*****************************************************************
09/25/02 **** RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL) **** VOL 10.246
*****************************************************************
RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************
NUCLEAR POLICY
1 Canada: Nuclear industry going down?
2 Japan: Gov't plans strict monitoring of nuclear reactors
3 Japan: Tepco begins checking reactor shroud for cracks*
4 UK: Nuclear giant in update U-turn
5 US: NRC approves TVA production of tritium
6 Taiwan: Ambivalence and nuclear power
7 Lukashenko Flatly Denies Aiding Iraq
8 US: Court denies bid to stop nuclear plant expansion
9 US: OP: Nuclear downsides
10 US: OP: Neutered nukes --
11 Bulgaria issues ultimatum to EU: inspect our nuclear plants, or
NUCLEAR REACTORS
12 US: 1,500 fish die in creek after hot water from nuke plant released
13 US: NRC Announces Opportunity for Hearing on License Renewal for
14 Canada: Lepreau refurbishing in question
15 US: Indian Point NUKE PLANT TEST BRINGS PROTESTS
16 US: Reactor test costs fuel debate
17 US: TVA gets nod to produce tritium for government at Watts Bar
18 US: NRC, FEMA Evaluating Emergency Response To Simulated Disaster At
NUCLEAR SAFETY
19 US: African gangs offer route to uranium
20 US: NRC Advises Nuclear Licensees to Review Supplemental Security
21 US: NIOSH Federal Register Notice: Advisory Board on Radiation and
NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
22 US: Colorado: Cotter public comment period extended* *to Oct. 2*
23 UK: Residents fight university plan for radioactive store buildings
24 US: NRC admits it erred in public notice on NFS project
25 US: Nuclear waste alchemy praised
26 US: NC: County loses bid to block nuclear waste
27 US: Utah: Radioactive Greed
28 US: Utah: State Leaders Assail 'Plan B' For Nuclear Waste Storage
29 US: Colo. Cotter public comment period extended to Oct. 2
30 US: EDITORIAL: The expanding dump
31 US: Appeals court backs storage of nuclear waste
32 US: Letter: Where is the fairness in plan to send us waste?
33 US: Yucca a source of pride for Bush
34 Taiwan: Residents want waste removed
35 US: Nuke industry concentrates on licensing of Nevada dump
36 US: West Valley puts wraps on radioactive waste -
37 US: Canada: New report shows abandoned uranium mines a concern in
38 Ex-nuclear official says Russia must halt nuclear waste imports,
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
39 US: U.S. to conduct subcritical nuclear test on Thursday
40 Japan: Kawaguchi gets Britain's dossier on Iraq
41 N-policy guided by deterrence, says Musharraf
42 Forgotten menace in Kashmir
43 India vs. China
44 US: UK: The Lawyer: A flawed document, and the price to preserve uni
45 Iraq takes journalists on tour to expose Blair 'lies'
46 UK: This dossier is not enough
47 Little hard evidence as Blair looks for trust
48 Hack? takes a whack at an attack on Iraq /*
49 NZ: The dishonesty of this so-called dossier
50 UK: Blair makes a persuasive case for action on Iraq
51 US: Russian station a historic artifact
52 UK: Sifting the old claims from new and suspicions from
53 UK: Saddam's nuclear shopping tour
54 U.S., Canada Praise Iraq Dossier
55 Siberia Orders Release of Physicist
56 Germany Refuses to Endorse Dossier
57 AU: Critic hits out at dossier 'evidence' -
58 Uranium heads secret shopping list
59 UK: Blair's dossier assessed
60 AU: UN must take charge: Crean
61 Blair dossier: Iraq to reply -
62 US: The difficult burden of proof |
63 Brazil uranium sales to Iraq stir debate*
US DEPT. OF ENERGY
64 CROET chasing second land transfer
65 Questions surface on USEC deal
66 DOE to prepare an environmental impact statement for plutonium
67 Patton says USEC deal still priority -
OTHER NUCLEAR
68 David Broder: Bush rewriting classic definition of conservatism
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
1 Canada: Nuclear industry going down?
New Brunswick's Public Utilities Board's failure to back upgrades
at Point Lepreau nuclear plant is being heard as a possible death
knell for the industry in Canada.
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 Back
The Halifax Herald Limited
/The Canadian Press /
Lepreau refurbishing in question $845m upgrade financially risky,
not in public's interest, board says
By Chris Morris / The Canadian Press
Fredericton - The era of nuclear energy in Atlantic Canada soon
may be at an end.
New Brunswick's Public Utilities Board has rejected a plan to
refurbish the aging Point Lepreau nuclear plant, saying the
proposed $845-million upgrade is financially risky and not in the
public's interest.
While the board's decision is only a recommendation for NB Power,
the provincial Crown utility that owns and operates Point
Lepreau, critics said Tuesday it's the kiss of death for Atlantic
Canada's only nuclear power plant - and possibly for Canada's
nuclear industry as a whole.
"The Canadian nuclear program has no future, either though
exports or through domestic use," said David Martin, nuclear
energy adviser to the Sierra Club of Canada.
"We will never see another new reactor built in Canada. The only
question we face now is this issue of rehabilitation of old
reactors."
David Coon of the New Brunswick Conservation Council, an
environmental group that intervened against the refurbishment,
wants the province the begin mothballing Lepreau when it reaches
the end of its life in 2006.
"For the first time, we are looking at the possibility of a
nuclear-free Atlantic Canada," Coon said. "My children are not
going to have to live under the spectre of a potential nuclear
accident."
The 18-year-old Point Lepreau reactor, a 630-kilowatt model
located in southern New Brunswick, was designed as a showpiece of
Canadian Candu know-how and was used by the industry as a
demonstrator for the export market.
However, during the past decade the prematurely aging plant has
experienced more than its share of expensive breakdowns and
repairs.
The renovations proposed by NB Power are more extensive than any
ever undertaken in Canada and are designed to keep the reactor
running for another 25 years.
Ken Little, a vice-president at the utility, said NB Power isn't
prepared, at this point, to pull the plug on Lepreau.
He said the Public Utilities Board urged NB Power to take another
look at building a plant powered by natural gas rather than
refurbishing Lepreau. But Little said there are no guarantees of
a long-term gas supply from offshore Nova Scotia.
"Is the gas option even real?" he said, noting that New Brunswick
recently lost its case with the National Energy Board for a
Canada-first gas policy.
Jeannot Volpe, New Brunswick's energy minister, said the province
will wait and see if there are any private interests ready to act
as white knights and salvage Point Lepreau.
The provincial government did not support the refurbishment
proposal by NB Power, saying there are too many questions about
costs, potential delays and performance guarantees from Atomic
Energy of Canada Ltd., the federal Crown agency that would carry
out the renovation.
Copyright © 2002 The Halifax Herald Limited
*****************************************************************
2 Japan: Gov't plans strict monitoring of nuclear reactors
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 09:30 JST
TOKYO ?
The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency on Tuesday presented a
set of proposals to prevent any recurrence of damage cover-up
scandals at nuclear reactors operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co,
agency officials said.
Among the proposals submitted to a subcommittee meeting of the
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry were surprise inspections
of operators of nuclear reactors and strengthening penalties for
law violations, the officials said.
(Kyodo News)
Japan Today Discussion
*****************************************************************
3 Japan: Tepco begins checking reactor shroud for cracks*
FUKUSHIMA (Kyodo) Tokyo Electric Power Co. started checking
Tuesday for cracks in the core shroud of a reactor at its
Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant here.
The inspection is the first to be undertaken by the nation's
biggest power utility since August, when it became embroiled in
allegations that it concealed damage at its reactors in Fukushima
and Niigata prefectures.
The inspectors used an underwater camera to check for cracks and
scars in the welded part of the shroud covering the No. 4
reactor. They were observed by inspectors from the Nuclear and
Industrial Safety Agency, in accordance with the nuclear reactor
law, and officials from the towns of Futaba and Okuma, who
supervise the plant.
The inspection is expected to continue until late October.
Ahead of Tuesday's inspections, Fumio Murata of the Fukushima
Prefecture's nuclear safety division called on Tepco officials to
cooperate, stating that working together with local communities
is a necessary part of operating nuclear reactors.
In response, plant head Kazuhiro Matsumura apologized over the
concerns prompted by the latest scandal and vowed to cooperate
fully with the probe.
Tepco shut down the reactor Sept. 16 after it was discovered that
the utility failed to report shroud damage to the national
government.
Tepco is suspected of violating the Electric Utility Law by
failing to replace core shrouds in five reactors at its two
plants in Fukushima Prefecture in the 1990s, despite having
discovered the cracks two to five years earlier.
Tepco is also suspected of violating the Nuclear Reactor
Regulation Law in connection with cracks in the steam dryer of
the No. 1 reactor at Fukushima No. 1.
The utility allegedly instructed that footage showing the cracks
be edited out of a videotape. Tepco denied the allegations and
said the videotape no longer exists.
On Sept. 17, Tepco Chairman Hiroshi Araki and President Nobuya
Minami said they would resign to take blame for the coverups and
punish 33 executives and senior officials at the company.
In announcing the punishments, Tepco released an in-house report
on its investigation into 29 coverups and admitted that 16 of
them, including those involving defective areas, were
unacceptable in light of "social common sense."
On Friday, Tepco revealed eight more coverups of nuclear plant
damage.
*The Japan Times: Sept. 25, 2002* (C) All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
4 UK: Nuclear giant in update U-turn
Scotsman.com
EDINBURGH EVENING NEWS ONLINE *Wednesday, 25th September 2002*
/By JIM STANTON Deputy Business Editor/
BRITISH Energy, the embattled nuclear generator, has scrapped its
plans to update investors later this week on its financial
performance.
The East Kilbride-based company, which produces about 20 per cent
of Britain?s energy needs, said it had taken the step as it holds
desperate survival talks with the Government.
The company was recently given a £410 million emergency loan by
the Government - but that is due to expire on Friday. Analysts
said the move only served to add to the uncertainty about the
company?s survival prospects.
Sources familiar with the talks expect the loan provided on
September 9 to be extended later this week so that talks over its
long-term future can continue.
British Energy shocked the City earlier this month when it said
it faced a cash crisis and pleaded for a state bail-out only
weeks after telling investors it was solvent. Plunging wholesale
electricity prices and high fixed costs mean that it is selling
power for less than it costs to generate it. British Energy is
currently being investigated by the Financial Services Authority
for what some may see as misleading information about its
financial health just weeks before a cash plea. There were also
accusations that the company delayed passing on information about
its cash position.
A spokeswoman for British Energy, referring to the practice of
giving an update before closing its books for the six months to
September 30, said: "Because we are in discussions with the
Government about the long-term future of the company, it is not
appropriate to be putting out a pre-close statement this week."
Like other shareholder-owned companies, British Energy
traditionally provides investors with an update on how its
business is performing ahead of half-year and annual results.
Possible long-term solutions to the company?s plight include tax
breaks, a revised relationship with state-owned parts of the
nation?s nuclear industry, the sale of North American assets and
a financial restructuring that could cut out shareholders
altogether and leave other investors severely out of pocket.
Earlier yesterday, British Energy confirmed it would not be
drawing down £350m in credit facilities due to expire in 2005.
The company?s decision that it was unable to guarantee repayment
of future bank loans triggered its appeal to the government for
funds. Last week it cancelled a further £260m of undrawn bank
facilities.
Some sources close to the Government have suggested that the loan
facility it has given British Energy will be increased to "£500m
or more" to provide the embattled company with a longer breathing
space.
Any new deal is likely to last between two and three months, to
provide time for a longer-term restructuring of the company.
©2002 scotsman.com | contact
*****************************************************************
5 NRC approves TVA production of tritium
By Rebecca Ferrar, News-Sentinel business writer September 24,
2002
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission gave its approval today for TVA
to produce tritium at the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant for use in
making nuclear weapons. The NRC approved an amendment to TVA’s
operating license of the Watts Bar plant at Spring City to allow
the process.
Tritium is a short-lived gas that boosts the power of nuclear
weapons. TVA already has approved a $6 million contract with
Westinghouse to prepare the Watts Bar plant for tritium
production.
The plant is at Spring City about 50 miles south of Knoxville.
The tritium production is being done at the behest of the
Department of Energy, which oversees the nuclear weapons
stockpile for the Department of Defense.
The license amendment gives TVA permission to use
tritium-producing burnable absorber rods at Watts Bar. The rods
will be installed in the Watts Bar nuclear reactor. The tritium
is produced using lithium. Once the rods are irradiated, they
will be shipped to the Savannah River site near Aiken, S.C.,
where DOE will extract the tritium. TVA put 32 burnable absorber
rods in the Watts Bar reactor in 1997 to test the technology and
irradiated the rods until 1999.
DOE confirmed that the process worked.
The amendment allows TVA to install up to 2,304 rods into the
Watts Bar reactor and irradiate them for one fuel cycle or about
18 months. Then the rods will be shipped to Savannah. DOE plans
to have TVA repeat the process for the life of the Watts Bar
plant. There is some controversy over the process revolving
around whether the government is permitted to mix defense and
commercial operations.
Rebecca Ferrar may be reached at 865-342-6357 or
ferrarr@knews.com.
Copyright 2002, Knoxville News-Sentinel Co.
*****************************************************************
6 Taiwan: Ambivalence and nuclear power
The Taipei Times Online: 2002-09-25
By Huang Wen-shiung ¶À¤å¶¯
The issue of nuclear power has long been marginalized in Taiwan.
Whether the third round-island march against nuclear power, which
began at Taipei's Lungshan Temple on Sept. 21, will change this
situation remains to be seen. But the issue is not just about the
Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, or even nuclear power itself.
I've been back in Taiwan for more than six years, but there is
still one thing I can't get used to. In summer -- when
electricity reserves are at their lowest level -- many public and
private venues have their front doors wide open and their
air-conditioners on full blast. When you feel a chill running
your back, it's not just because there's a huge air conditioner
blasting out cold air behind you. It's also because such a
surreal phenomenon represents a madness so common that it no
longer surprises anyone.
`But Taiwan has never taken the nuclear energy issue seriously.
While leaving our front doors wide open and turning on our
air-conditioners full blast, we care little about our compatriots
from Kungliao and Orchid Island who have to shoulder the hazards
of nuclear power with their lives and health.'
Have you ever travelled to countries that endure heavy snow-falls
in winter? Public venues in those countries have revolving doors
or automatic doors to prevent heat escaping. The privacy of
private residences is respected, but that does not mean people
with money are beyond the reach of regulators. The government
will then send people to take infrared photos of your house or
building. If it is emitting infrared rays like the head of a
mystic cult master, this means your house does not have good
insulation. The government will negotiate with you on what kind
of subsidies you need to make improvements. Even factories whose
energy efficiency levels are 20 percent to 30 percent higher than
Taiwan's can't evade energy conservation regulations.
The escape of hot air and cold air both waste energy. I feel
that, compared with Taiwan, these countries have at least some
basic reasons for why they use nuclear power. Their debates on
whether to use nuclear power and accept its risks are built on a
base of energy-conservation efforts. Or at least they go hand in
hand with energy-conservation efforts, so that they may build as
few nuclear power plants as possible. Also, in these countries,
the democratic debate on whether to take the risks of nuclear
power never evades the question of basic human rights. If no one
wants a nuclear power plant in his or her backyard, then in whose
backyard should we build it? Life, survival and health are basic
human rights. No such rights of any minority can be sacrificed
for the interests of the majority, even if everyone is already
working hard to save energy. But Taiwan has never taken the
nuclear energy issue seriously. While leaving our front doors
wide open and turning on our air-conditioners full blast, we care
little about our compatriots from Kungliao and Orchid Island who
have to shoulder the hazards of nuclear power with their lives
and health. I once talked to children about these issues. The
children didn't feel the issues involved any abstruse reasoning.
One even suggested that we go and talk to the owner of a shop
that had its door open and its air-conditioner on. If children
have such critical judgement and moral sensitivity, does it mean
the problem is in the adults? Or is it in the history and
systemic structure that has deprived adults of their critical
judgment and moral sensitivity? Let's take, for example, the
authoritarian rule that "froze" the constitutional human rights
of the people of Taiwan for more than 40 years. The decision to
build the nuclear plants was made by the "great head of the
family." Denied the right to doubt, allowed only to listen but
not to question, we evaded our own moral responsibility -- out of
habit and convenience -- thereby weakening our moral sensitivity.
The propaganda offensive from Taipower further narrowed the
horizons of our knowledge with descriptions of beautiful scenes
and safety guarantees. Energy conservation either did not cross
its mind or was sidelined with a few perfunctory slogans. At most
times, authoritarian rulers threaten violence but do not use it.
At most times, they only need to create excuses for us not to be
responsible and not to think -- and therefore not to doubt and
resist. The advent of democratization has deprived us of this
"convenience." As a result, criticism about the Fourth Nuclear
Power Plant is emerging. Some citizens have reclaimed their
critical judgment and moral sensitivity. Their voices have even
influenced other citizens to some extent. But we are a people
used to having our feet bound. Look at how indifferent we are
toward places with open front doors and air-conditioning. Think
about how ambivalent is our sympathy for the people in Kungliao
and on Orchid Island. On the other hand, the vested economic and
ideological inter-ests of nuclear energy remain very stubborn and
nimble. Even when a halt to the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant's
construction was put on the country's political agenda, they
still managed -- in collaboration with some media institutions --
to turn the issue into gossip, whether it was former premier Tang
Fei's (ð¸) resignation or President Chen Shui-bian's (³¯¤ô«ó)
rudeness toward KMT Chairman Lien Chan (³s¾Ô). All this is true,
but look at how successfully the vested interests have used these
opportunities to marginalize the issues of the Fourth Nuclear
Power Plant and nuclear power itself. For some time to come,
things such as disagreements between Chen and former DPP chairman
Lin Yi-hsiung (ªL¸q¶¯) over the nuclear plant issue may be
targets of media gossip.
I think the conclusions are very clear. One, we can't continue to
lazily rely on a ruling party just as ambivalent and inert as
ourselves. Two, we, the ordinary citizens, must rediscover our
critical judgment and moral sensitivity. Three, we need to take
back our democratic rights and powers to set the nation's agenda.
Even if nuclear power is 99 percent as safe as Taipower claims it
to be, and even if Taiwan is wading knee-deep through money, does
that mean we can build nuclear power plants? That was the
starting point of my thoughts as I walked on the round-island
anti-nuclear march.
Huang Wen-shiung is a national policy advisor to the president
and a consultant at the Taiwan Association for Human Rights.
Translated by Francis Huang
This story has been viewed 299 times.
URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/09/25/story/0000169406]
Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
7 Lukashenko Flatly Denies Aiding Iraq
Wednesday, Sep. 25, 2002. Page 2
The Associated Press
Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko flatly denied
allegations that his nation had provided dual-use technology or
goods to Iraq, which would allow Baghdad to produce nuclear
weapons.
"We have very good relations with Iraq, but we cooperate with
Iraq only in those areas that are not prohibited by the United
Nations," Lukashenko told the BBC in an interview. A tape of the
interview was made available to The Associated Press on Tuesday.
Lukashenko stressed that Belarus "is not the kind of state, in
its potential and might, that could defy the opinion of the world
community."
Lukashenko, who has earned the strong disfavor of the United
States and other Western nations with his authoritarian policies,
has eagerly reached out to Iraq and other countries the United
States accuses of fostering terrorism.
Defense Minister Leonid Maltsev said Tuesday that the allegations
are "insinuations and speculation that have no official proof."
"Belarus, in its international relations, acts in strict
compliance with decisions of the UN and other international
documents, agreements," he said after meeting Tuesday with
Ukrainian Prime Minister Anatoly Kinakh in Kiev, Interfax
reported.
Belarussian-Iraqi cooperation is developing rapidly. A week ago,
the head of Iraq's electricity system visited Minsk, and
Lukashenko met with Iraq's deputy prime minister in July.
© Copyright 2002, The Moscow Times. All Rights Reserved. Visit
*****************************************************************
8 Court denies bid to stop nuclear plant expansion
Tuesday, September 24, 2002 12:00AM EDT
The Associated Press
A federal appeals court rejected Orange County's lawsuit to stop
Carolina Power &Light from storing more used uranium fuel rods at
a nearby nuclear power plant.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruled Thursday in favor
of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which found that the
chances of a nuclear accident were too remote to trigger a
wide-ranging hearing on the issue.
CP has been storing highly radioactive fuel assemblies from its
Brunswick Nuclear Power Plant near Southport and Robinson Nuclear
Power Plant near Hartsville, S.C., at its Shearon Harris plant
for the past year. The spent nuclear fuel is placed in a new,
water-filled cooling basin.
