*****************************************************************
02/14/07 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 15.37
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
Send News Stories to news@energy-net.org with title on subject
line and first line of body

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 [NYTr] Questions arise about Iran bomb claims
2 Guardian Unlimited: Bush retreats on claim that leaders in Tehran ar
3 BBC NEWS: Bush maintains pressure on Iran
4 UPI: Analysis: Iran, 'a very serious threat'
5 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI welcomes wise N-initiatives
6 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Charlier removed as Iran's inspector
7 Reuters: Iran official hints at halting atomic work - paper 
8 Reuters: Ex-aide says Rice misled Congress on Iran 
9 Reuters: U.S. backs away from linking Iran govt to Iraq chaos 
10 UPI: Bush: No Iran talks in offing
11 UPI: Lavrov: Russia supports dealing with Iran
12 UPI: Bush sure of facts on Iran weapons in Iraq
13 AFP: Bush backs off key charge against Iran 
14 AFP: US liaises with Russia, China over pressuring Iran - 
15 UPI: Outside View: Risks of war with Iran
16 IPS-English NORTH KOREA: Nuclear disarmament victory for
17 IPS-English NORTH KOREA: Nuclear Roulette Spins - No Regime
18 UN Atomic Watchdog Chief Welcomes Accord On Dpr Korea's Nuclear Prog
19 [NYTr] Hirsh: Behind Bush's N. Korea Flip-Flop
20 New York Times: In Shift, Accord on North Korea Seems to Be Set - 
21 Korea Herald: Nuke pact will pave way to peace: Roh
22 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]No small achievement
23 Digital Chosunilbo: How Long Will Denuclearization of the Peninsula 
24 Korea Times: IAEA Set to Resume Inspection of NK Nuke Facilities
25 AFP: Japan faces isolation over North Korea 
26 AFP: Asian press cautious on NKorea nuclear deal 
27 IAEA: Director General Welcomes Latest Outcome of Six-Party Talks
28 Guardian Unlimited: Korean Nuclear Deal Delays Disarmament 
29 IPS-English LATIN AMERICA: Celebrating 40 Nuclear-Weapon-Free
30 Possible Saudi/Russian Nuke Power Program May Lead To N-Weapons
31 [NYTr] Saudis Welcome Putin Offer to Help Develop Nuke Energy
32 World Nuclear News: Putin offers co-operation with Gulf states
33 Independent: Not in our name: bid to stop Trident
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
34 The Hindu: Agni-III will be test fired 'very soon'
35 US: TCRE: Former nuclear plant site to get historical marker in Char
36 Times of India: Govt gets going on two N-plants
37 US: FR: NRC: Notice of Sunshine Act Meetings
38 DAILY YOMIURI: KEPCO, TEPCO falsified water data
39 business.iafrica.com: 'Public ignored' on second Koeberg
40 US: Hanford News: Nuclear power unlikely alternative in Northwest, a
41 allAfrica.com: South Africa: No Longer a Dirty Word, Nuclear a
42 Energy Business Review: Chinas green drive to be nuclear-powered - 
43 Xinhua: Areva may get nuclear contract
44 IHT: Austrian no-nuke activists block border crossing with Czech Rep
45 Reuters: New Total CEO says nuclear not a priority 
46 Reuters: Suez wants to build nuclear plant in France-report 
47 Reuters: Saudi says no bar to nuclear cooperation with Russia 
48 Reuters: Sharapova donates $100,000 to Chernobyl victims 
49 US: emporiagazette.com: Nuclear energy; the more the better 
50 US: NewsWatch: Energy: New nukes soon?
51 US: Business: Nuclear plants can pass on costs
52 AFP: Saudi looking into Russian arms, nuclear energy offers - 
53 US: SFSS: Florida allows FPL to collect surcharge to help pay for ne
54 IHT: Safety problems throw Sweden's nuclear energy program into ques
55 IHT: Chinese may shift reactor contracts to French company -
56 GU: British Energy calls for partners to build new wave of nuclear p
 
                          NUCLEAR SECURITY
 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
57 US: DaytonDailyNews.com: Mound Plant records buried in New Mexico
58 US: Spectrum: Downwinders on Discovery Channel Thursday
59 US: Cape Cod Times: State wants more study on toxicity of tungsten 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
60 Sydney Morning Herald: Incentives for indigenous land for (nuclear)d
61 Pahrump Valley Times: Nicholson applies for nuke office slot
62 US: Bradenton Herald: Lockheed gift helps schools
63 US: AP Wire: Nuke documents buried
64 AU ABC: Govt told to 'come clean' on NT waste dump
65 US: Aiken Today: Public meeting in North Augusta to discuss nuclear 
66 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Conflicts in Yucca review
67 US: WVLT: Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Waste Coming to Oak Ridge
68 US: FPON: Govt calls halt to uranium licences
69 Hanford News: Firm with Yucca links to do review of troubled nuke-wa
70 US: Hanford News: Lawmaker worries about nuke facility in Tennessee;
71 US: KnoxNews: Backers, critics turn out for GNEP 'scoping' session
72 US: Daily Press: Cities sue county over perchlorate surcharge 
73 US: DailyBulletin.com: Aerojet site still far from being clean
74 US: Carlsbad Current-Argus: Council OKs payment to energy alliance
75 US: Chillicothe Gazette: Nuke recycling site in Piketon good idea
76 JAGJ&CC: Dounreay D-Day questions to be posed at public forum
77 US: The Australian: Now French move in on our uranium 
78 US: kutv.com: Lawmakers: Energysolutions Can Expand
79 Aardvarchaeology : Never Mind CO2, What About Radioactive Waste?
80 US: The Australian: Areva pours money into uranium 
 
                           PEACE
 
81 Ban Ki-moon Hails 40th Anniversary Of Latin American Nuclear Weapon-
82 US: Hanford News: Los Alamos scientist criticizes federal approach t
83 IAEA: Tlatelolco Treaty A Trailblazer for Non-Proliferation
 
                        US DEPT. OF ENERGY
 
84 Hanford News: Hanford landfill under scrutiny
85 FR: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern 
86 KnoxNews: Security pressure may broaden drug testing at Y-12 nuke pl
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 [NYTr] Questions arise about Iran bomb claims
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:51:24 -0600 (CST)


Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
AP via Yahoo - Feb 14, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iran_iraq

Questions arise about Iran bomb claims

By PAULINE JELINEK
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration struggled Tuesday to explain what it
knows about alleged Iranian interference in Iraq after the Pentagon's top
general appeared to contradict a recently released military dossier on the
subject.

At issue was a weekend briefing in Baghdad at which three senior U.S.
military officials said that the "highest levels" of the Iranian government
had ordered the smuggling into Iraq of high-tech roadside bombs that have
been killing American soldiers.

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters in
the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, that U.S. forces have arrested Iranians in
Iraq and some of the materials used in roadside bombs had been made in
Iran.

"That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is
directly involved in doing this," Pace said.

The assertion of Tehran's involvement, made by U.S. officers who spoke on
condition of anonymity Sunday in Baghdad, had already drawn skeptical
responses from some lawmakers and other critics still wary of an
administration that based the invasion of Iraq on faulty intelligence.

Those doubts increased Tuesday after Pace said the link between the bomb
materials and the government had not been definitively proven.

Defense experts said Pace's comments -- and the way the dossier had been
presented to reporters anonymously -- cast doubt on how solid the
administration case is against Iran. Some suggested the apparent mixed
messages were meant to keep Tehran off guard.

Michael O'Hanlon, an analyst with the Brookings Institution, a
liberal-leaning think tank, called Pace's comments "close to a
contradiction" of what briefers said Sunday in Baghdad.

"Obviously, they can talk their way around it ... but these guys are not
naive about how words are interpreted, and the guys in Baghdad knew what
impression they wanted to leave listeners with," O'Hanlon said.

John Hutson, a retired former Navy judge advocate general and dean of the
Franklin Pierce Law School, said, "I think we have to take away from it a
huge dose of caution."

"If we have disagreement within the military about the role of the
Iranians, we have to proceed very cautiously," he added.

Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said Tuesday he could not
explain the apparent contradiction and referred questions to Pace's office
and to American forces in Baghdad.

A military official on Pace's staff said the general stands by his
comments. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to speak on the record.

Asked if Pace had vetted the information that went into Sunday's briefing,
the official said that Pace was aware of what was going to be presented in
Baghdad but that the comment about involvement at the highest levels of
Iranian government was not included in the material Pace was given.

Asked in a CNN interview whether he believed Iranians were shipping weapons
to Iraq, the top commander in the Middle East said Tuesday he didn't know.
"I have no idea who may be actually with hands-on in this stuff, but I do
know that this is not helpful to the situation in Iraq," said Navy Adm.
William Fallon.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said that he had phoned Pace on Tuesday and
that there was no disagreement.

He said Pace agreed with the basic scenario spelled out by U.S. military
officials on Sunday and then backed up by the White House -- that weapons
are moving into Iraq through the Iran's Revolutionary Guards elite Quds
Force.

"The Quds Force is, in fact, an official arm of the Iranian government and,
as such, the government bears responsibility and accountability for its
actions, as you would expect of any sovereign government," Snow told White
House reporters.

"I think a lot of people are trying to whomp up a fight here that doesn't
exist," Snow said.

U.S. officials have claimed for years that weapons were entering the
country from Iran but had stopped short of alleging involvement by top
Iranian leaders.

Sunday's briefing had been some time in the making. The administration
moved to put together its information after Tehran demanded the United
States present evidence of its allegations. Defense officials in Baghdad
had first put together a larger dossier, but it was rejected by Defense
Secretary Robert Gates and other administration officials who questioned
some of the information in it.

"Questions remain, questions have not been answered," said Christopher
Preble, an analyst at the CATO Institute, a libertarian research group,
also noting the unidentified sources at Sunday's briefing. "At some level,
that just seems not very credible to me."

[Associated Press reporters Chris Brummitt in Jakarta and Ben Feller in
Washington contributed to this report.]

Copyright ) 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 2 Guardian Unlimited: Bush retreats on claim that leaders in Tehran are arming insurgents

Ewen MacAskill in Washington

Thursday February 15, 2007 The Guardian

President George Bush backtracked yesterday on US military
intelligence claims that Iranian supplies of weaponry to Iraqi
insurgents had been ordered at the highest levels in Tehran. Mr Bush
told a press conference at the White House that he could not be
certain that the Iranian leadership was behind the alleged smuggling
of weapons.

But Mr Bush insisted that Iranian weapons were being used to kill US
soldiers in Iraq. In a warning to Tehran, he said: "I'm going to do
something about it."

The confusion came as the state department announced that the US,
after resisting allowing significant numbers of Iraqi refugees into
America, is to take 7,000 this year. The US has allowed only 463
Iraq refugees into the country since the war began, even though an
estimated 3.8 million have fled. The administration also plans to
pledge $18m (Ł9.1m) for a worldwide resettlement and relief
programme.

On Sunday, three American military officials briefed journalists in
Baghdad on what they said was evidence from a 200-page classified
document showing Iranian weapons were being used against US troops,
in particular a sophisticated explosives device capable of
penetrating US tanks. They disclosed that one of six Iranians
arrested in Iraq by US forces last month included a member of the
Quds Brigade, an elite section of the Iranian revolutionary guards.

But General Peter Pace, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, in a
series of interviews since the Baghdad briefing, said he was not
ready to conclude that Iran's leadership was behind the arms supply.
The White House spokesman, Tony Snow, spoke to Gen Pace on Tuesday
to seek clarification.

The confusion in Washington is awkward for the Bush administration.
With its credibility in question after misleading intelligence in
the run-up to the Iraq invasion in 2003, the White House, Pentagon
and state department spent weeks double-checking the Iran dossier to
ensure it was strong enough to convince sceptics.

Mr Bush, moving into line with Gen Pace, said: "What we do know is
that the Quds force was instrumental in providing these deadly IEDs
[improvised explosive devices] to networks inside of Iraq. What we
don't know is whether the head leaders of Iran ordered the Quds
force to do what they did. But, my point is, what's worse, them
ordering it and it happening, or them not ordering it and it
happening?" He added: "I intend to do something about it ... we're
going to protect our troops."

The president, who has repeatedly refused to enter into negotiations
with Iran, said he believed progress was being made in the effort to
resolve the dispute peacefully. "If I thought we could achieve
success, I would sit down [with the Iranians]," he said. "But I
don't think we can achieve success right now."

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, denied on Monday that Tehran
was supplying sophisticated weapons. His denial came amid tentative
signs that the US military build-up in the Gulf and a tightening of
economic sanctions is beginning to have an effect. Ali Akbar
Velayati, adviser to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei,
suggested in remarks published yesterday that Tehran might consider
suspending uranium enrichment, which the west claims is part of
Iran's drive to achieve a nuclear weapons capability.

Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 3 BBC NEWS: Bush maintains pressure on Iran

Last Updated: Wednesday, 14 February 2007, 17:52 GMT

Mr Bush spoke as Congress debates his Iraq plans

President Bush has insisted a branch of Iran's Revolutionary Guards
is linked to some attacks on US troops in Iraq.

The US was "certain", he said, that the force was providing a weapon
known as an EFP, which the US says has been used in particularly
deadly attacks.

But he said he did not know who was directing the force, and denied
laying the groundwork for an attack on Iran.

He admitted that it would take time to establish security in
Baghdad, and said that violence would continue, but said it was
vital to US security to succeed in Iraq.

"If we fail there, the enemy will follow us here. I firmly believe
that," he said.

The US House of Representatives on Tuesday began debate on a
resolution opposing the president's plan.

The non-binding resolution is expected to pass easily, with as many
as several dozen members of Mr Bush's Republican party joining the
Democratic majority.

Government orders?

Mr Bush appeared to be trying to steer a fine line on Iran.

I don't think we know who picked up the phone and said to the Quds
Force: 'Go do this'

George W Bush

Unnamed US officials in Baghdad said at the weekend that the
"highest levels" of the Iranian government were supplying weapons to
Shia militants in Iraq.

But top uniformed personnel - including the highest-ranking US
military officer, General Peter Pace - have refused to confirm that
accusation in recent days.

Mr Bush said Iran's Quds Force - a branch of the Revolutionary
Guards charged with exporting the Iranian revolution - was the
source of the weapons.

But he said he did not know who was giving them their orders.

"I don't think we know who picked up the phone and said to the Quds
Force: 'Go do this.'"

The Revolutionary Guards report to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei.

Mr Bush denied he was attempting to provoke Iran, insisting he was
only seeking to protect US troops.

He also appeared to suggest there was no point in talking directly
to Iran at the present time.

"If I thought we could achieve success, I would sit down with Iran,"
he said.

But he insisted Tehran must "have a verifiable suspension" of its
alleged nuclear weapons programme before the US would engage in
direct talks.

*****************************************************************
 4 UPI: Analysis: Iran, 'a very serious threat'

United Press International - Intl. Intelligence - 

2/14/2007 3:09:00 PM -0500

By CLAUDE SALHANI

UPI International Editor

WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 (UPI) -- Iran today poses a five-pronged threat,
warned the man who first blew the whistle on the Islamic republic's
nuclear program.

Iran is "a very, very serious threat to the free world," said
Alireza Jafarzadeh, who outlines the dangers posed by the Islamic
republic, as he sees them, in his new book, "The Iran Threat:
President Ahmadinejad and the coming nuclear crisis."

"Iran wants to extend its influence beyond its borders," said
Jafarzadeh.

"The agenda of Ayatollah Khomeini was to establish global Islamic
rule, to expand Iran's influence beyond the Iranian borders. They
want to deliver Jerusalem via Karbala, meaning to turn Iraq into an
Islamic republic and from there use it as a springboard to spread
their revolution to other countries in the area," he said.

The author, who is close to the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, was the first
person to reveal the Islamic republic's secret nuclear processing
sites at Natanz and Arak.

On Iran's role in Iraq, Jafarzadeh wrote: "The problem in Iraq is
neither a civil nor a sectarian war. The main threat to Iraq is
neither al-Qaida nor the Sunni insurgents -- they both are cause for
major problems, but neither can take the whole future of Iraq as a
hostage. Rather, Iraq is now a battleground for the clash of two
alternatives: Islamic extremist opinion which gets its orders from
Tehran and seeks to establish an Islamic republic in Iraq, and a
democratic alternative seeking a pluralistic democracy in the
country. The former seeks sectarian violence and fans the flames of
civil war while the latter seeks to ease tension, provide security
and stability and establish democratic institutions."

Outlining those threats, Jafarzadeh, an Iranian exile who lives in
Washington, underlined the five prongs followed by the regime in
Tehran.

First: Iran wants to pursue its nuclear program, come what may. Iran
is cognizant of the facts possession of nuclear weapons puts it in a
different category altogether. The regime in Tehran believes that
nuclear weapons will offer it protection from a potential invasion
by the United States. Indeed, Washington is likely to think twice
about waging war on a country that is armed with nuclear weapons.

Second: Iran's meddling in Iraq. Since the start of the Iranian
revolution in 1979, Khomeini wanted to export the Islamic revolution
to neighboring countries, particularly Iraq, Bahrain and Kuwait, who
have important Shiite minorities. But try as they did, Iran's
mullahs were unsuccessful until the fall of Saddam Hussein.

The American invasion of Iraq in 2003 offered the Iranians a unique
opportunity to intervene in Iraq's internal affairs. Immediately
after the fall of Baghdad to the U.S.-led coalition, Iranian
Revolutionary Guards profited from the fact that Iraq's 900-mile
border with Iran was largely unguarded as the Iraqi army was, first,
on the retreat, and, second, disbanded by order of the U.S.
administrator of Iraq. Iranian forces therefore immediately began to
cross into Iraq and began supporting anti-American and
anti-coalition forces. Iranian agents started training Iraqis in
insurgency tactics and, according to several sources, Iran has
provided training, financing and explosives and weapons to the
insurgency.

Third: Iran's support of international terrorism. The United States
accuses the Tehran regime of supporting terrorist groups, or groups
considered to be terrorists by the United States. Iran, says
Jafarzadeh, poses a serious threat to the world by its support of
terrorism. The Islamic republic has long been a supporter of groups
such as Lebanon's Hezbollah, or the Islamic resistance movement in
the Palestinian territories, better known as Hamas.

Fourth: Iran continues to oppose the Middle East peace process.
However, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does nothing to
encourage peace in the Middle East with his repeated claims that
"Israel should be wiped off the map," and persists with his
insistence that the "Holocaust never happened.

Needless to say, this has raised concern, not only in Israel, but in
the United States and Western countries that a nuclear-armed Iran
will only make matters worse.

Jafarzadeh writes: For 27 years, the Iranian regime has voiced its
hatred of the United States and the West, and for the same number of
years attempts have been made to change the regime's behavior
through external pressures, threats, negotiations and appeasement.
All these attempts have the failed, and as the Iranian regime
accelerates its push for a nuclear arsenal, the world no longer has
the luxury of waiting for Tehran to turn itself around and shed its
medieval mindset. The Iranian regime was not budged from its
original theme of hating the West and working to export its Islamic
revolution.

"Ignoring this will only further step up Tehran's rush to the bomb,"
Jafarzadeh said.

And five: The way Iran treats its own citizens. The mistreatment of
women, abuse of human rights, censorship and executions continue to
preoccupy human rights groups and Iranians struggling and hoping to
see democracy blossom in their country.

--

(Comments may be sent to claude@UPI.com.)


Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 5 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: IRI welcomes wise N-initiatives

2007/02/14

Presenting constructive and wise nuclear initiatives by other
countries can open the door of negotiations, Deputy Chairman of the
Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said on Tuesday.

Mohammad Saeedi further told reporters that the interaction should
be respecting Islamic Republic of Iran's right in achieving nuclear
fuel.

Asked about plans raised by foreign countries in this respect, he
replied that the ideas should be naturally within the framework the
Non-Proliferation Treaty and Iran's right according to the article
four of the treaty should be respected.

The official noted that negotiation is definitely considered the
most logical, constructive and beneficial way to attain all-out
agreement on Iran's nuclear dossier.

"Return from the UN Security Council to the International Atomic
Energy Agency and negotiation table is a wise way," adding, "Ee hope
that the sides involved in the negotiations would soon realize it,
and avoid turning the simple issue into a complicated one."

Responding to a question about different plans including Swiss and
Mohamed Elbaradei's proposals in this respect, he noted that to
judge every new idea, clarifying the details and goals of such ideas
is necessary.

He replied a question on Iran's plans to settle the nuclear dispute,
noting that the country has advanced and specific suggestions which
would be presented at real and equal negotiations.

SM

Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir 
*****************************************************************
 6 IRIB PERSIAN NEWS: Charlier removed as Iran's inspector

2007/02/14

Iranian Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Ali-Asghar Soltaniyeh said in Vienna on Tuesday that Chris Charlier
has been taken out from the list of UN inspectors monitoring the
Islamic Republic of Iran's nuclear program upon the r equest of Iran.

He added that Charlier has also been been transferred from the
section in charge of Iran's nuclear case to another section in the
IAEA.

Iran in January sent a letter to the IAEA asking for the removal of
Charlier from the list of inspectors supervising Iran's nuclear
activities, Soltaniyeh said.

Charlier, who is a Belgian nuclear engineer and has been with the
IAEA for 26 years, headed the section in charge of Iran at the
IAEA's department of safeguards.

mk

Copyright 2004, All Rights Reserved By Islamic Republic of Iran 
Broadcasting News Network Sponsored By IRIB News Computer Center. 
E-Mail: Info@IRIBNEWS.ir 
*****************************************************************
 7 Reuters: Iran official hints at halting atomic work - paper 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 1:48PM EST

By Parisa Hafezi

TEHRAN (Reuters) - An adviser to Iran's top authority, Supreme
Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, suggested in remarks published on
Wednesday that Tehran might consider suspending sensitive atomic
work.

The comments are the latest in a series of conflicting signals from
Iranian officials on whether Iran would halt uranium enrichment,
which the West fears Tehran is using to build nuclear bombs. Iran
insists its plans are peaceful.

President George W. Bush said on Wednesday he believed the United
States and its allies were making progress toward solving their
disputes with Iran over its nuclear program peacefully but direct
talks with Tehran were unlikely to be successful.

"If I thought we could achieve success, I would sit down (with the
Iranians)," Bush told a news conference in Washington. "But I don't
think we can achieve success right now."

"We are more likely to achieve our goals when others are involved as
well."

In previous rounds of nuclear talks that collapsed, Iran said it was
open to discussing suspension but would explain that it was an
"illogical" step for Iran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
ruled out suspension in a speech on Sunday.

Ali Akbar Velayati, quoted by French daily Liberation, said Iran had
accepted suspension in the past but the move had not helped to end
the dispute.  Continued...

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 8 Reuters: Ex-aide says Rice misled Congress on Iran 

Thu Feb 15, 2007 12:38AM EST

By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Controversy over a possible missed U.S.
opportunity for rapprochement with Iran grew on Wednesday as former
aide accused Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice of misleading
Congress on the issue.

Flynt Leverett, who worked on the National Security Council when it
was headed by Rice, said a proposal vetted by Tehran's most senior
leaders was sent to the United States in May 2003 and was akin to
the 1972 U.S. opening to China.

Speaking at a conference on Capitol Hill, Leverett said he was
confident it was seen by Rice and then-Secretary of State Colin
Powell but "the administration rejected the overture."

Rice's spokesman denied she misled Congress and reiterated that she
did not see the proposal.

Separately, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns warned Iran it
risked further U.N. and other sanctions if it did not halt uranium
enrichment as the U.N. Security Council demanded.

He stressed there was still time for diplomacy before Iran reached a
critical point in its nuclear capability and said conflict with Iran
was not inevitable.

Washington remains patient and committed to negotiations with Tehran
and its carrot-and-stick approach with other major powers is
influencing Iran's internal debate, Burns told the Brookings
Institution think tank.  Continued...

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 9 Reuters: U.S. backs away from linking Iran govt to Iraq chaos 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 11:43AM EST

By Dean Yates

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The United States backed away on Wednesday from
a U.S. official's comments implicating Iran's government in arming
Iraqi militants and said it was not trying to "hype" evidence of
Iranian weapons being used in Iraq.

President George W. Bush said he did not know if Iran's leaders
ordered members of the Quds Force of Iran's Revolutionary Guards to
provide improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to militias in Iraq.

"What we do know is that the Quds Force was instrumental in
providing these deadly IEDs to networks inside of Iraq," he said.
"What we don't know is whether or not the head leaders of Iran
ordered the Quds Force to do what they did."

A senior U.S. military analyst, at an off-the-record briefing by
three officials in Baghdad on Sunday, indicated the "highest levels"
of Iran's government were involved in arming Iraqi militants with
weapons used to kill American soldiers.

Tensions were already high between the two arch-foes over Tehran's
nuclear plans.

But the analyst's comments were not supported by the head of the
U.S. joint chiefs of staff, Marine Corps General Peter Pace, who on
Tuesday said Iranian weapons found in Iraq did not mean the "Iranian
government per se ... is directly involved in doing this".

At a news conference in Baghdad on Wednesday, U.S. military
spokesman Major-General William Caldwell was repeatedly pressed if
he wanted to rescind the comments made by the analyst.  Continued...


Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 10 UPI: Bush: No Iran talks in offing

United Press International - 

Published: Feb. 14, 2007 at 11:47 AM

WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush said 
Wednesday he won't meet one-on-one with Iranian leaders unless he 
thinks success can be achieved.

Bush told a White House news conference he thinks it is unlikely 
bilateral talks would convince Iran to give up its nuclear 
program.

"If I thought we could achieve success, I would sit down. But I 
don't think we can achieve success right now," Bush said.

Bush said it is more likely success would be achieved if other 
nations are involved.

"I want to make sure the whole world stays engaged. I believe 
that's a more effective way of convincing the Iranians to give up 
their nuclear weapons," Bush said.

Š Copyright 2007United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 11 UPI: Lavrov: Russia supports dealing with Iran

United Press International - 

Published: Feb. 14, 2007 at 2:53 PM

ABU DHABI, Feb. 14 (UPI) -- Russian Foreign Minister Sergei 
Lavrov said his nation supports a compromise on the Iranian 
nuclear issue.

Lavrov, speaking Wednesday, said that rather than a resolution on 
sanctions against Iran, Russia sees a possible compromise with 
Tehran without imposing on non-proliferation efforts, Itar-Tass 
reported.

He suggested that in the place of a resolution of sanctions 
against Iran for its non-compliance with the International Atomic 
Energy Agency, Russia supports beginning negotiations with the 
country's leaders.

While Iran has been resilient in its stance to continue on with 
its nuclear program, international opposition has increased 
lately through allegations of nuclear weapon production.

Š Copyright 2007United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 12 UPI: Bush sure of facts on Iran weapons in Iraq

United Press International - 

Published: Feb. 14, 2007 at 11:23 AM

WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 (UPI) -- U.S. President George Bush said it 
is unclear whether those in the highest reaches of the Iranian 
government were aware of weapons being shipped to Iraq.

Bush on Wednesday told a White House news conference that it is 
clear that a faction of the government -- the Quds Force -- was 
responsible for shipping explosive devices to Iraqi insurgents. 
What is unclear, he said, was whether the Quds Force was acting 
independently or under the aegis of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali 
Khamenei.

"What's worse? That the government did know or that it didn't 
know?" Bush asked.

Bush said he is still willing to talk with the Iranian government 
if Tehran's nuclear program is suspended. Bush sidestepped a 
question on whether his rhetoric on Iran mirrors that which led 
to the invasion of Iraq.

Š Copyright 2007United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 13 AFP: Bush backs off key charge against Iran 

by Olivier Knox Wed Feb 14, 4:29 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US President George W. Bush said he was unsure 
whether Iran's leaders were behind shipments of arms being used 
to kill US soldiers in Iraq, undercutting a US charge levelled 
days earlier.

But he said there was no doubt that an elite force of Iran's
Revolutionary Guards was the source of powerful new improvised
explosive devices (IEDS) used by Iraqi fighters and vowed he would
"do something about it."

"Whether (Iranian President Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad ordered the Qods
Force to do this, I don't think we know. But we do know that they're
there," Bush told his first press conference since December 20.

Bush, who also dismissed as "preposterous" any suggestion that
Washington was fabricating charges against Tehran, ruled out direct
bilateral talks for now with the Islamic republic.

"If I thought we could achieve success, I would sit down. But I
don't think we can achieve success right now," he said, stressing
that he believed the ongoing multilateral approach to Iran's nuclear
programs was paying off.

"That's a more effective way of convincing the Iranians to give up
their nuclear weapons ambitions," he said. "And I believe we are
making good progress toward solving this issue peacefully."

"If they want us at the table, we're more than willing to come, but
there must be a verifiable suspension of this weapons program that
is causing such grave concern," he said. Tehran denies seeking
nuclear weapons.

Three days after anonymous US officials in Baghdad told a roomful of
reporters that "the senior levels of the Iranian government" had
approved weapons shipments to Iraqi fighters, Bush said he could not
vouch for it.

"I can say with certainty that the Qods force, a part of the Iranian
government, has provided these sophisticated IEDs that have harmed
our troops," he said.

"I do not know whether or not the Qods force was ordered from the
top echelons of government. But my point is what's worse -- them
ordering it and it happening, or them not ordering it and it
happening?

His comments came after the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of
Staff, Marine General Peter Pace, cast doubt on the allegation that
the highest levels of Iran's government were directing the weapons
flows.

Pace told Voice of America radio that the explosives were made in
Iran but added: "What I would not say is that the Iranian
government, per se, knows about this."

Pace's apparent break with the briefing in Baghdad added fuel to
criticisms that the Bush administration was exaggerating the case
against Iran and recalled the bitter debate over the flawed case for
invading Iraq.

"The idea that somehow we're manufacturing the idea that the
Iranians are providing IEDs is preposterous," countered Bush.

"When we find the networks that are enabling these weapons to end up
in Iraq, we will deal with them. If we find agents who are moving
these devices into Iraq, we will deal with them," said the US
president.

"We know they're there, we know they're provided by the Qods force.
We know the Qods force is a part of the Iranian government. I don't
think we know who picked up the phone and said to the Qods force, go
do this, but we know it's a vital part of the Iranian government,"
said Bush.

The US president spoke hours after the US military in Baghdad
formally repeated the charges made at the weekend briefing, where
officials spoke on condition that they not be named and recording
devices were banned.

