***************************************************************** 09/12/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.233 ***************************************************************** RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE ***************************************************************** NUCLEAR POLICY 1 IAEA invites COMSATS NUCLEAR REACTORS 2 Nuclear power: Hairline cracks `pose no risk' 3 Greenpeace says Mexico's lone nuclear power station is unsafe 4 Authorities say no earthquake danger from fault lines under 5 US: Nuclear plants lock down 6 US: Nuclear Power Plant Security: Voices from Inside the Fences 7 US: Indian Point plant shuts down electricity production to repair 8 US: Nuclear plants 'unready' for attack NUCLEAR SAFETY 9 US: U.S. Nuclear Guards Said Overworked, Undertrained 10 The Kick in the Fruit Punch Could Be Atomic 11 US: Coast Guard flags 'radioactive' ship 12 Communist politician says 200 nuclear warheads disappeared from 13 US: U.S. agents investigate container at Port Newark NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE 14 US: Foolish Initiative 15 US: Yucca: Raitt on the mark in understated concert 16 Activists at sea in search for radioactive shipment * 17 Ahern visits Rainbow Warrior * 18 US: No right to enhance risk* 19 US: Uranium Mine in Australian National Park Dead 20 US: Yucca OK facilitates push for new plants 21 DEFENCE IN DEPTH AT SELLAFIELD 22 BNFL CUSTOMER PLUNGED INTO CRISIS 23 UK: PROTEST EXPECTED OVER DISCHARGES 24 SOFT TARGET FOR TERRORISTS 25 Louisiana Energy Services Seeks to Circumvent Public Involvement 26 US: States' rights at stake in Yucca battle - 27 US: Radiation fears after revelations of uranium 28 Selling a nuclear plant to the Hartsville area * 29 AU: Anti-nuclear activists set sail to intercept British ships - 30 Local Attorney Voices Concerns At Erwin Hearing* 31 US: State law found to cover uranium mines NUCLEAR WEAPONS 32 Text of President Bush's speech to the United Nations on 33 US: Bush's Evidence of Iraq's Nuclear Ability Questioned 34 Sinister secrets secreted 35 N. Korea may cooperate on N-inspections 36 US: ARE NUCLEAR KAMIKAZES TO REACH AMERICA? 37 U.N. Delegates Want Weapons Stoppage 38 Bush Speech to the United Nations 39 White House spells out case against Iraq - 40 Russian parliament expected to ratify U.S.-Russian nuclear arms US DEPT. OF ENERGY OTHER NUCLEAR ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** FULL NEWS STORIES ***************************************************************** ***************************************************************** 1 IAEA invites COMSATS The Frontier Post */ *Home Page* fpost.jpg (6909 bytes) ©The Frontier Publications (Pvt) Ltd. Address: 27 abdara road univeristy town Peshawar. Pakistan. P.O.Box.1161. Phone: +92-91-845157 Fax : +92-91-845162 SC directs filing of appeals in HCs / Updated on 9/12/2002 7:34:54 PM/ * *F.P. Report* ISLAMABAD: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has invited the Commission on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development in the South (COMSATS) to attend its forthcoming regular session of the General Conference. * The 46th session of the General Conference of the Agency is scheduled to be held in Vienna-Austria, from September 16-21, said a press release on Wednesday. The meeting of the members of this policy-making body of IAEA is convened once a year to discuss and debate wide ranging issues, policies and programmes. The COMSATS Executive Director Dr. Hameed A Khan will represent the Commission in the General Conference and the associated Scientific Forum. This year, the focus of Scientific Forum will be on nuclear power life cycle management, nuclear knowledge and nuclear security. © Copyright 2001 The Frontier Post ***************************************************************** 2 Nuclear power: Hairline cracks `pose no risk' The Taipei Times Online: 2002-09-12 STAFF WRITER, WITH AGENCIES Taiwan Power Company (Taipower) said yesterday that the date set originally for the opening of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, July 1, 2006, would not be affected by the recent discovery of hairline cracks on supporting plates of a reactor pedestal. In August, Taipower discovered 80 hairline cracks in the plates in addition to those discovered in June. Taipower notified General Electric Co, the designer of the reactor and the pedestal, on Sept. 5 and asked for an investigation. Taipower official Liang Tieh-min (±çÅK¥Á) said yesterday that the cracks would have no impact on the safety of the pedestal. However, Liang said construction on parts of the pedestal would be halted until related problems were solved. The plant, officials stressed, would still begin its commercial operation as scheduled. This story has been viewed 329 times. Information [http://ecommerce.taipeitimes.com/] Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 3 Greenpeace says Mexico's lone nuclear power station is unsafe Veracruz Gov. Miguel Aleman swims at a beach beside the Laguna Verde nuclear facility in June. /Saul Ramirez, Notimex/ EFE - 9/12/2002 Greenpeace says Mexico's lone nuclear power station is spilling radioactive material and has threatened to bring legal action against the plant's operators unless it is shut down. On Tuesday, Greenpeace-Mexico director Raul Benet said the Laguna Verde station located on the Gulf coast of the state of Veracruz was leaking radioactive liquid and other material. Unless the station's license is revoked, Benet said he would begin legal proceedings against Alejandro Elias Ayub, the head of the National Electricity Commission, and the Commission's nuclear power manager, Miguel Medina. Located 290 kilometers (174 miles) northeast of the capital, Laguna Verde has been the country's only nuclear power station since 1989. For years, the plant has been the target of controversy over its security arrangements and its nuclear waste disposal. Greenpeace-Mexico has also asked legislators to open an investigation into the plant's operation and for a review of reports on the power station carried out by Mexican and international nuclear power organizations. © Copyright 2002 EFE ©Copyright 2002 TheNewsMexico.com All Rights reserved. ***************************************************************** 4 Authorities say no earthquake danger from fault lines under proposed nuclear reactor Yahoo! News Thu, September 12, 2002 AP World Politics CANBERRA, Australia - Two earthquake fault lines under the construction site of a new nuclear reactor in Sydney pose no danger and do not warrant a change in the plant's design, authorities said Thursday. The fault lines were discovered in June by scientists during a routine examination of the reactor's excavation site at Lucas Heights in southwest Sydney and triggered new calls for construction to stop. The federal government ordered an investigation by the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization, which issued a report Thursday saying the last movement of the fault lines was between 5 million to 13 million years ago. "These faults are clearly not potential seismic sources, even under the most conservative assumption on the age of the last movement ... and they do not pose a surface-fault rupture hazard," the report said. The government approved construction of the new 300 million Australian dollar (U.S. dlrs 165 million) reactor in April, despite protests about safety from environmentalists and residents living nearby. The site is currently being excavated and foundations laid. The reactor will produce radioactive material for use in medicine and research but will not generate power. It is being built near an aging reactor at Lucas Heights that will be decommissioned once the new reactor starts work in 2005. Sydney has never been struck by a serious earthquake, but a strong 5.6 magnitude quake shook the city of Newcastle, 150 kilometers (90 miles) to the north, in 1989, causing widespread damage and killing 13 people. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 5 Nuclear plants lock down PalmBeachPost.com: Thursday, September 12 By Deborah Circelli, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer Thursday, September 12, 2002 As Americans on Wednesday remembered those lost in last year's terrorist attacks, the nation's utilities have quietly gone to a higher state of alert to guard against the unthinkable: another assault. Florida Power & Light Co. added guards and local law enforcement officers at the entrances of its two nuclear plants in St. Lucie and Miami-Dade counties Tuesday afternoon and Wednesday. The state's largest utility, and owner of some of its highest profile terrorist targets, also closed the educational visitors center at the St. Lucie plant and beefed up security at its other power plants in the state. From Fort Pierce to West Palm Beach, the mood at Florida's water, electric and gas utilities was a mixture of somberness and tension. The higher alert status came after the Bush administration put the nation on "orange" alert Tuesday based on information from a captured Al-Qaeda operative. The alert suggests a "high risk" of an attack, just one level under a code red, the highest alert. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission ordered all the nation's 103 reactors to implement higher security Tuesday afternoon, including closing the sites to visitors. "We're restricting access to only essential personnel who have duties at the site," FPL spokeswoman Rachel Scott said. "We're just being very vigilant and have cautioned all our employees to be very alert." Scott said visitors would be allowed back on the site when the NRC alert is lifted, but she did not know when that would be. The Coast Guard continues to enforce restricted zones around FPL's two nuclear plants to keep boaters away, and pilots are advised to avoid flying over or near nuclear and other power plants. Although the alert doesn't cover them, other area utilities -- including city and county water departments, the state's two gas pipelines and West Palm Beach-based Florida Public Utilities Inc. -- also have added security and patrols in recent days. "Keeping our water supply safe is of the utmost importance to us," said Brenda Buffy, spokeswoman for the Palm Beach County Water Utilities Department. Officials at Fort Pierce Utilities Authority said they have stepped up measures at their water and electric plants and other facilities. "We're more observant now than we were a day or two ago and have increased our surveillance," spokesman Mac Hamilton said. Lake Worth continues monitoring its city-owned plant with added television and motion detectors, bolstered by police patrols. deborah_circelli@pbpost.com [deborah_circelli@pbpost.com] Copyright © 2002, The Palm Beach Post. All rights ***************************************************************** 6 Nuclear Power Plant Security: Voices from Inside the Fences pogo.org Project On Government Oversight 09/12/02 Security guards at only one of four nuclear power plants are confident their plant could defeat a terrorist attack, according to interviews conducted by POGO for this report. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulates the utilities operating nuclear power plants. The utilities generally subcontract with private guard companies for security services. The security guards say morale is currently very low and that they are under-manned, under-equipped, under-trained, and underpaid. More than 20 security guards protecting 24 nuclear reactors (located at 13 plants) were interviewed during POGO's investigation into nuclear plant security. POGO offers 29 recommendations to toughen security at the nuclear power plants. Executive Summary Security guards at only one out of four nuclear power plants are confident their plant could defeat a terrorist attack, according to interviews conducted for this report by the Project On Government Oversight (POGO). The guards say morale is very low and that they are under-equipped, under-manned, and underpaid. More than 20 security guards protecting 24 nuclear reactors (located at 13 plants) were interviewed during POGO's investigation into nuclear plant security. The guards' major concerns: Under-manned: Prior to 9/11, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) required only five to ten security guards on duty per nuclear reactor. Since then, the NRC has ordered the utilities to minimally increase the guard force. But more than half the guards POGO interviewed say their plants are relying on increased overtime of the existing guard force -- up to six consecutive days of 12-hour shifts -- rather than hiring more guards. Guards raised serious concerns about fatigue. While a few guards said their plants have increased the guard force -- one plant has tripled the number of guards -- most interviewed believe that they are still below adequate levels to defeat a real terrorist attack. According to one guard, "If an attack took place, most of the guards would run like hell." Under-trained: Nuclear industry executives have repeatedly claimed that guards receive 270 hours of training before being posted; 90 hours per year to re-qualify with their weapons; and 30 hours per year in antiterrorist tactical exercises. None of these claims appear to be true. Most guards interviewed train with their weapons only once per year for two to three hours during their annual weapons qualification. Most also have had no training or practice in shooting at a moving target. "Tabletop" exercises are so rudimentary that utilities use red and blue colored clothes pins to depict locations and tactics of guards and terrorists. Under-equipped: Many of the guards believe they are not equipped with adequate weaponry. The power and range of weapons provided to many of the guards is vastly inferior to the weapons known to be used by terrorists, due in part to restrictive state laws. According to one guard, terrorists will come armed with automatic weapons, sniper rifles, and grenades and the guard force "would be seriously outgunned, and won't have a chance." Underpaid: Low wages and inadequate health, disability and other benefits are causing turnover in the guard force at some plants as high as 70-100% over the 3½year life of a labor contract. At six nuclear facilities identified by POGO, security guards were being paid $1 to $4 less per hour than custodians or janitors. Guards also often earn less than workers in their area who face substantially less risk such as funeral attendants, manicurists, and aerobic instructors. Unsure: Nearly all of the guards interviewed raised concerns about the lack of guidance on the use of deadly force. Guards are currently restricted from using deadly force unless an intruder is wielding a weapon or threatening the life of an individual. If a suicidal terrorist with a backpack (possibly containing explosives) jumped the fence and headed straight for a spent fuel pool or reactor, the guard could only observe and report the event. One guard summed up the problem stating: "If you pull the trigger, you're on your own and you'll need a good lawyer." Since 9/11, the NRC has done little to bolster security at the power plants: + The NRC requires utilities simply to delay attackers until outside help arrives from local sheriff departments, state police, or the FBI. However, the NRC is only just recognizing the chasm between how long plant security can hold off an attack and when outside responders could arrive. Tabletop exercises begun by NRC in July, 2002, indicate that it would take one to two hours for outside responders to arrive with SWAT capability. NRC's performance tests have shown that successful terrorist attacks are over in between three to ten minutes. + The NRC has failed to toughen security regulations. Current regulations reportedly only require nuclear plants to be prepared for an attack by three terrorists and one insider -- a clearly inadequate scenario in light of the coordinated attack by 19 terrorists on 9/11. Recommended improvements have languished at the Commission. + The NRC issued an order in February, 2002, that required utilities to make incremental upgrades in security by August, 2002. Those upgrades include minimal increases in the guard force, requirements that guards carry their primary weapons while on patrol (i.e. shotgun or rifle), and the movement of truck bomb barriers farther from reactor target sets. + The NRC has not conducted force-on-force performance tests since 9/11. The NRC claims this is due to its current high-alert status. However, both the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, which are also at high-alert status, have continued to test the performance of security over the past year. Prior to 9/11, power plants failed the mock force-on-force tests almost half the time according to closed-door Congressional testimony by NRC officials. POGO found that even those tests are seriously dumbed-down. In addition to security guards, POGO also interviewed Army and Navy Special Forces personnel who conduct force-on-force tests, current and former NRC and other officials, a National Guard commander, and contractors. POGO's report is based on information and documents gathered from these sources. POGO briefed officials at the NRC on its findings. Foreword The Project On Government Oversight (POGO) is an investigative organization that works with inside sources to improve public policy. Founded in 1981, POGO is a politically-independent, nonprofit watchdog that strives to promote a government that is accountable to the citizenry. This is our second report on inadequate security at nuclear facilities. In early 2001, POGO began its first investigation into nuclear security, after more than a dozen high-level Department of Energy (DOE) security experts came forward with concerns regarding inadequate security at the DOE's nuclear weapons facilities. Just prior to September 11, 2001, POGO completed that investigation, concluding that the nation's ten nuclear weapons facilities, which house nearly 1,000 tons of weapons-grade plutonium and highly-enriched uranium, regularly fail to protect this material during mock terrorist attacks. The resultant report, "U.S. Nuclear Weapons Complex: Security at Risk," was released in October 2001. Since the report's release, Congress, the General Accounting Office, and several federal agencies have undertaken reviews of POGO's findings which are as yet on-going. In the meantime, the Department of Energy has put into motion a plan to relocate tons of bomb-grade nuclear materials from one of three facilities POGO profiled for immediate attention. The facility, known as Technical Area 18, is located in an indefensible canyon at Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico. Also since the report's release, more than 30 additional security experts and inside sources at the Department of Energy have contacted POGO to reveal documents and information about security weaknesses. As a result, POGO continues to expose the lack of security of our nation's nuclear weapons facilities. Because of this work at nuclear weapons facilities, several current and former guards from commercial nuclear power plants began contacting POGO in early 2002 with similar concerns about inadequate security at the nation's nuclear power plants. POGO takes no position on nuclear power. In April, POGO took a group of nuclear power plant security guards and former guards to brief nine congressional offices and committees about their concerns. POGO then expanded its investigation, randomly contacting guards at additional facilities. In all, POGO interviewed over 20 guards protecting 24 reactors at 13 sites (both active and decommissioning). This represents more than one in five, or 23%, of the total reactors. These guards work at nuclear power plants across the country - in all four of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regions. Most of these guards asked that neither they nor the utility that runs their plant be identified so as not to expose ongoing vulnerabilities, and because of the fear of reprisal from their employers. They are not "anti-nuclear." In fact, most of them have worked at nuclear power plants for more than ten years, many for most of their careers. This report is based on the security concerns of over 20 guards interviewed by POGO. While these guards are certainly a small percentage of the security force working at nuclear power plants, it is surprising and unusual that this many were concerned enough either to contact POGO or be willing to be interviewed and provide their timely and on-the-ground testimony, in most cases in written statements. These guards all said they have come forward because they are hoping to help inform policymakers of the current security inadequacies by working with POGO. POGO did not use a questionaire during the interviews, in an effort to avoid leading or directing the conversations, and obviously cannot independently verify a good deal of their information. There have been no independent analyses by the Inspector General or the General Accounting Office evaluating the security concerns of nuclear plant guards since 1977. In an effort to corroborate these concerns, POGO consulted security specialists with military backgrounds who test and evaluate security at commercial reactors, current and former NRC and other federal security officials, contractors, and a National Guard supervisor who is supplementing security at a nuclear plant. These experts shared most of the guards' concerns about security at the nation's nuclear power plants. There are clearly common threads that run through the concerns addressed in this report. A number of other people assisted with this report as well, including current and former Army and Navy Special Forces and DOE and NRC security experts who asked that their names not be revealed, as well as nuclear experts such as Dave Lochbaum of the Union of Concerned Scientists. POGO attempted numerous times to meet with nuclear industry representatives, but were repeatedly put off. At the conclusion of our investigation, POGO briefed two NRC officials, including a Commissioner, of POGO's findings. There appears to be a growing awareness among some at the NRC about many of the problems raised by the guards, and an acknowledgment both that the NRC has relied far too much on the nuclear industry to provide insights and that there has been virtually no direct communication between the NRC and guard forces. Unfortunately, there is not unanimity at the Commissioner level about how and whether to address these concerns. It is clear that the NRC is not on a fast track to correct these problems. Currently, the NRC also vigorously opposes Congressional efforts to upgrade security. (Appendix R) Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has encouraged the open discussion of our nation's vulnerabilities as the only way to push intransigent bureaucracies to make real security improvements. During a speech at the White House, he stated "... we will operate from a few basic principles. First, candor. No one should be wary of coming forward when they see a problem. It's the only way to define a solution. The urgency of our task dictates candor about our challenges and confidence in our ability to solve them."1 This report is offered in that spirit. Introduction There are 65 commercial nuclear power plants in 31 states operating 103 reactors. These plants generate about 20% of the nation's electricity. There are also 12 decommissioning reactors in the nation. While these reactors no longer produce electricity, they still have tons of radioactive spent nuclear fuel which remains stored in spent fuel pools and casks. Spent fuel pools are where the spent fuel rods are removed from reactors and placed in 45 foot deep pools of water for temporary storage. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), an independent federal regulatory agency, is responsible for licensing and regulating these nuclear facilities and nuclear materials.2 As part of this responsibility, the NRC has the obligation to ensure that nuclear power plants are operated in a manner that protects public health, public safety and the environment. This includes the obligation to establish requirements which ensure that nuclear facilities are protected against acts of radiological sabotage and theft of nuclear material. To accomplish this, the NRC requires utilities operating nuclear reactors to submit security plans that it must approve.3 The vast majority of these utilities subcontract with private guard force companies to provide the protective services. There is doubt about the effectiveness of the security of our nuclear power plants in many quarters. In the aftermath of 9/11, President Bush and other top government officials have said repeatedly that more terrorist attacks are likely. In his 2002 State of the Union Address, President Bush said that diagrams of nuclear power plants had been discovered in Al-Qaeda hideouts in Afghanistan.4 In April, the White House homeland security budget report, entitled "Securing the Homeland, Strengthening the Nation" identified nuclear facilities as among "the nation's highest risk targets" and among "the most vulnerable potential targets" of terrorists.5 Furthermore, during a briefing of the New York Times editorial board, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge was asked, "given all the things he had to worry about - hijacked airlines, anthrax in the mail, smallpox, germs in crop-dusters - what did he worry about most? He cupped his hands prayerfully and pressed his fingertips to his lips. 'Nuclear,' he said simply."6 But it's not just political leaders and national security officials who are concerned about attacks on nuclear plants. The public is also concerned. Polls taken by news organizations show that the majority of Americans believe it is likely that terrorists will attack a nuclear power plant: + In a Fox News poll of 900 registered voters nationwide in April 2002, 65% said they thought that security at U.S. nuclear power plants needs to be tightened.7 + In May 2002, Time and CNN asked 1,007 Americans how likely they thought it was that terrorists would attack a nuclear power plant in the next 12 months - 76% said they thought it was likely or somewhat likely.8 These concerns are not without basis. More than half of the nation's nuclear power reactors are near metropolitan areas, including Indian Point near New York City; Salem and Hope Creek near Philadelphia; Limerick, also near Philadelphia; Seabrook and Pilgrim, both near Boston; and Waterford near New Orleans.9 While there has never been a successful terrorist attack on a nuclear power plant, there have been threats or attempts to penetrate or sabotage nuclear reactor sites reported in the United States.10 Officials have identified several attempts to penetrate security at nuclear plants since 1978. Most significantly, in the mid-1980s, three power lines leading to the Palo Verde plant in Arizona were sabotaged, and in 1989 four people were charged with conspiring to disable three Southwest nuclear plants.11 According to a Princeton University study, the 1986 Chernobyl accident significantly contaminated over 140,000 square kilometers in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine; induced perhaps 10,000 child cases of thyroid cancer; resulted in the deaths of an uncertain number of plant and emergency workers; and otherwise affected the lives of over 7 million people.12 The NRC projected in 1981 that in a worst case accident at the San Onofre plant near San Clemente, California, as many as 130,000 deaths could result from an accident where the redundant safety mechanisms fail, and radioactivity reaches the environment in sufficient amounts to threaten the public, as might be caused by successful sabotage.13 NRC officials said in early September 2002 that the methodology used to project fatalities has changed since the 1981 study and that the projection is no longer valid. The officials said the NRC now estimates, based on a classified study, that in the most severe accident at a nuclear power plant, a handful to several dozen people would die soon after the accident and several hundred to several thousand people would develop health problems, such as cancer, over their lifetimes. Currently, NRC commissioners, utility executives and nuclear industry lobbyists have all tried to alleviate the public's concerns. Richard Meserve, Chairman of the NRC, testified before Congress that the nation's nuclear plants have robust security, stating, "... NRC's current programs continue to provide a very high level of security ... . We are comfortable with the security at our nuclear power plants."14 One official with the nuclear industry association Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) even went so far as to argue that "the plants are overly defended at a level that is not at all commensurate with risk."15 Since then, NEI has run advertisements with pictures of well-armed and intimidating individuals and splashed with blazing headlines such as "Vigilant" and "More than Strong Fences - It's about the paramilitary security professionals who protect what's behind the fences."(Appendix S) Despite the assurances from Chairman Meserve and the nuclear industry that nuclear security is adequate, David N. Orrik, the NRC security official who conducts mock terrorist attack tests at nuclear power plants, testified to the contrary. He testified before Congress on April 11, 2002 that the NRC found "a significant weakness" in armed response during 37 out of 81 mock attacks and the mock "attackers" were able to take actions "which would lead to core damage and in many cases, to a probable radioactive release." In other words, the guard forces failed to protect the plants during these mock attack tests 46% of the time.16 As further evidence that post-9/11 security is not as "vigilant" as suggested by the nuclear industry or its regulators at the NRC, mock "terrorists" have told POGO they were able to enter a plant disguised as a work crew, "destroy" the target sets,17 and leave the plant completely undetected. In another example, mock "terrorists" created false identification badges and were able to enter the control room of a nuclear plant and exit unimpeded. Some Members of Congress have become so frustrated with the NRC's resistance to seriously upgrading security that they are trying to legislate improvements in security. This POGO report examines what has happened since 9/11, and the roles and problems at the nexis where the important players in nuclear power plant security meet: the guards, the utilities running the plants, local law enforcement and other outside responders to an attack, and NRC's federal oversight. POGO found that the security forces at the nation's nuclear power plants, with a few exceptions, believe they are under-manned, under-trained, under-equipped, underpaid and unsure about the rules of using deadly force. Increased Security Since September 11, 2001? The NRC has done little to effectively improve security at nuclear power plants since 9/11. Most significantly, the NRC has not toughened the Design Basis Threat (DBT) security regulations, which specify the number of outside attackers and inside co-conspirators that nuclear facilities must be prepared to defeat.18 The current DBT reportedly only requires nuclear plants to be prepared for an attack by three terrorists - hardly realistic given the coordinated attack by 19 terrorists on 9/11.19 According to NRC sources, the NRC's Threat Assessment Team recommended improvements to the currently inadequate DBT after 9/11. Unfortunately, that recommendation has languished at the Commissioner level and Chairman Meserve of the NRC testified in June 2002, that the Commission could not commit to a date for toughening the DBT. Indecisiveness over increasing the DBT will further exacerbate the delay in implementing heightened security. Because it takes time to hire and train guards, reconfigure the physical layout of parts of the plant, and purchase equipment that meets the requirements of a new DBT, it will be at least two years after 9/11 before necessary upgrades are likely to be implemented. Instead of upgrading the DBT, the NRC issued an order on February 25, 2002, to its utilities to make a temporary, incremental upgrade to their defensive posture.20 These upgrades included minimally increasing the guard force, requiring the guards to actually carry their primary weapons while on patrol, and moving truck bomb barriers farther from reactor target sets. Plants were also ordered to address vehicle access control problems, for instance by requiring guards to escort chemical trucks in the security area, as well as to address the effectiveness of intrusion detection systems such as alarms on fences and doors. These improvements were required to be implemented by the end of August 2002 and were described by an NRC Commissioner as an "implicit" increase in the DBT. On August 20, 2002, 11 months after 9/11, the NRC announced a new Homeland Security Advisory System. This new system, according to this NRC Commissioner, sent a "strong hint" to the plants that the NRC would not allow them to return their pre-9/11 security postures. It does not however, spell out exactly what the new expectations will be. (Appendix R) One example of changes in security that does not actually improve security is the utility companies' dependence on overtime. According to the majority of the guards interviewed by POGO, rather than dramatically increasing the number of guards, their plants are heavily relying on increased overtime of the existing guard force - with 12-hour shifts, six days a week being common. These guards raised serious concerns about the inability to remain fully alert under these circumstances. Following 9/11, National Guard units were also stationed outside a number of nuclear power plants to patrol the perimeter. Security experts advise that while this may be a deterrent, it is not an effective tactic if there were a real attack on the plant. As the Special Forces describe the role of perimeter defense, the plant guards are alerted that an attack is underway when the National Guardsmen on the perimeter are killed - the proverbial canary in a coal mine. It was later discovered that at least some of the National Guard units were patrolling with unloaded weapons.21 Yet another example of insufficiently increased security is that to protect against larger truck bombs, the utilities were ordered to move the barriers back to 700 feet from the hardened target buildings. However, some experts believe this move is inadequate. The analysis used to arrive at this distance assumed the use of a smaller bomb than has been used by terrorists against a number of U.S. targets. The attacks against the World Trade Center (in 1993), the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City, and U.S. embassies and barracks overseas used larger trucks to deliver the bombs than were accounted for in the analysis. An NRC official has suggested that the move to 700 feet was derived more from a concern about the loss of convenient parking spaces, rather than from security considerations. Because the NRC only requires guards at nuclear power plants to be able to delay, observe and report an attack, security guards are not expected to be able to defeat a terrorist attack without reinforcement from outside responders. The NRC, however, has only just begun tabletop testing the timelines for these responder teams to arrive at the plant. Initial estimates are one- to two- hours after the attack, even though performance tests have shown successful terrorist attacks to take between three and ten minutes. In response to 9/11, the NRC also established the Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response on April 7, 2002. However, only one of the five senior managers of this office has any security experience. The others are safety and emergency response experts. This is not much of a step forward for security. Despite the critical need for increased security since 9/11, the NRC has not conducted force-on-force performance tests to determine whether or not the recent minimal upgrades in security have improved the performance of the guard force in handling even the current, inadequate DBT. The NRC claims this is due to its current high-alert status. However, both the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, which are also at high-alert status, have continued to test the performance of security over the past year. Site Map I [pam@pogo.org] I Site Policies © The Project On Government Oversight 2002 ***************************************************************** 7 Indian Point plant shuts down electricity production to repair leak * *Jersey/Metro News * *The Associated Press 9/12/02 7:01 AM* BUCHANAN, N.Y. (AP) -- Electricity production at the Indian Point 2 nuclear power plant was shut down to repair a hydrogen gas leak in the non-nuclear part of the facility, officials said. Jim Streets, a spokesman for Entergy Corp., which owns the Indian Point plants, said the turbine was shut down at about 10 a.m. Wednesday and the plant's nuclear reactor power was reduced to 10 percent. The leak, which was in a cooling system for the main electric generator, was discovered about two weeks ago, Streets said. Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it posed no threat to the public. When it was first detected, the leak had been allowing about 600 cubic feet of gas to escape daily, but the amount of escaping gas grew to about 10,000 cubic feet, Streets said. The hydrogen was mixed with water that helps to cool the generator and was being discharged into the Hudson River. Officials had planned to repair the leak during a scheduled refueling shutdown but decided not to wait until it worsened, Streets said. The plant was not expected to return to normal until this weekend. Copyright 2002 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This ***************************************************************** 8 Nuclear plants 'unready' for attack | csmonitor.com Peter N. Spotts Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor--> September 12, 2002 edition Despite tightened security, a new study shows vast gaps in training, tools, and staff. By Peter N. Spotts | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor Since last September's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the US nuclear industry has undergone the most intensive security crackdown in its history. But significant chinks in the armor remain. Debate US strategy and tactics in the war on terrorism Security guards at several commercial facilities complain that they are undertrained: In some cases, training exercises consist of little more than facing mock adversaries with rubber guns and whistles. Some security personnel say they practice with weapons once a year for two or three hours to requalify. Few have experience shooting at moving targets. Others admit that they are uncertain whether they can use deadly force to prevent an attack, because deadly-force rules and permissible-weapons regulations are set at the state level. And, unlike federal nuclear facilities, no commercial plant has undergone mock attacks designed to field test security improvements in more than a year. Compounding the problem: Guards at several plants say they're underpaid and driven to exhausting amounts of overtime by plant owners unwilling to hire extra security personnel. These concerns are highlighted in a study released Thursday by the Project on Government Oversight, a nonpartisan government watchdog group in Washington. It concludes that, given the events of Sept. 11, 2001, the potential threat nuclear plants are faced with is far greater than the one they are presently prepared for. "If you equate the Department of Energy to the NFL" on nuclear security preparations, many of the plants in the study "are junior high school," says Peter Stockton, an author of the report, who was a special assistant for nuclear security under former Energy Secretary Bill Richardson. The results suggest that a significant number of plants "have done the least amount required to protect the American public from a suicidal terrorist attack" on a plant, says Danielle Brian, executive director of the group. Hiring more personnel But the industry hasn't been idle. It has spent millions on security. In addition, 1,000 security officers have been added to 103 reactors nationwide, bringing the total to around 6,000, according to Steve Kerekes of the Nuclear Energy Institute, which represents nuclear facilities. Indeed, the problems the report cites are not universal, Mr. Stockton acknowledges. The scope of the report is limited: Twenty-two guards from 24 commercial reactors at 13 sites across the country, including a member of the National Guard protecting one plant, stepped forward to share their concerns. They were prompted to speak out following the publication of a report by the Project by Government Oversight in October that dealt with security concerns at Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. A top concern for many guards in this new report is that they fear they lack the firepower to deal with terrorists armed with automatic weapons or sniper rifles. Indeed, in some states, they would not be allowed to use deadly force against someone planting explosives. And many states prohibit the use of automatic weapons on site. All too often, Stockton says, training exercises degenerate into arguments over who did and didn't get hit, because they don't train with the high-tech laser-tag equipment used by DOE security personnel in training exercises. Last line of defense The effectiveness of a nuclear plant's security is crucial: All too often, exercises have shown that attacks end – one way or the other – before outside help arrives. That realization led Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to reconstitute an in-house SWAT team it had disbanded for budget reasons. "We found at least two sites that have ramped up security significantly. They've tripled their guard forces," Stockton says. For further information: • Al-Qaeda 'plotted nuclear attacks' [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2244146.stm] BBC • Nuclear Regulatory Commission [http://www.nrc.gov/] • Terrorism: Q & A | Nuclear Facilities [http://www.terrorismanswers.com/security/nuclearfacilities.html] • Power Plant News [http://www.powerplant.com/] Please Note: The Monitor does not endorse the sites behind these links. We offer them for your additional research. Following these links will open a new browser window. Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights ***************************************************************** 9 U.S. Nuclear Guards Said Overworked, Undertrained September 12, 2002 12:09 AM ET By Chris Baltimore WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Guards at the nation's 103 nuclear power plants are overworked, undertrained and outgunned and some of them doubt they could repel a terrorist attack, a study by a government watchdog group said on Thursday. Interviews with 22 guards at 13 U.S. nuclear power plants revealed many had doubts about preparedness and training, the Project on Government Oversight reported. The chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which is rethinking industry security guidelines in the wake of last year's deadly attacks on Washington and New York, criticized the study for relying on "a very thin sample" of the 6,000 guards posted at U.S. nuclear plants. Almost a year to the day after the attacks, the NRC on Tuesday advised nuclear plant operators to boost their security levels after the government issued a general alert for a possible terrorist attack. Al Qaeda, the Islamic extremist network Washington blames for the hijack attacks, may have singled out U.S. nuclear power plants as a possible target. "It is prudent to assume that al Qaeda may consider nuclear facilities as potential targets," NRC Chairman Richard Meserve said at an industry event on Wednesday. The non-profit watchdog group said it found nuclear plant owners have ordered only minimal increases in the number of guards, and are relying heavily on overtime for existing guards rather than hiring new ones. Some guards interviewed by the advocacy group said they worked 12-hour shifts for up to six consecutive days. Most guards interviewed "believe that they are still below adequate levels to defeat a real terrorist attack," the group said. "If an attack took place, most of the guards would run like hell," one guard told the group in an interview. Guards said they were plagued by fatigue during long and tedious night shifts. "There's a major problem with guards sleeping, especially on the night shift," one guard said. GUARDS WORKING 'EXTENSIVE OVERTIME' Meserve acknowledged that some U.S. utilities have used "extensive overtime" to maintain security while they carry out "extensive new hiring" of guards as part of a post-Sept. 11 push to boost security. With a total of 6,000 guards at U.S. nuclear facilities, the report used "a very thin sample in which to draw very profound conclusions," Meserve told reporters. "The security at nuclear plants is very strong and the plants have the inherent capacity to withstand severe events of all types including those that might be attempted by terrorists," Meserve said. The Project for Government Oversight defended its report. "The vast majority of the concerns the guards raise ring absolutely true," said researcher Pete Stockton. "They believe they don't have a chance" against an attack, he said. The Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry lobby, called the report "an insult to the 6,000 highly trained, well-armed security officers" defending nuclear plants. Most guards interviewed by the advocacy group said they practice firing their weapons only once or twice a year during annual qualification tests, far less than the time necessary to become and remain proficient, the report said. Guards also told the group they did not feel adequately equipped to deal with attackers. Many guards have only shotguns while attackers would likely be armed with sophisticated assault rifles, grenades and automatic weapons, Stockton said. In the event of an attack, plant guards "would be seriously outgunned, and won't have a chance," one told the group. Some Democrats have sought to impose tougher security at nuclear power plants. "Nuclear power plants are at the very top of the target list and their security must be permanently upgraded," said Rep. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat backing legislation to give guards authority to use deadly force against attackers. ***************************************************************** 10 The Kick in the Fruit Punch Could Be Atomic The New York Times September 12, 2002 *By MICHAEL WINES* MOSCOW, Sept. 10 ? Good news for Muscovites! "There are practically no cases of radioactive watermelons this year," says Andrei A. Buyanov. All right. Maybe that is practically good news. Then again, it could be worse. Some of the lingonberries here all but glow in the dark. It is radioactive-produce season in Moscow, and it's a bad one. Or, depending on one's perspective, a great one: so far this summer, the inspectors at the Moscow City veterinarian's office, have confiscated a ton of hot lingonberries, blueberries and practically nonexistent melons. And cranberry and mushroom seasons are yet to come. At this rate, says Mr. Buyanov, the office's amiable, crew-cut deputy chief, seizures could exceed last year's 3,050 pounds by a good 10 percent. And last year's seizures were slightly above those the year before. Mr. Buyanov displays little pleasure in his ever increasing haul of radioactive fruit. But it does suggest that he and his inspectors are doing their job, which is to nab edibles rich in cesium and strontium before they reach the stalls in any of the city's 69 open-air produce markets. If anyone wonders why Moscow needs a corps of atomic food inspectors, the answer is simple: the city lies a bare 415 miles from Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear-power station, which belched a Hiroshima bomb's worth of isotopes into the air when one of its reactors blew apart in April 1986. If anyone wonders why this task falls to the veterinary service, that answer is simple, too: besides lingonberries and mushrooms, the inspectors are on constant lookout for hot sirloin and pork chops. Lest this sound alarmist, it should be said that grocery shopping in Moscow is a completely roentgen-free experience (with one exception, noted later), thanks to the vigilance of the atomic food inspectors. Even if the inspectors were to vanish tomorrow, Russians could still safely eat most anything they chose (with several exceptions, noted immediately below). The problems mostly arise with what Irina I. Rozanova, the chief of the city's food-inspection laboratory, calls forest produce ? mushrooms, berries and other delicacies that, often as not, are hand-picked in the wild by folks looking to supplement their incomes. The quality of farm-grown food can be monitored fairly easily. Not so forest produce. "Normally, some middleman buys it from various sources and brings it to market," she said. "And when he's asked where it comes from, the seller just gives the name of some region near Moscow." Dramatically demonstrating the perils posed by produce-smugglers, Ms. Rozanova opened a laboratory jar, plucked out a suspicious-looking dried mushroom from Bryansk, a Russian region bordering Chernobyl, and probed it with her alpha-beta-gamma spectrometer. "It shows the cesium content is 20 times the admissible level," she said. Cesium 137 is easily absorbed by the body and has a half-life of 30 years. Mushrooms tend to soak it up, Ms. Rozanova said, lending new meaning to the term "mushroom cloud." As fate has it, Russians utterly dote on wild mushrooms. Not far behind are blueberries, cranberries and lingonberries, which are indistinguishable from cranberries, save that they are a bit smaller and grow on bushes instead of in bogs. So the men and women of the veterinarian's office are posted in tiny laboratories at each of the city's 69 produce markets. There, with hand-held scanners and more sophisticated measuring machines, they take the radioactive measure of every crate that comes through their doors. Anything suspected of radiating is shipped off to Ms. Rozanova's lab for a final determination, then handed over to a produce-destruction squad if the initial findings are confirmed. Radioactive-produce season runs roughly from June through October. First come the blueberries and lingonberries, which ripen earlier in Belarus and Ukraine than in Russia. About now come the forest mushrooms. In October it will be glowing-cranberry time. Mr. Buyanov and his inspectors have caught 160 radioactive shipments so far this season. "Nobody sells anything at a market without a test," he said, "and at markets where there are no labs, the sale of produce is banned." Which makes for an airtight, lead-lined inspection system. With one glaring exception: the kerchief-clad, gap-toothed grandmothers who illegally peddle fresh produce at hundreds of street corners, roadside stands and metro stations. "We don't regulate them," Mr. Buyanov said severely. "Better to buy at a market where it's all checked." But even hardened Muscovites cannot resist a wizened babushka trying to support her grandchildren by selling fruit. So buy, already. Just stay away from the lingonberries. You don't know where they've been. Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company ***************************************************************** 11 Coast Guard flags 'radioactive' ship NY Daily News - Home The Coast Guard escorted a cargo ship back out to sea from Port Newark last night after an inspection turned up mysterious radiation readings, Port Authority police said. Authorities said the Liberian-flagged 708-foot container vessel M/V Palermo Senator was guided beyond the 12-mile limit where the inspection continued. The ship was moved because "fluctuating levels of radioactivity of unknown origin" were discovered on it, a Port Authority spokesman said. The readings were discovered after the Coast Guard, which routinely checks out "high-interest vessels," intercepted the ship earlier in the day and brought it to Port Newark for a joint inspection with the U.S. Customs Service and Port Authority. Authorities would not disclose the ship's cargo or the nationality of its crew. Leo Standora All contents © 2002 Daily News, L.P. Disclaimer and Copyright ***************************************************************** 12 Communist politician says 200 nuclear warheads disappeared from Ukraine, but defense ministry denies allegation Yahoo! News Thu, September 12, 2002 KIEV, Ukraine - Ukraine's Communist Party leader warned that 200 nuclear missiles disappeared from this former Soviet republic in the mid-1990s, but the Ukrainian Defense Ministry insisted Thursday that tight security would have prevented such a huge loss. "This could hardly be possible," said Kostiantyn Khivrenko, the ministry's spokesman. "Two hundred warheads are not a needle in a hay stack." He said that after newly independent Ukraine renounced nuclear weapons in 1996 and transferred all of its 1,300 nuclear warheads to Russia, a security convoy accompanied the missiles, and special measures were taken to ensure their safe transportation. But Communist Party leader Petro Symonenko told a public meeting in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv on Wednesday that during the transfer, some 200 of the warheads had disappeared, the Interfax news agency reported. "Their fate ... is unknown," he was quoted as saying. Symonenko said his information was based on the findings several years ago of a now-defunct parliamentary commission. Khivrenko suggested that Symonenko's speech was linked to politics because it came just days ahead of Monday's planned nationwide opposition protest against the government of President Leonid Kuchma. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine inherited the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal, including hundreds of missiles and dozens of strategic bombers. (ms/mb/ji) Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 13 U.S. agents investigate container at Port Newark Wednesday, September 11, 2002 By MITCHEL MADDUX Staff Writer U.S. Coast Guard personnel and federal agents were examining a cargo ship at Port Newark on Tuesday night after it triggered a radioactivity detector during a search, officials said. The radioactivity seemed to be coming from either cargo containers or from the ocean-going ship itself, which was at a wharf at the Maersk Sealand terminal, an official familiar with the incident said. Specialists from the U.S. Department of Energy were at the scene, along with FBI agents and others, the official said. At press time, authorities had not issued a finding on the source of the radioactivity. The Palermo Senator is a 708-foot cargo ship sailing under a Liberian flag, said Michael Hvordza, a Coast Guard spokesman. The incident began at 6 a.m. when the Coast Guard routinely inspected the vessel off Sandy Hook, the official familiar with the incident said. He said inspectors heard noises from a cargo area and initially suspected stowaways. But a later survey picked up readings of a possibly radioactive substance, the official said. Officials were considering calling in a Nuclear Emergency Search team including scientists, weapons design specialists, and electronics technicians. They also were weighing towing the ship out to sea as the probe continued, another official said. The Palermo Senator is owned by Senator Lines. It began its voyage from South Korea on July 31. On Aug. 22, it stopped at Port Suez in Egypt, before heading to Europe en route to Newark, according to the company's Web site. www.northjersey.com ***************************************************************** 14 Foolish Initiative The Salt Lake Tribune -- Foolish Initiative Thursday, September 12, 2002 If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck -- it's a cow! Things are not always what they seem. Special interest groups along the Wasatch Front have circulated petitions, and have been successful in getting an initiative on the ballot for the coming election. The initiative is to allow nuclear wastes to come into the state for storage, but to impose a 600 percent tax. The money generated will be used for education and to help the homeless. Sounds worthy and noble. Why not? This would solve many of the state's financial woes -- or would it? What business could afford a 600 percent tax? This is a smokescreen to destroy Envirocare and keep nuclear waste out of Utah. Whether the measure passes or not, do not expect any money to come from the taxes. A defunct company cannot pay taxes. This is a brilliantly devious means of duping the people of the state. Let's be honest. What are the real dangers of parking radioactive materials 50 miles from Salt Lake? Will they explode? Will they steal into our yards? Our sun exposes everyone to radioactivity every day. Should we not keep the sun out of Utah? Is there some way we can tax it? If you like being snookered, vote for the initiative. DE LAMAR GIBBONS Blanding © Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on ***************************************************************** 15 Yucca: Raitt on the mark in understated concert What: Bonnie Raitt, Lyle Lovett When: Tuesday Where: Aladdin Attendance: 4,000 Grade: A for Raitt, A- for Lovett Thursday, September 12, 2002 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal By DOUG ELFMAN REVIEW-JOURNAL Bonnie Raitt stood still at the microphone. Red hair flowed everywhere. "I can't make you love me if you don't," she sang in surrender, naked emotionally, projecting the slowest of slow. "You can't make your heart feel something it won't. Here in the dark, in these lonely hours, I will lay down my heart and I'll feel the power. But you won't." It was the most touching emotion delivered to an Aladdin Theatre crowd of, largely, middle-aged women in cute haircuts, smiling beside their men, women and friends. Raitt told them she's been on both sides of the one-sided love of "I Can't Make You Love Me." Such deep empathy made her vocals feel passionate and compassionate, traits that made her soulful. Her insistent spirit put truth in "Angel from Montgomery" and other delicates, also in blues-rockers such as "Gnawin' on It," a shredder that let Raitt wail on slide guitar. Mouthy, not mousey, she advocated peace not war. She joked about her music. ("Any song that starts with 'Hey, shut up,' is OK with me.") And she grimaced at two big video monitors showing her face: "How would you like to see yourself this big at 52?" As a headliner, she used power politely, inviting opening act Lyle Lovett to sing duets and to hug her six or seven times. She also sang with Lovett's backup singers. And she joined Lovett at the end of his set. (Lovett himself was soulful, singing gospel, blues and traditional country-rock with a horn section, gospel-blues singers, an upright bassist, a steel guitarist and a cellist.) After the last hug of the concert, Raitt rode to a luxury condo, where dozens of fans donated to environmental group Citizen Alert to meet Raitt. The cause at hand: to stop the government from dragging nuclear waste across America to store at Yucca Mountain, near Las Vegas. Raitt, a political activist for three decades, posed for pictures and talked smarter, nicer and more articulately than most celebrities do. At 1 a.m., she found the nonfat chocolate cake in the shape of a guitar in the kitchen. She cut it and passed out pieces. She was preparing to leave, to sleep, then ride a tour bus, when she realized: "It's Sept. 11," she said, fretted, then looked soothed. "I can't imagine being around a better group of people." Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002 ***************************************************************** 16 Activists at sea in search for radioactive shipment * /online.ie 12 Sep 2002/ Activists from the environmental campaign group Greenpeace put to sea today to lead a flotilla of boats in the search for a radioactive shipment on its way to Sellafield. The group's flagship, the Rainbow Warrior, led a handful of boats from Dublin port while more vessels set sail further south from Arklow in Co Wicklow. The flotilla of 10 craft will sail to Holyhead in Wales and then along the coast to Scotland where more small boats and yachts will join the protest. They will then attempt to locate the cargo ships, the Pacific Pintail and the Pacific Teal, which are due to arrive in the Irish Sea within days. In addition to the protest, the Government has decided to deploy Navy vessels and spotter aircraft in its territory in the region to monitor the shipment when it nears its shores. The five-tonne cargo of plutonium mixed oxide fuel (MOX) was sent back from Takahama in Japan after safety records at Sellafield, which is operated by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd (BNFL), were exposed as false in 1999. Speaking as the flotilla set sail, Greenpeace campaigner Shaun Burnie said: "After 100,000 kilometres this global nuclear pariah and its cargo of rejected plutonium MOX will receive the welcome it deserves - the united voice from all the nations of the Irish Sea that this should be the last plutonium transport by BNFL." Publicity officer Mhairi Dunlop added: "This shipment represents an industry which is not only financially, but morally, bankrupt. We will make sure that the ships, BNFL and the UK Government hear us loud and clear." She said Greenpeace believed the ships, which are fitted with 30mm cannon and guarded by UK Atomic Energy Authority police, are currently off the west coast of Madeira in international waters. She added that activists had no intention of attempting to board or block the ships. BNFL points out that the safety measures under which the shipment is being made have been inspected and approved of by independent authorities in the UK. But the company has failed to reassure Irish politicians - during their three weeks in Dublin Greenpeace campaigners held talks with, and won support from, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, Environment Minister Martin Cullen and Marine Minister Dermot Ahern. Fine Gael leader, Enda Kenny, was at Sir John Rogerson's Quay in Dublin this morning to watch the Rainbow Warrior and the campaigners begin their journey. ***************************************************************** 17 Ahern visits Rainbow Warrior * /online.ie 11 Sep 2002/ Bertie Ahern today made a courtesy call to the Greenpeace vessel Rainbow Warrior, currently docked in Dublin ahead of the arrival in the Irish Sea of a double shipment of nuclear waste material. Mr Ahern used the visit to reaffirm his government's determination to take legal action aimed at forcing the closure of the nuclear waste complex at Sellafield, Cumbria. The Rainbow Warrior is due to leave Dublin tomorrow to monitor the arrival of the two ships carrying plutonium mixed oxide ? MOX ? to Sellafield after being turned away by the authorities in Japan. The Greenpeace vessel, along with a flotilla of vessels from Dublin and Arklow, will stage protests when the nuclear cargo enters the Irish Sea, a development that could come by the weekend. The MOX is being returned after British Nuclear Fuels client in Japan refused to take the material when it emerged that safety records had been falsified. The strength of all-round political backing for the Greenpeace line on Sellafield in Ireland will be demonstrated tomorrow, when Enda Kenny, leader of Fine Gael, will highlight his support by attending a quayside ceremony marking the departure of the Rainbow Warrior. Last week, Mr Ahern authorised the Defence Force's naval service to shadow the nuclear waste ships once they arrive in the Irish Sea. ***************************************************************** 18 No right to enhance risk* deseretnews.com Opinion Thursday, September 12, 2002 /dn/email/form/1,1455,405030050,00.html> I am writing in response to the opinion titled "Living Involves Risk" in last Sunday's Deseret News and the notion that 31 American deaths are within an acceptable range of loss during accident-free transportation of high-level nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain. An ad hoc attack was made about the logic asserting the U.S. government does not have the right to go ahead with the plan that endangers the lives of its citizens. The assumptions made in support of this ad hoc attack are simply fallacious. It seems fair to assert that one with a Ph.D. would understand the difference between a legally competent adult choosing to place himself in harm's way by driving a car, using a ladder or enjoying water sports and an outside entity placing that same competent adult in harm's way by transporting high-level nuclear waste through his neighborhood. I do agree that living every day is a risky venture. But we do not need the government to willfully enhance that risk. *Dave Rose* Salt Lake City © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company ***************************************************************** 19 Uranium Mine in Australian National Park Dead ens SYDNEY, Australia, September 6, 2002 (ENS) - Aboriginal people and