***************************************************************** 11/20/07 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 15.271 ***************************************************************** 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 US: New York Times: A Deeply Green City Confronts Its Energy Needs a NUCLEAR REACTORS 2 IPS-English ENERGY-GULF: Joint study with IAEA on first nuclear faci 3 Chernobyl: UN Switches Assistance Efforts To Focus On Economic Self- 4 US: Reuters: Calif. lawmaker cancels nuclear power ballot move 5 US: al.com: NRC special team leaves Farley, increased oversight cont 6 London Times: Big energy users eager to invest in nuclear stations - 7 US: FT Online: GE chief urges incentives to fuel nuclear switch 8 IPS-English EGYPT: Mubarak Brings Up Peaceful Nuclear Programme Agai 9 CBC News: Nuclear protest convoy dumps on Alberta reactor 10 Monbiot: The Middle East has had a secretive nuclear power in its mi 11 Edmonton Journal: Alberta faces 'worst of all worlds' with oilsands, 12 US: The Free Press: People were killed by Three Mile Island & other 13 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Is Nuclear Power an Option? 14 AU ABC: Protesters try to get nuclear on election agenda - 15 edmontonsun.com: Alberta - Protesters rally at Legislature 16 Xinhua: U.N. urges efforts to reduce consequences of Chernobyl disas 17 DCN: Ontario Power Generation cites Pickering nuclear station woes a 18 Reuters: French strike cuts 5,500 MW in nuclear capacity NUCLEAR SECURITY 19 US: ENS: Nuclear Plants Subject to Terrorism, Earthquakes, States Wa NUCLEAR SAFETY 20 [NYTr] Deaths from Radioactive Weapons in Mideast May Exceed Hiroshi 21 [NYTr] Depleted uranium -- a way out? 22 US: Burlington Free Press: Yankee rapped for 2006 radioactivity inci 23 US: The Hawk Eye: Widow seeking workers on IAAP Line 1 24 ITV: John Pilger - Doug Rokke Interview 25 US: USA TODAY: Radioactivity may be danger - 26 US: High Country News: Worker fallout NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 27 US: Cibola County Beacon: Former workers meet with federal caseworke 28 Amarillo.com: French look for nuke site 29 US: The Mississippi Press: Richton salt dome is a disaster in the ma 30 US: cleveland.com: U.S. suspends former nuclear plant's cleanup 31 US: The Observer: 'Safe' uranium that left a town contaminated 32 US: Mississippi Press: Sees salt dome as worst disaster since Katrin 33 US: Deseret Morning News: Nuclear plant fight focuses on waste-stora 34 DOE: U.S. and Russia Sign Plan for Russian Plutonium Disposition 35 US: PE: Emergency declaration could get Rialto help on water cleanup 36 Reuters: Congolese river used for radioactive dumping no danger PEACE 37 [NYTr] Pakistan Nukes Already Under US Control: Stratfor 38 ICH: Pak Nukes Under US Control: Report 39 U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms US DEPT. OF ENERGY 40 Ohio.com - AP: Government calls halt to A-plant cleanup 41 DaytonDailyNews.com: Cost overruns halt cleanup at Mound plant 42 ReporterHerald: More work to be done for Rocky Flats workers 43 PE: State probe of contamination around Wyle Labs finds homes, schoo 44 Seattle PI: EPA, Energy Department reach agreement over Hanford viol ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 New York Times: A Deeply Green City Confronts Its Energy Needs and Nuclear Worries FORT COLLINS, Colo. - This city takes pride in being green, from its official motto, "Where renewal is a way of life," to its Climate Wise energy program, which helps local businesses reduce the carbon emissions that scientists say can contribute to global warming. Skip to next paragraph Kevin Moloney for the New York Times W. S. Sampath, a professor at Colorado State University, inspecting a solar panel prototype. But now two proposed energy projects are exposing the hard place that communities like this across the country are likely to confront in years to come as the tangled nuances of thinking globally come back to bite. Both projects would do exactly what the city proclaims it wants, helping to produce zero-carbon energy. But one involves crowd-pleasing, feel-good solar power, and the other is a uranium mine, which has a base of support here about as big as a pinkie. Environmentalism and local politics have collided with a broader ethical and moral debate about the good of the planet, and whether some places could or should be called upon to sacrifice for their high-minded goals. The solar project, called AVA Solar, plans to use a new manufacturing process developed at Colorado State University here to make panels for electricity generation, and will use cadmium - a hazardous metal linked to cancer - as part of the industrial process. The company that would run the proposed uranium mine, Powertech Uranium, would like to drill down through part of an aquifer about 10 miles northeast of town using what the company says would be state-of-the-art drilling technology to extract fuel for nuclear-generated electricity. Some politicians who agree on almost nothing else have united in expressing concerns about the mine - especially its possible effect on water quality - including Representative Marilyn Musgrave, a Republican who represents the area, and Senator Ken Salazar, a Democrat. Local environmentalists like Dan Bihn, an electrical engineer and environmental consultant who sits on the Fort Collins Electric Utilities Board, are caught in the middle. "I think nuclear needs to be on the table, and we need to work through this thing and we can't just emotionally react to it," Mr. Bihn said in an interview at Mugs Coffee Lounge, an environmentally correct cafe near the university, where the take-out forks are biodegradable. Asked about his own emotional reaction to the mining plan, Mr. Bihn paused. "Deep down inside, my emotional reaction is that we should never do this," he said. The central thorn in Fort Collins's dilemma, some land-use and energy experts say, is that local and global simply do not mean what they once did. "Politically it's going to become more complicated," said Bill Klein, the director of research at the American Planning Association, a nonprofit group that works with local governments. "There's always been this weighing of our individual desires against the greater good, but now we're becoming much more attuned to a global responsibility," Mr. Klein said. "We've got to question some of the knee-jerk responses that we've had in the past." What green energy even means these days is probably the next question to ask. Gov. Bill Ritter Jr., a Democrat who was elected last year and who has made what he calls "the new energy economy" a centerpiece of his administration, does not include uranium mining in the green portfolio, said Tom Plant, the director of the governor's energy office. Mine regulators still handle questions about uranium, Mr. Plant said. Ron Cattany, the director of the division of reclamation, mining and safety at the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, said that Powertech had not yet filed a formal application, but that the hurdles to opening any kind of new mine in Colorado, regardless of the location, were high. There is no doubt that new money is chasing new energy. Company officials at Powertech, which is based in Denver, said they had spent more than $2 million so far buying land, or the option to buy, in the area where their proposed drilling would take place. They bought the minerals beneath the surface last year for an undisclosed price, and under what is called "split estate," that gives them title to the uranium, no matter who owns the land on top of it. Test drilling in the 1970s confirmed the existence of about 9.7 million pounds of uranium in deposits under 5,700 acres, according to the company's Web site. At the current market price, which has risen about 30 percent in the last year, the ore would be worth about $860 million. Mr. Cattany said that 10 other uranium projects - all involving the possible reopening of mothballed mines that use traditional open cut or underground methods, and all on the state's less-populated western side - had come into a formal review or staff consideration over the last year as uranium prices shot up. Powertech has proposed using what is called in-situ mining - chemicals are injected into the ground, releasing the uranium, which is then pumped to the surface. The process was developed in the 1950s and 1960s, but has never been used in Colorado for commercial mining, state officials said. At least $250 million, meanwhile, has flowed into solar, wind and ethanol projects in Colorado over the last few years as well, according to state figures, and officials at the new solar company said they were seeing their share of the tide. Skip to next paragraph Enlarge This Image Kevin Moloney for the New York Times Scientists tested the chemistry of the groundwater at the planned mine site. The New York Times "We're not hurting," said Russ Kanjorski, the director of strategic planning for AVA Solar. Mr. Kanjorski declined to say how much the start-up costs might be for a factory, but said the company intended to build up to a production level of 4.5 million solar panels a year beginning in 2009, employing up to 500 people, mostly engineers. "Funding is not an issue for us," he said. Mr. Kanjorski said that the environmental protections in using cadmium would be tight and that he expected the state would take a very close look at the water discharge and monitoring practices in particular, which he said were still being developed. Jeff Lebesch, another member of the city's utility board, said he worried that the popularity of some energy projects could make for bad public policy. "I think there is a risk that the popular ones have some things overlooked," said Mr. Lebesch, who is also a co-founder and president of New Belgium Brewing, a 16-year-old company that has been a leader in pushing energy conservation and renewable sources like wind power. As for nuclear power, Mr. Lebesch said he was not opposed, if the energy was really needed. "The big issue of power plants is carbon emissions," he said, "and nuclear plants don't have them." The fuel is the bigger issue for him. Extracting uranium, processing it and disposing of it, he said, all have long-term, unresolved questions. A spokesman for Powertech, Lane Douglas, said the company's proposal should be judged on facts, not beliefs or prejudices or what he conceded was a spotty environmental record for uranium mining. "The science will either be good science or it won't," said Mr. Douglas, the company's Colorado land and project manager. "We're just saying give us a fair hearing." Ariana Friedlander, an advertising sales representative, who was having lunch at Mugs on a recent afternoon, said she was trying to be consistent. Ms. Friedlander said she opposed the mine but thought the solar factory should be closely regulated, too. "I don't know of anyone who's really for it," she said of the mine. "But we shouldn't be giving the other guys a pass because they're sexy right now." * Copyright 2007 * The New York Times Company | ***************************************************************** 2 IPS-English ENERGY-GULF: Joint study with IAEA on first nuclear facility Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:13:52 -0800 Att.Editors: The following item is from the Emirates News Agency (WAM) ABU DHABI, Nov. 20 (WAM) - The first stage of a feasibility study into plans for a nuclear power plant in the Gulf has been completed, it was revealed on Monday. “The study was being carried out jointly by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)”, said Ali bin Abdullah Al Owais, Undersecretary at the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Ministry of Energy. “Nuclear power is the ultimate solution to meet future energy demands and challenges”, he told the 13th Annual Energy Conference of the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research in Abu Dhabi. The country -- with its rapid growth in all sectors -- could not always depend on hydrocarbon energy. Nor could it fully rely on renewable energy sources such as solar power. Al Owais told ‘Emirates Today’: “Once the final feasibility study is ready in four or five years’ time it will be submitted to the Supreme Council of the GCC for approval. Following that the project will be executed”. He said the scheme will be completed under the supervision of the IAEA, which had already given the green light to the plans. In his keynote address Al Owais said: “The demand for energy is growing fast -- last year it rose by 15 per cent and it is growing further. There are many questions that need to be answered -- for example, how long will our natural resources last? The consensus for going nuclear has been growing in the GCC countries and finally it has been decided that the region will have a joint atomic power plant”. The GCC Supreme Council launched its joint nuclear power project last year and asked the IAEA for help to build the plant. “The GCC nuclear power project is in progress and is expected to take at least 15 years to complete”, added Al Owais. “The plant is expected to be operational in 2025. It will be constructed in a safe area”. All other energy sources -- such as solar and other renewable forms -- would be supporting elements. But the ultimate solution was atomic power. Nuclear energy is considered the optimal means of generating electricity in the world today. In 2006 there were 442 nuclear plants in 44 countries. He said: “The demand for power in the region is the highest in the world. We need a huge supply of energy as our growth continues”. (WAM) (WAM) ***************************************************************** 3 Chernobyl: UN Switches Assistance Efforts To Focus On Economic Self-reliance Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:00:25 -0500 CHERNOBYL: UN SWITCHES ASSISTANCE EFFORTS TO FOCUS ON ECONOMIC SELF-RELIANCE New York, Nov 19 2007 7:00PM More than two decades after the world’s worst nuclear accident occurred in Chernobyl, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) says it is working to end the “culture of dependency” that had emerged among people living near the site and to promote greater economic self-reliance and prosperity. Cihan Sultanoglu, UNDP’s Deputy Assistant Administrator and Deputy Director of the Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States, told reporters today that “we are already seeing grounds for optimism” about the ability of people living in Ukraine, Russia and Belarus to take control of their economic destiny. “UNDP is trying to change the legacy of Chernobyl from one of despair and hopelessness to one of hope and prosperity and health,” she said. Ms. Sultanoglu said that for too long, relief efforts in the three countries worst affected by the April 1986 disaster had led to a culture of dependency that also fostered apathy and fatalism. Some five million people live in areas deemed by contaminated by radioactive waste from the reactor, and unemployment remains high, investors still largely shun the affected region and many young people move elsewhere in search of jobs and opportunities. Yet since 2004 UNDP has taken the lead in promoting efforts to encourage the communities to devise and then implement their own ideas for projects to help in recovery. Ms. Sultanoglu said the agency’s focus on socio-economic development meant a shift in emphasis from emergency and disaster relief to rehabilitation and sustainable development in which local communities set their own priorities and UNDP helps fund and support them. “We see our role at the United Nations as assisting national governments to create new jobs, to promote investments, support small and medium businesses and to rebuild a sense of self-reliance among the communities affected by the accident.” Already UNDP is involved in projects that have provided microcredit to small businesses in Russia, helped over 170 Ukrainian villages with job-creation schemes and formed part of a consortium in Belarus to promote sustainable development. Tomorrow the General Assembly is expected to consider a resolution that would proclaim the period until 2016 as a “decade of recovery and sustainable development” for territories in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine affected by the accident, and to help those communities make “a return to normal life.” The Chernobyl accident, in which explosions destroyed the core of one of the site’s reactors, forced more than 330,000 people to leave their homes, infected over 5,000 children with cancer and left millions of people across the former Soviet Union and the rest of Europe deeply worried about their health and livelihoods. 2007-11-19 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/ ***************************************************************** 4 Reuters: Calif. lawmaker cancels nuclear power ballot move Tue Nov 20, 2007 4:37pm EST By Bernie Woodall LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - California Assemblyman Chuck DeVore on Tuesday vowed to continue his efforts to repeal a state law banning new nuclear power plants, one day after he canceled an effort to gather signatures to put the question to state voters in mid-2008. DeVore said he will introduce a bill in January allowing nuclear power, which will be modified from a bill killed by legislative committee this year. If that measure fails again in 2008, he will resurrect the ballot initiative attempt. DeVore, a Republican from Irvine County, claims opponents of nuclear power are ignoring the fact that it does not emit greenhouse gases that cause global warming and that the state won't meet its ambitious renewable power generation goals and greenhouse gas emission reductions without it. While DeVore says the technology is safe and is slowly growing in popularity in California, his opponents, including Dan Hirsch, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap, disagree. "Nuclear power is the most dangerous technology on earth, with risks of meltdowns, terrorist attack, proliferation, and leaking long-lived wastes." said Hirsch. "This humiliating reversal for a proposed initiative to revive it in California is a great victory for common sense. Now the state can focus on safe and sensible renewable solutions to global warming." DeVore said the ballot initiative did not get enough support this year but will get more as time goes by. The pulled initiative would have set a vote in June 2008 to reverse a 1976 California law that banned construction of new nuclear power plants until "there exists a demonstrated technology for the permanent disposal of spent fuel," according to the California Energy Commission. A proposed Yucca Mountain national repository in Nevada for nuclear waste is becoming less likely as opposition grows, much of it in Nevada where politicians have lined up against it. Nuclear power builders say technology is being developed to allow safe storage of nuclear waste on plant sites, but that concept is hotly contested by opponents and it is unknown if the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will allow it. California has four existing nuclear reactors at two plants that received state approval before the 1976 ban. Continued... ***************************************************************** 5 al.com: NRC special team leaves Farley, increased oversight continues 11/19/2007, 9:46 p.m. CST The Associated Press DOTHAN, Ala. (AP) - The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Monday that its additional inspectors have left the Farley Nuclear Plant, but the NRC plans to keep a close watch on the plant after a string of breaker failures raised safety concerns. Farley officials said they are confident the causes of the failures have been identified and that action has been taken to make sure similar problems don't arise again. The NRC and Farley managers held a public meeting Monday to discuss the findings of an Augmented Inspection Team from Atlanta that was sent to examine Farley's equipment and the procedures used to correct and prevent equipment failures. The additional NRC inspectors were sent in after some breaker failures were identified by Farley staff. In all, six breaker failures were reported. At least one of them affected an operating system that could have prevented important safety equipment from working in the event of a shutdown. The other failures happened during testing or when the reactor was already shut down. The Dothan Eagle reported that the special inspection team leader Michael Ernstes said the most serious breaker failure occurred in the component cooling water system of one of the reactors, a piece of safety equipment that cools one of the reactor's critical systems. He said Farley is still operating safely, but he said he was concerned over how the plant determined the cause of some of the equipment failures. Ernstes said some of the inspection procedures used at the plant "lacked (the) rigor and independence to effectively get to the root cause (of the failures.)" He said Farley officials only reached the correct conclusions with help from NRC inspectors. Root causes of the failures included possible defects in the manufacture of the breaker and possible faulty installation. The Eagle reported that Randy Johnson, Farley's site vice president, said NRC input was welcome. "As you can see, this is a very robust regulatory process," Johnson said. "The NRC identified and pointed out some areas we can improve. Both units at Farley have been operating safely and will continue to be operated safely." He said all of the issues were identified by Farley staff. He said they work not only to identify the technical problem but also to find the corrective action. Under normal circumstances, there are two NRC inspectors assigned full-time to Farley. The additional oversight means the plant will likely have more inspections. Ernstes said the special inspection team will put out a public report in about two weeks. In the meantime, additional inspections will continue. ___ Information from: The Dothan Eagle ***************************************************************** 6 London Times: Big energy users eager to invest in nuclear stations - Times Online November 19, 2007 Angela Jameson, Industrial Correspondent Big British energy users, including manufacturers and transport groups, are so concerned by the threat of rising electricity prices that they are considering investing in new nuclear power stations, The Times has learnt. British Energy, the nuclear generator that operates the UK’s existing nuclear fleet, is expected to disclose the identity of at least one potential partner in January, but sources familiar with the talks have revealed that some of the would-be partners are from outside the energy industry and the financial sector. Two winters ago, soaring power prices put many of Britain’s important industrial manufacturers, including chemical companies and steel and aluminium producers, under severe financial strain. Manufacturers hope that by joining a consortium of developers to build nuclear power stations they could protect themselves from future price rises and increase their economic competitiveness. In Finland and France, where power stations are being built, industry partners, with long-term offtake agreements, have been key partners in the development teams behind the consortiums. The Finnish reactor, the first to be built in Western Europe since the early 1990s, is run on a not-for-profit basis on behalf of its main customers, who are also its shareholders. This group comprises Finland’s biggest energy users, who are guaranteed a stable supply of relatively cheap electricity rather than a dividend. A spokeswoman for Corus would say only that the company supported the argument that old nuclear power stations should be replaced with a new generation. Paul Spence, the head of strategy and business development at British Energy, said: “Industry realises that the cost of energy is a really important competitive factor. They have been on a rollercoaster ride in the last two to three years, which has been really difficult to manage.” British Energy has had a strong response to its search for one or two partners for a new nuclear build programme. According to the company, more than ten potential partners are in discussions. Energy companies including Centrica, Scottish and Southern Energy and EDF have already declared that they are in talks with British Energy. Other companies that are thought to be in discussions with British Energy include big continental utilities that are keen to expand outside their home markets, including E.ON, of Germany, RWE, of Italy, and Endesa and Iberdrola, of Spain. Financial partners such as infrastructure funds and private equity groups have not participated in talks so far, but they are expected to join later, if the Government gives the industry the green light to replace Britain’s ten ageing nuclear power stations. © Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd. This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69. ***************************************************************** 7 FT Online: GE chief urges incentives to fuel nuclear switch By Ed Crooks and Francesco Guerrera Published: November 18 2007 22:04 | Last updated: November 18 2007 22:04 US government hopes that hundreds of nuclear power plants will be built to boost national energy supplies will be dashed unless the power industry is given strong financial incentives to switch away from fossil fuels, said Jeffrey Immelt, chief executive of General Electric. Mr Immelt told the Financial Times that large-scale nuclear construction would go ahead only if a high enough cost was placed on carbon-dioxide emissions. The US administration backs large-scale investment in nuclear power to strengthen energy security and curb greenhouse gas emissions. But Mr Immelt said only five to 10 US nuclear power projects were likely to go ahead unless there was a carbon-pricing framework to create incentives for utilities to build more. EDITOR'S CHOICE Video: Jeffrey Immelt on the US nuclear energy outlook - Nov-19 US utilities sceptical over nuclear plants - Nov-18 GE pension fund knocked by losses of $200m - Nov-15 GE-backed trust delays Singapore IPO - Nov-15 China, India `will shield GE from downturn' - Oct-28 GE juggernaut's driver still confident - Oct-28 GE is one of the world's biggest nuclear engineering companies, and this year launched a 60 per cent-owned joint venture with Hitachi of Japan to take part in an expected worldwide resurgence in nuclear investment. There are about 30 nuclear power plant projects being developed in the US, and applications for two have been filed. However, Samuel Bodman, US energy secretary, said last week that the administration favoured a much greater expansion of nuclear capacity. He told reporters at the World Energy Congress in Rome: "We don't need 30 of these additional units, we need 130 or 230. We are going to need a substantial increase in nuclear power if we are to deal with generating electricity on the one hand and protecting the environment - read that to say climate change issues - on the other." Mr Immelt said that the construction of nuclear power plants might not even be sufficient to offset the shutdown of existing reactors. "In all practicality, in the steady state, the US will be lucky to replace its current [nuclear] capacity," he said. "It's 19 per cent of the power generation in the US: I think we're going to have to get a move on if we are going to keep it at 19 per cent." If US utilities were making investment decisions without any additional government incentives, he said, they would choose to invest only in gas-fired power stations and in wind farms. Mr Immelt added that the only way to change that would be for the US to put "a meaningful price" on carbon-dioxide emissions, preferably through a cap and trade system of emissions permits. © Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2007. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of The Financial Times Limited. Privacy policy | Terms | Advertising ***************************************************************** 8 IPS-English EGYPT: Mubarak Brings Up Peaceful Nuclear Programme Again Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:16:33 -0800 Adam Morrow and Khaled Moussa al-Omrani CAIRO, Nov 19 (IPS) - Late last month, President Hosni Mubarak reiterated Egypt's intention to launch a peaceful nuclear programme to offset rising domestic energy demand. While some analysts say the plan makes good economic sense, other observers saw the declaration as little more than propaganda for the President's ruling National Democratic Party (NDP). ”The President's announcement was made for domestic political reasons,” Ahmed Thabet, professor of political science at Cairo University told IPS. ”By announcing an ambitious plan for nuclear power, Mubarak hopes to bolster the ruling party's popularity.” On Oct. 29 Mubarak announced plans to establish a national programme for the production of nuclear energy, to include the construction of several nuclear power stations. Heavily quoted in the state press, the President stressed that energy security represented ”a major part of building a future for the country and an integral part of Egypt's national security system.” Mubarak went on to say that skyrocketing international oil and gas prices had made the pursuit of alternative energy sources ”imperative”. Shortly afterwards, chairman of Egypt's Nuclear Energy Agency Ali Islam Metwali was quoted as saying that Egypt's first nuclear reactor would be operational within eight years, at an estimated cost of 1.5 billion dollars. While the first reactor would be owned and operated solely by the state, Metwali noted that the participation of the private sector ”could not be ruled out” in subsequent projects. Officials are quick to point out that envisaged nuclear energy production would be for peaceful purposes only as stipulated in the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, to which Egypt is signatory. Under the treaty's terms, member nations are allowed to build nuclear power stations for peaceful purposes on the condition that they are subject to international supervision. In an indication of the government's seriousness, cabinet ministers officially agreed on Oct. 31 to implement a presidential decree establishing a Supreme Council for the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy. To be headed by the President, the council will also consist of ten ministers with relevant portfolios, including defence, finance and electricity. According to the Nov. 1 edition of state daily al-Ahram, the council is mandated with ”establishing the programme for securing nuclear facilities and studying international agreements governing the peaceful use of nuclear energy.” There is little doubt that the government is in desperate need of alternative power sources to meet rising domestic demand for energy. Cairo is currently spending roughly 50 billion Egyptian pounds (approximately 9.3 billion dollars) a year to provide the growing populace with subsidised energy. With global prices for fossil fuels continuing to hit new record highs, this figure is only expected to increase further. According to Hamdi Abdel-Azim, economist and former head of the Cairo- based Sadat Academy, the availability of nuclear energy -- which can be converted into electricity for general use -- could eventually offset these rising energy costs. ”Nuclear energy is a much cheaper alternative for producing electricity,” Abdel-Azim told IPS. ”In fact, it's 60 percent cheaper to produce electricity from nuclear energy plants than it is to produce it from petroleum-fuelled plants.” The move would not represent Egypt's first foray into the nuclear arena. In 1963, then president Gamal Abdel-Nasser issued a decision to build the country's first nuclear power station, but the project was derailed by war with Israel four years later. A second attempt in 1986 was also aborted after the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine prompted a successful anti-nuclear campaign by opposition parliamentarians. Mubarak's recent declaration comes just over a year since a similar announcement by the President's prominent son, Gamal Mubarak, who is widely seen as a likely successor to the presidency. In September of last year, Gamal -- who is also NDP assistant secretary-general -- articulated a highly publicised proposal to revive Egypt's long-stalled nuclear programme. ”It's time for Egypt to put forth this proposal for discussion about the issue of alternative energy, including nuclear energy,” the younger Mubarak said at the time. Quoted shortly afterwards in al-Ahram, minister of electricity and energy Hassan Younis offered more details. ”The programme for the peaceful use of nuclear energy will involve several plants in different regions in order to guarantee the flow of electricity needed for development activities,” Younis said. Some independent observers, however, take a more cynical view of the ruling party's sudden interest in alternative energy. They point out that the President's recent announcement came only five days before the NDP's annual party congress, at which presidential scion Gamal Mubarak was heavily promoted. ”The timing of the nuclear announcement just before the party congress was aimed at boosting Gamal Mubarak's popularity in the eyes of both the army and the people,” said Thabet. ”Right now, the regime is only thinking about securing Gamal's political legitimacy -- not about the country's long-term energy needs.” Thabet also rejected the notion that Egypt's stated nuclear ambitions were intended to counter Iran's contentious nuclear programme. ”Iran has surpassed Egypt's influence in the Middle East, politically and strategically,” he said. ”Egypt needs to do more than just build a peaceful nuclear energy capacity if it wants to regain its leading role in the region.” (END/IPS/MM/IP/PI/NR/AM/SS/07) = 11192041 ORP010 NNNN ***************************************************************** 9 CBC News: Nuclear protest convoy dumps on Alberta reactor Last Updated: Monday, November 19, 2007 | 1:59 PM MT A group of protesters drove almost 500 kilometres from northern Alberta to deposit fake leaky barrels of radioactive waste on the steps of the legislature in a demonstration Monday against a proposal for the province's first nuclear power plant. More than 150 people, including families, rallied at the legislature to protest a proposed nuclear reactor in northern Alberta. (John Archer/CBC) However, the eye-catching convoy ran into a roadblock at the legislature's security gates when guards refused to let the fake barrels through. Despite the setback and the morning chill, about 150 people stayed for a rally, with many holding large protest signs. The demonstrators, arriving in Edmonton from northern communities including Peace River, Valleyview and Slave Lake, oppose plans for a nuclear reactor to be built on private land near Lac Cardinal, about 30 kilometres from Peace River. Calgary-based Energy Alberta Corp. embarked on the long licensing process in August. Pending approvals, the $6-billion project is slated to produce 2,200 megawatts of electricity when it opens in 2017. Organizers of Monday's rally said they want to raise awareness about the dirty and dangerous impact of nuclear energy and to ask Premier Ed Stelmach to keep Alberta nuclear-free. The group will present an anti-nuclear petition signed by 1,300 people in northern Alberta to the energy and environment ministers as well as the MLA for the Peace River region. The protesters want Premier Ed Stelmach to keep Alberta nuclear-free. (John Archer/CBC) "We have over 1,300 signatures, which is quite significant considering this is a sparsely populated, rural area and a lot of the signatures are concentrated in the 20 or 30 kilometres right around the proposed site," said Brenda Brochu of the Peace River Environmental Society. "So we hope this will cause the politicians to sit up and take notice and to start consulting with Albertans on energy policy instead of just rubber-stamping every economic development project that comes along." Brochu says the proposed site is on a fault line that has a history of earthquakes, and she hopes the provincial government rejects the request to build the plant. Trudi Keillor, who lives in Grimshaw, the town closest to the proposed reactor, is uneasy with an option for the plant to use reprocessed fuel from other countries. "So do we really want that? We become the nuclear dumping ground for other countries," Keillor told CBC News. Copyright © CBC 2007 ***************************************************************** 10 Monbiot: The Middle East has had a secretive nuclear power in its midst for years Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:14:29 -0600 (CST) The Guardian www.guardian.co.uk The Middle East has had a secretive nuclear power in its midst for years When will the US and the UK tell the truth about Israeli weapons? Iran isn't starting an atomic arms race, it's joining one By George Monbiot George Bush and Gordon Brown are right: there should be no nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The risk of a nuclear conflagration could be greater there than anywhere else. Any nation developing them should expect a firm diplomatic response. So when will they impose sanctions on Israel? Like them, I believe that Iran is trying to acquire the bomb. I also believe it should be discouraged, by a combination of economic pressure and bribery, from doing so (a military response would, of course, be disastrous). I believe that Bush and Brown - who maintain their nuclear arsenals in defiance of the non-proliferation treaty - are in no position to lecture anyone else. But if, as Bush claims, the proliferation of such weapons "would be a dangerous threat to world peace", why does neither man mention the fact that Israel, according to a secret briefing by the US Defence Intelligence Agency, possesses between 60 and 80 of them? Officially, the Israeli government maintains a position of "nuclear ambiguity": neither confirming nor denying its possession of nuclear weapons. But everyone who has studied the issue knows that this is a formula with a simple purpose: to give the United States an excuse to keep breaking its own laws, which forbid it to grant aid to a country with unauthorised weapons of mass destruction. The fiction of ambiguity is fiercely guarded. In 1986, when the nuclear technician Mordechai Vanunu handed photographs of Israel's bomb factory to the Sunday Times, he was lured from Britain to Rome, drugged and kidnapped by Mossad agents, tried in secret, and sentenced to 18 years in prison. He served 12 of them in solitary confinement and was banged up again - for six months - soon after he was released. However, in December last year, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, accidentally let slip that Israel, like "America, France and Russia", had nuclear weapons. Opposition politicians were furious. They attacked Olmert for "a lack of caution bordering on irresponsibility". But US aid continues to flow without impediment. As the fascinating papers released last year by the National Security Archive show, the US government was aware in 1968 that Israel was developing a nuclear device (what it didn't know is that the first one had already been built by then). The contrast to the efforts now being made to prevent Iran from acquiring the bomb could scarcely be starker. At first, US diplomats urged Washington to make its sale of 50 F4 Phantom jets conditional on Israel's abandonment of its nuclear programme. As a note sent from the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs to the secretary of state in October 1968 reveals, the order would make the US "the principal supplier of Israel's military needs" for the first time. In return, it should require "commitments that would make it more difficult for Israel to take the critical decision to go nuclear". Such pressure, the memo suggested, was urgently required: France had just delivered the first of a consignment of medium range missiles, and Israel intended to equip them with nuclear warheads. Twenty days later, on November 4 1968, when the assistant defence secretary met Yitzhak Rabin (then the Israeli ambassador to Washington), Rabin "did not dispute in any way our information on Israel's nuclear or missile capability". He simply refused to discuss it. Four days after that, Rabin announced that the proposal was "completely unacceptable to us". On November 27, Lyndon Johnson's administration accepted Israel's assurance that "it will not be the first power in the Middle East to introduce nuclear weapons". As the memos show, US officials knew that this assurance had been broken even before it was made. A record of a phone conversation between Henry Kissinger and another official in July 1969 reveals that Richard Nixon was "very leery of cutting off the Phantoms", despite Israel's blatant disregard of the agreement. The deal went ahead, and from then on the US administration sought to bamboozle its own officials in order to defend Israel's lie. In August 1969, US officials were sent to "inspect" Israel's Dimona nuclear plant. But a memo from the state department reveals that "the US government is not prepared to support a 'real' inspection effort in which the team members can feel authorised to ask directly pertinent questions and/or insist on being allowed to look at records, logs, materials and the like. The team has in many subtle ways been cautioned to avoid controversy, 'be gentlemen' and not take issue with the obvious will of the hosts". Nixon refused to pass the minutes of the conversation he'd had with the Israeli prime minister, Golda Meir, to the US ambassador to Israel, Wally Barbour. Meir and Nixon appear to have agreed that the Israeli programme could go ahead, as long as it was kept secret. The US government has continued to protect it. Every six months, the intelligence agencies provide Congress with a report on technology acquired by foreign states that's "useful for the development or production of weapons of mass destruction". These reports discuss the programmes in India, Pakistan, North Korea, Iran and other nations, but not in Israel. Whenever other states have tried to press Israel to join the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, the US and European governments have blocked them. Israel has also exempted itself from the biological and chemical weapons conventions. By refusing to sign these treaties, Israel ensures it needs never be inspected. While the International Atomic Energy Agency's inspectors crawl round Iran's factories, put seals on its uranium tanks and blow the whistle when it fails to cooperate, they have no legal authority to inspect facilities in Israel. So when the Israeli government complains, as it did last week, that the head of the IAEA is "sticking his head in the sand over Iran's nuclear programme", you can only gape at its chutzpah. Israel is constantly racking up the pressure for action against Iran, aware that no powerful state will press for action against Israel. Yes, Iran under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a dangerous and unpredictable state involved in acts of terror abroad. The president is a Holocaust denier opposed to the existence of Israel. During the Iran-Iraq war, Iran responded to Saddam Hussein's toxic bombardments with chemical weapons of its own. But Israel under Olmert is also a dangerous and unpredictable state involved in acts of terror abroad. Two months ago it bombed a site in Syria (whose function is fiercely disputed). Last year, it launched a war of aggression against Lebanon. It remains in occupation of Palestinian lands. In February 2001, according to the BBC, it used chemical weapons in Gaza: 180 people were admitted to hospital with severe convulsions. Nuclear weapons in Israel's hands are surely just as dangerous as nuclear weapons in Iran's. So when will our governments speak up? When will they acknowledge that there is already a nuclear power in the Middle East, and that it presents an existential threat to its neighbours? When will they admit that Iran is not starting a nuclear arms race, but joining one? When will they demand that the rules they impose on Iran should also apply to Israel? www.monbiot.com ======== http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2213814,00.html ======== ***************************************************************** 11 Edmonton Journal: Alberta faces 'worst of all worlds' with oilsands, nuclear plants edmontonjournal.com Time to abandon mistakes of 20th Century, American activist says Mairi MacLean, The Edmonton Journal Published: 2:21 am EDMONTON - Alberta is the "new energy colony" for the United States, says an expert visiting Edmonton for the Parkland Institute's annual fall conference. Proposed nuclear power facilities in Peace River and Whitecourt will power future oilsands development even though oil companies maintain that is not the case, says Paul Gunter, an activist and director with Beyond Nuclear U.S.A., a nuclear policy research institute based in Takoma Park, Md. The northern location of the proposed sites and the unwillingness of Energy Alberta, the company proposing the Peace River site, to disclose its financiers and customers, "clearly represents a hidden agenda," Gunter told the conference Saturday. "The suggestion has been put out there that 70 per cent of the electricity would go to an unidentified customer," he said. "The tarsands, by location to these facilities, is the goal. "Then the transmission lines being proposed down to the U.S., as well as the pipelines, is all consistent with the camel's nose coming under the tent in regard to what's in store for you." ENERGY ALBERTA HAS SAID IT IS STILL meeting with prospective customers. Areva, a French nuclear energy conglomerate behind the Whitecourt proposal, has said it is in talks with possible customers. A study by the Canadian Energy Research Institute has identified the northern Alberta bitumen belt as a net electricity supplier, not a buyer, and described oilsands operators as an independent breed who prefer their operations to be self-sufficient. A chain of co-generation plants makes power for oilsands complexes and sells surpluses into the Alberta grid. But Gunter sees nuclear-powered oil development as the opening move in further energy colonization of Alberta by the U.S. "that will not only have impacts on Albertans, but global climate consequences." He told the conference, at the University of Alberta, "We would now have the worst of all worlds, with a combination of nuclear power and carbon emissions out of the tarsands." Gunter said it's time to abandon "the mistakes of the 20th century -- basically coal, oil and nuclear -- and directing our policies towards harvesting the wind, the sun." He described Alberta as the Saudi Arabia of wind power, and predicted business will boom in wind energy here and elsewhere. "Unlike nuclear power, wind will attract new investors and it's compatible with family traditions in agriculture," he said. "Farmers can work with and lease to new wind developers and at the same time these lease arrangements can support continued agricultural development throughout Alberta." The traditional system of long transmission lines represents "a very brittle source of energy." A more viable energy policy for the 21st century will incorporate elements such as photovoltaic roofs for generating electricity and smart metering so homes not only use electricity but power up the grid, too. "It's this kind of spreading (power) generation over a wide variety of technologies and communities that makes for a more durable and democratic energy policy," Gunter said. "We all realize we're at a crossroads. We put a man on the moon in 10 years, we can certainly bring about an energy policy that's sustainable in the next 10 years. It's a road map that begins with hard caps on carbon, no carbon trading and eliminating subsidies and tax breaks for fossil, nuclear and biofuels from food crops." mmaclean@thejournal.canwest.com © The Edmonton Journal 2007 © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks ***************************************************************** 12 The Free Press: People were killed by Three Mile Island & other nuclear disasters Independent News Media - Harvey Wasserman November 18, 2007 One of the biggest lies ever told in American industrial history is that “no one died at Three Mile Island.” In the frenzy to get public funding for still more nuclear reactors, some industry backers now say no one has ever been killed by the nuclear industry AT ALL. These absurd statements reflect atomic energy's desperate need for federal loan guarantees, which have been slipped into the Energy Bill now before Congress. After fifty years of proven failure, no private sources will invest in this lethal, expensive technology. Meanwhile billions are pouring into the booming business of green power, including wind, solar power and increased efficiency. These technologies are not only profitable and clean, they don't kill people. And the reality is that people have, in fact, been killed by the fallout from atomic power, and not just at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. At the very birth of fission technology, Lewis Slotin, a top researcher on the Manhattan Project, was fatally irradiated in an early experiment. Patriotic workers were exposed to high radiation doses while building the bombs that destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In the 1950s, a critical accident struck a reactor at Chalk River, Canada. Scores of American “jumpers” were run into the plant to do clean-up work and then run out. One was the future president Jimmy Carter, who joked about the incident in his autobiography “Why Not the Best.” In 1961, three workers were killed at the SL-1 plant in Idaho. One was pinned to the ceiling of the containment dome by a fuel rod that shot out of the reactor core. The men's bodies were classified as high level radioactive waste, and were buried in lead casks. On October 5, 1966, a critical blockage brought Michigan's Fermi I fast breeder reactor to the brink of disaster. Fermi's owners said the $100 million accident released no radiation. But for a month state authorities prepared to evacuate Detroit. The entire history of atomic energy is defined by radiation releases that the industry has covered up. Today, nothing reactor owners say can be believed. At both Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, elaborate official studies done before the accidents “proved” that it was “impossible” for what then did happen to occur. The term "inherently safe" had been applied to reactors that proved very much otherwise. Today that same term is being used to describe the "new generation" of plants to be underwitten by these proposed guarantees. In the late 1960s, Dr. John Gofman was asked to evaluate the killing power of so-called "normal" releases from America's fleet of atomic reactors. Gofman was a towering figure. He was instrumental in developing the atomic bomb. As a medical doctor, his breakthrough discoveries in heart disease and LDL cholesterol are still in use. Dr. Gofman was chief of health research at the Atomic Energy Commission. But he discovered that regular radiation emissions from America's nukes would kill 32,000 citizens per year, even without an accident or terror attack. The industry demanded Gofman change his findings. When he refused, he was fired. He spent the rest of his life warning that Americans were being killed every day by the ever-growing fleet of US reactors. In 1979, human error caused the melt-down at Three Mile Island Unit Two. The reactor's owners immediately denied there was any melting of fuel. This was a lie. Robotic cameras later showed that at least a third of the fuel had melted. The owners said there was never a danger of a major catastrophe. That was a lie. The plant was very much at the brink of an apocalyptic radiation release. The owners ridiculed those---among them Pennsylvania's Secretary of Health---who desperately warned that local citizens should be evacuated, especially to protect pregnant women and small children. The governor finally ordered just such an evacuation, but later fired his long-time friend at the Department of Health, who had advocated the evacuation, and who warned of damage from TMI's stealth radioactive fallout. TMI's owners denied that its releases harmed anyone. But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has admitted to Congress that nobody knows how much radiation escaped or where it went. Official statistics showed a huge jump in infant death rates in Harrisburg in the three months after the accident compared to the numbers for the previous two years. State statistics showing heightened cancer rates were quickly altered. The state's tumor registry was abolished. Evidence showing downwind health effects was suppressed. But an investigative team from the Baltimore News-Herald uncovered a massive epidemic of death and disease among the area's farm and wild animals. In early 1980, I reported from ground zero on a ghastly epidemic of human death and disease. Based on a horrifying series of house-to-house interviews, I found cancer, heart attacks, respiratory problems, skin lesions, cataracts, a metallic taste in the mouth, hair loss, birth defects and everything else you'd expect from a major radiation release was everywhere to be found. With three other researchers, I spent two years investigating these and other parallel epidemics at nuclear facilities throughout the United States. Our findings were published in 1982 by Dell/Delta in a book called KILLING OUR OWN (www.ratical.org/radiation/KillingOurOwn/KOO.pdf) that showed a similar death toll throughout the nuclear fuel cycle---especially at uranium mines, mills and enrichment facilities---and at weapons production plants, waste storage pools and much more. At TMI, 2400 central Pennsylvania families filed a class action lawsuit seeking justice. But the federal courts have never allowed their case to be heard. Studies by Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina have confirmed the TMI death toll. Researcher Joe Mangano and others have used the government's own statistics to show a heightened cancer rate in the region. Parallel studies have correlated radioactive emissions with infant death rates, cancer rates and other health epidemics around other operating reactors. But the industry's response is always the same. Anyone who shows that reactors kill people is automatically "discredited," even if their credentials, like those of Dr. Gofman, dwarf those of their attackers. Even at an obvious catastrophe like Chernobyl, the deniers are out in force. The radiation releases at this unprecedented explosion far exceeded what was released at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By all accounts, the plague that darkened central Pennsylvania after TMI was exponentially exceeded for thousands of downwind square miles in the Ukraine and other nearby nations of the former Soviet Union. The cancers, birth defects and other radioactive plagues have duplicated on a far larger scale what had already happened in the US in 1979. Today, with billions in bailout dollars on the line, there is big money to be made in saying that atomic reactors have harmed no one. But the truth is less convenient. Nuclear power kills people. From the Manhattan Project to TMI, from Chalk River to Chernobyl, even "normal" operations can be lethal. Solar power, wind energy, bio-fuels, increased conservation---these sources are safe and clean. They don't create radioactive emissions or wastes, and will not be potential terror targets. Nor do they need federal loan guarantees. Unlike atomic energy, green power is profitable for the entire community. And unlike Three Mile Island, we will never have to evacuate wind farms or solar panels while their owners lie about what's really going down. -- Harvey Wasserman edits www.nukefree.org and is senior editor of www.freepress.org. All content © 1970-2007 The Columbus Free Press ***************************************************************** 13 allAfrica.com: Nigeria: Is Nuclear Power an Option? Daily Trust (Abuja) OPINION 17 November 2007 Posted to the web 18 November 2007 Ali Goni It is desirable to provide a general and somewhat rudimentary analysis of what constitutes a nuclear power plant and how it operates. The concept of nuclear power plant (first developed in 1944) is based on the heat generated when controlled chain-reaction of uranium-235 takes place. A typical nuclear power plant consists basically of the nuclear reaction chamber - the core - of the installation. This is the fundamental place where the nuclear fuel cells are placed and the nuclear reaction and needed heat is generated. The heat generated is 'picked' up by water in the form of super-heated steam which is processed through system of pipes - the primary pipes that contain highly radio-active (the much feared product of nuclear reaction) water. It then inter-changes with a secondary system of pipes that 'picks' up the heat - without contact with water of the primary pipes. The heated secondary pipes containing steam is now linked to the turbines of generators that provide electricity. In order to maintain good control and stability of the reactors/installations, cooling towers consisting of large concrete structures are built. In some installations cooling could be achieved by river water in the vicinity of the installation. During operation, and even after shutdown, a large 1000MW power reactor contains billions of curies (unit of measurement) of radioactivity. Radiation emitted from the reactor during operation and from the fission products after shutdown is absorbed in thick concrete