The NRC last year gave Raleigh-based CP permission to double its
storage capacity for spent reactor fuel at the Harris plant. The
utility was running out of room to store the
used-but-still-dangerous fuel assemblies from its three plants
because of the federal government's delay in opening a national
burial site for radioactive waste.
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the independent Atomic
Safety &Licensing Board studied our plan extensively for more
than two years and found it to be safe and responsible," Progress
Energy general counsel William D. Johnson said. CP, a utility
serving eastern North Carolina and South Carolina, is a
subsidiary of Progress Energy.
Orange County attorney Geoffry Gledhill and a county spokesman
did not return calls seeking comment Monday.
In 1998, CP asked the NRC for permission to use the Harris
plant's two unused storage pools, which were identical to two
pools the company already used to cool the spent fuel.
Orange County commissioners filed their federal lawsuit to stop a
project they said posed an unacceptable risk of a catastrophic
accident. County commissioners and environmental activists wanted
CP to store nuclear waste in dry casks rather than pools. CP
contends the technologies are equally safe.
The three-judge appeals panel heard oral arguments in the case
Sept. 5.
© Copyright 2002, The News &Observer Publishing Company. All
*****************************************************************
9 OP: Nuclear downsides
newsobserver.com : front : Editorials
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 5:40AM EDT
Charles Harman (Point of View article, Sept. 21) presented an
overwhelmingly one-sided argument in favor of nuclear energy. He
promoted nuclear power as a preferred generation method compared
to coal-based power plants based on the short-term impact of each
on the atmospheric environment. This point is true, but he
neglects to justify the long-term, negative impact that a nuclear
power plant has on the environment. He failed to point out the
devastation to both lives and property wrought by the Chernobyl
power plant accident, a situation not yet resolved.
He failed to point out that the failure at Three Mile Island
brought the United States amazingly close to our own
Chernobyl-like devastation in central Pennsylvania. And he failed
to point out the overwhelmingly unfair burden on future
generations of Americans that the safe storage and perpetual
guarding of the residue of a few decades of power generation
requires.
To have a plant in operation for 30 to 50 years requires that the
spent fuel rods and the plant itself must be protected from
leakage into the environment for 10,000 years or more --a feat
for which future generations will be responsible without having
had the benefit of the power generated. Harman owes it to readers
to give the whole truth about an issue of such importance. Steve
Laux Cary
© Copyright 2002, The News &Observer Publishing Company. All
*****************************************************************
10 OP: Neutered nukes --
The Washington Times
September 25, 2002
Kenneth Adney
It has been 10 years this week since the last U.S. nuclear test
shook the ground at the Nevada Test Site.
Lacking the antinuclear conviction and political clout to do away
with nuclear weapons, Bill Clinton instead tried to make nuclear
weapons politically correct. He declared an indefinite nuclear
test moratorium, signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty in
1996, and suppressed research and development that would do
anything more than keep the U.S. nuclear stockpile on life
support.
In 1998, India and Pakistan tested their nuclear weapons and,
later, the Senate rejected the Test Ban Treaty. This treaty is so
ineffective it doesn't even have a practical definition of what
constitutes a nuclear test. The Bush administration does not
support the treaty, but the test moratorium and too many other
Clinton-era nuclear weapon policies remain in effect,
nonetheless.
Nuclear testing was replaced by a "program" and a "process." The
program spends billions each year on computers and software for
simulating nuclear weapon performance and for non-nuclear
experiments including those with giant lasers. In a prime example
of Orwellian doublespeak, this program is called "science-based
stockpile stewardship" even though it is less scientific since it
precludes the most prolific source of empirical data on nuclear
weapons, namely, nuclear tests.
A process of nuclear weapon certification was also established in
which every year, scientists evaluate the stockpile using the
non-nuclear tools now permitted. If anyone concludes a nuclear
test is absolutely necessary to resolve some inescapable problem,
the recommendation must go through a bureaucratic gauntlet all
the way up to the president.
This certification process is seriously flawed. Since only
computer simulations and static and non-nuclear examinations are
allowed, there is a risk significant technical issues will not be
uncovered simply because we are not looking in the right way. As
the saying goes, absence of evidence of a problem is not evidence
a problem is absent.
The psychology of the process is also wrong. A "lowly"
scientist's recommendation that nuclear testing is needed would
likely be based on some arcane technical reason but would begin a
chain of events having major repercussions to him, his laboratory
and the entire nation. It would be an admission that all those
expensive computers, expensive non-nuclear testing machines, and
all that expensive brainpower fell short. No one would have told
anti-nuclear President Clinton and who today would hand President
Bush another problem?
Besides, it is simply bad policy to conduct nuclear tests
only after we are convinced our weapons are "broken." With this
as our advertised approach, nuclear test resumption discloses to
everyone, everywhere, the U.S. is in a nuclear weapon crisis —
not very smart. A policy of certification with routine rather
than emergency nuclear testing would remove this problem and be
consistent with preventative maintenance standards demanded for
nearly all military equipment and even consumer goods. Without
daily use, periodic testing is even more important for nuclear
weapons than for refrigerators, cars and tanks.
Who can predict how the U.S. may use nuclear weapons in the
future? Frankly, it is impossible to predict these future
scenarios with any certainty. However, one thing is certain: U.S.
use of nuclear weapons will not be casual. It will be under the
most desperate circumstances, and duds will not be acceptable.
Stockpile reductions promise less than one-tenth of the old
stockpile will remain active. Thus, we must be certain the Cold
War relics we keep (with their "eight-track tape" technology)
function when called upon. Better yet, new weapons should be
developed for optimum military usefulness in yield, precise and
rapid delivery, etc. Unfortunately, modernization of the nuclear
stockpile is hampered by the absence of nuclear tests.
Only a fool would believe unreliable or militarily obsolete U.S.
nuclear weapons will make this a safer world. But fools seem to
abound in this business. Even some in military leadership accept
this degradation and oppose nuclear testing.
Nuclear weapons can be a costly nightmare of military command,
control and security. Nuclear weapons are also not an easy fit
into the warrior ethic. In some sense, using nuclear weapons is
an admission of military failure: failure of those nifty,
surgical, precision-guided, multimillion-dollar bombs and
missiles armed with "humane" conventional explosives, failure of
military stratagems and traditional battlefield skill. Instead,
to rescue the day, the military must call for these starkly
impersonal, overwhelmingly destructive, unholy nuclear weapons.
For the past 10 years, U.S. scientists have been working hard
trying to squeeze as much blood as possible from this
no-nuclear-test turnip. But it is not enough that only our
scientists sitting in their cubicles reviewing computer
simulations feel confident of our weapons. It is even more
important that our enemies believe this.
Among other factors, U.S. credibility is undermined by our
timidity to test our own nuclear weapons on our own soil — in
fear of international objections and protests by Martin Sheen and
other Hollywood 1960s retreads.
The U.S. continues to spend several billion dollars each year to
maintain the nuclear weapon complex and the aging stockpile.
While much of this work should continue, a significant fraction
is spent on activities simply to compensate for the fact that we
are not conducting nuclear tests.
Instead of these, a program of one or two well-instrumented
nuclear tests each year would cost less, supply a huge amount of
directly relevant data to U.S. scientists, and do all the other
things that nuclear tests did in the past to assert the
credibility of U.S. nuclear capabilities to the entire world.
Hello? These are nuclear weapons — they require nuclear
tests.
Kenneth Adney worked for more than 25 years as a scientist for
the Energy Department. He was involved in more than 100 nuclear
tests and continues to work in support of the U.S. nuclear weapon
program. The views expressed in this article are solely his own.
*****************************************************************
11 Bulgaria issues ultimatum to EU: inspect our nuclear plants, or
closure will be delayed
News Wed, Sep 25, 2002
AP World Politics
By VESELIN TOSHKOV, Associated Press Writer
SOFIA, Bulgaria - Bulgaria won't obey the European Union's demand
that it close two nuclear plant reactors by the end of 2006
unless the union sends experts to inspect the units' safety and
to reevaluate the closure demand, a government minister said
Tuesday.
Meglena Kuneva, the minister in charge of integration with
Europe, said she would not sign a final EU agreement on energy
that is part of Bulgaria's pre-accession talks unless EU inspects
the plants.
Refusing to sign that agreement would likely bring the talks to
an end. Bulgaria agreed with the EU in 1999 to close the two
oldest reactors in the Kozlodui nuclear power plant by the end of
this year and two other units by the end of 2006 because of
safety concerns.
As a reward, the EU started accession talks with Bulgaria, which
is eager to join. But Bulgaria now argues that the two units set
to be closed in 2006 could be safely used until 2010 and 2012.
The EU wants them closed because they lack protective
encasements, but Bulgaria argues that assessment is no longer
valid because the reactor walls have been enforced and a new
safety system designed to prevent radioactive leaks in case of an
emergency has been installed. "Bulgaria will close units 3 and 4
of the Kozlodui nuclear plant till the end of 2006 only if the
European Commission lets its experts to inspect them," Kuneva
told journalists.
Energy Minister Milko Kovachev said the Bulgarian ultimatum aimed
to provoke the EU to assess the units' safety and to extend their
operation period. The four units to be closed are 440-megawatt
pressurized water reactors installed between 1974 to 1982.
Manufacturers say the reactors have 30-year life spans. Two newer
1,000-megawatt units with safety containment are not affected by
the EU-demanded closures.
A mission of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.
nuclear watchdog group, visited Kozlodui in July and concluded
that the units now meet or exceed the agency's safety criteria.
Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
12 1,500 fish die in creek after hot water from nuke plant released
Asbury Park Press | Story
September 25, 2002 The Jersey Shore's News Source
Published in the Asbury Park Press 9/25/02 By ERIK LARSEN,
RICK HEPP and KIRK MOORE STAFF WRITERS
LACEY -- More than 1,500 dead fish were scooped from the Oyster
Creek after the water temperature rose nearly 20 degrees to 106
early Monday morning when a pump used to cool water discharge
from the nuclear power plant was taken offline.
TIM MC CARTHY photo
A dead striped bass floats in Oyster Creek east of the nuclear
power plant Tuesday.
The pump, which regulates the temperature of water used to cool
the nuclear reactor before it is released into the Oyster Creek
discharge canal, was shut down about 2:30 a.m. Monday to perform
maintenance upgrades on the plant's electric transmission and
distribution system, said Dave Simon, a spokesman for the Exelon
Nuclear, which operates the plant.
Ninety minutes later, plant employees noticed about 100 dead fish
floating in the creek and notified supervisors, said Neil
Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which
was notified of the problem.
That number had risen to more than 1,500 yesterday, according to
Simon, as a crew from Normandeau Associates Inc. in Spring City,
Pa., continued to pull spotfish, bluefish, drum fish, striped
bass and oyster toadfish from the tidal creek.
Simon said that maintenance workers hadn't realized that shutting
off the pump would have the adverse impact on the creek.
From the Oyster Creek's banks in Waretown, Ocean Township,
yesterday, two workers could be seen aboard a 20-foot
flatbed-style boat, capturing the remains of one fish after
another with a hand-held net. As the vessel zigzagged from shore
to shore, workers placed some of the bloated carcasses, some up
to 4 feet long, in plastic bags to be disposed of in a landfill.
Fish won't be tested
Wayne Adelung, 69, could see the dead fish floating near his
waterfront house on Capstan Road in Waretown. He pulled at least
two of the carcasses out of the water himself.
Adelung, alarmed by the extent of the fish kill, called Ocean
Township Mayor Robert Kraft and was upset that Kraft hadn't been
notified.
"I told him (the fish) should be tested (to make sure the cause
of death was thermal pollution and not something else," Adelung
said.
Simon said the fish will not be tested, but all of the
appropriate state and local authorities had been notified.
Lacey Mayor Louis A. Amato said he, too, was unaware of the fish
kill, as was the Ocean County Health Department in Toms River and
the county's Office of Emergency Management, officials said.
The state Department of Environmental Protection, which regulates
the plant's water discharge, has opened an investigation, said
DEP spokesman Al Ivany.
After the plant was alerted to dying fish Monday morning, it
notified the state environmental agency and its Office of Water
Compliance and Enforcement, Ivany said. The agencies quickly
ordered the plant to bring the water pump back online or reduce
the nuclear plant's generating power, which in turn would reduce
the temperature of the discharged water.
Plant officials had the thermal dilution plant back online by
8:30 p.m., and water temperature returned to normal by 10 p.m.,
Ivany said.
In the meantime, water temperatures in the Oyster Creek near the
Route 9 overpass increased from 87 degrees to 106.
DEP review scheduled
The DEP will review why the plant scheduled unauthorized
maintenance work and the extent of the fish kill, which was
mostly confined to a lagoon, Ivany said.
According to DEP policy, the plant is prohibited from shutting
down the thermal dilution plant from June through September to
prevent the already-warm summer water from becoming too hot to
sustain marine life. The plant also is prohibited under its New
Jersey pollution permit from causing the water in the Oyster
Creek to exceed 97 degrees.
The plant has 10 days to submit an incident report documenting
the maintenance work and 30 days to send a fish kill report to
the department's Fish and Wildlife office, Ivany said.
A fish kill report states the extent of the damage and lists the
types of species killed; it also details the cleanup, which has
to be performed by a licensed contractor. The NRC also will
review the incident to ensure the plant corrects its maintenance
policy to prevent a similar occurrence in the future. Sheehan
said.
Commercial fisherman Walter Wardenski, 53, of Compass Road,
Waretown, said he encountered the cleanup crew as he headed out
of the Oyster Creek yesterday morning in his own boat, bound for
his clam beds in Barnegat Bay.
The fish included many striped bass that Wardenski estimated were
about 5 to 6 pounds each. "I'm in the first lagoon from the bay
(on the Waretown side of the creek), and when I got there, they
were working between the lagoon and the bay," Wardenski said. The
crew was working their way up the creek, toward the plant later
in the morning, he said.
The power plant draws water from the south branch of the Forked
River to cool its heat exchangers. The water then is discharged
through a canal into the Oyster Creek, which flows to the bay.
The effect is to raise water temperature in the Oyster Creek,
which tends to attract fish, especially during the cooler months.
"When I left my dock, I had a water temperature of 84.9 degrees,
which is not uncommon," Wardenski said. Out in the bay over the
clam beds, the water temperature was close to 70 degrees.
Wardenski said he knew immediately that something had happened at
the plant to affect the marine wildlife in the creek.
Plant shutdowns, which lower water temperature, historically have
resulted in fish kills there.
"This is a shame," Wardenski said. "This happens at least once a
year."
the Asbury Park Press
*****************************************************************
13 NRC Announces Opportunity for Hearing on License Renewal for
Ginna Nuclear Power Plant
NRC: News Release - 2002 - 111 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov
No. 02-111 September 25, 2002
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced the opportunity
to request a hearing on an application for a 20-year renewal of
the operating license of the R.E. Ginna nuclear power plant. The
plant is located in Wayne County, New York. The current operating
license for the facility expires on September 18, 2009.
Rochester Gas & Electric Corp. (RG&E) submitted the application
on July 30. A notice of receipt was published by NRC in the
Federal Register on August 26. The staff has determined that RG&E
has submitted sufficient information for the NRC to formally
"docket," or file, the application and conduct a detailed review.
Operating licenses are issued by the NRC for commercial power
reactors to operate for up to 40 years. This term was selected on
the basis of economic and antitrust considerations, not technical
limitations. The NRC has a process in place for renewing an
operating license for up to an additional 20 years of plant life
if certain requirements are met for plant operations.
The deadline for hearing requests is 30 days from the date of
publication of the Federal Register notice, expected shortly. By
that time, requests must be filed by anyone whose interest might
be affected by the license renewal and who wishes to participate
as a party to the proceeding. Requests for a hearing must be
filed with the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. They may also be delivered
to the NRC Public Document Room at 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland. A copy of the request should also be sent to
the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, by FAX to (301)
415-3725, or by e-mail to: OGCmailcenter@nrc.gov
[OGCmailcenter@nrc.gov] and to Dr. Robert C. Mecredy, Vice
President, Nuclear Operations Rochester Gas and Electric
Corporation, 89 East Avenue, Rochester, NY 14649.
Additional information about the opportunity for hearing may be
found in the Federal Register notice. Copies of the license
renewal application will be available at the NRC web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications.html
and are also available through the NRC's Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS). Help in using ADAMS is
available by contacting the NRC Public Document Room staff at
301-415-4737 or 1-800-397-4209, or by sending a message to
pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] via e-mail. The application is
available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room in
Rockville, Md.
In addition, a copy of the license renewal application is
available at the Rochester Public Library, in Rochester, N.Y.,
and the Ontario Public Library, in Ontario, N.Y.
Privacy Statement | Site Disclaimer
Last revised Wednesday, September 25, 2002
*****************************************************************
14 Canada: Lepreau refurbishing in question
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 Back The Halifax Herald Limited
The Canadian Press
New Brunswick's Public Utilities Board's failure to back upgrades
at Point Lepreau nuclear plant is being heard as a possible death
knell for the industry in Canada.
Lepreau refurbishing in question
$845m upgrade financially risky, not in public's interest, board
says By Chris Morris / The Canadian Press
Fredericton - The era of nuclear energy in Atlantic Canada soon
may be at an end.
New Brunswick's Public Utilities Board has rejected a plan to
refurbish the aging Point Lepreau nuclear plant, saying the
proposed $845-million upgrade is financially risky and not in the
public's interest. While the board's decision is only a
recommendation for NB Power, the provincial Crown utility that
owns and operates Point Lepreau, critics said Tuesday it's the
kiss of death for Atlantic Canada's only nuclear power plant -
and possibly for Canada's nuclear industry as a whole.
"The Canadian nuclear program has no future, either though
exports or through domestic use," said David Martin, nuclear
energy adviser to the Sierra Club of Canada.
"We will never see another new reactor built in Canada. The only
question we face now is this issue of rehabilitation of old
reactors." David Coon of the New Brunswick Conservation Council,
an environmental group that intervened against the refurbishment,
wants the province the begin mothballing Lepreau when it reaches
the end of its life in 2006. "For the first time, we are looking
at the possibility of a nuclear-free Atlantic Canada," Coon said.
"My children are not going to have to live under the spectre of a
potential nuclear accident." The 18-year-old Point Lepreau
reactor, a 630-kilowatt model located in southern New Brunswick,
was designed as a showpiece of Canadian Candu know-how and was
used by the industry as a demonstrator for the export market.
However, during the past decade the prematurely aging plant has
experienced more than its share of expensive breakdowns and
repairs. The renovations proposed by NB Power are more extensive
than any ever undertaken in Canada and are designed to keep the
reactor running for another 25 years.
Ken Little, a vice-president at the utility, said NB Power isn't
prepared, at this point, to pull the plug on Lepreau. He said the
Public Utilities Board urged NB Power to take another look at
building a plant powered by natural gas rather than refurbishing
Lepreau. But Little said there are no guarantees of a long-term
gas supply from offshore Nova Scotia.
"Is the gas option even real?" he said, noting that New Brunswick
recently lost its case with the National Energy Board for a
Canada-first gas policy. Jeannot Volpe, New Brunswick's energy
minister, said the province will wait and see if there are any
private interests ready to act as white knights and salvage Point
Lepreau.
The provincial government did not support the refurbishment
proposal by NB Power, saying there are too many questions about
costs, potential delays and performance guarantees from Atomic
Energy of Canada Ltd., the federal Crown agency that would carry
out the renovation.
Copyright © 2002 The Halifax Herald Limited
*****************************************************************
15 Indian Point NUKE PLANT TEST BRINGS PROTESTS
NYPOST.COM Regional News:
September 25, 2002 -- A phony crisis at the Indian Point 2
nuclear power plant drew real protesters yesterday - complaining
that the facility's existing evacuation plan was insufficient.
Scores of observers from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and
the Federal Emergency Management Agency were on hand to evaluate
how plant workers and county officials reacted to the "emergency"
as a series of escalating "problems" led to an "evacuation" order
for more than half of the surrounding 10-mile area.
Meanwhile, outside a fake press center more than 25 miles away at
the Westchester County Airport, about two dozen real
demonstrators carried umbrellas and signs that read "We're not
covered."
AP
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
*****************************************************************
16 Reactor test costs fuel debate
PalmBeachPost.com Home
Copyright © 2002, The Palm Beach Post. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
17 TVA gets nod to produce tritium for government at Watts Bar
The Oak Ridger Online -- State News --
12:36 p.m. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government has given the Tennessee Valley
Authority the approval to produce tritium, a gas that enhances
the explosive force of nuclear warheads.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced Tuesday that TVA
could produce the material for the government at the public power
company's Watts Barr plant near Spring City, Tenn.
