*****************************************************************
02/09/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.33
*****************************************************************
   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 UPI: Eye on Iraq: Three wars at once
2 [southnews] A Strike on Iran would signify the Beginning of an Epoch
3 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Halts Aid on Projects With Tehran 
4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuke Envoy, IAEA Official to Meet 
5 Guardian Unlimited: Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring 
6 AFP: Iranian nuclear negotiator to meet UN atomic agency chief -
7 AFP: Iranian negotiator calls off Europe trip to discuss nuclear cri
8 AFP: UN atomic agency almost halves aid to Iran 
9 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Envoy Cancels IAEA Meeting 
10 Korea Herald: China proposal boosts optimism at nuclear talks   
11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Is Close to Achieving Its 1956 Ac
12 UPI: China offers draft in North Korea talks
13 Korea Times: China Proposes 5 Working Groups on N. Korean Denucleari
14 Korea Times: N. Korea Wants Diplomatic Ties With Washington 
15 AFP: Oil, sanctions, terrorism on the table in NKorea nuke talks -
16 AFP: NKorea says ready for deal on nuclear weapons 
17 Times of India: NPT framework broadened by N-deal - US-
18 RIA Novosti: Russia should renew its nuclear arsenal
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
19 US: [NukeNet] Pelosi Warms to the Idea of Nuclear Power
20 US: ENS: Nuclear Regulator Vows to Streamline Industry Renaissance 
21 US: APP.COM: Panel backs plant license renewal if conditions are met
22 US: Vermont Guardian: Powers clean with nuclear green
23 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI ready to coop in Belarus N-plant 
24 Asia Times: In Japan nuclear power moves to next level 
25 Norway Post: Norway to consider nuclear energy
26 US: Patriot Ledger: READERS VIEW: Threats to Pilgrim nuclear plant g
27 US: New London Day: State Won't Wait On Millstone Permit   
28 US: UPI: Nuclear loan guarantees unclear
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
29 US: Rutland Herald: Security strong at nuclear plants
30 US: New York Times: New York to Test Ways to Prevent Nuclear Terror 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
31 US: [DU List] CNN Transcripts on DU From Tuesday's show
32 Guardian Unlimited: Two More in Britain Exposed to Isotope
33 US: The Enquirer: Fernald radiation data to get review
34 US: ABC4.com: Bishop not deciding on Divine Strake yet - 
35 US: Deseret News: Radiation facts get thumbs up
36 Whitehaven News: Radioactive contamination on beach
37 US: Ventura County Star: Health aid expanded for lab workers 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
38 US: Independent: N.M. company joins search for uranium
39 US: Sydney Morning Herald: ALP 'will scrap' nuclear mines policy - 
40 SLO Trib: Nevada says taxpayers would save if Yucca Mountain project
41 Platts: Cost of US nuclear waste repository put at $20 bil
42 US: ALJ: Fuel reprocessing proposal full of risks | 
43 US: Salt Lake Tribune: Uranium cleanup hitch
44 US Energy Secretary: Yucca Mountain Project Costs To Rise On Delay
45 www.bbj.hu: EU proposes fines, jail sentences for illegal waste ship
46 US: Deseret News: Uranium cleanup faces delay
47 BloggingVegas.com: Yucca Mountain project may be dying - 
48 US: Guardian Unlimited: Utah Nuclear Sludge Cleanup Delayed 
 
                           PEACE
 
49 [southnews] A warning from the wise
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
50 Tri-City Herald: PNNL chemist wins DOE award 
51 LA Daily News: DOE invites agency input on lab cleanup
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 UPI: Eye on Iraq: Three wars at once
     
 United Press International - Security &Terrorism - 

2/9/2007 11:43:00 AM -0500

 By MARTIN SIEFF UPI Senior News Analyst

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- "One war at a time," U.S. President
Abraham Lincoln famously said when dismissing a proposal to risk
war with the British Empire, the most powerful nation on earth,
when he already had his hands full waging the U.S. Civil War.
But as the United States heads for a full-scale confrontation
with Iran, it risks fighting three separate wars simultaneously
in the same theater of operations. 

The first war is already raging at fill intensity, and the
United States and the Iraqi government are still losing it: That
is the struggle against the Sunni insurgents in Iraq. 

This weekend Lt. Gen. David Petraeus will get his fourth star.
Petraeus will succeed Gen. George Casey, slated to be the U.S.
Army's next chief of staff, as the next U.S. and allied ground
forces commander in Iraq. He has already made clear he wants to
saturate Baghdad with troops and clear insurgents out of Sunni
majority neighborhoods to end their violent onslaught in the
Iraqi capital of 6 million people. 

In recent weeks, far from abating, Sunni insurgent violence in
Baghdad has reached new levels of intensity with scores and even
hundreds of people at a time being killed in mass terror bomb
attacks. 

However, even while U.S. policymakers await hopefully but
uncertainly to see the results of Petraeus' new strategy,
they're also hunkering down for a looming confrontation with
Iran over its refusal to heed United Nations Security Council
Resolution 1737 of Dec. 23 and abandon its nuclear development
program. 

A second U.S. aircraft carrier battle group has been dispatched
to the Persian Gulf. An aviator admiral with no experience of
dealing directly with land warfare but with almost unrivalled
experience in directing carrier-launched aircraft against
mainland targets, Adm. William Fallon has been chosen by
President George W. Bush to head Central Command or CENTCOM, the
U.S. command that includes both Iraq and Iran. And the U.S.
government has sent new batteries of Patriot anti-ballistic
missiles out to the region to protect U.S. bases and ground
forces, Israel and other potential targets of Iranian ballistic
missile attacks. 

Meanwhile, the Iranians appear to be expecting a U.S. attack. In
the past three days, they have announced successful tests of
their new, state-of-the-art Tor-M1 anti-aircraft missile system,
jut received from Russia, and of their older but still
potentially dangerous Sark anti-ship missile system, also
supplied by Russia. 

The Iranians would have other forms of retaliation available
too. In the event of a U.S. air strike on their new nuclear
centrifuges and other faculties, they would almost certainly
unleash the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr, the highly popular
Iraqi Shiite leader, which is particularly strong across
southern Iraq and in the Sadr City Shiite poor neighborhoods of
Baghdad, where 2 million people live. 

But if the U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft strike Iranian
nuclear facilities, then Washington policymakers could end up
directing three separate but overlapping wars at the same time. 

For the war Gen. Petraeus has been sent to fight against the
Sunni Muslim insurgents in Iraq, especially in Baghdad, is a
very different kind of war from an air campaign involving
possible retaliation by anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles.
And if Sadr's Mahdi Army were to rise, especially, if it was
supported by other Shiite militias or even by significant
elements in the U.S.-raised and trained new Iraqi army, that
would be a third, even more complicated war. 

Historically, even the finest armies have often been unbalanced,
caught by surprise and even annihilated when they were forced to
fight very different kinds of enemies simultaneously or in quick
succession. 

The Norman Conquest of England in 1066 only succeeded because
King Harold of England had had to fight and destroy the
Norwegian army of Harald Hardrada at the Battle of Stamford Hill
to the north only weeks before he fought and died at the Battle
of Hastings. 

More recently, the German Sixth Army in World War II, reputed to
be the finest infantry force in the world at the time, was
ground up and decimated in street fighting in the Battle of
Stalingrad. Neither the Sixth Army's own top officers nor the
German High Command paid any attention to the build up of
reserve Soviet Red Army forces on the flanks of the Sixth Army
until they attacked in November 1942 and cut the German force in
the city off from behind. 

Two years later, in the fall of 1944, the German Army ruthlessly
and effectively crushed the Armija Krajowa, the Polish Home
Army, after its unsuccessful rising in the Battle of Warsaw. But
they proved no match for the rested Red Army in conventional
battle when it swept across the River Vistula and scattered
German reserve forces to the winds in its January 1945
offensive. 

Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery, the greatest British combat
commander of World War II, always emphasized the importance of
balance in full-scale army formations deployed to fight major
land battles. But if an army's operational and planning energies
are focused on defending their lines of communication,
maintaining control of large cities, or in fighting and
suppressing large irregular forces, then they may be
disastrously distracted from the main axis of conventional
attack against them. 

If U.S. forces in the Iraq-Iran region are forced to fight two
or three major but very different campaigns simultaneously
within a small geographical area, they will run the risk of
confusion and dispersal of effort that could generate this kind
of dangerous distraction.

 
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 2 [southnews] A Strike on Iran would signify the Beginning of an Epoch of Nuclear War
 
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:52:28 -0600 (CST)


In my paper entitled 2007: Opening a New Page in the Worlds History, 
published in September, 2006, I examined the possibility that a US 
strike on Iran using small-scale nuclear munitions would to be launched, 
and that the strike would become the beginning of an epoch of nuclear 
wars. There were various responses to the paper. Some authors, including 
recognized experts, doubted the possibility of such a development. At 
present, few people doubt that there will be a strike on Iran. Rather, 
the question is whether nuclear or conventional weapons will be used in 
the offensive

A Strike on Iran would signify the Beginning of an Epoch of Nuclear War

By Dmitriy Sedov

Global Research, February 10, 2007
Strategic Cultural Foundation (Russia)

In my paper entitled 2007: Opening a New Page in the Worlds History, 
published in September, 2006, I examined the possibility that a US 
strike on Iran using small-scale nuclear munitions would to be launched, 
and that the strike would become the beginning of an epoch of nuclear 
wars. There were various responses to the paper. Some authors, including 
recognized experts, doubted the possibility of such a development. At 
present, few people doubt that there will be a strike on Iran. Rather, 
the question is whether nuclear or conventional weapons will be used in 
the offensive.

In this context, I would like to present the following considerations.

1. An attack on Iran is motivated by nothing but the US domestic 
political expediency and the unlimited appetites of the countrys 
military-industrial complex. President G. Bush has no choice  his only 
option is a breakthrough. The problem does not originate from the total 
failure of his doctrine of the war on international terrorism. If the 
US political elite represented by Bush based its decisions solely on the 
estimates of the damage to its public image that might be caused by the 
fiasco of the global anti-terrorist campaign, it would have extremely 
serious reservations about starting a new regional war. However, they 
are motivated by something else  they need to continue Bushs politics 
backed by a conglomerate of weapons suppliers, who established control 
over the countrys oversized military spending. Should Bush recognize 
being defeated and withdraw the US military forces from the Middle East, 
the Democrats elite would overtake the financial leverage, and a major 
redistribution of the military commissioning would follow. When such 
enormous funds are at stake, peoples lives and those of entire nations 
become tokens in the game. For these operations, the destiny of the 
Middle East and its nations means absolutely nothing, just as the lives 
of the Vietnamese and the Cambodians showered with napalm and defoliants 
meant nothing either. One must be naove to suppose that the Pentagon 
machine will stop and miss the new incredibly high profits.

2. The coming war between the US and Iran has to conform to certain 
parameters defined a priori. The US is tired of Iraq, and the public 
opinion in the country is turning increasingly anti-war. Therefore, the 
offensive against Iran has to be swift and victorious. This will save 
Bushs political group and give it a higher rating in the country. There 
can be no doubt that a successful aggression will make Bush extremely 
popular in the US  in this anti-Christian society the pagan god of 
victory has long taken the place of the Savior. A triumph will make the 
US public blind and deaf  it will remain unaware of the price of the US 
victory for the nations of the Middle East. The crucial circumstance is 
that only nuclear weapons can guarantee the US victory in this war. 
Knowing that the US failed to win even in Iraq, a country plagued by 
religious and ethnic strife, one cannot expect it to prevail in the 
united and spiritually strong Iran. Only the use of nuclear weapons can 
make it possible to cause severe damage to the Iranian control system 
hidden in bunkers and, importantly, to behead its leadership no matter 
how deep underground it might be hiding. Iran without its leaders and 
with a paralyzed system of control, with an army devastated by baby 
nukes, is the only option which suits the US - it agrees to talk about 
peace only to a totally subdued offender. Such talks would let the US 
leaders old dream of a Middle Eastern Disneyland, mastered by the US 
and Israel, come true.

Here are the facts which illustrate the process of the preparations for 
the devastation of Iran:

- The UN Security Council Resolution envisions that a further tightening 
of the sanctions imposed on Iran must take place after February 21, 
2006. From the standpoint of the international law, this is a pretext 
(essentially, a poor one, but a one that does exist) to legalize an 
aggression against the country.

- Two US aircraft carrier groups armed with nukes are moving into the 
region. The US aircraft carrier groups have been on missions 5 times 
over the past 15 years. In 4 cases out of the 5, they launched military 
offensives. In March, 2007 both groups are to take their combat positions.

- Additional ground forces are shifted to the border between Iraq and 
Iran. Preparations for a new phase of hostilities are underway.

- In February, Patriot missile defense systems will be ready to defend 
Israel and the aircraft carrier groups from enemy airstrikes.

- British combat engineers are entering the regions of the future 
fighting, clearly in order to operate in the Strait of Ormuz, where 
Iranians are most likely to lay mines.

- The US and Israel launched a powerful information and propaganda 
campaign preparing the global public opinion for the aggression.

- CENTCOMs Commander John Abizade, an opponent of the war with Iran, 
resigned. His position was taken over by Admiral W. Fallon, a veteran of 
the 1991 Iraq and 1995 Bosnia campaigns.

- John Negroponte has been moved from his position as the First Director 
of National Intelligence for persistently resisting the use of force 
against Iran.

- T. Blair, the staff peacemaker for the Middle East, never mentions a 
peaceful settlement of the Iran dossier problem. He makes no attempts to 
find a way to resolve the crisis in a peaceful way, and this is highly 
indicative.

All of the above constitutes evidence of Irans being prepared for 
sacrifice. Will a major provocation be orchestrated for this purpose? A 
number of observers opine that Washington needs one. We believe that 
what we will see is going to be a plain cowboy-style scenario like the 
one which materialized in Iraq. Media never stop debating the issue of 
the Iranian atomic bomb  just as they focused on S. Husseins 
weapons of mass destruction. It is time for them to start. It 
absolutely does not matter that eventually nothing of the kind will be 
found in Iran. Those who disagree will be silenced by force.

The question is  will such a breakthrough do G. Bush any good? The 
idea of attacking Iran was born in the primitive minds of those who, 
just for the sake of their profits, can sell the rope on which they will 
be hanged. This time it will be neither they nor their children who will 
perish in the nuclear Holocaust, and theyd rather not worry that by 
this they will take the entire mankind a step closer to the total 
catastrophe.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole 
responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the 
Centre for Research on Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research 
articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not 
modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For 
publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms 
including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has 
not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are 
making such material available to our readers under the provisions of 
"fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, 
economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed 
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving 
it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted 
material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission 
from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

) Copyright Dmitriy Sedov, Strategic Cultural Foundation (Russia), 2007

The url address of this article is: 
www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=4729

The archives of South News can be found at
http://southmovement.alphalink.com.au/southnews/ 
*****************************************************************
 3 Guardian Unlimited: IAEA Halts Aid on Projects With Tehran 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday February 9, 2007 4:46 PM
 	
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency on
Friday suspended nearly half of the technical aid it now
provides Iran, in line with sanctions imposed on the country for
its refusal to suspend uranium enrichment. 

As IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei issued the report to his
agency's 35-nation board, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator
abruptly canceled meetings both with ElBaradei in Vienna and
with senior European leaders in Munich, on the sidelines of a
security conference in the German city. 

Organizers of the Munich conference said negotiator Ali Larijani
canceled because of an unspecified illness, whereas IAEA
officials said they were told he was not coming for ``technical
reasons.'' 

``The official explanation is that he got sick,'' said Horst
Teltschik, the Munich conference organizer. 

Larijani's meetings with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter
Steinmeier and Javier Solana, the chief foreign policy envoy for
the European Union would have been the first with senior Western
officials since negotiations with Solana collapsed last year
over Tehran's refusal to suspend enrichment, a potential pathway
to nuclear arms. 

The Vienna-based IAEA already suspended aid to Iran in five
instances last month in line with Security Council sanctions
calling for an end to assistance for programs that could be
misused to make atomic weapons. Diplomats emphasized that the
freeze was temporary and subject to review and approval by the
35-nation board of the IAEA next month. 

On Friday, the agency fully or partially suspended another 18
projects that it deemed could be misused. Those too were subject
to review and approval by the board. 

Iran gets IAEA technical aid for 15 projects and 40 more that
involve other countries. The suspensions were across the board
but in the case of projects involving other countries affected
only Iran. 

A diplomat familiar with the issue said the United States -
along with key allies - had been looking to have up to half of
the projects involving only Iran canceled, restricted or more
closely monitored. 

A U.S. official said Washington's position on what projects
should be affected was ``very similar'' to that of the European
powers, Britain, France and Germany. 

The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity in return for
divulging confidential information 

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany
all want Iran to suspend its enrichment program and have acted
as a group in trying to engage Tehran on the issue. But their
approaches and priorities have differed over the past year. 

Russian and Chinese reluctance to impose harsh sanctions on
Tehran - as initially demanded by Washington - have created the
greatest pressures. Both nations share economic and strategic
interests with Iran. 

Differences over how severely to punish Tehran for its refusal
to suspend enrichment led to months of disputes before agreement
was reached in December on a Security Council resolution
imposing limited sanctions that fell short of the harsher
measures sought by the Americans. 

The sanctions include a review of technical aid to Iran -
programs meant to bolster the peaceful use of nuclear energy in
medicine, agriculture or power generation. 	 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 4 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuke Envoy, IAEA Official to Meet 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday February 9, 2007 11:01 AM
 	
By GEORGE JAHN Associated Press Writer 

VIENNA, Austria (AP) - Tehran's chief nuclear negotiator
arranged a meeting with the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog
Friday as the agency prepared to release recommendations on
withdrawing technical aid for some nuclear projects run by Iran. 
The talks between Ali Larijani, Iran's senior nuclear envoy, and
Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief of the International Atomic Energy
Agency, were confirmed by an IAEA official who asked for
anonymity because he was not the agency's official spokesman. 

After his stopover in Vienna, Larijani was to meet with German
Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Javier Solana, the
EU's top foreign policy official, on the sidelines of a security
conference in Munich, Germany, said diplomats, who asked
anonymity for divulging confidential information. They said his
talks in both Vienna and Munich would likely focus on the
technical aid report. 

Iran insists it will not give up uranium enrichment, despite
U.N. sanctions for its refusal to do so, but has repeatedly said
it is open to a diplomatic solution in its standoff with the
international community. 

Larijani's meetings with Steinmeier and Solana would be the
first with senior Western officials since negotiations with
Solana collapsed last year over Tehran's refusal to suspend
enrichment, a potential pathway to nuclear arms. A European
official told The Associated Press, however, that there were no
indications Larijani was carrying new proposals that would lead
to renewed negotiations. 

The Vienna-based IAEA suspended aid to Iran last month in line
with Security Council sanctions calling for an end to assistance
for programs that could be misused to make an atomic weapon.

Diplomats back then emphasized that the freeze was temporary for
now and subject to review and approval by the 35-nation board of
the IAEA next month. 

The report, to be issued internally to board member, nations
will propose culling those programs from the full list that that
could serve non-peaceful nuclear aims. It is up to board members
to make the final decision. 

The agency's move to temporarily shelve some projects even
before a final decision by the board was interpreted by some
diplomats who deal with the Vienna-based IAEA as a victory for
the United States. 

Washington is the key critic of Tehran's refusal to suspend
uranium enrichment. While Tehran says it wants to develop an
enrichment program to generate energy, the Americans say the
Islamic republic is more interested in the program's other
application - creating the fissile core of nuclear warheads. 

Iran gets IAEA technical aid for more than 15 projects and
dozens more that also involve other countries. 

The United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany
all want Iran to mothball its enrichment program and have acted
as a group in trying to engage Tehran on the issue. But their
approaches and priorities have differed over the past year -
resulting in often visible strains in what is meant to be a
joint initiative. 

Russian and Chinese reluctance to slap harsh sanctions on Tehran
- as initially demanded by Washington - have created the
greatest pressures. Both nations share economic and strategic
interests with Iran 

Differences over how severely to punish Tehran for its refusal
to suspend enrichment led to months of disputes before agreement
was reached in December on a Security Council resolution
imposing limited sanctions that fell short of the harsher
measures the Americans had pushed for. 

The sanctions include a review of technical aid to Iran -
programs meant to bolster the peaceful use of nuclear energy in
medicine, agriculture or power generation. 

In November, the board of the agency indefinitely suspended an
IAEA project that would have helped Iran put safety measures in
place for a heavy water reactor that, once completed, will
produce plutonium - like enriched uranium, a potential pathway
to nuclear arms. That decision, however, was relatively
straightforward, considering the Security Council had already
indirectly called for an end to construction of the reactor. 

In contrast, most of the projects up for review at the March
meeting are for programs that have less obvious potential
weapons applications. 

They include cancer therapy programs, nuclear safety projects
and requests for help in international nuclear licensing
procedures. 

The March meeting also will hear a separate report from
ElBaradei expected to confirm that Iran has expanded its
enrichment efforts instead of mothballing them - a development
that would empower the Security Council to impose stricter
sanctions. 

