***************************************************************** 09/11/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.232 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 US: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advises Nuclear Licensees to 2 BNFL plays down fears over risk of terrorist attack on nuclear fuel NUCLEAR REACTORS 3 US: NRC Issues Finding of Low to Moderate Safety Significance to 4 US: NRC chief reports no specific threat to nuclear plants 5 US: Davis-Besse liner was cracking NUCLEAR SAFETY 6 US: [radiation-survivors] Radiation Detected at Newark NJ NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 7 US: *Magnets may help process nuclear waste* 8 US: Judge to decide if science or politics influenced nuke decision 9 US: NE - Judge told Nebraska thwarted nuclear waste dump 10 US: YUCCA TIMETABLE: Deadlines expected to be met 11 US: Yucca lawsuits survive challenge 12 US: DOE expects to have waste transportation plan in a year 13 US: U.S.: Bury plutonium at S.C. nuclear site 14 NRC Names A ?Presiding Officer? To Rule On NFS Hearing Petitions* 15 *Radioactive discharge resumes at Sellafield* 16 BNFL plays down fears over risk of terrorist attack on nuclear fuel 17 US: Lander Commissioners urge DOE get local input before designatin 18 US: N.M. court rules uranium mines are covered by state law 19 US: Energy department official recommends burying waste at SRS NUCLEAR WEAPONS 20 US: Bush Taking Iraq Case to Congress 21 UN resolutions on Iraq 22 War drums stoke up petrol prices 23 Iraq's bid for nuclear technology 24 Iraq nuclear dilemma exposed - 25 US: You Call That Evidence? 26 Bush to Ask U.N. For Help With Iraq 27 How Nuclear is Iraq? 28 Huge arsenals held across Middle East US DEPT. OF ENERGY 29 Security Tighter But Not Oppressive At UC-Run Labs* 30 Plant adds security - 31 Nuclear sites bolster security OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advises Nuclear Licensees to Increase Security Measures NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 107 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov No. 02-107 September 10, 2002 Consistent with the raising of the national threat condition this afternoon to the Orange (High) level as announced by Attorney General John Ashcroft, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission immediately advised nuclear power plants and other nuclear facilities to implement heightened security measures in accordance with pre-established procedures. The NRC informed its licensees that while there is no specific credible threat against any of them, or indeed, against any potential target in the United States, as noted by the Attorney General, there has been credible intelligence involving US interests and facilities abroad, particularly in Asia. The specific additional security measures at nuclear facilities called for by the NRC are understandably sensitive, but had been worked out in advance and communicated to licensees previously. They include close coordination with local and state law enforcement agencies. At the same time, the NRC has further stepped up security measures at its headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, and at its four regional offices. ***************************************************************** 2 BNFL plays down fears over risk of terrorist attack on nuclear fuel ships [http://www.ft.com] By Sheila Jones, Northern Correspondent Published: September 11 2002 5:00 | Last Updated: September 11 2002 5:00 British Nuclear Fuels has sought to play down claims by Greenpeace, the environmental campaign group, that a shipment of nuclear fuel from Japan due to arrive in British waters in the next week could be a terrorist target. Security surrounding the arrival of two armed ships containing mixed plutonium-uranium fuel had been reviewed since the September 11 terrorist attacks, BNFL said yesterday. But national and global regulators were satisfied that security arrangements meant any risk of an attack on the vessels would be negligible. BNFL acknowledged it would be possible to construct a nuclear bomb from the 225kg of plutonium contained in 4.5 tonnes of fuel pellets on the two vessels, but said the idea that terrorists could overcome the security barriers was not credible. "Even if it were possible to gain access to the fuel, you would need a processing plant the size of Sellafield to extract the plutonium," said Malcolm Miller, responsible for BNFL's nuclear fleet. Greenpeace said yesterday its vessel, the Rainbow Warrior, was in Dublin awaiting the arrival of the two BNFL ships in Irish and British waters. But the group said it would "do nothing to impede their safe navigation". It is thought the vessels, which left Japan on July 4, are likely to arrive at Barrow early next week. The Mox fuel is being returned to BNFL by Kansai Electric, the Japanese utility, after it emerged in 1999 that some manual safety checks on the fuel rods had been falsified. Shaun Burnie, a Greenpeace campaigner on board Rainbow Warrior, said: "We accept they are minimising the risk but the only thing they can do to take away the risk is to stop making these transports. They know that these ships are vulnerable. What they don't want is for the public to know that they are." BNFL said the two ships, which have travelled in convoy via the Cape of Good Hope, were armed with 30mm cannons and highly trained armed police. The Mox fuel is contained in a 100-tonne steel flask bolted to the ship. BNFL's nuclear ships are the only armed merchant vessels in the world. The Department of Trade and Industry, which is responsible for nuclear security, said the security arrangements for the ships were "amply robust to deal with any potential threat". [http://news.ft.com ***************************************************************** 3 NRC Issues Finding of Low to Moderate Safety Significance to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Plant NRC: Press Release Region I - 2002 - 58 - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 www.nrc.gov No. I-02-058 September 10, 2002 CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330 Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331 E-mail: [opa1@nrc.gov] The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a "white" finding to the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant for an issue involving the plant’s emergency sirens. The NRC considers the issue to be of low to moderate importance to safety but one which may require additional NRC inspections. Calvert Cliffs, a twin-reactor plant located in Lusby, Md., is operated by Constellation Generation Group. In November of last year, Constellation informed the NRC that 49 sirens located in Calvert County, Md., were not capable of being activated in a timely manner from August 14 to November 5, 2001. An icon on computers in the 911 center for Calvert County had been removed from screens. Without the icon, the alert and notification system was disabled and could not be activated in a timely manner. NRC regulations require that members of the public within the emergency planning zone be notified within about 15 minutes from the time that State and local officials are notified of an emergency condition. Using the agency's significance determination process, NRC officials classify certain findings at nuclear power plants as being one of four colors which delineate increasing levels of safety significance, beginning with "green" and progressing to "white," "yellow" or "red." In an August 12 letter to Constellation, the NRC preliminarily classified the finding as white and offered the company an opportunity to meet with the NRC to discuss it. The company did not contest the characterization of the risk significance and declined the opportunity for a regulatory conference to discuss the issue or to respond in writing. The company also was cited for a violation of NRC requirements involving the same issue and has 30 days to respond to the notice of violation. ***************************************************************** 4 NRC chief reports no specific threat to nuclear plants » The Plain Dealer 09/11/02 Stephen Koff Plain Dealer Bureau Chief Washington - Speculation has been high that terrorists might strike an American nuclear power plant, but so far, not a single credible threat has been made, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Richard Meserve said yesterday. "As you might imagine, the flow of information has become very substantial since Sept. 11, and the information we would have suggests that there's been no targeting of a nuclear power plant, no specific plan that's directed at a nuclear power plant," Meserve said. But, he cautioned: "Nuclear power plants are clearly on potential target lists for al-Qaida. They have identified a number of different possible targets over time . . . and nuclear power plants are clearly included on that list." Meserve's comments in an interview in his Rockville, Md., office followed reports by a journalist for Al Jazeera, the Arabic-language satellite television network, that al-Qaida initially planned to include a nuclear plant in its Sept. 11, 2001, attack sites. The reporter, Yosri Fouda, said he learned of this from an interview in June with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, identified as head of al-Qaida's military committee. Fouda plans to broadcast the audiotapes from his interview tomorrow but he wrote about it in London's Sunday Times. When planning began 2½ years before the attacks, "the first targets considered were nuclear facilities," Fouda said Mohammed told him. But then Mohammed said the plan was changed "for fear it would go out of control," according to Fouda's newspaper account. "You do not need to know more than that at this stage," Fouda said Mohammed told him, "and anyway it was eventually decided to leave out nuclear targets. For now." NRC chairman Meserve said the Al Jazeera interview "doesn't change the fundamental point - that we are not aware of a credible threat that's directed at a nuclear power plant in the United States. That's been true since Sept. 11th." He said he based his assessment on "interaction with the intelligence community" and law enforcement agencies, including the FBI. The NRC and the nuclear power industry, Meserve said, have been "very vigilant since Sept. 11 in upgrading security. Because while we're not aware of a specific threat, the general threat environment is high and clearly nuclear power plants are potential targets." Critics say the NRC is not doing enough to guard against attacks, and some have urged passage of laws forcing security upgrades or the use of soldiers at nuclear power plants. While tougher measures are being considered by Congress, lawmakers have rejected using federal forces. The Project on Government Oversight, a nonprofit group that advocates safer measures, will release a report tomorrow saying that nuclear plant guards it surveyed complain of insufficient training, manpower and weapons. While the NRC and the nuclear power industry say they have beefed up security, with plants spending millions of dollars on new security, the Project on Government Oversight says many of the new positions were filled by making existing employees work overtime. The Washington Post, asking experts to grade security at the nation's power plants, ports, bridges, tunnels, airports and other facilities, yesterday gave security at nuclear power plants an A-/B+, higher than almost every other category. That "substantiates that our approach is correct," Meserve said. To reach this Plain Dealer reporter: skoff@plaind.com, 216-999-4212 © 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. © 2002 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 5 Davis-Besse liner was cracking » The Plain Dealer 09/11/02 John Funk and John Mangels Plain Dealer Reporters A new laboratory analysis has found that the stainless-steel liner under the lid of the crippled Davis-Besse nuclear reactor was thinner than officials first believed and had begun to crack in several places. The strength of the liner became critical when corrosion created a large hole in the reactor's lid, leaving the liner as the only barrier between the reactor's high-pressure coolant and the containment building that houses the reactor. Officials of Davis-Besse and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission don't know how or when the cracks formed, or even how deep they go, and said yesterday that they are still reviewing the findings. But the cracks' presence raises questions about whether the stainless-steel barrier was as robust as the plant's owner has contended and how much longer it would have been able to withstand the reactor's tremendous operating pressures. The answers to those questions will affect the outcome of NRC and Davis-Besse studies to determine how close the Toledo-area plant came to a major nuclear accident. That finding, in turn, will dictate what penalties and continuing scrutiny plant owner FirstEnergy Corp. faces. "We want to know more, obviously," said William Beecher, an NRC spokesman. "It's important to know what happened . . . every detail," agreed FirstEnergy spokesman Todd Schneider. The information will help the plant's efforts to get back on line, he said, and aid the nuclear industry "so a situation like this doesn't repeat itself at Davis-Besse or any other nuclear plant in the country." Davis-Besse officials learned of the cracks Monday night, Schneider said. The reactor has been idle since February, when the plant shut down so workers could inspect for cracks in the 69 nozzles that penetrate its massive steel lid. Nozzle cracking has been a recognized issue industrywide for years in older reactors. The cracks were thought to be relatively benign, but the NRC became alarmed when more extensive, possibly dangerous cracks were found at a South