shields around the reactor and primary coolant system. Other safety features include emergency core cooling system to prevent core overheating in the event of malfunction of the main coolant system. This is the most feared failure of nuclear reactor. It is common to also build large steel and concrete containment building to retain any radioactive elements that could escape in the event of a leak. The general description outlined creates an illusion of simplicity and safe installation that should not be difficult to construct and maintain. But there are real difficulties: the project itself can cost monumental sums that can drain the resources of a small country. It is estimated that to build a major nuclear power reactor to provide 1,000 MW could cost up to N120 billion. This cost for a country such as ours, with heavy demand on electricity would appear affordable by the government. Our biggest problem, however, lies in the operation and maintenance of the facility. It is known that not a single world-class heavy industry is in black Africa! A nuclear plant with intractable controls belongs to the class of heavy industries. Is the country prepared to handle such a complex and hazardous facility? Several articles have been published in the recent past supporting the construction of power plant in the country without full analysis of the dangers associated with it. Since the nuclear power plant accident of 1979 at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, U.S.A., no new orders for such plants have been placed in the country and those whose construction were completed have not been commissioned due to safety and economic concerns. The accident did not result in any deaths or injuries. It, however, occurred in a country where rapid response to emergency procedure were in place; hospitals well equipped to handle radiation exposures to people. Vehicles to deliver large populace on emergencies could be assembled within few hours. Had the situation not been contained, the much dreaded catastrophic failure leading to what is termed 'China Syndrome' of a nuclear plant would have occurred. This is the situation feared by all nuclear power processing companies: during this stage, the nuclear fuel cells will continue to generate heat, due to failure of, say the valves in the piping assemblage, and thus impeding flow of water to the system, such that the entire 'core' of the plant will melt. At this stage, massive exposure of radiation becomes inevitable that can annihilate the entire settlement in the area! Rescue operations to the wounded become a specialised work because the rescuers could be at risk. Relevant Links West Africa Economy, Business and Finance Energy Nigeria Past governments of the country had pumped substantial funds to the power sector with little result due to massive housing and industrial development that had been ahead of power generation. This government is reportedly hell bent on getting it right - and quickly too. It is my view that the situation in the country can only be solved on two fronts: short and long term strategies. The short term approach is of course to fix all power supply facilities to work optimally. This will only improve the situation slightly as the demand of power in the country is well in excess of 10,000 MW. We are told the present level of generation is about 3,500 MW and fixing the existing installations could fetch another 2,000 MW. This will still be short of the required desirable target. Power supply for a country the size of Nigeria cannot be fixed with a 'knee-jack' approach. Some serious hard planning is necessary so that sustainable solutions can be put in place. Answers are many but not all may be suitable due to cost and time of implementation. A situation similar to this had once occurred in the country when Lagos, as a capital of the nation, became too congested for efficient running of the federal government. All efforts of the then administration to build fly-over bridges and bigger/better roads could not provide for smooth traffic flow and efficient running of government. The then government of (late) Gen Murtala Mohammed constituted a panel of experts that was charged with the responsibility of finding alternative to Lagos. The select panel ignored calls for relocation to lbadan and Kaduna among other places and settled, after extensive study and tours, for Abuja. All is now history but one lesson is here: Nigerians can solve the most complex policy problems if the right approach is adopted. The team that made this selection finished their assignment and was not part of the implementation - and there lies the wisdom: solution to power generation will be achieved if a team that will not be involved in the implementation is empowered to find one. Copyright © 2007 Daily Trust. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright ***************************************************************** 14 AU ABC: Protesters try to get nuclear on election agenda - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) Updated November 19, 2007 16:13:00 * Alice Springs 0870 Anti-nuclear campaigners have staged a rally in Alice Springs urging people not to vote for the major parties in this weekend's federal election. Gathering outside his office, protesters put up speech bubbles of statements made by Lingiari candidate Adam Giles - as well as his CLP colleague Senator Nigel Scullion - on nuclear waste proposals. Mitch, a representative of the Alcoota community near one of the four proposed waste sites, told the rally politicians need to be reminded their decisions affect real people. "Nuclear waste that hasn't been on the agenda at the election is something that's really real and critical that's going to impact out families on country," she said. "We've heard them say that these communities are far away from any form of civilisation. I just like to remind you that Alcoota mob own their station and sell their steaks at the local Woolworths here so you're actually eating stuff that our people have produced so think carefully next time when you're voting." Mitch says the Government has been unwilling to listen to her community's plans for renewable energy and told the rally she'll be voting for the Greens this weekend. Mr Giles told the group he could not stay for their performance because he had a full schedule, and said he would meet with them at another time. A similar rally was also held in Darwin. © 2007 ABC Privacy Policy ***************************************************************** 15 edmontonsun.com: Alberta - Protesters rally at Legislature Mon, November 19, 2007 Concerned residents present petition with 1,300 signatures By JEREMY LOOME, Sun Media Just 10 kilometres from Trudi Keillor’s house in the Peace Country is an unassuming spit of land, vacant save for wildlife, water and weeds. The fact that its status might someday change scares the hell out of her. It also demonstrates that fear is another harmful byproduct of nuclear energy. “We do not want this. We don’t want it for the rest of Alberta or for Canada,” Keillor said, as she joined about 100 other Peace Country residents outside the legislature today, protesting a company’s plan to build a nuclear power plant. “I live six miles west of the proposed site. And this is all happening behind the scenes. Nothing is being done to keep residents informed.” Energy Alberta Corporation, which is owned by Calgary liquor magnate Wayne Henuset, has the only license from the Atomic Energy Company of Canada to built a reactor in Alberta. It sees 10 to 15 years of hearings, license applications and approvals before that can happen. It did not return a call for comment today. But the process is already moving too quickly for residents to keep up, said Keillor, and given that the company has met numerous times with government to push the deal already, they’re not taking EAC’s word on the issue. “It was all done hush-hush, and people were very upset when they found out. And a lot of the municipal councillors did not get voted back in that were involved in that. The people have not been consulted.” Keillor doesn’t doubt the company can produce reams of stats showing nuclear power accidents are incredibly rare. She also thinks that assurance is meaningless, given the magnitude of the damage when something does go wrong. “They talk about it being so safe and having all of these redundancy features, but accidents do happen. And if a nuclear accident happens, it is very big.” The province has repeatedly noted that ultimately most of the approvals related to nuclear plant construction are under federal jurisdiction. “With respect to the development of nuclear energy in Alberta most certainly there is an application in front of the Canadian Nuclear Security Commission. That’s the proper place for it to be. Under the constitution, the federal government reserves a right to deal with these issues and we respect that,” said Energy Minister Mel Knight. “We are at this point neither an opponent of nor a detractor from any nuclear energy in this province.” Brenda Brochu helped organized today's rally and said the province can play a role in keeping the public informed. She noted numerous rural politcians who rushed to get Energy Alberta onside and their town as a potential location subsequently got voted out during Alberta’s October municipal elections.” “I have a petition here with me with 1,407 signatures on it from our area objecting to the construction of a nuclear plant, and that’s a lot of people” she said. “We’re calling on government to consult with Albertans. “My understanding is that officials with Energy Alberta Corporation have met with the whole Conservative caucus and that there have also been further discussions with the energy minister and with other officials in the energy department. So we want to know how many of those meetings have taken place, when they took palce and what was the nature of the discussions.” Dr. David Swann, the Alberta Liberals environment critic, said the process is moving ahead without enough public involvement. “This is illustrative of a government that has its own agenda and isn’t particularly concerned with what the average citizen thinks. A government that is interested in the people would go to the people first,” said Swann. “They’re more interested in business opportunities and short-term profit. We as citizens of this province demand a broad and full public consultation, and that’s still not happening. Whereas the business connections with government are preceding apace. Copyright © 2007, Canoe Inc. All rights reserved. Test ***************************************************************** 16 Xinhua: U.N. urges efforts to reduce consequences of Chernobyl disaster www.chinaview.cn 2007-11-21 07:58:49 Print UNITED NATIONS, Nov. 20 (Xinhua) -- The U.N. General Assembly adopted by consensus a resolution on Tuesday on strengthening international cooperation and coordination of efforts to reduce the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster which occurred in 1986. The resolution, sponsored by Ukraine, proclaimed the next 10 years as a decade of "recovery and sustainable development" to help affected communities reverse the domino effect of poverty, poor health, fear and psychosocial trauma that have hampered growth in the region since 1986, when one of the plant's nuclear reactors exploded during a test. The resolution is meant to focus United Nations and national-level activities on helping Chernobyl-affected communities return to normal life, as far as possible, within that time frame. The assembly's action came after the release early last month of a report by U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who noted that, after two decades, the international community was uniting behind an emerging consensus that the focus of Chernobyl-related activities should "shift from emergency humanitarian aid to long-term development assistance aimed at creating new economic opportunities, restoring community self-sufficiency and promoting a return to normalcy among affected populations." The United Nations and the governments of the three nearby countries had come to recognize that a return to normal life was a "realistic prospect" for most people living in Chernobyl-affected regions, Ban said. Now, the areas most needed sustainable social and economic development: new jobs, fresh investment and the restoration of a sense of community self-reliance, he said. To that end, the resolution welcomed the recent proposal by the U.N. Development Program to coordinate the drafting of a U.N. Action Plan for Chernobyl recovery to 2016, "to implement the decade in support of national strategies of the affected countries, with the aim of maximizing limited resources, avoiding duplication of effort and building on recognized agency mandates and competencies." Chernobyl's fourth Soviet-designed nuclear reactor exploded in the early hours of April 26, 1986, resulting in tragic environmental and human consequences. Editor: Sun Yunlong ***************************************************************** 17 DCN: Ontario Power Generation cites Pickering nuclear station woes as factor in profit decline Daily Commercial News November 20, 2007 TORONTO Ontario Power Generation Inc. has reported a cut in summer-quarter profit to $113 million, down from $167 million a year ago, citing weaker generation from the Pickering A nuclear station and higher maintenance costs at other nuclear and fossil-fuel plants. The provincially owned utility said its July-September revenue was $1.42 billion, fading from $1.44 billion a year earlier. Electricity generation was 26.2 trillion terrawatt-hours, down from 27 terawatt-hours. Fuel costs rose to $336 million from $310 million, and operations, maintenance and administration expenses grew to $689 million from $628 million. “Over the first nine months of 2007, performance, in terms of production and reliability of OPG’s fossil and hydroelectric stations as well as the Darlington nuclear station, has continued to improve,” stated CEO Jim Hankinson. “The Pickering A and B stations have experienced a number of operational and technical issues that have unfavourably affected their performance.” He noted that OPG will apply for higher rates to the Ontario Energy Board during the fourth quarter. OPG has taken initial steps to seek an increase which it says would be three per cent for residential users, but big power consumers say it could amount to 14 per cent for manufacturers, threatening to drive business out of the province. OPG disputes that contention, saying the rise for industrial users would be about 4.6 per cent. The Ontario Energy Board will consider the utility’s request in April. During the third quarter, OPG received an average of 4.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, the same as in the year-ago quarter. Last week’s report said nuclear output sagged 16 per cent compared with the summer of 2006 to 10.8 terawatt-hours, “mainly due to unplanned outages at the Pickering A station.” Hydroelectric production was up six per cent to 7.2 terawatt-hours, while fossil-fuel stations generated 8.2 terawatt-hours, up 12 per cent. OPG also disclosed that progress on its giant Niagara tunnel “has been slower than expected.” At Sept. 30 the boring machine had advanced just over a kilometre along the 10.4-kilometre project to increase the water flow to the Sir Adam Beck generating stations. The work has encountered fractured rock formations and “uncertainty remains with respect to the schedule,’’ although OPG said the project is still expected to cost $985 million. Meanwhile, construction of a 12.5-megawatt Lac Seul hydroelectric station on the English River has been delayed, partly as a result of replacing a subcontractor. It now is expected to be competed of next year, within its $47-million budget. CANADIAN PRESS 500 Hood Rd, 4th Flr., Markham, ON. L3R 9Z3 Phone: 905-752-5408 | Fax: 905-752-5450 Toll free: 800-465-6475 | Toll free Fax: 888-396-9413 E-mail: dcnonl@reedbusiness.com © 2007 Reed Business Information a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. ***************************************************************** 18 Reuters: French strike cuts 5,500 MW in nuclear capacity Tue 20 Nov 2007 | 20:23 GMT PARIS, Nov 20 (Reuters) - Striking French energy workers had cut 5,500 megawatts (MW), or about 8.7 percent of production capacity at EDF (EDF.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) nuclear plants at 1100 GMT, the leading energy union said on Tuesday. French energy workers are staging their third national 24-hour strike in protest at the government's plan to reform special pensions in the public service. French teachers, postal workers and other civil servants also began a one-day protest on Tuesday, joining forces with transport workers on strike for the last seven days. "Around 5,500 MW of nuclear capacity has been cut, as well as 2,000 MW in thermal capacity and 500 MW in hydroelectric," a CGT spokesman told Reuters. This is less than the 8,000 MW cut in nuclear capacity during the last national strike of Nov. 14. EDF said that 14 percent of employees were on strike at 1030 GMT, against 28 percent at the same time on Nov. 14, while GDF said 13.4 percent of the workforce was on strike at midday. "Many strikers are favouring joining the demonstrations that are taking place across the country, especially as EDF has issued messages this morning forbidding strikers to drop nuclear capacity to lower levels," he said. EDF is by law entitled to forbid energy strikers to cut additional power capacity if it deems the supply balance of electricity networks is at risk. The cuts are taking place at the Blayais, Cattenom, Paluel Flamanville and Gravelines nuclear plants, the union spokesman said. (Reporting by Muriel Boselli, editing by Anthony Barker) © Reuters2007All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 19 ENS: Nuclear Plants Subject to Terrorism, Earthquakes, States Warn "Environment News Service (ENS) WHITE PLAINS, New York, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and the attorneys general of five other states have submitted a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC, expressing "serious concerns" about the commission's disregard of safety issues - such as earthquakes or terrorist attacks - when deciding whether to renew the operating license of a nuclear power plant beyond its initial 40 year term. "The NRC's failure to address safety issues including updating its review of seismic activity in the relicensing of nuclear power plants is irresponsible," said Cuomo. "The NRC should have learned a lesson from this summer's earthquake in Japan, which forced the emergency shutdown of the world's largest nuclear plant and resulted in the release of radioactive material into the air and water," he said. "Our letter illustrates the concern states across the nation have about nuclear power plant safety." Beyond the threat of terrorism, the U.S. Geological Survey has indicated there is a "significant" hazard for earthquakes in the New York metropolitan region. Geologists warn that a substantial earthquake in the region could be more disastrous than those in the Western United States because the rocky nature of the Earth's crust on the East Coast is capable of transmitting more powerful shockwaves. Under current regulations, NRC license renewal procedures address age-related structural degradation of fixed, non-moving components, like reactor cores, containment systems, pipes and electrical cables. But the commission does not specifically include factors that are also relevant to the avoidance of catastrophe, such as the location of the plant and surrounding population density. Security and susceptibility to a terrorist attack are not addressed, even after the attacks of September 11, 2001. Nor does the commission consider the adequacy of emergency warning and evacuation plans in its license renewal procedures, and geographic and seismic issues are not considered either. Indian Point nuclear power generating station is at Buchanan, New York on the Hudson River. (Photo credit unknown) All these considerations are important for the pending licence renewal of two reactors at Indian Point on the east shore of the Hudson River, in Buchanan, Westchester County. The nuclear facility generates 2,140 megawatts of electricity for customers in Westchester and in New York City. The current licenses for Indian Point Unit 2 and Unit 3 expire in 2013 and 2015, respectively. The owner, Entergy Nuclear Operations Inc., submitted a license renewal application to the NRC in April requesting authorization to operate each pressurized water reactor an additional 20 years. A final decision is not likely before 2009. Situated 24 miles north of the Bronx, 20 million people live within the 50 mile radius of Indian Point where the greatest damage would occur in the event of an accident or deliberate attack. Westchester County Executive Andy Spano said, "The Indian Point re-licensing process must consider all the possible threats to this plant, whether it's an earthquake, a terrorist attack or the fact that it is located in one of the most populated areas in the nation. We welcome the support of Attorney General Cuomo and the other attorneys general in our continued fight to protect the health and safety of the residents of the Hudson Valley." Hudson Riverkeeper has been warning of these dangers for years. President Alex Matthiessen said, "Riverkeeper commends Attorney General Cuomo and his colleagues for challenging the NRC's failure to adequately address seismic risks during the relicensing review, when every aspect of a nuclear plant's operations, particularly safety and security risks, must be evaluated." "Indian Point is an aging, badly maintained facility operating in the midst of 20million people, all of whom deserve the most rigorous, in-depth review possible. Anything less is an abdication of NRC's responsibility to protect public health and safety," Matthiessen said. Cuomo's letter to the NRC was joined by Attorneys General Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, Beau Biden, III, of Delaware, Lisa Madigan of Illinois, Gregory Stumbo of Kentucky and William Sorrell of Vermont. "The NRC has a legal and moral duty to assure that the nation's nuclear plants are as safe as possible," Blumenthal said. "Older nuclear power plants seeking relicensing must be held to the highest safety and environmental standards. Waiving safety standards for older nuclear power plants is illogical and irresponsible. The Connecticut attorney general said, "Enforcing the toughest possible safety rules is vital to protecting public health and safety, as well as the environment." Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 20 [NYTr] Deaths from Radioactive Weapons in Mideast May Exceed Hiroshima, Nagasaki Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 05:29:12 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Francis Boyle Biddho.com - Nov 20, 2007 http://www.biddho.com/content/view/495/29/lang,english/ Deaths from Radioactive Munitions Fired In Middle East May Exceed A-Bombing of Japan by Sherwood Ross By firing radioactive ammunition, the U.S., U.K., and Israel may have triggered a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East that, over time, will prove deadlier than the U.S. atomic bombing of Japan. So much ammunition containing depleted uranium(DU) has been fired, asserts nuclear authority Leuren Moret, "The genetic future of the Iraqi people for the most part, is destroyed." "More than ten times the amount of radiation released during atmospheric testing (of nuclear bombs) has been released from depleted uranium weaponry since 1991," Moret writes, including radioactive ammunition fired by Israeli troops in Palestine. Moret is an independent U.S. scientist formerly employed for five years at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and also at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, both of California. Adds Arthur Bernklau, of Veterans For Constitutional Law, "The long-term effect of DU is a virtual death sentence. Iraq is a toxic wasteland. Anyone who is there stands a good chance of coming down with cancer and leukemia. In Iraq, the birth rate of mutations is totally out of control." Moret, a Berkeley, Calif., Environmental Commissioner and past president of the Association for Women Geoscientists, says, "For every genetic defect that we can see now, in future generations there are thousands more that will be expressed." She adds, "the (Iraq) environment now is completely radioactive." Dr. Helen Caldicott, the prominent anti-nuclear crusader, has written: "Much of the DU is in cities such as Baghdad, where half the population of 5 million people are children who played in the burned-out tanks and on the sandy, dusty ground." "Children are 10 to 20 times more susceptible to the carcinogenic effects of radiation than adults," Caldicott wrote. "My pediatric colleagues in Basra, where this ordnance was used in 1991, report a sevenfold increase in childhood cancer and a sevenfold increase in gross congenital abnormalities," she wrote in her book, "Nuclear Power is not the Answer"(The New Press). Caldicott goes on to say the two Gulf wars "have been nuclear wars because they have scattered nuclear material across the land, and people---particularly children--- are condemned to die of malignancy and congenital disease essentially for eternity." Because of the extremely long half-life of uranium 238, one of the radioactive elements in the shells fired, "the food, the air, and the water in the cradle of civilization have been forever contaminated," Caldicott explained. Uranium is a heavy metal that enters the body via inhalation into the lung or via ingestion into the GI tract. It is excreted by the kidney, where, if the dose is high enough, it can induce renal failure or kidney cancer. It also lodges in the bones where it causes bone cancer and leukemia, and it is excreted in the semen, where it mutates genes in the sperm, leading to birth deformities. Nuclear contamination is spreading around the world, Caldicott adds, with heaviest concentrations in regions within a 1,000-mile radius of Baghdad and Afghanistan. These are, notably, northern India, southern Russia, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Tibet, Pakistan, Kuwait, the Gulf emirates, and Jordan. "Downwind from the radioactive devastation in Iraq, Israel is also suffering from large increases in breast cancer, leukemia and childhood diabetes," Moret asserts. Doug Rokke, formerly the top U.S. Army DU clean-up officer and now anti-DU crusader, says Israeli tankers fired radioactive shells during the invasion of Lebanon last year. U.S. and NATO forces also used DU ammunition in Kosovo. Rokke says he is quite ill from the effects of DU and that members of his clean-up crew have died from it. As a result of DU bombardments, Caldicott writes, "Severe birth defects have been reported in babies born to contaminated civilians in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan and the incidence and severity of defects is increasing over time." Like symptoms have been reported among infants born to U.S. service personnel that fought in the Gulf Wars. One survey of 251 returned Gulf War veterans from Mississippi made by the Veterans Administration found 67% of children born to them suffered from "severe illnesses and deformities." Some were born without brains or vital organs or with no arms, hands, or arms, or with hands attached to their shoulders. While U.S. officials deny DU ammunition is dangerous, it is a fact Gulf War veterans were the first Americans ever to fight on a radioactive battlefield, and their children apparently are the first known to display these ghastly deformities. Soldiers who survived being hit by radioactive ammunition, as well as those who fired it, are falling ill, often showing signs of radiation sickness. Of the 700,000 U.S. veterans of the first Gulf War, more than 240,000 are on permanent medical disability and 11,000 are dead, published reports indicate. This is an astonishing toll from such a short conflict in which fewer than 400 U.S. soldiers were killed on the battlefield. Of course, "depleted uranium munitions were and remain another causative factor behind Gulf War Syndrome(GWS)," writes Francis Boyle, a leading American authority on international law in his book "Biowarfare and Terrorism," from Clarity Press Inc. "The Pentagon continues to deny that there is such a medical phenomenon categorized as GWS---even beyond the point where everyone knows that denial is pure propaganda and disinformation," Boyle writes. Boyle contends, "The Pentagon will never own up to the legal, economic, tortious, political, and criminal consequences of admitting the existence of GWS. So U.S. and U.K. veterans of Gulf War I as well as their afterborn children will continue to suffer and die. The same will prove true for U.S. and U.S. veterans of Bush Jr.'s Gulf War II as well as their afterborn children." Boyle said the use of DU is outlawed under the 1925 Geneva Convention prohibiting poison gas. Chalmers Johnson, president of the Japan Policy Research Institute, writes in his "The Sorrows of Empire"(Henry Holt and Co.) that, given the abnormal clusters of childhood cancers and deformities in Iraq as well as Kosovo, the evidence points "toward a significant role for DU." By insisting on its use, Johnson adds, "the military is deliberately flouting a 1996 United Nations resolution that classifies DU ammunition as an illegal weapon of mass destruction." Moret calls DU "the Trojan Horse of nuclear war." She describes it as "the weapon that keeps killing." Indeed, the half-life of Uranium-238 is 4.5-billion years, and as it decays it spawns other deadly radioactive by-products. Radioactive fallout from DU apparently blew far and wide. Following the initial U.S. bombardment of Iraq in 2003, DU particles traveled 2,400 miles to Great Britain in about a week, where atmospheric radiation quadrupled. But it is in the Middle East, predominantly Iraq, where the bulk of the radioactive waste has been dumped. In the early Nineties, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority warned that 50 tons of dust from DU explosions could claim a half million lives from cancer by year 2000. Not 50 tons, but an estimated two thousand radioactive tons have been fired off in the Middle East, suggesting the possibility over time of an even higher death toll. Dr. Keith Baverstock, a World Health Organization radiation advisor, informed the media, Iraq's arid climate would increase exposure from its tiny particles as they are blown about and inhaled by the civilian population for years to come. The civilian death toll from the August, 1945, U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been put at 140,000 and 80,000, respectively. Over time, however, deaths from radiation sickness are thought to have claimed the lives of another 100,000 Japanese civilians. [Sherwood Ross is a Miami, Florida-based free-lance writer who covers military and political topics. Reach him at sherwoodr1@yahoo.com. Ross has worked as a reporter for the Chicago Daily News and several wire services and is a contributor to national magazines.] * ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us Our main website: http://www.blythe.org List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 21 [NYTr] Depleted uranium -- a way out? Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:50:44 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit sent by Francis Boyle Mehr News Agency (Iran) - Nov 20, 2007 http://www.mehrnews.com/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=589688 Opinion Depleted uranium -- a way out? by Felicity Arbuthnot Tehran Times It was in 1993, when a group of twenty-four affected soldiers approached Professor Asaf Durakovic, one of the world's leading experts on the effects of radiation, that a cause came to light. They had many times the "safe" level of chemically toxic and radioactive depleted uranium (DU) in their bodies. Durakovic, although a senior officer in the U.S. Army during the first Persian Gulf War, had been unaware that the weapons used had contained depleted uranium. "I was horrified," he said. "I was a soldier, but above all I am a doctor." By 1997, it was estimated that ninety thousand U.S. veterans were suffering from Persian Gulf War Syndrome. Durakovic, who is also medical consultant for the Children of Chernobyl project at Hadassah University, Jerusalem, lost his job as Chief of Nuclear Medicine at the Veteran's Administration Medical Facility at Wilmington, Delaware as a direct result of his work with Persian Gulf War veterans contaminated with radiation, he states. Two other physicians, Dr. Burroughs and Dr. Slingerland of the Boston VA, also lost their jobs when they asked for more sensitive equipment to better diagnose the soldiers referred to them by Professor Durakovic. Oddly, all the records pertaining to the sick soldiers at the Delaware VA went missing, a syndrome of another kind which has become familiar on both sides of the Atlantic. Two years before Durakovic's discovery, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) "self initiated" a report warning the government that if fifty tons of the residual dust from the explosions of the weapons on impact was left "in the region", they estimated it would generate "half a million" extra cancer deaths by the end of the century (2000.) Iraq's cancers and birth deformities have become an anomaly, compared to those in the Pacific Islands and amongst British troops after the nuclear testing in the 1950s. Further, "depleted" is a misnomer. These weapons are made from waste from the nuclear fuel cycle and thus contain the whole lethal nuclear cocktail. DU weapons (sold to seventeen countries that are known and possibly others -- why let poisoning the planet and its population get in the way of numerous millions of quick bucks) are equivalent to spreading the contents of a nuclear reactor around the globe. And far from fifty tons and that chilling warning, in Iraq several thousand tons now cover this ancient Biblical land, and with the bombs raining daily, the audit rises nearly hour by hour. The U.S. is currently by far the largest user of DU weapons. Over the past decade, they have bought more than sixteen million DU shells and bullets from Alliant Tech Systems alone. (Source: Janes.) Strangely, this time, there have been few reports of soldiers with the terrible effects of 1991, where they were only in the region for a few weeks. Although troops now remain for months or a year, Persian Gulf War Syndrome mark 2 seems not an issue. Perhaps it is because, reportedly, doctors treating returning troops have been threatened with jail and or hefty fines if they say anything regarding DU-related symptoms. The implication regarding compensation to countries affected by this poisoned legacy (DU's lethality lasts for four and a half billion years) and troops is financially stratospheric. Since the 2003 invasion, U.S. troops have denied entry to International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors and all other radiation experts seeking to test ground and air levels. In Bosnia and the other parts of the former Yugoslavia where DU weapons were used (with missiles also dropped accidentally in neighboring countries, by the U.S., to whom all the world's lives are seemingly cheap) the "Iraq Syndrome" quickly became apparent. Even European peacekeepers on relatively short tours of duty became ill and developed leukemia and other cancers, and a number died. A five man film crew from BBC Scotland all tested DU positive after filming for less than a week there. Afghanistan too was "liberated" in 2001, by uranium weapons, which continue to be routinely used, condemning generations yet to be born to deformities and the living -- the newborn and under fives the most susceptible -- to cancers and other horrific DU-related conditions. Durakovic also found high levels of uranium in hospital patients there, as there will undoubtedly be in the occupying forces. He also found identical conditions to Iraq amongst the young: "Children born with no limbs, no eyes, or with tumors protruding from their mouths and eyes." The latest country to fall victim to uranium weapons is Lebanon -- but with a difference; it transpires. Dr. Chris Busby*, founder of the Low Level Radiation Campaign and Green Audit, is Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk and also sits on the (UK) Ministry of Defence Uranium Oversight Board. Israel is one of the countries that possess uranium weapons. "The first evidence that the IDF (Israeli Defense Force) were using them (in the July-August 2006 Israeli bombardment) was a Getty Picture Library image of an Israeli soldier carrying a DU anti-tank shell," says Busby. He then noted a report in Lebanon's Daily Star saying that Dr. Khobeisi, a scientist, had measured gamma radiation in a bomb crater at Khiam in the south of the country, at ten to twenty times higher (samples taken from different locations in the crater) than naturally occurring background radiation. The following month, independent researcher Dai Williams went to Lebanon on behalf of Green Audit to investigate and bring back samples to the UK for testing. He also brought back an air filter from an ambulance. Tested at the Harwell UKAEA laboratory: "The results were astonishing." Both soil and filter contained enriched uranium with the soil sample containing uranium about nine times higher than the natural background. (Remember how threatening the West has become towards Iran's efforts to enrich uranium?) The soil sample was also sent to the School of Ocean Sciences in North Wales for a second test by a different method for certainty. The results were the same. Busby asks, "Why use enriched uranium? It is a bit like shooting your enemy with diamonds." He contends it is possible that it is a smoke screen for the wider use of depleted uranium, as the final contamination "when all gets mixed up after the war has a natural isotopic signature" (i.e.: can be read as uranium which occurs naturally in nature). There are two other chilling possibilities says Busby: a fusion bomb or a thermobaric bomb, both of which would need enriched uranium. Certainly, doctors were reporting bodies in conditions they could find in no medical manuals, as in the attack on Falluja, Iraq. Lebanese authorities denied the presence of enriched uranium; Israel denied using it. The bombardment had ended on the agreement that UN peacekeepers went in. Given their debilitation and mortality rate in the Balkans, this lethal presence might well have deterred them. To be certain, the incident was not isolated. Williams returned to Lebanon and brought back soil and water samples from Khiam and other sites. Enriched uranium was found in water samples from two separate craters in Khiam and in one of the soil samples. Then the money ran out. The samples tested had already cost B#2,000. Donations from an Arab friend and Swiss supporters totaled B#850 -- and Dai Williams had paid the rest out of his own money. More work is needed, but it is now known that the IDF used enriched uranium in Lebanon. "Since it is in the ambulance air filter, it is also in the lungs of the inhabitants... the Lebanese people have been sacrificed to cancers, leukemia, birth defects, like the people of the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq," says Busby, adding, "and it may be worse: since we still do not know what the weapon was." And have these weapons been used on the people of Gaza and the West Bank? Furthermore, Israel is not only decimating those she perceives as her enemies, but her own people, neighboring countries, and even those further afield. In context, Green Audit studied airborne uranium at sites in the UK between 1998 and 2004. There was only one period in which uranium in the air "significantly" exceeded the naturally occurring background presence: during the bombing of Iraq, in March and April 2003. As with the radionuclides from Chernobyl, which affected Europe and the globe and still contaminate agricultural land, the potentially deadly wave of invisible particles traveled on the wind from Iraq. "We are all (Persian) Gulf War victims now," commented Busby's colleague Richard Bramhill. Can anything be done to halt the use of these genocidal weapons? Francis Boyle, Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois and author of The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, thinks so. He has launched a campaign for a global pact against uranium weapons. Boyle points out that the 1925 Geneva Protocol prohibits "the use in war of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases and of all analogous liquids, materials or devices." Clearly, he says, DU is "analogous" to poison gas. The government of France is the official depository for the 1925 Geneva Protocol. Boyle contends that rather than aiming for an international treaty prohibiting the use of DU, which would probably take years, pressure should be put on every state to submit a letter to the French government to enforce a ban. "All that needs to be done is for anti-DU citizens, activists and NGOs in every country to pressure their foreign minister to write to their French counterpart, drawing attention to the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare of 17th June 1925, prohibiting uses as above." The letter should add that this Protocol is believed to "already prohibit the use in war of depleted uranium ammunition, uranium armor plate and all other uranium weapons." A request should be made that the letter be circulated to all other High Contracting Parties to the 1925 Protocol and addressed to: His Excellency, The Foreign Minister, Republic of France, 37, Quai d'Orsay, 75351 Paris, France. Or Fax: 33-1-43-17-4275. Professor Boyle points out, "As the Land Mines Treaty demonstrates, it is possible for a coalition of determined activists and NGOs, acting in concert with at least one sympathetic state, to bring into being an international treaty to address humanitarian concerns." Such a sympathetic state exists. Belgium outlawed uranium weapons earlier this year. If the rest of the world does not follow, what will happen is what Richard Bramhill calls "a DU-locaust" -- of the children of the countries where these weapons have been used, of soldiers, of the uranium miners, and of the munitions workers, as the living, dead, and deformed prove. [Busby is the author of Wings of Death and of Wolves of Water (2007) essential reading on radiation's horrors, published by Green Audit (admin@greenaudit.org). Busby is also involved in Radioactive Times, the journal of the Low Level Radiation Campaign, a detailed quarterly update on nuclear industry shenanigans at http://www.llrc.org See also http://www.eoslifework.co.uk for a wealth of DU related material.] B)2003-2005 Mehr News Agency * ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us Our main website: http://www.blythe.org List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 22 Burlington Free Press: Yankee rapped for 2006 radioactivity incident burlingtonfreepress.com | Burlington, Vermont Published: Sunday, November 18, 2007 By Sam Hemingway Free Press Staff Writer The Nuclear Regulatory Commission lowered its safety rating for the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant last year after the facility mistakenly sent a piece of machinery with abnormally high radiation readings to a Pennsylvania plant. According to documents on file with the NRC, the equipment -- packaged inside a large container and shipped by truck -- had a reading of 820 millirems per hour when it arrived at the Susquehanna nuclear power plant near Berwick, Pa., on Aug. 31, 2006. The reading was well above the allowable 200 millirems-per-hour limit, said Neil Sheehan, an NRC spokesman. A millirem is a measure of exposure to radiation; an acceptable exposure for a nuclear plant worker is 5,000 millirems per year. Sheehan said the incident caused the Vernon reactor to lose its place among plants with the NRC's highest safety rating. The plant just regained that status last month, he said. "It was clearly over the limit," Sheehan said of the radiation readings. "It was very concerning." He said no one was exposed to the high radiation levels because the "hot spots" inside the container were on its bottom, which lay on the truck's trailer bed. Vermont Yankee's safety record has come under increasing scrutiny since the collapse of a cooling tower structure in August ripped a gaping hole in the side of the tower building and spilled thousands of gallons of water. Three days later, a malfunctioning turbine valve forced a temporary shutdown of the plant. Last week, the Douglas administration announced it was joining the state's congressional delegation in calling for an independent safety assessment of Vermont Yankee, something done only once in the history of the NRC. Dave O'Brien, commissioner of the state's Public Service Department, said the policy shift was designed in part to address growing concern among Vermonters about safety at the plant. Entergy is seeking to relicense the 35-year-old plant so it can be run for another 20 years. Friendly fire The Vernon plant also came under fire last week from an unlikely source -- union workers at the Pilgrim nuclear power plant in Plymouth, Mass. Pilgrim and Vermont Yankee are among six plants owned by Entergy Nuclear, which is considering a plan to have the six spun off into a subsidiary company tentatively called SpinCo. Union leaders at Pilgrim said they don't want that to happen if Vermont Yankee is in the mix. "We at Pilgrim have worked long and hard to get a good safety record here," said David Leonardi, a Pilgrim senior operations instructor and vice president of Local 369, Utility Workers Union of America. "We're concerned that this fleet mentality will erode our safety record and drag down our performance." The Pilgrim plant has NRC's top rating, as do 79 of the other 103 reactors around the country. Leonardi said Pilgrim also has earned the highest rating from the nuclear industry's Institute of Nuclear Power Operations. He said he did not know what rating Vermont Yankee had received from the industry group. "I'm confident it's not the same as ours," Leonardi said. David McElwee, an Entergy spokesman, said Vermont Yankee would not disclose the rating it was given by the industry group, which does not make its ratings public. "That is something we absolutely do not talk about," McElwee said. "That would diminish the purpose of that kind of evaluation." Leonardi said his union's concerns about Vermont Yankee were based primarily on the Vernon plant's cooling tower collapse in August and the subsequent problems with the turbine stop valve. He said he was unaware of the Susquehanna incident until informed about it by a reporter last week. According to the NRC documents, the item sent by Vermont Yankee to the Susquehanna plant was a control rod crusher. Control rods are devices that lie between fuel rods in nuclear reactors and are used to stop the nuclear reaction by absorbing neutrons. "Upon close examination, several small highly radioactive pieces of debris were identified," a portion of a Nov. 7, 2006, NRC report about the incident said. "It was fortuitous and not the result of design or package preparation that the material was deposited in such manner that effectively limited the potential for any public exposure." In a follow-up report issued Aug. 21, 2007, the NRC said an analysis of the case had found that mistakes in packaging and testing at Vernon before shipment of the control rod crusher were to blame for the incident. "Entergy identified the following two primary root causes: inadequate procedures for preparing the equipment for shipment ... and an insufficient questioning attitude of personnel involved in shipment preparation activities," the report said. The report also found that the instruments Vermont Yankee used to test the shipment for radioactivity before shipment were "too large to access the small recesses in the equipment and detect the discrete radioactive particle contamination." Larry Smith, an Entergy spokesman, said last week that Vermont Yankee had learned its lesson from the Susquehanna incident. "We've dealt with it," he said. "We took corrective action immediately to ensure it doesn't happen again." Contact Sam Hemingway at 660-1850 or e-mail at shemingway@bfp.burlingtonfreepress.com Copyright ©2007 Burlingtonfreepress.com All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 23 The Hawk Eye: Widow seeking workers on IAAP Line 1 Husband suffered severe illness working on security project. By KILEY MILLER kmiller@thehawkeye.com FORT MADISON -- Jean Orr knows her husband worked on Line 1 at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant. Her question: Does anybody else? Howard Orr Jr. was fresh out of college in November 1950 when he got a job at the Middletown ammunition plant. But he wasn't an employee of the Atomic Energy Commission or even the much larger Department of Defense. Instead he worked in a government property office conducting inventories on buildings and equipment. "It was not his field," Jean Orr said. "Jobs were hard to come by then." Sometime during his first few months at the plant, Howard got a security clearance for Line 1. That was the production area where the AEC built and tested components for nuclear weapons in a not-so-secret secret program that was well-known to locals but taboo to mention in public. A single conversation, still sharp in her memory despite the passage of more than 50 years, is enough for Orr to believe beyond doubt her husband was allowed into the AEC compound. "He told me, 'Because I'm low man on the totem pole, they've got me going on Line 1 more than anyone else,' " she said. "I said, 'Is that a good thing?' and he said, 'Well, that's where all the explosions are.' " Howard Orr remained at the plant until March 1952. After that, he went on to a career as a loan officer at Fort Madison Savings & Loan. Then, on Aug. 3, 1991, he died at the age of 65. At the time, doctors identified pulmonary fibrosis, or scarring of the lungs, as Orr's killer. But they couldn't figure out what had done so much damage to his respiratory system. Now, 16 years later, his widow thinks she has the answer. Jean Orr believes her husband was exposed to beryllium during his time on Line 1. If that is the case, she is eligible for at least $150,000 from the federal government through a compensation program for former energy workers and their families. Last month, however, the Department of Labor denied Orr's claim. "They're saying (Howard) wasn't really on Line 1," she said. Now Orr needs help. Working with area media, she is searching for anybody who knew her husband at the ammunition plant and who is willing to swear in an affidavit that he worked on Line 1. The witnesses could be either AEC employees or, even better, people assigned to the property office. "I don't really know anyone he worked with," Orr said, "and he couldn't have told me who worked on Line 1. That wasn't allowed." Laurence Fuortes, a physician at the University of Iowa who has spent the better part of the past decade directing a health screening program for former ammunition plant workers, indicated Orr's problem is not unusual. To receive money under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act, Fuortes said, a claimant must prove two things: * Employment at an eligible AEC or Department of Energy facility; and * A "compensable illness." Howard Orr's medical records could be enough to meet the second demand. Chronic beryllium disease qualifies under the compensation program. What Orr didn't leave behind is irrefutable evidence his job took him back and forth onto Line 1. Fuortes' team has combed databases stuffed with employee information, including one containing some 50,000 scanned-in 3-by-5 personnel cards, but all they've been able to prove so far is that Orr was a contract administrator. That doesn't make Fuortes doubt Jean Orr, though. "The history that she gave us was really interesting to me," he said, "because it sounded so consistent with what we would have expected for someone working in the office where she said her husband worked." Besides, Fuortes has been down this road before. For instance, he said, men and women who worked in the cafeteria on Line 1 sometimes struggle to prove they are eligible for compensation because they were not employed directly by the government. Instead, they worked for subcontractors hired by the primary plant contractor. "For a minority, (this is) a significant problem, and it's not anybody trying to scam or trying to be difficult," Fuortes said. "It's just that the availability of the data has passed." After 50 years, he continued, reconstructing employment histories can be extremely difficult. As for Orr, there is no guarantee that sworn affidavits from some of her husband's coworkers will win over the Labor Department. Outcomes in similar situations in the past have been "variable," Fuortes said. "We've had several cases where (an affidavit) was, unfortunately, not considered as a valid proof of employment at the plant, despite the fact that we've told the Department of Labor that those were former Line 1 workers," he said. "And who else to say that this person was employed on Line 1 than another worker there?" Nevertheless, Marek Mikulski, a colleague of Fuortes, suggested Orr would be following the right track by seeking out testimonies from men and women who worked with her husband. "It definitely wouldn't hurt," he said. The Hawk Eye PO Box 10, 800 S. Main St. Burlington, Iowa 52601 319-754-8461 · 1-800-397-1708 · FAX: 319-754-6824 Circulation: 319-754-8462 · Classified: 319-754-8463 Problems? Contact the webmaster. ©2007 The Burlington Hawk Eye ***************************************************************** 24 ITV: John Pilger - Doug Rokke Interview Iraq: Paying The Price Doug Rokke was a health physicist responsible for cleaning up depleted uranium after the Gulf War. Here, we publish the full transcript of John Pilger's interview with him, some of which appeared on 'Paying the Price'. The UK Atomic Energy Authority report provided some of the background to this interview. John Pilger: What was your job during and immediately after the Gulf War? Doug Rokke: In the beginning, prior to the ground war, the responsibility I had was training and educating all the medical professionals and the combat soldiers on the effects of nuclear, biological, and chemical warfare. But more important was what type of medical care and treatment, and along with that decontamination, do we need to do for those that may be injured or wounded during the war. JP: And immediately after the war? DR: With the completion of the ground war I was tasked as a health physicist responsible for cleaning up the depleted uranium or uranium 238 contamination. JP: What did you know about the contamination, had you been forewarned? DR: With the uranium 238 contamination the only warning we had was a single letter that came from the Surgeon General's office in the United States army. And that said, "think about DU, and this uranium contamination". And as we found out after the ground war - not only didn't we know anything about it, how to handle it, how to dispose of it, how to clean it up, what medical care to be given - nobody did - they just didn't tell anybody. Whether it be British Canadian German or US forces. They just didn't tell anybody. JP: What was your reaction when you arrived on the battlefield where DU had been used? DR: It can be summed up in three easy words: oh my God. The contamination was extensive, the casualties were grotesque. You have probably seen or heard of the term 'crispy critter' for the individual that's in a vehicle when it's struck by depleted uranium munitions. If they survive, they have burns and shrapnel - it depends whether they are in the vehicle. But the ones that died, they are just literally burned to a crisp. JP: Now this was effectively in southern Iraq. DR: It was throughout all Iraq, in Kuwait and also with the munitions testing and preparation in Saudi Arabia, so it covers the entire region. JP: What do you estimate the effect on people living in that part of the world, living in southern Iraq? DR: The effect depends on whether a person inhaled it, got some of it eating it or drinking it, or if they got the uranium contamination into an open wound. If they did then - dependent upon the amount that they had - what we're seeing now are respiratory problems, breathing problems, kidney problems, and cancers. We have individuals of our team that were actually known exposed and they have died of cancer. We have other individuals right now that have cancer. We have rashes, neurological problems. A lot of people - and again this is out of the whole complex toxic battlefield where DU contributes - lost fine motor function, individuals have neural psychology problems, short term memory losses. The uranium is a heavy metal poison and also a radiological poison, so we have to look at a conglomeration of potential health effects that then mix with other causes to create serious problems. JP: How have you yourself been affected? DR: My mission is not so much about myself as trying to get medical care specifically for everybody else that's been exposed. But from my own experience, they didn't test or measure our team for years and they still haven't. It was a deliberate action to deny medical care. JP: How have you yourself been affected? DR: The story isn't that I'm looking for what affected me. What it's about is the overall effects and what we're looking at is dependent upon whether a person inhaled, breathed it in, ingested it, ate, some DU contamination that got into a wound. And this can happen to anybody - the