*****************************************************************
10/27/06 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 14.255
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 [NYTr] Iran Moves Ahead with Nuclear Program
2 Guardian Unlimited: Report: Iran Has Expanded Nuke Program
3 BBC: Bush condemns Iran nuclear move
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Doubles Nuke Enrichment Capacity
5 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Arrogance want to monopolise science
6 AFP: Bush: World must 'double' effort on Iran nuclear program -
7 AFP: Six major powers discuss Iran sanctions draft
8 AFP: Iran steps up enrichment work in defiance of UN resolution -
9 AFP: Chirac says stalemate in Iran talks should trigger sanctions -
10 AFP: Israeli PM accuses world of doing 'nothing' over Iran
11 AFP: Russia unconcerned by Iranian nuclear 'cascade' work
12 UPI: Iran produces second nuclear cascade
13 UPI: Bush seeks more intensive effort on Iran
14 UPI: Iran's centrifuges don't worry Ivanov
15 [NYTr] Why Bush is Seeking Confrontation with North Korea
16 Korea Herald: Military works on nuclear defense plans
17 Korea Herald: Hong Kong detains 2nd N.K. vessel
18 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]Call for wisdom
19 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS]Save the U.S. alliance
20 washingtonpost.com: Deterring Kim Jong Il -
21 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Nuclear test gives U.S. new sanctions authori
22 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: U.S. ambassador: ¡®Strong response' to test i
23 AFP: Next UN chief in China to discuss NKorea nuclear crisis
24 Guardian Unlimited: France, China Express N. Korea Concern
25 Korea Times: N. Korean Ship Sailing Without Inspection
26 Korea Times: 'N. Korea Offered Indirect Apology to China'
27 Korea Times: Lee Defends N. Korea Policy
28 Korea Times: Preposterous Pyongyang
29 AFP: US ready to meet NKorea -- if it returns to six-way talks -
30 Guardian Unlimited: Some N.Koreans Scoff at U.N. Sanctions
31 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea, China Weigh N. Korea Sanctions
32 UPI: Outside View: Moscow softer on North Korea
33 UPI: Warning: N Korea could still attack South
34 Korea Herald: U.S. to impose 'India-Pakistan sanctions' on N.K.
35 US: Jim Hightower: Whistleblowers not popular in D.C.
36 AFP: US will not impede nuclear arms debate in Japan - ambassador -
37 UPI: Analysis: Russian tycoon a sign of times
NUCLEAR REACTORS
38 US: newsobserver.com: Cost of Duke plants jumps
39 US: Rutland Herald: Longer test of nuclear sirens
40 US: NRC: Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Consideration o
41 US: NRC: In the Matter of Holders of Material Licenses Authorized To
42 US: NRC: In the Matter of Holders of Material Licenses Authorized To
43 US: Newsday.com: Report: N.E. needs more electric capacity, less rel
44 US: The Day: Nuclear Reactors To Be Part Of Accident Study Millstone
45 US: PRN: UPDATE: Is Nuclear Power The Solution to Climate Change & F
46 UPI: Analysis: Russia powerful with energy
47 US: Dallas Morning News: TXU shuts down Comanche Peak nuclear reacto
48 ForUm: Ukraine's President seeks energy ties with EU
NUCLEAR SECURITY
49 US: Eureka Alert: Turning a nuclear spotlight on illegal weapons mat
NUCLEAR SAFETY
50 US: Sky News: Radiation Critical Errors
51 UN Scientific Committee Studying The Effects Of Radiation Has UN Cri
52 US: [NYTr] The Scientist: IBM cancer data published
53 US: Hudson Valley News: Candidate calls for action on depleted urani
54 US: NRC: Notice of Availability of Model Safety Evaluation on Techni
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
55 Accountancy Age: 20bn nuclear waste scheme to be funded through taxe
56 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Energy Department starts radioactive cleanup
57 US: NRC: Application for a License To Export High-Enriched Uranium
PEACE
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
58 Los Alamos: Secret Nuke Data Found During Meth Raid
59 SF New Mexican: Domenici: We have to get answers
60 Inside Bay Area: Feds may compensate Sandia workers
61 Inside Bay Area: New bid entered for LLNL contract
62 Guardian Unlimited: Man: Didn't Know About Secret Nuke Data
63 lamonitor.com: Retirees stew about LANL's handling of benefits plan
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 [NYTr] Iran Moves Ahead with Nuclear Program
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:15:02 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com
Iran Moves Ahead with Nuclear Program
Teheran, Oct 27 (Prensa Latina) Iran has made an important step in its
nuclear program with the uranium gas injection of a second spin cascade for
the enrichment of the fissionable material, an official source said on
Friday.
The centrifuges were ready since two weeks ago, according to a report from
ISNA news agency, which also announced the beginning of the uranium
enrichment process.
According to the source, the operation was carried out this week, though it
does not specify the date.
The new step shows Iran s firm decision to continue with its peaceful
nuclear program, which has been the cause of a conflict with mainly the US,
Great Britain and Germany.
Next week, the UN Security Council will probably discuss a resolution to
sanction the Islamic Republic for its refusal to abandon the nuclear
project.
hr ajs msl mf
PL-14
*
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
. Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
2 Guardian Unlimited: Report: Iran Has Expanded Nuke Program
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 27, 2006 3:46 PM
AP Photo NYOL701
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran has doubled its capacity to enrich
uranium by successfully executing the process with a second
network of centrifuges, a semiofficial news agency reported
Friday, sending a defiant new message to the U.N. Security
Council.
Council members are working on a draft resolution that would
impose limited sanctions on the Islamic republic because of its
refusal to cease enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for
a civilian nuclear reactor or fissile material for a warhead.
The Iranian Students News Agency quoted an anonymous official as
saying Iran has successfully begun injecting gas into a second
network of centrifuges.
``We are injecting gas into the second cascade, which we
installed two weeks ago,'' the official said, according to ISNA.
The news agency said the second cascade had doubled Iran's
capacity to enrich uranium.
``We have already exploited the product of the second cascade,''
the official was quoted as saying.
Iranian authorities are believed to leak ISNA information that
they want published but consider too sensitive for release to
official media.
France's Foreign Ministry called Iran's expansion of its nuclear
program a ``negative signal'' that should be taken to account at
U.N. talks over possible sanctions.
A spokesman for the ministry, Jean-Baptiste Mattei, said the
Iranian announcement was not a great surprise because the
International Atomic Energy Agency had said in August that Iran
was developing new nuclear capacities.
``The door to negotiations is always open, but at the same time
the priority goes to the negotiations for a U.N. Security
Council resolution,'' Mattei said at a news conference.
French President Jacques Chirac, meanwhile, expressed support
for sanctions against Iran but insisted that they be temporary
and reversible.
In a separate report on Friday, ISNA quoted Ali Larijani, Iran's
top nuclear negotiator, as saying his country's enrichment
program should not hinder negotiations with the West.
``It is possible to review both nuclear and regional issues
through negotiation,'' Larijani was quoted as saying.
Larijani called for an open negotiation on the enrichment issue,
and blamed the West of being irrational in its opposition to an
Iranian nuclear program, which Tehran says is geared toward
purely civilian use.
Diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were
not authorized to divulge the information to media, told The
Associated Press on Monday that even the decision to ``dry
test'' the 164 centrifuges in the second Iranian pilot
enrichment facility showed Iran's defiance of the Security
Council. The council had set an Aug. 31 deadline for Tehran to
cease all experiments linked to enrichment.
Iran produced a small batch of low-enriched uranium - suitable
as nuclear fuel but not weapons grade - in February, using its
initial cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot plant at Natanz.
The Iran official quoted by ISNA said the nuclear watchdog was
fully aware that Tehran was injecting the gas in its new
centrifuges, and that nuclear inspectors had already arrived in
Iran.
The Vienna, Austria-based IAEA would not comment on the report.
Iran says it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz by the
end of this year. Some 54,000 centrifuges would be required to
produce enough nuclear fuel for a reactor.
Although Iran is nowhere near that goal, its successful
operation of more cascades of centrifuges indicates that the
country is gradually mastering the complexities of producing
enriched uranium.
The United States accuses Iran of secretly trying to build an
atomic bomb under the guise of a civilian nuclear program. But
Iran denies this, saying its program is strictly for the
generation of electricity.
The U.S. and its European allies are circulating a draft U.N.
Security Council resolution that would ban the sale of missile
and nuclear technology to Iran and deny the country certain
assistance from the U.N. nuclear watchdog.
China and Russia, which can veto Security Council resolutions,
are reportedly pushing for continued dialogue with Iran instead
of punishment.
The enrichment process takes gas produced from raw uranium and
aims to increase its proportion of the uranium-235 isotope,
needed for nuclear fission.
The gas is pumped into a centrifuge, which spins, causing a
small portion of the heavier, more prevalent uranium-238 isotope
to drop away. The gas then proceeds to other centrifuges -
thousands of them - where the process is repeated, increasing
the proportion of uranium-235.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
3 BBC: Bush condemns Iran nuclear move
Last Updated: Friday, 27 October 2006
[Men at work inside Iran's plant at Isfahan to make hexaflouride
(uranium) gas]
Iran produces uranium gas at a plant near Isfahan
US President George W Bush says the international community must
"redouble" efforts to prevent Iran obtaining nuclear weapons.
He spoke after reports Iran had stepped up work to enrich uranium
by activating a second cascade of centrifuges at its Natanz
plant.
Feeding gas into centrifuges can produce fuel for nuclear power
plants or, ultimately, atomic weapons.
Mr Bush said he was aware of the "speculation" and condemned the
move.
"Whether they doubled it or not, the idea of Iran having a
nuclear weapon is unacceptable," Mr Bush said.
"We must double our effort to work with the international
community to persuade the Iranians that there is only isolation
from the world if they continue working forward on such a
programme."
Iran says its enrichment work is aimed at generating electricity,
but the US and other Western nations fear Iran is trying to
acquire nuclear weapons.
The move is being seen as an act of international defiance by
Teheran, given demands by the UN Security Council that it suspend
uranium enrichment, says the BBC's Pam O'Toole.
The permanent members of the Security Council are meeting in New
York to discuss sanctions over Iran's failure to meet an August
deadline to stop enrichment.
'Product obtained'
The report that a second cascade of centrifuges had been
activated at Tehran's enrichment plant at Natanz came from the
semi-official Isna agency.
ENRICHING URANIUM: CASCADES
For uranium to b used as nuclear fuel, its concentration of
uranium-235 isotopes must be increased To be used in a reactor,
uranium must contain 2-3% U-235 Weapons grade or highly enriched
uranium (HEU) has a concentration of at least 90% U-235 Gas
centrifuges are used to carry out this enrichment process
Cascades are chains of these centrifuges 3,000 of the type of
centrifuges Iran is using would produce enough HEU for one
nuclear bomb, analysts say Guide: Nuclear fuel cycle Iran
'years from bomb'
The report suggested that scientists had injected gas into the
second cascade, and quoted its unnamed source as saying the
second cascade's "product" had been obtained.
The second cascade had been installed two weeks ago with the
knowledge of UN nuclear inspectors, the source said.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency has been fully aware of
the issue and the inspectors are present in Iran," the source
said.
Installation of the second cascade in itself is not a major
technological breakthrough, our correspondent says.
Experts admit that it would take years for it to install the many
thousands of centrifuges required and master the specialised
technology required to do so.
Even so, some Western diplomats have expressed unease at Iran's
progress.
They fear that even operating a few cascades of centrifuges helps
Tehran to develop knowledge of the fuel cycle, making it easier
for Iran to go underground with a covert weapons programme in the
future, our correspondent adds.
Iran's first cascade, consisting of 168 centrifuges, produced a
small quantity of enriched uranium in February.
Tehran has said it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges in Natanz
by March, something scientists say appears optimistic, our
correspondent adds.
*****************************************************************
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Doubles Nuke Enrichment Capacity
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 27, 2006 5:01 PM
AP Photo NYOL701
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iran has doubled its capacity to enrich
uranium by successfully executing the process with a second
network of centrifuges, a semiofficial news agency reported
Friday, sending a defiant new message to the U.N. Security
Council.
Council members are working on a draft resolution that would
impose limited sanctions on the Islamic republic because of its
refusal to cease enrichment, a process that can produce fuel for
a civilian nuclear reactor or fissile material for a warhead.
The Iranian Students News Agency quoted an anonymous official as
saying Iran has successfully begun injecting gas into a second
network of centrifuges.
``We are injecting gas into the second cascade, which we
installed two weeks ago,'' the official said, according to ISNA.
The news agency said the second cascade had doubled Iran's
capacity to enrich uranium.
``We have already exploited the product of the second cascade,''
the official was quoted as saying.
Iranian authorities are believed to leak ISNA information that
they want published but consider too sensitive for release to
official media.
France's Foreign Ministry called Iran's expansion of its nuclear
program a ``negative signal'' that should be taken to account at
U.N. talks over possible sanctions.
A spokesman for the ministry, Jean-Baptiste Mattei, said the
Iranian announcement was not a great surprise because the
International Atomic Energy Agency had said in August that Iran
was developing new nuclear capacities.
``The door to negotiations is always open, but at the same time
the priority goes to the negotiations for a U.N. Security
Council resolution,'' Mattei said at a news conference.
French President Jacques Chirac, meanwhile, expressed support
for sanctions against Iran but insisted that they be temporary
and reversible.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said Iran's action was
not a cause for worry.
``I don't share concerns on this account,'' Ivanov told
reporters, adding that a second network of centrifuges launched
by Iran was under IAEA supervision. ``It's premature to talk of
uranium enrichment or of military uranium.''
Russia has strong commercial ties to Tehran, with a $1 billion
contract to build Iran's first nuclear power station.
In a separate report on Friday, ISNA quoted Ali Larijani, Iran's
top nuclear negotiator, as saying his country's enrichment
program should not hinder negotiations with the West.
``It is possible to review both nuclear and regional issues
through negotiation,'' Larijani was quoted as saying.
Larijani called for an open negotiation on the enrichment issue,
and blamed the West of being irrational in its opposition to an
Iranian nuclear program, which Tehran says is geared toward
purely civilian use.
Diplomats, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were
not authorized to divulge the information to media, told The
Associated Press on Monday that even the decision to ``dry
test'' the 164 centrifuges in the second Iranian pilot
enrichment facility showed Iran's defiance of the Security
Council. The council had set an Aug. 31 deadline for Tehran to
cease all experiments linked to enrichment.
Iran produced a small batch of low-enriched uranium - suitable
as nuclear fuel but not weapons grade - in February, using its
initial cascade of 164 centrifuges at its pilot plant at Natanz.
The Iran official quoted by ISNA said the nuclear watchdog was
fully aware that Tehran was injecting the gas in its new
centrifuges, and that nuclear inspectors had already arrived in
Iran.
The Vienna, Austria-based IAEA would not comment on the report.
Iran says it plans to install 3,000 centrifuges at Natanz by the
end of this year. Some 54,000 centrifuges would be required to
produce enough nuclear fuel for a reactor.
Although Iran is nowhere near that goal, its successful
operation of more cascades of centrifuges indicates that the
country is gradually mastering the complexities of producing
enriched uranium.
The United States accuses Iran of secretly trying to build an
atomic bomb under the guise of a civilian nuclear program. But
Iran denies this, saying its program is strictly for the
generation of electricity.
The U.S. and its European allies are circulating a draft U.N.
Secure, needed for nuclear fission.
The gas is pumped into a centrifuge, which spins, causing a
small portion of the heavier, more prevalent uranium-238 isotope
to drop away. The gas then proceeds to other centrifuges -
thousands of them - where the process is repeated, increasing
the proportion of uranium-235.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
5 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Arrogance want to monopolise science
2006/10/27
"Superpowers want science for thier own interests and are
opposed to companionship between science and morality", said the
Minister of Science, Research and Technology in a meeting with
the winner of Avi Sina second international award.
Mohammad Mehdi Zahedi in his meeting with Sergeon and Master of
Torento university in Canada, Professor Abdollah Dar who has
payed a visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran said that giving
priority to morality over science is based on teachings of the
Noblest Messenger of Allah, Hazrat Mohammad (PBUH) for mankind.
He referred to heavy responsibility of university students and
scholars of the world in safeguarding virtues and said that
although the world powers have used scientific achievements and
nuclear energy against human rights, but they are oppose to our
peaceful nuclear purposes and put IRI under pressure.
Zahedi expressed his satisfaction over the Omani Muslim
scholar'a winning the international Ave Cina award, adding that
"individuals like you should be forerunner of morality-expansion
movement."
During the meeting Professor Abdollah Dar said "I feel I belong
to Iranians" adding that "I honour linkage between the name of
the most famous Iranian physician and the award which I
received."
Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center.
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir
*****************************************************************
6 AFP: Bush: World must 'double' effort on Iran nuclear program -
Fri Oct 27, 11:59 AM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - President George W. Bush" /> said the
international community must "double our effort" to stop Iran" />
from getting nuclear weapons after reports that Tehran had
stepped up sensitive atomic work.
Asked about news accounts that Iran had taken a new step in
uranium enrichment, Bush replied: "It says to me that we must
double our effort to work with the international community to
persuade the Iranians that there is only isolation from the
world if they continue working forward on such a program."
His comments came after the ISNA news agency reported that
Iranian scientists have begun feeding gas into a second cascade
of centrifuges to enrich uranium, defying UN threats of
sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.
"I've read the speculation about that that's what they may be
doing," Bush told reporters after a meeting at the White House
with NATO" /> Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
"But whether they double it or not, the idea of Iran having a
nuclear weapon is unacceptable. It's unacceptable to the United
States, and it's unacceptable to nations we are working with in
the United Nations" /> to send a common message" to Tehran, said
Bush.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
7 AFP: Six major powers discuss Iran sanctions draft
by Gerard Aziakou Thu Oct 26, 7:40 PM ET
NEW YORK (AFP) - Six major powers huddled behind closed doors to
review a draft UN Security Council resolution mandating sanctions
against Iran" /> Iranover its refusal to halt sensitive nuclear
fuel work.
The talks at Britain's UN mission brought together ambassadors
from the UN Security Council's five veto-wielding members --
Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States -- as well
as from Germany.
The focus was on the resolution crafted by Britain, France and
Germany in consultations with Washington to penalize Tehran for
failing to heed UN demands that it freeze its uranium enrichment
activities, which the West fears could lead to Iran building a
nuclear warhead.
"It was just a preliminary exchange of views," said US
Ambassador John Bolton. "We will meet again probably on Monday
and I think at that point we'll have a chance to talk about
specifics."
The meeting was held just as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov rejected the proposed sanctions, arguing that they did
not advance objectives agreed on earlier by the six major world
powers.
These, he noted, include preventing proliferation of "sensitive
technology" without the supervision of the International Atomic
Energy Agency" /> International Atomic Energy Agency, while also
keeping open "all necessary channels of communication with
Iran."
"A lot of work is still to be done, a lot of work," said
Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin as he emerged from the
meeting at the British mission.
The draft calls on UN member states to slap nuclear and
ballistic missile related sanctions on Iran. It provides for a
freeze on assets related to Iran's nuclear and missile programs
as well as travel bans on nuclear and weapons scientists
involved in those programs.
According to some diplomats, Washington had pressed for a
tougher text, including a call for an end to Moscow's help
building Iran's Bushehr nuclear power station.
But British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry played down differences
between Washington and the European trio, which has spearheaded
inconclusive talks to persuade Iran to scale down its nuclear
ambitions.
"The Americans and we are on board and we are very close to each
other," Jones Parry said. "I wouldn't blow up the differences.
We didn't screw down the final details but the essence of the
resolution has been worked out and we are in close harmony."
In an apparent bid to mollify Moscow, the text drawn up by the
three European powers specifically exempts Russian aid to
Bushehr from the proposed sanctions.
A Western diplomat, however, said the exemption did not apply to
the provision of nuclear fuel to Bushehr.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said
his government understood Russian worries about the proposed
sanctions.
"We know that the Russians have some concerns about the tactics
and concerns about applying too much pressure too quickly on the
Iranians. We certainly understand their point of view," he said.
"We expect that there are probably going to be changes along the
way. That is just the nature of multilateral negotiations on
these UN Security Council resolutions," he added.
The draft states that the sanctions "shall not apply if it is
determined in advance and on a case by case basis that such
supply, sale, transfer or provision of such items or assistance
would clearly not contribute to the development of Iran's
sensitive technologies in support of its nuclear and ballistic
programs, including where such items or assistance are for food,
agricultural, medical or other humanitarian purposes."
But it calls on all states to bar "specialized teaching or
training of Iranian nationals, within their territories or by
their nationals, of disciplines which would contribute to Iran's
nuclear and ballistic missile programs."
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
8 AFP: Iran steps up enrichment work in defiance of UN resolution -
by Farhad Pouladi Fri Oct 27, 12:16 PM ET
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iranian scientists have begun feeding gas into a
second cascade of centrifuges to enrich uranium, defying UN
threats of sanctions over Iran" /> 's nuclear program, a news
agency has reported.
said the international community needed to work harder to stop
Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon, and French President
Jacques Chirac" /> said the time may have come for sanctions.
Asked in Washington about the news from Iran, Bush replied: "It
says to me that we must double our effort to work with the
international community to persuade the Iranians that there is
only isolation from the world if they continue working forward
on such a program."
Iran confirmed Wednesday that it had installed new equipment to
step up uranium enrichment, and would imminently start pumping
gas into it.
On Friday, an official told the ISNA agency: "The second cascade
was set up two weeks ago and this week gas was injected in them.
We have the product of the second cascade."
Bush said the idea of Iran having a nuclear weapon was
unacceptable.
"It's unacceptable to the United States, and it's unacceptable
to nations we are working with in the United Nations" /> to send
a common message" to Tehran, he said.
Tehran's announcement came as six major powers huddled behind
closed doors in New York to review a draft UN Security Council
resolution mandating sanctions against Iran over its refusal to
halt its sensitive nuclear fuel work.
Iran denies it has a nuclear weapons program, maintaining that
the project is aimed solely at producing electricity.
The UN talks brought together ambassadors from the Security
Council's five veto-wielding members -- Britain, China, France,
Russia and the US -- and Germany.
The focus was on a resolution crafted by Britain, France and
Germany in consultations with Washington to penalize Tehran for
failing to heed UN demands that it freeze uranium enrichment.
Following the news from Iran, French President Jacques Chirac
said sanctions should be imposed if there is a stalemate in
dialogue.
"I hope that we can find a solution through dialogue," he said
during an official visit to China.
"If it goes on and appears that the dialogue will not end, then
it is probably necessary to find calibrated, adaptable,
temporary and reversible sanctions that will be imposed to show
Iran that the entire international community does not understand
their position and is hostile to it."
Chirac said he had "never been a great believer in sanctions"
and that he "has never been convinced of their effectiveness."
But "in this particular case, it is obvious and the entire
international community recognizes this, notably China, but also
Russia, the Europeans and the United States, that the ambitions
clearly signalled by Iran are not compatible with the idea we
are making concerning non-proliferation."
According to some diplomats, the US had pressed for a tougher
draft resolution, including a call for an end to Moscow's help
building Iran's Bushehr nuclear power station.
But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has rejected the
proposed sanctions, arguing that they do not advance objectives
agreed earlier by the six powers.
The draft calls on UN member states to slap nuclear and
ballistic missile-related sanctions on Iran. It provides for a
freeze of assets related to Iran's nuclear and missile programs
and travel bans on scientists involved in those programs.
A top Iranian cleric who preached Tehran's Friday sermon defied
the UN over probable sanctions, calling again for a return to
talks.
"If you want to go ahead with the sanctions, go ahead. You have
imposed sanctions on us for the past 27 years. What did you
gain? It was with these sanctions that Iranian youth reached
nuclear energy and self-sufficiency," challenged Ahmad Khatami.
"You will lose more than us if you impose sanctions. Give up
these kinds of games because your benefit is in what Iran has
proposed," added Khatami.
"Saying it again, negotiating is the best way and we are
negotiating from a position of power," he said, echoing Iranian
officials' call for new talks.
Tehran has so far conducted small-scale enrichment at Natanz in
central Iran, feeding UF6 gas into a single 164-centrifuge
cascade.
Enrichment, carried out in lines of centrifuges called cascades,
is used to make fuel for civilian nuclear reactors. In highly
refined form, however, the product can also serve as the raw
material for atomic weapons.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
9 AFP: Chirac says stalemate in Iran talks should trigger sanctions -
Fri Oct 27, 9:15 AM ET
WUHAN, China (AFP) - French President Jacques Chirac" /> has said
that if a stalemate develops in the dialogue with Iran" /> over
its nuclear program then sanctions should be imposed.
"I hope that we can find a solution (to the Iranian nuclear
issue) through dialogue," Chirac said in the central Chinese
city of Wuhan on Friday.
"If it goes on and appears that the dialogue will not end, then
it is probably necessary to find calibrated, adaptable,
temporary and reversible sanctions that will be imposed to show
Iran that the entire international community does not understand
their position and is hostile to it."
Chirac's statements followed reports from Iran that scientists
had begun feeding gas into a second cascade of centrifuges to
enrich uranium, defying UN threats of sanctions over Iran's
nuclear program.
"The second cascade was set up two weeks ago and this week gas
was injected in them," an unidentified official told the ISNA
news agency in Tehran. "We have the product of the second
cascade."
Iran on Wednesday confirmed it had installed new equipment to
step up uranium enrichment and said it would imminently start
pumping gas into the equipment.
The announcement came as six major powers huddled behind closed
doors in New York to review a draft UN Security Council
resolution mandating sanctions against Iran over its refusal to
halt its sensitive nuclear fuel work, which the West fears could
be diverted to make a nuclear bomb.
Chirac, who was in China on the third day of a four-day visit,
said that he had "never been a great believer in sanctions" and
that he "has never been convinced of their effectiveness."
But "in this particular case, it is obvious and the entire
international community recognizes this, notably China, but also
Russia, the Europeans and the United States that the ambitions
clearly signalled by Iran are not compatible with the idea we
are making concerning non-proliferation."
A top Iranian cleric, who preached Tehran's Friday sermon defied
the UN over probable sanctions, calling again for a return to
negotiations.
"If you want to go ahead with the sanctions, go ahead," said
Ahmad Khatami in a challenging tone.
"You have imposed sanctions on us for the past 27 years. What
did you gain? It was with these sanctions that Iranian youth
reached nuclear energy and self sufficiency."
In New York, the talks at Britain's UN mission brought together
ambassadors from the UN Security Council's five veto-wielding
members -- Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States
-- as well as from Germany.
The focus was on the resolution crafted by Britain, France and
Germany in consultations with Washington to penalize Tehran for
failing to heed UN demands that it freeze its uranium enrichment
activities, which the West fears could lead to Iran building a
nuclear warhead.
On Thursday in Beijing, a joint communique released by Chinese
President Hu Jintao" /> and Chirac called on Iran to heed UN
mandates over its nuclear program and abide by an earlier
Security Council resolution to abandon its uranium enrichment
program or face sanctions.
"The two sides call for respect of Security Council resolution
1696 and agree to pursue their joint efforts for a resolution of
the nuclear issue to maintain a close permanent contact on this
matter," the statement said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
10 AFP: Israeli PM accuses world of doing 'nothing' over Iran
Friday October 27, 04:07 PM
[Ehud Olmert]
JERUSALEM (AFP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has accused
the international community of "doing nothing" over Iran,
likening the situation to the appeasement of the 1930s when
faced with the rise of Nazism.