Major General William Caldwell repeated the bulk of the charges --
but backtracked from Sunday's claim that the shipments initiated at
"the highest level" of the Iranian government, calling that an
analysts' "inference."

Copyright Š 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 14 AFP: US liaises with Russia, China over pressuring Iran - 

Wed Feb 14, 5:24 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States said it was working closely
with Russia and China on ratcheting up pressure on Iran if it did
not suspend its sensitive nuclear program by next week as mandated
by the United Nations.

"We had very good discussions with the Russian government just over
the last three or four days and also last week on this issue, and we
are rather comfortable where we are with the Russian Federation and
China, and the Iranians need to understand that," said US
Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns.

Russia and China have strong economic interests in Iran and had
watered down a UN Security Council resolution against Iran in
December.

Talks between Iran, Germany, Britain, France and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) collapsed last year over Tehran's
refusal to suspend uranium enrichment in return for political and
economic incentives.

That impasse led the UN Security Council to impose limited sanctions
on Iran, which was given until February 21 to halt its uranium
enrichment work or face more penalties, including extensive economic
sanctions.

"Next week on February 21, (IAEA chief) Mohamed ElBaradei will
report to the Security Council at our request on whether or not Iran
is complying with the terms of (UN Security Council) Resolution
1737," Burns told a forum in Washington.

"The obvious answer will be 'no' because we know that Iran has
kicked out some of the IAEA inspectors," he said.

The Security Council, Burns said, "will have to entertain the
possibility of a second Security Council resolution that will
gradually increase the pressure on Iran."

He said however that an "exit door" remained for the Iranians to
settle the nuclear issue diplomatically.

"What you are going to see is if the Iranians are going to
essentially snub the international community" and step up their
nuclear program, the sanctions would also be beefed up, Burns said.

Copyright Š 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 15 UPI: Outside View: Risks of war with Iran

United Press International - Security & Terrorism - 

2/14/2007 12:32:00 PM -0500

By SHIREEN T. HUNTER UPI Outside View Commentator

WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 (UPI) -- The crisis between Iran and the West
has escalated to an alarming degree. Barring a show of realism on
the part of Iran, resulting in its suspension of enrichment
activities, or a willingness on the part of the United States to
engage in talks without pre-conditions, a U.S.-Iran military
confrontation may become inevitable.

Before this is allowed to happen, the West should have a correct
assessment of the seriousness of the Iranian threat to regional and
international security, the consequences of a military attack on
Iran, and the relative costs and benefits.

Some Western and Middle Eastern commentators have offered highly
exaggerated assessments of the nature and scope of the Iranian
regional and global security threat, comparing it to the Soviet
Union and Nazi Germany.

Clearly, Iran's support for Hezbollah and militant Palestinian
groups, its non-constructive approach to the Arab-Israeli peace
process, and its ambiguous role in Iraq have destabilizing effects
in the region. And the morally and politically unacceptable
statements by Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, notably his
denial of the Holocaust and his threatening language toward Israel,
have created legitimate anxieties.

Yet these transgressions do not make Iran a Soviet Union or Nazi
Germany. Iran lacks the economic and military power to pose a
serious regional let alone global threat. Turkey, Pakistan, and
Israel have larger and better equipped armies, the latter two with
nuclear bombs. The Western-U.S. military presence the Persian Gulf,
Iraq, and Afghanistan decisively tips the military balance against
Iran.

Beyond helping Hezbollah and Palestinian groups, Iran is not engaged
in other terrorist acts. In Iraq, most bombings have been carried
out by Sunni insurgents, supported financially by official and
private Arab sources, and by volunteer fighters with support from
Arab governments. Shias have constituted most of the dead and
wounded.

In the last 200 years, Iran has not attacked its neighbors, but has
frequently been attacked by others, mostly recently by Iraq.

Iran's leadership potential in the region is also limited. For most
Arabs, it remains a Shia-Persian interloper that has no right to
meddle in Arab and Islamic affairs.

Iran's ideology is not democratic, but neither is it totalitarian or
racist. Notwithstanding Ahmedinejad's rants Iran has the largest
Jewish community outside of Israel in the Middle East.

Moreover, most Iranians and a good part of the political elite
oppose their government's policies and confrontational style and
language.

In sum, Iran can neither militarily threaten its neighbors nor
impose its political hegemony. On Arab-Israeli peacemaking, Iran's
impact is limited. Any time the Palestinians/Arabs and Israelis have
agreed on a plan, Iran's influence has counted for nothing. Under
such circumstances, notably after the 1993 Oslo Accords, even
Hezbollah has tried to gain political legitimacy.

Now the question must be asked what would be the consequences,
costs, and benefits of a military attack against Iran.

An attack on Iran would foster extreme instability from the Persian
Gulf to the Caspian Sea. Should an attack on Iran lead to its
territorial disintegration, as some would like to happen, this would
unleash centrifugal forces that would not remain limited to Iran.
The idea proposed by some that Iran should be reduced neatly to its
"Persian core" cannot be realized easily or cheaply or without
involving other countries, such as Azerbaijan, Turkey, Pakistan and,
potentially Russia. Iranian nationalism is stronger and its
neighbors' ethnic problems are more substantial than many believe.

Entities emerging from Iran's collapse would not be economically and
otherwise viable, raising the question of who would be responsible
for the enormous task of nation- building that would lie ahead. If
nation-building has not been easy in Afghanistan and Iraq, each of
which has some experience of statehood, why should it be easy in
Khuzistan, Baluchistan, or Kurdistan?

Benefits of an attack on Iran are also illusory. Turmoil in Iran or
its disintegration will not lead the Palestinians to give up their
quest for statehood or the Arabs to show flexibility on this issue.
On the contrary, once relieved of the Iranian challenge, Arab
countries may well become even less compromising on Palestine and
also on energy issues. Nor would Iran's diminution solve the problem
of Shia aspirations for legitimacy and emancipation after centuries
of discrimination and vilification. They would pursue their claims
even without Iran.

Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons or impose its
hegemony on the region, and it should be pressed to alter its
positions on key issues. But is the use of military force or
sustained efforts to destabilize Iran the best way to achieve these
goals? And do the benefits justify the high costs involved? Clearly
not.


(Shireen T. Hunter is a visiting fellow and adjunct professor at the
Georgetown University Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, and
was formerly deputy director of the Middle East program and director
of the Islam Program at the Center for Strategic and International
Studies, a Washington think tank.)


(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are
written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of
important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect
those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an
open forum, original submissions are invited.)


Š Copyright 2007 United Press International, Inc. All Rights
Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 16 IPS-English NORTH KOREA: Nuclear disarmament victory for
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:56:35 -0800


<x-flowed>
NORTH KOREA: Nuclear disarmament victory for diplomatic engagement: UAE papers

Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM)

ABU DHABI, Feb. 14 (WAM) - Two major United Arab Emirates (UAE) newspapers
today hailed the six-nation talks that persuaded North Korea to dismantle
its nuclear facilities, saying it was a significant triumph for diplomatic
engagement.

In its Wednesday editorial comment, the Dubai-based 'Khaleej Times' said:
"At a time when the argument for negotiated settlements is finding little
favour with the world's top policy makers, North Korea's nuclear
disarmament agreement following the six-nation talks marks a significant
triumph for diplomatic engagement."

    Recalling the tensions and circumstances that had long dominated the
North Korean nuke programme, the paper said the deal was commendable by
any standards, especially considering the "military strike" and "sea of
fire" exchanges that have dominated the headlines for the past few years.

    "The deal also epitomises the give-and-take philosophy central to
diplomatic settlements. Extremist as the North Korean regime is, there is
weight in the argument that it pushed the nuclear button to be taken more
seriously by the West in the negotiations. And the present course does
suggest that if more had been offered earlier, there might have been less
friction in East Asia," it said.

    This deal, said the paper, should set an important precedent for modern
day international politics. As more voices cry for moderation in
approaching the Iranian nuclear issue, it must be kept in mind that there
are few historical examples of force accomplishing more than talks,
whatever the limitations of the latter.

    "Instead of some of the scepticism being expressed by certain quarters
in the U.S. that the fuel for nuclear-freeze plays into Pyongyang's hands,
there should be appreciation that what was all but dismissed as a
political deadlock has begun to sort itself out. These are indeed
unprecedented times in terms of factors influencing international
relations. And as more precedents are set, settling of North Korea's
nuclear problem marks one for diplomacy," said the paper.

    The Dubai-based 'Gulf News' also concurred with this view, saying: "For
six years, the White House, with a Republican-controlled Congress, treated
North Korea with deep hostility, even referring to it as part of the axis
of evil. Weeks after the Democrats' sweeping gains, and all of a sudden a
deal is on the table. Pyongyang must act towards nuclear disarmament
within 60 days and in return the economically stricken country will
receive 50,000 tonnes of fuel oil or economic aid of equal value."

    It is difficult to imagine this type of agreement being reached just
four months ago, said the paper, adding: "The deal is remarkably similar
to that brokered by the Clinton White House and scrapped by the present
administration. It not only reflects the changed circumstances in
Washington, it demonstrates the persuasive power of an emerging China,
North Korea's closest ally. Beijing did the diplomatic spadework to
reconvene the long-stalled talks between itself, North and South Korea,
the U.S., Russia and Japan. But the over-riding lesson of the breakthrough
in Beijing shows that old-fashioned, sensible diplomacy can work and
should be given every opportunity in other nuclear disputes," concluded
the paper. (WAM)
                     (WAM)

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 17 IPS-English NORTH KOREA: Nuclear Roulette Spins - No Regime
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:56:39 -0800


<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS AP NA WD DV IP HU NU=20
NORTH KOREA: Nuclear Roulette Spins - No Regime Change
Antoaneta Bezlova
BEIJING, Feb 14 (IPS) - Perhaps more than anything else the deal on=20
denuclearising North Korea, drafted by China and agreed to by all six=20
parties in Beijing, has scuttled the United States' intentions of=20
engineering 'regime change' in the 'Hermit Kingdom'.

Tuesday's agreement marks the first real breakthrough in three years of=20
tortuous disarmament negotiations involving the U.S. and North Korea and=20
neighbours   China, Russia, Japan and South Korea. Under the terms,=20
Pyongyang will shut down its main nuclear reactor at the Yongbyon complex=
=20
and eventually dismantle its nuclear weapons programme in return for=20
energy aid, and allow international inspectors to verify its actions.

Despite being described as the =91implementation' document of an earlier=20
2005 denuclearisation agreement among the parties, the current deal has=20
more specifics and a precise timetable.

Pyongyang has 60 days to seal the Yongbyon plant, admit U.N. Internationa=
l
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors and disclose all its nuclear=20
programmes. In return, it will receive 50,000 tonnes of fuel oil or=20
economic aid of equal value.

The next phase, which has no timeframe, requires the North Korean regime=20
to disable all its nuclear facilities and list its reserves of plutonium,=
=20
the fuel that fed Pyongyang's first nuclear test last October. It will=20
receive another 950,000 tonnes of fuel when it completes that process.

Under the agreement, Japan and the U.S. would take the first steps toward=
s=20
normalising relations with Pyongyang, with Washington also agreeing to=20
begin the process of clearing North Korea from a list of state sponsors o=
f=20
terrorism. According to the agreement, Washington will also lift its=20
freeze on North Korean bank accounts in Macao's Banco Delta Asia within 3=
0=20
days.

U.S. President George W. Bush welcomed the deal as =94a very important fi=
rst=20
step=94 towards implementing a plan to make the Korean peninsula=20
nuclear-free.
=94The talks represent the best opportunity to use diplomacy to address=20
North Korea's nuclear programmes. They reflect the common commitment of=20
the participants to a Korean peninsula that is free of nuclear weapons,=94=
=20
he was quoted as saying.

China, which hosted the talks for over three years, declared the outcome =
a=20
=94breakthrough=94 in a very arduous process, and the result of =94powerf=
ul=20
diplomacy=94.

=94Not so long ago, there was doubt over whether the talks could move bey=
ond
stalemate,'' said an editorial in the official =91China Daily' on Wednesd=
ay.=20
=94The
successful end of the fifth round will rebuild the international=20
community's
confidence in the mechanism.=94

Despite both the U.S. and China praising the success of the multilateral=20
negotiations, some Korean watchers say the outcome would have been=20
impossible without a direct dialogue between North Korea and the U.S.=20
preceding the talks.

Last month, the U.S. held one-on-one talks with North Korea in Berlin,=20
discussing ways of ending the stalemate that has impeded the disarmament=20
negotiations, since 2005, when Washington imposed financial sanctions on=20
Pyongyang.

=94The important progress made during these bilateral meetings in Berlin=20
lessens the necessity of a multi-party forum like the six-party talks,=94=
  Li=20
Dunqiu, a Chinese expert on the Korean peninsula at the Chinese Academy o=
f=20
Social Sciences, said.

China has been eager to use any diplomatic tool to forestall a crisis on=20
the Korean peninsula. After North Korea's underground nuclear test in=20
October,
China showed unusual solidarity with the key countries that have a stake=20
in the North Korean crisis, by voting in favour of mandatory non-military=
=20
sanctions under the U.N. charter.

But ever since signing on the set of tough sanctions, Beijing has been=20
under scrutiny on its commitment to enforce them effectively, that ran th=
e=20
risk of causing the collapse of a strategic neighbour. The U.N. resolutio=
n=20
called on North Korea to abandon all nuclear programmes and other weapons=
=20
of mass destruction (WMD) in a =94complete, verifiable and irreversible=94=
=20
manner.

By comparison, the agreement reached this week in Beijing appears less=20
comprehensive and unequivocal as it omits reference to North Korea's=20
biological and chemical weapons programmes. It also postpones a resolutio=
n=20
of Pyongyang's suspected clandestine uranium enrichment programme.

China was quick to pledge its commitment to enforcing the provisions of=20
the new deal. =91'The Chinese government firmly supports the document and=
=20
will spare no efforts to take on its responsibilities,=94 State Councillo=
r=20
Tang Jiaxuan said at the end of the talks, according to the state-run=20
Xinhua News agency.

The deal however, has been criticised by some as a =94sell-out=94, which=20
preserves the status quo of the reclusive North Korean regime. Human=20
rights activists have documented the regime's long history of rampant=20
abuses against its own people -- from imprisoning mentally ill and=20
disabled in special camps to ruthlessly persecuting refugees. More than=20
two million North Korean people are believed to have perished during the=20
man-made famine of the late 1990s.
*****
+POLITICS-US: Korea Deal Marks Big Victory for Realists
(http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D36553)
+NORTH KOREA: Nuclear Talks - Who Blinks First?=20
(http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D36525)
+POLITICS: Doomsday Clock Ticking Faster - in Asia=20
(http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D36245)
+Nuclear Ambitions - IPS special coverage
(http://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/nuclear/index.asp)
(END/IPS/AP/NA/WD/IP/NU/DV/HU/AB/RDR/07)



=20
=3D 02141143 ORP008
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 18 UN Atomic Watchdog Chief Welcomes Accord On Dpr Korea's Nuclear Programme
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:01:23 -0500

UN ATOMIC WATCHDOG CHIEF WELCOMES ACCORD ON DPR KOREAS NUCLEAR PROGRAMME
 
New York, Feb 14 2007 11:00AM
The top United Nations official entrusted with preventing the proliferation 
of nuclear weapons today welcomed the agreement reached 
with the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) as a step 
in the right direction towards achieving a nuclear-free Korean 

UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Mohamed 
ElBaradei <" http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/News/2007/sixpartytalks.html">said 
he expected that his Agency, with the concurrence 
of its Board of Governors, will provide monitoring and verification 
required by the agreement reached yesterday in six-party talks 

The talks involving the DPRK, China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, 
Russia and the United States, have been going on sporadically in 
Beijing for several years but had so far failed to end nuclear 
weapons on the peninsula. The DPRK carried out its first proclaimed 
nuclear test in October, after which the UN Security Council imposed 
sanctions on the country. 

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon yesterday strongly welcomed the accord 
as the first step towards a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula and 
he urged all sides to sustain the current positive momentum to 
ensure it is implemented.
 2007-02-14 00:00:00.000 


___________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/ 
_______________________________

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 19 [NYTr] Hirsh: Behind Bush's N. Korea Flip-Flop
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:34:39 -0600 (CST)


Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Newsweek  Feb 14, 2007
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17136874/site/newsweek/

About Face

Bush's North Korea accord is a reversal for the administration -and a sign
that the administration's hardliners are falling from grace.

by Michael Hirsh

Feb. 13, 2007 - More than anything else he has done in his second term,
George W. Bush's embrace of a fuel-for-nukes accord with North Korea shows
that he is adjusting to the harsh realities of diplomacy-and straying ever
further from the ideology of regime change. The proof: the president has
cut a deal that is likely to help a member of his notorious "Axis of Evil,"
Kim Jong Il, stay in power longer, even while it may make the world safer.

The agreement announced today represents a major change in attitude that
goes beyond North Korea. The most evident sign is that the accord, under
which Pyongyang will immediately get 50 tons of emergency fuel oil with
nearly a million more tons to come, is plainly a reversal of the
administration's previous principled stand against the "nuclear blackmail"
that it accused Bill Clinton of engaging in. Until this week the
administration refused to reward "bad behavior"-secret weapons programs-by
promising dictators like Kim goodies in return for giving up nukes.
"There's a little bit of tripping over earlier rhetoric," says Michael
Green, the senior director for Asia on the National Security Council in
Bush's first term.

Another sign that a shift in attitude is afoot is the answer that Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice gave at a news conference today, when she was
asked about comments made by John Bolton, her just-departed U.N.
ambassador. Bolton told CNN that the deal "sends exactly the wrong signal
to would-be proliferators around the world: 'If we hold out long enough,
wear down the State Department negotiators, eventually you get rewarded'."
Bolton urged Bush to reject the deal. When Rice was asked, "Do you think
there's any substance to his criticism?" she replied tersely: "No, I
don't." She then made it clear that Bolton, the one-time favorite of Dick
Cheney and other hardliners, was so far out of the loop that he didn't know
what he was talking about. "I can assure you that the president of the
United States knows every detail of this agreement," she said.

Former senior administration members say the North Korea deal is evidence
of two big changes: one, several key hardliners have left, and the
influence of others, including Cheney, is waning; and two, that Bush is now
consumed with Iraq, Iran and the Middle East. "It was so clearly against
the approach we had tried to impose," says a former top Bush
nonproliferation official. "Why now?  I can think couple of reasons. One is
that he is completely overwhelmed with the Middle East and desperate for a
political victory anywhere. And a lot of people who were against engagement
have either left the administration, like Bolton and Bob Joseph [Rice's
former under secretary for counterproliferation], or are otherwise
preoccupied, like the vice president with the Scooter Libby trial [in which
Cheney's former chief of staff is accused of perjury]."

Another significant sign came the day before the agreement, when Bush was
asked in a C-SPAN interview whom he thought were the most underrated
presidents. "Well, George H.W. Bush is one of them," the president said.
"He followed President Reagan, who was such a really strong president that
people have yet to take a look at my dad.'' For Bush watchers who had long
portrayed the son as a committed Reaganite in a state of rebellion against
his father's centrist administration, this was a striking statement. Six
years into an administration marked by a reluctance to negotiate its way
out of trouble-most recently when Bush rejected the advice of his father's
secretary of State, Jim Baker, about sitting down with Iran and Syria-Bush
seems to have a new appreciation for his father's moderate views about
"talking to the enemy."

All of which leaves the question: is the North Korea pact a good deal?
Critics said it was full of pitfalls-not least of which is that it doesn't
directly address the disposition of Pyongyang's alleged arsenal of several
nuclear weapons, nor its secret uranium-enriching program. Asked about
this, Rice said that if North Korea is to get rewards beyond the first
phase, it will have to give up everything. "The joint statement covers the
fact that the North is to declare and abandon, dismantle all of its nuclear
programs," she said. "And everybody understands what  'all' means."

Other critics also said that the deal could have been negotiated six years
ago, before the North had already tested a nuclear weapon. And even some
former moderate officials of the Bush administration agreed with Bolton's
view that the accord sends a worrisome signal to other rogue states. "The
North Koreans wanted two things. They wanted serious negotiations. And they
wanted separate talks on financial issues. We told them to go screw
themselves until Oct. 9, when they tested. Then we say OK. To me that's
troublesome. You're reinforcing bad behavior," said the former senior
nonproliferation expert. Under the agreement, Kim's regime is getting the
kind of recognition it has long sought. Rice and the foreign ministers of
the other major parties-China, Japan, Russia and South Korea-are to meet
with the North Korean foreign minister for the first time after the initial
60-day phase, during which the North is to shut down its Yongbyon nuclear
plant and list all its nuclear programs.

Still, nuclear experts say the agreement promises a safer region-and
world-than a situation in which a desperate and out-of-control North Korea
continues to manufacture nuclear material and weapons. And the deal has a
couple of big advantages over the 1994 Agreed Framework, the Clinton-era
pact under which the North was to get 500,000 tons of heavy fuel oil each
year and billions of dollars' worth of civilian nuclear equipment in return
for freezing and "eventually" dismantling its plutonium program. "The price
tag is small compared to agreed framework," says Green. In addition,
between pressures applied together by the United States and an unusually
cooperative China, the North Korean regime is under unprecedented severe
financial and economic strain.

But even Rice admitted that "this is still the first quarter. There is
still a lot of time to go on the clock." Says Green: "I can imagine a dozen
ways North Koreans could make mischief with this deal," including perhaps
refusing to acknowledge its secret uranium program. But for the Bush
administration, it is a first: a new deal for the Axis of Evil.

) 2007 Newsweek, Inc.
       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 20 New York Times: In Shift, Accord on North Korea Seems to Be Set - 

China Photos/Getty Images

The chief American envoy, Christopher R. Hill, left, walked outside
a guest house in Beijing on Monday.

By JIM YARDLEY and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: February 13, 2007

BEIJING, Tuesday, Feb. 13  The United States and four other nations
reached a tentative agreement to provide North Korea with roughly
$400 million in fuel oil and aid, in return for the Norths starting
to disable its nuclear facilities and allowing nuclear inspectors
back into the country, according to American officials who have
reviewed the proposed text.

While the accord sets a 60-day deadline for North Korea to
accomplish those first steps toward disarmament, it leaves until an
undefined moment in the future  and to another negotiation  the
actual removal of North Koreas nuclear weapons and the fuel that it
has manufactured to produce them.

Bush administration officials said they believed that the other
nations participating in the talks  China, Japan, South Korea and
Russia  would consent to the tentative agreement as soon as
Tuesday. The parties still await a final confirmation from the North
Korean leader, Kim Jong-il. The tentative agreement was forwarded to
the respective national capitals Tuesday morning.

In essence, if the North agrees to the deal, a country that only
four months ago conducted its first nuclear test will have traded
away its ability to produce new nuclear fuel in return for immediate
energy and other aid. It would still hold on to, for now, an arsenal
that American intelligence officials believe contains more than a
half-dozen nuclear weapons or the fuel that is their essential
ingredient.

The accord also leaves unaddressed the fate of a second and
still-unacknowledged nuclear weapons program that the United States
accused North Korea of buying from the Pakistani nuclear engineer
Abdul Qadeer Khan in the late 1990s, in what appeared to be an
effort to circumvent a nuclear freeze the North negotiated in 1994
with the Clinton administration.

Negotiations had appeared near collapse on Sunday over North Koreas
demands for huge shipments of fuel oil and electricity.

Under the new tentative agreement, the oil and aid for North Korea
would be provided by South Korea, China and the United States 
meaning that President Bush would need to win Congressional
approval. That proved difficult for the Clinton administration,
which constantly fought hawks in Congress over providing fuel oil to
the impoverished nation under the earlier accord.

Japan has declined to participate in providing oil or aid until it
resolves separate issues with North Korea about the abduction of
some of its citizens by the North, American officials said.

In Washington on Monday night, administration officials declined to
call the first phase of the new agreement a nuclear freeze. The
term has echoes of the Clinton accord, which Mr. Bush had criticized
because it failed to force the North to ship its nuclear fuel out of
the country before it received significant aid. The officials
insisted that the current agreement was different because the North
will not receive light-water nuclear reactors, like the ones it was
promised in the 1994 agreement, and because the agreement will also
be signed by the Norths immediate neighbors, including China.

Beijing was the Norths ally in the Korean War and its protector for
decades, but relations have been strained and the Chinese leadership
was apparently pressuring the North to accept the new agreement.

If they renege on this, said one senior administration official,
who would not speak on the record because the deal had not been
signed, they are sticking their fingers into the eyes of the
Chinese.

Nonetheless, some administration officials acknowledged that they
had concluded that a step-by-step accord was their only choice and
that it would be impossible to set a schedule for the Norths
disarmament without taking initial steps to build trust.

Everybody had to make some changes to try to narrow the
differences, the chief American negotiator, Christopher R. Hill,
told reporters as he returned to his hotel at 2:41 a.m. on Tuesday.

Mr. Hill was expected to meet again on Tuesday in Beijing with
envoys from China, South Korea, Japan, Russia and North Korea to
learn if each nation has approved the deal. He said he had been in
frequent contact with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during the
late-night negotiations and that he believed the Bush administration
would support the agreement. We feel it is an excellent draft, he
said. I dont think we are the problem.

If Mr. Hill is correct, it marks a major change of course for an
administration that has been beset by six years of virulent internal
arguments over whether to negotiate with North Korea or squeeze the
government of Mr. Kim until it collapses. Hawks in the
administration, including many allies of Vice President Dick Cheney,
have opposed any deal that would provide aid to the North before it
disgorges its arsenal.

Even before the preliminary agreement was signed in Beijing, one of
Mr. Cheneys protégés, John R. Bolton, who left his post as American
ambassador to the United Nations just two months ago, denounced the
accord. This is a very bad deal, he said on CNN, urging President
Bush to reject it. He added that it contradicts fundamental
premises of the presidents policy, and he said that it made the
administration look very weak.

Gary Samore, who was the top nonproliferation official in the
Clinton White House and who negotiated with North Korea, commended
the Bush administration for negotiating an accord with the North,
but said: Unfortunately, it is three years, eight bombs and one
nuclear test too late. But better late than never.

Under the details of the deal, as described by American and Asian 
officials, the $400 million in aid would be disbursed to the 
North as it meets its initial commitments, probably over the 
course of a year. The first of those must be completed in the 
next 60 days, including the "permanent disablement" of the 
country's existing nuclear facilities at Yongbyon, its main 
nuclear complex north of the capital, Pyongyang.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, whose inspectors were 
kicked out of North Korea four years ago, also would need to be 
invited back in. And the North would have to prepare a "complete 
declaration" of all its nuclear facilities, turning that over to 
all of the parties in the talks and the I.A.E.A.

That would pave the way for a second phase, in which "working 
groups" would negotiate the details of disarmament, including 
turning over weapons and fuel. Other groups would explore 
normalization of relations, a peace treaty formally ending the 
Korean War, and other economic aid in return for disarmament.

But the disarmament process promises to be enormously complex, 
far harder than dismantling Libya's comparatively small nuclear 
complex three years ago. Libya never produced nuclear material. 
North Korea is believed to have made one or two weapons, or the 
fuel for them, nearly two decades ago, and perhaps a half-dozen 
or more since 2003. But American officials are uncertain exactly 
how many weapons the North possesses, and in the second phase of 
the accord, the North would have to explain what it did with the 
uranium-enrichment equipment that it is said to have purchased 
from Dr. Khan.

"We don't know what state that program is in," one senior 
official with access to the intelligence information said Monday. 
"We only know what they appear to have bought," based in part on 
Pakistani interrogations of Dr. Khan.

United Nations sanctions against North Korea put into place after 
last year's nuclear test are expected to remain in effect for the 
next year, American officials said.

Some experts doubt that the North will ever agree to turn over 
its weapons, which it considers its main bargaining chip with the 
West, and Mr. Kim's only insurance policy against being toppled. 
"This is a freeze with a promise to negotiate subsequent 
disarmament," said Mr. Samore. "And a North Korean promise to 
negotiate later is pretty worthless."

Mr. Hill acknowledged that he had a lot of negotiating ahead of 
him. "This is only one phase of denuclearization," he said. 
"We're not done."

If the deal is approved, Mr. Hill added, the new working groups 
could be quickly established while chief negotiators would likely 
reconvene in Beijing as soon as next month. He said the tentative 
agreement would create a succession of deadlines that would need 
to be met as a precondition of the deal.

North Korea had nearly scuttled the negotiations in recent days 
by insisting on a huge energy aid package. Varying reports in 
Asia suggested that North Korea had demanded two million tons of 
heavy fuel oil and two million kilowatts of electricity in 
exchange for its approval of any new agreement, far less than it 
got.

Jim Yardley reported from Beijing, and David E. Sanger from 
Washington.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
*****************************************************************
 21 Korea Herald: Nuke pact will pave way to peace: Roh
 
MADRID - President Roh Moo-hyun in Spain yesterday said the latest
breakthrough in the nuclear talks will pave the way for permanent
peace on the Korean Peninsula and help raise Korea's economic credit
rating because of the reduced security threat.

"By negotiating and forging permanent peace on the Korean Peninsula
that goes beyond the nuclear problem, we will be able to eradicate
the outside factors that prevent South Korea from earning the
highest credit rating," Roh said during a dinner hosted for Korean
residents at the Palacio del Pardo.

"When a multilateral security framework of Northeast Asia is
established (following the nuclear deal) South Korea will be
geopolitically stretching in all directions. The geographical
location itself places Korea in a good credit position."

The six-party talks in Beijing agreed earlier this week on the
first-step implementation measures requiring North Korea to shut
down its nuclear activities in Yongbyon in return for 50,000 tons of
heavy fuel oil within 60 days.

Roh is currently in Europe traveling through Madrid, the Vatican
City State, and Rome.

On his last day in Spain on Wednesday, Roh toured the exhibition
site of the world renowned International Contemporary Art Fair in
Madrid. South Korea has been invited as the honorary guest.

Expressing gratitude for Spain's hospitality, Roh said he felt the
entire city was a cultural treasure.

During the dinner with 200 Korean residents, Roh refrained from
making any comments regarding domestic politics. Defectors from the
ruling Uri Party registered themselves as a new floor negotiating
group this week, while some remaining Uri members are calling for
the president to leave the party.

Roh's itinerary in Spain included meeting with King Juan Carlos and
summit talks with Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez.

At the summit discussion on Tuesday, Roh invited the premier to come
to South Korea.