environmentalists are challenging mining giant Rio Tinto to abandon a proposed uranium mine in the heart of an Australian national park, after aborigines have made it clear that they oppose the project. [Kakadu] Kakadu National Park near the Jabiluka mine site (Photo courtesy courtesy Territory Greens [http://www.nt.greens.org.au/public_html/new_greens_website/home.htm] ) After years of protests against the Jabiluka uranium mine in Kakadu National Park, it appears that Rio Tinto will not proceed with the proposed mine without permission from the Mirrar aboriginal people, who are firmly opposed to the mine. Speaking on the BBC's "World Hardtalk" Rio Tinto Chairman Sir Robert Wilson restated the company's position that, "...there would be no development of that project without the consent of the traditional landowners, the Mirrar people...we won't develop it without their consent, full stop." The Senior Traditional Owner of the Mirrar, Yvonne Margarula, Thursday reaffirmed her longstanding opposition to the mine. [Margarula] Yvonne Margarula is a recipient of the Nuclear-Free Future Award. (Photo courtesy Nuclear-Free Future Award [http://www.nuclear-free.com/] ) Margarula said, "It doesn't matter how many times they ask, I'm not going to agree to this mine, whatever money they ask for it. Mining ruins the land. Just like the way the other Rio Tinto uranium mine, Ranger, has destroyed my land. My mind is firmly set." Rio Tinto owns 64 percent of Energy Resources of Australia Ltd., after its purchase of North Ltd. two years ago. North already extracts uranium at the Ranger mine about 15 kilometers (9.3 miles) away from the Jabiluka site. The Mirrar are now challenging Rio Tinto to rehabilitate the Jabiluka mine site, where a 1.2 kilometer underground tunnel was drilled before the site was acquired by Rio Tinto. Sir Robert has now committed his company to rehabilitating the mine site stating on the BBC that Rio Tinto will, "...rehabilitate that area" and "... block off the adit [mine tunnel], but this is not a very large area, nor in any way is it a threat to the environment," he said." [tunnel] Portal entrance to Jabiluka Mine (Photo by Sam de Silva courtesy Territory Greens) "It is now time for Rio Tinto to follow through on the wishes of its chairman and begin the rehabilitation of the Jabiluka mine site" said Leanne Minshull, corporate campaigner for The Wilderness Society of Australia. The Mirrar also challenge Rio Tinto's claim that there has been no damage to sacred sites at Jabiluka. The Mirrar have issued many statements regarding the desecration of sacred sites at Jabiluka. In July 1998, they sought a Northern Territory Supreme Court injunction against the construction of the mine tunnel, arguing that a sacred site would be desecrated. Jabiluka has been the subject of persistent questioning and protest at the Earth Summit in Johannesburg, where Rio Tinto has been trying to persuade governments and the public that it supports sustainable development. Hearings for an Australian Senate inquiry into the contamination at Rio Tinto's uranium operations at the Ranger mine begin on September 30. [editor@ens-news.com] for Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights ***************************************************************** 20 Yucca OK facilitates push for new plants Las Vegas SUN Today: September 12, 2002 at 11:19:13 PDT By Benjamin Grove WASHINGTON -- Nuclear technology companies, emboldened by congressional approval for Yucca Mountain and other favorable factors want to build new nuclear power plants in the United States within five years. That is the message at a three-day "Nuclear Renaissance" conference that began Tuesday in the nation's capital, where nuclear technology company executives have gathered to discuss a new age of nuclear power production in America. Several said the time is right for building new power plants. No new plants have been ordered in this country since before the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, due to public fears, and a combination of economic, regulatory and waste factors. The reasons to move ahead now are clear, the executives said: As the nation's economy continues to grow and global warming worsens, America will need more emissions-free power. The nation also now has a pro-nuclear president that seems committed to building new plants -- and dealing with nuclear waste. Several attendees said no companies would be talking new plants if lawmakers this year had not approved Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste dump. "The failure of Congress to act would have been a significant obstacle," said Ernie Kennedy, Westinghouse vice president for new plants. Westinghouse is one of a handful of nuclear technology companies that intend to be involved in designing and constructing a new generation of plants in America. The nuclear industry first buzzed over a nuclear renaissance after President Bush was inaugurated and during the California energy crisis. Since then, the excitement has ebbed. Hurdles remain. Utility companies are still wary of investing in new nuclear plants in part because natural gas and coal plants still produce cheaper power than nuclear plants, and gas plants are cheaper to build. But ultimately, nuclear plants can be competitive, especially with the fluctuating cost of gas, industry insiders said. It's "realistic" that new plants could be licensed and constructed within the next decade, said Tony Pietrangelo, director for licensing for the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade group. Still, another hurdle is the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's new nuclear plant licensing process, recently streamlined but as-yet unnavigated, executives said. That creates some uncertainty for companies whose shareholders prefer sure-bet projects, several executives said. While Congress helped pave the way with Yucca Mountain approval, "Economics are the bottom line," Westinghouse's Kennedy said. "It comes down to: What's the most effective, cost-efficient supply of electricity for the country?" The conference was sponsored by nuclear technology companies AECL, Excel Services Corp., Framatome ANP, and Chicago-based law firm Winston &Strawn. The law firm's energy practice lawyers used to handle Yucca project legal work for the Energy Department. But the firm last year resigned amid controversy that the firm had a conflict-of-interest -- it also had lobbied in favor of Yucca for the industry group NEI. Doubters of the nuclear renaissance abound. While market experts are skeptical about nuclear's economic viability, environmentalists generally say nuclear energy is not efficient or cost-effective because it produces dangerous waste that is expensive to store. "It's an old, dirty technology, and I really believe that the industry is going to have difficulty siting any new plants," said Wenonah Hauter of Public Citizen, the only environmentalist invited to speak at the conference. And Nevada lawmakers have long scoffed at the industry's push for new plants because they believe Yucca Mountain is a dangerous place to store waste. "The industry has got to find a solution to the question of waste, other than geologic burial," Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said. Gibbons supports the concept of nuclear power, but abhors the Yucca plan. "Deep geological burial will be the death of nuclear power in this country," Gibbons said. "It's the wrong kind of solution for their problem." Still, companies are quietly vying to be among the first to build new U.S. plants. AECL Technologies, Inc., with offices in Washington and a parent company in Canada, has engaged in preliminary planning with the plant-licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said AECL's David Torgerson, senior vice president for technology. The department is working closely with the industry to pave the way for more plants as part of the department's Nuclear Power 2010 program, first unveiled in February. The program's goal: to help nuclear companies establish at least one new U.S. plant in the next eight years. "We think the technology can stand on its own, and we think the utilities are interested," said Gail Marcus, an Energy Department deputy director and president of the American Nuclear Society. "It's an ambitious program, but it's doable." Marcus said the "renaissance" still has momentum, spurred in part by the Yucca decision. "It's was a real factor," she said. "Everybody (utilities) said that unless we have a path forward on Yucca Mountain, nobody will place new orders." All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 21 DEFENCE IN DEPTH AT SELLAFIELD [The Whitehaven News] A YEAR on from September 11 and Sellafield can now boast heightened ability to respond to threats, including the ability to better deal with a major aviation fuel fire. BNFL called local media to a special briefing, on Monday, to tell the public how they have "ramped up their response capability" at the already high security nuclear complex. Yesterday, flags were to fly at half mast across the site where 9,000 local people are employed. Paul Croft deputy head of site security told the media: "We do not believe there is any specific threat and there is no intelligence indicating that, but clearly we have to be prepared. Air cover from the RAF has been stepped up and Sellafield now has new fire tenders that can deal with an aviation fuel fire.'' He said: "September 11 was clearly a milestone and after that date the Office of Civil Nuclear Security, that regulates security at Sellafield, instigated significant reviews. He explained that Sellafield has "defence in depth" including the following layers: outer security fence, armed police patrols, site pass systems, vetting of all staff, electronic access control to higher security areas, inner area detection and surveillance, hardened buildings and frequent security response exercises. He also said there were security measures that could not be revealed in the public domain. Mr Croft indicated that the CAA was still considering possible prosecution over a light aircraft that was seen to breach the no fly zone over Sellafield in August. Sellafield is protected by a two kilometre air exclusion zone. But when questioned by the News, BNFL officials admitted that this zone only extended to a height of 2,200 feet. Most commercial jet flights are in the range of 25,000 to 35,000 feet and key flightpaths cross the Lake District every day. n An open air remembrance service for the victims of September 11 was scheduled at St Nicholas' Gardens, in Whitehaven, yesterday at noon. [http://www.whitehaven-news.co.uk/onyx/passport.htm] ***************************************************************** 22 BNFL CUSTOMER PLUNGED INTO CRISIS [The Whitehaven News] THE government's decision to bail out ailing British Energy with a £410 million loan brought a sigh of relief at Sellafield which reprocesses fuel from BE's nuclear power stations. But it is only a temporary reprieve as the Department of Trade and Industry (which holds BNFL's golden share) looks towards a possible restructuring of BE and even administration. There is still concern at Sellafield over the outcome because BE is BNFL's biggest home customer for reprocessing fuel and the cost of treating it has been a major sore point during the crisis. British Energy was facing financial collapse and insolvency until the government's rescue package which will last for only two weeks. The government has given BE a fortnight in which to repay the £410 million loan which will provide working capital and collateral for its trading partners. Trade and Industry Secretary Patricia Hewitt said: "This deal is primarily about securing energy for Britain, not securing British Energy." Radioactive spent fuel from BE's power stations is sent to Sellafield for reprocessing in Thorp, accounting for one third of the plant's lucrative business, the rest coming from Europe and Japan. Alarm bells started ringing for BE after a progressive collapse in wholesale electricity prices and towards the end of last week the company suspended its shares after talks with British Nuclear Fuels to try and drastically reduce its fuel reprocessing bill fell through. According to reports in the City, lawyers then advised that because of the company's dire financial position it could no longer draw on its £550 million bank credit lines. Even after the resumption of trading, BE shares slumped from 65 per cent to 28p. BNFL charges BE an annual £300 million for treating the spent fuel but not even a sizeable reduction of £70 million was going to be enough to save the company. After emergency weekend talks involving government officials, ministers decided that public safety could be threatened if BE which produces about a quarter of the country's power became bankrupt. BNFL is said to have "bent over backwards" to try and help alleviate the crisis for its biggest UK customer. However, a group which claims support from 100 Labour MPs including six Cabinet ministers urged the government to tear up the reprocessing contracts even though the home-based business is regarded as crucial to BNFL and Sellafield employment. They claim that putting the fuel into dry storage instead of reprocessing would save BE as much as £200 million a year but inevitably this would put Sellafield jobs at risk. One of the site's union spokesmen Howard Rooms warned: "BE is one of our biggest customers so it could have a massive impact on BNFL, the workforce and the West Cumbrian economy. "In a worst-case scenario it could amount to lots of redundancies." n BE's financial nightmare reached its head just as BNFL was trying to persuade the government that nuclear energy generation as "more affordable than ever before". BNFL is arguing that its new state-of-the-art reactor design (the Advanced Passive 1000) is the way forward. Calder Hall at Sellafield, the world's first large-scale commercial nuclear power station, is to close early next year and there are hopes that it can eventually be replaced with a modern reactor. But BNFL's chief executive Norman Askew says: "The time to act is now. We are ready to meet the challenge and we have already taken steps to deliver the AP1000 to the UK market by asking the regulators to start a pre-licensing review. "I want to start this work as soon as possible. Nuclear power is the way to a low-carbon fuel economy and is the only credible solution to ensure a large-scale secure, reliable and environmentally-friendly energy supply." ***************************************************************** 23 UK: PROTEST EXPECTED OVER DISCHARGES [The Whitehaven News] PLANNED discharge of 30 TBq or more of Tc-99, this week, from Sellafield represents one third of BNFL's annual limit for the material and is equivalent to a whole year's production of Tc-99 from Magnox reprocessing. CORE, having long since urged the Environment Agency to ban discharges of Tc-99 and to store it on site, believes it is a slap in the face to the Norwegian Government and will provoke outrage from other Scandinavian governments and the Irish. "BNFL continues to use the Irish Sea as its own personal sewer and with these discharges shows its contempt for the environment " BNFL spokesman, Nigel Monkton, said: "BNFL is subject to requirements from our regulators which means we must reduce the volume of medium active liquids (MAC) currently stored on-site. These arose from past operations of the Magnox reprocessing plant, and contain quantities of Tc-99. If processing of the current 'batch' of MAC is delayed, then BNFL cannot meet the regulators requirements. "There have been no discharges of Tc-99 this year, but these will restart once treatment of the medium active liquors commences. The batch being processed will be subject to the normal, authorised, treatment process, and all discharges will be within the current regulatory limits. "There is no currently available technology to remove Tc-99 from these effluents. BNFL would like to trial a process known as the TPP process, which may show potential for reducing Tc-99 discharges. However permission to undertake such a trial has not been received." ***************************************************************** 24 SOFT TARGET FOR TERRORISTS [The Whitehaven News] BNFL has come in for criticism over its plans to build a large new office development outside the perimeter fence at Yottenfews, dubbed Sellafield Mark II. It could, it was claimed this week, create a softer target for terrorist strikes. Robin Simpson, former leader of Copeland Council, stressed that it was a departure from the council's policy of no development outside the fence and brought the situation "right back to square one''. There had been 12 months of talks between the company and Copeland/Allerdale councils about moving staff into the West Cumbrian towns, but this new application appeared to "totally ignore'' all that had previously gone before, Coun Simpson (Lab) said, at Tuesday's full council meeting. The company wants to build six office units, two/three storey high, to house 1,800 staff, at the Yottenfews car park and is asking Copeland for planning permission. Provision for 1,080 car spaces in the 38-acre site is also included. Councillors are expected to make a site visit before taking any decision but Coun Simpson said this latest development raised the question about whether it had been worthwhile engaging in lengthy discussions with the company about relocating staff into Whitehaven and other locations. Allerdale had given a list of possible sites and Copeland had submitted 11 possible locations. Council leader, George Usher, said discussions between BNFL and Copeland about staff relocation were subject to confidentiality. "We will attend meetings, listen and work with them. I have been delighted with any discussions with BNFL we have had.'' The nuclear plant is keen to see a reduction in the number of employees' cars driving into and out of the Sellafield site, on a daily basis, and regulatory bodies the NII and the Office of Civil Nuclear Security support the move BNFL says Yottenfews is ideal for those people who do not need to be on site but within easy distance if they need to regularly visit plants Nigel Monkton, BNFL spokesman, said yesterday: "We have been discussing our accommodation strategy with Copeland for some time. There are three parts, offices at Yottenfews are just one part, we are also looking at taking further new space at Westlakes and at developing office accommodation in Whitehaven, once a suitable site is identified, this is still being discussed.' ***************************************************************** 25 Louisiana Energy Services Seeks to Circumvent Public Involvement in Uranium Enrichment Plant Licensing Process + --> nirs [http://www.nirs.org/] NEWS FROM NIRS Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street NW, #404, Washington, DC 20036 202.328.0002; f: 202.462.2183; nirsnet@nirs.org, www.nirs.