Diplomats earlier this week revealed that technicians had
assembled hundreds of centrifuges in series in an underground
facility near the central Iranian city of Natanz, in a further
step toward Tehran's stated goal of running 54,000 centrifuges
there that churn out enriched uranium. 	 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 5 Guardian Unlimited: Target Iran: US able to strike in the spring 

Despite denials, Pentagon plans for possible attack on nuclear
sites are well advanced 

Ewen MacAskill in Washington

Saturday February 10, 2007 The Guardian             

[F18 Hornet jet] 

A second battle group has been ordered to the Gulf and extra
missiles have already been sent out. Meanwhile oil is being
stockpiled. Photograph: Reuters
 

 US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an
advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush
administration, according to informed sources in Washington.

The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to
mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if
there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before
Mr Bush leaves office.

Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American
Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front
against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The
state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic
congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The
sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush
administration insists the military build-up is not offensive
but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic
concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect
nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional
expansion.
 			 		 			 			Article continues
Robert Gates, the new US defence secretary, said yesterday: "I 
don't know how many times the president, secretary [of state 
Condoleezza] Rice and I have had to repeat that we have no 
intention of attacking Iran."

But Vincent Cannistraro, a Washington-based intelligence
analyst, shared the sources' assessment that Pentagon planning
was well under way. "Planning is going on, in spite of public
disavowals by Gates. Targets have been selected. For a bombing
campaign against nuclear sites, it is quite advanced. The
military assets to carry this out are being put in place."

He added: "We are planning for war. It is incredibly dangerous."

Deployment

Mr Cannistraro, who worked for the CIA and the National Security
Council, stressed that no decision had been made.

Last month Mr Bush ordered a second battle group led by the
aircraft carrier USS John Stennis to the Gulf in support of the
USS Eisenhower. The USS Stennis is due to arrive within the next
10 days. Extra US Patriot missiles have been sent to the region,
as well as more minesweepers, in anticipation of Iranian
retaliatory action.

In another sign that preparations are under way, Mr Bush has
ordered oil reserves to be stockpiled.

The danger is that the build-up could spark an accidental war.
Iranian officials said on Thursday that they had tested missiles
capable of hitting warships in the Gulf.

Colonel Sam Gardiner, a former air force officer who has carried
out war games with Iran as the target, supported the view that
planning for an air strike was under way: "Gates said there is
no planning for war. We know this is not true. He possibly meant
there is no plan for an immediate strike. It was sloppy wording.
"All the moves being made over the last few weeks are consistent
with what you would do if you were going to do an air strike. We
have to throw away the notion the US could not do it because it
is too tied up in Iraq. It is an air operation."

One of the main driving forces behind war, apart from the
vice-president's office, is the AEI, headquarters of the
neo-conservatives. A member of the AEI coined the slogan "axis
of evil" that originally lumped Iran in with Iraq and North
Korea. Its influence on the White House appeared to be in
decline last year amid endless bad news from Iraq, for which it
had been a cheerleader. But in the face of opposition from
Congress, the Pentagon and state department, Mr Bush opted last
month for an AEI plan to send more troops to Iraq. Will he
support calls from within the AEI for a strike on Iran?

Josh Muravchik, a Middle East specialist at the AEI, is among
its most vocal supporters of such a strike.

"I do not think anyone in the US is talking about invasion. We
have been chastened by the experience of Iraq, even a hawk like
myself." But an air strike was another matter. The danger of
Iran having a nuclear weapon "is not just that it might use it
out of the blue but as a shield to do all sorts of mischief. I
do not believe there will be any way to stop this happening
other than physical force."

Mr Bush is part of the American generation that refuses to
forgive Iran for the 1979-81 hostage crisis. He leaves office in
January 2009 and has said repeatedly that he does not want a
legacy in which Iran has achieved superpower status in the
region and come close to acquiring a nuclear weapon capability.
The logic of this is that if diplomatic efforts fail to persuade
Iran to stop uranium enrichment then the only alternative left
is to turn to the military.

Mr Muravchik is intent on holding Mr Bush to his word: "The Bush
administration have said they would not allow Iran nuclear
weapons. That is either bullshit or they mean it as a clear
code: we will do it if we have to. I would rather believe it is
not hot air."

Other neo-cons elsewhere in Washington are opposed to an air
strike but advocate a different form of military action,
supporting Iranian armed groups, in particular the Mujahideen-e
Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a
terrorist organisation.

Raymond Tanter, founder of the Iran Policy Committee, which
includes former officials from the White House, state department
and intelligence services, is a leading advocate of support for
the MEK. If it comes to an air strike, he favours bunker-busting
bombs. "I believe the only way to get at the deeply buried sites
at Natanz and Arak is probably to use bunker-buster bombs, some
of which are nuclear tipped. I do not believe the US would do
that but it has sold them to Israel."

Opposition support

Another neo-conservative, Meyrav Wurmser, director of the centre
for Middle East policy at the Hudson Institute, also favours
supporting Iranian opposition groups. She is disappointed with
the response of the Bush administration so far to Iran and said
that if the aim of US policy after 9/11 was to make the Middle
East safer for the US, it was not working because the
administration had stopped at Iraq. "There is not enough
political will for a strike. There seems to be various notions
of what the policy should be."

In spite of the president's veto on negotiation with Tehran, the
state department has been involved since 2003 in back-channel
approaches and meetings involving Iranian officials and members
of the Bush administration or individuals close to it. But when
last year the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, sent a
letter as an overture, the state department dismissed it within
hours of its arrival.

Support for negotiations comes from centrist and liberal
thinktanks. Afshin Molavi, a fellow of the New America
Foundation, said: "To argue diplomacy has not worked is false
because it has not been tried. Post-90s and through to today,
when Iran has been ready to dance, the US refused, and when the
US has been ready to dance, Iran has refused. We are at a stage
where Iran is ready to walk across the dance floor and the US is
looking away."

He is worried about "a miscalculation that leads to an
accidental war".

The catalyst could be Iraq. The Pentagon said yesterday that it
had evidence - serial numbers of projectiles as well as
explosives - of Iraqi militants' weapons that had come from
Iran. In a further sign of the increased tension, Iran's main
nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, cancelled a visit to Munich
for what would have been the first formal meeting with his
western counterparts since last year.

If it does come to war, Mr Muravchik said Iran would retaliate,
but that on balance it would be worth it to stop a country that
he said had "Death to America" as its official slogan.

"We have to gird our loins and prepare to absorb the
counter-shock," he said.

War of words

"If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment 
of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond 
firmly" George Bush, in an interview with National Public Radio 
"The Iranians clearly believe that we are tied down in Iraq, that 
they have the initiative, that they are in position to press us 
in many ways. They are doing nothing to be constructive in Iraq 
at this point"

Robert Gates

"I think it's been pretty well-known that Iran is fishing in 
troubled waters"

Dick Cheney 

"It is absolutely parallel. They're using the same dance steps - 
demonise the bad guys, the pretext of diplomacy, keep out of 
negotiations, use proxies. It is Iraq redux" Philip Giraldi, a 
former CIA counter- terrorism specialist, in Vanity Fair, on 
echoes of the run-up to the war in Iraq "US policymakers and 
analysts know that the Iranian nation would not let an invasion 
go without a response. Enemies of the Islamic system fabricated 
various rumours about death and health to demoralise the Iranian 
nation, but they did not know that they are not dealing with only 
one person in Iran. They are facing a nation"

Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei
 
[UP] 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 6 AFP: Iranian nuclear negotiator to meet UN atomic agency chief -
     
Friday February 9, 11:27

By Michael Adler 

[Iranian technicians work at the Isfahan Uranium Conversion
Facilities]   

VIENNA (AFP) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani is to
meet in Vienna with the chief of the UN watchdog, Mohamed
ElBaradei.

Larijani is on his way to Munich for an international security
conference at which European countries will seek a breakthrough
in the crisis over Iran's nuclear programme, diplomats have told
AFP on Friday.

The spokesman said "this is the sort of meeting that occurs
regularly," as Larijani often consults with ElBaradei, head of
the International Atomic Energy (Advertisement)
 [Click Here] [ src=] Agency, which monitors Iran's compliance
with with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

ElBaradei proposed in January a "time-out" in the confrontation
over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Iran rejects a UN Security Council resolution of December 23
which imposed limited sanctions to force it to stop enriching
uranium. ElBaradei has proposed that in simultaneous moves Iran
should suspend enrichment and the United Nations should hold off
on sanctions.

A diplomat close to the IAEA said European states would be
seeking in Munich to use informal contacts with Larijani to get
Iran "to come up with some realistic, achievable proposals" to
meet the UN demands.

The uranium enrichment uses centrifuges to make fuel for
civilian nuclear reactors but can also be used to make material
for bombs. It is at the heart of US charges that Iran is hiding
work to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its programme is
peaceful.

A second diplomat said the best outcome, on the sidelines of the
Conference on Security Policy being held in the southern German
city from Friday to Sunday, would be for European Union powers
Britain, Germany and France, along with Russia and China to hold
a meeting with Iran.

"They might agree on some sort of framework or concept under
which the Iranians will pull the plug on centrifuges for a
couple of months" -- opening the door to wider talks including
the United States -- and for the Security Council to take "no
action for that period" on sanctions.

Moscow supports ElBaradei's "time-out" proposal.

But diplomacy in Munich could be stilled by the long shadow of
the United States, and perhaps hardline allies like Britain,
which reject such simultaneity and want any Iranian enrichment
pause to come first and be unconditional in order to keep Iran
from winning additional time to continue strategic fuel work.

US officials have pointed out that once Iran met its commitments
to stop such fuel work, the Security Council would suspend its
sanctions, as the resolution makes clear.

But diplomats said some European states were at least playing
with the idea of a face-saving solution along the lines of a
"time-out" that fudges the need for Iran to unconditionally
stand-down.

The Security Council could impose tougher sanctions if a report
by ElBaradei later this month shows Tehran continuing to defy
the Security Council, especially since Iran is pressing ahead
with building an underground plant at Natanz for
industrial-level uranium enrichment.

The Munich meeting gathers international leaders in a framework
that favours informal contacts.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela
Merkel, new US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and European Union
foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who led the EU's stalled
talks with Iran, will all be at the conference.

Non-proliferation analyst Mark Fitzpatrick, of the London think
tank the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said:
"Iran will be looking for a way to escape further sanctions" but
he said that what Larijani "has to offer will likely fall short
of the Security Council's resolution for a verified suspension."
 
AFP
*****************************************************************
 7 AFP: Iranian negotiator calls off Europe trip to discuss nuclear crisis 

 by Michael Adler Fri Feb 9, 1:04 PM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - Iran " /> Iran's top nuclear negotiator has called 
off a trip to Europe to discuss the crisis over his country's 
atomic ambitions as the UN nuclear watchdog prepared a report 
recommending cuts in technical aid to Iran. 

The envoy, Ali Larijani, was to have met International Atomic 
Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Mohamed ElBaradei before going on to a 
security conference in Munich, Germany attended by many top 
international leaders."
 
Iran's state news agency, IRNA, announced that Larijani's visit 
to the conference has been called off. "Dr Larijani's trip to 
Munich has been cancelled due to his illness," the agency quoted 
an informed source at the Iranian embassy in Germany as saying.
 
Larijani has previously postponed several trips and meetings to 
discuss the nuclear dispute.
 
Larijani was to meet ElBaradei as the UN agency chief sent out a 
report to the IAEA board of governors's 35 member states saying 
which of the 82 technical aid projects with Iran will be cut in 
line with UN sanctions.
 
Following a resolution passed by the UN Security Council on 
December 23, over Iran's refusal to halt uranium enrichment, the 
United States has been pressing for the 82 technical aid projects 
with Iran to be cut by half.
 
Enrichment uses centrifuges to make fuel for civilian nuclear 
reactors but can also produce atom bomb material. It is at the 
heart of US charges that Iran is hiding work to develop nuclear 
weapons.
 
Tehran insists its programme is peaceful.
 
Russian President Vladimir Putin " /> Vladimir Putin, Germany 
Chancellor Angela Merkel and new US Defence Secretary Robert 
Gates are among top officials expected at the Munich conference 
where, diplomats said, Europe was to make a new push to persuade 
Iran to fall in line with UN resolutions.
 
ElBaradei had in January proposed a "time-out" in the 
confrontation over Iran's nuclear ambitions.
 
Iran rejected the December UN resolution which imposed limited 
sanctions in a bid to force a halt in enrichment. ElBaradei has 
proposed that in simultaneous moves Iran should suspend 
enrichment and the United Nations " /> United Nationsshould hold 
off on sanctions.
 
The resolution also said nations should stop aid to Iran which 
might help it "make nuclear reactor fuel" or develop "nuclear 
weapons delivery systems."
 
ElBaradei was to issue another report on February 21 on Iranian 
enrichment work. This could lead to tougher UN sanctions if it 
shows Iran continuing to defy the Security Council.
 
Iran is pressing ahead with building an underground plant at 
Natanz in central Iran for industrial-level uranium enrichment.
 
Russia supports ElBaradei's "time-out" proposal.
 
The Munich meeting, which concentrates on informal contacts 
between top international leaders, would have been a rare chance 
to bring together all the protagonists in the diplomatic tussle.
 
EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, who led EU talks with 
Tehran is also to be in Tehran.
 
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 AFP: UN atomic agency almost halves aid to Iran 

 by Michael Adler Fri Feb 9, 3:10 PM ET 
		 	 
VIENNA (AFP) - The UN atomic watchdog agency has halted almost 
half its aid programmes to Iran " /> Iranas part of UN sanctions 
imposed to get Tehran to allay fears it seeks nuclear weapons, an 
IAEA report said. 

"It is a substantive measure ... as aid is a valuable instrument 
for Iran,&amp;quot; said a senior official close to the 
International Atomic Energy Agency."

The move comes as Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani was
heading, according to reports from Tehran, to a security
conference in Munich, Germany, after earlier reports had said he
was too ill to leave.
 
A diplomat close to the Vienna-based IAEA said European states
would in Munich urge Larijani to revive moribund diplomacy by
getting Iran "to come up with some realistic, achievable
proposals" to meet the UN demands.
 
Friday's IAEA report by its chief Mohamed ElBaradei comes ahead
of a meeting of the agency's 35-nation board of governors in
March that will review aid, as well as another report by
ElBaradei on whether Iran is honouring UN calls for it to
suspend sensitive nuclear fuel work.
 
The UN Security Council on December 23 imposed sanctions on Iran
for continuing to enrich uranium and called for cuts in the
IAEA's aid to the Iranian nuclear programme.
 
Out of 55 national and regional projects that the IAEA has with
Iran, 22, or 40 percent, were either totally or partially
frozen, said the confidential report, a copy of which was
obtained by AFP.
 
Though the measures have been taken the IAEA's board of
governors could alter them when it reviews the report in the
meeting in Vienna starting March 5.
 
But the official close to the IAEA said the agency's secretariat
was trying to comply with the UN's wish "to send a strong
message to Iran."
 
Tension is escalating over Iran's nuclear programme,
particularly its production of enriched uranium -- which can be
nuclear reactor fuel but also in highly refined form the
explosive core of atom bombs.
 
Iran says its programme is a peaceful effort to generate
nuclear-powered electricity but the United States says Tehran is
using this as a cover for secret development of atomic weapons.
 
The United States had called for a strict interpretation of the
Security Council's resolution on Iran and cuts of up to 50
percent of the aid programmes, according to a US briefing paper
distributed at IAEA headquarters here and read to AFP.
 
There was no immediate US reaction to the report.
 
A US official in Vienna said merely that the United States would
consult with European powers Britain, Germany and France and
other members on the IAEA board "to formulate US policy
regarding the resolution's impact on IAEA technical cooperation
with Iran."
 
In a sign of possible conflict, a non-aligned diplomat close to
the IAEA said that "political interference in aid programmes is
not something developing nations will look at positively."
 
The Security Council resolution said states should stop aid to
Iran which might help it "make nuclear reactor fuel" or develop
"nuclear weapon delivery systems."
 
The resolution says "technical cooperation provided to Iran by
the IAEA ... shall only be for food, agricultural, medical,
safety or other humanitarian purposes."
 
A key role of the IAEA, besides its verification mission, is to
promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy. 

The IAEA in January halted some of its technical aid to Iran
following the adoption of the UN resolution. 

And in November last year, the IAEA rejected Tehran's request
for technical help in building a heavy-water reactor in Arak
that the West fears could provide plutonium, also a possible
nuclear weapons material. 

Examples from the IAEA report show approval of a project to help
Iran "prepare therapeutic sources . . . and radiopharmaceuticals
for cancer treatment," saying this was "entirely for medical
purposes." 

But the agency said no to a project "to strengthen ...
capabilities ... for provision of safe and reliable nuclear
power generation capacities," saying this was outside what is
allowed in the UN resolution. 

There was no question, however, of blocking IAEA aid to Iran's
construction of its first nuclear reactor in Bushehr, a project
for which Iranian ally and key trading partner Russia has a
billion-dollar contract, as the UN resolution said this project
was untouchable.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 9 Guardian Unlimited: Iran Nuclear Envoy Cancels IAEA Meeting 

From the Associated Press        

[UP] 

Friday February 9, 2007 4:31 PM
 	
By DAVID RISING Associated Press Writer 

MUNICH, Germany (AP) - Iran's top nuclear negotiator canceled
plans Friday to meet with the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog
and several Western officials in Europe, officials said Friday. 
Ali Larijani told organizers of a security conference in Munich
that he would not attend due to illness, conference organizer
Horst Teltschik said. 

Diplomats earlier said Larijani had planned to meet with
Germany's foreign minister and Javier Solana, the EU's top
foreign policy official, on the sidelines of the conference. The
meetings would have been the first with senior Western officials
since negotiations with Solana collapsed last year over Tehran's
refusal to suspend enrichment, a potential pathway to nuclear
arms. 

``The official explanation is that he got sick,'' Teltschik told
The Associated Press, adding that he does not expect anybody
else from Iran to attend in Larijani's place. ``It's not so easy
to replace Larijani; he has a key role in Iran.'' 

An official at the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy
Agency also said Larijani had canceled his trip to Europe.
Larijani had been expected to meet with IAEA chief Mohamed
ElBaradei during a stopover Friday in Vienna. The official spoke
on condition of anonymity because he was not the agency's
authorized spokesman. 

There was no immediate comment from Tehran. 

The IAEA was preparing to release recommendations Friday on
withdrawing technical aid for some nuclear projects run by Iran.
Diplomats had said Larijani talk with Vienna and Munich were to
have focused on the technical support. 
for its refusal to do so. 

The IAEA suspended aid to Iran last month in line with Security
Council sanctions calling for an end to assistance for programs
that could be misused to make an atomic weapon. Diplomats back
then emphasized that the freeze was temporary and subject to
review and approval by the 35-nation board of the IAEA next
month. 

While Iran says it wants to develop an enrichment program to
generate energy, the U.S. says the Islamic republic is more
interested in the program's other application - creating the
fissile core of nuclear warheads. 

Iran gets IAEA technical aid for more than 15 projects and
dozens more that also involve other countries. The programs are
meant to bolster the peaceful use of nuclear energy in medicine,
agriculture or power generation. 

---- 
Associated Press Writer George Jahn in Vienna, Austria,
contributed to this story. 	 
		 	 	   
    Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 10 Korea Herald: China proposal boosts optimism at nuclear talks   
        
From news reports 

BEIJING - China has proposed establishing five working groups
within the six-nation nuclear disarmament talks to oversee North
Korea's denuclearization process, sources said yesterday. 

The proposal is part of a draft agreement to be announced at the
end of this week's open-ended six-party talks. This week's
round, the first since December, opened on Thursday. 

One of the proposed working groups would deal with normalization
of ties between the U.S. and North Korea, the main protagonists
in the nuclear dispute that erupted in late 2002, said one
source, speaking on condition of anonymity. 

The Chinese proposal also calls for North Korea and Japan to
begin negotiations for formal diplomatic relations, according to
the source. 

Negotiators seeking to end North Korea's nuclear program
prepared to consider the Chinese proposal for Pyongyang to
freeze its key weapons-related facilities within two months in
exchange for aid. 

Hours after a new round of six-nation nuclear disarmament talks
opened in Beijing on Thursday, host China circulated the draft
statement. 

"Now that the draft statement has been presented, North Korea
and the U.S. are expected to start full-scale negotiations, and
rapid headway may be possible," said one source close to the
talks. 

North Korea and the U.S. are the two main protagonists in the
six-nation talks which also involve South Korea, Japan and
Russia. China has been hosting the talks since they started in
2003. 

With both Washington and Pyongyang supporting the need to revive
the Sept. 19 Joint Statement, the forecast appeared optimistic
for the members to draw out a tangible outcome. 

"This is just the first step. We would like to pick up the
pace," Christopher Hill said when asked about the Chinese
proposal distributed overnight to participants in the
negotiations in Beijing. 

The Joint Statement signed by the six parties in 2005 states
several principles of North Korea's denuclearization and the
corresponding economic, political, and diplomatic incentives. 

In Washington, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said she
was "cautiously optimistic" of progress towards ending that
regime's nuclear weapons program. 

