*****************************************************************
03/13/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.65
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 USA to pay for transportation of Uzbek enriched uranium to Russia
2 US: Congress eyes federal takeover of security at nuclear plants
NUCLEAR REACTORS
3 Fire at Asahi Kasei plant in Kyushu extinguished
4 Swedish 960 MW N-reactor F2 to shut due leak
5 US: Acid leak eats hole in cap of Davis-Besse nuclear reactor
6 Czech Temelin plant loads fuel into 2nd reactor
7 US: NRC to Meet with Entergy To Discuss Safety Performance at Waterf
8 US: NRC team on way to inspect Davis-Besse corrosion
9 US: NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safety
10 US: NRC to Meet with Duke Energy Officials to Discuss Safety
11 US: NRC to Meet with Virginia Power Officials to Discuss Safety
12 US: NRC to Meet with Duke Energy Officials to Discuss Safety
13 US: NRC to Meet with TVA Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at
14 US: NRC to Meet With Exelon March 18 to Discuss Clinton Nuclear Plan
15 US: NRC team on way to inspect Davis-Besse corrosion
16 US: Texas reactor top U.S. producer of nuclear power
17 US: Dominion Seeks to Renew Licenses
18 Aust nuclear reactor contractor seeks bailout
19 US: Dominion seeks license renewal for Millstone
20 US: NRC Staff Proposes $7,500 Civil Penalty Against Hospital In Hato
21 US: NRC to Meet with Virginia Power Officials to Discuss Safety
NUCLEAR SAFETY
22 Vieques: Possible renewed bombing -- Call to Action
23 Gulf veterans reject uranium 'small risk' report
24 Simulated accident exercise starts at disputed Czech nuclear
25 Tunnel freight halted indefinitely
26 Locals flee fire at radioactive factory in Miyazaki
27 US: N-PLANTS IN DARK ON TERROR
28 US: Conn. to stockpile radiation-protection pills
29 US: N.H. to get 350,000 pills for nuclear radiation protection
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
30 US: Nevada pairs GOP, Democrat lobbyists against Yucca Mountain
31 US: Bush's choice of Yucca Mountain prompts heated nuclear debate
32 US: 75-year-old Yucca Mountain opponent doesn't let energy go to was
33 US: Republican lobbyist joins Yucca battle
34 US: Reid to make case against Yucca before real estate execs
35 US: Heavyweight GOP lobbyist joins Nevada team
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
36 Never mind Saddam. What about nuking the Belgians?
37 US nuclear strategy paper out of line with Russia dialogue -
38 Saddam is on the brink of 'crude nuclear capability'
39 Iranian radio says America "biggest rogue state in the world"
40 By God they frighten me
41 N. Korea May Rescind Nuclear Promise
42 Russian, U.S. Officials to Cut Nukes
43 US: Security chief creates color-coded warnings
44 US: Wrong message sent on nuclear weapons
45 N Korea condemns 'nuclear blackmail'
46 Bush says U.S. will 'deal with' Saddam
47 Germany rejects US nuclear attack plans
48 US: Nuclear weapons: A new name but the same old blunder
49 US: Necessary nukes
50 US: Democrats Divide Over Nuclear Plan
51 US: Editorial: New warning system for terrorist threats
52 US: Nellis looks to keep its takeoff area safe
53 US: The Nuclear Posture
54 US: NUCLEAR SITE THREAT WASN'T RELAYED
55 US: A closer look: A nuclear ‘posture,’ not a plan
56 Aussie presentation in Vienna on nuclear weapons
57 US: Nuclear reform overdue
58 US: IEER Conference: Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treat
59 US: IEER Conference: Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treat
60 N.K. slams U.S. nuclear strategy
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
61 Findings by ORNL physicists pop 'bubble fusion'
62 Hanford's state fine ends at $305,000
63 DOE seeks firms to clean up river shore
64 Benton officials worry land transfer may cause loss of revenue from
65 ORNL project angers unions
66 Inexcusable -- Bureaucrats still defy cleanup law
67 Energy Department Announces Leadership Changes at Brookhaven and
OTHER NUCLEAR
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 USA to pay for transportation of Uzbek enriched uranium to Russia
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 13, 2002
Text of report by Russian news agency ITAR-TASS
Washington, 13 March, ITAR-TASS correspondent Andrey Surzhanskiy:
The US and Uzbek governments on Tuesday [12 March] signed an
agreement covering the transportation to Russia of
highly-enriched uranium which was amassed for reprocessing at an
Uzbek nuclear facility. The agreement was signed for the American
side by US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and for the Uzbek
side by Foreign Minister Abdulaziz Komilov.
Under the agreement the Uzbek nuclear reactor concerned is to be
refitted so that it is no longer able to process weapons-grade
highly-enriched uranium. According to the available information,
the USA will be paying the full cost of transporting to Russia
the Uzbek nuclear fuel, which preliminary estimates put at some
4m-dollars worth.
In the agreement the USA and Uzbekistan confirm their intention
of cooperating on nonproliferation.
Source: ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow, in Russian 2359 gmt 12 Mar
02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC.
*****************************************************************
2 Congress eyes federal takeover of security at nuclear plants
Rob Hotakainen
Star Tribune
Published Mar 13, 2002
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Fearing that the nation's 103 nuclear
reactors could be terrorist targets, Congress is eyeing a
possible federal takeover of their security.
"We must ensure that a nuclear reactor on our soil is never
turned against Americans as a weapon of terror," said Sen. Harry
Reid, D-Nev., the assistant majority leader.
Congress voted to federalize airport security last year, and the
nuclear industry is worried that it could be next. Its
representatives are on Capitol Hill, carrying a simple message:
There's nothing to fix.
"Federalization does not help us," said Mark Findlay, security
director for Hudson, Wis.-based Nuclear Management Co., which
protects six reactors in the Midwest, including the Prairie
Island and Monticello plants in Minnesota.
Under the Senate bill, Congress would authorize a federal nuclear
security force whose members would be required to meet strict
qualifications. The bill would require proficiency reviews and,
every two years, security evaluations at nuclear plants that
would include mock terrorist attacks. A companion bill has been
introduced in the House.
Until Sept. 11, the nuclear-power industry kept a low profile,
but Findlay said the industry is changing its strategy. CNN
toured the Prairie Island plant on Friday, and Findlay is now in
Washington meeting with congressional staff members and
conducting interviews.
Reid said that nuclear reactors are "poorly protected," but
Findlay questioned whether the senator has ever toured one.
"I will tell you: Jesse Ventura told me that he is not concerned
about the safety and the security of the nuclear facilities,
because he's seen it," Findlay said Tuesday. "I would challenge
you or anyone to find a more secure facility anywhere in the
world."
Reid has three cosponsors for the bill, called the Nuclear
Security Act. One of them is Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt., chairman
of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which has
jurisdiction over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
"We are living in a changed world, one that requires us to look
at the darkest scenarios and plan accordingly," said Jeffords.
The other cosponsors are Sens. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and
Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., both members of the environmental
committee.
Findlay said it's wrong to compare the security at nuclear plants
with the security at airports. Nuclear plants use
state-of-the-art equipment, he said, and 70 percent of the
security personnel have prior military, law enforcement or
industrial security experience. He would not say how many people
provide security, but he said that all security personnel pass
psychological tests and background checks by the FBI. Workers are
paid an average of $35,000 a year, he said.
"We're not competing with the minimum-wage jobs out there,"
Findlay said. "I think there's no comparison with the [airport]
screeners, so why federalize them?"
Findlay said that the NRC already provides strong oversight,
adding that a federal takeover would result in "the regulator
becoming the employer." If that happened, he said, "I would think
there'd be an ethical kind of issue."
Minnesota's senators, both Democrats, have yet to take a position
on the bill.
Sen. Paul Wellstone said the legislation is "a positive start to
the important discussions of securing our nuclear facilities
against terrorist attack." He called it a bipartisan issue and
said that security at the plants must be improved.
Sen. Mark Dayton said he wants to consult with utilities,
security providers and experts before deciding "how to guarantee
the maximum possible protection."
-- Rob Hotakainen is at
rhotakainen@mcclatchydc.com [rhotakainen@mcclatchydc.com] .
Return to top© Copyright 2002 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
3 Fire at Asahi Kasei plant in Kyushu extinguished
KYODO NEWS
MIYAZAKI, March 13, Kyodo -
Firefighters finally managed on Wednesday afternoon to extinguish
a blaze at an Asahi Kasei Corp. nylon factory in Nobeoka,
Miyazaki Prefecture, some 21 hours after it began on the first
floor and nearly destroyed the five-story building, the Nobeoka
fire department said.
Nobeoka firefighters said the fire, which started Tuesday at
around 5:15 p.m., was put out at 2:37 p.m. City officials then
lifted an evacuation advisory that had affected 9,407 residents
in 3,698 households within a 1 kilometer radius of the plant.
There were no reports of injuries among the 400 workers at the
factory, a 15,150-square-meter compound located about 3 km
southeast of the city center along National Route 10.
The evacuation advisory was issued as a precaution against toxic
fumes. Around 600 people, who took refugee at a nearly school and
three other locations, have now returned home, city officials
said. At one point, the Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF) sent a
chemical decontamination team from the 8th GSDF division, based
in Kumamoto, Kumamoto Prefecture, to stand by on the outskirts of
Nobeoka.
The Asahi Kasei plant, which produces nylon fibers for tires,
stockings and other products, has 11 liquid-level gauges that
contain cobalt 60, a radioactive substance.
The cobalt 60 was contained in thermal vessels that can withstand
heat of up to 800 C and no radiation leakage was detected,
company officials said.
Of the 11 gauges, nine that were within the burned down area have
been confirmed undamaged.
The gauges were attached to outside a tank containing materials
for fiber production, but the blaze did not reach the area of the
plant where the tank was located, according to the company
officials.
According to government radioactive experts, the radioactive
level of the cobalt 60 used at the factory is lower than that of
radiation treatment for cancer.
On Tuesday, at around 5:15 p.m., Asahi Kasei workers saw fire
coming out of two fiber winding machines on the first floor of
the factory, officials of the Nobeoka fire department said.
The machines in question were last inspected in November last
year, and no abnormalities were detected at that time, the
company said. Plant workers attempted to put out the fire with
extinguishers but it grew too large to contain, causing small
explosions and spewing black smoke.
The Miyazaki police have set up an investigative headquarters at
the Nobeoka police station, manned by 200 officers, to look into
suspicions the fire was caused by negligence.
The police and the firefighters will jointly investigate the site
to look into the cause of the fire.
The central government is also sending officials from the science
ministry and the Fire and Disaster Management Agency to conduct
look for radioactive examinations and also try to determine the
cause of the fire, government officials said.
At a news conference Wednesday, the chief of the plant, Masami
Fujimori, said he suspects the fire may have been caused by a
problem in the electrical system of a heater attached to a
machine that winds fibers to make tires.
Asahi Kasei, a major chemical company based in Tokyo, is planning
to set up an independent team to look into the exact cause of the
accident, Kazumoto Yamamoto, the president, said.
The Miyazaki prefectural government, meanwhile, decided to
conduct air and water quality checks from Wednesday around the
factory to verify if any toxic substances, such as dioxins, were
emitted by the fire. Analyses could take over one week, a
prefectural official said.
As for the operations of the factory, Senior Managing Director
Toru Okano, who doubles as the president of the Nobeoka branch of
the company, said, ''We have not been able to map out any plan to
resume operations.''
He added that the company will visit evacuated families to
apologize within one week.
According to the Nobeoka fire department, there was a small fire
at another factory owned by Asahi Kasei for production of
pharmaceutical products on Jan. 29. Though no casualties were
reported, the office instructed the company's Nobeoka branch and
all of the firm's factories in the area to step up fire
preparedness.
2002 Kyodo News (c) Established 1945.
*****************************************************************
4 Swedish 960 MW N-reactor F2 to shut due leak
Planet Ark :
NORWAY:
March 13, 2002
OSLO - A 960-megawatt unit at Swedish nuclear power station
Forsmark shut down yesterday afternoon due to a leakage in a
valve, operator Vattenfall said this week.
The unit is expected to come back on line during the coming
weekend, Vattenfall said in a statement to Nordic power bourse
Nord Pool.
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
ENVIRONMENTAL NEWS SEARCH
*****************************************************************
5 Acid leak eats hole in cap of Davis-Besse nuclear reactor
By TOM HENRY
The Davis-Besse nuclear plant has become the focus of a
national investigation after officials learned that acid from the
plant's reactor ate a half-foot chunk out of a steel cap that
covers the vessel.
Described by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and
FirstEnergy Corp as the most extensive corrosion ever found on
top of an American nuclear plant reactor, the radioactive boric
acid came within a half-inch of burning a hole through the huge
vessel head - a dome-like structure that is 17 feet wide and made
primarily of two types of steel.
The corrosion, missed in previous inspections, prompted
the NRC to immediately notify the nation's 102 other commercially
operated nuclear plants to be on the lookout for a similar
problem.
"It's a very significant degradation of the vessel head,"
said Jan Strasma, NRC spokesman. "It's certainly very unusual.
... Certainly, it's a deterioration of a very important safety
feature."
None of the cracks caused an immediate threat to the
public because Davis-Besse has been shut down for normal
refueling and maintenance since Feb. 16.
The utility had hoped to restart the plant by the end of
March but said the corrosion problem - to be addressed by a team
of 50 scientists, technicians and nuclear experts from all parts
of the country - will keep the plant idle until at least late
April.
Strasma gave no assurances that the utility will be able
to stick to that schedule. "They'll develop a repair procedure
and we'll see if that is sufficient to deal with the problem," he
said.
Trace amounts of boric acid, which the reactor creates
during the nuclear fission process, are believed to have dribbled
for a long time - possibly years - from at least one of 69
extended, vertical tubes called control rod drive mechanism
nozzles.
The nozzles, which operators use to maneuver control rods
and keep the plant running safely, are permanently implanted into
the reactor head and are supposed to be welded airtight.
Somehow, acid escaped, burning through all six inches of
carbon steel that forms the outer layer of the reactor head and
made contact with the stainless steel on the cap's innermost
side.
The stainless steel layer is only about three-eighths of
an inch thick - about the size of an eraser head - but the
corrosion did not penetrate it because that type of metal is
impervious to boric acid, said Richard Wilkins, FirstEnergy
spokesman.
The corrosion created a cavity four inches wide and five
inches long around the most troublesome nozzle, he said.
"We were not expecting to see that extent of corrosion,"
he said. "This has not been seen in the industry before."
FirstEnergy is repairing five of the 69 reactor nozzles
which are believed to have cracked sometime during the plant's
25-year history. Two are now thought to be leaking - something
which wasn't previously known.
The reactor head's corrosion appears linked to at least
one of those two leaking nozzles or to aging weld seams
surrounding them, Wilkins said.
Even if it had been operating, the reactor does not make
direct contact with the environment. It is sealed off in a
separate building designed to trap radiation that might escape
from the vessel.
The utility also believes operators would have had plenty
of time to shut down the plant if an emergency had arisen. There
was never any hint of a problem: The plant ran at full power for
months, without any noticeable loss in reactor pressure, Wilkins
said.
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service,
http://www.shns.com.) March 12, 2002
The Knoxville News-Sentinel Co. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
6 Czech Temelin plant loads fuel into 2nd reactor
CZECH REPUBLIC: March 12, 2002
PRAGUE - The Czech Temelin nuclear power plant, whose operation
is strongly opposed by Austria, said yesterday that it has
completed loading fuel into its second 981 megawatt (MW) reactor.
Temelin's owner, state-owned power utility CEZ , has been testing
the plant's first 981 MW reactor since late 2000 amid fierce
protests from neighbouring Austria which fears the plant is
unsafe and should be closed.
Temelin spokesman Milan Nebesar said all 163 fuel units had been
installed into the second reactor, which would be checked by
international nuclear safety regulators later yesterday. A
controlled nuclear fission reaction is expected to be activated
within six weeks.
The Soviet-designed station, which has been upgraded with western
control systems, is located 60 km (38 miles) from the border of
the fiercely anti-nuclear Austria.
This has made Temelin a source of unrelenting friction between
the two central European neighbours. The EU, however, has said
the plant is not an issue in the Czechs' drive to join the
15-nation bloc, expected in 2004.
REUTERS NEWS SERVICE
*****************************************************************
7 NRC to Meet with Entergy To Discuss Safety Performance at Waterford 3
NRC: Press Release Region IV - 2002 - 8 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region IV 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington TX 76011
www.nrc.gov
No. IV-02-008 March 13, 2002
CONTACT: Breck Henderson Phone: 817-860-8128 Cellular:
817-917-1227 E-mail: opa4@nrc.gov [opa4@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
representatives of Entergy Operations, Inc. on Wednesday, March
20, to discuss the results of the agency's annual assessment of
safety performance at the Waterford 3 nuclear power plant. The
facility is located near Taft, Louisiana, and operated by
Entergy. The meeting, which will be the open to the public for
observation, is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m. in the St.
Charles Parish Courthouse, 15045 River Road, Hahnville, La. NRC
staff will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer
any questions from the public.
A letter sent from NRC Region IV's Regional Administrator to
Entergy addresses plant performance during the period April 1,
2001, to December 31, 2001, and will serve as the basis for the
meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wat_2001q4.pdf
Current performance information for Waterford 3 is available on
the NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WAT3/wat3_chart.html
*****************************************************************
8 NRC team on way to inspect Davis-Besse corrosion
03/13/02
John Funk Plain Dealer Reporter
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday sent a team of
engineers and metallurgists to inspect corrosion on the reactor
head of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
FirstEnergy shut down the plant last month for refueling and to
carry out an NRC-mandated inspection of the tubes in the reactor
head, which carry the control rods into the core of the reactor.
Inspections at two similar plants had turned up cracks in the
stainless-steel tubes.
Company inspectors - using robots equipped with cameras in the
radioactive area - not only discovered cracks in three of the
stainless tubes but also found part of the dome head had been
nearly eaten through. The dome-shaped head, measuring 17 feet
across, is made of 6.5-inch-thick carbon steel.
NRC spokesman Jan Strasma, of the commission's Chicago office,
said the team would take at least a week to inspect the reactor
and evaluate FirstEnergy's proposed temporary fix. The final
decision to approve the repairs would be made by NRC headquarters
in Washington in consultation with the Chicago regional office.
He said the NRC has not encountered such a problem at any of the
102 other reactors in the nation.
FirstEnergy spokesman Richard Wilkins said the company is
considering cutting through the stainless steel liner near the
cracked control rod tube, removing all of the corroded carbon
steel and welding a 4-inch- to 5-inch-thick chunk of stainless
steel alloy into the gap.
The company earlier this week was figuring that the repairs would
keep the plant down at least until May 1. But if NRC approval
takes more time - or if additional damage is discovered in the
remaining two control-rod holes in which the stainless steel
tubes were cracked - the plant could be shut down longer.
Ellen Raines, a FirstEnergy spokeswoman, said the company has
long-term contracts to buy additional power from other utilities
if necessary. Davis-Besse, rated at 925 to 930 megawatts, has a
net output of about 883 megawatts, she said. FirstEnergy's total
generation capacity is 12,958 megawatts, not including four
85-megawatt gas turbine generators now under construction in
Michigan, she said.
FirstEnegy spokesman Todd Schneider said the company has ordered
a new head. But delivery of the special order will take two
years, he said. The 150-ton head will be cast in Japan and
machined in France, he said. Contact John Funk
at:jfunk@plaind.com, 216-999-4138
© 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission. » Send This Page |
» © 2001 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
9 NRC to Meet with Southern Nuclear Officials to Discuss Safety
Performance at Vogtle Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 9 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-009 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Southern Nuclear Operating Company officials on Tuesday, March
19, to discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety
performance at the Vogtle nuclear power plant. The meeting will
be held at 1:00 p.m. in the Vogtle Training Center at the plant.