The commission also is reviewing whether to allow TVA to produce
tritium at its Sequoyah plant near Chattanooga. Mark Padovan, the
NRC's lead manager for the project, predicted that approval would
come within a month. The government has not produced tritium
since 1988 when it shut down its last weapons reactor at the
Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C. Tritium decays over time,
and the government says it must be replenished periodically to
ensure the security and reliability of the nation's nuclear
weapons stockpile.
The Energy Department oversees the nuclear weapons stockpile for
the Department of Defense, and former Energy Secretary Bill
Richardson approved using a commercial reactor for tritium
production. But critics say that breaches the long-standing wall
between commercial and military uses of nuclear reactors. "It
crosses the imaginary line that separates the civilian nuclear
industry and military production in the U.S.," said Bob
Schaeffer, public education director for the Alliance For Nuclear
Accountability. "This is the first time that the U.S. is using a
civilian power reactor to make nuclear weapons material." The
tritium production is expected to begin next year. TVA will
produce the material in special rods, which will hold the isotope
until it can be extracted under high heat at a facility at the
Savannah River Site. ------
On the Net: TVA: http://www.tva.gov [http://www.tva.gov] / Energy
Department: HTTP://www.energy.gov [HTTP://www.energy.gov] /
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
18 NRC, FEMA Evaluating Emergency Response To Simulated Disaster At
Indian Point Nuke Plant
7Online.com:
(Harrison-WABC, September 24, 2002) — It is what many residents
who live near New York's Indian Point nuclear plant would call
their worst nightmare, an accident at the plant. But Tuesday's
emergency drill at the plant was ONLY a test, and the accident
was only simulated. The federal drill was done to rate the
readiness of those at the nuclear plant and officials in
surrounding towns. Tim Fleischer reports from Harrison with
details.
For the most part, you wouldn't even realize that there was an
emergency drill going on in and around Westchester County Tuesday
morning. There were no sirens, no evacuations, pretty much
everything being done is behind the scenes in offices and
emergency centers around the area. Since 9/11, we are told there
have been a number of changes to the responses in the event of a
problem at the Indian Point II nuclear power plant and Tuesday's
drill was designed to test the changes and the response plan. The
focus of part of the drill, conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and FEMA was Entergy's Indian Point nuclear plant,
where a simulated accident occurred Tuesday morning.
Bill Josiger, Entergy Special Projects Manager: "This is a drill.
This morning at 08:34, the operators at Indian Point unit II
experienced a loss of off-site electric power..."
The federal drill is also designed to engage the emergency
response by various agencies like the ones stationed at
Westchester County's emergency operations center.
Adelle Dowling, Westchester County Spokesperson: "This is a test,
the emergency alert system has been activated by chief officials
of Westchester, Rockland, Orange and Putnam Counties..."
The drill, which is the first of its kind done since the
September 11th attacks, comes amid concerns over the response
plans.
Andrew Spano, Westchester County Executive: "This is going to be
the most evaluated drill, I believe and so do a lot of others, in
the history of the United States."
Still, critics of the nuclear plant and the county's evacuation
plan believe the test is not adequate.
Alex Matthiessen, Riverkeeper: "I think it would be a good idea,
at the very least, to do some small level evacuation in a given
geographic area to at least try and demonstrate how an evacuation
from one area would take place." Others believe a full test is
impractical. Jim Steets, Entergy Spokesperson: "Effecting a
full-scale evacuation is probably a little too much to ask.
Businesses aren't going to want to shut down, people don't want
to be inconvenienced that way." The NRC was on hand at Indian
Point II, looking over the shoulders of workers Tuesday morning.
Both the NRC and FEMA are evaluating the emergency workers'
response to the simulation, and will be releasing a report
detailing how successful the drill was.
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
*****************************************************************
19 African gangs offer route to uranium
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian |
Suspicion falls on Congo and South Africa
James Astill in Nairobi and Rory Carroll in Johannesburg
Wednesday September 25, 2002 [http://www.guardian.co.uk]
Iraqi agents have been negotiating with criminal gangs in the
Democratic Republic of Congo to trade Iraqi military weapons and
training for high-grade minerals, possibly including uranium,
according to evidence obtained by the Guardian.
It comes as the dossier unveiled by Tony Blair accused Saddam
Hussein of trying to buy African uranium to give Iraq's weapons
programme a nuclear capability. The dossier did not identify any
country allegedly approached by Baghdad but security analysts
said the Congo was the likeliest, followed by South Africa.
"We know Saddam has been trying to buy significant quantities of
uranium from Africa, though we do not know whether he has been
successful," Mr Blair said. A delegation of five Iraqis was
arrested in Nairobi by the Kenyan secret service last November
while travelling to eastern Congo on fake Indian passports, a
western intelligence officer said.
Documents seen by the Guardian show that leaders of the
Mayi-Mayi, a brutal militia embroiled in the country's civil war,
visited Baghdad twice and offered diamonds and gold to the
Iraqis. Uranium was not mentioned in the documents but the
intelligence officer said the Mayi-Mayi would be able to obtain
the material in areas it controlled. Initial contact between
Baghdad and the militia was said to have been brokered by a
Sudanese general who offered Sudan as a conduit for Iraqi oil and
arms. Since US obtained uranium for its first atom bombs from a
mine in the Kivu region, foreign governments have vied for the
Congo's uranium. In 1998 North Korea sent military trainers to
Shinkolobe under an agreement with the country's former
president, Laurent Kabila. They were swiftly withdrawn under
American pressure after it was alleged that they had reopened a
uranium mine.
Citing sources in Brussels, French radio reported last year that
Mobutu loyalists had moved 10kg (22lbs) of uranium bars to Libya,
en route to a "rogue state" believed to be Iraq.
Some analysts were sceptical. "That uranium mine is an old story
but as far as I know it has been closed for some time. I don't
know of any rumours or information regarding the Iraqis being
involved," Jakkie Cilliers, head of the Institute for Security
Studies in Pretoria, said. Dr Cilliers was also doubtful of
Baghdad obtaining uranium from South Africa. "As a past nuclear
power we are an obvious suspect but it is un likely because the
programme was dismantled under the observation of the the
International Atomic Energy Agency."
In the 1980s South Africa's apartheid rulers built several
nuclear bombs and, according to a BBC investigation, a year
before halting the weapons programme in 1989 they traded enriched
uranium with Saddam Hussein. The BBC cited an anonymous South
African intelligence official who said that Washington, which
favoured Saddam at the time, approved the deal. "About 50kg were
sold to the Iraqis. The Americans gave the green light for the
deal," the official was quoted as saying.
South Africa signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty in 1991
and dismantled its en richment capabilities but Dr Cilliers did
not rule out the possibility of rogue officials or former
officials dealing with Iraq after that date.
Yesterday was a national holiday in South Africa and no
government spokesman was available to respond to Mr Blair's
speech. Africa produces a fifth of the world's uranium. Niger,
Namibia, South Africa and Gabon have exported the material. Last
year Niger was the biggest producer at 3,096 tonnes.
At least four other countries - Congo, Zambia, Central African
Republic and Botswana - are said to have exploitable deposits.
Most of the deposits are mined by European and South African
companies and end up exported to Japan and France.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
*****************************************************************
20 NRC Advises Nuclear Licensees to Review Supplemental Security
Measures as Nation Returns to Yellow Homeland Security
NRC: News Release - 2002 - 110 -
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs
Telephone: 301/415-8200 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail:
opa@nrc.gov [opa@nrc.gov] www.nrc.gov
No. 02-110 September 24, 2002
Consistent with todays announcement by Attorney General John
Ashcroft that the Homeland Security threat level has been lowered
from Orange (High) to Yellow (Elevated), the NRC is advising
nuclear power plants and other nuclear facilities to implement
the appropriate protective measures consistent with the NRCs
corresponding Level 3 threat level. Supplemental security
measures implemented September 10, following the establishment of
an Orange threat condition, are no longer necessary. On September
10, 2002, the NRC advised licensees to implement the actions
specified for the Level 4 threat level of the agencys Threat
Advisory and Protective Measures System to counter and respond to
terrorist threats.
Although the NRC has received no information concerning either a
general or specific credible threat to U.S. nuclear facilities or
materials, the agency continues to monitor threats and other
related developments as it coordinates its activities with other
licensees, Federal agencies, and local and State law enforcement
authorities.
In addition, the NRC will maintain heightened security measures,
consistent with the Yellow threat level, at its headquarters in
Rockville, Maryland, and at its four regional offices.
The NRCs threat Level 3 corresponds to the Homeland Security
Yellow threat level.
Privacy Statement | Site Disclaimer
Last revised Tuesday, September 24, 2002
*****************************************************************
21 NIOSH Federal Register Notice: Advisory Board on Radiation and
Worker Health:
Meeting [Federal Register: September 25, 2002 (Volume 67, Number
186)] [Notices] [Pages 60240-60241]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health Advisory Board on Radiation and
Worker Health: Meeting
In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC) announces the following committee meeting.
Name: Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH).
Times and Dates: 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m., October 15, 2002; 8 a.m.-5
p.m., October 16, 2002.
Place: Inn at Loretto, 211 Old Santa Fe Trail, Santa Fe, New
Mexico 87501, telephone 505/988-5531, fax 505/984-7988.
Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available.
The meeting room accommodates approximately 65 people.
Background: The Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health
("the Board") was established under the Energy Employees
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 to advise
the President, through the Secretary of Health and Human Services
(HHS), on a variety of policy and technical functions required to
implement and effectively manage the new compensation program.
Key functions of the Board include providing advice on the
development of probability of causation guidelines which have
been promulgated by HHS, advice on methods of dose reconstruction
which have also been promulgated as an interim final rule,
evaluation of the validity and quality of dose reconstructions
conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) for qualified cancer claimants, and advice on the
addition of classes of workers to the Special Exposure Cohort.
In December 2000, the President delegated responsibility for
funding, staffing, and operating the Board to HHS, which
subsequently delegated this authority to CDC. NIOSH implements
this responsibility for CDC. The charter was signed on August 3,
2001, and in November 2001, the President completed the
appointment of an initial roster of 10 Board members. In April
2002 and August 2002, the President appointed additional members
to ensure more balanced representation on the Board. The initial
tasks of the Board are to review and provide advice on the
proposed and interim rules of HHS.
Purpose: This board is charged with (a) providing advice to the
Secretary, HHS, on the development of guidelines under Executive
Order 13179; (b) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the
scientific validity and quality of dose reconstruction efforts
performed for this Program; and (c) upon request by the
Secretary, HHS, advising the Secretary on whether there is a
class of employees at any Department of Energy facility who were
exposed to radiation but for whom it is not feasible to estimate
their radiation dose, and on whether there is reasonable
likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the
health of members of this class.
Matters To Be Discussed: Agenda for this meeting will focus on
dose reconstruction contract award information, dose
reconstruction examples, site profile development, residual
contamination study, Board member interaction with claimants, and
the dose reconstruction workgroup report.
Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
Contact Person for More Information: Larry Elliott, Executive
Secretary, ABRWH, NIOSH, CDC, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45226, telephone 513/841-4498, fax 513/458-7125.
The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices
pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee
management activities for both the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry. Dated: September 18, 2002 John C. Burckhardt Acting
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention
Certifying Officer [FR Doc. 02-24303 Filed 9-24-02; 8:45 am]
*****************************************************************
22 Colorado: Cotter public comment period extended* *to Oct. 2*
Welcome to The Pueblo Chieftain Online
The Pueblo Chieftain
*Wednesday September 25th, 2002*
By TRACY HARMON
/The Pueblo Chieftain/
*CANON* *CITY* - The state health department has extended a
public comment period on worker-safety issues associated with
Cotter Corp. uranium mill.
The three-week comment period was to have ended Tuesday, but
instead comment will be accepted through Oct. 2. Colorado
Department of Public Health acting Director Doug Benevento
granted the extension at the request of Canon City area residents
who are interested in submitting comments.
Comment should focus on worker safety issues which were the
primary reason for the department's July 9 suspension of plant
operations at the Cotter mill. Issues include respiratory
protection for workers, sampling of workers' exposure to uranium
via internal body testing as well as equipment and clothing
tests.
Public comments will be considered before the department makes a
final decision on whether to allow the plant to resume full
operations. The department has agreed to allow Cotter to do
limited processing of 1,500 cubic yards of uranium material from
Cotter's Schwartzwalder Mine near Golden; and 825 cubic yards of
calcium fluoride from the Honeywell facility in Metropolis, Ill.,
to gauge whether Cotter's proposed remedies will meet industry
standards.
"Before we permit the plant to resume full operations, we want to
thoroughly review all of the citizen comments and to review the
plant's operating procedures during this test period," Benevento
said. "The worker safety issues must be resolved to the
department's full satisfaction before we can allow full
operations to occur."
The public can view Cotter-related documentation at the Canon
City Public Library, 516 Macon Ave.; or log on to
www.cdphe.state.co.us/lr/lrhom.asp
. Written comments on
worker safety issues can be sent to Jake Jacobi, manager,
Radiation Services Program, Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment, 8100 Lowry Blvd., Denver, CO 80230; or via
e-mail to jake.jacobi@state.co.us.
*****************************************************************
23 UK: Residents fight university plan for radioactive store buildings
Scotsman.com
Wed 25 Sep 2002
/JAMES DOHERTY/
RESIDENTS in Glasgow?s historic university district staged a
public meeting last night to garner support against proposals for
the building of two research blocks, which they claim amount to
?architectural vandalism?.
More than 250 people who live in the shadow of the proposed £29
million development by Glasgow University met at Hillhead library
to vent their anger at the plans, claiming the new blocks would
be used to house dangerous radioactive materials and destroy
views across the gothic skyline.
However, representatives from the university dismissed claims
that the planned cardiovascular research and biomedical research
centres would detract from the built legacy which surrounds the
site in University Avenue.
A coalition of community groups, residents? associations and
businesses and politicians have formed West End Stands Together
(WEST) to oppose the plans, which will be considered by the city
council next month.
Support for the WEST group has already seen at least 372 letters
of objection against the proposals.
Bill Burke, the co-ordinator of WEST, said the strength of
feeling against the proposals remained high, despite what he
claimed were ?cosmetic? changes to the proposed structures.
He said: ?We are opposed to the huge intensity of this
development. People are in a state of disbelief.
?This is the wrong site for a large invasive, dominating and
intensive industrial structure. This development and its
undoubted 24-hour working would have a seriously detrimental
impact on people?s lives.?
Mr Burke expressed serious concern that the university would
stock sealed radioactive sources within the new buildings, after
it was claimed at the weekend that Scottish universities,
including Glasgow, could not afford to dispose of the hazardous
materials safely.
WEST claims that firefighters were hindered last year in their
attempts to tackle the devastating fire which destroyed the
university?s Bower building, by the removal of radioactive
sources.
Professor Robin Leake, the university vice-principal for estates,
who addressed the meeting, said: ?It is more expensive to dispose
of radioactivity than it is to buy it in the first place, but the
sort of radioactivity that we use for biomedical research is
almost entirely a very weak emitter.
?I used to say that you could put it on your bread and butter and
eat it and it wouldn?t do you any harm.?
Prof Leake said there were agreed levels where the radioactivity
could be disposed down an ordinary sink with running water.
He added that Scotland?s health would benefit from having two new
centres of excellence to carry out important research into heart
disease and other illnesses.
Francis Shennan, the vice-chairman of the Ashton Road Families?
and Residents? Association, said: ?The scale and combination of
chemicals, radiological material and gases required for these
research centres mean they should not be kept in a heavily
populated area.?
©2002 scotsman.com | contact
*****************************************************************
24 NRC admits it erred in public notice on NFS project
Elizabethton Star - Online Edition
By Kathy Helms-Hughes STAR STAFF khughes@starhq.com
Staff with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have admitted that a
notice published July 9 in the Federal Register failed to
properly inform the public of opportunity for a hearing regarding
Nuclear Fuel Services Inc.'s proposed project to turn bomb-grade
uranium into fuel for nuclear reactors.
In Thursday's response to a memorandum and order issued Sept. 11
by Presiding Judge Alan S. Rosenthal of the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board Panel, NRC staff said that to remedy the defect,
a "revised notice to properly notice both the license amendment
application and the opportunity for hearing" will be published in
the Federal Register. No publication date was given.
Judge Rosenthal and Judge Richard F. Cole, special assistant,
were designated Sept. 3 to hear concerns submitted by David and
Trudy Wallack of Greeneville and by Greeneville actress Park
Overall on behalf of State of Franklin Group/Sierra Club, Friends
of the Nolichucky River Valley Inc., Oak Ridge Environmental
Peace Alliance, and Tennessee Environmental Council. Fifteen
local citizens represented by Greeneville attorney Todd Chapman
also filed separate petitions.
Attorneys for NFS asked the NRC to deny petitioners' requests for
a hearing, stating that none of them had demonstrated "standing"
or "injury in fact." Judge Rosenthal said, however, that before
NFS's objections could be considered, a preliminary matter had to
be addressed.
"Although the Federal Register notice in question summarized in
some detail the content of the Environmental Assessment that had
led to the issuance of the Finding of No Significant Impact ...
there was an inadequate identification in the notice of the
license amendment application itself.
"The notice neither set forth the date upon which the notice had
been filed or supplied any information as to how the content of
the application might be located. This omission raises
troublesome questions," Rosenthal said. He gave the NRC staff
until Sept. 19 to answer a set of questions regarding the notice.
Jennifer Euchner and David Cummings, counsel for NRC staff, said:
"Although the notice of the Environmental Assessment (EA) and the
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was adequate, the notice
of opportunity for hearing was inadequate in that it failed to
provide appropriate notice of the license amendment application."
NFS filed an application for amendment of its Special Nuclear
Materials license Feb. 28, 2002, requesting authorization to
construct and operate a Uranyl Nitrate Storage Building at its
Erwin facility as part of the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium (BLEU)
project.
On July 9, the NRC published in the Federal Register notice that
it was considering the license amendment and had prepared an
Environmental Assessment and had made a Finding of No Significant
Impact in support of the action. "The notice of opportunity for
hearing, however, should not have been published with the notice
of the EA and FONSI," NRC counsel said. "Rather, the notice ...
should have been published upon receipt and docketing of the
license amendment application."
NRC attorneys said the July 9 notice "failed to provide the
necessary information with regard to the license amendment
application, and failed to identify the scope of the opportunity
for hearing." While the failure "was not truly inadvertent, it
was the unintended consequence of an inappropriate notice."
Attorneys agreed with the judge that information regarding the
license amendment application could have assisted petitioners in
developing pertinent areas of concern. The revised notice will
describe the proposed action and identify all related
information, documents and references, attorneys said.
While petitioners do not have to file additional requests for a
hearing after publication of the revised notice, they may wish to
supplement their original hearing requests, according to NRC.
In the Sept. 11 memorandum and order, Judge Rosenthal also asked
NRC staff whether the entire license amendment application was
available for public inspection.
According to NRC counsel, a non-proprietary version of the
original Feb. 28 license amendment application was filed May 9
and is available for inspection on NRC's Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System, or ADAMS, under Accession No.
ML021350445. An attempt to verify the document through ADAMS led
to a 36-page NFS Integrated Safety Analysis Summary for storing
low-enriched uranyl nitrate solutions at the BLEU Complex. The
original Special Nuclear Material license contains more than 600
pages.
NRC counsel also said NFS submitted a revised license amendment
application Aug. 23, under ADAMS Accession No. ML022610016.
Searches on Friday and Saturday for a document by that number
returned the result: "Nothing found."
NRC counsel said all other documents related to or referenced in
the license amendment application or the EA also are available
for public inspection. No accession numbers were given.
NFS took down its web site, which contained some information on
the BLEU project, following an "Orange" alert issued prior to
Sept. 11. Tony Treadway, spokesman for NFS, said the site was
removed as a result of the alert notice by the federal government
"for all nuclear facilities to take down their web sites for a
while." When asked why no other facilities had taken down their
web sites, Treadway said: "I'm only the spokesperson for NFS. We
were asked to take the site down for a while by the NRC as part
of the orange alert. We complied with their request. That's all I
can tell you." The site is still down.
NFS will meet with the NRC in Rockville, Md., on Sept. 30 to
discuss an amendment application for the Blended Low-Enriched
Uranium Preparation Facility. Attendance at that meeting is
closed to members of the public "due to the sensitive nature of
information to be discussed ..."