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Michael Mariotte September 12, 2002 202-328-0002 LOUISIANA ENERGY SERVICES SEEKS TO CIRCUMVENT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN URANIUM ENRICHMENT PLANT LICENSING PROCESS ASKS FEDERAL NRC FOR UNIQUE RULING TO KEEP RELEVANT ISSUES OUT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Louisiana Energy Services (LES) has asked the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a ruling that would bar the public from raising numerous relevant issues in public hearings related to the licensing of a uranium enrichment plant LES has proposed to build near Hartsville, Tennessee. The ruling sought by LES, and described as "unique" by one knowledgeable NRC staffer, would prohibit members of the public (including organizations and local and state government bodies) from addressing such issues as environmental justice, the financial qualifications of the LES consortium, the disposition of the thousands of tons of radioactive/hazardous waste the proposed plant would produce, the need for the plant, and others. Not coincidentally, a citizens group in northern Louisiana, Citizens Against Nuclear Trash, successfully stopped LES from building a similar plant there in the 1990s by successfully raising these exact issues before an NRC adjudicatory body. "Rather than clean up its act and play by the rules," said Michael Mariotte, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), "LES is attempting to change the rules so that local people cannot even raise the same type of issues that defeated its last effort to build a dangerous, unnecessary, uneconomic nuclear facility. This smacks of desperation before LES even has submitted a license application. How could the NRC deny the opportunity for people to raise such fundamental issues, when the NRC has not seen even one official word of LES' plans?" In a September 11, 2002 letter to the NRC, NIRS requested that the agency allow NIRS to comment on the LES proposals, and also requested that the NRC allow a 90-day public comment period so that people in Tennessee also could provide their comments. "The NRC should reject LES' outrageous request out-of-hand," said Mariotte, "but at the very least, they should let the public know what LES is doing, and give the public an opportunity to respond." The LES request would significantly limit the meaning of the Environmental Impact Statement that must be prepared for any nuclear facility of this size, as well as the opportunity for citizens and government agencies to participate in formal, legal hearings about the plant. This is not the first time LES has sought to limit public oversight over its activities. In 1989, it convinced then-Senate Energy Committee Chairman J. Bennett Johnston (D-LA) to pass legislation allowing foreign ownership of uranium enrichment plants, to bypass the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement for such a plant, and to end the requirement for adjudicatory-or formal-hearings on such a plant, among other provisions. Their intent then, as it is now, was to attempt to ensure that members of the public could not legally challenge LES' plans. Most of that legislation was scrapped by the U.S. House of Representatives, and an EIS and formal hearings are still required for such a project. This time, realizing that Congress would never approve such legislation, LES is attempting to achieve the same practical goal by circumventing NRC procedures. LES is a consortium dominated by the European firm Urenco, which is itself a consortium composed of British Nuclear Fuels, Ltd., the Dutch government, and a number of German firms. Urenco operates three uranium enrichment plants in western Europe. Other, minority, members of the LES consortium include three major nuclear power utilities-the Exelon Corporation, Duke Power and the Entergy Corporation. Westinghouse Nuclear (a subsidiary of British Nuclear Fuels) and Cameco (a Canadian uranium mining and processing company) also are partners of LES. While details of the current financial structure of LES are not yet known, and likely will not be made public until a formal license application is submitted, the company is basically a Limited Liability Corporation. Under this structure, each of the partners establishes a new subsidiary, which provides a relatively small amount of financing and owns a fraction of the consortium, thereby shielding the parent corporations from any liability associated with the licensing, operation or decommissioning of the proposed project. Under the normal NRC process, if citizens or their governments decided to challenge any part of the LES license application, a three-member Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (typically composed of one lawyer and two scientists) would be appointed to hear the disputes. The ASLB acts as a judicial body, and its hearings include rights of discovery, cross-examination, and other legal safeguards. Since the beginning of the nuclear age, only one project ever has been denied a license by an ASLB as a result of such hearings: that project was the LES uranium enrichment plant proposed for the small town of Homer, Louisiana (one other project, the Byron nuclear reactor near Rockford, Illinois, was initially denied a license in 1984, but the denial was later overturned). NIRS letter to the NRC is available on NIRS' website, www.nirs.org [http://www.nirs.org/] , or via e-mail [nirsnet@igc.apc.org] or fax by request. The Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) was founded in 1978 to assist grassroots environmental organizations and people concerned about nuclear power, radioactive waste, and sustainable energy issues. NIRS and its affiliate WISE (World Information Service on Energy) have two offices in the United States, and 11 offices in Europe, Asia, and South America. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ***************************************************************** 26 States' rights at stake in Yucca battle - By Susan Paslov BY SUSAN PASLOV Nevada Appeal columnist September 11, 2002 Congress has recently voted to send 77,000 tons of high-level (radioactive) nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain in Nevada for permanent storage. It did the bidding of the Department of Energy and President Bush, who in turn appear to serve at the whim of the nuclear energy industry. Of note, of the 60 U.S. senators who voted for the dump, 45 have received an average of $50,585 a year between 1997 and 2002 from companies that operate nuclear power plants, nuclear trade groups and companies that develop nuclear technology (Las Vegas Sun). There are varying opinions about this vote. Some Nevadans feel that this could provide an economic boondoggle, and that we must exploit the eventuality of becoming the nation's dump. Perhaps steep licensing and user fees could be levied against any state which dumps their waste here (this could run afoul of the Interstate Commerce Clause, however). Many new jobs could be created, especially in the security field, since Yucca Mountain would likely become a favorite target for terrorists, as would the routes taken in shipping the waste to Nevada. The economy could flourish, with working people spending more and pumping up sales tax revenues. Indeed, the short-term economic benefits could be fantastic. However, sobering thoughts attend this economic excitement. Accurate and objective science took a back seat to political expediency. And several inequities took place in the process of "sticking it to Nevada." At least five lawsuits have already been filed in federal courts, challenging the DOE's transparently political/inequitable push to send nuclear waste here. As columnist Guy Farmer noted, the decision was based solely on politics and mostly along partisan lines. The inequities spin off from shabby statesman-ship. The two Utah U.S. senators have cut a deal with the Department of Energy to keep nuclear waste out of Utah. In exchange they have gladly voted to stick Nevada with the waste. Two Idaho senators joined up out of self-interest as well. Even some opponents of the dump cast votes against it only out of self interest (not wanting waste transported through their states) and without apparent concern for the larger questions of unconstitutionality and simple fairness. The morals of a Uriah Heap come to mind. George W Bush's promise to Nevadans to base his decision on "sound science" (made in the election campaign of 2000) was not kept. In fact, several reputable entities have strongly questioned the Yucca Mountain Project, including the National Academy of Sciences. The Government Accounting Office, the support and research arm for Congress, found over 200 unresolved scientific concerns in the proposed project, both onsite and in potential transport routes. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has listed 293 unresolved scientific issues. In addition to the lie about "sound science," which says the deposit of the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain is safe, there is the compelling question of "states' rights." Practically speaking, it isn't hard for the nuclear industry and its allies in government to force their will on Nevada, however illegal /immoral the act. After all, we are a small state with only four electoral votes, considered just a wasteland by many in the East. What can and must stop this bullying is the U.S. Constitution, which looks out for states, whether weak or strong. The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution grants broad powers to each state to regulate its own affairs. It reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Among other things, each state must protect and defend the health, safety and welfare of its people. This is one reason that Gov. Guinn vetoed the nuclear waste repository. For purposes of political expediency our federal government is violating the spirit, if not the letter, of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. The lawsuits being brought against the DOE, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Environmental Protection Agency, Secretary Abraham and President Bush must be joined by a challenge on grounds of unconstitutionality. This is probably the most crucial challenge Nevada must bring. For it is the U.S. Constitution that must protect the rights and sovereignty of Nevada (or any other state), size or influence notwithstanding. To help with legal/lobbying fees, please contribute to Gov. Guinn's "Nevada Protection Fund," 1802 N. Carson, Suite 252, Carson City 89701. Susan Paslov is a retired attorney who teaches English as a Second Language. ***************************************************************** 27 Radiation fears after revelations of uranium The World Today - 12/9/2002: JOHN HIGHFIELD: In the wake of news that Rio Tinto, the giant mining corporation, plans to close the Jabiluka Uranium Mine near Kakadu National Park in the Northern Territory if it can't gain the support of traditional owners, there've been revelations today of more uranium sludge leaks from the Beverley Uranium Mine in South Australia. The latest incidents, ranging between 50 litres to almost 1,750 litres of acid uranium solution, now appear on the South Australian government's Primary Industries website after being reported by the company that runs the mine, Heathgate Resources. There's a Senate inquiry looming about the effectiveness of the monitoring and reporting at the uranium sites, so questions are obviously being asked whether enough is being done to prevent them. Nance Haxton reports. NANCE HAXTON: The Beverley uranium mine in the foothills of South Australia's northern Flinders Ranges, about 600 kilometres north of Adelaide, has had its share of controversy in recent years. It was the scene of heated battles between police and protestors two years ago when the commercial plant was being constructed after the trial mine was deemed successful by the Federal Government. The mine's operator, Heathgate Resources, uses the 'in situ' mining method where diluted acid solution pumps the uranium to the surface. Heathgate revealed in May this year that almost 15,000 litres of acid uranium solution spilt from a faulty joint. However it is the latest revelations that there have been more spills since that has sent Green groups, Federal Senators and Aboriginal traditional owners into a spin. Adnyamathanha Traditional Lands Association chairperson, Vince Coulthard, told AM this morning that these are just the latest in a number of worrying leaks at the mine. VINCE COULTHARD: One leak's too many, you know? They can walk away from that area after closing up that mine but we, we'll continue to live in that, in the vicinity of that mine. NANCE HAXTON: In a letter to the South Australian government, Heathgate Resources defended the spills by saying the fluid was generally less than 20 parts per million uranium, and that they reported a number of spills that were not required under minimum guidelines, in the interests of full disclosure. However, the Australian Conservation Foundation says the leaks show that the state government is not doing enough to monitor and prevent uranium leaks. Campaign officer, David Noonan. DAVID NOONAN: This is evidence now of no effect, no response, by the government that has prevented those leaks occurring over time. We had major leaks in May, we had major leaks in January. Effectively there's no scrutiny. There's no effective intervention being made in the Beverley uranium mine operations. NANCE HAXTON: The state's Mineral Resources Minister, Paul Holloway, says the government has completed a review called the Backman Report, investigating recording procedures into spills at uranium mines. He says the government will not release the report's findings to the public until it is considered by Cabinet. However, it does contain some recommendations for improvement. He says the latest leaks are not of a size to cause concern. PAUL HOLLOWAY: I think it's important to know that these particular spills are just a fluid that really, they don't represent any harm to any individual or to the environment in any way. NANCE HAXTON: However, Senator Lyn Allison who is heading a Senate inquiry into environmental regulation of uranium mining which is soon to begin hearings in the Northern Territory and South Australia, disagrees with Minister Holloway saying the leaks, no matter how small, are indicative of a wider problem. LYN ALLISON: It’s the fact that there's been so many leaks at Beverley, in particular, where of course 60,000 litres of highly acidic radioactive solution leaked from a ruptured pipe in January this year. But that's just one of almost too many to mention. In those cases we need to be sure that uranium is not spreading into the environment and so I think there are already major question marks about the environmental damage that this mine is causing. JOHN HIGHFIELD: Victorian Democrat Senator Lyn Allison was speaking with our reporter Nance Haxton. [ABC Online] [ border=] Policy [http://www.abc.net.au/privacy.htm] ***************************************************************** 28 Selling a nuclear plant to the Hartsville area * Most Tennesseans won't quarrel with a $1.1 billion investment and 250 jobs for the state, but it's the people of Trousdale County and Louisiana Energy Services who will determine whether nuclear fuel will be made in Hartsville. LES must persuade the federal government that the proposed plant meets a mountain of standards. But Rep. Bart Gordon got it right in noting that ultimately the people of Trousdale County will decide what they want, and LES must convince them. With more than two years before any building starts, they have plenty of time to discuss the proposal. The potential impact is huge. If constructed, the plant would be only the second nuclear fuel-producing facility in the United States. Supporters tout it as a way to reduce American dependence on Russian sources for as much as 55% of nuclear fuel currently purchased there. For Tennessee, the 250 permanent jobs created and 400 construction jobs mean new tax revenues, something this financially strapped state can't ignore. Whether those jobs will put Trousdale County and Hartsville residents to work is just one of many issues to be considered. Nearly 70% of the jobs called for skilled technicians with a minimum of two years college and nuclear experience. Another 10% would include janitorial and administration clerks. Even if Trousdale County residents don't fill those jobs, they'll have to think about how the plant will impact other jobs in the community. Safety considerations undoubtedly will top the list, especially with the heightened concerns about terrorism. The impact on the environment, including waste disposal, fuel transportation and land use, will interest the county as well as its neighbors. Trousdale County officials already are trying to become fully informed about the project. The county prepared for TVA's nuclear power plant only to see it go for naught but the experience may be useful as officials investigate this venture. Planning officials are preparing to require duplicates of all licensing and research information submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on the proposal. LES certainly should be amenable to full disclosure. The consortium can cite a good safety record and a membership that includes Duke Power, a Canadian mining company and a European uranium enrichment operation. But its international partners and even federal authority won't mean much without the support of its proposed neighbors. The plan sounds great from afar. Whether it sounds right for those next door is the question that still must be answered. © Copyright 2002 The Tennessean ***************************************************************** 29 AU: Anti-nuclear activists set sail to intercept British ships - smh.com.au September 13 2002 Irish anti-nuclear activists led by Greenpeace's flagship, the Rainbow Warrior, left port yesterday to intercept two armed British vessels carrying a cargo of rejected nuclear fuel toward the Irish Sea. The protesters, aboard about 10 vessels, said they wouldn't try to board or block the two ships operated by British Nuclear Fuels Ltd, which runs the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant on England's north-west coast. BNFL said the two ships would stay away from Irish waters, which extend 19km off the coast. All major Irish parties for decades have appealed for Britain to shut Sellafield, one of the world's few facilities for recycling nuclear waste, about 250km north-east of Dublin. Scientists agree that radiation levels are low in the Irish Sea between Britain and Ireland. But since the terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, politicians here have increasingly worried that Sellafield or its nuclear shipments could became a target. Anti-nuclear sentiment has been flaring in Ireland in the buildup to the expected arrival within the next week of the two British Nuclear Fuels ships, which are carrying about five tonnes of fuel pellets made from reclaimed uranium and plutonium. A Japanese nuclear plant rejected the pellets and ordered them shipped back to Britain after BNFL admitted its Sellafield staff fabricated safety checks on their 1999 production. Greenpeace campaigner Shaun Birnie said their protest would gather more anti-nuclear vessels from Wales and Scotland before trying to locate the two ships, the Pacific Pintail and Pacific Teal, possibly as soon as Sunday. As of today the two BNFL ships were still sailing north off the Portuguese island of Madeira. Birnie said protesters from England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales would demonstrate a "united voice from all the nations of the Irish Sea that this should be the last plutonium transport by BNFL." The Greenpeace-led mission received backing from Prime Minister Bertie Ahern, who visited the Rainbow Warrior on Wednesday, and the largest opposition party, Fine Gael. "I stand by my assertion that if Sellafield were hit by terrorists, then death would be the least we had to fear," Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny said today aboard the Rainbow Warrior before it departed Dublin's River Liffey for the Irish Sea. He also visited the ship last week. Referring to the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the former Soviet Union, he said Irish people were determined "to see that Ireland doesn't become another Belarus, and that our children don't become the new Chernobyl children." Ahern's government has already ordered the tiny Irish navy and air corps to monitor the Pacific Pintail and the Pacific Teal to ensure neither sinks or is seized by terrorists. AP Copyright © 2002. The Sydney Morning Herald. advertise ***************************************************************** 30 Local Attorney Voices Concerns At Erwin Hearing* Sun Photo by Bill Jones Johnson City resident Kent Aiken, standing at microphone, speaks during a public hearing at the Unicoi County Courthouse on Nuclear Fuel Services? request to renew its permit to store and treat mixed hazardous wastes at its Erwin plant. Seated in the front row at right is Greeneville lawyer Todd Chapman, who also addressed Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) officials during the hearing. Beside Chapman is Greene County resident Trudy Wallack, who attended the hearing but did not speak. By: /By BILL JONES/Staff Writer/ Source:/ The Greeneville Sun / 09-11-2002 ERWIN ? Five area residents, including a Greeneville attorney, spoke here on Tuesday evening during a public hearing on the proposed renewal of a state permit that allows Nuclear Fuel Services Inc. (NFS) to store and treat ?mixed hazardous waste? at its plant here. Several of the speakers, including Greeneville attorney Todd Chapman and Gerald O?Connor, president of Erwin-based Impact Plastics Incorporated, questioned renewal of the permit. Chapman represents 15 Northeast Tennessee residents who have filed petitions asking the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to hold a public hearing on an unrelated uranium down-blending operation NFS wishes to implement at the Erwin plant site. On Tuesday evening, Chapman said he was concerned about the possible impact on Greeneville?s drinking water ? which comes from the Nolichucky River ? as the result of possible contamination entering the river from the NFS plant. ?I can?t get away from the location of the facility (the NFS plant),? Chapman said during the hearing. ?Why store this stuff on the banks of a river? Is that the most insane thing, or am I just coming out of left field?? He also questioned what might happen in the event that a ?100-year flood? of the Nolichucky River struck the NFS plant. ?Back in the 1970s there was a tremendous flood that took out many bridges in Greene County,? he said. ?What happens if that happens again? What happens if it?s five times that bad? Where does this stuff go?? NFS officials deny, however, that their operations pose any danger of contamination to the river. Chapman also asked TDEC officials to respond, in their final report, to a lengthy list of questions, including everything from who the owners of the NFS plant are to how many rules violations have taken place at the NFS plant over the years. Property Owner O?Connor, whose plant is located adjacent to the NFS plant in Erwin, has filed suit in U.S. District Court in Greeneville against NFS. That suit alleges that ground water beneath O?Connor?s property is contaminated by radioactive materials from the NFS property. ?I?ve been struggling with this thing for six and a half years with my own money,? he said. ?I have hundreds of thousands of dollars in it. I?m a property owner and I?m frustrated with it,? O?Connor said during the hearing. ?They?re (NFS) already in violation of the Tennessee Clean Water Act. Where do you go from there?? O?Connor explained that he had had numerous wells drilled on his property to check for contamination and maintained that the water beneath his property was contaminated. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) official Charlie Burroughs said, in response, that the correction action portion of the permit, if it is renewed by TDEC, requires NFS to remediate (clean up) contaminated ground water. NFS recently filed an answer to the suit, seeking to have it dismissed, partially on the grounds that O?Connor has not shown that he has actually been harmed by the alleged contamination. NFS has operated a plant on Banner Hill Road in Erwin since 1957 that manufactures fuel for the U.S. Navy?s nuclear-powered surface ships and submarines. NFS Permit Background Since March 28, 1991, the NFS plant has had a ?mixed waste? storage and treatment permit from the TDEC, according to documents distributed during the Tuesday evening public hearing. That permit was scheduled to expire on March 28, 2001, but NFS applied for renewal of the permit about six months before the scheduled expiration date, according to TDEC officials. The hearing, which was conducted in an upstairs courtroom at the Unicoi County Courthouse by TDEC officials, began about 6:30 p.m. with members of the public being allowed to inspect a draft copy of the proposed permit and speak with TDEC officials. At 7 p.m., the hearing was convened by TDEC Hearing Officer Ed Casey, who told members of the audience that only those comments pertinent to the NFS permit renewal would be considered. Casey said the format for the hearing would consist of an opening statement from NFS Environmental Safety Manager Janice Greene followed by an explanation of the proposed permit by Dilraj Mokha, a TDEC environmental protection specialist. Following those presentations, Casey explained, members of the public who had signed up before the meeting would be allowed to speak, with their remarks recorded as part of the record of the hearing. NFS Position Greene pointed out during her opening statement that NFS had greatly reduced over the past 10 years the amount of mixed hazardous waste stored at the Erwin plant site. ?There is no increase in existing capacities for storage,? Greene said. ?NFS will only store and treat wastes that are generated on the plant site. This is a renewal request with no changes to the existing permit.? NFS, according to Greene, has made significant progress in reducing stored mixed waste at the Erwin plant. Mixed waste, she said, is regulated as both a hazardous and a radioactive waste. NFS spokesman Tony Treadway said during a pre-meeting interview that the waste in question consisted of such things as contaminated gloves and pieces of cheesecloth used to clean up laboratory spills. Greene told the audience during her remarks that when the original mixed hazardous waste storage and treatment permit was issued, there was no place in the country where mixed waste could be shipped for treatment or disposal. Since that time, however, facilities in Utah and elsewhere have become available for disposal of such waste. In addition, she said, NFS has, over the years, found ways to reduce the amount of mixed hazardous waste that it generates from about 12 drums a year of material to only two drums a year now. ?In the past two years, NFS has shipped more than half of its inventory of mixed waste containers for disposal,? she said. ?The company is actively pursuing additional shipments to reduce its inventory further.? Small quantities of mixed waste are generated each year though laboratory analysis of NFS fuel material and from plant clean-up operations, according to Greene?s remarks and an NFS news release distributed during the meeting. Other Projects During the public hearing Greene also covered several clean-up projects that she said are underway at the plant, including efforts to clean up contaminated ground water. Full-scale ground water remediation began this month at the plant to reduce hazardous and radioactive materials, she said. ?The pilot test of the process showed an 83 percent reduction in the hazardous material and a 60 percent reduction in the radioactive concentrations in the affected ground water,? according to an NFS news release. Greene said the ground water clean-up process currently being implemented involves injecting ?a nutrient? into the ground water. That, she said, causes microorganisms to literally eat away at dissolved uranium and chemical contaminants. The contaminated ground water does not pose a risk to the public or drinking water supplies, according to the NFS news release. Permit Scope TDEC?s Dilraj Mokha read a statement during the hearing, explaining the permit and its requirements for ?continuing corrective action.? ?The operations of this mixed hazardous waste are being continued in the 310 Warehouse Building and Building 304,? Mokha read. ?The 310 Warehouse Building consists of a container storage unit having a maximum capacity of 28,276 gallons. ?This warehouse was constructed in September 1970 as a storage area for operating supplies to support nuclear manufacturing operations and as a staging area for low level nuclear waste (LLW) awaiting shipment to a licensed burial site. Mixed wastes are stored in this unit. ?Building 304 houses the mercury mixed waste treatment facility which includes a container storage unit with a maximum storage capacity of 5,453 gallons, and a tank treatment/storage unit with a maximum capacity of 1,225 gallons. ?This mercury mixed waste treatment facility will only store and treat mixed mercury (DO09) waste that is generated on site. There is a shredder in Building 304 that shreds mixed D009 waste material into a size suitable for treatment in the D009 treatment tank unit.? During her remarks, NFS? Greene pointed out that the treatment unit described by TDEC is no longer in operation. TDEC Mokha's noted during her remarks that also included as part of the draft permit are the corrective action conditions for what she called Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs) and Areas Of Concern (AOCs). ?Pursuant to this permit, NFS shall be required to investigate any releases of hazardous waste or hazardous constituents at the facility, regardless of the time at which waste was placed in a unit, and to take appropriate corrective action for any such releases,? Mokha said. Extent of Contamination Since the issuance of the previous permit, several investigations have been conducted at NFS to determine the nature and extent of ground water contamination which resulted from past manufacturing and waste management practices at the nuclear fuel production facility, according to a TDEC document distributed during the meeting. ?The extent of on-site ground water contamination has been well defined through the installation and sampling of over 80 monitoring wells within the 62-acre facility,? the document stated. An (underground, contaminated) ground water plume (plus degradation products) covers almost 13 acres (600-feet x 900-feet) in the northernmost portion of the facility, according to the TDEC document. ?Based on off-site ground water monitoring data and constituent transport modeling, the off-site plume has been estimated to extend an additional 5-8 acres in a northwest direction toward the backwash area of the Nolichucky River.? Although a TDEC document lists a number of hazardous materials as being in the ground water beneath the NFS site, it maintains that uranium is not believed to be in ground water beyond the boundaries of the NFS site. ?Since uranium is not routinely detected in the facility boundary wells, it is not believed to be present in the off-site ground water at concentrations above the proposed ... MCL for drinking water (30 pCi/L),? the TDEC document states. Comments about our site © 2002 East Tennessee Network - R.A.I.D. (Regionalized Access ***************************************************************** 31 State law found to cover uranium mines DJC.COM: Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce September 11, 2002 SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) -- 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. Copyright ©2002 Seattle Daily Journal and djc.com. ***************************************************************** 32 Text of President Bush's speech to the United Nations on Thursday, as released by the White House:/ The Associated Press Thursday, September 12, 2002; 12:46 PM PRESIDENT BUSH: Mr. Secretary-General, Mr. President, distinguished ladies and gentlemen: We meet one year and one day after a terrorist attack brought grief to my country, and to the citizens of many countries. Yesterday, we remembered the innocent lives taken that terrible morning. Today, we turn to the urgent duty of protecting other lives, without illusion and without fear. We have accomplished much in the last year ? in Afghanistan and beyond. We have much yet to do ? in Afghanistan and beyond. Many nations represent here have joined in the fight against global terror ? and the people of the United States are grateful. The United Nations was born in the hope that survived a world war ? the hope of a world moving toward justice, escaping old patterns of conflict and fear. The founding members resolved that the peace of the world must never again be destroyed by the will and wickedness of any man. We created a United Nations Security Council, so that ? unlike the League of Nations ? our deliberations would be more than talk, and our resolutions would be more than wishes. After generations of deceitful dictators, broken treaties and squandered lives, we dedicate ourselves to standards of human dignity shared by all, and to a system of security defended by all. Today, these standards, and this security, are challenged. Our commitment to human dignity is challenged by persistent poverty and raging disease. The suffering is great, and our responsibilities are clear. The United States is joining with the world to supply aid where it reaches people and lift up lives ... to extend trade and the prosperity it brings ... and to bring medical care where it is desperately needed. As a symbol of our commitment to human dignity, the United State will return to UNESCO. This organization has been reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance human rights, tolerance, and learning. Our common security is challenged by regional conflicts ? ethnic and religious strife that is ancient but not inevitable. In the Middle East, there can be no peace for either side without freedom for both sides. America stands committed to an independent and democratic Palestine, living beside Israel in peace and security. Like all other people, Palestinians deserve a government that serves their interests and listens to their voices. My nation will continue to encourage all parties to step up to their responsibilities as we seek a just and comprehensive settlement to the conflict. Above all, our principles and our security are challenged today by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no limit to their violent ambitions. In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale. In one place ? in one regime ? we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms ... exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront. Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped ? by the might of coalition forces, and the will of the United Nations. To suspend hostilities and to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear: to him, and to all. And he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations, and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge ? by his deceptions, and by his cruelties ? Saddam Hussein has made the case again himself. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organization that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September 11th. And al-Qaida terrorists escaped from Afghanistan are known to be in Iraq. This demand goes ignored. Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human rights found that Iraq continues to commit "extremely grave violations" of human rights and that the regime's repression is "all pervasive." Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating, burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands; children in the presence of their parents ? all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. Last year the Secretary-General's high-level coordinator of this issue reported that Kuwaiti, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and Omani nationals remain unaccounted for ? more than 600 people. One American pilot is among them. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded the Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organization that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September 11th. And al-Qaida terrorists escaped from Afghanistan are known to be in Iraq. In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge. From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. United Nations inspections also reveal that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard, and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons. And in 1995 ? after four years of deception ? Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its unclear program ? weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, an accounting of nuclear materials, and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq's state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons. Iraq also possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N. Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long-range missiles that could inflict mass death throughout the region. In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council resolutions. In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and arms his country. By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens. In 1991, Iraq promised U.N. inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to verify Iraq's commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles. Iraq broke this promise, spending seven years deceiving, evading and harassing U.N. inspectors before ceasing cooperation entirely. Just months after the 1991 cease-fire, the Security Council twice renewed its demand that the Iraqi regime cooperate fully with inspectors, "condemning" Iraq's "serious violations" of its obligations. The Security Council again renewed that demand in 1994 and twice more in 1996, "deploring" Iraq's "clear violations" of its obligations. The Security Council renewed its demand three more times in 1997, citing "flagrant violations" and three more times in 1998, calling Iraq's behavior "totally unacceptable." And in 1999, the demand was renewed yet again. As we meet today, it has been almost four years since the last U.N. inspectors set foot in Iraq ? four years for the Iraqi regime to plan and build and test behind a cloak of secrecy. We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in the country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take. Delegates to the General Assembly: We have been more than patient. We have tried sanctions. We have tried the carrot of "oil for food" and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming. The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding or will it be irrelevant? The United States helped found the United Nations. We want the U.N. to be effective and respected and successful. We want the resolutions of the world's most important multilateral body to be enforced. Right now these resolutions are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime. Our partnership of nations can meet the test before us, by making clear what we now expect of the Iraqi regime. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles and all related material. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it, as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans and others ? again as required by Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown. It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait, and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues ? as required by the Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program, to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people. If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis ? a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty and internationally supervised elections. The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people, who have suffered for too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it and the security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest and open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq. We can harbor no illusions. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980, and Kuwait in 1990. He has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel. His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15 and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in Northern Iraq. He has gassed many Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages. My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council on a new resolution to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately and decisively to hold Iraq to account. The purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced ? the just demands of peace and security will be met ? or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power. Events can turn in one of two ways. If we fail to act in the face of danger, the people of Iraq will continue to live in brutal submission. The regime will have new power to bully, dominate and conquer its neighbors, condemning the Middle East to more years of bloodshed and fear. The region will remain unstable, with little hope of freedom and isolated from the progress of our times. With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors. If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world. These nations can show by their example that honest government, and respect for women, and the great Islamic tradition of learning can triumph in the Middle East and beyond. And we will show that the promise of the United Nations can be fulfilled in our time. Neither of these outcomes is certain. Both have been set before us. We must choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security, and for the permanent rights and hopes of mankind. By heritage and by choice, the United States of America will make that stand. Delegates to the United Nations, you have the power to make that stand as well. Thank you. © 2002 The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 33 Bush's Evidence of Iraq's Nuclear Ability Questioned Sep 12, 2002 By Earl Lane WASHINGTON BUREAU; Special correspondent Knut Royce contributed to this story. September 12, 2002 Washington - As President George W. Bush takes his case against Iraq to the United Nations today, some specialists say the administration's evidence on Saddam Hussein's nuclear capabilities is too vague to support pre-emptive military action. The administration says Iraq has tried several times to buy aluminum tubes for use in centrifuge equipment to make bomb-grade uranium. While the attempts were thwarted, the specialists note that such materials have other uses. The Bush administration also has cited commercially available satellite photos showing new construction at sites once associated with Iraq's nuclear program and other weapons activities. But the import of those photos, also of interest to UN agencies, remains unclear. "You can't have any conclusion about the purpose of these sites until you get inspectors on the ground," said Mark Gwozdecky, a spokesman for the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. David Albright, a former consultant to UN nuclear weapons inspectors, said the evidence discussed publicly is ambiguous, at best. "This is not strong evidence if you are trying to make a case for pre-emptive military action," he said. The administration also has been trying to make its case in closed briefings for members of Congress, but some have emerged asking for more specifics. The debate spotlights the difficulty in trying to assess what is happening in Iraq based on incomplete evidence and a demonstrated history of deception by Iraqi officials. In his speech to the UN, Bush is expected to brand Hussein an outlaw who has repeatedly defied the world body. However, he is not expected to offer new details on Iraq's weapons program. Albright and others said it would be helpful for the administration to release more data on Iraq's effort to buy materials on the open market that could help it reconstitute its nuclear weapons program. With information on the metallic composition, thickness and diameter of the aluminum tubes, for example, their potential use could be confirmed. "It's quite legitimate to ask for this information," Albright said. Centrifuges spin uranium in gaseous form at high speed to separate out the desired isotope, uranium-235, for use in a bomb. Gary Milhollin, director of the Washington-based Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, said a news account of the intended use of the tubing - as outer casing for centrifuges - is curious. "You need specialized aluminum for the rotor of a centrifuge, not the housing," Milhollin said. "An allegation that it was destined for use in housings is a little puzzling." Albright said he had learned there was a significant debate within the intelligence community on the intended purpose of the aluminum tubing, which he said also could be used for casings of artillery rockets. A U.S. official said, however, that there is a consensus within the CIA that the tubes would have been used in centrifuges. He acknowledged there had been some disagreement elsewhere in the intelligence community, which he declined to discuss. Experts say there is little doubt Iraq is still interested in researching and developing nuclear weapons. "We believe that Iraq has probably continued at least low-level theoretical R&D associated with its nuclear program," the CIA told Congress earlier this year. The crucial missing ingredient remains fissile material, either plutonium or enriched uranium. If Iraq were to acquire such material on the black market - and there is no evidence it has - specialists say it probably could make a nuclear weapon in a matter of months. But if Iraq must build its own uranium-enrichment facilities, they say, it could take years to produce enough weapons-usable material. "I don't think there is any public evidence of an immediate threat," said Arjun Makhijani, president of the nonprofit Institute for Energy and Environmental Research in Takoma Park, Md. He said the UN should demand that Iraq allow an aggressive new round of inspections to search for evidence of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. David Kay, the former chief nuclear inspector, said that if inspectors returned to Iraq tomorrow, "I have little confidence that we could find" the full extent of its presumed nuclear program, given Iraq's past obstruction of inspection teams. Makhijani said Kay is overly pessimistic and noted that before the inspectors left in 1998, they had successfully found sites of previously unknown Iraqi nuclear activity. Special correspondent Knut Royce contributed to this story. Copyright © 2002, Newsday, Inc. ***************************************************************** 34 Sinister secrets secreted Sinister secrets secreted -- The Washington Times September 12, 2002 Arnaud de Borchgrave Rogue states learned long ago that America's spies in the sky could see everything on Earth down to a 6-inch scar on a human face. The obvious concealment for building proscribed weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) is to dig deep -- very deep. A leftist British member of Parliament inadvertently let the cobra out of the basket when he said the elevator he took for his audience with Saddam Hussein went down so deep "that my ears popped." Yet the picture of the MP shaking hands with the dictator appeared to have been taken inside one of the umpteen palaces built since the end of the Gulf war. In other words, a go-anywhere-do-anything inspection regime voted by the U.N. Security Council (assuming no vetoes from France, Russia or China) could not possibly detect a door-sized opening on the side of a hill, covered with soil that leads down to huge underground hangars where WMDs are stored, such as a former Soviet tactical nuclear weapon purchased on the Russian black market. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. On Nov. 15, 1974, a South Korean army patrol was on a routine patrol near the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) when it noticed steam rising from the ground. Hoping they had discovered a hot spring on a chilly morning, the South Korean soldiers quickly discovered a tunnel that extended 1,000 meters south. The chatter of machine-gun fire from a North Korean guard post rapidly halted their discovery. The South Korean patrol returned fire to cover its retreat. The tunnel was designed to allow an entire North Korean division to move under the DMZ and pop up behind U.S. and Korean lines in the event of war. It was made of reinforced concrete slabs replete with electric power and lighting, weapons storage, sleeping areas and a narrow gauge railroad with carts to move troops quickly from North to South Korea. The discovery led to three more tunnels, the last one unearthed March 3, 1990. The North Koreans had been digging their way deep into South Korea for years. Col. Moammar Gadhafi, now the leader of the new African Union (that replaced the OAU), has employed thousands of Korean and Filipino workers for the past 20 years, a quarter-mile underground, building a $25 billion project that, when finished, will have more than 2,000 miles of west-east tunnel from Tunisia to Egypt, and south to the borders of the Sudan and Chad. The "Great Man-Made River Project" across the Sahara contains, besides the pipelines, huge underground storage areas every 50 miles that foreign engineers, retired from the job, say are made of reinforced concrete suitable for anything from storing supplies to hiding WMDs. Col. Gadhafi has never made a secret of his nuclear ambitions. Libya tried to buy a nuclear weapon from China in 1970 and Russia in 1992. The Western intelligence community long ago established Libya's role in helping Pakistan develop its nuclear arsenal. Libya was the intermediary in procuring Niger-mined uranium, and with direct financial assistance. Pakistani nukes, in Col. Ghadafi's mind, would eventually become the Islamic world's answer to the nuclear monopoly of the U.N. Security Council's Big Five powers. Col. Gadhafi has never made a secret of his determination to acquire a nuclear capability. In his own words, "the primary threat to Libya is Israel's arsenal of nuclear weapons and missiles capable of hitting targets in Libya." During the 1980s, Libya succeeded in producing up to 100 tons of blister and nerve agents at its Rabta facility. The precursor chemicals were obtained from foreign sources, said the Pentagon's "Counterproliferation Paper No. 8" in October 2000. The Rabta facility was closed down in 1990 because of a fire and reopened in 1996. Meanwhile Col. Gadhafi built a deeply buried new facility at Tarhunah, southeast of Tripoli. Foreign engineers debriefed by Western intelligence services said this new facility was capable of producing up to 1,000 tons of mustard gas, 90 tons of sarin, and 1,300 tons of soman nerve agent per year. Libya also has the delivery vehicles courtesy of North Korean missile technology. The only mitigating factor in the Libyan WMD buildup is that Col. Gadhafi now is convinced that radical Islam is a bigger threat to his regime than to the U.S. and has volunteered intelligence on transnational terrorism to Western intelligence services. On the other hand, prior to his "responsible statesman" image, Col. Gadhafi, and his brother-in-law Abdullah Senoussi, the head of Libyan intelligence, had interfered with a mix of terrorism, lavishly funded subversion and overt military aggression in the internal affairs of no less than 44 countries. In October 1978, the Bobbsey twins of international terrorism airlifted 3,000 regular army troops down to the equator in a belated attempt to save fellow Muslim Idi Amin, the butcher of Uganda. In a geopolitical skit worthy of Groucho Marx, Idi Amin's army retreated without telling the Libyans. They then used the trucks assigned to the Libyans to carry their newly plundered wealth in the opposite direction. Col. Gadhafi's troops suddenly found themselves alone on the front line against the Uganda National Liberation Front. Amin fled by air to Libya and then Saudi Arabia where the House of Saud gave him digs befitting his exalted rank for life. Top terrorist spook Senoussi was also the boss of the two Libyan agents accused in the downing of Pan Am 103 on Dec. 21, 1988, which killed 270 (one of them was acquitted by the International Court in The Hague). The French government has an international warrant outstanding against Senoussi for allegedly ordering a bomb planted on the French UTA airliner that was blown out of the sky over Niger in 1989, killing 170. Col. Gadhafi, aged 27, seized power as an unknown Libyan army sergeant in September 1969. King Idris of Libya was on his yacht in the eastern Mediterranean. The new CIA station chief was on his way by car sampling the Guide Michelin's three-star restaurants along the Rhone Valley. Unbeknownst to the CIA, and by sheer coincidence, the British MI6 spook was on a similar epicurean quest in the Loire Valley on his way back from home leave. The unpredictable Libyan colonel is still in power 33 years later. Anyone for regime change? It would be irredeemably gullible to posit that Saddam has not been eagerly beavering away underground during the past 11 years. After the Gulf war, refugees from northern Iraq talked of major excavation work inside a mountain northeast of Baghdad. And it would be equally naive to think Saddam was bluffing when he was reported to have said at the end of June that Iraq would use "all weapons on all fronts" just as soon as America's military might throws the first punch. Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large for The Washington Times, a position he also holds with United Press International. Back to Commentary [http://asp.washtimes.com/printarticle.asp?action=print&ArticleID=20020912-7549 7623] [http://asp.washtimes.com/mailarticle.asp?action=send&ArticleID=20020912-754976 23] Updated at 12:00 a.m. •

Bush Demands That U.N. Confront Iraq

[http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=BUSH] •

Reno Refuses to Concede to McBride

[http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=FLORIDA%2dGOVERNOR] •

Moussaoui's Lawyers Oppose Tape

[http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=MOUSSAOUI%2dCOCKPIT%2dTAPES] •

CDC Confirms West Nile Organs Link

[http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=WEST%2dNILE%2dBLOOD] •

Alleged Mullah Omar Statement Aired

[http://wire.ap.org/?SLUG=SEPT%2d11%2dTALIBAN%2dLEADER] Updated at 12:00 a.m. • McBride wins Florida primary -- maybe • UPI's Capital Comment for Sept. 12, 2002 • Greenspan warns deficit could hurt growth • Bush urges U.N. to act on Iraq • Argentine budget sees lower 2003 inflation • Positive reaction to Bush UN speech • Analysis: Bush speech prelude to UN action • Israel intensifies operations in Gaza [http://www.washingtontimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.washtimes.com/co mmentary/index.htm/15395633/Position2/AmazGertz001/BillSammon_120x90b.gif/34306 638323133323364383136623730] [http://www.washingtontimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.washtimes.com/co mmentary/index.htm/1156133755/Position3/WebdirectLearskyscraper/Lear-washtimes- 120x600-2.gif/34306638323133323364383136623730] [http://www.washingtontimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.washtimes.com/co mmentary/index.htm/1663907941/Position4/HomeGuide001/homeflash7.gif/34306638323 133323364383136623730] All site contents copyright © 2002 News World Communications, Inc. Privacy Policy [http://www.washingtontimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/www.washtimes.com/co mmentary/index.htm/245643700/Bottom/default/empty.gif/3430663832313332336438313 6623730] ***************************************************************** 35 N. Korea may cooperate on N-inspections [Daily Yomiuri On-Line] Yomiuri Shimbun North Korean leader Kim Jong Il will announce that he will cooperate with nuclear inspections conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) during his summit meeting with Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi on Sept. 17 in Pyongyang, government officials said Wednesday. During preparatory negotiations for the summit, the North Korean side indicated its intention of beginning to cooperate with the IAEA inspections, the officials said. In preparation for the full-scale inspections, North Korean negotiators said Pyongyang would begin: -- Gathering data on nuclear and related facilities. -- Accepting visits by nuclear engineering experts. -- Selecting equipment to be used in the inspections. If North Korea accepts the IAEA inspections, it will be the first time it has done so since October 1994, when Washington and Pyongyang reached a framework agreement over the issue. In the preparatory negotiations, the two sides have been discussing whether a joint statement released after the summit meeting will include an agreement that North Korea will start cooperating with the IAEA inspections, the officials said. The Japanese side has demanded Pyongyang take a cooperative position toward inspections to assess its suspected development of nuclear weapons, which is seen as the largest cause of instability in Northeast Asia. Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun ***************************************************************** 36 ARE NUCLEAR KAMIKAZES TO REACH AMERICA? ¹ Sep, 10 2002 The 9/11 tragedy that shook the world, is to become a symbol of the war in the 21st century There is a legend that first ballistic missiles with nuclear weaponry were piloted, in addition to the nuclear warheads they also had a cockpit for a military pilot. Although it seems fantastic, it is at the same time rather logical that ballistic missiles were piloted in the previous century: there were no guidance systems at the end of the 1950s. Missiles are not shells from a cannon which trajectory is defined with the initial starting conditions, speed and orientation of the gun. While the missile engine speeds up the missile and stages of the carrier get separated, a number of factors is operating to drive the missile far from the target. In fact, originally ballistic weapons were analogous to ancient catapults with which hostile fortresses had been attacked. That is why a great number of missiles was built to make sure that the target was hit. These are not only idle fantasies: lack of effective guiding systems was the subject of a comedy popular in the 1960s, Sia Forst, Frede! (Strike First, Freddie!) where spies wanted to seize “a military secret”, the carrier pigeons that controlled the flight from inside the missiles. It is perfectly clear that a man would perform more effective. In any case, development of surface, water and satellite guidance systems, the fleet of nuclear submarines equipped with missiles have saved leaders of the war race of the necessity to train units of space kamikaze (if such had really existed because we are speaking of a legend, although a very credible one). It was effectiveness of guidance systems, not the good will of Gorbachev and Reagan that encouraged them for nuclear disarmament. There was no need any more to keep big arsenals when amount of missiles compensated for poor accuracy. These aspects should be taken into consideration to give a better estimate to challenges addressed to the humanity in the new century. The problem is that only industrially developed and technologically advanced countries can afford expensive satellite guidance systems to follow the trajectory of missiles. And countries that have carrier rockets and nuclear weapons, but no guidance systems, have to use piloted nuclear missiles. And it is obvious that such countries can have just several piloted nuclear missiles, however all leading countries of the world will have to take them into consideration. Can a nation-wide anti-missile defense guarantee protection? First of all, there is no system that can guarantee a 100% effectiveness. Second, the very fact of such anti-missile defense changes the problem situation and new logical variants appear. Let’s consider them. The anti-missile defense of Moscow is maintained by intercepting missiles. Unlike the USA, Russia owns a developed technology to track aggressive strikes with three radio-locating bearings and intercept them with anti-aircraft missiles. It is known that attempts to spread the system over the Soviet Union territory had caused panic among the enemies. The USA insisted that construction of a Krasnoyarsk radar near the Yenissey River, that was meant to maintain the Russian national anti-aircraft defense, should be stopped. A similar system is just being worked upon in the USA; it will take a long time and much finance to complete it. However, is it to be effective enough? Does it make sense to work on it at all? You can find the answer in a book by Andrey Shmarygin, The Strategic Defensive Initiative As Seen By A Russian Colonel, on the Internet, or from articles by American scientific observer, John Horgan. A massive attack with a great number of missiles and warheads is the easiest way to break such anti-aircraft defense. However, individual nuclear kamikaze can also get it easily over, if a crew is well-equipped to meet radio-controlled interceptors. Besides, kamikazes can also use various means to mislead radars tracking them. Thus, introduction of the anti-aircraft defense will result in a new armament stage when ballistic “flying fortresses” will replace ballistic catapults. They will allow to break the defense, return the fire of interceptors and emit cover-ups of aluminum dust to repulse radio-waves. Another important principle can be also used in the anti-aircraft defense: the superstandard layers can be artificially ionized to hamper operations of the surface guidance systems. The Russian mass media are making much stir about a HAARP plant set by the USA in Alaska: an address of the Russian Duma deputies was published in Russia’s newspaper Parlamentskaya Gazeta (Parliamentary Newspaper) in July. The Russian deputies are anxious that the set will allow Americans to heat the atmosphere so that any ballistic missile will burn immediately before approaching, which in its turn, is to bring inevitable consequences for the planet. It is really awful, because even slightest fluctuations of the air temperature bring typhoons, frost, floods. However, these fears are groundless because the set can’t “roast” the atmosphere. It is well known that too much energy is necessary to heat the atmosphere to this condition. And what for? No matter how hot the atmosphere is, it can’t burn any missiles, moreover, they will successfully hit the targets. It is like hiding from arbalest arrows behind a campfire. Are Russian deputies so stupid not to understand that? Americans built the new expensive system to create some kind of northern lights to hamper the Soviet guidance systems. An interesting effect has been discovered by physicians: it turned out that air shines right in the place where two radar rays with definite characteristics cross. A man-caused “star” appears in the sky at that. If the radar rays are coordinated, the star starts roaming the sky, which in its turn produces a surprising effect. This effect caused many legends about unidentified flying objects that can fly quicker than the velocity of light, its course can be zigzag at that. It is like a spot of reflected light that children like so much. As for more realistic flying objects, you can read about them in my book, UFO Liquidation (it is available at www.krasu.ru on the Internet). A Russian popular newspaper Top Secret also published about the address of the Duma deputies concerning the set established in Alaska. The article proves that Americans used development of Serbian genius Nikola Tesla, who had invented the alternate current scheme. Nikola Tesla also invented distant ionization. One of the laboratories of the Siberian aerospace academy uses the effect for commercial purposes: neon lamps of lightning can shine wireless, which can’t be also damaged neither with rain, nor with snow. So, the panic is senseless, as it is only indirectly concerns the anti-aircraft defense. The Russian deputies have made for the US’s benefit when they alleged that the USA held something strong to protect them from a missile attack. In fact, artificial northern lights can save only from a precise guidance system. It is clear why no antennas are used on Alaska: the USSR is no longer a threat to the US’s nuclear safety, however, no luminous effects can save from nuclear kamikaze. Modifications of the ionospheric plasma will certainly negatively influence the weather, communications and world energy system. However, it is more important to consider its effect on the military rivalry. Many countries have ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. Until recently, usage of missiles and weapons was closely connected with surface-to-satellite guidance systems. Now, when this variant is excluded, attacks of space kamikaze in ballistic nuclear attack planes will be the only variant of a nuclear war. The 9/11 tragedy in America that shook the world, is to become a symbol of the war in the 21st century. Pavel Poluyan Krasnoyarsk Translated by Maria Gousseva Read the original in Russian: http://pravda.ru/main/2002/09/10/46833.html [http://pravda.ru/main/2002/09/10/46833.html] ***************************************************************** 37 U.N. Delegates Want Weapons Stoppage Las Vegas SUN September 11, 2002 By VANESSA ARRINGTON ASSOCIATED PRESS UNITED NATIONS- Peace will remain elusive as long as weapons pervade the world's nations, especially those recuperating from bloody internal wars, officials told delegates at a U.N. conference. There are currently 30,000 nuclear warheads and 639 million small arms in the world, making up a massive "war machine" that needs to be dismantled, Jayantha Dhanapala, the U.N. undersecretary-general for disarmament affairs, said Wednesday. The United States alone has shelled out some $5.6 trillion on nuclear weapons over the last five decades, Dhanapala said. He urged all nations to stop building weapons and instead invest resources in public health, education and sustainable development. Officials also spoke of the need to create more jobs for combatants who give up their arms. "There is no logic in disarmament unless (the person) knows there's a future without the need for weapons," said Jean-Marie Guehenno, the U.N. undersecretary-general of peacekeeping operations. The session on disarmament was held on the final day of the annual U.N. conference for non-governmental organizations. One of the speakers, a former child soldier in Sierra Leone's grisly civil war, founded a youth empowerment organization to help ex-combatants deal with their transition into regular society. But he warned that the situation in Sierra Leone is still fragile, despite the fact that the country's decade-long war was officially declared over in January. "The signing of a peace accord is not necessarily the end of the conflict, it's just another phase," said Vandy Kanyako. "There should be peace education so young people can grow up learning how to respect one another, to live in peace with their neighbors." The irony of discussing peace at a time when the U.N. General Assembly is abuzz with debate on a possible U.S. attack on Iraq was noted by the president of the Hague Appeal for Peace, who got a standing ovation after her spirited remarks. "We can't talk about demobilizing the war machine and ignore the drums beating to start another war," said Cora Weiss, accusing the United States of moving from patriotism to extreme nationalism in its fight against terrorism. Weiss also stirred up the audience when she called on the international community to incorporate