"Like the 1930s in Germany, the international community hears
voices today calling for the destruction of Israel and does
nothing," he said Friday during a speech at the country's
Holocaust memorial, Yad Vashem.
"For the first time, the leader of a great nation (Iran)
declares that its objective is the destruction of the State of
Israel, which does not stop this nation from remaining a
legitimate partner in the UN," he added.
Israel views the Islamic republic as its chief enemy, alarmed by
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's call for the Jewish
state to be wiped off the map and his dismissal of the Nazi
Holocaust as a myth.
Olmert charged that Iran was not happy with words alone, "but is
deploying huge efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction".
He was speaking at a ceremony organised by Yad Vashem to honour
US billionaire Sheldon Adelson, who donated 25 million dollars
in what was the largest single private donation in the
memorial's history.
Israel and the United States have spearheaded international
claims that Iranian nuclear activities are a cover for an atomic
weapons programme although Tehran insists it wants only to
generate energy.
Israel is widely believed to be the only country in the Middle
East to have a nuclear arsenal, estimated at 200 warheads,
although it has never formally confirmed or denied it holds such
weapons.
AFP
*****************************************************************
11 AFP: Russia unconcerned by Iranian nuclear 'cascade' work
Friday October 27, 04:02 PM
[Sergei Ivanov]
MOSCOW (AFP) - Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov has said
he was unconcerned by reports that Iran has taken a new step in
uranium enrichment, saying it was still a long way from building
a military capability.
"I do not share these fears. Iran has started a second cascade
of centrifuges under total control of the IAEA (International
Atomic Energy Agency) for scientific purposes," he told
journalists Friday.
"It is premature to speak of weapons-grade uranium," he said,
underlining the need for Iran's nuclear work to take place under
IAEA supervision.
The comments came after Iran's ISNA news agency reported that
Iranian scientists have begun feeding gas into a second cascade
of centrifuges to enrich uranium, defying UN threats of
sanctions.
"The second cascade was set up two weeks ago, and this week gas
was injected in them," an unidentified official told ISNA. "We
have the product of the second cascade."
Meanwhile, Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alexeyev said that
Russia, which is building Iran's first atomic power station at
Bushehr, wants to deepen economic links with Iran.
"The two sides underlined the need to intensify their efforts to
expand economic cooperation," he said in a statement from the
foreign ministry after a meeting with Iran's ambassador.
Iran on Wednesday confirmed it had installed new equipment to
step up uranium enrichment and said it would imminently start
pumping gas into the equipment.
The announcement came as six major powers are huddling behind
closed doors in New York to review a draft UN Security Council
resolution mandating sanctions against Iran over its refusal to
halt its sensitive nuclear fuel work, which the West fears could
be diverted to make a nuclear bomb.
The charge has been vehemently denied by Iran, which maintains
that its nuclear program is aimed solely at producing
electricity.
AFP
*****************************************************************
12 UPI: Iran produces second nuclear cascade
United Press International - NewsTrack -
10/27/2006 7:43:00 AM -0400
NATANZ, Iran, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- Iran has stepped up its nuclear
enrichment plans by combining gas with a second cascade of
centrifuges at its nuclear site in Natanz.
An anonymous source quoted by the country's semi-official IRNA
news agency said "product" had been obtained from the second
cascade, the BBC reported Friday. It was unknown how many
centrifuges were involved in the second group, but the country's
first cascade included 168 centrifuges that produced their first
small amounts of enriched uranium in February.
To create industrial-scale nuclear fuel, the country would
require tens of thousands of centrifuges, the BBC said.
The Iranian source said the U.N. International Atomic Energy
Agency was made aware of the development.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency has been fully aware of
the issue and the inspectors are present in Iran," the source
said.
Iran plans to have 3,000 centrifuges installed by the end of
2006, the BBC said.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
13 UPI: Bush seeks more intensive effort on Iran
United Press International - NewsTrack -
10/27/2006 1:08:00 PM -0400
WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush Friday
said efforts to convince Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions
must be intensified.
Following an Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary-General
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Bush told reporters word that Iran is
doubling its uranium enrichment capacity is unacceptable.
"It (Iran's actions) says to me that we must double our effort
to work with the international community to persuade the
Iranians that there is only isolation from the world if they
continue working forward on such a program," Bush said.
"And I've read the speculation ... that that's what they may be
doing, but whether they've doubled it or not, the idea of Iran
having a nuclear weapon is unacceptable, and it's unacceptable
to the United States and it's unacceptable to nations we're
working with in the United Nations to send a common message."
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
14 UPI: Iran's centrifuges don't worry Ivanov
United Press International - Security &Terrorism -
10/27/2006 1:14:00 PM -0400
MOSCOW, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- Russia's defense minister said Friday
he wasn't concerned about Iran's expansion of its uranium
enrichment capabilities.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov was speaking after Iran
announced Friday it had activated a second network of gas
centrifuges to enrich uranium, the RIA Novosti news agency
reported.
"I do not share those fears, because I know the situation," said
Ivanov, who is also a deputy prime minister. "Iran has launched
a second cascade of centrifuges, and this process is fully
controlled by the IAEA."
According to the RIA Novosti report, Ivanov said the centrifuges
were already function in what he called a in a test mode. He
said he knew they were not being utilized to enrich
weapons-grade uranium. "It is at least premature to talk about
uranium enrichment in Iran," he said.
The U.S. government has urged Russia to stop its companies'
involvement in constructing Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant.
However, "Russia has consistently rejected the demands, citing
Iran's right to nuclear power under the Non-Proliferation
Treaty," the RIA Novosti report said.
The EU3, or European Trip nations of Britain, France, and
Germany ,earlier this week proposed creating new international
economic sanctions to penalize Iran. However, RIA Novosti noted
that even thiese sanctions "would limit the Bushehr project but
not stop it."
Russia's Atomstroiexport company "is building Bushehr's first
power unit under a $1 billion contract signed by Russia and Iran
in 1995.
"Russia's nuclear chief Sergei Kiriyenko said last month the
Bushehr NPP will be commissioned in September 2007, and that
power generation will begin two months later. In September 2006,
Russia agreed to supply fuel for the plant in March 2007, in
time for its commissioning," the RIA Novosti report said.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
15 [NYTr] Why Bush is Seeking Confrontation with North Korea
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:15:03 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: SPAM-LOW
X-Spam: [SPAM] - LOW
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
Counterpunch - Oct 27, 2006
http://www.counterpunch.org/elich10272006.html
"A Bursting Boiler at Russia's Doorstep"
Why Bush is Seeking Confrontation With North Korea
By GREGORY ELICH
North Korea's nuclear test and UN sanctions have brought relations between
the U.S. and North Korea to their lowest point since President Bush took
office. Yet it was only little more than a year ago that for one brief
moment hopes were kindled for a diplomatic settlement of the nuclear
dispute. At the six-party talks on September 19, 2005, a statement of
principles on nuclear disarmament was signed between the U.S. and the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK the formal name for North
Korea). The Bush Administration, however, viewed its signature on the
agreement as only a tactical delay. During negotiations it had firmly
rejected the statement, and was brought around only when the Chinese
delegation warned that it would announce that the U.S. was to blame were
the six-party talks were to collapse.
The ink was barely dry on the document when the U.S. immediately violated
one of its main points. Although the U.S. was required under the agreement
to begin normalizing relations with North Korea, on literally the very next
day it announced the imposition of sanctions on North Korean accounts held
in the Macao-based Banco Delta Asia, ostensibly because they were being
used to circulate counterfeit currency.
Whether there was any substance to the accusation or not has yet to be
shown, but there are at least some grounds for skepticism. German
counterfeit expert Klaus Bender believes that since U.S. currency is
printed on specially made paper in Massachusetts, using ink based on a
secret chemical formula, "it is unimaginable" that anyone other than
Americans "could come by these materials." The printing machines that North
Korea obtained three decades ago, Bender says, are "outdated and not able
to produce the USD supernote, a high tech product." He strongly implied
that the CIA could be the source of the counterfeit currency as it "runs a
secret printing facility equipped with the sophisticated technology which
is required for the production of the notes." That the CIA has the capacity
to print money does not prove that it has done so. It would, however, have
a motive, and the source has not been traced. Wherever the counterfeit
supernotes came from, the Bush Administration was ardently using the issue
as a pretext to take action against North Korea. Despite that, Bender
reports, "the opinion of experts" is that the U.S. allegation against North
Korea "is not tenable." (1)
Banco Delta Asia was quick to deny the charge, saying that its business
relations with North Korea were entirely legitimate and commercial. Over a
year later, the U.S. has yet to complete its investigation. As long as the
investigation remains unresolved, the U.S. can continue to freeze the
DPRK's funds. Russian Ambassador to South Korea Gleb Ivashentsov called for
the U.S. to present evidence to back its accusation. Yet all the Russians
received was "rumor-level talk." U.S. Treasury officials met with a North
Korean delegation in New York in March 2006, but provided nothing to back
the charge. DPRK delegation head Ri Gun remarked afterwards, "There were
neither comments nor discussion" about evidence. At that meeting, he
proposed creating a joint U.S.-DPRK consultative body to "exchange
information on financial crimes and prepare countermeasures." The North
Koreans said they would respond to evidence of counterfeiting by arresting
those who were involved and seizing their equipment. "Both sides can have a
dialogue at the consultative body through which they can build trust. It
would have a very positive impact on addressing the nuclear issue on the
Korean peninsula," Ri said. The delegation also suggested that a North
Korean settlement account be opened at a U.S. financial institution and
placed under U.S. supervision, so as to allay suspicions. (2)
Not surprisingly, the North Korean offers were rejected. By raising the
issue of alleged counterfeiting, the Bush Administration sought to use this
as a means to justify economic warfare against the DPRK. It was not an
agreement with North Korea that the Bush Administration wanted, but regime
change, and further action was soon to come. The U.S. went on to impose
sanctions on several North Korean import-export firms, on the
unsubstantiated charge that they were involved in the arms trade. Then more
sanctions were announced, this time against several Indian and Russian
firms doing business with the DPRK, along with yet more North Korean
companies. (3)
The measures taken against Banco Delta Asia deprived North Korea of a major
access point to foreign exchange, and served also as a mechanism for
magnifying the effect of sanctions. By blacklisting Banco Delta Asia, the
U.S. caused other financial institutions to curtail dealings with the bank,
until it was forced to sever relations with North Korea. The campaign soon
took on global significance. The U.S. Treasury Department sent warning
letters to banks around the world, resulting in a worldwide wave of banks
shutting down North Korean accounts. Fearing U.S. retaliation, banks felt
it prudent to close North Korean accounts rather than risk being
blacklisted and driven out of business. U.S. Treasury Under Secretary
Stuart Levey observed that sanctions and U.S. threats had put "huge
pressure" on the DPRK, leading to a "snowballingavalanche effect." U.S.
actions were meant to undermine any prospect of a peaceful settlement. From
now on, a senior Bush Administration official revealed, the strategy would
be: "Squeeze them, but keep the negotiations going." But talks, the
official continued, would serve as nothing more than a means for accepting
North Korea's capitulation. A second U.S. official described the goal of
talks as a "surrender mechanism." Indeed, even before the signing of the
September 19 agreement, the U.S. had already decided "to move toward more
confrontational measures," claims a former Bush Administration official.
(4)
As general manager of Daedong Credit Bank, a majority foreign-owned joint
venture bank operating in Pyongyang and primarily serving importers, Nigel
Cowie was in a position to witness the effect of the Treasury Department's
letters. "We have heard from foreign customers conducting legitimate
business here, who have been told by their bankers overseas to stop
receiving remittances from the DPRK, otherwise their accounts will be
closed." To illustrate the lengths to which U.S. officials were prepared to
go, Cowie described an operation that involved his own firm, from which, he
said, "you can draw your own conclusions." An account was opened with a
Mongolian bank. Arrangements were made for legal cash transactions. But
when the Daedong Credit Bank's couriers arrived in Mongolia, they were
detained by Mongolian intelligence officials, and their money confiscated.
Accusations were made that the couriers were transporting counterfeit
currency from North Korea. A leak to the news media from an unidentified
source led to reports charging that "North Korean diplomats" had been
arrested for smuggling counterfeit currency. After two weeks, the Mongolian
"intelligence officials in a meeting with us finally conceded that all the
notes were genuine; the cash was released." In the final meeting, Mongolian
intelligence officials "appeared rather embarrassed that they had been
given incorrect information." It requires little imagination to guess the
source of that incorrect information. (5)
U.S. actions were meeting with resounding success. "For our part," Cowie
explains, "we are only conducting legitimate business, but have nonetheless
been seriously affected by these measures. A large amount of our and our
customers' money not just in USD, but in all currencies has effectively
been seized, with no indication of when they'll give it back to us." The
fate of Banco Delta Asia served as an object lesson. "Banks with any kind
of U.S. ties are just terrified to have anything to do with any North
Korean bank," Cowie said. After the majority interest in Daedong Credit
Bank was purchased by British-owned Koryo Bank, the new owner, Colin
McAskill, asked U.S. officials to examine the bank's records in order to
prove that its funds are legitimate and should be unfrozen. "We will take
on the U.S. over the sanctions standoff," he said. "They've had it much too
much their own way without anyone questioning what they are putting out."
(6)
Warning letters to banks were often followed by personal visits from U.S.
officials. Bankers and American officials say that the messages contained a
mix of implicit threats and explicit actions. Consequently, it was not long
before nearly all of North Korea's accounts held in foreign banks were
closed, with a deleterious effect on the DPRK's international trade. U.S.
officials were inflicting serious economic harm on North Korea, but planned
to do much more. "We're just starting," said Treasury Under Secretary
Stuart Levey several months ago. In many cases, no pretense was made that
the actions were related to illegal financial transactions. U.S. officials
were now openly pressing financial institutions to sever all economic
relations with the DPRK. "The U.S. government is urging financial
institutions around the world to think carefully about the risks of doing
any North Korea-related business," Levey said. By September 2006, the U.S.
had sent official dispatches to each UN member state, detailing plans for
harsher economic sanctions. The planned measures were so strong that
several European nations expressed concern, and it was said that the plans
aimed at nothing less than a total blockade on all North Korean trade and
financial transactions. (7)
Concerned over the direction events were heading, Selig Harrison, director
of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy, visited the
DPRK and reported on what he saw. "I found instances in North Korea
authenticated by foreign businessmen and foreign embassies in which
legitimate imports of industrial equipment for light industries making
consumer goods have been blocked. The North Koreans understandably see this
as a regime change policy designed to bring about the collapse of their
regime through economic pressure." Harrison said the message he heard from
North Korean officials was essentially, "We want the U.S. to show us it is
ready to move toward normal relations in accordance with the September 19
agreement. If the U.S. won't lift all of the financial sanctions, all at
once, then it should show us in other ways that it has got its act together
and is giving up the regime change policy." (8)
North Korean officials were understandably miffed at the Bush
Administration's immediate violation of the September 19 agreement on
principles. As the U.S. continued to tighten the screws, North Korea
announced that it would not return to the six-party talks until the U.S.
honored the agreement it had signed. Sanctions would have to be lifted. At
a minimum, dialogue should take place on resolving any questions
surrounding the accusation of counterfeiting. U.S. officials said the
sanctions were not up for discussion, and demanded North Korea's return to
the six-party talks. The image presented to the American public was of
North Korean obdurate behavior and refusal to negotiate. Unmentioned was
how the Bush Administration had deliberately torpedoed the talks.
South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun visited Washington in September 2006,
asking for the U.S. investigation into Banco Delta Asia to be brought to a
speedy conclusion. Roh said it was also important that the U.S. refrain
from imposing further sanctions since such actions made the resumption of
six-party talks impossible. (9) Predictably, his requests were rebuffed.
Instead, the U.S. State Department allocated $1 million to three radio
stations to broadcast hostile programs into the DPRK. (10) "I think our
sanctions have had real impact," Stuart Levey claimed in a speech before
the American Enterprise Institute just one month before the DPRK's nuclear
test, "but the real goal, I think, is to see a real change in North Korea.
So we are not satisfied with what has happened so far." (11)
Any hope for a resumption of the six-party talks had vanished. The Bush
Administration wanted regime change in North Korea and could be expected to
increase tensions. The North Koreans had earned a reputation for their
proclivity for responding in kind: by negotiating when approached
diplomatically, and with toughness when threatened. North Korea decided to
proceed with a nuclear test so as to discourage any thoughts in Washington
of military action. A statement was issued by the DPRK Foreign Ministry, in
which it was said that the U.S. was trying to "internationalize the
sanctions and blockade against the DPRK." A nuclear test would be a
countermeasure "to defend the sovereignty of the country" against the Bush
Administration's "hostile actions." (12)
The nuclear test took place on October 9. There is still some mystery about
the nature of the test. The yield was surprisingly small, estimated to be
in the half kiloton to 0.9-kiloton range. The North Koreans had notified
Chinese officials beforehand of an impending 4-kiloton test, far below the
yields of other nations when they conducted their first tests. It could be
that the DPRK was trying to conserve its limited supply of plutonium and to
reduce the extent of radioactive emissions. The test is widely thought to
have been a partial failure, due to an incomplete detonation of the nuclear
charge. U.S. intelligence officials and weapons analysts believe that
either a nuclear device (not a bomb) was tested and malfunctioned, or that
a test was done only on a nuclear component. The DPRK still has far to go
before it is capable of developing a functioning nuclear weapon. If the
DPRK wanted to signal the U.S. that it had a nuclear deterrent, then it had
accomplished the opposite, with the test revealing that its nuclear program
was still in the early stages. (13)
It was always the goal of the Bush Administration to win international
backing for UN sanctions against North Korea. There were those in the Bush
Administrations who admitted that they were hoping that the North Koreans
would conduct a nuclear test. Having maneuvered the DPRK into carrying out
the only option it had, the U.S. swiftly seized its opportunity. (14)
The U.S. won approval in the UN Security Council for international
sanctions against the DPRK. China and Russia did succeed in eliminating any
phraseology that could lead to military action, but there are still
inherent dangers in the UN resolution. For example, UN member states are
called upon to take "cooperative action including through inspections of
cargo to and from the DPRK." Both the Security Council and the sanctions
committee were given the right to expand the list of goods and technology
that can be blocked, and the committee is to meet every 90 days to
recommend "ways to strengthen the effectiveness of the measures." (15) It
can be expected that the U.S. will press for more draconian measures. U.S.
officials were quick to point out that UN sanctions allowed the inspection
of North Korean ships, and gave the go-ahead for a more aggressive campaign
to force financial institutions to cut ties with the DPRK. The Bush
Administration regards the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), a
program said to be aimed at limiting the flow of nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons, as the centerpiece of enforcement. (16)
Soon after the passage of the UN resolution, U.S. Ambassador Alexander
Vershbow and Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill asked South
Korea to review its economic relations with the North, with an eye to
limiting contact. This was followed by a visit from Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice, who was there to reinforce the message. In particular,
the U.S. wanted South Korea to halt cooperative projects in the North at
the Kaesong industrial park and the Mount Kamgang tourist resort. (17) To
its credit, South Korea refused to abandon the projects, as both are
essential to long-range plans for the reunification of the Korean
peninsula. "The decision is South Korea's to make," stressed South Korean
security aide Song Min-soon. (18)
Condoleezza Rice's trip also took her to Tokyo, Beijing and Moscow, where
she urged officials to implement measures that would sharpen the effect of
sanctions. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov felt that Rice went too
far in her demands, and afterwards commented, "Everyone should demonstrate
realism and avoid extreme, uncompromising positions." (19) Predictably,
U.S. officials met with more success in Japan, which had recently imposed a
total ban on trade with the DPRK. Japanese officials talked of submitting a
new resolution to the UN if North Korea were to conduct a second test. The
new resolution as envisaged by Japan would require UN member nations to
block nearly all trade with the DPRK. More alarmingly, Article 42 would be
invoked so as to permit military action. (20)
The furor over the partial failure of North Korea's single, rather puny
nuclear test made for an interesting contrast with the indifference that
has greeted other nations' nuclear arsenals. The U.S., of course, has a
massive arsenal of nuclear arms at its disposal. There is no suggestion
that the established nuclear states should disarm, nor have there been
calls for sanctions against the newer nuclear states, India, Pakistan and
Israel. The U.S. has even recently signed a nuclear deal with India. In all
of these cases, the nuclear programs dwarfed that of North Korea's. Yet
only North Korea has been singled out for punishment and outrage. The basis
for such a glaringly obvious double standard is that none of the other
nuclear powers are potential targets for U.S. military forces. The
operative principle is that no nation the U.S. seeks to crush can be
allowed the means of thwarting an attack.
North Korea's nuclear test was driven by the perceived need to reduce the
risk of attack by the U.S., a real enough consideration given the fate of
conventionally armed Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia. At the same time,
the test played into the Bush Administration's hands. The U.S. military is
tied up to a large extent in the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, but
UN sanctions are a cost-effective alternative for bringing ruin to North
Korea and its people. How the Bush Administration interprets what the
sanctions allow it to do is a question with potentially profound
consequences. There have already been indications that the U.S. may go well
beyond the letter of the resolution and implement measures that represent a
real menace to peace. The UN resolution gives nations the legal backing to
stop North Korean ships in foreign ports and waters. But U.S. Ambassador to
the UN John Bolton has hinted at the possibility of stopping and searching
North Korean ships in international waters, an act lacking in any legal
basis. If the U.S. decides to pursue that course of action, it risks
inviting a military clash at sea. Japan is considering contributing
destroyers and patrol aircraft to the U.S. plan to harass North Korean
shipping. (21) This would be seen as an especially provocative act, given
the bitter memories associated with the many years Korea spent under harsh
Japanese colonial rule.
But then, confrontation is surely what the Bush Administration wants,
viewing it as an opportunity for further punishment of the DPRK. Since
demolishing the 1994 Agreed Framework, the Bush Administration has gone on
to do everything in its power to worsen tensions. "The U.S. never intended
to honor the Agreed Framework and did not fully fulfill any of its
provisions," points out Alexander Zhebin of Russia's Institute of the Far
East. "The U.S. would love to place a bursting boiler at Russia's doorstep.
Americans would sit back and watch it explode on TV, and let Russians,
Chinese and Koreans sort out the consequences." (22)
NOTES
(1) "Sharply Increased US Sanctions are Based on the USD Supernote
Accusation against North Korea. But Counterfeit Experts Say the Accusation
is Baseless," European Business Association (European Chamber of Commerce
in Pyongyang), April 2006.
"An der 'Supernote' Stimmt Fast Alles," Associated Press, April 19, 2006.
(2) "NKorea Nuke Talks Uncertain," UPI, December 6, 2005.
"No US Evidence on Counterfeiting: NKorean Diplomat," Agence France-Presse,
March 9, 2006.
"N.K. Proposes Separate Negotiations to Discuss U.S. Sanctions," Yonhap
(Seoul), March 8, 2006.
Lee Chi-dong, "Russia Urges U.S. to Present Evidence of N. Korean
Counterfeiting," Yonhap (Seoul), March 7, 2006.
(3) Jeannine Aversa, "White House Targets N. Korean Companies," Associated
Press, October 21, 2005.
"US Slaps Sanctions on N.Korea, Russian Firms," Reuters, August 4, 2006.
"U.S. Slaps Sanctions on Two N.Korean Firms," Chosun Ilbo (Seoul), August
7, 2006.
(4) Christian Caryl, "Pocketbook Policing," Newsweek, April 10-17, 2006.
Joel Brinkley, "U.S. Squeezes North Korea's Money Flow," New York Times,
March 10, 2006.
(5) Nigel Cowie, "US Financial Allegations What They Mean," Nautilus
Institute, May 4, 2006.
(6) Nigel Cowie, "US Financial Allegations What They Mean," Nautilus
Institute, May 4, 2006.
"North Korea's Nuclear Push May be Stymied by U.S. Banking Rules,"
Bloomberg, March 7, 2006.
Anna Fifield, "Bankers Challenge US Sanctions on North Korea," Financial
Times (London), September 5, 2006.
(7) Steven R. Weisman, "U.S. Pursues Tactic of Financial Isolation," New
York Times, October 16, 2006.
"N.Korean Regime Feeling Pinch from Sanctions: U.S.," Chosun Ilbo (Seoul),
April 3, 2006.
"North Funds Lose Havens in Sanctions," JoongAng Ilbo (Seoul), August 24,
2006.
"US Targets Business with North Korea," Associated Press, September 9,
2006.
"US Reportedly Asks for Cooperation with Sanctions on DPRK from UN Member
States," Chosun Ilbo (Seoul), September 13, 2006.
(8) Selig S. Harrison, "N.K. Nuclear Test Depends on U.S.," Hankyoreh
(Seoul), October 2, 2006.
(9) "South Korea Asked U.S. to Suspend Further North Korea Sanctions:
Source," Yonhap (Seoul), September 18, 2006.
(10) "US Funds Radiocasts Aimed at North," Dong-A Ilbo (Seoul), September
28, 2006.
(11) "U.S. Not Yet Satisfied with Impact of N.K. Sanctions: Levey," Yonhap
(Seoul), September 9, 2006.
(12) "DPRK Foreign Ministry Clarifies Stand on New Measure to Bolster War
Deterrent," KCNA (Pyongyang), October 3, 2006.
(13) Jungmin Kang and Peter Hayes, "Technical Analysis of the DPRK Nuclear
Test," Nautilus Institute, October 20, 2006.
Ivan Oelrich, "North Korea's Bomb: A Technical Assessment," Strategic
Security Blog (a Project of the Federation of American Scientists," October
13, 2006.
Ludwig De Braeckeleer, "N. K. Nuclear Test: Evidence and Unknowns," Ohmy
News (Seoul), October 12, 2006.
"Alleged Radioactive Debris from N.K. Nuclear Test Detected," Yonhap
(Seoul), October 14, 2006.
Greg Miller and Karen Kaplan, "Even if Device was Flawed, Test Crossed a
Threshold," Los Angeles Times, October 10, 2006.
(14) Interview with Selig S. Harrison, "Harrison Faults Bush Administration
for Rejecting Step-by-Step Accords to Halt North Korea's Nuclear Program,"
Council on Foreign Relations, May 10, 2004.
Glenn Kessler, "Rice Sees Bright Spot in China's New Role Since N. Korean
Test," Washington Post, October 22, 2006.
(15) "Text of U.N. Resolution on N. Korea Sanctions," CNN, October 14,
2006.
(16) Warren Hoge, "Security Council Backs Sanctions on North Korea," New
York Times, October 15, 2006.
"U.S. Achieves Key Objectives in U.N. Resolution, with PSI as Centerpiece,"
Yonhap (Seoul), October 15, 2006.
(17) Park Song-wu, "Vershbow Wants Seoul to Cut Economic Ties with
N.Korea," Korea Times (Seoul), October 18, 2006.
Richard Lloyd Parry, "US Demands the Closure of 'Cash Cow' Projects for
Kim," The Times (London), October 19, 2006.
Lee Joo-hee, "Seoul Urged to Get Tough on N. Korea," Korea Herald (Seoul),
October 19, 2006.
(18) Chun Su-jin, "Testy Official Snaps Back at U.S. Sanctions Pressure,"
JoongAng Ilbo (Seoul), October 19, 2006.
Kim Ji-hyun, "Seoul Digs in Over Projects with N. Korea," Korea Herald
(Seoul), October 20, 2006.
