointing to was the possibility that
the economics of nuclear power may well change in the decades
ahead and it may well be that if the government comes to the
conclusion, and there is a consensus that nuclear power has a
role to play in power generation in this country, it may well be
that in 10 years a nuclear power station may commence," Senator
Minchin said.
"I happen to think at this stage that is probably optimistic."
*****************************************************************
62 Guardian Unlimited: Nuclear sell-off in trouble as defects revealed
Terry Macalister
Tuesday October 17, 2006 The Guardian
Government plans to sell off its holding in British Energy were
in serious trouble last night after the nuclear power company
admitted it had found 90 defects at one site, leaks at another,
and agreed that only one of its plants was operating normally.
The list of problems was lambasted by critics and came as British
Nuclear Group, which is also scheduled for privatisation, was
fined Ł500,000 for safety lapses at the country's largest atomic
site, Sellafield.
The two events cast a cloud over the atomic power industry's
attempt to celebrate today's 50th anniversary of the opening of
the world's first, mainly civil, nuclear plant at Calder Hall,
Sellafield, by the Queen.
BE's difficulties cut the share price by a quarter. They also
raise questions about nuclear energy's contribution to
generating electricity this winter and are potentially damaging
to the industry's bid to build new reactors. The company also
admitted that its hopes of extending the life of its plants by
up to 10 years might be hit. This would depend on the scale of
defects found in the future, it explained.
The government and its City advisers had planned to launch a
roadshow for the sale of its 65% stake in BE in September, but
this never got off the ground. The delay was never explained.
The truth leaked out during a briefing to analysts yesterday.
The company said Downing Street had been made aware of boiler
cracking problems at its Hunterston B plant, on the west coast
of Scotland, which it warned could extend to other facilities.
Asked whether the share sale would have to wait, a BE official
said: "The government needs to consider how to deal with it [the
sale] in the light of the latest information."
BE, which supplies more than 20% of the UK's electricity, was
last month forced to cut its output forecasts due to cracks at
Hunterston B and said that it would have to inspect its sister
unit at Hinkley Point, Somerset. The company admitted yesterday
that the boiler cracking at Hinkley Point B's number three
reactor was at the "high end of expectations" and there are now
further inspections going on at other reactors on both sites.
In addition, BE said it was investigating underground leaks at
its Hartlepool site where two reactors were meant to return to
service next month. Further delays are possible, it admitted.
The plant at Heysham 1 is now being inspected and one reactor
there is working at reduced capacity as a separate investigation
is carried out. Meanwhile Dungeness B is suffering from fuel
supply problems, while Sizewell B, the newest of all the BE
plants, is going through a statutory "outage" period for repairs.
This leaves only the Torness site working normally. The company
declined to specify what impact the latest difficulties would
have on its targets for producing electricity, but admitted it
would have to buy power itself on the open market to meet its
supply obligations.
The government invested more than Ł3bn in BE in September 2004
when the company was pushed to the edge of financial collapse by
a slump in wholesale power prices. It gained its shareholding as
part of a huge restructuring of the BE balance sheet. While BE
was outlining its latest problems to the City, Carlisle crown
court was handing out a Ł500,000 fine, plus costs of over
Ł37,000, to British Nuclear Group Sellafield.
The company was told by the court that it would have faced a
fine of Ł250,000 more if it had not pleaded guilty to the
prosecution brought by the Health &Safety Executive. The agency
brought the prosecution following the discovery, in April 2005,
of a large leak of highly radioactive liquid within Sellafield's
Thermal Oxide Reprocessing plant (Thorp).
The leak of more than 80,000 litres of spent nuclear fuel was
only detected nine months after it started. Thorp was closed and
has yet to reopen. BNG, which runs the nuclear plant, had
pleaded guilty to three charges of breaching the Sellafield site
licence at an earlier hearing.
Jean McSorley, Greenpeace's senior nuclear adviser, said the
court was damning about the safety culture at Sellafield.
"This fine was thoroughly deserved and highlights the sheer
ineptitude of the nuclear industry. However, as British Nuclear
Group is a government-owned company, it effectively means that
the fine is being paid by the taxpayer," she added.
When atomic power was clean and green
When the young Queen Elizabeth opened the world's first nuclear
power station at Calder Hall in Cumbria 50 years ago today, it
promised to usher in an era of clean and limitless energy.
The Lord Privy Seal, Richard Butler, told the thousands gathered
to witness the opening that by the mid-1960s no other type of
power station would be built, with nuclear replacing all other
forms of energy. Another nine nuclear power stations soon sprang
up across Britain, providing up to a quarter of the country's
electricity.
Calder Hall, which closed in 2003, consisted of four Magnox-type
reactors, each producing about 50MW each. It was originally
built to manufacture military plutonium but then came to provide
electricity for the national grid.
However, Britain's half-century of nuclear power has been dogged
by controversy. After billions of pounds spent and technological
glitches galore, opinion began to turn against the industry. The
first warnings about safety came as early as 1957 when a fire
broke out at the Windscale nuclear complex next to Calder Hall,
which took four days to put out. Disasters at Three Mile Island
and Chernobyl brought fears to a new height, and problems about
how to dispose of waste and decommission old stations suggested
that the era was over.
Now concerns about global warming and fossil fuels have led the
government to call for a new debate about the future of nuclear.
Calder Hall may be long gone but nuclear power remains firmly on
the agenda.
Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute
[UP]
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
63 DOE: State of New Mexico Issues Permit For Remote-Handled Waste at WIPP
October 16, 2006
Enables DOE to Permanently Move Waste to the WIPP Repository for
Safe Disposal
CARLSBAD, NM U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced
that the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) issued a
revised hazardous waste facility permit for DOEs Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico. The
revised permit enables WIPP to receive and dispose of
remote-handled (RH) transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste
currently stored at DOE clean-up sites across the country. WIPP
expects to receive its first RH-TRU waste shipment in the coming
months, as soon as the regulatory approvals are obtained.
WIPP is a key element of the safe cleanup of this nations
defense waste and the significance of this permit, which enables
the Department to continue its cleanup momentum, cannot be
understated, said James Rispoli, DOE Assistant Secretary for
Environmental Management. Through state and federal efforts,
the Department will move forward to permanently and safely
deliver waste stored at DOE facilities to WIPPs safe
underground repository.
NMED Secretary Ron Curry was joined by New Mexico Gov. Bill
Richardson, State Senator Carroll Leavell, State Representative
John Heaton, Dr. Inés Triay, Chief Operating Officer for DOEs
Environmental Management Program, and community leaders and WIPP
employees for a permit signing ceremony in Carlsbad.
I want to thank Secretary Curry, his staff and the citizens of
this state, who worked so diligently to produce a sound,
responsible permit, Dr. Dave Moody, Manager of the DOE Carlsbad
Field Office, said. I also would like to thank the communities
of southeast New Mexico whose confidence in the WIPP project was
evidenced throughout the public hearings.
Since opening in 1999, more than 83,000 containers of
contact-handled TRU waste have been safely disposed in WIPPs
half-mile deep repository. WIPP was designed for the safe
disposal of both contact-handled and remote-handled TRU waste.
Central to the permit issued today is removal of the ban on
disposal of remote-handled TRU waste at WIPP. Other revisions
to the permit include alternate methods for analyzing wastes
prior to shipment to WIPP, increased container storage areas
aboveground, more efficient methods for monitoring volatile
organic compounds in the repository, a new dispute resolution
process, and an e-mail notification system to inform the public
of various permit-related activities.