Rice told a Senate hearing that preparatory talks, including
rare bilateral encounters between North Korean and U.S. envoys
in Berlin last month, had paved the way for resumed
implementation of a September 2005 denuclearization deal. 

"I think we are cautiously optimistic that there may be some
movement forward," she said after the first day of resumed
six-party negotiations in the Chinese capital. 

China's distribution of the draft underlined heightened hopes
for progress in this round of talks, the first since December. 

All delegates, including even North Koreans, were upbeat about
prospects for a breakthrough. 

The Chinese statement includes a proposal for North Korea to
freeze several nuclear-related facilities, including its only
operational 5-megawatt reactor and a radiochemical laboratory,
multiple sources said, requesting anonymity. 

The proposal also calls for North Korea to re-allow in outside
nuclear monitors in exchange for an unspecified amount of energy
aid from the five other countries involved in the talks, they
said. 

South Korea's chief negotiator Chun Young-woo was positive as
well. 

"There was a consensus that because the measures in the initial
phase only mean a starting phase in the process of complete
denuclearization, (the countries) need to move into the
denuclearization phase at the earliest date possible. 

"It's good as a basis for negotiations, but I don't want to
predict whether there will be smooth negotiations," Chun
Yung-woo told reporters as he left his hotel yesterday. He
declined to give any details of what the draft contained. 

North Korea's reaction to the Chinese proposal was unknown but
its chief nuclear envoy, Kim Kye-gwan, said upon arrival in
Beijing on Thursday that progress would depend on whether the
U.S. stops its "hostile" policy toward Pyongyang. 

Resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue has added urgency
because of the communist country's first-ever nuclear weapons
test on Oct. 9. Western experts believe that the North has
enough fissile material to make up to 10 atomic bombs. 

The latest nuclear row spiked in late 2002 when U.S. officials
accused North Korea of having a secret uranium-based weapons
program, in addition to its acknowledged plutonium-based one, a
claim denied by the North. 

The U.S. subsequently halted promised fuel oil shipments to the
North. Pyongyang responded by expelling U.N. nuclear monitors
and withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty. 

2007.02.10
*****************************************************************
 11 Korea: Digital Chosunilbo: N.Korea Is Close to Achieving Its 1956 Action Plan 
 
  >     Updated Feb.9,2007 12:41 KST   
 
Hopes of Nuclear Freeze as Six-Party Talks Resume Washington, 
Seoul 'Mulling Energy Aid for N.Korea' Seoul to Resume Rice Aid 
If N.Korea Freezes Nukes N.Korean Nuke Crisis Becoming a Chronic 
Disease Six-Party Talks Discuss Chinese Draft Accord N.Korea 
Could Switch Off Reactor Within Two Months 

Six-party talks resumed in Beijing on Thursday to resolve the
North Korean nuclear crisis. Nobody would oppose a genuine
resolution of the deadlock and the establishment of a
substantial and practical international peace framework for the
Korean Peninsula. 

But a careful look at the North Korean regime and its South
Korea and international policies gives rise to many concerns.

Foremost is a strategy for unifying the peninsula through the
communization of the South. Once the core knot in a chain of
knots is disentangled, the theory goes, the other knots are
easily untied. On April 28, 1956, three years after the
armistice, the North Korean Workers' Party at its third national
convention announced six stages for peaceful unification. It has
consistently pursued them over the past 50 years through Kim
Il-sung¡¯s and Kim Jong-il¡¯s orders and actions by its fifth
column in the South. The latest round of the six-nation talks
looks worryingly like an operation to untie the last knot and
nearly complete those stages. 

The six stages are: a unified government to be established in a
general election; turning the armistice into a firm peace by
minimizing armed forces and withdrawing U.S. forces from South
Korea and an end to the South Korea-U.S. mutual defense treaty;
¡°democratic principles¡± to be realized in the South for the
achievement of peaceful unification by guaranteeing freedom of
political action by political parties, social organizations and
individuals; boundaries to be removed to promote peaceful
unification; joint struggle against American imperialism and
enemies of peaceful unification; and an international agreement
to maintain peace in Korea and peaceful settlement of the Korean
question. This last stage calls for convening an international
conference with representatives of the two Koreas and Asian
countries. 

The regime has steadily been untying the six knots, particularly
in the last few years. Reports have it that the U.S. is prepared
to replace the armistice with a peace treaty, and that China
will propose an agreement to that end. The South Korean armed
forces are already being reduced. South Korea is taking back
wartime operational control of its forces, which could cause the
U.S. military to withdraw at any time. Once that happens, it
won¡¯t be difficult to end the Seoul-Washington mutual defense
treaty. The National Security Law is in tatters. North Korea and
its fifth column in the South have achieved quite a lot in their
struggle against ¡°American imperialism and the enemies of
peaceful unification.¡± It only remains to conclude an
international agreement for ¡°peaceful resolution of the Korean
question." 

The basic goal of the six-party talks is to completely dismantle
Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and nuclear development programs.
They must not end with an international agreement, the last knot
in the North's codes of action for communist unification,
without achieving their basic goal. If they do, history may
judge them as having brought calamity upon the Korean Peninsula. 
The column was contributed by Song Dae-sung, a chief researcher
at the Sejong Institute. 
*****************************************************************
 12 UPI: China offers draft in North Korea talks

	
     United Press International - News. Analysis. 

Published: Feb. 9, 2007 at 7:04 AM
                        
BEIJING, Feb. 9 (UPI) --The Chinese delegation to the six-party 
talks on North Korea's nuclear weapons program in Beijing has put 
forth a draft document calling for denuclearization.
 
The draft, which calls for North Korea to end all nuclear 
programs in exchange for international help with alternative 
energy sources, was being negotiated Friday, the second day of 
talks, Xinhua, China's official government-run news agency, 
reported.
 
"The Chinese delegation circulated a draft, but we haven't had
much discussion yet ... It's a process starting with discussion
and moving to the written form," said Christopher Hill, the
chief U.S. negotiator in the talks. 

"Surely we will have bilateral meetings with all other parties
discussing the draft. It will be a long day," said Hill. 

Chun Yung Woo, the chief envoy from North Korea, said the draft
creates a "not bad" foundation for the talks.
 
However, Japanese negotiator Kenichiro Sasae said Japan may have
a different view of the Chinese draft.
 
"China has its views while Japan has its own stance," Sasae
said. 

© Copyright 2007United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 13 Korea Times: China Proposes 5 Working Groups on N. Korean Denuclearization 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

China has proposed creating five working groups within the
six-nation nuclear disarmament talks to oversee North Korea's
denuclearization process, the Yonhap New Agency reported quoting
unidentified sources Friday.

 The proposal is part of a draft agreement to be announced at
the end of this week's open-ended six-party talks. This week's
round, the first since December, opened on Thursday.

 One of the proposed working groups would deal with
normalization of ties between the U.S. and North Korea, the main
protagonists in the nuclear dispute that erupted in late 2002,
Yonhap quoted one source as saying on condition of anonymity.

 The Chinese proposal also calls for North Korea and Japan to
begin negotiations for formal diplomatic relations, according to
the source. 

02-09-2007 11:58         
  
*****************************************************************
 14 Korea Times: N. Korea Wants Diplomatic Ties With Washington 

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation   

By Park Song-wu
 Korea Times Correspondent

 BEIJING _ A draft accord, circulated by China after resuming
the six-party talks on Thursday, reportedly contains the key
phrase: North Korea will shut down its nuclear facilities in
Yongbyon within 60 days in return for energy alternatives. 
Declining to confirm the report, however, a senior South Korean
official indicated on Friday that there might be another key
subject the North wants to include in the draft. 

``I think it is inappropriate to characterize the draft simply
as a nuclear freeze with energy aid,'' he said, referring to
initial steps to implement a 2005 deal under which the North
pledged to dismantle its nuclear programs in return for economic
and diplomatic benefits. 

As envoys were keeping quiet, the question of what else the
North wants to put into the draft needs to be identified from
what Kim Gye-gwan, Pyongyang's top envoy to the denuclearization
talks, told reporters upon arriving at Beijing on Thursday. 

``We are ready to discuss the initial steps, but whether the
United States will give up its hostile policy against us and
come out for mutual, peaceful co-existence will be the basis for
our judgment,'' he said. 

Even though it looks like just another cliche, what he
apparently made clear was that Washington's ``carrots,'' such as
energy, food and the lifting of sanctions, could not satisfy
Pyongyang. 

Two U.S. scholars recently said in a co-authored article for the
Nautilus Institute that Pyongyang's fundamental goal is to
improve its relations with Washington by using the six-party
framework. 

``Above all, it wants, and has pursued steadily since 1991, a
long-term, strategic relationship with the United States,'' said
John Lewis, a professor emeritus at Stanford University, and
Robert Carlin, a former U.S. State Department analyst who
participated in most of the U.S.-North Korea negotiations
between 1993 and 2000. 

A pro-Pyongyang newspaper in Japan also said on Friday that
North Korea wants the United States to make an ``irreversible''
decision to drop its hostile policy toward the Stalinist state. 

``The North holds the position that it can take corresponding
steps only after it confirms the United States takes the first
irreversible steps toward dropping the hostile policy," the
Chosun Sinbo reported. 

Technically, it is possible to dismantle the North's reactors
irreversibly. 

But political decisions can always be reversed. That is why
Pyongyang may want Washington to make a big political concession
during the initial stage of denuclearization so that it can gain
trust in the United States. 

The concession could include replacing the 1953 armistice with a
peace treaty, as U.S. President George W. Bush indicated during
his summit with President Roh Moo-hyun in Vietnam late last
year. Pyongyang may also want Washington to erase its name from
the list of state sponsors of terrorism. 

But a lingering question is whether the North will really decide
to give up its nuclear programs that have served as a lifeline
for the country. 

02-09-2007 17:43
*****************************************************************
 15 AFP: Oil, sanctions, terrorism on the table in NKorea nuke talks -
     
 by Karl Malakunas Fri Feb 9, 6:25 AM ET 
		 	 
BEIJING (AFP) - North Korea " /> wants lots of oil, a lifting of 
US sanctions and removal from a US terrorist list in return for 
taking first steps towards ending its nuclear weapons programme, 
analysts and press reports said. 

 's Yonhap news agency, citing unidentified but multiple sources, 
reported the draft involved North Korea committing to freeze or 
shut down its five-megawatt nuclear reactor at Yongbyon and a 
radiochemical laboratory.
 
It would also have to freeze spent nuclear fuel reprocessing
facilities in Yongbyon, as well as stop construction of two
other nuclear reactors -- one of 50 megawatts in Yongbyon and
another 200-megawatt plant in Taechon.
 
In return, the five other countries in the six-nation talks
should jointly finance the supply of "alternative energy
sources" to North Korea, according to Yonhap.
 
Although the report made no clear-cut reference to the type of
energy to be provided, long-time observers of the six-party
process said the potential deal likely included the supply of at
least 500,000 tonnes of oil.
 
In a report, Scott Snyder, a senior associate at US-based The
Asia Foundation, said the 500,000 tonnes of oil was a key part
of the negotiating deal for North Korea.
 
Already one of the world's poorest and most isolated countries,
United Nations
" /> sanctions imposed on North Korea after its first-ever
atomic test on October 9 last year cut it off even further from
the global economy.
 
Snyder said North Korea would also want to see at least a
partial lifting of unrelated US financial sanctions imposed
against it last year for alleged money laundering and
counterfeiting.
 
North Korea has repeatedly insisted that the sanctions issue --
which has seen 24 million dollars frozen in a Macau bank -- must
be resolved before it agrees to move forward on disarmament.
 
Snyder said North Korea would also want to be taken off a US
list of state sponsors of terrorism.
 
Chief North Korean nuclear negotiator Kim Kye-Gwan made it clear
when he arrived in Beijing for the six-party talks on Thursday
that it was up to the United States to make concessions if
progress was to be made.
 
"We are ready to discuss the initial steps, but whether the US
will give up its hostile policy against us and come out for
mutual, peaceful co-existence will be the basis for our
judgement," Kim told reporters.
 
The six-party talks involve China, the two Koreas, the United
States, Japan and Russia.
 
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 AFP: NKorea says ready for deal on nuclear weapons 

 by Jun Kwanwoo and Shigemi Sato Fri Feb 9, 7:20 AM ET 
		 	 
BEIJING (AFP) - North Korea " /> has said it was ready for 
compromise as envoys from six nations worked on a draft accord 
that could see the regime taking the first steps towards ending 
its nuclear weapons drive. 

 said she was "cautiously optimistic" about the prospects for 
progress.
 
Rice said preparatory negotiations, including rare direct
meetings between Hill and Kim in Berlin last month, had paved
the way for the September 2005 deal to be revived.
 
"I think we are cautiously optimistic there may be some movement
forward," she said on Thursday in Washington.
 
However, Hill also cautioned Friday that the draft offered no
guarantee of progress at the forum, which involves China, the
two Koreas, the United States, Russia and Japan.
 
"There is a lot of work to do. Every time you get to a draft you
have to look at every word, every comma, to make sure about
things," he said.
 
South Korea
" /> 's Yonhap news agency, citing unidentified but multiple
sources, reported that the draft accord involved North Korea
committing to freeze its five-megawatt nuclear reactor at
Yongbyon and a radiochemical laboratory. 

It would also have to allow international nuclear inspectors
back into the country, and in return would receive an
unspecified amount of energy aid from the five other countries
involved in the talks, Yonhap said. 

Scott Snyder, a senior associate at US-based The Asia
Foundation, said the first phase of the deal under negotiation
would see North Korea freeze its Yongbyon reactor and allow
inspectors to return in exchange for at least 500,000 tonnes of
oil. 

North Korea would also want to see at least a partial lifting of
the US financial sanctions, which have led to 24 million dollars
being frozen in a Macau bank, he said. 

South Korea's chief envoy, Chun Yung-Woo, said on Friday the 
draft accord contained concrete measures to begin implementing 
the 2005 agreement and that it formed a good basis for 
consultations between the six nations. 

"But I do not want to recklessly predict at the moment whether
it will be a smooth consultation process," Chun said.
 	 		 			
Copyright © 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 17 Times of India: NPT framework broadened by N-deal - US-

[ 9 Feb, 2007 0957hrs ISTPTI ]

WASHINGTON: The United States has said that it has broadened the
non-proliferation regime by bringing India inside it through the
Indo-US nuclear deal. 

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday told the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee that even the IAEA believed that
with the Indo-US nuclear deal, India had come inside the
non-proliferation framework. 

"Just on the India point, because I think it's a very important
point, many people, including Mohamed El Baradei (the head of
the International Atomic Energy Agency), believed that by
finally dealing with the India anomaly, if you will, that we've
actually broadened the proliferation regime to put India inside
the non-proliferation regime," Rice remarked. 

She was responding to Senator Barack Obama who expressed concern
that the "structure" of non proliferation "may not sustain
itself over the long term" given the Indo-US nuclear pact and
that observers had claimed the NPT was "fraying" around the
edges. 

"Given the deal that was reached with India, I think there is
concern that the structure that had been in place may not
sustain itself over the long term if we don't make sure that
we're gathering up some sort of international consensus about
what the rules of the road are. I know that the administration
takes this seriously, but I don't think that there has been as
systematic an approach as I would like to see," Obama said. 

Responding to Obama's point on India being an "anomaly", Rice
said, "Well, I think that could be the case. But, of course,
there's a very specific circumstance of the India-Pakistan,
South Asia, context" and added that the "most likely problem"
would come from an "Iranian" nuclear weapon. 
  
Rice emphasised the non-proliferation credentials of the Bush 
administration and maintained it has been pursuing a number of 
elements that were outlined in a Presidential speech in 2004 and 
pointed to the success of counter-proliferation efforts, 
especially the busting of the nuclear components smuggling 
network run by disgraced Pakistani scientist A Q Khan.

"The non-proliferation side has been very important to us ever 
since the President gave, at the National Defense University in 
2004, a major non-proliferation speech. And we've been pursuing a 
number of the elements of that outline. Obviously, you do have to 
deal with the bad actors, Iran and North Korea. There's a 
counter-proliferation element of that,

Rice also pointed out that the administration was engaged as well 
on how to go about the central problem of the fuel cycle.

"There's a loophole in the NPT which says that countries can 
pursue civil nuclear power. And it doesn't say by what means" she 
pointed out, emphasising the issue with Iran and why it is that 
Teheran had to suspend enriching and reprocessing.

"So the President spoke to this problem and suggested that there 
should be some kind of international or fuel suppliers group that 
could provide fuel to countries that wish to pursue civil nuclear 
power without having the whole fuel cycle. We think that the 
Russian programme Bushehr in Iran is on exactly that model. When 
President Putin and President Bush were together very recently in 
Vietnam, they agreed to have talks about how Russia and the 
United States might move forward a strengthening of the 
non-proliferation regime based around issues of the fuel cycle," 
Rice told Senator Obama. 

Copyright ©2007Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved. For
*****************************************************************
 18 RIA Novosti: Russia should renew its nuclear arsenal

Opinion &analysis - 

09/ 02/ 2007                                  

MOSCOW. (Military commentator Alexander Bogatyryov for RIA
Novosti) - As everyone knows, the level of technical equipment
determines the army's combat readiness. Until now, Russia's
limited resources prevented it from overhauling military
equipment, most of which was developed over 20 years ago. 
However, the situation has been gradually improving, and
increased defense spending has largely facilitated Moscow's
efforts to supply its Armed Forces with modern weaponry and
equipment. 

Michael Maples, director of the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence
Agency, recently said the Russian Army's combat and
theater-level training is now at its highest since the break-up
of the Soviet Union. The United States is somewhat concerned
because the Russian Defense Ministry is focusing on rearmament,
modernization of available weapons and efforts to revive the
defense industry. This only proves that the Russian Armed Forces
have now started improving. 

On February 7, Russia's Deputy Prime Minister and Defense
Minister Sergei Ivanov addressed the State Duma, the lower house
of parliament, at the Government Hour and said his Ministry
would receive 821 billion rubles ($30.98 billion, or Euro 23.87
billion) in 2007. This is a great improvement on 2001, when
Russia's defense budget stood at just over 214 billion rubles
($8.08 billion, or Euro 6.22 billion). 

Russian defense spending still accounts for 3% of the country's
GDP. The Armed Forces are spending more on development, and this
trend will persist in the future. Such allocations, which
totaled about 44% of the defense budget in 2006, will increase
to 50% by 2011. Most of this money will be used to buy large
batches of weaponry and military equipment. 

The 2007 state defence order stipulates 300 billion rubles
($11.32 billion, or Euro 8.72 billion), of which over 144
billion rubles ($5.43 billion, or Euro 4.19 billion) will be
spent on the acquisition of new weapons. 

For instance, the Armed Forces are to buy 17 inter-continental
ballistic missiles, four spacecraft and four launch vehicles.
There are plans to re-equip one Strategic Air Command squadron,
six Air Force and helicopter squadrons, as well as seven tank
and 13 motorized-rifle battalions. 

There are also large allocations for purchasing, repairing and
upgrading telecommunications and troop-control systems,
artillery pieces and anti-tank guided missiles, airborne
infantry fighting vehicles and other motor vehicles. 

As for long-term prospects, the 2007-2015 State Armament
Program, due to receive almost 5,000 billion rubles ($188.68
billion, or Euro 145.35 billion), stipulates for a complete
re-equipment of Russia's strategic nuclear forces. The Defense
Ministry plans to commission 34 silo-based missile launchers and
command centers and 66 mobile Topol-M ICBM systems, as well as
to increase the number of strategic bombers. 

The Strategic Air Command is to operate a total of 50 Tupolev
Tu-160 Blackjack and Tu-95 Bear missile carriers. 

There are plans to build and commission up to eight Mk 955/955A
strategic missile submarines, to develop space-based
reconnaissance, telecommunications, data-relay, mapping,
surveying, early-warning and troop-control systems. 

It is intended to complete launch facilities for orbiting Angara
and Soyuz-2 rockets, to fully restore the early-warning radar
configuration, and to boost the Air Defense Force's combat
potential by 20%. 

The Russian Army is to fully re-equip 40 tank battalions, 97
motorized-rifle and 50 paratrooper battalions. Five missile
brigades are to receive state-of-the-art Iskander-M tactical
missile systems. Two multiple-launch rocket system (MLRS)
regiments are to get the revamped Uragan (Hurricane)-1M MLRSs. 

In addition, 116,000 motor vehicles will be purchased. 

The Navy is to receive 31 new warships. 

In all, about 45% of available Army and Navy military equipment
will be replaced under the new armament programme. 

The incipient Federal Agency for the Procurement of Weapons,
Military and Specialized Equipment and Material Resources is to
play an important part in this process. 

The reorganized Defense Industry Commission now oversees both
the Defense Ministry and Russia's defence industry with good
results. This concept has improved coordination between
military-equipment suppliers and their clients. 

Sergei Ivanov discussed military development and its prospects,
efforts to improve the combat-training system, and to enhance
the social security of military personnel and their families. He
also spoke on the Defense Ministry's interaction with different
public organizations. 

It is obvious that Russia's theoretical opponents are worried
about its enhanced defense capability, but this only confirms
the fact that Ivanov's statements are not a mere assertion. 