(19) Adrian Blomfield, "Russian Rebuke for Rice over N Korea," Daily
Telegraph (London), October 21, 2006.
(20) Ewen MacAskill and Jonathan Watts, "Japan Bans All Trade with North
Korea," The Guardian (London), October 12, 2006.
"Japan Eyes Tougher N. Korea Resolution," Kyodo News Service (Tokyo),
October 22, 2006.
(21) "MSDF Set to Monitor 2 Sea-Lanes to Check Ships Near Okinawa, Tsushima
Strait," Yomiuri Shimbun, October 22, 2006.
(22) Vladimir Radyuhin, "U.S. Provoked N. Korea: Russia," The Hindu,
Chennai, October 22, 2006.
[Gregory Elich is the author of Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and
the Pursuit of Profit.]
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
16 Korea Herald: Military works on nuclear defense plans
The South Korean military has embarked on a project to establish
a new defense plan to cope with North Korea's nuclear program,
informed sources said yesterday.
Gen. Rhee Sang-hee, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has
ordered military officials to map out new operational plans in
light of the changed security landscape on the Korean Peninsula
following Pyongyang's nuclear test, they said.
The JCS is now developing a three-stage nuclear defense concept
- deterrence, surgical strike and damage control.
The deterrence strategy aims to deter North Korea's use or
threats of using its atomic arsenal against South Korea. For the
first stage defense, the South's military may rely on U.S.
pledges of an "extended deterrence" - in the form of a nuclear
umbrella - to South Korea.
Washington vowed the "continuation of the extended deterrence
offered by the U.S. nuclear umbrella" to Seoul last week during
a defense ministers' talks.
The sources said under the "extended deterrence" scenario, the
U.S.' tactical nuclear weapons and conventional precision-guided
missiles would function as a deterrent against any North Korean
nuclear attack.
Surgical strike is considered as part of the second stage of the
plan.
The JCS mulls the use of South Korea's conventional weapons to
destroy North Korea's nuclear arsenal when an attack becomes
imminent, according to the sources.
In the event of such a preemptive strike, the JCS plans to use
F-15K fighter jets to drop satellite-guided JDAM bombs or fire
280-kilometer range SLAM-ER missiles at the North's nuclear
installations. Those weapons can hit the target with an error of
margin of 3 meters.
In addition, the newly-developed 500-kilometer cruise missiles
code-named Cheonryong, ground-to-ground Hyunmoo missiles and the
Army Tactical Missile System could be mobilized to neutralize
operations.
South Korea possesses Hyunmoo missiles with a range of only 180
kilometers, and have deployed a total of 110 ATACMS missiles,
with a strike range of 300 kilometers.
South Korea has recently successfully tested a 1,000-kilometer
range precision-guided cruise missile that can hit any target in
North Korea, and is also developing an upgraded version with a
range of more than 1,500 kilometers.
As for the third stage of the defense plan, the JCS is also
studying ways to minimize damages if a North Korean nuclear bomb
is dropped in South Korea. The South's military assesses that if
a 20-kiloton nuclear weapon was dropped on Yongsan, Seoul, there
would be more than 1.2 million casualties, including around
200,000 deaths. One kiloton is equivalent to 1,000 kilograms of
TNT in destructive power.
The JCS is especially concerned with any possible radiological
contamination and electronic paralysis caused by a North Korean
nuclear bomb. It estimates that a 20-kiloton nuclear detonation
could result in widespread radiological contamination within 24
hours along a radius of some 28 kilometers from the detonation
site, disrupting military operations in the contaminated region.
An explosion would also produce electronic pulses that can
paralyze electronic devices within 2-10 kilometers from ground
zero.
The JCS is working on how to protect domestic communications
lines and electronic equipment from the attacks and secure
military personnel and civilians from radiological fallouts.
About 10 military officers with doctoral degrees in the field of
nucleonics will be assigned for the tasks in addition to
operational planning personnel, the sources said.
(davidpooh@heraldm.com)
By Jin Dae-woong
2006.10.28
*****************************************************************
17 Korea Herald: Hong Kong detains 2nd N.K. vessel
From news reports
HONG KONG - Hong Kong's marine inspectors have detained another
North Korean cargo ship this week for safety violations,
officials said yesterday.
The officials from the Hong Kong Customs and Marine Department
said the North Korean vessel, Kang Nam 5, has been barred from
leaving the port after its inspectors found about a dozen safety
violations Thursday. Details of the suspected violations were
not available.
The vessel was the second North Korean cargo ship detained in
Hong Kong this week after a 2,000-ton freighter, Kang Nam 1, was
placed under detention Monday for 25 reported safety violations,
including faulty navigational and fire-fighting equipment and
outdated nautical charts.
Hong Kong inspectors said that the safety inspection was a
routine procedure and wasn't influenced by U.N. sanctions
recently passed authorizing inspections of North Korean ships.
The U.N. measures were approved in response to North Korea's
Oct. 9 nuclear test.
"The decision to detain the North Korean ship is part of routine
procedures based on port safety regulations," the Hong Kong
government said.
Including the Kang Nam 5, seven North Korean vessels have been
detained this year, mostly for safety violations, according to
the officials. A total of 10 North Korean ships have been
inspected this year.
The latest North Korean ship to undergo safety inspections
arrived without cargo, according to the officials.
2006.10.28
*****************************************************************
18 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]Call for wisdom
Caught between growing pressure from the United States to
participate in the U.S.-led Proliferation Security Initiative
and the need to exercise caution in order not to provoke North
Korea into military action, the Roh Moo-hyun government is
agonizing over how it should proceed on the issue.
While U.N. Resolution 1718 does not specifically mention PSI,
it calls upon member states to "take, in accordance with their
national authorities and legislation, and consistent with
international law, cooperative action including thorough
inspection of cargo to and from the DPRK as necessary" to
prevent illicit trafficking of weapons of mass destruction,
missiles and related materials.
The United States views the U.N. resolution as lending teeth to
the voluntary anti-proliferation initiative and has been
pressing South Korea to fully participate in PSI, to which it is
currently a limited participant.
An inter-Korean maritime agreement which went into effect last
year covering passage of ships from South to North, North to
North, North to South to a third state already meets the U.N.
resolution's call, according to Seoul. However, no North Korean
ship has ever passed through South Korean waters en route to a
third state since the signing of the agreement. Hence, the
agreement is largely ineffective in preventing WMD proliferation
which is the aim of PSI.
Fully joining the PSI is a political choice that will be
symbolical of South Korea's commitment to falling in step with
the international community's effort to force Kim Jong-il to
abandon nuclear weapons and to return to negotiations.
The Proliferation Security Initiative, launched in 2003, is a
relatively flexible arrangement that currently has 17 fully
participating countries. It was used successfully against Libya
to force that country to eventually abandon its nuclear weapons
program. The unique situation on the Korean Peninsula, however,
requires a more judicious approach to applying PSI.
One option would be for South Korea to participate on a
case-by-case basis so as to avoid direct confrontation with
North Korean vessels. For example, we may participate in
operations against terrorists or pirates but abstain from direct
physical participation in cases involving North Korean ships. We
can participate only in cases far off our coastal waters or
choose to limit participation to information sharing.
It is estimated that the North Korea will lose about $700
million to $1 billion in earnings from weapons exports, drug
trafficking and counterfeit activities if PSI is fully enforced.
This amounts to up to 50 percent of the country's total $2
billion in foreign earnings annually. This would be a major blow
to North Korea's economy and the Kim Jong-il regime.
On Thursday, Seoul announced a travel ban on North Koreans
suspected of taking part in Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program.
It is the first sanction to be announced since the adoption of
U.N. Resolution 1718.
The government must now decide on how to proceed with
inter-Korean projects and the growing pressure to join PSI at a
higher level of commitment. The government is required to submit
its plan for enforcing the U.N. sanctions by Nov. 15. The Roh
administration needs to draw up a plan that will show the
international community that we are responsible actors and will
play our role to achieve denuclearization while not further
escalating tension on the peninsula. Wisdom is sorely needed.
2006.10.28
*****************************************************************
19 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: [EDITORIALS]Save the U.S. alliance
Octorber 28, 2006 KST 14:07 (GMT+9)
A high-level official of the U.S. Department of Defense said
it was nonsense for the South Korean Defense Ministry to call
the "extended deterrence," a new achievement from the Security
Consultative Meeting.
The official was saying the United States has continued to
offer extended deterrence. Washington also spoke against the
Blue House chief security advisor, Song Min-soon, for saying the
United States has had the more wars in its history than any
other country. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Mr.
Song must be reminded the United States lost 30,000 of its
soldiers in the Korean War.
It's never surprising to note discord between Seoul and
Washington under the Roh Moo-hyun administration. However, the
two countries have managed to overcome major crises due to
agreements made regarding South Korea's dispatch of troops to
Iraq and the relocation of the U.S. army base on the Korean
Peninsula. However, with the transition of the wartime military
operational control issue and the dealings with North Korea's
nuclear test, the conflict between the two countries is reaching
a dangerous level now.
South Korea asked for 2012 for the transition of the wartime
control, but Washington adhered to 2009. It's been only a few
days since the annual security meeting, but we've heard that the
U.S. Department of State officials made derogatory about the
South Korean government. There may be a difference in views, but
if it were a normal alliance, there would be behind-the-scenes
coordination. Unfortunately, there seems to be no such
coordination, which is evidence of a weaker-than-ever South
Korean-U.S. alliance.
We have no other choice but to rely more on the United States
for our security, which was true even before the North Korean
nuclear test. A simple example would be the fact that we
urgently asked for the guarantee of a nuclear umbrella from the
United States at the Security Consultative Meeting. It is more
so when we consider our economic situation, as we live on
exports. In particular, in order to properly deal with Japan,
which is leaning to the right and with China, which is provoking
us with historical disputes, we must have support from the
United States.
When the alliance with Washington falls apart, South Korea will
be orphaned in the Northeast Asian region. Revamping the
security and diplomatic cabinets must be the highest priority
for President Roh Moo-hyun. His appointments should not further
aggravate the South Korean-U.S. alliance. President Roh must
keep this in mind.
2006.10.27
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc. Terms of Use |
*****************************************************************
20 washingtonpost.com: Deterring Kim Jong Il -
By Graham Allison
Friday, October 27, 2006; Page A23
In an interview aired last week, George Stephanopoulos put the
question to President Bush: What would he do if "North Korea sold
nukes to Iran or al-Qaeda?" Bush replied, "They'd be held to
account."
Seeking specifics, Stephanopoulos asked: "What does that mean?"
The president answered, "I want the leader of North Korea to
understand that he'll be held to account. Just like he's being
held to account now for having run a test ."
[North Korean leader Kim Jong Il with soldiers in April.] North
Korean leader Kim Jong Il with soldiers in April. (Korea Central
News Agency Via Associated Press) +
Say what? If North Korea sells a nuclear weapon to Osama bin
Laden or Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, he should expect
the United States to go to the United Nations and negotiate
further sanctions? And if al-Qaeda sneaks that bomb into the
United States and we awake to the president's nightmare in which
a mushroom cloud engulfs Washington or Los Angeles, then what?
If this formulation stands -- without further specification --
America risks becoming the victim of a catastrophic "deterrence
failure."
Deterrence emerged as a central concept in Cold War strategy. It
meant convincing the adversary that the costs of taking an
unacceptable action would greatly exceed any benefits it could
hope to achieve. How did the United States prevent the Soviets
from seizing Berlin? By convincing Soviet leaders that such an
attack would trigger a response that would destroy their country.
Effective deterrence required three components: clarity,
capability and credibility. Clarity meant bright lines and
unacceptable consequences. Credibility was understood to be in
the eye of the beholder. How credible was the threat to trade
Boston for Berlin? Never 100 percent. But U.S. forces, exercises
and communication were crafted to convince Soviet leaders they
dare not test it.
To date the Bush administration has demonstrably failed to deter
Kim Jong Il. Successive U.S. demands that Kim not develop
nuclear weapons, not test a missile and not test a nuclear bomb
have been defied. In each case, the president has asserted that
this would be "intolerable." Pressed to be precise about what
this threat meant, however, Bush refused, responding instead, "I
don't think you give timelines to dictators and tyrants."
National security adviser Stephen Hadley has gone further,
arguing that red lines make no sense in dealing with North Korea
because "the North Koreans just walk right up to them and step
over them."
Having stiffed Bush -- and the world -- in building a nuclear
arsenal, testing a long-range missile and testing a nuclear
weapon, might Kim now imagine that he could also sell nuclear
weapons?
America's challenge is to prevent this act by convincing Kim
that he will be held accountable for every nuclear weapon that
originates in North Korea. This requires clarity, credibility
about our capacity to identify the source of a bomb that
explodes in one of our cities (however it is delivered by
whomever) and a believable threat to respond.
Kim must be convinced that American nuclear forensics will be
able to identify the molecular fingerprint of nuclear material
from his Yongbyon reactor. He must feel in his gut the threat
that if a nuclear weapon of North Korean origin explodes on
American soil or that of a U.S. ally, the United States will
retaliate precisely as if North Korea had attacked the United
States with a nuclear-armed missile: with an overwhelming
response that guarantees this will never happen again.
Here, the president can take a page from President John F.
Kennedy in the Cuban missile crisis. In 1962, as the Soviet
Union was emplacing nuclear-tipped missiles in Cuba, some
worried that these weapons could be transferred to a young
revolutionary named Fidel Castro. Kennedy issued an unambiguous
warning to Nikita Khrushchev. "It shall be the policy of this
nation," he announced, "to regard any nuclear missile launched
from Cuba against any nation in the Western Hemisphere as an
attack by the Soviet Union on the United States requiring a full
retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union." Khrushchev knew
that meant a nuclear war.
The writer, an assistant secretary of defense under President
Bill Clinton, is director of the Belfer Center for Science and
International Affairs at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government
and the author of "Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable
Catastrophe."
2006 The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
21 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: Nuclear test gives U.S. new sanctions authority
Octorber 28, 2006 KST 14:07 (GMT+9)
October 28, 2006 ¤Ñ The U.S. State Department spokesman, Sean
McCormack, said yesterday that Washington is preparing a set of
unilateral sanctions on North Korea.
"Right now we're taking a look, the lawyers and the
proliferation experts are taking a look, at what the applicable
sanctions might be, what is the possible universe," Mr.
McCormack said.
On Wednesday, citing a legal bar on U.S. assistance to nations
attempting to join the roster of world nuclear powers, Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice said Washington was "obligated by law
to adopt additional sanctions on North Korea under national
legislation.''
The spokesman cited Ms. Rice's remarks but said no date had been
set for the sanctions to be imposed.
"She mentioned the Glenn Amendment, which is actually ¡ª there
is a trigger in there any time you have a non-nuclear weapons
state conducting a nuclear test, these sanctions are triggered,"
he said.
A State Department official who asked not to be identified said
the sanctions authority, bearing the name of Senator John Glenn,
who sponsored it in the Congress, is open-ended in the range of
sanctions available.
That official predicted that all financial and economic
transactions with North Korea would be ended, except for
humanitarian aid.
A Korean Embassy official in Washington agreed with that
prediction, specifically mentioning a bar on travel-related
financial transactions and on U.S. investment in North Korea.
Separately yesterday, several government sources in Seoul said
new construction has been observed at the North Hamgyong
province site where North Korea conducted its Oct. 9 nuclear
test. The purpose of the new buildings, these sources said, was
not known.
"Intelligence agencies from South Korea and the United States
are trying to confirm whether this new building is connected to
another nuclear test," one of the sources said.
by Lee Sang-il africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc.
*****************************************************************
22 INSIDE JoongAng Daily: U.S. ambassador: ¡®Strong response' to test is required
Octorber 28, 2006 KST 14:07 (GMT+9)
October 28, 2006 ¤Ñ Seoul should stop dragging its feet and
participate in a U.S.-led program aimed at prohibiting the
trafficking of weapons of mass destruction, Alexander Vershbow,
Washington's top diplomat in Seoul, urged yesterday.
"The U.S. asks only that South Korea remember that North Korea's
test requires a strong response of the kind that the UN Security
Council resolution is," said the ambassador, according to a tape
of comments he made at a forum at the Seoul Press Center. "I
expect that the ROK government, after the healthy democratic
debate on the issue that is now underway, will take appropriate
steps to signal its resolve that North Korea's behavior is
unacceptable."
The pointed remarks came as Seoul is still weighing whether to
participate in the proliferation security initiative, designed
to stop vessels engaged in the trafficking of weapons of mass
destruction, in which the country is currently only an observer.
Until now, government officials have not provided a concrete
answer as to what it will do.
Asked about the fate of inter-Korean projects, the ambassador's
message was clear. "We haven't made any specific requests or
recommendations to the South Korean government. As Secretary
Rice said, it's up to the South Korean government to draw its
own conclusions, bearing in mind that the UN resolution asks all
member-states to look at any programs that may be providing
direct or indirect support to North Korea's nuclear weapons
program."
When asked how anti-U.S. sentiment here was viewed in the United
States, Mr. Vershbow launched more pointed remarks. "I think
there is a perception in the U.S. these days that Koreans have
become more and more anti-American, and that they don't
appreciate the U.S. defense guarantee and the commitment of
troops on the Korean peninsula, and this contributes to a
certain mistrust and sometimes even animosity toward Korea."
"It's actually encouraging that the silent majority has been a
little bit more vocal in recent weeks in reminding people of
just how important our alliance still is."
Meanwhile, Yu Myung-hwan, vice minister of foreign affairs,
said yesterday Seoul is hesitating about joining the security
initiative. He told lawmakers doing so would increase the
possibility of a conflict with the North in light of the current
situation, in which both Koreas are still under an armistice.
by Brian Lee africanu@joongang.co.kr>
Copyright by Joins.com, Inc.
*****************************************************************
23 AFP: Next UN chief in China to discuss NKorea nuclear crisis
by Verna Yu Fri Oct 27, 1:27 PM ET
BEIJING (AFP) - Incoming United Nations" /> United Nationschief
Ban Ki-Moon arrived in China for talks with Chinese President Hu
Jintao" /> Hu Jintaothat focused on North Korea" /> North Korea's
recent nuclear test.
Ban, currently South Korea" /> South Korea's foreign minister,
met with Hu and State Councillor Tang Jiaxuan, who was the first
foreign diplomat to meet with North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il
since the declared October 9 nuclear test.
The North Korean nuclear issue was discussed during the
meetings, according to South Korean officials, but details were
not immediately made public.
At the start of the talks, Hu congratulated Ban on his
appointment as UN secretary general.
"It is the first time in 35 years that an Asian has been elected
to the post," the Chinese president told Ban Friday.
"I believe... you will be able to play a greater role in the
maintenance of world peace and common development."
Ban thanked the Chinese government for supporting his
candidature.
"The Chinese government offered me extensive help and support, I
want to express my heartfelt gratitude," he told Hu.
"I will make my best efforts on the issue of reform of the UN
and other issues concerning the UN."
Tang told Ban in the opening minutes of their meeting that "our
two countries are close neighbors and have very close relations.
Your election as the UN secretary general is a big event for us,
not just for South Korea."
"As your Chinese friends, we have great hope and expectations
for you."
North Korea staged its test on the same day the Security Council
voted to elect Ban as Kofi Annan" /> Kofi Annan's successor.
In the lead-up to his visit, officially part of Ban's tour of UN
Security Council member states to express thanks for his
election, both China and South Korea said Pyongyang's nuclear
ambitions would be high on their agenda.
China is regarded as one of the most important players in global
efforts to curtail North Korea's nuclear program as it is the
isolated nation's strongest ally, its biggest provider of aid
and largest trade partner.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao emphasized on
Thursday that China would focus on ways to restart the stalled
six-nation talks aimed at convincing North Korea to abandon its
nuclear program.
"We hope we can strengthen our cooperation with the ROK (South
Korea) to promote the resumption of the six-party talks and
relax the current tensions," Liu said.
The six-nation talks -- involving hosts China, the two Koreas,
the United States, Japan and Russia -- have been stalled since
November last year, with Pyongyang refusing to attend in protest
at US financial sanctions against it.
A resumption is one element of a Security Council resolution on
North Korea following its atomic test which sparked
international concern.
Spokesman Liu said China hoped Ban's visit could help "achieve
the objective of the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula
and preserve peace and stability in Northeast Asia."
China was also hoping to have an exchange of views with Ban on
China-UN relations, Liu said.
Ban said in Seoul this week he intended to play an active part
in finding a peaceful settlement to the North Korean crisis.
Ban, who has spent years dealing with the North Korean nuclear
issue, has promised to end a "crisis of confidence" and heal
divisions hampering the work of the UN. He has also pledged to
appoint a special UN envoy on North Korea when he takes over in
January.
Ban is scheduled to travel to Russia and France next week.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
24 Guardian Unlimited: France, China Express N. Korea Concern
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Thursday October 26, 2006 11:31 PM
AP Photo ENA116
By CHRISTINE OLLIVIER
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - The presidents of France and China pledged
Thursday to work toward a peaceful resolution of the North
Korean and Iranian nuclear disputes, expressing ``grave
concern'' about Pyongyang's nuclear test in a joint statement.
French President Jacques Chirac and Chinese President Hu Jintao
also promised to ``keep in close and regular contact and work to
find a peaceful solution of the Iran nuclear issue,'' though
they did not mention any new initiatives.
Both Paris and Beijing hold permanent U.N. Security Council
seats with power to veto U.N. actions.
``Faced with the behavior of North Korea and Iran,
multilateralism must be effective,'' Chirac said later in a
speech to students at elite Peking University. ``Not doing
anything would be to resign ourselves to threats to peace and
international stability.''
The joint statement also said the leaders signed a declaration
to ``promote and protect human rights'' but no details were
given.
French officials said before the meeting that Chirac would raise
human rights concerns with Chinese leaders, including the Sept.
30 shooting by border guards of a group of Tibetans attempting
to flee to Nepal. Beijing says Chinese forces were attacked and
acted in self-defense.
One woman - a 25-year-old Buddhist nun - was killed immediately
in the shooting, group members said. Chinese officials, in a
statement, have said a second person also died.
Chirac arrived Wednesday with a 30-strong business delegation,
reflecting efforts to expand ties in nuclear power, railways and
other areas where France is a major player. French trade ties to
China - the world's fourth-largest economy - have nearly doubled
since 2000 but are still relatively slim.
On Thursday, China signed an order for 150 of Airbus Industrie's
mid-size A320 to be made in a planned Airbus factory in China
and a letter of intent to buy 20 of Airbus's larger planned
A350s.
Airbus also took a major step toward opening the factory,
signing a framework agreement with Chinese partners for the
facility, which is due to start production in the eastern city
of Tianjin in 2009.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
25 Korea Times: N. Korean Ship Sailing Without Inspection
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation > The Nation
A North Korean ship, which the United States and Japan suspect
of carrying military equipment, is on a voyage without any
inspection after stopping at Hong Kong for refueling, a top
South Korean security official confirmed yesterday.
Song Min-soon, the chief presidential secretary for security
affairs, said at the National Assembly that the ship, named
Ponghwasan, left Nampo of North Korea on Oct. 19 and has been
sailing southward after fueling up at an outer port of Hong Kong.
His remarks came in response to a question by an opposition
party lawmaker, who doubted China¡¯s volition to comply with the
U.N. sanction on North Korea since its nuclear test on Oct. 9.
``I heard the Chinese authorities did not take any steps to
inspect the ship,¡¯¡¯ he said.
Song added, as far as he understands, the North Korean ship is
a refrigerator ship. ``China has a position that it would
intercept North Korean ships if they are suspected of carrying
materials related to military equipment,¡¯¡¯ he said.
In the meantime, Hong Kong has detained a North Korean cargo
ship over suspected safety violations, the second such detention
since U.N. sanctions mandated all North Korean ships be
inspected for banned cargo, according to foreign news reports on
Friday.
jinryu@koreatimes.co.kr 10-27-2006 22:25
*****************************************************************
26 Korea Times: 'N. Korea Offered Indirect Apology to China'
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation
WASHINGTON (Yonhap) _ Chinese envoy Tang Jiaxuan, sent to
Pyongyang to mediate a breakthrough in North Korean nuclear
talks earlier this month, spent 20 minutes enumerating to the
North¡¯s top leader all that Beijing has done for Pyongyang in
the past as a means to press the ally to come back to
negotiations, a Washington insider said Thursday.
Chris Nelson, author of the widely read political tip sheet
¡°Nelson Report,¡± said North Korean leader Kim Jong-il then
apologized, not for conducting the nuclear test as reported by
some media, but for upsetting Beijing.
¡°He said something to the effect that ¡®I am sorry you¡¯ve
been inconvenienced by our decision,¡¯¡± he said at a lecture
sponsored by the South Korean Embassy.
Nelson files daily briefings on inside information pooled from
his conversations with government and non-government sources.
10-27-2006 20:57
*****************************************************************
27 Korea Times: Lee Defends N. Korea Policy
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times
By Kim Sue-young Staff Reporter
Lee Jong-seok
Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok yesterday defended Seoul's
engagement policy toward North Korea, as disputes have
intensified between the liberal and conservative forces here.
In a radio interview, the outgoing minister criticized Rep. Kim
Yong-kap of the main opposition Grand National Party (GNP), well
known for his ultraconservative character and ``red baiting''
remarks, for his condemnation of the government policy.
``His claims that we have aggravated the alliance between South
Korea and the United States are not true,'' Lee, who offered his
resignation Wednesday, said. ``It is an insult to the people and
the government that they chose.''
During an annual National Assembly inspection Thursday, Kim
criticized the minister, arguing that the government's
engagement policy is pro-North Korean and leftist, helping the
communist state to pursue its strategy of maintaining tension on
the Korean Peninsula.
Unlike his previous responses, Lee, who vowed not to assume
another government post, fought back and reaffirmed his
refutation one day after the Assembly inspection.
As for the engagement policy, Lee said, ``I am sure that Seoul
will not change the engagement policy and the president is
unwavering on the issue.''
Since the Stalinist state's nuclear test on Oct. 9, the GNP has
further denunciated the engagement policies calling them a
failure.
Rep. Kang Jae-sup, chairman of the GNP, urged the government to
stop North Korean projects and to replace security-related
officials on the day after the test.
Last Sunday, GNP floor leader Kim Hyung-o told reporters that
the engagement policy should be abolished after Kim Geun-tae,
chairman of the governing Uri Party, visited the Kaesong
Industrial Complex in the North.
The governing party, however, has expressed its intention to
maintain the engagement policy insisting that the policy can
help North Korea pursue reform and openness.
Former President Kim Dae-jung, who initiated the engagement
policy called the ``sunshine policy,'' also supported the policy
last week saying, ``It doesn't make sense to attribute North
Korea's nuclear program to the sunshine policy.''
Kim said that Seoul should make more efforts to solve the issue
in a diplomatic way.
More people within the United States as well as in South Korea
argue that the U.S. should have bilateral talks with North
Korea.
Republican Chairman Richard Lugar of the Foreign Relations
Committee said it is inevitable to have bilateral talks to solve
the nuclear issue on Fox News last Sunday.
ksy@koreatimes.co.kr 10-27-2006 17:29
*****************************************************************
28 Korea Times: Preposterous Pyongyang
Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Opinion
Threat Against Seoul Narrows Room for Engagement
It is with strong anger and despair that most South Koreans
listened to North Korea¡¯s warning to Seoul against joining
international sanctions. The Committee for the Peaceful
Reunification of the Fatherland threatened Thursday to take
``corresponding action¡¯¡¯ against the South if the latter ends
up joining U.S.-led moves to sanction and stifle Pyongyang.