WIPP is the world's first repository for the permanent disposal
of defense-generated transuranic radioactive waste left from
research and production of nuclear weapons. Located in
southeastern New Mexico, 26 miles east of Carlsbad, WIPP
facilities include disposal rooms excavated in an ancient,
stable salt formation, 2,150 feet (almost one-half mile)
underground. Waste disposal began at WIPP on March 26, 1999.
Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, (202) 586-4940 Dennis Hurtt,
(505) 234-7300 [ ]
U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW |
Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403
*****************************************************************
64 SF New Mexican: State revises WIPP permit to allow so-called 'hot waste'
[FreeNewMexican.com]
Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:04 pm
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
CARLSBAD, N.M. (AP) - The New Mexico Environment Department has
issued a revised permit, allowing higher levels of nuclear waste
to be stored in underground repositories at the Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant.
The permit enables WIPP to receive and dispose of remote-handled
transuranic radioactive waste, currently stored at U.S.
Department of Energy sites nationwide. The first shipments of
the new waste could begin after regulatory approvals in coming
months.
"WIPP is a key element of the safe cleanup of this nation's
defense waste, and the significance of this permit, which
enables the department to continue its cleanup momentum, cannot
be understated," Assistant Energy Secretary James Rispoli said
Monday.
Gov. Bill Richardson and state Environment Secretary Ron Curry
were among the dignitaries attending the signing ceremony.
Since WIPP opened in 1999, the plant has stored more than 83,000
drums of radioactive waste in salt beds 2,150 feet under the New
Mexico desert. But that waste was low-level _ things like
clothes and tools used by workers at radioactive sites.
The new waste _ so-called "hot waste" _ must be handled by
machines using robotic arms. It has always been part of WIPP's
management plan, after the plant had demonstrated it can handle
the lesser stuff safely.
"WIPP is one of the few success stories in that it's operating
and they're putting waste in," said Bob Neill, a former manager
of a state WIPP oversight group.
After hearings in Carlsbad and Santa Fe, a state hearing officer
concluded last month that WIPP had earned the right _ through
its unblemished safety record of no spills or leaks _ to take
the next step.
"This means New Mexico, technologically when it comes to waste,
is one of the leaders around the world," Richardson said.
However, a government watchdog group, Citizens for Alternatives
to Radioactive Dumping, issued a news release criticizing the
permit.
The group said an impact study should have been conducted "to
determine if the current health of the communities surrounding
the WIPP site and along the WIPP routes can bear yet more
environmental stress."
According to a DOE news release, the revised permit allows
alternate methods for analyzing waste before shipment, increases
container storage areas above ground and adds more efficient
methods for monitoring volatile organic compounds inside the
repository.
It also institutes a new dispute resolution process and an
e-mail notification system "to inform the public of various
permit-related activities."
Richardson said the permit was crafted after "thorough, careful
review and analysis." He said the process involved discussions
with residents, citizens groups and DOE and state Environment
Department scientists.
"This is the best possible permit," he said. "It both allows for
the safe disposal of remote handled transuranic waste and _ at
the request of the environmental community _ creates vastly
better public access to information about the waste that is
accepted at WIPP."
Comment posting on our site has been temporarily suspended.
Thank you for your patience.
/ Terms of Use | ©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican,
*****************************************************************
65 Platts: UK's Sellafield fined $929,000 over leaking nuclear pipe: press
London (Platts)--17Oct2006
The operator of Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant was fined
GBP500,000 ($929,000) Monday after 83,000 litres of radioactive
acid leaked out of a broken pipe, British media reported Tuesday.
British Nuclear Group Sellafield was handed the fine after
pleading guilty to three counts of breaching conditions attached
to the Sellafield site license.
The "Daily Telegraph" reported the case at Carlisle Crown
Court that heard scientists had taken eight months to detect the
spillage when it should have been discovered "within days."
The acid, which contained 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg of
plutonium, was destined for a sealed concrete holding site at the
west Cumbrian plant but dripped from a crack in the system, the
report said. No one was injured in the leak and no radiation
escaped, but the plant has been closed ever since it was
uncovered, it added.
Monday's punishment comes on top of a GBP2 million penalty
imposed on BNG Sellafield by the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority earlier this year.
News of the fine came on the same day that British Energy
announced it was shutting down key nuclear reactors after
discovering cracks inside boilers.
The discovery forced the firm to shut down its Heysham plant
in Lancashire and prepare to shut down two similar reactors at
Hinkley and Hunterston, in Ayrshire. For more news, request a
free trial to Platts Power in Europe at
http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ or subscribe
now at
http://www.platts.com/infostore/product_info.php?cPath=2_31&p
roducts_id=55
Copyright © 2006 - Platts, All Rights Reserved
[The McGraw-Hill Companies]
*****************************************************************
66 Carlsbad Current-Argus: Richardson signs WIPP waste permit
By Andrea Rich
10/16/2006
+ »CARLSBAD Officials say it's the biggest thing to happen at
the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant since the nuclear waste
repository operation opened in 1999.
New Mexico's secretary of environment, Ron Curry, and Governor
Bill Richardson jointly signed the remote handled waste permit
for WIPP after months of a governmental process involving
hearings, public input and investigating the safety of handling
this level of waste for both New Mexicans and the New Mexico
environment.
Remote Handled Waste will be shipped to Carlsbad by truck and in
the same type of containers that the contact-handled waste is
being received today. It will be placed in the walls of the same
underground storage rooms where contact waste is stored. The
first RH waste is expected in the spring of 2007. Remote handled
waste emits more penetrating radiation than contact-handled
waste, but was part of the Department of Energy's original plan
for the WIPP site.
The signing took place at the Skeen Whitlock building the
Department of Energy's Carlsbad Field Office. In addition to
Gov. Richardson and Curry, a fleet of officials from the DOE,
New Mexico, Eddy and Lea counties, Carlsbad, Eunice and Hobbs
were present for the signing event.
"This is the most significant event to effect this facility,"
Sec. Curry said in an interview before the Governor arrived. "It
changes the nature of the facility.
"Since the original WIPP permit was written, the ability to take
remote handled waste was not there," Curry explained. Through
the efforts of the local staff at the DOE, the governor's
office, the New Mexico Environment Department and Washington
D.C. officials, Curry said the permit was written through a
process that "caused the environmental and health issues to be
answered." He said the thoroughness of all parties involved
including the dissenters opposed to more nuclear waste matter
being shipped and stored near Carlsbad made for the writing of a
sustainable permit that will outlast his service as Secretary of
the Environment and Richardson's administration.
"I don't see any process problems," he said.
James Bearzi essentially wrote the RH permit and was present at
the signing. When asked how long the process of permitting RH
waste has taken, Bearzi said, "Since 1992.
"With the land withdrawal act, we've always contemplated it to
be here. It's a big day because the permit will further the
nation's cleanup effort of the country's legacy waste," Bearzi
said prior to the start of ceremonies.
The RH permit goes into effect 30 days from signing.
"Thirty days from now I'll consider WIPP to be fully
operational," Bearzi said.
Rep. John Heaton led the ceremonies after introductions by Sen.
Carroll Leavell.
"What a great day this is for Carlsbad and Southeast New Mexico.
The endurance you have (in pursuing this permit) is really
incredible," Heaton said.
Gov. Richardson considers WIPP to be part of his career. He was
involved in the idea of burying nuclear waste in salt beds near
Carlsbad decades ago as a federal legislator and as the
secretary of the Department of Energy.