Roh also asked for the Spanish government's cooperation to help
families of resident South Korean workers when applying for visas.
Zapatero agreed to look into it.

Currently, South Korean company employees coming to work in Spain
must wait between four and six months to receive a working visa. It
takes an additional two or three months for the families to acquire
the visa.

Following the four-day visit in Spain, Roh was set to arrive in Rome
on Thursday. Roh's schedule begins with the Vatican City and a
meeting with Pope Benedict XVI.

The two are expected to share discussions a variety of issues,
including the situation on the Korean peninsula.

The Korean leader will then have a luncheon with Cardinal Tarcisio
Bertone.

While in Rome, Roh is also scheduled to meet Italian President
Giorgio Napolitano and Prime Minister Romano Prodi to discuss
bilateral issues.

Korea and Italy formed diplomatic ties in 1884.

Italy was also the first EU country to form diplomatic relations
with North Korea in 2000.

Following the summit talks with the Italian prime minister, Roh and
Prodi will hold a joint news conference.

Roh leaves for home on Friday.

(angiely@heraldm.com)

By Lee Joo-hee Korea Herald correspondent

2007.02.15
*****************************************************************
 22 Korea Herald: [EDITORIAL]No small achievement
 
North Korea has agreed to shut down its nuclear facilities in
Yongbyon and subject them to international inspections within 60
days, in return for energy aid of an initial 50,000 tons of heavy
fuel oil. It is set to receive a further 950,000 tons if it goes on
to disable all nuclear facilities in its possession.

These are the core parts of a new agreement the United States, South
Korea, China, Japan and Russia concluded with North Korea in Beijing
on Tuesday. The accord is nothing more than a first step toward
North Korea's complete, verifiable and irrevocable nuclear
dismantlement. If past experience is any guide, there are likely to
be many hurdles along the long road to a final negotiated
settlement. North Korea has a track record of hard bargaining.

Nonetheless, the accord is no small achievement, given the threat
that the North Korean nuclear test in October last year posed to
regional security. The possibility has dramatically diminished of
military action remaining as a viable option, as it once did, to the
United States.

It is no accident or coincidence that the new six-party agreement
sounds familiar. It is indeed a follow-through on the joint
statement issued by the six parties on Sept. 19, 2005, which
included a provision on energy aid.

Moreover, the provision of 50,000 tons of heavy oil was contained in
the 1994 U.S.-North Korean Agreed Framework concluded by the Clinton
administration, but later repudiated by George W. Bush. In an
unmistakably positive development, the Bush administration now
appears to be mothballing its alleged North Korea policy guideline
of ABC, or "anything but Clinton," and borrowing quite a lot from
the Agreed Framework.

Both documents refer not only to energy aid but also to removing
obstacles to establishing formal relations and promoting economic
exchanges between the two adversaries. The agenda for bilateral
dialogue, set to start within 30 days, will certainly include a
demand that United States stop designating North Korea as a state
sponsor of terrorism.

Now a pressing issue for South Korea is how to finance its share of
the "economic, energy and humanitarian assistance" of 1 million tons
of heavy oil, which is estimated will cost 62 billion won. This
should not be too much of a problem, given a remark by a budget
officer that the government has 140 billion won in reserves for
inter-Korean economic cooperation, in addition to a budget of 870
billion won for inter-Korean projects.

But South Korea would have to shoulder a far greater burden if the
process of dismantling the nuclear facilities should proceed without
a hitch. The reason is that it has in the past committed itself to
providing North Korea with 2 million kilowatts of electric power,
which would cost up to 1 trillion won each year, according to some
estimates.

On top of this hefty cost of promoting denuclearization, South Korea
will also have to help finance the construction of light-water
reactors. Under the Sept. 19 joint statement, South Korea and the
four other parties are required "to discuss, at an appropriate time,
the subject of the provision of a light water reactor to the DPRK,"
or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

South Korean assistance on such a scale can only be justified when
North Korea ultimately commits itself to destroying all nuclear
weapons in its arsenal. It will also have to pledge not to test,
produce, possess, and store nuclear weapons again. In a nutshell, it
will have to help eliminate the danger of nuclear war and thus help
build a peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

2007.02.15
*****************************************************************
 23 Digital Chosunilbo: How Long Will Denuclearization of the Peninsula Take?

Updated Feb.14,2007 12:13 KST

The accord reached in six-party talks in Beijing on Tuesday is
merely a first step toward divesting North Korea of its nuclear
program and facilities. The real process of dismantling them will
start only after the agreement is put into practice.

ĄßReporting the program

If North Korea complies with the initial steps to nuclear
disablement within 60 days, the most crucial moment could happen
when it has to reports its nuclear materials and facilities and the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) starts inspections. In
1992, the IAEA discovered two nuclear facilities that North Korea
had not reported, but its request to inspect them was rejected by
the North. That was the beginning of the first nuclear crisis.
Nobody can rule out a similar incident this time. In October 2002,
the U.S. says, North Korea admitted to a uranium enrichment program,
causing a second-round crisis. North Korea has since then denied the
existence of such a program. And if it continues to do so and fails
to report it to the IAEA, there is a danger that the rewards will be
suspended.

Both South Korea and the United States urge North Korea to
ultimately destroy about 44 kg of plutonium that it is estimated to
have produced. Given that this material can be turned into nuclear
weapons any time, Seoul and Washington stress the importance of
having the North report it as soon as possible and dismantle it. But
North Korea is highly likely to try to start protracted negotiations
over the issue.


This DigitalGlobe satellite file image shot on Feb. 5, and released
Feb. 7, 2003 shows the nuclear reactor site in Yongbyon, North
Korea./AFP-Yonhap



Ąß The light-water reactor, again

While implementing the initial steps, North Korea will likely bring
up the light-water reactor it has long demanded. Since the 2005
statement of principles mentions "negotiationsĄą on the supply of a
safer -- i.e. non-plutonium producing -- light-water reactor, North
Korea has called for it at every opportunity, including the
six-party talks. But the U.S. maintains that only after North Korea
dismantles its nuclear facilities can it even begin discussions on
the matter. Thus there always exists fodder for a fresh dispute.
Besides, there is the question whether to shut down the site in
Gilju, North Hamgyeong Province where North Korea conducted a
nuclear test last year. Other participating nations, including South
Korea, want it shut down to prevent the North from conducting
another test. North Korea thinks differently.

Views are divided over how long it will take to finish the whole
process. U.S. President George W. Bush wants to complete it before
his term of office expires in January 2009. It took four years and
four months since the second nuclear crisis that North Korea agreed
to freeze operation of the Yongbyon nuclear reactor again, which was
first shut under the 1994 Geneva Accord. If this is the standard,
all the participants will be dead before North Korea completely
dismantles its nuclear facilities, let alone its nuclear program.

(englishnews@chosun.com )
*****************************************************************
 24 Korea Times: IAEA Set to Resume Inspection of NK Nuke Facilities

Hankooki.com > The Korea Times > Nation > North Korea Today

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) plans to send its
nuclear inspectors back to North Korea following the six-nation
denuclearization agreement, the IAEA chief said Tuesday.

``The IAEA will go back to North Korea to ensure that all nuclear
activities are for peaceful purposes,ĄŻĄŻ IAEA Director General
Mohamed ElBaradei told reporters during a visit to Luxembourg.

He did not say when the inspectors would go but said it would be
discussed at a meeting of the agency's board of governors on March 6.

ElBaradei welcomed the agreement, although he had yet to see all the
details. ``It's a step in the right direction,ĄŻĄŻ he said. ``This
is the first part of the process.ĄŻĄŻ

He said the agreement could serve as an example for ending the
international standoff over Iran's nuclear program.

``We should find a way to get Iran to sit around the table and talk
to world powers,ĄŻĄŻ ElBaradei said.

The Vienna-based U.N. agency has been shut out of North Korea for
four years and ElBaradei has frequently urged North Korea to give up
its nuclear ambitions by returning to the Nuclear Nonproliferation
Treaty (NPT) it quit in 2003 and allowing back agency inspectors.

U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon also welcomed TuesdayĄŻs nuclear deal,
calling it the ``first practical stageĄŻĄŻ toward a nuclear-free
Korean Peninsula.

In a statement, Ban said the constructive effort by the
international community can eventually result in strengthening the
global non-proliferation regime as well as in contributing to
durable peace, security and prosperity in the region.

Ban, the former South Korean foreign minister, urged the
participants _ South and North Korea, the U.S., China, Japan and
Russia _ to make every effort to sustain the current positive
momentum and ensure that the accord is implemented as agreed.

02-14-2007 15:03
  
*****************************************************************
 25 AFP: Japan faces isolation over North Korea 

Wed Feb 14, 2:53 AM ET

TOKYO (AFP) - Japan is faced with hard choices on North Korea 
with its hardline stance leaving it the odd man out after a 
compromise deal on the communist state's nuclear programme.

Japan has ruled out any funding for the agreement, reached Tuesday
in six-nation talks that included Tokyo, until it resolves a row
with North Korea over its past kidnappings of Japanese civilians.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who built his career campaigning on the
emotionally charged abduction dispute, told parliament Wednesday
that the issue "is our top priority."

But Japan is increasingly alone. Its chief ally, the United States,
has compromised with the state which US President George W. Bush
once derided as part of an "axis of evil."

"The deal seems to be the result of a change in US policy to stress
dialogue instead of pressure on North Korea, which means Japan is
isolated in the six-party talks," said Masafumi Iida, a researcher
at Japan's National Institute For Defence Studies.

"Given that the United States is stuck in turmoil over Iraq and the
Iranian nuclear issue, and its domestic politics are increasingly
influenced by Democrats critical of President Bush's tough line
against North Korea, Japan is now the only nation to maintain a hard
line against Pyongyang," he said.

Japan sees itself as the chief target of North Korea, which fired a
missile over its main island in 1998.

In 2002, North Korea admitted kidnapping Japanese civilians in the
1970s and 1980s to train its spies. It allowed five victims and
their families to return to Japan.

But Japan says more abductees -- the most famous being Megumi
Yokota, who was snatched in 1977 when she was only 13 -- are alive
and kept under wraps.

Abe was an early advocate for the kidnap victims' families. He
enjoyed high popularity after slapping sweeping sanctions on North
Korea in response to its October nuclear test, which took place days
into his premiership.

But Abe's poll ratings have since slipped due to domestic scandals,
and his uncompromising stance on North Korea has not been without
criticism.

Taku Yamasaki, a ruling-party lawmaker close to Abe's predecessor
Junichiro Koizumi, who paid two landmark visits to Pyongyang, said
Japan should chip in for the nuclear deal, even if the abduction
issue is unresolved.

"I don't buy the view that the denuclearisation of Korean Peninsula
should be left up to other countries," said Yamasaki, who himself
visited North Korea last month.

"It is Japan that will be the chief beneficiary of
denuclearisation," he told reporters.

Masao Okonogi, a North Korea expert at Tokyo's Keio University, said
Abe is too identified with his hawkish stance to ease it now,
especially ahead of July's upper house elections seen as uncertain
for the ruling party.

But Okonogi predicted that Japan may eventually be forced to adapt
to new realities.

Despite the Bush administration's insistence on six-way talks, the
United States and North Korea have increasingly been hashing out
differences in bilateral meetings.

Abe's government also has cooler ties with the US than did Koizumi,
who was one of Bush's closest allies. Two of Abe's top cabinet
ministers have recently offered unusually blunt critiques of US
policy on Iraq.

US Vice President Dick Cheney is scheduled to visit Japan next week
amid the bilateral strains.

"The move towards direct talks between Pyongyang and Washington
during the latest negotiations on the North Korean nuclear issue
could mean that things will happen more quickly than now expected,"
Okonogi said.

"And if the denuclearisation process proceeds rapidly, it would
result in a diplomatic pitfall for the Abe administration --
isolation from the international framework."

Copyright Š 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 26 AFP: Asian press cautious on NKorea nuclear deal 

Wed Feb 14, 2:42 AM ET

TOKYO (AFP) - Asian newspapers have voiced caution about North 
Korea's agreement to shut down key atomic facilities, warning 
that the deal still left the reclusive state with an arsenal of 
nuclear weapons.

Press commentators viewed the agreement as only first steps but
called it a sign of a new pragmatism by a weakened US President
George W. Bush.

The Japanese media were among the most sceptical, saying that their
country was no safer for Tuesday's agreement with North Korea sealed
during six-nation talks in Beijing.

"The most important thing to bear in mind is that the latest
agreement does not mean that Pyongyang's nuclear development has
stopped," the top-selling Yomiuri Shimbun said in an editorial.

"Neither has North Korea promised to halt nuclear tests," it added.

"If North Korea succeeds in downscaling nuclear weapons and
developing a ballistic missile with nuclear warheads, Japan -- which
is within reach of a Rodong missile -- would face an even more
serious threat."

The agreement would see North Korea close key nuclear facilities in
exchange for energy aid and US diplomatic concessions, although
Pyongyang later said it would be only a temporary suspension.

Japan sees itself as a primary target for North Korea, which shot a
missile over its main island in 1998 and tested an atom bomb last
year.

Japan has ruled out funding the deal due to a separate dispute with
North Korea over its kidnappings of Japanese civilians in the 1970s
and 1980s.

The liberal Asahi Shimbun, for its part, noted that the agreement
does not clearly refer to North Korea's alleged uranium enrichment,
a dispute that ruined an earlier deal in 1994.

"We will eventually need to face up to this issue to seek the
complete abandonment of nuclear programmes by North Korea," the
Asahi said.

In South Korea, conservative newspapers also regretted that the
agreement only mentioned North Korea's nuclear facilities, not its
existing bombs.

"After all, the outcome of the talks represents no more than a first
step toward our goal -- the Republic of Korea should be freed
completely from nuclear fears through the denuclearisation of the
Korean peninsula," said the largest circulation Chosun Ilbo.

The English-language Korea Times said the most important element was
"North Korea's determination to abide by the accord."

"Pyongyang should prove it is a reliable dialogue partner by
faithfully adhering to every small detail," it said.

But newspapers also saw a change of approach from Bush, who had
lumped together North Korea with Iran and Saddam Hussein's Iraq as
an "axis of evil" in 2002.

The deal reflects "the Bush administration's new-found willingness
to embrace pragmatism and compromise," said an analysis in the
Indian daily The Hindu.

"Under siege because of the Iraq fiasco and facing mounting
international criticism of its bellicose language towards Iran, the
US has chosen to cut its losses in the Korean peninsula," it said.

The most positive assessment of the agreement came from state-run
newspapers in China, North Korea's closest ally which had faced US
calls to rein in Pyongyang.

"This document not only puts a full stop on the fifth round of the
six-party talks, but it represents an important and solid step
forward in the process of denuclearising the Korean Peninsula," the
People's Daily said in an editorial.

Copyright Š 2007 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 27 IAEA: Director General Welcomes Latest Outcome of Six-Party Talks

Web IAEA.org

Staff Report

14 February 2007

IAEA Director General ElBaradei speaks with journalists in
Luxembourg 13 February. He was joined by Luxembourg´s Foreign
Minister Jean Asselborn. (Photo: AP)

Speaking to journalists in Luxembourg 13 February, IAEA Director
General Mohamed ElBaradei welcomed the outcome of the latest Six
Party talks on the Democratic People´s Republic of Korea (DPRK)
nuclear programme, welcoming it as "a step in the right direction."

Dr. ElBaradei said he expects that the Agency, with the concurrence
of the Board of Governors, will provide monitoring and verification
required by the agreement.

Dr. ElBaradei was in Luxembourg on an official visit.

The Third Session of the Fifth Round of the Six-Party Talks was held
in Beijing 8-13 February 2007 and included delegations from China,
the DPRK, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Russia, and the USA. The
Parties held discussions on the actions each Party will take in the
initial phase for the implementation of the Joint Statement of 19
September 2005.

Copyright Š, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100,
Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria
Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail:
*****************************************************************
 28 Guardian Unlimited: Korean Nuclear Deal Delays Disarmament 

From the Associated Press

Wednesday February 14, 2007 9:01 AM

AP Photo BEJ110

By ALEXA OLESEN

Associated Press Writer

  BEIJING (AP) - A hard-won disarmament pact that the U.S. and 
four other nations struck with North Korea on Tuesday requires 
the communist nation to halt its nuclear programs in exchange for 
oil while leaving the ultimate abandonment of those weapons 
projects to a potentially trouble-filled future.

  In a sign of potential problems to come, North Korea's state 
news agency said the country was receiving 1 million tons of oil 
for a ``temporary suspension'' of its nuclear facilities - and 
failed to mention the full disarmament for which the agreement 
calls.

     It wasn't clear if the report represented an attempt by the 
government to backtrack on the deal, or was simply a statement of 
bluster for a deeply impoverished domestic audience that 
Pyongyang has rallied around the nuclear program as a cause for 
national pride.

  And by tackling so many issues in a process likely to take 
years, the deal could unravel, pulled apart by differing agendas 
of its six signers, which also include China, South Korea, Russia 
and Japan.

  ``We have a lot of work to do,'' U.S. Assistant Secretary of 
State Christopher Hill told reporters. ``It's certainly not the 
end of the process, it's really just the end of the beginning of 
the process.''

 Nevertheless, the agreement marks a turnabout for North Korea, 
which rattled the world only four months ago when it tested a 
nuclear device. If Pyongyang follows through with its promises, 
they would be the first moves the communist state has made to 
scale back its atomic development since it kicked out 
international inspectors and restarted its sole operating nuclear 
reactor in 2003.

   ``These talks represent the best opportunity to use diplomacy 
to address North Korea's nuclear programs,'' President Bush said 
in a statement. ``They reflect the common commitment of the 
participants to a Korean Peninsula that is free of nuclear 
weapons.''

 U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon ``strongly welcomes'' the 
deal as ``the first practical stage towards a non-nuclear 
peninsula,'' said his spokeswoman, Michele Montas.

  Ban, who had been deeply involved in the six-nation talks as 
South Korea's foreign minister last year, urged participants to 
make every effort to ensure that this accord is implemented as 
agreed.

  Robert J. Einhorn, a former State Department official who 
visited North Korea with then-Secretary of State Madeleine 
Albright, said Americans should applaud the agreement, but he 
predicted it would come under heavy questioning from both the 
right and the left.

 He said, ``I think a number of people are going to ask the 
question, `Couldn't this deal have been concluded three or four 
years ago before North Korea conducted its nuclear test and 
acquired enough additional plutonium to build anywhere from six 
to 10 nuclear weapons?'''

 On the right, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton said the 
agreement rewards North Korea for bad behavior while encouraging 
Iran to ignore international demands that it roll back its 
nuclear program and hold out for a better deal.

 ``I will be the saddest man in Washington'' if Bush goes along 
with the agreement, Bolton told reporters. ``I think the 
agreement is fundamentally flawed.''

     The accord, completed at a Chinese government guesthouse by 
negotiators from six countries after tortuous talks, lays out an 
ambitious agenda. It sets a firm 60-day timetable for North Korea 
to seal its main nuclear reactor and begin accounting for other 
nuclear programs.

  Within that time, more talks are planned on ending the 
hostilities between North Korea and the United States and Japan 
that have made northeast Asia a tense corner of the world. In 
return, North Korea will receive 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil, a 
modest down payment on a promised 1 million tons in oil or aid of 
a similar value if it ultimately disarms. One million tons of oil 
would be equivalent to more than two-thirds of North Korea's 
entire oil consumption in 2004, according to the CIA Factbook. 
Hill said the aid package was worth about $250 million at current 
prices.

 In the negotiations, envoys debated who would pay for North 
Korea's disarmament. China, the U.S., South Korea and Russia 
agreed to foot the bill though Moscow may contribute in the form 
of debt relief. Japan has refused to provide aid until Pyongyang 
fully accounts for the abductions of Japanese citizens by North 
Korea.

   ``We understand it marks the first concrete step by North 
Korea toward its nuclear dismantlement,'' Japanese Prime Minister 
Shinzo Abe said after the accord was struck in Beijing. ``But our 
position that Japan cannot provide support without a resolution 
of the abduction issue is unchanged.''

   Disarmament, however, is likely to remain the thorniest 
problem.

  ``What if North Korea doesn't show them to inspectors, if they 
say we've stopped this and shut down that, what if they say you 
have to trust us?'' said Liu Gongliang, a physicist at China's 
Institute of Applied Physics and Computational Mathematics who 
has followed North Korea's nuclear program for the Chinese 
government.

    Under the deal, the North is required to seal its main 
nuclear reactor and related facilities at Yongbyon, north of the 
capital, within 60 days and allow inspections by the 
International Atomic Energy Agency.

  Senior IAEA figures have met regularly with North Korean 
diplomats in past months preparing for such a mission, and a 
diplomat familiar with the status of preparations told The 
Associated Press that IAEA inspectors could be on site ``within 
days'' once given the go-ahead.

  But no timetable was set for a final declaration by North Korea 
of all its nuclear programs and their ultimate dismantling.

    North Korea has sidestepped previous agreements. It allegedly 
operated its uranium-based weapons program even as it froze a 
plutonium-based one, sparking the latest nuclear crisis in late 
2002. The country is believed to have countless mountainside 
tunnels in which to hide projects.

  The uranium program was not explicitly addressed in the 
agreement. But, Hill said, ``I certainly have made very clear 
repeatedly that we need to ensure that we know precisely the 
status of that.''

     The nuclear issue has frequently been ensnarled by lingering 
frictions between the North and its neighbors, as well as a 
dispute over U.S. sanctions against the regime for alleged money 
laundering and counterfeiting activities. Hill said the sanctions 
issue would be resolved within 30 days, but didn't provide 
specifics.

   The United States will also begin the process of removing 
North Korea from its designation as a terror-sponsoring state and 
also on ending U.S. trade sanctions, but no deadlines have been 
set, according to the agreement. Washington's blacklisting of a 
Macau bank in September 2005 had led the North to a 
more-than-yearlong boycott of the six-nation talks during which 
it tested its first nuclear bomb.

   The accord also would set up working groups expected to 
discuss establishing a permanent peace settlement to replace the 
cease-fire that ended the Korean War in 1953.

  ``What is very important about this agreement,'' said South 
Korean President Roh Moo-hyun, ``is that it not only resolves the 
North Korea nuclear issue itself, but in a further step, it 
includes a clause for discussions, negotiations on establishing a 
permanent peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.''

 The two Koreas planned a meeting Thursday on resuming 
Cabinet-level talks, which have been stalled for months.

Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 29 IPS-English LATIN AMERICA: Celebrating 40 Nuclear-Weapon-Free
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:47:47 -0800


<x-flowed>
ROMAIPS LA IP NU=20
LATIN AMERICA: Celebrating 40 Nuclear-Weapon-Free Years
Diego Cevallos

MEXICO CITY, Feb 14 (IPS) - Latin America and the Caribbean celebrated=20
Wednesday the 40th anniversary of the pact that declared this region free=
=20
of nuclear weapons and made it a leader in nuclear disarmament in the=20
world.

The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and th=
e=20
Caribbean, also known as the Tlatelolco Treaty, was the first of its kind=
,=20
and encouraged other regions of the world to create similar instruments.

However, the body that administers the treaty is in serious financial=20
trouble.

The 40th anniversary of the Tlatelolco Treaty was celebrated with a=20
ceremony in Mexico and a seminar in the Mexican Foreign Ministry.

Tlatelolco is the name of the area in the capital where the headquarters=20
of the Foreign Ministry were located on Feb. 14, 1967, when the document=20
was signed.

Mexico became the driving force behind the treaty after the 1962 Cuban=20
missile crisis, when the region almost found itself in the middle of a=20
nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union after Soviet=20
missiles were installed in Cuba.

All of the countries in the region are parties to the landmark treaty tha=
t=20
prohibits the testing, use, manufacture, production or acquisition of=20
nuclear weapons in the entire region.

After hesitating for years, Argentina and Cuba finally signed the treaty.=
=20
Buenos Aires ratified it in 1994, while Havana signed it in 1995 and=20
ratified it in 2002.

A compliance oversight organisation was created, OPANAL (Organisation for=
=20
the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean), t=
o=20
enforce the treaty and promote agreements with other regions.

This regional body got the big nuclear powers -- the United States,=20
France, Britain, Russia and China -- to sign Protocol II of the Tlatelolc=
o=20
Treaty, which obligates them not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapon=
s=20
against contracting parties.

OPANAL also encouraged other regions of the world to declare themselves=20
nuclear-weapon-free zones in populated areas, through the Treaty of=20
Rarotonga (1986) in the South Pacific, the Pelindaba Treaty (1996) for th=
e=20
African continent, the Bangkok Treaty (1997) in Southeast Asia and the=20
treaty adopted in September 2006 in Semipalatinsk by five countries of=20
Central Asia.

Today, a total of 109 countries are party to treaties that create=20
nuclear-weapon-free zones.

On several occasions, countries in the region have committed themselves t=
o=20
strengthening the Mexico-based OPANAL, in order to further the cause of=20
global disarmament.

But they have not lived up to that pledge. According to internal reports,=
=20
OPANAL is suffering serious financial problems and could soon even close=20
its doors, because many of the members have not kept up with their=20
contributions to the regional body, whose annual budget is around 300,000=
=20
dollars.

The preamble to the Tlatelolco Treaty states that =94militarily=20
denuclearised zones are not an end in themselves but rather a means for=20
achieving general and complete disarmament at a later stage.=94

On Tuesday, at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament, which is=20
meeting this month in Geneva, Latin American delegates stated that the=20
mere existence of nuclear weapons represents a threat to humanity, and=20
called for their total elimination as the only absolute guarantee against=
=20
their use or the threat of use.

The statement, signed by Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Cuba,=20
Ecuador, Mexico, Peru and Venezuela, indicates that nuclear-weapon-free=20
zones play an important role in strengthening the nuclear=20
non-proliferation regime and contribute to disarmament.

=94The Tlatelolco Treaty was a pioneer and a guiding light for other=20
instruments,=94 Professor Santiago V=E9lez, a lawyer in international law=
,=20
told IPS. =94But the most important aspect is that it kept the region fre=
e=20
of many headaches, conflicts and expenses linked to the aspiration of=20
having nuclear weapons.=94

Greenpeace congratulated the region for its commitment to remaining=20
nuclear-weapon-free and suggested that the countries take another step:=20
curb the use of nuclear energy to produce electricity. The international=20
environmental watchdog expressed concern over the risk of accidents, the=20
accumulation of toxic waste and the general lack of transparency and=20
secrecy that surrounds the nuclear industry.

But plans underway in Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, the only countries in=
=20
the region that use nuclear energy, would seem to make it unlikely that=20
the request will prosper.

The adherents to the Tlatelolco Treaty have reaffirmed their =94inalienab=
le=20
right=94 to carry out R&D in nuclear energy and to use it for peaceful en=
ds.

Brazil, one of the nine countries in the world that enrich uranium, plans=
=20
to install a third nuclear power plant, while Argentina and Mexico aim to=
=20
expand from two to four reactors each.

These plans could lead to a doubling of the proportion of electricity=20
produced by nuclear plants in the region, which currently stands at 3.5=20
percent of total electricity generation.
*****
+ LATIN AMERICA: Nuclear Energy Reborn
(http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=3D34975)
+ Tlatelolco Treaty
(http://www.opanal.org/opanal/Tlatelolco/Tlatelolco-i.htm)
+ OPANAL (http://www.opanal.org/index-i.html)
(END/IPS/LA CA IP NU/TRASP-SW/DC/DCL/07)


=20
=3D 02150216 ORP002
NNNN

</x-flowed>
*****************************************************************
 30 Possible Saudi/Russian Nuke Power Program May Lead To N-Weapons
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:44:33 -0500



   Well,
            As "The Bulletin Of The Atomic
Scientists" [ http://www.thebulletin.org ] has
eradicated most of it's database and promotes
nuclear power while ostensibly oppossing nuclear
weapons we see yet another example of the
thouroughly documented link between both lethal
WMD technologies, nuclear power and nuclear
weapons. I suggest that whomever is reading this
call "The Bulletin Of The Atomic Scientists" and
asks them to once and all irrefutably repudiate
their promotion of nuclear power and to make this
promise in print in their next journal. Please
call and/or write to diplomatically but firmly
express your opposition to their support of
nuclear power no matter where in the world you
are. Please forward to other lists and interested
parties.  Nuclear power is NO solution for climate
change, is inherently a stationary radiological
nuclear weapon/WMD and can lead to conventional
nuclear weapons. See Dr. Helen Caldicott's most
recent book "Nuclear Power Is Not The Answer"
["The Free Press"] for a factual description of
nuclear power and climate change.

 Contact info for "The Bulletin Of The Atomic
Scientists" is:
    Mailing Address/Phone
  Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
  6042 South Kimbark Ave.
  Chicago, IL 60637
  Telephone: 773-702-2555


http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/world/international-saudi-russia-nuclear.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
 Saudi Says No Bar to Nuclear Cooperation with
Russia
  a..                E-Mail
  b.. Print
  c.. Save



By REUTERS
Published: February 14, 2007
Filed at 8:06 a.m. ET

Skip to next paragraph
RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia, the world's
biggest oil exporter and a key U.S. ally, said on
Wednesday the kingdom does not see any obstacle to
cooperating with Russia on developing a nuclear
energy program.

``There is no obstacle to cooperate with Russia on
... nuclear energy,'' Foreign Minister Prince Saud
al-Faisal told a news conference.

Analysts said the plan by Sunni bastion Saudi
Arabia is a warning shot to Shi'ite Iran that it
could enter the regional arms race and start
developing nuclear capability.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday
during a visit to Saudi Arabia that his country
would consider helping the kingdom with a possible
atomic energy program.

``On nuclear energy, there was a (Russian) contact
with the kingdom and the Gulf Cooperation
Council,'' he said when asked if Saudi Arabia and
Russia had made any agreements.

Saudi Arabia and fellow GCC members Qatar,
Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and the United Arab
Emirates, said in December they would study
embarking on a joint civil atomic program.

The announcement by the GCC, a loose economic and
political alliance, raised concern of a regional
arms race with analysts saying the Arab bloc
wanted to match Iran's nuclear program.

The United States and its regional allies
including Israel and Saudi Arabia suspect Iran's
nuclear energy program aims to develop weapons, a
charge Tehran denies.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani was
expected in Riyadh on Wednesday for a second round
of talks with Saudi leaders in a month, Iranian
media said.