Copyright © 1996 - 2002 Elizabethton Newspapers, Inc. Direct
questions or comments to webmas [webmaster@starhq.com]
ter@starhq.com [webmaster@starhq.com] Elizabethton Newspapers,
Inc., 300 Sycamore Street Elizabethton, Tennessee 37643 -
423.542.4151
*****************************************************************
25 Nuclear waste alchemy praised
Buffalo News -
WEST VALLEY
By JOHN F. BONFATTI News Staff Reporter 9/25/2002
Speaker after speaker called what has happened at the West Valley
Demonstration Project groundbreaking, and they were right.
An unprecedented state-federal partnership used pioneering
technology to turn deadly, liquid, radioactive waste into a
manageable solid, an accomplishment the project celebrated at
ceremonies Tuesday marking the official end of that process,
called vitrification.
"We've turned a potential environmental threat into an
environmental success story," Alice Williams, the project manager
for the Department of Energy, told several hundred workers,
officials and local citizens who helped push for the cleanup.
"We became the first project in the nation to complete a
vitrification program, and the first to demonstrate that high
level waste can be handled safely," she said.
The ceremony marked the end of vitrification, in which 60,000
gallons of dangerous waste that was sitting in decaying
underground tanks was pumped out, treated and blended into molten
glass. It's a process that the DOE is now utilizing in much
larger facilities elsewhere. Twenty years after the federal law
establishing the project was passed, and six years after the
first radioactive liquid was transformed into radioactive glass,
more than 24 million curies of radioactivity (by comparison, 7.3
million curies were released at the Chernobyl atomic plant
accident) were solidified in 631 tons of glass contained in 277
stainless steel canisters. The liquid in the tanks represented
the most urgent threat at West Valley, which operated as the
country's only commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing center in the
late 1960s and early 1970s. Had the waste escaped the tanks, it
could have found its way into nearby Cattaraugus Creek and,
eventually, Lake Erie.
But it isn't the only problem. The tanks still remain in the
ground. The process building, which will house the stainless
steel canisters until off-site storage is built, still stands, as
does the vitrification building. There are two large dumps filled
with radioactive materials and a plume of radioactive ground
water.
The state, through the New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority, and the federal government, through the
DOE, have engaged in as-yet unfruitful negotiations over future
cleanup and long-term stewardship of the site.
While enough communication between the parties has taken place to
forestall a threatened cut in federal funding, the two sides are
not close to reaching an agreement.
NYSERDA President Bill Flynn said the state presented a proposal
to the DOE several months ago but has not seen a reply. "I hope
the enthusiasm of today kick-starts like momentum for the
negotiations," he said.
Williams said she is not on the DOE negotiating team, which she
said was headed up by the DOE's Mark Frye. The parties are set to
meet for more negotiations in October.
e-mail: jbonfatti@buffnews.com [jbonfatti@buffnews.com]
Copyright 1999 - 2002 - The Buffalo News
[http://www.buffalonews.com/copyright.htm]
*****************************************************************
26 NC: County loses bid to block nuclear waste
heraldsun.com:
By Rob Shapard and Geoffrey Graybeal : The Herald-Sun
[rshapard@heraldsun.com] Sep 23, 2002 : 7:24 pm ET
HILLSBOROUGH -- Orange County has lost a case in the U.S. Court
of Appeals challenging the expanded storage of spent fuel at the
Shearon Harris nuclear plant.
The county had asked the federal appeals court in Washington,
D.C., about 15 months ago to halt the expansion of storage of
radioactive spent-fuel rods at Shearon Harris, which is in
southern Wake County. The court didn’t agree to an immediate
halt, and it did not hear oral arguments on the county’s request
until earlier this month. The court formally dismissed the
request on Thursday in a brief ruling. Progress Energy, which
owns CP&L, said in a statement on Monday that the ruling
confirmed what the company has argued all along, that its storage
plan was safe.
"The court clearly validated the decision that was made with such
careful deliberation and study by the experts at the NRC and
ASLB," said William D. Johnson, executive vice president and
general counsel for Progress Energy. "The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the independent Atomic Safety & Licensing Board
studied our plan extensively for more than two years and found it
to be safe and responsible." Orange County Commissioners Chairman
Barry Jacobs said the ruling is more proof that the "deck is
stacked against the public" in terms of getting a "neutral forum"
to discuss the risks.
Jim Warren of the N.C. Waste Awareness & Reduction Network
(WARN), a 14-year-old Triangle-based nuclear watchdog group, also
said the process is rigged against the public. He said the NRC is
biased in favor of the nuclear industry.
"It’s tragic that we’ve got a situation with such a large
stockpile of high-level nuclear waste and the NRC has a very
narrow view looking at it," Warren said. "Top experts, who are
honest and enormously qualified, presented legitimate concerns
that have never been aired out. Because the NRC is so protective
of the industry, it refused to listen." C.S. Hinnant, senior vice
president and chief nuclear officer for Progress Energy, said the
company’s nuclear plants generate about half of the electricity
used by customers each year. "This ruling allows us to continue
storing used nuclear fuel in a safe and proven way until the
federal government meets its obligation to create a permanent
national storage facility," Hinnant said about the appeals
decision.
Diane Curran, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney who has
represented Orange County, said Monday that she hasn’t yet spoken
with county officials about possible next steps in the matter.
The dismissal by the federal appeals court was the latest step in
a legal battle that Orange County launched about 3½ years ago.
In December 1998, CP&L asked the NRC to amend its license for the
Shearon Harris plant so that the company could use two unused
pools at the plant for storing rods of spent nuclear fuel. The
company already was storing rods in two other pools at the plant.
It started using the third pool last year, and the company has
said it wouldn’t need to begin using the fourth pool for about 15
years. Alarmed by the planned expansion of storage capacity,
Orange officials decided to intervene in early 1999.
The county has argued a number of technical points, but one of
its key contentions is that the NRC should have required a
full-fledged environmental impact statement on CP&L’s storage
plan. The county argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals that an
evidentiary hearing should be held on that question, at which
experts could give testimony. Throughout the county’s
intervention, decisions by the NRC staff and the ASLB
consistently have gone against the county.
The ASLB is an independent board, but it does have a connection
to the NRC. Three ASLB judges came to Raleigh to hear arguments
on the question of an environmental impact statement. In December
2000, while their decision was pending, the NRC staff formally
approved the license amendment for Shearon Harris. The ASLB later
ruled against Orange County. The county then asked the five
commissioners of the NRC to review the case, but they turned down
that request last year.
"Every step of the way the system has been set up to thwart an
open evaluation," Jacobs said. He said the county’s experts have
not yet been allowed to testify.
"We’d like to see an honest analysis of the risks of wet pool
storage of spent fuel rods in an age of terrorism," Jacobs said.
"We’ve not gotten it. What we’ve proposed is an honest and full
analysis of the current plan, which we haven’t gotten and
apparently aren’t likely to get." Curran said she hasn’t seen a
hard copy of the appeals decision, but it was read to her on
Friday. "I certainly don’t agree with the decision," Curran said.
"I still believe very strongly that the [NRC] acted illegally and
did public safety a great disservice by denying Orange County a
hearing. "The county’s going to have to consider whether it’s
worthwhile to go forward," she said. "I just don’t know yet. The
thing that concerns me is that there isn’t a discussion of the
issues that the county raised. To say this has now been fully
addressed would be an exaggeration." Warren said that Orange
County should be applauded for its efforts. For its own part,
N.C. WARN has continued its campaign to stop shipment of
spent-fuel rods into the Shearon Harris nuclear plant. N.C. WARN
has a legal petition asking N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper to
use his authority over the corporation to get an injunction
against CP&L.
With the NRC’s apparent inactivity, it’s up to the state to stop
CP&L’s current procedures, Warren said.
"We’re very hopeful that [Cooper] will stand up and do the right
thing," he said.
: © 2002 The Durham Herald Company :
*****************************************************************
27 Utah: Radioactive Greed
The Salt Lake Tribune --
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
Some Utahns smell a missed business opportunity in the temporary
storage site for spent nuclear fuel on the Skull Valley
Reservation of the Goshutes. These Utahns think that if the state
is going to be saddled with a parking lot for high-level nuclear
waste, it should develop its own site somewhere else on state
land and reap the profits for state coffers.
The stench arising from this suggestion begins with greed. Think
of it this way. A small tribe of impoverished American Indians
who have been pushed off their ancestral lands and marginalized
by white civilization for about 150 years develops a hot business
prospect, and some white people want the state government to
snatch it away for itself. This kind of thinking is what turns
the words "business ethics" into an oxymoron.
But that's only half of the hypocrisy inherent in this proposal.
The other half is this:
The state government, from Gov. Mike Leavitt on down, has been
arguing ever since the Goshutes' project became public that the
waste is so dangerous that Utah will have none of it. Not now,
not ever. To his credit, the governor is sticking by his "over my
dead body" opposition.
If the state were to change its tune, if it were to say that if
Utah is going to be stuck with the stuff, it might as well
develop its own site and reap the profits, it would gut the
arguments about safety. It would be saying, "Well, the stuff is
terribly dangerous, but if you pay us enough money, we'll take
it."
None of this phases the advocates of the so-called Plan B, the
implication being that it should be the state's fall-back
position if and when the Goshutes win federal regulatory approval
for their storage facility. All the people like Utah Republican
Party Chairman Joe Cannon and lobbyist Nancy Sechrest can smell
is all that money going to a small band of Indians instead of the
state's treasury.
They argue that most Utahns will be put at risk by the shipments
of highly radioactive spent fuel rods that will make their way
through the state to the parking lot at Skull Valley, about 45
miles southwest of Salt Lake City. As a result, all should share
in the bounty that will come from payments to the entity that
hosts the site. The state also could provide a site that is even
more remote from Utah's urban population than Skull Valley.
Goodness knows the state could put the added money, perhaps
hundreds of millions of dollars, to good use in its schools.
But similar arguments about shared risk could be made about
hundreds of businesses that deal in dangerous materials. No one
is suggesting the state come up with an alternative scheme to
steal that business and its profits away. The Goshutes have taken
the risk and the political heat of developing this plan. If
successful, they deserve the fruits of their enterprise.
© Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on
*****************************************************************
28 Utah: State Leaders Assail 'Plan B' For Nuclear Waste Storage
The Salt Lake Tribune --
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
BY DAN HARRIE and JUDY FAHYS © 2002, THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE
Political insiders plotting to hijack a proposed high-level
nuclear waste storage site on tribal lands are drawing fire,
including charges of racism.
Utah Director of Indian Affairs Forrest Cuch, in an e-mail to
economic development officials and in a separate interview,
lashed out at the so-called Plan B waste project that could
derail a proposed waste site on the Skull Valley Goshute
Reservation in Tooele County.
"It is appalling to me and smacks of racism at its highest," Cuch
said Tuesday.
+ Family Feud: Goshutes Split Over Nuclear Waste Site (8/18/2002)
+ Hot Rod Ride: Nuclear Route A Bit Too Close For Comfort?
(8/25/2002) + For Goshutes, the Issue Has Always Been Simple:
Survival (9/1/2002) + This Is The Place For Waste (9/8/2002) +
N-Waste: Hot Material Piles Up With No Firm Solution in Sight
(9/15/02) + Officials Covet N-Waste Profits (9/22/02)
While personally opposed to the Skull Valley project, Cuch said
the Goshutes "have a sovereign right to pursue their interests .
. . . What I think as an American Indian is that this [Plan B] is
an outrage and selfishness and an abuse of power."
He was reacting to a proposal quietly explored last year by a
group including Utah Republican Chairman Joe Cannon to develop a
contingency site so that if nuclear waste storage in Utah were
inevitable, it could be located on remote state trust lands far
from population centers, with promises of bringing "billions" of
revenue to public schools.
The plan has gone nowhere because of fierce opposition by Gov.
Mike Leavitt, who on Monday told The Tribune he believes it would
be hypocritical to pursue a state alternative to the Goshute
plan. Still, some proponents continue exploring the issue with
state legislators and other groups.
The Goshutes have been working for more than a decade on plans
for an above-ground, temporary warehouse for spent nuclear-plant
fuels.
The $3.1 billion project is being financed and constructed by
Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of eight utility companies
eager for a storage facility before 2010, the year the U.S.
Energy Department plans to open its proposed national repository
at Yucca Mountain, Nev.
Gentler words: PFS project manager Scott Northard used gentler
words, but his meaning echoed Cuch's view. "It's unfortunate that
they would want to take this away from the tribe when they have
worked so hard on this for so many years," he said of Plan B.
Pointing to the stifling poverty of the Goshutes, Cuch said the
state cannot simultaneously oppose the tribe's proposal for
nuclear waste while trying to figure out a way to develop its own
competing project to bring money into state coffers.
"It's dehumanizing," he said. "Proponents of Plan B are saying we
do not count, [that] American Indians do not even exist -- and
that's appalling to me."
Skull Valley Tribal Chairman Leon Bear did not return telephone
calls seeking comment.
Leavitt's criticisms were more subdued, but still pointed for a
politician normally cautious in his choice of words.
"It is incredibly naive and hypocritical for us as a state to be
pursuing waste," said Leavitt, who has vehemently opposed at
least three proposals for high-level waste storage in his state,
the one in Skull Valley, one in San Juan County and one in
northern Utah.
He said Plan B was naive because chances of such an alternative
being developed or approved in the next few years are almost nil.
"I'm doing everything I can to obstruct it and to ensure that it
doesn't happen," the governor said. "And I'm not doing it because
of the money. I'm doing it because it's unsafe, and we don't want
it here."
However, Leavitt acknowledges he has met on more than one
occasion with proponents of Plan B, including lobbyist Nancy
Sechrest, with some of the discussion touching on specific sites
in eastern Utah.
He also allows it is conceivable contacts may have been made with
officials of the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration.
Still, the governor dismisses the idea as a back-of-the-envelope
brainstorm that is "not even a serious proposal."
David Bird, attorney for the consortium, notes that the
involvement of Joe Cannon and former state Republican Executive
Director Spencer Stokes in the Plan B discussions, "has to be an
embarrassment to the governor . . . . It makes a mockery of the
arguments that they've been making all along."
Meanwhile, others also question the assumptions of Plan B.
Brian O'Connell is director of the nuclear waste program office
for the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
He notes that the Nuclear Waste Fund is reserved only for costs
associated with a permanent waste repository. Any change in that
restriction, O'Connell said, "would be an uphill battle."
Joe Strolin of the State of Nevada's Nuclear Projects Office,
shared that view, adding that promoting Plan B in Washington,
D.C., would mean acts of Congress to authorize the new site,
appropriations votes to fund it and the full support of the Utah
congressional delegation.
"But I can't imagine them coming out for this," he said. "It
would be political suicide."
Strolin also suggested that Plan B proponents are "being
snookered," buying into outlandish promises.
The massive federal waste fund is expected to max out at $30
billion, while $9 billion of it already has been spent and future
demands on it are expected to range between $59 billion and $100
billion.
'Obscene numbers': "This is typical of the nuke industry's guys,"
said Strolin. "They dangle obscenely large numbers in front of
people."
He added that another problem with "Plan B" is how it undercuts
the governor's Goshute project fight. The state's willingness to
negotiate with the federal government for its own high-level
waste site would "imply consent" to the project and transform the
dispute about high-level waste into a negotiation," he said.
"If your governor changed his position one bit on this issue, you
would have a credibility problem in terms of pursuing litigation
in the Goshute case," said Strolin. "If this were happening in
our state, our governor would be doing the same thing your
state's governor is doing. He would oppose it tooth and nail."
PFS's Northard said proponents of the Skull Valley project are
not surprised about Plan B.
"It just goes to prove that, if you strip away the politics,
there are a lot of people who believe this can be done safely and
provide economic opportunities for the local communities that
host the facility," Northard said.
This notion was shared by Goshute tribal attorney Scott York, who
added that any competing project was "behind the 8-ball" in terms
of timing and the pursuit of storage-site customers.
"I can't see how the state can back any other competing storage
facility without inferring that it's just not all right for the
Goshutes to store fuel there, when I don't think they believe
that."
Lisa Gue, anti-nuclear activist with Washington, D.C.-based
interest group Public Citizen, also criticized Plan B.
"There's always someone out there looking to make a buck, but it
makes no sense to negotiate on a deal that would make central
Utah the dumping ground for the nation's nuclear waste," she
said. "That's a losing proposition no matter who's proposing it."
Proponents of Plan B say they, too, oppose storage of high-level
nuclear waste in Utah. But they argue that if it is going to
come, anyway, the state would be better off putting the stuff on
state trust lands, far from the populous Wasatch Front, where it
could bring revenues and state oversight to the project.
Those behind the contingency speak of potentially "billions" of
dollars in benefit to the state.
dharrie@sltrib.com
fahys@sltrib.com
© Copyright 2002, The Salt Lake Tribune All material found on
*****************************************************************
29 Colo. Cotter public comment period extended to Oct. 2
The Pueblo Chieftain Online - Wednesday September 25th, 2002
[The Pueblo Chieftain]
By TRACY HARMON The Pueblo Chieftain
CANON CITY - The state health department has extended a public
comment period on worker-safety issues associated with Cotter
Corp. uranium mill. The three-week comment period was to have
ended Tuesday, but instead comment will be accepted through Oct.
2. Colorado Department of Public Health acting Director Doug
Benevento granted the extension at the request of Canon City area
residents who are interested in submitting comments.
Comment should focus on worker safety issues which were the
primary reason for the department's July 9 suspension of plant
operations at the Cotter mill. Issues include respiratory
protection for workers, sampling of workers' exposure to uranium
via internal body testing as well as equipment and clothing
tests.
Public comments will be considered before the department makes a
final decision on whether to allow the plant to resume full
operations. The department has agreed to allow Cotter to do
limited processing of 1,500 cubic yards of uranium material from
Cotter's Schwartzwalder Mine near Golden; and 825 cubic yards of
calcium fluoride from the Honeywell facility in Metropolis, Ill.,
to gauge whether Cotter's proposed remedies will meet industry
standards. "Before we permit the plant to resume full operations,
we want to thoroughly review all of the citizen comments and to
review the plant's operating procedures during this test period,"
Benevento said. "The worker safety issues must be resolved to the
department's full satisfaction before we can allow full
operations to occur."
The public can view Cotter-related documentation at the Canon
City Public Library, 516 Macon Ave.; or log on to
www.cdphe.state.co.us/lr/lrhom.asp
[http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/lr/lrhom.asp] . Written comments on
worker safety issues can be sent to Jake Jacobi, manager,
Radiation Services Program, Colorado Department of Public Health
and Environment, 8100 Lowry Blvd., Denver, CO 80230; or via
e-mail to jake.jacobi@state.co.us.
[jake.jacobi@state.co.us.]
©1996-2002 Chieftain.com [http://www.chieftain.com] The
Star-Journal Publishing Corp. Pueblo, Colorado U.S.A.
*****************************************************************
30 EDITORIAL: The expanding dump
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL: OPINION:
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
From its inception, the federal government's plan to dump nuclear
waste at Yucca Mountain has been rife with junk science, bogus
economics and accounting gimmickry that wouldn't pass a smell
test at Arthur Andersen. The most recent substantiation came from
the Department of Energy, which last week estimated that -- as
now envisioned -- the repository would be unable to hold about
two-thirds of the waste that's slated to be buried there.
Current plans are to convert liquid nuclear waste into glass logs
with a process known as vitrification, which poses fewer storage
and transportation risks than sealing the waste in casks that
could leak. But Energy Department spokesman Joe Davis confirmed
last week that the Yucca Mountain repository would be large
enough to hold only 8,275 of the roughly 24,000 glass logs that
are expected to be produced over the next three decades.
What about the remainder of the waste? Congress will have to
either authorize a second repository (guess where that one would
be located?) or simply expand the area of the Yucca dump.
But wait. There's more: The $67 billion price tag for vitrifying
liquid nuclear waste alone will exceed the estimated "life-cycle"
costs of the entire Yucca Mountain project by some $9 billion.
Expanding costs and a need for additional capacity reinforce the
arguments by state officials that the Yucca project's 80-pound,
9,000-page environmental impact statement is a joke. They're
right.
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002
*****************************************************************
31 Appeals court backs storage of nuclear waste
Tuesday, September 24, 2002
Associated Press
RALEIGH - A federal appeals court rejected Orange County's
lawsuit to stop Carolina Power &Light from storing more used
uranium fuel rods at a nearby nuclear power plant.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., ruled Thursday in
favor of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which found that the
chances of a nuclear accident were too remote to trigger a
wide-ranging hearing on the issue.
CP has been storing highly radioactive fuel assemblies from its
Brunswick Nuclear Power Plant near Southport and Robinson Nuclear
Power Plant near Hartsville, S.C., at its Shearon Harris facility
for the past year. The spent nuclear fuel is placed in a new,
water-filled cooling basin.