Carolina reactor in 2001. At Davis-Besse, workers found not only serious cracking, but also the 6-by-8-inch hole formed by the reactor's corrosive coolant leaking from the cracks and pooling undetected on the lid for years. Only the reactor lid's stainless steel liner, supposedly three-eighths of an inch thick and intended to block corrosion rather than act as a pressure barrier, held back the hot, radioactive coolant that bathes the reactor core. The coolant, pushing on the liner with a force of more than a ton per square inch, had caused it to bulge slightly into the hole in the lid. The company, which has bought a replacement lid, cut out the damaged area of the old lid and sent it to a Virginia lab for analysis. The lab testing showed three or four hairline cracks, each about the length of a pencil eraser, in the part of the liner's surface visible at the bottom of the rust hole. The testing also determined that the liner was significantly thinner in places - in one location nearly 50 percent thinner - than FirstEnergy had believed it to be. The reason for the discrepancy - whether the liner was made thinner than intended or thinned out over time as it bulged under the strain of holding back the reactor coolant - is unclear. Officials also don't know how long the liner had been cracked. "Certainly it [the liner] would not be as strong as a flawless piece of metal," said Jack Grobe, who heads the special NRC panel overseeing FirstEnergy Corp.'s efforts to repair and reform the troubled plant. "It's too early to tell whether any of this has significance until we get it to our metallurgists and study it more." FirstEnergy has used the liner's robustness as part of its argument to the NRC that Davis-Besse wasn't close to an accident, and thus it doesn't deserve a harsh punishment. Although the company will have to revise its safety calculations based on the new crack findings, its argument still holds, Schneider said. "We have to remember that the liner held normal operating pressure and that the plant shut down safely," he said. The NRC itself is struggling with the issue of whether FirstEnergy should get any credit for the liner having prevented an accident. The identification of the cracks just makes that determination all the more difficult, said David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists, which is following the Davis-Besse situation. "The stainless steel was never put there to be a barrier, so it was luck that it held," Lochbaum said. "Since luck was your barrier, the discovery of the flaws . . . just adds to the uncertainty." To reach these Plain Dealer reporters: jfunk@plaind.com, 216-999-4138 jmangels@plaind.com, 216-999-4842 © 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. © 2002 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 6 [radiation-survivors] Radiation Detected at Newark NJ Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 15:44:22 -0500 (CDT) At the port of Newark, New Jersey, across the river from New York, the Coast Guard has moved a Liberian-flagged freighter out to sea after it detected radiation. An investigation is underway. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/6xSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: radiation-survivors-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ----- Together we can make a difference.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ***************************************************************** 7 *Magnets may help process nuclear waste* From the Science & Technology Desk Published 9/10/2002 3:27 PM COLUMBIA, S.C., Sept. 10 (UPI) -- Magnets might turn out to be useful tools after all in efforts to process dangerous radioactive wastes, scientists reported Tuesday. New findings show electromagnets are more effective than previously thought when it comes to separating hazardous nuclear waste components from more benign ingredients, especially when the waste is in a liquid slurry or sludge form. "This might be a cheaper way to remove some of the radioactive solids from sludge," researcher James Ritter, chemical engineer at the University of South Carolina, told United Press International. Magnetic separation has been used to purify coal and metal mining ores and help restore the environment since the late 1960s. Until now, however, researchers never tried using magnets to cleanse nuclear sludge because they thought the magnets could not affect the intricate blends of metals and minerals that comprise radioactive waste sufficiently. "If you take a little magnet and put it next to a drum of sludge, you won't see the magnet picking up anything," Ritter said. "If you look at a handbook of chemistry or physics, you can see that these are truly weakly magnetic materials." Still, radioactive sludge tends to eat away at its metal containers after years of storage. This phenomenon provided a vital clue for investigators to begin thinking there might be enough iron compounds in the waste for magnets to pick up. Ritter and his team tried out their ideas on four different kinds of simulated nuclear waste -- materials chemically similar to their hazardous counterparts but containing no radioactive elements. The researchers used a simple, off-the-shelf bench-top magnetic separating apparatus, which essentially consists of steel wool inserted into an electromagnet that is then energized. The magnetic zaps proved remarkably effective. "(The test compounds) went in looking like brown paint and went out looking like apple juice," Ritter said. "These results were very positive and quite surprising. I had colleagues who initially told me none of my sludges were magnetic." Even when the researchers used relatively weak magnetic fields, the device pulled every piece of solid grit from the samples. The key to the technique's effectiveness is the steel wool, Ritter explained. The metal fibers set up crinkles in the electromagnetic field that increase the force the waste particles experience. The resulting radioactive slurry, in theory, could be melted into glass for safe storage while the diluted liquid could be mixed into concrete to become low-level nuclear waste. Although the magnetic removal technique does not render any waste non-radioactive, it may offer a number of advantages over existing treatment techniques. For example, because it is so simple, it might prove both cheaper and safer, "since it minimizes the number of steps that human beings would have to be exposed to," Luis Nunez, a chemist at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois told UPI. "I think it's good work that should continue." Ritter said the process still needs to be scaled up before it can provide any cost benefits, but he added magnets may one day might even help to clean waste streams with high iron content or "possibly some nuclear plant water." (Reported by Charles Choi, UPI Science News, in New York) Copyright © 2002 United Press International ***************************************************************** 8 Judge to decide if science or politics influenced nuke decision Wednesday, Sep. 11, 2002 BYNANCYHICKS / Lincoln Journal Star Nebraska officials refused to license a Boyd County low-level radioactive waste site because it did not meet all the legal requirements. Sometimes there was standing water on part of the site, a potential environmental problem, and the company hired to build and run the facility was in poor financial condition, Brad Reynolds, the state's lead attorney, told U.S. District Court Judge Richard Kopf Tuesday. Nebraska officials did not act in bad faith and had good reasons for their decision, Reynolds said during closing arguments on a case that could cost the state and its taxpayers as much as $200 million in damages and interest. But groups that wanted to build the low-level-waste site countered that the judge should be looking at the methods used during the licensing process, not whether the final decision was right or wrong. "Nebraska officials have demonstrated their open hostility to the facility and their willingness to be controlled by concerns extraneous to the regulations," said Alan Peterson of Lincoln, representing the compact of states that joined to build a waste warehouse. The lawsuit, filed by the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission, contends that Nebraska officials decided to deny the license in 1998 for political reasons. The commission is seeking both money and a waste site in Nebraska. The commission wants about $98 million that was paid to Nebraska during the licensing process refunded, plus interest. The suit also asks that Kopf continue the licensing process through the court system, by appointing a special master, and creating an independent review process. But the major utilities, generators of the low-level waste and funders of the licensing process, have offered a slightly different option to Kopf. They have asked the court to return the money, around $150 million, to them rather than the commission. The companies also don't want to continue the licensing process in Nebraska, according to a brief filed by Entergy and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operation Corp. In fact, Kopf characterized the companies' attitude as "We have had all the fun we can stand in Nebraska. Give us 150 million bucks and we will go away." Kopf also expressed strong opinions on actions by state leaders over the eight years the compact commission worked to get the Boyd County site licensed. "Nobody has anything to be proud of," Kopf said, specifically listing Attorney General Don Stenberg; former Gov. Ben Nelson, now a U.S. senator; former State Auditor John Breslow and Kate Allen, former Nelson staff member. Kopf has ruled against Nebraska on several occasions leading up to the eight-week trial this summer. "This is not a pleasant case. I'm proud of this state, not proud of what happened," said Peterson. "We took a tumble here -- the state of Nebraska did. ... It's not going to make an ethics highlights film, that's for sure," he said. Kopf also peppered attorneys with questions and comments during the three hours of closing arguments. He had questions about the practicality of requiring a court or a special master to oversee the licensing and running of a waste site for the next 30 years. He wondered what might happen to that licensing process if Nebraska withdrew from the compact and erased all the laws on licensing. The state has said it will withdraw from the five-state compact, leaving Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Louisiana. Kopf asked attorneys whether they were representing that former Gov. Nelson actually made comments that appear to be attributed to him in notes of meetings by staffer Allen. According to her notes Nelson suggested that the state needed to keep waste site supporters "off balance" and that the administration needed to "be careful not to get public sentiment against us." Peterson said he contends Nelson said these things. Reynolds pointed out that Nelson denied making the statements. Both sides have accused the other of game playing. The compact commission tried to hide the reality of the wetlands on the Boyd County site from regulators, Reynolds said. "We have an applicant (for a license) who quite frankly hid the ball on a number of occasions," he said. The commission argues that Nelson's political desire not to have a low-level site in the state drove the decision not to license the Boyd County site. Kopf said he expects to have a decision on the lawsuit available to the public by Oct. 1. Defending the lawsuit has been a costly state expense. The state expects to spend about $21 million on the lawsuit, for several years of preparation, thousands of documents and the two-month trial. About $11 million will go to two Washington, D.C., law firms hired to defend the state. The out-of-state firms had six lawyers in the courtroom working full time on the case during the trial. At least five others worked part time on the case. Plaintiffs expect to spend much less, about $5 million, primarily for the work of three Nebraska attorneys. Peterson represented the compact commission. Tom Johnson of Omaha represented utility companies and Steve Seglin of Lincoln represented the contractor, U.S. Ecology. Reach Nancy Hicks at nhicks@journalstar.com or 473-7250. written permission from the Lincoln Journal Star. 926 P Street Lincoln NE 68508 402 475-4200 ? feedback@journalstar.com ***************************************************************** 9 NE - Judge told Nebraska thwarted nuclear waste dump Wednesday, Sep. 11, 2002 LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) - Then-Gov. Ben Nelson's administration deliberately thwarted plans for a multistate, low-level nuclear waste dump in northeast Nebraska, an attorney said in the closing arguments of a case that could cost the state up to $200 million. State officials argued Tuesday that they refused to license the dump because of concerns over possible pollution and a high-water table near the proposed site in Boyd County near the South Dakota border. They rejected claims that Nelson, now a U.S. senator, and others conspired to submarine plans for the dump that was meant to store radioactive waste from Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana. Utilities that generate radioactive waste filed the lawsuit against Nebraska, accusing state officials of acting in bad faith by not licensing the facility in 1998. Other states in the waste compact later joined the lawsuit. "This is not a pleasant case. I'm proud of this state - not proud of what happened," said Attorney Alan Peterson of Lincoln, who is representing the compact. "We took a tumble here - the state of Nebraska did. ... It's not going to make an ethics highlights film, that's for sure," Peterson told U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf. Kopf, who has ruled against Nebraska on several occasions leading up to the trial, seemed to agree with Peterson. "Nobody has anything to be proud about," he said. However, Kopf later cited Nebraska's concerns over denying the dump's license, including the site developer's economic problems and referring to the site as "a swamp." Brad Reynolds, Nebraska's lead attorney on the case, bristled at the allegation that Nebraska officials set out to submarine the licensing process or that they lied on the stand. "You are not going to be able to find that there was a failure of good faith," he said. The judge expects to announce his decision in the case Oct. 1. At stake for Nebraska taxpayers is $200 million - the high-end estimate of what the state could be ordered to pay if it loses. Some of the utilities involved in the lawsuit have asked for a refund of the millions of dollars they have paid into the waste compact for development of the dump site. The other states in the compact, however, are asking for the appointment of a special master to guide the licensing process and place the dump in Nebraska. Most of the lawyers on both sides of the case expect it to eventually end up in the U.S. Supreme Court. On The Net: Central Interstate Low Level Radioactive Waste Compact Commission: http://www.cillrwcc.org/ Copyright © 2002, Lincoln Journal Star. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 10 YUCCA TIMETABLE: Deadlines expected to be met Wednesday, September 11, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal Chu wants to submit license application in 2004, see nuclear waste at repository in 2010 By KEITH ROGERS REVIEW-JOURNAL Despite congressional approval of the Yucca Mountain Project this summer, uncertainties abound regarding a plan for transporting nuclear waste to Nevada, finalizing the repository's design and funding the project. But the nation's nuclear waste chief said Tuesday she intends to meet two major milestones: submitting a complete license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in December 2004, and accepting the first load of spent nuclear fuel for disposal in December 2010. Margaret Chu, director of the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, also said her staff will have a plan ready early next year for transporting used fuel across the nation from commercial power reactors and other sites where highly radioactive waste is stored in 39 states. But that plan won't designate transportation routes or be held to a formal public hearing process. Instead, it will be more of a planning agenda for internal agency use outlining the challenges and strategies for hauling 77,000 tons of spent fuel and nuclear waste to the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. "It will have all the elements on how we intend to develop a transportation capability by 2010 so we can begin receiving waste," Chu said after she addressed Tuesday's meeting of a scientific oversight panel, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. She said the plan will include how the Energy Department will acquire casks used for transporting spent fuel assemblies by trucks, trains and barges. Her intentions are to develop policies for emergency responses and safeguarding the waste while in route. The plan will also spell out how the department will use contractors to assist in the transportation task. Hauling routes won't be designated in the plan but Chu's aide, Christopher Kouts, said those routes will be well known in the states they traverse three to five years before shipping is expected to begin. The Energy Department will assist states in emergency preparedness training but each state will shoulder the costs of equipment and personnel needed to respond to a transportation accident involving spent fuel or highly radioactive waste. Bob Loux, Nevada's Nuclear Projects Agency chief, contends those issues and all other impacts for transporting nuclear waste should have been addressed in the Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement that was finalized when Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham recommended the site to President Bush in February. As for Chu's goals to meet the project's milestones in 2004 and 2010, Loux said, "She certainly is very optimistic." Loux, who also spoke at Tuesday's meeting, said during a break it is "highly unlikely" those goals will be met. "I don't see relief coming in the budget and there are large scientific and institutional questions that will keep them from meeting those goals," Loux said. The Energy Department had requested $527 million in funding for the project in 2003 but the Senate set the figure at $336 million and a House committee has recommended $525 million. Chu said the timetable for a House-Senate conference on that matter is unclear. At the meeting, Loux reminded the panel that the state has numerous lawsuits pending against the NRC and other federal agencies. The courts, he said, could kill the project if the state prevails on any of the key issues such as its challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency's radiation safety standards or the NRC's licensing guidelines. Nevada attorneys are also challenging the Department of Energy shift toward a reliance on unproven engineered barriers -- metal canisters and drip shields -- to contain the waste despite the intent of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to rely on the mountain's natural features to hold the materials. State officials also assert that although DOE plans show a 100-acre above-ground temporary storage site at Yucca Mountain is essential to the project, building such a facility would violate prohibitions in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act against an interim storage site in Nevada. Asked about the above-ground storage facility's design, Chu told the panel Tuesday, "We're still working on that." Peggy Maze Johnson, executive director of the statewide environmental group Citizen Alert, said the Energy Department should prepare an environmental impact statement on the transportation plan and hold hearings in states affected by it. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 11 Yucca lawsuits survive challenge OPEN HOUSE Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff members will hold an open house next week in Las Vegas to discuss their role for ensuring safety of the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. The meeting will be from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on Tuesday at the Clark County Transportation Building, 4701 W. Russell Road. -- REVIEW-JOURNAL Wednesday, September 11, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU WASHINGTON -- Nevada's lawsuits against the Yucca Mountain Project have survived a challenge in federal court. A judicial panel in Washington, D.C., declined to dismiss three of the state's Yucca Mountain lawsuits on procedural grounds requested by the Department of Energy. Instead, the court consolidated the three lawsuits and referred them to a merit panel for a hearing. The court also denied a request by the pro-Yucca Nuclear Energy Institute to join the case. The multipronged order was issued Friday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Nevada Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa said the ruling was significant because it will allow the state to fully present its case against the nuclear waste repository proposed for Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis said the ruling "is mostly procedural stuff." "One panel of the court is just giving the other panel of the court a look at the case, which happens often," Davis said. "There is nothing significant here." Two other Nevada-filed Yucca Mountain cases are pending before the appeals court. Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 12 DOE expects to have waste transportation plan in a year Las Vegas SUN: Today: September 11, 2002 at 9:42:15 PDT By Mary Manning The Energy Department's chief scientist in charge of the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository said the agency will have a national transportation plan ready in a year for shipping the expected 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. Once Congress approved Yucca Mountain as the repository site, Energy Department officials focused on preparing a licensing application due to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in December 2004, said Margaret Chu, director of the DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Office. "Since transportation activities have been deferred for years, DOE needs to develop and implement a national transportation program," Chu told the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board at a meeting Tuesday at the Alexis Park hotel. Yucca Mountain opponents have criticized the department for failing to address nuclear waste shipments from commercial reactors in 39 states to Yucca. Chu said that the Energy Department plans to begin accepting waste at Yucca Mountain in December 2010, although a final design for the repository is not ready. Nevada has filed four lawsuits that could prove "fatal" to the repository plan, said Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency on Nuclear Projects. Funding from Congress, which has been a target of Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., has hampered efforts to complete work on the repository's license or a transportation plan, Chu said. A House Appropriations bill asks for $524 million for 2003, but the Energy Department had asked for $527 million to help meet its goal, she said. In a 10-hour hearing Tuesday, the review board with its new chairman Michael Corradini and four other new members heard criticism of the Energy Department's approach from a variety of scientists, who said more technical work needs to be done on the project. Appointed by President Bush, Corradini replaced Jarod Cohon on the board. Corradini, listed as a nuclear expert by the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry's lobbying arm, said he would remove himself from the list if asked. Energy Department scientists presented an array of data. They still have not determined why mold is growing in some of the alcoves where water tests are being conducted at the site, or how hot the repository could be, Mark Peters of Yucca contractor Bechtel SAIC said. Tim McCartin of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff said he did not speak for the commissioners. He said more information is needed about how radiation would be contained. Robert Budnitz, who chaired a review panel on the Energy Department's seismic studies, called the department's technical concepts "confusing." "A lot of discussion of what we heard today was fantasy," he said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 13 U.S.: Bury plutonium at S.C. nuclear site Atlanta Journal-Constitution: ajc.com: TODAY • September 11, 2002 Associated Press Columbia --- The U.S. Energy Department's inspector general has recommended burying millions of gallons of radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site instead of processing and storing it in Nevada. Inspector General Gregory Friedman said burying the waste left over from decades of producing plutonium for nuclear weapons in underground vaults at SRS near Aiken would save $500 million. Friedman, in a report to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, said officials at the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control told him they would consider approving his recommendation. Gov. Jim Hodges, who has waged a yearlong legal battle against the agency to keep plutonium from being shipped to the site near Aiken, is also opposed to burying radioactive waste there. ''The governor has said all along that South Carolina should not become the nation's nuclear dumping ground,'' spokesman Morton Brilliant said. ''Governor Hodges has worked very hard, and with some success, to take nuclear waste out of South Carolina. And it would be a terrible thing for the entire state if we slide back down that hill.'' Georgia officials also expressed reservations. "We certainly would be concerned about any storage of nuclear waste on Savannah River Site," said Jim Setser of the Department of Natural Resources. "We are concerned about groundwater contamination." Energy Department officials said last year they would dispose of the waste at SRS by extracting the most dangerous materials, mixing it with sludge and converting it into glass logs. The logs would be sent to Yucca Mountain in Nevada, selected by President Bush as the nation's permanent repository for radioactive waste. In the report released last week, Friedman said disposing of the waste by mixing it with cement and burying it in underground vaults at SRS would save time and money. ''Although all four treatment alternatives were considered safe, in almost every scenario evaluated by the department, the direct disposal in grout technology posed less risk to on-site workers, the general public and the environment,'' Friedman reported. Burying the waste would create higher radiation levels at the site, Friedman said. Ed Lyman, president of the Nuclear Control Institute, a Washington-based nonprofit group that studies the spread of nuclear weapons, called the recommendation outrageous. ''There is no basis at all to conclude that it is safe to dispose of this in concrete, which is a water-laden solid,'' Lyman said. ''To simply dump it at the Savannah River Site instead of processing it and disposing of it responsibly is an outrage.'' Lyman said federal law requires the agency to turn high-level waste into a glasslike substance and send it to Yucca. Workers have been cleaning radioactive materials, including 35 million gallons of liquid waste, since nuclear weapon production was shut down at SRS in 1988. The department has resisted direct disposal, fearing it would be difficult to gain public support and regulatory approval, Friedman said. Waste disposal at the site is at the center of a federal lawsuit between the state and the Energy Department. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the state's request last month to block a plutonium shipment from Rocky Flats, a weapons plant near Denver. Hodges, concerned the plutonium would remain permanently at SRS, has vowed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Staff writer Charles Seabrook contributed to this article. © 2002 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ***************************************************************** 14 NRC Names A ?Presiding Officer? To Rule On NFS Hearing Petitions* *125 West Summer Street - Greeneville, TN - (423) 798-0545* *September 11, 2002* By: /By BILL JONES/Staff Writer/ Source:/ The Greeneville Sun / 09-10-2002 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has appointed a ?presiding officer? to rule on petitions seeking a hearing on a request by Erwin-based Nuclear Fuel Service Inc. to amend its nuclear materials license so that a proposed uranium ?down-blending? project can move forward. But an NRC public information officer contacted about the document said the new appointment does not mean that a hearing will actually be held. NRC spokesman Victor Driggs described the document as ?very preliminary? and noted that the newly appointed presiding officer must make a number of findings before a hearing will be scheduled by the NRC. A document, dated Sept. 3, was sent by the NRC to individuals and groups who filed petitions seeking a hearing on the NFS request to modify its nuclear materials license. The document notes that ?notice is hereby given that (1) a single member of the (NRC?s) Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel is designated as Presiding Officer to rule on petitions for leave to intervene and/or requests for hearing; and (2) upon making the requisite findings in accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.1205(h), the Presiding Officer will conduct an adjudicatory hearing in the following proceeding: Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Erwin, Tennessee (Material License Amendment).? If scheduled, the hearing will be conducted pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart L, of the (Nuclear Regulatory) Commission's Regulations, ?Informal Hearing Procedures for Adjudications in Materials and Operator Licensing Proceedings,? according to the document mailed to petitioners. The NRC document notes that requests for hearing were submitted: on Aug. 6, 2002, by David Wallack; on Aug. 7, 2002, by Trudy L. Wallack; on Aug. 6, 2002, by the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Tennessee Environmental Council, the State of Franklin Group/Sierra Club, and Friends of the Nolichuckey River Valley, Inc.; on Aug. 8, 2002, by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League Inc.; and on Aug. 8, 2002, by 15 Northeast Tennessee residents. ?The requests were filed in response to a notice of consideration by the NRC staff of a proposed request from Nuclear Fuel Services Inc. (NFS) to amend its special nuclear material license to authorize construction and operation of a Low-Enriched Uranyll Nitrate Storage Building at the NFS site in Erwin, and to increase the Uranium-235 (U235) possession limit,? the NRC document notes. The notice of environmental assessment performed by the staff, a finding of no significant impact, and opportunity for a hearing were published in the Federal Register on July 9, 2002 (67 Fed. Reg. 45,555), according to the NRC. ?The Presiding Officer in this proceeding is Administrative Judge Alan S. Rosenthal,? the document states. ?Pursuant to the provisions of 10 C.F.R. §§ 2.722, 2.1209, Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole has been appointed to assist the Presiding Officer in taking evidence and in preparing a suitable record for review.? All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed with Judges Rosenthal and Cole in accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.1203. Their addresses are: ? Administrative Judge Alan S. Rosenthal Presiding Officer Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 and ? Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole Special Assistant Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C, 20555-0001 The NFS special nuclear materials license amendment request was filed as part of the company?s plans to implement a project in which highly enriched uranium from U.S. Department of Energy stockpiles would be ?down-blended? into low-enriched uranium suitable for use in manufacturing fuel for Tennessee Valley Authority nuclear power reactors. © 2002 East Tennessee Network - R.A.I.D. (Regionalized Access ***************************************************************** 15 *Radioactive discharge resumes at Sellafield* *Wednesday September 11th 2002* BRITISH Nuclear Fuels has resumed radioactive discharges from Sellafield into the Irish Sea after halting the practice for more than a year. The Irish Independent confirmed that the discharges of technetium-99 resumed this week despite warnings from the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland that they were a significant cause of concern. The disclosure followed Greenpeace claims yesterday that BNFL was planning to release as much of the radioactive substance from its Sellafield tanks as possible later this week before an expected British government decision to reduce the discharge limits. However, BNFL confirmed to this newspaper last night that it had already begun releasing the radioactivity within the past week. A BNFL spokesperson said that the radioactive discharges had begun within the past few days after they were stopped for more than a year, pending the results of tests to determine if technetium-99 could be taken out of their nuclear waste stream. But she dismissed claims that the discharges had resumed in order to beat the expected lower official limits, due within the next few weeks. The spokesperson said BNFL was obliged to keep emptying its tanks, and the discharges would comply with existing authorisations. "They held off as long as they could," the spokeswoman said. *Treacy Hogan* /© Irish Independent http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/ & http://www.unison.ie// ***************************************************************** 16 BNFL plays down fears over risk of terrorist attack on nuclear fuel ships FT.com Wednesday Sep 11 2002. All times are London time. By Sheila Jones, Northern Correspondent Published: September 11 2002 5:00 | Last Updated: September 11 2002 5:00 British Nuclear Fuels has sought to play down claims by Greenpeace, the environmental campaign group, that a shipment of nuclear fuel from Japan due to arrive in British waters in the next week could be a terrorist target. Security surrounding the arrival of two armed ships containing mixed plutonium-uranium fuel had been reviewed since the September 11 terrorist attacks, BNFL said yesterday. But national and global regulators were satisfied that security arrangements meant any risk of an attack on the vessels would be negligible. BNFL acknowledged it would be possible to construct a nuclear bomb from the 225kg of plutonium contained in 4.5 tonnes of fuel pellets on the two vessels, but said the idea that terrorists could overcome the security barriers was not credible. "Even if it were possible to gain access to the fuel, you would need a processing plant the size of Sellafield to extract the plutonium," said Malcolm Miller, responsible for BNFL's nuclear fleet. Greenpeace said yesterday its vessel, the Rainbow Warrior, was in Dublin awaiting the arrival of the two BNFL ships in Irish and British waters. But the group said it would "do nothing to impede their safe navigation". It is thought the vessels, which left Japan on July 4, are likely to arrive at Barrow early next week. The Mox fuel is being returned to BNFL by Kansai Electric, the Japanese utility, after it emerged in 1999 that some manual safety checks on the fuel rods had been falsified. Shaun Burnie, a Greenpeace campaigner on board Rainbow Warrior, said: "We accept they are minimising the risk but the only thing they can do to take away the risk is to stop making these transports. They know that these ships are vulnerable. What they don't want is for the public to know that they are." BNFL said the two ships, which have travelled in convoy via the Cape of Good Hope, were armed with 30mm cannons and highly trained armed police. The Mox fuel is contained in a 100-tonne steel flask bolted to the ship. BNFL's nuclear ships are the only armed merchant vessels in the world. The Department of Trade and Industry, which is responsible for nuclear security, said the security arrangements for the ships were "amply robust to deal with any potential threat". Home World | Business ***************************************************************** 17 Lander Commissioners urge DOE get local input before designating route of Yucca Mountain nuclear waste rail spur - By Gary Been Battle Mountain Bugle By Gary Been Bugle/Sun Editor September 3, 2002 BATTLE MOUNTAIN -The three Lander County Commissioners voted to endorse an Aug. 13 letter, written by Commission Chairman Mickey Yarbro, to the United States Department of Energy (D.O.E.) regarding its search for a suitable railroad spur line to carry nuclear waste to the controversial proposed Yucca Mountain waste site in southern Nevada. "There will be significant political influence on routing options for Yucca Mountain," Yarbro wrote. "Although the D.O.E. intends to select one final rail route for Yucca Mountain, it may be necessary to have more than one feasible option available given the political uncertainty faced in the future," Yarbro said in the letter . Yarbro's letter strongly suggested the D.O.E. assemble a working group of local governments being affected by the rail spurs across the nation. He was motivated to write the letter in part because, in his words, "I do not believe the D.O.E. compiled the necessary information to make final judgments about rail spur alternatives in Nevada. " The letter requested a meeting between Lander County officials and D.O.E. officials "in the next several weeks. "Local input is essential," Yarbro stated. Commissioners said they believed the rail spur funding was to be scheduled for approval by Congress this year. The controversial Yucca site was widely attacked in bipartisan fashion by both of Nevada's United States senators, John Ensign and Harry Reid, governor Kenny Guinn, Congressman Jim Gibbons and Congresswoman Shelley Berkley as well as most of the state's elected officials. The complaints center around "questionable science" used by the D.O.E to justify selecting Yucca as its primary site for a nuclear waste repository. The D.O.E. maintains its science is accurate and shows the site is safe and will be safe for the next 10,000 years. If the project meets with all the necessary environmental approvals and survives at least five legal challenges, nuclear waste shipments will start arriving by train and truck beginning in 2010. ***************************************************************** 18 N.M. court rules uranium mines are covered by state law [http://www.azcentral.com] Barry Massey Associated Press Sept. 10, 2002 11:55:00 SANTA FE, N.M. - Environmentalists are applauding a court ruling that makes clear that uranium mines in New Mexico are subject to state regulation and requirements for cleaning up closed mines. "The point is that existing mining operations not be left unreclaimed, posing threats to the public health and environment," Douglas Meiklejohn, executive director of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, said Tuesday. The state Court of Appeals, in a unanimous ruling issued Monday, said the New Mexico Mining Act applied to uranium mines that operated before 1993, when the law took effect. The decision reversed a 2000 ruling by a district court in Santa Fe, which concluded that uranium ore wasn't covered by the mining law. Ted Apodaca, special assistant attorney general who handled the case for the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, said the appeals court decision was "very significant" because it ensured that older uranium mines would be cleaned up. The case involved three closed uranium mines in northwestern New Mexico, which had been operated in the 1970s and 1980s by United Nuclear Corporation. The Northeast Church Rock mine is northeast of Gallup. The St. Anthony Mine is on the Cebolleta Land Grant near Laguna Pueblo. The Section 27 mine is northwest of Grants. The company's leases for the mines ended in 1988 and 1993. A Santa Fe lawyer for United Nuclear did not immediately return a telephone call Tuesday seeking comment on the court's ruling. Apodaca said he expected the company to challenge the latest ruling and ask the state Supreme Court to review the case. The state Mining Act went into effect in 1993, and requires permits for hard-rock mining operations and reclamation of mining sites. The law applied retroactively to mines that had operated for at least two years between January 1970 and June 1993. The state Mining and Minerals Division cited the company in 1995 for failing to submit mine site assessments and permit applications, which is a step that could have lead to plans for cleaning up erosion and pollution at the open pit mines. The state Mining Commission upheld the agency's order, and the company took the case to the district court. Judge Daniel Sanchez, agreeing with arguments by the company, ruled that uranium ore was regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and therefore was exempt from the state mining law. The federal government, for example, regulates uranium