The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials
will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any
questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Southern
Nuclear, which addresses plant safety performance during the
previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is
available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/vog_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two units at the Vogtle plant is available at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/VOG1/vog1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/VOG2/vog2_chart.html
*****************************************************************
10 NRC to Meet with Duke Energy Officials to Discuss Safety
Performance at Catawba Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 10 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-010 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Duke Energy officials on Wednesday, March 20, to discuss the
results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the
Catawba nuclear power plant. The meeting will be held at 10:00
a.m. in the Rock Hill City Council Chambers, 155 Johnston Street
in Rock Hill. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and
NRC officials will be available before the meeting is adjourned
to answer any questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Duke
Energy, which addresses plant safety performance during the
previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is
available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/cat_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two units at the Catawba plant is available
at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT1/cat1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CAT2/cat2_chart.html
*****************************************************************
11 NRC to Meet with Virginia Power Officials to Discuss Safety
Performance at Surry Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 11 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-011 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Virginia Power officials on Wednesday, March 20, to discuss the
results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the
Surry nuclear power plant. The meeting will be held at 1:00 p.m.
in the Surry Nuclear Information Center at the plant site. The
public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will
be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any
questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Virginia
Power, which addresses plant safety performance during the
previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is
available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/sur_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two units at the Surry plant is available at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUR1/sur1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/SUR2/sur2_chart.html
*****************************************************************
12 NRC to Meet with Duke Energy Officials to Discuss Safety
Performance at McGuire Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 12 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-012 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Duke Energy officials on Thursday, March 21, to discuss the
results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the
McGuire nuclear power plant. The meeting will be held at 1:00
p.m. in the Energy Explorium at the plant site. The public is
invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be
available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any
questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Duke
Energy, which addresses plant safety performance during the
previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is
available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/mcg_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two units at the McGuire plant is available
at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MCG1/mcg1_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MCG2/mcg2_chart.html
*****************************************************************
13 NRC to Meet with TVA Officials to Discuss Safety Performance at
Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 13 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-013 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Tennessee Valley Authority officials on Friday, March 22, to
discuss the results of NRC's annual assessment of safety
performance at the Browns Ferry nuclear power plant. The meeting
will be held at 10:00 a.m. (CST) in the Days Inn conference room,
1322 Highway 72 East in Athens, Alabama. The public is invited to
observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before
the meeting is adjourned to answer any questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to TVA, which
addresses plant safety performance during the previous year and
forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is available from
Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/bf_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two operating units at the Browns Ferry plant
is available at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BF2/bf2_chart.html and
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/BF3/bf3_chart.html
*****************************************************************
14 NRC to Meet With Exelon March 18 to Discuss Clinton Nuclear Plant
Performance
NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 3 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region III 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532 www.nrc.gov
No. III-02-003 March 13, 2002
CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)
829-9662 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov [opa3@nrc.gov]
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
representatives of Exelon Generating Company in Clinton,
Illinois, on Monday, March 18, to discuss the results of the
agency's annual assessment of safety performance at the Clinton
Nuclear Power Plant. The facility is located near Clinton. The
meeting, which will be the open to the public for observation, is
scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. in the Vespasian Warner Public
Library, 310 N. Quincy St., Clinton. Before the meeting is
concluded, NRC officials will answer any questions from members
of the public.
The performance period to be discussed is April 1 through
December 31 of last year.
A letter sent from the NRC Region III office to Exelon addresses
plant performance during the period and will serve as the basis
for the meeting discussion. It is available on the NRC web site
at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/clin_2001q4.pdf
Current performance information for Clinton is available on the
NRC web site at:
http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/CLIN/clin_chart.html
*****************************************************************
15 NRC team on way to inspect Davis-Besse corrosion
03/13/02
John Funk Plain Dealer Reporter
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission yesterday sent a team of
engineers and metallurgists to inspect corrosion on the reactor
head of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station.
FirstEnergy shut down the plant last month for refueling
and to carry out an NRC-mandated inspection of the tubes in the
reactor head, which carry the control rods into the core of the
reactor. Inspections at two similar plants had turned up cracks
in the stainless-steel tubes. 
[http://ads1.advance.net/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.cleveland.com/xml/story/
b/bxbiz/@Sponsor5?x] Company inspectors - using robots equipped
with cameras in the radioactive area - not only discovered cracks
in three of the stainless tubes but also found part of the dome
head had been nearly eaten through. The dome-shaped head,
measuring 17 feet across, is made of 6.5-inch-thick carbon steel.
NRC spokesman Jan Strasma, of the commission's Chicago
office, said the team would take at least a week to inspect the
reactor and evaluate FirstEnergy's proposed temporary fix. The
final decision to approve the repairs would be made by NRC
headquarters in Washington in consultation with the Chicago
regional office. He said the NRC has not encountered such a
problem at any of the 102 other reactors in the nation.
FirstEnergy spokesman Richard Wilkins said the company is
considering cutting through the stainless steel liner near the
cracked control rod tube, removing all of the corroded carbon
steel and welding a 4-inch- to 5-inch-thick chunk of stainless
steel alloy into the gap.
The company earlier this week was figuring that the
repairs would keep the plant down at least until May 1. But if
NRC approval takes more time - or if additional damage is
discovered in the remaining two control-rod holes in which the
stainless steel tubes were cracked - the plant could be shut down
longer.
Ellen Raines, a FirstEnergy spokeswoman, said the company
has long-term contracts to buy additional power from other
utilities if necessary. Davis-Besse, rated at 925 to 930
megawatts, has a net output of about 883 megawatts, she said.
FirstEnergy's total generation capacity is 12,958 megawatts, not
including four 85-megawatt gas turbine generators now under
construction in Michigan, she said.
FirstEnegy spokesman Todd Schneider said the company has
ordered a new head. But delivery of the special order will take
two years, he said. The 150-ton head will be cast in Japan and
machined in France, he said.
Contact John Funk at:jfunk@plaind.com, 216-999-4138
© 2002 The Plain Dealer. Used with permission.
© 2001 cleveland.com. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
16 Texas reactor top U.S. producer of nuclear power
HoustonChronicle.com -
March 13, 2002, 11:20AM
By STEVE OLAFSON
Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle
WADSWORTH -- The South Texas Project Unit 1 nuclear reactor
generated more electricity than any other reactor in the United
States last year, according to Nucleonics Week magazine, an
industry publication.
The unit produced 10.8 million megawatts of power in 2001 to lead
the nation's 103 reactors.
The unit placed eighth in production among the 433 reactors
around the world and had the lowest average fuel cost of all
power plants in this country last year, at four-tenths of a cent
per kilowatt-hour, the magazine reported in its February issue.
Except for a scheduled 21-day shutdown for refueling, Unit 1 ran
continuously last year.
"We sustained a 94 percent capacity factor in Unit 1 in a year
with a refueling outage, something that was unheard of in the
industry only a few years ago," said Gary Parkey, vice president
of generation at the plant near this Matagorda County town.
"This accomplishment is a credit to the STP team and the efforts
we have made over the past few years to operate safely with
reliable performance and short refueling outages."
The plant is owned by Reliant Energy, American Electric Power's
subsidiary Central Power and Light, City Public Service of San
Antonio and Austin Energy. It is operated by the STP Nuclear
Operating Company and produces 2,500 megawatts of electricity,
enough to serve more than 1 million homes.
*****************************************************************
17 Dominion Seeks to Renew Licenses
ABCNEWS.com :
March 12, 2002
Dominion Seeks to Renew Licenses Dominion Announces Intention to Renew
Licenses for Millstone Nuclear Reactors
The Associated Press
WATERFORD, Conn. March 12 —
The company that owns Millstone Power Station will seek a 20-year
renewal for licenses to operate the station's two nuclear
reactors.
Dominion, based on Richmond, Va., plans to file the renewal
application with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2004.
The company is seeking to extend the licenses of the Millstone 2
reactor to 2035 and the Millstone 3 reactor to 2045. A third
reactor at the Waterford complex, Millstone 1, is being
decommissioned.
"We want to continue generating electricity for New England well
into the future," said Thomas Capps, chairman, president and
chief executive officer of Dominion on Tuesday.
Nancy Burton, a lawyer for the anti-nuclear Connecticut Coalition
Against Millstone, said her group will strongly oppose the
renewal application.
"Dominion underestimates the fear and loathing with which most
people in Connecticut regard these dangerous reactors," Burton
said. "We will fight this battle with ferocity."
Copyright 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This
*****************************************************************
18 Aust nuclear reactor contractor seeks bailout
theage.com.au, Breaking News
CANBERRA, March 13 AAP|Published: Wednesday March 13, 7:51 PM
The contractor for the new Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in
Sydney has had to ask for a $10 million bailout from the
Argentinean government, the Senate was told today.
But Communications Minister Richard Alston said INVAP's financial
troubles were not likely to affect the construction of the $290
million nuclear reactor.
"I am advised that the Argentinean government has put in place a
$10.5 million facility, a repayable draw-down for INVAP, which is
quite clearly a demonstration that the Argentinean government
believes in the ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology
Organisation) project," he told the Senate.
He said INVAP, the company contracted to build the second
reactor, was on track to complete the project on time.
"INVAP has met every milestone on schedule since the contract was
awarded and it has already completed the bulk of the design work
for the project," Senator Alston said.
Labor Senator Kim Carr demanded construction of the reactor be
put on hold until INVAP's financial concerns were dealt with.
"The Australian public has been kept deliberately in the dark,"
he said.
"Not only have questions and criticisms been raised about INVAP's
projects in several third-world countries but now the future of
the entire Lucas Heights project must be reviewed."
Copyright © 2002 John Fairfax Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
19 Dominion seeks license renewal for Millstone
TheDay.com:
March 13
Nuclear plants could operate until 2045
By Paul Choiniere - More Articles
Published on 03/13/2002
Waterford –– If the new owner of Millstone Power Station gets its
way, the nuclear facility will continue to generate electricity
through 2045. Dominion announced Tuesday its plans to apply for a
20-year license renewal for both the Millstone 2 and 3 reactors.
When the Virginia-based utility purchased the nuclear station
last April for $1.3 billion, executives indicated they would
explore extending the life of the reactors. Millstone supplies
about one-third of the state's electricity and 12 to 15 percent
of the power used in New England, while employing 1,450 people.
Millstone 2 began operating in 1975 and Millstone 3 in 1986, both
under 40-year licenses. If approved, the license renewal would
allow Millstone 2 to operate until 2035 and Millstone 3 until
2045.
All signs point to the Millstone plants obtaining the license
renewal. Since March 2000 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has
approved 20-year license extensions for eight nuclear plants. It
has yet to deny a license renewal application. As nuclear plants
have gotten out from under the huge debt amassed in constructing
them, they have been able to produce electricity affordably, said
Eileen Supko, a senior consultant and nuclear engineer with
Energy Resources International Inc., located in Washington, D.C.
The company is a consultant for
the energy industry. Power plants that use natural gas and oil
are subject to volatile price swings in the cost of those fuels,
while the cost of nuclear power generation remains steady and
predictable, a trait attractive to investors, Supko said.
For years the high cost of construction was a drag on the nuclear
industry. In Connecticut the cost of paying the huge mortgages on
the Millstone plants, which collectively cost $4.3 billion to
build, was passed along to ratepayers as part of the plan to
bring competition to the electric industry.
Utility executives had argued that if not freed of these
“stranded costs,” nuclear could not compete in an open market.
In the mid-1990s utilities were closing reactors, including
Millstone 1 and Connecticut Yankee in Connecticut, Maine Yankee
and Yankee Rowe in Massachusetts. But the economics have changed
significantly since then and, if the plants had not been closed,
some could be seeking license renewals now, said Supko.
The wave of nuclear plant closings appears to be over. The
Nuclear Energy Institute expects that eventually all 103
operating nuclear plants in the United States will seek
permission to continue operating past their 40-year licenses.
Fifteen have license renewal applications pending and another 30
have announced plans to do so over the next six years. The NRC is
reviewing license renewal applications for Dominion's two nuclear
stations, North Anna and Surry, in Virginia.
Improved efficiency, shorter refueling outages and fewer
unplanned reactor shut downs have all combined to improve the
competitive position of nuclear power, said Supko.
Millstone plans to file its application in 2004. Between now and
then it will be preparing the application, looking at all the
reactor safety systems and associated support systems to
determine what work will need to be done to continue for another
20 years, said company spokesman Pete Hyde. Much of the effort
will be concentrated on providing the engineering data to show
that the equipment can safely handle continued operation past the
original 40-year license.
Jim Riccio, a nuclear policy analyst with the environmental group
Greenpeace, said the nuclear industry and its regulators are
courting disaster.
“The NRC is allowing reactors to run harder and longer with less
regulation,” Riccio charged.
He said the renewal approval process is heavily weighted in favor
of the industry. And indeed opponents of license renewal are not
allowed to raise contentions about where to store the additional
nuclear waste the plants will produce or whether emergency
evacuation plans remain viable despite growing populations.
“When there are no criteria and no standards, it is no wonder
these corporations want to keep these things running,” Riccio
said. “It's a financial windfall for them.”
The NRC's Stephen T. Hoffman, senior project manager in the
license renewal program, said issues such as plant safety, the
adequacy of emergency planning and the handling of nuclear waste
are part of the ongoing regulatory process. The license renewal
process focuses only on issues directly tied to the license
extension, principally whether the plant is fit to continue
operating and whether that continued operation will cause any
adverse environmental problems.
At Millstone 2 and 3, the storage pools used to store spent
nuclear fuel will not be able to handle the fuel produced by
another two decades of operations, Hyde said. Some fuel would
have to be moved into special casks, a growing industry trend.
Eventually the Department of Energy wants all nuclear waste moved
to Yucca Mountain in Nevada at a national repository. The
proposal remains a scientific and political hot potato, though it
does have the support of President Bush.
Riccio said he finds it ironic that at a time when the country is
dealing with increased terrorist threats it is working on
extending the life of nuclear reactors, rather than phasing them
out in favor of safer forms of energy production.
“The public is very much aware that every one of these plants is
a terrorist target. They are nuclear bombs within our borders,”
he said.
Nancy Burton, an attorney for the Connecticut Coalition Against
Millstone, said the group would oppose the Millstone license
renewals.
p.choiniere@theday.com
© 1998-2002 The Day Publishing Co.
*****************************************************************
20 NRC Staff Proposes $7,500 Civil Penalty Against Hospital In Hato
Rey, Puerto Rico, for Noncompliance with Regulations
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 7 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-007 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has proposed a $7,500
civil penalty against I. Gonzalez Martinez Oncologic Hospital in
Hato Rey, Puerto Rico, for violation of NRC safety requirements
after a radioactive therapy source was misplaced, left
unprotected in a room where an employee unknowingly received
unnecessary exposure, and found in a trash compactor in an alley
outside the hospital some 19 hours after it was lost. NRC
officials said that around 11:30 a.m. on March 14, 2001, hospital
personnel removed a brachytherapy implant containing about 97
millicuries of radioactive Cesium-137 from a patient. Failure to
adequately label, count or control the radioactive material
caused it to be misplaced, and it was not until 8:00 p.m. that
hospital personnel noted that it was missing.
Federal regulations require that the dose in any unrestricted
area from external sources does not exceed 2 millirems in any one
hour. However, on March 14 and 15, 2001, the hospital created
radiation levels of up to approximately 50 millirems an hour in
the vicinity of the trash compactor and public parking lot. The
NRC said hospital personnel also allowed the source to remain
unshielded in a brachytherapy preparation room, a restricted
area, before it was sent to the trash compactor but did not
perform adequate surveys to ensure that a hospital employee
entering the room was not exposed to radioactivity in excess of
allowable limits.
The NRC said hospital examination of the circumstances associated
with the event indicated that the employee, who was not a
radiation worker, did not receive an exposure of more than 100
millirems, the annual limit for individuals not licensed to work
with radioactive material. There was also no indication that
anyone received more than 100 millirems while the material was in
the trash compactor in the alley.
The hospital has 30 days from receipt of the Notice of Violation
to either pay the civil penalty or to protest it.
*****************************************************************
21 NRC to Meet with Virginia Power Officials to Discuss Safety
Performance at North Anna Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 8 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs,
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov
No. II-02-008 March 13, 2002 CONTACT:
Ken Clark (404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417
E-mail: opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with
Virginia Power officials on Tuesday, March 19, to discuss the
results of NRC's annual assessment of safety performance at the
North Anna nuclear power plant. The meeting will be held at 1:00
p.m. in the North Anna Nuclear Information Center at the plant.
The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials
will be available before the meeting is adjourned to answer any
questions.
A letter sent from the NRC's Regional Administrator to Virginia
Power, which addresses plant safety performance during the
previous year and forms the basis of the meeting discussion, is
available from Region II Public Affairs or on the NRC web site at
www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/na_2001q4.pdf Current
information for the two units at the North Anna plant is
available at www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/NA1/na1_chart.html
and www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/NA2/na2_chart.html
*****************************************************************
22 Vieques: Possible renewed bombing -- Call to Action
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:50:00 -0600 (CST)
The Nicaragua Network has received this important alert on Vieques. Please
reply to: bieke@prdigital.com
Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques
PO Box 1424 Vieques, Puerto Rico 00765
Telefax (787) 741-1717 E mail: bieke@prdigital.com
12 March, 2002
A CALL TO ACTION FOR PEACE ON VIEQUES
Warm greetings from the Island of Vieques, Puerto Rico. Faced with the
threat of renewed bombing here at the beginning of April, we prepare
for the next round of civil disobedience. The Committee for the Rescue and
Development of Vieques (CRDV), together with other groups in Vieques
and on the big island, work out last details for the peacefull civil
disobedience actions that will take place if and when the bombing
begins.
It is our duty to try to stop Navy bombing that is responsible for the
environmental and health crises that have been killing our people
during more than sixty years.
We ask for support from people and organizations in solidarity at this
critical moment. According to press reports in Puerto Rico on March
11, the US Navy plans to resume bombing Vieques on the 4th of 5th of April.
During those days, we would like to coordinate a series of protest
actions and denunciations in Puerto Rico, in the US and in countries where
there are friends of Vieques. We know the forces for peace in our world
posess great creativity and capacity to develop protest actions that will
have
impact and raise consciousness. At this moment, we appeal to that
creativity and solidarity to carry out actions for peace on Vieques on
the 4th and 5th of April in different parts of the planet.
Our friends in the US have experience with civil disobedience actions
and protest against the military presence on Vieques. We hope to see
mobilizations on these dates, particularly in the power centers of New
York and Washington, DC. Groups struggling for peace and justice in
the Phillipines, Panama Okinawa, Japan, Korea, India, Hawaii, Guam,
England, Italy, France, Scotland, Spain and throughout Latin America, could
protest at the US embassies in their respective countries. Educational
activities (handing out literature, showing documentaries, music-poetry in
solidarity, picketing, acts of civil disobedience) or protest through
the mass media will help put more pressure on the United States to
immediately and permanently cease their war practices on Vieques. Messages
and
declarations from leading religious, political, sports or artistic
figures can also be very powerful.
In Vieques we are prepared to directly confront the military monster
that rapes our sea and lands, that violates our most basic rights to live in
peace with dignity. We hope that a concerted effort of people at
different points around the globe, with the positive energies that
eminate from those who live and work for peace, will have important
repercussions for us and for all who participate in this walk for justice.
We would appreciate communications via email or fax, indicating the
possibilities of organizing actions in your geographic area to denounce
the continuation of bombing on Vieques.
In struggle, in solidarity
CRDV
*****************************************************************
23 Gulf veterans reject uranium 'small risk' report
online.ie
online.ie 12 Mar 2002
Claims that only a "small number" of soldiers and civilians might
suffer kidney damage after heavy exposure to depleted uranium
were today dismissed as "nonsense" by a veterans' group.
Experts from the Royal Society said the material could be harmful
if inhaled or swallowed in contaminated water, but that few
people would be affected.
But a spokesman for the National Gulf Veterans and Families'
Association rejected this finding, saying there was anecdotal
evidence that large numbers of soldiers had been harmed and
called for all veterans to be investigated.