``Sources in Saudi Arabia said the aim of this
visit is to exchange views over Iran's nuclear
issue and the recent changes in the region ...,''
Iran's official IRNA news agency said.

Larijani's talks in Riyadh last month also covered
Iran's role in Iraq, where Saudi Arabia blames
Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias for sectarian
killings of Sunni Iraqis.

``They expressed recently their anxiety about
possible efforts to divide the Muslim world
between Sunnis and Shi'ites and this is something
that we are anxious about,'' the Saudi foreign
minister said.

``We look forward to agreements and action on the
ground to see what both countries can do to
prevent it.''


*****************************************************************
 31 [NYTr] Saudis Welcome Putin Offer to Help Develop Nuke Energy
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 19:30:39 -0500 (EST)


Via NY Transfer News Collective  *  All the News that Doesn't Fit
 
Daily Star (Lebanon) - Feb 15, 2007
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=79551

Saudi foreign minister smiles on Putin's offer to help develop nuclear energy

Compiled by Daily Star staff

Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter and a key US ally, said on
Wednesday the kingdom does not see any obstacle to cooperating with Russia
on developing a nuclear-energy program. "There is no obstacle to cooperate
with Russia on ... nuclear energy," Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal
told a news conference.

Analysts said the plan by Saudi Arabia is a warning shot to Iran that it
could enter a regional arms race and start developing nuclear capability.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday during a visit to Saudi Arabia
that his country would consider helping the kingdom with a possible
atomic-energy program.

"On nuclear energy, there was a [Russian] contact with the kingdom and the
Gulf Cooperation Council," he said when asked if Saudi Arabia and Russia had
made any agreements.

Saudi Arabia and fellow GCC members Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and the
United Arab Emirates said in December they would study embarking on a joint
civil atomic program.

The US and its regional allies, including Israel and Saudi Arabia, suspect
Iran's nuclear energy program aims to develop weapons, a charge Tehran
denies.

Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, arrived in Saudi Arabia
Wednesday for talks expected to cover his country's nuclear work, Iranian
media said.

"Sources in Saudi Arabia said the aim of this visit is to exchange views
over Iran's nuclear issue and the recent changes in the region ... Larijani
will leave Riyadh this evening," Iran's official Islamic Republic News
Agency said. "According to Saudi news sources, Larijani will also discuss
the significant role of Iran and Saudi Arabia in resolving the Lebanese
conflict as well as current developments in the Middle East region," it
added.

Larijani was in Riyadh last month for talks with Saudi officials which also
covered Iran's role in Iraq, where Saudi Arabia accuses Iranian-backed
Shiite militias of sectarian killings of Sunni Iraqis.

"They [the Iranians] expressed recently their anxiety about possible efforts
to divide the Muslim world between Sunnis and Shiites and this is something
we are anxious about," Prince Saud said earlier Wednesday.

"We look forward to agreements and action on the ground to see what both
countries can do to prevent it," he added.

But in the latest sign of internal troubles in the oil-rich Gulf kingdom, a
Saudi wing of Al-Qaeda called Wednesday for attacks on US oil sources around
the world, saying targets should not be limited to the Middle East and
listing Canada, Venezuela and Mexico as US oil suppliers.

The threat appeared in the Al-Qaeda organization in the Arabian Peninsula's
e-magazine, Sawt al-Jihad (Voice of Holy War), which was posted on a Web
site used by Islamist militants.

"It is necessary to hit oil interests in all regions which serve the United
States, not just in the Middle East. The goal is to cut its supplies or
reduce them through any means," it said.

The group was behind the February 2006 failed suicide attack on the world's
largest oil-processing plant in Saudi Arabia in which officials said 2 tons
of explosives were used.

"Targeting oil interests includes production wells, export pipelines, oil
terminals and tankers and that can reduce US oil inventory, forcing it to
take decisions it has been avoiding for a long time and confuse and strangle
its economy," it said.

Officials in the Canadian Public Safety Ministry, the Natural Resources
Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office did not immediately respond to
requests for comment.

Canada is the biggest exporter of crude oil to the US, followed by Mexico,
Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. - Agencies

       
                                *
================================================================
.NY Transfer News Collective    *    A Service of Blythe Systems
.          Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us         .
.339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012     http://www.blythe.org
.List Archives:   https://olm.blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/
.Subscribe: https://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr
================================================================
*****************************************************************
 32 World Nuclear News: Putin offers co-operation with Gulf states

14 February 2007

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince
Saud al-Faisal have both spoken positively about the potential for
cooperation on the development of civil nuclear energy programs in
Saudi Arabia.

President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is willing to look
into cooperation opportunities with Saudi Arabia in the area of
atomic energy at a meeting of the Riyadh Chambers of Commerce on 12
February. Putin told delegates he hoped to build stronger ties with
Arab Muslim countries.

"We are all allies of the Kingdom in working to meet the world's
need for energy," Putin said.

At a news conference on 14 February, the Saudi prince said he did
not see any obstacle to cooperating with Russia on developing a
nuclear energy programme.

President Putin was on a two-day tour of Saudi Arabia, the first
visit by a Russia leader.

"On the face of it... it seems that we are rivals, but considering
the world's growing demand for energy, that is not so," Putin said
at a meeting with Russian and Saudi businessmen.

Putin said that there was already a Russian contact working with the
Gulf Cooperation Council, which has previously announced its
interest in developing nuclear energy in the Gulf region.

Further information

Gulf Cooperation Council

WNN:
*****************************************************************
 33 Independent: Not in our name: bid to stop Trident

Leading figures from politics, religion, the arts and the military
launch campaign against Trident

By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor

Published: 15 February 2007

A powerful coalition of 100 scientists, lawyers, church leaders,
actors, writers and MPs is today demanding a halt to the rush by
Tony Blair towards a replacement for Britain's Trident nuclear
weapon system.

Stephen Hawking, the astrophysicist, is among the prominent figures
fronting the campaign, which will strengthen growing demands in
Parliament for the vote on the replacement of the nuclear weapons
system to be delayed until a full debate on the options has taken
place.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Right Rev Rowan Williams, the
author Zadie Smith, the actress Emma Thompson, the fashion designer
Vivienne Westwood and the architect Richard Rogers have also signed
a statement objecting to a hasty decision.

They question the wisdom of rushing into the replacement of the
Trident system with a Cold War-style generation of
submarine-launched nuclear missiles at a cost of Ł65bn over its 30
years of service, while the most serious threat is now posed by
terror groups that cannot be deterred by nuclear weapons.

The presence of Professor Hawking's name in the list will add weight
to the voices raised against the Government's drive for a
replacement for Trident. It is the first time he has publicly
attacked the haste with which the cabinet decision was taken in
favour of replacing the nuclear weapon in December. His previous
political intervention came in 2004 when the author of A Brief
History of Time attacked the loss of 100,000 lives in Iraq as a "
war crime".

In a statement to The Independent yesterday, Professor Hawking said:
" Nuclear war remains the greatest danger to the survival of the
human race. To replace Trident would make it more difficult to get
arms reduction and increase the risk. It would also be a complete
waste of money because there are no circumstances in which we would
use it independently."

The campaign's statement is intended as a rebuke to ministers who
campaigners argue are misleading the public over the replacement of
Trident as they did during the build-up to the war in Iraq. Four
years ago today, more than a million people marched in London - many
carrying banners bearing the slogan "Not In My Name" - in protest at
the imminent conflict in Iraq.

"Parliament is being rushed into an early decision," the campaign
statement says. They add there is "the suspicion that evidence which
supports a position the Prime Minister is already committed to is
being used selectively and uncritically". They compare it to "the
notorious weapons of mass destruction" dossier, which said Iraq's
weapons were " ready to use in 45 minutes". The Cabinet was accused
of signing a blank cheque when it rubber-stamped the decision to
replace Trident only hours before a government White Paper
supporting the decision was published.

The coalition will invite comparisons with the Committee of 100 who
opposed the Polaris system in the 1960s. But this is no simple "ban
the bomb" campaign, although it is supported by many who do not want
Britain to have any nuclear weapons. They make clear in their
statement released today that they want a full debate before any
decision is reached. They have the support of many MPs who are not
in favour of unilateral nuclear disarmament, a policy that made the
Labour Party unelectable in the 1980s.

Gordon Brown has made it clear he supports a full-scale replacement
for Trident, but significantly, the list of objectors includes a
close ally of the Chancellor, Nicholas Brown, a former minister. His
name could embolden more MPs to join the campaign for a delay in any
decision, which is expected before Easter.

Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrat leader, said Britain
should delay a decision until a review conference on the
Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 2010. Jon Trickett, the Labour MP
and chairman of the Compass group of MPs, compared the haste over a
decision on the Trident replacement with the " dodgy dossier" before
the rush to war on Iraq. "Some may be convinced that Trident needs
to be replaced but this process is totally false," he said. "I hope
this will electrify MPs. We have a significant part of the cultural,
political, religious and military establishment signed up to this
statement."

The campaigners insist that the existing system can be continued in
service at least until the end of the decade before a final decision
has to be taken. The White Paper rejected cheaper alternatives such
as air-launched cruise missiles with nuclear warheads and came down
firmly in favour of a new generation of submarine launched nuclear
ballistic missiles.

The White Paper said the replacement for Trident would cost Ł15bn to
Ł20bn, but senior defence officials confirmed that it could cost
Ł1.5bn a year to run, raising the cost to Ł65bn over its 30 years in
service.

'Nuclear bombs are not a deterrent'

Professor Stephen Hawking:

"Nuclear war remains the greatest danger to the survival of the
human race. To replace Trident would make it more difficult to get
arms reduction. It would also be a waste of money because there are
no circumstances in which we would use it independently."

Sir Richard Jolly:

"Britain's military spending is already the second highest in the
world. More spending on nuclear submarines will only make the world
more dangerous. We need to invest in diplomacy, the only solution."

Vivienne Westwood:

"Nuclear bombs are not a deterrent. Are we seriously saying we would
be prepared to inflict nuclear war on the already suffering people
of the planet? Tony Blair doesn't want to go down in history - he
wants to go down with history."

Ken Livingstone:

"The Cold War is long over. The great challenge of the 21st century
will be to prevent catastrophic climate change. Rather than wasting
billions on new weapons of mass destruction, Britain should
demonstrate real world leadership by investing in a radical
programme to cut carbon emissions."

Sir Menzies Campbell:

"If Britain is to take full advantage of the review conference on
the Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2010, it makes sense to take a final
decision on whether to replace Trident after we are aware about the
outcome of that conference. Going into the talks, Britain should
signal that it will reduce its warhead stockpile and operational
nuclear capability by 50 per cent."

Helena Kennedy QC:

"Nuclear missiles are the ultimate weapons of mass destruction and,
for me, renewal is a moral question. As international law makes
clear, a nuclear strike cannot make distinctions between combatants
and non-combatants - so innocent civilians face death, irradiation,
burns, cancers, destruction of their environment and fallout on
neighbouring states - the whole vista is too terrible to
contemplate."

Jon Trickett MP:

"The Trident debate has been unnecessarily truncated, facts have
been inadequately explained and MPs are justifiably irritated at the
Government's heavy-handed approach. The last thing we need is the
Blair era bowing out with yet another decision forced through the
Commons by whips, a large-scale rebellion and the need to rely on
Tory support."

The names behind the anti-nuclear petition

We believe that:

* Britain should not be rushed into a premature decision to replace
its Trident nuclear weapons system;

* More time should be taken for parliamentary and public scrutiny
and debate;

* The urgent need is both to halt the spread of nuclear weapons to
new countries, and for all states which possess them to move more
rapidly and substantially towards nuclear disarmament;

* The priority for the Government should be a renewed diplomatic
initiative to seek a breakthrough in disarmament and
non-proliferation negotiations, similar to the lead it has taken in
relation to such global challenges as climate change and poverty.

Diane Abbott MP

Damon Albarn musician

Lord Archer of Sandwell QC

Professor Frank Barnaby nuclear consultant, ORG

Professor Keith Barnham

General Sir Hugh Beach

Anhil Bhanot

Professor Ken Booth

Nick Brown MP

Colin Burgon MP

Professor Roy Butterfield

The Bishop of Southwark, the Rt Rev Thomas Butler

Julia Buxton

Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell MP

Colin Challen MP chair of All Party Group on Climate Change

Katy Clark MP

Jarvis Cocker musician

Jonathan Coe novelist

Jeremy Corbyn MP

Jon Cruddas MP

Anne Cryer MP

Baroness David

Carol Ann Duffy poet and playwright

George Galloway MP

Air Marshal Sir Timothy Garden

Neil Gerrard MP

Dr Ian Gibson MP

John Gittings academic

John Grogan MP

John Harris writer

Nick Harvey MP

Professor Stephen Hawking

Professor Tim Jackson Sustainable Development Commission

Bianca Jagger human rights campaigner

Lord Joffe

George Joffé Centre for International Studies, Cambridge University

Professor Sir Richard Jolly former assistant secretary general of
the UN

Rebecca Johnson director of Acronym Institute for Disarmament
Diplomacy

Tony Juniper environmental campaigner

John Kampfner editor of New Statesman

Helena Kennedy QC

Professor Tom Kibble

Peter Kilfoyle MP

Glenys Kinnock MEP

Hari Kunzru Novelist

Neal Lawson director of Compass

Ken Livingstone

Elfyn Llywd MP leader of Plaid Cymru

Air Commodore Alistair Mackie

Kate Macintosh RIBA

Safraz Manzoor Broadcaster and Writer

Austin Mitchell MP

Michael Moore MP

Cardinal O'Brien

Stuart Parkinson

Gordon Prentice MP

Adam Price MP

Rt Rev Timothy Radcliffe former master of the Dominican order

General the Lord Ramsbotham

Louise Richards anti-poverty campaigner

Linda Riordan MP

Tony Robinson actor and broadcaster

Lord Rogers of Riverside architect

Joan Ruddock MP

Alex Salmond MP

Will Self writer

Marsha Singh MP

Professor John Sloboda

Zadie Smith novelist

Sir Peter Soulsby MP

Gavin Strang MP

Graham Stringer MP

David Taylor MP

Emma Thompson actress

Baroness Tonge

Jon Trickett MP

Professor David Webb

Phillip Webber

Vivienne Westwood fashion designer

Professor John Whitelegg

Baroness Williams of Crosby

Thom Yorke musician

The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Rt Rev Rowan Williams

Š 2007 Independent News and Media Limited
*****************************************************************
 34 The Hindu: Agni-III will be test fired 'very soon'

February 14, 2007 : 1735 Hrs

New Delhi, Feb. 14 (PTI): The nuclear-capable Agni-III missile with
a range of 3000 km will be test fired "very soon" as defence
scientists have rectified a fault in its heat shield, DRDO chief M
Natrajan said today.

Tracing the failure of the missile's first test last year to a
defective heat shield which had been unable to withstand the heat
generated due to friction during the flight, Natarajan said, "This
has now been rectified.

"We have now come up with a flexible heat shield. All other
parameters of the missile would remain the same," he told newsmen on
the sidelines of a function to confer the Defence Minister's Awards
for Excellence.

Without going into the specifics of the schedule of the new test
flight, Natarajan said he had left it to the project scientists and
engineers.

"It may be in May or June or even earlier," he said.

Natarajan, who is also the Scientific Advisor to the Defence
Minister, said DRDO may carry out the second test of its interceptor
missile prior to test firing of Agni III.

Copyright Š 2006, The Hindu.
*****************************************************************
 35 TCRE: Former nuclear plant site to get historical marker in Charlevoix

Traverse City Record-Eagle
02/14/2007

By MICHAEL CARNEY

Capital News Service

LANSING ? The site of Michigan's first nuclear power plant will be
remembered with a historical marker, a reminder of the plant that
stood at Big Rock Point in Charlevoix.

The state Historical Preservation Office plans to erect a marker at
a roadside park in Charlevoix overlooking Big Rock Point on Little
Traverse Bay. The site took its name from a Native American meeting
point, said Laura Ashlee, publication and historical marker
coordinator at the office.

"The plant was named after literally a big rock that sits out in the
water,? said Ken Pallagi of Consumers Energy, which built and
operated the plant from 1962 to 1997. "It was used for centuries as
a navigational aid by Native Americans.

"They would travel via birch bark canoe, and when they saw Big Rock,
they used it as a gathering point and spent a couple days there
before continuing their journey across the bay to Harbor Springs,?
he added.

One side of the marker will explain the power plant, while the other
side will describe the history of Big Rock Point.

The marker is the first the state has erected for a nuclear power
plant.

"Consumers Energy applied for Big Rock Point,? said Ashlee. "We rely
on people to tell us why a site is deserving, show historical
research, provide photographs and the historical significance to
Michigan.?

Individuals or organizations must donate the cost of the markers.
Consumers Energy paid $3,150 for the one at Big Rock Point, said
Ashlee.

No dedication date has been set.

Big Rock Point provided electricity for Charlevoix from 1962, when
it became Michigan's first nuclear power plant, until 1997, when the
antiquated reactor was shut down.

"Big Rock Point was Michigan's first and the nation's fifth
commercial nuclear power plant,? said Pallagi. "It really was the
ground floor of nuclear power in the United States.?

Today, little remains at the site. The day after it was
decommissioned, plant cleanup began, which was finished last August,
said Pallagi.

An above-ground storage facility housing the spent fuel rods is the
only remaining structure.

No firm plans have been set for the eventual use of the site.

Š , 1998-2006 | Terms of Use | Privacy
Record-Eagle.com | GTHerald.com | RecordEagleJobs.com |

*****************************************************************
 36 Times of India: Govt gets going on two N-plants

15 Feb, 2007| Updated at 0117hrs IST 

Sanjay Dutta

NEW DELHI: Convinced that its nuclear winter's over after
endorsements from both US and Russia, the government is stepping on
the gas with nuclear-power projects envisaged in the 2007-2012 11th
Plan period.

The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE), administered by the Prime
Minister's Office, is pushing to place orders for equipment that
take time to manufacture before the projects get regular financial
sanction.

The government has approved in principle two nuclear-power projects
at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan and Kakrapar in Gujarat, each with a
capacity to generate 700 mw electricity, envisaged to be built
during the 11th Plan.

The DAE now does not want to wait till the government sanctions the
money and proposes to place orders for critical equipment worth Rs
1,680 crore as part of pre-project activity.

DAE has argued that manufacturers of equipment such as steam
generators and thermal shields take anywhere between three and four
years to deliver.

Since the government's procedure of placing orders takes time, the
DAE has argued that the procurement process needs to be initiated in
2007.

In the absence of a formal financial approval, DAE wants to put the
expenditure as part of pre-project activity, to be funded by Nuclear
Power Corporation's internal accruals.

DAE argues that some components for manufacturing these equipment
have already been purchased as part of advance-procurement action
for heavy water reactors, along with components for reactors for the
Tarapur project's third and fourth phases.

These have been preserved in long-term storage facilities and will
be used for completing manufacture of equipment for the Rawatbhata
and Kakrapar projects.

DAE's aim is to attain a capacity to produce 20,000 mw from
nuclear-powered plants. It plans to set up eight 700 mw units, while
the remaining capacity is to be added through imported light water
reactors and indigenous fast breeder reactors.

Copyright Š2007Times Internet Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 37 FR: NRC: Notice of Sunshine Act Meetings

07-694

[Federal Register: February 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 30)] 
[Notices] [Page 7090-7091] From the Federal Register Online via 
GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14fe07-135]                         


NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 

DATE: Weeks of February 12, 19, 26; March 5, 12, 19, 2007.

PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland.

Status: Public and closed.

Matters to be Considered: 

Week of February 12, 2007

Thursday, February 15, 2007

9:25 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. 
System Energy Resources, Inc. (Early Site Permit for Grand Gulf 
ESP) (Tentative). 9:30 a.m. Briefing on Office of Chief Financial 
Officer (OCFO) Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) 
(Contact: Edward New, 301 415- 5646).

[[Page 7091]]

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

Week of February 19, 2007--Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of February 19, 
2007.

Week of February 26, 2007--Tentative

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

9:30 a.m. Periodic Briefing on New Reactor Issues (Public 
Meeting) (Contact: Donna Williams, 301 415-1322).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

Week of March 5, 2007--Tentative

Monday, March 5, 2007

1 p.m. Meeting with Department of Energy on New Reactor Issues 
(Public Meeting).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

Tuesday, March 6, 2007

1 p.m. Discussion of Management Issues (Closed--Ex. 2).

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

9:30 a.m. Briefing on Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 
Response (NSIR) Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public 
Meeting). (Contact: Miriam Cohen, 301 415-0260).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

1 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed--Ex. 1 and 3).

Thursday, March 8, 2007

10 a.m. Briefing on Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and 
Safeguards (NMSS) Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public 
Meeting) (Contact: Gene Peters, 301 415-5248).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

1 p.m. Briefing on Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) 
Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: 
Reginald Mitchell, 301 415-1275).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

Week of March 12, 2007--Tentative

    There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of March 12, 
2007.

Week of March 19, 2007--Tentative

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

1:30 p.m. Briefing on Office of Information Services (OIS) 
Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: 
Edward Baker, 301- 415-8700).

    This meeting will be webcast live at the Web 
address--http://www.nrc.gov .

    *The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on 
short notice. To verify the status of meetings call 
(recording)--(301) 415- 1292. Contact person for more 
information: Michelle Schroll, (301) 415- 1662. The NRC 
Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: 
http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html.

    The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with 
disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable 
accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need 
this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from 
the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large 
print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, 
Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at 
DLC@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable 
accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. This notice 
is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no 
longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the 
distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, 
Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of 
this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you 
are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule 
electronically, please send an electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov.

    Dated: February 8, 2007. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the 
Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-694 Filed 2-9-07; 4:23 pm]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


*****************************************************************
 38 DAILY YOMIURI: KEPCO, TEPCO falsified water data


Kansai Electric Power Co. and Tokyo Electric Power Co. announced
Wednesday that they falsified water intake data by installing
illicit programs in meters at 255 hydroelectric power plants over
long periods of time.

According to the two firms, they used programs that modify data on
water intake so the readout remained within the permitted level,
even if the firms had taken more water than they were authorized to
do so.

KEPCO also announced that it had taken water from rivers for cooling
generators and for firefighting equipment at 129 hydro electric
power plants on 459 occasions without permission.

Both firms stated that their actions had not affected safety at the
facilities, and that they therefore were not included in points to
be inspected.

The Construction and Transport Ministry instructed all of the 10
power companies to reexamine issues surrounding data fabrication,
pointing out that similar cases may have occurred at the other firms.

According to the announcement of both firms, data falsification
through the use of illicit programs occurred at 131 TEPCO plants
from 1996 to 2005 and 124 KEPCO plants since 1974.

Although both firms have been removing the illicit programs since
TEPCO was found in August 2002 to have falsified its inspection data
at nuclear power reactors, they have not made an announcement on the
matter.

KEPCO, for its part, is required to apply separately to take water
for a dam reservoir that is to be used to operate generators at
hydroelectric power plants as well as peripheral machinery. However,
it did not take the necessary steps.

Among the plants is Keage Hydroelectric Power Plant in Kyoto, which
is the first hydroelectric power plant in Japan and was built during
the Meiji era (1867-1912).

KEPCO apologized, maintaining that it had believed it should apply
for intake in both cases in one go.

The ministry, which should have raised concerns over KEPCO's
applications, said that it had thought the electric company had used
some of the water for the dam was used for peripheral machinery, and
therefore it did not believe anything was amiss.

The Daily Yomiuri, The Yomiuri Shimbun
Š The Yomiuri Shimbun.
*****************************************************************
 39 business.iafrica.com: 'Public ignored' on second Koeberg

Wed, 14 Feb 2007

The decision to build a second nuclear power station was made
without public participation, Earthlife Africa Cape Town said on
Tuesday.

Environmental and socio-economic assessments were also ignored,
according to Maya Aberman, the organisation's campaign co-ordinator.

"(We) can only assume that either the Minister (of Public
Enterprises Alec Erwin) isn't aware of the provisions of the
Constitution and laws governing South Africa, that he considers
these provisions irrelevant, or that he is attempting to inspire a
false sense of optimism about his and his department's nuclear
fantasies," Aberman wrote in a statement.

No public input

Earthlife Africa also claimed that the public enterprises department
was busy finalising its national nuclear energy strategy, and was at
work on a uranium mining and beneficiation strategy, without public
input.

"Earthlife Africa Cape Town was under the impression that government
strategies were formulated with some level of input... and made at
least an attempt to gather the opinions and concerns of affected
citizens," said Aberman.

Public enterprises spokesperson Gaynor Kast declined to comment on
Tuesday.

Erwin told Parliament on Monday that the government had approved the
construction of a second nuclear power station in the southern part
of the country.

Sapa

   Copyright Š 2002-2005 iafrica.com, a division of Metropolis* 
*****************************************************************
 40 Hanford News: Nuclear power unlikely alternative in Northwest, analyst says

This story was published Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

By William McCall, Associated Press Writer

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Nuclear power is unlikely to return to the 
Pacific Northwest any time soon, an analyst who reviewed the 
costs for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council said 
Tuesday.

Jim Harding of Harding Consulting in Seattle told the regional 
council there are a number of factors that would affect investing 
in nuclear power, which has gained new attention nationally with 
increasing oil and natural gas prices.

Some include public acceptance of new plants, a learning curve on
building new plants with new designs, a shortage of engineers and
skilled workers, waste disposal and Wall Street support.

But a key issue may be the supply of uranium.

Although it is still is relatively plentiful - there are large
supplies in Australia and Canada - it takes a huge investment in
time and money to mine it and process it for use in a nuclear plant,
he said.

"It will take heroic efforts to find the uranium needed for a major
nuclear expansion," Harding said.

The council is holding hearings this week to update its five-year
energy plan developed in 2004 for Oregon, Idaho, Montana and
Washington state.

The council, which oversees regional energy planning, sees a
combination of coal, wind, natural gas and conservation as its best
bet for meeting increased energy demand through 2024, said John
Harrison, council spokesman.

But it also is considering other sources, including geothermal,
solar and even nuclear power, Harrison said.

Laughter, however, broke out when Harding pointed out the cheapest
way to build a nuclear power plant would be spreading out the cost
with a public subsidy - similar to what led to the largest municipal
bond default in national history with the collapse of the former
Washington Public Power Supply System nuclear project in the 1980s.

Only one plant survived among the five planned for the project. And
the only other nuclear plant in the Northwest, the Trojan plant in
Oregon, was closed in the 1990s by Portland General Electric after
the utility decided it was too costly to repair cracks in steam
tubes.

One of the last symbols of nuclear power in the region, the Trojan
cooling tower visible from Interstate 5 along the Columbia River,
was demolished last May.

A Virginia company, Alternate Energy Holdings Inc., announced plans
last December to build a 1,500-megawatt nuclear plant along the
Snake River in a remote area of southwestern Idaho. The company was
formed last year by former utility and finance executives led by
Donald Gillespie, who serves as its president.

Gillespie said Tuesday that Alternate Energy still is awaiting a
report by geologists on the suitability of the site, along with
Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval of new reactor designs,
before moving ahead. The company also is considering whether to take
on utilities as partners or to finance the project itself through
private investment, but "we're determined," he said.

Gillespie also said the West cannot expect to rely on coal or
alternative sources such as wind to provide all its energy needs.

"I think the West is running into a tough road without much coal
capacity being built, and trying to rely almost totally on wind, and
maybe solar power, to keep up with growth," he said.

Harding said any new plant likely will face increasing costs in the
initial stages, especially for the cost of nuclear fuel.

He cited estimates on the cost of new plants, ranging from about
$1,000 per kilowatt hour to nearly $2,500 per kilowatt hour. But
studies have shown actual costs tend to be higher overall, he said.

"To have a nuclear renaissance, you have to have a stable supply of
fuel, regulatory support and a compelling economic story," Harding
said later in an interview. "And all three of those are questionable
right now."

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 41 allAfrica.com: South Africa: No Longer a Dirty Word, Nuclear a
Sensible Choice in SA Context

Business Day (Johannesburg)

OPINION

February 14, 2007

Robyn Chalmers Johannesburg

IT's going to send a shiver of dread down the spine of many a
red-blooded environmentalist, but the decision to build a nuclear
power station in the Cape is the sensible one to make in the current
energy environment.

It is well documented that SA is facing a power shortage. Many
people have been the victims of blackouts as Eskom's stations are
pushed to the limit, notably in Western Cape where SA's sole
existing nuclear power station is located. New power stations are
urgently needed, but the question that Eskom and government have
grappled with is what type -- coal, gas, nuclear or renewable?

Eskom has made it clear that most of these stations will be
coal-fired. That's because SA has an abundance of comparatively
cheap coal, which will help Eskom to limit future price hikes (which
will nevertheless be significant) and help retain SA's position as
having among the lowest electricity prices in the world. But
conventional coal power stations are damaging to the environment in
the extreme -- SA has frightening pollution levels thanks to the
high levels of carbon dioxide emitted when coal is burnt.

We are not alone. The need to build new power stations is universal
at the moment. Current predictions are that worldwide demand for
energy will double in the next 25-30 years. In the midst of the
scramble to develop additional power sources, there is a growing
recognition that traditional fossil fuels are unlikely to cope with
this massive surge in demand. Not only that, but the prices of the
predominant power sources, such as coal and natural gas, have risen
steeply in recent years, making nuclear power increasingly
attractive.

For example, the International Energy Agency estimated recently that
at current price levels, nuclear power is cheaper than gas and comes
close to being cheaper than coal. Nuclear power is also far more
environmentally friendly than fossil fuels and significant progress
has been made by big global nuclear companies such as Areva, General
Electric and Westinghouse towards making nuclear power stations more
economical and safer, while also producing less waste.

It was for all these reasons and more that the Group of Eight (G-8)
decided at its July summit to endorse the development of nuclear
power for the first time in 15 years. It was a seminal moment. Not
only did it have the support of France, Japan, Canada, Russia and
the UK, it also meant that Germany, which currently chairs the G-8,
reversed a long-held policy of opposing the development of nuclear
reactors. It also overturned a political decision taken by Germany
six years ago to close down all its nuclear power plants by 2020.