mills and processing facilities. The Court of Appeals concluded that "unrefined and unprocessed ore produced at the three sites" is not regulated by the NRC and that uranium ore, "at the time of its extraction from the earth by conventional mining techniques," is covered by state law. The court upheld the notices of violation against the company. Apodaca said the case has been closely watched by the once thriving uranium industry. Cleanup work is taking place at other closed mines in the state, Apodaca said. But if the district court's ruling had remained in effect, he said, uranium mining would have been exempt from state regulation and other mines probably "would have stopped any reclamation activities under the Mining Act." [http://www.arizonarepublic.com/] - [http://www.arizonarepublic.com/] • ***************************************************************** 19 Energy department official recommends burying waste at SRS Augusta Georgia: Technology: Web posted Wednesday, September 11, 2002 Associated Press [http://wire.ap.org/] COLUMBIA, S. C. -- The U.S. Energy Department's inspector general has recommended burying millions of gallons of radioactive waste at the Savannah River Site instead processing and storing it in Nevada. Inspector General Gregory Friedman said burying the waste left over from decades of producing plutonium for nuclear weapons in underground vaults at SRS in Aiken will save $500 million. Friedman, in a report to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, said officials at the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control told him they would consider approving his recommendation. Gov. Jim Hodges, who has waged a yearlong legal battle against the agency to keep plutonium from being shipped to the Aiken site, is also opposed to burying radioactive waste there. "The governor has said all along that South Carolina should not become the nation's nuclear dumping ground," spokesman Morton Brilliant said. "Gov. Hodges has worked very hard, and with some success, to take nuclear waste out of South Carolina. And it would be a terrible thing for the entire state if we slide back down that hill." DHEC spokesman Thom Berry said the agency's consideration of Friedman's plan "doesn't mean we are committed to approve it." Energy department officials said last fall they would dispose of the waste at SRS by extracting the most dangerous materials, mixing it with sludge and converting it into glass logs. The logs would then be sent to Yucca Mountain in Nevada, selected by President Bush as the nation's permanent repository for radioactive waste. In the report released last week, Friedman said disposing of the waste by mixing it with cement and burying it in underground vaults at the site would save time and money. "Although all four treatment alternatives were considered safe, in almost every scenario evaluated by the department, the direct disposal in grout technology posed less risk to on-site workers, the general public and the environment," Friedman reported. Burying the waste would create higher radiation levels at the site, Friedman said. Ed Lyman, president of the Nuclear Control Institute, a Washington-based, nonprofit group that studies the spread of nuclear weapons, called the recommendation outrageous. "There is no basis at all to conclude that it is safe to dispose of this in concrete, which is a water-laden solid," Lyman said. "To simply dump it at the Savannah River Site instead of processing it and disposing of it responsibly is an outrage." Lyman said federal law requires the agency to turn high-level waste into a glasslike substance and send it to Yucca. Workers have been cleaning radioactive materials, including 35 million gallons of liquid waste, since nuclear weapon production was shut down at SRS in 1988. The department has resisted direct disposal, fearing it would be difficult to gain public support and regulatory approval, Friedman said. Waste disposal at the site is the center of a federal lawsuit between the state and the Energy Department. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last month rejected the state's request to block a plutonium shipment from Rocky Flats, a weapons plant near Denver. Gov. Hodges, concerned the plutonium would remain permanently in Aiken, has vowed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. AugustaChronicle.com is a proud member of Augusta.com [http://augusta.com] ***************************************************************** 20 Bush Taking Iraq Case to Congress Las Vegas SUN Today: September 11, 2002 at 6:45:26 PDT By KEN GUGGENHEIM ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON- Before President Bush goes before the United Nations to make the case for action against Iraq, his administration is facing a tough audience closer to home: Congress. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld and the Joint Chiefs of Staff met for three hours Tuesday with Gen. Tommy Franks, the commander who would lead any military campaign in Iraq. Meanwhile, a push by senior Bush administration officials, including Capitol Hill meetings Tuesday with CIA director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, hasn't convinced key lawmakers that a war is needed. "I set the mark very high," House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, said. "I will need to see a plan before I will cast a vote. I will need to see it is necessary, and there is a plan that I personally think is fair to the courage we ask of these young people." An important part of any overall plan to oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, many lawmakers say, must be that the United States not act alone in its fight against Iraq. On Thursday, Bush will tell the United Nations it cannot stand by while Saddam defies it by barring weapons inspectors and develops chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. Under the agreement that ended the 1991 Persian Gulf War and several U.N. Security Council resolutions, Iraq is forbidden to develop weapons of mass destruction and under orders to allow any already in its arsenal to be destroyed. "I believe this is an international problem, and that we must work together to deal with the problem," Bush said during an appearance Tuesday at the Afghan Embassy. Bush linked his goal of toppling Saddam to the war on terror he began after the Sept. 11 attacks a year ago. "I'm deeply concerned about a leader who has ignored the United Nations for all these years, refused to conform to resolution after resolution after resolution, who has weapons of mass destruction," Bush said. "And the battlefield has now shifted to America; so there's a different dynamic than we've ever faced before." Bush does not plan to offer new information about an Iraqi threat or recommend any specific actions in his Thursday speech, a senior White House official said on condition of anonymity. Lawmakers said Tenet and Rice gave no new information in the private Capitol Hill meetings. Outside experts and U.S. officials say Iraq probably has stocks of chemical and biological weapons and could make a nuclear bomb if it could obtain enough nuclear material. Iraq denies having weapons of mass destruction. "This is not something where you can wait until you have clear evidence," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said in an interview with AP Radio and AP Television News. "In fact, one of the fundamental points that Sept. 11 should have brought home to us is that you may not have a clear case after the fact, because the nature of terrorism is that it operates in the shadows, and it could be a way for a country that wants to do us harm to do it in a semi-anonymous way." But many lawmakers say they have yet to be convinced that Iraq poses enough of a threat to justify a pre-emptive strike. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., gave Tenet a letter asking for a report outlining the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. "If we are about to make a decision that could risk American lives, we need full and accurate information on which to base that decision," Durbin wrote. CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said the agency is studying the senator's request. A number of both public and classified CIA reports have discussed Iraq's programs, but a specific estimate solely about Iraq's weapons efforts has not been issued. Leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee sent Bush a letter that said, "Based on what we have heard to date, there is not yet a consensus on many critical questions." Those questions include whether Iraq would be likely to use weapons of mass destruction, what links it has to terrorist groups and whether Iraq could be disarmed without the use of force, said the letter by Chairman Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., the senior Republican. The senators urged Bush to seek broad international support and to be candid with the American people that Iraq requires a long-term commitment by the United States. Bush met Tuesday with the prime minister of NATO member Portugal, who cautioned him against acting alone. "It is very important that the United States of America and President Bush listen to the opinion of the close allies, and Portugal is a very close ally of the United States," Prime Minister Jose Durao Barroso said. The Bush administration will continue pushing Congress on Iraq, with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld appearing next Wednesday before the House Armed Services Committee. The panel met in secret Tuesday with CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency officials. In open session, two former U.N. arms inspectors told the panel that as long as Saddam remains in power, Iraq's nuclear and biological programs seriously threaten the United States. David Kay, a former chief weapons inspector, said he had no doubt that Iraq, with enough time and money, would develop a nuclear weapon. "They will eventually surprise us in ways that will be terribly painful," he said. On the Net: Bush-Barroso meeting: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/ All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 UN resolutions on Iraq BBC NEWS | Middle East | Monday, 9 September, 2002, 16:18 GMT 17:18 UK UN resolutions on Iraq BBC News Online outlines the key United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR) on Iraq stemming from the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. UNSCR 660 and 661 - 2/6 August 1990 Condemn the invasion and impose economic sanctions: Resolution 660 demanded that Iraq immediately withdraw its troops to the positions held prior to the invasion on 1 August 1990. Resolution 661 imposed a full trade embargo, stopping all imports from and exports to Iraq except for food, medicine and humanitarian supplies. The resolution set up the 661 Committee to oversee the sanctions. UNSCR 687 - 3 April 1991 Ceasefire agreement at the end of the Gulf War: Resolution 687 created a UN observer force to monitor the demilitarised zone. The resolution also called for the destruction, removal or rendering harmless of: + All chemical and biological weapons, and all stocks of agents and components + All research, development, support and manufacturing facilities for ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150km and related repair and production facilities. Resolution 687 created a special commission - Unscom - to inspect Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear facilities. Iraq was required to hand over all biological and chemical weapons to Unscom for destruction, and ordered to respect the 1968 Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The resolution outlined these demands as part of a wider scheme to create a zone in the Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction, with the global objective of a worldwide ban on chemical weapons. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/23/IMG/NR059623.pdf?OpenE lement] UNSCR 688 - 5 April 1991 Condemns repression of civilians in Iraq: The Security Council condemned repressive measures exercised by the Iraqi regime against civilians, and demanded access for humanitarian groups. At the end of the war, uprisings against the regime by Kurds in northern Iraq and Shia Muslims in the south were brutally suppressed by the Iraqi military. The Gulf War coalition did little to stop this, but the US, Britain and France created a northern 'safe haven' and a so-called 'no fly zone' under the auspices of Resolution 688. A similar no-fly zone was set up in southern Iraq in 1992, and extended in 1996. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/24/IMG/NR059624.pdf?OpenE lement] UNSCR 706 - 15 August 1991 Suggests allowing Iraq to export oil to pay for food and medicine: This resolution proposed allowing Iraq to export up to $1.6bn of oil, the revenue from which would be paid into a UN-administered account. This could only be used to buy food, medicines and other essential material for a six month period. Some of this account would be used to meet compensation payments to Kuwait and the cost of UN operations. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/42/IMG/NR059642.pdf?OpenE lement] UNSCR 707 - 15 August 1991 Demands compliance with weapons inspectors: This resolution emphasised the need for Iraq to allow Unscom and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) immediate and unconditional access to any areas they wish to inspect. Iraq was also ordered to not to move or attempt to hide anything relating to its nuclear, chemical or biological programmes. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/42/IMG/NR059642.pdf?OpenE lement] UNSCR 949 - 15 October 1994 Orders Iraq to refrain from threatening its neighbours: This resolution demanded that Iraq should: + Withdraw forces recently deployed to southern Iraq to their original positions + Not use any forces in a hostile or provocative manner to threaten either neighbouring countries or UN staff working in Iraq + Not redeploy or enhance its military forces in the south of the country. Iraq was again ordered to comply fully with Unscom inspectors. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N94/401/71/PDF/N9440171.pdf?OpenElemen t] UNSCR 986 - 14 April 1995 Establishes the 'oil for food' programme: Discussed in Resolution 706, this measure eventually came into force in 1996 after a delay in securing Iraqi agreement. Under its terms, Iraq was allowed to: + Sell oil in exchange for food as a "temporary measure to provide the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people" + Export oil products at the rate of $1bn every 90 days. Revenues from oil sales must be paid into a UN-administered account, with a committee set up to monitor the exchange process, the resolution stipulated. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/109/88/PDF/N9510988.pdf?OpenElemen t] UNSCR 1051 - 27 March 1996 Import monitoring system agreed: The Security Council passed this resolution recognising the need for Iraqi imports and exports to be monitored by Unscom and the IAEA. The resolution called for countries exporting so-called dual use items - which could potentially be used in weapons systems - to notify Unscom. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/074/04/PDF/N9607404.pdf?OpenElemen t] UNSCR 1137 - 12 November 1997 Iraqi travel restrictions outlined: This measure condemned continuing violations of earlier resolutions by Iraq, and again demanded that Baghdad comply with the Unscom inspectors. As a punitive measure, it imposed travel restrictions on Iraqi officials deemed to have obstructed the weapons inspectors. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/074/04/PDF/N9607404.pdf?OpenElemen t] UNSCR 1284 - 17 December 1999 Unmovic established: The United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (Unmovic) was created to replace Unscom. Iraq was ordered to allow Unmovic teams immediate and unconditional access to any weapons sites and facilities. The resolution also recognised the importance of a comprehensive approach to enforcing Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq. It demanded that Iraq improve the humanitarian situation in the country - but also lifted the ceiling on Iraqi oil exports. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N99/396/09/PDF/N9939609.pdf?OpenElemen t] UNSCR 1409 - 14 May 2002 Territorial backing set out: This resolution reaffirmed UN members commitment to maintaining the territorial integrity of Iraq. It also drew up a list of products - the so-called Goods Review List - which would be subjected to the scrutiny of the sanctions committee. [http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/381/15/PDF/N0238115.pdf?OpenElemen t] © MMII | News Sources | Privacy ***************************************************************** 22 War drums stoke up petrol prices BBC NEWS | Business | Wednesday, 11 September, 2002, 07:36 GMT 08:36 [Iraq oil pipeline] The lure of Iraq's oil could yet help spark renewed turmoil Petrol prices are rising because of worries that the threat of war on Iraq is going to choke off oil supplies. But the head of one of the world's major oil firms believes industrial nations have sufficient stockpiles to withstand any output cuts. "There's a lot of oil to take care of a very significant shortfall for quite a period of time," Lord Browne, chief executive of BP told BBC Radio. On Tuesday, two big oil companies warned they were raising prices at the petrol pumps in the UK. ChevronTexaco said its prices would go up by a penny (1.5 US cents) a litre, taking the minimum price for unleaded to 73.9 pence a litre. TotalFinaElf said it was doing the same. Air travel could also face a hike in costs, as jet fuel prices hit a post-11 September high. Jitters The rise in petrol prices in the UK is the direct result of an 11% climb in the price of wholesale gasoline last week, in the face of ever-louder noises about war with Iraq from Washington DC and London. And the cost of aviation fuel reached $283 a tonne, threatening airlines already burdened with heavy losses from the disruption which followed the 11 September attacks on the US. The insistence from both President George W Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair that Iraq's president, Saddam Hussein, is rebuilding nuclear, chemical and biological weapons stockpiles is setting traders' nerves on edge. Benchmark Nymex crude oil in the US has touched $30 a barrel in the past 24 hours. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) likes to keep prices between $22 and $27, and a meeting later this month could well produce a production boost. But till then the jitters are set to continue, market watchers said. © MMII | News Sources | Privacy ***************************************************************** 23 Iraq's bid for nuclear technology BBC NEWS | Middle East | Tuesday, 10 September, 2002, 21:26 GMT 22:26 [Sarin-filled rockets were found in Iraq after the Gulf War] By Paul Adams BBC defence correspondent Left to its own devices, Iraq could take many years to acquire a nuclear bomb. Years of work and a wealth of human expertise are all very well, but without fissile material and an array of sophisticated equipment, they don't make a bomb. According to the International Institute for Strategic Affairs, Iraq "may have completed the necessary preparations to build a nuclear weapon", but simply lacks the highly enriched uranium (HEU) needed to do it. "Iraq could produce a nuclear weapon on fairly short notice if it was somehow able to acquire sufficient nuclear material from a foreign source," notes the IISS report published on Monday, "but there is no evidence that Iraq has done so." That may be so, but some experts warn that it's perhaps only a matter of time before Iraq succeeds. Previous warnings In 1996, former CIA director John Deutch, told a Senate subcommittee that "Iraq would seize any opportunity to buy nuclear weapons materials or a complete weapon". The pattern of Iraqi behaviour suggests they're out there and interested, but we haven't seen any examples of Iraqi officials touring Russian institutes John Wolfstahl Carnegie Endowment, Experts point to a long history of Iraqi efforts to acquire technology, including an intercepted attempt to smuggle small electronic triggers, or krytrons, from the United States in the late 1980s. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, which prompted fears of a much less regulated nuclear environment, Iraq expanded its procurement network in an attempt to exploit new opportunities. In 1995, UN weapons inspectors discovered that Iraq had successfully acquired sophisticated guidance and control components for proscribed ballistic missiles. UNSCOM fished thirty gyroscopes - from eliminated Russian ballistic missiles - from the Tigris river, after they were apparently dumped there by Iraqi officials involved in the covert acquisition. If US officials are to be believed, Iraqi efforts to obtain nuclear components continue to this day. On Sunday, US Vice President, Dick Cheney, said America had intercepted a shipment of aluminium tubes designed for a centrifuge to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. [Dick Cheney] Dick Cheney: Iraq making efforts to enrich uranium "What we have seen recently is that Saddam Hussein now is trying through his illicit procurement network to acquire the equipment he needs to be able to enrich uranium," Mr Cheney said. Experts say the shipment does not necessarily prove anything. "It's disturbing," says John Wolfstahl, deputy director of the Non-Proliferation Project, at the Carnegie Endowment, "but by no means a smoking gun." "It's a weak indicator," says David Albright, president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. "A lot of people disagree with Cheney." Regular offers When it comes to efforts to acquire fissile material, there's little hard evidence. But in the words of an expert with first hand knowledge of UN inspections, "this was always our biggest worry". "The Iraqis said they were being approached all the time with offers of plutonium and highly-enriched uranium," says Mr Albright, who was in Baghdad in 1996. He says Iraqi officials were much too suspicious to accept unsolicited offers of this kind, but he has little doubt that they were trying to obtain fissile material. "There's stuff being smuggled all the time," he adds. "Getting it into Iraq would be pretty straightforward." © MMII | News Sources | Privacy ***************************************************************** 24 Iraq nuclear dilemma exposed - CNN.com - September 9, 2002 By CNN's Steve Goldberg LONDON, England (CNN) -- Iraq could assemble a nuclear weapon in months if it had foreign help, a report into Baghdad's arms programmes has concluded. The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) also says Iraq could have been stockpiling chemical and biological weapons since 1998 when U.N. inspectors left the country and were refused permission to return. The report, published on Monday, outlines the dilemma Iraqi President Saddam Hussein poses for the international community: "Wait and the threat will grow. Strike and the threat may be used." The IISS, an independent international research group that examines political, economic and military trends, concludes: "War, sanctions and inspections have reversed and retarded but not eliminated Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and long-range missile capacities, nor removed Baghdad's enduring interest in developing these capabilities." CNN Senior International Correspondent Walter Rodgers said the IISS estimates of Iraq's capabilities are generally lower than that of some Israeli generals in the intelligence divisions. "It would seem the IISS is not jumping on the Bush administration bandwagon. They do not appear to be making a compelling case for immediate war," Rodgers said. In a news conference in which the report was released, IISS Director John Chipman said: "We prefer not to make heroic assumptions about Iraq's capabilities." The report's author, Gary Samore, a senior fellow for non-proliferation at the IISS, told CNN in an interview: "The argument in favour of taking action now, whether it's to compel Baghdad to accept inspectors or to use military force to change the regime, is that it's better to act when (Iraq's) capabilities are still short of reaching their ultimate objective. "If you wait, you run the risk that the Iraqis will get further along, perhaps even acquire a nuclear weapon, and that will make it much more difficult to pressure Baghdad or to prevent them from taking actions in the region that would jeopardise U.S. interests." (Full story) U.S. President George W. Bush is due to address the United Nations on Thursday to spell out why he believes military action is necessary. The London-based IISS, founded in 1958 and now with offices in Washington and Singapore, says Iraq could "probably assemble" nuclear weapons in months if Saddam Hussein could get fissile material from foreign sources but that Iraq does not have the facilities to make enough material for a nuclear weapon itself. Iraq would need several years and "extensive foreign assistance" to build the necessary factories, the report concludes. "There is a nuclear wildcard. ... Iraq could produce a nuclear weapon on fairly short notice if it was somehow able to acquire sufficient nuclear material from a foreign source, but there is no evidence that Iraq has done so," the report said. The report also assesses Iraq's biological, chemical and ballistic missile capability. It estimates that Iraq retained "perhaps thousands of litres of anthrax" from before the Gulf War. Saddam could resume making biological weapons within weeks and could have produced thousands of litres of anthrax, botulinum toxin and other agents since weapons inspections ended in 1998, it says. On chemical weapons the report says Saddam probably has a few hundred tonnes of mustard gas from before the Gulf War as well as "precursors" for a few hundred tonnes of sarin and perhaps the same amount of VX. Saddam could resume making chemical weapons in months and could have made hundreds of tonnes of mustard and nerve gases since 1998, the report adds. Saddam has probably about 12 al-Hussein missiles, with a range of 650km, but would need several years and much foreign aid to build long-range missiles, according to the IISS. The report came as former U.N. arms inspector Scott Ritter continued a visit to Baghdad having told the Iraqi National Assembly on Sunday that the U.S. "seems to be on the verge of making a historical mistake" in calling for a regime change. (Full story) Ritter, an American and a critic of Washington's threat of military action, is visiting the Iraqi capital as a private citizen. He looked for weapons in Iraq from 1991 until 1998, when he was recalled to the U.S. two days before a military attack on Iraq. An AOL Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. ***************************************************************** 25 You Call That Evidence? You Call That Evidence? | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists [http://www.thebulletin.org/media/022702pr.html] The Bush administration has begun to produce what it calls evidence to support its claim that Iraq is moving very near a nuclear weapon capability. But a story in Sunday’s New York Times (September 8, 2002), especially as elaborated by administration officials on Sunday talk shows, actually suggests just the opposite—that Iraq is not as close as it was before the Gulf War. In a front-page story, Times reporters Michael Gordon and Judith Miller write that they were told by administration officials that Iraq