Depleted uranium, or DU, is the "waste" left over from the
process used to produce the fissionable material used in nuclear
weapons. It is very heavy, having nearly twice the density of
lead - which makes it ideal for "penetrators" in armour-piercing
shells. For this reason it was used widely in the Gulf War and
conflicts in Bosnia and Kosovo.
However, there have been fears that dust from the shells may pose
a radiation hazard or cause heavy metal poisoning.
Today a report from the Royal Society which looked into the
poisoning threat said most soldiers exposed to normal levels of
DU on battlefields would not be at risk.
But the kidneys of a few soldiers could be damaged if they
inhaled large quantities of the dust after their vehicle has been
struck by a DU shell, or while working for long periods in
contaminated vehicles.
Large numbers of corroding DU penetrators buried in the soil may
also pose a long-term threat if the uranium leaked to water
supplies, said the report.
Although only a small number of civilians would be at risk,
heavily contaminated soil should be removed if battlefields were
to be repopulated, said the scientists.
Professor Brian Spratt, chairman of the Royal Society working
group which produced the report, said: "Most soldiers and
civilians will not be exposed to dangerous levels of depleted
uranium.
However, in certain circumstances the exposures may be high and
there would be a risk of heavy metal poisoning that could lead to
long-term kidney damage for a few soldiers."
An earlier report from the Royal Society said there might also be
a similar increased risk of lung cancer from the radioactive
effects of depleted uranium if exposure is high.
The report repeated the Society's earlier recommendation that UK
veterans who may have had substantial intakes of DU should be
identified and invited to take part in an independent study of
its health effects.
Anecdotal reports of deaths and illness among US Gulf War
veterans who worked for long periods in heavily contaminated
vehicles should also be investigated, the report recommended.
The report called for soldiers to be tested for kidney function
and the presence of DU in their urine if they suffered major
exposure in future conflicts.
Tony Flint, of the National Gulf Veterans and Families'
Association, pointed out that at a meeting two years ago it
emerged that six of 300 ex-soldiers attending suffered from
nephritis inflammation of the kidneys.
Statistically only one of the 50,000 service personnel who took
part in the Gulf conflict should have acquired the condition.
"It's nonsense to say depleted uranium has only harmed a small
number of people who had high exposure," said Mr Flint.
"There's a guy from my unit who was 350 miles behind the lines in
Riyadh and according to the independent tests we had carried out
in Canada he was suffering from the effects of depleted uranium.
"We had five people tested and in every case they came out
positive. Their bodies contained between 25 and 75 times the
normal level of DU.
"I think everyone who took part in the Gulf War should be
investigated, including those who never went to the front line
but had to clean out the vehicles which returned."
He believed the British and US forces had now ceased using
depleted uranium in armour piercing munitions and employed a much
more expensive form of tungsten instead.
The Ministry of Defence confirmed that Britain no longer used
depleted uranium in weapons."
*****************************************************************
24 Simulated accident exercise starts at disputed Czech nuclear
power station
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 13, 2002
Text of report in English by Czech news agency CTK
Temelin/Ceske Budejovice, south Bohemia, 13 March: Alarm sirens
could be heard on the premises of the Temelin nuclear power plant
this morning announcing a simulated accident and starting thus
the Zone 2000 two-day exercise.
"In the Zone 2002 exercise the power plant will train its
accident plan. It is the first of six exercises planned for this
year," Temelin's official Vaclav Brom told CTK.
According to the scenario of the exercise, the simulated
accidents will gradually accumulate and deteriorate to a
situation simulating leak of radioactive substances when alarm
sirens will be heard in a 13-km zone around Temelin.
The emergency staffs of fire fighters, the State Nuclear Safety
Office (SUJB) and south Bohemian regional and local authorities
will, in cooperation with Temelin, train measures aimed at
protection of people, evacuation of local elementary school
pupils, decontamination of people and facilities as well as
protection of domestic animals.
The exercise will not touch civilians. Local residents have been
informed about the exercise and warned about the planned test of
sirens by leaflets.
Situated in south Bohemia, 60 km from the borders of Austria and
Bavaria, Temelin is sharply criticized by Austria, Bavaria as
well as environmentalists who say it is not safe because it
combines Soviet design and western fuel and safety technology.
Source: CTK news agency, Prague, in English 0901 gmt 13 Mar 02
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC.
*****************************************************************
25 Tunnel freight halted indefinitely
BBC News | EUROPE |
Tuesday, 12 March, 2002,
[Refugees try to access the Channel Tunnel ]
SNCF wants extra police security
Freight services through the Channel Tunnel have been suspended
indefinitely after repeated security problems at the freight yard
on the French side.
Trains from the freight depot at Frethun, near Calais, were
halted on Friday after more than 200 asylum seekers gained access
to the yard.
French rail operator SNCF, which runs the depot, said on Tuesday
the situation had not changed, with up to 50 would-be immigrants
invading the site whenever a new train was about to depart.
This is effectively destroying our business
EWS
As a result the company did not know when services would resume.
A spokeswoman for SNCF said the company had tried to get four
trains through on Monday but only one had managed to get into the
tunnel because asylum seekers climbed over them.
"We certainly don't intend to put an end to our freight traffic
but we need more help from the Gendarmerie before traffic gets
back to normal," she said.
A spokesman for rail freight company English Welsh &Scottish
Railway (EWS), which has lost £6m because of the delays, said the
situation was a "disaster for British business".
Robust security
SNCF had just 15 police officers patrolling the perimeter of the
yard and five security staff, he added.
"That number of security trying to stop more than 200 asylum
seekers is hardly robust security for an international boundary,"
he said.
"This is a disaster for British business and the British economy.
This is effectively destroying our business.
"We have no idea if services will be resumed next week or even
longer. This is entirely in the hands of SNCF and the French
authorities."
Red Cross centre
The French Transport minister met representatives of SNCF on
Monday to discuss whether more police would be made available to
patrol the depot's perimeter, but there was no outcome.
A spokeswoman for the Home Office said: "The UK Government has
been actively urging SNCF and the French Government to improve
security and police levels that will allow the rapid full
resumption of secure services."
The invasions by asylum seekers is blamed on the proximity of
Sangatte Red Cross centre, which houses the migrants on the
outskirts of Calais.
Since SNCF first restricted services heading to Britain in
November more than 1,700 EWS international rail freight services
have been cancelled.
*****************************************************************
26 Locals flee fire at radioactive factory in Miyazaki
Mainichi Interactive - Top News
MIYAZAKI -- Some 9,400 residents of Nobeoka, Miyazaki Prefecture,
were ordered to evacuate Tuesday night after a factory that
stores radioactive material caught fire, authorities said.
Mainichi Shimbun
Thick black smoke bellows out of the Asahi Kasei Corp. factory
in Nobeoka, Miyazaki Prefecture, on Tuesday.
Thick black smoke was bellowing out of the four-story Asahi Kasei
Corp. factory in the city's Nagahama district at 10 p.m., some
five hours after the start of the blaze.
A Science and Technology Ministry spokesman said some 40 metal
containers of the radioactive material, Cobalt 60, are stored in
the factory's third floor.
The possibility that the residents were exposed to radiation is
virtually none because the level of radiation Cobalt 60 emits is
low, ministry officials claimed. Officials of the Nobeoka
Municipal Government have set up a disaster task force and urged
9,407 people living near the factory to evacuate because highly
toxic gas could be generated from the factory. The flames
reportedly reached the third floor.
Emergency officials said some 140 workers were at the Asahi Kasei
Leona factory when the fire broke out in its switchboard room,
but they all managed to escape unhurt.
"The air was filled with the smell of burning rubber from around
5 p.m.," an employee of a neighboring car dealer said.
The factory manufactures synthetic material used in tires, car
engine parts and stockings.
Cobalt 60, a heavy radioactive isotope, is used at the factory
for meters attached to tanks, Asahi Kasei officials said.
(Mainichi Shimbun, March 12, 2002)
© 2002 The Mainichi Newspapers Co.
*****************************************************************
27 N-PLANTS IN DARK ON TERROR
NYPOST.COM National News:
March 13, 2002
U.S. officials received a warning as early as 1995 that Islamic
militants were plotting to attack an American nuclear site, but
did not pass along the information to the agency that oversees
nuclear facilities or to the plants themselves, The Associated
Press has learned.
The warning came in police interrogations of convicted terrorist
Abdul Hakim Murad and from a computer seized in the Philippines
from Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 attack on the World
Trade Center.
A letter obtained from Yousef's computer indicated he was
"planning to attack any nuclear facilities in the U.S. and
targets in France and Great Britain."
AP
[http://www.nypost.com]
NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP
Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM
are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc. Copyright 2002 NYP Holdings,
Inc. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
28 Conn. to stockpile radiation-protection pills
Worcester Telegram &Gazette Online
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
HARTFORD-- Connecticut will receive nearly 450,000 potassium
iodide tablets to treat people in case of a nuclear accident at
the Millstone Power Station in Waterford.
Anbex Inc. of New York announced yesterday it will
distribute tablets to Connecticut, Arizona and New Hampshire,
which are among nine states participating in the federal Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's stockpiling program.
Dan Morley, a planning specialist at the state Office of
Policy and Management, said officials do not know when the
tablets will arrive.
Connecticut officials calculated the number of tablets by
providing two pills for each of the 200,000 people who live and
work within a 10-mile radius of Millstone.
Another 50,000 tablets will be stockpiled for later
distribution, Morley said.
Potassium iodide blocks the thyroid gland from absorbing
cancer-causing iodine isotopes that could be released in a
nuclear fallout.
The tablets are an “inexpensive, safe and effective
protective measure” to supplement evacuation and shelter in a
nuclear power plant emergency, Anbex said.
Anti-nuclear activists scoff at plans to stockpile tablets
near Millstone, saying too few would be available in a nuclear
catastrophe. They say there should be enough pills for residents
and workers within a 50-mile radius of the power plants.
The federal government is financing the cost of the tablets
and the state will pay for public education and distribution,
Morley said. State officials, facing a two-year, $1 billion
budget deficit, have not yet determined the cost, which “will be
absorbed somehow,” he said.
Legislation has been introduced in the General Assembly to
require the state Commissioner of Public Health to stockpile
potassium iodide tablets and adopt regulations governing their
distribution in a nuclear accident.
State Rep. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, says potassium
iodide tablets are “wholeheartedly endorsed” by her constituents.
Distribution to schoolchildren “could be tricky, but I am sure it
can be resolved,” she said.
The NRC announced in December it would pay for two doses of
potassium iodide nationally for residents within 10 miles of
nuclear power plants. The NRC has ordered 6 million tablets.
Through the end of February, Anbex said it distributed 1.9
million tablets to Maryland, Massachusetts and New York.
The company said it has orders for nearly 1 million tablets
for Alabama, Florida and Vermont.
Worcester Telegram & Gazette Corp.
*****************************************************************
29 N.H. to get 350,000 pills for nuclear radiation protection
© 2002 George J. Foster Co.
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — New Hampshire will get nearly 350,000
potassium iodide tablets to treat people in case of nuclear
accidents at the Seabrook and Vermont Yankee nuclear power
plants.
Anbex Inc. of New York said Vermont is to receive 93,000 pills
while Connecticut will get 450,000 and Arizona 7,000 pills. They
are among nine states participating in the federal Nuclear
Regulatory Commission’s stockpiling program.
Massachusetts has received 550,000 pills, the company said.
Potassium iodide blocks the thyroid gland from absorbing
cancer-causing iodine isotopes that could be released in a
nuclear fallout.
The tablets are an "inexpensive, safe and effective protective
measure" to supplement evacuation and shelter in a nuclear power
plant emergency, Anbex said.
The NRC announced in December it would pay for two doses of
potassium iodide nationally for residents within 10 miles of
nuclear power plants. The NRC has ordered 6 million tablets.
Through the end of February, Anbex said it had distributed 1.9
million tablets to Maryland, Massachusetts and New York.
The company said it has orders for nearly 1 million tablets for
Alabama, Florida and Vermont.
Last month Gov. Jeanne Shaheen asked the government to send the
anti-radiation pills for New Hampshire residents.
With fears of further terrorist attacks, possibly at nuclear
plants, the government announced in December it would supply the
pills to states requesting it.
Until recently, state officials did not recommend stockpiling the
pills. The Office of Emergency Management had said the pills
provide very little protection and would detract from evacuation,
the best response to a nuclear incident.
But Shaheen said "it makes sense to take steps to ensure that
everyone living near Seabrook Station and Vermont Yankee has
access to potassium iodide."
*****************************************************************
30 Nevada pairs GOP, Democrat lobbyists against Yucca Mountain
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 12:25:21 PST
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Kenneth Duberstein, former White House chief of
staff to President Ronald Reagan, has been hired to help Nevada
fight a plan to bury the nation's radioactive waste 90 miles from
Las Vegas.
Duberstein is chairman of the Duberstein Group, a Republican
lobbying firm in Washington, D.C., and has close ties to the
American Gaming Association. He will work with John Podesta,
former White House chief of staff in the Democratic
administration of President Bill Clinton, who was hired last week
to help Nevada oppose the Yucca Mountain project.
U.S. Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., announced Duberstein's hiring
Tuesday. Ensign emphasized Duberstein's ties and relationships
with senators and said the two lobbyists should work well
together.
They will head Nevada's efforts to win Senate support for an
anticipated veto by Gov. Kenny Guinn against the nuclear dump
plan.
Duberstein, 56, was White House chief of staff from 1988 through
January 1989. Podesta, 54, who was recruited by Sen. Harry Reid,
D-Nev., was White House chief of staff from October 1998 through
January 2001.
Duberstein has worked on a contractual basis for the American
Gaming Association since his friend, Frank Fahrenkopf, became the
association's president in 1995.
The amount Duberstein and Podesta will be paid has not been
disclosed. They'll be paid from a fund that includes $5 million
from the Nevada Legislature; $250,000 from the Nevada Resort
Association and $500,000 from the American Gaming Association.
Guinn has said he will veto President Bush's decision to approve
Yucca Mountain, as the repository for 77,000 tons of the nation's
commercial, industrial and military nuclear waste.
Bush announced his decision Feb. 15. The governor has until
mid-April to issue his veto.
Congress will then have 90 legislative days to decide by a
majority vote in the House and Senate whether to override the
veto.
Guinn has acknowledged Nevada will concentrate its efforts in the
Senate because the state believes it cannot win a majority vote
in the House. Lobbying for the dump is headed by John Sununu and
Geraldine Ferraro, and financed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
through its Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth.
Sununu, a Republican, is a former New Hampshire governor and
White House chief of staff for former President George Bush,
Ferraro is a former Democratic New York congresswoman and vice
presidential nominee.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
31 Bush's choice of Yucca Mountain prompts heated nuclear debate
Greg Gordon
Star Tribune
Published Mar 3, 2002
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Army officials detonated an anti-tank
missile warhead next to a huge nuclear waste storage cask 3 1/2
years ago to test the container's ability to withstand a
terrorist attack.
The explosion at the Army's Aberdeen (Md.) Proving Ground blew a
grapefruit-size hole in the cast-iron cask.
Dueling interpretations of that test offer a taste of the
escalating debate over President Bush's Feb. 15 approval of
Nevada's Yucca Mountain as a permanent repository for the
nation's high-level nuclear waste.
Nevada officials, who want Congress to overturn the decision, say
the test blew a hole in the nuclear industry's assertion that the
public faces little risk of radiation leaks from the waste. They
note that 600 of the same German-made, "Castor V/21" casks are
storing nuclear waste around the globe -- 25 of them at a
Virginia power plant -- and transporting it in European
countries.
Executives of Twin Cities-based Xcel Energy Corp. and other
nuclear utilities accuse Yucca opponents of fear-mongering.
Nevada officials want to kill the Yucca project with scary images
of thousands of trucks and rail cars carrying waste to Nevada
from 130 government and industry nuclear facilities nationwide,
including Xcel's two nuclear plants in Minnesota, said Scott
Northard, Xcel's director of nuclear assets.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rejected an application
to use Castors to transport waste in the United States years ago.
Northard says that unlike the Castor, most U.S.-approved
transportation casks have double liners of steel.
Nevada opposed
The debate over the casks underscores the fact that rhetoric is
flying and money is flowing as both sides gear up for a
months-long lobbying battle over moving nuclear waste to Yucca
Mountain. Over the last 20 years, the government has spent $6
billion searching for a site, then tunneling, drilling and
analyzing whether Yucca would safely isolate the waste while it
decays over 10,000 years.
Most Nevada residents are embittered that their state, which has
no nuclear power plants, seems destined to get everybody else's
waste -- 77,000 tons of some of the deadliest stuff known to man.
The state's political leaders argue that Bush has ignored
evidence that, within a few hundred years, seeping groundwater
could carry radiation from the site. They hope to either win a
court order blocking the siting or to erode congressional support
for the project.
A congressional showdown is prescribed by law. Nevada's
Republican governor, Kenny Guinn, gets until April 16 to veto
Bush's ruling -- an action he says he will take. Then the House
and Senate have 90 legislative days to uphold the president by
simple majority votes, a process that could extend until late in
the year.
In recent years, sizable majorities in both the House and Senate
have backed bills to put the waste at Yucca. Sen. Paul Wellstone,
D-Minn., has voted against those bills because of concerns about
the risks of transporting the waste, but most members of the
Minnesota House delegation voted in favor. Sen. Mark Dayton, the
freshman Democrat, hasn't taken a position but says he worries
the most about keeping the waste in Minnesota.
Nevada plans to advertise in states such as Indiana, Missouri and
Nebraska -- where the most westward-bound trucks and trains with
nuclear payloads would roll -- hoping to sway public opinion and
the votes of lawmakers.
The state has hired a former Energy Department official who
oversaw the Yucca project, three former NRC officials, lobbyists,
rail safety experts, public relations strategists and teams of
lawyers, said Bob Loux, executive director of Nevada's Agency for
Nuclear Projects. And in a clue about one part of Nevada's
strategy, the state has hired former Senate parliamentarian Bob
Dove "because of his expertise in the procedures of the Senate
and House," said Charlie Fitzpatrick, a Texas lawyer working for
the state.
But Nevada's most potent weapon may be its senior senator, Harry
Reid, who is the assistant Senate majority leader. Closing ranks
with Reid, Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., has said he would
oppose any move to go forward with Yucca.
On the other side, the nuclear power industry has donated
millions of dollars to political campaigns and parties this
election cycle and wields a wide array of lobbyists. They range
from Bennett Johnson, the Louisiana Democrat who formerly headed
the Senate Energy Committee, to Vin Weber, the former Republican
congressman from Minnesota.
Nuclear utilities are also helping fund pro-Yucca coalitions,
including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's "Yucca Mountain
Initiative," co-chaired by ex-New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu, a
Republican, and former New York Sen. Geraldine Ferraro, a
Democrat.
Positive interpretation
As for the missile warhead tests, Steve Kraft of the Nuclear
Energy Institute sees a positive side to them, even though they
conjure images of attacks from terrorists believed to possess the
light, anti-tank missiles. When the Castor was shielded by a
concrete wall in a second test, Kraft noted, the warhead did not
penetrate it. And without the concrete shield, he said, even when
aimed "against the weakest spot on the cask," the warhead failed
to "blow it to smithereens," suggesting a radiation leak could be
repaired.
"It's not going to be a great day if it happens," said Kraft, a
nuclear-waste expert for the industry's lobbying arm. "But it's
not going to be the horrible thing that people make it out to
be."
As to the safety of transporting the waste, Xcel's Northard
argues that 3,000 shipments have been hauled over U.S. roads and
highways since 1964 without problems.
Maybe so, says Nevada's Loux, but that "doesn't mean we're going
to do it correctly 100,000 more times" between 2010 and 2048.
Bob Halstead, a Wisconsin-based transportation consultant to
Nevada, said it would take as many as 1,544 truck shipments to
transport the waste from Xcel's Prairie Island nuclear plant near
Red Wing and the older, smaller Monticello reactor near St.
Cloud. If most Prairie Island waste is hauled by rail, as Xcel's
Northard predicts, Halstead says it would take 250 truck and 224
rail shipments, most passing near the Twin Cities.