It shows just how much the world has changed. Nuclear is no longer a
dirty word. And Alec Erwin, our public enterprises minister, has
been quick to recognise the sea change in world opinion, bringing it
swiftly to our shores. Erwin has long been a proponent of the pebble
bed modular reactor, the mini-nuclear reactor that is billed as
safer than conventional nuclear stations. Government has long punted
the pebble bed for local use and for its export potential, but the
project has been stymied by an inability to secure a credible,
sustainable, heavyweight international partner. The global surge of
interest in nuclear may, finally, deal with this but, as that is by
no means guaranteed, the pebble bed is likely to be a longer term
source of power for SA.

Government and Eskom may well find, however, that the easiest part
of going the nuclear route was making the decision to do so. The
hard part is still ahead. It remains to be seen whether SA will be
able to play catch-up on building another nuclear power plant. Many
of the G-8 countries are several years ahead of us in their
planning, and there is a limited pool of skills available to build
conventional plants, particularly after most nations backed off in
the 1980s and 1990s. SA will be way down in the global queue and we
simply can't afford to wait. The upshot is that we may find prices
are higher than expected.

There will also be plenty of nervousness from the public, as well as
opposition from environmentalists. If they are smart, government and
Eskom will work hard to calm nerves through communication and
education. The most difficult part of doing this will be explaining
how SA is going to deal with nuclear waste. To date, the world has
failed to find a way of safely handling nuclear waste -- it's
generally sealed in containers and then buried or dumped in the sea
-- but all that means is that future generations will have to find a
way of dealing with it.

In the interim, government needs to ensure that plenty of funds are
put into researching and developing cheaper renewable energy
sources, from wind to solar to hydro. The development of large-scale
renewable energy is deemed to be unviable as it is far more
expensive to produce than either coal, nuclear or gas. But it has to
be SA's future energy source if there is to be any hope of
containing the massive damage being done by emissions from fossil
fuels. Nuclear is one step down this path. Far more must follow.

Chalmers is deputy editor.

Copyright Š 2007 Business Day. All rights reserved. Distributed by
AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com).
*****************************************************************
 42 Energy Business Review: Chinas green drive to be nuclear-powered - 

Thursday, 15th February 2007

13th February 2007

By EBR Staff Writer

The United Nations and China are seeking to establish a carbon 
trading exchange in Beijing to tap into the lucrative Chinese 
market for emissions credits. While the new bourse offers further 
downside to already weak European carbon prices, it is ultimately 
a sub-plot to China's longer-term drive towards atomic power 
generation.

'Content China and the UN are in negotiations to open the 
'developing' world's first carbon trading exchange. Competing 
with the likes of London's European Carbon Exchange (ECX) and the 
Chicago Carbon Exchange (CCX), a Chinese bourse would provide yet 
another avenue into the fragmented multi-billion dollar global 
emissions trading market.

The high volume of over-the-counter carbon deals in the world's 
fastest growing major economy makes Beijing an obvious target for 
a formalized traded emissions exchange. This is by no means a 
guarantee of success, however, as the vast majority of global 
carbon transactions are still conducted bilaterally or via a 
broker under bespoke agreements.

Economics before emissions

While China's drive towards emissions trading provides further
evidence that the People's Republic is addressing its poor
environmental record, it does not represent a dramatic policy shift
in Beijing. Essentially, the environment is another battleground in
China's long-term economic rivalry with the US.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change continues to seek
deeper, internationally binding emissions targets. The progress made
in many regions of the world, particularly Europe, will mean little
though without direct Chinese and American participation.

Neither of the planet's largest emitting nations has accepted
mandatory carbon targets, with the US declining to ratify the Kyoto
Protocol primarily on the basis that China was exempted from
obligatory emissions curbs. Chinese involvement in carbon abatement
is therefore central to active US participation and vice versa.

Voracious economic growth in China has, however, created more
pressing problems for Beijing - namely an energy crisis. Having
overtaken Japan as the world's second largest importer of oil (after
the US), the Chinese continue to suffer from sporadic energy
shortages, most notably electricity blackouts.

Nuclear groundswell reaches critical mass

With eight new nuclear power stations under construction in 2006,
the long-awaited renaissance of nuclear power will center in China.
The benefits this will bring in reining in China's enormous appetite
for coal-fired power production, while welcome, are not the key
driving force behind atomic expansion. Above the environmental
imperative is the economic need for the Chinese to boost supply
security that is shielded, to some extent, from global commodity
cycles.

Washington is set to follow in Beijings footsteps; it faces the
same security of supply concerns, yet lacks the political hostility
to nuclear power found in western Europe. Even Russia, with its vast
gas reserves, is eager to get on the nuclear bandwagon.

Collectively, China, Russia and the US will account for almost 38%
of global nuclear output in 2010. By 2030, this is predicted to rise
to over 45%. While America's share of total atomic production will
slip to 26% during this period, China's will increase from 3% to 9%.
Globally, nuclear power supplies are projected to grow 30% over the
same 20-year timeframe.

EU anti-nuclear lobby on the back foot

Resurgence in atomic generation poses greater challenges in Europe
than elsewhere. The flagship European emissions trading scheme (ETS)
is struggling to establish a suitably strong carbon price to
incentivize genuine emission abatement. This, combined with mounting
concerns over supply security (most notably for Russian gas), has
seen EU politicians increasingly championing the zero-emission
nuclear option.

In a recent policy document, the UK government made its case for
market-based funding of new nuclear build on the basis of a carbon
price in the region of E25 per metric tonne. Allowance prices for
the second phase (2008-2012) are, however, currently trading nearer
to E15 per metric tonne. Ironically, a formal Chinese carbon trading
exchange may actually serve to suppress European emission prices
further, facilitating clearer access to non-EU credits, which can
legitimately be used to offset targets in Europe.

Germany, too, must reconcile popular support for its current nuclear
phase-out policy against a potential future power supply shortage,
its need to meet increasingly stringent emissions targets, and a
strong dependence on Russian gas imports.

The reality is that the EU25 will be reliant on ageing atomic
capacity for some 17% of its electricity output in 2010. At present,
Finland and France are the only member states with new nuclear build
planned. While tough decisions undoubtedly lie ahead for London and
Berlin, China will ultimately lead a non-European renaissance of
nuclear power. 'End Intelliext

Š2007 Business Review
*****************************************************************
 43 Xinhua: Areva may get nuclear contract

www.chinaview.cn 2007-02-14 09:29:09

    BEIJING, Feb. 14 -- China will hold talks this month with
France's Areva SA for possible contracts to build two nuclear
reactors that were originally awarded to Toshiba Corp's Westinghouse
Electric Co, a Chinese official said.

    Areva may build the reactors at Yangjiang in Guangdong Province,
among four earmarked in a 5.3 billion U.S.dollars contract for
Westinghouse, said Xu Damao, a senior consultant to project operator
China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Co.

    Westinghouse could instead get a contract for two reactors at
Haiyang in Shandong, in addition to its two at Sanmen in Zhejiang,
he said.

    Paris-based Areva and Westinghouse, headquartered in
Pennsylvania, are competing to build as many as 26 more reactors by
2020 as China turns to atomic energy to cut pollution and reliance
on oil.

    "This will help China diversify technology sources for nuclear
power," said He Jun, a senior analyst with Beijing-based consultancy
Anbound Group.

    Areva spokesman Charles Hufnagel and Guangdong Nuclear spokesman
Li Zhiyuan declined to comment. Westinghouse spokesman Vaughn
Gilbert said he couldn't immediately comment.

    Westinghouse outbid Areva and Russia's AtomStroyExport to build
four reactors after almost two years of negotiations and lobbying by
the three companies, which were short listed by China in February
2005.

    U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman and Ma Kai, head of China's
National Development and Reform Commission, signed an agreement in
Beijing on December 16 awarding the contracts to Westinghouse. The
U.S. company was bought by Japan's Toshiba for 4.16 billion dollars
in October.

    "The change may not be a big deal for Westinghouse as it will
still get four reactors with a similar contract value," said Simon
Lee, an analyst with Morgan Stanley Asia Ltd. "The only thing is
that Westinghouse may need to share the market for third-generation
reactors in China with Areva if the French company wins the
Yangjiang reactors."

    Formal contract talks with Areva, the world's biggest maker of
nuclear reactors, will begin around the week-long Chinese New Year
holiday that starts on Feb. 18, Xu at Shenzhen-based Guangdong
Nuclear said.

    (Source: China Daily)

Editor: Jiang Yuxia
*****************************************************************
 44 IHT: Austrian no-nuke activists block border crossing with Czech Republic

- International Herald Tribune

The Associated Press

Published: February 14, 2007

PRAGUE, Czech Republic: Austrian activists blocked a border crossing
with the Czech Republic for one hour on Wednesday in protest against
a Czech nuclear power plant, Czech Television reported.

Dozens of activists staged a rally at the Dolni Dvoriste/Wullowitz
crossing some 160 kilometers (100 miles) south of Prague, urging
their government to take legal action against the Czech Republic for
operating the Temelin plant, which it says is unsafe.

On Dec. 15, the Austrian Parliament voted unanimously to take legal
action, but the cabinet has not moved on the issue so far.

The plant, located some 60 kilometers (35 miles) north of the
Austrian border, has been a source of friction between the two
nations for decades.

Copyright Š 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights
reserved     
*****************************************************************
 45 Reuters: New Total CEO says nuclear not a priority 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:54AM EST

PARIS, Feb 14 (Reuters) - The new chief executive of French oil
giant Total (TOTF.PA: Quote, Profile, Research), Christophe de
Margerie, said on Wednesday that developing acitivites in the
nuclear energy sector was not a priority.

"Our priority is on traditional hydrocarbons. That does not mean we
should not think about it. One day it could be nuclear but it is not
a priority..," he told a news conference on the 2006 results.

De Margerie told the Financial Times in an interview earlier this
month that the group would at some point enter the nuclear energy
sector.





Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.


*****************************************************************
 46 Reuters: Suez wants to build nuclear plant in France-report 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 3:26PM EST

PARIS, Feb 14 (Reuters) - French utility Suez (LYOE.PA: Quote,
Profile, Research) has sought permission to build a nuclear
electricity plant in France, Les Echos newspaper reported on
Wednesday.

In a preview of its Thursday front page, the newspaper said Suez was
looking to build a next generation EPR reactor, developed by Areva
(CEPFi.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) and Siemens (SIEGn.DE: Quote,
Profile, Research), near Tricastin in the country's Drome region.

It said no final go ahead was expected from the French government
before elections scheduled in April and May.

Suez - which is in merger discussions with state-controlled Gaz de
France (GAZ.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) - currently has no nuclear
reactors in France but has experience in operating them in
neighbouring Belgium through its Electrabel subsidiary.

A spokesperson for Suez could not be reached for comment immediately.

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 47 Reuters: Saudi says no bar to nuclear cooperation with Russia 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 9:58AM EST

By Andrew Hammond

RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter
and a key U.S. ally, said on Wednesday the kingdom does not see any
obstacle to cooperating with Russia on developing a nuclear energy
program.

"There is no obstacle to cooperate with Russia on ... nuclear
energy," Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal told a news
conference.

Analysts said the plan by Sunni bastion Saudi Arabia is a warning
shot to Shi'ite Iran that it could enter the regional arms race and
start developing nuclear capability.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday during a visit to
Saudi Arabia that his country would consider helping the kingdom
with a possible atomic energy program.

"On nuclear energy, there was a (Russian) contact with the kingdom
and the Gulf Cooperation Council," he said when asked if Saudi
Arabia and Russia had made any agreements.

Saudi Arabia and fellow GCC members Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, Kuwait and
the United Arab Emirates, said in December they would study
embarking on a joint civil atomic program.

The announcement by the GCC, a loose economic and political
alliance, raised concern of a regional arms race with analysts
saying the Arab bloc wanted to match Iran's nuclear program. 

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 48 Reuters: Sharapova donates $100,000 to Chernobyl victims 

Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:27PM EST

By Evelyn Leopold

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Maria Sharapova, the world's top-ranked
female tennis player, on Wednesday became a goodwill ambassador for
the U.N. Development Fund and donated $100,000 to help victims of
the Chernobyl nuclear disaster.

At a crowded press conference, Sharapova, 19, said she gave the
money to eight U.N. development projects in rural communities in
Belarus, Russia and Ukraine for youths still suffering from the
April 1986 Chernobyl power plant explosion.

The world's worst nuclear accident in the Ukraine spewed clouds of
radioactive dust into parts of Europe, Russia and especially
Belarus, making large areas uninhabitable.

"My first step is to focus on the Chernobyl-affected region, where
my family has roots," Sharapova said. "Today, it is poverty and lack
of opportunities that pose the greatest threat for young people in
the Chernobyl region."

Sharapova's family left Gomel in Belarus after the Chernobyl
accident. She was born in Nyagan in Siberia a year later but left
Russia for the United States at age 9 to study tennis. She won
Wimbledon in 2004 and the U.S. Open in 2006.

Sharapova is one of the highest paid female athletes, earning nearly
$19 million last year in advertising endorsement and prize money and
endorsements, according to Forbes magazine.

Individual U.N. agencies have used numerous goodwill ambassadors,
beginning with UNICEF, the U.N. Children's Fund, in the 1950s. Other
envoys, like retired boxer Muhammad Ali, and actor Michael Douglas
serve as peace envoys for the U.N. secretary-general.

Goodwill ambassadors for UNDP include soccer stars Ronaldo of
Brazil, Zinedine Zidane of France and now also Didier Drogba of
Ivory Coast as well as Crown Prince Haakon Magnus of Norway,
Japanese actress Misako Konno and U.S. basketball star Dikembe
Mutombo, a native of the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Š Reuters 2007. All rights reserved.

*****************************************************************
 49 emporiagazette.com: Nuclear energy; the more the better 

The Emporia Gazette

February 14, 2007

By Chris Walker (Contact)

WITH $8 billion in federal government subsidies at stake,
applications have been pouring in to secure new sites for nuclear
power plants. Most of the applications have been for locations in
the south.

In the â80s, nuclear energy had fallen out of favor after a couple
of incidents. But the government is hoping that subsidies will spur
on nuclear energy again in an attempt to reduce our reliance on
foreign energy sources.

The horse race is on and we need to be asking: Does Kansas have a
horse in the race?

Wolf Creek and nuclear energy have been part of our life in this
part of Kansas for more than 21 years.

But with the Wolf Creek plant aging, it makes sense to start
lobbying to put a new plant near the existing one.

The Kansas House has proposed legislation that would provide
property tax relief if a new nuclear plant is built near Wolf Creek.
This is a good first step and we hopeful it will be passed.

But with this large amount of federal money available to encourage
construction of new nuclear plants, we hope our state agencies,
economic development organizations and power utilities are
aggressively working together to get Kansas its share of that
federal money.

Wolf Creek has been a tremendous benefit to Coffey County, Lyon
County and the state. We want to make sure we donât miss out on
this opportunity to bring jobs and economic vitality to our area.

Christopher White Walker

Editor & Publisher

* Š Copyright 2006 The Emporia Gazette. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 50 NewsWatch: Energy: New nukes soon?

Blogging the business of energy with Brett Clanton, Tom Fowler 
and Kristen Hays

February 14, 2007

New nuclear power projects in the U.S. should be started in the next
two to three years, said Exelon President and CEO John Rowe.

During a post-lunch keynote Rowe said the number of projects depends
on the new Democratic majority's willingness to "... embrace nuclear
technology as an arrow in its quiver to address climate change."

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has acknowledged nuclear power needs to be
considered, Rowe said, but Massachusetts Rep. Ed Markey is heading a
key committee that would address such policy issues, "... and I will
be a very old man by the time I convince Mr. Markey to [support]
nuclear energy."

Chicago-based Exelon is one of the largest electric utilities in the
country, serving about 5.2 million customers in Illinois and
Pennsylvania, and distributing natural gas to more than 470,000
customers in southeastern Pennsylvania. Rowe said the company has
long been a supporter of greenhouse gas legislation, which is why it
sold off large parts of its fossil-fuel fired plants in the past and
now operates the largest nuclear fleet in the U.S. and the third
largest in the world.

Despite Exelon's decidedly pro-nuclear stance, Rowe closed with one
prediction/observation about the future of the U.S. power industry:

"Natural gas has become something of a bitch goddess. She's still
queen."


Posted by Tom Fowler at February 14, 2007 03:19 PM

*****************************************************************
 51 Business: Nuclear plants can pass on costs

The Public Service Commission on Tuesday adopted new rules to spur
the construction of nuclear power plants in Florida.

By Times Staff Writer

Published February 14, 2007

The Public Service Commission on Tuesday adopted new rules to spur
the construction of nuclear power plants in Florida.

The bottom line: Investor-owned utilities, such as Progress Energy,
intending to build nuclear plants in the state will be able to pass
on the upfront costs of construction to customers early.
Specifically, a utility can request partial recovery of planning and
construction costs before a nuclear plant becomes operational.

"Early recovery should reduce risks and encourage financial
investment in nuclear power plants by allowing prudent costs to be
recouped as they are incurred," the commission said in a statement.
If utilities had to wait to recover their capital costs, the
commission said, it could lead to a "rate shock."

PSC chairman Lisa Polak Edgar described the rules as a way to
"protect ratepayers while promoting investment in Florida's energy
future."

Progress Energy Florida has picked a tract north of the Tampa Bay
area in Levy County to build a nuclear power plant. A single-reactor
plant would cost at least $2.5-billion and a dual-reactor plant
could cost more than $5-billion, according to Progress Energy.

[Last modified February 13, 2007, 21:29:00]


Š 2007 ? All Rights Reserved ? St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South ? St. Petersburg, FL 33701 ? 727-893-8111
*****************************************************************
 52 AFP: Saudi looking into Russian arms, nuclear energy offers - 

Wednesday February 14, 12:52 PM

RIYADH (AFP) - Saudi Arabia confirmed that it was in talks with
Russia over the possible purchase of Russian weapons for the first
time and welcomed Moscow's offer to help it develop nuclear energy.

"There are no obstacles to cooperation between the two countries in
all fields pertaining to... armament and nuclear energy," Foreign
Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal told reporters two days after Russian
President Vladimir Putin visited Saudi Arabia.

Riyadh, a close US ally in the Middle East, has traditionally 
used Western defence systems, but is seeking to diversify its 
sources of weaponry.

"On the armament front, there have been discussions between the two
countries. They are taking place in accordance with the kingdom's
requirements in terms of armament and with what Russia can provide
of the kingdom's needs for such equipment," Saud said.

He did not give details, but a diplomatic source had earlier said
that Putin's talks during his first visit to Saudi Arabia were
expected to lead to a "verbal understanding" on the sale of about
150 Russian T-90 battle tanks to the oil-rich kingdom.

The source said that tests were carried out on the T-90 in Saudi
Arabia last year to determine the tank's suitability for harsh
desert conditions, and Russia is also looking to sell Mi-17
helicopters.

Putin held a one-on-one meeting with Saudi Crown Prince and Defence
Minister Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz before leaving Riyadh Monday
for Qatar on the second leg of a Middle East tour that also took in
Jordan.

In remarks to a Saudi-Russian business forum, Putin also offered to
help Saudi Arabia develop civilian nuclear energy.

"On the nuclear issue, there was a contact with the kingdom and the
(Riyadh-based Gulf) Cooperation Council during the visit," Saud said.

He recalled that the six oil-rich GCC states had decided during a
summit in Riyadh two months ago to pursue nuclear energy technology
in accordance with the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and other
international protocols "without going into the issue of (nuclear)
weapons."

"Russia is one of the states which possess this industry and there
are no obstacles to cooperating with her (on this score) as we would
cooperate in any other domain," Saud said.

Russia is building a nuclear reactor in Iran amid a standoff with
the West, which suspects the Islamic republic is seeking nuclear
weapons, a charge denied by Iran.

AFP
*****************************************************************
 53 SFSS: Florida allows FPL to collect surcharge to help pay for new nuclear plants

South Florida Sun-Sentinel

By Joseph Mann

Posted February 14 2007

State regulators Tuesday adopted new rules that allow investor-owned
utilities like Florida Power & Light Co. to recover planning and
preconstruction costs of nuclear power plants before the facilities
go into operation.

These rules, approved by the Public Service Commission, open the
door for Juno Beach-based FPL and St. Petersburg-based Progress
Energy Florida to advance plans for proposed nuclear plants in
Florida.

They also open the door to higher bills for FPL customers, since
"prudent" preconstruction and licensing costs would be passed along
to customers, probably as a surcharge, as the project develops.

FPL has not formally decided it will build a new nuclear plant,
which could cost $5 billion to $6 billion and could take about a
decade to complete. But the company expects to announce the location
of the site of its proposed nuclear plant in coming months. Progress
Energy last year chose a site in Levy County for its proposed plant.

FPL last built a nuclear reactor in the early 1980s.

"This decision clarifies things for us," FPL spokesman Mayco
Villafańa said. "If indeed FPL decides to build a nuclear plant in
the future, these rules define the process and will allow the
commission to review preconstruction costs on an annual basis."

FPL customers will not be faced with absorbing costs associated with
a new nuclear generating plant anytime soon. The company is only at
the beginning of the planning stages for a proposed nuclear facility.

If FPL decides to build a nuclear plant, it will have to ask
regulators to determine if the new facility is needed to meet future
power demands. Once regulators agree on the so-called "need
determination," the company can ask the PSC for permission to
recover costs from customers. FPL also has to obtain licensing and
other types of approvals from federal, state and local authorities.

Phasing in the recovery of costs will ease the "rate shock"
impacting utility customers when an expensive nuclear plant is put
into operation, the PSC said in a statement. Regulators also said
that even though nuclear plants are expensive to build, they are
usually the least expensive type of power plant to operate during
the long term.

"A diverse and balanced mix of fuel sources protects customers from
significant price fluctuations and makes fuel-related power
disruptions less likely, PSC Chairman Lisa Polak Edgar said.

"Having the option to invest in nuclear power is important because
prices for oil and natural gas could continue to rise, and we need
to diversify our fuel mix," Villafańa said. FPL currently obtains
about 20 percent of its power from four nuclear reactors at two
complexes in Florida: St. Lucia and Turkey Point. About 48 percent
of its electricity comes from generating plants powered by natural
gas, 10 percent from fuel oil, 5 percent from coal and 17 percent
from purchased power.

Joseph Mann can be reached at jmann@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356-4665.

Copyright 2007, Sun-Sentinel Co. & South Florida Interactive Inc.
Sun-Sentinel.com, 200 E. Las Olas Blvd., Fort Lauderdale, Florida
33301

*****************************************************************
 54 IHT: Safety problems throw Sweden's nuclear energy program into question

- International Herald Tribune

By Ivar Ekman

Published: February 14, 2007

STOCKHOLM: The discovery of serious safety problems at one of
Sweden's three nuclear power plants has thrown the country's energy
model into question.

On Wednesday, it was reported that low-level radiation leaks at a
reactor north of Stockholm went undetected for three years, and the
leaks were only the latest in a series of mishaps.

The problems at Forsmark, a plant with three reactors about 200
kilometers, or 125 miles, north of Stockholm, surfaced with a
serious incident on July 25 last year. Two of four backup
generators, designed to control the shutdown of one of the reactors,
malfunctioned during a power failure.

The two remaining generators shut down the reactor. But the incident
exposed a serious vulnerability, with some analysts arguing that the
outcome was a matter of luck and that a serious accident â even a
meltdown â could have happened.

But the management of the plant, as well as the Swedish nuclear
power inspector agency, SKI, played down the seriousness of the
incident, saying that all problems could be dealt with. After an
initial rush of interest in the Swedish and international media, the
matter died down.

Last month, however, a highly critical internal report from Forsmark
was reported on a Swedish television show. The report criticized
what it called an "extensive and profound degradation" of the safety
culture, describing, among other things, how an alcohol test of 25
workers at the plant resulted in three being sent home for
drunkenness.

It also found that the July incident had "not marked a decisive turn
to the better."

Signs of trouble have continued to pile up. A few days after the
report became public, SKI asked prosecutors to investigate whether
the operator of Forsmark had broken the law in its response to the
July incident.

Then two of Forsmark's reactors were shut down after a seal in one
of them was found to be defective. The authorities said Wednesday
that one reactor would remain closed. A week ago, the managing
director of Forsmark, Lars Fagerberg, resigned abruptly.

"What bothers me most is that we've all been so naďve," said Bjorn
Karlsson, a professor of energy systems at Linkoping University, who
also advises the Swedish government on nuclear security. "If someone
had told me a year ago that the security culture could degenerate
this much at a Swedish power plant, I would have replied that it's
not possible."

Lennart Daleus, the secretary general of Swedish Greenpeace, said,
"It's almost like a farce, with all this happening one thing after
another. There has been a myth here that Swedish nuclear power is
safer than in other countries, but now that's been proven wrong."

Greenpeace is one among a growing number of voices calling for a
thorough, outside review of Sweden's 10 reactors, and the Swedish
government recently decided to send a request to the International
Atomic Energy Agency to inspect the safety at Forsmark.

Daleus said he was certain that such a review would show that the
Swedish reactors â the first built in the early 1970s, and the
last in 1985 â were outdated and would have to be closed.

"These reactors are old," he said. "We're living dangerously."

Sweden has a long and complicated history with nuclear technology.
Although a majority in a 1980 referendum voted to phase out nuclear
power by 2010, the country remains heavily dependent on it.

Sweden uses practically no Russian natural gas and has cut
greenhouse gas emissions by more than 10 percent in the past decade.

Recent opinion polls show that the country is divided when it comes
to nuclear power. A telephone poll of 1,000 Swedes conducted Feb.
5-8 and published in the daily Svenska Dagbladet, showed that 21
percent have become more skeptical of nuclear power because of the
problems at Forsmark. But 58 percent still think that the nuclear
power system should remain as it is today, or should even be
extended.

The recently elected center-right government has said there are no
plans to either reduce or expand Sweden's nuclear capacity, even if
the recent events are taken into account, according to Ola Altera,
state secretary at the Ministry for Enterprise, Energy and
Communications.

"It is easy to believe that it's a quick fix to the climate 
problem," Altera said. "But nuclear power is vulnerable, and what 
happened last summer was not very good."

Copyright Š 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights
reserved     
*****************************************************************
 55 IHT: Chinese may shift reactor contracts to French company -

International Herald Tribune

By Winnie Zhu and Wang Ying Bloomberg News

Published: February 13, 2007

SHANGHAI: China will hold talks this month with France's Areva for a
contract to build two nuclear reactors that were originally awarded
to Toshiba's Westinghouse Electric, a Chinese official said.

Areva may build the reactors at Yangjiang in Guangdong Province,
among four earmarked in a $5.3 billion contract for Westinghouse,
said Xu Damao, a senior consultant to project operator China
Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding.

Westinghouse may instead get a contract for two reactors at Haiyang
in Shandong, in addition to its two at Sanmen in Zhejiang, he said.

Granting Areva a share of the nuclear contracts would reward
lobbying by President Jacques Chirac of France during October talks
in Beijing with his Chinese counterpart, Hu Jintao. Paris- based
Areva and Westinghouse of Monroeville, Pennsylvania, are competing
to build up to 26 more reactors by 2020 as China turns to atomic
energy to cut pollution and reliance on oil.

An Areva spokesman, Charles Hufnagel, and a Guangdong Nuclear
representative, Li Zhiyuan declined to comment. A Westinghouse
spokesman, Vaughn Gilbert, also said he could not comment.

Westinghouse outbid Areva and Russia's AtomStroyExport to win the
bid to build four reactors after almost two years of negotiating and
lobbying by the three companies, which were short-listed by China in
February 2005.

The U.S. energy secretary Samuel Bodman and Ma Kai, head of China's
National Development and Reform Commission, signed an agreement in
Beijing on Dec. 16 awarding the contracts to Westinghouse. The U.S.
company was bought by Japan's Toshiba for $4.16 billion in October.

Formal contract talks with Areva, the world's biggest maker of
nuclear reactors, will begin around the weeklong Chinese Lunar New
Year holiday that starts Sunday, Guangdong Nuclear's Xu said. He
declined to comment on the reasons for possibly switching the
contracts from Westinghouse to Areva. "This is the decision of the
government," said Xu.

Areva has built four nuclear reactors in China at Daya Bay and Ling
Ao in Guangdong and has provided technology for reactors at Qinshan
in Zhejiang.

Électricité de France, Europe's biggest power generator, said Friday
its cooperation with Guangdong Nuclear will increase in coming
months. Électricité de France was involved in the Daya Bay and Ling
Ao projects.

"Our long-term nuclear cooperation will move to a new level in the
coming months," Caroline Muller, an Électricité de France
spokeswoman in Paris, said after a meeting between the company's
chief executive officer, Pierre Gadonneix, and representatives of
the Chinese nuclear operator.


Copyright Š 2007 the International Herald Tribune All rights
reserved     
*****************************************************************
 56 GU: British Energy calls for partners to build new wave of nuclear plants

Guardian Unlimited Business

Terry Macalister

Wednesday February 14, 2007

The Guardian

British Energy called yesterday for partners to help build a new
generation of nuclear plants by 2016, fuelling expectations that the
government will give the final go-ahead within weeks for more atomic
power. Sizewell in Suffolk and Hinkley Point in Somerset are being
promoted by British Energy as the best potential sites for building
new plants.

The company, which is still 65% government owned, made its pitch
after reporting a doubling of nine-monthly pre-tax profits to Ł622m,
although its ageing power stations continued to be plagued by
breakdowns.

Bill Coley, chief executive, said: "We have today launched a process
to invite potential partners for new nuclear generation projects in
the UK. Construction of new nuclear power stations is critical to
meeting the UK's security of supply and climate change objectives."

British Energy has up until now kept quiet in the debate about new
reactors, arguing that it had to sort out its internal problems
before focusing on more plants. A disastrous performance in the past
- the government had to come to the rescue three years ago - also
made it a bad advert for nuclear, argue critics.

But strong results for the nine months to December 31 have left Mr
Coley in bullish form and he said it was not "unrealistic" to expect
new nuclear plants to be on stream by 2018 or before, depending on
how the planning process worked.

The British government said during its energy review last summer
that nuclear power had a role to play in electricity generation, in
part because it produces less carbon than fossil fuels and so would
help reduce greenhouse gases.

Friends of the Earth (FoE) and many other green groups remain
opposed to this strategy, arguing that atomic power is unsafe and
bad for the environment. Greenpeace has tried to stop the move by
calling on the high court to undertake a judicial review on the
grounds that there was no proper consultation.