At the same time, it should be noted that Russia spends a lot on
defensive weapons and equipment in line with its military
doctrine. Consequently, the West should not fear Russia's
upgraded defence potential because this, rather than a reversion
to the Cold War, matches common security interests. 

But practical experience shows that some Western politicians
would like to see Russia as a theoretical rival, rather than a
strategic partner. 

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author
and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial
board. 

President Putin inspects Topol-M mobile ICBMs President Vladimir 
Putin said Thursday the deployment of mobile Topol-M 
intercontinental ballistic missile systems contributes a great 
deal to Russia's national security.   
    

© 2005 RIA Novosti   
*****************************************************************
 19 [NukeNet] Pelosi Warms to the Idea of Nuclear Power
 
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:16:00 -0800


<x-flowed>
NukeNet Anti-Nuclear Network (nukenet@energyjustice.net)



This is only one of several articles I've seen today that basically say the 
same thing.  I have been wary of Nancy Pelosi since she "promised" before 
the election that bush would NOT be impeached.  Now, it looks like she's 
getting ready to support new nukes.  PLEASE - letters and phone calls to 
her in abundance!!!  MoJo


<http://blog.nam.org/archives/2007/02/pelosi_warms_to.php>http://blog.nam.org/archives/2007/02/pelosi_warms_to.php


February 9, 2007




Pelosi Warms to the Idea of Nuclear Power

Yesterday's hearing at the House Science and Technology Committee on 
climate change and emissions caps covered well-trod territory, but a 
<http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2007/2007-02-08-10.asp>piece of 
interesting news appears to have slipped out. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, 
D-CA, is willing to consider nuclear energy as a source of more power 
generation.
Part of the response to climate change could be increased use of nuclear 
power, Pelosi said in response to a question from Representative W. Todd 
Aiken, a Missouri Republican.
The House speaker said she now has "a more open mind" about increasing 
nuclear power as part of a strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"We need to compare it to the alternatives … I think it has to be on the 
table," Pelosi said, adding that waste disposal "is the big challenge."

We haven't found a transcript of the exchange -- beware the ambiguity of 
ellipses! -- but from this and 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/09/washington/09warming.html>other reports, 
the Speaker's comments are promising, a tacit recognition that nuclear 
power must play a role in America's diversified energy future.
In 2005, Rep. Pelosi 
<http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Aug05/energypast.html>voted 
against the Energy Policy Act, which has since sparked a nuclear 
renaissance, blasting the measure with populist zeal: "Billions of dollars 
are going to the oil, gas, and nuclear industries and nothing is going to 
consumers paying more at the pump." With the responsibility of power, 
perhaps populism is giving way to practicality. If so, great. We look 
forward to bipartisan cooperation in Congress to address America's energy 
needs.
P.S. The Environmental News Service story 
<http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2007/2007-02-08-10.asp>linked above is 
quite good. It includes laudable comments from one committee member who 
recognizes the realities of a global economy:
"I'm skeptical that mandatory regulation of greenhouse gases is the best 
solution to the problem of climate change," said Representative Ralph Hall, 
a Texas Republican and ranking member of the committee. "We can't figure 
out how to write a cap and trade bill that doesn't result in an immediate 
spike in natural gas."
Increased energy costs will drive businesses and jobs overseas, Hall said, 
where there "are no pollution controls, inevitably worsening global 
emissions."

Tagged: <http://technorati.com/tag/Global%20Warming>Global Warming , 
<http://technorati.com/tag/Nancy%20Pelosi>Nancy Pelosi , 
<http://technorati.com/tag/nuclear%20power>nuclear power , 
<http://technorati.com/tag/Ralph%20Hall>Ralph Hall
Posted by Carter Wood at February 9, 2007 3:30 PM


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"It is vital that our state understand that once PG&E and SCE are no longer 
generating electricity from Diablo Canyon and San Onofre, high-level 
radioactive waste will be left on our coast vulnerable to attack. No longer 
will it be a matter of 'We need the power so the risk is worth it.' The 
utility - the jobs, property taxes and donations to the community will be 
gone. Only the risk will remain for our children and grandchildren." - 
Rochelle Becker, Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility

"The parachute used by George Herbert Walker Bush when his bomber was shot 
down over the Pacific in 1944 was 100% legal American "Marihuana." (hemp) 
George W. Bush was not born until 1946. Therefore, legal "Marihuana" has 
saved the lives of two US Presidents."
http://www.progressiveu.org/140827-marijuana-saved-george-bushs-life

Molly Johnson
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA 93451


Everyone is raving about 
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42297/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta>the 
all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscribe/Unsubscribe Here: http://www.energyjustice.net/nukenet/
Change your settings or access the archives at:
http://mail.energyjustice.net/mailman/listinfo/nukenet_energyjustice.net

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 20 ENS: Nuclear Regulator Vows to Streamline Industry Renaissance 

Environment News Service (ENS)
 
AmeriScan: February 8, 2007
 
WASHINGTON, DC, February 8, 2007 (ENS) - Nuclear Regulatory
Commission Chairman Dale Klein said today the NRC hopes "not be
to an impediment" to the licensing of new reactors that
utilities want to build in the coming decade. 

"I am a regulator and I cannot promote nuclear energy," Klein
said at the third Annual Platts Nuclear Energy Conference in
Washington, "but let me indulge in a bit of optimism. I do not
believe the NRC to be a bottleneck in the process." 

Describing his vision of standard applications and a strong
regulatory authority with set requirements, Klein said that the
NRC will strive to provide "the regulatory stability needed in
the uncertain first days of a rapidly expanding, technologically
complex and capital-intensive industrial sector." 

He also said he hopes to reduce the time necessary to process
new reactor applications. "We're still looking at ways to reduce
the review time required for early site permits and combined
operating licenses," he said, "with no compromise on safety." 

He predicted that the "pinch points" in the licensing process
are finding high quality components, hiring sufficient qualified
personnel and connecting substantial numbers of new plants to
the nation's electrical grid. 

He said the NRC and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are
working together to address issues associated with adding plants
to the nation's electrical grid to meet increasing demand for
electricity. 

Klein said the agency will make certain its rigorous inspection
program will "ensure the quality and authenticity" of the
components that go into new nuclear plants in the United States. 

Praising the work of Congress in keeping funding flowing to the
agency, Klein said the current proposed fiscal '08 budget will
allow the agency to keep dealing with industry growth. 

He said through the end of fiscal '08 the agency will hire about
600 more people to deal with "the graying workforce" at the
agency. 

He advised the nuclear industry to work at encouraging young
Americans to join the industry through financial incentives to
students. 

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2006. All Rights
Reserved. 
*****************************************************************
 21 APP.COM: Panel backs plant license renewal if conditions are met 

| Asbury Park Press Online

Back Issues:Friday, February 9, 2007
  	 	 
plant license renewal if conditions are met 

BY STAFF WRITER

Federal regulators should allow the Oyster Creek nuclear power
plant in Lacey to run for an additional 20 years, but only if
they require its operator to meet certain conditions, a federal
committee on nuclear safety said Thursday.

The recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards, a section of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
was outlined in a seven-page letter forwarded to the agency's
chairman.

It said the NRC should approve the 20-year license renewal
application submitted by plant operator AmerGen Energy Co.
because the company has demonstrated it could run Oyster Creek
"without undue risk to the health and safety of the public."

But the recommendation came with a caveat. Before entering the
renewal period, AmerGen would need to conduct two studies and
agree to step up its program to detect corrosion of a key
radiation barrier known as the drywell liner.

AmerGen would be willing to meet all the conditions recommended
by the advisory committee, said Rachelle Benson, a spokeswoman
for Oyster Creek.

One condition would require AmerGen to analyze the liner using a
three-dimensional computer model and the results of thickness
measurements taken in October, creating what should be the most
accurate picture ever taken of the 100-foot tall steel structure.

Plant critics and regulators are concerned that the liner could
buckle if the metal becomes thinner due to additional corrosion.
A water leak caused the exterior to rust and lose some of its
width between 1988 and 1992. The leak comes from above the liner
every two years, when the plant is refueled.

Shaped like a light bulb with its stem pointed up, the liner
surrounds the reactor vessel, where atoms are split to make
heat. During a serious accident, the liner would contain highly
pressurized and radioactive steam.

Richard Webster, a lawyer representing six advocacy groups
opposed to the renewal, has told regulators that the liner is
already thinner than what's required in some areas and said he
is waiting to hear how AmerGen will conduct the modeling.

"That's when we'll know whether they meet the requirement or
not," he said.

The other study imposed as a condition would require AmerGen to
look at fixing or reducing the ongoing water leak that caused
the liner to rust in the first place.

Committee members also recommended that AmerGen inspect and
measure the entire liner every four years, a greater frequency
than what's proposed by NRC now.

Recommendations from the committee of nuclear experts and
engineers will be weighed alongside evaluations made by NRC
staff. A final decision on the renewal could come in May but
would be postponed until at least January if the agency grants a
special hearing requested by state environmental officials.

The committee reached its conclusion after hearing about 16
hours of testimony from agency staff, AmerGen and Webster over
three days at NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md.

Benson said the committee's letter "strengthens what we've been
saying all along" about the liner being able to perform its
designed function and about the plant being able to operate
safely for another 20 years.

Oyster Creek would become the nation's first commercial nuclear
plant to run for more than 40 years if the NRC approves the
renewal. Without it, Oyster Creek would close when its initial
license expires in April 2009.
 
  Copyright © 2007 Asbury Park Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 22 Vermont Guardian: Powers clean with nuclear green

By Shay Totten | Vermont Guardian
 
Posted February 9, 2007
 
Two years ago, Vermont Yankee acquiesced to handing over more
than $25 million to the state to establish a fund that would
help support the development of renewable energy in Vermont.
 
In exchange, it got the support of state officials to back its
plan to produce more power than the plant was originally
designed to produce, and the support of legislators to begin
storing some of its spent nuclear fuel in cement dry casks on
site.
 
To date, nearly $7 million has been deposited into the fund 
first with two lump sums of $2 and $2.5 million aimed at
protecting ratepayers if Vermont Yankee shuts down due to its
uprate status, and then bolstered by quarterly payments of
$625,000. Of that, about $1.3 million was spent on some
renewable energy projects last year, by order of the
Legislature, and another $2.5 million was given to utilities who
had to buy power on the spot market when a fire at Vermont
Yankee took the plant offline for a period of time. There is
currently about $3 million in the fund, with Vermont Yankee
expected to replenish the ratepayer money this spring. 

Now, a group of public and private officials are trying to
figure out how best to spend the rest of the money between this
year and 2012, when money stops going into the fund, and what
kind of projects it should support.
 
According to a draft report of this working group, obtained by
the Vermont Guardian, little changes have been made since a
thumbnail sketch was issued by the Department of Public Service
(DPS) more than a year ago.
 
This has rankled, and exasperated, some proponents of expanding
the amount of renewable energy that makes up the states mix of
power sources before VYs license expires in 2012, and a series
of contracts begin to expire with Canadian power giant
Hydro-Quebec. These sources represent the equivalent of
two-thirds of the states power needs.
 
State officials, however, contend the report is being heavily
revised and will be much more detailed within the month. In
fact, the group meets this week  on Thursday  in what some hope
will be a final working session before polishing up the draft.
 
Several members contacted by the Guardian, as well as one key
lawmaker, believe that having a part of the fund targeted for
revolving investments makes sense, especially since the $25
million investment stops in 2012.
 
I know there are some who wanted us to take a little bigger
leap, said Rob Ide, director of energy efficiency at DPS. But,
we were going to be criticized either way  if we went too far or
not far enough. In this case, we erred on the side of
conservatism and the investment committee members providing more
depth to the ideas in the draft. The bottom line is that this is
a significant project and its important we get it right.
 
Last year, the Legislature earmarked $1.3 million in the fund to 
be used for a variety of projects: $500,000 to support 
small-scale wind and solar; $485,000 to support CowPower 
projects; $100,000 went to the Agriculture Agency for renewable 
energy development; $100,000 went to an assisted living project 
in Windham County; $65,000 went to DPS to defray administrative 
expenses; $50,000 was set aside for the upcoming public 
participation process; and $50,000 was used to help the 
University of Vermont and Middlebury College examine the 
construction of combined heat and power projects.
 
A similar, diverse approach is developing in the use of the fund.
 
There are many objectives to this fund, said Richard Sedano, a
former commissioner of the Public Service Department under Gov.
Howard Dean and director of the Montpelier-based Regulatory
Assistance Project, which consults with utilities throughout the
country.
 
We want to stimulate businesses in Vermont, and stimulate
interest among consumers to look for clean energy opportunities,
said Sedano. That includes helping people think about ways to
make new homes and buildings more energy efficient, and more
self sufficient in terms of energy use.
 
There a lot of reasons to encourage people to think differently
about their buildings, Sedano said. The whole concept of net
zero energy buildings is starting to get some currency and
people shouldnt be held to that kind of goal as a primary
objective but there is a lot of potential for people and
businesses to be energy producers, not just energy users.
 
Mark Sinclair, the former director of the Conservation Law
Foundation in Vermont and now with the Clean Energy Group in
Montpelier and a member of the funds investment committee, said
the biggest hurdle is figuring out how best to stretch a limited
amount of money.
 
There is an awful lot of activity by the states to drive
markets, and its pretty exciting  theres a lot more activity on
the state level than there is at the federal level and the
states are really experimenting with a lot of different
approaches, said Sinclair. 

Even though Vermont is coming later to the game than other
states, Sinclair believes that the approach outlined in the plan
 one that promotes a more entrepreneurial approach to funding
rather than straight incentives  can work.
 
The challenge is going to be figuring our what are the best ways
to get a big bang for the buck, said Sinclair. This is not a lot
of money and I think its smart to try and leverage it with other
investors. That may be a way of bringing a broad group of
stakeholders together.
 
Sinclair said the funds small size is not enough to meet the
demand from the market, or some lawmakers who believe the clock
is ticking.
 
The committee is aware that time is ticking and we cant sit on
this fund, but it makes sense to be clever and to figure out how
to use these funds, said Sinclair.
 
Other members believe there needs to be someone in place to
oversee the fund, rather than have it be tacked onto an existing
job title.
 
Treasurer Jeb Spaulding said the committee wants to hire an
executive director to oversee the fund, rather than leave it all
on the shoulders of the Department of Public Service, and other
state agencies.
 
I think we need someone running this who knows what they are
doing, and the fund isnt just one of the myriad of
responsibilities they have to do, said Spaulding. 

Spaulding said his office could possibly work on providing
grants, but loans and investments may need to flow through the
Vermont Economic Development Authority, which has the expertise
on staff to vet potential projects. 

More importantly, Spaulding noted, is that the committee is
struggling with ways to make portions of the fund perpetually
run through a revolving loan fund, or some form of venture
investment component.
 
Sen. Ginny Lyons, D-Chittenden, chairwoman of the Senate Natural
Resources and Energy Committee, said she is looking forward to
seeing the committees work. It is likely that the House and
Senate will hold a joint hearing on the fund in the coming
weeks, or when a public draft of the report is available.
 
Lyons said keeping part of the fund as a revolving loan fund,
combined with direct incentives and grants, were all part of the
legislative discussion when the fund was established.
 
All of those things are legitimate approaches, and the question
is where is the demand coming from, said Lyons. I think a lot of
folks are hoping that well see something tangible coming out of
this and not just more reports and planning, but funding some
actual projects.
 
  | | Northern Vermont: PO Box 335, Winooski, VT 05404 Southern 
Vermont: 139 Main Street, Suite 702, Brattleboro, VT 05301 
Contact: 802.861.4880 (ph) | 802.861.6388 (fax) | 877.231.5382 
(toll-free)

 ©2005 Vermont Guardian | 

Visit us: www.vermontguardian.com
 This document can be located online:
www.vermontguardian.com/local/022007/CleanPower.shtml
 
*****************************************************************
 23 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI ready to coop in Belarus N-plant 

  2007/02/09   
    
  12:54:42 È.Ù 

Ambassador to Belarus on Friday expressed Tehran's readiness to
explore cooperation in construction of a nuclear plant in the
country.
 
According to the Belarussian state-owned News Agency Belta,
Abdolhamid Fekri made the remarks at a news conference in Minsk
saying that the Islamic Republic of Iran will be ready to survey
cooperation in Belarus' nuclear plant, if it is asked.
 
He also noted that Belarus enjoys abundant scientific and
technological potentials to undertake the job itself. Fekri
underlined that the Islamic Republic of Iran develops nuclear
programs under the limitations of international regulations.
 
The Ambassador also referred to the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) reports on Iran's nuclear activities, saying that
the Agency has never reported any diversion in this respect.
 
Responding to question, he declared that Iran and Belarus will
create a joint bank structure in the future. Fekri called the
two sides' cooperation in the field of tourism as good.
 
M.H.Z   

  Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir     
*****************************************************************
 24 Asia Times: In Japan nuclear power moves to next level 

 Japanese nuclear power steams ahead

By Hisane Masaki 

TOKYO - Japan's New National Energy Strategy calling for 
increased use of nuclear power to generate electricity and, more 
controversially, the need to extract plutonium from spent nuclear 
fuel for future use to power reactors has run into trouble 
because of repeated accidents and mishaps at various plants. 

So it was considered something of a victory for nuclear power 
generation when the Mihama-3 reactor in Fukui prefecture in 
western Japan resumed full-scale commercial operation on 
Wednesday, two and a half years after it was shut down in the 
wake of the nation's deadliest accident at a nuclear power plant. 

The 826-megawatt pressurized-water reactor, owned by the Kansai 
Electric Power Co (KEPCO), was shut down in August 2004 after a 
steam pipe on the non-radioactive side of the plant ruptured, 
scalding 11 workers, five of whom died. 

After full-scale commercial operations were resumed at the 
reactor, KEPCO president Shosuke Mori posted a statement on the 
company website offering "heartfelt apologies" again to the 
victims of the accident and their families. He vowed never to let 
a similar accident happen again, saying, "Safeguarding safety is 
my own and my company's mission." 

KEPCO has 11 nuclear reactors, all of them in Fukui prefecture. 
It is dependent on nuclear power for about 60% of its electricity 
generation, the highest percentage among Japanese utilities. With 
the full resumption of operations at the Mihama-3, the capacity 
utilization rate of KEPCO's reactors for the current fiscal year 
ending March 31 will go up 1.8 percentage points to 77%. 

The accident was a prime example of why many Japanese harbor
reservations about the management of the country's extensive
network of nuclear power plants. The ruptured pipe had not been
inspected even once in the 28 years since the reactor was first
put into operation in 1976. The pipe had corroded from its
original thickness of 10 millimeters to 0.4mm, far below the
national standard of 4.7mm. 

In addition to replacing the ruptured carbon-steel pipe with one
made of more corrosion-resistant stainless steel, KEPCO took
measures to prevent a recurrence, including strengthening
management of the secondary cooling-water system and relocating
the headquarters of its nuclear-plant business from Osaka to
Mihama, a town of about 11,400 people. 

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, affiliated with the
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), approved the
utility's safety measures last March. Two months later, the
Fukui prefectural government and the Mihama town office gave
their official go-aheads for the utility to resume operations.
KEPCO confirmed the safety of the pipes at the reactor during a
test run in September and October. 

Some of the families of the accident victims opposed the
restart, saying it was too early. But KEPCO president Mori
visited the families of the five victims at the end of last year
to explain the necessity of resuming commercial operations.
After the meeting, KEPCO felt it had obtained the consent of the
bereaved families to resume operations, the firm said. 

Fukui prefectural police are still investigating the accident
for possible charges of professional negligence resulting in
bodily injury and death. Investigators are looking into whether
employees and others knew the pipe could rupture and, if so, who
was responsible for their management and supervising duties. 

A tarnished reputation
The Mihama-3 accident isn't the only incident that has tarnished
the reputation of Japan's nuclear-power industry, which is the
world's third-largest in terms of the number of plants in
operation. Japan's largest utility, Tokyo Electric Power Co
(TEPCO), recently admitted that it falsified data at its nuclear
plants for three decades in an attempt to pass compulsory
government inspections easily. TEPCO said it had discovered
falsifications of technical data on nearly 200 occasions from
1977 to 2002 at three nuclear plants and reported them as
requested. 

In December, METI ordered the company to review past data after
the company's discovery that cooling-water data had been
falsified at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant in Fukushima
prefecture in the late 1980s. The company also faked test
operations at its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear plant in Niigata
prefecture in 1992, when an emergency core cooling-system pump
failed during a government inspection. 

TEPCO came under fire after another safety-data cover-up scandal
in 2002, stirring public distrust of Japan's nuclear industry
and forcing the then chairman and the president of the company
to resign to take responsibility. 

Another key to the future of the nation's nuclear-energy program
is the fast-breeder reactor (FBR), which produces more fissile
material than it consumes. But the prototype FBR Monju in
Tsuruga, Fukui prefecture, has remained shut down since the
liquefied sodium used to cool the reactor core leaked and burned

in December 1995. The operator, then known as the Power Reactor 
and Nuclear Fuel Development (Donen), tried to cover up the 
extent of the accident.

It remains uncertain when Monju will resume full operations, 
although its current operator, the semi-governmental Japan Atomic 
Energy Agency, has been preparing Monju with an eye toward 
resuming full operations next year.