Richardson said Monday afternoon that the ability to take RH
waste would provide for another 200 jobs for Carlsbad, and
become a cornerstone in the nation's handling of cold war
nuclear waste. The governor said the permit both "allows for
safe disposal" of RH waste and "vastly better access to public
information for waste handling at WIPP."
Richardson said the key to the success of WIPP and the expected
success of this new ability is state oversight something he's
pushed since his days in Washington. The state of New Mexico has
authority over WIPP waste related to chemical, not radioactive,
components.
The process of the RH permit brought about unprecedented
cooperation between government officials and environmental
groups, one Washington official at the ceremony said. By
government standards, the RH permit progress over the last year
is considered to be astonishingly rapid, which legislators and
Gov. Richardson attribute to the cooperation of the Carlsbad
community, the agencies and the NMED.
Also speaking at the ceremony was Carlsbad Mayor Bob Forrest.
"The governor asked me if I was still mad that he delayed WIPP
about 10 years," Forrest said from center stage, referencing the
delays at the federal level as Richardson was at one time for
it, and at other times against it.
"Governor, I never did tell you the DOE never quit funding it,
so we had about 10 years of funding " he broke off to the
laughter of the crowd and the governor.
Forrest spoke some to WIPP's safety record, and the national
attention WIPP gets for its perfect safety rating.
"One mistake would have killed us all," Forrest said.Print
Copyright © 2005 Carlsbad Current Argus, a MediaNews Group
*****************************************************************
67 Telegraph: Sellafield fined over leaking nuclear pipe
[telegraph.co.uk]
By Anil Dawar
(Filed: 17/10/2006)
The operator of Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant was fined
Ł500,000 yesterday after 83,000 litres of radioactive acid
leaked out of a broken pipe.
Scientists took eight months to detect the spillage when it
should have been discovered "within days", Carlisle Crown Court
heard.
The acid, which contained 20 tonnes of uranium and 160kg of
plutonium, was destined for a sealed concrete holding site at
the west Cumbrian plant but dripped from a crack in the
system.
No one was injured in the leak and no radiation escaped, but the
plant has been closed ever since it was uncovered.
British Nuclear Group Sellafield was handed the fine after
pleading guilty to three counts of breaching conditions attached
to the Sellafield site licence.
Yesterday's punishment comes on top of a Ł2million penalty
imposed on BNG Sellafield by the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority earlier this year.
News of the fine came on the same day that British Energy
announced it was shutting down key nuclear reactors after
discovering cracks inside boilers.
The discovery forced the firm to shut down its Heysham plant in
Lancashire and prepare to shut down two similar reactors at
Hinkley and Hunterston, in Ayrshire.
© Copyright of Telegraph Group Limited 2006.
*****************************************************************
68 News & Star: ...and still no senior manager has been sacked
Published on 17/10/2006
IT was a blunder “worthy of Homer Simpson,” the inept nuclear
plant worker of the TV cartoon series The Simpsons.
That was how shadow trade secretary David Willets famously
described the leak of 83,000 litres of highly radioactive liquor
which yesterday landed Sellafield operator British Nuclear Group
(BNG) in court.
The condemnation was always likely to be strong.
As yesterday’s case drew to a close at Carlisle Crown Court,
The Honourable Mr Justice Openshaw set the scene fittingly,
pointing out: “Sellafield is the most significant and
potentially most hazardous nuclear site in this country.”
Despite the health and safety breaches, bosses at the company
must hope that the ÂŁ500,000 fine for the blunder will draw a
line under the episode.
But after the case, a spokeswoman for the company confirmed that
no senior manager was dismissed over the leak.
Yet the impact of the incident has been immense: it led to Thorp
being closed for the last 18 months at a cost of at least ÂŁ50
million, the company facing a ÂŁ2 million penalty imposed by the
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and finally to yesterday’s
embarrassing court appearance before the Honourable Mr Justice
Openshaw.
“Two senior managers have been through formal disciplinary
procedures,” said the Sellafield spokeswoman, adding that
neither of the two managers are now based at the Thorp plant.
The Public Relations department at Sellafield issued a statement,
expressing regret for what happened and vowing that the company
is determined to do what it takes to ensure there is never a
repeat of the incident.
But Health &Safety chiefs in Cumbria welcomed the ÂŁ500,000 fine,
saying that company’s running of the Thorp facility during the
incident fell well below the required standard for a considerable
time.
A HSE spokesman said: “Thorp was Sellafield’s flagship and
built to high standards.
“It must also be operated, maintained, and managed to high
standards.
“In particular, the conditions attached to Sellafield’s
nuclear site licence to secure the protection of workers and the
public must be fully complied with.
“For the wider nuclear industry, our message is clear: high
standards are demanded of the nuclear industry.”
The fine was also welcomed by Greenpeace.
The charity’s senior nuclear advisor Jean McSorley said:
“This fine was thoroughly deserved and highlights the sheer
ineptitude of the nuclear industry.
“BNG not only completely failed to prevent a leak of high
radioactive nuclear waste, but they didn’t even realise their
shameful act of incompetence for nine months.”
*****************************************************************
69 washingtonpost.com: Cracking the Arms Race -
By George Perkovich,vice president for studies of the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace and the author of "India's
Nuclear Bomb"
Tuesday, October 17, 2006; Page C09
SHOPPING FOR BOMBS
Nuclear Proliferation, Global Insecurity, and the Rise and Fall
of the A.Q. Khan Network
By Gordon Corera
Oxford Univ. 288 pp. $28
It is tempting to demonize A.Q. Khan, the Pakistani engineer who
became infamous for selling nuclear weapons designs and
production equipment to North Korea, Iran, Libya and perhaps
others. Demonizing the fiery nationalist who brought the bomb to
Pakistan -- the state that nurtured the Taliban and remains a
den of terrorist training and Islamist fanaticism -- can
actually be reassuring: If Khan is written off as simply evil,
then his deeds can be written off as peculiar sins that do not
reflect flaws in the international system.
Unfortunately, life is more complicated. As the BBC reporter
Gordon Corera vividly narrates in his fine new "Shopping for
Bombs," it was prosperous Western engineers and business people
who eagerly provided the wares that Khan marketed, and it was
largely governments from the "advanced" world, including the
United States, that failed to correct the weaknesses in export
rules that Khan's network exploited. Khan was a brilliant
shopper, trade expediter and salesman, not a great technologist.
Now exposed as an arms peddler and confined to his villa in
Islamabad, he is certainly an egomaniacal and amoral man, but
the systemic dangers he represents are far larger than any one
person.
The network took decades to build. Khan, a metallurgist, left
the Netherlands for Pakistan in the 1970s, armed with nuclear
centrifuge designs and parts stolen from his employers at a
Dutch engineering firm, as well as lists of the manufacturers of
components for a uranium-enrichment plant. That's important
because nuclear export controls work like a filter: Rulemakers
decide which components should be controlled and then set the
gauge of the filter to catch them. With his eager vendors'
connivance, Khan realized that these controls could be bypassed
by trading subcomponents that would pass undetected through the
filters. As Corera shows, instead of transferring complete
centrifuges, which would have set off alarm bells, the Khan
network would buy and sell specialized steel parts, magnets and
electrical gear separately and assemble them later in Pakistan,
Iran, North Korea, Libya and perhaps elsewhere. As countries got
wise to the game, the network would move its manufacturing to
less suspecting and less suspected countries such as Malaysia.