``The South should hold all responsibility and pay dearly for
it,¡¯¡¯ the propaganda machine said. We are dumbfounded at the
audacity of the evildoers.
The announcement was timed with South Korea¡¯s first
disciplinary action, which bans the entry of North Koreans
related to weapons of mass destruction. It reflects the deep
sense of crisis Pyongyang feels about Seoul¡¯s declining
economic aid. The isolationist regime might be referring to
possible military provocation, such as a naval battle in West
Sea, or suspension of inter-Korean business projects in Kaesong
and Mt. Kumgang. In either case, it is the North that will
suffer the most.
Pyongyang said Seoul¡¯s joining the Washington-initiated
sanctions would be tantamount to violating the June 15, 2000,
declaration on inter-Korean reconciliation and cooperation. But
that is the pot calling the kettle black, as the Stalinist
regime first broke the agreement on denuclearization on this
peninsula and heightened tensions. The reclusive regime might be
targeting conservatives in America and South Korea. So far,
however, Pyongyang¡¯s moves have only strengthened the
hard-liners¡¯ positions.
The latest threat will surely reduce the room to maneuver for
South Koreans sympathetic to the North and the engagement
policy. Pyongyang is severing the final lifeline by alienating
the southern liberals, thus making their ``march of hardship¡¯¡¯
even more difficult. The North Korean leadership should know not
all South Korean doves are cowards or political opportunists,
but that they just don¡¯t want another fratricidal war. What
they want is peaceful evolution, not violent revolution, in the
North.
Koreans, with a sense of history both in South and North, hope
their reunified country could play the role of a regional
balancer, not swayed by a single superpower. The U.S.¡¯
strong-arm tactics appear aimed at keeping the Koreas from
getting too close to China. Washington¡¯s current strategy,
however, is driving not only Pyongyang but also Seoul toward
Beijing. This notwithstanding, the North¡¯s strategy of nuclear
blackmail is an inappropriate response, only resulting in its
slow economic death.
If Pyongyang really wants to develop the inter-Korean
relationship, it should abandon its nuclear weapons program and
return to the negotiating table. A dozen atomic bombs can never
guarantee its regime and system. A majority of South Koreans
still regard their northern brethren as erratic relatives
needing help and correction. If the southerners begin to abandon
this view, the North will become a lonely island in the far-off
sea.
10-27-2006 17:35
*****************************************************************
29 AFP: US ready to meet NKorea -- if it returns to six-way talks -
Fri Oct 27, 1:01 PM ET
TOKYO (AFP) - The United States is willing to hold bilateral
talks with North Korea" /> on the condition it returns to the
six-nation dialogue on ending its nuclear program, the US
ambassador to Japan said.
North Korea, which declared on October 9 it had tested its
first atomic bomb, has long sought one-on-one talks with US
President George W. Bush" /> 's administration.
Bush administration officials have repeatedly met one-on-one
with North Korea, but only on the sidelines of six-nation talks,
which started in 2003.
"We ask them to come back to the six-party talks to engage in
discussion," Thomas Schieffer, the US ambassador to Japan, told
reporters.
"We are happy to discuss the issues with them in a bilateral
way, or in a multilateral system, if they would come back to
those talks. So if they want to resolve and defuse this crisis
there's ample opportunity to do that. And we hope they take
advantage of that," he said.
North Korea stormed out of the talks -- which also included
China, Japan, Russia and South Korea" /> -- in November last
year, to protest US sanctions on a Macau bank accused of
laundering and counterfeiting money for Pyongyang.
Just two months before the boycott, North Korea agreed in
general terms, at the fifth and last round of six-way talks, to
give up its nuclear weapons program in exchange for aid and
security guarantees.
Schieffer appealed to North Korea not to test another nuclear
bomb, saying it would be "another provocative step."
Chinese officials said Tuesday North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il
had told a Chinese envoy he had no plans for a second nuclear
explosion. But Schieffer said North Korea's intentions remained
unclear.
"I don't think any of us knows whether North Korea is about to
explode another nuclear device and I suspect that, if indeed
they did, we would not know about it until pretty shortly before
they did it, because so much of this sort of stuff is done
underground," Schieffer said.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
30 Guardian Unlimited: Some N.Koreans Scoff at U.N. Sanctions
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 27, 2006 10:16 AM
AP Photo TOK803
By YONG-HO KIM
Associated Press Writer
DIAMOND MOUNTAIN, North Korea (AP) - An oasis of consumerism
framed by snowcapped North Korean peaks, this idyllic mountain
resort in the world's most tightly controlled nation has come
under criticism from the U.S. in the wake of the North's nuclear
test.
South Korea has been reluctant to roll back its reconciliation
policies with the North - which include the marquee Diamond
Mountain resort project - as punishment for the Oct. 9
detonation. During a visit this week to Diamond Mountain by
foreign correspondents, North Korean workers hewed to the
defiant party line, hailing their country's recent nuclear test
and scoffing at the possibility of sanctions.
``We are not scared of any sanctions,'' Kim Nam Sook, a
31-year-old guide who is one of the resort workers hand-picked
by a regime that allows no opposition. ``Any economic sanctions
by U.S. imperialists will only help us endure more difficulties
in the future ... We should even thank them for that.''
In the shadow of Diamond Mountain's rugged foothills, the resort
is one of two key inter-Korean initiatives supported by Seoul -
in addition to a joint economic zone in the North - that have
come under criticism from the U.S.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill, the chief
negotiator to international talks over the North's nuclear
programs, said in Seoul last week that the tourism program seems
to be ``more designed to give money to the North Korean
authorities.''
Washington has also openly criticized an inter-Korean industrial
complex in the North Korean border city of Kaesong, citing a
lack of labor rights and low wages paid through the North Korean
government, not directly to the workers.
But South Korea lauds the projects as a symbol of hope for the
peninsula's reunification, and has been reluctant to drop
support. So far, Seoul has only said it would reconsider the two
ventures in light of the U.N. sanctions.
``It is regrettable'' that the Diamond Mountain project has come
under pressure to be suspended, said Pak Myong Nam, a North
Korean official at a farm jointly run by the North and a South
Korean provinces near the resort.
``It all depends on how South Korean authorities react'' to such
pressure, Pak said. ``I think they should think about whether
it's a national project or a project that can be pressured by
outside forces.''
The U.N. resolution calls for a ban on the sale of major arms to
the North, and inspection of cargo to and from the country.
It also calls for the freezing of assets of businesses supplying
North Korea's nuclear and ballistic weapons programs, as well as
restrictions on sales of luxury goods and travel bans on
officials from the North.
Despite the looming uncertainties over its future, operations
were in full swing at the South Korea-run tourist enclave, where
the North's communist traits can hardly be spotted except for a
handful of North Korean workers.
A golf course - the second 18-hole course to be built in the
North - is near completion ahead of its planned fall 2007
opening, said Park Hyung-cheol, an official at Emerson Pacific
Group, a South Korean golf course operator. The first 18-hole
golf course in North Korea was built in the mid-1980s near
Pyongyang.
The resort's par-73 course - which claims to have the world's
longest hole with a 1,082-yard stretch - has already started
selling memberships to South Korean golfers, Park said.
``Unless you come out here, you can't get rid of the feeling of
anxiety,'' said Park. ``It is extremely peaceful and safe and we
try to explain this to South Koreans.''
Park said the golf course plans to hire 50 North Korean women as
caddies, which will help create jobs in the communist North -
reflecting South Korea's hope that its joint ventures will help
the reclusive North open and reform economically and ultimately,
politically.
Pyongyang has defended its nuclear weapons program as an
important deterrent to what it calls the U.S. threat of war.
Washington has repeatedly said it has no intention of invading
the communist nation. ``It is our national pride,'' said Thae
Chun Sung, another North Korean guide at Diamond Mountain,
referring to his country's nuclear test. ``It is very important
we have this much power.''
He said whether the North conducts another test as feared ``all
depends on what position the U.S. takes.''
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
31 Guardian Unlimited: S. Korea, China Weigh N. Korea Sanctions
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 27, 2006 3:31 PM
AP Photo TOK220
By AUDRA ANG
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) - Chinese leaders met with South Korea's foreign
minister Friday to discuss sanctions against North Korea, as
U.S. diplomats pressed for a tough response to Pyongyang's
nuclear test.
The U.S. ambassador to Japan urged Tokyo to consider taking on
more responsibilities in missile defense, and called for
international cooperation in inspecting North Korean cargo to
prevent proliferation of weapons technology.
South Korea and China, the top aid providers to the North, are
trying to find a balance between enforcing U.N. sanctions
against Pyongyang and keeping regional tensions to a minimum.
South Korean Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon - the next U.N.
secretary-general - met with Chinese President Hu Jintao and
other Chinese officials in Beijing. South Korea's Foreign
Ministry had said they would discuss sanctions, but no details
of their talks were immediately released.
Among Chinese officials meeting with Ban was State Councilor
Tang Jiaxuan, who met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Il last
week. Kim told Tang he had no immediate plans for a second
nuclear test, though he did not rule out the possibility in the
future, China's government said this week.
Ban's trip to China was also part of his tour of the five
permanent U.N. Security Council members following his election
as secretary-general this month.
South Korea said Thursday it would ban some Northern officials
from traveling to South Korea, in line with the U.N. resolution.
It was Seoul's first real effort to enforce the sanctions.
Seoul is trying to decide how to participate in the U.S.-led
Proliferation Security Initiative, which calls for the
interception and inspection of North Korean ships suspected of
carrying banned cargo. China has been balking at the prospect of
interdicting North Korean ships, saying it could provoke a
battle in the high seas.
U.S. Ambassador to South Korea Alexander Vershbow on Friday
stepped up pressure on Seoul to take stronger steps to show the
North that its ``behavior is unacceptable.'' He called on South
Korea ``to join the international community in preventing
proliferation of weapons.''
Along with the travel ban, Unification Minister Lee Jong-seok
said Seoul will control transactions and remittances related to
inter-Korean trade and investment, the Yonhap news agency
reported.
The Oct. 9 nuclear test has had political repercussions in South
Korea, where the head of the main intelligence agency offered to
resign Friday. He was the third top South Korean official to
offer to quit over the test.
In Tokyo, meanwhile, U.S. Ambassador Thomas Schieffer pressed
the Japanese government to say whether it would be willing to
shoot down a North Korean missile that might not be heading to
Japan.
The U.S. and Japan are developing a joint missile defense system
to counter the threat posed by North Korea. But Japan's pacifist
constitution, which bans the use of force to resolve
international conflicts, means it is not clear how much Japan
can contribute to the defense program.
``The United States would like an answer to whether (Japan)
would shoot down that missile,'' Schieffer said. ``Japan's
answer will be critical to the future of the alliance.''
Schieffer also urged nations to cooperate in implementing the
U.N. sanctions.
``If there are containers coming out of North Korea, we'd like
to have those containers inspected, whether in Hong Kong or
Japan,'' Schieffer said. ``We need to approach enforcing
sanctions in a multilateral way.''
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has vowed to revise the
country's constitution. On Friday, Japan's Parliament began
deliberations on whether its defense agency should be upgraded
to a ministry, which would allow its troops to quickly respond
to foreign threats and put in a better position to negotiate for
funds.
---
Associated Press writers Jae-soon Chang in Seoul and Hiroko
Tabuchi in Tokyo contributed to this report.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
32 UPI: Outside View: Moscow softer on North Korea
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence -
10/27/2006 11:58:00 AM -0400
By PYOTR GONCHAROV UPI Outside View Commentator
MOSCOW, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- "We have urged the North Koreans to show
maximum restraint and to return to the negotiating table,"
announced Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov earlier this
week. "It is important that all participants in the six-party
talks take a similar stand and refrain from steps that could
aggravate the situation."
There should be no doubt that Moscow will oppose any tough
measures related to the North Korean nuclear problem, which was
exacerbated by Pyongyang's recent nuclear test. At the very
least, Moscow will continue to support six-party talks involving
North Korea, the United States, Russia, China, South Korea and
Japan. At most, it will press for direct American-North Korean
negotiations.
This position is based on Moscow's view of the developments and
what brought them about.
Russia believes that the situation deteriorated after the United
States accused North Korea of having resumed its uranium
enrichment program in October 2002, an allegation that was not
supported by any evidence. When America suspended construction
of two light-water nuclear reactors in North Korea, despite
their bilateral framework agreement, Pyongyang responded by
officially withdrawing from the nuclear nonproliferation treaty.
What followed is well known.
The situation in the autumn of 2002 could have been salvaged.
With that goal in mind, six-party talks commenced in Beijing in
August 2003. Two years later they managed to agree on a joint
statement, whose crucial points were North Korea's commitment to
abandon nuclear weapons and return to the nuclear
nonproliferation treaty and the International Atomic Energy
Agency, while the United States announced it was ready to
improve relations with Pyongyang and discuss supplying the
ill-fated light-water reactor to North Korea within an
acceptable period of time.
After the adoption of the statement, the parties were expected
to start working on a road map that would clearly lay out future
steps to settle the crisis, i.e. to implement the agreements
outlined in the statement. No such luck.
Washington violated the principle agreed upon during the Beijing
talks: a promise for a promise, an action for an action. In
September 2005, the United States initiated restrictions against
North Korean accounts with the bank Delta Asia in Macao,
accusing Pyongyang of laundering profits from missile exports,
counterfeiting U.S. dollars and pirating goods. Although these
allegations have not been proved, there is no sign that America
intends to lift financial restrictions against North Korea. On
the contrary, it seems determined to further toughen them.
Since Pyongyang's nuclear tests, the United States has been
trying to involve other countries in these efforts, arguing that
the money North Korea receives from "illegal operations" could
be deposited in any lending institution in the world. Japan and
Australia have already introduced unilateral sanctions against
North Korea.
Of course, Pyongyang has reacted negatively to these moves,
viewing them as an attempt to introduce a financial and economic
blockade to "stifle" the country's regime and thereby topple it.
In fact, as Moscow sees it, the country's defiant missile tests
last July and recent nuclear tests were its response to
increasing pressure from America.
Russian officials and independent experts alike say that
negative developments around the North Korean nuclear problem
were to a large extent provoked by Washington.
Mikhail Titarenko, director of the Institute of the Far East of
the Russian Academy of Sciences, said, "North Korea has been
cornered largely due to U.S. policy, and now it is important to
give it an opportunity to edge out with dignity."
A well-informed source in Moscow close to the talks gave the
following outline of the Russian position: "Russia unequivocally
denounces North Korea's nuclear move, which undermines the
international non-proliferation regime. It demands that
Pyongyang take immediate steps to return to the NPT and resume
six-party talks. It would be a good idea for the U.S. and North
Korea to hold negotiations to settle bilateral differences."
This is the stand Russia is sticking to in the U.N. Security
Council as well. At the same time, it believes that it is
important to take measures that will persuade Pyonyang to adopt
a more sensible position.
By cooperating with the other parties involved, Russia will do
its best to avoid a worst-case scenario and to bring the matter
back to the negotiating table.
(Pyotr Goncharov is a political commentator at RIA Novosti. This
article was reprinted with permission from the news agency.)
(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are
written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of
important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect
those of United Press International. In the interest of creating
an open forum, original submissions are invited.)
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
33 UPI: Warning: N Korea could still attack South
United Press International - Security &Terrorism -
10/27/2006 1:25:00 PM -0400
WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- U.S. officials remain concerned
that North Korea could launch a "bolt from the blue" surprise
attack on South Korea.
U.S. Department of Defense analysts continue to study the
possibility that North Korea could launch a sudden,
unanticipated attack on South Korea, the American Forces Press
Service reported Thursday.
The North Korean armed forces remain the fourth-largest military
in the world, with 1.21 million soldiers, according to State
Department figures, the report said.
South Korea's capital, Seoul, remains exceptionally vulnerable
to such an attack as it is located only 30 miles from the
Demilitarized Zone, or DMZ, between South Korea and North Korea.
Also, over the past half century, Seoul has grown northward
toward North Korea. Today, there are an estimated 20 million
people in the Seoul megalopolis area, the AFPS report said.
U.S. officials "estimate that if the North were to open
artillery fire on Seoul, about 250,000 people would die.
Officials have not estimated, at least publicly, what a nuclear
blast would do to the South Korean capital," AFPS said. North
Korea said it successfully tested a nuclear device underground
on Oct. 9.
The AFPS report also noted that North Korea retains a
120,000-man special operations force. That force has the
capacity to attack targets anywhere on the Korean peninsula,
U.S. Forces Korea officials told AFPS.
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
34 Korea Herald: U.S. to impose 'India-Pakistan sanctions' on N.K.
WASHINGTON - The United States will impose the kind of sanctions
against North Korea that were taken on India and Pakistan after
their nuclear tests in 1998, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
said Wednesday.
The U.N.-invoked sanctions, in the meantime, should remain in
place even if North Korea returns to nuclear negotiations, until
Pyongyang has made progress in the talks, she said.
Speaking at the Washington-based think tank Heritage
Foundation, the secretary specifically referred to the Glenn
Amendment of 1994 as steps the U.S. would take in addition to
the U.N. sanctions.
"As for our part, the United States is now obligated to adopt
additional sanctions on North Korea under national legislation,
including the Glenn Amendment," Rice said.
The Glenn Amendment allows the U.S. president to apply
sanctions when a nonnuclear weapons state detonates a nuclear
device.
Rice gently prodded South Korea to show a strong commitment to
international sanctions.
Rice said the U.S. has no wish to tell Seoul how it should
coexist with its neighbor and noted the vigorous debate in South
Korea over the future of its "Sunshine Policy" of partial
rapprochement.
But she said North Korea's test of a nuclear device Oct. 9
"requires a strong response," and said that adherence to a U.N.
resolution banning the sale of weapons material, luxury goods
and more to North Korea is key. The sanctions also seek
interception of ships believed to be carrying suspect materials.
"It requires a strong commitment by South Korea," she told the
conservative Heritage Foundation. "Any activities need to be
seen in the light of making certain to implement that
resolution."
The secretary had returned from an extensive trip last week to
Northeast Asia and Russia, where she tried to drum up support
for full implementation of the U.N. resolution.
Sanctions against India, which conducted the test in May 1998,
included prohibition of activities funded under the foreign
assistance act, U.S. government credit and other financial
assistance by U.S. agencies.
Foreign military sales and financing were also prohibited,
along with export licenses for certain munitions and dual-use
goods.
The U.S. also opposed loans and other assistance to India by
international institutions.
Assistance restrictions were already in force at the time of
Pakistan's nuclear test, also conducted in May 1998, and the
U.S. added new measures to restrict credit and credit
guarantees, limit commercial exports of munitions and dual-use
items, and restrict commercial bank lending to the Pakistani
government.
A congressional directive prohibited the U.S. from supporting
nonbasic human-needs lending by international financial
institutions.
China and Russia, two veto-wielding members of the Security
Council with still-strong ties to North Korea, have argued that
U.N. sanctions should be lifted once North Korea returns to the
six-nation nuclear disarmament talks.
South and North Korea, the U.S., China, Russia and Japan are
members of the talks that have not been held since November last
year due to Pyongyang's boycott.
Rice, however, said North Korea's return is not enough.
"We all agreed that if those talks resume, Resolution 1718
would remain in force until North Korea has made progress on
denuclearization," she said.
Meanwhile, President George W. Bush pledged to keep up efforts
to resolve the North Korea nuclear standoff diplomatically,
despite Pyongyang's warning of the risk of war if South Korea
joins U.S.-led sanctions.
"The leader of North Korea likes to threaten," Bush told a
White House news conference. "What he's doing is just testing
the will of the five countries that are working together to
convince him there is a better way forward for his people."
Bush spoke after North Korea warned South Korea its
participation in sanctions would be seen as a serious
provocation leading to a "crisis of war" on the Korean peninsula.
"Our goal is to continue to remind our partners that when we
work together, we're more likely to be able to achieve the
objective, which is to solve this problem diplomatically," Bush
said when asked about the North Korean threat.
2006.10.27
*****************************************************************
35 Jim Hightower: Whistleblowers not popular in D.C.
10/27/06
102706 opinions 4 CJOnline.com
It's not easy being a whistleblower -- especially when the head
honcho of the federal agency charged with protecting
whistleblowers is a blockhead. -->
By Jim Hightower
MinutemanMedia.org
It's not easy being a whistleblower -- especially when the head
honcho of the federal agency charged with protecting
whistleblowers is a blockhead.
His name is -- aptly enough -- Scott Bloch. He's another of
George W's political appointees with no particular competence
for the job. His previous post was at the Justice Department's
"task force for faith-based initiatives." Bloch has been a
bumbler -- he's under investigation for sexual bias in the
workplace and retaliation against employees who disagree with
his policies. He even has a whistleblower complaint against him
by his own staff! And in his first month on the job, he blithely
tossed out more than 1,000 legitimate whistleblower cases,
apparently so he could claim progress in reducing his agency's
backlog.
But Bloch's most blockheaded move was his treatment of Leroy
Smith, who had been named 2006 "Public Servant of the Year."
Smith was being honored for blowing the whistle on federal
prison factories that expose inmates and staff to deadly toxics.
In September, Smith was flown to Washington for the big
ceremony, media were invited, lawmakers were coming, a roomful
of catered food was laid out, and the doors to the event were
swinging open when -- Slam! -- Bloch abruptly canceled the event.
He claimed that he had to cancel because another agency
official had suffered a "sudden" death in her family. But the
death was not sudden. "It's kind of fishy," said a disappointed
Smith. What really caused this petulant reaction by Bloch, the
guy who's supposed to prevent retaliation against
whistleblowers? It seems he learned that Smith was going to a
press conference after the ceremony to decry the difficulties of
being a federal whistleblower -- and that would not be good for
Bloch's image. He later mailed the award to Smith.
To help whistleblowers fight such blockheads, contact the
watchdog group, PEER, at 202-265-7337.
Jim Hightower is the best-selling author of "Thieves In High
Places: They've Stolen Our Country And It's Time To Take It
Back," on sale now from Viking Press. www.jimhightower.com
The Topeka Capital-Journal / Morris Communications
*****************************************************************
36 AFP: US will not impede nuclear arms debate in Japan - ambassador -
by Shaun Tandon Fri Oct 27, 10:03 AM ET
TOKYO (AFP) - The United States sees no need for Japan to develop
nuclear weapons but will not try to stop an emerging debate in
the country on the long-taboo issue, the US ambassador said.
Senior officials have called for Japan to discuss the nuclear
option in the face of the threat from communist neighbor North
Korea" /> North Korea, which said on October 9 it had tested its
first atomic bomb.
Japan, the only nation to be attacked with atomic bombs, has a
four-decade policy against the possession, production and
presence of nuclear weapons on its soil.
"The United States also understands very well the three nuclear
principles here in Japan and they are not inconsistent with
American foreign policy goals here," US Ambassador to Japan
Thomas Schieffer told reporters.
"From our standpoint, we have been able to work under those
guidelines for a long time and we see no necessity for changing
that today," he said.
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, known for his passionate support of a
larger military role for Japan, has ruled out developing nuclear
weapons.
But one of his top policy aides, Shoichi Nakagawa, and Foreign
Minister Taro Aso have said Japan needed at least to debate the
nuclear option, in light of North Korea.
Schieffer said Washington had no objections to the debate in
Japan, one of its closest allies.
"What the Japanese talk about with themselves or with their
government is up to the Japanese. It is not up to the United
States to decide what is appropriate or not appropriate for the
Japanese to say," Schieffer said.
Abe said Friday that individual lawmakers were free to express
their opinions, even though the government and his ruling
Liberal Democratic Party would not take up the issue.
"It is clear that it will not be discussed by the government or
a formal party organ," Abe told a meeting of newspaper editors.
But he added: "Other than that, discussions cannot be suppressed
because Japan is a free country."
Former prime minister Eisaku Sato proposed developing nuclear
weapons in the 1960s, as China built the bomb, but dropped the
plan in the face of objections from the US.
Sato later declared the three non-nuclear principles and won the
Nobel Peace Prize.
The United States destroyed the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
at the end of World War II, in the world's only atomic attacks.
More than 210,000 people died instantly or from horrific burns.
The US forced Japan to renounce the right to wage war after its
defeat, and has since provided it with a security umbrella.
Abe wants to revise the US-imposed constitution's Article Nine,
under which Japan renounced the right to maintain a military or
even threaten to use force.
Such changes are viewed with unease in China and the two Koreas,
which remain resentful of Japan's past aggression.
Schieffer said the US did not have concerns about constitutional
revision, a process expected to take several years.
"I don't know that there is an overriding concern that we have
about Article Nine," Schieffer said.
"I don't think revision of Article Nine would stand in the way
of us being able to do things together for our mutual benefit,"
he said.
Despite its official pacifism, Japan has about 240,000 troops on
active duty and an annual military budget of more than 41
billion dollars, the fourth-highest in the world.
Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
37 UPI: Analysis: Russian tycoon a sign of times
United Press International - Intl. Intelligence -
10/27/2006 12:44:00 PM -0400
By ALAN J. MCCOMBS UPI Correspondent
WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 (UPI) -- Attorneys for business
tycoon-turned-convict Mikhail Khodorkovsky insist he is a
political prisoner amid renewed calls from human rights groups
for the international community to address declining respect for
law in Russia.
"His trial was a complete farce and his basic human rights have
been consistently violated since the first time he was picked
up," John Pappalardo, an attorney representing Khodorkovsky,
said at a press conference in Washington this week.
"Essentially the rule of law in Russia is a fiction that is
exemplified by this case," he said.
Khodorkovsky, the former head of Russian energy giant Yukos Oil,
was arrested three years ago by Russian authorities on charges
of fraud and tax evasion stemming from his leadership of the
company. He is currently serving an eight-year sentence in a
Siberian prison camp.
Yukos was built from purchases of government assets at prices
below their market value by Khodorkovsky and his financial
partners during the privatization era in Russia in the early
1990s. The company became Russia's largest business; however,
like its founders, has been dogged by government investigations.
Yukos was charged with failing to pay over $27 billion in taxes
and then placed under government control after being declared
bankrupt in August.
Khodorkovsky's arrest and the fall of Yukos have been called by
human rights activists punishment for his attempts to exert
influence beyond the business world into Russia's political
arena.
Prior to his arrest in 2003, Khodorkovsky funded several
political parties and was critical of the state of democracy in
Russia. After his conviction in August 2005, he attempted to use
a loophole in the legal system to run for the State Duma,
Russia's parliament. But when his appeal was rejected, he became
ineligible to run for office.
Human rights groups fear that Russia is slipping backwards from
the democratic reforms launched under former President Boris
Yeltsin at the close of communist rule in the 1990s.
"There is no question that someone is out there trying to
intimidate independent voices -- and if it's not the government,
it's their job to protect them," said Joshua Rubenstein, a
regional director with Amnesty International.
Rubenstein said that moves by the Russian government, including
a push by President Vladimir Putin to appoint regional governors
rather than have them be elected, as well as increased
censorship on television and encroachments on the freedom of the
press, are of grave concern.
"Civil society is under siege," said Rubenstein, who has
traveled extensively in Russia over the past two decades. "Since
Putin came in 1999, we have seen severe constraints on the
press."