-- Greg Gordon is atggordon@mcclatchydc.com
[atggordon@mcclatchydc.com] . Return to top© Copyright 2002 Star
Tribune. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 75-year-old Yucca Mountain opponent doesn't let energy go to waste
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
COLUMN: John L. Smith
When anti-Yucca Mountain activist Marge Detraz arrives for the
interview, the diminutive 75-year-old Caliente resident is nearly
overcome by the weight of the material she carries.
First, there's the paperwork. Reams of it. From bags she removes
documents, transcripts, news clips, editorial cartoons,
photocopies and handwritten notes. In no time, her nervous energy
covers the table with a storm of anti-Yucca information. She
takes out a large magnifying glass and scours her notes for
particularly pertinent nuggets.
In minutes, she thrusts 200 pages into my hands.
A little light reading. Marge has basically memorized the stuff.
Then there's the tape recorder and bundles of cassettes of
Yucca-related meetings. She took it upon herself several years
ago to independently compile a record, in no small part because
Lincoln County is the state's only regional government to openly
court the dump, which would store 77,000 tons of high-level
nuclear waste. If anyone needs to listen to the droning rhetoric
that filled those meetings, she's the woman to see.
And there are the T-shirts, which she sometimes sells but mostly
gives away. "Nevadans Say Nuclear Waste No Way!" the shirt
proclaims. Another, no doubt meant for our neighbors from the
Beehive State, says "Utahns Say Nuclear Waste No Way!" In case
anyone might doubt her purpose, she wears her anti-Yucca T-shirt.
She also carries a 2-foot-by-3-foot sign with the message, "Do We
Oppose Nuclear Waste In Nevada? You Bet! Our Families Are Not
Expendable!"
At this point, you get the feeling Detraz has something on her
mind.
It's conceivable that the radioactive waste would pass by rail
near Caliente, and that has some Lincoln County officials
believing there is a possible economic windfall in welcoming the
spent fuel from the nation's military installations and nuclear
power plants.
Such thoughts drive Detraz to distraction.
So, she's in my face, papers flying and signs waving, to remind
me that plenty of folks in Lincoln County oppose Yucca -- just
like approximately 80 percent of surveyed Southern Nevadans.
With her partner in the radioactive revolution, Pioche resident
Louie Benezet, Detraz spreads the word about Yucca's potential
dangers to anyone willing to listen.
Today, I'm it.
"I am hot under the collar about this. Louie and I have been
working on this more than six years," she says.
She stands to point to paperwork, plead her personal case against
Yucca, and proclaim that none of those folks who favor the dump
site possesses the facts as she knows them. "I don't know how
anybody in their right mind would want nuclear waste. Lincoln
County is the only county that wants it. They used to intimidate
me, but I got tired of that. Now I speak my peace."
She does that and then some. She argues like a big-city lawyer on
the insanity of shipping radioactive substances through dozens of
states and near millions of citizens.
By then, she believes, it will be too late for Caliente, the
place her family has lived since 1921. Although she and her
husband once worked at the Nevada Test Site, she sees Yucca in
far more alarming terms.
Unlike some of her neighbors, she doesn't see the economic
upside, believes local politicians have been blinded by nuclear
lobbying funds, knows the plutonium can be safely stored where it
is for another century, and questions the ethics of proponents
who appear more intent on taking speaking trips to Washington
than looking out for the best interests of the residents of
Lincoln County.
At this point, she's motivated enough to block one of those big
rigs with her bare hands.
Some sophisticated observers of the Yucca Mountain Project will
call her one-woman crusade quaint and smile at her small-town
ways.
Detraz, like many Nevadans, knows how she feels but not what to
do about it. She refuses to acknowledge that this battle is
bigger than the efforts of even the most tenacious 75-year-old.
But for a moment, she made me wonder where Nevada might be if all
its citizens showed half as much passion in this fight.
John L. Smith's column appears Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday and
Sunday. E-mail him at Smith@lvrj.com or call him at 383-0295.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002
*****************************************************************
33 Republican lobbyist joins Yucca battle
Kenneth Duberstein Has close ties to the American Gaming
Association
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
Duberstein served as White House chief of staff for Reagan from 1988 through
January 1989
By TONY BATT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON -- Kenneth Duberstein, who was White House chief of
staff during the last year of the Reagan administration, will be
the leading Republican lobbyist for Nevada in the state's fight
in Congress this year against the Yucca Mountain Project.
Duberstein, 56, is chairman of the Duberstein Group, a Republican
lobbying firm, and has close ties to the American Gaming
Association.
He will work with John Podesta, another former White House chief
of staff who agreed last week to represent Nevada in opposing
nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain.
"Ken's group is one of the most respected firms in Washington,
D.C., and they have great relationships in the Senate," said Sen.
John Ensign, R-Nev., who made the announcement Tuesday. "They
will work well with Podesta and his group. This brings a wealth
of talent to our efforts (against Yucca Mountain)."
Duberstein declined to comment.
Duberstein was White House chief of staff for President Reagan
from 1988 through January 1989.
Podesta, 54, who was recruited by Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., was
White House chief of staff from October 1998 through January 2001
for President Clinton.
"Ken Duberstein will do a great job. He has represented Nevada's
interests well in the past, and I am confident he will do so in
the future," Reid said through spokesman Nathan Naylor.
Duberstein has worked on a contractual basis for the American
Gaming Association since his friend, Frank Fahrenkopf, became the
association's president in 1995.
"He brings a knowledge of the gaming industry and the concerns of
the state of Nevada," Fahrenkopf said.
The amount Duberstein and Podesta will be paid has not been
disclosed. Both lobbyists will be compensated by a growing fund
that already includes $5 million approved by the Nevada
Legislature; $250,000 from the Nevada Resort Association and
$500,000 from the American Gaming Association.
Duberstein and Podesta will lead Nevada's efforts to win a
majority vote in the Senate to sustain an anticipated veto by
Gov. Kenny Guinn against the Yucca Mountain Project.
Guinn has vowed to veto President Bush's decision to approve
Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as a repository
for 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste. Bush announced his
decision Feb. 15; Guinn has 60 days to issue a veto. Congress
will have 90 legislative days to decide by a majority vote in the
House and Senate whether to override the veto.
Guinn has acknowledged Nevada will concentrate its efforts in the
Senate because the state cannot win a majority vote in the House.
webmaster@lvrj.com Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 -
*****************************************************************
34 Reid to make case against Yucca before real estate execs
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 11:07:21 PST
Sen. Harry Reid will discuss Yucca Mountain with the local
chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office
Properties on March 28.
Reid, the second-highest ranking Democrat in the U.S. Senate, is
leading Nevada's fight in Washington against storing the nation's
nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain.
Reid will discuss Yucca Mountain this year "to educate (NAIOP)
members on the issue, because it really affects our members,"
said a NAIOP spokeswoman.
NAIOP's local chapter has taken no official position on nuclear
waste storage at Yucca Mountain, which is 90 miles northwest of
Las Vegas.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
35 Heavyweight GOP lobbyist joins Nevada team
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 11:13:39 PST
By Benjamin Grove
WASHINGTON -- Nevada lawmakers have enlisted GOP heavyweight
lobbyist Ken Duberstein to help them drum up opposition in
Congress to the Yucca Mountain project.
Duberstein, who served as President Reagan's chief of staff, was
at the top of a short list during a search in recent days for a
high-profile Republican lobbyist, Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said.
Duberstein will join Democrat John Podesta, former chief of
staff to President Clinton, as Nevada's leading anti-Yucca
lobbyists on Capitol Hill.
President Bush approved Yucca Mountain as the most suitable site
to bury the nation's nuclear waste last month, and Congress is
expected to vote on the issue by mid-year. Both the House and
Senate are expected to approve the Yucca plan, but some observers
say the Senate vote could be close.
The nuclear industry is mobilizing an aggressive lobbying
campaign in favor of the Yucca project.
To counter that, Duberstein and Podesta will spend much of their
time urging key senators to vote against it, Ensign said.
Duberstein is chairman and CEO of The Duberstein Group.
"They have great relationships in the U.S. Senate, and they have
credibility," Ensign said.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said, "John (Ensign) and I now have an
outstanding team in place to fight the misguided Yucca Mountain
project."
Duberstein was not available for comment. Nevada lawmakers have
not disclosed how much Podesta or Duberstein will be paid.
"We're not talking money," Ensign said.
The state has a growing anti-Yucca fund -- the Nevada
Legislature approved $5 million; the American Gaming Association
has committed $500,000; and the Nevada Resort Association
$250,000.
Duberstein's name surfaced as Ensign sought advice on lobbyists
from trusted allies, including American Gaming Association
president Frank Fahrenkopf, who is also former chairman of the
Republican National Committee. Duberstein has worked for the AGA
on gaming issues.
Fahrenkopf said Duberstein is a powerful player in Washington.
"Anytime you can enlist in a legislative battle two former White
House chiefs of staff, you've got a powerful team," Fahrenkopf
said. "Mr. Duberstein is a very well-respected lobbyist in
Washington."
Duberstein does not have any conflicts of interest with the
nuclear industry, which is a vocal supporter of the Yucca
Mountain project, Ensign said.
Duberstein and Podesta are "excited" about working together as
an anti-Yucca lobbying team, Ensign said.
Duberstein also serves on the board of directors of Boeing
Company, on the advisory board of the Kennedy School at Harvard's
Institute of Politics and is chairman of the ethics committee for
the U.S. Olympic Committee.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
36 Never mind Saddam. What about nuking the Belgians?
The Guardian - United Kingdom; Mar 13, 2002
The startling omission of Belgium from the list of countries
against which the United States would be prepared to use nuclear
weapons has worried and depressed many of the world's foremost
military analysts, such as myself.
It is almost unbelievable that the Belgians, with their sickly,
mayonnaise-drenched cuisine and disturbing interest in
paedophilia, are not considered an axis of evil all by
themselves.
Plus, all Belgians slouch, especially the Walloons. Believe me, I
was there recently and I know what I'm talking about. The notion
that they should be spared even the most minuscule of
thermonuclear holocausts while the industrious and robust Chinese
sit unhappily at the top of the hit list is, frankly,
unsupportable and does not make me feel very safe in my bed at
night.
I'm also worried about this rather effete notion of
"provocation"; that is, the concept that Iraq, say, would need to
actually do something wicked before being righteously reduced to
an extremely large sheet of glass. Surely the point of having
many more nuclear weapons than anyone else - and bigger, more
expensive ones, too - is that you don't need to wait for
something as tiresome as an excuse? We might have to wait for
ever, drumming our fingers on the tabletop, the little red button
just out of reach.
So, disconcerted, I rang the Pentagon and asked to be put through
to someone in charge.
"Yes, sir, how may I help you?" said an abrupt young woman at the
end of the line.
"I was wondering about this list of seven countries against which
you folks would use nuclear weapons. There's Iraq, Russia . . ."
"Yes, I know the list you mean," she interrupted. "What about
it?"
"Well," I said, "I was wondering if you'd mind awfully appending
the name of Belgium to the list."
There was a pause, but only for a couple of seconds. Then she
said: "OK, sir. You need to talk to Colonel Humm. I can put you
right through."
"Colonel Humm? You made that up! That's not a person's name!"
"Yes, it is, sir. Lieutenant-Colonel Michael Humm, as in hum,
except with two 'm's," she added, helpfully.
Now, this Col Humm, I wondered. Is he responsible for the bit of
the Pentagon that deals with nuclear weapons or the bit of the
Pentagon that deals with attacking Belgians? It wasn't clear, and
became no clearer when I was put through, because he wasn't
there.
But next day, I did get through to Lieutenant-Colonel Catherine
Abbott. She was very helpful.
"Colonel Humm's not a real person, is he?" I began. "Yes, he is.
But he's off work ill."
So I explained. These countries on the list, they can change,
can't they? You couldn't rule out the possibility of an addition
to the list, such as Belgium, could you?
"I can't talk about the official document, because it's
classified," she said. "But if we received new information and as
circumstances changed, we would have to prepare for different
eventualities."
Terrific. They can't rule out nuking Belgium. I was greatly
encouraged. I wanted to ask her about the possibility of adding
South Norwood to the list, too - when Crystal Palace are playing
at home. You wouldn't even need a nuke - just a few tubs of Sarin
would do it. But Catherine was gone.
Anyway, clearly these friendly and helpful Americans, with their
historic commitment to democracy, are prepared to listen to those
with whom they enjoy a special relationship. And then, perhaps,
to act.
So, I am compiling a dossier of fabricated evidence, supposition
and pure guesswork - which will show that Belgium is presently
developing weapons of mass destruction, sponsoring terrorism
abroad and producing cheap, subsidised steel for export.
I'll be sending this to Col Humm in the happy expectation that
his frugal and rather boring list will be amended. And, as a
special, one-off service to Guardian readers, I am prepared, for
a small fee, also to add the name of any country YOU would like
to see reduced to an irradiated wasteland.
Perhaps you've just come back from a lousy holiday in Portugal,
or maybe developed a quite irrational loathing of Moldovians -
whatever the country, I'll pass it on, with more cheaply
concocted evidence, to the Pentagon for a fee of, say, pounds
250. Or a straight fiver if it's France.
Johnson . . . embargoed Big Macs
*****************************************************************
37 US nuclear strategy paper out of line with Russia dialogue -
minister
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 13, 2002
Text of report by Russian news agency ITAR-TASS
Moscow, 13 March, ITAR-TASS correspondents Valeriy Agarkov and
Dina Pyanykh: Washington's latest document on the new American
nuclear strategy "is out of line with the dialogue between Russia
and the USA", Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said today.
Addressing Duma members of parliament, he recalled that US
nuclear strategy is reviewed at the start of each new
administration, which decides its own targets for possible
strikes. Ivanov stressed that therefore "there cannot in essence
be anything new in this document". He said that "Moscow's concern
arises from the form and timing of the document". The minister
believes it to be framed in the spirit of the Cold War period.
"This kind of document should not be appearing, given the present
nature of relations between Russia and America," Igor Ivanov
noted.
Source: ITAR-TASS news agency, Moscow, in Russian 0906 gmt 13 Mar
02 /BBC Monitoring/ © BBC.
*****************************************************************
38 Saddam is on the brink of 'crude nuclear capability'
Irish Newspapers -
IRAQ could develop a crude nuclear device within five years
unless its weapons programme is checked immediately, British
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw claimed last night. Mr Straw was
addressing a private meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party
over the prospect of British involvement in US military action
against Iraq.
He emphasised that no decision had yet been taken on opening a
second front in the war on terrorism, as well as his wish to
explore diplomatic solutions.
The briefing document prepared for the meeting underlined the
threat Iraq poses to its own people, as well as its neighbours.
However, it goes on to admit that there is no firm evidence that
Saddam Hussein currently has weapons of mass destruction but says
they are understood to be hidden in a range of locations because
UN weapons inspectors could not account for thousands of tonnes
of chemicals used in weapon production.
Mr Straw's assertions came as US Vice-president Dick Cheney
arrived in the Middle East last night in a bid to secure Arab
support for a war against Iraq.
While the official reception at the start of his nine-nation tour
of the region may have been courteous the atmosphere in the Arab
world is distinctly frosty.
Mr Cheney is expected to be greeted this week by a wall of
resistance in the nine Arab capitals he visits.
Even before his aircraft touched down yesterday in Amman, he was
left in no doubt that even moderate Arab leaders, such as his
host King Abdullah of Jordan, want no part of a war against Iraq.
A similar message was delivered to Downing Street yesterday by
King Muhammad VI of Morocco, another young moderate Arab leader
and American ally.
Arab nations fear that President Saddam Hussein could lash out if
attacked, triggering war with Israel or destabilising vulnerable
neighbours such as Jordan or Saudi Arabia.
Key Arab states in the region, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia,
want the US to put the emphasis back into the Middle East. ( The
Times, London)
David Charter and Tom Baldwin
© Copyright Unison
*****************************************************************
39 Iranian radio says America "biggest rogue state in the world"
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Mar 13, 2002
Text of commentary by Iranian radio on 12 March
In a meeting with [Iranian President] Mr Khatami, the
director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency
[IAEA], [Muhammad] Al-Boradi'i, has emphasized that Iranian
atomic activities and research at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant
are peaceful.
The remarks of Al-Boradi'i in Vienna clearly refute the
allegations of the American officials against our country. In
order to create obstacles in the way of the Islamic Republic of
Iran's access to nuclear technology for peaceful means, the
American government has always accused our country of trying to
produce nuclear weapons, an accusation which has been rejected
repeatedly by the IAEA.
On the basis of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the UN
organization, IAEA, is the only source which can inspect nuclear
activities of various countries and point out the nuclear
activities which are contradictory to the nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty, known as the NPT. Countries which
possess the nuclear capability have been committed not to attack
the countries which decide against pursuing the production of
nuclear weapons and also to help the transfer of the nuclear
technology to those countries for peaceful means.
The interesting point is that the IAEA was established on the
basis of an atom-for-peace plan which was proposed by the
American President Eisenhower. Despite that, the revelation of
the parts of an American nuclear review plan at the beginning of
the current week - in which a number of countries, including
Iran, have been threatened with atomic attack in case they launch
an attack against America or Washington's allies - is not only
against the spirit of the NPT, it also revealed clearly to the
people of the world that America considers its prerogative to
violate multilateral agreements which form the basis of
international order and security.
Of course, this is not the only case of America's disregard for
international laws and agreements. The unilateral rejection of
the ABM Treaty, opposition to the endorsement of the Kyoto
accord, opposition to the inspection of the restriction of small
arms, the banning of anti-personnel mines and the illegal
increase on duties for steel imports have turned America into the
biggest rogue state in the world.
Source: Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran, in Persian
2115 gmt 12 Mar 02
/BBC Monitoring/ © BBC.
*****************************************************************
40 By God they frighten me
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian |
By God they frighten me
Wednesday March 13, 2002
The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk]
We live in a frightening and insecure world: no one can deny or
escape this fact (Tough talk on Iraq, March 12). But I had always
thought the task of our national leaders and governments was to
ensure as far as humanly possible that we are able to live our
lives in all reasonable security and freedom from fear.
So why is it that Mr Bush and Mr Blair frighten the life out of
me? Who is going to tell these people that their policies
regarding the "war against terror" are themselves terrifying to
their own people? Who is going to help them to make the most
basic connections between their own decisions to attack Iraq and
the deaths of countless civilians, the certainty of terrible
reprisals, and the further irreversible poisoning of the
environment? This endangers the lives of us all.
Come on, Mr Bush and Mr Blair, speak to your people honestly, and
tell us whether you really wish to collude with this folly any
longer!
Rev Paul Fisher Langcliffe, N Yorks
paul.fisher@ukonline.co.uk [paul.fisher@ukonline.co.uk]
· You say that seen from Baghdad the plans for a war on Iraq must
seem "a trifle odd" and "surreal". These are idiotic adjectives
to use to describe how they must view the threats. The violence
being threatened is literally without limits, even nuclear
weapons are being talked of.
Parents in Baghdad are explaining to their children why they must
practice air raid drills. They are agonising over whether to stay
in their homes or try to flee before the bombing starts and those
children start wetting their beds in their terror. "Odd"? The
prospect of war, seen from the victims' perspective, is always
terrifying, horrific, appalling. We should find it so also, for
their sakes.
Fay Dowker London
· Tony Blair has absolutely no right to plunge this country into
war. Bombing the people of other nations is never the way to root
out terrorism - indeed, it is a sure way of strengthening support
for terrorists. Neither war nor terrorism were on the agenda when
Labour was elected.
If Blair wants to take such a crucial step as committing this
country to war, thereby laying us open to counter-attacks, then
there should be a referendum on that specific issue. All those
who feel this way should write to their MPs and make their voice
heard before we get dragged into wars we do not want.
Marc Delaney Barry, Glamorgan marc.delaney@ntlworld.com [
marc.delaney@ntlworld.com]
· Since Israel's nuclear weapons of mass destruction, which
exist, are no different from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction,
which we are assured do exist, why is the alliance not preparing
to do to Sharon what it has in mind for Saddam?