Khan's venality and recklessness were immoral but, by and large,
not illegal. No international criminal law proscribes the
proliferation of nuclear weapons or the wherewithal to produce
them. That isn't the case for other dangerous evils such as
slave-trading, hijacking and piracy, but when it comes to
peddling nukes, each country is supposed to make its own laws
and decide whether and how to prosecute violators. "It has been
estimated," Corera writes, "that at least two-thirds of the Khan
network was entirely legitimate, breaking no law." The few
members of the network who have been prosecuted have done little
or no jail time.
"Shopping for Bombs" is more than the fast-paced story of an
alarming proliferation network and the conditions that let it
flourish. Corera also offers a fascinating, detailed account of
how Libya surprised the world with its undetected nuclear
acquisitions and how the United States and Britain secretly
persuaded Moammar Gaddafi to verifiably give them up.
That proved to be a major turning point for Khan. Washington and
London had started getting detailed intelligence on the
surprising extent of his network's activities in 2000, but
before taking action against it, U.S. and British intelligence
agencies wanted to learn more "to be sure that all the tentacles
were under surveillance. Otherwise they could simply go
underground and emerge soon after in a new -- and unknown --
form." But then came the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, and
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf suddenly became a key
helper in the U.S.-led war against al-Qaeda. Pressing Musharraf
to put Khan out of business would have to wait.
But in 2003, when the United States and Britain managed to
induce Gaddafi to hand over all his nuclear equipment, materials
and blueprints, Libya provided troves of new intelligence on the
Khan network, which served as the public justification for
Musharraf finally to turn on Pakistan's greatest hero and source
of nuclear pride. But Musharraf continued to dodge and conceal
information that would be vital to preventing future
proliferation.
Here, Corera takes readers briskly through some real policy
conundrums without lapsing into wonk talk. "The United States
had invested so much in Musharraf personally rather than
building broader democratic institutions that it found itself
with little leverage to influence Pakistani policy," he notes.
Would cutting off U.S. aid -- meant primarily to boost
Pakistan's cooperation in hunting al-Qaeda -- change Musharraf's
calculations? When the United States had imposed severe
sanctions on Pakistan in 1990 because of its nuclear weapons
program, it had pushed the Khan network into overdrive. The
diminished U.S.-Pakistani relationship that resulted from the
sanctions deprived the United States of contacts and
intelligence that might have helped uncover Khan's activities;
it also reduced the leverage Washington had to try to get the
Pakistani government to crack down on the Khan network.
Gaddafi eased these dilemmas by exposing the network's dangers
and scope so dramatically that the heretofore reluctant
Musharraf had to take Khan out of commission. But the basic
dilemmas raised by Pakistan remain relevant for Iran and other
future flashpoints: Is combating proliferation more important
than hunting terrorists or promoting regime change? If bombing,
invading or sanctioning a country -- whether Pakistan or Iran --
cannot solve the proliferation problem, what levers can compel
changes in nuclear policy? International criminalization of
activities described so cogently by Corera certainly wouldn't
hurt.
Copyright 1996- The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
70 Win in Livermore Lab BSL-3 Lawsuit-read our press release
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:18:35 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
For more information:
Tri-Valley CAREs: Marylia Kelley or Loulena Miles, (925) 443-7148
Nuclear Watch New Mexico: Jay Coghlan, (505) 989-7342
Lead attorney: Stephan Volker, (510) 496-0600
For immediate release: October 16, 2006
COMMUNITY GROUPS HAIL VICTORY, COURT GRANTS DEMAND FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
BEFORE BIO-WARFARE AGENT RESEARCH FACILITY OPENS AT LIVERMORE LAB;
9th Circuit Court Issues Final Decision in Landmark National Lawsuit
San Francisco -- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling today
holding an Energy Department environmental study inadequate and thereby
halting Energy's impending plans to operate the first advanced biowarfare
agent research facility inside a US nuclear weapons lab. This decision
follows three years of litigation and public outcry against the planned
operation of the dangerous facility.
The Biosafety Level-3 facility was designed to conduct aerosol experiments
and genetic modifications using lethal pathogens such as live anthrax,
plague, botulism and Q fever. The Energy Department had omitted any study
of security risks and terrorist threats to the facility on the basis that
such an analysis was not required under the National Environmental Policy
Act.
The Ninth Circuit Court upheld plaintiffs' contention that the Energy Dept.
acted illegally in omitting that analysis.
Two plaintiff organizations, the Livermore Lab watchdog group, Tri-Valley
CAREs, and the Los Alamos Lab watchdog group, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico,
along with individually-named community members, demanded that the Energy
Dept. conduct a thorough study of the project's potential environmental
impacts -- including potential terrorist threats.
In today's decision, the Ninth Circuit remanded the environmental review
back to the Department of Energy for further analysis on terrorist risks,
and possibly a full environmental impact statement, before the facility can
operate.
"We are thrilled that the Court sent the Department of Energy back to the
drawing board on this ill-conceived plan," said Marylia Kelley, the
Executive Director of Tri-Valley CAREs, who lives down the street from
Livermore Lab. "I feel safer today because of the court's decision. This
is a huge victory for the residents of the Bay Area."
Kelley continued, "In the event of a terrorist attack on this laboratory
where bioagents become airborne, hundreds or thousands of people could have
been exposed to deadly pathogens."
"This decision marks a turning point for Department of Energy
decision-making and sets a precedent for Energy Department facilities
across the nation, ensuring that they cannot open without a stringent
environmental review," said Tri-Valley CAREs' Staff Attorney Loulena
Miles. "Now the agency cannot merely cry National Security and avoid hard
questions concerning environmental impacts and terrorist risks."
The original lawsuit challenged both the Livermore Lab's plans to operate
the BSL-3 facility without proper environmental study as well as a sister
proposal for Los Alamos Laboratory in New Mexico to open a similar biolab,
also without thorough environmental review.
Jay Coghlan, Executive Director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, believes this
decision is likely to have wide-ranging impacts as well. "This decision in
California is excellent. The question is how it might apply to Energy
Department activities across the country. For instance, the Department is
expanding the Los Alamos nuclear weapons programs, but failed to consider
potential terrorism. New environmental review of the Los Alamos biolab is
expected soon. DOE is about to begin review of the nation-wide nu clear
weapons complex. Because the post-9/11 consequences to the public can be so
very serious, potential terrorism effects should be considered in each
case. We are very pleased that our litigation is leading in that
direction," said Coghlan.
After plaintiffs filed suit in 2003, the Energy Dept. withdrew its approval
for the Los Alamos biolab and, therefore, litigation went forward only on
the Livermore proposal. Neither of the advanced biowarfare agent research
facilities that were the subject of the original litigation have opened.
The Dept. of Energy is presently conducting further analysis of the
environmental risks of the Los Alamos bio-lab proposal.
If either of these advanced biowarfare agent research facilities would have
been allowed to open, it would be the first time an advanced biowarfare
agent research lab would have operated inside a US nuclear weapons lab.
"Opening this lab would have sent a signal to the world that it is
acceptable to study advanced biowarfare agent research inside classified
nuclear weapons labs," argued Loulena Miles. "A handful of committed
individuals have kept advanced biowarfare agent research out of the hands
of US nuclear weapons labs so far, but we still have a lot of work to do."