The Mihama-3 accident temporarily halted the utility's plans to



participate in Japan's "pluthermal" program, the next phase of 
the country's nuclear-power development. It involves the use of 
mixed uranium and plutonium ("mixed oxide" or MOX) fuel in 
civilian power-generating plants. ("Plutherma" refers to 
plutonium and "thermal", ie light-water reactors.)

KEPCO froze the pluthermal program at its Takahama nuclear power 
plant, but Mori has said, "We would like to reconsider it in a 
concrete manner after the safety operations of the Mihama-3 
reactor are confirmed." The program got the nod from the 
prefectural government in March 2004, but was put on ice because 
of the accident that August.

Japan imports almost all of its oil and is also the world's 
largest importer of liquefied natural gas, so the government 
attaches great importance to nuclear-power promotion as a key to 
ensuring national energy security. Its New National Energy 
Strategy, adopted last May, calls for, among other things, 
raising the percentage of nuclear power in the total national 
electricity supply from the current 30% to 40% or more by 2030.

The New National Energy Strategy also calls for establishing a 
closed nuclear-fuel cycle. That means the spent fuel is 
reprocessed to remove usable fissile material, which is then 
fabricated into mixed-oxide fuels and placed back in reactor to 
produce more electricity.

This new phase in Japan's nuclear program began last March when a 
nuclear-fuel-reprocessing plant run by Japan Nuclear Fuel in the 
Aomori prefecture village of Rokkasho in northern Japan started 
test operations to extract plutonium for the pluthermal 
power-generation project. The Rokkasho plant is scheduled to come 
into commercial operation this summer.

Government officials say the recycling of uranium resources via 
the nuclear-fuel-cycle program will contribute to the stability 
of energy supplies. According to plans prepared by 11 Japanese 
power companies, as much as 6.5 tons of plutonium will be burned 
annually at nuclear plants after the pluthermal power-generation 
project gets under way.

The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan plans to get 
pluthermal power generation under way at 16-18 power plants by 
the end of fiscal 2010. The companies have said they plan first 
to use plutonium produced overseas, such as in Britain and 
France, at the pluthermal plants and start burning domestically 
produced plutonium in 2012 or later.

But it remains to be seen whether Japanese power companies, 
facing a serious loss of public confidence in nuclear-plant 
safety in the wake of a spate of accidents, will be able to carry 
out their plans. According to one opinion poll, a majority of 
Japanese support the promotion of nuclear power generation while 
remaining concerned about safety at nuclear plants.

The Japanese government has approved several pluthermal programs. 
But so far only two of them, in addition to KEPCO, have managed 
to get the green light from local governments. Shikoku Electric 
Power Co won the approval of the Ehime prefectural government 
last October to generate electricity using MOX fuel at the 
Ikata-3 nuclear plant. In March, Kyushu Electric Power Co 
received local-government approval for a pluthermal program, in 
its case for the Genkai-3 reactor in Saga prefecture.

Meanwhile, Japan is revving up its drive to secure uranium abroad 
as global demand for nuclear power rises amid high oil and gas 
prices and growing environmental concerns. Major Japanese trading 
and energy firms are looking at multibillion-yen investments in 
uranium mine projects, while electronics conglomerate Toshiba 
Corp purchased Westinghouse, the US power-plant arm of British 
Nuclear Fuels, for about US$5.4 billion last February.

In anticipation of further growing demand for uranium, Sumitomo 
Corp and KEPCO invested in APPAK LLP, a subsidiary of 
Kazakhstan's state-run nuclear power company, Kazatomprom, in 
January last year to develop the West Mynkuduk mine. Sumitomo and 
KEPCO acquired stakes in APPAK LLP of 25% and 10%, respectively.

Uranium prices are climbing as energy-hungry China and India are 
stepping up construction of nuclear plants to power their 
high-flying economies, while some industrialized countries, 
including the US and Britain, are also thinking about building 
new plants after suspending construction after nuclear accidents 
at Three Mile Island near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in the US in 
1979 and Chernobyl, Ukraine, in 1986.

Nuclear-power generation has begun to come under the spotlight 
again because of growing environmental concerns as well as high 
prices for oil and gas. Nuclear power plants generate no carbon 
dioxide, the primary greenhouse gas widely blamed for global 
warming. Renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power 
are not available in sufficient amounts - or at affordable 
prices.

Hisane Masaki is a Tokyo-based journalist, commentator and 
scholar on international politics and economy. Masaki's e-mail 
address is yiu45535@nifty.com.

(Copyright 2007 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. 
Please
                                                                                                                                        
 Copyright 1999 - 2007 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd.                                                                                                                                                                         
Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street 
East, Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, 
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110                                                                                          
*****************************************************************
 25 Norway Post: Norway to consider nuclear energy
           
09.02.2007 08:06

Norway to consider nuclear energy The Norwegian government has 
decided to look into the possibility of using nuclear energy. A 
committe will consider the use of thorium rather than uranium.
 
Some of the world's largest deposits of thorium is found in
Norway. This is a material which is considered well suited for
the use in energy production, and safer than uranium. 

However, nuclear physicist Nils Boehmer of the environmental
organization Bellona says it will take at least 20-30 years to
develop a prototype of a thorium reactor. 

Also, he points out that for the next 50 years thorium faces
competition from cheap uranium on the world market. 

(NRK) 

Rolleiv Solholm



*****************************************************************
 26 Patriot Ledger: READERS VIEW: Threats to Pilgrim nuclear plant go unanswered

SouthofBoston.com 400 Crown Colony Drive P.O. Box 699159 Quincy, 
MA 02269-9159 (617) 786-7000
 
OPINION

By BRIAN F. SULLIVAN, FAA Special Agent (Retired)
New England Region, Plymouth
 
The Patriot Ledger has asked what we think of the governments
decision to put the burden of preventing an air attack on a
nuclear power plant on the U.S. military. My answer is that, as
far as our government is concerned, what difference does it make
what we think. The government has demonstrated that it isnt
going to listen to local concerns and is again failing in its
primary mission, which is to defend the American people.

It is going to do what it is going to do, regardless of the
facts or citizen input, and that is to support the position of
the nuclear power industry at all costs. This decision by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission is just one more example of the
kind of avoidance mentality that led to 9/11 and the devastation
caused by the failure of the levies in the aftermath of
Hurricane Katrina.

The 9/11 Commission has documented that targeting U.S. nuclear
facilities was in the terrorists playbook. Add to that that our
government has for years botched the development of nuclear
waste storage sites at Yucca Mountain in Nevada and Skull Valley
in Utah, and we have a recipe for disaster.

Little did towns like Plymouth know that 30 years after Pilgrim
was built, wed see the local woods used as a nuclear waste
storage facility, which is exactly what will happen when the
spent fuel rod pool at Pilgrim reaches full capacity within the
next few years.

Expecting that the military will be able to prevent an air
strike on the spent fuel rod pool at Pilgrim demonstrates the
same ‘‘lack of imagination condemned by the 9/11 Commission.
There simply isnt enough time for the good folks at the Otis
Air Force Base, or anywhere else, to react.

The tragedy is that our government just doesnt seem to care
about our concerns. While it has ‘‘fiddled and diddled with
the development of storage sites at Yucca Mountain and Skull
Valley, and catered to the whims of the nuclear power industry,
it has decided once again, in the tradition of 9/11 and Katrina,
to wait for a disaster to occur before considering effective
counter measures.

Copyright 2007 The Patriot Ledger
Transmitted Friday, February 09, 2007

The Patriot Ledger, 400 Crown Colony Drive P.O. Box 699159, 
Quincy, MA 02269-9159 Telephone: (617) 786-7000
*****************************************************************
 27 New London Day: State Won't Wait On Millstone Permit   

Stricter renewal moving forward despite possible EPA appeal of 
court ruling   
	     
  By Patricia Daddona Day Staff Writer, Millstone\/business 
trends E-mail: p.daddona@theday.com Phone No.: (860) 701 - 4324   
  
  Published on 2/8/2007 in Home Â»Business Â»Business Local   
  
Connecticut will not wait for the Environmental Protection
Agency to react to a federal court ruling on power plant fish
kills. Rather, it will proceed with plans to make Millstone
Power Station's water discharge permit more stringent than it is
now.

 The state Department of Environmental Protection is
rescheduling a hearing postponed Tuesday to consider renewing
Millstone's permit. The permit governs how water from Long
Island Sound is used to cool equipment in two nuclear reactors,
said DEP spokesman Dennis Schain.

 The new hearing date has not yet been set, he said, noting that
the postponement was for procedural reasons and not due to the
court case. 

The EPA is considering challenging a Jan. 25 ruling that could
alter the way 539 power plants, including nuclear reactors,
across the country avoid killing fish while cooling their energy
producing systems. The EPA has from 45 to 90 days to decide what
avenue of appeal it might take, said EPA spokesman Dale Kemery. 
Last month, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the
EPA to clarify or change its laws involving whether power plants
must stop fish kills by using the best technology available 
a step that could require an expensive technological overhaul at
many plants, including Millstone's two reactors.

 State Attorney General Richard Blumenthal had joined the
lawsuit lodged by Riverkeeper Inc. and several other
environmental groups, along with the states of Delaware, Rhode
Island, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York.

 If there is any change in the law, it would be up to Congress,
not EPA, to make such a change, Kemery added.

 The DEP is carefully reviewing the court case but intends to
proceed with the renewal process for Millstone's National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit, which originally
expired in 1997. Former DEP Commissioner Arthur J. Rocque Jr.
allowed Millstone to continue operating under an emergency
authorization.

 It may take some time for the court decision to be translated
into new federal regulations, Schain said. If we were to issue
a new permit that does not reflect new federal standards, we
would move to make necessary adjustments. But we believe
conditions we are seeking will yield environmental improvements
to protect the natural resources of Long Island Sound.

 At Millstone, the power plant takes in water from Long Island
Sound to cool steam used to generate electricity. The water
flows through a grate, which traps fish and other sea life alive
and returns them to the Sound by way of a vertical conveyor belt.

 The proposed permit, which DEP has tentatively approved,
incorporates new rules designed to reduce the death of winter
flounder larvae. A study by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
found the larvae were too small to be trapped by the screens
Millstone uses and instead died from the heat inside the power
plants.

 DEP has recommended protecting aquatic life by reducing the
amount of water Dominion may discharge by 20 percent per day. It
also calls for a 40 percent drop in water usage during the
spawning season for winter flounder, which typically runs from
early April until mid-May.

 Dominion has said that in order to comply, the plant would have
to slightly reduce its electricity output in the spring, but
that would not harm the power grid.

 A better technology than most power plants' cooling systems is
a closed system that would kill far fewer organisms because it
relies on less fresh water, the ruling states.

 The EPA must explain its conclusions regarding cost-benefit
analysis that determined the best technology available was too
expensive compared to the result, the ruling states.

 Requiring closed-cycle cooling could cost the industry upwards
of $2.26 billion and could close nine power plants, according
to the EPA, but the EPA failed to discuss whether the industry
could reasonably bear this burden, the ruling states.

 Millstone owner Dominion does not have a current estimate for
what it would cost to convert to a closed-cycle system, said
spokesman Pete Hyde.

 We have worked to address the concerns that the DEP brought
forward, and we're looking forward to a renewal of the permit,
Hyde said.   
  
  Privacy Policy  |  Contact Us at 1 (860) 442-2200  |  New
London, CT  |  Â© 1998-2007 The Day Publishing Co. 104   
*****************************************************************
 28 UPI: Nuclear loan guarantees unclear
     
  United Press International - Energy - Analysis: 

2/9/2007 6:49:00 PM -0500

 By BEN LANDO UPI Energy Correspondent

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 (UPI) -- The U.S. nuclear industry fears
proposed guidelines for new loan guarantees reduce the lure to
investors the 2005 Energy Policy Act intended, threatening the
much talked about expansion of nuclear power in the country. 

The Energy Department, given the task of issuing the guidelines,
says the Bush administration can't be considered a bear when it
comes to promoting nuclear power. 

"I don't think anybody can complain about our support for the
nuclear power industry," said department spokesman Craig
Stevens, rattling off a list of programs and incentives
initiated during Bush's tenure. 

"I cannot imagine an administration that is more a proponent of
nuclear energy than this administration," he said. 

To be sure, the first of dozens of new plant license
applications since the 1970s expected by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission have been helped by recent policies (along
with high and volatile prices for oil and natural gas and the
newly talked about threat of global climate change due to fossil
fuel emissions). 

Nuclear Power 2010 and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership are
two Bush programs. The Energy Policy Act, passed by Congress in
2005, included insurance for nuclear plants against licensing or
litigation delays, tax credits and loan guarantees. 

Any energy project that uses new technology to "avoid, reduce,
or sequester" greenhouse gas emissions is eligible for the loan
guarantees which "shall not exceed an amount equal to 80 percent
of the project cost of the facility that is the subject of the
guarantee," the Act states. 

Guidelines proposed in August by the Energy Department (after
vetting by the White House Office of Management and Budget)
authorize a guarantee of 80 percent of the debt of the project,
not 80 percent of the project's cost. And any loans outside of
those federally guaranteed take a backseat when it comes to
servicing. 

"You've got to have credit support for these projects from
somewhere," said Richard Myers, executive director for policy
development at the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's
trade group. 

The NRC is preparing for a slew of new license applications that
could be using new reactor technology not on the market yet. The
loan guarantees, among the other dangling carrots, are what
companies say they need to take on hurdles of expensive
projects, regulators and the powerful anti-nuclear community. 

"Our need is urgent" to secure the loan guarantee terms, Myers
said. "Unless a company has a clean line of sight" on the terms,
it will could just stop progress on a project even if had spent
millions already on licensing and ordering parts. 

The fiscal year 2007 budget, passed by the House last week,
authorizes about $7 million for an Energy Department office to
handle $4 billion in loan guarantees and gives it six months to
issue final guidelines. Bush's proposed 2008 budget increases
the office by $1.4 million. It also increases the amount of
loans guaranteed to $9 billion, though department and industry
officials aren't clear if the 2007 amount is folded into that
since it most likely won't be doled out until next fiscal year. 

Demand for electricity is growing fast. Plants built in states
that regulate their electricity market still have the benefit of
recovering costs with the backing of state regulators or
legislators, lowering the need for loan guarantees. 

But those built in other states must attract funding for the
project itself. 

The major nuclear companies in the country have market value
ranging from $4.8 billion to $40.4 billion, according to NEI
figures. 

Nuclear plants cost around $3 billion to $4 billion to build
which, Myers said, is a heavy load to carry for an industry of
companies with fairly low market values. 

"It really does impose stresses," Myers said. He compared
nuclear firms to ExxonMobil, with a $427.8 billion market
capacity, can more easily fund such costly projects. 

"It's absurd to expect these companies to take these types of
risk," Myers said. 

"The nuclear projects...just wouldn't be able to use this
program, wouldn't get financing and wouldn't move forward,"
Myers said. 

George Vanderheyden, senior vice president of Constellation
Generation Group and president of UniStar Nuclear, a joint
venture between Constellation Energy and Areva Inc, said steps
the Bush administration and Congress have taken to encourage
more nuclear power "is exactly the step down the right path." 

He added it is "hanging by a thread" with the Energy
Department's loan guarantee interpretation. "All the processes
have to add up to significant incentives for all the risks we're
going to take." 

If the thread breaks, Vanderheyden said, only the strongest
proposals will survive, most likely the ones to be built in the
regulated arena. He said the incentives could be temporary, but
needed to get the first few plants out the door. 

"It's got some elements that might work but there's some flaws
with it that I don't think will be enough to get the industry
moving in the right direction," said Paul Cutler, treasurer at
the FPL Group, an energy company that includes Florida Power
&Light Co. 

"The costs of these projects are obviously very large and the
risk is really in the construction period and getting to the
finish line and getting to the commercial operation." 

Stevens, the Energy Department spokesman, said nuclear is just
one of many energy sources that could access the loan
guarantees. But 80 percent of the debt taken out to build such
an expensive plant is a risk. 

"Loan guarantees are there because there is sufficient risk in
the technology and we recognize that we may have to pay this
back if there's a default," Stevens said. "We're going to be
wise stewards of the taxpayer's dollar, look at each project
with a fine tooth comb and ensure at least there's some sense
these loans will be paid back." 

(Comments to energy@upi.com)

 
© Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 29 Rutland Herald: Security strong at nuclear plants

Rutland Vermont News & Information
 	 	 	 	 	 
February 9, 2007 
  
The headline ("U.S.: Military should guard plants") on your Jan.
30 article may have left readers with the wrong impression of
the strong state of security at U.S. nuclear power plants.

Nuclear power plants are the nation's best-defended industrial
facilities, in no small part because plant owners recognize that
these facilities are vital to our nation's domestic energy
supply and protect them accordingly.

Since 2001, the industry has spent more than $1.5 billion on
improving commercial nuclear plant security. We have increased
the number of security officers by 60 percent to a total of
8,000 officers; increased the size and numbers of defensive
weapons systems; extended plant security perimeters; increased
the intensity of training, including "force-on-force" mock
terrorism drills.

With regard to potential aircraft attacks, the Electric Power
Research Institute in 2002 led a year-long, $1 million-plus
research effort involving some of the world's leading structural
engineering experts. Their sophisticated computer studies
modeled a fully fueled 767-400 aircraft striking nuclear plant
structures that house radioactive material. EPRI found that,
while these structures would obviously be damaged, their
formidable barriers of steel and steel-reinforced concrete would
fully protect these materials and prevent a release of radiation
to the environment. Details on these analyses can be found at
www.nei.org.

SCOTT PETERSON (Vice President, Nuclear Energy Institute) 
Washington, D.C.
   
© 2007 Rutland Herald
*****************************************************************
 30 New York Times: New York to Test Ways to Prevent Nuclear Terror - 
 
By ERIC LIPTONPublished: February 9, 2007 			 	 

WASHINGTON, Feb. 8 New York City is about to become a laboratory 
to test ways of strengthening the nation's defenses against a 
terror attack by a nuclear device or a radioactive dirty bomb.

Starting this spring, the Bush administration will assess new 
detection machines at a Staten Island port terminal that are 
designed to screen cargo and automatically distinguish between 
naturally occurring radiation and critical bomb-building 
ingredients.

 And later this year, the federal government plans to begin
setting up an elaborate network of radiation alarms at some
bridges, tunnels, roadways and waterways into New York, creating
a 50-mile circle around the city.

The effort, which could be expanded to other cities if proven
successful, is a major shift of focus for the Department of
Homeland Security. As it finishes installing the first
generation of radiation scanners at the nation’s ports and land
border crossings, the department is trying to find ways to stop
a plot that would use a weapon built within the United States. 

“How do you create deterrence against terrorism?” said Vayl S.
Oxford, director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, the
Homeland Security agency coordinating the work. “You complicate
the ability for the terrorist to do what they want.”

But even as the new campaign begins, some members of Congress
and antiterrorism experts are raising concerns that the
initiative, like previous Homeland Security programs, could
prove extraordinarily costly and provide few security gains.

“This is just total baloney,” said Tara O’Toole, a former
assistant secretary at the Department of Energy during the
Clinton administration, where she oversaw nuclear weapons safety
efforts. “They are forgetting that no matter what type of
engineering solution they try in good faith to come up with,
this is a thinking enemy and they will look for a way around it.”

While Homeland Security officials repeatedly declined to
estimate the costs of a nationwide detection system, agency
documents show they might spend more than a billion dollars on
the cargo-screening equipment alone.

 Local officials in New York are sparring with Homeland Security
over a plan to immediately transfer to local and state
authorities the burden of maintaining and operating the network
of detection machines when it is completed within several years.

“We are concerned they will put money forward for a piece of
hardware and then move to another project,” said Raymond W.
Kelly, New York City’s police commissioner. He added that while
the city supports the plan, he is not convinced that the
proposed detection network makes sense. “Whether or not it
works, whether or not it causes too many false alarms, which
causes a whole other set of problems, all of these things are
still to be determined,” he said.

Mr. Oxford said he is aware of the concerns about costs, which
is still the subject of negotiations, and the performance of the
new detection machines. But with a threat like a nuclear attack,
the country cannot afford to wait until all the details are
worked out, he said.

“Our philosophy is not to wait for perfection, because
perfection never comes,” he said.

The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, among the newest agencies
at Homeland Security, was established in April 2005, in response
to criticism that efforts to combat nuclear terrorism were too
disorganized.

The office focuses on blocking two types of plots: a nuclear
weapon or a dirty bomb. A nuclear attack by terrorists is
considered unlikely, because of the difficulty of obtaining the
required radioactive materials, such as highly enriched uranium.

The detonation of a dirty bomb is considered much more feasible.
It only requires dynamite or another conventional explosive to
detonate a widely available radioactive source — like the cesium
or cobalt in certain medical devices. The blast might cause
injuries or deaths, but the radioactive residue would cover a
two- to three-block area and not pose an immediate health
threat. Possible panic and economic disruption could be among
the most serious consequences, experts say. 

The Securing the Cities detection network, as the New York
experiment is called, is intended to stop a nuclear or
radiological threat as far away from a city as possible.
“Detecting it in the core of Manhattan is too late,” Mr. Oxford
said.