Earlier this month, respected journalist Anna Politkovskaya, a
critic of Putin and Russia's conflict in Chechnya, was found
murdered in her apartment building in Moscow. No arrests have
been made, and her case is still under investigation.
Government intimidation has been strongly felt by those
defending Khodorkovsky and Yukos, said Charles A. Krause, a
former news correspondent in Russia and currently a spokesman
for Khodorkovsky's lawyers.
"In some ways it was easier to report about the problems the
communists were having at the end of that regime than it was to
talk about Khodorkovsky," he said in an interview.
Krause worked as a reporter for PBS's NewsHour in Russia during
the end of Soviet rule in Russia. Yet after he began work on
Khodorkovsky's case, he claims he was told by Russian officials
that he was no longer welcome in the country.
"Why are we having a press conference here you might ask
yourself? Well, because none of us can go to Moscow and the
Russian lawyers who might give a press conference are basically
terrified," Krause said.
Various lawyers representing Khodorkovsky or Yukos have been
detained by government officials, questioned, threatened with
disbarment or beaten, said Khodorkovsky's lawyers.
Since the Russian courts rejected Khodorkovsky's appeal, he has
been imprisoned at a Siberian prison camp which once serviced
uranium mines in the area.
The prison places Khodorkovsky over 3,000 miles from Moscow, far
beyond Russia's political nerve center.
Calling Khodorkovsky a political prisoner is part of a new
effort by his attorney to give his case greater international
prominence, so that he has a voice in isolation.
"He is a political prisoner right now. Yes, he was a successful
businessman, but he's no longer a successful businessman," said
Maria Logan, one of Khodorkovsky's lawyers. "He sits in jail in
Siberia and he needs someone to raise the issue on a daily
basis."
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
38 newsobserver.com: Cost of Duke plants jumps
October 27, 2006
Raleigh · Durham · Cary · Chapel Hill
Two power plants will cost more than expected, an expense the
utility wants to pass on to customers
John Murawski, Staff Writer
Just six weeks after Duke Energy fended off critics' arguments
against building a pair of coal-fired power plants at an
anticipated cost of $2 billion, the company is experiencing
significant cost overruns.
The state Utilities Commission has yet to rule on Duke's request
to build twin plants about 60 miles west of Charlotte. But the
Charlotte-based electric utility warned in a surprise filing
that the cost will be significantly higher than previously
expected.
The company would not reveal the new cost estimates while it is
in negotiations with equipment vendors, but the rapid cost
runups will require the company to present revised arguments to
state regulators.
"They're significant enough that we want to talk further with
the commission about it," said Duke Energy spokesman Tom
Williams.
If the project is approved, customers will pay for the increased
cost of the plants through rate increases. Duke insists that
coal plants are the most economical option because the
alternatives -- building natural gas plants or buying wholesale
electricity from other utilities -- are also becoming more
expensive.
Duke's updated estimates were filed confidentially Wednesday
with the utilities commission and are known only to parties to
the case who have signed confidentiality agreements. The company
said that vendor proposals are coming in over budget for the
boiler, steam turbine generator and air quality control system,
which represent 20 percent of the cost of the plant. Final bids
on the project are expected next year.
The company said it underestimated the costs based on industry
estimates and its experience with equipment and labor costs.
Recent pricing trends for power plant equipment and labor market
surveys indicate that there are fewer vendors bidding on utility
projects, contributing to higher prices, earlier payment
schedules and longer delivery times, Duke said in its filing.
The new disclosures raise questions about Duke's ability to
build coal-fired power plants as the least costly option for
meeting future electricity demand. The plants are planned for
the company's Cliffside Steam Station along the Broad River,
straddling Cleveland and Rutherford counties. The company said
they are needed by 2011.
Opponents of the plant were surprised by Duke's disclosure.
"They're already having cost overruns?" said Jim Warren,
director of N.C. Waste Awareness and Reduction Network, a
Durham-based group. "They haven't even gotten approval and the
price is already skyrocketing."
Critics have contended that Duke had overstated the need for the
plants and underestimated the true costs. NC WARN and other
environmental groups want the state to adopt efficiency and
conservation standards instead of allowing new coal plants or
nuclear plants.
The state attorney general has also taken an interest in the
case, arguing that only one of the two plants is needed.
The consumer advocacy arm of the Utilities Commission -- the
Public Staff -- agreed with Duke that both coal plants are
necessary to meet the state's energy needs.
"In the long run, everyone acknowledges we need more energy
efficiency, but how much can you get and how quickly can you get
it? These plants are needed in five years," said Public Staff
director Robert Gruber. "We're talking about the need for an
enormous amount of power."
Duke Energy has 1.6 million customers in North Carolina,
including about 115,000 in Durham County, 45,000 in Orange
County and 1,700 in Wake County. Staff writer John Murawski can
be reached at 829-8932 or murawski@newsobserver.com.
© Copyright 2006, The News & Observer Publishing Company
A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company ![]()
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,
Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier,
express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail addressed to the Office of
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ; or (4)
facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415-1101,
verification number is (301) 415-1966.
[[Page 63042]] A copy of the request for hearing and petition for
leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted
either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by
e-mail to . A copy of the request for hearing and petition for
leave to intervene should also be sent to Richard F. Locke, Esq.,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco,
California 94120, attorney for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated October 18, 2006, which is
available for public inspection at the Commission's Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible
electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site . Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to .
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan Wang, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division
of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-18022 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
41 NRC: In the Matter of Holders of Material Licenses Authorized To Use
FR Doc E6-18052
[Federal Register: October 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 208)]
[Notices] [Page 63043-63046] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27oc06-104]
Sealed Sources in Panoramic and Underwater Irradiators and
Possess Greater Than 370 Terabecquerels (10,000 Curies); Order
Imposing Fingerprinting and Criminal History Records Check
Requirements for Unescorted Access to Certain Radioactive
Material and Modification of the Compensatory Measures (Effective
Immediately) I The Licensees identified in Attachment 1 \1\ to
this Order hold licenses issued in accordance with the Atomic
Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) or Agreement States,
authorizing possession of greater than 370 Terabecquerels (10,000
curies) of byproduct material, in the form of sealed sources,
either in panoramic irradiators that have dry or wet storage of
the sealed sources, or in underwater irradiators in which both
the source and the product being irradiated are underwater.
On August 8, 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) was
enacted. Section 652 of the EPAct amended Section 149 of the AEA
to require fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) identification and criminal history records check of any
person who is permitted unescorted access to radioactive
materials subject to regulation by the Commission, and which the
Commission determines to be of such significance to the public
health and safety or the common defense and security as to
warrant fingerprinting and background checks. NRC has decided to
implement this requirement, in part, prior to the completion of
the rulemaking to implement the provisions under the EPAct, which
is underway, because a deliberate malevolent act by an individual
with unescorted access to these radioactive materials has a
potential to result in significant adverse impacts to the public
health and safety or the common defense and security. Those
exempted, from fingerprinting requirements under 10 CFR 73.59 (71
FR 33,989 (June 13, 2006)) for access to Safeguards Information
\2\ (SGI) are also exempt from the fingerprinting requirements
under this Order. In addition, individuals who have a
favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history record check
within the last five (5) years, or individuals who have an active
federal security clearance (provided in each case that they make
available the appropriate documentation), have satisfied the
EPAct fingerprinting requirement and need not be fingerprinted
again. Individuals who have been fingerprinted and granted access
to SGI by the reviewing official under Order EA-06-155 do not
need to be fingerprinted again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and
will not be released to the public.
\2\ Safeguards Information is a form of sensitive, unclassified,
security-related information that the Commission has the
authority to designate and protect under section 147 of the AEA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- II Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11,
2001, the NRC issued a security Order requiring certain large
panoramic and underwater irradiator licensees to implement
Compensatory Measures (CMs) for radioactive materials. The
requirements imposed by that Order (Irradiator Order), and
measures licensees have developed to comply with that Order, were
designated by the NRC as SGI and were not released to the public.
One specific CM imposed by the Irradiator Order required
licensees to conduct local criminal history checks to determine
the trustworthiness and reliability of individuals needing
unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater irradiator
sealed sources. ``Access,'' means that an individual could
exercise some physical control over the material or device. At
that time, the NRC did not have the authority, except in the case
of power reactor licensees, to require licensees to submit
fingerprints for FBI criminal history records checks of
individuals being considered for unescorted access to radioactive
materials subject to NRC regulations. Therefore, in accordance
with Section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the
Commission is imposing the FBI criminal history records check
requirements, as set forth in this Order, including Attachment 2
to this Order, on all Licensees identified in Attachment 1 to
this Order, that possess greater than 370 Terabecquerels (10,000
curies) of byproduct material in the form of sealed sources.
These requirements will remain in effect until the Commission
determines otherwise.
In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, find that in light of the
common defense and security matters identified above, which
warrant the issuance of this Order, the public health, safety,
and interest require that this Order be effective immediately.
III Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o,
182, and 186 of the AEA of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's
regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Part 30, and 10 CFR Part 36,
it is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that all licensees
identified in attachment 1 to this order shall comply with the
requirements set forth in this order.
A. All licensees identified in Attachment 1 to this Order shall
comply with the following requirements: 1. The Licensee shall,
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, establish and
maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the requirements of
Attachment 2 to this Order, for unescorted access to the
panoramic or underwater irradiator sealed sources.
2. The Licensee shall, in writing, within twenty (20) days of the
date of this Order, notify, the Commission (1) receipt and
confirmation that compliance with the Order will be achieved, or
(2) if it is unable to comply with any of the requirements
described in Attachment 2, or (3) if compliance with any of the
requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances. The
notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for
seeking relief from, or variation of, any specific requirement.
B. In accordance with the NRC's ``Order Imposing Fingerprinting
and Criminal History Check Requirements for Access to Safeguards
Information'' (EA-06-155) issued on August 21, 2006, only the
NRC- approved reviewing official shall review results from an FBI
criminal history records check. The reviewing official shall
determine whether an individual may have, or continue to have,
unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater irradiator
sealed sources that equal or exceed 370 Terabecquerels (10,000
curies). Fingerprinting and the FBI identification and criminal
history records check are not required for individuals exempted
from fingerprinting requirements under 10 CFR 73.59 [71 FR 33,989
(June 13, 2006)] for access to SGI. In addition, individuals who
have a favorably decided U.S. Government criminal
[[Page 63044]] history records check within the last five (5)
years, or have an active federal security clearance, (provided in
each case that the appropriate documentation is made available to
the Licensee's reviewing official) have satisfied the EPAct
fingerprinting requirement and need not be fingerprinted again.
C. Fingerprints shall be submitted and reviewed in accordance
with the procedures described in Attachment 2 to this Order.
Individuals who have been fingerprinted and granted access to SGI
by the reviewing official under Order EA-06-155 do not need to be
fingerprinted again.
D. The Licensee may allow any individual who currently has
unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater irradiator
sealed sources, in accordance with the Irradiator Order, to
continue to have unescorted access without being fingerprinted,
pending a decision by the reviewing official (based on
fingerprinting, an FBI criminal history records check and a
trustworthy and reliability determination) that the individual
may continue to have unescorted access to the panoramic or
underwater irradiator sealed sources. The licensee shall complete
implementation of the requirements of Attachment 2 to this Order
by January 15, 2007.
E. The CMs of the Irradiator Order are modified as follows: 1.
The requirement for a local criminal history check in CM 2.A.ii.
is superceded by the FBI criminal history records check. All
other requirements in CM 2.A.ii are still applicable. Licensee
responses to Condition A.2. shall be submitted to the Director,
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001. In addition, Licensee responses shall
be marked as ``Security-Related Information--Withhold Under 10
CFR 2.390.'' The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials
and Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good
cause by the Licensee.
IV In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any
other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an
answer to this Order, and may request a hearing on this Order,
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. Where good
cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time
to request a hearing. A request for extension of time in which to
submit an answer or request a hearing must be made in writing to
the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good
cause for the extension. The answer may consent to this Order.
Unless the answer consents to this Order, the answer shall, in
writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically set forth the
matters of fact and law on which the Licensee or other person
adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order
should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing
shall be submitted to the Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attn: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555.
Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Federal and
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the
Assistant General Counsel for Materials Litigation and
Enforcement at the same address, and to the Licensee if the
answer or hearing request is by a person other than the Licensee.
Because of possible delays in delivery of mail to United States
Government offices, it is requested that answers and requests for
hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either
by means of facsimile transmission to (301)-415-1101, or by e-
mail to hearingdocket@nrc.gov and also to the Office of the
General Counsel, either by means of facsimile transmission to
(301)-415-3725, or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. If a
person other than the Licensee requests a hearing, that person
shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his/her
interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address
the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309. If a hearing is requested
by the Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected,
the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place
of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered
at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition
to demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or
sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate
effectiveness of the Order on grounds that the Order, including
the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on adequate
evidence, but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations, or error.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the
provisions as specified above in Section III shall be final
twenty (20) days from the date of this Order, without further
Order or proceedings.
If an extension of time for requesting a hearing has been
approved, the provisions as specified above in Section III shall
be final when the extension expires, if a hearing request has not
been received. An answer or a request for hearing shall not stay
the immediate effectiveness of this order.
Dated this 17th day of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Charles L. Miller, Director, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental Management Programs.
Attachment 1--List of Applicable Materials Licensees Redacted
Attachment 2--Requirements for Fingerprinting and Criminal
History Checks of Individuals When Licensee's Reviewing Official
Is Determining Unescorted Access to the Panoramic or Underwater
Irradiator Sealed Sources Subject to EA-06-248 General
Requirements Licensees shall comply with the following
requirements of this attachment.
1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment
shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted
unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater irradiator
sealed sources.
The Licensee shall review and use the information received from
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and ensure that the
provisions contained in the subject Order and this attachment are
satisfied.
2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the
fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal
history record and inform the individual of the procedures for
revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as
specified in the ``Right to Correct and Complete Information''
section of this attachment.
3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an
employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor,
manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.59 for access to Safeguards Information,
has a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history check
within the last five (5) years, or has an active federal security
clearance. Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which
granted the federal security clearance or reviewed the criminal
history check must be provided for either of the latter
[[Page 63045]] two cases. The Licensee must retain this
documentation for a period of three (3) years from the date the
individual no longer requires unescorted access to radioactive
materials associated with the Licensee's activities.
4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this
Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the
FBI.
5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the
FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthy and
reliability requirements of the Irradiator Order, in making a
determination whether to grant, or continue to allow, unescorted
access to radioactive materials.
6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a
criminal history records check solely for the purpose of
determining an individual's suitability for unescorted access to
the panoramic or underwater irradiator sealed sources.
7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination
whether to grant, or continue to allow, unescorted access to the
panoramic or underwater irradiator sealed sources.
Prohibitions A Licensee shall not base a final determination to
deny an individual access to radioactive materials solely on the
basis of information received from the FBI involving: An arrest
more than one (1) year old for which there is no information of
the disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in
dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.
A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal
history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that
would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the
Licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate
among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national
origin, sex, or age.
Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks For the purpose of
complying with this Order, Licensees shall, using an appropriate
method listed in 10 CFR 73.4, submit to the NRC's Division of
Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-6E46, one completed, legible
standard fingerprint card (Form FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where
practicable, other fingerprint records for each individual
seeking unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater
irradiator sealed sources, to the Director of the Division of
Facilities and Security, marked for the attention of the
Division's Criminal History Check Section. Copies of these forms
may be obtained by writing the Office of Information Services,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by
calling (301) 415-5877, or by e-mail to
forms@nrc.gov. Practicable alternative formats are set forth in
10 CFR 73.4. The Licensee shall establish procedures to ensure
that the quality of the fingerprints taken results in minimizing
the rejection rate of fingerprint cards due to illegible or
incomplete cards.
The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for completeness.
Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing omissions or
evident errors will be returned to the Licensee for corrections.
The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one
re-submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI
because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified. The one
free re-submission must have the FBI Transaction Control Number
reflected on the re-submission. If additional submissions are
necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will
require a second payment of the processing fee.
Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application.
Licensees shall submit payment with the application for
processing fingerprints by corporate check, certified check,
cashier's check, money order, or electronic payment, made payable
to ``U.S. NRC.'' [For guidance on making electronic payments,
contact the Facilities Security Branch, Division of Facilities
and Security, at (301) 415-7404]. Combined payment for multiple
applications is acceptable. The application fee (currently $27)
is the sum of the user fee charged by the FBI for each
fingerprint card or other fingerprint record submitted by the NRC
on behalf of a Licensee, and an NRC processing fee, which covers
administrative costs associated with NRC handling of Licensee
fingerprint submissions. The Commission will directly notify
Licensees who are subject to this regulation of any fee changes.
The Commission will forward to the submitting Licensee all data
received from the FBI as a result of the Licensee's
application(s) for criminal history checks, including the FBI
fingerprint record.
Right To Correct and Complete Information Prior to any final
adverse determination, the Licensee shall make available to the
individual the contents of any criminal records obtained from the
FBI for the purpose of assuring correct and complete information.
Written confirmation by the individual of receipt of this
notification must be maintained by the Licensee for a period of
one (1) year from the date of the notification.
If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is
incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change,
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any
matter in the record, the individual may initiate challenge
procedures. These procedures include either direct application by
the individual challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law
enforcement agency) that contributed the questioned information,
or direct challenge as to the accuracy or completeness of any
entry on the criminal history record to the Assistant Director,
Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification Division,
Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR 16.30 through
16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge to the
agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to verify
or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an official
communication directly from the agency that contributed the
original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any
changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by
that agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten (10) days for
an individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an
FBI criminal history records check after the record is made
available for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final
determination on unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater
irradiator sealed sources based upon the criminal history record
only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate confirmation or
correction of the record. Upon a final adverse determination on
unescorted access to the panoramic or underwater irradiator
sealed sources, the Licensee shall provide the individual its
documented basis for denial. Unescorted access to the panoramic
or underwater irradiator sealed sources shall not be granted to
an individual during the review process.
Protection of Information 1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal
history record on an individual pursuant to this Order shall
establish and maintain a system of files and procedures for
protecting the record and the personal information from
unauthorized disclosure.
2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal
information collected and maintained to persons other than
[[Page 63046]] the subject individual, his/her representative, or
to those who have a need to access the information in performing
assigned duties in the process of determining unescorted access
to the panoramic or underwater irradiator sealed sources. No
individual authorized to have access to the information may
re-disseminate the information to any other individual who does
not have a need-to-know.
3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a
criminal history record check may be transferred to another
Licensee if the Licensee holding the criminal history record
receives the individual's written request to re-disseminate the
information contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee
verifies information such as the individual's name, date of
birth, social security number, sex, and other applicable physical
characteristics for identification purposes.
4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained
under this section, available for examination by an authorized
representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the
regulations and laws.
5. The licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history
records received from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file
has been transferred, for three (3) years after termination of
employment or denial to unescorted access to the panoramic or
underwater irradiator sealed sources. After the required three
(3) year period, these documents shall be destroyed by a method
that will prevent reconstruction of the information in whole or
in part.
[FR Doc. E6-18052 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
42 NRC: In the Matter of Holders of Material Licenses Authorized To
FR Doc E6-18066
[Federal Register: October 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 208)]
[Notices] [Page 63046-63050] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27oc06-105]
Manufacture or Distribute Items Containing Radioactive Material
of Concern; Order Imposing Fingerprinting and Criminal History
Records Check Requirements for Unescorted Access to Certain
Radioactive Material and Modification of the Additional Security
Measures (Effective Immediately) I The Licensees identified in
Attachment 1 \1\ to this Order hold licenses issued in accordance
with the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) or Agreement
States, authorizing them to manufacture or initially transfer
items containing radioactive materials for sale or distribution.
On August 8, 2005, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) was
enacted. Section 652 of the EPAct amended Section 149 of the AEA
to require fingerprinting and a Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) identification and criminal history records check of any
person who is permitted unescorted access to radioactive
materials subject to regulation by the Commission, and which the
Commission determines to be of such significance to the public
health and safety or the common defense and security as to
warrant fingerprinting and background checks. NRC has decided to
implement this requirement, in part, prior to the completion of
the rulemaking to implement the provisions under the EPAct, which
is underway, because a deliberate malevolent act by an individual
with unescorted access to these radioactive materials has a
potential to result in significant adverse impacts to the public
health and safety or the common defense and security. Those
exempted from fingerprinting requirements under 10 CFR 73.59 (71
FR 33,989 (June 13, 2006)) for access to Safeguards Information
\2\ (SGI) are also exempt from the fingerprinting requirements
under this Order. In addition, individuals who have a
favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history record check
within the last five (5) years, or individuals who have an active
Federal security clearance (provided in each case that they make
available the appropriate documentation), have satisfied the
EPAct fingerprinting requirement and need not be fingerprinted
again. Individuals who have been fingerprinted and granted access
to SGI by the reviewing official under Order EA-06-155 do not
need to be fingerprinted again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- \1\ Attachment 1 contains sensitive information and
will not be released to the public.
\2\ Safeguards Information is a form of sensitive, unclassified,
security-related information that the Commission has the
authority to designate and protect under section 147 of the AEA.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------- II Subsequent to the terrorist events of September 11,
2001, the NRC issued a security Order requiring certain
Manufacturing and Distribution (M) Licensees to implement
Additional Security Measures (ASMs) for certain radioactive
materials. The requirements imposed by that Order (M Order), and
measures licensees have developed to comply with that Order, were
designated by the NRC as Safeguards Information (SGI) and were
not released to the public. One specific ASM, imposed by the M
Order, required licensees to conduct local background checks to
determine the trustworthiness and reliability of individuals
needing unescorted access to radioactive materials. ``Access,''
to these radioactive materials means that an individual could
exercise some physical control over the material or device. At
that time, the NRC did not have the authority, except in the case
of power reactor licensees, to require licensees to submit
fingerprints for an FBI criminal history records checks of
individuals being considered for unescorted access to radioactive
materials subject to NRC regulations. Therefore, in accordance
with Section 149 of the AEA, as amended by the EPAct, the
Commission is imposing the FBI criminal history records check
requirements, as set forth in this Order, including Attachment 2
to this Order, on all Licensees identified in Attachment 1 to
this Order, who possess risk-significant radioactive materials
equal to or greater than the quantities listed in Attachment 3 to
this Order. These requirements will remain in effect until the
Commission determines otherwise.
This Order also modifies the M Order (EA-03-225 or EA-05-126M),
to reflect recent Commission regulatory actions. The ASMs for M
Licensees are modified to be consistent with (1) the ``Order
Imposing Additional Security Measures on the Transportation of
Radioactive Materials Quantities of Concern'' (EA-05-006), (2)
the final rule on the Export and Import of Radioactive Material:
Security Policies (70 FR 37985 and 46066), dated July 1, 2005,
(3) the Order Imposing Increased Controls (EA-05-090), and (4)
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Code of Conduct on
the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources.
In addition, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that in light of
the common defense and security matters identified above, which
warrant the issuance of this Order, the public health, safety,
and interest require that this Order be effective immediately.
III Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 149, 161b, 161i, 161o,
182, and 186 of the AEA of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's
regulations in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR Part 30, and 10 CFR Part 32,
It is hereby ordered, effective immediately, that all licensees
identified in Attachment 1 to this order
[[Page 63047]] shall comply with the requirements set forth in
this order.
A. All licensees identified in Attachment 1 to this Order shall
comply with the following requirements: 1. The Licensee shall,
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order, establish and
maintain a fingerprinting program that meets the requirements of
Attachment 2 to this Order, for unescorted access to radioactive
materials that equal or exceed the quantities listed in
Attachment 3 to this Order.
2. The Licensee shall, in writing, within twenty (20) days of the
date of this Order, notify, the Commission, (1) receipt and
confirmation that compliance with the Order will be achieved, or
(2) if it is unable to comply with any of the requirements
described in Attachment 2, or (3) if compliance with any of the
requirements is unnecessary in its specific circumstances. The
notification shall provide the Licensee's justification for
seeking relief from or variation of any specific requirement.
B. In accordance with the NRC's ``Order Imposing Fingerprinting
and Criminal History Check Requirements for Access to Safeguards
Information'' (EA-06-155), issued on August 21, 2006, only the
NRC- approved reviewing official shall review results from an FBI
criminal history records check. The reviewing official shall
determine whether an individual may have, or continue to have,
unescorted access to radioactive materials that equal or exceed
the quantities listed in Attachment 3 to this Order.
Fingerprinting and the FBI identification and criminal history
records check are not required for individuals that are exempted
from fingerprinting requirements under 10 CFR 73.59 [71 FR 33989
(June 13, 2006)] for access to SGI. In addition, individuals who
have a favorably decided U.S. Government criminal history records
check within the last five (5) years, or individuals who have an
active Federal security clearance, (provided in each case that
the appropriate documentation is made available to the Licensee's
reviewing official) have satisfied the EPAct fingerprinting
requirement and need not be fingerprinted again.
C. Fingerprints shall be submitted and reviewed in accordance
with the procedures described in Attachment 2 to this Order.
Individuals who have been fingerprinted and granted access to SGI
by the reviewing official under Order EA-06-155 do not need to be
fingerprinted again.
D. The Licensee may allow any individual who currently has
unescorted access to radioactive materials, in accordance with
the M Order, to continue to have unescorted access without being
fingerprinted, pending a decision by the reviewing official
(based on fingerprinting, an FBI criminal history records check,
and a trustworthy and reliability determination) that the
individual may continue to have unescorted access to radioactive
materials that equal or exceed the quantities listed in
Attachment 3 to this Order.
The licensee shall complete implementation of the requirements of
Attachment 2 to this Order by January 15, 2007.
E. The ASMs of the M Order are modified as follows: 1. ASM 7.d.
is superseded in its entirety by Order EA-05-006. 2. ASM 8. is
superseded by 10 CFR Part 110--Export and Import of Nuclear
Equipment and Material [see also Final Rule 10 CFR Part 110,
dated July 1, 2005 (70 FR 37985 and 46066)--Export and Import of
Radioactive Material: Security Policies].
3. ``Table 1: Radionuclides of Concern'' is superseded by
Attachment 3 to this Order.
4. The requirement for a local criminal history check in ASM 5.a.
is superceded by the FBI criminal history records check. All
other requirements in ASM 5.a. are still applicable. Licensee
responses to Condition A.2. shall be submitted to the Director,
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555. In addition, Licensee responses shall be
marked as ``Security- Related Information--Withhold Under 10 CFR
2.390.'' The Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, may, in writing, relax or
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration of good
cause by the Licensee.
IV In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the Licensee must, and any
other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an
answer to this Order, and may request a hearing on this Order,
within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. Where good
cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the time
to request a hearing. A request for extension of time in which to
submit an answer or request a hearing must be made in writing to
the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and
Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and include a statement of good
cause for the extension. The answer may consent to this Order.
Unless the answer consents to this Order, the answer shall, in
writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically set forth the
matters of fact and law on which the Licensee or other person
adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order
should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing
shall be submitted to the Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555.
Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Federal and
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the
Assistant General Counsel for Materials Litigation and
Enforcement at the same address, and to the Licensee if the
answer or hearing request is by a person other than the Licensee.