Michael Kustow London
mkustow@globalnet.co.uk [mkustow@globalnet.co.uk]
· Tony Blair and George Bush, like Saddam Hussein, are
"developing weapons of mass destruction". Does this mean that
someone somewhere who doesn't like that fact will feel free to
invade the UK or the US? Prof Gary Craig University of Hull
· You report Gordon Brown as telling ministers in key social
areas (Morris, Blunkett, Byers et al) that their spending plans
are extravagant. I trust he also had words with Tony about the
cost of supporting Bush over Iraq. Now there's an extravagance we
can't afford, morally or fiscally.
Cllr Jeremy Sutcliffe Oldham Cllr.j.sutcliffe@oldham.gov.uk
[Cllr.j.sutcliffe@oldham.gov.uk]
· Who should we be more scared of now? The Islamic or the
military fundamentalists? Matthew Page Lewes, E Sussex
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
*****************************************************************
41 N. Korea May Rescind Nuclear Promise
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 8:20:19 PST
SEOUL, South Korea- North Korea, angered by a Pentagon study
naming the communist state as a potential target for nuclear
strikes, threatened Wednesday to abandon a 1994 promise to freeze
its nuclear laboratories.
The 7-year-old accord with Washington is a linchpin of U.S.
efforts to stop the Stalinist country from developing atomic
bombs.
However, "under the present situation where nuclear lunatics have
taken office in the White House, we are compelled to examine all
the agreements with the U.S.," North Korea's Foreign Ministry
said in a statement carried by the official Korean Central News
Agency.
North Korea also accused Washington of planning to launch a
nuclear war on the Korean peninsula and warned that it has the
ability to retaliate.
"A nuclear war to be imposed by the U.S. nuclear fanatics upon
the Democratic People's Republic of (North) Korea would mean
their ruin in nuclear disaster," KCNA warned in a separate
statement earlier Wednesday.
The remarks were North Korea's first reaction to reports last
week that the Pentagon was studying the possible use of nuclear
weapons against seven countries that could threaten the United
States: North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Russia and Syria.
"In case the U.S. plan ... turns out to be true, the DPRK will
have no option but to take a substantial countermeasure against
it, not bound to any DPRK-U.S. agreement," the Foreign Ministry
said.
Secretary of State Colin Powell told a Senate Appropriations
subcommittee Tuesday that no country was being targeted
day-to-day. He said reduction of the U.S. nuclear weapons
stockpiles will continue.
North Korea has previously threatened to restart its nuclear
program. As part of the 1994 accord with Washington, the North
froze Soviet-designed reactors suspected of producing
weapons-grade plutonium. In return, a U.S.-led international
consortium is building two $4.6 billion light-water reactors in
North Korea.
The CIA believes North Korea stockpiled enough plutonium before
the 1994 freeze to make one or two atomic bombs. The country
refuses U.N. inspectors full access to its facilities,
complicating efforts to determine Pyongyang's nuclear
capabilities.
U.S. officials say North Korea has chemical and biological
weapons programs and is developing a longer-range Taepo Dong-2
missile that could carry a significant payload to Alaska, Hawaii
and parts of the U.S. continent.
Also Wednesday, North Korea condemned two joint U.S.-South Korean
military exercises scheduled to begin March 21.
The exercises are "prelude to a very dangerous war of aggression
aimed to plunge the Korean nation into a scourge of a nuclear
war," Rodong Sinmun, the official newspaper of the ruling
Workers' Party, said in commentary carried by KCNA.
North Korea has been smarting since President Bush characterized
the country as being part of "an axis of evil," along with Iran
and Iraq.
During a visit to South Korea in February, Bush renewed an offer
to start a dialogue with North Korea, but Pyongyang again
rejected it Wednesday, calling it a "sheer lie."
Washington keeps 37,000 troops in South Korea as a deterrent
against the North. The United States led a U.N. force that fought
on South Korea's side during the 1950-53 Korean War.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
42 Russian, U.S. Officials to Cut Nukes
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 10:15:13 PST
WASHINGTON- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Wednesday
the United States and Russia are likely to come up with a legally
binding document outlining their mutual pledge to cut long-range
nuclear weapons by two-thirds.
President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin "have agreed
that they would like to have something that would go beyond their
two presidencies," Rumsfeld said at a news conference after two
days of meetings with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov.
Referring to Ivanov's call for a legally binding document
outlining that pledge, the American defense secretary said: "Some
sort of a document of that type is certainly a likelihood."
Ivanov said he would like to see good progress toward such a
document so that it could be signed at a May summit by Putin and
Bush in Russia.
"We believe there should be a legally binding document which
would be comprehensive and understandable for the whole world,
and which would also reflect the transparency we need to achieve
between the two countries," Ivanov said.
Rumsfeld also sought to reassure Russian officials and the world
that the United States is not eyeing Russia as a potential target
of nuclear weapons. The disclosure last weekend of an internal
U.S. nuclear review naming Russia and six other countries as
potential threats alarmed the Kremlin and leaders of other
countries.
"Without getting into the classified details, I can say that the
review says nothing about targeting any country with nuclear
weapons," Rumsfeld said. "The United States targets no country on
a day-to-day basis."
Echoing the comments of other Bush administration officials since
news reports of the document appeared, Rumsfeld said the Nuclear
Posture Review was not a planning document for possible U.S.
action, but merely "sets out prudent requirements for deterrence
in the 21st century."
Russian officials had been briefed on the document in January,
Rumsfeld said. The document does, however, note that Russia has
formidable nuclear weapons and "prudently takes this into
account," Rumsfeld said.
But the relationship between the United States and Russia has
undergone such a fundamental improvement that the two countries
no longer view each other as adversaries, Rumsfeld said.
"The United States seeks a cooperative relationship with Russia,
which moves away from the mutually assured destruction (policy)
of the past," Rumsfeld said.
On Tuesday, Ivanov had told reporters "it's quite natural" that
he would want to discuss the review with the people who prepared
it. He told reporters that Rumsfeld's public statements about the
report accurately reflect its contents.
"Secretary Rumsfeld briefed you on the true situation, and I
don't have anything to add here," Ivanov told reporters.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, the
president's national security assistant, also have assured Russia
it is not being targeted.
Ivanov also made clear that a U.S. plan to send military
personnel to help train soldiers in the Republic of Georgia to
fight terrorists remains a sensitive topic for Russia.
Ivanov said the United States and Russia would need "the most
close cooperation" to effectively help Georgia's government deal
with the problem. Fighters trained in Afghanistan have escaped to
the Pankisi Gorge area, which borders Russia's breakaway
Chechnya, Ivanov said, and are "full of new plans for terrorist
operations." Russia "cannot just sit and watch these activities
indifferently," he said.
The United States also believes fighters linked with the al-Qaida
terrorist network are hiding in the crime-infested gorge. Ivanov
said the United States is keeping Russia informed of its
intentions, both the planned phases of training and the scope of
that training.
Rumsfeld said the United States has no plans to put any military
personnel into the gorge itself, and is only sending "relatively
modest number of trainers over to assist them (Georgia) in
training."
President Eduard Shevardnadze of Georgia also has sought to
reassure Russian officials that Washington will not have a
long-term military presence in the region.
Georgia, eager to shed Russian influence and reach out to the
West, has long refused Russian offers to help crack down in the
gorge, and Shevardnadze admitted only recently that the gorge
could house terrorists and welcomed U.S. offers of help.
On Tuesday, Ivanov called on Bush at the White House to discuss
the U.S. and Russian pledges to reduce nuclear stockpiles and the
U.S.-led campaign against terror.
Ivanov described the meeting as "rather warm and productive" and
said he did not take up the Pentagon study with Bush.
The National Security Council spokesman, Sean McCormack, said
Bush had raised the issue of nuclear weapons, but "only in the
context of reiterating his commitment to reduce U.S. offensive
nuclear arms to the range the U.S. is committed to."
Secretary of State Colin Powell on Tuesday told members of
Congress that the number of U.S. nuclear weapons has dropped to
fewer than 10,000 from the 20,000 that were in the arsenal when
he was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff a decade ago.
Bush intends to go ahead with a plan to reduce the total of
long-range U.S. nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 over
the next 10 years, Powell said.
Putin has pledged a similar cut, but would like it to be legally
binding. Powell said Bush had no objection to the formality, but
that it was not necessary now that the United States and Russia
are no longer adversaries.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
43 Security chief creates color-coded warnings
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal
By RON FOURNIER
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON -- America is on yellow alert, facing a "significant
risk of terrorist attacks," homeland security chief Tom Ridge
said Tuesday as he announced a color-coded system designed to end
confusion over terror warnings.
It will be years before the nation sees green, the lowest threat
level, because terrorism may be "a permanent condition" in
America, Ridge said.
Ridge and Attorney General John Ashcroft have issued four terror
warnings since the Sept. 11 hijackings, and local officials have
complained the assessments were too vague. Bush advisers feared
the public was getting frustrated with the broad alarms.
"What we're trying to do is work with the states and local
communities (and) also the private sector so we have a common
vocabulary," Ridge said in describing the new system in a speech
to the National League of Cities.
In Las Vegas, Metropolitan Police Department officials in won't
adopt the national warning system until it has gone through a
comment and trial stage. Until then, the department will continue
to use its own four-tiered alarm system developed several months
ago.
The system announced by Ridge ranks threats by colors, starting
with green and followed by blue, yellow, orange and red as
perceived dangers intensify. The warning level can be upgraded
for the entire country or for specific regions and economic
sectors, such as the nuclear industry.
The system's guidelines give government officials advice on what
to do as threats grow, but no such guidance is offered for the
general public.
Ridge said the system is designed to motivate local leaders to
develop emergency response plans that would include ways to
inform private citizens about how to react.
"This is so much better than what they gave us before, which was
not much," said Clark County Sheriff Jerry Keller, who also is
president of the Major Cities Chiefs of North America.
In the absence of any federal guidelines, Las Vegas police
developed its own system with "condition level one" being the
lowest level of alert and "condition level four" being the
highest.
"We didn't have the luxury of waiting for a standard, so we had
to put one in place," Las Vegas police Lt. Vincent Cannito said.
Las Vegas is on the lowest alert level, which is defined as
anytime there is no general or specific threat of possible
terrorist activity, violent protest or any other significant
event. The next level is when there is a general threat. A level
three occurs if there is a specific threat or imminent likelihood
of a threat. The highest level of alert is reserved for when a
terrorist attack is occurring.
Cannito said the new federal guidelines will go through a 45-day
comment period, followed by a 90-day trial period before they are
finalized. "At the conclusion of that, we will make the necessary
changes to comply with the federal standards," he said.
Cannito said the department will rely largely on the media to
notify the public of a change in the threat levels, but might use
the Emergency Broadcast System.
America is at yellow alert because the al-Qaida terrorist network
is trying to re-form after defeats in Afghanistan and has trained
thousands of terrorists, some of whom probably have slipped into
the United States, Ridge said.
Ridge can't require local governments to participate, but he
predicted they would.
"Unless we work together so that we have a seamless strategy
through the state and down to the local government, I'm afraid we
won't be as strong as we need to be to confront what I consider
to be a permanent condition that we as a country need to accept
as a fact of life," Ridge said.
Hundreds of police agencies were notified Tuesday of the yellow
alert. The color system was put in force immediately for federal
agencies.
The system will be subject to a 45-day comment period, after
which Ridge plans to turn it into a national framework.
Local officials said they hoped the announcement means more
information and federal money is coming their way.
"This is a start in reforming the system, and I'm sure there will
be other changes as times go by," said Bill Pasco, executive
director of the Fraternal Order of Police.
"With the prior system, everything was equal, when I doubt the
levels of threat were equal," said Mayor Pat McCrory of
Charlotte, N.C.
Oklahoma Gov. Frank Keating, a former FBI agent, recalled that he
could not be briefed about one terrorism warning, because as
governor he did not have the proper security clearance.
"It does no good to tell state officials that something bad might
happen and refuse to tell them what, where or when," Keating
said.
Review-Journal writer Ryan Oliver contributed to this report.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002
*****************************************************************
44 Wrong message sent on nuclear weapons
Opinion - StatesmanJournal.com
OpinionWednesday, March 13, 2002
The United States likely appears hypocritical to its foes and
allies.
March 13
Talk about bad timing: Here’s Vice President Dick Cheney heading
off Sunday for a 10-day trip to Britain and the Middle East — and
meanwhile, a Pentagon report calls for development of new nuclear
weapons suitable for use on Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya, among
others.
Cheney is bound for an area where many people hate the United
States, and where we’re struggling to gain the support of those
who at least are on the fence. And now they know we’re looking at
resuming nuclear testing and enlarging our view of where and when
we’d consider using nuclear weapons.
Other nations might reasonably respond:
You’re seeking our support, but you’re getting ready to lob
nuclear missiles into our back yard?
You want us to refrain from nuclear testing, yet you’re looking
at developing new weapons that you’ll want to test?
You’ve promised in the past not to use nuclear weapons against
countries that don’t have them, and now you’re backing off? If
so, why shouldn’t we develop nukes to protect ourselves?
No matter how deep our nation’s anguish and anger about the Sept.
11 attacks, we don’t have a license to become the world’s bully.
We cannot continue to pursue a go-it-alone mentality that says,
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
During his campaign, President Bush said he wanted to cut the
number of nuclear weapons and develop a strategy suited to the
passing of the Cold War era. That should remain a central goal
for the United States.
The Pentagon has responded that its 56-page report — which also
mentions North Korea, China and Russia as possible targets — is
simply an analysis of the options available to the
administration. However, this makes us look hypocritical both to
our foes and our potential allies.
As the world’s major nuclear power, we should be setting the
example of pulling back from the brink. We should lead the way in
making use of nuclear weapons unthinkable.
Copyright 2002 Statesman Journal, Salem, Oregon
*****************************************************************
45 N Korea condemns 'nuclear blackmail'
BBC
Wednesday, 13 March, 2002,
[The Japanese city of Hiroshima shortly after a US nuclear bomb
destroyed it in 1945] US would be "grossly mistaken" to repeat
its attack on Hiroshima
North Korea has for the first time reacted to its inclusion on a
list countries the US says it might use nuclear weapons against
by promising it will take a "strong countermeasure".
A report carried by the official North Korean news agency, KCNA,
accused the US of pursuing a policy of "nuclear blackmail".
But our correspondent in Seoul, Caroline Gluck, says the agency
leaves ambiguous the possibility that North Korea has the
capability of carrying out its own nuclear attack.
US nuclear targets China Russia Iraq North Korea Iran Libya Syria
The secret Pentagon document, first reported in US newspapers at
the weekend, outlines scenarios in which nuclear weapons might be
used against a number of countries.
US officials have played down the policy paper - Secretary of
State Colin Powell has portrayed it as "sound.. conceptual
planning" only, not a blueprint for any attack.
China, Russia and Iran have already called on Washington to
explain the report. China said on Tuesday it was "deeply shocked"
to be included on the list.
A report in the official China Daily on Wednesday said the review
was a pretext for the US to resume nuclear tests and develop new
nuclear arms to extend its military dominance in the world, KCNA
said the US plans justified its efforts to increase its capacity
for self defence.
It said: "If the US intends to mount a nuclear attack on any part
of the DPRK [North Korea] just as it did on Hiroshima, it is
grossly mistaken.
"A nuclear war to be imposed by the US nuclear fanatics... would
mean their ruin in nuclear disaster."
Arsenal reduction
But Colin Powell has dismissed suggestions the US was moving
towards nuclear recklessness, saying its superiority in
conventional weapons made nuclear conflict less likely.
Answering questions from Democratic senators on Tuesday, Mr
Powell said: "There is no way to read that document and come to
the conclusion the United States will be more likely or will more
quickly go to the use of nuclear weapons."
Mr Powell said the US has offered to reduce its nuclear arsenal
to between about 1,700 and 2,200 nuclear warheads, in parallel
with similar reductions by Russia.
Three-pronged plan
Weekend reports said the weapons could be used in "retaliation
for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons" and
"against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack".
The third category - "in the event of surprising military
developments" - is described by the BBC's Washington
correspondent, Paul Reynolds, as a "catch-all" clause.
The report - titled Nuclear Posture Review - is quoted as saying
the Pentagon should be ready to use nuclear weapons in an
Arab-Israeli conflict, a war between China and Taiwan and an
attack by North Korea on the South.
As for Russia, it is said to be only listed in view of its own
large nuclear arsenal and it is not viewed as an enemy.
*****************************************************************
46 Bush says U.S. will 'deal with' Saddam
[startribune.com]
Ron Fournier
Associated Press
Published Mar 14, 2002
WASHINGTON -- President Bush declared Wednesday that Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein is a menace ``and we're going to deal
with him,'' and said Osama bin Laden - a man he once said he
wanted dead or alive - has been reduced to a marginal figure in
the war on terrorism.
``He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it,
and met his match,'' Bush said of the suspected mastermind behind
the Sept. 11 attacks. ``I truly am not that concerned about
him.''
In his first full-blown news conference in five months, the
president produced strong rhetoric on the war and America's
enemies. Bush said he is leaving ``all options on the table'' as
the Pentagon reworks its nuclear weapons policy to deter any
attack on the United States - including from non-nuclear states
such as Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria.
Critics say the Pentagon's plans to produce less powerful nuclear
weapons make it more likely that the United States will
eventually launch a nuclear attack. But the president said a
modern nuclear arsenal is ``a way to say to people who would harm
America: 'Don't do it.' ... that there is a consequence.''
``The president must have all options available to make that
deterrent have meaning,'' he said.
Bush, holding his fifth formal White House news conference,
fielded questions on more than a dozen issues and sought to
defuse the toughest questions with humor.
But his eyes grew red and moist as he talked about slain U.S.
servicemen in Afghanistan. ``I feel responsible'' when troops are
harmed, he said. ``I'm not very good about concealing my
emotions.''
In a slap at one of the closest U.S. allies, Bush criticized
Israel for escalating military action against Palestinians.
``It's not helpful what the Israelis have recently done,'' he
said.
Still, the president said Israel has a right to protect itself
and expressed optimism that U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni would be
able to reduce violence during his Middle East trip.
Israel contends it is waging war against Palestinian terrorists,
but Bush drew a sharp distinction between his war on terrorism
and the Mideast conflict: ``Unlike our war against al-Qaida,
there is a series of agreements in place that will lead to
peace.'' He urged Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to embrace them.
On Iraq, Bush did not tip his hand but pledged to consult with
allies, many of whom are urging the United States not to take
military action.
``All options are on the table,'' Bush said. ``But one thing I
will not allow is a nation such as Iraq to threaten our very
future by developing weapons of mass destruction.''
The United States, which has a long-standing policy calling for a
regime change in Iraq, plans to steadily increase pressure on
Saddam with diplomatic, intelligence and perhaps even military
action, U.S. officials say.
Asked if Saddam was still holding a U.S. pilot captured in the
Persian Gulf War, the president replied, ``Wouldn't put it past
him.''
Vice President Dick Cheney is in the region building the case
against Iraq. Bush said Saddam has a record of killing his own
people, developing weapons of mass destruction and breaking
agreement to allow weapons inspectors into the country.
``He is a problem, and we're going to deal with him,'' Bush said.
Turning to another foe, Bush was unusually dismissive of bin
Laden.
``I know the man's on the run if he's alive at all,'' Bush said.
He asserted that bin Laden, if alive, is marginalized as a
leader, no longer running a country or heading a command
structure. ``We shoved him more and more on the margins,'' Bush
said.
Even with all the talk of war, Bush said a military draft is not
in the cards.
``I think we're in good shape'' with the voluntary force, Bush
said. ``If not, I'll address the nation.''
Bush also:
-Sharply criticized Senate Democrats for opposing Judge Charles
Pickering's nomination to the federal appeals court. With the
Senate Judiciary Committee poised to reject the Mississippi
judge, Bush said there is a ``disturbing pattern'' of Democrats
blocking his judicial nominees for ideological reasons.