-- 30 --
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- is our web site address. Please visit us
there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
*****************************************************************
71 Contra Costa Times, SF Chronicle, AP on bio-warfare agent
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:18:39 -0700
X-Nohoney: yes white-hard - relay H=adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (borg.energy-net.org) [63.203.231.61]
X-Sender-Host-Address: 63.203.231.61
X-Sender-Host-Name: adsl-63-203-231-61.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY-WHITELIST
Good morning, colleagues. Here are three articles on our legal victory
obtaining additional environmental review before the Dept. of Energy can
collocate bio-warfare agents and nuclear weapons research at Livermore Lab.
The gist of the ruling is that DOE must conduct an analysis of the impact
of a potential terrorist attack. I sent out our press release yesterday --
thought you'all might also enjoy seeing some of the press it generated.
Good news is hard to come by these days. Enjoy...
CONTRA COSTA TIMES
Court: More study of terrorist attacks on 'hot lab' needed
By Eric Kurhi
A federal appeals court ruled today that the Department of Energy must
take the possibility of terrorist actions into account before opening a
biodefense facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
The decision affirms a lawsuit filed by Livermore-based Tri-Valley
Communities Against a Radioactive Environment, which alleged such an
attack on a Livermore biowarfare research lab could have a disastrous
effect on the surrounding community.
"I can tell you honestly I feel safer today because of the ruling," said
Marylia Kelley of Tri-Valley CARES. "Operating an advanced biowarfare
research facility without review is an extremely dangerous undertaking."
The new 1,600-square-foot "hot lab" would allow scientists to deal with
deadly pathogens, including anthrax and plague, in an effort to prepare
antidotes to counter such a biological attack.
It had been scheduled to open in mid-November, but cannot begin
operations until the agency "considers whether the threat of terrorist
activity necessitates the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement," according to the court's decision.
A spokesman for the lab said the Energy Department is reviewing its
options. Those could involve doing a full environmental report, or
expanding the existing study. What actions are taken will ultimately up
to the Energy Department.
According to Monday's memorandum, "We caution that there 'remain open to
the agency a wide variety of actions it may take on remand, and we do
not prejudge those alternatives.' "
Kelley said she hopes the decision will result in more public input.
"We want the department to come to the conclusion that it needs to do an
environmental impact statement before opening the lab," she said. "At
that point a public hearing would be mandatory."
Attorney for Tri-Valley CARES Stephen Volker said they are also
concerned there was not enough attention paid to the possible effects of
an earthquake on the hot lab. Livermore lab sits within two miles of two
faults.
"Significant new information regarding faults and earthquake behavior
has been done since then that will affect the impact of the lab," he said.
Volker said he hopes that, ultimately, the location of the lab will be
moved to somewhere less populated.
"This gives the government a chance to do it right ... this is the worst
possible location for such a lab," he said.
Monday's ruling notes that the assessment of earthquake risks was
"minimal," but the court cannot override the Energy Department's findings.
The court based its ruling on a decision in a suit against Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant in San Luis Obispo County. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission was ordered to reconsider whether a study is needed of the
impact of a possible terrorist attack on a planned spent fuel facility
at the Diablo Canyon plant.
In September, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asked the U.S. Supreme Court
to review that case.
Tri-Valley CAREs originally sued the Energy Department over proposed hot
labs at Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories in August 2003.
Shipments of biological agents -- including botulism, anthrax, plague,
valley fever and Query fever -- were stopped pending the decision.
Last November, the DOE announced it would do a full environmental report
for the lab at Los Alamos.
Eric Kurhi can be reached at 925-743-2216 or e-mail ekurhi@cctimes.com.
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
Court blocks Lawrence Livermore research center
- Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
A federal appeals court on Monday blocked Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory from opening a research center for detecting biological weapons
until the government studies the possible environmental consequences of a
terrorist attack.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the federal
Department of Energy must consider whether terrorists could attack the
center, and then decide whether the possible consequences warrant a full
environmental review. Such a review could take a year.
Two anti-nuclear organizations and several local residents sued the
government to keep the lab from opening next month. Research performed at
the lab is intended to help the government detect terrorist weapons that
might take the form of biological pathogens such as anthrax, plague,
brucellosis and Q fever.
According to the plaintiffs, the research would include putting lethal
substances into aerosol form and testing them on mice, rats and guinea pigs.
The Energy Department had previously concluded that the possibility of
deadly substances being released into the general population was too remote
to require a full environmental review. Such a review would require the
government to solicit public comment and consider possible protective
measures, such as moving the research lab elsewhere.
The appeals court did not go that far in its ruling Monday, but it did tell
the Energy Department to look into the environmental consequences of a
terrorist attack and document its conclusions.
Lab spokesman Steve Wampler said the government was reviewing the ruling and
hadn't determined what actions to take or when the research lab might open.
The appeals court based its 3-0 ruling on a Ninth Circuit decision in June
requiring the government to consider the possibility of a terrorist attack
before allowing construction of a nuclear waste storage site at the Diablo
Canyon power plant near San Luis Obispo. The plant's operator, Pacific Gas
and Electric Co., has appealed that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Opponents of the Livermore testing lab described Monday's ruling as a major
victory.
"This decision marks a turning point for Department of Energy
decision-making,'' said Loulena Miles, a lawyer with the anti-nuclear group
Tri-Valley CARES, which is a plaintiff in the suit.
"I feel safer today because of the court's decision,'' said the group's
executive director, Marylia Kelley, who lives a quarter-mile from the
Livermore lab. "In the event of a terrorist attack on this laboratory where
bio-agents become airborne, hundreds or thousands of people could have been
exposed to deadly pathogens.''
The court sided with the government, however, on other issues in the case,
including opponents' claims that the possible release of hazardous
substances in an earthquake required full environmental review.
The suit, filed in 2003, contended that the Las Positas fault zone near the
lab is capable of generating a quake of greater magnitude than the
prefabricated building housing the research lab is designed to withstand.
The appeals court said the government had made a "minimal assessment of
earthquake risks despite the presence of known, active faults that run
directly under nearby Berkeley.'' But despite "some substantial questions
about the validity of (the department's) substantive conclusions,'' the
court said it was legally required to accept those conclusions, because the
department had examined the environmental concerns and made a "fully
informed'' decision.
Despite that setback, plaintiffs' lawyer Stephan Volker said the court's
order of reconsideration would allow opponents to reopen a variety of safety
issues by presenting information about earthquake hazards and security risks
that wasn't available when the department approved the lab in December 2002.
Page B - 1
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/17/LIVERMORE.TMP
ASSOCIATED PRESS WIRE STORY (Ran in Sacramento Bee and scores of other
papers today)
Appeals court questions Livermore biodefense lab
By DAVID KRAVETS, AP Legal Affairs Writer
(10-16) 15:50 PDT San Francisco (AP) --
The federal government's plan to research lethal agents such as HIV and
anthrax in a San Francisco Bay area suburb hit a legal snag Monday when an
appeals court ruled the Energy Department must consider what would happen
if the lab were attacked by terrorists.
Acting in a case brought by neighbors of the Livermore facility, the 9th
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the Energy Department conducted an
inadequate assessment of the lab's environmental impact because the agency
did not adequately examine the repercussions of a terrorist attack.
The new biodefense lab was initially set to open in August at Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, but lawsuits have so far held up the
project. The facility would test airborne agents, including hantavirus,
influenza, hepatitis, Q fever, brucellis, herpes and salmonella, on live
animals.
Steve Wampler, a spokesman for the lab, said the Energy Department was
studying the decision and weighing its options, which include an appeal to
the U.S. Supreme Court. The government told the appeals court during oral
arguments this summer that the administration concluded there was little
risk of disaster striking the lab.