Because of possible delays in delivery of mail to United States
Government offices, it is requested that answers and requests for
hearing be transmitted to the Secretary of the Commission either
by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415-1101 or by e-
mail to hearingdocket@nrc.gov and also to the Office of the
General Counsel either by means of facsimile transmission to
(301) 415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. If a person
other than the Licensee requests a hearing, that person shall set
forth with particularity the manner in which his/her interest is
adversely affected by this Order and shall address the criteria
set forth in 10 CFR 2.309. If a hearing is requested by the
Licensee or a person whose interest is adversely affected, the
Commission will issue an Order designating the time and place of
any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at
such hearing shall be whether this Order should be sustained.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), the Licensee may, in addition
to demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or
sooner, move the presiding officer to set aside the immediate
effectiveness of the Order on the ground that the Order,
including the need for immediate effectiveness, is not based on
adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, unfounded allegations,
or error. In the absence of any request for hearing, or written
approval of an extension of time in which to request a hearing,
the provisions as specified above in Section III shall be final
twenty (20) days from the date of this Order without further
Order or proceedings.
[[Page 63048]] If an extension of time for requesting a hearing
has been approved, the provisions as specified above in Section
III shall be final when the extension expires, if a hearing
request has not been received. An answer or a request for hearing
shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order.
Dated this 17 day of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Charles L. Miller, Director, Office of Federal and State
Materials and Environmental Management Programs.
Attachment 1--List of Applicable Materials Licensees (Redacted)
Attachment 2--Requirements for Fingerprinting and Criminal
History Checks of Individuals When Licensee's Reviewing Official
Is Determining Unescorted Access to Radioactive Material Subject
to EA-06-250 General Requirements Licensees shall comply with the
following requirements of this attachment.
1. Each Licensee subject to the provisions of this attachment
shall fingerprint each individual who is seeking or permitted
unescorted access to risk significant radioactive materials equal
to, or greater than, the quantities listed in Attachment 3 to
EA-06-250. The Licensee shall review and use the information
received from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and
ensure that the provisions contained in the subject Order and
this attachment are satisfied.
2. The Licensee shall notify each affected individual that the
fingerprints will be used to secure a review of his/her criminal
history record and inform the individual of the procedures for
revising the record or including an explanation in the record, as
specified in the ``Right to Correct and Complete Information''
section of this attachment.
3. Fingerprints for unescorted access need not be taken if an
employed individual (e.g., a Licensee employee, contractor,
manufacturer, or supplier) is relieved from the fingerprinting
requirement by 10 CFR 73.59 for access to Safeguards Information,
has a favorably-decided U.S. Government criminal history check
within the last five (5) years, or has an active Federal security
clearance. Written confirmation from the Agency/employer which
granted the Federal security clearance or reviewed the criminal
history check must be provided for either of the latter two
cases. The Licensee must retain this documentation for a period
of three (3) years from the date the individual no longer
requires unescorted access to radioactive materials associated
with the Licensee's activities.
4. All fingerprints obtained by the Licensee pursuant to this
Order must be submitted to the Commission for transmission to the
FBI.
5. The Licensee shall review the information received from the
FBI and consider it, in conjunction with the trustworthy and
reliability requirements of the M Order, in making a
determination whether to grant, or continue to allow, unescorted
access to radioactive materials.
6. The Licensee shall use any information obtained as part of a
criminal history records check solely for the purpose of
determining an individual's suitability for unescorted access to
risk-significant radioactive materials equal to or greater thank
the quantities used in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250.
7. The Licensee shall document the basis for its determination
whether to grant, or continue to allow, unescorted access to
risk- significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than
the quantities used in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250.
Prohibitions A Licensee shall not base a final determination to
deny an individual access to radioactive materials solely on the
basis of information received from the FBI involving: An arrest
more than one (1) year old for which there is no information of
the disposition of the case, or an arrest that resulted in
dismissal of the charge or an acquittal.
A Licensee shall not use information received from a criminal
history check obtained pursuant to this Order in a manner that
would infringe upon the rights of any individual under the First
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, nor shall the
Licensee use the information in any way which would discriminate
among individuals on the basis of race, religion, national
origin, sex, or age.
Procedures for Processing Fingerprint Checks For the purpose of
complying with this Order, Licensees shall, using an appropriate
method listed in 10 CFR 73.4, submit to the NRC's Division of
Facilities and Security, Mail Stop T-6E46, one completed, legible
standard fingerprint card (Form FD-258, ORIMDNRCOOOZ) or, where
practicable, other fingerprint records for each individual
seeking unescorted access to the risk-significant radioactive
materials equal to or greater thank the quantities used in
Attachment 3 to EA-06-250, to the Director of the Division of
Facilities and Security, marked for the attention of the
Division's Criminal History Check Section.
Copies of these forms may be obtained by writing the Office of
Information Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555- 0001, by calling (301) 415-5877, or by
e-mail to forms@nrc.gov. Practicable alternative formats are set
forth in 10 CFR 73.4. The Licensee shall establish procedures to
ensure that the quality of the fingerprints taken results in
minimizing the rejection rate of fingerprint cards due to
illegible or incomplete cards.
The NRC will review submitted fingerprint cards for completeness.
Any Form FD-258 fingerprint record containing omissions or
evident errors will be returned to the Licensee for corrections.
The fee for processing fingerprint checks includes one
re-submission if the initial submission is returned by the FBI
because the fingerprint impressions cannot be classified. The one
free re-submission must have the FBI Transaction Control Number
reflected on the re-submission. If additional submissions are
necessary, they will be treated as initial submittals and will
require a second payment of the processing fee.
Fees for processing fingerprint checks are due upon application.
Licensees shall submit payment with the application for
processing fingerprints by corporate check, certified check,
cashier's check, money order, or electronic payment, made payable
to ``U.S. NRC.'' [For guidance on making electronic payments,
contact the Facilities Security Branch, Division of Facilities
and Security, at (301) 415-7404]. Combined payment for multiple
applications is acceptable. The application fee (currently $27)
is the sum of the user fee charged by the FBI for each
fingerprint card or other fingerprint record submitted by the NRC
on behalf of a Licensee, and an NRC processing fee, which covers
administrative costs associated with NRC handling of Licensee
fingerprint submissions. The Commission will directly notify
Licensees who are subject to this regulation of any fee changes.
The Commission will forward to the submitting Licensee all data
received from the FBI as a result of the Licensee's
application(s) for criminal history checks, including the FBI
fingerprint record.
Right to Correct and Complete Information Prior to any final
adverse determination, the Licensee shall make available to the
individual the contents
[[Page 63049]] of any criminal records obtained from the FBI for
the purpose of assuring correct and complete information. Written
confirmation by the individual of receipt of this notification
must be maintained by the Licensee for a period of one (1) year
from the date of the notification.
If, after reviewing the record, an individual believes that it is
incorrect or incomplete in any respect and wishes to change,
correct, or update the alleged deficiency, or to explain any
matter in the record, the individual may initiate challenge
procedures. These procedures include either direct application by
the individual challenging the record to the agency (i.e., law
enforcement agency) that contributed the questioned information,
or direct challenge as to the accuracy or completeness of any
entry on the criminal history record to the Assistant Director,
Federal Bureau of Investigation Identification Division,
Washington, DC 20537-9700 (as set forth in 28 CFR 16.30 through
16.34). In the latter case, the FBI forwards the challenge to the
agency that submitted the data and requests that agency to verify
or correct the challenged entry. Upon receipt of an official
communication directly from the agency that contributed the
original information, the FBI Identification Division makes any
changes necessary in accordance with the information supplied by
that agency. The Licensee must provide at least ten (10) days for
an individual to initiate an action challenging the results of an
FBI criminal history records check after the record is made
available for his/her review. The Licensee may make a final
determination on unescorted access to risk-significant
radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities
used in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250, based upon the criminal
history record only upon receipt of the FBI's ultimate
confirmation or correction of the record. Upon a final adverse
determination on unescorted access to risk-significant
radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities
used in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250, the Licensee shall provide the
individual its documented basis for denial. Unescorted access to
risk-significant radioactive materials equal to or greater than
the quantities used in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250, shall not be
granted to an individual during the review process.
Protection of Information 1. Each Licensee who obtains a criminal
history record on an individual pursuant to this Order shall
establish and maintain a system of files and procedures for
protecting the record and the personal information from
unauthorized disclosure.
2. The Licensee may not disclose the record or personal
information collected and maintained to persons other than the
subject individual, his/her representative, or to those who have
a need to access the information in performing assigned duties in
the process of determining unescorted access to risk-significant
radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities
listed in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250.
No individual authorized to have access to the information may
re- disseminate the information to any other individual who does
not have a need-to-know.
3. The personal information obtained on an individual from a
criminal history record check may be transferred to another
Licensee if the Licensee holding the criminal history record
receives the individual's written request to re-disseminate the
information contained in his/her file, and the gaining Licensee
verifies information such as the individual's name, date of
birth, social security number, sex, and other applicable physical
characteristics for identification purposes.
4. The Licensee shall make criminal history records, obtained
under this section, available for examination by an authorized
representative of the NRC to determine compliance with the
regulations and laws.
5. The licensee shall retain all fingerprint and criminal history
records received from the FBI, or a copy if the individual's file
has been transferred, for three (3) years after termination of
employment or denial to unescorted access to risk-significant
radioactive materials equal to or greater than the quantities
listed in Attachment 3 to EA-06-250. After the required three (3)
year period, these documents shall be destroyed by a method that
will prevent reconstruction of the information in whole or in
part.
Attachment 3--Radionuclides of Concern Table A.--Radionuclides of
Concern
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Quantity of Radionuclide Quantity of concern concern
\2\ \1\ (TBq) (Ci)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- Am-241........................... 0.6..................
16 Am-241/Be........................ 0.6.................. 16
Cf-252........................... 0.2.................. 5.4
Cm-244........................... 0.5.................. 14
Co-60............................ 0.3.................. 8.1
Cs-137........................... 1.................... 27
Gd-153........................... 10................... 270
Ir-192........................... 0.8.................. 22
Pm-147........................... 400.................. 11,000
Pu-238........................... 0.6.................. 16
Pu-239/Be........................ 0.6.................. 16
Ra-226 \3\....................... 0.4.................. 11
Se-75............................ 2.................... 54 Sr-90
(Y-90)..................... 10................... 270
Tm-170........................... 200.................. 5,400
Yb-169........................... 3.................... 81
Combinations of radioactive See Footnote Below materials
listed above \4\. \5\.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------- \1\ The aggregate activity of multiple, collocated
sources of the same radionuclide should be included when the
total activity equals or exceeds the quantity of concern.
\2\ The primary values used for compliance with this Order are
TBq. The curie (Ci) values are rounded to two significant figures
for informational purposes only.
[[Page 63050]] \3\ The Atomic Energy Act, as amended by the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, authorizes NRC to regulate Ra-226 and
NRC is in the process of amending its regulations for discrete
sources of Ra-226.
\4\ Radioactive materials are to be considered aggregated or
collocated if breaching a common physical security barrier (e.g.,
a locked door at the entrance to a storage room) would allow
access to the radioactive material or devices containing the
radioactive material.
\5\ If several radionuclides are aggregated, the sum of the
ratios of the activity of each source, I of radionuclide, n,
A(i,n), to the quantity of concern for radionuclide n, Q(n),
listed for that radionuclide equals or exceeds one. [(aggregated
source activity for radionuclide A) / (quantity of concern for
radionuclide A)] + [(aggregated source activity for radionuclide
B) / (quantity of concern for radionuclide B)] + etc. * * * >=1.
Guidance for Aggregation of Sources NRC supports the use of the
International Atomic Energy Association's (IAEA) source
categorization methodology as defined in IAEA Safety Standards
Series No. RS-G-1.9, ``Categorization of Radioactive Sources,''
(2005) (see http://www-pub.iaea.[fxsp0]org/MTCD/
publications/[fxsp0]PDF/Pub1227--web.[fxsp0]pdf) and as endorsed
by the agency's Code of Conduct for the Safety and Security of
Radioactive Sources, January 2004 (see
http://www-pub.iaea.[fxsp0]org/MTCD/
publications/[fxsp0]PDF/Code-2004--web.[fxsp0]pdf). The Code
defines a three-tiered source categorization scheme. Category 1
corresponds to the largest source strength (equal to or greater
than 100 times the quantity of concern values listed in Table 1.)
and Category 3, the smallest (equal or exceeding one-tenth the
quantity of concern values listed in Table 1.). Additional
security measures apply to sources that are equal to or greater
than the quantity of concern values listed in Table 1, plus
aggregations of smaller sources that are equal to or greater than
the quantities in Table 1. Aggregation only applies to sources
that are collocated.
Licensees who possess individual sources in total quantities that
equal or exceed the Table 1 quantities are required to implement
additional security measures. Where there are many small (less
than the quantity of concern values) collocated sources whose
total aggregate activity equals or exceeds the Table 1 values,
licensees are to implement additional security measures.
Some source handling or storage activities may cover several
buildings, or several locations within specific buildings. The
question then becomes, ``When are sources considered collocated
for purposes of aggregation?'' For purposes of the additional
controls, sources are considered collocated if breaching a single
barrier (e.g., a locked door at the entrance to a storage room)
would allow access to the sources. Sources behind an outer
barrier should be aggregated separately from those behind an
inner barrier (e.g., a locked source safe inside the locked
storage room). However, if both barriers are simultaneously open,
then all sources within these two barriers are considered to be
collocated. This logic should be continued for other barriers
within or behind the inner barrier.
The following example illustrates the point: A lockable room has
sources stored in it. Inside the lockable room, there are two
shielded safes with additional sources in them. Inventories are
as follows: The room has the following sources outside the safes:
Cf-252, 0.12 TBq (3.2 Ci); Co-60, 0.18 TBq (4.9 Ci), and Pu-238,
0.3 TBq (8.1 Ci). Application of the unity rule yields: (0.12 /
0.2) + (0.18 / 0.3) + (0.3 / 0.6) = 0.6 + 0.6 + 0.5 = 1.7.
Therefore, the sources would require additional security
measures.
Shielded safe 1 has a 1.9 TBq (51 Ci) Cs-137 source and a 0.8 TBq
(22 Ci) Am-241 source. In this case, the sources would require
additional security measures, regardless of location, because
they each exceed the quantities in Table 1.
Shielded safe 2 has two Ir-192 sources, each having an activity
of 0.3 TBq (8.1 Ci). In this case, the sources would not require
additional security measures while locked in the safe.
The combined activity does not exceed the threshold quantity 0.8
TBq (22 Ci).
Because certain barriers may cease to exist during source
handling operations (e.g., a storage location may be unlocked
during periods of active source usage), licensees should, to the
extent practicable, consider two modes of source
usage--``operations'' (active source usage) and ``shutdown''
(source storage mode). Whichever mode results in the greatest
inventory (considering barrier status) would require additional
security measures for each location.
Use the following method to determine which sources of
radioactive material require implementation of the Additional
Security Measures (ASMs): Include any single source equal to or
greater than the quantity of concern in Table A.
Include multiple collocated sources of the same radionuclide when
the combined quantity equals or exceeds the quantity of concern.
For combinations of radionuclides, include multiple collocated
sources of different radionuclides when the aggregate quantities
satisfy the following unity rule: [(amount of radionuclide A) /
(quantity of concern of radionuclide A)] + [(amount of
radionuclide B) / (quantity of concern of radionuclide B)] + etc.
. . . [gteqt]1.
[FR Doc. E6-18066 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
43 Newsday.com: Report: N.E. needs more electric capacity, less reliance on gas
AP Connecticut
By MARK JEWELL AP Business Writer
October 27, 2006, 5:01 PM EDT
BOSTON -- Satisfying New England's growing appetite for
electricity will require building roughly eight large power
plants by 2015 and investing more than $3.5 billion to improve
power transmission, the region's power grid manager said Friday.
A report from ISO New England Inc. also warns the region has
become too dependent on electricity generated from burning
natural gas _ an energy source that was cheap and plentiful a few
years ago, but has since become prone to winter price spikes.
"The region's 40 percent dependence on natural gas to generate
electricity is a serious reliability risk to New England
customers, especially during winter peak-demand periods," ISO New
England said in an annual update of the region's 10-year
electricity outlook.
The report also says the region could help ensure a reliable
electricity supply by building new terminals to import liquefied
natural gas and by adding new gas pipelines _ steps that have
run into opposition in New England and elsewhere because of
various concerns, including safety risks.
ISO New England says a surge in recent proposals for generating
plants has left the six-state region better prepared to meet
rising demand than it was a year ago and has reduced potential
for rolling blackouts when electricity use spikes during hot
weather.
Investors have submitted 35 proposals for new plants in New
England since mid-2005, after construction dropped off sharply
from 2002 through 2005.
Officials attribute the investor interest to a recent agreement
that will reshape New England's wholesale electricity market by
allowing power generators to bid at auctions for the right to
build plants. The "Forward Capacity Market" agreement is also
expected to lead to higher electricity rates _ which prompted
opposition from some top elected officials _ while creating
greater incentives to spur new projects.
Ken McDonnell, a spokesman for ISO New England, a nonprofit
corporation based in Holyoke, said that many of the 35 proposed
projects won't be built because they'll fail to meet permit
requirements, run into opposition from neighboring residents or
lose investor backing.
ISO New England's report projects the region's electricity
demand will grow at an annual rate of 1.9 percent through 2015.
To meet that growth, ISO New England projects the region will
need to add 4,300 megawatts of capacity _ an amount that could
be supplied by about eight large plants capable of producing at
least 500 megawatts.
Unless the region adds new plants, it could face rolling
blackouts during peak demand, according to the report.
The need for more plants is especially pressing in southwestern
Connecticut, an area facing transmission bottlenecks.
Five upgrades of high-voltage transmission upgrades, an
investment of more than $2 billion, are now under way in New
England's large cities. But ISO New England says an additional
$3.5 billion or more must be invested by 2015 to relieve
bottlenecks and otherwise improve power grid operations.
The report does not advocate adding specific new types of energy
sources, but suggests the region should "increase renewable
generating resources and consider adding new coal and nuclear
technologies."
___
On the Net:
ISO New England's 2006 Regional System Plan:
http://www.iso-ne.com/trans/rsp/2006/rsp06_final_public_version_1
026 06.pdf
Newsfrom amNY.com | Long Island
*****************************************************************
44 The Day: Nuclear Reactors To Be Part Of Accident Study Millstone
Among Sites to Be Examined For impact Of Nuke Fallout
theday.com
By Patricia Daddona Day Staff Writer\, Millstone\/business
trends E-mail: p.daddona@theday.com Phone No.: (860) 701 - 4324
Published on 10/27/2006 in Region » Region News
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will analyze what would happen
if radiation were released during a nuclear accident at any of
the nation's 63 reactor sites, including the Millstone Power
Station in Waterford.
The NRC this summer authorized its staff to conduct a three-year
study of radioactive fallout in accidents by contracting with
specialized laboratories for sophisticated computer modeling
studies. Those analyses could lead to improvements in operational
procedures and the timing of emergency response at the sites,
said Scott Burnell, an NRC spokesman.
The study, called State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence
Analysis, will examine emergency preparedness, how weather
conditions affect a plume of radiation released into the air, and
how safety systems and barriers prevent radioactive isotopes from
reaching the environment, Burnell said.
You put all that together, and the end result is meant to be as
realistic as possible about what the consequences of a reactor
accident would be, he said.
NRC staff met publicly Wednesday with the six reactor-site
owners participating in the first phase of the project. Those
nuclear complexes include Seabrook in New Hampshire; Salem in New
Jersey; Peach Bottom in Pennsylvania; Fermi in Michigan; Duane
Arnold in Iowa; and Diablo Canyon in California.
Only the 103 operating reactors in the United States will be
studied, not closed ones.
The reactor sites in the first phase were chosen because of the
range of population density and types of containment they
represent. There are three boiling water reactors and three
pressurized water reactors represented, Burnell said.
Eventually, every reactor owner will be asked to participate in
the study and provide specific detail about its reactor
operations, Burnell said.
Dominion, which owns Millstone, will cooperate with the research
as it is conducted, said spokesman Pete Hyde.
NRC staff are writing contract proposals that could go out to
bid soon, Burnell said. Funding will come from the agency's
research budget.
Over the past few decades there have been piecemeal attempts to
look at the possible consequences of an accident at a nuclear
power plant, (but) no studies in realistic detail, Burnell said
Wednesday.
The only major study assessing radioactive releases was a 1982
analysis by Sandia Laboratories that oversimplified variables in
order to isolate one concern: the most appropriate places to
build new reactors, Burnell said.
There have been no major accidents in the United States since the
1979 incident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania.
Ed Lyman, senior staff scientist for the Union of Concerned
Scientists, said he fears the study will be used to justify the
way things are already done.
Our concern is that this study is being done to allay public
fears about the consequences of reactor accidents, he said. To
that end, the methodology and assumptions behind the study are
going to be crucial, because we're afraid the NRC is going to
pick and choose the kind of scenarios ... just to reassure the
public.
Two years ago, Lyman studied a computer-modeled meltdown of a
reactor core, containment building rupture and release of a
gaseous plume at the Indian Point plant in New York, and found
that radioactive iodine releases would travel much farther than
previously thought.
The Nuclear Energy Institute, which advocates for the nuclear
industry and supports the study, said Thursday it is concerned
that the NRC hasn't really established a project plan beyond the
first year.
The institute believes two reactor sites that have already
analyzed some of the issues surrounding accidents as a part of
re-licensing should be included in the first phase of study, said
Tony Pietrangelo, vice president for regulatory affairs. He
declined to name the sites but noted Millstone is not one of
them.
The study will not address the release of radioactivity in
routine air and water emissions.
p.daddona@theday.com
Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200 | New London, CT | ©
1998-2006 The Day Publishing Co. [Beacon Locator] ~ YN ~
*****************************************************************
45 PRN: UPDATE: Is Nuclear Power The Solution to Climate Change & Future Energy Demand?
PR Newswire
***Live Web-Cast Debate***
Former Greenpeace Activist Turned Nuclear Industry Frontman
to Debate
Leading Experts Against a New Nuclear Renaissance
NEW YORK, Oct. 27 /PRNewswire/ --
WHY: Burlington, VT -- After decades of decline and
near-oblivion, the question of a nuclear power "renaissance" is
being brought to the fore as a miracle answer to combat climate
change and charge up a new energy regime free from foreign
dependence. Few images elicit more impassioned responses than
that of a nuclear reactor -- some of horror and others of hope.
This pressing debate, now raging in every media medium and
outlet, has been universally one- sided. With questions as
crucial to the planet as climate change and energy, we cannot
afford to let statements go unchallenged. The sharply differing
views on the proposed "nuclear renaissance" promises to provide
an action- filled exchange of the contentious issues at hand at
the annual conference of the Society of Environmental
Journalists, a "nonpartisan, non-advocacy membership organization
of professional journalists and academics."
WHO: Panelists:
Peter Bradford, Former NRC Commissioner, Vice-Chair,
Board of
Directors, Union of Concerned Scientists, Nuclear
Energy Advisor,
GRACE Energy Initiative;
http://www.graceenergyinitiative.org
Patrick Moore, Clean and Safe Energy Coalition (CASE)
spokesperson, Chair/Chief Scientist, Greenspirit
Strategies;
Jim Riccio, Nuclear Policy Analyst, Greenpeace
http://www.greenpeace.org/usa
Moderator: Judy Fahys, Environment Reporter, The
Salt Lake
Tribune
WHEN: Friday October 27th @ 11:15 AM-12:30 PM
WHERE: The Conference of the Society of Environmental
Journalists, in Burlington, Vermont
Live Web-cast with interactive online polling
pre-register one hour ahead of the debate at:
http://www.graceenergyinitiative.org/nuclearexpertdebate.php
WHAT: GRACE WEBCAST of a panel discussion from the SEJ
Conference called-
"Cradle to Grave: New Nukes and Old Radioactive Waste"
The promise of greenhouse gas-free electricity has some
people predicting a nuclear power Renaissance. The Bush
administration is pledging billions of dollars in incentives to
fast-track the construction of new nuclear reactors and the
reprocessing of waste, yet nuclear terrorism and proliferation of
nuclear weapons abetted by nuclear power programs remain chilling
threats. These thorny issues have further polarized the debate:
some former nuclear opponents support nuclear as the world's best
energy solution, while some former regulators have doubts about a
revival, and other environmental groups continue to warn of new
nuclear risks. The GRACE Energy Initiative will release a new
report in advance of the debate called -- "FALSE PROMISES:
DEBUNKING NUCLEAR INDUSTRY PROPAGANDA." To get an advance copy of
the report, or for more information please, SOURCE GRACE Energy
Initiative
Related links:
+ http://www.gracelinks.org
+ http://www.greenpeace.org/usa
+ http://www.graceenergyinitiative.org/nuclearexpertdebate.php
+ http://www.graceenergyinitiative.org
Issuers of news releases and not PR Newswire are solely
responsible for the accuracy of the content. Terms and
conditions, including restrictions on redistribution, apply.
Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights
Reserved. A United Business Mediacompany.
*****************************************************************
46 UPI: Analysis: Russia powerful with energy
United Press International - Energy -
10/26/2006 10:16:00 PM -0400
By BEN LANDO UPI Energy Correspondent
WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 (UPI) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin
may not like the term energy superpower, but if prices stay
relatively high and demand continues to grow, countries looking
for oil and natural gas will look to Moscow.
Russia is by far the largest holder of natural gas reserves and
is pumping its 74 billion barrels of oil reserves around
capacity -- 6.7 million a day last year, according to the U.S.
Energy Department's data arm, the Energy Information
Administration.
"They have a lot of energy to export. I guess in that sense
they're an energy superpower. And everyone needs what they
have," said Julia Nanay, senior director at Washington-based
analyst PFC Energy.
With $260 billion in foreign exchange reserves and 48 trillion
cubic meters of natural gas reserves, "they're somewhat
sheltered at this point from anything dramatic happening," Nanay
told United Press International.
With Russia feeding Europe with 40 percent of its gas
consumption, it has an extra foothold there. The EIA estimates
Russia's natural gas exports at 7.6 trillion cubic feet in 2004.
Oil is trading around $60 a barrel, down from its high of $78
over the summer, and natural gas is selling for $8.38.
But Robert Ebel, chairman of the Energy Program at the Center
for Strategic and International Studies, says the foothold isn't
necessarily a permanent mark of a superpower.
"It has the natural gas to make it think it is an energy
superpower. And it thinks it is an oil superpower because it's
second only to Saudi Arabia in terms of oil production and
exports," he said. "But they're not a price-maker in the market,
they are a price follower. So in that regard I don't define them
as a superpower."
Although Russia is talking firmly in terms of sending gas east,
especially to China, the largest demand growth market, its sales
in western Europe must flow through pipelines owned by and
operated through former Soviet states in eastern Europe.
"That's where the difficulties arise," Ebel said, referring to
the spat with Ukraine. Most of western Europe's gas transfers
through pipelines built in Ukraine during the Soviet era. Europe
was angry at Russia in January when it shut off gas to Ukraine
over a pricing dispute. The spat led to reduced flow to Ukraine.
"In natural gas ... you're limited by delivery by pipeline. And
that puts a limit on their influence," said Ebel. "On oil, I
don't think they deliver such substantial quantities to any one
consumer that they could say that they hold undue influence over
that one country."
Cliff Kupchan, director of Europe and Eurasia for Eurasia Group,
a business risk analyst, met with Putin in September, along with
three dozen other political scientists from around the world.