The network would most likely include truck inspection stations 
along highways approaching New York, which would be equipped with 
radiation detection devices, agency budget documents say. Devices 
might also be installed at highway tollbooths and at spots where 
rail, boat and subway traffic could be monitored.
Skip to next paragraph
Threats & Responses
Go to Complete Coverage ¯

The detection equipment, some of which would be mobile, would be 
electronically connected and monitored so if a suspicious vehicle 
passed one spot without being stopped, it might be intercepted 
after passing another detector.

Some New York agencies already have a limited supply of radiation 
detection equipment, but the new system would be much more 
extensive and go much further outside the city.

Mr. Kelly said that the city would, at least initially, use any 
new detection equipment to screen vehicles heading into Lower 
Manhattan. The project would complement a city program to install 
cameras, license plate readers and devices that can block vehicle 
traffic, creating a "ring of steel" around the financial 
district.

The actual design of the Homeland Security system and the 
protocols for how responses to alarms will be handled, are still 
being negotiated by federal officials and authorities in New York 
City, New Jersey, Connecticut and New York state.

Benn H. Tannenbaum, a physicist and nuclear terrorism expert at 
the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 
Washington, said the system would never create anything close to 
an impenetrable barrier, particularly for a nuclear bomb, since 
the required ingredients have low levels of radioactivity and can 
easily be shielded. But the project still might be worthwhile, he 
said. "If nothing else, it makes the terrorist think twice before 
they do something like this," he said.

Ms. O'Toole, the former Department of Energy official, pointed to 
Homeland Security's BioWatch program, set up in about 30 cities 
in 2003 to monitor the air for a possible biological attack.

The equipment was installed quickly, but there was no detailed 
plan in place for how to respond to positive alarms, which meant 
three weeks of confusion among Houston authorities in October 
2003, after tularemia, a naturally occurring pathogen, was 
discovered. "There is this disconnect between these grand schemes 
for technology and reality," Ms. O'Toole said.

Laura S. H. Holgate, vice president at the Nuclear Threat 
Initiative, a Washington-based research group, said the 
government should put far more energy into a global effort to 
prevent nuclear materials from getting into the hands of 
terrorists.

The testing planned on Staten Island at the New York Container 
Terminal is intended to police concerns about false alarms.

Three sets of new types of detection machines have been installed 
there. For the first time, such machines sound an alarm when 
something radioactive passes through, and simultaneously identify 
the radioactive isotope. That allows officials to distinguish 
between innocuous items that can emit low levels of radiation, 
such as granite or kitty litter, and real threats.

Officials at the Government Accountability Office and some 
members of Congress are concerned that Homeland Security is 
moving too quickly to buy the new machines. Initial tests have 
shown them to be not much more effective than existing machines 
that are a fraction of the cost.

"We know this system is going to be expensive," said Senator 
Joseph I. Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut and chairman 
of the Senate Homeland Security Committee. "We need to be sure it 
will perform as promised."
*****************************************************************
 31 [DU List] CNN Transcripts on DU From Tuesday's show
 
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:15:51 -0800


<x-flowed>

CNN - AMERICAN MORNING Transcripts on Depleted Uranium - Tuesday, February 
6th, 2007

<http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/06/ltm.02.html>http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/06/ltm.02.html 
**See below

O'BRIEN: Well, now to our AMERICAN MORNING special investigation on the 
fallout, if you will, from the use of depleted uranium in the war zone. It 
can cut through a foot of enemy armor and leave behind radioactive dust 
that some say is making vets sick.

AMERICAN MORNING's Greg Hunter joining us now with part two of the series.

Good morning, Greg.

GREG HUNTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Miles.

Depleted uranium, the controversial weapon and the radioactive dust it 
creates are at the center of a debate that just won't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTER (voice-over): Samala (ph), Iraq, spring 2003, Iraq, site of a fierce 
coalition offensive. Soldiers operating, sleeping, eating in areas that 
were hit by depleted uranium, or D.U.

For some soldiers it marked the beginning of another type of battle. These 
five National Guard veterans claim they got sick from serving there.

RAYMOND RAMOS, IRAQ WAR VETERAN: I just got to the point where I could not 
physically stand sometimes. The headaches were unbearable. I would get 
dizzy spells.

HUNTER: They report similar ailments: painful urination, headaches and 
joint pain. They say Army doctors blame their symptoms on posttraumatic 
stress.

We showed them a tape the Army made in 1995, a tape the Army never 
distributed. It warned of potential D.U. hazards. The Army's expert on D.U. 
training concedes some information contained on the tape is true. For 
instance, inhaling radioactive particles can be harmful.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Alpha is the least penetrating but is the most hazardous 
if it does get into the body.

HUNTER (on camera): So you're saying in part this is correct, but too much 
information?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It really doesn't provide any useful information to the 
soldier.

HUNTER (voice-over): These vets say they were never warned about D.U. 
They're suing the Army for what they say is knowingly exposing them to D.U. 
dust and failing to properly treat them.

ANTHONY YONNONE, IRAQ WAR VETERAN: They didn't furnish us with any of that 
information.

HUNTER (on camera): At all?

YONNONE: At all. HUNTER: Does it make you angry?

YONNONE: Absolutely.

HUNTER: Why?

YONNONE: Because here we are sick. We don't know why. The Army don't know 
why, and they're just calling us liars.

HUNTER (voice-over): The veterans' claims against the government may be 
barred by a statute that protects the military from lawsuits by soldiers. 
But a judge is permitting the soldiers' claims of malpractice to go forward.

DR. ASAF DURAKOVIC, URANIUM MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTER: I personally call it 
not so depleted uranium.

HUNTER: In the 1990s Dr. Asaf Durakovic studied D.U. health effects for the 
U.S. military. Now a private researcher, Durakovic says his own test of 
these veterans showed abnormally high levels of D.U. in their urine and 
that those levels pose a serious health threat.

DURAKOVIC: There is genetic change in chromosoma of the regions (ph) in the 
people who have been found positive with depleted uranium.

HUNTER: The military's overall health expert says tests on thousands of 
veterans from both Iraq wars have produced very few positive D.U. tests.

DR. MICHAEL KIRKPATRICK, DEFENSE DEPARTMENT HEALTH AFFAIRS: We are not 
seeing it in 74 individuals who are most heavily exposed, and that, I 
think, is really the golden standard if you take a look at people who had 
heavy exposure, internalization, some still having the depleted uranium in 
their bodies, still excreting very high levels in their urine, and their 
health appears at this point to be normal.

HUNTER: Some scientists and politicians claim the Army's testing is not 
sophisticated enough. Connecticut state representative Pat Dillon helped 
pass legislation allowing her state to do its own testing of National 
Guardsmen.

PAT DILLON, CONNECTICUT STATE REPRESENTATIVE: It's a heavy metal. It gets 
absorbed into your bones. So I don't think that the test that they're using 
is sensitive enough to find whether or not you've been contaminated.

HUNTER: The Army tells CNN its policy is to get every soldier training in 
depleted uranium and hazard protection. It also has an updated 
instructional video, produced in 2000.

We asked why these soldiers say not only did they not see the video, but 
they knew nothing about D.U. before going to Iraq.

COL. MARK MELANSON, WALTER REED ARMY MEDICAL CENTER: I'm not able to give 
you any statistics on who received training and who didn't receive 
training. I can just talk about the training that was provided and what the 
policy is.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HUNTER: Dr. Durakovic says one thing is for sure: a large part of Iraq is 
contaminated, particularly in the south where heavy tank battle took place. 
He calls it, quote, "a radiological sewer." The Army adamantly denies that.

O'BRIEN: When you go back and look at another war and another toxic agent, 
in that case Agent Orange in Vietnam. Veterans there had similar claims. 
Were sick because we were in contact with this Agent Orange. Ultimately, 
did they get claims from the military, and is that likely what's going to 
happen here?

HUNTER: Some did, but it took decades. And let me tell you, Agent Orange is 
tame compared to radiological dust that you can breathe into your lungs, 
stays in your body forever, has a half life of 4.5 billion years. This 
stuff stays around forever. So it is -- it is quite a controversy.

O'BRIEN: Keep us posted, Greg. Greg Hunter, thank you very much.

In just a little while, Sanjay Gupta will join us, and he'll explain a 
little bit more about the medical implications of contact to this depleted 
uranium -- Alina.


Sanjay, good morning. So first things first, what are the symptoms of D.U. 
poisoning?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: There's sort of short-term symptoms 
and longer-term symptoms, and, you know, this is a difficult thing. The 
jury is still out among many researchers in terms of what's causing when 
and at what time.

But if you look at some of the early things, you can get things like nausea 
and vomiting as your G.I. tract sort of reacts to the depleted uranium. 
Also, kidney problems potentially and skin lesions.

There have been some case reports that it could possibly cause irritability 
and behavioral changes, as well, but that's not really nailed down.

Longer term, it can get a little bit more complicated. You might develop 
things like an immune system damage. So you could actually suppress your 
white blood cells, those sort of -- those fighting cells of infection.

Lung cancer potentially as well, although, again, it's somewhat 
controversial studies. And potentially birth defects in the offspring of 
people who were exposed to depleted uranium, as well.

Alina, I should say -- I think as Greg pointed out as well, the depleted 
uranium and its potential link to Gulf War syndrome is one of the most 
controversial things probably that exists in medicine. A lot of people sort 
of focused on it. Probably not enough studies as of yet, still.

CHO: All right. So what about treatment? Is there any treatment for this?

GUPTA: Well, not really. I mean, first of all, it's very hard to know, for 
example, if someone has actually been exposed. You can test it in the 
blood. You can actually get some blood tests that will tell if you have 
higher levels of the particular isotope associated with depleted uranium, 
but for the most part you've got to let the thing sort of run out its course.

It can cause damage to cells, and if those cells actually turn into tumor 
cells, for example, you obviously have to treat the cancer or remove the 
tumor, but it's hard to treat symptoms of depleted uranium poisoning overall.

CHO: All right. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, live for us in Atlanta. Sanjay, thank you.

GUPTA: Thank you.


The 
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/nowyoucan/free_from_isp/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40565/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>all-new 
Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your 
Internet provider.
__._,_.___
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/message/607;_ylc=X3oDMTMyZm82cTBuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBG1zZ0lkAzYwNwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawN2dHBjBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTEEdHBjSWQDNjA3>Messages 
in this topic (1) 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJvNHBoY3Q1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBG1zZ0lkAzYwNwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNycGx5BHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?act=reply&messageNum=607>Reply 
(via web post) | 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlY2w1MGE0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE3MTAzNTk1MQ-->Start 
a new topic
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/messages;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZ25ydG1oBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA21zZ3MEc3RpbWUDMTE3MTAzNTk1MQ-->Messages 
| 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/links;_ylc=X3oDMTJmaTJsNDdmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2xpbmtzBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE->Links 

<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkZXFhNXZyBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2dmcARzdGltZQMxMTcxMDM1OTUx>e93fa8.jpg 

<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/join;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcWdzajNpBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3N0bmdzBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE->Change 
settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: 
<mailto:pandora-project-digest@yahoogroups.com?subject=Email Delivery: 
Digest>Switch delivery to Daily Digest | 
<mailto:pandora-project-traditional@yahoogroups.com?subject=Change Delivery 
Format: Traditional>Switch format to Traditional
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project;_ylc=X3oDMTJka29jN3JhBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA2hwZgRzdGltZQMxMTcxMDM1OTUx>Visit 
Your Group | <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use 
| <mailto:pandora-project-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=>Unsubscribe
Recent Activity
    *  1 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmNGlwbW8xBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE->New 
Members
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pandora-project;_ylc=X3oDMTJlajdibzd2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI5NjM0NjgEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1MDYwNjgyBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTE3MTAzNTk1MQ-->Visit 
Your Group
SPONSORED LINKS
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjdTFzbXZrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzEEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?t=ms&k=Pandora+bead&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=wAXA1kxZMgf9IL04PQkoCA>Pandora 
bead
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjdjQ4MTVlBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzIEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?t=ms&k=Government+software&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=NH9DtEIbCR2Q2atCOGKkOQ>Government 
software
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjNWVva2RnBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzMEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?t=ms&k=Government+contract&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=vX23NAY2e9TKg7zQMb7mXg>Government 
contract
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjOWE0ZnBhBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzQEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?t=ms&k=Pandora+jewelry&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=ZmZsuAb2o62bGOD8wdZqQw>Pandora 
jewelry
    * 
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads;_ylc=X3oDMTJjYnRianM4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BF9wAzUEZ3JwSWQDMjk2MzQ2OARncnBzcElkAzE3MDUwNjA2ODIEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNzEwMzU5NTE-?t=ms&k=Pandora&w1=Pandora+bead&w2=Government+software&w3=Government+contract&w4=Pandora+jewelry&w5=Pandora&c=5&s=102&g=2&.sig=Kece1JQymj-CtxPGo3Sbsw>Pandora 

Yahoo! Mail

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12is3h9j3/M=493064.9803214.10510208.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171043151/A=3848570/R=0/SIG=12j26nlu5/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42411/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/handraisers>Get 
it all!

With the all-new

Yahoo! Mail Beta
New web site?

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12irodf97/M=493064.9803227.10510220.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171043151/A=3848642/R=0/SIG=131eshi2t/*http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/srchv2.php?o=US2004&cmp=Yahoo&ctv=Groups3&s=Y&s2=&s3=&b=50>Drive 
traffic now.

Get your business

on Yahoo! search.
Y! GeoCities

<http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=12ihm1l2r/M=493064.9803219.10510212.8674578/D=groups/S=1705060682:NC/Y=YAHOO/EXP=1171043151/A=3848542/R=0/SIG=12ban20bv/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=42416/*http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/y360/?v=f>Share 
More

Create a blog, web

site, and more.
.
e93fca.jpg
__,_._,___  
</x-flowed>


Attachment Converted: e93fa8.jpg: 00000001,367cc3bd,00000000,00000000
Attachment Converted: e93fca.jpg: 00000001,367cc3be,00000000,00000000
*****************************************************************
 32 Guardian Unlimited: Two More in Britain Exposed to Isotope

From the Associated Press        
	 
[UP] 

Friday February 9, 2007 11:46 AM
 	
LONDON (AP) - Two more people have shown signs of low-level
exposure to polonium-210, the radioactive isotope that killed
former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko, British health
authorities said Thursday. 

The Health Protection Agency said one was a staff member at the
Sheraton Hotel in London's Park Lane and the second visited a
bar at London's Millennium Hotel on Nov. 1, the same day as
Litvinenko. 

Russian businessman Andrei Lugovoi, a former KGB agent, and
business associate Dimitri Kovtun met with Litvinenko at the
Millennium Hotel bar on the morning he fell ill. The hotel is
among a number of sites investigators found traces of the
radioactive isotope responsible for killing Litvinenko. 

Health officials said the two who tested as having been exposed
to the radioactive isotope were likely to face only a small risk
of long-term health effects. 

Of the 13 people who previously tested positive for
contamination since Litvinenko was poisoned, eight worked at the
Millennium Hotel. 

Litvinenko was a vocal Kremlin critic who accused Russian
authorities of being behind deadly 1999 apartment building
bombings that stoked support for a renewed offensive against
separatists in Chechnya. 

He died from polonium-210 poisoning in a London hospital Nov.
23, and in a deathbed statement accused President Vladimir Putin
of being behind his killing. 
		 	 	   
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 33 The Enquirer: Fernald radiation data to get review
 	 
Last Updated: 6:38 pm | Friday, February 9, 2007

Worker's daughter's petition may expand benefits eligibility 

BY PEGGY O'FARRELL | POFARRELL@ENQUIRER.COM

MASON - Sandra Baldridge's fight just entered Round 2.

A federal advisory board panel voted Thursday to get a second 
opinion from an independent consulting firm on the petition the 
Monroe woman filed seeking special compensation for thousands of 
people who used to work at the Fernald uranium foundry.

The board's vote came after health physicists with the National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health recommended
rejecting the petition.
						 
Baldridge, whose father worked at Fernald before dying of
cancer, wants former Fernald workers who developed cancers that
might be related to radiation declared a "special exposure
cohort."

The designation would mean there isn't enough evidence for NIOSH
scientists to perform so-called dose reconstructions, or
calculations showing how much radiation workers were exposed to.

NIOSH uses the calculations to determine whether former energy
workers' cancers were likely caused by the radiation they were
exposed to at Fernald or other nuclear sites.

If the calculations show radiation exposures probably caused
cancer, workers or their survivors are eligible for federal
compensation.

NIOSH said Thursday it had plenty of data to run the numbers on
the people who worked at the Crosby Township foundry.

But Baldridge disagreed, arguing federal scientists can't
determine radiation exposure at Fernald "with sufficient
accuracy."

Some of the data NIOSH bases its calculations on are from other
nuclear sites, she said. Some are based on inaccurate, and
sometimes falsified, information from National Lead of Ohio, the
company that managed Fernald on the Department of Energy's
behalf.

And none of NIOSH's calculations figure in the thorium Fernald
workers were exposed to, she said.

Thorium is a radioactive metal mixed with steel and other metals
to make very hard, lightweight and heat-resistant castings.

With the advisory board's vote, Sanford, Cohen and Associates, a
Virginia consulting firm that has contracted with the board,
will review Baldridge's petition, NIOSH's calculations and other
information from the U.S. Department of Energy and other sources.

After that, consultants will make a recommendation to the
advisory board on whether to approve the petition, said John
Mauro, a senior vice president with the company.

The company has reviewed several such petitions, Mauro said, and
questions are always raised about the accuracy of the
information used to determine workers' radiation exposure.

"It was all collected so many years ago, and the scientific
know-how has changed so much over the years," he said.

Baldridge said Thursday that she's happy with the board's action.

"That's what they needed to do. If they had voted today, it
would have been to agree with NIOSH's recommendation against our
petition," she said.
 					 					 					
Copyright © 1995-2007:   Use of this site signifies
*****************************************************************
 34 ABC4.com: Bishop not deciding on Divine Strake yet - 

February 9, 2007 - 10:34 PM                                                                                                                                              

It now appears the whole Divine Strake debate may end up being
decided in court. 

At least, that's according to Utah Congressman Rob Bishop. 

Governor Jon Huntsman, Congressman Jim Matheson and Senator
Orrin Hatch are all concerned about Divine Strake. But
Congressman Bishop's views have been a bit of mystery. 

Bishop is pretty firm, though, in his belief that ultimately
there will be Divine intervention in the courts. 

One lawsuit opposing Divine Strake has already been filed by a
Native American tribe in Nevada. 

Bishop told ABC 4, "You give me any major policy initiative in
this country that hasn't had somebody suing about it and I'll be
highly surprised. So yeah, I think it will happen." 

But when it comes to saying how he feels about Divine Strake,
Bishop isn't saying much. 

Bishop is well aware of the human costs Utahns paid in the wake
of earlier nuclear bomb tests in Nevada. 

But he also represents Utah's First Congressional District, the
one where Hill Air Force Base is. 

Bishop said, "If I were to make a decision on whether it's good
or bad or anything else right now without actually knowing what
the truth is, that's premature is the best way of saying
that.â€ 

Congressman Bishop says he will wait until all environmental
studies have been finished before taking a position on Divine
Strake.   
*****************************************************************
 35 Deseret News: Radiation facts get thumbs up

[deseretnews.com] 

Friday, February 9, 2007

By Lee Benson Deseret Morning News

I do not know an isotope from a rem. Let's get that clear right 
up front. I am not a physicist, scientist or Ph.D. I know way 
more about the infield fly rule than atoms and gamma rays.

       After quoting retired health physicist Blaine Howard
about the relative safety of the proposed Divine Strake blast in
Nevada, I heard from a lot of people who do know about such
things.

       It wasn't the first time. Over the past several years,
whenever I have quoted professionals who suggest that the
public's fear of things nuclear is often not grounded in
science, I typically receive a thumbs up from the scientific
community.

       Among the latest responses:

       • "Thanks again for enlightening us on the issue of
radiation. As a person who deals with P32 in experiments (the
best way to track the movements of DNA with gels) and X-rays in
patients, your willingness to cite sound reasoning is very
welcome." — John D. Kriesel, M.D.

       • "Blaine Howard is correct. In all these matters, one
has to be a little suspicious of the political objectives behind
some of the fear-mongers who prey on the public's trust." —
Darrell R. Fisher, Ph.D.

       • "While the press often exaggerates the effects of
radiation exposure, here is an article that gets it right." —
Wesley R. Van Pelt, Ph.D., CIH (Certified Industrial Hygienist),
CHP (Certified Health Physicist).

       • "Your article should calm irrational fears. It's also
interesting to note that ANY explosion will send radioactivity
into the air because all soil contains some natural
radioactivity." — Glenn Marshall, CHP.

       • "Congratulations for writing on Utah radiation after
interviewing a health physicist. I am a science reporter and
former secretary to the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board of India.
I have tried to allay the unfounded fears of the members of the
public who always believe that radiation is more harmful than
any other agent." — K.S. Parthasarathy, Ph.D. (Mubai, India).

       • "I agree with and endorse (Blaine Howard's) main
points. Thus agreeing makes me a member of a small minority.
Nevertheless I believe my credentials are such that my opinions
should carry at least a little weight. I received BS and MS
degrees from BYU in physics and mathematics. There followed four
years of nuclear physics research experience with the Air Force.