The NRC last year gave Raleigh-based CP permission to double its
storage capacity for spent reactor fuel at the Harris plant.
The utility was running out of room to store the
used-but-still-dangerous fuel assemblies from its three plants
because of the federal government's delay in opening a national
burial site for radio- active waste.
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the independent Atomic
Safety &Licensing Board studied our plan extensively for more
than two years and found it to be safe and responsible," Progress
Energy general counsel William D. Johnson said. CP, a utility
serving eastern North Carolina and South Carolina, is a
subsidiary of Progress Energy.
Orange County attorney Geoffry Gledhill and a county spokesman
did not return calls seeking comment Monday.
In 1998, CP asked the NRC for permission to use the Harris
plant's two unused storage pools, which were identical to two
pools the company already used to cool the spent fuel.
Orange County commissioners filed their federal lawsuit to stop a
project they said posed an unacceptable risk of a catastrophic
accident. County commissioners and environmental activists wanted
CP to store nuclear waste in dry casks rather than pools. CP
contends the technologies are equally safe.
The three-judge appeals panel heard arguments Sept. 5.
Copyright © 2002 Charleston.Net. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
32 Letter: Where is the fairness in plan to send us waste?
Las Vegas SUN
September 24, 2002
It should come as no surprise that the Department of Energy wants
to increase the size of its deliveries to the proposed
radioactive waste dump at Yucca Mountain. As things stand, Nevada
will receive unlimited radioactive waste, with no compensation.
Despite assurances that Nevada residents are safe, adding
additional waste adds to the risk. We simply do not know where
the limits are, as our state continues to run up a high budget
deficit, and we continue to be exploited by the federal
government.
As this new proposal of additional waste comes forward, Nevada
residents face additional risks, with no opportunity to say
"enough is enough." Why should this state be singled out to
become the national radioactive waste dump? As things stand,
there is nothing to negotiate. We get unlimited nuclear waste in
order to make the residents of other states feel safe. Where is
the equity or fairness in this plan?
ERIC STEFIK
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
33 Yucca a source of pride for Bush
Las Vegas SUN
Today: September 25, 2002 at 11:08:42 PDT
Waste site extolled as environmental victory
By Benjamin Grove
WASHINGTON -- In a draft document touting President Bush's
environmental accomplishments, the White House says Yucca
Mountain will protect public health and safety and "should be
able to meet EPA's radiological protection standards."
The 32-page draft called "The Bush Administration's Environmental
Accomplishments" is an update of a list released last spring that
chronicles Bush's progress on lands, water and air quality
issues, said a White House source who spoke on the condition of
anonymity. The earlier version was made public and distributed to
reporters at a Senate hearing in March, the source said.
The document has not been formally released and is subject to
change, the source said. It is designed to focus attention on
Bush for positive environmental initiatives. When completed, it
likely would be posted on the White House's website, the source
said.
The document, stamped with "Draft -- Not for Distribution," is
circulating among congressional offices this week and was
obtained by the Sun. "The designation of a site for a repository
for this material is environmentally important because it is
critical to our ability to clean up former defense sites around
the country as well as to retaining nuclear power," the document
says.
Nuclear power produces no greenhouse gases, and is a clean and
reliable source of electricity, the document says.
More than 20 years and $4 billion in scientific study demostrate
Yucca is "scientifically and technically suitable for
development," the document says. "Yucca Mountain is a
geologically stable site, positioned in a closed groundwater
basin, isolated on federally controlled land, housed
approximately 800 feet underground, and located farther from any
metropolitan area than the great majority of less secure
temporary nuclear waste storage sites that exist today," the
document says.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who has led critics of Bush's
environmental policies, laughed at the White House draft. Reid
reasserted an old argument that waste will continue to pile up at
power plants as long as plants operate; Yucca Mountain would
merely become one more waste site. "It's a joke," said Reid, the
top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee.
"Every environmental group in America opposed Yucca."
Yucca Mountain, a site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas where the
Energy Department plans to construct a national dump for
America's most radioactive nuclear waste, is no victory for the
environment, Nevada lawmakers said. They have long argued that
factors including water flow inside the mountain, and earthquake
and volcano risks, make the site unsuitable. "If they are calling
that part of their clean energy environmental policy, then it
strikes me that if they really want to make it clean they need to
deal with the waste more responsibly than dumping it in the
desert," Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said Bush has been a "fantasitic"
president, but said he was "completely unimpressed" with Bush
listing Yucca as an environmental accomplishment. The Energy
Department used 20 years worth of bad science to mislead Bush
into believing the site is safe, he said.
"I simply disagree with the president on this issue," Gibbons
said. In a historic milestone in Yucca Mountain's 20-year
history, Bush in February approved the desert ridge as America's
high-level waste burial ground. Nevada Republican politicians
have distanced themselves from the president on the issue.
Careful not to lay harsh criticism on the president now, the
state's two GOP congressional candidates firmly disagreed that
Yucca Mountain is not good for the environment. Lynette Boggs
McDonald and Jon Porter say Bush's Yucca Mountain listing would
not tarnish their campaigns.
"I think voters in the district understand that I've been
fighting Yucca since 1985," Porter said.
Nevada politicians are on the same side when it comes to Yucca
and always have been, said Porter spokesman Mike Slanker.
"It's only been rhetoric from the Democrats who have tried to
cozy up local Republicans with (pro-Yucca) Republicans from other
states. But people are way too educated in Nevada for it to have
an effect on local candidates." Boggs McDonald spokesman Jack
Finn said, "When it comes to Yucca Mountain, voters know Lynette
vehemently opposes it, she believes the fight is not over and she
disagrees with the president."
It's simply not credible for Nevada Democrats to suggest GOP
candidates in any way support Yucca, UNLV professor Ted Jelen
said, adding that the Bush list won't hurt the Republicans.
"It might make them -- particularly Porter -- more circumspect
about taking campaign contributions (from pro-Yucca Republicans)"
Jelen said. "It might hurt them a little in fund raising."
As Election Day nears, voters overwhelmingly believe that it is
Nevada versus the rest of the United States in the Yucca fight,
said Pete Ernaut said, a longtime GOP adviser.
Bush likely considers Yucca a victory for the environment of the
other 49 states, Ernaut added. "For us, it's terrible."
Nuclear plants produce about 20 percent of the nation's energy,
less than greenhouse-gas emitting coal and gas-fired plants, and
nuclear officials have long touted that clean-air benefit.
Approving Yucca Mountain was also a victory for the environment
because the project seeks to consolidate waste piling up at sites
nationwide in a single, secure repository, said Joe Colvin,
president and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the industry's
top lobby group.
But environmental groups scoff at Bush's record on the
environment. Listing Yucca was "absurd," said Lisa Gue, policy
analyst for Public Citizen. "Let's be clear: Yucca Mountain is a
plan to transport 77,000 tons of the most deadly material out
there to an earthquake zone, and it is certain to contaminate the
local drinking water supply," Gue said.
"This is not an environmental record the Bush administration
should be bragging about."
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
34 Taiwan: Residents want waste removed
The Taipei Times Online: 2002-09-25
TAKE AWAY: People living near Taiwan's three nuclear power plants
say Taipower has already broken promises to get rid of
radioactive material stored near their homes
By Chiu Yu-Tzu STAFF REPORTER
Dozens of residents from Taipei and Pingtung counties protested
at the opening session of the Legislative Yuan yesterday to
demand a reliable deadline for relocating radioactive waste
currently stored at three operational nuclear power plants in
their home counties.
Responding to the residents, officials of the state-run Taiwan
Power Company (Taipower), the country's only power supplier, said
the delay in building a final repository for low-level
radioactive waste could be attributed to society's persistent
rejection of radioactive waste.
At a pubic hearing held at the Legislative Yuan yesterday, Taipei
County residents of Wanli (¸U¨½), Chinshan (ª÷¤s), Shihmen
(¥Ûªù), and Sanchi (¤TªÛ) said they had been treated by the
government as fourth-class citizens, which were ranked after the
citizens of Taipei City, the rest of Taiwan and the remote
islands.
"The promise made by Taipower in 1996, which said a final
repository for radioactive waste would be completed by August
this year, is obviously broken," said Chinshan Township Chief Yu
Chung-yi (´å©¾¸q).
Yu said that residents were irritated by Taipower's failure to
build sucha repository, which would make it impossible to remove
radioactive waste temporarily stored at two operational nuclear
plants near their villages.
Sanchi Township Chief Hua Tsun-Shiang (ªá§ø²») said Taipower's
being perfunctory would eventually provoke residents, who plan to
carry out violent opposition to highlight the waste issue.
Taiwan's first and second nuclear plants, both in Taipei County,
began commercial operation in 1978 and 1981 respectively.
Currently, about 35,000 barrels of low-level radioactive waste
are stored at the First Nuclear Power Plant and 38,000 barrels at
the Second Nuclear Power Plant.
Last Monday, residents living near the two plants petitioned at
the Legislative Yuan, accusing Taipower of intending to turn the
two plants into final repositories for low-level radioactive
waste by building two new warehouses. Each warehouse, expected to
open in 2004, would be able store up to 40,000 barrels of waste.
Residents see the construction as Taipower's solution to the
long-unsolved problem of relocating 98,000 barrels of radioactive
waste which, since 1982, has been stored at an interim repository
on Orchid Island
Taipower's proposal to build a final waste repository in Wuchiu
(¯QËú), Kinmen County is still in the works. The Environmental
Protection Administration, however, has not approved Taipower's
environmental impact assessment for the site because of
environmental and national security concerns.
Furthermore, in May, the Atomic Energy Council said it would not
back Taipower's initiative to build the nation's first final
repository for low-level radioactive waste in Wuchiu because
difficulties pertaining to logistics and supervision made the
site impractical.
At the public hearing yesterday, Hengchun Township Chief Lin
Chin-yuan (ªLª÷·½) said locals would resist Taipower's proposal
to build a new warehouse for its waste at the Third Nuclear Power
Plant, where commercial operations began in 1984.
"This is only part of Taipower's problem. It doesn't even know
where to dump high-level radioactive waste, such as used fuel
rods," said Lin. He added that the state-run company needs to
offer residents more compensation before problems can be solved.
Residents' protest yesterday gained support from lawmakers with
diverse political backgrounds including the DPP, the KMT and the
PFP. Taipower President Lin Ching-chi (ªL²M¦N) said new
warehouses under construction were still interim storage places
for existing waste.
This story has been viewed 398 times.
URL=[http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2002/09/25/story/0000169361]
Copyright © 1999-2002 The Taipei Times. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
35 Nuke industry concentrates on licensing of Nevada dump
Las Vegas SUN
Today: September 25, 2002 at 11:08:43 PDT
By Benjamin Grove
WASHINGTON -- Now that Congress has approved Yucca Mountain,
nuclear industry officials have shifted their lobbying
priorities, a top industry leader says. In this "post-Yucca vote
era," top nuclear industry executives have two top goals, said
Joe Colvin, president and chief executive of the Nuclear Energy
Institute, the industry's leading lobby group.
One: prod lawmakers to approve a record $593 million budget for
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project for next year.
President Bush requested the amount but Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.,
has already moved to cut the funding. And two: help the Energy
Department compile an application for a license for Yucca
Mountain.
The Energy Department must apply for the license from the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission before construction can begin. The
department plans to submit the application in December 2004.
Colvin said the department needs help assembling the complex
application. The Chicago-based law firm of Winston &Strawn, hired
by the department to help compile the application, quit the job
last year after two years of work. The firm, which has a
department that specializes in nuclear industry regulation law,
left amid conflict-of-interest charges. The firm strongly denied
any conflict, but said the controversy was distracting.
The department should hire another firm to fill the expertise
vacuum left by Winston &Strawn's departure, Colvin said.
"I'm not sure we (NEI) can fill that," Colvin said. NEI
officials, who led the pro-Yucca lobbying effort in Congress, are
now keeping close tabs on how the Energy Department assembles the
application -- without taking an active role, Colvin said. The
department has been briefing top industry executives on the
progress of the application, Colvin said, adding that the
meetings were "informal" question-and-answer sessions.
Industry executives are offering limited input, Colvin said.
Industry officials have expertise to offer the department in the
area of NRC licensing because nuclear plants -- and their on-site
waste storage areas -- are licensed and regulated by the NRC.
"The effected entity in all this -- us -- doesn't have much say,"
Colvin said during an interview at an energy conference held
Tuesday in Washington. "The Department of Energy has no
experience in licensing under the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
licensing process. We are trying to look out for our own
interests."
Nevada lawmakers have always been suspicious of communication
between the pro-Yucca lobby group and the department precisely
because NEI has such a vested interest in the project earning NRC
approval. "It sounds like a conflict of interest, doesn't it?"
Reid said. "You can't have some private entity advising a
government agency on what to do." Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev.,
added, "The Department of Energy is, and always has been, in bed
with the nuclear industry." Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said the
nuclear industry is doing everything it can to assure the license
application is approved. "I never trust an industry that has some
self-interest," Ensign said. "That's why it's important we have
watchdogs.
That's why we have to be vigilant to make sure all the licensing
requirements are met." Nuclear industry officials also are
standing behind pro-Yucca lawmakers who have goaded the
department to submit the application as much as a year early,
Colvin said. He said the accelerated timeline is "doable,"
although department officials have repeatedly said December 2004
is a firm target. On another matter, Colvin said NEI is not yet
pushing lawmakers to increase the capacity of Yucca Mountain.
By law, the underground tunnels 1,000 feet below the surface
would hold no more than 77,000 tons of waste. But Yucca will be
full roughly 25 years after it opens. Energy Department officials
acknowledge that Yucca will have to be expanded -- or a second
dump will have to be constructed -- as long as power plants
continue to operate.
Still, NEI won't have to throw its lobbying weight behind that
issue for years, Colvin said.
The influential group has other more immediate Yucca-related
issues to advocate, Colvin said. Colvin said NEI eventually wants
Congress to take Yucca "off-budget."
As it stands, nuclear utility ratepayers, and the Defense
Department, contribute hundreds of millions of dollars each year
to a federal fund that ultimately will pay for Yucca. Lawmakers
allocate an annual Yucca budget to the Energy Department each
year from the fund. But nuclear industry officials would like to
see Congress set aside the money so that it is not subject to the
annual political whims of lawmakers. They have been frustrated
with efforts led by Reid to slash the budget each year.
They say lawmakers would still have oversight of the project,
just not budget-setting authority every year.
Nevada lawmakers oppose the proposal. It amounts to an "open
checkbook," Gibbons said.
"This is a terrible idea," he said.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
36 West Valley puts wraps on radioactive waste -
2002-09-24 -
Buffalo
The West Valley Demonstration Project has completed its
high-level radioactive waste vitrification program.
Since 1996, the Project has solidified more than 600,000 gallons
of high-level liquid radioactive waste into glass, encased in
stainless steel canisters. In doing so, the Project met one of
the key project milestones established by the West Valley
Demonstration Project Act.
The act was passed by U.S. Congress and signed into law by
President Jimmy Carter in 1980. It authorized the Department of
Energy to conduct the facility cleanup after the former operator
terminated its lease agreement. West Valley Nuclear Services
Company was selected as the prime contractor in 1981.
The solidified waste will remain in temporary storage at the
demonstration project until it is eventually shipped to a nuclear
waste repository in the future. Additional clean up at the site
will continue with activities associated with waste removal and
decommissioning.
© 2002 American City Business Journals Inc.
*****************************************************************
37 Canada: New report shows abandoned uranium mines a concern in
northern Saskatchewan
Sympatico NewsExpress: National | Full Story September 26th 2002
JULIAN BRANCH
REGINA (CP) - Northern leaders and opposition politicians say a
new report on abandoned uranium mines in Saskatchewan proves it's
time to clean up the hazardous sites. A 170-page report on
abandoned mines in northern Saskatchewan, released by the
province Tuesday, states that many of the sites pose "severe
public safety hazards and possible long-term environmental
concerns."
The report says "unconfined tailings deposits" from the abandoned
Gunnar uranium mine, amounting to 4.4-million tonnes, have made
their way into Lake Athabasca since the operation was shut down
in 1964. It says the site "contains numerous public safety
hazards and environmental concerns and is very accessible by
tourists and fishermen." "Northerners have experienced different
kinds of illnesses in regards to years gone bye. They've lost
people. High rates of cancer has been one of the issues," said
New North chairman Bobby Woods. "But they're always told you
can't relate it to that.
"Well, they don't know and that's what they're saying. We have
this and we don't know what it's creating but we know that it
needs to be dealt with." The report entitled An Assessment of
Abandoned Mines in Northern Saskatchewan,' also raises serious
concerns about the Lorado Mill site, about eight kilometres south
of Uranium City.
The mill was used to treat uranium ore from the Lorado mine and
smaller satellite mines in the region. It says tailings at the
site, which cover an area of about 14 hectares, are leaching into
two nearby lakes. A 1976 study showed that discharges of waste
into Nero Lake had severely affected water quality.
The report warns that unconfined tailings pose a gamma radiation
concern. "This has the potential to cause the migration of
contaminants to downstream receptors including humans and
wildlife." Saskatchewan Environment spokesman Richard Snider said
it would take a couple of days of exposure to the tailings before
an individual reached their allowable dose limit.
"It's not an immediate threat," he said. "I walk on the tailings
area and I collect samples and I don't concern myself with that.
But I wouldn't camp on the tailings or I wouldn't spend a week
there by any stretch." Snider said there are signs posted around
the tailing to warn people of the danger of radiation.
The provincial government is currently negotiating a cost-sharing
agreement with the federal government to clean up several
abandoned uranium mines, but Snider said there is no word on when
a deal may be struck. He told the Saskatoon StarPhoenix that it
will cost $25 million to clean up just two of 75 abandoned mines
being assessed in the three-year study of the deserted sites.
Saskatchewan Party environment critic Carl Kwiatkowski said the
contamination could have a huge impact on tourism.
"We're not only going to compromise public safety, compromise the
environment, we're going to lose tourism revenue," said
Kwiatkowski. Environment Minister Buckley Belanger was
unavailable to comment. However, in a news release he stated that
most of the sites examined pose no immediate health or major
environmental risks. "However," he stated in the release, "the
potential for some long-term environmental impacts and public
safety concerns" exists.
Most of the mines were abandoned by mining companies in the
1950's and 60's when the ore ran out.
The government plans to compile another report on more abandoned
mines next summer.
"There have been all sorts of excuses why we can't go in and
clean these sites up and I think it's gotten to the point now
where we need to see something real," said Kwiatkowski.
© The Canadian Press, 2002
© 2001 Sympatico-Lycos Inc. All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
38 Ex-nuclear official says Russia must halt nuclear waste imports,
clean its own mess
Yahoo! News Wed, Sep 25, 2002
AP World Politics
By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV, Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW - A former top Russian nuclear safety official on
Wednesday urged the government to suspend imports of spent
nuclear fuel from abroad, saying that the nation must handle its
own nuclear waste first.
Viktor Kuznetsov, who served as Russia's top nuclear safety
inspector in the early 1990s, also said that the authorities must
concentrate on improving safeguards at the country's nuclear
facilities to prevent the theft of radioactive materials.
"Russia needs a moratorium on imports of spent nuclear fuel from
abroad," Kuznetsov, who currently coordinates nuclear and
radiation safety programs for the Russian Green Cross, an
environmental advocacy group, said at a news conference.
A highly controversial bill allowing the government to import
spent nuclear fuel from abroad for reprocessing and storage was
approved by the parliament last year despite opinion polls
showing that most Russians abhorred the idea. President Vladimir
Putin signed the bill into law in July 2001, and the nuclear
ministry has already imported spent nuclear fuel from
Soviet-built nuclear power plants in Bulgaria and Ukraine.
Most environmental groups have remained strongly critical of the
nuclear waste imports, saying the practice would turn Russia into
the world's nuclear dumping ground.
Nuclear ministry officials argue that Russia could earn dlrs 20
billion over the next decade, importing some 20,000 metric tons
(22,000 tons) of spent nuclear fuel. They say that the earnings
would be used to help build more waste storage facilities and
clean up nuclear pollution left after the Soviet era.
Russian nuclear officials are currently planning to build a new
storage facility in the Siberian city of Zheleznogorsk that would
be capable of storing 33,000 metric tons (36,300 tons) of
radioactive waste, the Interfax-Military News Agency reported
Wednesday. The existing Zheleznogorsk waste depot can hold 6,000
metric tons (6,600 tons) of nuclear waste, and it's already more
than half full, Kuznetsov said. He claimed that the construction
of new processing and storage facilities would take many years
during which the existing storage space would be filled to the
brim and unable to incorporate Russia's own waste.