"He said, 'No we're not an energy superpower, we don't like the
term superpower, it's a cold war term, but we have a tremendous
amount of energy power, more power than you could ever
realize.'"
When asked his view: "Yes, no question about that," Kupchan
said. "Russia's back on the world stage. They were flat on their
back in 1998, now they're just flat back."
Aside from an upper hand in squabbles over energy with Europe
and over deals with foreign companies struck in the 1990s,
Russia's influence can be seen in its pivotal role in
international issues such as Iran's and North Korea's nuclear
program -- "a much more self-confident, resurgent, reemergent
Russia," Kupchan said.
"Not necessarily as a return to traditional czarist autocracy,
but I think Russia is increasingly emerging as a non-aligned
power pursuing Russian national interests in a Russian manner."
Regardless of what the rest of the world thinks of him, with
approval ratings hovering around 80 percent, Putin's not short
on support within Russia.
Whether it's the war on terrorism, fighting nuclear
proliferation or energy security, Kupchan said, "it means most
countries' vital interests lead to Moscow."
He said Russia is a power "that has to be dealt with and will
factor more prominently that it did 10 years ago in global
foreign policy."
That is, if the price for oil and gas doesn't tank.
"The country is riding on a wave of nationalism brought about by
the high price for energy," said Ebel. "The question is how long
can this continue. What happens if prices go down or stay down
for awhile? I don't think Russia is prepared for that."
PFC Energy's Nanay doesn't take the same drastic assessment.
"The limitations (on Russia) would be if the price of oil
crashes. Clearly it endangers the Russian economy but I think
that that they have built up enough of a war chest right now,"
like foreign exchange and oil reserves, she said.
She said in 10 years, with increased investment in its natural
gas fields -- including foreign investment, either direct or
subcontracted -- Russia could be the main supplier to both
Europe and Asian markets.
(Comments to energy@upi.com)
© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
*****************************************************************
47 Dallas Morning News: TXU shuts down Comanche Peak nuclear reactor
| News for Dallas, Texas
11:45 AM CDT on Friday, October 27, 2006
Bloomberg News
GLEN ROSE - TXU Corp., the biggest power producer in Texas,
idled its Comanche Peak 2 nuclear reactor Friday morning because
of a problem with the feedwater system.
Workers are doing testing and hope to begin increasing power
later in the day, Kimberly Morgan, a spokeswoman for
Dallas-based TXU, said in a telephone interview. The unit had
been building toward capacity after a refueling and maintenance
shutdown that lasted about 18 days, Morgan said. The feedwater
system provides water to steam generators, she said.
Comanche Peak 2 supplies about 1,150 megawatts to the grid, the
company has said. That means the unit can generate enough power
for 920,000 typical U.S. homes, based on U.S. Energy Department
estimates.
The plant is about 75 miles southwest of Dallas. Comanche Peak 1
was operating at full power, according to a report Friday
morning from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
© 2006 The Dallas Morning News Co.
*****************************************************************
48 ForUm: Ukraine's President seeks energy ties with EU
News / 27 October 2006 | 16:13
Ukraine's President seeks energy ties with EU
Victor Yushchenko has said Ukraine appreciates Europe’s
assistance in the construction of the Odesa-Brody-Plock oil
pipeline and hopes to start building its Brody-Plock section
soon, president's press office reported.
“We urge the European Union to help involve Europe’s leading
companies and financial institutions in this project,” he said
at the tenth summit “Ukraine-EU” in Helsinki.
The President called on the European Commission to help Ukraine
experimentally transport Caspian oil from Brody to the Czech
city of Kralupy via Slovakia’s transportation network.
Mr. Yushchenko said Ukraine was ready to join the Nabukko gas
pipeline project, particularly construct some of its sections in
Ukraine.
“We want to build a constructive dialogue with all the
participants of the energy market,” he stated, adding that
Ukraine could confirm its international obligations to transport
energy to the EU.
The Head of State also said Ukraine had sent its proposals on
the formulation of an EU energy strategy to the European
Commission last May.
“The integration of the Ukrainian energy system into the
European energy network is a part of Ukraine’s strategic
ambition to join the European Union,” he said.
Mr. Yushchenko said Ukraine wanted to create a pan-European
energy system to ensure transparency and introduce common rules
for all its participants. He said the energy sector was “a
strategic priority of development” for our country, as well as
for other sovereign states. He admitted that energy issues often
became “weapons of political blackmail and pressure, posing a
serious threat to Europe’s energy security.”
He said the Caspian region boasted large oil and gas reserves
but did not have a direct channel to transport energy to Europe
and was thus considering alternative projects, some of them
aimed at the Asian continent.
The President opined that the European Union should be
interested in turning these energy resources in the European
direction. He also said Ukraine was thereby ready to hold talks
on the European use of the Odesa-Brody oil pipeline.
“We are ready to maximally involve major oil producers in this
project,” he said, urging EU officials to politically support
this idea.
In his speech, Yuriy Nedashkovsky, Deputy Energy Minister, said
Ukraine was successfully implementing the memorandum on energy
cooperation with the EU. He promised the EU would receive
Ukraine’s report on nuclear power plants next week.
Finland’s Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen said the EU welcomed
this week’s gas deal between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
“The European Union appreciates Ukraine’s role as an energy
transporter,” he said. “The European Union will support
Ukraine’s energy security policies and help it in the nuclear
sector.”
President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso praised
the memorandum on energy cooperation. He said this document
would work in 2007, adding that the EU planned to invest 100
million euros in Ukraine’s energy sector.
Editorial staff:english@for-ua.com
All rights are reserved by © LTD. Inter-Media, ForUm 2001-2006
*****************************************************************
49 Eureka Alert: Turning a nuclear spotlight on illegal weapons material
EurekAlert! ]] Public release date: 27-Oct-2006
Contact: Michael Baum michael.baum@nist.gov 301-975-2763
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Turning a nuclear spotlight on illegal weapons material
Researchers at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) have
demonstrated that they can cheaply, quickly and accurately
identify even subnanogram amounts of weapon-grade plutonium and
uranium. Their work was presented in September at the national
meeting of the American Chemical Society.*
Worldwide, most nuclear facilities generate electricity or
produce neutrons for peaceful research--but they also can create
materials for nuclear weapons. International inspectors
routinely tour such facilities, taking cloth wipe samples of
equipment surfaces for forensic analysis of any potential
weapon-grade materials in suspicious locations. In particular,
they search for specific uranium or plutonium isotopes capable
of setting off a nuclear explosion.
NIST chemists working at the NIST Center for Neutron Research
have applied a highly sensitive technique called delayed neutron
activation analysis to improve such efforts, the NIST and ORNL
researchers report. The center includes a specially designed
research neutron source, which bathes material samples with
low-energy neutrons. Next, those samples rapidly go into a
barrel-shaped instrument, embedded with neutron detectors, which
precisely count the neutrons emitted over a short period of
time. The neutron count acts as a unique signature of special
nuclear material. In their study, the scientists used this
technique to successfully identify trace amounts of uranium-235
and plutonium-239 in less than three minutes.
"We're emphasizing the technique now because world events have
made it more critical to detect traces of nuclear materials,
which is technically very challenging," says analytical chemist
Richard Lindstrom, co-author of the ACS presentation. This tool
also complements a variety of other sophisticated methods used
by NIST researchers working on homeland security.
The low detection levels are due in part to the use of the NIST
neutron source, which is particularly well designed for this
task. The technique can detect weapon-grade material just four
microns in diameter - less than a tenth the size of a human
hair. The technique could be used to find subtle, lingering
radioactive material in samples taken during inspection of
trucks or cargo shipping containers, for instance. Beyond
forensics, NIST uses the technique for measurements of isotopes
in research and for industrial projects. The team is now working
to automate the counting instrument and simplifying its
operation for rapidly handling large batches of samples.
###
*R. M. Lindstrom, D.C. Glasgow and R.G. Downing. Trace fissile
measurement by delayed neutron activation analysis at NIST.
Presented at the 232nd ACS National Meeting, San Francisco,
Calif., Sept 10, 2006.
EurekAlert!
*****************************************************************
50 Sky News: Radiation Critical Errors
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 19:54:16 -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
Radiation Critical Errors
Updated: 14:10, Friday October 27, 2006
Teenage cancer patient Lisa Norris died after a "critical error" by
hospital staff led to her receiving 19 radiation overdoses, a report has said.
It said a figure was wrongly entered on a paper form that was
"significantly higher" than it should have been.
The independent report said "significant lessons" had to be learned from
the death.
The Scottish Executive, which commissioned the report, has ordered
inspections of all five cancer centres in Scotland.
Scottish Health Minister Andy Kerr said: "I hope today's report will help
to ensure that the mistakes made in her treatment are not repeated."
Lisa, 16, was given the overdoses during treatment of a brain tumour at
Glasgow's Beatson Oncology Centre in January. She was 15 at the time.
The treatment left her with burns on her head and neck.
In a statement in February the Beatson said the overdose was the result of
human error and staff were "extremely distraught".
Lisa later underwent specialist oxygen treatment in a hyperbaric chamber
and announced in March she was feeling better and had more energy.
In September she underwent a two-hour brain operation at Glasgow's Southern
General Hospital after losing weight and complaining of blurred vision.
She was eventually allowed to go back to school but died at her home in
Girvan, Ayrshire, last week. A post mortem is being carried out.
*****************************************************************
51 UN Scientific Committee Studying The Effects Of Radiation Has UN Crisis
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 18:01:47 -0400
UN SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE STUDYING THE EFFECTS OF RADIATION HAS FUNDING
CRISIS
New York, Oct 27 2006 6:00PM
Inadequate funding is “seriously hindering” the work of the United
Nations principal scientific body studying the effects of radiation,
which provides critical information for both government programmes
and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which
establishes health standards, officials have <"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gaspd356.doc.htm">warned.
The funding crisis for the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects
of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) dominated discussions on Thursday
in the General Assembly’s Fourth Committee, which deals with special
political and decolonization issues. The Fourth Committee will
meet on the issue again on Monday.
Malcolm Crick, UNSCEAR’s secretary, said there must be more funding
for the Committee and a high-level post, that had been abolished,
should be reinstated.
There was strong support among Member States for boosting funding
– which comes from the UN’s general budget – and some discussion
of possibly creating a trust fund.
Established by the General Assembly in 1955, the Committee’s mandate
is to undertake broad reviews of the sources of ionizing radiation
and its effects on the health of humans and the environment.
UNSCEAR has scientists from 21 Member States and is relied upon by
Governments and organizations throughout the world as the scientific
basis for evaluating radiation risk, establishing radiation
protection and safety standards, and regulating radiation sources,
according to its website.
2006-10-27 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/
*****************************************************************
52 [NYTr] The Scientist: IBM cancer data published
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:12:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: olm.blythe-systems.com
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Whitelisted"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: HAM-VERY
Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit
sent by Tim Murphy (activ-l)
The Scientist - 26th October 2006
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/daily/25356/
IBM cancer data published
Disputed study sees the light of day after a lengthy controversy
By Anne Harding
The journal Environmental Health has published
a study showing
abnormally high rates of cancer deaths among workers at IBM semiconductor
plants, two years after another journal turned the study down under
controversial circumstances
http://www.thescientist.com/article/display/22294> .
IBM fought the study's author, Richard Clapp
, in court over his right to publish the study, which was based on data the
company released during the course of a lawsuit. In March, a New York judge
ruled that the material was not confidential and that publishing it would be
in the public interest.
IBM and the organization representing U.S. silicon chip makers maintain the
study is flawed, and that workers in the industry are safe. "The valid
studies that have been done to date do not show any evidence of increased
cancer risk among clean room workers," John Greenagel, a spokesman for the
San Jose-based Semiconductor Industry Association
, told The Scientist.
Clapp, a professor of environmental health at Boston University, said that
it's "gratifying" that information that could help prevent harmful
environmental exposures is finally being made public. But he added that much
more independent research needs to be done into health risks manufacturing
workers in the semiconductor industry may face.
"The study done by Dr. Clapp gives us important leads that can be used for
more detailed studies of cancer in semiconductor workers," Robert Harrison
, a professor of
clinical medicine in the University of California, San Francisco's Division
of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, told The Scientist.
An unofficial organizing group for IBM workers also welcomed the
publication. "We believe this reinforces the anecdotes we've been hearing
and talked about for years from IBM facilities," said Lee Conrad, national
coordinator of Alliance@IBM in Endicott, New
York, where one of IBM's two remaining U.S. semiconductor chip manufacturing
facilities is located. The other is in Burlington, Vermont.
"If IBM doesn't like this study, we should do more studies," said Conrad,
who worked at the Endicott plant for 26 years but has since retired. "Let's
get to the bottom of this."
Under court order in 2003, IBM handed over its Corporate Mortality File on
employee deaths to plaintiffs' attorneys in a lawsuit brought by two workers
at its San Jose semiconductor plant, who charged that they had developed
cancer due to on-the-job exposures. The attorneys hired Clapp to analyze the
data, which included nearly 34,000 employee or retiree deaths and covered
the period from 1969 to 2001.
Clapp's analysis of 31,941 death records found higher rates of mortality
from brain, breast, kidney, lymphatic and hematopoietic cancers, as well as
melanoma, among the workers compared to the general public. The judge in the
California case ruled the findings inadmissible, after which Clapp sought to
publish the study in the journal Clinics in Environmental Medicine, in a
November 2004 special issue on the electronics industry.
IBM lawyers sent Clapp a letter warning him not to publish, but he retained
an attorney who told him he was within his legal rights. Then the journal
rejected the paper. Elsevier, the journal's publisher, later said it refused
the study because it only published reviews, not original work. However, the
journal had published original studies in the past. Other contributors,
including UCSF's Harrison, agreed to withhold their work
in protest, at the
request of the issue's guest editor, Joseph LaDou, of the University of
California School of Medicine.
Chris Andrews, a spokesman for IBM, told The Scientist Clapp's findings
"aren't credible, nor are they backed by any kind of legitimate science."
According to Andrews, the Corporate Mortality File was an "incomplete human
resources database that IBM used years ago in conjunction with providing
benefits to beneficiaries of deceased IBM employees."
"It really contained no information that would support the study of and the
drawing of scientifically valid conclusions with regard to diseases among
IBM workers," he said.
Greenagel, of the Semiconductor Industry Association, said the proportional
mortality ratio design of Clapp's study was not a valid approach to
evaluating cancer risks.
Clapp has argued that the study design was necessary to control for the
"healthy worker effect," which can skew research because worker populations
exclude those who are too ill for employment.
Harrison also defended the science behind the study. "Dr. Clapp's analytic
methods are used routinely by scientists who study the risk of workplace
chemicals and cancer risk," he said. "For example, the proportionate
mortality study design was used by researchers in the 1970s who found a link
between chemicals used in the tire industry and high rates of leukemia."
Links within this article:
Environmental Health
http://www.ehjournal.net/
R. Clapp, "Mortality among US employees of a large computer manufacturing
company: 1969-2001," Environmental Health, Oct. 19, 2006
http://www.ehjournal.net/content/pdf/1476-069x-5-30.pdf
A. McCook, "IBM Responds in Study Dispute," The Scientist, July 16, 2004.
http://www.thescientist.com/article/display/22294
Richard Clapp
http://sph.bu.edu/index.php?option=com_sphdir&id=239&Itemid=340&INDEX=588
Semiconductor Industry Association
http://www.sia-online.org/home.cfm
Robert Harrison
http://coeh.berkeley.edu/people/faculty/harrison.htm
Alliance@IBM
http://www.allianceibm.org
A. McCook, "Researchers Boycott Journal," The Scientist, June 23, 2004
http://www.thescientist.com/article/display/22247
*
================================================================
.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
================================================================
*****************************************************************
53 Hudson Valley News: Candidate calls for action on depleted uranium before election
day
Friday, October 27, 2006
Zimet addresses small crowd of veterans in New Paltz
New Paltz - State Senate candidate Susan Zimet is asking why,
more than three months after both houses of the state
legislature passed legislation providing better testing and
treatment of veterans exposed to hazardous substances, has not
been sent to the governor.
Democrat Zimet blames the stall on the Republican-controlled
senate, demanding that they either fix whatever problem they
have with the bill, or send it to Governor Pataki to sign.
Every day that this bill sits there is another day that soldiers
come home, that soldiers dont get registered, they dont get
tested, they dont get treated.
Matthews: "we are all misdiagnosed"
Gerard Matthews, an Iraq War veteran, returned home in September
2003, with a variety of medical problems, most notably, the
effects of exposure to depleted uranium, a low-level radioactive
metal used by the Pentagon to harden artillery shells.
The effects can be devastating. For Matthews, it was a birth
defect in his daughter, born nine months after his homecoming.
Matthews says veterans deserve better, and a unified effort at
the state level might attract attention higher up.
We got 92 soldiers dead already, and who knows what else is
happening. We got soldiers coming back sick. We got soldiers
at Walter Reed on the fourth floor; they dont even know whats
wrong with them. They are misdiagnosed. We are all
misdiagnosed. They dont want to say the real reason. Without
this, from a state level and hopefully we can get New York and
get all the different states to do it hopefully the federal
government will really listen to us.
The effort started close to home. Last year, Zimet, an Ulster
County legislator, persuaded her colleagues to unanimously adopt
a resolution calling on the state to act.
HEAR today's news on MidHudsonRadio.com, the Hudson Valley's
only Internet radio news report.
*****************************************************************
54 NRC: Notice of Availability of Model Safety Evaluation on Technical
FR Doc E6-18076
[Federal Register: October 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 208)]
[Notices] [Page 63050-63053] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27oc06-106]
Specification Improvement To Modify Requirements Regarding LCO
3.10.1, Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation Using
the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process AGENCY: Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the staff of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared a model safety
evaluation (SE) relating to the modification of shutdown testing
requirements in technical specifications (TS) for Boiling Water
Reactors (BWR).
The NRC staff has also prepared a model
no-significant-hazards-consideration (NSHC) determination
relating to this matter. The purpose of these models is to permit
the NRC to efficiently process amendments that propose to modify
LCO 3.10.1. The proposed changes would revise LCO 3.10.1, and the
associated Bases, to expand its scope to include provisions for
temperature excursions greater than [200] [deg]F as a consequence
of inservice leak and hydrostatic testing, and as a consequence
of scram time testing initiated in conjunction with an inservice
leak or hydrostatic test, while considering operational
conditions to be in Mode 4. Licensees of nuclear power reactors
to which the models apply could then request amendments,
confirming the applicability of the SE and NSHC determination to
their reactors.
DATES: The NRC staff issued a Federal Register notice on August
21, 2006 (71 FR 48561) that provided a model safety evaluation
(SE) and a model no significant hazards consideration (NSHC)
determination relating to modification of requirements regarding
LCO 3.10.1, ``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation.''
The NRC staff hereby announces that the model SE and NSHC
determination may be referenced in plant-specific applications to
adopt the changes.
The staff will post a model application on the NRC web site to
assist licensees in using the consolidated line item
[[Page 63051]] improvement process (CLIIP) to revise the TS on
LCO 3.10.1, ``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Kobetz, Mail Stop: O-12H2,
Division of Inspections and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555- 0001, telephone 301-415-1932.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Regulatory Issue Summary
2000-06, ``Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process for
Adopting Standard Technical Specification Changes for Power
Reactors,'' was issued on March 20, 2000. The consolidated line
item improvement process (CLIIP) is intended to improve the
efficiency of NRC licensing processes by processing proposed
changes to the standard technical specifications (STS) in a
manner that supports subsequent license amendment applications.
The CLIIP includes an opportunity for the public to comment on a
proposed change to the STS after a preliminary assessment by the
NRC staff and a finding that the change will likely be offered
for adoption by licensees. The CLIIP directs the NRC staff to
evaluate any comments received for a proposed change to the STS
and to either reconsider the change or announce the availability
of the change for adoption by licensees.
This notice involves the modification of LCO 3.10.1. The proposed
changes would revise LCO 3.10.1, and the associated Bases, to
expand its scope to include provisions for temperature excursions
greater than [200] [deg]F as a consequence of inservice leak and
hydrostatic testing, and as a consequence of scram time testing
initiated in conjunction with an inservice leak or hydrostatic
test, while considering operational conditions to be in Mode 4.
This change was proposed for incorporation into the standard
technical specifications by the owners groups participants in the
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) and is designated
TSTF-484. TSTF-484 can be viewed on the NRC's web page utilizing
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS).
ADAMS accession numbers are ML052930102 (TSTF-484 Submittal),
ML060970568 (NRC Request for Additional Information, RAI),
ML061560523 (TSTF Response to NRC RAIs), and ML062650171 (TSTF
Response to NRC Notice for Comment).
Applicability Licensees opting to apply for this TS change are
responsible for reviewing the staff's evaluation, referencing the
applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary
plant-specific information. Each amendment application made in
response to the notice of availability will be processed and
noticed in accordance with applicable rules and NRC procedures.
Public Notices In a notice in the Federal Register dated August
21, 2006 (71 FR 48561), the staff requested comment on the use of
the CLIIP to process requests to revise the TS regarding LCO
3.10.1, ``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation.'' In
addition, there have been several plant-specific amendment
requests to adopt changes similar to those described in TSTF-484
and notices have been published for these applications. TSTF-484,
as well as the NRC staff's safety evaluation and model
application, may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC/s Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records are accessible electronically from the ADAMS
Public Library component on the NRC Web site, (the Electronic
Reading Room).
The staff received one response with seven comments following the
notice published August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561), soliciting
comments on the model SE and NSHC determination related to
TSTF-484, Revision 0. The comments were offered by the TSTF in a
letter dated September 20, 2006 (ADAMS ML062650171). The comments
are administrative in nature in that they provide clarification
and do not have a material impact on the model SE and NSHC
determination published August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561). TSTF
comments that were incorporated include the comment on the
Federal Register Notice for Comment and comments 1, 3, 4, and 5
on the Model Safety Evaluation. The TSTF has been informed of NRC
staff decision not to incorporate comments 2 and 6. Comment 2
provides for additional information about TSTF-484 regarding
scram time testing to be included in paragraph one of section
3.0. In the original Model Safety Evaluation published for
comment on August 21, 2006 (71 FR 48561), the first half of
section 3.0 discusses hydrostatic and leakage testing, while the
second half of section 3.0 discusses scram time testing. NRC
staff believe that there may be confusion if the comment is
incorporated into the first section of 3.0 while scram time
testing is not discussed until the second half of section 3.0.
The information provided in the comment is captured in the second
half of section 3.0. Comment 6 was not incorporated due to
possible confusion regarding the term ``conservatively''. In
reviewing the TSTF-484, Revision 0 submittal, the NRC has
concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the health and
safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the
proposed manner, such activities will be conducted in compliance
with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of the
amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security
or to the health and safety of the public. Therefore, it was
decided that comment 6 was not needed in order to justify
TSTF-484, Revision 0 approval. The revised model SE is included
in this notice for use by licensees. As described in the model
application prepared by the staff, licensees may reference in
their plant-specific applications to adopt TSTF-484, the SE and
NSHC determination.
Model Safety Evaluation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Consolidated Line Item
Improvement, Technical Specification Task Force Change TSTF-484,
Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing Activities
1.0 Introduction By application dated [Date], [Name of Licensee]
(the licensee) requested changes to the Technical Specifications
(TS) for the [Name of Facility].
The proposed changes would revise Limiting Condition for
Operation (LCO) 3.10.1, and the associated Bases, to expand its
scope to include provisions for temperature excursions greater
than [200] [deg]F as a consequence of inservice leak and
hydrostatic testing, and as a consequence of scram time testing
initiated in conjunction with an inservice leak or hydrostatic
test, while considering operational conditions to be in Mode 4.
2.0 Regulatory Evaluation 2.1 Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic
Testing. The Reactor Coolant System (RCS) serves as a pressure
boundary and also serves to provide a flow path for the
circulation of coolant past the fuel. In order to maintain RCS
integrity, Section XI of the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME) Pressure Vessel Code requires periodic
hydrostatic and leakage testing. Hydrostatic tests are required
to be
[[Page 63052]] performed once every ten years and leakage tests
are required to be performed each refueling outage. Appendix G to
10 CFR Part 50 states that pressure tests and leak tests of the
reactor vessel that are required by Section XI of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Pressure Vessel Code must
be completed before the core is critical.
NUREG-1433, General Electric Plants, BWR/4, Revision 3, Standard
Technical Specifications (STS) and NUREG-1434, General Electric
Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3, STS both currently contain LCO 3.10.1,
``Inservice Leak and Hydrostatic Testing Operation.'' LCO 3.10.1
was created to allow for hydrostatic and leakage testing to be
conducted while in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant
temperature greater than [200] [deg]F provided certain secondary
containment LCOs are met.
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing
Activities, modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to implement
LCO 3.10.1, while hydrostatic and leakage testing is being
conducted, should average reactor coolant temperature exceed
[200] [deg]F during testing. This modification does not alter
current requirements for hydrostatic and leakage testing as
required by Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50.
2.2 Control Rod Scram Time Testing. Control rods function to
control reactor power level and to provide adequate excess
negative reactivity to shut down the reactor from any normal
operating or accident condition at any time during core life. The
control rods are scrammed by using hydraulic pressure exerted by
the control rod drive (CRD) system. Criterion 10 of Appendix A to
10 CFR part 50 states that the reactor core and associated
coolant, control, and protection systems shall be designed with
appropriate margin to assure that specified acceptable fuel
limits are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation,
including the effects of anticipated operational occurrences. The
scram reactivity used in design basis accidents (DBA) and
transient analyses is based on an assumed control rod scram time.
NUREG-1433, General Electric Plants, BWR/4, Revision 3, STS and
NUREG-1434, General Electric Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3, STS both
currently contain surveillance requirements (SR) to conduct scram
time testing when certain conditions are met in order to ensure
that Criterion 10 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 is satisfied.
SR 3.1.4.1 requires scram time testing to be conducted following
a shutdown greater than 120 days while SR 3.1.4.4 requires scram
time testing to be conducted following work on the CRD system or
following fuel movement within the affected core cell. Both SRs
must be performed at reactor steam dome pressure greater than or
equal to [800] psig and prior to exceeding 40 percent rated
thermal power (RTP).
TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing
Activities, would modify LCO 3.10.1 to allow SR 3.1.4.1 and SR
3.1.4.4 to be conducted in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant
temperature greater than [200] [deg]F. Scram time testing would
be performed in accordance with LCO 3.10.4, ``Single Control Rod
Withdrawal--Cold Shutdown.'' This modification to LCO 3.10.1 does
not alter the means of compliance with Criterion 10 of Appendix A
to 10 CFR Part 50.
3.0 Technical Evaluation The existing provisions of LCO 3.10.1
allow for hydrostatic and leakage testing to be conducted while
in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant temperature greater than
[200] [deg]F, while imposing Mode 3 secondary containment
requirements. Under the existing provision, LCO 3.10.1 would have
to be implemented prior to hydrostatic and leakage testing. As a
result, if LCO 3.10.1 was not implemented prior to hydrostatic
and leakage testing, hydrostatic and leakage testing would have
to be terminated if average reactor coolant temperature exceeded
[200] [deg]F during the conduct of the hydrostatic and leakage
test. TSTF-484, Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time
Testing Activities, modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to
implement LCO 3.10.1, while hydrostatic and leakage testing is
being conducted, should average reactor coolant temperature
exceed [200] [deg]F during testing. The modification will allow
completion of testing without the potential for interrupting the
test in order to reduce reactor vessel pressure, cool the RCS,
and restart the test below [200] [deg]F.