soldiers but more important today the women and the children and the non-combatants in Iraq and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. JP: Perhaps you could tell me anyway because I think it's quite important, I know you don't want to push your own self in any way but I think it's quite important... DR: Respiratory problems, breathing problems, again the respiratory and breathing problems were suggested or documented as far back as the Manhattan Project in 1943. Some of the world's greatest scientists told General Leslie Groves that this stuff is going to cause almost immediate respiratory problems, so it's documented going way back. So the respiratory problems we have, the kidney problems, cancers. Members of our team have died from cancer. They were denied medical care. Other individuals have cancer and the rashes, the neurological problems, loss of fine motor function. Again this goes back to what uranium is when it's inhaled or ingested or gets in the body. It's not only radiological; it's a heavy metal like eating lead so you're going to see all the toxic effects. JP: What level of uranium do you have in your body? DR: Well again we're going back to the point of the deliberate denial of medical care and medical screening that we recommended be done immediately after the Gulf War. Within days or months after we found it, the US Department of Defence never tested me, still hasn't. The US Department of Energy did when I was running the Nevada test project in '94 and '95 and at that time they found out it was 5,000 times permissible. Although the army found out they didn't bother to tell me for about two and a half years. JP: Let's get this straight, you have 5,000 times the safe level of uranium. DR: Correct. In 1994 the uranium that was found in my body was 5,000 times more than anybody should have in their body. You're definitely not going to get that from dietary intake. It only came from wartime exposure, from doing the work. JP: Tell me what you think the effect on the civilian population of Iraq will be. You see, when I was in Iraq there appeared to be an epidemic of cancer but they don't have any scientific studies to measure what their estimates are. Could you just comment generally on that? DR: Numerous times, at various meetings and conferences, the Iraqis have asked for the medical treatment protocols. They've asked for the environmental clean-up protocols which the US Department of Defence and the British Ministry of Defence have refused to do repeatedly. With the extent of the contamination in Basra and all over Iraq where the DU was fired by the tanks and by the aircraft - over 300 tons - there's no doubt in my mind that, because that lasts forever unless it's been physically removed, that any woman or child, any soldier, any non-combatant, anybody that comes in the area that it gets into their body is going to have medical problems. The overall effects are the fact that we used a weapon that's indiscriminate for eternity and therefore unless the environmental clean up is totally completed and the medical care is provided, the effects are permanent and lasting forever and ever and ever. That's wrong. JP: Just tell me a little bit more about the appeal the Iraqis have made for clean-up protocols. DR: The initial appeal was an Iraqi position at a conference in Washington DC several years ago. Because the conferences are open to the public, they had Iraqi position representatives that came to the conference looking for help. They approached us at the conference - myself, members of the United States Secretary of Defence, members of the British Ministry of Defence, members of the VA, United States Veterans Affairs that provides care for the discharged or retired veterans - and asked for help, for medical protocols. They were rebuffed. JP: In what way? DR: It's just their responsibility - we don't need to tell them anything. The same thing with the medical care request. How do we provide assessment? What type of medical care do we need to give to all of these casualties? You've got to remember, we had over 100 friendly fire casualties in the United States and a handful in Britain - most of those have not received any medical care as of today. But in Iraq there are thousands and thousands of the soldiers that were wounded or exposed that didn't get any medical care - and all the civilians, the women and the children today. But that's expanded into Kosovo now because the United States deliberately ? NATO deliberately and wilfully used uranium munitions in this recent battle in Kosovo despite all the specific warnings that we gave them not to. It's bad. JP: Now after the Gulf War you were involved in making some videos about this, could you tell me about that? DR: Based on everything that we learned, all the input that we had - a lot of reports, a lot of science reading and everything, a lot of first hand experience - the US Department of Defence was basically ordered to prepare an entire education and training curriculum. That curriculum included videos as a supplemental part - visual is how you teach, you don't just stand there and lecture, you show people something. That curriculum, which was completed by December of 1995 and fully approved by not only all of the military forces in the United States, by the British Ministry of Defence, the Canadians, the Australians and the Germans because there were people directly assigned to help us do it from those countries - so totally approved and it didn't happen. This was to teach people -this is the soldiers and other civilians employed by the military - about the hazards. And how to properly work around depleted uranium contamination, and how to clean it up. And basically it's been done in part - but it's not been done. The videos were made and they were basically shelved. The curriculum was made and it's only been partially implemented. I got a message through the official army chain a couple of weeks ago from the Centre for Health Promotion and Preventative Medicine - that's your occupational health research group, part of the United States army. And in that e-mail it stated specifically we're getting all kinds of requests for depleted uranium training. And we're going?.wait a minute? it's been ordered numerous times repeatedly since 1993. It's all been available since January, December 1995, January 1996. Why not? So again it's just a deliberate action. JP: Why do you think why not? DR: It's very simple. If you tell everybody about what the real hazards are, they're going to seek medical help. The sooner they seek medical help the more likely it is that, if they were exposed and are sick from it, they're going to find the contamination in their body. If they wait long enough, the biological half life, which is how long the uranium's detectable in the body, is going to disappear. So therefore even though they're sick there's no evidence that they are sick or they were exposed. That's why medical care has been denied in Great Britain, in England, in Canada, the United States, all over the world. If we don't check it we won't find out they're sick. If we don't find out they're sick we're not responsible for them. But more important, more important, what this is all about? we're not liable for the non-combatants, the women and the children around the world that have been affected. That's the bottom line, this stuff is an indiscriminate weapon. JP: You see we saw in Basra ward after ward after ward of children with cancers that they've never seen before, cancers of the nervous system and cancers of the muscles they've never seen before. DR: Given the contamination that we found during the war, and we confirmed after the war in research in 1994 and '95, absolutely nobody should come within 25 metres, or climb on, or crawl in, or get anywhere near, depleted uranium destroyed or contaminated equipment, buildings or structures without full respiratory and skin protection. And if they don't, if they have that and there's whole areas that are totally contaminated because of the size of the battle, no wonder these people are sick. JP: But you see under the imposition of the United Nations sanctions they can't get equipment to measure just how sick they are. They can't even get diagnostic equipment. DR: That's wrong, it's criminal. You do not deny medical equipment necessary for assessment and care in the name of trying to force a government out. There's no doubt about how bad Iraq is and Saddam Hussein. And there's no doubt that we need to make sure that there is continuous monitoring so that he destroys his weapons. But at the same time the women and children have no control over what he does. The women and children can't change the government. The women and children are sick and dying not necessarily because of DU exposure but because of the whole host of the toxic battlefield. But they can't get medical supplies to provide simple medical care. That's wrong. JP: The argument is that the equipment would be dual use and therefore used by Saddam Hussein in building up his weapons again. DR: Very difficult to figure out how medical equipment can be turned into weapons. The medical equipment might be used to treat casualties if he decides to go to war again, but you still need to provide medical care for an individual that's wounded in a war either way. That's an obligation under God. JP: Considering that this is one of the most populated parts of the Middle East, what is the scale of the disaster? DR: Within those areas where the destroyed or contaminated equipment is, unless that is physically removed and totally disposed of properly, the disaster is for eternity. You cannot have contaminated equipment in terrain where people can inhale, ingest or get uranium contamination into a wound. You can't have women and children run in their back yard where uranium penetrators - each one solid uranium 238, not coated, not tipped, up to 4500 grams in mass- are laying. Who in their right mind would allow any women or child or anybody to play in their sand box or swing on their swing set with solid uranium contamination all over their back yard? JP: Is there a parallel with the use of atomic weapons with both civilians and troops, and also with the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam? DR: The comparison is very tight. The Canadians just recently are doing assessments of the Agent Orange exposures in the general population in Vietnam at this time, and that was broadcast on CBS News 60 Minutes in the United States a week ago. They're finding individuals sick all over from it. The warriors that went to war that got sick from Agent Orange are the same thing. So what we have is a deliberate use of a weapon that has an indiscriminate effect forever. That's wrong. The women and the children and non-combatants don't deserve to be affected for eternity. JP: How should Washington and London be helping the Iraqis cope with this disaster? DR: Well Washington and London, the officials in both governments, have an obligation to do two things. One is either to complete the environmental clean up themselves for the areas that they deliberately contaminated, or provide the guidelines for environmental re-mediation. And the second thing is they have a moral obligation to provide either the medical care and treatment, or to provide the protocols and the equipment that will permit the medical care and treatment. That's an obligation under God. JP: You see I put it to the State Department spokesman and others and they said "well look, don't tell us that, it's all Saddam Hussein's fault". DR: Saddam Hussein did not use depleted uranium munitions. The United States and Great Britain consciously decided to use depleted uranium munitions. They had other weapons of choice. When you go to war, yes, you've got to kill the enemy, if that's the political decision. But once you do that then the weapons should no longer have a lasting effect on the battlefield. The uranium munitions have a permanent effect to everybody on the battlefield. JP: Does anyone care about the Iraqis? DR: I don't think so. I mean there is not even any indication whatsoever in the United States and Great Britain that either the US Department of Defence or the British Ministry of Defence even care about the warriors, the soldiers, the veterans who are civilians. If they did they'd all have had the medical care. But the medical care has been deliberately denied to friendly fire casualties, the over 100 that we had eight years ago. Medical care has been deliberately denied to the individuals who were tasked to provide medical care and clean up the mess, not only those that live in Great Britain but also in the United States and other countries. So no, they don't care; they don't even care about their own. So why would they care about the enemy or the women and the children of the enemy? JP: How much depleted uranium was used in that part of the world? DR: In the Gulf War there was well over 300 tons that was fired. Again it's very important to understand during the Gulf War that three kinds of round were fired. A 30 millimetre round from an A-10 attack aircraft, the Warthog - over 900,000 rounds. Each individual round is approximately 300 grams of solid uranium 238. There were another 15,000 rounds - predominantly the 120 millimetre round - fired by the tank. And each individual round is over 4500 grams of solid uranium 238. These rounds are not coated, they're not tipped, they're solid uranium 238. However today we have evidence to suggest that there was also plutonium contamination mixed in with it that occurred during the manufacturing process. This is why the same problems are seen at Oak Ridge National Laboratories in Tennessee in the United States, at the Paducah Lab. at Paducah, Kentucky, out in the Four Corners at Colorado where they originally started the whole process, and then with everybody who was exposed during the war or since. JP: It seems ironic that Saddam Hussein and Iraq have an embargo imposed upon them in order to get rid of weapons of mass destruction. DR: Yes. When NATO or the United States or the UN or the coalition decided to put an embargo against Iraq for using weapons of mass destruction it's almost like they're executing the divine right of kings. You do what we tell you, but we don't need to do what we tell you to do. JP: Was the Ministry of Defence here aware of this lethal after effect of depleted uranium before it was used? DR: My understanding in speaking to your MPs, Members of Parliament in the last few days is that, yes, they were aware. The question is how much they were aware at the completion of the ground war. I'm not sure, but I do know by 1994 or 1995 that they were absolutely aware. They all knew that there were directives out there to provide medical care for everyone and yet as of today they're still not doing it. JP: What's your personal view of the use of depleted uranium? You've come through from being a member of the armed forces, a nuclear physicist, a specialist, yourself affected. What's your personal view of that? DR: Because depleted uranium is indiscriminate on the environment and the health of all citizens of the world it should be banned from this planet in perpetuity, forever. JP: The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority have published a report, or not published a report but have certainly concluded, and you probably know about this, that if 8 per cent of the depleted uranium fired in the Gulf was inhaled it could cause 500,000 deaths. Is that an exaggeration? DR: If there is one death caused by the deliberate use of uranium in war that's too many, if one child gets sick and die because of deliberate use, that's too many. ***************************************************************** 25 USA TODAY: Radioactivity may be danger - THYROID CANCER AND RADIATION QUESTIONS: It kills thyroid cancer, but is radiation safe? I-131: Radioactivity may be danger REALITIES: Doctor's concern is not contaminating child REALITIES: Woman had "a great experience" By Steve Sternberg, USA TODAY The ruling that changed thyroid patients' lives appeared on Jan. 29, 1997, in the government's daily diary and rule book, TheFederal Register. In that entry, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued its "final rule" on the "release of patients" treated with radioactive iodine 131. I-131 is one of medicine's most effective cancer remedies, but patients who take it emit radiation for several days. The rule would, for the first time, permit doctors to treat thyroid cancer patients as outpatients, send them home and make them responsible for protecting those closest to them from radiation exposure. On the surface, the rule change seemed minor. "At the time, agency officials said the change was needed to clarify some uncertainty about NRC radiation standards," says Peter Crane, a former NRC lawyer and thyroid cancer survivor who is trying to get the agency to reverse its decision. "Its goal was to increase patients' choice, but its practical effect was to deprive patients of hospital care." Under the old rule, the standard for hospitalizing a patient depended on the radiation dose the patient received. The rule was based on the calculation that patients given more than 30 millicuries of I-131 may pose a danger to others. A millicurie reflects how much radioactivity is taken in by the patient. "They kept you in until you cooled off," Crane says. The new rule gave doctors the authority to release a patient if they could show that he or she would deliver no more than 500 millirems to another person. A millirem represents the energy of the radiation the bystander would absorb. The change allowed doctors to treat many more people with I-131 as outpatients. "Their clarification amounted to a wholesale reversal of the way they protected the public from radioactive patients," Crane says. NRC required that doctors supply patients with instructions to keep radiation doses to family members and others as low as possible. The 28-page notice acknowledges, however, that under the new rule, "individuals exposed to the patient could receive higher doses than if the patient had been hospitalized longer," a disadvantage "balanced by shorter hospital stays" and lower health care costs. It adds that patients may "reap emotional benefits from being speedily reunited with their families, improving the patients' state of mind" and the "outcome of treatment." Two years ago, Crane petitioned the NRC to restore the previous standard, to make it easier to hospitalize patients to safeguard others. Mark Delligatti, the NRC's chief of rulemaking, says that, even though most petitions must be acted upon within two years, Crane's request is still pending. Some thyroid cancer experts regard Crane as an alarmist, saying the risk to the public is low. Carol Marcus, an outspoken UCLA nuclear medicine specialist who petitioned the NRC to relax its rules in the 1990s, says, "I will not argue with you that there are some patients who are terribly worried, who have terrible fears. But what they need is education." Crane counters that he's thankful for I-131, because it helped him survive cancer. "I wouldn't want to do anything to impede the ability of patients to get their treatment. That doesn't mean you want to be reckless with kids (or bystanders)." For more information, visit the Thyroid Cancer Survivors' Association website, www.ThyCa.org. Former cancer patient Peter Crane wants the ruling reversed. Copyright 2007 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. ***************************************************************** 26 High Country News: Worker fallout November 20, 2007: Some sick workers from Rocky Flats are poised to receive compensation quickly, but the majority must wait Although the Rocky Flats nuclear facility northwest of Denver began its transformation into a wildlife refuge in 2001, its Cold War history lingers on in hundreds of workers who developed cancer and other illnesses from radiation and chemical exposure. Under a federal program started in 2000 to compensate sick nuclear workers from the Cold War era, roughly 775 Rocky Flats employees - out of 3,500 who have applied - have received payment. But the process of assessing an employee's past exposure takes time, and many end up dying while they wait. Now, a small group of workers from Rocky Flats have been approved for fast-tracked compensation - but critics say too many others are left behind, still unpaid and fighting with a frustrating bureaucracy. The Department of Health and Human Services recently approved part of a petition to add a new class of employees to the "special exposure cohort," a group of workers from nuclear facilities around the country who qualify for expedited compensation if they develop certain types of cancer. Most ill workers seeking compensation must wait while the Department of Labor, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, and the Department of Energy piece together personal information, employment records and data about the facility to reconstruct the worker's individual dose of radiation or chemical exposure. Normally, an employee only receives compensation if the agencies find that there is a greater than 50 percent chance his or her illness is work-related. But if the government determines that it doesn't have the records it needs to estimate the exposure levels of a particular group of workers, those workers are exempted from the dose reconstruction process and added to the expedited group. The agencies prefer to use individual monitoring records to assess workers' exposure levels, according to Chris Ellison, health communication specialist for the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's Office of Compensation Analysis and Support. But many of the records are decades old and filed in ways that make them difficult to access. In those cases, adding the workers to the special cohort gives them the benefit of the doubt. At Rocky Flats, the agencies concluded that the records were adequate for most employees, but a small group did qualify for the special exposure cohort: those workers believed to have been exposed to neutron radiation - a strong form that readily damages human tissue - while working at the Colorado facility between 1952 and 1966. "We've taken that proposed class and whittled it down and said here's what we can't do," says Ellison. While the decision is welcome news for those who meet the government's parameters, the majority of the facility's past workforce does not qualify. Excluded workers who become sick will still face the difficult and often lengthy process of parsing out their individual exposure levels in order to seek payment. "It was a good thing that they included the ones they did," says to Terry Bonds, district director for the United Steel Workers, which supported the original petition to add all Rocky Flats workers to the cohort. "But they are still excluding people who should be covered." The dose reconstruction process has many flaws, according to critics like Bond and LeRoy Moore, a consultant working on the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center's Nuclear Nexus Program. While the government does give workers a chance to add their own accounts to the mix, the process relies heavily on historical DOE records, many of which are incomplete or inadequate. In some older cases the dosimeters that workers wore to track exposure levels were primitive and inaccurate, and they were not always worn where they would detect the full amount of radiation absorbed by a worker's organs. In other cases, workers didn't wear dosimeters at all. In addition to relying on incomplete records, the compensation program entirely ignores many work-related illnesses, according to Moore. At first glance, using a list of 22 approved cancers seems valid, he says. But some workers have developed strange illnesses, which Moore believes may be the result of multiple exposures to toxic substances. "There is very little known about the combined effect of toxic materials," he says. "But because these workers don't fit the standard pattern, they're left out." To date, the federal government has paid more than 150,000 claims nationwide, totaling over $3.2 trillion dollars. The 54,000 of those claimants who reside in Western states have received $976 million. But Bond believes that many more workers, from Rocky Flats and other nuclear facilities, also deserve compensation. "These are people who fought in the Cold War," he says. "And the government should take care of them." ***************************************************************** 27 Cibola County Beacon: Former workers meet with federal caseworkers Monday, November 19, 2007 5:18 PM MST GRANTS - Only one third of the uranium workers who could be applying for compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program and Part E of that program have done so. That is according to representatives of the Department of Justice and the Department of Labor. Very shortly after the beginning of the presentation accusations towards the government started to come from Catherine Montano of Las Vegas, New Mexico. “It is criminal for you to come here and say we are not downwinders, we all drink radioactive water and we want to stop all the nuclear madness in our state,” she said. “We are only civil servants, we do not pass the laws,” said Gerard Fisher of the Department of Justice. He asked her to please hold her comments until the time allotted for questions and answers. Although more than 4,300 people have filed claims for compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act, it is known that 15,000 people or their survivors could apply, said Fisher. “The programs and the process for qualifying for them are very complicated,” he said. “That's why we're here.” The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act is administered by the DOJ and provides compensation to eligible individuals whose health and lives were affected as a result of exposure to radiation while they worked in the uranium industry and from nuclear testing. The EEOICPA provides compensation and medical benefits to employees who became ill as a result of working in the atomic weapons industry. There are two parts to this program, Part B and Part E. Part B covers current or former workers who have been diagnosed with cancers, beryllium diseases, or silicosis, whose illness or illnesses was caused by exposure to radiation, beryllium or silica while working directly for the Department of Energy. Shelby Hallmark of the DOL, along with Fisher, fielded questions from people in the audience and directed them to caseworkers who could assist them with a current, future, or past claim that had been previously denied. While dozens of people were meeting with caseworkers, Montano spoke to those who were still in the audience. “New Mexico is the nuclear dump of the nation,” she said. “Talk to your young people, tell them not to mine, if they won't work these companies can't mine the uranium.” By Cheryl Montoya Beacon staff writer Copyright © 2007 Cibola Beacon. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 Amarillo.com: French look for nuke site 11/20/07 Carlsbad area under consideration The Associated Press CARLSBAD, N.M. - A French corporation is looking at U.S. locations for an enrichment facility, including an area between Carlsbad and Hobbs, state Rep. John Heaton said. The plant would be similar to one being built near Eunice to make fuel for commercial nuclear reactors. The French company, Areva, would build a plant slightly larger than the Eunice one. Areva spokeswoman Nancy Lang said the company has selected eight locations for a possible plant, but she declined to say whether any are in southeastern New Mexico. "We hope to make the final decision in the early part of the year," Lang said. Heaton, a Carlsbad Democrat, said both Lea and Eddy counties have offered locations. "We think we've got two very good sites, and we have extremely strong support in southeastern New Mexico for nuclear projects," he said. Currently, only 15 percent of the enriched uranium used at power plants in the United States is supplied domestically, Heaton said. Louisiana Energy Service, which will operate the facility near Eunice, will boost the supply to about 50 percent. An Areva facility could put it at 85 percent, Heaton said. Copyright 2007 Amarillo Globe-News & Amarillo.com ***************************************************************** 29 The Mississippi Press: Richton salt dome is a disaster in the making Mississippi Press Mobile Register Monday, November 19, 2007 The recent article in the Mississippi Press regarding the pending Richton salt dome project should not be ignored. The article states the Department of Energy has approved using the Pascagoula River as the primary water source to facilitate coring out the Richton salt dome. To accomplish this feat, 50 million gallons of water per day would be drawn from the north end of the Pascagoula River and be pumped by pipeline to the salt dome site. The plan is to create a cavity to house crude oil to expand our national strategic oil reserves. There will be a negative impact on the Pascagoula River. Perhaps after the five year project is completed, over time the damage to the Pascagoula River might repair itself as it is a primary watershed with drainage to the Gulf of Mexico. However, the water from the Pascagoula River will be sent under pressure into an underground salt layer to create the cavity, and the resulting salt water slurry is planned to be sent by pipeline beyond Horn Island and released into the Gulf of Mexico in the Pascagoula Ship Channel. If this plan is in fact under way and the numbers are accurate, the slurry will contain 400 to 600 times more salt than the natural salinity of the Gulf. Marine biologists have already gone on record that this level of salinity will kill everything in its path: shrimp, oysters, larvae, eggs, fish, crabs -- everything! At 50 million gallons per day, this project will produce 8.2 trillion gallons of concentrated saline slurry over a four year period. This is insanity. Is the federal government, especially the Department of Energy this incompetent? How can the other government agencies allow this to happen? Where is the Department of Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency? How can our elected representatives including our mayor, Board of Supervisors, governor, state legislators and senators stand by and allow this plan to continue? What would our governor say if they proposed that the slurry be sent to the Ross Barnett Reservoir in Hinds County? What is Gene Taylor's and Trent Lott's position on this debacle? This planned disaster is a train wreck headed straight at Pascagoula, Gautier and Ocean Springs. If our government is bent on changing our inshore Gulf Coast into the equivalent of Israel's Dead Sea or the Great Salt Lake in Utah, then God help us for we will reap what we sow. The Pascagoula River might be able to heal itself over time, but we just may be creating a dead zone in the Gulf that might last for hundreds of years. And, at our present rate of crude oil consumption, how many months of petroleum products will this increase in our strategic reserves provide? A couple of months at best. When I asked about this issue, the official response was a copy of the press release that said (1) President Bush wants it, (2) it's good for national defense, and (3) it will provide a few jobs in Richton. But at what cost? If this program continues we will have no one to blame but ourselves when the damage is done. Such a condescending response was nothing more than a cookie cutter public relations spin. Obviously, the threat to our Gulf Coast is of no concern in Washington, D.C. Crude oil is worthless unless it is converted into gasoline, kerosene, lubricant oil, etc. So who is really behind this pending disaster? Could it be the oil companies? The Department of Energy has spent over $400-plus billion dollars over the past 25 years since its inception following the oil embargo of the Jimmy Carter era. And what do we have to show for it? Nothing. A zero policy, with no viable alternative energy program, a frozen nuclear power program that is 20 years behind the curve, and no firm policies on Detroit and the automobile industry. By potentially killing a huge area of the Gulf, the idiots who have come up with this plan have shown that they could care less about Pascagoula, Jackson County and the wider Gulf Coast. This type of elitist attitude mirrors the same "compassionate, forward thinking professionals" who have allowed our local industries to discharge 1.56 billion pounds of carcinogens and toxicants into our air, water, landfills, deep wells or hauled out of state over the past 12 years. In 2006, Jackson County's industries reported releasing over 2.4 million pounds of carcinogens into the environment. That's 34.7 pounds; compared with Hinds County at 1.4 pounds per person. And interestingly enough, Jackson County now is in the top 10 percent of cancer incidence and cancer death rates, per capita, out of 3,171 counties in the United States. Mississippi is in the top five states in the U.S. with its per capita cancer rates, and Jackson County is 147 percent higher than Mississippi. One example of the potential harm this may be causing can be found in Colmer Middle School. With about 40 faculty and staff, six teachers have cancer as of today; one of whom is my wife, but that's another story. So the bottom line is that our government is responsible for allowing the permits that authorize the release of these carcinogens. Coincidentally, every 1.5 days a person dies of cancer in Jackson County. It's not enough that we are killing off our citizens. Let's go for the creatures in the Gulf as well. I'm sure that Washington will cut a deal so that the Chinese can send us all the shrimp we can eat! The potential impact won't be like an oil spill that you can clean up. The potential disaster from this debacle might be forever. Robert Hardy Pascagoula © 2007 The Mississippi Press. Used with permission. © 2007 Alabama Live LLC [al.com and gulflive.com] All rights ***************************************************************** 30 cleveland.com: U.S. suspends former nuclear plant's cleanup Monday, November 19, 2007 Associated Press Miamisburg - The $1 billion cleanup of the former Mound nuclear plant in suburban Dayton has been stopped while the government decides whether to complete the job and figures out who will pay for it. U.S. Rep. Mike Turner, the Dayton Republican who led the effort to secure $30 million for the cleanup of radioactive and chemical hazards in an old Mound landfill, said the Energy Department should pay to complete the work. The department, which owns the site, believes the landfill cleanup was never environmentally necessary. After budgeting $4.5 million toward the project this fall, the department plans to walk away from it early next year if local officials don't come up with the estimated $5 million that's still needed. Cost estimates have increased as contractors have found more hazardous waste than expected. Cleveland Plain Dealer Privacy Policy | Contact Us cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 31 The Observer: 'Safe' uranium that left a town contaminated They were told depleted uranium was not hazardous. Now, 23 years after a US arms plant closed, workers and residents have cancer - and experts say their suffering shows the use of such weapons may be a war crime David Rose in Colonie, New York Sunday November 18, 2007 The Observer It is 50 years since Tony Ciarfello and his friends used the yard of a depleted uranium weapons factory as their playground in Colonie, a suburb of Albany in upstate New York state. 'There wasn't no fence at the back of the plant,' remembers Ciarfello. 'Inside was a big open ground and nobody would chase us away. We used to play baseball and hang by the stream running through it. We even used to fish in it - though we noticed the fish had big pink lumps on them.' Today there are lumps on Ciarfello's chest - strange, round tumours that protrude about an inch. 'No one seems to know what they are,' he says. 'I've also had a brain aneurysm caused by a suspected tumour. I'm constantly fatigued and for years I've had terrible pains, deep inside my leg bones. I fall over without warning and I've got a heart condition.' Ciarfello's illnesses have rendered him unable to work for years. Aged 57 and a father of five, he looks much older. The US federal government and the firm that ran the factory, National Lead (NL) Industries, have been assuring former workers and residents around the 18-acre site for decades that, although it is true that the plant used to produce unacceptable levels of radioactive pollution, it was not a serious health hazard. Now, in a development with potentially devastating implications not only for Colonie but also for the future use of some of the West's most powerful weapon systems, that claim is being challenged. In a paper to be published in the next issue of the scientific journal Science of the Total Environment, a team led by Professor Randall Parrish of Leicester University reports the results of a three-year study of Colonie, funded by Britain's Ministry of Defence. Parrish's team has found that DU contamination, which remains radioactive for millions of years, is in effect impossible to eradicate, not only from the environment but also from the bodies of humans. Twenty-three years after production ceased they tested the urine of five former workers. All are still contaminated with DU. So were 20 per cent of people tested who had spent at least 10 years living near the factory when it was still working, including Ciarfello. The small sample size precludes the drawing of statistical conclusions, the journal paper says. But to find DU at all after so long a period is 'significant, since no previous study has documented evidence of DU exposure more than 20 years prior... [this] indicates that the body burden of uranium must still be significant, whether retained in lungs, lymphatic system, kidneys or bone'. The team is now testing more individuals. In 1984, having bought the factory from NL for $10 in a deal that meant the firm was exempted from having to pay for its clean-up, the federal government began a massive decommissioning project, supervised by the Army Corps of Engineers. The clean-up did not finish until summer 2007, having cost some $190m. Contractors demolished the buildings and removed more than 150,000 tons of soil and other contaminated detritus, digging down to depths of up to 40ft and trucking it 2,000 miles by rail to underground radioactive waste sites in the Rockies. All that is now left of the NL plant is a huge, undulating field, ringed by razor wire. Despite this colossal effort, Parrish and his colleagues found high concentrations of DU particles in soil, stream sediments and household dust in the vicinity of the site, deposited long ago when the factory burnt the shavings and chips produced by the weapons manufacturing process: the study estimates that, over the years, about 10 tons of uranium oxide dust wafted from the chimney into the surrounding environment. The Army Corps clean-up team tested the soil from some of the gardens of houses backing on to the plant, and in cases where it was found to be emitting more than 35 pico curies of radiation per gram they removed it. The researchers discovered dust in and around buildings emitting up to 10 times as much. DU, inhaled in the form of tiny motes of oxide that lodge inside the lungs, emits alpha radiation, nuclei of helium. Unlike the gamma radiation produced by enriched, weapons-grade uranium, alpha particles will not penetrate the skin. But inside the body DU travels around the bloodstream, accumulating not only in the lungs but also in other soft tissues such as the brain and bone marrow. There, each mote becomes an alpha particle hotspot, bombarding its locality and damaging cell DNA. Research has shown that DU has the potential to cause a wide range of cancers, kidney and thyroid problems, birth defects and disorders of the immune system. When DU 'penetrators' - armour-piercing shells that form the standard armament of some of Britain's and America's most commonly deployed military aircraft and vehicles - strike their targets, 10 per cent or more of the heavy DU metal burns at high temperatures, producing oxide particles very similar to those at Colonie. TV footage shot in Baghdad in 2003 shows children playing in the remains of tanks coated with thick, black DU oxide, while there have long been claims that the DU shells that destroyed Saddam Hussein's tanks in the 1991 Gulf war were responsible for high rates of cancer in places such as Basra. Parrish's team includes David Carpenter, an environmental health expert from Albany University. 'DU burns, it releases particulates that can be breathed in, and it doesn't go away,' he says. 'The issue does not concern military personnel as much as civilian populations in theatres where they are used. Now we know that we can still find measurable levels of DU among the people of Colonie, we need a much bigger study to establish whether they have suffered disproportionate ill-effects such as cancers as a consequence. If they have, it would raise a serious ethical challenge to the use of these weapons. Arguably it could constitute a war crime.' The NL plant on Central Avenue, Colonie's main artery, opened in 1958 and became one of the Pentagon's main suppliers. DU - the material left in huge quantities by the process of refining enriched uranium for bombs and nuclear reactors - is extremely dense. A pointed rod fired at high velocity will penetrate not only armour but several feet of concrete. In 1979 a whistleblower from inside the plant told the local health department that it was releasing large amounts of DU from its 50ft chimney, which was not properly filtered. The state government carried out atmospheric tests and in 1981 ordered that main production cease. The factory shut three years later. One of those who has now tested positive is Mike Aidala, 71, who worked at the plant for 22 years and became its health and safety director. 'When it started, the place was spotless,' he says. 'But over the years it got dirtier and dirtier. We burnt the chips produced by the lathes in a steel furnace.' He added: 'A lot of my co-workers died young. Whether the plant was the reason, I guess we'll never know.' As concern in Colonie rose, a residents' group began to call for a publicly funded health study. For Anne Rabe, a founder member of a campaign that has now lasted for 25 years, the Parrish study represents overdue vindication. 'I do find it very ironic that the US government at state and federal level refused for so long to do anything, and now the UK comes along and has funded these tests,' Rabe says. Repeatedly, US agencies have claimed that the Colonie plant was reasonably safe, despite the massive clean-up. Most recently, in 2003, the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry issued a report saying that, although the pollution produced when the plant was operating might have slightly increased the risks of kidney disease and lung cancer, there was now 'no apparent public health hazard'. Rabe's campaign has conducted a health study of its own, assembling a dossier from personal contacts and by knocking on neighbours' doors. It found that among almost 400 people surveyed there were numerous cases of rare cancers, thyroid and kidney complaints and birth defects. The main difficulty the campaigners faced in the past is that DU eventually dissolves and is passed in the urine. The US government claimed that the plant had been shut so long that it would be impossible to determine who had been contaminated - so rendering a full health survey pointless. However, Parrish has developed new, more sensitive methods. At the same time, his impartiality is impeccable. Before his work in Colonie, Parrish tested more than 400 Gulf war veterans, failing to detect DU in any of them - so dealing a serious blow to those who claimed that DU is one of the causes of Gulf war syndrome. 'I did not expect to find it in Colonie,' he says. Some of those who have tested positive display classic, common symptoms found in DU victims elsewhere. For example, Ciarfello says he was still in his twenties when his teeth 'just started to crumble: they ground down to nothing until they were just these little stumps and I pushed them out with my tongue'. Other members of his family are sick. His son developed a severe kidney condition, while his brother, Frank, can barely walk and also suffers chronic fatigue. A nephew was born with a disfiguring facial skin tumour that has required repeated surgery. Tom Donnelly, 56, spent 34 years as a foreman at a garage door workshop next to the NL factory, where tests have found high concentrations of DU in dust samples from places such as shelves and light fittings. He has three auto-immune disorders: Crohn's disease, a chronic inflammation of the bowel, total alopecia, and cerebral vasculitis, an immune system-related narrowing of blood vessels in the brain. 'The new tests suggest I inhaled about 4,000 particles of DU,' Donnelly says. 'I used to come to work in the morning and see the chimney blowing its smoke in a thick black plume. Most of us had no idea that the plant was using uranium at all. After all, the sign outside said National Lead. The Army Corps removed all that soil, but they never looked at the dust at all. The effect on my life has been devastating, but how many others are already dead?' One is his late boss and friend Tom Murphy - who, like Donnelly, developed Crohn's and died of it at 61. Ann Carusone lived in a house behind the plant from the time of her birth in 1966 until 1993. 'When I tested positive, my reaction was sheer disbelief,' she says. She has endured years of a chronic lung disease, sarcoidosis, an inflammation of the lymph nodes usually found in much older people, as well as a blood disorder that produced petecchiae - dots of blood beneath her skin, similar to those seen in some of those exposed to radiation at Hiroshima. In her twenties she had a pre-cancerous ovarian cyst that when removed was the size of a grapefruit. 'I knew many people from round here who died young, in their twenties and thirties,' she says. 'We used to play out in the creek that flowed out of the plant site. The water was sluggish, a weird yellow-green colour. We'd splash about in it. Now we know it was laden with depleted uranium.' 'It's very striking how many people in this small group have immune disorders like Tom Donnelly's,' says Carpenter. 'I can say with great confidence that people who inhaled DU are at greater risk of lung cancer, as well as leukaemia, other cancers and genetic damage of the type that causes birth defects. Previous responses by official bodies could be said to amount to a cover-up. People have been told that there's no problem, and that's very clearly not true.' Yesterday NL failed to return calls requesting comment. Deadly residue Depleted uranium (DU) is the residue left in massive quantities when bomb-grade uranium is refined to make reactor fuel and nuclear weapons. The densest naturally occurring metal, it is used to make armour-penetrating shells, standard armament for some of the West's most widely deployed military aircraft and vehicles, such as Bradley armoured cars, Abrams tanks, and Jaguar A10 fighter planes. Less intensely radioactive than bomb-grade uranium, DU emits alpha particles, known to cause cancers. DU weapons that strike their targets produce clouds of tiny uranium oxide particles, which lodge in the lungs and other soft tissues such as the brain and bone marrow. DU shells were widely used in the 1991 Gulf war; in Bosnia and Kosovo; and are being used now in Iraq and Afghanistan. Special report The nuclear industry 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 © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007 ***************************************************************** 32 Mississippi Press: Sees salt dome as worst disaster since Katrina OPINION Sunday, November 18, 2007 Do you know what a steamroller sounds like? Sometimes they are almost silent. Jackson County has a steamroller headed its way, and it's not making much sound. The Department of Energy is planning to develop an oil reserve storage site near Richton, Miss. Doesn't sound like much impact on Jackson County, but it could possibly be one of the worst natural disasters to hit this county since Katrina. The plan that is moving forward -- listen closely for the sound of a steamroller -- is to hollow out a salt dome near Richton and fill it with 160 million barrels of oil for use in a national emergency. The impact to Jackson County will come from the method to be used to hollow out the salt dome. Fifty-million gallons of fresh water will be pumped from the Pascagoula River per day, for five years, to be used to dissolve the salt. Guess where the salt brine/slurry will be pumped? Into the waters right out from Jackson County. More precisely, just south of Horn Island, near the Horn Island Pass. After reading the Department of Energy's Site Selection Study and Draft Environmental Impact, I have several comments, as follows: Pulling 50 million gallons of water per day from a free-flowing, tidal river will allow 50 million gallon/day of salt water to move upriver to replace it. Plus the intruding water will be saltier as the discharged brine will be moved by tidal flow to the mouth of the river. The ecosystem of the Pascagoula River delta is extremely sensitive to salinity content. Small variations in salinity over long periods of time have been proven to kill the marsh grasses and even trees of river deltas. Marsh erosion is already a huge problem for the coastal states. According to the DOE report and MDEQ, Mississippi has lost about 60 percent of its wetlands and flood plains due to agriculture and residential and commercial development. The marsh and swamp wetlands are vital to the economy and protection of south Mississippi. They provide the estuaries for development of all of our seafood production, both commercial and recreational. They provide habitat for the majority of the wildlife found in the coastal counties. They provide a protective barrier from the effects of hurricanes. Possibly most importantly, they provide a filtering/cleaning effect to remove and neutralize pollutants from the water. The brine solution to be dumped into the Gulf of Mexico will have similar negative impacts on a large area of the Gulf of Mexico. The study shows a volume of brine to be discharged into the Gulf of Mexico over a 5-year period at 80 billion to 140 billion gallons. This would fill a volume equal to 10 miles by 10 miles by 4 to 6 feet deep. Since the salt will stay in solution indefinitely, and the salt content of this brine is seven times normal saltwater salinity, it will impact a huge area. The released brine will start out as a 100 percent solution that will eventually mix with the surrounding waters. A 10 percent increase in salinity can have a dramatic impact on marsh plants, trees and fish. If you calculate the numbers, you find that 140 billion gallons of this brine, evenly mixed with salt water, will raise the salinity over our waterways by 10 percent over an area as large as 20 miles by 350 miles by 6 feet deep. My math may not be exact, but anything near these numbers will have horrific impacts. It actually will be worse than this. The real world doesn't exactly follow these kinds of math models. Due to current and tidal flows that change daily, it's likely that large waterbodies consisting of much higher concentrations of salt will drift along for great distances before finally blending with the surrounding waters. These waters with the higher salt concentrations will do even more damage as they travel across the Gulf, Sound and into the rivers, not just the Pascagoula River. Anyone who has spent time in the Sound or the Gulf has seen similar bodies of water that do not mix with adjacent waters. They're generally referred to as "tide lines" or "rips." Waterbodies with different temperatures, salinity, turbidity, etc., do not mix readily, and move along in the current, separately, divided by a distinct line, called tide line or rip. Harrison County should take note. This plan will affect its waters, also, including offshore, the Sound and Back Bay. It's interesting that the nearby states of Alabama and Georgia are experiencing an extreme water shortage, and we're proposing wasting 50 million gallons of fresh water per day. How long before Mississippi starts experiencing the same water shortage as our neighbors, then wonder why we're turning a tremendous amount of freshwater into a toxic slurry and pumping that slurry into prime breeding grounds for fish, wildlife and plants. The 229 miles of pipeline buried across 67 bodies of water in south Mississippi, according to the DOE study, can't be too good for our environment. What about the possible effects from the underground nuclear testing (two atomic explosions) that was performed just south of Hattiesburg in 1964 and 1966? These explosions occurred in an adjacent salt dome about 30 miles from the Richton site. Although slim, there has to be a possibility these explosions weakened the Richton salt dome, allowing the possibility of leakage of the stored oil, or worse, contamination with the radioactive remnants from the tests. This was not even mentioned in the DOE study. The operations at Chevron will likely be impacted, since Chevron depends on freshwater pumped from the Pascagoula River at Cumbest Bluff. The effect of the salinity level rising at Cumbest Bluff due to the lower river water level/influx of salt water, will impact Chevron's ability to use this necessary water supply. I doubt anyone can predict how often Chevron would have to shut down the Cumbest Bluff pumping station, but it could be a significant percentage of time. This is a high risk to Jackson County's economy. With all the negatives, what are the positive aspects of this project for Jackson County? Virtually nothing. All Jackson County will see is a pipeline crossing our county, with no new jobs and no taxes paid. I understand the need for the storage is a national security issue and can't argue with national security, but, Mississippi should not throw out the baby with the washwater, just because this is for national security. This project can be accomplished without the huge environmental/economic impacts that the current proposal will cause. It will just require a little more money to be spent. For a small fraction of the total investment the impacts could be dramatically reduced. Why not pump salt water in from the Gulf of Mexico instead of using precious fresh water? As far as the brine discharge, why not run the pipeline farther out into the Gulf and space the diffuser nozzles over a longer distance? This would not add much to the overall cost and would have a huge decrease in the negative impact of this project. It's all about economics. Mississippi is traditionally cheap. It's part of why we stay in the bottom of the national barrel. This is the typical scenario that we continually see. Dump on Mississippi because it's cheap. Build coal-fired power plants here with fewer environmental controls to supply electricity to Florida where they require much more expensive/effective environmental controls (Example: Plant Daniels expansion). Truck toxic chemicals from New Jersey to Pascagoula, filter the toxic chemicals out and truck the product back to N.J. (Example: PFOA). This project could be accomplished in any other state with salt domes, it would just be more expensive. National security is important, but so is regional security. The price for national security needs to be paid in dollars, not environmental loss, which equates downstream to dollars lost. Eric Richards Pascagoula © 2007 The Mississippi Press. Used with permission. ***************************************************************** 33 Deseret Morning News: Nuclear plant fight focuses on waste-storage woes By Suzanne Struglinski Deseret Morning News Published: Saturday, Nov. 17, 2007 12:42 a.m. MST WASHINGTON ? While talk of building new nuclear power plants has only started in Utah, companies in other states have actually filed license applications with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for new plants. But as the industry prepares for what it hopes is a long-awaited "nuclear renaissance," the battle over what to do with nuclear waste lingers. In 1998, the federal government was scheduled to take the used nuclear fuel from reactors and move it to Nevada's Yucca Mountain, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Now, almost a decade later, the Energy Department says the "best-achievable schedule" to open the site is in 2017. While work on Yucca continues, the Energy Department is also working on the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, known as GNEP, part of which involves research into reprocessing or recycling spent nuclear fuel to be used again in reactors but without generating dangerous nuclear by-products. "GNEP is completely compatible with our near-term effort to license and open the waste repository at Yucca Mountain," Dennis Spurgeon, assistant secretary of Nuclear Energy told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Tuesday. But Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., the committee's top Republican, said the government needs to do something sooner rather than later. He pointed out that the government has estimated it will owe $7 billion to nuclear companies for failing to take the waste if Yucca opens in 2017 and $11 billion if it opens in 2020, or about $1.3 billion a year. "We must have a path forward, not 50 years from now, but now," Domenici said. "We are left with only one choice ? focus on an integrated spent fuel strategy that will address our liability question immediately, and implement a recycling strategy that will avoid the political and economic nightmare that would result from attempts to site a second repository." In addition to moving the government to talks on reprocessing, the delay in opening Yucca Mountain forced Utah to fight its own battle over nuclear waste with the planned temporary storage site at the Goshute Indian Reservation in Tooele County. Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of companies looking for a place to store waste until Yucca opens, got a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for temporary storage on the Goshute reservation. But more than a year ago, the government voided the lease and did not give a right of way to land needed for a transportation hub, stopping the project. ***************************************************************** 34 DOE: U.S. and Russia Sign Plan for Russian Plutonium Disposition November 19, 2007 Will Eliminate Enough Russian Plutonium for Thousands of Nuclear Weapons WASHINGTON, DC –U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman and Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency Director Sergey Kiriyenko have signed a joint statement outlining a plan to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium from Russia’s weapons program. Under the new plan, the United States will cooperate with Russia to convert Russian weapon-grade plutonium into mixed oxide fuel (MOX) and irradiate the MOX fuel in the BN-600 fast reactor, currently operating at the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant, and in the BN-800 fast reactor, currently under construction at the same site. The United States and Russia also intend to continue cooperation on the development of an advanced gas-cooled, high-temperature reactor, which may create additional possibilities for disposition of Russia’s plutonium. “This joint statement between the United States and Russia reflects measurable progress towards disposing of a significant amount of weapon-grade plutonium in Russia,” Secretary Bodman said. “Along with the U.S. program to dispose of plutonium as mixed oxide fuel in light water reactors, the Russian program will ensure that enough plutonium for thousands of weapons is converted into a form which cannot be used to construct a weapon and will instead be used to provide fuel to produce clean electricity.” The United States and Russia agreed that the BN-600 and BN-800 fast reactors will dispose of Russia’s surplus weapons plutonium without creating new stocks of separated weapon-grade plutonium. Under the new plan, Russia would begin disposition in the BN-600 reactor in the 2012 timeframe. Disposition in the BN-800 would follow soon thereafter. Once disposition begins, the two reactors could dispose of approximately 1.5 metric tons of Russian weapons plutonium per year. Russia intends to implement this program, with the U.S. contributing $400 million, as previously pledged for cooperation under the 2000 Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement and subject to appropriations by the U.S. Congress. The agreement commits the United States and Russia to dispose each of 34 metric tons of surplus weapon-grade plutonium. “This joint statement is part of a comprehensive and cooperative approach to countering nuclear proliferation around the world. A balanced, effective nonproliferation program should provide for the disposal of dangerous materials along with securing and detecting them,” said William Tobey, NNSA’s Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. “Through this program, the United States and Russia will dispose of at least 68 metric tons of surplus weapons plutonium.” U.S. and Russian officials will meet in the coming months to amend the existing plutonium disposition agreement between the United States and Russia to reflect today’s joint statement as well as related technical discussions and other modifications necessary for cooperation to proceed. Established by Congress in 2000, NNSA is a separately organized agency within the U.S. Department of Energy responsible for enhancing national security through the military application of nuclear science. NNSA maintains and enhances the safety, security, reliability and performance of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile without nuclear testing; works to reduce global danger from weapons of mass destruction; provides the U.S. Navy with safe and effective nuclear propulsion; and responds to nuclear and radiological emergencies in the United States and abroad. Visit the NNSA homepage for more information. The following is the text of the Joint Statement: Joint Statement on Mutual Understanding Concerning Cooperation on the Program for the Disposition of Excess Weapon-Grade Plutonium U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman and Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency Director Sergey Kiriyenko -- emphasizing the commitment of Rosatom and the U.S. Department of Energy, as Executive Agents under the 2000 Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement (PMDA), to effective and transparent disposition by each side of 34 metric tons of weapon-grade plutonium designated as no longer required for defense purposes, and taking into account the work of experts carried out pursuant to their Joint Statement of July 2006 on plutonium disposition and also the technical consultations on the possibility of involving the BN-600 and BN-800 fast-neutron reactors in Russia’s program -- have arrived at the following mutual understanding concerning U.S.-Russian cooperation in this area. Rosatom plans to implement the Russian program for plutonium disposition within the framework of the strategy for developing Russian nuclear energy, based on irradiating weapon-grade plutonium in the form of MOX fuel: (a) in the BN-600 reactor at Beloyarsk NPP; and (b) in the BN-800 reactor which will be built at the same site. Rosatom and the U.S. Department of Energy intend to continue cooperation on an equal basis and at funding levels agreed to by them, in order to support research and development of the advanced gas-cooled high-temperature reactor (the Gas-Turbine Modular Helium Reactor, or GT-MHR), the successful development of which may create additional possibilities for speeding up plutonium disposition in the PMDA context in the time frame of 2015-2020. Rosatom plans to begin implementation of the Russian program for disposition of excess weapon-grade plutonium in the BN-600 reactor once the necessary modifications have been made to the PMDA, and in the BN-800 reactor once the necessary modifications have been made to the PMDA and the construction both of the reactor and of the associated facilities has been completed, including construction of the MOX fuel production facility. The U.S. Department of Energy will endeavor to support Rosatom’s efforts to establish MOX fuel production for the BN-800 reactor. The U.S. Department of Energy intends to contribute $400 million, in accordance with agreed milestones and schedules, within the framework of cooperation in the area of Russian plutonium disposition. The U.S. Department of Energy and Rosatom intend to undertake joint efforts to seek other donor funding, which would be used to reduce Russian outlays for, and facilitate timely implementation of, disposition in the BN-800. Based on this Joint Statement and on the report on technical consultations, as well as on other undertakings for U.S.-Russian cooperation to proceed, the necessary modifications to amend and update the PMDA will be prepared. These modifications will be submitted for approval by the U.S. and Russian Governments. Sergey Kiriyenko Samuel W. Bodman Director Secretary of Energy Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) United States of America Media contact(s): Megan Barnett, DOE (202) 586-4940 Bryan Wilkes, NNSA (202) 586-7371 U.S. Department of Energy | 1000 Independence Ave., SW | Washington, DC 20585 1-800-dial-DOE | f/202-586-4403 ***************************************************************** 35 PE: Emergency declaration could get Rialto help on water cleanup | PE.com The Web 06:54 AM PST on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 By MARY BENDER The Press-Enterprise The chemical perchlorate is contaminating 360 million more gallons of Rialto's drinking water each month, and the City Council tonight will consider declaring a local emergency as part of an appeal to the state for disaster assistance. On Thursday, City Administrator Henry Garcia declared a local emergency, as is his right under two sections of the Government Code, the California Emergency Services and the California Disaster Assistance acts. Under state law, the Rialto City Council must ratify Garcia's declaration within a week or it will expire, according to a written report by Rialto City Attorney Robert Owen. "We hope this will help encourage the state and the governor to assist us in an expedient manner," City Councilman Ed Scott said on Monday. Rialto's request to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger also seeks funding to stop the six-mile-long plume of contaminated groundwater from moving at its current pace of at least 20 inches per day. "I think we've asked for about $20 million," Scott said. The contaminants have polluted the Rialto/Colton groundwater basin, an underground reservoir from which Rialto pumps drinking water through several wells. The city contends that the basin was polluted over the decades by several businesses that operated on a 160-acre industrial site north of Highway 210 in Rialto. Those companies include Goodrich Corp., Pyro Spectaculars Inc., Black & Decker Inc., Kwikset Locks Inc., Kwikset Corp. and Emhart Industries Inc. In his report, Owen listed several reasons for Rialto's appeal for state assistance. The past year's scant rainfall has created a greater demand for water from limited supplies, such as the State Water Project aqueduct that carries water south from Northern California. The city's limited fresh-water supply also is hindering growth. "The city of Rialto may now have to impose a moratorium on new water hookups, and institute other mandatory water conservation efforts," Owen wrote. Reach Mary Bender at 909-806-3056 or mbender@PE.com © 2007 Press-Enterprise Company • 3450 Fourteenth Street, Riverside, California 92501 ***************************************************************** 36 Reuters: Congolese river used for radioactive dumping no danger Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:21pm EST By Joe Bavier KINSHASA, Nov 20 (Reuters) - A river in southeastern Congo where authorities believe as much as 19 tonnes of radioactive minerals were dumped earlier this month is no longer a danger to local people, officials said on Tuesday. Authorities had seized the minerals, mainly copper and cobalt ore, in the city of Likasi in Congo's mineral-rich Katanga province in October after tests revealed radiation levels nearly 50 times the limit for mineral exports. Katanga's environment minister ordered their disposal at a nearby abandoned uranium mine but the load never made it and the government says at least some of the ore was dropped from a bridge into the Mura river, just 10 km (6 miles) outside Likasi. "Practically all of the product has now been removed (from the river). Even at the dumping site, when we removed the sacks, we tested and there was nothing," Joseph Monga Herion, technical advisor to the provincial infrastructure minister, told Reuters. "There is no longer any risk." Workers removed some 12 tonnes of minerals from the site, just 7 km (4 miles) upstream from one of three pumping stations providing drinking water to Likasi's 300,000 inhabitants. Congo's Environment Minister, Didace Pembe, told Reuters earlier this month that he believed some of the minerals had disappeared and were never dumped in the Mura. Officials from Congo's national water company, known as Regideso, said they had restarted the pumping station following a three-day closure, when tests revealed water from the river was not contaminated. "We took samples at the pumping station and at the water purification factory. The levels we found were normal," Regideso's technical director in Katanga, Vincent de Paul Thihanga, said. The government initially banned local inhabitants from using water from the river for human or animal consumption, and a quarantine zone was set up around the dumping site. Those measures, Monga Herion said, had now been lifted. Congolese authorities have arrested seven people, including the entire team charged with disposing of the minerals, in connection with the dumping. Ore mined in Katanga, home to one of the world's richest belts of copper and cobalt, habitually contains trace amounts of uranium, which Congo is currently banned from exporting. Congolese officials said the dumped minerals were believed to have come from the nearby Kolwezi area, home to projects by several foreign mining groups including Katanga Mining (KAT.TO: Quote, Profile, Research), Nikanor (NKR.L: Quote, Profile, Research), and Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold (FCX.N: Quote, Profile, Research). © Reuters2007All rights reserved ***************************************************************** 37 [NYTr] Pakistan Nukes Already Under US Control: Stratfor Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:45:47 -0600 (CST) Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit Times of India - Nov 20, 2007 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/The_United_States/Pak_nukes_already_under_US_control_Report/rssarticleshow/2556824.cms Pak nukes already under US control: Report by Chidanand Rajghatta ,TNN WASHINGTON: Pakistan's nuclear weapons are already under American control even as analysts are working themselves into a lather on the subject, a well-regarded intelligence journal has said. In a stunning disclosure certain to stir up things in Washington's (and in Islamabad and New Delhi's) strategic community, the journal Stratfor reported on Monday that the "United States delivered a very clear ultimatum to Musharraf in the wake of 9/11: Unless Pakistan allowed US forces to take control of Pakistani nuclear facilities, the United States would be left with no choice but to destroy those facilities, possibly with India's help." "This was a fait accompli that Musharraf, for credibility reasons, had every reason to cover up and pretend never happened, and Washington was fully willing to keep things quiet," the journal, which is widely read among the intelligence community, said. The Stratfor commentary came in response to an earlier New York Times story that reported that the Bush administration had spent around $100 million to help Pakistan safeguard its nuclear weapons, but left it unclear if Washington has a handle on the arsenal. Over the past fortnight, even since the crisis in Pakistan broke and eclipsed every other geopolitical story, including Iraq, US officials and analysts have been speaking in different voices on the subject of a jihadi takeover of Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Some officials have expressed deep concern at the possibility and suggested US is ready with contingency plans to defang Pakistan of its nuclear weapons, while others have tried to assuage Islamabad by saying they believe the country's military rulers have good custodial control over their crown jewels. On Monday, a State Department official once again addressed the issue and hinted that Washington was in control of the situation. "... ultimately, the major responsibility for that falls with the Pakistani government. They have made public comments to the effect that the arsenal is secure, that they have taken a number of different steps to ensure that," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. "We ourselves see no indication to indicate to the contrary. It is secure. We obviously have an interest in seeing that it is secure," McCormack added. Stratfor , too, appears confident that the Bush administration has a handle on Pak's nukes. Not everyone is so sanguine. In a separate commentary over the weekend that had some US and Pakistani analysts blowing their gasket, two prominent Washington commentators detailed a US military action plan inside Pakistan, possibly with the cooperation of moderate Pakistani forces, to seize the nuclear arsenal if there was imminent danger of an extremist takeover. "As the government of Pakistan totters, we must face a fact: the United States simply could not stand by as a nuclear-armed Pakistan descended into the abyss," proposed Frederick Kagan and Michael O'Hanlon, analysts at two Washington DC think-tanks. "One possible plan would be a Special Forces operation with the limited goal of preventing Pakistan's nuclear materials and warheads from getting into the wrong hands." Pakistan's own leaders have spoken about the subject -- of nuclear weapons falling into extremist hands --with different emphasis and objectives. General Pervez Musharraf has suggested continued Western support to his military regime is the best way to prevent the nukes from falling into extremist hands, an "after-me-the-deluge" argument that some analysts see as unabashed blackmail. The country's opposition leader Benazir Bhutto has also invoked the loose nukes scenario to urge US to abandon the military regime, which she says has given rise to growing extremism and fissiparous tendencies that increase the danger of the nuclear arsenal going awry. Officially though, Islamabad is touchy about any commentary on its nuclear arsenal, and goes into transports of hysteria to assert that it is a responsible country with good command and control over its crown jewels. In the latest outburst, the country's out-going foreign minister Khurshid Kasuri asserted that Pakistan is fully capable of securing its nuclear assets and some Western lobbies are busy in creating confusion taking the advantage of ongoing conditions in Pakistan. The multi-layer security structure of the nuclear assets has a strong command and control system in place and there is no need for anyone at home or abroad to worry about the security of these assets, he insisted. But judging by the volume of worried commentary and analysis the subject is now getting, there aren't many takers for such assurances and the last word on the matter hasn't been said or written. * ================================================================= NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us Our main website: http://www.blythe.org List Archives: http://blythe-systems.com/pipermail/nytr/ Subscribe: http://blythe-systems.com/mailman/listinfo/nytr ================================================================= ***************************************************************** 38 ICH: Pak Nukes Under US Control: Report Resent-Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 16:55:15 -0600 (CST) IF INFORMATION CLEARING HOUSE IS IMPORTANT TO YOU, I NEED YOUR HELP Information Clearing House depends on readers to help offset the costs of web site hosting and bandwidth usage. Without reader support, both in forwarding news items to me and financial contributions, this site would not exist. I need your help to keep it going. I would appreciate your providing whatever you can- $1, $5, $10, $20, $50, $100- To Use Credit Card at PayPal click here: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/support.htm To use your credit card at Amazon click here. http://www.amazon.com/paypage/P2KA3Y9ANMJPWZ or if you prefer to send a check or money order, ICH, PO Box 365 Imperial Beach, CA 91933. USA. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Low income readers: DONT send money, just encourage others to subscribe. http://informationclearinghouse.info/subscribe.htm To all those who have helped in the past. Thank you. - Peace & Joy. Tom === "Count it the greatest sin to prefer life to honor, and for the sake of living to lose what makes life worth having." -- Juvenal [Decimus Junius Juvenalis] (c.55-c.128 AD) Roman satirical poet = "The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men." -- Samuel Adams- (1722-1803), was known as the "Father of the American Revolution." = "The inherent right in the people to reform their government, I do not deny; and they have another right, and that is to resist unconstitutional laws without overturning the government." -- Daniel Webster - (1782-1852) US Senator === Read this newsletter online http://tinyurl.com/dy6yy === Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered Since The U.S. Invaded Iraq 1,118,625 http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html === Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed (Officially acknowledged) In America'sWar On Iraq 3,875 http://icasualties.org/oif/ The War in Iraq Costs $470,275,752,665 See the cost in your community http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182 === Pak Nukes Already Under US Control: Report By Times Of India In a stunning disclosure certain to stir up things in Washington's (and in Islamabad and New Delhi's) strategic community, the journal Stratfor reported on Monday that the "United States delivered a very clear ultimatum to Musharraf in the wake of 9/11: Unless Pakistan allowed US forces to take control of Pakistani nuclear facilities, the United States would be left with no choice but to destroy those facilities, possibly with India's help." http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18752.htm === Musharraf Plays Bush for a Fool By Marjorie Cohn The recipient of nearly $11 billion of U.S. aid since 9/11, Musharraf will cover for his benefactor Bush to keep him from losing face in light of the Pakistani strongman's blatant and tyrannical power grab. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18753.htm === A Warning Shot For Iran, via Syria By Gareth Porter Until late October, the accepted explanation about the September 6 Israeli air strike in Syria, constructed from a series of press leaks from US officials, was that it was prompted by dramatic satellite intelligence that Syria was building a nuclear facility with help from North Korea. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18751.htm === The Middle East Has Had a Secretive Nuclear Power in its Midst For Years Iran isn't starting an atomic arms race, it's joining one By George Monbiot George Bush and Gordon Brown are right: there should be no nuclear weapons in the Middle East. The risk of a nuclear conflagration could be greater there than anywhere else. Any nation developing them should expect a firm diplomatic response. So when will they impose sanctions on Israel? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18756.htm === Why Israel Has No "Right to Exist" as a Jewish State By Oren Ben-Dor The Annapolis meeting is a con. As an egalitarian argument we should say loud and clear that Israel has no right to exist as a Jewish state. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18754.htm === Coup D'Etat Rumblings in Venezuela By Stephen Lendman Through the dominant media, Washington and Venezuelan anti-Chavez elements are using constitutional reform as a pretext for what they may have in mind - "to arouse the military to intervene" and oust Chavez. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18755.htm === Iraq: At least 39 killed in another bloody day of US occupation: Six bodies were found in different areas of Baghdad, police said. http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L20712603.htm === Iraq arrests 43 after woman is shot from convoy: Iraqi security forces arrested 43 people, including 2 Americans and 31 other foreigners, after a shooting in which a woman was wounded in central Baghdad, an Iraqi government spokesman said Monday. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/11/19/africa/iraq.php === US Accepts Iraqi Proposal For Talks With Iran -State Dept : The U.S. has accepted an Iraqi proposal to hold new talks with Iran about the security situation in Iraq, the State Department said Tuesday. http://snipurl.com/1tyt1 === 16 Taliban among 35 killed in fresh Swat fighting : As thirty-five more persons including 16 Taliban and seven soldiers were killed in fresh clashes between the security forces and militants thousands of people fled the troubled areas in Swat on Monday. http://paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?194707 === Afghan guards blamed for slaughter: UN report says they shot `deliberately' into crowd after suicide bombing http://www.thestar.com/SpecialSections/article/278012 === Afghan civilian casualties caused by NATO forces at 'alarming levels' says UN: The U.N.'s top human rights officer on Tuesday said civilian casualties caused by NATO troops in Afghanistan reached "alarming levels" this year and called for international forces to pay compensation money for victims. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/11/20/asia/AS-GEN-Afghan-UN.php === Losing Afghanistan, One Civilian at a Time: Taliban suicide bombers -- unlike their Iraqi counterparts -- have been generally loath to target civilians, preferring instead to focus on Western and Afghan military personnel and bases. http://snipurl.com/1tyt3 === Taliban captures 10 alleged security guards in S Afghanistan : Taliban insurgents have captured around 10 people allegedly belonging to a private security company in Garmser district of southern Afghan Helmand province, police said Tuesday. http://snipurl.com/1tyt4 === Musharraf can quit as general: Judges hand-picked by Gen. Pervez Musharraf took just two hours yesterday to quash legal challenges to his disputed re-election as president, paving the way for him to fulfil a promise to quit as army chief, perhaps by the end of the month. http://www.torontosun.com/News/World/2007/11/20/4670196-sun.html === Osama's Man in America: His job: keep the Viagra and the gossip flowing while praying for a Giuliani victory. http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_11_19/article.html === Three Palestinian Killed, Four Wounded In the Strip: Three Palestinians were shot and killed Tuesday morning among were two belongs to Al Aqsa martyr Brigade during a shootout with the Israeli troops north Gaza Strip while the third killed by the fire of IOF special forces while having been in front of his home south the Strip. http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_new/english/details.asp?name=20134 === Palestinian child dies as result of Israeli imposed sanctions: A nine-year old Palestinian boy died in Gaza city after Israeli military has rejected calls for him to travel for treatment, Palestinian hospital sources said on Monday. http://snipurl.com/1tyta === An Interview with Norman Finkelstein : Wajahat Ali speaks to American political scientist and writer Dr. Norman Finkelstein about the denial of his tenure at DePaul University, anti-Semitism, and challenging the academic status quo on the Palestine-Israel conflict. http://snipurl.com/1tytb === Foreigners fingerprinted in anti-terrorism move: Japan is fingerprinting foreigners entering the country in an anti-terrorism policy, bringing complaints from human right activists, business travellers and residents. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10477359 === Here come the thought police: Not since the "Patriot Act" of 2001 has any bill so threatened our constitutionally guaranteed rights. http://snipurl.com/1tytc === In the U.S. of A., we are all suspects now: The administration's demand that Congress shield the telecommunications industry from lawsuits for aiding in the systematic warrantless wiretapping of Americans has far less to do with protecting national security than its own exposed flanks. http://www.sptimes.com/2007/11/18/Opinion/In_the_US_of_A__we_ar.shtml === Judge rules FBI was liable for deaths of two men: A federal judge ruled Monday that the FBI was liable for the 1982 deaths of two men allegedly killed by fugitive mobster James "Whitey" Bulger and his associates, and said he would schedule a trial early next year to determine what damages should be awarded. http://snipurl.com/1tytf === Iran and Venezuela vow united front : The presidents of Venezuela and Iran have promised a united front against the US, predicting that the country was nearing the end of its world domination with the weakening greenback. http://snipurl.com/1tytg === Dollar slumps to fresh euro low : The dollar plunged to another historic low point against the euro Tuesday, as the greenback was plagued by concerns over the US economy amid a global credit squeeze. http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Dollar_slumps_to_fresh_euro_low_11202007.html === Saudi Riyal Touches 21-Year High: Gulf currencies rallied yesterday after United Arab Emirates policymakers called for a regionwide review of dollar-pegged exchange rates. http://snipurl.com/1tytj === Global crash imminent, warns expert: A sharp downward correction is due in the global markets as real estate, stocks and energy soar to record highs, warned a leading expert on the opening day at this year's Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Week. http://www.arabianbusiness.com/504237-global-market-crash-imminent-warns-expe rt === Freddie Mac Loses $2B, Seeks New Capital: The mortgage crisis intensified Tuesday as Freddie Mac, the nation's No. 2 buyer and guarantor of home loans, posted its largest quarterly loss ever and warned that it may need to curtail its business unless it can raise fresh capital. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20071120/earns-freddie-mac/ === Patrick J. Buchanan: The Crash of 2008? : The Fed's raising of interest rates would push up the rates on mortgages, credit cards and auto loans, and push millions of marginal folks into bankruptcy and the country into recession, a disaster for the Republicans. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23465 === Let Us Work Towards Peace & Joy Tom Feeley ***************************************************************** 39 U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:08:57 -0600 (CST) http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/washington/18nuke.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin November 18, 2007 U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Arms By DAVID E. SANGER and WILLIAM J. BROAD WASHINGTON, Nov. 17 Over the past six years, the Bush administration has spent almost $100 million on a highly classified program to help Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistans president, secure his countrys nuclear weapons, according to current and former senior administration officials. But with the future of that countrys leadership in doubt, debate is intensifying about whether Washington has done enough to help protect the warheads and laboratories, and whether Pakistans reluctance to reveal critical details about its arsenal has undercut the effectiveness of the continuing security effort. The aid, buried in secret portions of the federal budget, paid for the training of Pakistani personnel in the United States and the construction of a nuclear security training center in Pakistan, a facility that American officials say is nowhere near completion, even though it was supposed to be in operation this year. A raft of equipment from helicopters to night-vision goggles to nuclear detection equipment was given to Pakistan to help secure its nuclear material, its warheads, and the laboratories that were the site of the worst known case of nuclear proliferation in the atomic age. While American officials say that they believe the arsenal is safe at the moment, and that they take at face value Pakistani assurances that security is vastly improved, in many cases the Pakistani government has been reluctant to show American officials how or where the gear is actually used. That is because the Pakistanis do not want to reveal the locations of their weapons or the amount or type of new bomb-grade fuel the country is now producing. The American program was created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when the Bush administration debated whether to share with Pakistan one of the crown jewels of American nuclear protection technology, known as permissive action links, or PALS, a system used to keep a weapon from detonating without proper codes and authorizations. In the end, despite past federal aid to France and Russia on delicate points of nuclear security, the administration decided that it could not share the system with the Pakistanis because of legal restrictions. In addition, the Pakistanis were suspicious that any American-made technology in their warheads could include a secret kill switch, enabling the Americans to turn off their weapons. While many nuclear experts in the federal government favored offering the PALS system because they considered Pakistans arsenal among the worlds most vulnerable to terrorist groups, some administration officials feared that sharing the technology would teach Pakistan too much about American weaponry. The same concern kept the Clinton administration from sharing the technology with China in the early 1990s. The New York Times has known details of the secret program for more than three years, based on interviews with a range of American officials and nuclear experts, some of whom were concerned that Pakistans arsenal remained vulnerable. The newspaper agreed to delay publication of the article after considering a request from the Bush administration, which argued that premature disclosure could hurt the effort to secure the weapons. Since then, some elements of the program have been discussed in the Pakistani news media and in a presentation late last year by the leader of Pakistans nuclear safety effort, Lt. Gen. Khalid Kidwai, who acknowledged receiving international help as he sought to assure Washington that all of the holes in Pakistans nuclear security infrastructure had been sealed. The Times told the administration last week that it was reopening its examination of the program in light of those disclosures and the current instability in Pakistan. Early this week, the White House withdrew its request that publication be withheld, though it was unwilling to discuss details of the program. In recent days, American officials have expressed confidence that Pakistans nuclear arsenal is well secured. I dont see any indication right now that security of those weapons is in jeopardy, but clearly we are very watchful, as we should be, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon news conference on Thursday. Admiral Mullens carefully chosen words, a senior administration official said, were based on two separate intelligence assessments issued this month that had been summarized in briefings to Mr. Bush. Both concluded that Pakistans nuclear arsenal was safe under current conditions, and one also looked at laboratories and came to the same conclusion. Still, the Pakistani governments reluctance to provide access has limited efforts to assess the situation. In particular, some American experts say they have less ability to look into the nuclear laboratories where highly enriched uranium is produced including the laboratory named for Abdul Qadeer Khan, the man who sold Pakistans nuclear technology to Iran, North Korea and Libya. The secret program was designed by the Energy Department and the State Department, and it drew heavily from the effort over the past decade to secure nuclear weapons, stockpiles and materials in Russia and other former Soviet states. Much of the money for Pakistan was spent on physical security, like fencing and surveillance systems, and equipment for tracking nuclear material if it left secure areas. But while Pakistan is formally considered a major non-NATO ally, the program has been hindered by a deep suspicion among Pakistans military that the secret goal of the United States was to gather intelligence about how to locate and, if necessary, disable Pakistans arsenal, which is the pride of the country. Everything has taken far longer than it should, a former official involved in the program said in a recent interview, and you are never sure what you really accomplished. So far, the amount the United States has spent on the classified nuclear security program, less than $100 million, amounts to slightly less than one percent of the roughly $10 billion in known American aid to Pakistan since the Sept. 11 attacks. Most of that money has gone for assistance in counterterrorism activities against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The debate over sharing nuclear security technology began just before then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was sent to Islamabad after the Sept. 11 attacks, as the United States was preparing to invade Afghanistan. There were a lot of people who feared that once we headed into Afghanistan, the Taliban would be looking for these weapons, said a senior official who was involved. But a legal analysis found that aiding Pakistans nuclear weapons program even if it was just with protective gear would violate both international and American law. General Musharraf, in his memoir, In the Line of Fire, published last year, did not discuss any equipment, training or technology offered then, but wrote: We were put under immense pressure by the United States regarding our nuclear and missile arsenal. The Americans concerns were based on two grounds. First, at this time they were not very sure of my job security, and they dreaded the possibility that an extremist successor government might get its hands on our strategic nuclear arsenal. Second, they doubted our ability to safeguard our assets. General Musharraf was more specific in an interview two years ago for a Times documentary, Nuclear Jihad: Can Terrorists Get the Bomb? Asked about the equipment and training provided by Washington, he said, Frankly, I really dont know the details. But he added: This is an extremely sensitive matter in Pakistan. We dont allow any foreign intrusion in our facilities. But, at the same time, we guarantee that the custodial arrangements that we brought about and implemented are already the best in the world. Now that concern about General Musharrafs ability to remain in power has been rekindled, so has the debate inside and outside the Bush administration about how much the program accomplished, and what it left unaccomplished. A second phase of the program, which would provide more equipment, helicopters and safety devices, is already being discussed in the administration, but its dimensions have not been determined. Harold M. Agnew, a former director of the Los Alamos weapons laboratory, which designed most of the United States nuclear arms, argued that recent federal reluctance to share warhead security technology was making the world more dangerous. Lawyers say its classified, Dr. Agnew said in an interview. Thats nonsense. We should share this technology. Anybody who joins the club should be helped to get this. Whether its India or Pakistan or China or Iran, he added, the most important thing is that you want to make sure there is no unauthorized use. You want to make sure that the guys who have their hands on the weapons cant use them without proper authorization. In the past, officials say, the United States has shared ideas but not technologies about how to make the safeguards that lie at the heart of American weapons security. The system hinges on what is essentially a switch in the firing circuit that requires the would-be user to enter a numeric code that starts a timer for the weapons arming and detonation. Most switches disable themselves if the sequence of numbers entered turns out to be incorrect in a fixed number of tries, much like a bank ATM does. In some cases, the disabled link sets off a small explosion in the warhead to render it useless. Delicate design details involve how to bury the link deep inside a weapon to keep terrorists or enemies from disabling the safeguard. The most famous case of nuclear idea sharing involves France. Starting in the early 1970s, the United States government began a series of highly secretive discussions with French scientists to help them improve the countrys warheads. A potential impediment to such sharing was the 1968 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which bars cooperation between nations on weapons technology. To get around such legal prohibitions, Washington came up with a system of negative guidance, sometimes called 20 questions, as detailed in a 1989 article in Foreign Policy. The system let United States scientists listen to French descriptions of warhead approaches and give guidance about whether the French were on the right track. Nuclear experts say sharing also took place after the cold war when the United States worried about the security of Russian nuclear arms and facilities. In that case, both countries declassified warhead information to expedite the transfer of safety and security information, according to federal nuclear scientists. But in the case of China, which has possessed nuclear weapons since the 1960s and is a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the Clinton administration decided that sharing PALS would be too risky. Experts inside the administration feared the technology would improve the Chinese warheads, and could give the Chinese insights into how American systems worked. Officials said Washington debated sharing security techniques with Pakistan on at least two occasions right after it detonated its first nuclear arms in 1998, and after the terrorist attack on the United States in 2001. The debates pitted atomic scientists who favored technical sharing against federal officials at such places as the State Department who ruled that the transfers were illegal under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and under United States law. In the 1998 case, the Clinton administration still hoped it could roll back Pakistans nuclear program, forcing it to give up the weapons it had developed. That hope, never seen as very realistic, has been entirely given up by the Bush administration. The nuclear proliferation conducted by Mr. Khan, the Pakistani metallurgist who built a huge network to spread Pakistani technology, convinced the Pakistanis that they needed better protections. Among the places in the world that we have to make sure we have done the maximum we can do, Pakistan is at the top of the list, said John E. McLaughlin, who served as deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency at the time, and played a crucial role in the intelligence collection that led to Mr. Khans downfall. I am confident of two things, he added. That the Pakistanis are very serious about securing this material, but also that someone in Pakistan is very intent on getting their hands on it. ***************************************************************** 40 Ohio.com - AP: Government calls halt to A-plant cleanup * Beacon Journal Published on Sunday Nov 18, 2007 MIAMISBURG, Ohio _ The $1 billion cleanup of the former Mound nuclear plant in suburban Dayton has been stopped while the government decides whether to complete the job and figures out who will pay for it. U.S. Rep. Mike Turner, the Dayton Republican who led the effort to secure $30 million for the cleanup of radioactive and chemical hazards in an old Mound landfill, said the Energy Department should pay to complete the work. The department, which owns the site, believes the landfill cleanup was never environmentally necessary. After budgeting $4.5 million toward the project this fall, the department plans to walk away from it early next year if local officials don't come up with the estimated $5 million that's still needed. "It is our belief that DOE is legally obligated to provide the community with a pollution-free site," Turner said. "With a site this contaminated, it isn't a surprise that more money is needed to finish the remediation." Cost estimates have increased as contractors have found more hazardous waste than expected in the landfill, which was contaminated with organic compounds and radioactive thorium, uranium and even some plutonium, said Don Pfister, project director for the Energy Department. He said the levels of contamination are low, and the worst of the pollution from the landfill has been shipped to Utah for disposal. "I would be comfortable (with leaving some contaminants behind)," Pfister said, "because we'll leave it in a manner that's protective of the environment." The Energy Department "underestimated how serious a health threat these pollutants represent," Turner said. Failure to finish the cleanup will stifle the marketing of the Mound Advanced Technology Center, an industrial park on the site of the Cold War nuclear weapons plant, said Mike Grauwelman, who heads the Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corp. Local officials pushed for the landfill cleanup, in part, because the specter of radioactive contamination would make the industrial park a hard sell for new businesses. Some 200 employees work for 14 companies on the 305-acre site, according to the technology center's Web site. Mound began making triggers and detonators for nuclear weapons in 1949. The U.S. Department of Energy ended production at the plant in 1996, leaving cleanup of radioactive and hazardous waste as the primary activity. ©2007 The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308 ***************************************************************** 41 DaytonDailyNews.com: Cost overruns halt cleanup at Mound plant U.S. Rep. Mike Turner says the Energy Department should pay for the final cleanup costs. By Tom Beyerlein Staff Writer Sunday, November 18, 2007 MIAMISBURG — Work has ground to a halt on the final piece of the $1 billion environmental remediation of the old Mound atomic plant, and a battle is shaping up over whether the job will be completed and who will pay for it. "It is our belief that DOE is legally obligated to provide the community with a pollution-free site," Turner said. "With a site this contaminated, it isn't a surprise that more money is needed to finish the remediation." The cost estimate has risen as contractors have found more hazardous waste than anticipated in the landfill, which was contaminated with volatile organic compounds and radioactive thorium, uranium and even some plutonium, said Don Pfister, project director for the Energy Department. He said the levels of contamination are low, and the worst of the pollution from the landfill has been shipped to Utah for disposal. "I would be comfortable (with leaving some contaminants behind)," Pfister said, "because we'll leave it in a manner that's protective of the environment." Turner said the Energy Department "underestimated how serious a health threat these pollutants represent." He said they "clearly posed a health risk and needed to be removed." Failure to finish the cleanup will hamper efforts to market the Mound Advanced Technology Center, an industrial park on the site of the Cold War nuclear weapons plant, said Mike Grauwelman, who heads the Miamisburg Mound Community Improvement Corp. DaytonDailyNews.com: Copyright 2007 Dayton Daily News. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 42 ReporterHerald: More work to be done for Rocky Flats workers Opinion Publish Date: 11/19/2007 The Cold War was fought not on a battlefield in Europe or on the high seas, but in the factories, military bases and research facilities in the United States, Soviet Union and their allies. The warriors were not just members of the military, but were the workers who produced the nuclear deterrent that kept communism in check across the planet until those governments collapsed under the weight of their inefficiencies and subjugation of human rights. It is with that in mind that the congressional delegation from Colorado kept pushing for a group of warriors — those workers at the Rocky Flats site between Golden and Boulder — to be recognized for their efforts and the sacrifices they made. This week, 775 of those workers were included in a government program that expedites compensation for the hazardous work they did making nuclear triggers at the plant. But recognizing that group is like singling out one platoon from many in the cause. At Rocky Flats, many more workers sacrificed than those who were part of the efforts in Building 881 — where the 775 were recognized. Four members of Colorado’s delegation to Congress recognize that fact, and have continued to push for answers regarding Rocky Flats on behalf of its workers. Sen. Ken Salazar and Reps. Ed Perlmutter, John Salazar and Mark Udall are continuing to press the issue Labor Secretary Elaine Chow. Those efforts are starting to pay off, but more pushing is needed. The workers at Rocky Flats played a large role in keeping the United States ready to deter the threat posed by regimes of tyranny. They should be compensated for their sacrifice. Publish Date: 11/19/2007 The Reporter-Herald 201 East 5th St., Loveland, Colorado 80537 Telephone 970-669-5050 Classified 970-6353650 Fax 970-635-3677 All contents Copyright © 2007 Daily Reporter-Herald. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 43 PE: State probe of contamination around Wyle Labs finds homes, schools safe PE.com The Web 10:00 PM PST on Saturday, November 17, 2007 By ALICIA ROBINSON The Press-Enterprise State officials are wrapping up their two-year investigation into contamination at and around the now-closed Wyle Laboratories in Norco, and they said so far results have shown nearby homes and schools are safe. A report due out in January will give the fullest picture so far of how much contamination from the lab remains in the ground and how much has spread from the 429-acre site. By next fall officials expect to have a plan in place to clean up the property, said Rafat Abbasi, senior project manager for the state Department of Toxic Substances Control. The state is overseeing the investigation and cleanup at Wyle, which tested defense and aerospace products at its Hillside Avenue facility from 1959 until the lab's closing in 2004. Tests have found varying levels of suspected and known cancer-causing chemicals such as trichloroethylene, or TCE; N-nitrosodimethylamine, or NDMA; and perchlorate in groundwater and soil. The contaminants have been found on the site and in a plume that has spread about a quarter-mile away. Residents believe contamination from the lab caused cases of cancer, thyroid problems and other health complications experienced by neighbors of Wyle and students at nearby schools, though no official link between the lab and those health problems has been found. Concerned residents began agitating around 2003 to close Wyle, and to have environmental testing and cleanup of the site and nearby neighborhoods. Some remain unsatisfied by the state's response. The Department of Toxic Substances Control got involved at Wyle in late 2003 and began an investigation in late 2005. An immediate concern was whether nearby homes and three schools -- Norco elementary, intermediate and high schools -- were contaminated, Abbasi said. Tests were done on the air in the three schools and 27 homes to the west of the property, and more than 1,000 samples of groundwater, soil and soil gas have been tested, Abbasi said. Among the findings were low levels of some toxic wastes, as well as levels of TCE deemed high enough to cause health risks after long exposure. Vinyl chloride, a known carcinogen, was found in gas at Norco High School but was not traced to Wyle. "I think that one of the biggest milestones on the project is that we just finished investigation on the homes and the schools, all three schools, and we found them to be safe," Abbasi said. Higher levels of contaminants in one home turned out to be from a gun-cleaning solution in the house, he said. In 2004 the state installed ventilation systems in a few other homes on Golden West Avenue where levels of TCE vapors were high enough to pose a long-term cancer risk. Another high priority for state officials, Abbasi said, has been creating a plan to stop contaminated groundwater from leaving the Wyle site. That will be put in place in January. Abbasi said extraction wells already on the property will be used to remove contaminated water, which will then be treated and discharged on-site. Soil Cleanup Next spring, soil contaminated with polychlorinated biphenyl, or PCB, from stored transformers will be removed from the southeast part of the property, Abbasi said. While the state has the final say on the investigation and cleanup, a consultant hired by Wyle is doing the work. Abbasi said a study of possible cleanup methods should be done next spring, and by fall an action plan should be ready for public review. State officials point out that they have fast-tracked the investigation, but some residents think it has not been fast enough. "We've had to push every single inch of the way," said Celeste Tittle, who chairs the Wyle Labs Community Advisory Group. "If we had sat back and not done much, I don't think it would have moved along this quickly. ... How quickly is quickly enough when people's health is in danger?" School District Satisfied Corona-Norco Unified School District officials are satisfied with the state's response to the situation, Assistant Superintendent of Facilities Ted Rozzi said. "They have been very responsive to the public's interests, the district's interests, making sure the schools are safe," he said. But for Tittle and other residents, questions remain about the long-term effects of the chemicals found near Wyle and other pollutants already in the air. "We have so many people around us that have gotten ill," Tittle said. "That's the thing that has helped us to continue driving for this because we want to know what's going on, because we don't think we have normal numbers." As of 2005, more than 100 lawsuits had been filed against Wyle by residents, and some also have sued developers alleging that they knowingly failed to disclose information about the lab to homebuyers. © 2007 Press-Enterprise Company • 3450 Fourteenth Street, Riverside, California 92501 ***************************************************************** 44 Seattle PI: EPA, Energy Department reach agreement over Hanford violations Last updated November 20, 2007 3:08 p.m. PT By SHANNON DININNY YAKIMA, Wash. -- The U.S. Department of Energy reached an agreement with its regulators Tuesday to settle a $1.14 million fine for cleanup failures at the nation's most contaminated nuclear site. The fine was the largest ever levied by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Northwest office over work at the Hanford nuclear reservation in south-central Washington. The penalty concerned operations at a landfill for contaminated soils and other hazardous and radioactive wastes from cleanup operations. The federal government created Hanford in the 1940s as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb. Today, workers labor to rid the 586-square-mile site of waste left from decades of plutonium production for the nation's nuclear weapons arsenal. The problems came to light in January, when a subcontractor at the site discovered that an employee had been recording data for compaction testing at the landfill, when in fact no testing had been done since June 2005. Landfill workers also failed to perform weekly inspections of the landfill's system to collect and remove liquids, the EPA said. The system is intended to reduce the risk of leaks. "With this enforcement action we sent DOE a message that they and their contractors have taken to heart," Elin Miller, EPA's regional administrator in Seattle, said in a statement. "They have made changes to ensure that these types of violations don't occur again." Under the agreement, the Energy Department and its contractor, Washington Closure Hanford, will still pay a $285,000 fine. They also will buy two emergency response boats, costing $253,000, for the Benton County sheriff's office. The boats will respond to any hazardous materials spills in the Columbia River, which forms the north and east boundaries of the Hanford site. Another requirement is to build a greenhouse and nursery to grow native plants and seeds for habitat rehabilitation, at a cost of $602,000. That project will be implemented with help from Washington State University and area American Indian tribes. No federal cleanup dollars will be spent on either the projects or the fine, Energy Department spokeswoman Colleen French said. "The fine was a wake-up call," French said. "This facility is critical to our ability to continue full-scale cleanup of Hanford's river corridor and we agree with EPA that changes were needed." Washington Closure has made a number of improvements in operations at the landfill to address EPA concerns and to increase productivity, President Chuck Spencer said in a statement to employees announcing the settlement. The company bought two new compactors and upgraded the liquid collection system, and increased management oversight of the subcontractor operating the landfill. Todd Nelson, Washington Closure spokesman, said costs of the projects and fine likely will be passed on to the subcontractors responsible for managing the landfill. The native plant program is particularly relevant given wildfire damage this year at the Hanford site and the neighboring Hanford Reach National Monument. Wildfires scorched at least 92,000 acres in the two areas this summer alone. The Energy Department already is planting 200,000 pounds of seed for native grasses on 9,500 acres of burned area this fall, at a cost of $3.1 million. More replanting will occur next year. 101 Elliott Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 (206) 448-8000 Send comments to newmedia@seattlepi.com Send investigative tips to iteam@seattlepi.com ©1996-2007 Seattle Post-Intelligencer ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************