He also argued that the government must quickly tighten security
at the nation's nuclear facilities and install world-class
protection systems to stop radioactive thefts which have become
customary over the last decade. Only one of Russia's 116 research
nuclear reactors — the Kurchatov nuclear research institute in
Moscow — has a modern safety system installed with the U.S.
money, Kuznetsov said.
Security at the other 115 reactors, 80 percent of which use
highly enriched uranium, is below world standards, he added.
Kuznetsov on Wednesday presented his book on Russia's nuclear
safety that collected information on officials' sloppiness and
neglect in handling radioactive materials in both military and
civilian sectors. Authorities have reported numerous seizures of
radioactive materials for attempted illicit sales, but insisted
that all involved low-grade uranium or cesium unfit to
manufacture nuclear weapons. The Russian government says that no
weapons-grade uranium or plutonium has been stolen.
Kuznetsov said that security rules for handling radioactive
materials were even more lax in some other ex-Soviet republics.
He recalled how he put a handful of tablets of low-enriched
uranium in his pocket on a trip to a mining plant in
Ust-Kamenogorsk in eastern Kazakhstan several years ago and
walked past guards, unimpeded. When Kazakh officials began
talking about reliable safeguards against thefts at the plant, "I
simply took the tablets out of my pocket," Kuznetsov recalled
with a laugh.
Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
39 U.S. to conduct subcritical nuclear test on Thursday
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 17:15 JST
WASHINGTON ? The United States will conduct its 19th subcritical
nuclear experiment on Thursday at an underground test site in
Nevada, the Energy Department said Tuesday. It will be the sixth
such test under the administration of President George W Bush.
Subcritical nuclear experiments differ from traditional nuclear
weapons tests in that they fail to reach criticality or sustain a
nuclear chain reaction.
They examine the behavior of plutonium when strongly shocked by
forces produced by chemical high explosives.
Los Alamos National Laboratory will conduct the upcoming test,
dubbed Rocco, the department said.
The U.S. argues subcritical nuclear tests are necessary to
collect scientific data and technical information essential to
maintaining the safety and reliability of U.S. nuclear weapons
stockpiles. (Kyodo News)
Japan Today Discussion
*****************************************************************
40 Japan: Kawaguchi gets Britain's dossier on Iraq
Wednesday, September 25, 2002 at 09:30 JST
TOKYO ? British Ambassador to Japan Stephen Gomersall on Tuesday
gave Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi a copy of Britain's
"dossier of evidence" accusing Iraq of possessing weapons of mass
destruction, Japanese officials said.
In their talks at the Foreign Ministry, Gomersall handed
Kawaguchi the 55-page document, compiled based on intelligence
reports, along with a letter from British Foreign Secretary Jack
Straw, the officials said.
The ambassador was quoted as saying that while the British
government is hoping U.N. inspections would resolve suspicions
that Iraq possesses weapons of mass destruction, it is not
optimistic about the current situation.
Kawaguchi told Gomersall she will analyze the dossier carefully,
and explained that Japan has been strongly urging Iraq to accept
inspections immediately and without any conditions or
restrictions, according to the officials.
On Tuesday, British Prime Minister Tony Blair released the
dossier which said that Iraq has tried to secretly acquire
technology and materials to produce nuclear weapons and that it
had sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa despite
having no active civil nuclear power program that could require
it.
Iraq strongly denied the accusations contained in the document,
calling the charges "nothing but false lies."
Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, in a letter read out last week at
the U.N. General Assembly by Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, said
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have been destroyed, it did
not intend to produce such weapons anymore, and it did not wish
to possess nuclear weapons. (Kyodo News)
*****************************************************************
41 N-policy guided by deterrence, says Musharraf
/By Rana Qaisar /
ISLAMABAD: President General Pervez Musharraf on Tuesday said
Pakistan was a responsible country and its nuclear policy was one
of restraint and responsibility.
?Pakistan?s strategic capability is for deterrence against
aggression and the defence of the country?s sovereignty,? Inter
Services Public Relations (ISPR) quoted the president as saying
while chairing a meeting of the National Command Authority (NCA).
The president said Pakistan would not join an arms race but would
continue its nuclear programme to meet the minimum defence needs.
?Pakistan?s minimum deterrence needs will continue to be pursued
while avoiding an arms race.? It was the first strategic meeting
since the president?s return from the United States.
The NCA is the highest forum for command and control of strategic
assets, which meets regularly to review the country?s
capabilities and development projects. The ISPR said the
president expressed complete satisfaction over the pace of
development work by the NCA.
The chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, vice chief of army
staff, chief of naval staff and chief of air staff attended the
meeting, which also discussed issues of professional interests
and approved a number of proposals.
Foreign reserves: President Pervez Musharraf said on Tuesday
Pakistan?s foreign reserves would soon cross $8 billion, NNI
reported. He was addressing the annual dinner of the All Pakistan
Textile Mills Association held here on Tuesday night. The
president said top gangs of extremists had been arrested.
Daily Times - All Rights Reserved
*****************************************************************
42 Forgotten menace in Kashmir
Gwynne Dyer:/
Thursday September 26, 2002
The Pakistani uranium enrichment facilities, as far as we know,
are working three shifts around the clock," said Zia Mian, a
Pakistani physicist at Princeton University, in late May.
As far as we know, they still are. The threat of a war over
Kashmir is not over - it has just gone quiet for a while.
But not, perhaps, for much longer. The last time Pakistan and
India went to the brink of a (potentially nuclear) war in May, it
was Pakistan's dictator, General Pervez Musharraf, who stepped
back by promising to halt all infiltration of Islamist guerrillas
into the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir.
For two months he kept his word, but the rate of infiltration is
creeping up again.
It is not only the Indian Government saying so. The United States
Ambassador to New Delhi, Robert D. Blackwell, says "infiltration
is certainly still going on, and our judgment is that it is up in
August and up in September".
Islamist terrorist groups in Pakistan which provide the
volunteers for Kashmir say the money and arms are flowing from
the Inter-Services Intelligence agency in Islamabad again, if not
as lavishly as before.
The strongest evidence of all is the death toll since the Kashmir
state elections were announced last month: over 300 killed.
This is probably happening mainly because Musharraf has scheduled
parliamentary elections for Pakistan next month. As a military
usurper of power, his only easy source of popularity is to take a
hard line on Kashmir, a defining national issue for most
Pakistanis.
But if he doesn't stop soon, at the least we may expect another
Indian ultimatum (the third this year). At worst, we may see an
Indian attack designed to push the "line of control" west and
north beyond the passes that the infiltrators use.
An ideal time for that attack would be when everybody else is
distracted by a US attack on Iraq. Many in the Indian high
command are convinced that they could sustain this kind of
"limited" offensive for at least a week before Pakistan pulled
out its nuclear weapons - and then there would be a ceasefire
that let them keep their gains.
This could be a fatal miscalculation that leads to the dropping
of several hundred nuclear warheads on India and Pakistan.
Kashmir is obviously not worth megadeaths, and nobody has ever
accused Indians and Pakistanis of being stupid, so how did things
get this crazy?
The Kashmir problem is like an onion, with alternating layers of
blame and guilt going all the way back to the partition of
Britain's Indian empire in 1947.
The parts of the subcontinent that had been under direct British
rule were simply divided between Muslim-majority provinces
(Pakistan) and non-Muslim-majority areas (India), but the
"princely states" posed a special problem. They had signed
treaties accepting Britain's protection as independent states,
and theoretically a British withdrawal should mean they got their
independence back.
In practice, the rulers of these states were bribed or bullied
into handing over their sovereignty very quickly, except for
Kashmir, which Hari Singh actually tried to re-establish as an
independent country.
Since it had a highly mixed population, he reasoned - a narrow
Muslim majority concentrated in the Vale of Kashmir, but also a
large Hindu population and smaller Buddhist and Sikh communities
- it did not fit well into either India or Pakistan.
If Singh's gamble had succeeded, we would not now regard an
independent, multi-ethnic Kashmir in the foothills of the
Himalayas as any odder than an independent Nepal or Bhutan.
But then tribal irregulars from Pakistan invaded, seized about
half Kashmir (though mostly mountainous, sparsely populated
parts), and scared Singh into joining India.
The deal he cut gave Kashmir self-government in everything except
defence, foreign and fiscal policy. The plebiscite on Kashmir's
future that was mandated by the United Nations in 1949 has never
been held, but it could still have been a happy ending if the New
Delhi bureaucrats and politicians had left the deal alone.
In the first decades, sensible Indian Governments accepted that
the loyalties of Muslim Kashmiris would always be a bit
ambivalent, and worked with Kashmiri political moderates anyway.
In the late 1980s, however, Indira Gandhi's Government began
manipulating elections to produce more subservient Kashmiri
leaders. When this led to attacks on Indian troops, New Delhi
flooded Kashmir with soldiers and embarked on a campaign of
savage repression.
Reprisals, rapes, and political murders became commonplace, and
one Indian official said publicly that "the bullet is the only
solution for Kashmir".
A great many bullets later, nothing is solved. Tens of thousands
have died, and ISI-backed Pakistani Islamist groups have largely
supplanted the original local resistance (which is still more
inclined to independence than Pakistani annexation).
By now, there are so many layers of guilt that every Indian and
Pakistani can find plenty of reasons to feel self-righteous.
And unless Musharraf cuts back on infiltration again after next
month's election in Pakistan, we are heading for a war that would
make George W. Bush's planned Iraq outing look like a picnic.
* Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist.
©Copyright 2002, New Zealand Herald
*****************************************************************
43 India vs. China
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
The Indian Express
Jasjit Singh * * The world situation after September 11, 2001,
appears to have generated some new uncertainties in Beijing on
how to deal with the evolving scenarios. China has shown
near-spontaneous willingness to co-operate in the war against
terrorism. Sceptics would say this is because of China?s own
concerns in the western parts of the country and the risks of
terrorism from Afghanistan-Pakistan-Central Asia spilling over
into China, where the western regions have faced separatist
violence in recent years. But deeper concerns appear to be
arising out of the US policies in strategic terms.
US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and the way this was meekly
accepted by Russia and America?s allies appears to have blown a
hole in any thinking that the world would side with China on the
issue. But this is also seen in the broader context of a setback
to multilateralism and multilateral institutions responsible for
arms control and strategic stability. The US posture of
increasing unilateralism, the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive use of
force relying on high technology military power that remains
unmatched in the world, and the hype about the impending war
against Iraq seem to have expedited a re-look at the nature of
the evolving order. China in this respect appears to reflect the
concerns of the international community at large although no one,
and certainly not Beijing, is willing to come out openly against
the US. The trend in China appears to be to deepen co-operation
with the US working bilaterally and multilaterally, while
co-operation with its allies in Europe and Asia is deepened
separately.
Some Chinese military strategic experts believe that the end of
the Cold War has resulted in a shift of strategic concerns from
the strong to the weak, and ?failed? states (which, according to
them, includes Pakistan) have become major security concerns to
the US. The military brass are also concerned about greater
friction in the future between China and the US, especially as
the latter moves toward operational missile defence systems which
would ??seriously endanger the credibility of Chinese strategic
nuclear forces??, enhancing China?s sense of vulnerability and
leading to steps to enhance the survivability of these forces.
The risk of an expanding cycle of mutual suspicions could vitiate
bilateral relations as well as the security environment in Asia.
China has always emphasised the importance of the UN and its
primary responsibility for international peace and security. But
given the nature of things at present, the emphasis on
strengthening the UN, especially the Security Council, and
re-establishing its authority has increased substantively. This
is, of course, a natural corollary to the perceived need to
strengthen multilateralism in preference to a unilateralist
approach. In a way, this fits into the overall pattern of the
evolving lexicon and substance of policy where multilateralism is
offered to the world as a more attractive alternative to the
unilateralism currently high on the US agenda. Hence the need to
strengthen regional security institutions in Asia like the ARF
and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.
China?s approach to bilateral relations with India has undergone
near dramatic changes after 1998, in spite of the hiccups in the
weeks after the Indian nuclear tests. Since then the pace of
change toward deeper and stronger relations has intensified. An
increasing number of bilateral high level visits has helped to
deepen mutual understanding although the resolution of some of
the problems ?left over by history? seems very remote. China?s
aim appears to be to keep progress on them in slow motion while
building its own comprehensive power. This in no way should be
seen to signal negative implications for India. In fact we would
do well to adopt the same philosophy of building comprehensive
national power while strengthening bilateral relations with China
and maintaining peace and tranquillity on the borders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The increasing acknowledgment of a greater role for India is
implicit in the twin strands of multilateralism and the question
of strengthening the UN *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The increasing acknowledgment of a greater role for India in
world affairs is implicit in the twin strands of multilateralism
and the question of strengthening the UN. Many in China now
emphasise the importance of India qua India, while concluding
that it was not a good thing for the UN Security Council to have
only one solitary developing Asian country as a permanent member.
An increasing number of responsible people in Beijing seem to be
arguing for the need to bring India into the UN Security Council
as a permanent member so as to recognise geopolitical realities
and strengthen the UN. This does not, however, necessarily mean
that the government is ready to support this view. Meanwhile, a
wider support for the idea of a China-Japan-India co-operative
triangle based on strengthening bilateral as well as trilateral
co-operation seems to be growing.
Bilateral trade is increasing, though in absolute terms it is
marginal even for India, leave alone China. But the process is
opening up new avenues and a new understanding of the potential
for future trade. For example, the Chinese recognise the software
strength of Indians while they have progressed far in the
hardware arenas. This is an example of the complementarities that
need to be explored. Direct flights between Beijing/Shanghai and
Delhi have practically brought the two countries closer. What is
needed is to recognise this and build on it.
A new dynamic seems to be operating in China and we would need to
look for opportunities for strengthening the growing bilateral
relationship. This would also include enhancing border trade and
responding positively to Chinese initiatives to opening up new
opportunities like over-land trade with Tibet and/or implementing
the Kunming Initiative. There may be residual concerns about the
strategic and security implications of such steps. But we must
objectively assess the cost-benefit ratio of engaging China as
well as not engaging China across the land frontiers through
trade and investments. The answer clearly lies in deepening and
broadening engagement.
© 2002: Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd. All rights reserved
*****************************************************************
44 UK: The Lawyer: A flawed document, and the price to preserve unity
Independent.co.uk
By Anthony Scrivener
25 September 2002
*Iraq crisis*
Al Gore: The United States has squandered the world's goodwill
Saddam Hussein is a deplorable tyrant but despite losing the
"mother of all battles" in 1991 the allies allowed him to remain
in power. The Government's dossier sets out the history of
President Saddam's grotesque misdeeds at length but does it
justify an immediate war, which would destroy the lives of
thousands of innocent people who suffer under his regime and turn
their country into rubble? The short answer is that it does not
even attempt to do so.
Anyone used to sifting "evidence" will soon spot the yawning gap
in the argument. You only have to read Chapter 3, "The Current
Position: 1998-2002". Past sins there are aplenty but there is no
convincing evidence that Iraq is intending to attack anyone. In
fact the idea that it had such an intention is frankly ludicrous
unless President Saddam was intending to wipe out the US and the
UK at the same time.
We must accept that the "evidence" largely comes from
intelligence reports that are incapable of proper verification,
but a government has to act upon such material on occasions. The
position is different in a court. When proper evidence was
required in two cases alleged to have al-Qa'ida connections that
came to court in England, one was thrown out by the jury and in
the other the US Government were unable to produce any evidence
to support an extradition.
The chronology is important. The Gulf War ended in 1991 with Iraq
crippled. Unscom was established to provide for intrusive
inspections and to eliminate Iraq's chemical and biological
weapons and ballistic missiles with a range in excess of 150km
(93 miles). Over the next seven years large quantities of
chemical weapons and ballistic missiles and production facilities
were destroyed and nuclear materials were removed.
In January 1999 inspectors withdrew, unable to account for large
quantities of chemicals that could be used in chemical warfare.
The ability to monitor was gone. UN resolutions had probably been
broken but there were no demands for war at that time, so what
has changed? What is the "evidence"?
It is Chapter 3 that purports to set out "what we know of Saddam
Hussein's chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missile
programme". The list is unimpressive, even allowing for
favourable presentation.
It has to be conceded that almost all components and supplies
used in weapons of mass destruction and ballistic programmes are
dual purpose and could have innocent application.
The main chemical weapon production facility at al-Muthanna has
not been re-built, but a new one at al-Sharrat has been
constructed. There is no evidence that it is being used in
connection with chemical warfare. The fact that it has guards is
hardly surprising.
It is stated that most of the personnel involved in chemical
research are still in Iraq. This does not mean they are engaged
on the same work and they could hardly be deported. It cannot be
disproved that Iraq has destroyed technical manuals as they
claim.
Iraq is developing two short-range missiles with a range of 150km
but the UN resolution permits this. A wish to develop missiles
with a longer range does not mean they have done so.
It is stated that Iraq has tried to procure items that could be
used in connection with the enrichment of uranium but there is no
evidence that it has succeeded or that it has acquired uranium
apart from that held under IAEA supervision.
It is not suggested that Iraq has already got a nuclear
capability, let alone that it was intending to use it. The
evidence that Iraq continues work on developing nuclear weapons
depends upon a report that "uranium has been sought from Africa
that has no civil nuclear application" (a fact repeated on at
least three occasions in the dossier) and also attempts to
acquire certain equipment that could be used for nuclear weapons.
Neither was in fact acquired. In the case of specialised
aluminium tubes it is conceded there is no "definitive
intelligence that it is destined for a nuclear programme".
Even with the assistance of the gifted British Civil Service who
drafted it, the dossier hardly presents a convincing picture.
There are other countries, such as Israel, Pakistan, India and
China, which have a nuclear weapon programme, but no one so far
has suggested that this would be a justification for going to war
with them.
The breach by Iraq of UN resolutions is a matter for the UN, not
an excuse to embark on a war.
So what has changed?
The answer is that 9.11.01 changed everything for the United
States. The hurried announcement by President George Bush after
that tragedy of war against terrorism generally needs to show
some results. Progress has been made in Afghanistan but Osama bin
Laden may have slipped the net. If you wish to show your
determination to smash up a particularly nasty regime with a bad
track record, then Iraq is a good bet.
The strength of the political arguments in the Government that
have gone on behind the scenes can be seen from the final words
in the Prime Minister's Foreword. There is no cry for war or for
immediate military action of the kind the US is proposing. The
Foreword ends much more lamely: "The UK Government has been right
to support the demands that the issue be confronted and dealt
with."
Such is the price of unity. Such is the strength of the evidence.
Also from the Politics section.
Fifty-three Labour MPs rebel despite Blair's assurance: 'Our
purpose is No one wants military conflict'
25 September 2002 14:28 BDST
By Kim Sengupta in Baghdad
At the al-Qa'qa complex, 30 miles south of Baghdad, one of Iraq's
main centres for producing nerve agents ? according to Tony
Blair's "dossier" ? the director-general, Sinan Rasim Said,
declared yesterday he would welcome United Nations inspectors to
expose the "lies".
Saddam Hussein's regime responded to the British report about its
alleged acquisition of a nuclear, chemical and biological arsenal
with accusations of "baseless fabrications and zionist
conspiracy", and demanded that the document should be handed over
to the UN monitors for examination.
Within two hours and 10 minutes of Iraq's Weapons of Mass
Destruction ? The Assessment of the British Government appearing
on the internet, the Baghdad authorities were taking a group of
British journalists to see the sites of alleged manufacture and
storage named in the document.
One was the al-Qa'qa chemical complex, the site of the execution
of British journalist Farzad Bazoft on spying charges in March
1990, and the other the Amariyeh Sera vaccine plant at Abu
Ghraib, a suburb of the capital. We, the journalists, chose both
locations and neither had been visited before by the media.
Al-Qa'qa, according to the British dossier, was severely damaged
in the Gulf War but has "been repaired and (is) also operational.
Of particular concern are elements of the phosgene production
plant. They were dismantled under Unscom supervision, but have
since been rebuilt. While phosgene does have industrial use, it
can also be used by itself as a chemical agent or as a precursor
for nerve agent," according to the dossier.
Unscom had established that the Amariyah Sera site "was used to
store biological agents, seed stocks and conduct biological
warfare associated genetic research prior to the Gulf War. It has
now expanded its storage capacity".
At al-Qa'qa, a 26 square kilometer military establishment, Mr
Said insisted that no part of the plant had ever been dismantled
by Unscom.
He said that the work was solely to produce centralit, a
stabliser for gunpowder used in a variety of legal, conventional
weaponry from artillery to small arms. Phosgene, he claimed, was
generated as a result of making centralit, and could not be
extracted from the manufacturing equipment, let alone be used for
making nerve agents.