has been trying to buy specially designed aluminum tubes to be used to fabricate gas centrifuges in which to produce weapon-grade uranium. How does that compare to what we know about the state of Iraq’s nuclear program in 1991? After the Gulf War, U.N. Special Commission inspectors discovered that although Iraq had spent billions of dollars over nearly two decades, its efforts to produce weapon-grade uranium had basically come up empty. Iraq had been using two methods: One program involved building giant “calutrons,” a clumsy technology the United States had abandoned in the 1940s. For decades that technology had been considered so primitive and inefficient that it was unlikely ever to be copied; everything anyone could want to know about it was available in the open literature. It’s hard to say what an Iraqi success with this method would have meant, but in any case, the calutrons were destroyed. The second method—and certainly the modern method of choice—was to build a “cascade” of centrifuges to separate the fissile constituents of uranium from the non-fissile. A cascade consists of thousands of centrifuges, all of which must be able to withstand spinning at extraordinarily high speed. Inspectors discovered that although the Iraqis had brought in centrifuge experts from Germany and purchased specialty steel from German and Swiss companies, they had spoiled most of the material—failing to shape it properly or otherwise maltreating it. Essentially, the Iraqi centrifuge program was a failure. And if the Iraqis were to depend on producing weapon material through the centrifuge process—rather than trying to obtain it on the black market—experts say it would probably take five or six years. Now we are expected to believe that Iraq is closer to a nuclear weapon capability because it is starting all over again! Admittedly, this time Iraq is trying to get different materials with which to construct the centrifuges—and perhaps they hope to save time by getting it preformed as tubes. Mysteriously, Vice President Dick Cheney said on Meet the Press that he could not comment on what the administration knows, only on what had appeared in the Times—in other words, he would discuss only a selective, agreed-upon leak. He then asserted that the administration knew of only one attempted purchase of aluminum tubes because, he said, “we intercepted” that shipment. And if, he said, one shipment had been intercepted, how many others might have gotten through? These comments, of course, raise more questions than they answer. First, just who is the “we” Cheney refers to? The U.S. government? An ally? In any case, it is someone who has no name. This story certainly leaves the rest of us wondering if anyone has made an effort to find out anything about the possible supplier or suppliers, because of their potential violation of treaties forbidding the export of weapons-usable industrial items. Things got murkier after Condoleezza Rice’s appearance on CNN’s Late Edition. Although her discussion of the issue was more general, her remarks were more in line with the Times story; she said “we” knew about a series of shipments of tubes. How strange is a story in which one official argues the case of a single shipment while others say there have been a number of shipments, yet no one expresses any interest in the source? Are the same unnamed but all-knowing “we” not at all interested in asking alleged suppliers what they think they’re doing, or bringing any pressure on them to cut it out? And why hasn’t anyone in the media been able to tease out a single bit of independent, corroborating information? (And just a little tip for those assigned to leak additional new “evidence” of a stepped-up Iraqi nuclear threat: The tubing in centrifuges is not nearly as hard to acquire or assemble as the mechanisms that allow them to spin at rapid speeds; getting that stuff right, and getting thousands of centrifuges working in concert, is really hard. Also, leakers, please note: Should you want to claim that an Iraqi cascade is already in operation, such a facility uses as much energy as a fairly large city; it could be detected by its heat signature alone.) The aluminum tubing story—and others to come—may be taken at face value by an insufficiently skeptical press, but the decision to go to war is simply too important to let the administration “wing it” in presenting its rationale. As Jon Stewart of the Daily Show asked recently about the administration’s attitude toward the American public, “Do they think we’re retarded?” Linda Rothstein, Editor [http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/1991/m91/m91albright1.html] © 2002 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ***************************************************************** 26 Bush to Ask U.N. For Help With Iraq Las Vegas SUN September 10, 2002 By MATT KELLEY ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON- President Bush said Tuesday he will ask the United Nations "to deal with the problem" of Iraq and dispatched top members of his national security team to Capitol Hill to talk to skeptical lawmakers. Bush tied his goal of toppling Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to the war on terror he began after the Sept. 11 attacks a year ago. "I'm deeply concerned about a leader who has ignored the United Nations for all these years, refused to conform to resolution after resolution after resolution, who has weapons of mass destruction," Bush said during a visit to the Afghan Embassy. "And the battlefield has now shifted to America; so there's a different dynamic than we've ever faced before." The president does not plan to offer new information about an Iraqi threat or recommend any specific actions in his Thursday speech, a senior White House official said on condition of anonymity. Lawmakers said George Tenet, the director of central intelligence, and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice likewise gave no new information in private congressional briefings Tuesday. Bush also continued phone conversations on Iraq, talking to Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar of Spain, President Alvaro Uribe of Colombia and President Vicente Fox of Mexico. He plans to host Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi at Camp David Saturday, continuing a pattern of inviting like-minded leaders to the presidential retreat. Berlusconi has frequently allied himself with Bush on foreign policy, and in a letter to a newspaper to be published Wednesday, laid out his strongest case yet in support of the U.S. demand for ousting the Iraqi president, saying preventive military action was legitimate if Baghdad doesn't change its ways. U.S. allies and members of Congress have urged Bush to give them more evidence that Saddam's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs pose a direct threat. In his U.N. speech Thursday, the administration official said, Bush plans to respond with a challenge of his own: "What more do we need to know?" Outside experts and U.S. officials say Iraq probably has stocks of chemical and biological weapons and could make a nuclear bomb if it could obtain enough nuclear material. Iraq denies having weapons of mass destruction. "This is not something where you can wait until you have clear evidence," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said in a Tuesday interview with AP Broadcast. "In fact, one of the fundamental points that Sept. 11 should have brought home to us is that you may not have a clear case after the fact, because the nature of terrorism is that it operates in the shadows, and it could be a way for a country that wants to do us harm to do it in a semi-anonymous way." Some members of Congress said they still weren't convinced. "I set the mark very high," House Majority Leader Dick Armey said. "I will need to see a plan before I will cast a vote. I will need to see it is necessary, and there is a plan that I personally think is fair to the courage we ask of these young people." Armey, R-Texas, said he expects the White House to consult with Congress over the next few weeks to agree on the threat posed by Iraq and what to do about it. A congressional resolution authorizing that action could be introduced by mid-October, Armey said. Two former U.N. arms inspectors told the House Armed Services Committee that as long as Saddam remains in power, Iraq's nuclear and biological programs seriously threaten the United States. David Kay, a former chief weapons inspector, said he had no doubt that Iraq, with enough time and money, would develop a nuclear weapon. "They will eventually surprise us in ways that will be terribly painful," he said. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., gave Tenet a letter asking for the report outlining the consensus of U.S. intelligence agencies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. "If we are about to make a decision that could risk American lives, we need full and accurate information on which to base that decision," Durbin wrote. CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said the agency is studying the senator's request. A number of CIA reports - both public and classified - have discussed Iraq's programs, but a specific National Intelligence Estimate solely about Iraq's weapons efforts has not been issued. Many lawmakers have misgivings about the lack of international support for military action against Iraq. White House aides said that while few allies fully support Bush, the debate among some leaders has shifted from a question of not whether, but how, the United States should confront Saddam. Bush's hand has been strengthened by Saddam's rejection of U.N. Security Council resolutions that forbid him to possess and develop weapons of mass destruction. U.N. weapons inspectors left Iraq shortly before the United States and Britain launched airstrikes in 1998 to punish Saddam for refusing to cooperate, and Iraq has barred their return. During their seven years there, they often complained of the Iraqis' refusal to cooperate. Even without broad international support, Bush and his aides insist the United States has a right to attack Iraq on its own to thwart any plans Saddam might have of attacking. "We don't want to give him the first chance to hit us, to hit our friends and allies, whether it's the Arab states in the region or Israel," Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage said. "We always have the right to go it alone. It is not the preferred option, ... but we will not abrogate our right to act in self-defense." Bush met Tuesday with Portugal's prime minister, who cautioned Bush against acting alone. "It is very important that the United States of America and President Bush listen to the opinion of the close allies, and Portugal is a very close ally of the United States," Prime Minister Jose Durao Barroso said. All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 27 How Nuclear is Iraq? TIME - Mideast Monitor - Wednesday, September 11, 2002 Topical Searches Sept. 11 Iraq Tony Karon's daily Web log on the march to war with Saddam In Search of a Smoking Gun Well, okay, "smoking" is the wrong word, because that implies it has been fired. Even "gun" may be the wrong word at this stage — the Bush administration's case for taking out Saddam Hussein rests primarily on the idea that the world cannot tolerate even the active quest for nuclear weapons by the Iraqi regime. The argument repeated forcefully at the weekend by Vice President Cheney is that Saddam is actively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, and in light of his track record that's sufficient reason to take him out. The White House got a helping hand Monday from the release of a dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs by a respected British think-tank, the Institute for International Strategic Studies. The IISS study suggested Iraq's chemical and biological weapons could potentially kill millions of his neighbors and warned that Iraq could build a nuclear device within six months — if it obtained fissile material from an outside source. That's a big if, says BBC analyst Paul Reynolds. IISS spokesmen conceded that the probability of such acquisition was low, he notes, and other sources, including the U.S. Defense Department argued until last year that it would take five years for Iraq to refine its own weapons-grade material. The Financial Times says the gist of the IISS report is that Saddam's primary threat remains in hid neighborhood, where his chemical and biological weapons could wreak havoc. But those neighbors remain hostile to a war, and don't believe they're in any imminent danger from Iraq. Ritter's Switch The administration's PR efforts have not been helped by the return to Baghdad of Scott Ritter, the former weapons inspector who this week popped up in Saddam's capital to trash the administration's case. Ritter, who rose to global prominence as the tough-talking hero of the 1998 showdown when Iraq kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors but has since become an antiwar activist, says the U.S. has no evidence to back its claims on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. But he also warned the Iraqis that the unconditional return of arms inspectors was Iraq's only hope of avoiding a war — a line also being pushed hard by the Arab League and U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in their efforts to avert a clash. Last Chance For now, however — against the better judgment of some of the more hawkish Bushies — the matter appears to be headed back to the U.N. where Saddam will be given one more chance to get on the right side of the law. That fits, also, with new proposals from France's President Jacques Chirac who has suggested that the Security Council set Baghdad a three-week deadline to unconditionally readmit inspectors — and that a refusal could be followed up by a resolution authorizing the use of force. Tony Blair took the same line in his address to a skeptical Trade Union Congress, Tuesday. As my colleague Michael Elliot argues in this week's Time, by threatening unilateral action the Bush administration may have succeeded in rousing its allies to press more actively for an acceptable multilateral solution rather than simply ignoring Saddam's weapons programs. But while the President appears to have finally gotten his aides to speak with one voice on the demand that Saddam's defiance of the international community must be dealt with, deciding on just how, where and when it is to be dealt with remain the key questions facing President Bush. It's Up to Saddam Now that inspections are shaping up as the "trigger" issue, the question of whether or not the U.S. goes to war in Iraq may depend largely on the choices made by Saddam Hussein. Baghdad has signaled it is willing to negotiate over allowing the inspectors back in, but everyone from Kofi Annan and Scott Ritter to the leaders of Europe and the Arab world have made it clear that the international community will accept no conditions or fetters on a renewed inspection regime. So the question becomes, Is Saddam prepared to lose face in order to remain in power? Right now, that's an open question. Some Arab commentators suggest the sudden appearance of Scott Ritter in Baghdad signals that Iraq is preparing to readmit inspectors; others suggest that if he believes military action is inevitable regardless of his actions that he'll hang tough. [http://ads.web.aol.com/link/93062901/aol] Copyright © 2002 Time Inc. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 28 Huge arsenals held across Middle East Ian Bruce Wednesday, September 11, 2002 at 09:30 JST GLASGOW ? The entire Middle East is a gigantic arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, even without Saddam Hussein's quest for ever more lethal hardware, toxins, and nerve gases, and the means to deliver them from long range. Israel, with between 200 and 400 undeclared nuclear warheads from its top-secret Dimona reactor facility in the Negev Desert, has more atomic firepower than Britain and France combined. Iran has more than 350 ballistic missiles with ranges of up to 600 miles, and is developing longer-range varieties. It also has thousands of nerve-gas-filled shells and missile warheads. Tehran has negotiated a 600 million-pound deal with Russia to build a nuclear reactor complex at Bushehr on the Caspian Sea and is already conducting research which the U.S. claims is aimed at developing weapons. Five more reactors are planned. It also has a known biological warfare programme and the capability to manufacture VX, sarin and tabun, the most lethal nerve agents known to man. Part of this production was triggered by the use of Iraqi chemical warheads during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq conflict. Syria has 500 ballistic missiles, mainly versions of the ubiquitous Scud made famous in the Gulf war, with a 300-mile capability which puts every Israeli city in the crosshairs. Its Soviet-sponsored chemical warfare arsenal includes the usual nerve gases and the technology to employ them in missile warheads or from aircraft spray tanks. Egypt has 200 of the same Scud B and C variants and is actively developing 1000-mile versions. It also possesses small chemical and biowar stocks and has nuclear reactors with weapons-grade potential for both uranium and plutonium. Saudi Arabia deploys up to 60 missiles, possibly with nerve-gas or germ-filled warheads, as a deterrent against both Iraq and Israel. Turkey, the joker in the regional pack, has 120 short-range missiles with a limited 100-mile striking distance. Ankara has no known mass destruction warheads, but is becoming ever more closely allied with Israel militarily and shares strategic reconnaissance assets and tactical weaponry with the Jewish state. Israel, with 75% of its population crowded into a handful of coastal cities along the Mediterranean, is the most heavily armed and militarily capable country in the Middle East. Its 100 locally-designed Jericho missiles can target every major Arab capital. Its air force is equipped with 250 nuclear-capable jets, including the latest U.S. F-15 Strike Eagles. It probably has limited chemical and biological weaponry, but tends to concentrate on civil and military defense techniques against nerve and blistering agents rather than expand its offensive capacity. Iraq has between nine and 20 Scud B missiles left over from the 1991 and is known to have tried to increase the weapons range and payload. It fired 39 conventionally-armed warheads into Israel at the start of the Gulf war, a more were aimed at allied bases in Saudi Arabia. U.N. arms inspectors, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the CIA all claim that while Saddam's nuclear program was effectively ended by U.S. bombing, his research team has been kept intact and could build a crude but useable nuclear weapon "within months" with black-market uranium or plutonium. The Iraqi dictator also has a fearsome stock of nerve gases, blistering agents and biowar germs and spores. (The Herald) Japan Today Discussion ***************************************************************** 29 Security Tighter But Not Oppressive At UC-Run Labs* The Daily Californian *By CYRUS FARIVAR* Daily Cal Staff Writer Wednesday, September 11, 2002 Many employees at UC-run labs say they have grown accustomed to working among the labs' post-Sept 11 security measures. Employees at Lawrence Livermore National, Los Alamos National, and the Lawrence Berkeley National laboratories?many of whom are UC Berkeley faculty and students working on research?say increased security has become the norm. "For those of us who work here, there's not much change noted," said Livermore lab spokesperson David Schwoegler. "There already is a high level of security. We are constantly improving (security measures). That's an ongoing process. For the employee who works here they would only notice the traffic and parking differences." Traffic has been slightly slower with the closure of one road leading to the Livermore lab and the mandatory searches of all incoming delivery trucks by armed guards and sniffing dogs. This process can take up to 10 minutes and may take longer if contraband items are found. Since the mandatory searches began, there has been an increase in the number of contraband items discovered?firearms, illegal narcotics and video recording devices, Schwoegler said. But while employees experience these minor inconveniences, others find themselves banned from visiting the labs. Some visitors may not be allowed to enter the facility at all if they are from a list of 23 countries the Department of Energy has deemed "sensitive nations." Visitors to the lab from these countries, which include Iraq, Israel and Uzbekistan, are required to have a background check, which may take up to three months. Sometimes the lab is not willing to go to all of that trouble to have them visit the lab, Schwoegler said. The Livermore and Los Alamos labs have also experienced other stringent security changes to help protect their nuclear research. Lab officials have been hesitant to provide specific details about what changes went into effect when the national government raised the labs' security level. They have said, however, there has been an increase in the number of guards at the facility. According to Schwoegler, there are approximately 200 members of what he called a "protective force," nearly all of whom are armed. They are charged with protecting the lab's sensitive information and approximately 10,000 daily employees and visitors. Livermore lab officials also have staffed the lab's perimeter with armed guards. Prior to Sept. 11, there were no armed perimeter guards. Lab officials said they have increased their guard staff by 50 percent since Sept. 11, although the increase was already scheduled prior to that date, said Los Alamos lab spokesperson Kevin Roark. In addition, they have closed off a road alongside the plutonium facility, where research on the status of American nuclear weapons is done. The Livermore and Los Alamos labs?like the Berkeley lab?have never been threatened since the original attacks, and lab officials are relying on their increased sensitivity to further protect them. "At no time post-Sept. 11 has there been any credible threat to Los Alamos," Roark said. "The lab has always been really vigilant about (security). There may be an increased awareness but nothing you'd call an official mandate. They've always taken security here very seriously, and that has not changed." Back in the Berkeley lab, whose researchers do not perform any classified research, there has been much less of a dramatic change to the lab's daily operations. "Prior to Sept. 11 we were an open site," said Don Bell, manager for Security and Emergency Services at the Berkeley lab. "After Sept. 11 the Department of Energy saw a need to increase security, (but) it did not require a significant increase of security officers (at the Berkeley lab)." After the attacks, the Berkeley lab hired a small handful of security officers to complement its less than 50 unarmed security guards. UC police officers will assist Berkeley lab guards if they need armed backup. Now employees and visitors must show an identification card to take the free shuttle up the hill to the laboratory. Before the attacks, many shuttle riders said anyone could board the shuttle with no questions asked, even though a rule existed that required the showing of identification. "Once the staff became accustomed to (increased security), it was business as usual." Bell said. (c) 2002 Berkeley, California Email: dailycal@dailycal.org ***************************************************************** 30 Plant adds security - Paducah, Kentucky Wednesday, September 11, 2002 By Bill Bartleman bbartleman@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650 LANCE DENNEE/The Sun Tribute in Carlisle: A mural at 208 Front St. in downtown Bardwell, by Carlisle County resident Kay Presson, honors rescue workers' actions last Sept. 11. ‘I just want it to encourage people,’ she said. The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant was placed on a higher alert Tuesday after the Bush administration raised the nation’s terror alert warning to its second-highest level — code orange. The alert at the Paducah plant and the U.S. Department of Energy compound that surrounds it means that access to the plant will be limited, patrols will be increased and all employees will be on the lookout for unusual activity, according to officials with USEC Inc., which runs the plant, and DOE. Spokesmen for both emphasized there are no specific threats to the Paducah compound, but the higher alert and security measures are part of a plan approved after the terrorist attack one year ago. USEC Inc. and DOE have an emergency management team assembled that will be ready to make an immediate response to potential problems or emergencies. The team includes representatives of USEC, DOE and Bechtel Jacobs, the company that is overseeing cleanup work at the plant. Some routine deliveries and access to the plant will be canceled as long as code orange is in effect. Cleanup work by Bechtel Jacobs subcontractors will continue without interruption, company spokesman Greg Cook said. The high alert also includes other security measures, which DOE and USEC officials said are classified. McCracken County Sheriff Frank Augustus said he wasn't aware of the plant's increased security, but said his deputies will increase patrols in high-risk areas, such as the plant and Barkley Regional Airport. Airport Manager Richard Roof said the code orange alert will not change any security measures at the airport. "We have been at a high level of security since last Sept. 11," he said. However, he said commuter airlines serving Barkley have canceled flights today because of anticipated low ridership on the anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. Northwest Airlink canceled its 10:40 a.m. flight to Memphis, Tenn., but will continue its three other flights. American Connection will have only one flight to St. Louis today, at 10:26 a.m. Roof said the cancellations aren't expected to inconvenience travelers, because they were announced more than a month ago. He suggested travelers call the airlines to check on the status of the flights. Security and patrols also have been increased around Kentucky and Barkley dams, although officials with the Tennessee Valley Authority and Army Corps of Engineers would not discuss details. Access to many areas of the dams has been restricted since last year's attacks. ***************************************************************** 31 Nuclear sites bolster security NEWS.com.au | (September 11, 2002) From correspondents in Washington September 11, 2002 THE US government's nuclear watchdog has told power firms to step up security around nuclear facilities after authorities stepped up a nationwide terror attack alert. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) said it "immediately advised nuclear power plants and other nuclear facilities to implement heightened security" after the warning. The NRC gave no details of what it called the "sensitive" measures being taken, but said they had been worked out in advance and included "close co-ordination with local and state law enforcement agencies". There are 103 nuclear power stations and 36 non-commercial reactors, mainly at universities, in the United States. The government raised its level of alert to "high" earlier today, citing fresh intelligence on possible terror attacks for the first anniversary of the September 11 atrocities. Agence France-Presse ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************