Roger Higman, campaigns coordinator at FoE, said: "British Energy is
an obvious choice of nuclear partner because it has the sites. But
areas such as Sizewell are vulnerable to rising sea levels and,
given we cannot build Wembley stadium on time and on price, what
would be the cost of any new nuclear stations?"

Mr Coley said he favoured the firm's sites at Hinkley and Sizewell
as locations for a new generation of plants.

"I could actually envisage a scenario where initially there may well
be two nuclear plants under construction at the same time in
parallel. At quite a few sites we do have land adjacent. At Sizewell
and Hinkley, for example."

The French power company EDF has made it clear it would like to
build new nuclear reactors in Britain and analysts believe the
German utilities RWE and Eon are also interested, although much
depends on issues such as planning consents. British Energy said it
had held talks with "quite a few companies" but would not name names
and said there were no formal alliances.

British Energy is still struggling with reactor failures at four
sites. It expressed confidence that Hinkley and Hunterston could be
back in action by the end of March or early April, broadly in line
with expectations. Reactors at Heysham and Hartlepool are also not
working.

The firm also said it had fixed-price contracts in place for about
46 terawatt hours for its 2007-08 financial year at an average price
of about Ł44 a megawatt hour.

Analysts said this was good news given the recent fall in energy
prices but warned that the decline in prices would eventually have
an impact on the company.

Expectations that the government would announce it would sell its
stake in British Energy yesterday were not fulfilled and the shares
fell 2% to 415.5p.

Useful links
British Energy
Department of Trade and Industry
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd
Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Greenpeace
Come Clean WMD awareness programme
UK atomic energy authority
National Radiological Protection Board
Friends of the Earth
World Nuclear Association
World Nuclear Transport Institute

Guardian Unlimited Š Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
*****************************************************************
 57 DaytonDailyNews.com: Mound Plant records buried in New Mexico

Exhumation would cost millions, but they are key to workers' health
claims.

By Tom Beyerlein

Staff Writer

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

At least a dozen pallets of shrink-wrapped cardboard boxes, six 
55-gallon drums and 11 safes containing classified records from 
the Miamisburg Mound Plant are buried in underground shafts in 
Area G of a radioactive waste landfill at Los Alamos National 
Laboratory in New Mexico.

But a leading federal health official said Tuesday it may be
necessary to dig up the more than 400 boxes of records from the
1980s and 1990s in order to get a clear picture of the hazards
workers faced at Mound. The records could help to determine if
hundreds of cancer-stricken Mound workers qualify for federal
compensation.

"We are open-minded as to whether (the records) should be exhumed,"
said Larry J. Elliott, director of compensation analysis for the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH.
"This is an interesting problem, and we're doing the best we can to
make sure that we have the documents we need to do our work."

Elliott's office oversees scientific "dose reconstructions," a
paperwork method of estimating atomic workers' exposures to harmful
radiation and chemicals. If a reconstruction shows at least a 50
percent probability that a worker's cancer was caused by an
on-the-job exposure, the worker qualifies for cash and medical
benefits under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness
Compensation Program.

But NIOSH can't accurately estimate worker exposures without knowing
the hazards present at each of the nation's atomic plants. Federal
contractors working on a "site profile" of Mound hazards went to Los
Alamos to view the classified records last year, only to learn the
records had been buried as radioactively contaminated waste in 2005.
Elliott said it's the largest destruction of compensation-related
documents by Energy that he's ever seen.

"I find it amazing that the variety of records here &mdash; 12
pallets full &mdash; could all be contaminated," Elliott said. "How
could it happen?"

According to the Energy Department, Mound shipped 458 boxes of
classified records to Los Alamos in 1995 and later reclaimed 40
boxes for an early dose reconstruction project. Los Alamos officials
buried the remaining boxes, which contain logbooks, safety analysis
reports, Mound studies of the properties of toxic metals used there,
and descriptions of a 1989 release of radioactive tritium.

Energy officials are scouring their archives in hopes of finding
uncontaminated copies of the Mound records, and exploring ways to
prevent more destruction of documents that could help ailing atomic
workers to prove their compensation claims, said department
spokeswoman Megan Barnett.

"We are looking into it," she said. "We take this very seriously."

Elliott said he hopes uncontaminated copies of the documents can be
found. It may be necessary to exhume the records, he said, but that
would require potentially exposing workers in special protective
gear to radioactive waste. Elliott said he'll know in a few weeks
whether exhumation will be necessary.

In a memo released last week, the Energy Department told the federal
Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health it would take six
months and cost $1.5 to $3 million to exhume the records and another
year and up to $6 million to scan them to create uncontaminated
copies.

DaytonDailyNews.com:

Copyright Š2007 Cox Ohio Publishing, Dayton, Ohio, USA. All rights
reserved.
*****************************************************************
 58 Spectrum: Downwinders on Discovery Channel Thursday

www.thespectrum.com - The Spectrum, St. George, UT Customer Service:  

Wednesday, February 14, 2007   

ST. GEORGE  Southern Utah will be featured Thursday night on a 
Discovery Channel telecast of Best Evidence.

The science-oriented series will deal with atomic testing at the 
Nevada Test Site and nuclear fallout that spread from there. The 
program is scheduled to air at 9 p.m. (EST). Please check local 
listings.

Several St. George residents will be featured during the broadcast,
which will also take a look at the cast and crew of the film The
Conqueror.

For years there has been speculation that John Wayne, Susan Hayward,
Agness Moorehead and others involved with the film contracted cancer
because of their exposure to nuclear fallout while filming in the
desert near Washington County.

Of the 220 persons who worked on the film, 91 contracted cancer and
46 died from it. Scientists say that under normal circumstances,
only 30 people from a group that size would suffer a similar fate.

Originally published February 14, 2007 Print this article Email this

Copyright Š2007 The Spectrum.
All rights reserved.
Users of this site agree to the
Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
(Terms updated 7/20/05)
*****************************************************************
 59 Cape Cod Times: State wants more study on toxicity of tungsten 

(February 14, 2007)

By AMANDA LEHMERT STAFF WRITER

Department of Environmental Protection officials have asked the 
Army for more research on the potential toxicity of tungsten in 
humans.

The request comes after the recent release of an Army study on 
the toxicity of the metal, which was used in ammunition fired at 
Camp Edwards on the Upper Cape.


======================================================================
For more information on how tungsten missed its mark, see our
special resources site.

======================================================================

A million tungsten-nylon bullets were fired at the base since 1999
and, last year, tungsten was discovered in the aquifer flowing below
the base.

Army researchers at the Center for Health Promotion and Preventative
Medicine fed tungsten-tainted water to rats to simulate the way
people might be exposed to the metal. Researchers found that the
rats who were fed water laced with tungsten suffered kidney damage
and weight loss.

Despite these findings, the researchers stopped short of saying how
much tungsten would be safe for humans to drink. State environmental
officials and Army officials concluded there was still too little
information to make that determination.

''Although the (Army) study used a good overall design and adds to
the body of knowledge about tungsten toxicity, it is limited in
scope,'' Department of Environmental Protection spokesman Edmund
Coletta said in a statement. ''Thus, it is premature to draw any
conclusions about a safe level of exposure based on this one study.''

A follow-up study is expected to wrap up this month, an Army
spokeswoman said.

A year ago this week, Gov. Mitt Romney banned the tungsten-nylon
''green'' ammunition from Camp Edwards after military research
concluded the tungsten leached into the Cape's aquifer, the area's
primary source of drinking water.

Tungsten has been found in the aquifer in concentrations as high as
560 parts per billion. One part per billion is equal to a
half-teaspoon in an Olympic-size pool.

Tests by state environmental officials determined that no tungsten
has reached drinking water wells, so there is no immediate risk to
residents.

There are no state or federal drinking water standards for tungsten.
However, animal studies by various researchers indicate tungsten
exposure leads to lower fertility and can increase the
cancer-causing potential of other materials.

The Army called upon its toxicologists to study tungsten in light of
news that the tungsten in the bullets could leach into soil and
groundwater.

The researchers fed rats doses of tungsten-tainted water and took
note of their health and behavior. They found that at a dose of 200
milligrams (.01 ounce) per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of body weight, the
rats would show signs of kidney damage.

''It's typical of heavy metal toxicity in animals as well as
humans,'' said Glenn Leach, manager for the toxicity evaluation
program at the Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventative
Medicine, located in Maryland.

Researchers concluded they could observe no negative health effects
in the rats that ingested 20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.
Leach said the Army researchers have already begun a second study to
try to more carefully define a dose of tungsten that shows no
effects in rats.

The research was conducted in 2004 and 2005, but the study was only
released to officials at the Department of Environmental Protection,
the Environmental Protection Agency and the Massachusetts National
Guard after a Freedom of Information Act request was filed by the
Cape Cod Times in late 2006.

State environmental officials said they continue to monitor tungsten
toxicity research to determine whether they should set a drinking
water standard for the metal. In the past, the state set its own
standard for contaminants - such as perchlorate - in the absence of
guidance from the federal government.

Local EPA officials sent the Army study to the agency's Office of
Research and Development for a technical review.

Amanda Lehmert

Copyright Š 2007 Cape Cod Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 60 Sydney Morning Herald: Incentives for indigenous land for (nuclear)dump - 

www.smh.com.au

February 14, 2007 - 10:40PM

The federal science department has refused to reveal the incentives
it may offer indigenous people to nominate their land for a proposed
nuclear waste dump.

The federal government has identified three sites in the Northern
Territory as possible locations for a repository to store low and
medium-level radioactive waste - Harts Range and Mt Everard, near
Alice Springs, and Fishers Ridge near Katherine.

The government has said it wants to work with indigenous owners to
find a spot for the waste dump, and is seeking an agreement from
Aboriginal people to offer up indigenous land for the facility.

A Senate estimates hearing was told on Wednesday the department had
met with the Aboriginal representatives of the Northern Land Council
twice since November 2006, including last week, to negotiate the
possibility of building the nuclear waste dump on its land.

But the department's science group manager, Jessie Borthwick, would
reveal little information about last week's meeting - not even its
location.

Ms Borthwick would say only that the meeting took place in the
Tennant Creek vicinity, prompting NT Labor senator Trish Crossin to
query whether the meeting was held on the Stuart Highway.

She would not reveal the nature of the discussions, which the
Northern Land Council had asked to be kept secret.

Asked if the department had made provisions to offer incentives to
anyone who nominated land for the waste dump, Ms Borthwick replied:
"The discussions that we've had with the Northern Land Council are
confidential at this stage."

Further meetings were planned with the Central Land Council in
March, she said.

A private contractor is examining the three potential sites, and a
full report is due by the end of March.

At present, radioactive waste is stored at more than 100 sites
around Australia, including hospitals, factories, universities and
defence facilities.

The Senate committee was told on Wednesday the government hoped to
make an announcement about the preferred site for a nuclear waste
dump around mid-2007.

Š 2007 AAP

Copyright Š 2007. The Sydney Morning Herald.
*****************************************************************
 61 Pahrump Valley Times: Nicholson applies for nuke office slot

Feb. 14, 2007

By MARK WAITE PVT

Former Nye County Deputy District Attorney Rachel Nicholson is one
of 15 applicants for the position of director of the Nye County
Nuclear Waste Repository Office.

Interim director Dave Swanson has also applied for the job.
Applications closed Jan. 26. The county is offering an annual salary
of $82,243 to $106,849.

The applications were released by Nye County after an Open Records
Act request was filed by the Pahrump Valley Times.

The director supervises Nye County's oversight of the federal Yucca
Mountain program. Nye County received $2.65 million from the U.S.
Department of Energy this year for oversight.

The director also works with the county commission on implementing
the Payment Equal to Taxes agreement, under which the county
receives $10 million annually from DOE.

Nicholson was deputy district attorney from November 1992 to June
1998. Since then she has done extensive lobbying work in her
Pennsylvania law office for Nye County at a rate of $110 per hour.

Commissioners last October rejected a recommendation to appoint
Swanson to the permanent director's job, after then Commissioner
Patricia Cox pointed to a possible conflict of interest by the
selection committee. Commissioner Joni Eastley then used a
parliamentary measure to defeat the measure.

Eastley then pushed to change the job description to give preference
to candidates with a degree in law or public administration in
addition to at least a degree in physical sciences, engineering or
related fields.

Nicholson will be familiar to Commissioner Gary Hollis, the
commission's nuclear waste liaison, and Commissioner Roberta "Midge"
Carver. Nicholson drew up the lease papers for Carver's late
husband, former Commissioner Dick Carver, to use a Chevrolet
Suburban purchased for his use by a constituent, which was the
subject of a complaint with the Nevada Commission on Ethics filed by
Hollis in 1998.

Nicholson prosecuted the county's case against Nevada Test Site
contractors seeking to obtain possessory use tax money. She
represented Mineral County in a taxation case against Day,
Zimmerman, Hawthorne Corp. She handled cases involving the sale of
Nye Regional Medical Center, worked as a consultant on the Nye
County town sites plan and the land conveyance for the Amargosa
Valley Science and Technology Park in 2000.

Swanson has been interim director of the repository office since Les
Bradshaw left in March 2004, except for a brief period from February
to May 2006 when Dale Hammermeister was director. He was assistant
project administrator at the nuclear waste office under Bradshaw
from 2002 to 2004.

Swanson has 25 years of experience in environmental remediation for
various companies in Georgia and as chief hydro-geologist for the
Georgia Department of Natural Resource. Swanson is familiar with the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act.

Other candidates for the position include:

Bruce Hinton of Lindenhurst, Ill. He was vice-president of marketing
and sales for PCI Energy Services LLC and a product manager for
Westinghouse Electric.

Lewis Lacy Jr., of Las Vegas, a former assistant county attorney in
Harris County, Texas, which includes Houston, and manager of
manufacturing and petrochemical plants in Texas.

Joseph Meshi, of Las Vegas, manager of Inovium Corp., a start-up
financial company; CEO of Computility Inc. of Des Moines, Iowa, and
managing director of Venture Services LLC in Newport Beach, Calif.

Gerald Rizza of Murrysville, Pa., a project manager at Westinghouse
Electric Co., former school vice-principal in Lebanon, Ore., and
planner for ABB Combustion Engine of Windsor, Conn. He has a masters
degree in nuclear engineering from the University of Arizona.

John E. Thompson, of Yorkville, Ill., a former principal engineer in
nuclear fuel management with Commonwealth Edison who also worked at
the Nebraska Public Power District's Cooper Nuclear Station. He has
a degree from the Chicago Kent College of Law and a masters degree
in nuclear engineering from the University of Wisconsin.

Grayson Young Jr., of Baton Rouge, La., a project engineer for
Sargent and Lundy Engineering in Juno Beach, Fla., who evaluates
nuclear plants. He has a master's degree in nuclear engineering from
Louisiana State University.

Deirick L. Dorrell, of Pontiac, Mo., director of a nuclear lab
responsible for nuclear waste management for DLDC. He has a master's
degree in nuclear engineering.

webmaster@pahrumpvalleytimes.com
Copyright Š Pahrump Valley Times, 1997 -
*****************************************************************
 62 Bradenton Herald: Lockheed gift helps schools

02/14/2007 | 

Defense contractor involved in Tallevast cleanup gives $100,000 to
Manatee district

SYLVIA LIM

Herald Staff Writer

MANATEE - Defense contractor Lockheed Martin, embroiled in a
long-running cleanup of toxic pollution surrounding its former
property in the Tallevast area, has donated $100,000 to jump-start
three science and technology-related programs in the Manatee County
School District.

The money will be used to to fund a teacher-training project with
the South Florida Museum, increase participation in science and
engineering fairs and upgrade the school district's environmental
science program, according to district records.

The company received recognition and a plaque from Superintendent
Roger Dearing during a board meeting Monday night.

Despite the controversy surrounding the estimated 200-acre
underground toxic plume, traced to the former Loral American
Beryllium Co. plant, school district officials say they welcome the
company's contribution.

"We've had no discussions relative to the (Tallevast) issue," said
Margi Nanney, Manatee schools spokeswoman. "It's been about the
school district as a whole. Their expertise and resources can help
students in district as a whole."

School officials hope the relationship with Lockheed will be
long-term. Lockheed, in turn, says its donation will help Manatee
produce scientists and engineers it could hire in the future.

Out of 140,000 workers it employs, mostly in the United States,
90,000 will be retiring in the next decade, said Gail Rymer,
Lockheed's director of community relations.

"There aren't enough students in the science and math pipelines to
fill those jobs," Rymer said. "We need to look now for ways to get
them into that pipeline."

The programs Lockheed is funding could be a first step. In the joint
project with the South Florida Museum, up to 150 teachers will be
selected to participate in a series of workshops, called the
Institute of Science Teaching, to help them generate ideas on ways
to teach science, said Jeff Rodgers, the museum's education director.

Lockheed's funding also will be used to buy equipment to beef up the
district's environmental science programs in middle schools,
including some that will allow students a chance to measure and
analyze soil samples, Nanney said.

The company also will pay for a Space Day in May at Kinnan
Elementary School that will include participation from Abel
Elementary students, said Nanney and Rymer.

"We're looking at ways to get involved at local schools, in places
where we have environmental cleanups going on, but where we don't
have facilities there," Rymer said. "What I do is to become a local
presence and to work with those communities."

But Tallevast resident Wanda Washington was skeptical of Lockheed's
intention, describing the gesture as "buying sympathy from the
public."

"I don't have a problem with them donating money to schools, just as
long as the schools are safe for the children and staff," said
Washington, vice president of FOCUS, a Tallevast advocacy group.

In a public meeting with Tallevast officials a year ago, Washington
said, residents raised concerns about whether the plume extends to
nearby elementary schools, Abel to the northwest and Kinnan to the
northeast.

Forrest Branscomb, the district's risk manager, said the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection found tests at the schools
were unnecessary because they are outside the area of the
contamination.

Plus, he said, the schools draw their drinking water from the
county's water system instead of local wells, he said.

However, the size and borders of the plume are still being
challenged by Tallevast residents and developers.

Sylvia Lim, education reporter, can be reached at 745-7041 or
slim@Bradenton.com

HeraldToday.com 
*****************************************************************
 63 AP Wire: Nuke documents buried

02/14/2007 | 

Associated Press

NUCLEAR BURIAL: Records buried at a radioactive-waste landfill in 
New Mexico may be needed to determine if cancer-stricken workers 
at a former nuclear weapons plant in Ohio qualify for federal 
aid.

HEALTH STUDY: Health officials may need the records to help 
reconstruct dosages of radiation the workers received.



 Copyright | About the McClatchy Company







*****************************************************************
 64 AU ABC: Govt told to 'come clean' on NT waste dump

ABC Northern Territory  

Thursday, 15 February 2007. 09:29 (AEDT)Thursday, 15 February 2007.


The Northern Territory's Labor Senator, Trish Crossin, has accused
the Federal Government of lying after it admitted yesterday the
Territory will be a dump site for Sydney's decommissioned Lucas
Heights reactor.

Senator Crossin says officials told a Senate estimates about the
Commonwealth's dumping plan, despite assurances on the day of the
decommissioning that waste would not be heading for the Territory.

Senator Crossin says the Commonwealth will not say exactly how much
waste there will be or where it will go.

"Every time I go to estimates I find another saga, another story,"
she said.

"And we really need them to come clean and be honest and give us the
whole picture about exactly what it is we're going to be asked to
store on behalf of the Commonwealth."

Senator Crossin says the Federal Government has told her it is in
discussions with the Northern Land Council about where the waste
will be dumped.

"What we've got is a nuclear waste dump being constructed in the
Northern Territory under secrecy," she said.

"Why can't this Federal Government be open and honest about what it
is they are talking about with the Northern Land Council, if it's
going to be Muckaty Station then let us all know."

*****************************************************************
 65 Aiken Today: Public meeting in North Augusta to discuss nuclear energy project

AikenStandard.com

Wed, Feb 14, 2007

By PHILIP LORD Senior writer

A public meeting will be held in North Augusta Thursday to receive
input on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, a project two area
companies are hoping to attract to the region.

The GNEP public hearing will be held at the North Augusta Community
Center from 6-9 p.m., according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

"We look forward to gaining a broader understanding of the
environmental conditions under which we will be operating, so we
look forward to getting the local perspective at each site we're
evaluating to potentially build a GNEP site," DOE Assistant
Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dennis Spurgeon said. "Our need for
nuclear power ? a safe, emissions-free and affordable source of
energy ? is great and GNEP puts us on a path to encourage expansion
of domestic and international nuclear energy production while
reducing nuclear proliferation risks."

The meeting is expected to attract both nuclear supporters and those
who oppose the GNEP process, such as the Blue Ridge Environmental
Defense League, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy and others who
oppose the nuclear materials recycling process proposed.

Currently the Savannah River Site and a site near Barnwell are two
of the 11 sites in the running for GNEP funding.

The SRS project is being spearheaded by the Savannah River National
Laboratory and the Economic Development Partnership of Aiken and
Edgefield counties. The Barnwell plan is proposed by EnergySolutions.

DOE is also considering SRS and five other DOE sites as the location
for an advanced fuel cycle research facility which would perform
research and development into spent nuclear fuel recycling processes
and other advanced nuclear fuel cycles. SRS is also one of 11 sites
being considered for the an advanced recycling reactor.

According to DOE, GNEP will recycle spent nuclear fuel and destroy
its long-lived radioactive components. To accomplish this, DOE
proposes to design, build, and operate three facilities: an advanced
fuel cycle research facility, a nuclear fuel recycling center; and
an advanced recycling reactor which would destroy long-lived
radioactive elements in the new fuel while generating electricity.

Contact Philip Lord at plord@aikenstandard.com

Š 2005 The AikenStandard. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
 66 Las Vegas SUN: Editorial: Conflicts in Yucca review

Today: February 14, 2007 at 7:38:49 PST

'Independent' analysis is sought from firm where many employees have
Yucca ties

If Congress wanted an independent review of events leading up to
President Bush's decision to invade Iraq, would it offer the job to
a panel whose members included Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and
Condoleezza Rice?

Of course not.

So why has the Energy Department, which last summer announced it
wanted three independent reviews of the proposed Yucca Mountain
nuclear waste repository, hired a Henderson-based consulting firm
loaded with former Yucca Mountain officials to conduct the first of
those reviews?

The Las Vegas Sun's Washington reporter, Lisa Mascaro, reported
Tuesday that the Energy Department has awarded Longenecker &
Associates a six-month, $450,000 contract to review engineering work
by the Energy Department and a Yucca Mountain contractor, Bechtel
SAIC.

Not only has the Energy Department turned to the consulting company
in the past for work at Yucca Mountain, but also several members of
the company's staff and board have extensive individual experience
working at the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, where the
federal government wants to bury the nation's high-level nuclear
waste.

Serving on its board is Donald Pearman Jr., a former Energy
Department official who also worked at Yucca Mountain as deputy
general manager of Bechtel SAIC. Among the company's staff members
are Donald Horton, former deputy project manager at Yucca, and
Ronald Milner, who for 10 years served as chief operating officer of
the Energy Department's office that oversees work at Yucca.

The company's president, John Longenecker, told Mascaro that his
10-person review team will be a "totally fresh set of eyes," with
none of the members having worked in the past for the Energy
Department or Bechtel SAIC.

But that is not reassuring. Obviously, if the company's review
contained criticisms of past work at Yucca Mountain, the expertise
of many of its own employees who have years of experience there
would come into question. A company laden with conflicts of interest
has no incentive to perform a hard-hitting analysis.

Rather than waste more money reviewing 20 years of failed work at
Yucca Mountain, the federal government would be wise to shut down
this unsafe project.

All contents Š 1996 - 2007 Las Vegas Sun, Inc.
A member of the Greenspun Media Group, publishers of: In Business,
Las Vegas Life, Las Vegas Magazine, Las Vegas Weekly, LasVegas.com,
Ralston/Flash, Vegas Golfer, VEGAS Magazine, Vegas.com
*****************************************************************
 67 WVLT: Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Waste Coming to Oak Ridge


POll: Are you concerned about a new DOE plan that would bring out of state
nuclear waste into East Tennessee to be burned in Oak Ridge?

There have been 0 comments posted about this story

Posted: 11:18 PM Feb 13, 2007

(WVLT)- The nation's nuclear waste could be coming to Oak Ridge for
storage and reprocessing. Tuesday, the Department of Energy took the
first step in a plan to build a toxic waste incinerator there.

The waste produced by nuclear power plants traditionally is disposed
of...now, the federal government has a plan to recycle the spent
fuel, which has been in storage for many years at nuclear power
plants throughout the country.

Supporters say the worldwide electricity demand is expected to
nearly double in roughly 25 years...and the only way to supply that
demands is by reusing the usable components of nuclear waste.

"It's reusing, it's just like we recycle household products, paper,
plastic, it's the same thing," Dick Black said.

A spokesman for the office of nuclear energy says burning nuclear
waste at a toxic waste incinerator would minimize waste, and
preserve resources for future generations.

About one hundred folks attending the first public forum learned
that Oak Ridge is one of 13 sites under consideration.

"It's the only way we can reduce the dependence on foreign oil,"
Homer Fisher said.

"So that we'll have a long term reliable energy source in this
nation," Joe Lenhard said.

The plan's strategy calls for better securing sensitive materials,
but some question that.

"GNEP would build a large number of high-yield targets for
terrorists," Wolf Naegeli said.

The nuclear waste would be transported to Oak Ridge by either rail
or ground.

"We've got to be concerned about how much is being transported on
the roads, whether it's me or my daughter or my husband who's going
to get in a wreck with one of these trucks," Linda Modica said.

Officials say nuclear waste transportation has a safe track record,
dating back 50 years.

"There's been no incidents, no release, no breach of containment,
those casks are very, very robust," Black said.

Gray Television Group, Inc. - Copyright ÂŠ 2002-2007 -
*****************************************************************
 68 FPON: Govt calls halt to uranium licences

Free Press of Namibia

Wednesday, February 14, 2007 - Web posted at 7:16:32 GMT

TONDERAI KATSWARA

AS applications pour into Namibia from companies intending to 
prospect for uranium, the Ministry of Mines and Energy has 
stopped accepting such requests.

It will soon announce a moratorium in the Government Gazette.

   The Namibian has it on good authority that the Ministry 
stopped accepting applications for uranium prospecting and 
exploration two months ago.

  This comes hot on the heels of a similar moratorium slapped on 
the granting of diamond cutting and polishing licences by the 
same Ministry early this month, after the renewal of a five-year 
sales agreement between Government and De Beers on January 30.

    In the last two years, Namibia has become a global attraction 
because of its mineral deposits hugely in demand on international 
markets, like uranium and diamonds.

 In an interview with The Namibian yesterday, the Permanent 
Secretary of Mines and Energy, Joseph Iita, confirmed that no 
applications were currently being accepted, adding that more 
would soon be revealed in the Government Gazette.

         "It's a matter of regulating the issue of licences.

  Everyone is running to Namibia for uranium and we don't want 
every Jack and Jill mining uranium ...," he said.

    Iita also said uranium was a special mineral, adding that the 
Government was reconsidering its policies on the resource.

 He said there was an upsurge in the global demand for uranium, 
hence the need to regulate uranium activities.

  Said Iita: "The world is now highly advanced and has come up 
with all sorts of uses for uranium.

      In the end uranium is not only used for the generation of 
electricity, but can be used for destructive purposes as well."

 Local and international companies alike have of late been 
rushing in with applications for uranium prospecting and mining 
in Namibia.

  To date, more than 20 mining outfits are doing uranium 
prospecting and exploration, mainly in the Erongo Region.

 These companies are of an international mix with various owners 
from Namibia, China, Australia and Ghana, among a host of others.

     However, there are currently only two active uranium mines - 
Roessing Uranium and Langer Heinrich Uranium.

  With the possibility of a looming power crunch in southern 
Africa, nuclear power is being touted as an alternative power 
source.

      Last month the Ministry of Mines and Energy announced that 
Government was considering a nuclear power plant to escape the 
impending energy crisis and was looking for international 
partners to achieve this.

  Namibia imports about 50 per cent of its electricity needs, 
mainly from South Africa. 

Material on this site copyright The Free Press Of Namibia (Pty) 
Ltd PO Box 20783 - Windhoek - 42 John Meinert Street Tel: +264 
(61) 279600 - Fax: +264 (61) 279602

*****************************************************************
 69 Hanford News: Firm with Yucca links to do review of troubled nuke-waste dump

This story was published Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

By Lisa Mascaro, Las Vegas Sun, Scripps-McClatchy Western Service

WASHINGTON - To conduct an independent review of the troubled
nuclear-waste dump, the Energy Department has hired a firm whose
staff and board include past Yucca Mountain officials.

The firm, Longenecker & Associates, said that none of the former
officials of the Energy Department or its main contractor, Bechtel
SAIC, will play a role in the assessment. The company says it has
assembled a new team of professionals from elsewhere in the
corporate world for the $450,000 contract.

But opponents of the proposed nuclear dump 90 miles northwest of Las
Vegas say they expect nothing more than a "rubber stamp" review to
come from the effort.

"It would seem very difficult to get an independent assessment if
you're just turning around and hiring former Yucca Mountain people,"
said Bob Loux, executive director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear
Projects, which has been fighting Yucca Mountain for 25 years.

"These are individuals who are likely responsible for the problems
at Yucca Mountain. Now you're going to turn around and hire them?"

A spokesman for Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, who
has vowed to cut Yucca's funding in the department's 2007 budget,
said the firm's report is a waste of taxpayer dollars and "already
has no credibility.

"I don't think anyone would look at that and think it passes the
smell test," Reid spokesman Jon Summers said. "It's sort of like
having a failing math student go back and grade his own test."

Ward Sproat, the new director of the Energy Department's civilian
radioactive-waste-management office, which overseas Yucca Mountain,
announced as soon as he took over last summer that he wanted three
independent reviews of the project that is now 20 years behind
schedule.

In explaining his game plan before a House energy subcommittee in
July, Sproat said: "There are a number of process and organizational
issues which must be addressed, all of which are correctable."

His goal is to get the project to its next milestone of submitting a
construction license application to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission by 2008. The Energy Department has missed similar
deadlines in the past.

The department said Monday that it had awarded Longenecker the first
of those contracts, a six-month engineering review of the civilian
radioactive waste office and its contractor, Bechtel SAIC. The firm
has done work at Yucca Mountain before, mainly in quality assurance
oversight.

Company President John Longenecker said the 10-person team for the
engineering job comes from the ranks of some of the country's
leading corporations, including Fluor and Northrop Grumman.