The case was brought by Tri-Valley Cares, which claimed the government did
not adequately prepare or analyze what might happen if the proposed
biodefense lab were attacked.
Executive Director Marylia Kelley, who lives across the street from the
lab about 50 miles east of San Francisco, said she was concerned the
facility might still open without sufficient consideration of its risks.
"The planned 60 shipments of pathogens in and out of Livermore each month
have been halted for now, but we must stay vigilant because the Energy
Department may still try to approve this plan without serious
consideration to terrorist risks and other security concerns," Kelley
said.
It's not the first time the court has ordered terror studies on government
property.
In June, the San Francisco-based appeals court also blocked approval of an
Energy Department proposal to store additional radioactive waste at a
nuclear energy installation in Central California. The court said federal
regulators had to first consider the likelihood of a terrorist attack on
the facility.
The case decided Monday is Tri-Valley Cares v. Energy Department,
04-17232.
Editors: David Kravets has been covering state and federal courts for more
than a decade. Copyright 2006 AP
NOTE: Ian Hoffman did a pretty good piece in the Oakland Trib, and there
were other stories as well. I can dig up e-copies of additional stories and
send them on request. -- Marylia
Marylia Kelley
Executive Director
Tri-Valley CAREs
(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
2582 Old First Street
Livermore, CA USA 94551
- is our web site address. Please visit us
there!
(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
(925) 443-0177 - is our fax
*****************************************************************
72 MercuryNews.com: Ruling stalls biodefense lab in Livermore
10/17/2006 |
AGENCY MUST EXAMINE THREAT OF TERRORISM
By Ian Hoffman MediaNews
The defense arm of the U.S. Department of Energy cannot open a
new biodefense research facility at Lawrence Livermore nuclear
weapons laboratory until the agency considers the risk and
effects of a terrorist attack, a federal appeals court ruled
Monday.
The ruling by a panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
is likely to postpone by at least several months the start of
research at the new lab on potential bioterror germs that cause
anthrax, plague, Q fever and other lethal or disabling diseases.
Extending an earlier ruling that barred expanded storage of
spent nuclear fuel at the nuclear power station, the three-judge
panel said the environmental study prepared by the Energy
Department's National Nuclear Security Administration was
``inadequate'' for failing to consider the threat of terrorist
attack.
Federal and lab attorneys were studying the opinion Monday
afternoon ``and the options available to the department,'' lab
spokesman Steve Wampler said.
Federal officials have argued since 2002 that the new lab's
research is critical to national security and after several
delays had planned on starting work as early as mid-November.
Critics of the new biosafety level 3 lab at Livermore called the
ruling a clear victory, but the three-judge panel also rejected
all other arguments against the lab's opening.
Led by 9th Circuit Chief Judge Mary M. Schroeder, the panel
waved aside complaints that the federal government never
seriously considered it problematic to build a lab for handling
deadly pathogens close to active earthquake faults.
The failure to look at terrorist attacks was another matter. In
June, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission wrongly failed to consider the potential effect of
terrorist attacks when proposing to open a new storage pond for
spent nuclear fuel at Diablo Canyon power station. PG&E is
appealing that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In the Livermore case, the judges ordered the Energy Department
to ``consider whether the threat of terrorist activity
necessitates the preparation'' of a full-blown environmental
impact study.
Such a study would require multiple public hearings and probably
take at least a year.
``I think if they really take a hard look at the environmental
impacts and the terrorist risk to this facility, they will have
to do an environmental impact study, which will push the opening
to at least a year from now, if they choose to open it at all,''
said Loulena Miles, legal director for Tri-Valley CAREs, a
Livermore-based lab watchdog group, one of two that sued to halt
work on the new biodefense lab.
If the Energy Department chooses instead to add an analysis of
terrorist risk to its more modest environmental assessment, that
could take a few months. Federal officials could argue that some
or all of the added terrorist-risk assessment should be
classified, limiting public review and challenge.
The appeals court ruling was issued in unpublished form, which
means its observations about terrorist risk at a nuclear power
plant and Livermore's biodefense lab do not necessarily apply to
a broad array of federal actions.
*****************************************************************
73 Hanford News: Hanford symposium set at WSU Tri-Cities
This story was published Thursday, October 12th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Tom Grumbly, a Department of Energy undersecretary during the
Clinton administration, will visit the Tri-Cities to discuss
Hanford and its future Oct. 25.
He's one of the speakers for the 20th anniversary Public Lecture
of the Herbert M. Parker Foundation to be held at Washington
State University Tri-Cities. This year's lecture will cover
past, present and future cleanup activities at the Hanford
nuclear reservation, where plutonium was produced for the
nation's nuclear weapons program.
Grumbly will give an overview of DOE strategies and challenges
in cleaning up contamination of its weapons complex. He'll also
discuss the current Hanford cleanup mission and its future.
Mike Lawrence, the former Hanford director for DOE and now
deputy laboratory director for Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory, will discuss how Hanford facilities were used and
the extent of waste and contamination at the nuclear
reservation. He'll also discuss the establishment of the
Tri-Party Agreement that sets legally binding cleanup standards
and deadlines at Hanford.
Ron Kathren, WSU professor emeritus, will discuss the
contributions Herbert Parker made to health, safety and
environmental protection at Hanford. He developed a technique
for clinical radiation therapy that is still in use today, then
came to Hanford to establish the site's health physics program
during World War II.
A panel discussion also is planned with the symposium speakers:
Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and Wanda Munn, a member of the
Presidential Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health.
The event will begin at 3:30 p.m. with a multimedia presentation
of oral histories collected from Hanford pioneers, and the
lecture will follow at 4 p.m. at the East Building Auditorium.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
74 Hanford News: State revises WIPP permit to allow so-called 'hot waste'
This story was published Tuesday, October 17th, 2006
By The Associated Press
CARLSBAD, N.M. (AP) - The New Mexico Environment Department
issued a revised permit Monday, allowing higher levels of
nuclear waste to be stored in underground repositories at the
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
The permit enables WIPP to receive and dispose of remote-handled
transuranic radioactive waste, currently stored at U.S.
Department of Energy sites nationwide. The first shipments of
the new waste could begin after regulatory approvals in coming
months.
"WIPP is a key element of the safe cleanup of this nation's
defense waste, and the significance of this permit, which
enables the department to continue its cleanup momentum, cannot
be understated," Assistant Energy Secretary James Rispoli said.
Gov. Bill Richardson and state Environment Secretary Ron Curry
were among the dignitaries attending the signing ceremony.
Since WIPP opened in 1999, the plant has stored more than 83,000
drums of radioactive waste in salt beds 2,150 feet under the New
Mexico desert. But that waste was low-level - things like
clothes and tools used by workers at radioactive sites.
The new waste - so-called "hot waste" - must be handled by
machines using robotic arms. It has always been part of WIPP's
management plan, after the plant had demonstrated it can handle
the lesser stuff safely.
"WIPP is one of the few success stories in that it's operating
and they're putting waste in," said Bob Neill, a former manager
of a state WIPP oversight group.
Among the wastes expected to be shipped there are at least 1,000
cubic meters of highly radioactive waste from south-central
Washington's Hanford nuclear reservation. The debris involves
transuranic waste, such as clothing, equipment and pipes left
over from nuclear weapons production, that has been contaminated
both with plutonium and hazardous chemicals and must be handled
remotely.