In 1967 I received a Ph.D. degree in nuclear physics from the
University of Utah. Thereafter I worked for 30 years at the Los
Alamos National Laboratory, specializing in measurements of
radioactive substances. After returning to live permanently
again in Utah after 43 years I was deeply disappointed (appalled
might be the better word) at how seriously undereducated with
respect to ionizing radiation most of the people in Utah are,
and how violently emotional some are in opposition to something
they seem to know very little. If I may say so, the attitude of
many who oppose nuclear anything (Divine Strake, storage of
nuclear waste, nuclear power and etc.) is roughly equivalent to
wanting to permanently close all the swimming pools of Utah
because people drowned because of careless lifeguards over fifty
years ago." — Jack Parker, Ph.D.
 
Lee Benson's column runs Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday. 
Please send e-mail to benson@desnews.comand faxes to 
801-237-2527.
       			  		 		 	 	 		
© 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
 36 Whitehaven News: Radioactive contamination on beach
 						
Published on 09/02/2007
 						 														 						
RADIOACTIVE contamination from Sellafield has been detected on 
Braystones beach following recently improved monitoring.
 
British Nuclear Group has reported in the Sellafield newsletter 
that: â€œa week of radiological monitoring was carried out at 
Braystones beach from Monday, January 29 to Fridaym February 2 
2007. The monitoring was in line with an Environment Agency 
statutory requirement. 

â€œAs a result of the monitoring we have removed three
contaminated items from the beach. These are being fully
analysed to determine their source.
 
â€œThe Environment Agency is aware of the finds. Two of the
finds are of minor significance and are below the limit of
detection specified by the Environment Agency. The third,
detected at a depth of approximately 15 centimetres, is of less
significance than the two minor finds for external contact but
of greater significance if inhaled or ingested. The chance of
this happening whilst on the beach is extremely small and the
overall health risk to a member of the public is of the order
one in a hundred million â€“ it is safe to be on the beach.â€
 
In the 1980s there was outcry after a beach ban was introduced
because of contamination of the beaches around Sellafield.
 
Dr Rex Strong, head of strategy and standards, said: â€œIt is
important we put this find into context to reassure people. We
are talking about something the size of a grain of sand around
six inches below the surface of the beach and the chance of a
person coming into contact with this is tiny. This has been
discovered due to newer and more sensitive equipment and the
results will allow us to develop a new programme of
monitoring.â€ 

*****************************************************************
 37 Ventura County Star: Health aid expanded for lab workers 

Simi Valley

Illnesses linked to exposure may be covered

By Teresa Rochester, trochester@VenturaCountyStar.com

February 9, 2007

A year before her father died of Parkinson's disease at the age
of 74, Susan Hartzler filed a claim with the U.S. Department of
Labor, seeking compensation for his health ailments, which
included peripheral neuropathy. 

Richard Hartzler worked for 40 years at the Santa Susana Field 
Laboratory in the hills of south of Simi Valley. As director of 
facilities, he was called to the hill whenever there was an 
incident. 
		
 His daughter believes that his work led to his to illnesses.
She filed a claim through the Energy Employees Occupational
Illness Compensation Program, which covers workers diagnosed
with cancers and illnesses caused by exposure to radiation,
beryllium or silica while working for the Department of Energy,
a DOE contractor or subcontractor. 

The claim was denied. 

But nobody told Hartzler that her father might have qualified
under another branch of the program that covers those made ill
as a result of occupational exposure to any toxic substances at
DOE facilities. 

"I was very angry when I got back the notice he didn't qualify,"
Hartzler said, adding that she was surprised to learn about the
other part of the program. "I never heard about it. I was like
‘What?'" 

Hartzler was part of a standing-room-only crowd at the Best
Western Posada Royale Hotel &Suites in Simi Valley on Thursday
afternoon, attending one of two town hall meetings about the
compensation program hosted by the Department of Labor. 

"We try to do everything we can to try and assist people with
their claims," said Peter Turcic, director of the Energy
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. "It's a
nonadversarial process." 

The program has two prongs. The first — Part B — covers
employees whose illnesses stem from radiation, beryllium or
silica exposure. It went into effect in 2001. The second — Part
E — went into effect in 2004, and focuses on illnesses caused by
exposure to any toxic substance. 

Locally, the sites that are covered by the congressional act
that put the program in place include Area IV of the Field
Laboratory from 1955 to 1988 and the remediation process of the
area from 1988 to present; the DeSoto Avenue facility from 1960
to 1995, and the remediation process in 1988; the Vanowen
building at the Canoga Park facility from 1955 to 1960; and
those who worked at Atomics International. 

The meeting also included a question-and-answer period, when it
became clear that many of those in attendance had never heard of
the programs before. 

Larry Hill, who worked at Vanowen as a chemical specialist from
1973 to 2003, was surprised when he received a letter from
Boeing Co., which now owns the Field Laboratory, about the
meeting. 

"I was shocked because there's a lot of people that just aren't
aware you could file a claim," the West Hills resident said. "I
thought it was just Simi Valley people." 

For information on the Energy Employee Occupational Illness
Compensation Program, call 925-606-6302 or 866-606-6302. 

  2006 © The E.W. Scripps Co.       Ventura County Star
*****************************************************************
 38 Independent: N.M. company joins search for uranium

February 8, 2007: 

By Zsombor Peter Staff Writer
 
GALLUP — Add the Uranium Company of New Mexico to the latest wave 
of mining operations applying for exploration permits around Mt. 
Taylor. The mining company, which has ties to an Australian firm, 
filed its application with the New Mexico Mining and Minerals 
Division in December. 

Indian tribes in the area and the grassroots groups they've 
joined forces with are urging the state not to grant the permits. 
Still living with the environmental fallout of past uranium 
mining booms, they fear that another would only bring them more 
of the same. 

Public comments are due Friday. 

Fueled by a renewed global interest in nuclear power, uranium 
prices started to skyrocket in 2003. In the past few years, seven 
companies have filed for exploratory permits around Mt. Taylor 
alone. Uranium Company makes eight. 

"We've been waiting since 1987 for uranium prices to go up enough 
so we could start exploring," said Karl Meyers, who identified 
himself as the general manager of the company, which has held 
continuous title to the land since 1968. 

The site, about 3,000 acres according to Meyers, sits in the
extreme southwest corner of Sandoval County, a few miles north
of the Navajo Nation's Tohajiilee Chapter and west of the Laguna
Indian Reservation. In its application, Uranium Company lays out
its plans to drill 10 holes each 600 feet deep and five inches
wide to find out exactly how much uranium lies underneath.
According to a 2006 prospectus designed to attract investors,
there could be more than 4.5 million pounds at 12 percent U3O8
(a relatively stable combination of uranium and oxygen). 

Uranium Company hopes to start drilling by April. 

On its own, one exploration project isn't too much for the
surrounding tribes to worry about. 

"It's not about any one exploration project," said Chris Shuey,
an environmental health specialist for the Southwest Research
and Information Center, a non-profit group out of Albuquerque
helping local tribes keep the uranium industry off of Indian
land. 

"Each one of these is a relatively small operation ... but when
you start looking at the cumulative effect," he said, "all of a
sudden it starts to add up to a major impact." 

Local miners are still filing for restitution under the federal
government's Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which extends
eligibility to people who worked in a uranium mine anywhere in
the country prior to 1971. Others blame their chronic ailments
on residual radiation from nearby mining sites still waiting to
be cleaned up decades after they've been abandoned. 

Today's mining and exploration companies say modern technology
and tougher government regulations would spare them a repeat.
But tribes aren't convinced. 

In 2005, the Navajo Nation Council approved the Diné Natural
Resources Protection Act, which bans all uranium mining on
Navajoland. This past December, at the first Indigenous World
Uranium Summit, co-hosted by the Navajo Nation in Window Rock,
grassroots groups from some half-dozen countries ratified a
declaration opposing all uranium-related activity on "native
lands." 

For the local tribes that hold Mt. Taylor sacred, mining the
area would also constitute a desecration of the site.
Unfortunately for them, the mountain sits on one of the most
historically prolific uranium belts in the country. 

With all the renewed interest in the area, they're waiting on
Gov. Bill Richardson to take a firm position on uranium mining
in the state, one they hope opposed to it. 

But the companies pulling the state in the other direction
aren't just well funded. They're multinational. 

Uranium Company is so new it's not even registered with the
state yet. But according to Meyers, it's tied to Mineral Energy
and Technology, which had its uranium assets acquired by Uranium
King an exploration company out of Australia last summer.
Western Energy Development, another company after an exploration
permit near Mt. Taylor, is owned by Canada's Western Uranium
Corporation. 

That's not to say the tribes have to look abroad to pick a
fight. 

Tohajiilee, one of the Navajo Nation's own chapters, passed a
resolution in favor of Uranium Company's exploration plans,
according to chapter coordinator Nora Morris, who declined to
discuss the resolution. Messages for Chapter President Tony
Secatero and Lawrence Platero, the chapter's council delegate,
were not returned. 

Cibola and McKinley Counties, meanwhile, passed their own
resolutions supporting uranium mining in general. Their
resolutions touted the industry's potential to create new jobs
for the area.
     
Gallup Independent feedback on this website and
questions or comments to gallpind@cia-g.com  
*****************************************************************
 39 Sydney Morning Herald: ALP 'will scrap' nuclear mines policy - 

February 9, 2007 - 5:04PM
 	 	 	
The man who headed the federal government inquiry into nuclear
energy says he believes the Labor Party will drop its
three-mines policy.
 
Former Telstra boss Ziggy Switkowski led the taskforce charged
with researching and reporting on uranium mining, processing and
nuclear energy in Australia.
 
Dr Switkowski, guest speaker at the Uranium Club of Australia
lunch in Melbourne, said he believed there would be wide support
to drop the three-mines policy at the ALP's national conference
in April.
 
Former opposition leader Kim Beazley signalled in July last year
that he wanted to scrap Labor's three-mines policy, which it
adopted in 1984.
 
"When Kim Beazley was leader of the opposition he put on the
table that the national convention would address the issue of
the no-new-mines policy and that his position was that that
should be lifted," Dr Switkowski told reporters in Melbourne.
 
"My understanding is that (new Labor Leader) Kevin Rudd is going
to follow that position."
 
"There is no logic that I can see for limiting the development
and mining of any element, particularly uranium, in this
country."
 
The ALP was expected to discuss whether to change its mines
policy at its national conference, but remained firm on its
stance of no new nuclear reactors.
 
Three uranium mines currently operate in Australia - Ranger in
the Northern Territory as well as Olympic Dam and Beverley in
South Australia.
 
Dr Switkowski, a highly respected physicist, said he would have
no qualms about living next to a nuclear reactor.
 
"Without hesitation. And if that was down to a choice between
nuclear and a coal-fired plant, no hesitation."
 	
© 2007 	AAP

Copyright © 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 40 SLO Trib: Nevada says taxpayers would save if Yucca Mountain project dies

San Luis Obispo Tribune | 02/08/2007 | 

 Ken Ritter The Associated Press 

LAS VEGAS (AP) – Nevada officials released a report Thursday
saying taxpayers would save billions of dollars if the federal
government never opens a national nuclear waste dump at Yucca
Mountain.
 
It would be far cheaper and just as safe for the Energy
Department to leave radioactive waste at sites where it is
produced, Nevada nuclear projects chief Bob Loux said, including
the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant near Avila Beach.
 
"At-reactor storage is significantly less expensive than
building Yucca Mountain, even using DOE’s low-balled numbers,"
Loux said, citing Energy Department estimates that the Yucca
project would cost $58 billion to build and operate. Loux added
that power plant executives have testified that onsite storage
is safe.
 
The state-commissioned report by Michael Thorne, a London-based
cost analyst, represented the latest Nevada effort to undercut
support for the Yucca project, which has been stalled in recent
months by lawsuits, budget shortfalls and quality assurance
questions.
 
An Energy Department and Yucca Mountain project spokesman in Las
Vegas blamed the state for driving up costs, despite President
Bush and Congress approving the repository site, 90 miles
northwest of Las Vegas, in 2002.
 
"The state’s analysis of cost is based on delay," said project
spokesman Allen Benson, who said Thursday that about $9 million
had been spent on the project since 1982.
 
"The state’s tactic is to delay development of Yucca Mountain so
that its costs keep rising," he said, "and that’s what the
report says and justifies."
 
Thorne weighed the costs of proceeding with the Yucca project
and the cost of continuing to store spent nuclear fuel in dry
casks at 100 U.S. reactor sites, factoring in what Loux called
"normal" projected inflation rates of 3 percent to 7 percent per
year for 25 years. Thorne figured onsite dry storage costs of $4
million per reactor per year.
 
Using the 3 percent estimate, the analyst found that taxpayers
would save almost $31 billion if the Yucca Mountain repository
is never built, Loux said.
 
"Continued onsite dry storage will save billions of dollars
relative to proceeding with the repository," Loux added in a
statement that put the cost of dry storage at reactor sites "for
all perpetuity" at $13.3 billion.
 
In a report to state legislators on Tuesday, Loux characterized
the Yucca project as "on life support." But he said his agency
needed more state money to fight the federal government’s plan
to seek an operating license in 2008 from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and begin operating the dump in 2017.
 
As planned, Yucca Mountain would entomb 77,000 or more tons of
the nation’s most highly radioactive waste 1,000 feet beneath an
ancient volcanic ridge on the western edge of the government’s
Nevada Test Site reservation.
 
———
 
On the Net:
 
Nevada’s Agency for Nuclear Projects: 
*****************************************************************
 41 Platts: Cost of US nuclear waste repository put at $20 bil
 

Washington (Platts)--8Feb2007
 
US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman told Congress Thursday that 
building the proposed high-level nuclear waste repository at 
Nevada's Yucca Mountain will cost a total of roughly $20 billion. 
DOE has spent some $10 billion on the project to date.

     Testifying before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on 
his agency's fiscal 2008 budget request, Bodman stuck to a 
deadline of completing the Nevada project by 2017, and said that 
the $19 billion currently in the Nuclear Waste Fund would cover 
most of the future repository costs. Money in that fund is paid 
by consumers of nuclear energy through a surcharge on 
nuclear-generated electricity.

     "I looked at the numbers...we still are working at it, [but] 
my own estimate is something like $20 billion," Bodman said. 
"There is already $19 billion in the fund, some $700 million that 
will be paid in this year. The income [from interest] is also 
going to be $700 million to $800 million dollars," the secretary 
added.

                --Daniel Whitten, daniel_whitten@platts.com

Copyright © 2007 - Platts, All Rights Reserved [The McGraw-Hill 
Companies] 
*****************************************************************
 42 ALJ: Fuel reprocessing proposal full of risks | 

ajc.com The Atlanta Journal-Constitution]

By BOBBIE PAUL

Published on: 02/09/07                                                                                                                                                                                  
	 	
President Bush's latest weapon of "mass deception," being heavily 
marketed by the nuclear industry is called Global Nuclear Energy 
Partnership. This initiative is expected to cost between $3 
billion and $6 billion in its first five years. GNEP offers a 
misguided plan to expand global nuclear energy production, while 
solving the nuclear waste problem here at home and creating a 
"proliferation resistant" technology to keep nuclear materials 
out of the hands of terrorists.
 
These claims are misleading and obscure the real reason for this
government funded initiative.

Basically, GNEP is a huge import/export project of the nuclear
industry that requires the U.S. to manufacture nuclear fuel
rods, ship them to other countries to run reactors, and then
take the highly radioactive fuel rods back for reprocessing in
newly constructed facilities.
 
Eleven potential sites have been awarded $10.5 million to
explore the development of these reprocessing centers. The
Savannah River Site on the border of Georgia and South Carolina
is one of the 11, and is rumored to be the most likely site to
be chosen.
 
At the center of GNEP is the revival of reprocessing, erroneously 
called "recycling" by supporters. Reprocessing extracts plutonium 
and uranium from chopped-up spent nuclear fuel rods leaving 
behind large quantities of highly radioactive, acidic, liquid 
waste.
 
The U.S. government reprocessed nuclear fuel from the 1960s 
through the 1980s, pulling out plutonium and highly enriched 
uranium to make nuclear weapons. Less than 20 pounds of plutonium 
are needed to build a simple nuclear weapon.
 
The Savannah River Site was the site of nuclear fuel reprocessing 
for the fabrication of nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Today 
35 million gallons of reprocessing waste sit in underground 
carbon steel tanks, awaiting a safe disposal solution. Over the 
years, these tanks have leaked into the groundwater and 
contaminated crucial water supplies. The Department of Energy has 
been charged with cleaning up this Cold War legacy, which will 
eventually cost taxpayers at least $10 billion.
 
"Recycling" plutonium from irradiated fuel is the nuclear 
industry's clever disguise for reprocessing. Actually, the 
extracted uranium (which accounts for the greatest volume of 
waste) is not re-used. Low demand for plutonium fuel translates 
into stockpiles of separated plutonium growing every year. The 
nuclear power industry prefers using newly enriched uranium 
because it is so much cheaper to produce.
 
Lastly, GNEP depends on the construction of an "advanced burner 
reactor" that is an experimental type of nuclear reactor far 
riskier than the "light water" reactors used in the industry 
today. Quoting scientist Ed Lyman of the Union of Concerned 
Scientists: "These fast burning reactors have a much higher risk 
of experiencing a runaway nuclear chain reaction that could lead 
to an explosion like the Chernobyl accident."
 
GNEP is an untested program that needs much further scrutiny. 
People are encouraged to come to the North Augusta Community 
Center on Thursday, Feb. 15, at 6 p.m. to speak out against this 
dangerous program. It's time we started cleaning up the mess 
we've made rather than re-embarking on a nuclear path that will 
require billions of dollars and potentially leave us with another 
toxic legacy.
 
Bobbie Paul of Atlanta is executive director Atlanta WAND
(Women's Action for New Directions).
 
© 2007 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution | |
*****************************************************************
 43 Salt Lake Tribune: Uranium cleanup hitch

Feds say the Moab tailings pile project may drag on through
2028

By Robert Gehrke 

The Salt Lake TribuneArticle Last Updated: 02/09/2007 12:12:24
AM MST

WASHINGTON - Cleaning up a mountain of uranium tailings near
Moab will take five times as long as initially projected,
potentially dragging on through 2028, Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman said Thursday. 

    "The information I have is that 2028 is the schedule,"
Bodman told Rep. Jim Matheson during a House hearing. "We have a
lot of demands on our environmental operations." 

    The Energy Department made a final decision in 2005 to haul
the 10.5 million tons of tailings - remnants of uranium milling
done at the Atlas Minerals Corp. mill during the Cold War - by
rail to a lined pit. At that time, the department planned to
begin moving the pile this year and finish shuttling the
tailings and complete the project between 2011 and 2012. 

    "That was shocking to hear," Matheson said after the
hearing. "This is an expensive project, I don't want to deny
that. . . . I've always been worried that budget constraints are
going to lower this on the priority scale." 

    Matheson asked Bodman about the Energy Department's plans
for the pile because the department has requested bids to move
2.5 million tons of the pile and the congressman wanted to know
why the department seemed to be breaking the work into pieces. 

    DOE spokeswoman Megan Barnett said 2028 is the current target 
for closure based on the current funding levels and could change 
once a contractor is selected. The department is in the process 
of reviewing proposals from contractors who would move at least 
2.5 million tons over five years. 

    The Bush administration has proposed spending $23 million on
the Moab project next year. 

    Over the last five years the department has pumped 75
million gallons of contaminated water and put other measures in
place to keep chemicals in the pile from reaching the Colorado
River, she said. 

    "We are committed to making progress there," she said. 

    Both of Utah's senators said they were troubled by the
Energy Department's delays on the Moab pile. 

    "That's very disturbing to me, and I intend to push DOE to
recognize the need to keep as close as possible to the original
timeline," Sen. Orrin Hatch said in a statement. 

    Sen. Bob Bennett said Bodman is scheduled to be before the
appropriations committee next month and he will work with the
administration "to make sure this project stays on track." 

    "Obviously, I am very concerned if DOE plans to extend the
project timeline too far," Bennett said. 

    The tailings pile now sits just outside Arches National Park
on the banks of the Colorado River and studies have found that
toxic chemicals such as ammonia are seeping into the
groundwater, threatening four species of endangered fish. 

    The contamination has also alarmed officials downstream,
since the river provides drinking water for an estimated 25
million people. 

    "I continue to get evasive, incomplete information from DOE
regarding the need to remove the health and safety threat posed
by this pile. I will press this issue with the Secretary until I
get satisfactory answers about the project timeline and the
budget," Matheson said. 

    The pile spans about 130 acres. Thick sludge is what remains
of the Cold War uranium pile. Atlas bought the uranium mill in
1962, but closed it down in 1984. In 1998, the company filed for
bankruptcy, leaving a temporary cap on the pile and an
inadequate cleanup fund. 

    In 2000, Utah's delegation got legislation passed putting
the Energy Department in charge of remediation of the site. 

    Moving the 10.5 million tons of tailings and 1.4 million
tons of other contaminated soil entails building a dedicated
rail line and shipping rail cars full of material 30 miles north
to Crescent Junction. 