"We would never consider putting anybody who's ex-DOE on the review
team," Longenecker said Monday. "Our team of 10 is going to be a
totally fresh set of eyes."

The company's Web site lists many former Energy Department officials
on staff. Ronald A. Milner, who spent 10 years as the chief
operating officer of the department's civilian
radioactive-waste-management office, is part of Longenecker's senior
management team. He was hired in April after retiring from the
Energy Department. He had worked for the department since 1977.

The company also counts on its roster Donald G. Horton, the former
deputy project manager at Yucca Mountain, who also headed up its
quality assurance work.

The company's board includes Donald W. Pearman Jr., who had served
as Bechtel SAIC's deputy general manager at Yucca Mountain. He
previously worked at the Energy Department.

Many of the firms' associates have conducted Yucca-related work.

Longenecker noted the three former Yucca executives were retired and
working mostly on a part-time basis for his firm. He was unable to
immediately forward a list of team members for this contract.

Longenecker said he will oversee the final report, but said he would
not be part of the team because he has done past quality assurance
reviews at Yucca.

The project has suffered from repeated problems in its quality
assurance protocol, some of which were documented in 2004 by the
Government Accountability Office.

(Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service,
www.scrippsnews.com.)

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 70 Hanford News: Lawmaker worries about nuke facility in Tennessee; Hanford also
being studied for president's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

This story was published Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

By The Associated Press and Herald staff

OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - U.S. Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., has strong 
concerns about locating a nuclear waste processing facility at 
the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

The Department of Energy installation is one of 11 sites, 
including Hanford, being studied as part of the Bush 
administration's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

The strategy would reverse the country's long-held policy banning
the reuse of spent nuclear fuel, which is now stored at nuclear
power plants around the country awaiting the long-stalled opening of
a permanent storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.

The plan also envisions U.S. companies selling reactors and fuel
todeveloping countries, with the fuel returning to the United States
for reprocessing.

"We're really not aggressively going after it," Wamp, of
Chattanooga, and who represents Oak Ridge, told The Chattanooga
Times Free Press.

"Once we modernized our facilities (in Oak Ridge) and moved away
from the Manhattan Project era, we do not want waste. We do not want
to process waste. We do not want waste coming in. We want waste
leaving Oak Ridge," he said.

Supporters, however, see the economic benefits of locating some or
all of three proposed facilities - a recycling center, an
experimental advanced recycling reactor and an advanced fuel cycle
research facility - in Oak Ridge.

"The jobs are important," Lawrence Young said. "And the expertise is
justas important. Oak Ridge truly wantsto stay at the forefront of
this technology."

Young heads the Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee, an
Oak Ridge group that finds commercial uses for former government
facilities. The group received a DOE grant of $894,704 in January to
study Oak Ridge's potential for the nuclear waste processing
operations.

The 10 other candidates include five owned by the Energy Department,
including the Savannah River National Laboratory in South Carolina.
Others include the Paducah, Ky., and Portsmouth, Ohio, uranium
enrichment sites and the Hanford nuclear site in Washington.

Public hearings at the various sites began Tuesday in Oak Ridge,
with proposals to be submitted to DOE in about 90 days. Oak Ridge
officials say the state will have to OK the local plan, and Congress
will have to fund it - at potentially $20 billion to $40 billion.

Sherill Greene, director of the Oak Ridge Lab's nuclear
technologyprograms, said recycling the wasteis better than storing
it.

"I feel a personal responsibility to my children," he said. "I think
about the world they are going to inherit. We have got to solve this
problem, and this is an approach that we can take."

But the Union of Concerned Scientists interest group said any
community that has a reprocessing facility "will by necessity become
a long-term dump for spent fuel shipped from nuclear plants around
the country."

"Even if this spent fuel is eventually processed," said Ed Lyman,
the group's senior staff scientist, "the residual highly radioactive
wastes will have to stay where they are generated unless another
site and be found to take them - an unlikely prospect."

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 71 KnoxNews: Backers, critics turn out for GNEP 'scoping' session

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com

February 14, 2007

OAK RIDGE - Oak Ridge was born an atomic city in World War II, 
and it remains a nuclear friendly town.

But it's not yet clear what - if any - involvement Oak Ridge will 
have in one of the biggest nuclear projects of this era, the Bush 
administration's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.

The U.S. Department of Energy held a public "scoping" meeting in Oak
Ridge on Tuesday night to gather input on the program that's
designed to expand the use of nuclear energy. About 150 people
attended at the Doubletree Hotel, and there were supporters,
detractors and plenty of comments.

Oak Ridge is a candidate site for any or all of the three proposed
facilities: a recycling center for highly radioactive spent fuel, a
nuclear reactor that would destroy unwanted elements in old fuel and
generate electricity at the same time, and a nuclear
research-and-development center.

Joe Lenhard, a retired DOE research officer who has lived in Oak
Ridge for 50 years, was among those who spoke in support of the
venture. "Let's get behind GNEP and make it happen," he said.

Dozens of others who spent their careers in nuclear development were
on hand.

Wolf Nagley was among the opponents, calling it a "pipe dream." He
said GNEP would provide high-yield targets for terrorism. He said he
was concerned that DOE did not provide any reasonable alternatives
to the multibillion-dollar plan.

The Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee, a nonprofit
group that supports economic development, recently received a grant
to evaluate the suitability of a 7,000-acre site on federal land
near Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Science Applications
International Corp. is conducting the study.

Lawrence Young, the president of CROET, said the study would take
about three months to complete.

While there was plenty of support Tuesday night, some of its was
qualified.

The Tennessee Citizens for Wilderness Planning and the Advocates For
the Oak Ridge Reservation, both of which support conservation, said
they would prefer that any Oak Ridge development take place on
"brownfield" sites, such as the K-25 site, instead of the
never-used, wooded acreage being proposed for the nuclear facilities.

Senior writer Frank Munger may be reached at 865-342-6329.

 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
 72 Daily Press: Cities sue county over perchlorate surcharge 

Victorville, California

Tatiana Prophet February 14, 2007

For 11 cities in San Bernardino County, the prospect of paying a
surcharge for a chemical that did not originate in their areas just
doesnât seem right.

It has become such a sore point that the cities have filed suit 
against the county for breach of contract, asking for a refund of 
all fees paid since March relating to perchlorate found at the 
landfill in Rialto.

The suit also asks for a judicial declaration that the county was 
negligent in both its acquisition and handling of the Mid-Valley 
Landfill â which was previously used by manufacturers of 
rockets, missiles and other armaments, according to the 
complaint.

In March, the county informed all cities that it would be 
charging an additional 69 cents per ton resulting from the 
cleanup of perchlorate.

The cities and towns that have filed suit are: Apple Valley, 
Barstow, Big Bear Lake, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Highland, Loma 
Linda, San Bernardino, Victorville, Yucaipa and Yucca Valley.

At high levels, perchlorate can temporarily and reversibly 
inhibit the thyroidâs ability to absorb iodine from the 
bloodstream, according to the National Academy of Sciences. It 
has been associated with rocket fuel and the manufacture of other 
industrial components.

In previous interviews with local water experts, testing of wells 
in the Victor Valley area has not come up with perchlorate.

According to the complaint, âThe county failed to exercise 
reasonable due diligence and proper environmental assessment at 
the time of its purchase necessary to evaluate whether or not 
that parcel was contaminated.â

The Daily Press was unable to reach the attorney for the 
plaintiffs. But Deputy County Counsel Bob Jocks said the county 
conducted an âappropriateâ environmental assessment on the 
property.

âActually, when we bought the property, the environmental 
assessment didnât show any perchlorate,â he said. âWe 
obviously learned at some point after that that there was 
perchlorate on there.â

The cities claim breach of contract because the original contract 
from 1998 stated that the fee would be raised only because of an 
âuncontrollable circumstanceâ such as an âact of God, 
landslide, lightning, earthquake, fire, explosion, sabotage ... 
war, riot or civil disturbance.â

The suit also asks for a determination that the county breached 
the original agreement and is liable for damages to be proven at 
the time of trial.

Copyright Š 2006 Daily Press, a Freedom Communications newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 73 DailyBulletin.com: Aerojet site still far from being clean

Toxicity, unexploded ordnance concerns at former munitions lab

By Shelli DeRobertis, Staff Writer

Article Launched: 02/14/2007 01:00:00 AM PST

CHINO HILLS - The Aerojet site is still awaiting approval by the
state Department of Toxic Substances Control on its cleanup of
depleted uranium, but it is removing buried unexploded ordnances,
the DTSC and Aerojet officials told the City Council on Tuesday
night.

"Uranium is a toxic metal, so DTSC has a definite concern of
toxicity," said Hassan Amini, vice president of Geomatrix, the
company hired to perform cleanup of the site.

"They are doing a risk assessment and looking at uranium to find out
if levels constitute a risk to health or human environment," he said.

The Aerojet site consists of 400 acres of fenced-in rolling hills
bordered on the south by Chino Hills State Park and to the north by
the new Vellano development that will become 205 homes.

The former munitions site began as a small-weapons testing facility
in 1954 when it leased out 400 of its 800 acres and used them as a
buffer zone.

Amini said by the 1960s the operations performed by Aerojet grew to
include loading, assembling, packing and testing of munitions
systems for the U.S. Department of Defense, until operations ceased
in 1995.

The costly cleanup began after its closure and is still continuing
after 12 years.

"Aerojet has spent over $40 million dollars in voluntary closure
activities," Amini said.

Of 29 specific areas identified that contain contaminated soil,
Amini said 19 have been cleaned by removing more than 3,000 tons of
soil and debris.

"DTSC accepted 19 of 29 to require no further action," Amini said.

DTSC will soon review the results of the remaining 10 areas once a
report is submitted to them, stating the cleanup is complete.

Amini said the 10 areas include only a small amount of Aerojet's
acreage, but estimated it would be at least two years before DTSC
gives the site a clean bill of health.

Council member Bill Kruger was concerned that foliage on the site
may have absorbed harmful chemicals and asked if any of the plants
on the property have been tested.

"No, we have never tested any plant material," Amini said, but said
he was confident that the chemicals on the site are no longer an
issue.

"In my view it's more the ordnances that raise a concern. We have
our arms around the chemical issues," Amini said.

By summertime, Aerojet plans to submit a report to DTSC of the
additional testing it has performed on locating the remainder of
unexploded ordnances.

"Every site is different with respect to soil and vegetation, so the
materials we use must be appropriate," Amini said.

City Attorney Mark Hensley said the detection levels in equipment
used to locate ordnances are not 100 percent, and a chart has been
developed informing what percentage is allowable.

Jim Austreng, a state unexploded ordnance coordinator with DTSC,
said the site can't be declared clean yet, "but you as a council
decide what you want to do with the land."

Staff writer Shelli DeRobertis can be reached by e-mail at
shelli.derobertis@dailybulletin.com, or by phone at (909) 483-8555.


Los Angeles Newspaper Group
*****************************************************************
 74 Carlsbad Current-Argus: Council OKs payment to energy alliance

By Stella Davis

Article Launched: 02/13/2007 10:50:54 PM MST

CARLSBAD ? The Carlsbad City Council approved a payment of $7,500 to
the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance to continue the option on 1,000 acres
that could be the potential site for a nuclear fuel-recycling center.

Eddy County made the first payment of $7,500 on the two-year option.
The land is located midway between Carlsbad and Hobbs and the owner
has agreed to hold it for two years providing the Alliance meets the
financial obligation it agreed upon with the owner.

The Alliance, a limited liability company with representation from
Eddy and Lea Counties and the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs, received
word on Jan. 31 that it was awarded $1.59 million in U.S. Department
of Energy funds to conduct a site study that must be completed
within the next 90 days.

Eleven sites around the country received a combined total of $10.4
million to determine their viability of hosting either a fuel
recycling center or and advanced recycling reactor. Proposed
facilities that would be part of the DOE's Global Nuclear Energy
Partnership.

According to the DOE, a nuclear fuel-recycling center would separate
spent fuel into reusable and waste components and then manufacture
new nuclear fuel using the reusable components. An advanced 
recycling center would destroy the long-lived radioactive 
elements in the new fuel while generating electricity.

Mayor Pro Tem Ned Elkins, who heads Los Alamos National Laboratory's
Carlsbad office, asked whether the land owner would be willing to
extend the option beyond the two years, noting that the site
selection process by the DOE could go beyond the two years of the
option.

"The rancher has indicated he doesn't want to extend the option,"
said Mayor Bob Forrest, who serves as vice chairman of the Alliance.
"If we are not selected as the GNEP site, I think the land would be
excellent for an industrial park sometime in the future. We might
consider buying the land after the two-year option is up. We didn't
get the radium enrichment facility that Eunice got because we didn't
have the proper site at the time. GNEP is so big that there will be
something for everybody. Our strength is working together and making
sure we have all our i's dotted and our t's crossed."

Councilman Brad Day said that he believes the Alliance is doing "all
the right things" as it moves forward to convince the DOE that the
site chosen by the Alliance is the ideal site for GNEP.

On Monday the Alliance met in Carlsbad and approved a memorandum of
understanding between the Alliance, several subcontractors and two
primary contractors ? Washington Group International and Areva, a
French company and world leader in nuclear power with offices in the
United States ? and several subcontractors.

WGI has provided general management and oversights for the DOE's
Waste Isolation Plant near Carlsbad since 1985 and has expertise in
construction of nuclear facilities. Areva's expertise is in nuclear
regulatory compliance and the permitting process.

Copyright ÂŠ 2005 Carlsbad Current Argus, a MediaNews Group
Newspaper.
*****************************************************************
 75 Chillicothe Gazette: Nuke recycling site in Piketon good idea

www.chillicothegazette.com - Chillicothe, OH

Wednesday, February 14, 2007   

By DR. G. IVAN MALDONADO

With more than 30 construction and operating license (COL) 
applications for new nuclear power plants actively being pursued 
in the United States, many scientists and engineers applaud the 
Bush administration's support for nuclear power.

I include myself among those professionals who believe the 
political uncertainties surrounding nuclear power are beginning 
to recede, in large part as a result of President Bush's forceful 
advocacy of a program aimed at expanding the use of nuclear power 
in the United States and around the world.

Known as the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP, Ohioans
will have an opportunity next month to hear the program discussed,
and to provide input of their own. The Department of Energy has
scheduled a public hearing in Piketon on March 8. What's important
about the hearing is that the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant is
one of 11 locations in different parts of the country that DOE is
considering as sites for nuclear-fuel recycling facilities. The
facilities will be built under the GNEP program, and if Portsmouth
wins the competition, it will bring in an estimated $16 billion and
some 8,000 jobs.

As part of this high-stakes competition, DOE has selected 11
commercial and public consortia to receive up to $16 million in
grants to conduct site studies for the recycling facilities. The
Piketon Initiative for Nuclear Independence, LLC is sponsoring the
Portsmouth site.

Envisioned by the pioneers of nuclear power, recycling extracts more
energy from nuclear fuel, while at the same time reduces the
inventory of some of the most radiotoxic and longest-lived isotopes
in nuclear waste from power plants, thereby significantly increasing
the capacity of an underground repository.

Recycling in the United States was banned by President Carter in
1977, who thought other countries would use the process to build
nuclear weapons. Some nuclear countries did not follow Carter's
example, and continued to recycle. Among the countries were France,
Great Britain and Japan, all of which recycle nuclear fuel safely
and securely. President Reagan overturned Carter's ban, but
recycling was considered too expensive and not resumed.

Now, with the resurgence of nuclear power, the outlook for recycling
has changed. It is estimated that as many as 1,000 nuclear power
plants will be in operation worldwide by 2050, more than double the
number now. Consequently, there might not be enough uranium to
support the growth in nuclear power. So recycling spent fuel from
nuclear power plants - some 50,000 tons is in storage at reactor
sites in the United States - is beginning to make more and more
sense.

The process is straightforward. Leftover uranium is extracted for
recycling while long-lived waste is chemically separated from spent
fuel. Specific actinides such as plutonium, neptunium, americium,
and curium are separated from the waste and used as fuel for
advanced "burner" reactors. These reactors, also known as "fast
reactors," generate electricity while destroying long-lived
radioactive waste. Some nuclear waste would remain, and this would
need to be shipped to the Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada for
permanent disposal.

In other words, recycling is not a substitute for nuclear waste
disposal. We would still need the Yucca Mountain facility, but it
would have enough space to hold all of the nuclear waste from
nuclear power plants as well as waste from decommissioned plants and
the defense program, thus sparing the need to go through the
difficult political process of finding sites for a second and third
repository since one repository would be sufficient.

Other countries are understandably watching the U.S. recycling
initiative with great interest, since they might be able to obtain
nuclear fuel for electricity production without having to engage in
recycling themselves. That, of course, is the goal of the GNEP
program: to reduce the risk of nuclear-weapons proliferation and
enhance everyone's security.

Persuading DOE to site the recycling center in Portsmouth is a prize
worth striving for. Now is the time for state and local officials in
Ohio to mount a campaign.

(Maldonado is an associate professor in the Department of
Mechanical, Industrial and Nuclear Engineering at the University of
Cincinnati.)

 Is the activity at Piketon leading to a recycling plant or to a
substitute 'Yucca Mountain' nuclear waste dump?

Those who live close to the Piketon plant have formed a watchdog
group, SONG (Southern Ohio Neighbors Group) with a website
www.ohioneighbors.org questioning the real objective of the folks
vying to bring the Federal money to Piketon.

A 'recycling' plant (if the technology even exists) is one thing.
Becoming the worlds nuclear waste dump is quite another.

Good citizenship requires an objective study of all the facts before
buying into such a proposal.

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:34 am

======================================================================

 Here are some excellent articles that MSNBC is circulating online.
Not only do they tell you how a nuclear plant works (what are spent
fuel rods?) but it also lets you know why New Mexico is way ahead of
the Nuclear renaissance
Sen. Pete Domenici: nuclear renaissance man
Long-serving lawmaker is driving force behind U.S. industry's rebirth
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15922365/from/ET/


Does nuclear power now make financial sense?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16286304/


How Nuclear Plants Work
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16673076

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI serves as a unified industry voice
before the U.S. Congress, Executive Branch agencies, and federal
regulators, as well as international organizations and venue) states:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizonathe largest U.S.
power plant of any kind, including coal, oil, natural gas and
hydrowill lose nearly half of its 1,800-2,000 employees over the
next decade to attrition and retirement, said Paul Crawley, Director
of Fuel Management at the Arizona Public Service station, in
February 2002. In all, the U.S. nuclear industry will need 90,000
new professional and craft workers to fill jobs over the next
decade, he added. 

Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:21 am

Copyright Š2007 Chillicothe Gazette
All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 76 JAGJ&CC: Dounreay D-Day questions to be posed at public forum

John O'Groat Journal and Caithness Courier: 

By Iain Grant

Published:  14 February, 2007

IN what state should the ground at Dounreay be left after the
clean-up of the redundant nuclear plant? That is the question being
posed at a public forum in Thurso tomorrow night (Thursday).

Should the former fast-reactor complex simply be abandoned after the
necessary safety work is done and fenced off indefinitely?

Or should as much as possible of the 55-hectare site be restored to
brownfield status so it can accommodate new business ventures?

The site contractor, the UK Atomic Energy Authority, has set out
five options for D-Day  the end-point in the current Ł2.9 billion
decommissioning of Dounreay. On present projections, that is due to
be reached in the late 2020s.

The current consultation is designed to enable the Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority to fine-tune the clean-up programme.

Among the issues being considered is whether or not the shell of the
iconic DFR dome should escape the bulldozers and be retained as a
lasting reminder of the site's former role.

Workshops have already been held with representative groups to get
feedback on the five options, which are:


* Minimal restoration.
* Ongoing licensed site but cleared of redundant buildings.
* Restored site with natural attenuation.
* Restored site with early release of land.
* Maximum practicable restoration.


The consultation is being carried out for the NDA by Dounreay
Stakeholder Group, with support from the UKAEA and a firm of outside
consultants.

After the public exhibition and meeting tomorrow, members of DSG
will submit their recommendation by the end of next month.

The DSG chairman, Councillor Alastair MacDonald, yesterday pledged
that all views will be considered carefully by the group.

He said: "It is not an easy subject to get to grips with because it
has so many varying aspects. We will be listening to the views that
have been received and, as a group, come forward with a draft
recommendation for final review at our March meeting."

John Farquhar, the NDA's Forss-based regional director, said:
"Defining the end-state of the Dounreay site is vitally important to
the whole decommissioning process. If you don't know what you are
aiming for, it is impossible to plan how to deliver it."

Mr Farquhar said there is no reason some sort of industrial activity
cannot continue after the clean-up, given the site's well-developed
services.

"It would be very wasteful to completely dismantle that
infrastructure only to find it will be needed again in the future,"
he commented.

"The end-state does need to be environmentally and technically
feasible, financially affordable and in line with national strategy.
Beyond that, there is real flexibility in what can be left for
future generations.

"I would urge everyone to participate in this process which is
important for the whole community."

People are invited to find out more at tomorrow's exhibition in the
Royal Hotel from 2pm. It is followed at 6pm by the public meeting at
the same venue.

iain-grant@ukf.net

All content copyright 2007 Scottish Provincial Press Ltd.
*****************************************************************
 77 The Australian: Now French move in on our uranium 

* February 14, 2007

FRENCH nuclear industry giant Areva has tripled its stake to 18.5 
per cent slice in Northern Territory explorer Northern Uranium 
(NTU) but - more tellingly - the French company will take 
operational control of the junior's main project.

Northern Uranium's main focus is its Gardiner-Tanami "super
project", comprising 9950sq km of tenements in the Granites-Tanami
region of WA and the NT. The company's other projects also lie
within WA and the NT but encompass different styles of uranium
mineralisation.

It is the Gardiner-Tanami region that interests the French. Areva,
through its subsidiary Cogema, already holds 6.25 per cent of
Northern Uranium after subscribing to the company's initial public
offering last year.

Areva, owned by the French Government, is the world leader in
nuclear power and manufacturing plants in 40 countries; at present
it is contracted to build Finland's fifth nuclear reactor.

Also today, it has been reported that Areva has won a $US5 billion
($6.5 billion) contract to build two nuclear reactors at Yangjiang,
in China's Guangdong province. Aveva operates two mines in Niger,
the world's sixth largest uranium producer.

The deal with Northern Uranium involves Areva buying 6 million
shares worth $4.8 million and, as well as taking over operational
control of the flagship project, the French company will provide
technical support for exploration in Australia and have the right to
market uranium mined by Northern that is not already committed to
other buyers.

The French will rank as the third largest shareholder behind the two
stakes of 21.7 per cent each held by Washington Resources (WRL) and
Polaris Metals (POL), the two companies that combined their assets
to float Northern Uranium. Canada's Mega Uranium also took a 6.25
per cent stake when the company was floated.


THE URANIUM NEWS KEEPS FLOWING


ANOTHER junior is moving towards adding to Australia's list of
uranium mines. Curnamona Energy (CUY) said today it would build a
trial treatment plant at the Oban project in South Australia, which
is located 60km north of the Honeymoon deposit now being developed
as Australia's fourth uranium mine.

Curnamona said that, if the trial plant proved successful, it could
easily scale-up the plant to produce about 40 tonnes of yellowcake a
year - about $6.6 million worth a year at this week's uranium price.

And Metex Resources (MEE) has kick-started uranium exploration in
Western Australia with plans to start an airborne survey of
territory explored for the metal in the 1980s by French energy giant
Total.

This will include the company's Carley Bore prospect where a single
hole was drilled more than 20 years ago to produce an assay of 0.33
per cent uranium. A second survey will be flown over areas northeast
of Carnarvon.


THIS MIGHT BE A TIME TO BE IN TIN

PRICES of tin rose overnight on the London Metal Exchange after
Indonesia's second biggest producer of the metal, PT Koba Tin,
ceased all shipments. This followed the arrest of three of the
company's directors as part of a police investigation into illegal
purchases of ore.

Koba, which produces 25,000 tonnes a year of tin, continues to mine
and smelt but it cannot sell any of its production as police probe
to see whether any of the ore used came from illegal miners.

The metal rose 1 per cent on the LME to $US12,595/tonne - the
highest price for 17 years. It was one part of a good night in
metals trading: copper bounced 5.1 per cent, nickel 3.2 per cent and
zinc 3.5 per cent.

Meanwhile, a local company which listed last October is about to
begin drilling for tin and tungsten in Tasmania. Minemakers (MAK)
said it had got a drilling rig to work its Aberfoyle project just
north of the small town of Avoca.

*****************************************************************
 78 kutv.com: Lawmakers: Energysolutions Can Expand

Feb 14, 2007 4:57 pm US/Mountain

SALT LAKE CITY Lawmakers decided Wednesday that EnergySolutions
doesnt need their permission, that of the governor or of local
officials when seeking approval to nearly double the size of its
radioactive waste dump.

The House voted 55-10 to eliminate elected officials from the
nuclear regulatory process  leaving the decision-making to state
bureaucrats  if EnergySolutions wants to increase the amount
radioactive waste it accepts in Utah by more than 50 percent
compared with the amount for which the site was licensed in 1990.

This allows business to be conducted without the day-to-day
involvement with the Legislature, said Rep. James Gowans, R-Tooele.

Vanessa Pierce, executive director of the Healthy Environment
Alliance of Utah, said she wasnt surprised legislators voted to cut
themselves out of the process. The issue is too politically
sensitive for them to get involved in, she said.

Most Utahns oppose more nuclear waste being brought into this
state. Clearly this bill reflects special interests, not the
publics interest, she said. Bringing more nuclear waste into the
state is a hot button issue. By removing themselves from this
process, the legislators no longer have to be accountable to their
constituents.

EnergySolutions desert landfill is in Tooele County, 72 miles west
of Salt Lake City. It is the countrys largest and only privately
owned radioactive disposal site. The dump primarily handles
low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants and nuclear
weapons.

EnergySolutions officials say they have 15 years left before their
radioactive-waste dump is filled to its currently allowed limit.
They say want to accept more to achieve operational efficiencies.

Under Senate Bill 155, which has already been approved by the
Senate, EnergySolutions could store as much waste on its site as it
wants  as long as it meets regulatory approval. If it were to
expand beyond its current borders it would have to gain legislative
approval as well as that of the governor.

Last year, EnergySolutions made $189,020 in political donations last
year in Utah, including money to 75 of 104 legislators, according to
filings at the lieutenant governors office. That includes more than
$15,000 to legislative leaders.

Some lawmakers said their intention was to take politics out of the
process.

Lets let the regulators do their job. Lets not have regulators do
their job and have Legislature or governor say, We dont agree
because its now a political process, said Rep. Richard Wheeler,
R-Ephraim.

While the Senate has already approved the bill, it will need one
more vote there because an amendment was added saying the bill only
applies to facilities that existed before Dec. 31, 2006.


Š MMVII, KUTV Holdings Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 79 Aardvarchaeology : Never Mind CO2, What About Radioactive Waste?

Aardvarchaeology

Martin Rundkvist's blog. Archaeology, skepticism, Sweden. And books
and music and stuff.

Profile

Dr Martin Rundkvist is a Swedish archaeologist, journal editor,
public speaker, skeptic, atheist, lefty liberal, bookworm,
geocacher, and father of two. This blog is currently ranked c. 28
000 worldwide on Technorati.

&laquo; Uppland, Sweden, 2350 BC | Main

Never Mind CO2, What About Radioactive Waste?

Posted on: February 14, 2007 9:07 AM, by Martin R

I'm an archaeologist and I see things in the long perspective. Let
me offer you a suggestion.

The CO2, greenhouse effect, climate issue is no cause for concern
compared to the issue of radioactive waste.

I mean, long after our manipulation of the atmosphere's composition
and the sea levels has stopped, the waste from our reactors will be
an absolutely lethal threat to ecology.

People 40 000 years from now won't give a damn about our CO2
emissions. But our subterranean caches of radioactive waste will
still be a huge problem. And I believe that we have a pretty heavy
responsibility to them.

Dear Reader, am I missing something?

[More blog entries about environment, climate, c02,
radioactivewaste, greenhouseffect; drivhuseffekten, koldioxid,
k&auml;rnavfall, milj&ouml;, klimat.]

I think you fell off your rocker. Rad waste is actually a monor
technologically solvable problem. Even if we do it poorly, there
might be a few local problem spots. Worst case for GW could cause
severe extinctions i.e. we lose yet more species, and these aren't
coming back.

Even looking at the disastors we've had, such as Chernoble, these
areas are a boon to nature, as the exclusion of humans has allowed
nature to do its thing undisturbed.
Our planet -born of the radioactive waste of supernovas will barely
notice the small amount of rad-waste we generate.

Posted by: bigTom | February 14, 2007 10:13 AM

Well, for starters, the quantities of radioactive waste produced by
modern civilization are miniscule compared to the quantities of
chemical waste, including greenhouse gases.

One of the consequences of the hysterical fear of radioactive waste
is the resurgence of coal-fired electricity production, which
produces massive quantities of greenhouse gases in addition to other
pollutants.

With radioactive waste, at least you know where it is (assuming you
contain it prudently). The same can't be said of chemical pollutants
produced by burning coal: they go everywhere.

Is radioactive waste bad? Certainly. Is it a greater threat than our
current rate of CO2 emission? I seriously doubt that.

Posted by: Runolfr | February 14, 2007 11:32 AM

I agree with bigTom. Radioactive waste is not that big of a problem.
For once we have only used a couple of % of its total energy, you
can extract the extremely radioactive isotopes from it and bury
that, with an halflife of

If we are serious about GW and combatting it or atleast slowing it
down/not doing more damage, we (the HUUMANS) will have to stop the
emissions of CO2 from sources like oil, coal etc. And as I see it,
Nuclear power is the only feasible powersource we have that can it
replace all.

The areal needed for enough biofuels to replace the fossilic fuels
is also a problem, we simply cant grow enough with the areals we got
today and still feed the worlds population.

THUS, WE NEED MORE ATOMIC POWER!

Posted by: kurtan | February 14, 2007 11:34 AM

Radioactive waste may be a solveable problem, and it may be that one
day we will be able to re-use it until only short-lived isotopes
remain. But my point is that this problem is not yet solved. And
before it is, I find it irresponsible to run fission reactors.

You guys argue as if every kilogram of rad waste in the world were
neatly accounted for and somebody responsible knew exactly where it
was. Such is not the case. Most fission-using states have extremely
lax security in this department. I mean, hello: the Ukraine,
Belarus, Northern Korea? When the time comes to re-use the stuff,
most of it will be in unknown locations, polluting the ground water.