-Said he was ``plenty hot'' over news that his administration
recently issued visas to two of the suicide hijackers who slammed
a commercial airliner into the World Trade Center. Suggesting
that he chewed out Attorney General John Ashcroft, the president
said, ``He got the message.''
-Pledged not to turn over records of his energy policy meetings
to Congress' investigative arm and said he will not allow
domestic security chief Tom Ridge to testify before Congress.
``I'm not going to let Congress erode the power of the executive
branch.''
-Refused to acknowledge the Zimbabwe's election, calling the
victory of incumbent Robert Mugabe the result of a ``flawed
election.''
-Said he was confident the Catholic church would ``clean up its
business'' and deal with reports of molestation by priests. He
backed embattled Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, who recently
gave prosecutors the names of at least 80 priests accused of
sexually abusing children. ``I respect him a lot.''
-Predicted that he and Russian President Vladimir Putin will sign
a security accord during his visit to Russia in May. But he
cautioned that any arms reductions must be verifiable and said
destroying nuclear weapons will take time.
Copyright 2002 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
47 Germany rejects US nuclear attack plans
thr 055
Germany-US-Nuclear Weapons Program /WRD/
Berlin, March 13, IRNA -- Germany here Wednesday rejected
Washington's latest secret contingency plans to use nuclear
weapons against seven countries including Iran.
"Such a strategy could endanger the disarmament and
non-proliferation of nuclear weapons," German deputy foreign
minister, Ludger Volmer, was quoted as saying in the daily
Berliner Zeitung.
"We judge these plans extremely sceptical and reserved," he
added.
Volmer called US plans to use nuclear arms against
non-nuclear states as "extremely questionable".
He urged "regular consultations" with the US to revise their
nuclear arms policies.
The unilateral actions of the Bush administration have caused
great concern among European allies, warning Washington not to
treat them as a "satellite".
OT/HZ/KS
*****************************************************************
48 Nuclear weapons: A new name but the same old blunder
Tallahassee Democrat | 03/13/2002 |
Posted on Wed, Mar. 13, 2002
By Molly Ivins
CREATORS SYNDICATE
Thinking about nuclear weapons is sort of like looking directly
at the sun: If you do it for more than a split second, you go
blind. Or insane.
Our government is now contemplating such a ne plus ultra of
idiocy that it's enough to make one yearn for the dear, departed
days of MAD (mutual assured destruction). MAD was such a sane
policy. Dr. Strangelove, report for duty immediately, the Bush
administration needs you!
We are about to get a new nuclear weapons policy - cute nukes.
Teeny-tiny nukes. I was betting the Pentagon would name them
"precision nukes," but I have once again underestimated our
military's ability to obfuscate with mind-numbing language. The
cute nukes are "offensive strike systems."
Now here's a sane sentence from the Pentagon's new Nuclear
Posture Review: "Non-nuclear strike capabilities may be
particularly useful to limit collateral damage and conflict
escalation." That means we won't wipe out entire populations and
start World War III if we stick to non-nukes. A point to be
considered.
But our busy military planners like to plan for all contingencies
(except terrorists with box-cutters) and are proposing "a new
generation of nuclear weapons" - just what we need. The cute
nukes are to be "employed against targets able to withstand
non-nuclear attack (for example, deep underground bunkers or
bio-weapons facilities)."
The drawback to cute nukes is that they're more "useable" than
the old-fashioned, clunky kind. But cute nukes do have the same
charming property as the grown-up kind - they're made of lethal
radioactive materials no one on God's green earth knows how to
get rid of.
So who signed us up to build a whole new generation of nukes? Did
we vote on this? Anybody recall Bush mentioning cute nukes while
he was running for office? Since we have to pay for it, don't we
get a say?
Naturally, the rest of the world thinks we're nuts, and they're
not even using diplomatic language to say so. A Russian
legislator inquired if Americans "have somewhat lost touch with
the reality in which they live."
We could spend some time relishing the glorious black humor MAD
produced, but let's take a few steps back here at look at the Big
Picture. Here are the questions: What do we think we are doing?
And what kind of country do we want to be?
According to the State Department, the federal budget in 1949 for
international aid and diplomacy (that is, efforts to settle
conflicts peacefully) was $66.4 billion. In the 2002 budget, it
is $23.8 billion (from Harper's Index). We spend less on foreign
aid per capita than any other industrialized country. Japan
spends $3.5 billion more than we do. Some world leader.
We are also neglecting our own people and infrastructure. How
pathetic is it that we're going to put another trillion dollars
into the military while we cut back on child-care for women
moving from welfare to work?
In the play "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead," at the end
of the relentless tragedy, one says to the other, "There must
have been a time, somewhere near the beginning, when we could
have said no." As the beloved Robert Frost put it, "Two paths
diverged in a wood, and I - I took the one less traveled by, and
that has made all the difference."
We have been down the path of spending insane sums for
unspeakable weapons many times before, and we know where it
leads. The state of the world today is not much of a
recommendation for it. Before we lurch off onto it again, let us
at least stop and think, and ask questions and demand answers,
and consider alternatives.
Because this may be our only chance to say no.
MOLLY IVINS CREATORS SYNDICATE
*****************************************************************
49 Necessary nukes
March 13, 2002
National Post
Rule 1 of international affairs: A nuclear deterrent remains
credible only so long as the other side believes you are willing
to use it. Once a rival perceives, accurately or not, that your
missiles will stay locked in their silos for fear of possibly
adverse human, political or military consequences, you might as
well melt them down for scrap. So, clearly, the primary
responsibility of a nuclear superpower entrusted with policing
the world is to ensure that troublemakers do not question its
willingness to destroy them if push comes to shove.
Retaining this credibility is the animating spirit behind the
Pentagon's new nuclear posture review, which was leaked last
weekend. The review reportedly states that the United States
might use nuclear weapons against targets in rogue nations that
are able to withstand non-nuclear attack -- either in retaliation
for attacks from weapons of mass destruction or "in the event of
surprising military developments." The leak has induced some
commentators and arms control supporters to go ballistic. There
have been dark warnings of Dr. Strangelove breaking loose in the
Pentagon, a secret plan to nuke rogue nations pre-emptively and
the imminent arrival of a new arms race.
These warnings are prompted by an obsolete worldview. We live in
a world much changed since the Cold War: Instead of one
monolithic menace occupying a huge land-space, we have many
networked, hidden threats developing asymmetric options such as
chemical, biological and nuclear weapons that may one day be
delivered by missile, boat or even suitcase. While the nuclear
arsenals and strategies of the Soviet Union and the United States
reflected the structure of the Cold War -- that is, two massive
systems facing and balancing each other -- today's nuclear
doctrine must mirror the underlying reality of the post-Sept. 11
environment. Force-structure must be re-tooled to allow the
Pentagon to respond flexibly, rapidly and credibly to threats of
a different order and magnitude from those once presented by the
Soviet Union.
Indeed, the entire mentality of fighting a nuclear war has
altered in the past decade. Nuclear theory was previously built
on the assumption that a potential attacker must know that a
first strike would be followed by overwhelming retaliation in
order to preserve credibility. In today's world, however, it is
not likely that dozens of multi-kiloton warheads would be used to
devastate a small, backward country ruled by a tyrant. A more
likely scenario would be a profound crisis or terroristic
provocation that prompts the United States to target
well-armoured underground assets -- such as leadership bunkers or
weapons of mass destruction facilities.
Given this, it makes perfect sense that, as outlined in the
nuclear posture review, pinpoint theatre nuclear missiles
designed for "full spectrum" response in a variety of situations
should be developed to supplement the intercontinental behemoths
currently in use. It also makes sense that U.S. responses to
certain warlike acts -- such as a North Korean attack on South
Korea or an Iraqi launch of chemical warheads against Israel --
should be spelled out clearly to divest troublemakers ahead of
time of the excuse of ambiguity.
This nuclear posture review, therefore, is a welcome revelation.
As its revolutionary conventional performance in the Afghan war
has also demonstrated, the Pentagon is well ahead of its critics,
many of whom are still fighting the Cold War's rhetorical
battles.
Copyright © 2002 National Post Online | Privacy Policy |
*****************************************************************
50 Democrats Divide Over Nuclear Plan
March 13, 2002
THE NATION
Defense: The terrorism threat plays against concerns that new
bombing scenarios will make U.S. a rogue nation.
By GREG MILLER, TIMES STAFF WRITER
WASHINGTON -- Several leading Senate Democrats voiced concern
Tuesday with a Pentagon plan that calls for the development of
new breeds of nuclear weapons and an expansion of the list of
nations against whom such warheads might be used.
But as the administration continued to downplay the aggressive
tone of the so-called Nuclear Posture Review, there were also
abundant signs that many lawmakers from both parties are prepared
to consider profound changes to the nation's nuclear contingency
plans.
Many Republicans voiced support for the report and argued that
its central goal--the deterrence of strikes against the United
States and its allies--is consistent with the nation's
long-standing nuclear policy. "I do not believe it changes our
basic U.S. approach," said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). And
several high-ranking Democrats said the Sept. 11 terrorist
attacks made them more inclined to back a more aggressive nuclear
posture.
Changed Environment in Washington
"There are nations and groups adversarial to U.S. interests that
have gotten the mind set that the United States is a paper
tiger," said Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), chairman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee. The Pentagon's call for new weapons and a
wider range of scenarios in which to use them, he said, "sounds
like a step in the right direction."
Such receptive reactions to a report that many nuclear
experts--and some foreign leaders--have condemned underscores the
extent to which the terrorist attacks have altered the course of
defense policy debate in Washington.
For much of the last decade, policymakers have largely been
preoccupied with finding ways to reduce the size of the United
States' nuclear arsenal and with persuading other nations to
combat the proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology.
In testimony Tuesday on the Hill, Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell stressed that fighting the spread of nuclear weapons
remains a paramount goal. Noting that the number of U.S. nuclear
warheads has shrunk by two-thirds over the last decade, he said,
"The philosophy of President Bush, the philosophy of this
administration, is to continue driving down the number of nuclear
weapons."
But the report calls for, among other things, the development of
"low-yield" nuclear weapons that could be used against smaller
targets such as underground bunkers or chemical weapon
facilities. The report also recommends adding such hostile
nations as Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Syria to the
nation's nuclear targeting plans.
Many members of both parties, including Senate Majority Leader
Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), simply withheld judgment.
Daschle noted that the report's urging of the development of more
precise nuclear weapons contradicts earlier signals from the
Pentagon. But he offered no direct criticism of the report
itself. "We need more information before we come to any
conclusions," he said.
Democrats See Diplomatic Setback
But several prominent Democrats expressed dismay, saying the
Pentagon's proposal would put the United States on a rogue course
likely to erode the nation's diplomatic leverage and encourage
other countries to pursue or expand their own nuclear
capabilities.
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services
Committee, said the plan could "reverse the direction of where
arms control has been going for decades," and he vowed to press
the White House for details on the extent to which it intends to
pursue the report's recommendations.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), a member of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, said the United States risks being
labeled "a rogue nation going off and finding ways to use nuclear
weapons."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a prospective presidential
candidate, said the report undermines U.S. credibility as it
pressures other countries to resist developing nuclear weapons of
their own. "It's very disturbing. It reduces all our bona fides
on the proliferation issue."
Though the White House has a significant amount of discretion in
formulating nuclear contingency plans, several key elements of
the report would require cooperation from Congress.
The administration can modify existing weapon platforms, a
Democratic leadership aide said, but would need approval from
Congress to develop new varieties of weapons under the terms of a
1994 statute.
And of course, Congress controls the Pentagon's purse strings.
Asked what leverage lawmakers have on administration nuclear
policy, Levin replied: "The leverage is funding."
Copyright 2002 Los Angeles Times
*****************************************************************
51 Editorial: New warning system for terrorist threats
Las Vegas SUN
Today: March 13, 2002 at 8:30:44 PST
The federal government has issued four warnings since Sept. 11
that the United States could be attacked by terrorists. But the
warnings have been vague about the specifics of the threats and
unclear as to precisely when an attack might occur. The first
warnings created anxiety immediately following Sept. 11, but as
the months passed people just started ignoring the general
warnings altogether because they were meaningless.
Not only has the public been confused by this situation, but
local law enforcement agencies also frequently are in the dark
since they always haven't been told exactly what to keep an eye
on. On Tuesday domestic security chief Tom Ridge unveiled a a new
warning system that should give the public a better sense of what
kind of risks we're facing.
There will be a graduated, five-stage warning system in Ridge's
plan with green the lowest level, followed by blue, yellow,
orange and red. Ridge says that nationwide we're currently at
yellow, which means there is a significant risk of attack that
calls for increased surveillance of critical locations for the
federal government. In addition to the different degrees of
warnings, Ridge also said that they might be applied to specific
regions of the country or even sectors of the economy, such as
nuclear power plants, that could be the target of attacks.
We believe the more information the better, but even then there
are some limits. For instance, an intelligence alert went out to
a limited number of federal agencies in October that terrorists
had been able to smuggle a nuclear weapon into New York City. If
that information, which later turned out to be bogus, had been
prematurely released to the public there is a possibility that it
could have created a panic in New York. Federal officials were
remiss, however, in not alerting New York City's top officials
and the FBI in New York about the alert.
Ridge faces a tough job in informing the public without, at the
same time, also creating unnecessary anxiety. The new warning
system is a right step in managing that difficult balancing act.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
52 Nellis looks to keep its takeoff area safe
Las Vegas SUN:
Photo: Col. Del Eulberg speaks
Today: March 13, 2002 at 10:39:53 PST
Purchase of land north of runways needed to preserve base's future
By Mathis Winkler
On busy days, roaring fighter jets carrying bombs take off every
few minutes from Nellis Air Force Base.
"This is where we certify to say we're ready to go to war," Col.
Del Eulberg, Nellis' installation commander, said.
But just beyond the base's runway to the north -- where the
danger of an accident is highest -- lie 417 acres of privately
owned desert. Base officials worry that the explosive growth in
the Las Vegas Valley might push developers to build there
someday.
The officials plan to buy the land to ensure that planes
carrying munitions can continue to take off from the base.
"We have to protect the north," Eulberg said. "You take away our
ability to launch and recover aircraft with live ordnance, and
our ability to do our mission goes away."
Congress has already set aside $19 million for the purchase.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who pushed for the money, according to
Eulberg, believes protecting the base's operations is a matter of
national security.
"Nellis is one of the few places in the world that the Air Force
can train in real-life situations that prepare them for battle,"
Nathan Naylor, the senator's spokesman, said.
Training at Nellis "very much does save lives oversees" and at
home, he said.
The Bureau of Land Management is set to acquire additional land
in the area should the money set aside in Congress run out.
"As long as the BLM owns (the land), we don't have to worry
about somebody putting a McDonald's there," Eulberg said.
A public comment period on an environmental assessment of the
proposal ended Feb. 24. Base officials will have the land
appraised in the coming months to begin negotiations with the
land owners, who seem willing to sell, Eulberg said.
Eulberg hopes to close the deals within 18 months. The sooner
the better, he said, since land prices keep rising.
While county laws severely restrict the kind of development that
can take place on the land, there's no guarantee the laws won't
change in the future, Eulberg said.
In 1948, when the base began operations, no one foresaw that the
valley's growth would one day creep close enough to threaten
operations.
But a look at the southern end of the base reveals a cluster of
commercial areas and apartment complexes. That growth forced the
Air Force to cease takeoffs of planes carrying munitions there in
the early 1990s, Eulberg said.
With the Las Vegas Beltway scheduled to come near the base by
the end of this year, land in the area will become more
attractive to developers, he added.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. Air Force officials
want to be good neighbors, Eulberg said.
"But the last thing the U.S. Air Force wants is an accident to
happen and we lose the life of a citizen that we've sworn to
defend," he said.
So far, jets have taken off without incident from the base. But
in the mid-1960s a plane on its approach to landing at Nellis
crashed into a North Las Vegas neighborhood, said aviation
historian Doug Scroggins.
And planes with engine problems have jettisoned bombs in the
past. In October 2000 an A-10 aircraft dropped two 2,000-pound
bombs about 17 miles north of the base, causing one of the bombs
to explode.
While the bombs are not armed until pilots reach the test range
about 65 miles northwest, Eulberg said, they can explode upon
impact with the ground.
"It's like dropping a gun," he said. "Eight times out of 10, it
will not go off." But there is always a chance that it will, he
added.
Photo: Col. Del Eulberg speaks Las Vegas SUN main page
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
53 The Nuclear Posture
(washingtonpost.com)
Wednesday, March 13, 2002; Page A28
RECENT REPORTS about the Bush administration's review of U.S.
nuclear weapons strategy have tended to obscure the fact that
much of what the administration laid out in the congressionally
mandated report isn't new. For more than a decade, the United
States has sought to deter rogue states from using weapons of
mass destruction by publicly suggesting that it might respond
with a nuclear strike, and Pentagon planners have backed the
threat by laying out theoretical targeting plans for Iraq, Iran
and other such states. The policy, which the Clinton
administration continued from the first Bush presidency, has been
a success: Saddam Hussein, who used chemical weapons against his
own people in the 1980s, did not dare to employ them against U.S.
troops or allies during or after the Persian Gulf War. You
wouldn't know it from recent scaremongering headlines and
overheated rhetoric, but in this aspect the Bush review has
merely reaffirmed a sensible strategy.
Other aspects of the strategic review, however, raise questions
that merit congressional scrutiny. When the review was completed
in January, the administration trumpeted its own headline: a
reduction of operational and deployed U.S. nuclear warheads from
the current total of 6,000 to a level between 1,700 and 2,200
over the next 10 years. Again, there was less news here than it
may have seemed; the Clinton administration arrived at a similar
figure in formulating its proposal for nuclear reductions. But
while the previous administration described its proposed force as
meant to deter a possible Russian threat, the Bush administration
insists that Russia does not enter into its calculations. The
2,000-warhead figure, say President Bush's planners, was arrived
at by estimating only the force needed to deter rogue states and
to dissuade China from contemplating a nuclear buildup that would
put it on a par with the United States. While that effort to move
strategic thinking beyond the Cold War is admirable, the
conclusions don't appear to match the new theory: Two thousand
active warheads seems more than necessary to deter Iraq or
counter China, while the fact that the figure matches that
previously deemed necessary for Russia seems an odd coincidence.
If deterrence of Russia were really not needed, then a larger
number of weapons could probably be deactivated.
In fact, the Bush plan does call for a hedge against the
possibility that a hostile government will regain power in
Moscow. But because the 2,000 warheads supposedly don't serve
this purpose, the administration argues that it must preserve the
warheads it takes off weapons during the planned reduction, thus
allowing for a relatively quick buildback to a force of 4,600
warheads. Like some U.S. critics, Russia is loudly objecting to
this plan; administration officials reply that previous arms
control agreements have not provided for warhead destruction, and
that any deal mandating destruction would favor Russia, which
unlike the United States has preserved the ability to
mass-manufacture new warheads. The administration should be
pressed to weigh such arguments against the benefits of
guaranteeing the destruction of thousands of Russian nukes -- and
the risks of leaving such weapons intact when their vulnerability
to accidents or theft is the subject of well-justified alarms.
Administration officials say their new strategy will ultimately
decrease U.S. reliance on nuclear weapons, because they will
develop "new capabilities," such as high-tech conventional
weapons and missile defenses, to counter weapons of mass
destruction. That is a promising scenario, but it is undermined
by another old idea: the development of new nuclear weapons,
including low-yield warheads that could be aimed at smaller
targets or deeply buried bunkers. The administration's plan to
develop designs for such arms over the next three years is
troubling; the presence of such weapons in the U.S. arsenal could
dangerously lower the threshold for launching a nuclear attack,
while inviting a new arms race among existing and aspiring
nuclear powers. The Bush administration is right to focus more of
its strategic planning on deterring rogue states; but developing
new nuclear weapons for that threat is neither necessary nor
sensible.