"Unscom knew all along what we are doing, it was done with their
authorisation, and they carried out regular inspections", he said
sitting in the boardroom, beside a portrait of President Hussein.
Producing an Unscom letter from "Harald Marhold, Chief Inspector
CG-15", dated 13 August 1998 authorising maintenance work, he
continued "they did not dismantle anything here. Mr Blair's
report is totally wrong."
"We knew the Unscom people well, one was an English guy called
Steve, all the British have to do is ask them. The UN keeps
records, it would have been easy to find out." Al-Qa'qa was also
bombed by the United States and British warplanes, during
Operation Desert Storm, in 1998. "They destroyed boiler rooms and
a storage area, They did not bother to bomb the part of the plant
where there's phosgene, because they knew we can't make use of
it," Mr Said said.
Orange smoke belched from chimneys at the plant. Vapours escaped
through the pipes containing the phosgene, Mr Said pointed out,
sloshing through pools of murky water on the floor. The phosgene
was being stored in cooling tanks.
"Unscom put stickers on pieces of equipment to ensure that they
cannot be used for dual use, and as you can see, we have kept
them," he said. "We have given detailed reports every year since
the inspectors left in 1998. They are available for the
inspectors. We want them to come and expose these lies as soon as
possible." However, like the majority of Iraqis we have spoken
to, Mr Said did not believe war could be avoided. "I think the
Americans will bomb this place again, and use this false report
as one of the excuses," he said.
Amir al Sa'adi, a senior Iraqi weapons expert, accused Mr Blair
of singling out the plant because it could produce propellant
powder for weapons from pistols to artillery guns for Iraqi air
defenses.
At Amariyah Sera, the director, Karim Obeid, disputed that Unscom
had found it was used for biological warfare associated genetic
research or store biological agents. "They were coming here ever
since the Gulf War until they left, and they have never accused
us of any of those things in that time," he said. "All our work
was done with their supervision." The complex, he said, was used
for "for testing typhoid fever".
These are all standard practices, the inspectors are welcome to
see them," said Mr Obeid, who added he was morally opposed to
biological warfare "both as a scientist and a human being".
The storage capacity had indeed been increased, as the report
claimed, he said, showing us what he said were the two additional
structures.
One was a large mostly empty room. The first room, said Mr Obeid
was used to store solutions for blood tests, imported from the
Melat pharmaceutical company in France. The second room was
stacked with empty bottles of various brands of vaccine.
/Tim Ripley/
AS A prop to support his House of Commons speech yesterday,
Tony?s Blair much-heralded "Iraq dossier" certainly fitted the
bill. The Prime Minister frequently quoted page numbers but as a
piece of forensic evidence, it was lacking in what has become
known as the "smoking gun" writes Tim Ripley.
Officially titled Iraq?s Weapons of Mass Destruction - the
Assessment of the British Government, the dossier is a
combination of previously published UN reports and new
intelligence from UK and allied sources.
Tantalising grainy photographs taken earlier this year by US spy
satellites were included for extra spice and in some cases they
added to our knowledge of the state of Saddam Hussein?s arsenal.
The document restates the case against Iraq?s non-compliance with
UN arms control resolutions made by President George Bush earlier
in the month, but with many classic Alastair Campbell "touches"
included to appeal to tabloid newspaper headline-writers.
The claim in the bullet-point executive summary that Iraq?s
chemical and biological weapons could be launched at 45 minutes?
notice, is never fully explained in the body of the dossier.
Beyond the spin, the bulk of the dossier is drawn together by the
Joint Intelligence Committee from information gathered by MI6 and
MI5 spies, the Defence Intelligence Staff analysts,
communications eavesdroppers from GCHQ and "friendly" foreign
agencies.
In the chemical and biological weapons sections, little new is
added, beyond naming several industrial plants that could be
involved in these programmes.
As far as Iraq?s nuclear weapons programmes are concerned, the
dossier alleges that procurement efforts to buy key components
have continued, including efforts to buy uranium ore in an
unnamed African country.
The latter allegation is particularly intriguing, because the
anarchic country formerly know as the Congo was the main source
of uranium used by the US in the Second World War to build its
first atomic weapons.
Documents discovered by UN arms inspectors in Iraq have all
pointed to Baghdad?s scientists slavishly following the American
route to the bomb. A chemical factory complex at al-Sharqat is
named as a possible source of chemicals used in uranium
enrichment.
There are major gaps in some sections. It, for example, does not
name the location of any Iraqi plant to fill chemical or
biological shells and missile warheads, indicating that this key
facility is not known to British intelligence or is being kept
back to avoid alerting the Iraqis to its discovery. It may, of
course, not exist.
That is the dossier?s main weakness. By their very nature,
intelligence reports are a two-edged sword. If used to publicly
identify weapons of mass destruction sites, the Iraqis will be
alerted and could move to dismantle and hide the facilities
concerned. This would make any UN inspection effort or military
campaign to find and destroy them, more difficult to accomplish
successfully.
In the end, the Prime Minister is asking us to take him on his
word that the dossier is an honest and truthful summary of the
Iraqi threat.
# Tim Ripley is a research associate at the Centre for Defence
and International Security Studies at Lancaster University.
©2002 scotsman.com | contact
*****************************************************************
48 Hack? takes a whack at an attack on Iraq /*
Web Edition Thursday, Sep. 26, 2002
*Columns - September 25, 2002*
*/ Jack Kenny: *By JACK KENNY*
*IF GEORGE W. BUSH* had employed the services of David H.
Hackworth as speechwriter, the discomfort level might have been
considerably higher at the United Nations on Sept. 12, when the
President challenged and chided the world body over its inaction
on Iraq.
?I would have taken his speech and laid it on the table,? said
Hackworth, a retired Army colonel known for his outspoken and
frequently controversial opinions. ?And every place it said Iraq,
I would have crossed it out and I would have replaced it with
Syria, China, Lebanon and we could just go down (the list).?
Hackworth, a Connecticut resident, ventured up to New Hampshire
last week and was interviewed on the WNDS-TV program ?Capitol
Ideas? with Arnie Arnesen.
The former colonel gave the commander-in-chief something less
than a four-star review for the case he presented against Iraq at
the U.N. ?Can I give you about two dozen guys who are equally as
bad as Saddam Hussein?? Hackworth asked. ?I?ll go to Pakistan.
The guy that?s running that place got into power with a shotgun,
blowing everybody out of the way. Anybody who wants to run
against him, he blows out of the way. He supported and organized
the Taliban, who provided haven to al-Qaida?s bunch. And he?s got
?nuke? weapons that are really far more sophisticated than the
alleged ?nuke? weapons that Saddam Hussein has. So I just don?t
think the President has made a case and I don?t think he?s
articulated what the threat is. And I think if that was his best
shot to the United Nations, he hit his foot.?
JACK KENNY
?Hack,? as he likes to be called, knows something about shooting
oneself in the foot. The nation?s most decorated living solider,
he won more than 100 awards, 78 of them combat related. Highly
regarded for both his skill and courage, Hackworth became the
youngest full colonel in Vietnam. But discretion was not the
greater part of his valor. In 1971, he appeared on ABC?s ?Issues
and Answers? and was remarkably candid in his criticisms of our
military?s leaderships, strategy and tactics in Vietnam. The Army
brass soon convinced him that a career change might be preferable
to a court martial, and the 26-year veteran retired from active
duty.
But not from speaking his mind. He has written or co-authored
four books (one of them a novel), writes a column that appears in
about 100 newspapers, and he remains active on the lecture
circuit, making about 20 speeches a year. The Bush administration
might wish he were still in the Army, so he could be
court-martialed after all. Hackworth is openly scornful of the
administration?s claim that Saddam Hussein?s nuclear weapons
program poses an urgent threat to the United States.
Assuming he is on the verge of creating a ?crude? nuclear bomb,
the Iraqi dictator is still a few thousand miles short of being
able to deliver it to the United States. ?He?s got to put ?em in
his canoe,? Hackworth cracked. He believes our government?s
fixation on Iraq has less to do with ?weapons of mass
destruction? than with barrels of ?black gold.? ?We want a new
gas station and we?re going to get it,? said Hackworth. ?And
we?ll use the military power to get it.?
The Vietnam veteran isn?t worried about a protracted war this
time. He predicts it will be over in 90 days?60 days of bombing
followed by 30 days of ground war. But we may still be in Iraq
years ? even generations ? after Saddam Hussein is gone. ?Do we
occupy a new oil well, a gas station for the next 60 years??
Hackworth asked.
The more immediate consequence, he fears, is that U.S. standing
in the Arab world will further deteriorate and more young people
will be inspired to join the radical, anti-American forces.
?We?re engaged in a hell of a fight with the main opponent,? he
said. ?That is the al-Qaida, the terrorists that delivered such a
grievous blow to our country on Sept. 11. If we distract
ourselves on a sideshow such as Saddam Hussein, maybe to pay back
what Daddy (Bush) didn?t do or whatever, we might lose the main
event.?
Having lived long enough to be an old solider, Hackworth, 72,
resents ?the suits? in the Washington power elite who appear
quite eager to send another generation of young Americans into
another needless war. ?The ones that are advocating war, all
these super hawks, never went to war,? he said. ?Nor are any of
the kids of the congressmen and women in the forward positions of
a foxhole or a tank. They?re not going to be the ones that come
back in a body bag.?
/ Jack Kenny is a Manchester resident whose columns appear
regularly./
Copyright © 2002 Union Leader Corp. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
49 NZ: The dishonesty of this so-called dossier
Thursday September 26, 2002
/Robert Fisk:/
Tony Blair's "dossier" on Iraq is a shocking document. Reading it
can only fill a decent human being with shame and outrage. Its
pages are final proof - if the contents are true - that a massive
crime against humanity has been committed in Iraq.
For if the details of Saddam's building of weapons of mass
destruction are correct - and I will come to the "ifs" and "buts"
and "coulds" later - it means that our massive, obstructive,
brutal policy of UN sanctions has totally failed.
In other words, half a million Iraqi children were killed by us -
for nothing.
Let's go back to 12 May 1996. Madeleine Albright, the US
Secretary of State, had told us that sanctions worked and
prevented Saddam from rebuilding weapons of mass destruction
(WMD). Our Tory government agreed, and Tony Blair faithfully toed
the line.
But on 12 May, Mrs Albright appeared on CBS television. Leslie
Stahl, the interviewer, asked: "We have heard that half a million
children have died. I mean, that's more than died in Hiroshima.
And, you know, is the price worth it?"
To the world's astonishment, Mrs Albright replied: "I think this
is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth
it."
Now we know - if Mr Blair is telling us the truth - that the
price was not worth it. The price was paid in the lives of
hundreds of thousands of children. But it wasn't worth a dime.
The Blair "dossier" tells us that, despite sanctions, Saddam was
able to go on building weapons of mass destruction. All that
nonsense about dual-use technology, the ban on children's pencils
- because lead could have a military use - and our refusal to
allow Iraq to import equipment to restore the water-treatment
plants that we bombed in the Gulf War, was a sham.
This terrible conclusion is the only moral one to be drawn from
the 16 pages that supposedly detail the chemical, biological and
nuclear horrors that the Beast of Baghdad has in store for us.
It's difficult, reading the full report, to know whether to laugh
or cry. The degree of deceit and duplicity in its production
speaks of the trickery that informs the Blair government and its
treatment of MPs.
There are a few titbits that ring true. The new ammonium
perchlorate plant illegally supplied by an Indian company - which
breached those wonderful UN sanctions, of course - is a
frightening little detail. So is the new rocket test stand at the
al-Rafah plant. But this material is so swamped in trickery and
knavery that its inclusion becomes worthless.
Here is one example of the dishonesty of this "dossier". On page
45, we are told - in a long chapter about Saddam's human rights
abuses - that "on March 1st, 1991, in the wake of the Gulf War,
riots (sic) broke out in the southern city of Basra, spreading
quickly to other cities in Shia-dominated southern Iraq. The
regime responded by killing thousands".
What's wrong with this paragraph is the lie is in the use of the
word "riots". These were not riots. They were part of a mass
rebellion specifically called for by President Bush Jnr's father
and by a CIA radio station in Saudi Arabia. The Shia Muslims of
Iraq obeyed Mr Bush Snr's appeal. And were then left to their
fate by the Americans and British, who they had been given every
reason to believe would come to their help. No wonder they died
in their thousands. But that's not what the Blair "dossier" tells
us.
And anyone reading the weasel words of doubt that are insinuated
throughout this text can only have profound concern about the
basis for which Britain is to go to war. The Iraqi weapon
programme "is almost certainly" seeking to enrich uranium. It
"appears" that Iraq is attempting to acquire a magnet production
line. There is evidence that Iraq has tried to acquire
specialised aluminium tubes (used in the enrichment of uranium)
but "there is no definitive intelligence" that it is destined for
a nuclear programme. "If" Iraq obtained fissile material, Iraq
could produce nuclear weapons in one or two years. It is
"difficult to judge" whether al-Hussein missiles could be
available for use. Efforts to regenerate the Iraqi missile
programme "probably" began in 1995. And so the "dossier" goes on.
Now maybe Saddam has restarted his WMD programme. Let's all say
it out loud, 20 times: Saddam is a brutal, wicked tyrant. But are
"almost certainly", "appears", "probably" and "if" really the
rallying call to send our grenadiers off to the deserts of
Kut-al-Amara?
There is high praise for UN weapons inspectors. And there is more
trickery in the relevant chapter. It quotes Dr Hans Blix, the
executive chairman of the UN inspection commission, as saying
that in the absence of (post-1998) inspections, it is impossible
to verify Iraqi disarmament compliance. But on August 18 this
year, the very same Dr Blix told Associated Press that he
couldn't say with certainty that Baghdad possessed WMDs. This
quotation is excised from the Blair "dossier", of course.
So there it is. If these pages of trickery are based on
"probably" and "if", we have no business going to war. If they
are all true, we murdered half a million Iraqi children. How's
that for a war crime?
- INDEPENDENT
*****************************************************************
50 UK: Blair makes a persuasive case for action on Iraq
Times Online September 25, 2002
Hard evidence
The dossier released yesterday by Downing Street did not contain
a “silver bullet” which would convince the entire country that
Iraq must be confronted. In truth, many of the Prime Minister's
opponents on this issue would settle for nothing less than a
handwritten note from President Saddam Hussein outlining his
plans to use biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. Even then,
some would insist that Iraq had been driven into such
unreasonable behaviour by the White House.
Tony Blair's document did, however, provide the Government with
additional ammunition. It made a credible case that Iraq has
intensified its illegal activities in the past four years, a
serious “step change” that other reports had not outlined. It
enabled the Prime Minister to deliver a cool and cogent
performance in the debate staged in the House of Commons.
A dossier of this sort inevitably has its limitations. The very
fact that United Nations inspectors have not been present in Iraq
makes precision difficult. The best sources of intelligence are
frequently also the ones that need to remain secret. In the
circumstances, nonetheless, the text was more forceful than might
have been expected. It made the argument that Saddam will be a
serious threat in the not too distant future even more
convincing. As a result, with the exception of George Galloway
(who bizarrely cited The Daily Telegraph in his cause), no MP
disputed the assertion that Iraq was still actively in pursuit of
weapons of mass destruction. The dispute across the floor
yesterday concerned Saddam's intentions and the best means of
dealing with him.
For all the sound and fury from certain quarters in Westminster,
Mr Blair commanded a considerable consensus behind his strategy.
The vast majority of MPs believe that inspectors must return to
Iraq and that they must then work without impediment. Most
parliamentarians also accept the argument that a fresh resolution
from the UN Security Council laying down the law would be
desirable. And most, with varying degrees of reluctance,
acknowledge that if Saddam fails to comply, diplomatic avenues
will have been duly exhausted. In that respect, the House of
Commons accurately reflects the wider state of public opinion. Mr
Blair's contention that “doing nothing is not an option” is
winning acceptance.
The real test for the Prime Minister, as he knows, is therefore
not in Parliament but in the UN Security Council. The strategy
that he has helped President Bush to shape does depend on the
passage of a fresh resolution. The specific language matters less
than whether the words represent an advance on past motions and
make it plain that Saddam will not have a second chance to admit
inspectors on an unambiguously unconditional basis. If Iraq is
able to receive the inspectors on the old terms, it is a racing
certainty that Saddam, at some point inconvenient to the Bush
Administration, will try his old tricks again. Jack Straw, the
Foreign Secretary, appeared to be confident yesterday that the
necessary coalition in the Security Council would be constructed
— that would be a signigicant achievement for the American and
British Governments.
That joint effort has rarely mattered more than it does now. The
most impressive part of Mr Blair's statement was the passionate
endorsement he produced of his close co-operation with a US
President of a different philosophical outlook. With
German-American relations in a poisoned state at present, Mr
Blair carries the heavy responsibility of persuading not only the
Washington elite but ordinary Americans there that the whole of
Europe is not hostile to them. He has performed that task with
skill, but the job is far from done.
Times Newspapers Ltd.
*****************************************************************
51 Russian station a historic artifact
[deseretnews.com]
Monday, September 23, 2002
By Joe Bauman
Deseret News staff writer
"Ugly looking," was the verdict of historian Craig Fuller, "but
it did the job for them."
Utah historian Craig Fuller stands by the modular building used
by Russian INF treaty inspectors in Utah. [''] Michael Brandy,
Deseret News
"It" may be the largest historic artifact ever acquired by the
Utah Division of State History: the station manned by Russian
inspectors in Magna at the end of the Cold War.
The Russian station is a white, utilitarian four-part modular
building. Constructed in the former Soviet Union and shipped to
Utah in 1988, it sat in a bleak location adjacent to the Alliant
Techsystems missile plant in Magna.
The station was surrounded by chain-link fence that was topped
with barbed wire and included two small guardhouses.
Inside the main building, teams of Soviet inspectors were on duty
around the clock, checking trucks as they left the plant. After
the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, the inspectors painted over
the CCCP (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) emblem on the
outside and painted a new one with Russian and U.S. flags
intertwined.
For 13 years they enforced the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces
Treaty, verifying that the United States did not sneak Pershing
missile motors out of the plant in violation of the agreement.
Meanwhile, their U.S. counterparts worked in Russia.
The missile inspection program was completed in May 2001, and the
Russians returned to their homeland — leaving behind the station,
documents, manuals and gear.
"Over the course of several months before the Russians left, they
had invited representatives of the Historical Society to come out
to their inspection station," said Fuller, who works for the
society and the division. They wanted the Utah historians to get
familiar with the station.
When they left in May 2001, "they came to the Historical Society
and said, 'Would you like this building?' "
The inspectors thought it was important to preserve the building
and guard stations as a symbol of the unique experience the two
former Cold War adversaries had in fulfilling the historic
arms-control treaty.
Even though the minimum age defining historic artifacts is about
half a century, this one seemed clearly a part of history.
Division officials agreed it should be saved.
Alliant did not want the structures left on its property, Fuller
said.
"We had to either take it or it was going to be destroyed," said
Philip F. Notarianni, the division's acting assistant director.
"The first goal was to try and save these buildings, which we've
been successful at," Fuller said.
The division accepted the buildings, which were hauled by flatbed
truck to Salt Lake City.
"We got cameras, video equipment, some of the electronic gizmos
to open and close the gates and to turn the stoplights from red
to green and back to green," Fuller added.
Wilson G. Martin, acting director of the Utah Historical Society
and Division of State History, noted there are still "Russian
components of various types throughout the station.
"Without a doubt it's an important artifact."
Protected by sections of the imposing fence that once provided
security at Magna, the station stands behind division
headquarters, the Rio Grande Railroad depot at 300 S. Rio Grande
St. (455 West). The CCCP logo is still visible beneath the white
paint of one exterior wall.
During a brief tour, Fuller and Notarianni showed the Deseret
News through the structure. Bunk beds remain in the Spartan
resting quarters, the kitchen has a small refrigerator and stove,
a sign in Russian warns against smoking (forbidden except on the
back porch) and bulky gear squats in the utility room.
A big poster on one wall shows "Americanski" trucks and vehicles.
Inspectors could look at a dump truck waiting to go out Alliant's
gate, check the Cyrillic labels on the poster, identify the
vehicle, and know it was too small to smuggle a Pershing motor.
At one time, Fuller said, the building held more electronics. But
a federal agency removed items to study them and hasn't returned
some.
Now that the artifact is protected, the division has a problem.
"It's a very large artifact requiring a lot of attention," Martin
said. With budget reductions, that could be difficult.
The division's next goal is to find a permanent home for the
station, either by showing it at the depot or finding another
site for it.