Some of that waste already is in storage at Hanford awaiting
shipment to WIPP. Additional trash still must be dug up from an
area where waste generated during radioactive waste experiments
was buried, said Colleen French, an Energy Department
spokeswoman at Hanford.
"The WIPP facility is hugely important for Hanford cleanup,"
French said. "As far as burial grounds, this is the hottest of
the hot."
After hearings in Carlsbad and Santa Fe, a state hearing officer
concluded last month that WIPP had earned the right - through
its unblemished safety record of no spills or leaks - to take
the next step.
"This means New Mexico, technologically when it comes to waste,
is one of the leaders around the world," Richardson said.
However, a government watchdog group, Citizens for Alternatives
to Radioactive Dumping, issued a news release criticizing the
permit.
The group said an impact study should have been conducted "to
determine if the current health of the communities surrounding
the WIPP site and along the WIPP routes can bear yet more
environmental stress."
According to a DOE news release, the revised permit allows
alternate methods for analyzing waste before shipment, increases
container storage areas above ground and adds more efficient
methods for monitoring volatile organic compounds inside the
repository.
It also institutes a new dispute resolution process and an
e-mail notification system "to inform the public of various
permit-related activities."
Richardson said the permit was crafted after "thorough, careful
review and analysis." He said the process involved discussions
with residents, citizens groups and DOE and state Environment
Department scientists.
"This is the best possible permit," he said. "It both allows for
the safe disposal of remote handled transuranic waste and - at
the request of the environmental community - creates vastly
better public access to information about the waste that is
accepted at WIPP."
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
75 Hanford News: New Mexico to accept nuclear waste with more contamination
This story was published Tuesday, October 17th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
The state of New Mexico has agreed to allow waste with greater
levels of radioactive contamination to be disposed of at the
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad than the Department of
Energy repository has so far accepted.
"It's an important resource for the Hanford cleanup," said
Colleen French, spokeswoman for DOE at Hanford.
DOE announced Monday that New Mexico revised WIPP's hazardous
waste facility permit to lift a ban on accepting remote-handled
transuranic waste for underground disposal. Remote-handled waste
is so radioactively hot at the surface of containers that it
must be handled by remotely operated equipment.
Until now, only contact-handled transuranic waste has been
accepted at WIPP, which has disposal rooms excavated from an
ancient salt formation nearly a half mile underground.
At Hanford, transuranic waste is typically waste contaminated
with plutonium, such as used laboratory equipment and protective
clothing. However, it also could include waste such as the
radioactive sludge from Hanford's K Basins that might be sent to
WIPP as remote-handled waste after it is treated.
DOE expects to have at least 1,300 cubic yards of remote-handled
transuranic waste to dispose of from Hanford cleanup and it
could have far more, depending on what's uncovered in old burial
grounds that are as yet untouched.
The waste is left from the past production of plutonium at
Hanford for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
"WIPP is a key element of the safe cleanup of this nation's
defense waste and the significance of this permit, which enables
the department to continue its cleanup momentum, cannot be
understated," said James Rispoli, DOE assistant secretary for
environmental management, in a statement. "Through state and
federal efforts, the department will move forward to permanently
and safely deliver waste stored at DOE facilities to WIPP's safe
underground repository."
Shipment of remote-handled transuranic waste from Hanford is not
expected to begin for years.
Now Hanford lacks the equipment to analyze and package
remote-handled transuranic waste, but it faces a legal deadline
to have T Plant modified for that work by 2012.
Hanford already has sent 292 shipments of contact-handled
transuranic waste to WIPP. That's enough waste to fill 9,500
drums. Hanford has roughly 20 times as much contact-handled
transuranic waste as remote-handled transuranic waste.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
76 Hanford News: Sludge moving out of K East Basin
This story was published Tuesday, October 17th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
Hanford workers began transferring radioactive sludge out of the
K East Basin to await treatment in underwater containers at the
K West Basin on Monday afternoon.
"Reaching this stage is the biggest step for the K Basins
cleanup project since we started removing the spent fuel in
2000," Keith Klein, the Department of Energy Hanford manager for
the Richland Operations Office, said in a statement.
"Getting the material into containers and out of the basin gets
us in position to take down the basin itself so we can clean up
the contamination underneath."
Getting sludge in the K East Basin corralled in containers has
been one of Hanford's most technically challenging projects in
recent years and has been plagued with unexpected difficulties.
Fluor Hanford could have the bulk of K East sludge in containers
by the end of the week, said Pete Knollmeyer, vice president of
the K Basins Closure Project for contractor Fluor Hanford.
In the meantime, Fluor has started the process to move sludge
from the first of the underwater containers at K East to K West.
Removing the sludge from K East will allow work to continue to
tear out the basin while a treatment system is built to process
the sludge for disposal.
The sludge, diluted to about 3 percent to 7 percent by weight
with K Basin water, is being pumped through about 2,500 feet of
piping between the basins.
The K Basins, each holding 1 million gallons of water, were
built in the 1950s to hold irradiated reactor fuel until it was
processed to remove plutonium for use in producing nuclear
weapons.
After the last Hanford processing plant closed, leftover
irradiated fuel remained in the pools for more than a decade. It
corroded and particles mixed with dirt and concrete that
sloughed off the sides of the basins to form a radioactive
sludge.
The bulk of the sludge is in K East Basin, where vacuuming 55
cubic yards of it into underwater containers has proved far more
difficult than DOE or Fluor anticipated.
They found more debris than expected hiding beneath the sludge
at the bottom of the basin and have struggled to keep water
clean enough for workers to see what they were doing with
underwater cameras.
But as the transfer of sludge begins "for the first time we're
dealing with something known," Knollmeyer said. "We've
eliminated surprises."
Fluor plans to pump the sludge in five batches from K Basin
containers. Each batch is expected to take eight to 16 hours to
transfer.
It's pulled from the bottom of underwater containers and diluted
as a worker standing on the grate above the water sprays down
the sludge through holes in the container's cover to keep sludge
moving toward the outlet.
The transfer pipeline, called a "hose-in-hose" system, includes
a central line surrounded by a second line to contain
radioactive sludge in case of a break. Pumping stations between
K East and K West keep the waste moving.
Workers practiced by transferring more than 100,000 gallons of
water between the basins during the past several months.
Transfer of the sludge Monday "started up nicely," Knollmeyer
said.
There had been some concern that the sludge would become hard
packed at the bottom of the underwater container, but that did
not happen. The sludge has been filtered through a quarter-inch
screen, so particles are of uniform size. But the sludge
contains some sand and other heavier particles.
"We are encouraged to see that the final step in removing sludge
from the K East Basin is under way," said Larry Gadbois,
environmental scientist for the Environmental Protection Agency,
in a statement. "Removing the sludge, and the soils underlying
the basin, is an important step in reducing risks to the
Columbia River."
DOE faces a legal deadline of May 2007 to finish transferring
all the sludge from the K East Basin to K West.
Fluor expects to have the first four transfers of the bulk
sludge completed by the end of December. That will leave the
more difficult job of vacuuming up any fine sludge that escaped
into the K East Basin during the transfer and giving the floor a
final vacuum. That sludge then would be transferred to K West.
Then work can start to remove contamination embedded in the
walls and floors of K East. Cleanup plans call for draining the
basin, tearing down the structure and removing the underlying
contaminated soil.
Work to vacuum the sludge in K West into underwater containers
will be done between transfers of K East sludge and could start
in November.
To see video of the sludge transfer, go to www.hanford.gov and
click on "Hanford Site News" on the right upper corner. When
prompted for a keyword, leave the space blank and hit search.