    Groundwater remediation is expected to take 75 years. 

*****************************************************************
 44 US Energy Secretary: Yucca Mountain Project Costs To Rise On Delay
 
WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Costs for the Yucca Mountain nuclear 
repository planned in Nevada are likely to rise because of 
ongoing litigation and other delays in getting the program 
approved, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Thursday.
 
Costs for construction of the facilities, including the 
transportation infrastructure, will reach $20 billion alone, up 
from the previously estimated $ 12-13 billion, Bodman said.
 
Furthermore, a previous estimate for an entire life-cycle cost of 
$58 billion is also considered outdated.
 
"Frankly, I think that all of the numbers that have been around 
for five years are going to increase because we've had delays," 
Bodman told reporters Thursday after testifying to the House 
Energy and Commerce Committee at a hearing on the White House's 
fiscal-year 2008 budget.
 
"It's going to be more costly to accomplish what we want to 
accomplish," he added. 

Department of Energy spokesman Craig Stevens said that once an 
application for the Yucca Mountain project is approved, the DoE 
will be able to produce a more accurate cost estimate.
 
Last week, Deputy Secretary of Energy Clay Sell estimated the 
facility wouldn't likely become operational until around 2020, 
three years later than the planned 2017 date. He expected the 
license application would be ready by June 2008.
 
But approval of the repository is in doubt because of objections
from a growing grass-roots campaign, environmentalists and
lawmakers.
 
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is a key critic of
the administration's plan to open the permanent waste site about
100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. He and other federal lawmakers
promised to block the plan.
 
President George W. Bush's budget request describes building the
repository as a legal obligation to open a permanent geological
waste site for high-level radioactive waste produced from the
nation's nuclear power plants.
 
In the budget proposal, his administration described 2008 as a
critical year for the project and provided $494.5 million for
the Energy Department's radioactive waste office to make
progress toward opening the site. 

-By Ian Talley, Dow Jones Newswires; (202) 862 9285;
ian.talley@dowjones.com
 
(Maya Jackson Randall contributed to this report.) 
  (END) Dow Jones Newswires
  02-08-071627ET
  Copyright (c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 45 www.bbj.hu: EU proposes fines, jail sentences for illegal waste shipments - 

extended

09.02.2007 19:17 
 
bbj.hu

European Union regulators proposed fines and prison sentences for 
the illegal shipment of waste, reviving a push for EU-wide 
criminal penalties to protect the environment.                                                                  

The European Commission's draft law would introduce fines and 
jail times for â€žserious environmental offensesâ€ such as the 
August 2006 alleged dumping of toxins in the Ivory Coast by a 
Dutch-chartered vessel. The legislation would also cover unlawful 
activities including radiation pollution, trade in 
ozone-depleting substances and damage to protected habitats.

We cannot allow safe havens of environmental crime inside the
EU,â€ Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini said in a statement
released today in Brussels. â€žIn many member states, the levels
of sanctions are inadequate.â€ The commission, the 27-nation
EU's regulatory arm, has been emboldened by a 2005 European
Court of Justice ruling that curtailed the right of member
states to act on their own over criminal sanctions tied to EU
environmental protection. The court struck down a law that
governments approved by skirting the EU's normal decision-making
procedures and blocking a 2001 commission proposal.


The commission is also responding to the August incident in the
Ivory Coast, where several people died and thousands sought
medical help after the Probo Koala oil tanker allegedly unloaded
as much as 500 metric tons of toxic waste in the city of
Abidjan. The vessel, chartered by Dutch commodity trader
Trafigura Beheer BV, was detained in Estonia the following month
because toxins were found on board. Trafigura, which is
currently fighting a lawsuit over the spill in London, said on
September 24 that the material wasn't toxic and was given to a
certified Ivorian company for disposal. â€žEnvironmental
legislation needs to be backed up by criminal sanctions,â€
Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said at a Brussels press
conference today. â€žEnvironmental crimes can have devastating
effects.â€ The draft legislation, which needs the support of EU
governments and the European Parliament, would set minimum
levels of maximum penalties including fines for companies
ranging from â‚¬300,000 ($390,000) to â‚¬750,000 and prison
sentences from one year to five years. The offenses would have
to be committed intentionally or with â€žserious negligence.â€


France, Italy, Slovenia, Malta and Cyprus would have to upgrade
their standards the most as a result of the proposal, according
to Dimas. Nations including the UK, the Netherlands, Spain and
Poland have â€žmediumâ€ standards by comparison and countries
such as Sweden, Germany and Belgium have the highest norms, he
said. In addition, some countries refuse to recognize all of the
offenses covered by the proposal as crimes, said Dimas. This is
the case with Spain and Portugal for illegal shipments of waste,
Italy for unlawful damage to protected habitats and Austria for
unlawful trade in or use of ozone-depleting substances, he said.
The commission initiative may run into fresh resistance from EU
lawmakers concerned it would give the bloc too much control over
member states. The commission â€žis using the environmental
agenda as an excuse to massively increase its powers at the
expense of national parliaments,â€ Syed Kamall, a UK member of
the European Parliament's largest political group, the European
People's Party, said in a statement. â€žThis is a very slippery
slope.â€


The commission is acting within its rights, said Michael Renouf,
a partner and European environmental-law specialist at Berwin
Leighton Paisner LLP. â€žThere's a solid legal basis for what
they've proposed,â€ Renouf said by telephone from London.
â€žThere's an existing body of European legislation that
establishes environmental obligations.â€ Frattini said the
commission was making â€žprudent use of the principlesâ€ set by
the 2005 EU court ruling. Since then, the commission has
proposed EU-wide criminal penalties in one other regulatory
field - goods counterfeiting - and said a similar approach could
be taken in as many as seven more areas. The draft environmental
law would also target the discharge of materials that causes
death or serious injury to any person; the unlawful production
of nuclear materials; the illegal import of waste; the illegal
operation of a plant in which dangerous activity is carried out;
and illegal damage to protected plants and animals. The draft
makes no explicit mention of oil spills, which the commission
intends to cover by proposing new EU measures on ship pollution
later this year. National governments also skirted EU
decision-making norms when they agreed in 2005 on measures to
enforce the law against ship pollution - a move also being
challenged in court by the commission. (Bloomberg)

*****************************************************************
 46 Deseret News: Uranium cleanup faces delay

[deseretnews.com] 

Friday, February 9, 2007
		
Moab decontamination could take 20 years

By Suzanne Struglinski Deseret Morning News                                          

WASHINGTON — The Energy Department's new 2028 completion date to 
clean up uranium-mill tailings in Moab shocked Rep. Jim Matheson 
at an Energy and Commerce Committee hearing Thursday.

[Photo (Deseret Morning News graphic)] Deseret Morning News
graphic       Matheson asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman
about the project's status and why the department has a pending
request for a contractor to move only 2.5 million tons of waste
over five years.

       The project, as approved by Congress, is to move the 16
million tons of uranium mill tailings from a pile near the
Colorado River, north of Moab, to a location near Grand
Junction, Colo.

       Bodman told Matheson that the department has made the
decision to move the tailings pile, but the project is expected
to take 20 years, with completion in 2028.

       "This is news to me," Matheson said. "DOE (the Department
of Energy) has been telling us that the pile would be cleaned up
within a decade, and the secretary now seems to think that 20
years is an acceptable time frame."

       Matheson said the department had said before that the
project would be done in seven to 10 years.

       The congressman said he now is waiting for answers on the
project's total cost and time line for cleanup.

       Energy Department spokeswoman Megan Barnett said the
department is committed to making progress at Moab. So far, the
department has decontaminated 75 million gallons of water, she
said.

       Once a contract has been awarded, the contractor will
have a cost and timetable in place. She said the 2028 date is
the estimated closure date, based on current funding levels.

       Matheson said Congress can advocate for more money to
help hasten the cleanup, and the 2028 date was not what was
originally agreed upon.

       The department requested about $24 million for the
project in the 2008 budget request, released Tuesday.
 
E-mail: suzanne@desnews.com			  		 		   

© 2007 Deseret News Publishing Company  
*****************************************************************
 47 BloggingVegas.com: Yucca Mountain project may be dying - 
 
The infamous Yucca Mountain project to stash 77,000 tons of 
nuclear waste inside an old volcano northwest of Las Vegas may be 
moribund, slowly dying of inanition as funding is cut.
 
It couldnâ€™t happen to a more deserving project.
 
Five years after then-Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham
recommended on Feb. 14, 2002 to President George W. Bush that
Yucca Mountain be used for storage of radioactive rods, the
Department of Energy has scaled back its spending on the
project. It probably represents a tacit recognition that storage
in Nevada of radioactive waste from the nationâ€™s nuclear power
plants is a doomed project.
 
The DOE in early February sent Congress a budget requesting
$494.5 million for the proposed nuclear waste repository in the
federal fiscal year beginning Oct. 1. It was the smallest Yucca
Mountain request since fiscal 2002, and $50 million less than
the amount budgeted last year for 2007.
 
In an editorial titled â€œWaste dump loses support,â€ the Las
Vegas Sun on Feb. 8 waxed eloquently on the predictably
languishing project:â€œBurial of high-level nuclear waste is not
the answer, whether at Yucca Mountain or anywhere else. It is
simply too dangerous. It would require carting the highly
radioactive nuclear waste around the country, causing increased
risk of nuclear accidents on the nationâ€™s highways. Burial
would also make the waste susceptible to earthquakes, and hasten
what appears to be the inevitableâ€”that the waste will
eventually leech into the ground water.â€
 
One of the little-publicized truths of the Yucca Mountain
boondoggle is that nobody has developed a cask that will hold
the radioactive nuclear rods for 1,000 years, let alone 10,000
years as has been suggested as being necessary. Once the casks
were laid to rest in the mortiferous mausoleum of the mountain,
and began to leak, you canâ€™t send in guys dressed in lead
space suits to fix the problem. And once the radioactivity
leeched into the ground water, it would seep into Death Valley,
thereby provoking a giant interstate battle between Nevada and
California.
 
Good riddance to a bad project.
 
						 						 						 						 Posted February 8, 2007 1:13 PM by
Anthony Greno | Permalink | Email This 

*****************************************************************
 48 Guardian Unlimited: Utah Nuclear Sludge Cleanup Delayed 

From the Associated Press        
	 
[UP] 

Friday February 9, 2007 10:16 PM
 	
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) - Cleanup of radioactive sludge near the
Colorado River - a major source of drinking water across the
West - may be pushed back by 16 years, Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman said. 

In 2005, when the government said it would haul the uranium
tailings to a lined pit, the job was supposed to be done by
2012. At a House committee hearing Thursday, Bodman said the
schedule now calls for the later timetable. 

``We have a lot of demands on our environmental operations,''
Bodman said at the hearing. 

Energy Department spokeswoman Megan Barnett said 2028 is the
target based on the agency's budget, but the date could change
when a contractor is selected. 

The agency is reviewing proposals for moving at least 2.5
million tons of the sludge over five years from along the river
near Moab in southern Utah. The Bush administration has proposed
spending $23 million on the project in the fiscal year that
begins Oct. 1. 

The sludge is piled on about 130 acres outside Arches National
Park near Moab. 

U.S. Rep. Jim Matheson, a Utah Democrat, said the new timetable
is ``shocking.'' 

``This is an expensive project. I don't want to deny that,'' he
said. ``I've always been worried that budget constraints are
going to lower this on the priority scale.'' 

A remnant of the Cold War, the waste comes from a uranium mill
bought by Atlas Minerals Corp. in 1962 but closed in 1984. In
1998, the company filed for bankruptcy, leaving a temporary cap
on the pile. Moab's rich uranium deposits were mined in the
1950s for nuclear bombs. 

The Energy Department has pumped 75 million gallons of
contaminated water and put other measures in place to keep
chemicals from reaching the Colorado River, which provides
drinking water for about 25 million people across the West. 

``We are committed to making progress there,'' Barnett said.     
		 	 	   
    Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 49 [southnews] A warning from the wise
 
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 19:15:12 -0600 (CST)


Out of the mouths of ... retired US officials and generals comes the 
simple truth about nuclear weapons and the dangers the world faces while 
its most powerful leaders remain in denial.

A warning from the wise
John Gittings

Guardian February 8, 2007 6:52 PM

Out of the mouths of ... retired US officials and generals comes the 
simple truth about nuclear weapons and the dangers the world faces while 
its most powerful leaders remain in denial. I would like to think that 
if Tony Blair had listened yesterday to Robert McNamara being 
interviewed on the BBC Today programme, the prime minister would now be 
reconsidering his obsession with "hard power" and Trident renewal - but 
I very much doubt it.

McNamara warned: "The weapons [which nearly led to nuclear war in the 
Cuba crisis etc] are still there and the potential for misjudgment is 
still there, and the only way to avoid that in the long term is to 
eliminate nuclear weapons, that should be our objective, in a very real 
sense it's the lesson of the cold war."

The nub of the problem is the familiar mismatch between intending to 
remain a nuclear power forever and telling others not to join the club. 
Hypocrisy apart, it won't achieve its purpose: if nuclear weapons are so 
vital for defence, others will want them too - which is the logic (as 
McNamara pointed out) behind Pyongyang's determination to have them.

"I must say if I was them," said McNamara of the North Koreans, "I would 
be worried ... that the US or Britain or one of their allies is seeking 
to destroy my regime and to prevent that if I had the capability [of 
making nuclear weapons] ... I would certainly move in that direction."

McNamara woke up early on to the inadequacy as well as danger of 
policies based on the threat of nuclear weapons. Already in 1982 he was 
advocating (along with George Kennan and McGeorge Bundy) a policy of "no 
first use": the declaration that one will not use nuclear weapons first 
is still rejected by the US, Britain, France and Russia, and the British 
white paper on Trident renewal has dismissed it again.

By the mid-l990s, McNamara's views were shared more widely as the 
nuclear powers were seen to fail, post-cold war, to move decisively 
towards nuclear disarmament.

In the words of General Lee Butler, ex-chief of Strategic Air Command, 
speaking in 1999: "The leaders of the nuclear weapons states today risk 
very much being judged by future historians as having been unworthy of 
their age, of not having taken advantage of opportunities so perilously 
won at such great sacrifice and cost, of reigniting nuclear arms races 
around the world, of condemning mankind to live under a cloud of 
perpetual anxiety."

Last month a bipartisan study group at the Global Security Institute in 
Washington warned: "Current efforts by the administration to stem 
proliferation fail precisely because they do not uphold the principal 
bargain of the non-proliferation treaty - a clear commitment to nuclear 
disarmament in exchange for non-proliferation."

The GSI group endorsed a recent op-ed article calling for new efforts to 
achieve the goal of "a world free of nuclear weapons": it is a sign of 
the times that the article had been published in the Wall Street Journal 
and co-signed by Henry Kissinger.

Just how to restore confidence in non-proliferation, convince would-be 
proliferators that they have nothing to fear, and tackle the real 
problems posed by North Korea and Iran, is a huge and difficult agenda. 
Occasional hopeful signs - such as today's report from Beijing that 
Pyongyang may be willing to discuss "initial steps to nuclear 
disarmament" - have been invariably dashed.

But none of these problems can be addressed convincingly if nuclear 
weapons continue to be regarded, by the handful of powers who possess 
them, as an unconditional and indefinite requirement. In this context 
Tony Blair's fall-back argument for Trident renewal, that Britain must 
retain nuclear weapons for the next half-century because we cannot 
"predict the unpredictable", means that there are no circumstances under 
which they will ever be given up.

That is the road to eventual disaster, and it is not only CND but those 
in Washington with long experience of nuclear realities who are saying 
so now.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/john_gittings/2007/02/a_warning_from_the_wise.html
*****************************************************************
 50 Tri-City Herald: PNNL chemist wins DOE award 

Published Friday, February 9th, 2007
 
By John Trumbo, Herald staff writer 

An environmental chemist at the Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory who specializes in radionuclides contamination has
won a Department of Energy award that includes a $50,000 prize. 

But John Zachara says his greatest satisfaction comes from
knowing that the fundamental science he does "has an important
role in solving Hanford's problems with contamination." 

"It feels great. It's a great acknowledgment. However an award
like this honors a team of individuals. I am the just the head
of the team," Zachara said Thursday. 

The E. O. Lawrence Award honors scientists and engineers at
mid-career for exceptional work on behalf of DOE. This is the
sixth Lawrence Award presented to a PNNL scientist since the
awards began in 1959.
 
Zachara, a senior chief scientist, will be honored at a ceremony
in late March in Washington, D.C., with the presentation of a
gold medal, a certificate signed by Energy Secretary Samuel
Bodman and the $50,000 honorarium. The last Lawrence Award given
to a PNNL researcher was in 1996. 

Zachara, 55, joined PNNL in 1979. He has worked on environmental
chemistry the entire time, and for the past 10 years has focused
on Hanford research issues. His specialty in recent years has
been the migration behavior of contaminates. 

"I've been very successful at performing and directing research
that addresses Hanford problems. The award is for a major
scientific achievement which has evolved over time," Zachara
said. 

He said the work involving chemical interactions of toxic metals
and radionuclides with mineral surfaces and micro-organisms
began in 2000 after the energy undersecretary called for more
fundamental science research in Hanford's contamination
problems. 

"He felt it should be given a chance," said Zachara. 

"We've learned that some of the contaminants on the ground are
not going to move very far, and are little risk. While others
will move with water and are a greater risk" he explained. 

Zachara's team has been able to segregate the bad from the
harmless "in a quantitative way." He said fundamental science
helps show how things work and their effect, so researchers can
develop ways to solve contamination problems. 

Zachara has had more than 125 scholarly articles on his area of
research published during his 28-year career at PNNL. He has a
bachelor's degree in chemistry from Bucknell University, a
master's degree in soil and watershed chemistry from the
University of Washington and obtained a doctorate in soil
chemistry from Washington State University in 1986. 

The E. O. Lawrence Awards are given in seven categories each
year. Zachara was honored in the environmental science and
technology category.
 
© 2007 Tri-City Herald, Associated Press &Other Wire Services
*****************************************************************
 51 LA Daily News: DOE invites agency input on lab cleanup

Public and regulators part of broader consultations

BY KERRY CAVANAUGH, Staff WriterArticle Last

Updated: 02/08/2007 10:55:08 PM PST

A decade into the cleanup of radioactive contamination at the
Santa Susana Field Lab, the Department of Energy has begun
consulting with state and federal environmental regulators on
decontamination of the site's last buildings. 

And surprising longtime watchdogs, the agency has asked the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to weigh in on demolition of two
buildings in the former nuclear energy research facility. 

The two federal agencies have publicly clashed over cleanup
standards at the lab, with the EPA saying four years ago that
the Energy Department's plan would leave the lab unsafe for
anything but limited picnicking and camping. 

Environmental groups have a pending lawsuit over the cleanup,
saying the Energy Department ignored its own pledge to follow
EPA guidance and will leave hazardous radiation on the site. 

But Energy Department officials said Thursday that they've
adopted a new policy that calls for more input from the public
and environmental regulators. 

"The environmental management program at DOE has become more
mature," Energy Department spokesman William Taylor said. "Even 
if there is not a clear line of jurisdiction, why not bring them 
in anyhow? We welcome the comments so nobody can stand up in a 
meeting and say we weren't consulted on this." 

But Dan Hirsch with the Committee to Bridge the Gap was
skeptical about the Energy Department's change. 

"Are they going through the motions of complying with (EPA
guidance) but doing so only for the last two buildings while the
entire rest of the site has been in violation?" 

Located in the hills above Simi Valley and Chatsworth, the Santa 
Susana Field Lab was developed in the late 1940s for 
rocket-engine research. 

Ninety acres of the site were used by the federal government for
nuclear research from 1955 through 1988. There were 10 reactors
on the site; one experienced a partial meltdown. 

The Energy Department has sole authority for the radiation
cleanup and has slowly been decontaminating the site. The
government is preparing to finish the cleanup and return the
land to lab owner Boeing Co. by early next year. 

But controversy remains over cleanup standards and how much
radiation will be left on the land. 

And one of the biggest disputes has centered on whether the
Energy Department has to follow the EPA's cleanup guidance. 

In 1995, the two agencies signed an agreement that said the
Energy Department would follow EPA guidance. But the EPA
contends the DOE has not followed the deal in the Santa Susana
Field Lab cleanup. 

Instead, the DOE chose the less stringent of two cleanup
standards for the property. Under that standard, someone living
on the site for 40 years would receive an extra 15 milirem of
radiation per year. That would represent a 1-in-3,333 risk of
cancer death. 

The EPA guidelines suggested a 0.05 milirem goal representing a
1-in-a million cancer death risk. 

Energy Department officials are careful to note that while they
again are consulting with the EPA, they are not following their
original agreement with the agency. 

EPA officials said the DOE appears to be following the
agreement's policy of cooperation although they still have
concerns about the cleanup effort. 

kerry.cavanaugh@dailynews.com

(213) 978-0390 

If you go

 A public hearing on the DOE cleanup proposal will be held from
6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Feb. 21 at the Grand Vista Hotel, 999
Enchanted Way, Simi Valley. Return to Top  	 	  

Los Angeles Newspaper Group 
    
*****************************************************************

NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 this 
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who 
have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for 
non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more 
information go to: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************