Rad waste may not be a big problem now or within the coming 50
years. But I'm more interested in our responsibility toward the far
posterity, tens of thousands of years from now.

Nuclear power may be the only realistic alternative to fossil fuels
if we are to keep up our current energy use. But in the long-term
perspective, it's way too risky. In fact, there is no way that we
can continue to use energy at current levels unless we get
functioning fusion power.

CO2 has no long-term negative consequences. It only hits two or
three generations who have to move their cities because of the
rising seas. Rad waste hits every generation to come for tens of
thousands of years.

Posted by: Martin R | February 14, 2007 01:03 PM

You may be right... if you think what matters is the world in 40.000
years. If you take a more average stance, in which what happens in
the next 30-200 years is more relevant, then radioactive wastes is
absolutely negligible compared to global warming.

Global warming is potential civilization-wrecker. Radiactive wastes
is a mere nuisance in comparison.

We need more nuclear power, not less. Fusion power would be even
nicer.

Posted by: Johan Lundström | February 14, 2007 01:11 PM

I'd be quite happy to save modern civilization if it could be done
without fucking up the Earth's ecology for aeons to come. But as it
is, I find it better for our civilization to downscale and bow out
gracefully in the near future and leave the planet in reasonable
shape.

Posted by: Martin R | February 14, 2007 01:24 PM

Oh, and another thing: every true environmentalist must demand
immediate damming of all major watercourses for hydroelectric power.
Never mind the natural beauty of these places or a few populations
of migrant fish. Any damage done by hydroelectric damming will be
entirely obliterated within a few hundred years if the dams are not
kept up.

Saving a set of beautiful rapids isn't environmentalism, it's naive
aestheticism.

Take that, Northern Sweden!

Posted by: Martin R | February 14, 2007 01:48 PM





I gotta disagree with you here, Martin R. Because of the
"advantages" of radioactive waste, it is in fact much easier to deal
with than spewing gases into the atmosphere. CO2 emissions are like
toothpaste - once it's out of the tube, you're kinda screwed. But
radioactive waste stays in the tube. We just need to figure out what
to do with the tubes.

Radioactive waste, treated with current standards, will affect far
smaller areas than greenhouse gases do. Rad waste might say, cause a
few square miles of empty land to be permanently empty. Greenhouse
gases, by your own admission, will destroy cities all over the globe.

Nuke power produces far less waste, per kW generated, than coal or
oil power. So it's a smaller problem too!

When we started burning fossil fuels, we didn't much care about the
environment. There was no push or incentive, or even consciousness,
to fix the pollution problem. Only after the fact have resources
been devoted to scrubbing emissions and developing processes that
pollute less, but are still efficient. It's a game of catch-up and
band-aid fixes.

With nuke power, we already are aware of the environmental impacts.
So as nuke plants become more common, we can tackle the waste
problem head-on, from the beginning. We won't have to work backwards
like has been done for fossil fuels.

Necessity breeds invention. The more waste we produce, the faster we
learn to deal with it. If we continue to produce very little, then
no one will bother. And in time, more "orphaned" waste will be
produced than if we had ramped up nuke power in the first place.

There are some innovative ideas that need to be researched. There
are also innovative new reactor designs (pebble bed, for instance)
that are safer than the current working nuke plant population. Their
waste is also more manageable. If we were ever able to get a space
elevator, we could maybe fling the waste into the sun. Perhaps we
could bury the waste deep near a subduction zone, so that it is
taken deep into the earth and recycled that way. By the time any of
it (if any was left) emerged again, it would be effectively inert.

Posted by: cephyn | February 14, 2007 02:04 PM





Idiots everywhere that buy into Liberal Light Science.
Rad waste is small compared to all of the other wastes out there.
Move away a few miles and it can't harm you. CO2 supposedly harms
the whole world, except that water vapor causes 99% of green house
gas heating, so this too is bogus.
Wake up people, everything "they" want is to change your
behavior/buying habits/power structure - it has nothing to do with
saving Mother Earth.
Cheap energy = high standard of living and freedom. Think of this
each time your local anti-nuclear movement tries to hinder new power
plants.

Posted by: Dave | February 14, 2007 09:15 PM





Post a Comment


(Email is required for authentication purposes only. Comments are
moderated for spam, your comment may not appear immediately. Thanks
for waiting.)




Name:


Email Address:



URL:

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)








Having problems commenting?




* ScienceBlogs home
* Last 24 Hours
* About ScienceBlogs
* Syndication Feeds (RSS)
* Email Subscriptions


Search All Blogs



Blogs in the Network


All Blogs A Blog Around The Clock Aardvarchaeology Adventures in
Ethics and Science Aetiology Afarensis Chaotic Utopia The Cheerful
Oncologist Cognitive Daily The Corpus Callosum The Daily Transcript
Deep Sea News Deltoid Developing Intelligence Discovering Biology in
a Digital World Dispatches from the Culture Wars Dr. Joan Bushwell's
Chimpanzee Refuge Dynamics of Cats Effect Measure evolgen
EvolutionBlog Evolving Thoughts The Examining Room of Dr. Charles
Framing Science The Frontal Cortex Gene Expression Good Math, Bad
Math Integrity of Science The Intersection The Island of Doubt
Living the Scientific Life (Scientist, Interrupted) The Loom Mike
the Mad Biologist Mixing Memory Molecule of the Day Neurontic
Neurotopia (version 2.0) No Se Nada Omni Brain Page 3.14 Pharyngula
Pure Pedantry The Questionable Authority Respectful Insolence
Retrospectacle: A Neuroscience Blog ScienceToLife The Scientific
Activist The Scientific Indian Signout Smooth Pebbles - Stoat
Stranger Fruit Terra Sigillata Tetrapod Zoology Thoughts from Kansas
Thus Spake Zuska Uncertain Principles The World's Fair



Top Five: Most Active



1. Retraction 02.14.2007 ˇ PZ Myers
2. Texas Legislature: Officially Insane 02.14.2007 ˇ PZ Myers
3. It's the arrogance, stupid 02.14.2007 ˇ PZ Myers
4. Stealth Creationists and Illinois Nazis 02.13.2007 ˇ Chad Orzel
5. ? 02.12.2007 ˇ Jason Rosenhouse




Top Science Stories





Siesta Touted As Defense Against Heart Disease



...


* Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 2/14/2007
* Siesta Touted As Defense Against Heart Disease
* Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 2/13/2007
* Chimps Used Tools as Early as the Stone Age
* I Can't Believe It's Science (Feb. 12, 2007)













* Focus
* Seed's Daily Zeitgeist: 2/14/2007
* Hill Report
* More from the Vanguard of Science
* Found: Most of the Universe
* Our Expanded View

* News Items
* Siesta Touted As Defense Against Heart Disease
* Chimps Used Tools as Early as the Stone Age
* I Can't Believe It's Science (Feb. 12, 2007)
* Branson, Gore Launch Prize to Cut Greenhouse Gases
* EU Aims to Put Environmental Criminals Behind Bars

* Magazine
* More from the Vanguard of Science
* Our Expanded View
* The African Way
* Then There Were Eight
* Cribsheet #8: The Elements






Copyright Š2005-2007 ScienceBlogs LLC ˇ Advertise with Seed ˇ
Privacy Policy ˇ Terms &amp; Conditions ˇ Contact Us ˇ Home

*****************************************************************
 80 The Australian: Areva pours money into uranium 

* February 15, 2007

* Robin Bromby

THEY'RE coming to get our uranium sector.


This week alone, big French and Canadian money has continued to
flood into explorers.

The latest development was a move yesterday by French nuclear giant
Areva to triple its stake in Northern Territory explorer Northern
Uranium, and - more tellingly - take operational control of the
junior's main project.

This followed Monday's $23 million raising by Uranium Equities, with
much of that sum coming from Canada. Even before this placement,
Uranium Equities' largest shareholder was Toronto-listed Laramide
Resources, which will be taking $3 million of the placement.

The total placement money will be used on exploring its various
properties, including the Alligator River project in the Northern
Territory - where the company is in joint venture with yet another
Canadian company, Cameco.

Other uranium companies in which foreign groups have substantial
equity include Summit Resources, Energy Metals and Paladin
Resources, while OmegaCorp has just fallen to a takeover from
another Canadian, Denison Mines.

Northern Uranium's main focus is its Gardiner-Tanami "super
project", comprising 9950sqkm of tenements in the Granites-Tanami
region straddling the Northern Territory-Western Australia border.

Areva, through its subsidiary Cogema, already holds 6.25 per cent of
Northern Uranium and will now move to 18.5 per cent.

The French Government-owned Areva is the world leader in nuclear
power and manufacturing plants in 40 countries. This week it won a
$US5 billion ($6.4 billion) contract to build two nuclear reactors
in China's Guangdong province.

Areva operates two mines in Niger, the world's sixth-largest uranium
producer.

The deal with Northern Uranium involves Areva buying 6 million
shares worth $4.8 million, and as well as taking over operational
control of the flagship project, the French company will provide
technical support for exploration in Australia and have the right to
market uranium mined by Northern that is not already committed to
other buyers.

The French will rank as the third-largest shareholder behind the two
stakes of 21.7 per cent each held by Washington Resources and
Polaris Metals, the two companies that combined their assets to
float Northern Uranium. Canada's Mega Uranium also took a 6.25 per
cent stake when the company was floated.

Areva is technical partner to Perth-based Berkeley Resources, which
is exploring for uranium in Spain. The French can move to a 14 per
cent stake by exercising options in Berkeley, but the junior is
really only Australian in name now - most of its shares are held in
Europe and Canada.

Canadians have been very active among Australian uranium plays in
the past two years, taking big stakes in companies like Paladin and
Summit.

Another Canadian company, SXC Uranium One, is developing the
Honeymoon uranium mine in South Australia, while Mega Uranium has
already taken over two Australian explorers (Hindmarsh Resources and
Redport). In addition, Mega recently bought the Queensland uranium
assets formerly owned by Glengarry Resources and entered a joint
venture with West Australian explorer Aura Energy.

Š The Australian
*****************************************************************
 81 Ban Ki-moon Hails 40th Anniversary Of Latin American Nuclear Weapon-free Zone
 
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 18:00:23 -0500

BAN KI-MOON HAILS 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF LATIN AMERICAN NUCLEAR WEAPON-FREE ZONE
 
New York, Feb 14 2007  6:00PM
The historic pact of Latin America and the Caribbean States to maintain 
a nuclear-weapon-free zone, the first-ever of its kind, has 
withstood the test of time and should spur greater efforts to rid 
the world of these arms, United Nations Secretary-General Ban 
Ki-moon said in honouring the 40th anniversary of the landmark agreement.

Mr. Ban <"http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs//2007/sgsm10882.doc.htm">hailed 
the success of The Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear 
Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, also known as the 
Treaty of Tlatelolco, an area in Mexico City, as it has become the 
archetype for other regional denuclearized zones.  At present, 
there are virtually no such weapons in the entire southern hemisphere, 
offering further proof of the Treatys accomplishments.

The agreement represented an important commitment by Latin American 
and Caribbean governments to use nuclear materials and installations 
for purely peaceful purposes to the benefit of their citizens, 
Mr. Ban said in remarks delivered by Nobuaki Tanaka, the Under 
Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs today at a ceremony 
held at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Mexico City.

The Treaty of Tlatelolco has been followed by other regional agreements 
establishing denuclearized zones: the South Pacifics Treaty 
of Rarotonga of 1986, the Pelindaba Treaty of 1996 covering the 
African continent, the 1997 Bangkok Treaty for South-East Asia 
and the agreement signed by five Central Asian countries in Semipalatinsk 
last September.

This year also marks the 25th anniversary of Mexicos Alfonso García 
Robles acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize for his ground-breaking 
work in spearheading and implementing the Tlatelolco agreement, 
adopted 40 years ago today.

The Secretary-General lauded the Treatys creation of an innovative 
verification system to boost confidence in compliance and the 
Protocol obligating nuclear weapons-possessing States to neither 
use nor threaten to use such weapons against Treaty signatories.

I hope this commemoration can help energize efforts to halt, and 
reverse, the spread of nuclear weapons, Mr. Ban said, echoing previous 
statements he has made in urging States to not expand nuclear 
arsenals and also to reduce existing stockpiles.  Together, 
we should work towards the day when all regions of the world are 
finally free of nuclear weapons.

Todays ceremony will be followed by a day and a half long series 
of seminars to assess the impact of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, both 
regionally and internationally.
 2007-02-14 00:00:00.000 


___________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news
To listen to news and in-depth programmes from UN Radio go to: http://radio.un.org/ 
_______________________________

To change your profile or unsubscribe go to:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/email/
*****************************************************************
 82 Hanford News: Los Alamos scientist criticizes federal approach to arsenal

This story was published Wednesday, February 14th, 2007

By James Sterngold, San Francisco Chronicle, Scripps-McClatchy
Western Service

LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - With the Bush administration and Congress 
fighting over how to rebuild the nuclear-weapons complex, one of 
the country's top weapons designers said he believes it is time 
for the United States to consider a radical shift in policy that 
would ultimately eliminate the nuclear arsenal.

Joseph Martz, leader of a team designing a new generation of 
warheads at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, said in a series 
of interviews last week that he is troubled by how the debate on 
nuclear-weapons policy in Washington is focused narrowly on the 
number of weapons needed for the future, and how they would be 
built, rather than on how to eradicate them entirely.

Lab officials originally refused to give Martz permission to be
interviewed for this article. Martz, however, said he decided to
speak anyway in order to press ideas that he believes can reduce the
risk of nuclear war and carve out a central role for the weapons
labs, which have been threatened with budget cuts. Martz emphasized
that he was expressing only his personal views and not those of the
lab. But his comments still represent the first time in recent years
that a senior scientist inside the weapons program has proposed
making disarmament a concrete policy goal.

Martz said the discussion in Washington needs to reflect
technological breakthroughs found in two prime areas: the
weapons-maintenance program, known as stockpile stewardship; and the
new weapon-design initiative called the Reliable Replacement
Warhead, or RRW.

Martz's aim is to help policymakers understand that, because of a
more sophisticated grasp of weapons science, the United States can
slowly dismantle its warheads and still protect itself. The country
could also bolster its credibility as a leading voice for
disarmament by ratifying the long-stalled treaty banning underground
testing.

"The time is right," Martz said. "A confluence of events has now
allowed the debate to progress, including the changes in Congress,
the maturation of the stockpile-stewardship program and the
recognition by the military that RRW is feasible. A few years ago,
we didn't have that."

The key to the new policy, he said, would be slowly reducing the
number of warheads over a period of years, and during that time
replacing older weapons with the new Reliable Replacement Warhead
weapons as an interim phase. But the final goal, according to Martz,
should be the elimination of the entire arsenal.

What the United States would retain in its place, he argued, would
be the technology to assemble warheads from stockpiled materials if
a grave threat to national security arose. The labs now have the
capability to do that in a relatively short period of time, he said,
without the need for testing. The U.S. nuclear deterrent would be
transformed from thousands of weapons deployed on high alert to what
has come to be known as the "virtual stockpile."

Martz, 41, described this view as part of the evolution in the
thinking of a younger generation of weapons designers eager to rely
more on science than missiles to deter foes.

"You understand what I'm offering here," he said. "I'm offering
through our technological achievements the security we need to enter
into a real discussion" of nuclear disarmament.

Martz believes the U.S. nuclear arsenal has been critical to the
country's security and should be maintained for some years. But the
nuclear-policy debate, he said, has focused too much on producing
new bombs and not enough on the next steps needed for broader
arms-control initiatives.

"I'm trying to offer solutions that say, 'How can we get the
benefits of deterrence without having to put thousands of warheads
on hair-trigger alert?' " he said.

Some of Martz's ideas have been discussed before, mostly among
arms-control experts, and there is disagreement over whether the
country should deploy new generations of warheads, as Martz is
proposing, even as an interim step. These experts argue that the
current stockpile will be safe and reliable for decades, and that
building new warheads is too provocative.

But this is the first time a senior official involved in maintaining
Cold War-era warheads and designing the weapons of the future has
proposed a long-term plan for eliminating them. Under current
policy, officials say the world is too dangerous to consider
eliminating the nuclear deterrent - the United States now has more
than 5,000 warheads - which must be updated indefinitely.

Various treaties have reduced the size of the stockpile - under the
Moscow Treaty of 2002, the United States will decrease its deployed
arsenal to 2,200 or fewer weapons by 2012 - but actual disarmament
has never been embraced as a concrete policy objective. In fact,
even opponents of Martz's plan are pleased with his ideas, if only
because it may inspire a debate on disarmament.

"We should be on a glide path to get to lower numbers of weapons,"
said Eugene Habiger, a retired Air Force general and former head of
the U.S. Strategic Command, which manages the nuclear arsenal. "It's
a glide path we've been on for years, but we need to think about the
next step beyond the Moscow Treaty, and nobody is doing that yet."

Under the Reliable Replacement Warhead program, two design teams,
one from Los Alamos and the other from the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory, submitted plans in April for a new generation
of warheads. They are supposed to be safer and more reliable than
the older weapons, but they must be built without underground
testing, which has never been done before.

(Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service,
www.scrippsnews.com.)

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 83 IAEA: Tlatelolco Treaty A Trailblazer for Non-Proliferation

Web IAEA.org

Latin America and Caribbean Celebrate 40 Years as
Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone

Staff Report

14 February 2007

Ms. Ana Maria Cetto is in the Tlatelolco district of Mexico City to
mark the anniversary. (Photo: D. Calma/IAEA)

Four decades ago today, Latin America and Caribbean nations drafted
a treaty to keep their region free of nuclear weapons. Known as the
Treaty of Tlatelolco it opened for signature on 14 February 1967 and
has been signed and ratified by all 33 nations in the region. It was
the first time such a ban was imposed in a densely populated area.

In a statement to mark the occasion, IAEA Director General Mohamed
ElBaradei said: "The Treaty set an important precedent in devaluing
the role of nuclear weapons in its zone of application - thereby
contributing to regional peace and security by ensuring that Latin
America and the Caribbean remained free from nuclear weapons."

The Treaty was drafted five years after the Cuban missiles crisis.
It was widely seen as a trailblazer for nuclear non-proliferation,
with the global Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT) opening for signature a year later, in 1968. Four more
nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZ) followed, with the Pelindaba Treaty
in Africa, the Rarotonga Treaty in the South Pacific, the Bangkok
Treaty in Southeast Asia and the Treaty of Semipalatinsk in Central
Asia in 2006.

"Today these five NWFZ cover between them nearly two-thirds of the
countries of the world and virtually the entirety of the southern
hemisphere. In effect, NWFZ constitute important first steps to
achieve a nuclear-weapon-free world," Dr. ElBaradei said.

Under the Tlatelolco Treaty, the State Parties agree to prohibit and
prevent the "testing, use, manufacture, production or acquisition by
any means whatsoever of any nuclear weapons" and the "receipt,
storage, installation, deployment and any form of possession of any
nuclear weapons."

Compliance with the Treaty obligations is overseen by the Agency for
the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the
Caribbean (OPANAL), based in Mexico City. Each Party must also
conclude safeguards agreements with the IAEA.

"As the first such Treaty making full-scope IAEA safeguards a
requirement for all its Parties, the Treaty of Tlatelolco has played
an important role in the evolution and strengthening of the IAEA´s
safeguards system," the Director General said.

IAEA Deputy Director General and Head of Technical Cooperation, Ms.
Ana Maria Cetto, is in the Tlatelolco district of Mexico City. She
will tell a commemorative ceremony that the IAEA´s work in the
region is helping "to foster the role of nuclear science and
technology in support of sustainable development." Through the
Agency´s technical cooperation arm, it was helping Latin American
and Caribbean countries to tackle pressing challenges such as
hunger, disease, the management of natural resources, pollution, the
production of energy and climate change.

The world´s NPT nuclear weapons States -- the USA, UK, France, China
and Russia -- have also signed and ratified a protocol to the Treaty
to refrain from undermining in any way the nuclear-free status of
the region.

Copyright Š, International Atomic Energy Agency, P.O. Box 100,
Wagramer Strasse 5, A-1400 Vienna, Austria
Telephone (+431) 2600-0; Facsimilie (+431) 2600-7; E-mail:
*****************************************************************
 84 Hanford News: Hanford landfill under scrutiny

This story was published Tuesday, February 13th, 2007

By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

More problems have been discovered at Hanford's landfill for 
low-level radioactive waste as officials have investigated the 
falsification of test data discovered last month.

"The conduct of operations is not what we would hope it would 
be," said Nick Ceto, Hanford project manager for the 
Environmental Protection Agency.

The Department of Energy has the same concerns about conduct of
operations, said Joe Franco, DOE's assistant manager for Hanford's
river corridor.

Questions have been raised about whether a ground compaction plan is
being followed and whether compaction testing is accurate. In
addition, the regulatory limit for water above the landfill's liner
has been exceeded.

Tests will be done to confirm the integrity of the landfill, called
the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. It has a capacity
of 8 million tons and space saved for expansion.

Chuck Spencer said he plans to emphasize discipline of operations
and safety for Washington Closure Hanford and its subcontractors in
his new role as president of Washington Closure.

The first issue about the landfill was raised Jan. 12, when a
subcontractor discovered a worker had been entering false data for
compaction tests.

After soil and building debris from the cleanup of Hanford is added
to the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, bulldozers are
used to compact it to predetermined standards. That ensures settling
does not occur that could disturb the cap that is expected to
eventually be placed over the landfill.

The waste materials management plan for the landfill specifies what
weight of bulldozer must be used for compaction.

But Washington Closure Hanford, the contractor for the site, has not
been using a bulldozer of the size specified to achieve the required
pressure.

Washington Closure believes it is meeting the pressure requirement
for compaction, but it was the contractor's responsibility to have
revised the management plan to reflect the equipment it is using,
Spencer said. The plan also lists the number of passes needed by
heavy equipment to compact the landfill, and he said more passes
than required were done.

EPA also is questioning if compaction testing is being done
correctly. Rather than insert a probe into the soil that would
become radioactively contaminated, the contractor has used a method
that measures compaction by sending gamma rays into the ground and
measuring how much bounces back.

That method has been used since the landfill was established,
Spencer said.

But as the mix of materials buried changes to less soil and more
debris, the methodology will be evaluated, he said.

When EPA officials watched compaction testing equipment demonstrated
at the landfill, the readings varied widely and didn't seem to
correspond to what would be expected based on the type of soil being
tested, Ceto said.

In the third matter, the amount of water allowed to collect on the
landfill's liner twice exceeded regulations, Ceto said.

The problem was caused by a lightning strike last year that affected
the pumps that collect leachate. The problem should have been
discovered and fixed promptly, Spencer said. However, not enough
water collected to exceed the standard for which the liner was
designed, he said.

Until the problem is fixed, a manual pumping system is being used
and the system is being watched closely to make sure water that
collects above the liner does not exceed regulations.

Because of the compaction problems, only testing activities were
allowed at the landfill from Jan. 12 until last Thursday. Then
Washington Closure received permission to continue limited burial of
waste in areas of the landfill with no waste already in place.

Also, work can be done only when a DOE official is there to observe.

Tests are planned to confirm the problems with compaction testing
have not damaged the landfill's integrity. That includes digging up
some areas to make sure there are no voids in the landfill, taking
cone-shaped samples of the soil and doing load testing.

An evaluation of the best techniques to ensure compaction also will
be done, Spencer said.

&copy 2007 Tri-City Herald. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 85 FR: Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Northern New Mexico

E7-2546

[Federal Register: February 14, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 30)] 
[Notices] [Page 7021] From the Federal Register Online via GPO 
Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr14fe07-39]                         

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental 
Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Northern New Mexico. 
The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) 
requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the Federal 
Register. This meeting is being held in place of the January 31, 2007 
meeting, which was cancelled due to inclement weather.

DATES: Monday, March 5, 2007, 2 p.m.-8:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Jemez Complex, Santa Fe Community College, 6401 Richards 
Avenue, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Menice Santistevan, Northern New 
Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board (NNMCAB), 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite 
B, Santa Fe, NM 87505. Phone (505) 995-0393; Fax (505) 989-1752 or E-
mail: msantistevan@doeal.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make 
recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste 
management, and related activities.

Tentative Agenda

2 p.m. Call to Order by Deputy Designated Federal Officer (DDFO), 
Christina Houston.
    Establishment of a Quorum.
    Welcome and Introductions by Chair, J. D. Campbell.
    Approval of Agenda.
    Approval of Minutes of September 27, 2006, Board Meeting.
    Approval of Minutes of November 29, 2006, Board Meeting.
2:15 p.m. Board Business/Reports.
    Old Business, Chair, J. D. Campbell.
    Report from Chair, J. D. Campbell.
    Report from Department of Energy (DOE), Christina Houston.
    Report from Executive Director, Menice Santistevan.
    Other Matters, Board Members.
    New Business.
2:30 p.m. Facilitated Discussion on NNMCAB Member Expectations and 
Technical vs. Non-technical Work of the NNMCAB, Grace Perez and Pam 
Henline.
3 p.m. Break.
3:15 p.m. Committee Business/Reports.
    A. Environmental Monitoring, Surveillance and Remediation 
Committee, Pam Henline.
    B. Waste Management Committee, J. D. Campbell.
    C. Ad Hoc Committee on Bylaws, Presentation of Proposed Amendments 
for First Reading, J. D. Campbell.
    D. Appoint Ad Hoc Committee to Plan Agenda for Annual Retreat, J.D. 
Campbell.
4:15 p.m. Reports from Liaison Members.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Rich Mayer.
    DOE, George Rael.
    Los Alamos National Security, Andy Phelps.
    New Mexico Environment Department, James Bearzi.
5 p.m. Dinner Break.
6 p.m. Public Comment.
6:15 p.m. Consideration and Action on Recommendations to DOE.
6:45 p.m. Consideration and Action on Draft Public Participation Plan, 
J.D. Campbell.
7 p.m. Los Alamos National Laboratory Environmental Management Program 
under the estimated Fiscal Year 2007 funding.
8 p.m. Round Robin on Board Meeting and Presentations, Board Members.
8:15 p.m. Recap of Meeting: Issuance of Press Releases, Editorials, 
etc., J. D. Campbell.
8:30 p.m. Adjourn.

    This agenda is subject to change at least one day in advance of the 
meeting.
    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written 
statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the 
meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to 
agenda items should contact Menice Santistevan at the address or 
telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days 
prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include 
the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer 
is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate 
the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public 
comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their 
comments.
    Minutes: Minutes of this meeting will be available for public 
review and copying at the U.S. Department of Energy's Freedom of 
Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 
p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be 
available at the Public Reading Room located at the Board's office at 
1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, NM. Hours of operation for the 
Public Reading Room are 9 a.m.-4 p.m. on Monday through Friday. Minutes 
will also be made available by writing or calling Menice Santistevan at 
the Board's office address or telephone number listed above. Minutes 
and other Board documents are on the Internet at: http://www.nnmcab.org
.

    Issued at Washington, DC on February 8, 2007.
Rachel M. Samuel,
Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer.
 [FR Doc. E7-2546 Filed 2-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6405-01-P

*****************************************************************
 86 KnoxNews: Security pressure may broaden drug testing at Y-12 nuke plant

By FRANK MUNGER, munger@knews.com

February 14, 2007

A news report circulated last week that the National Nuclear 
Security Administration may consider random drug testing for all 
of its nuclear-defense sites, partly in response to ongoing 
security problems at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New 
Mexico.

"This makes sense to me," Tom D'Agostino, the acting 
administrator of NNSA, told a reporter from The Albuquerque 
Tribune following a budget briefing.

Drug testing is already a pretty big deal at the Y-12 nuclear
weapons plant in Oak Ridge.

According to Steven Wyatt, a federal spokesman at the
warhead-manufacturing facility, random drug tests are a part of the
Human Reliability Program. The HRP covers those people in
high-security jobs, including workers involving classified info or
strategic nuclear materials.

Wyatt said 2,719 employees at Y-12 are currently in the Human
Reliability Program. That includes employees with BWXT, the
government's managing contractor at Y-12, and Wackenhut Services,
the security contractor, as well as federal officials in the plant's
oversight office.

That's about half of the total work force at Y-12.

The program's goal is to ensure that workers in sensitive positions
"meet the highest standards of reliability and physical and mental
suitability," Wyatt said.

There also is drug testing for new hires, as well as "routine
testing for employees in other safety-sensitive positions not
covered by HRP," and testing for cause in the event of an accident
or other suspicious situations, Wyatt said.

A new policy, if implemented, reportedly would add random drug tests
for the Y-12ers in less sensitive positions. At least that appears
to be the likeliest change at this time.

"We are fully meeting all current DOE order and federal regulations
to ensure that we maintain a drug-free workplace," Wyatt said in a
statement.

Speaking of security, there's still no news on the security
contracts in Oak Ridge.

"It is still under review and evaluation at (Department of Energy)
headquarters," Wyatt said.

Two contracts, both held currently by Wackenhut, are up for grabs.
One is for protective services at Y-12. The other is for ORNL and
other DOE facilities in Oak Ridge.

Government officials originally planned to award the contracts last
fall. Wackenhut, which submitted a proposal to keep the Oak Ridge
security role, is continuing to do the job under contract extensions.

Bill Wilcox spent his 84th birthday with Oliver North.

North, the highly decorated Marine who was a central figure in the
Iran-Contra affair, is now a politically conservative commentator.
He was in Oak Ridge Jan. 26 to film a segment for his "War Stories
with Oliver North" television series on Fox News.

Nobody knows much more about Oak Ridge history than Wilcox, who came
to Oak Ridge during the World War II Manhattan Project and spent
most of his career at Y-12 and the K-25 uranium-enrichment facility.

Wilcox said North and a seven-member film crew came to his Oak Ridge
home for an interview. They later visited parts of K-25 to get some
film footage.

"I liked him. I thought he was easy to talk to," Wilcox said. "He
came on as a real patriot, not just a celebrity. He seemed genuinely
interested (in Oak Ridge)."

Senior writer Frank Munger covers the Department of Energy for the
News Sentinel. He may be reached at 865-342-6329 or at
munger@knews.com.

 Copyright 2007, Knoxville News Sentinel Co.
    
*****************************************************************

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> 
    
*****************************************************************