Look for the transferring sludge video at the top of the list.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
77 Hanford News: DOE fined $120,000 for chemical spills
This story was published Tuesday, October 17th, 2006
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
The Environmental Protection Agency fined the Department of
Energy $120,000 Monday over two spills of a hazardous chemical
this summer at the Hanford nuclear reservation.
DOE failed to report the first spill to regulators for 11 days
and contractor Washington Closure Hanford did not correctly
handle the spill, according to EPA. In both cases, contaminated
soil was put back into the ground, according to regulators.
"We don't like to levy penalties but there was so much wrong
with this picture," said Dennis Faulk, an environmental
scientist for EPA.
The Washington State Department of Ecology, which investigated
the incident, asked EPA last month to consider a fine. The state
has been overseeing work where the spill occurred, but EPA has
the legal authority to impose a penalty.
On June 15 an estimated 30 gallons of sodium dichromate spilled
from a twin set of pipes being removed from the ground near the
D and DR reactors less than a half-mile from the Columbia River
in north Hanford.
On the next work day, June 19, the set of pipes was cut farther
down the line and about three gallons spilled before work was
stopped.
The sodium dichromate, which includes hexavalent chromium at
levels 22,000 times the safe level for human exposure, was piped
to Hanford reactors to be used to prevent corrosion in the
reactor's cooling system. The reactors operated from 1944-67 to
produce plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons system.
Part of EPA's concern was that Washington Closure Hanford had an
earlier spill when pipes were cut in the area near the B and C
reactors, Faulk said.
It should have been prepared when its subcontractor, Duratek,
which is now part of EnergySolutions, started work to remove
pipes used for chromium near the D and DR reactors, he said.
But "they weren't ready to do work," he said.
Washington Closure Hanford said historical records showed the
pipes there had been drained.
However, when workers cut into one section of the piping, red
and green liquid indicating highly concentrated sodium
dichromate dribbled out. To see if there was more in the pipe,
it was tipped and about 30 gallons spilled into the spoil.
At the least, a container should have been used to catch the
liquid, according to EPA.
After it spilled, workers dug up contaminated soil. But they
only had one waste container nearby. When it was filled with the
most contaminated soil, workers put plastic down in the hole and
piled in the rest of the contaminated soil.
Workers went home that night for a three-day weekend and
returned Monday and cut into the pipe at another location. When
sodium dichromate again spilled from the pipe, they stopped work
and filled the hole with soil without sampling the soil.
Under work plans approved for the project, contaminated soil is
required to be set aside and back fill done only when fill
material is verified as clean, according to EPA.
In addition, the soil that was dug up and the exposed faces of
the dig should have been tested to determine cleanup levels,
according to EPA.
DOE faced a legal deadline to have certain work started, which
included digging up the chromium pipes near the D and DR
reactors, by the end of July. Because a contract for the work
had not been awarded, it asked Duratek to step in to start the
work.
Work is now being done by new subcontractor Safety and Ecology
Corp. The soil at the first spill site remains in the ground on
top of the tarp placed in the hole, but soil has been excavated
from the second spill site, according to Washington Closure
Hanford.
Most of the penalty, $105,000, was assessed for problems with
how the spills were handled and DOE's failure to correct
violations of the work plan for 11 weeks, according to a letter
sent to Keith Klein, manager of DOE's Hanford Richland
Operations Office.
In addition, a penalty of $5,000 was assessed for the first week
regulators were not notified and $10,000 for the portion of the
next week that regulators were not notified.
DOE and its contractors must follow plans approved by EPA and
the state Department of Ecology to assure that workers and the
environment are protected during Hanford cleanup, said Nick
Ceto, EPA's Hanford program manager, in a statement.
"In this case, Ecology identified several instances where
approved work plans were not followed," he said.
However, EPA has seen improvements since the state issued a
notice of violations in September and asked EPA to consider a
fine, Ceto said.
"We have seen a marked improvement in communication between DOE
and its contractors and EPA and Ecology," he said.
That's led to improved work practices, he said.
For instance, when another pipe started to weep recently, a drip
pan was used to catch liquids, Faulk said.
DOE received the notice of the fine Monday and had made no
decision on whether to dispute EPA's decision. DOE has 15 days
to challenge the EPA and state findings that it did not comply
with the approved plan for the work, but EPA will not allow DOE
to challenge the amount of the fine.
© 2006 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
78 SF Chron: Court blocks Lawrence Livermore research center
[San Francisco Chronicle]
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
A federal appeals court on Monday blocked Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory from opening a research center for detecting
biological weapons until the government studies the possible
environmental consequences of a terrorist attack.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said
the federal Department of Energy must consider whether
terrorists could attack the center, and then decide whether the
possible consequences warrant a full environmental review. Such
a review could take a year.
Two anti-nuclear organizations and several local residents sued
the government to keep the lab from opening next month. Research
performed at the lab is intended to help the government detect
terrorist weapons that might take the form of biological
pathogens such as anthrax, plague, brucellosis and Q fever.
According to the plaintiffs, the research would include putting
lethal substances into aerosol form and testing them on mice,
rats and guinea pigs.
The Energy Department had previously concluded that the
possibility of deadly substances being released into the general
population was too remote to require a full environmental
review. Such a review would require the government to solicit
public comment and consider possible protective measures, such
as moving the research lab elsewhere.
The appeals court did not go that far in its ruling Monday, but
it did tell the Energy Department to look into the environmental
consequences of a terrorist attack and document its conclusions.
Lab spokesman Steve Wampler said the government was reviewing
the ruling and hadn't determined what actions to take or when
the research lab might open.
The appeals court based its 3-0 ruling on a Ninth Circuit
decision in June requiring the government to consider the
possibility of a terrorist attack before allowing construction
of a nuclear waste storage site at the Diablo Canyon power plant
near San Luis Obispo. The plant's operator, Pacific Gas and
Electric Co., has appealed that ruling to the U.S. Supreme
Court.
Opponents of the Livermore testing lab described Monday's ruling
as a major victory.
"This decision marks a turning point for Department of Energy
decision-making,'' said Loulena Miles, a lawyer with the
anti-nuclear group Tri-Valley CARES, which is a plaintiff in the
suit.
"I feel safer today because of the court's decision,'' said the
group's executive director, Marylia Kelley, who lives a
quarter-mile from the Livermore lab. "In the event of a
terrorist attack on this laboratory where bio-agents become
airborne, hundreds or thousands of people could have been
exposed to deadly pathogens.''
The court sided with the government, however, on other issues in
the case, including opponents' claims that the possible release
of hazardous substances in an earthquake required full
environmental review.
The suit, filed in 2003, contended that the Las Positas fault
zone near the lab is capable of generating a quake of greater
magnitude than the prefabricated building housing the research
lab is designed to withstand.
The appeals court said the government had made a "minimal
assessment of earthquake risks despite the presence of known,
active faults that run directly under nearby Berkeley.'' But
despite "some substantial questions about the validity of (the
department's) substantive conclusions,'' the court said it was
legally required to accept those conclusions, because the
department had examined the environmental concerns and made a
"fully informed'' decision.
Despite that setback, plaintiffs' lawyer Stephan Volker said the
court's order of reconsideration would allow opponents to reopen
a variety of safety issues by presenting information about
earthquake hazards and security risks that wasn't available when
the department approved the lab in December 2002.
Page B - 1
The San Francisco Chronicle]
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************