more women into its peacekeeping efforts, directing some of her criticism at fellow panel member Guehenno. "We're simply asking to share the responsibility," said Weiss. "It's never happened in history, and the present ways are failing." In the closing session of the conference, Yugoslav President Vojislav Kostunica urged the European community to help maintain and build upon current stability in the Balkan region. "Europe cannot be 'single and free' until it encompasses the countries of southeast Europe," he said. "The price will be high indeed unless this is achieved: poverty, loss of hope, crime and political radicalism, which already threaten the region's security." -- All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc. ***************************************************************** 38 Bush Speech to the United Nations (washingtonpost.com) The Associated Press Thursday, September 12, 2002; 12:46 PM Text of President Bush's speech to the United Nations on Thursday, as released by the White House: PRESIDENT BUSH: Mr. Secretary-General, Mr. President, distinguished ladies and gentlemen: We meet one year and one day after a terrorist attack brought grief to my country, and to the citizens of many countries. Yesterday, we remembered the innocent lives taken that terrible morning. Today, we turn to the urgent duty of protecting other lives, without illusion and without fear. We have accomplished much in the last year – in Afghanistan and beyond. We have much yet to do – in Afghanistan and beyond. Many nations represent here have joined in the fight against global terror – and the people of the United States are grateful. The United Nations was born in the hope that survived a world war – the hope of a world moving toward justice, escaping old patterns of conflict and fear. The founding members resolved that the peace of the world must never again be destroyed by the will and wickedness of any man. We created a United Nations Security Council, so that – unlike the League of Nations – our deliberations would be more than talk, and our resolutions would be more than wishes. After generations of deceitful dictators, broken treaties and squandered lives, we dedicate ourselves to standards of human dignity shared by all, and to a system of security defended by all. Today, these standards, and this security, are challenged. Our commitment to human dignity is challenged by persistent poverty and raging disease. The suffering is great, and our responsibilities are clear. The United States is joining with the world to supply aid where it reaches people and lift up lives ... to extend trade and the prosperity it brings ... and to bring medical care where it is desperately needed. As a symbol of our commitment to human dignity, the United State will return to UNESCO. This organization has been reformed and America will participate fully in its mission to advance human rights, tolerance, and learning. Our common security is challenged by regional conflicts – ethnic and religious strife that is ancient but not inevitable. In the Middle East, there can be no peace for either side without freedom for both sides. America stands committed to an independent and democratic Palestine, living beside Israel in peace and security. Like all other people, Palestinians deserve a government that serves their interests and listens to their voices. My nation will continue to encourage all parties to step up to their responsibilities as we seek a just and comprehensive settlement to the conflict. Above all, our principles and our security are challenged today by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and have no limit to their violent ambitions. In the attacks on America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further destruction and building new bases for their war against civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale. In one place – in one regime – we find all these dangers, in their most lethal and aggressive forms ... exactly the kind of aggressive threat the United Nations was born to confront. Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped – by the might of coalition forces, and the will of the United Nations. To suspend hostilities and to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear: to him, and to all. And he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations, and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge – by his deceptions, and by his cruelties – Saddam Hussein has made the case again himself. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organization that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September 11th. And al-Qaida terrorists escaped from Afghanistan are known to be in Iraq. This demand goes ignored. Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human rights found that Iraq continues to commit "extremely grave violations" of human rights and that the regime's repression is "all pervasive." Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating, burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands; children in the presence of their parents – all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. Last year the Secretary-General's high-level coordinator of this issue reported that Kuwaiti, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and Omani nationals remain unaccounted for – more than 600 people. One American pilot is among them. In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded the Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organization that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September 11th. And al-Qaida terrorists escaped from Afghanistan are known to be in Iraq. In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge. From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. United Nations inspections also reveal that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard, and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons. And in 1995 – after four years of deception – Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its unclear program – weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, an accounting of nuclear materials, and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq's state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons. Iraq also possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N. Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long-range missiles that could inflict mass death throughout the region. In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council resolutions. In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and arms his country. By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens. In 1991, Iraq promised U.N. inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to verify Iraq's commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles. Iraq broke this promise, spending seven years deceiving, evading and harassing U.N. inspectors before ceasing cooperation entirely. Just months after the 1991 cease-fire, the Security Council twice renewed its demand that the Iraqi regime cooperate fully with inspectors, "condemning" Iraq's "serious violations" of its obligations. The Security Council again renewed that demand in 1994 and twice more in 1996, "deploring" Iraq's "clear violations" of its obligations. The Security Council renewed its demand three more times in 1997, citing "flagrant violations" and three more times in 1998, calling Iraq's behavior "totally unacceptable." And in 1999, the demand was renewed yet again. As we meet today, it has been almost four years since the last U.N. inspectors set foot in Iraq – four years for the Iraqi regime to plan and build and test behind a cloak of secrecy. We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in the country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic and the facts lead to one conclusion. Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take. Delegates to the General Assembly: We have been more than patient. We have tried sanctions. We have tried the carrot of "oil for food" and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has nuclear weapons is when, God forbid, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming. The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding or will it be irrelevant? The United States helped found the United Nations. We want the U.N. to be effective and respected and successful. We want the resolutions of the world's most important multilateral body to be enforced. Right now these resolutions are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime. Our partnership of nations can meet the test before us, by making clear what we now expect of the Iraqi regime. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles and all related material. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it, as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans and others – again as required by Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown. It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait, and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues – as required by the Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program, to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people. If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis – a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty and internationally supervised elections. The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people, who have suffered for too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it and the security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest and open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq. We can harbor no illusions. Saddam Hussein attacked Iran in 1980, and Kuwait in 1990. He has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Israel. His regime once ordered the killing of every person between the ages of 15 and 70 in certain Kurdish villages in Northern Iraq. He has gassed many Iranians and 40 Iraqi villages. My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council on a new resolution to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately and decisively to hold Iraq to account. The purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced – the just demands of peace and security will be met – or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power. Events can turn in one of two ways. If we fail to act in the face of danger, the people of Iraq will continue to live in brutal submission. The regime will have new power to bully, dominate and conquer its neighbors, condemning the Middle East to more years of bloodshed and fear. The region will remain unstable, with little hope of freedom and isolated from the progress of our times. With every step the Iraqi regime takes toward gaining and deploying the most terrible weapons, our own options to confront that regime will narrow. And if an emboldened regime were to supply these weapons to terrorist allies, then the attacks of September 11th would be a prelude to far greater horrors. If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world. These nations can show by their example that honest government, and respect for women, and the great Islamic tradition of learning can triumph in the Middle East and beyond. And we will show that the promise of the United Nations can be fulfilled in our time. Neither of these outcomes is certain. Both have been set before us. We must choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security, and for the permanent rights and hopes of mankind. By heritage and by choice, the United States of America will make that stand. Delegates to the United Nations, you have the power to make that stand as well. Thank you. © 2002 The Associated Press ***************************************************************** 39 White House spells out case against Iraq - CNN.com - September 12, 2002 Report is titled 'A Decade of Deception and Defiance' [President Bush addressed the United Nations' General Assembly Thursday, calling the Saddam Hussein regime ] President Bush addressed the United Nations' General Assembly Thursday, calling the Saddam Hussein regime "a grave and gathering danger." WASHINGTON (CNN) -- As the Bush administration makes its strongest bid yet for international and domestic support for action against Iraq this week, the White House released a report early Thursday, listing some of the principal accusations against Iraq and its leader. Bush addressed the United Nations' General Assembly later in the morning on Thursday, saying, "The Security Council resolutions will be enforced. The just demands of peace and security will be met. Or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power." (Full story) The report was intended to serve as a "background paper" for Bush's U.N. speech. "This document provides specific examples of how Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has systematically and continually violated 16 United Nations Security Council resolutions over the past decade, " the report said in a preface. White House report on Iraq + Lists Security Council resolutions the United States says Saddam Hussein has violated + Cites New York Times article in which Iraqi defector says he visited 20 secret facilities for producing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons + Alleges an array of human rights violations, citing various reports + Accuses Iraq of concealing biological weapons program from U.N. inspectors + Cities accounting inconsistencies regarding chemical weapons + Cites report on nuclear weapons that says Iraq "probably" could build a nuclear warhead within months if it got plutonium or enriched uranium from another country + Concludes that Iraq doesn't have nuclear weapons capability and probably lacks systems needed to deliver chemical, biological or nuclear weapons The document bases its claims against Iraq on reports from opposition groups, Iraqi defectors, former Iraqi military leaders, U.N. weapons inspectors and human rights groups. However, several of the statements included in the report are unsubstantiated. Titled "A Decade of Deception and Defiance," the report begins with a list of the Security Council resolutions the United States says Saddam has violated, beginning with demands issued November 29, 1990, three months after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, when the United Nations authorized the use of "all means necessary" to remove Iraq from Kuwait. Listed soon after are the original demands from Resolution 687 passed after the end of the Gulf War calling for Iraq to destroy its weapons, stop making more weapons, and submit to weapons inspections. Eleven of the resolutions that follow are mainly calls for Iraq to adhere to Resolution 687, or deplore or condemn Iraq's refusal to do so. The list ends with a resolution passed at the end of 1999 -- over a year after Iraq suspended cooperation with UNSCOM (U.N. Special Commission on Iraq) -- urging Iraq to allow weapons inspectors. The two remaining resolutions demand that Iraq release prisoners and return property to Kuwait after the Gulf War, and condemns Iraq's repression of civilians. The report also lists the dates of 30 statements from the Security Council president "regarding Saddam Hussein's continued violations" of council resolutions, from June 28, 1991, through May 14, 1998, but it does not list specific topics of the statements. The document then makes the case that Iraq either is harboring or has the capability to harbor biological, chemical, nuclear and ballistic missiles. Citing an article from The New York Times last year, the report refers to an Iraqi defector, Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, who said he visited some 20 secret facilities for making chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Al-Haideri supported his claims with government documents. Remaining items accuse Iraq of concealing its biological weapons program from UNSCOM, mainly citing UNSCOM reports, but making two unsubstantiated claims that Iraq is upgrading facilities or trying to procure mobile weapons laboratories. The segment on chemical weapons begins with a recounting of the alleged chemical weapons attack by the Iraqi military against Iraqi Kurds in the late 1980s that reportedly killed thousands. The segment also cites accounting inconsistencies by Iraq, identified by UNSCOM, and several unsubstantiated claims Iraq is seeking to develop or purchase chemical weapons production equipment. The segment on nuclear weapons cites a report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies which appeared in the media Monday, saying Iraq could "probably" build a nuclear warhead within months if it procured plutonium or enriched uranium from another country. The report also concluded Iraq did not currently have a nuclear weapons capability, and probably lacked the systems needed to deliver chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. The nuclear weapons section included unsubstantiated claims that Iraq has the technical expertise to make nuclear weapons, and even that "Saddam Hussein has repeatedly met with his nuclear scientists over the past two years, signaling his continued interest in developing his nuclear program." Iraq continues work on ballistic missiles prohibited by Resolution 687, according to the report, which also says Iraq has rebuilt testing structures that were destroyed by UNSCOM. The report also cites Iraqi defectors and refugees alleging human rights violations by Iraqi security forces, including attempts to intimidate suspected political opponents by raping or decapitating their family members, routine and systematic physical torture, and even one account from an Iraqi soccer player who said he and his teammates were beaten and humiliated at the order of Saddam's oldest son, Uday, because of poor performances. Also cited is an April 1998 report from Max Van der Stoel, a former U.N. Human Rights Special Rapporteur, saying Iraq had executed at least 1,500 people during the previous year for political reasons, and that Iraq had over 16,000 disappearances or persons unaccounted for, the world's highest. [Iraqi President Saddam Hussein] As it does for many of the human rights allegations, the document cites a U.S. State Department report in alleging that the Iraqi leader threatened parents throughout Iraq with the loss of food ration cards to compel them to enlist their sons between 10 and 15 years of age in a training course for weapons use. The report also accuses Saddam Hussein of persecuting the majority Shi'a Muslims by killing and detaining Shi'a clerics, and restricting religious observances. In the segment on Iraq's support for terrorists, there is no mention of any link between Iraq and the terrorist network al Qaeda. The segment does list a 1993 assassination attempt on then-President George H.W. Bush and the Emir of Kuwait. Iraq is also accused of sheltering two Palestinian terrorist organizations, and it lists Saddam's decision in 2002 to increase from $10,000 to $25,000 the bounty paid to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. The segment also lists the Salman Pak facility in Iraq, which former Iraqi military officers describe as a secret terrorist training facility. A report filed Monday by CNN's James Martone included a tour of this facility given by Iraqi officials, who maintain it is used for counter-terrorist training for Iraqi security agents. The report ends with allegations that Iraq has failed to return property stolen from Kuwait during the Gulf War, and failed to return or account for hundreds of Kuwaitis and others, still missing from the conflict, including one American pilot. Also included are reports from the United Nations saying Iraq is diverting money gained from its oil-for-food program to military uses, is delaying issuing visas to humanitarian groups in northern Iraq, and that Saddam is diverting money from illegal oil sales to spend on "his lavish palaces and inner circle, rather than on the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people." CNN.com ***************************************************************** 40 Russian parliament expected to ratify U.S.-Russian nuclear arms Yahoo! News Thu, September 12, 2002 "I think that the Duma will ratify the treaty by the end of the year," said Konstantin Kosachev, deputy chairman of the Duma's international affairs committee. The treaty calls for the United States and Russia to cut their deployed strategic nuclear arsenals over the next decade to 1,700-2,200 warheads each, down from about 6,000 each now. U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the treaty in May and Bush submitted it to the Senate in June, asking for a quick vote on ratification. Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Georgy Mamedov told lawmakers Thursday that the government would submit the treaty to the lower house of parliament, the State Duma, by the end of the month. Kosachev said that the delay in submitting the documents was caused by technical reasons. "Russia shouldn't artificially rush the ratification process," Mamedov said, according to the ITAR-Tass news agency. U.S. lawmakers have said they expect the Senate to ratify the treaty, though some have expressed concern that Russia doesn't have the money to safely store deactivated warheads. Some senators have also complained that the treaty lacks verification measures essential for tracking Russian arsenals. Russian officials, however, responded that it was U.S. officials who insisted on a pared-down treaty without verification mechanisms. Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The ***************************************************************** 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: *****************************************************************