Since the current LCO 3.10.1 allows testing to be conducted while
in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant temperature greater than
[200] [deg]F, the proposed change does not introduce any new
operational conditions beyond those currently allowed.
SR 3.1.4.1 and SR 3.1.4.4 require that control rod scram time be
tested at reactor steam dome pressure greater than or equal to
[800] psig and before exceeding 40 percent rated thermal power
(RTP). Performance of control rod scram time testing is typically
scheduled concurrent with inservice leak or hydrostatic testing
while the RCS is pressurized. Because of the number of control
rods that must be tested, it is possible for the inservice leak
or hydrostatic test to be completed prior to completing the scram
time test. Under existing provisions, if scram time testing can
not be completed during the LCO 3.10.1 inservice leak or
hydrostatic test, scram time testing must be suspended.
Additionally, if LCO 3.10.1 is not implemented and average
reactor coolant temperature exceeds [200] [deg]F while performing
the scram time test, scram time testing must also be suspended.
In both situations, scram time testing is resumed during startup
and is completed prior to exceeding 40 percent RTP. TSTF-484,
Revision 0, Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Time Testing Activities,
modifies LCO 3.10.1 to allow a licensee to complete scram time
testing initiated during inservice leak or hydrostatic testing.
As stated earlier, since the current LCO 3.10.1 allows testing to
be conducted while in Mode 4 with average reactor coolant
temperature greater than [200] [deg]F, the proposed change does
not introduce any new operational conditions beyond those
currently allowed. Completion of scram time testing prior to
reactor criticality and power operations results in a more
conservative operating philosophy with attendant potential safety
benefits.
It is acceptable to perform other testing concurrent with the
inservice leak or hydrostatic test provided that this testing can
be performed safely and does not interfere with the leak or
hydrostatic test. However, it is not permissible to remain in TS
3.10.1 solely to complete such testing following the completion
of inservice leak or hydrostatic testing and scram time testing.
Since the tests are performed with the reactor pressure vessel
(RPV) nearly water solid, at low decay heat values, and near Mode
4 conditions, the stored energy in the reactor core will be very
low. Small leaks from the RCS would be detected by inspections
before a significant loss of inventory occurred. In addition, two
low-pressure emergency core cooling systems (ECCS)
injection/spray subsystems are required to be operable in Mode 4
by TS 3.5.2, ECCS-Shutdown. In the event of a large RCS leak, the
RPV would rapidly depressurize and allow operation of the low
pressure ECCS. The capability of the low pressure ECCS would be
adequate to maintain the fuel covered under the low decay heat
conditions during these tests. Also, LCO 3.10.1 requires that
secondary containment and standby gas treatment system be
operable and capable of handling any
[[Page 63053]] airborne radioactivity or steam leaks that may
occur during performance of testing.
The protection provided by the normally required Mode 4
applicable LCOs, in addition to the secondary containment
requirements required to be met by LCO 3.10.1, minimizes
potential consequences in the event of any postulated abnormal
event during testing. In addition, the requested modification to
LCO 3.10.1 does not create any new modes of operation or
operating conditions that are not currently allowed. Therefore,
the staff finds the proposed change acceptable.
4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission's
regulations, the [Name of State] State official was notified of
the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had
[no] comments. [If comments were provided, they should be
addressed here].
5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendment changes a
requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility
component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR
Part 20. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves
no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change
in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and
that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative
occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously
issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no
significant hazards consideration, and there has been no public
comment on such finding issued on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]).
Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for
categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant
to 10 CFR 51.22(b) no environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the
issuance of the amendment.
6.0 Conclusion The Commission has concluded, based on the
considerations discussed above, that: (1) There is reasonable
assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be
endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's
regulations, and (3) the issuance of the amendment will not be
inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and
safety of the public.
7.0 References 1. NUREG-1433, ``General Electric Plants, BWR/4,
Revision 3, Standard Technical Specifications (STS)'', August 31,
2003.
2. NUREG-1434, General Electric Plants, BWR/6, Revision 3,
Standard Technical Specifications (STS)'', August 31, 2003.
3. Request for Additional Information (RAI) Regarding TSTF-484,
April 7, 2006, ADAMS accession number ML060970568.
4. Response to NRC RAIs Regarding TSTF-484, June 5, 2006, ADAMS
accession number ML061560523.
5. TSTF-484 Revision 0, ``Use of TS 3.10.1 for Scram Times
Testing Activities'', May 5, 2005, ADAMS accession number
ML052930102.
6. TSTF Response to NRC Notice for Comment, September 20, 2006,
ADAMS accession number ML062650171.
Principal Contributor: Aron Lewin.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12th of October 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy Kobetz, Branch Chief, Technical Specifications Branch,
Division of Inspections and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-18076 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
55 Accountancy Age: 20bn nuclear waste scheme to be funded through taxes -
Government's plans to build and pay for underground nuclear
waste dump questioned by MPs David Jetuah
27 Oct 2006
Controversial plans to bankroll a nuclear waste disposal
programme through taxes, at a possible cost £20bn, have been
unveiled by the government.
Environment secretary David Milibandtold the Commons that the
debate over financing the operation would be difficult and
complex.
Government figures estimate the project will cost in the region
of £10bn-£20bn, but doubts were raised by opposition members
over speculations of an alternative funding scheme.
Planners of this alternative scheme rested their hopes on
private operators building new nuclear reactors in the near
future and contributing to the projects biggest costs, which
centre on disposal and the construction of bunker 1km
underground.
The eventual disposal programme will be overseen by the
Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which also owns
nuclear facilities, a fact that has led shadow environment
minister Peter Ainsworthto voice concerns regarding a possible
conflict of interest.
The NDA defended the government's tax-funded scheme, believing
the costs would span the lifetime of the project and the bill
would be paid over more than 100 years.
Further reading:
Lord Lawson warns of UK tax
and red tape burden
Government errors cost farmers £22.5m
Publications] © 1995-2006 All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
56 Salt Lake Tribune: Energy Department starts radioactive cleanup near Moab
By Robert Gehrke
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated:10/27/2006 12:44:18 AM MDT
WASHINGTON - The Energy Department took the first steps Thursday
toward hiring a contractor to clean up 12 million tons of
radioactive tailings and contaminated soil along the Colorado
River near Moab.
The department requested proposals to clean up the 435-acre
former Atlas Uranium Mill site, from designing the waste
handling system to moving the material 30 miles to Crescent
Junction and completing the site cleanup.
"Release of this request brings the department one step
closer to watching the mill tailings being loaded and moved from
the current location," said Donald Metzler, DOE's Moab Site
Project director.
The mill processed uranium during the Cold War for weapons
and other purposes, and the tailings are the remnants of the
process. The mill was later purchased by Atlas Corp. It was shut
down in 1984, and Atlas went bankrupt in 1998. In 2000,
ownership of the pile was transferred to the federal government.
A temporary earthen cap was put on the pile to keep it in
place, but it continued to contaminate groundwater in the nearby
Colorado River. After four years of study, the DOE decided
moving the pile was the best solution. The project is expected
to take five years to complete.
Sen. Orrin Hatch and Rep. Jim Matheson both praised the DOE
action.
"After years of talk, we'll soon have someone cleaning up this
mess," Hatch said. "It makes it easier to imagine a day when the
people of Moab can be freed from the threat of this gigantic
poisonous pile hanging over their heads."
Matheson, however, has expressed concern that the timetable
for the cleanup has been delayed, even though the pile has
become less stable.
"I hope that DOE also remains committed to expeditiously
completing this major project," Matheson said. "Today's
announcement is a positive sign."
© Copyright 2006, The Salt Lake Tribune.
*****************************************************************
57 NRC: Application for a License To Export High-Enriched Uranium
FR Doc E6-18021
[Federal Register: October 27, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 208)]
[Notices] [Page 63042-63043] From the Federal Register Online via
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr27oc06-103]
Pursuant to 10 CFR 110.70(b)(2) ``Public Notice of Receipt of an
Application,'' please take notice that the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has received the following request for an export
license. Copies of the request can be accessed through the Public
Electronic Reading Room (PERR) link
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html at the NRC Homepage.
A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene may be
filed within 30 days after publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. Any request for hearing or petition for leave
to intervene shall be served by the requestor or petitioner upon
the applicant, the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; and the
Executive Secretary, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC
20520.
In its review of the application for a license to export special
nuclear material as defined in 10 CFR Part 110 and noticed
herein, the Commission does not evaluate the health, safety or
environmental effects in the recipient nation of the material to
be exported.
The information concerning the application follows.
NRC Export License Application for High-enriched Uranium
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------- Name of Applicant Date of Description of
material Application
-----------------------------------------------------------------
--------- ----------------------------------- End use Recipient
country Date Received Application Number Material
type Total quantity Docket Number
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------- DOE/NNSA-Y12 National Security
High-Enriched Uranium (93.35%) Up to 15.5 kg Uranium
(14.46925 kg To fabricate targets Canada.
Complex U-235) for irradiation in
October 5, 2006................... the National
Research Universal
(NRU) Reactor to
produce medical
radioisotopes.
October 10, 2006 XSNM03473 11005654
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------
[[Page 63043]] Dated this 17th day of October 2006 at Rockville,
Maryland.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Margaret M. Doane, Deputy Director, Office of International
Programs.
[FR Doc. E6-18021 Filed 10-26-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
*****************************************************************
58 Los Alamos: Secret Nuke Data Found During Meth Raid
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:31:48 -0500 (CDT)
X-Sender-Host-Name: chumbly.math.missouri.edu
X-DSPAM-Result: mail; result="Innocent"; class="Innocent"; probability=0.0000; confidence=1.00; signature=N/A
X-Spam-Class: SPAM-LOW
X-Spam: [SPAM] - LOW
http://justanotherblowback.blogspot.com/2006/10/los-alamos-secret-nuke-data-found.html
Top Nuke Lab Data Leak Apparently Discovered During Drug Bust;
Officials Search For Ties Washington, Oct. 25, 2006
(CBS/AP) Authorities in northern New Mexico are looking for ties
among three people involved in an apparent security breach of the
Los Alamos National Laboratory that surfaced during a home search
spurred by a domestic violence incident.
Los Alamos police answered a call at Royal Crest mobile home park
last Tuesday about a possible fight between a man and a woman, CBS
News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports. When officials arrived,
they said they saw methamphetamine paraphernalia and began seizing
evidence.
According to records filed by the Los Alamos Police Department,
police confiscated three USB port computer memory sticks. Sources
tell CBS News that those memory sticks small portable computer
storage devices are believed to contain classified information
from the nation's top nuclear weapons lab.
Officials arrested a 20-year old man on drug charges along with his
girlfriend and the female owner of the trailer. Officials are also
checking out reports that one of the women may have had secret
clearance to work at the lab in the so-called Dynamic Experiments
Program.
Police alerted the FBI to the secret documents, which agents traced
back to a woman linked to the drug dealer, officials said. The woman
is a contract employee at Los Alamos National Laboratory, according
to an FBI official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of
the sensitive nature of the case.
The official would not describe the documents except to say that
they appeared to contain classified material and were stored on a
computer file.
Sources tell CBS News the documents were found on a computer flash
drive the very type of memory device banned from the lab two years
ago. At that time, the Energy Department prohibited all devices
that can be easily copied, Attkisson reports.
FBI special agent Bill Elwell in Albuquerque, N.M., confirmed that
a search warrant was executed on Friday night, but he refused to
discuss details.
"We do have an investigation with regard to the matter, but our
standard is we do not discuss pending investigations," Elwell said.
A lab spokesman declined to comment.
Los Alamos has a history of high-profile security problems in the
past decade, with the most notable the case of nuclear scientist
Wen Ho Lee.
After years of accusations, Lee pleaded guilty in a plea bargain
to one count of mishandling nuclear secrets at the lab.
In 2004, the lab was essentially shut down after an inventory showed
that two computer disks containing nuclear secrets were missing. A
year later the lab concluded that it was just a mistake and the
disks never existed.
But the incident highlighted sloppy inventory control and security
failures at the nuclear weapons lab. And the Energy Department began
moving toward a five-year program to create a so-called diskless
environment at Los Alamos to prevent any classified material being
carried outside the lab.
Even though Los Alamos is now under new management, Danielle Brian,
executive director of the watchdog group Project on Government
Oversight said the lab has not done much to clean up its act.
"The problem is when you actually have those materials that are
supposed to be protected inside the lab and you find them outside
the lab in the hands of criminals that should worry everybody,"
Brian said.
The FBI and the U.S. attorney's office in Albuquerque were "evaluating
the information obtained as a result of the search warrant," Elwell
said.
The federal charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified
material is a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of a year
in prison and up to a $100,000 fine.
SOURCE: CBS News
Big Medicine http://justanotherblowback.blogspot.com/
"If you give a man the correct information for seven years, he may
believe the incorrect information on the first day of the eighth
year when it is necessary, from your point of view, that he should
do so. Your first job is to build the credibility and the authenticity
of your propaganda, and persuade the enemy to trust you although
you are his enemy."
A Psychological Warfare Casebook - Operations Research Office -
Johns Hopkins University (1958)
-- http://www.fastmail.fm - Access all of your messages and folders
wherever you are
*****************************************************************
59 SF New Mexican: Domenici: We have to get answers
[FreeNewMexican.com]
Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:48 pm
Pete V. Domenici, New Mexico Senator speaks at the dedication
ceremony of the Jemez Pueblo, July 5, 2006.
By ANDY LENDERMAN | The New Mexican
The FBI needs more time to investigate why information that
appears to belong to Los Alamos National Laboratory turned up at
a mobile home in Los Alamos, U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M.,
said Thursday.
The FBI had nothing new to report Thursday on its investigation
concerning a potential breach of security by a former lab
contract employee.
Domenici spoke to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and a member of
the FBI on Wednesday, and said he learned "enough to know that
we've got a lot of investigating to do on this one. And that
it's going to take some time."
FBI spokesman Bill Elwell said his agency is still trying to get
to the bottom of the case.
No arrest warrants have been issued in connection to the
incident.
The Los Alamos Police Department found three computer memory
sticks, or jump drives, while conducting a search at a Los
Alamos mobile home Oct. 17. Without describing those jump
drives, police later said the search turned up property that
might belong to the lab. Federal agents executed a search
warrant Oct. 20 after gathering evidence. That warrant has been
sealed.
Meanwhile, the lab has initiated security measures that its
spokesman was not authorized to discuss in detail.
The lab has been engaged for several years in an effort to limit
access to classified material and reduce the overall amount of
classified information at the nuclear weapons lab, spokesman
Kevin Roark said.
"I was upset that this happened," Domenici said. " ... The
laboratory better have good answers on this."
Los Alamos police responded to a domestic disturbance call Oct.
17, police records show. During the call, officers noticed glass
pipes and other items that indicated possible illegal drug use,
causing that agency to seek a search warrant.
Justin Stone, 20, was arrested at the scene on a probation
violation. He was also charged with possession of drug
paraphernalia, according to a criminal complaint.
Stone told the Los Alamos Monitor in its Thursday edition that
he gave a man methamphetamines in exchange for one of the jump
drives discovered at the house.
Stone also told police the home where he was staying was owned
by Jessica Quintana.
Quintana, 22, had most recently worked at the Los Alamos Family
YMCA. Before that, she was an employee at Information Assets
Management Inc., a laboratory contractor that was also based in
Los Alamos, according to Linda Daly, YMCA director. Quintana
could not be reached for comment Thursday.
"It sounds so strange," Domenici said of the case. "We just have
to get answers."
Contact Andy Lenderman at 995-3827 or
alenderman@sfnewmexican.com.
| ©2006, Santa Fe New Mexican,
*****************************************************************
60 Inside Bay Area: Feds may compensate Sandia workers
Government to consider petition for $150,000 for radiation
exposure
By Michael Doyle, FRESNO BEE
Article Last Updated:10/27/2006 07:53:48 AM PDT
WASHINGTON — Some ailing San Joaquin Valley residents who have
worked at a top-secret Livermore facility might receive $150,000
payments.
First, though, the X-ray technicians and scientists from Sandia
National Laboratories need a green light from federal officials.
If they get it, they will become the first batch of Californians
deemed eligible for a special compensation program born from
politics and pain.
Last week, the Sandia workers moved an important step closer to
their goal.
Bush administration officials announced they would consider a
Sandia petition for assistance. The petition covers a relative
handful of employees who had worked in three particular rooms at
the Sandia site, next to the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory.
"Radiation exposures were inevitable and pretty much an everyday
occurrence," one Sandia worker reported on the petition.
The workers, whose names are blacked out, added that "years of
exposure and dose records are apparently missing."
This complicates efforts to prove exposure to cancer-causing
radiation. Only a few workers from Sandia's X-Ray Diffraction
and Fluorescence Laboratory are on the petition, though their
efforts could have broader consequences if successful.
Government-owned, but managed by corporate giant Lockheed
Martin, Sandia helps turn Lawrence Livermore research into
nuclear weapons. Currently, Sandia employs some 900 workers.
A Sandia spokeswoman said the company will assist the employees.
"Sandia cooperates fully when we receive requests for employment
and medical records of former employees who make claims under
this program," spokeswoman Jennifer Hallstrom said.
As with the larger Lawrence Livermore lab, most Sandia workers
have historically lived in Alameda, Contra Costa and San Joaquin
counties.
Their work has boosted the nation's nuclear defense. Sometimes,
it also has been dangerous.
"They did what their country asked of them," Republican Rep.
Lindsey Graham, of South Carolina — who is now a senator — said
of nuclear weapons workers during congressional debate in 2001.
"Unfortunately, the government was not always aware or up front
about what they were being exposed to and the dangers it
presented to their health."
Prompted by horror stories from other facilities, Congress began
a special compensation program in 2001. It provides lump-sum
$150,000 payments and covers medical expenses for
nuclear-complex workers who developed radiation-induced cancer.
Several types of workers can seek help.
Energy Department employees who have cancer determined to be "at
least as likely as not" caused by their work exposure can get
aid. This is not a sure thing.
A total of 4,680 claims have been filed in California. Of these,
472 claims have been paid, $38.2 million.
The California claims include 123 for Lawrence Livermore
workers, three paid to Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
staffers and two paid to Sandia workers. Most applicants fail.
The 123 Lawrence Livermore petitions granted, for instance, are
a small fraction of the 2,011 petitions filed by lab workers.
Alternatively, the petition allows workers to seek assistance as
a "special exposure cohort." Once recognized, these groups of
workers have an easier burden of proof. If they have
radiation-based cancer, it is automatically attributed to their
work exposure.
It will take six months or more for a decision.
"It depends on the complexity of the site and the complexity of
the (radiation) exposures," said Larry Elliot, director of the
Office of Compensation Analysis and Support.
© 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers |
*****************************************************************
61 Inside Bay Area: New bid entered for LLNL contract
Nation's third-largest defense contractor files papers on last
day
By Ian Hoffman, STAFF WRITER
Article Last Updated:10/27/2006 02:47:29 AM PDT
At the 11th hour, a defense contractor has stepped up to
challenge a University of California/Bechtel-led team for the
contract to manage Lawrence Livermore nuclear weapons lab for at
least the next seven years.
Northrop Grumman officials announced they are putting forward a
team to run Livermore with the same composition as a Northop-led
team that earlier this year won a $2.5 billion, five-year
management contract for the Nevada Test Site.
The company's decision was first reported Thursday by Inside
Energy, a newsletter on energy policy and the U.S. Department of
Energy.
Northrop's official entry came on the eve of the competition —
the deadline for submitting proposals is today. Preparing the
highly detailed proposals, which run to hundreds of pages, is
estimated to cost more than $3 million each.
Besides Northrop, the nation's third largest defense contractor
by income, the team — known as National Security Technologies
LLC — includes Nuclear Fuel Services, a nuclear materials
handling firm; CH2M Hill, an engineering and environmental firm;
and AECOM, an infrastructure and environmental conglomerate.
That team beat incumbents Bechtel and BWXT, as well as another
team comprisedpartly of Battelle and Washington Group
International. Those four are the University of California's
partners in bidding for operation of Livermore lab, a job the
university has held on its own for more than 50 years.
The Northrop team has no university, suggesting a novel challenge
to UC, which is expected to argue — as it did in a similar
competition for management of Los Alamos lab — that no other
entity is better equipped for science and technology.
© 2000-2006 ANG Newspapers
*****************************************************************
62 Guardian Unlimited: Man: Didn't Know About Secret Nuke Data
From the Associated Press
[UP]
Friday October 27, 2006 5:31 PM
LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) - A 20-year-old man arrested on drug
charges says he had no idea that portable computer storage
drives he had traded for methamphetamine may have contained
classified data from the Los Alamos National Laboratory,
newspapers reported.
The FBI is investigating three USB flash drives that Los Alamos
police found during a drug investigation at a trailer home on
Oct. 17. They notified the lab, which then called the FBI.
Justin Stone, who was arrested at the trailer after police
executed a search warrant for suspected drug paraphernalia, told
the Los Alamos Monitor he gave methamphetamine to a man in
exchange for one of the flash drives. He would not disclose the
man's name.
``I have no idea what's on it because I didn't get a chance to
look,'' Stone told the newspaper Wednesday from jail.
In the interview published Thursday, he said he traded another
local man methamphetamine for a jump drive about a year ago. He
said he erased that drive and used it himself.
``I vaguely remember it contained information about nuclear
waste sites around Los Alamos,'' Stone said.
He said the third drive was on his roommate's key chain. That
roommate, who was not home during the drug investigation, once
worked for a lab subcontractor. She has not been charged with
any crime.
Stone said it's hard to believe his roommate or the drug users
he says frequented the home had any interest in classified
documents from the nuclear weapons lab.
``Half of the people going through the house couldn't spell
plutonium,'' he told the Albuquerque Journal in a story
published Friday. He also told the Journal he traded
methamphetamine for a flash drive.
Stone, jailed on a probation violation and a charge of
possession of drug paraphernalia, said he ``was basically in the
wrong place at the wrong time.'' He said he had been renting a
room in the trailer for about three weeks.
He has been sentenced to two years for the probation violation
and an additional six months for the possession of paraphernalia
charge. The sentences will run consecutively, Magistrate Pat
Casados said.
Lab Director Michael Anastasio said in a statement Wednesday
that the lab was cooperating with federal investigators in the
probe of a possible security breach by a former subcontractor.
The National Nuclear Security Administration, which oversees the
nation's nuclear weapons labs, also is investigating.
Stone, whose parents work at the lab, said he's ``freaked out''
about being linked to the federal investigation. He said he has
been struggling with drug addiction but wants to get treatment.
``I just want this all to go away,'' he said.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2006
*****************************************************************
63 lamonitor.com: Retirees stew about LANL's handling of benefits plan
The Online News Source for Los Alamos
ROGER SNODGRASS roger@lamonitor.comMonitor Assistant Editor
Coming out of a public meeting last week, some former employees
of Los Alamos National Laboratory expressed their disappointment
with the laboratory's handling of health and benefits coverage.
Their list of complaints included poor notice, lack of handout
materials, no information about costs, incorrect information
about other matters and second-class treatment, compared to
full-time employees.
Retirees say they have been dropped because of mix-ups about
Medicare eligibility for dependent spouses and hundreds of them
are blocked because of a mysterious "special indicator" in their
files.
The benefits representatives have partially responded through a
laboratory spokesperson to one of the complaints, but have left
many questions unanswered.
Steve Sandoval of the laboratory communications office confirmed
that, with less than a month to go before open enrollment,
neither employees' nor retirees' premium information has yet
been finalized, awaiting a decision by the Department of Energy.
He suggested retirees should call Hewitt's Customer Care Center
at (866) 934-1200 or the laboratory benefits office, if they
need additional assistance.
The closer LANL retiree Dale Henderson looked at the
communication process and contradictory explanations, the more
problems he found.
"I don't know if it was ever this bad," he said. "I'm not in a
position to parse out who is responsible."
Glenn Lockhart, a LANL retiree and a former human resources
staffer said, "There was a lack of planning and execution on the
part of LANS." Los Alamos National Security (LANS) is the
for-profit limited liability corporation that began managing the
laboratory on June 1.
Citing a series of snafus going back to a May retirement, Denise
George, a software developer in the lab's theoretical division
said, "I don't know whom we can blame, but it is certainly not
working well for the retirees.
The first thing that went wrong, Henderson said, was that there
were not enough handouts for the meeting.
"They ran out well before the meeting started," Henderson said.
"Having a handout would have been helpful," George said. "Then
they said they were on the web and they weren't. There was no
reason to tell us misinformation. They could have just said
we'll make sure they are up on the web in two days."
Henderson said the public meeting started with complaints from
the audience about why there had not been better notice for the
meeting. They were told that one ad each had appeared in four
local newspapers.
When the audience hooted this explanation, Henderson said, they
were told that the laboratory wrote letters to each retiree -
but forgot to mail them on time.
"They told us they were mailed on Thursday," he said. That would
be Oct. 12, for an Oct. 17 meeting.
Henderson finally received the folded mailer on Oct. 24, 12 days
after the meeting, but then he noticed another peculiarity. It
was mailed under a nonprofit postage permit.
The mailer bears the Los Alamos National Laboratory logo in the
upper left hand corner with a return address of the Human
Resources Benefits Office.
"What is the profit-making management of Los Alamos National
Laboratory doing sending their mail out under a non-profit
permit?" he asked.
Lockhart is a health insurance and benefits assistance corps
volunteer with the New Mexico Aging and Long Term Services
Department, so he regularly counsels laboratory retirees.
He emphasized a point shared by the others, that the retiree
open enrollment is only open for two weeks (Nov. 20 to Dec 1),
while the period for regular employees is four weeks.
He said the retirees were told that the two week period was the
standard period for Hewitt Associates, but the participants
afterward were skeptical that the problem could have been
avoided in the first place if somebody was looking out for their
interests, that it could have been fixed with a simple change in
the software, and that there were Hewitt accounts that did not
have a two week open enrollment.
"Retirees are scattered over 30 states," said Lockhart, who has
been retired since 1993. "That makes it hard to communicate with
them."
George said somebody at the meeting stood up and said he was
going to Antarctica on Nov. 9 and wouldn't be back until after
the deadline.
George said she has dealt with numerous Catch-22s since
retiring, including "innumerable instances of difficulties" with
her and her husband's health care.
"I'd sign on and find out we had been dropped, or our dental
coverage had been dropped."
She said her representative at LANL, Pam Baron, had been
"terrific" in helping her get back into the system each time.
The most recent problem started in mid-September when she
discovered that Hewitt was sending her mail to the wrong ZIP
code. When she tried to set up an account for open enrollment,
she had to enter her ZIP code. Her efforts were rejected until
Baron interceded and got her address changed.
"When I changed my address, they dropped my health coverage,"
she said.
Sandoval provided a response to one of the questions that were
raised.
"The reason that open enrollment continues to be four weeks for
active laboratory employees is that the benefits office manages
it in-house. It is not contracted out to a company such as
Hewitt and Associates," he wrote after a request for
clarification on several of the points.
Retirees have yet to hear a resolution of another set of
problems, relating to whether their pensions would remain within
the University of California Retirement Plan, or be seperated.
into a separate account that they believe will be under funded
or vulnerable to further detachment. That decision, as well,
awaits a DOE decision.
© 2003 Los Alamos Monitor All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************