© 2002 The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
54 NUCLEAR SITE THREAT WASN'T RELAYED
Warning came in 1995 of militants' plot to target nuclear
facility in United States Wednesday,
March 13, 2002
BY JIM GOMEZ
AND DAFNA LINZER
Associated Press
U.S. officials received a warning as early as 1995 that
Islamic militants were plotting to attack an American nuclear
site, but did not pass along the information to the agency that
oversees nuclear facilities or to the plants themselves, The
Associated Press has learned.
The warning came in police interrogations of convicted
terrorist Abdul Hakim Murad and from a computer seized in the
Philippines from Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the 1993 attack on
the World Trade Center.
Both men were linked to Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida
network, and are serving life in prison in the United States for
plotting to blow up 12 U.S.-bound airliners.
The AP learned of the 1995 warning through secret
intelligence documents and interviews with officials in the
United States and the Philippines.
According to a secret Philippines report, a letter obtained
from Yousef's computer indicated he was "planning to attack any
nuclear facilities in the U.S. and unspecified targets in France
and Great Britain."
Yousef, who ran the al-Qaida cell that targeted the World
Trade Center in 1993, discussed the plan with Murad when the two
met in October 1994 in Quetta, Pakistan, according to statements
Murad made to interrogators.
But Murad, who was arrested in Manila in January 1995, said
he was unaware of the specifics of the plan to attack nuclear
facilities.
Rodolfo Mendoza, a former police official in Manila who was
among those who supervised Murad's interrogations, said the
details on the nuclear threat were immediately shared with U.S.
authorities.
"During a debriefing session, Murad told us about this
planned attack on an unspecified nuclear facility. We passed on
that information from Murad to them (U.S. officials)," Mendoza
said.
Murad also told investigators that he and other Middle
Eastern students took pilot training at U.S. flight schools in
the early 1990s and that he had proposed a suicide mission in
which he would fly a jetliner into a federal building.
That information, provided six years before the Sept. 11
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, also was
shared with FBI agents in Manila. An FBI agent, who accompanied
Murad back to the United States for trial, testified in 1996 that
Murad spoke about plans for a nuclear attack.
Victor Dricks, spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, said that the government agency charged with
overseeing the country's 104 nuclear facilities had not heard of
such a warning during 1995.
"We did not know of any credible threat against any specific
facility that we would take seriously enough to take some action
on," he said.
Carl Crawford, manager of nuclear communications at Energy
Nuclear, which operates nine reactors in the South and the
Northeast, said that in 1995 the company "never received any
formal communications from the NRC or any other federal law
enforcement agency regarding such threats. We never received any
request to go on high alert."
In January, the NRC alerted nuclear power plants that the
government had received a tip from an al-Qaida operative that
terrorists might be planning a suicide attack on a power reactor.
An FBI official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said at
the time that the NRC had acted on old information that had been
deemed not credible.
But the NRC communication said the agency decided to issue
the alert after an FBI agent in Washington State contacted a
nuclear power plant about the threat.
The NRC ordered the nation's nuclear plants operating in 31
states to their highest alert level after Sept. 11 and at least
seven states are using National Guard troops to help secure
reactors.
The Federal Aviation Administration banned private planes
from flying within 11 miles of nuclear plants and the U.S. Coast
Guard is patrolling the Great Lakes to keep ships away from
plants on the coastline.
Copyright © 2002 Charleston.Net. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
55 A closer look: A nuclear ‘posture,’ not a plan
Orange County Register - Top News
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, took
questions Sunday on CNN about U.S. policies on the use of nuclear
weapons in the wake of the release of a classified document
citing potential targets. The following are excerpts taken from
the interview transcript on the Pentagon's Web site.
Q. The document specifically mentions seven countries that
potentially might draw U.S. nuclear action if necessary: China,
Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. What would it
mean for the U.S. to launch military strikes against any of those
countries?
A. It is not an operational plan. It is the Nuclear Posture
Review as required by Congress. It's a policy document. And it
simply states our deterrence posture, of which nuclear weapons
are a part.
Q. Five of those countries are not nuclear powers, at least not
as far as the United States knows, and those five have signed the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Washington has promised that it
will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states
that have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, unless
those countries attack the United States or its allies in
alliance with a nuclear weapon state. So would the U.S. have to
break its own acceptance of the treaty if it attacked one of
those five states?
A. This is, again, not a plan. This preserves for the president
all the options that a president would want to have in case this
country or our friends and allies were attacked with weapons of
mass destruction, be they nuclear, biological, chemical, or for
that matter high explosives. And it's been the policy of this
country that the president would always reserve the right up to
and including the use of nuclear weapons if that was appropriate.
Q. As you look back on the six months since the Sept. 11 attacks,
where do you believe six months from now, the Pentagon, the U.S.
military will be in this war on terrorism?
A. Nobody can know for certain, but you can envision that our
major effort in Afghanistan might be over. That we will probably
be in the middle of helping train an Afghan national army. But,
there is lots of work to do in terms of rooting out terrorist
organizations around the world.
The Orange County Register ocregister@link.freedom.com-->
*****************************************************************
56 Aussie presentation in Vienna on nuclear weapons
International Nuclear Issues- Global Issues -
Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Address by Mr Max Hughes, Australian Ambassador and Permanent
Representative, Vienna Sydney Institute, 14 February 2002
I hope today to give you some perspectives on the international
nuclear framework, seen from my position as Australia's Permanent
Representative to the international organisations in Vienna - the
United Nations' centre for nuclear non-proliferation issues.
Vienna is host to both the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) as well as the provisional secretariat of the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO). In addition,
the world's main suppliers of nuclear technology meet regularly
in Vienna in two forums: the Zangger Committee and the Nuclear
Suppliers Group.
Nuclear issues therefore consume much of my time. This is
particularly the case for the next 8 months, as I had the honour
of being elected Chairman of the IAEA Board of Governors in
September 2001.
I should add that concerns about the proliferation of nuclear and
other weapons of mass destruction have assumed greater
international prominence in the wake of the terrible events of 11
September 2001 in New York city and Washington D.C. I shall make
some comments later in my presentation about the spectre of
nuclear or radiological terrorism, and what the IAEA is proposing
should be done to meet this challenge.
Other factors have raised the international profile of nuclear
energy issues over recent years. Future US energy forecasts, the
relevance of which were underlined by the serious electricity
shortages experienced in California in the northern winter a year
ago, have given renewed prominence to nuclear as an energy source
in that country. Particular issues include energy security
(reducing dependence on hydrocarbon fuels) and long term
pricing. Nuclear energy is also being given closer attention in
the light of international environmental concerns about
greenhouse gases. Thus, while recognising that in many
countries, including Australia, there are significant
sensitivities about nuclear issues, this should not be an
impediment to serious minded attention to this subject among
decision makers and opinion leaders as well as the wider
community.
Australia has always been an active participant in the discourse
between nations on nuclear issues. We became a member of the
International Atomic Energy Agency at its foundation in 1957, and
have been one of only 10 permanent members of its Board of
Governors ever since.
Australia also has a particular connection with the CTBT, as we
took the lead in rescuing the Treaty from deadlock in the
Conference on Disarmament in 1996 and bringing it to the UN
General Assembly where it was successfully adopted.
Australia's interests
It is perhaps worthwhile touching briefly on why Australia has
taken such a close interest in the strength and well-being of the
international nuclear framework.
First, Australia has long been aware that the relative strategic
stability in our own region is underpinned by the absence of
weapons of mass destruction - particularly the absence of nuclear
weapons. This is something that we may take for granted, but is
by no means an accident of history. The absence of nuclear
weapons in all but a minority of states is the result of decades
of painstaking diplomacy and difficult national compromise - a
process in which Australia has been an active participant.
A second reason for our close interest in all things nuclear is
that Australia is itself a major player in the nuclear industry.
This position was made possible through a hard-won domestic
political consensus that Australian participation in the nuclear
industry - especially through our exports of uranium worth 367
million dollars annually - is a responsible position. This
position is, of course, contingent upon being able to assure
ourselves that we are not unwittingly contributing to the spread
of nuclear weapons and that the international nuclear industry is
operated with due regard to the safety of people and the
environment.
Underpinning Australia's confidence in the international nuclear
framework is the fact that the overwhelming majority of states
are full parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of
Nuclear Weapons. The NPT - extended indefinitely in 1995 and
universally reaffirmed during the 2000 Review Conference - is
fundamental in providing the international legal and moral basis
upon which states have foregone the right to possess nuclear
weapons and have agreed to cooperate in the peaceful nuclear
applications. The next NPT review cycle will be initiated by a
Preparatory Conference to be held in New York in April.
International Atomic Energy Agency
The International Atomic Energy Agency represents a practical
realisation of the commitment in the NPT to the non-proliferation
of nuclear weapons and the peaceful use of nuclear technology for
the betterment of mankind. Indeed the Final Document from the
2000 NPT Review Conference mentions the IAEA no less than (xxxx)
times.
The work of the IAEA is usually characterised as being based on
'three pillars':
+ Verification that nuclear activities remain exclusively
peaceful through a system of nuclear safeguards; + Promotion of
the peaceful uses of nuclear technology; + and strengthening the
global culture of nuclear safety. For Australia, the IAEA's most
important task is in verifying that states do not develop nuclear
weapons - a task made possible through its extensive network of
safeguards agreements. The IAEA currently has in place more than
200 safeguards agreements with about 140 states. The Agency
conducts about 2500 safeguards inspections per year, and its
annual safeguards expenditure is around 90 million US dollars.
The centrality of IAEA safeguards in preventing the spread of
nuclear weapons was reaffirmed in the 2000 NPT review Conference
Final Document. Importantly for Australia, the Review Conference
also endorsed the IAEA's move to a system of strengthened
safeguards.
Strengthened safeguards reflect a fundamental shift in
international approaches to safeguarding nuclear material from
diversion to military uses - an approach prompted by the
disclosure in 1990 that Iraq was well on its way to developing a
nuclear weapons programme, despite having a traditional IAEA
safeguards agreement in place. Under strengthened safeguards,
the IAEA, instead of focusing primarily on whether declared
material has been diverted, will particularly focus its efforts
on determining whether any activitieshave, in fact, not been
declared in the first place.
The IAEA's strengthened safeguards system has many distinctive
features. New measures include levels of access to international
inspectors that would be thought intrusive by many governments if
it were not so clearly warranted by the menace of nuclear
weapons, and the employment of monitoring techniques that could
be thought overzealous if they were not authorised by the
consensus of the members of a major multilateral organisation.
Australia has a long record of active involvement in promoting
and strengthening IAEA safeguards. For example, it can be
justifiably proud of the active role it played in negotiating the
Additional Protocol which sets out states obligations under
strengthened safeguards. Moreover, Australia was the first state
to ratify the Additional Protocol, and subsequently became the
first state in which strengthened safeguards were being applied.
It is worth noting too that John Carlson, the Director General of
the Australian Safeguards and Non-proliferation Office (ASNO),
chairs the international group of experts that advises the IAEA
Director General on safeguards issues (the Standing Advisory
Group on Safeguards Implementation - SAGSI).
The IAEA has gained practical experience in Australia in
implementing the new measures, such as unannounced inspections
and complementary access visits, which will prove invaluable as
strengthened safeguards are extended to other countries with more
significant nuclear activities. Importantly, we hope that
Australia's experience will also demonstrate to others that
strengthened safeguards are not burdensome, but rather deliver
benefits in terms of increased efficiency and effectiveness.
While Australia sees the IAEA's system of nuclear safeguards as
underpinning the ability of states to benefit from nuclear
cooperation, we also recognise the important role of the IAEA as
an agent for the transfer of nuclear technology for peaceful
uses. While not a country with nuclear power, Australia is both
a major exporter of uranium and a regional centre of expertise in
non-power nuclear applications. Australia has leading edge
nuclear research and technology capability, centred at the
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO),
including in the use of radioisotopes in medicine, agriculture,
marine science and industry, and is a significant exporter of
radiopharmaceuticals. In this context we have a direct interest
in the nuclear technology activities of the IAEA.
In particular, the IAEA has been recognised by successive NPT
Review Conferences as the principal agent for nuclear technology
transfer - an element of the NPT 'bargain' of most importance to
many developing countries. Australia is a major donor to the
IAEA's Technical Cooperation Fund, and has been active in seeking
a strengthening in the effectiveness of the Agency's development
activities which, I should note, are overwhelmingly focused on
the non-power applications of nuclear energy.
It is important to remember that international confidence in
nuclear cooperation - including our own exports of uranium -
depends not only on assurances that such cooperation will remain
exclusively peaceful, but also on assurances that nuclear
activities will be conducted safely. We therefore see the IAEA
as having an essential role in establishing a global nuclear
safety culture, including through establishing international
safety standards and other guidance documents, and through
providing expert safety review missions to help member states
conduct their nuclear activities as safely as possible.
Australians have long been at the centre of IAEA efforts to
strengthen nuclear safety internationally. For example,
officials from ANSTO and the Australian Radiation Protection and
Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) have recently chaired IAEA expert
committees working on codes of conduct on the safety and security
of radiation sources and also on strengthening the safety regime
for nuclear research reactors. We look forward to playing an
active role this year when parties to the Convention on Nuclear
safety gather in Vienna to undertake a peer review of each
others' nuclear safety programs.
Nuclear terrorism
Since the tragic events of 11 September, Member States of the
IAEA have been very much focused on the threat of nuclear
terrorism. While it is important to keep the risks in
perspective, the unprecedented nature and scale of the 11
September attacks has focused us on the possibility a terrorist
attacks involving nuclear weapons - the casualties from which
could potentially be of much higher orders of magnitude. Apart
from the nightmare scenario of a terrorist attack involving an
actual nuclear explosive device, two other forms of nuclear
terrorism have been the subject of increasing concern to IAEA
Member States: the misuse of radioactive materials and violent
attacks against nuclear facilities in order to create
radiological hazards.
1) The theft of a nuclear weapon by a sub-national terrorist
organisation is widely assessed as unlikely, but it is a
possibility that cannot be excluded, bearing in mind the
potentially devastating consequences. It is important to
highlight, however, that security of the nuclear arsenals of the
five Nuclear Weapons States (United States, Russia, UK, France
and China) and for that matter the three nuclear-capable states
outside the NPT (Pakistan, India and Israel) is a responsibility
for those individual states. Neither the IAEA, nor any other
international organisation, has any role in ensuring that nuclear
weapons in these states are kept secure, though these states have
an obvious direct national interest in doing so.
2) a second form of nuclear terrorism could be the result of
terrorist organisations manufacturing a nuclear device. The
likelihood that a terrorist organisation, even a highly
sophisticated one, having the wherewithal to manufacture and
successfully detonate a nuclear explosive device is again
considered to be low. The case of Iraq's unsuccessful attempt to
develop a nuclear weapons programme in the 1980s is instructive,
in that it demonstrated that even where there is the
unconstrained political and financial backing of a sovereign
Government, building a nuclear weapon is very difficult. But
again the possibility cannot be discounted that a terrorist
organisation would attempt to go down this path. In this regard,
the uneven application of national protection measures is a
concern to many in the international community. In recent years
states have reported to the IAEA some 175 cases of illicit
trafficking involving nuclear materials. While only a few of
these cases involved significant amounts of nuclear material,
they demonstrate that security is still inadequate in certain
locations.
3) A third form of nuclear terrorism that the IAEA is concerned
about is the creation of a radiological hazard through the misuse
of radioactive material. By "radiological hazard" I do not mean
a nuclear explosion based on a chain reaction of highly enriched
uranium or plutonium, but rather the dispersion of radioactive
material using other means, such as conventional explosives. A
so-called "dirty bomb" could be created, for example, by
attaching conventional explosives to a medical or industrial
device containing Cobalt-60, and detonating it in a public space,
with potential harmful effects to people, property and the
environment. While the consequences of such a threat may be
limited in comparison with an actual nuclear explosion, the
common world-wide use of radioactive sources in agriculture,
industry and medicine means that such the possibility of this
type of nuclear terrorist attack is greater. Recent media
reports of Al Quaeda documents containing references to this type
of terrorist attack is therefore of grave concern.
4) A final form of nuclear terrorism could involve a physical
attack on a nuclear facility, such as a nuclear power plant or
fuel fabrication facility, again for the purposes of creating a
radiological hazard. Although nuclear facilities are generally
very robust structures - particularly in comparison to other
civil infrastructure - they are not normally hardened to
withstand acts of extreme violence. The level of security and
"defence in depth", however, varies from facility to facility and
country to country.
It is important to recognise that the primary responsibility for
ensuring that nuclear materials and facilities do not become an
instrument of international terrorism lies with individual
states. Nonetheless, Australia believes that the IAEA - as the
recognised world centre for international nuclear cooperation -
has a legitimate role to play in enhancing the international
community's protection against the threat of nuclear terrorism,
building on the work it is already doing in relation to nuclear
safeguards, and security and physical protection of nuclear
material and facilities. We see a particular Agency role in
three key areas:
First, Australia considers the IAEA's system of nuclear
safeguards as a key ingredient in the international community's
protection against nuclear terrorism. They are the first line
of defence against both nuclear proliferation by states, and
nuclear terrorism by sub-national groups. The events of 11
September have confirmed in our minds that it is now more
important than ever to widen the net of Additional Protocols to
minimise the opportunities for terrorists to develop nuclear
weapons.
Second, the IAEA's web of conventions, international standards,
and other guidance documents relating to security of nuclear
materials and facilities needs to be reviewed and strengthened in
the light of the threat of nuclear terrorism. I should note that
Australia was an active proponent of the strengthening of the key
treaty in this regard - the Convention on the Physical Protection
of Nuclear Material - well before the events of 11 September.
Since then we have played a key role in convincing the wider
membership to strengthen the treaty's provisions in relation to
the domestic use, storage and transport of nuclear material.
Third, the Agency's mechanisms for delivering technical
assistance to its member states - particularly those with
inadequate systems of materials security and physical protection
- need to be strengthened. Australia would like to see more
International Physical Protection Advisory Service (IPPAS)
missions conducted in Member States, particularly those with
inadequate nuclear security infrastructure in place.
I would not wish to give the impression that there are not
differences in the IAEA membership over how the international
community should respond to the threat of nuclear terrorism.
Differences do exist, including over the extent to which aspects
of combating nuclear terrorism should be the preserve of national
governments and which should be the preserve of the international
community. Views also differ over the relative priority of
nuclear terrorism activities compared, for example, to activities
promoting sustainable development and, as always, over the issue
of how to finance any new measures.
Many of these questions will be finalised during the next meeting
of the IAEA Board of Governors in March, which I will Chair,
which will review a comprehensive package of proposals put
forward by IAEA Director General ElBaradei. I do sense, however,
that there is increasing recognition that the IAEA is the only
international organisation capable of coordinating international
action on nuclear terrorism. Moreover, in an environment where
international security against acts of nuclear terrorism are
dependant to a significant extent on the "weakest link" in the
international nuclear community, the IAEA is being seen as an
important partner in helping countries to ensure that they do not
become that weakest link.
Nuclear testing
While a focus of my comments today has been nuclear terrorism,
this is clearly not the only current challenge to the
international nuclear framework. As I mentioned earlier, the
issue of nuclear testing is high on the Australian Government's
agenda in Vienna, through our work on the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT) - the Provisional Secretariat of which is
headquartered in Vienna.
Australia's strong support for the CTBT is based on the practical
view that a complete ban on all nuclear testing is in Australia's
security interests, and the interests of all. We are therefore
disappointed that CTBT has not yet entered into force. But with
165 signatories and 89 ratifications, there should be no doubt
that the CTBT has firmly established a powerful international
norm against nuclear testing.
The successful Article XIV Conference held in New York last year,
to look at ways of accelerating entry into force of the CTBT,
confirmed that the international community is determined to go on
working until this goal is achieved. Australia will continue to
be at the forefront of those countries working to this end.
Australia is, however, realistic about the prospect of the Treaty
entering into force in the immediate term. We have expressed our
disappointment that several states whose ratification is required
for the Treaty's entry into force - including the United States -
have indicated that they are not in a position to ratify at this
time.
As a friend and trusted ally, Australia is better placed than
many to influence US thinking on the Treaty, and we are
continuing to urge the US to join the international consensus on
this issue. We are, of course, giving the same message other key
states such as Pakistan, India and China. And until the Treaty
enters into force, Australia expects existing moratoria on
nuclear testing to be maintained.
At a practical level, the provisional secretariat in Vienna has
made significant progress toward building up the CTBT
verification network, of 337 monitoring facilities, in some 90
states around the globe. Around a third of these facilities have
now been completed, with another 90 well underway in
construction. When completed, the network will be capable of
registering vibrations underground, in the sea and in the air,
as well as picking up radionuclides released into the atmosphere
from any nuclear explosion, thus ensuring that the international
community's prohibition on nuclear testing can be effectively and
efficiently verified.
Nuclear disarmament
In addition to preventing the further spread of nuclear weapons
and promoting the peaceful use of nuclear energy, a key issue on
the international nuclear agenda is the commitment in the NPT to
pursue nuclear disarmament. The current focus there is on follow
up to announcements late last year by the United States and
Russia of welcome major reductions to their strategic nuclear
arsenals.
On the multilateral front, apart from achieving a successful NPT
Prepcom in New York in April, another key priority for Australia
this year in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva will be the
early commencement of negotiations for a Fissile Material Cut-Off
Treaty (FMCT) - a move we consider to be the next logical step on
the arms control and disarmament agenda. Capping the amount of
fissile material available for use in weapons - in effect turning
off the nuclear-weapons 'tap' - is essential to achieving
irreversible nuclear disarmament. FMCT negotiations would also
be a timely and welcome vote of confidence in multilateral
approaches to arms control and disarmament.
Australia is meanwhile exploring with like-minded states the
possibility of making informal progress toward an FMCT outside
the Conference on Disarmament. By enabling progress on cut-off
issues in the absence of formal negotiations, such informal work
would pave the way for more rapid progress when formal
negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament do begin. Pending
the emergence of the FMCT Australia has urged all relevant states
to join a moratorium on production of fissile material for
nuclear weapons.
A related nuclear disarmament objective being pursued in Vienna
is the finalisation of the so-called 'Trilateral Initiative' -
under which Russia and the United States are working with the
IAEA to develop a system of verifying that excess nuclear weapons
material is irreversibly disposed of, or converted to peaceful
uses.
The conclusion of the Trilateral Initiative was laid down as a
milestone in the disarmament action plan agreed during the 2000
NPT Review Conference. We understand that there is a real
prospect of the parties to the Initiative completing their work
by the end of this year, and the possibility of verification
commencing by 2004. Once this work is complete, Australia would
expect other relevant states to similarly place excess weapons
stock under IAEA verification.
Conclusion
I hope my comments today have gone some way to explaining
Australian perspectives of the international nuclear framework,
as seen from Vienna. While nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear
disarmament have been on the international nuclear agenda for
some time, the issues have largely concerned the behaviour of
states. Differences have been dealt with through dialogue
between governments. But since 11 September - and amid
heightened international attention being paid to the threat of
nuclear terrorism - governments like our own are being asked to
step beyond traditional multilateral nuclear diplomacy and to
respond to potential nuclear threats from non-state actors. This
will be a particular challenge for me this year as Chairman of
the IAEA Board of Governors, but I believe it is a challenge to
which the international community will successfully rise.
Thank you.
This page last modified: Friday, 08-Mar-2002 14:19:41 EDT
Home | Search [http://www.dfat.gov.au/search] | Site Index
[http://www.dfat.gov.au/directory.html]
© Commonwealth of Australia 2002
[http://www.dfat.gov.au/copyright.html] | Disclaimer
[http://www.dfat.gov.au/disclaim.html] | Privacy
[http://www.dfat.gov.au/privacy.html]
*****************************************************************
57 Nuclear reform overdue
03/12/2002 - Updated 11:10 PM ET
By Frank J. Gaffney Jr.
The Bush administration's classified Nuclear Posture Review (NPR)
marks an important — and laudable — departure from recent
policies toward nuclear weapons. Specifically, the current NPR is
rooted in the premise that, to be effective, a nuclear deterrent
must be credible.
By contrast, President Bill Clinton and his first energy
secretary, Hazel O'Leary, openly talked about their policy as one
of "denuclearization." The nuclear testing needed to ensure the
safety, reliability and military effectiveness of our nuclear
weapons was formally forsworn. The infrastructure required to
produce and maintain nuclear weapons was largely shut down.
Things got so bad, the House Armed Services Committee in 1996
issued a report that condemned this approach to stewardship of
the U.S. nuclear stockpile as "erosion by design."
Let's be clear: The Bush administration is no more desirous of
fighting a nuclear war than was its predecessor. In fact, the
president has unilaterally directed that our deployed strategic
forces be reduced to the lowest levels in a generation, between
1,700 and 2,200 weapons. He appreciates, however, that
deliberately allowing the credibility of our nuclear deterrent to
erode is an invitation for others' aggression. Accordingly, the
new review calls for a nuclear posture comprising forces that are
modern, safe and appropriate to the missions they might, in
extreme circumstances, have to perform.
In order to establish these requirements, the military has been
charged with examining where the wars of the 21st century might
be conducted and with whom. This is, as Secretary of State Colin
Powell has put it, "sound, military conceptual planning."
Notwithstanding the histrionics of critics who misperceive this
as evidence of incipient attacks on some seven countries, it is
as responsible as it is necessary to our security.
Finally, the Bush NPR strives further to reduce the danger of
nuclear conflict by recognizing the important contribution that
advanced conventional munitions and missile defenses can make to
U.S. security — contributions the Clinton administration largely
ignored. This comprehensive approach to restoring and enhancing
the U.S. deterrent posture represents a change all right, but a
change very much for the better.
Frank Gaffney Jr., who was responsible for nuclear weapons policy
in the Reagan administration Defense Department, is president of
the Center for Security Policy in Washington.
Copyright 2002 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.
[http://www.gannett.com]
*****************************************************************
58 IEER Conference: Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treaties
[http://www.ieer.org/index.html] | [http://www.ieer.org/webindex.html]
Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treaties
Conference hosted by the Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research (IEER) Tuesday, April 9, 2002 United Nations, New York
Draft Agenda
Sessions I and II will be held in the UN building, Conference Room E
SESSION I: 11am-12:30pm
11:00 - 11:10 Welcome and Introductions - Michele Boyd (IEER)
11:10 - 12:30 The state of treaty compliance
* Compliance with security treaties: Overview - Nicole Deller
* State of the ABM, CTBT, and Kyoto Protocol - Arjun Makhijani (IEER)
* NPT compliance - John Burroughs (Lawyers' Committee on Nuclear Policy)
SESSION II: 2pm-5pm
2:00 - 3:30pm The role of treaty compliance and nuclear proliferation
* The function of treaties in international security - Merav Datan (IPPNW/PSR)
* Role of the NPT in preventing non-state nuclear proliferation - TBA
* International law related to terrorism - Peter Weiss (Lawyers' Committee on
Nuclear Policy)
3:30 - 3:45pm Break
3:45 - 5:00pm Technical issues related to nuclear proliferation * Role of
nuclear material accounting and control in the NPT - TBA
* Reprocessing and proliferation - TBA
* Connections between biological and nuclear weapons - TBA
Session III will be held in the Church Center, 2nd Floor of 777 UN Plaza
(on the corner of 44th St. and 1st Ave)
SESSION III: 6pm-9pm
6:00 - 7:00pm Reception
7:00 - 7:30pm The Non-Proliferation Treaty, nuclear disarmament, and terrorism
- Jayantha Dhanapala (UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament)
7:30 - 8:00pm Discussion
8:00 - 9:00pm Panel response and discussion * A new era of proliferation: View
from Russia - Alla Yaroshinskaya (Ecological Foundation, Russia)
* Admiral L. Ramdas (India-Pak People's Forum for Peace and Democracy) -
invited
* Arjun Makhijani (IEER) - Moderator
Related IEER literature:
+ [http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_9/9-3/index.html] (Science for Democratic
Action vol. 9 no. 3, May 2001)
+ [http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_8/8-2/index.html] (Science for Democratic
Action vol. 8 no. 2, February 2000)
[http://www.ieer.org/index.html] Comments to Outreach Coordinator:
[ieer@ieer.org]
Takoma Park, Maryland, USA
Posted March 8, 2002
*****************************************************************
59 IEER Conference: Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treaties
IEER [http://www.ieer.org/index.html] | Subject Index
[http://www.ieer.org/webindex.html]
Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security Treaties
Conference hosted by the Institute for Energy and Environmental
Research (IEER) Tuesday, April 9, 2002 United Nations, New York
A number of security-related treaties are in deep trouble. One
prominent reason is the reluctance of the major powers, notably
nuclear weapons states, to comply with their more important
disarmament and verification related obligations. An
opportunistic attitude towards treaty obligations by nuclear
weapons states is contributing to nuclear dangers, including the
potential for both state and non-state nuclear proliferation.
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) is
holding a conference, Nuclear Dangers and the State of Security
Treaties, during the 2002 NPT Preparatory Committee meeting, in
order to examine the connection between the erosion of security
treaties and the increase of nuclear threats.
You are invited to attend this conference, which will be held in
New York on Tuesday, April 9. Sessions I and II will be held in
Conference Room E of the United Nations Building. Jayantha
Dhanapala, UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament, will be
the keynote speaker at Session III on Tuesday evening, which will
be held at the Church Center, 777 UN Plaza (2nd Floor), across
from the UN Building. A draft agenda
[http://www.ieer.org/latest/npt02ag.html] is available.
In order to enter the United Nations building to attend Sessions
I and II, you must be registered with the UN. If you are planning
to attend IEER's conference and will not already be registered at
the UN for the 2002 NPT PrepComm, please let us know your name
and affiliation by March 20, 2002, so that we can register you.
For additional information about the conference, please contact
Michele Boyd (michele@ieer.org [michele@ieer.org] ).
Draft Agenda [http://www.ieer.org/latest/npt02ag.html]
Related IEER literature:
+ Nuclear Weapons and International Law
[http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_9/9-3/index.html] (Science for Democratic
Action vol. 9 no. 3, May 2001)
+ Nuclear Weapons and the Rule of Law
[http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/vol_8/8-2/index.html] (Science for Democratic
Action vol. 8 no. 2, February 2000)
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
[http://www.ieer.org/index.html] Comments to Outreach Coordinator:
ieer@ieer.org [ieer@ieer.org]
Takoma Park, Maryland, USA
Posted March 8, 2002
*****************************************************************
60 N.K. slams U.S. nuclear strategy
welcome to Korea Herald!!_National
http://www.koreaherald.com
North Korea said yesterday a reported U.S. nuclear weapons
strategy which targets seven countries - including the communist
North - for possible attacks would encourag a global nuclear arms
race.
In the first reaction from the communist state to leaks of the
U.S. plan, the official Korean Central News Agency said: "The
U.S. nuclear war scenario is an inhuman plan to spark a global
nuclear arms race and bring the political and military situation
in the world, including the Korean peninsula, to an extreme pitch
of tension."
The tightly controlled state agency accused the United States of
pursuing "nuclear blackmail".
According to leaks to the U.S. media, the U.S. Defense
Department's Nuclear Policy Review calls for a shift away from
the Cold War posture of using the U.S. nuclear arsenal to deter a
nuclear strike from the former Soviet Union. It sees China, Iran,
Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Russia and Syria as potential targets
for U.S. nuclear strikes, according to news reports. (AFP)
2002.03.14
(C) Copyright 2000 Digital Korea Herald. All rights reserved.
Story last updated at 10:45 a.m. on Wednesday, March 13, 2002
by Paul Parson
Oak Ridger staff
The Knoxville Building and Construction Trades Council feels shut
out of an upcoming construction project at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, according to the group's president.
Ray Whitehead, president of the 19-union Knoxville Building and
Construction Trades Council, said this morning that the developer
of a three-story complex at the lab isn't awarding any contracts
to local construction groups.
The private-sector-funded project will actually house three
distinct facilities, including research-related areas for
computer sciences and engineering technology.
Whitehead said the Knoxville Building and Construction Trades
Council plans to engage in a "concerted activity" this Friday to
secure work for locally unemployed construction workers and
others. It is believed these activities could consist of
picketing the ORNL project, with a potential lawsuit to follow.
An ORNL spokesman this morning declined to provide comment about
the situation.
However, information from the lab indicated that five
subcontractors for the modernization project were based in
Tennessee. Engineering services are being supplied by Barge,
Waggoner, Sumner and Cannon of Oak Ridge.
Last August, UT-Battelle Development Corp. selected Colliers
Keenan development firm of Columbia, S.C., to construct the
private-sector-funded complex, which Bill Madia, the lab's
director, recently called the "linchpin" to ORNL's $300 million
modernization effort.
Paul Parson can be contacted at (865) 220-5533 or
pparson@oakridger.com [pparson@oakridger.com] .
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
66 Inexcusable -- Bureaucrats still defy cleanup law
The Paducah Sun
Paducah, Kentucky
Wednesday, March 13, 2002
Since Congress passed legislation mandating the construction of
uranium waste conversion plants in Paducah and Portsmouth, Ohio,
the White House has changed hands, the country has been involved
in two wars and the oldest man on Capitol Hill, U.S. Sen. Strom
Thurmond, has celebrated his 96th, 97th, 98th and 99th birthdays.
Thurmond will turn 100 and retire from Congress by the time the
U.S. Department of Energy gets around to completing the latest in
a series of reviews of the conversion projects.
U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell was the main sponsor of the bill
mandating the conversion plants. The bill was approved by
Congress in the summer of 1998. A hope is that Sen. McConnell
will see the plants completed before he reaches Thurmond's age.
Last month DOE announced that it will ask the three finalists in
the bidding for the projects to resubmit bids based on the cost
of building one plant instead of two. The last-minute change in
the bidding procedure will delay a decision on construction by at
least another year.
Leon Owens, the president of the union local that represents most
of the workers at the USEC Inc. plant in Paducah, said the
"foot-dragging on this major cleanup project is simply
inexcusable."
In our view, the term "foot-dragging" exaggerates the helpfulness
of the federal executive branch in handling this portion of the
cleanup of the gaseous diffusion plants in Paducah and
Portsmouth.
The evidence suggests that bureaucrats in DOE and/or the White
House Office of Management and Budget, which reportedly objected
to building two cleanup facilities, simply are unwilling to carry
out the congressional mandate.
The legislation requires construction to begin on the two
facilities by Jan. 31, 2004. With less than two years to go until
that deadline, unelected bureaucrats have decided to substitute
their interpretation of the law for the clear congressional
intent.
U.S. Rep. Ed Whitfield, who helped to shepherd the bill through
the House of Representatives, says it explicitly requires two
plants to convert depleted uranium hexaflouride into safer
material for disposal or reuse.
Apparently, however, it doesn't matter what the authors of the
legislation intended — the plants' future is in the hands of the
bean counters at OMB and the DOE bureaucrats who frittered away a
decade before removing any contaminated material from the Paducah
Gaseous Diffusion Plant.
Owens suggested the state should go to court to force the federal
government to clean up the 40,000 cylinders of uranium
hexafluoride stored at the Paducah plant site.
Ohio Gov. Bob Taft and Tennessee Gov. Don Sundquist threatened
legal action against DOE in a letter the two governors and
Kentucky Gov. Paul Patton sent to then-President Clinton in 2000.
The states could decide to regulate the UF6 as hazardous waste;
that would present the federal government with the choice of
removing or recycling the material or paying fines.
State officials are justified in pursuing legal action against
the federal government for its failure to follow through on the
cleanup plan.
We would also like to see President George W. Bush give these
projects a boost. It's difficult even for a president to motivate
entrenched mid-level federal bureaucrats, but the fact is, the
heads of OMB and DOE answer to Bush.
These cleanup facilities represent justified federal spending to
eliminate a problem caused by the federal government itself.
The OMB's green eyeshade approach, weighing the value of one
plant against the other, ignores the federal government's
responsibility for cleaning up the mess. And, to put it bluntly,
it won't help the president politically in two states he carried
on his way to a razor-thin Electoral College victory in 2000.
On the UF6 issue, the federal government is in the process of
turning years of indifference and neglect into outright defiance
of a cleanup law approved by Congress. The latest delay may well
move the matter beyond the bureaucracy and into the courts.
*****************************************************************
67 Energy Department Announces Leadership Changes at Brookhaven and
Oak Ridge Offices --->
energy.gov - Headquarters' Press Release
RELEASE DATE: March 13, 2002
WASHINGTON, DC – The Department of Energy (DOE) today announced
leadership changes at its Brookhaven Area Office and Oak Ridge
Operations Office and the creation of a team to look for
opportunities to simplify and streamline processes within the
Office of Science.
Leah Dever, most recently manager of the Oak Ridge Operations
Office, will be detailed to the Office of Science at headquarters
to head its Office of Laboratory Operations and Environment,
Safety and Health. Ms. Dever will be responsible for providing
leadership and a central focal point for all the operations,
infrastructure, environment, safety and health and construction
management activities of the Office of Science.
“Ms. Dever brings to her new position a unique blend of
experience from working at many levels of the department, both in
the field and at headquarters,” James Decker, acting director of
the Office of Science, said. “Her perspective on the issues
facing our laboratory system with respect to infrastructure and
environment, safety and health will be invaluable to us.
Ms. Dever has over 25 years of DOE management experience. She
began her federal career as an environmental scientist at DOE
headquarters where she gave guidance to the department’s
operations offices on environmental compliance. Prior to becoming
manager of the Oak Ridge Operations Office, she served as manager
of the Ohio Field Office.
Replacing Ms. Dever will be Michael Holland, most recently
manager of DOE’s Brookhaven Area Office in New York. In his new
position as interim manager, Holland will be responsible for
Energy Department programs in basic research, national defense,
environmental management, and uranium and engineering programs at
facilities located in Oak Ridge, Tenn., and in four other states.
While at the Brookhaven Area Office, Holland was responsible for
contractor oversight including: operation of DOE’s newest nuclear
physics facility, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider;
environmental remediation; shipment of spent nuclear fuel;
community outreach programs and large facility commissioning and
decommissioning. “Mr. Holland has done a great job at
Brookhaven,” Decker said. “His experience managing large, complex
and high-profile projects involving considerable public interest
will serve him well in his new position.”
Mr.
Holland has 25 years experience in the operations of large
facilities including 12 years related to DOE nuclear facilities
operation, construction, environmental remediation and facility
decommissioning projects. Another 17 years were spent in the
commercial power industry including 15 years in the construction,
operation and decommissioning of the Shoreham Nuclear Power
Station. Mr. Holland was licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission as a Senior Reactor Operator.
Frank Crescenzo, deputy manager of the Brookhaven Area Office
will serve as acting manager at the Brookhaven office. Crescenzo
has 22 years of federal service in various technical and
management positions. He joined the department’s Brookhaven Area
Office in 1990. He was promoted to deputy area manager in 1992
and has acted as area manager for a period totaling nearly three
years. He has also contributed greatly to several DOE initiatives
to improve safety management, contract management and community
relations throughout the department’s complex. He played an
important role in the selection and transition of the new
contractor at the Brookhaven Lab. Prior to joining the
department, Mr. Crescenzo worked as a senior inspector with the
NRC.
Ed Cumesty, deputy manager of the Oak Ridge Operations office,
will also take on new responsibilities. Cumesty will lead a team
to look at opportunities to re-engineer processes within the
Office of Science to: reflect a more standards-based management
approach; adopt, where possible, best business practices; clarify
and streamline roles and responsibilities; and lower the cost of
providing Office of Science services. He will be detailed to
headquarters to lead this effort. Prior to taking the position of
deputy manager at Oak Ridge, Mr. Cumesty served as the Operations
Office’s assistant manager for laboratories, project director and
deputy project director for the Superconducting Super Collider,
and deputy manager of the Chicago Operations Office.
These changes will be effective April 1. Media Contact: Jeff
Sherwood, 202/586-5806 Release No. PR-02-041
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************