"It is an artifact, and we think there are other facilities like
Hill Air Force Base . . . that have a Cold War responsibility,"
Martin said.
"It's important because this is the only one in the United
States," Notarianni said.
Division officials have been in contact with the Hill Air Force
Base Museum. "Initially, they didn't want it," Notarianni said.
But the division hasn't given up trying to persuade the Hill
museum to take it for a Cold War exhibit.
Meanwhile, the station will remain just west of the Rio Grande
Depot, a monument to a treaty that advanced the cause of world
peace.
E-MAIL: [bau@desnews.com]
© 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company
*****************************************************************
52 UK: Sifting the old claims from new and suspicions from
assertions of fact
Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian |
Nicholas Watt and David Pallister Wednesday September 25, 2002
The Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk]
Nuclear weapons The claims
· Scientists recalled in 1998 to nuclear weapons programme · Iraq
seeking to acquire key elements for gas centrifuge system to
enrich uranium for a bomb - includes 60,000 aluminium tubes,
entire magnet production and vacuum pumps · Attempts to secure
"significant quantities" of uranium from Africa · Ending or
weakening of sanctions would allow Iraq to produce a bomb on its
own after at least five years.
With foreign help, it could be one or two years The assessment
Scientists agree that the individual elements that Iraq is
alleged to have tried to buy for a gas centrifuge system are not
significant on their own, but collectively they suggest a
concerted effort to build a bomb. Gary Samore of the
International Institute for Strategic Studies, which recently
produced its own assessment of the Iraqi threat, said:
"Individually many of these have dual-use applic-ations and taken
alone none of them amounts to a smoking gun. But together this is
highly suggestive that Iraq is trying to make a gas centrifuge
system."
His remarks were echoed by David Kay, UN chief weapons inspector
between 1991 and 1992. "The aluminium tubes are significant -
that is the first time we have seen that number of tubes. That is
a genuinely industrial scale production. But it all has to go
together be cause the tubes are nothing on their own. They have
to be spun at incredible speed." Mr Kay was also struck by Iraq's
alleged attempt to procure an entire magnet production line.
There is no other use for them, he said, than in the uranium
enrichment process.
One of the key allegations in the dossier - that the Iraqis have
tried to procure uranium from Africa - did not come as a surprise
to Mr Kay who said that the claim was first made by an Iraqi
defector. Basing this claim on "intelligence" in the dossier
suggests that MI6 may have better information than the defector,
but the information is too vague to be able to make a judgment.
Mr Kay said: "I do not know whether to be concerned or really,
really worried. If they attempted to get uranium from Africa I
would be concerned. If they succeeded, then my concern goes up
several levels." But Bhupendra Jasani, visiting professor at the
department of war studies, King's College London, said that the
allegations about Africa needed to be backed up by more evidence.
"Uranium ore on its own is no good, so you need to ask where is
it being processed, how it will take weapons form and how it will
be put onto a warhead.
Lots of stages are missing." Prof Jasani said that it would be
relatively easy to prove whether a uranium enrichment plant had
been set up. "An enrichment plant needs a very large source of
electric power. It also needs cooling facilities, such as a river
or a pond, because the centrifuge moves at great speed. You can
see water being discharged through thermal imaging." All these
would be signs, he said, that "it is an enrichment plant and not
a Tescos".
Chemical weapons The claims
· Continuing production of chemical weapons. Attempts to procure
dual-use chemicals and industrial chemical production resumed at
renovated sites formerly associated with its chemical warfare
programme. · Capacity to produce significant quantities of
mustard gas within weeks and nerve agents within months.
· Chlorine and phenol produced at Fallujah 2, north-west of
Baghdad, could be used as precursors for chemical agents ·
Command and control system in place to launch a chemical weapon
within 45 minutes of an order
The assessment
Most expert observers agree that Iraq is continuing to develop
chemical weapons, that it already has some in stock and that it
has a limited capacity to deliver them over both battlefield and
longer ranges. The dossier does little to expand on the detailed
summary published last month by the International Institute for
Strategic Studies . That concluded: "On balance, an arsenal of
this size is insufficient for sustained offensive military
operations and is unlikely to inflict militarily significant
casualties on well-trained and well-equipped troops."
Observers point out that the dossier's intelligence in this area
is weak, mainly because the plants are ostensibly for civilian,
industrial production. "Without UN weapons inspectors," the
dossier said, "it is very difficult to be sure about the true
nature of many of Iraq's facilities." Prof Jasani is making a
study of Iraq's chemical plants from commercial satellite
imagery. Dual-use plants are the most difficult to analyse, he
said. "But it is possible to detect tell-tale signs.
At Fullujah 2, for example, one can see it is a highly sensitive
place with military perimeter fencing in a highly secured area.
Then there are the defences like anti-aircraft guns. Generally,
secure places in remote areas with good transportation facilities
and a large water supply can be considered suspect." He added
that he would have liked to have seen some sequential photographs
in the dossier showing how the places were gradually rebuilt to
back up that contention.
Apart from the knowledge that Iraq retained unaccountable amounts
of material and delivery systems after the inspectors left in
1998, the dossier provides no hard evidence of either military
applications at these plants or of successful procurement abroad.
Much reliance is placed on the fact that the country did
manufacture chemical weapons in the past, and was prepared to use
them.
The suggestion that a chemical or biological weapon could be
launched in 45 minutes is regarded as credible. Wyn Bowen, a UN
weapons inspector in 1997-98 and now a senior lecturer in defence
studies, King's College, London, said that lapse of time would be
possible for certain delivery systems.
"I suppose they are referring to aerial bombs or artillery shells
which are the easiest to deliver. It just takes a telephone call.
The time is less likely for a missile unless they have been
well-maintained and the crew is properly trained. But if that's
the case a chemical or biological warhead could be launched in
that time."
Trevor Findlay, director of the Verification Research, Training
and Information Centre in London, was unsure about the 45-minute
claim. "It's a bit vague because it makes no mention of what
delivery system would be used within 45 minutes. Does it mean
artillery shells, gravity bombs or ballistic missiles? It gives
the impression that it is talking about ballistic missiles but
that is not clear.
"That is of course deliberate because the intelligence
information must be protected - this report is not footnoted."
Despite his doubts, Dr Findlay described the dossier as
"credible". But he added: "It does not give new grounds for a
pre-emptive strike against Iraq. It does add grist to the mill
for the UN security council's deliberations on a new resolution."
Biological weapons The claims
· Iraq continues to produce biological agents and has the means
to deliver them as weapons. It is "judged to be self-sufficient
in the technology required to produce biological weapons", which
include anthrax, botulinum toxin, aflatoxin and ricin.
· Intelligence suggests that Iraq was starting to produce
biological warfare agents in mobile production facilities and
could produce agents within weeks if required
The assessment
Iraq did not acknowledge that it had made biological weapons - as
opposed to manufacturing the agents - until the defection of
Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law, in 1995.
According to the former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, he told
UNSCOM: "I ordered destruction of all weapons - biological,
chemical, missile, nuclear - all were destroyed."
Ritter himself commented: "Everything Hussein Kamal said about
Iraq's undeclared weapons programs was confirmed."
Since the inspectors left, however, defectors have alleged that
the programme is continuing.
The dossier does not enhance what was already known and
published, according to western military experts. "The short
answer is that very little is new," says Professor Paul Rogers of
the Bradford University peace studies department. The IISS
report, drawing on published sources, concluded: "Iraq retains a
significant capability to produce BW agent. It may have
substantial stocks of previously produced agent which it
successfully concealed from UNSCOM."
Delivery systems, said the IISS, were "limited" and inaccurate.
The dossier does not produce hard evidence that civilian
facilities are being turned to dual use and the limited
reconstruction of suspect sites is based on satellite pictures.
The assertion that Iraq can produce agents within weeks is in the
public domain.
Mobile production facilities are also known about. A recent
defector has said that disguised refrigerated Renault trucks have
been converted to biological production laboratories.
The foot and mouth plant at al-Dawra which was used to produce
botulinum toxin and possibly anthrax was renovated last year
after a formal request by Iraq to the United Nations food and
agriculture organisation based in Rome. After an inspection the
FAO recommended that renovations went ahead.
Ballistic missiles
The claims
· Work began in 1998 to develop missiles with range over 1,000km,
contravening UN rules which impose 150km limit
· Up to 20 al-Hussein missiles, used in attacks on Israel and
Saudi Arabia and Israel in the Gulf war, have been retained in
breach of UN · Iraq plans to extend the range of al-Samoud and
Ababil-100 missiles to 200km · Missile production infrastucture
was rebuilt after allied bombing · Iraqi agents and "front
companies in third countries" are attempting to acquire
propellant chemicals for ballistic missiles The assessment
Scientists agree that a satellite image on page 29 of the
dossier, which shows a large new weapons stand at an Iraqi test
facility, is highly significant. But the satellite image is of
such poor quality that they warned they have to accept the
government at its word. Wyn Bowen, a weapons inspector from 1997
to 1998 who is a senior lecturer in defence studies at King's
College London, said the satellite photo shows the Iraqis are
looking at the development of a larger engine. "The bigger the
test stand, the larger the engine and the longer the range of the
missile. But there are unlikely to be any flight tests of the
missiles with a range over 150km because that would be detected."
His remarks were echoed by Mr Kay.
He said: "I have not seen those weapons stands before. The map is
scary as hell for the European allies who would be within its
range." But Mr Kay and Dr Bowen disagreed on the government's
claim that 20 al-Hussein missiles have been hidden by the Iraqis.
Dr Bowen said this claim was new. Mr Kay said that Britain and
the US had long claimed that Iraq had hidden around 20 of the
missiles, in contrast to the UN which believes the figure is less
than a dozen. "This is a long and complex argument," he said.
Dr Samore attached great significance to the claim that Iraq has
rebuilt its missile infrastructure, most notably at the al-Mamoun
plant to produce ammonium perchlorate - a key ingredient in the
production of solid propellant rockets. "We have known that Iraq
has rebuilt its facilities but this is the first time that
[al-Mamoun] has been identified." Mr Kay thought that weapons
inspectors would be greatly interested in this section of the
dossier.
"The missile programme is the one thing that inspectors can
threaten the most. You can hide existing ones but you cannot hide
new ones. "Al-Mamoun is a facility that inspectors can go to and
sit on top of. You can be sure whether castings are being made
for non-approved missiles." Mr Kay was particularly disturbed by
the dossier's claim that Iraqi agents are attempting to procure
propellant chemicals for ballistic missiles.
"That is significant. That sort of paragraph is what we would
like to have more detail on. If they seek to acquire those sorts
of things from a country like Ukraine, which has poor export
licence system, then we have a great deal to worry about."
Willingness to use weapons The claims
· Saddam attaches great importance to weapons of mass
destruction, believing they form the basis for his standing in
the region
· Iraq is prepared to use weapons on his own people, particularly
Shia Muslims in the south
The assessment
The International Institute for Strategic Studies believes that
Saddam attaches great importance to chemical weapons because they
played a decisive role in forcing the Iranians to the negotiating
table at the end of the Iran-Iraq war in 1988. Academics are
divided on this interpretation of history, but they
all agree that Saddam believes that retaining weapons of mass
destruction are crucial to his survival.
Rosemary Hollis, of the Royal Institute of International Affairs,
said: "The academic wisdom is that Saddam's motives are to do
with survival and his stature. But if he uses them it will be the
end because the rules have changed. When he used poison gas on
the Iranians in 1984 he was called to account by the Americans,
but this was not pursued vigorously. That has changed."
Dr Hollis was sceptical of the dossier's claim that Saddam would
use chemical weapons on his own people, in particular the Shia
Muslims of the south. "That is a wild card and sounds like a bit
of a wind up. That claim can only be made on the basis of the
extrapolation of facts from the way in which the Shia rebellion
in the south was crushed so brutally in 1991. This claim is not
based on fact, it is based on supposition."
Dr Findlay said that Britain's claim that Saddam would like to
attack its Shia population was speculation. He added: "What is
missing from the dossier is anything serious about intention. If
Iraq is bellicose towards its neighbours that should be brought
out. But there is no discussion of that. There is lots about
Iraq's capabilities. But the question is whether Iraq is planning
to use its weapons for anything other than deterrence and
self-defence."
Sources of information
The claims
The government was constrained by the need to protect its sources
of intelligence. This meant that crucial new claims in the
dossier, such as the allegation that Iraq has sought to buy
uranium from Africa, could not be substantiated.
The assessment
Academics and scientists were divided on whether the government
could have provided more details.
Prof Jasani said that the dossier could have made greater use of
"before and after" satellite pictures - the only images were
grainy photographs showing current sites. "It is disappointing
the way they have dealt with satellite images," he said.
"If you are going to convince people then they should have made
more use of this." Prof Jasani was critical of one the main
satellite pictures on page 20 of the dossier which shows the Ibn
Sina Company at Tarmiyah.
"This was a nuclear site, it is significant that it is now
chemical related. It would have been nice to have had a before
and after image. They could have shown it soon after the Gulf war
when a lot of facilities were destroyed. I have a 1991 image from
a French satellite. It shows that a lot was destroyed. You can
now see that new buildings have cropped up. They could have shown
the change very easily."
But Mr Kay was impressed by the dossier and believed that the
government had struck the right balance of providing strong
evidence without compromising its intelligence sources. "It is a
very useful dossier. I have not found anything pulled together in
this way before. "
What do you think? politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
*****************************************************************
53 UK: Saddam's nuclear shopping tour
Times Online
September 25, 2002
By Michael Evans and Richard Beeston
IRAQI agents have been scouring countries
across Africa for uranium to help Saddam Hussein to build nuclear
weapons, The Times has learnt.
The dossier released by the Government yesterday noted in passing
that Baghdad had recently tried to acquire “significant quantities
of uranium from Africa”. But what it left out was evidence supplied
to the Cabinet Office’s Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) showing
that Saddam’s agents have secretly visited a number of African
countries, 13 of which have uranium as a natural
resource.
Uranium, once enriched, could form the core of a nuclear bomb, but
there is no evidence yet that Saddam has succeeded it acquiring it.
“If Iraq had succeeded in buying uranium from Africa, the dossier
would have said so,” one Whitehall source said.
The Iraqis are known to have targeted the war-ravaged Democratic
Republic of Congo, though no uranium has been extracted there for
several years. The mine that produced the uranium used in the
American bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 is in an
area controlled by Zimbabwean troops. The dossier draws on top
secret intelligence, and refers only generally to
“Africa” as a potential source of uranium, possibly because of the
fear that too detailed an insight might expose the sources. The
Prime Minister has said that although an unprecedented amount of
intelligence material published in the document, some of the most
sensitive information has been excluded. The dossier states that
Iraq is producing biological and chemical weapons that
can be deployed in 45 minutes, that it is developing missiles with
a range of 1000km (600 miles), and that Saddam may have given his
son Qusay the power to order the use of such weapons.
What the document does not do is link Saddam to Osama bin Laden,
al-Qaeda and the September 11 attacks. The intelligence committee
has concluded that Saddam has no sympathy for Islamic
fundamentalism.
The Sunday Times
*****************************************************************
54 U.S., Canada Praise Iraq Dossier
Las Vegas SUN:
Today: September 25, 2002 at 1:25:17 PDT By THOMAS WAGNER
ASSOCIATED PRESS
LONDON- Prime Minister Tony Blair's warning about Iraq's alleged
weapons of mass destruction appeared to win little support
outside Washington, with France and China expressing skepticism.
For weeks, talk about a possible U.S.-led war against Iraq had
created widespread interest about Blair's long-promised dossier
about Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological arsenal.
In it and his speech to a special session of the House of Commons
on Tuesday, Blair said the stockpile is not only growing, but
that Saddam is prepared to use such weapons of mass destruction
quickly. The intelligence dossier also said Iraq has taken steps
to develop nuclear weapons. Blair, President Bush's top ally,
said he wants U.N. weapons inspectors allowed back into Iraq with
no limits on their movements.
But he also supported the U.S. goal of a "regime change" in
Baghdad, given how often Saddam has defied the world body's
requirements regarding his weapons since losing the Gulf War.
Britain and the United States are two of the five permanent,
veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council, and they have
been trying to win the support of the other three - China, France
and Russia - for a new resolution threatening Iraq for its
continued defiance.
But the French and Chinese leaders both sounded skeptical Tuesday
about Blair's speech and the dossier in comments they made while
attending a summit of European and Asian leaders in Denmark.
French President Jacques Chirac said a war with Iraq is still
avoidable if the U.N. Security Council is given a primary role in
the crisis. Chirac reiterated there was no need for a proposed
Security Council resolution threatening war if Saddam keeps U.N.
arms inspectors out.
"This is not the view of France," said Chirac, adding that only
inspectors can provide the needed proof about Saddam's weapons.
"I do not think at all that war is unavoidable."
China's prime minister, Zhu Rongji, warned that any attack
against Iraq without a U.N. blessing "will lead to severe
consequences." Calling for a U.N. mandate in the crisis, he said:
"We request that Iraq comply with U.N. resolutions without any
preconditions."
Recently, there has been confusion over Russia's position on the
need for a new U.N. resolution on Iraq, and that remained the
case Tuesday. The Russian Foreign Ministry said that British
Ambassador Sir Roderic Lyne met with Deputy Foreign Minister
Alexander Saltanovim in Moscow to discuss Iraq and the
Palestinian territories.
During the discussion, Lyne said Blair was presenting the dossier
about Iraq to the British parliament and that it would be made
available to other countries. But the Russian Foreign Ministry
said it did not receive a copy of the report during the meeting,
and made no comment about Blair's speech.
As Iraqi officials dismissed the dossier as inaccurate and an
excuse for a British and American attack on Baghdad, the White
House called its information "frightening" and praised the
British prime minister for his strong defense of U.S.-led efforts
against Saddam. In Canada, Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham
said Blair's information should be taken seriously.
In Asia, Singapore's former leader Lee Kuan Yew said a U.S.-led
war against Iraq looked likely, but warned the such a campaign
would "complicate" ties between Washington and Muslim countries.
"Few doubt that the U.S. will act to remove (Saddam) unless he
hands over weapons of mass destruction," Lee said in a speech.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
55 Siberia Orders Release of Physicist
Las Vegas SUN: Today: September 25, 2002 at 3:30:16 PDT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
MOSCOW- A court in Siberia has ordered that authorities release a
Russian physicist jailed on charges of spying for China, his
lawyer said Wednesday. Valentin Danilov, who worked at
Krasnoyarsk Technical University, has been jailed since February
2001 on charges of selling state secrets to a Chinese company and
of misappropriating money.
Danilov maintains his innocence, saying the information he
provided was no longer classified and had been published in
scientific journals. He also dismisses the charges of
misappropriating money. Danilov's trial was adjourned earlier
this year when the court sent the case back to prosecutors for
further investigation. On Tuesday, the court said Danilov would
be released from custody at the end of the week, on either Friday
or Saturday, his lawyer Yelena Yevmenova said. It is not clear
when the court will resume hearings, Yevmenova said.
Prosecutors wrapped up their second investigation of Danilov in
August. Danilov's case is part of a wave of spy trials in recent
years against Russian researchers who cooperate with foreigners -
cases that are particularly difficult for the defense since the
charges, and supporting investigative materials, are secret. The
cases have caused alarm among advocates of academic freedom.
The case also dovetails with Russia's campaign to show it is
complying with international demands that it prevent the export
of sensitive technology. According to Russian news reports,
Danilov is accused of trying to sell equipment that can model the
impact of outer space on satellites. Russian courts have
frequently turned down requests to free suspected spies pending
investigation or trial.
Earlier this month, a Moscow court refused a defense request to
free arms control researcher Igor Sutyagin, who is accused of
passing information on the development of new-generation
submarines and the combat-readiness of Russia's nuclear weapons
and missile attack warning systems to a British company allegedly
set up as a cover for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.
Sutyagin, who has pleaded innocent, has been imprisoned since
October 1999.
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
56 Germany Refuses to Endorse Dossier
Las Vegas SUN:
Today: September 25, 2002 at 12:10:14 PDT By TONY CZUCZKA
ASSOCIATED PRESS
BERLIN- Germany refused Wednesday to endorse a British warning
about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and said it remains
opposed to war, joining France and China in reacting skeptically
to a report the United States called "frightening."
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov warned on Wednesday against
building "a big propaganda campaign around this paper," but he
appeared to soften Moscow's opposition to a new U.N. resolution
on the return of weapons inspectors to Iraq.
Like the Russians, the German government said experts were
studying the dossier presented by British Prime Minister Tony
Blair, a document which details allegations that Iraq has
stockpiled chemical and biological weapons and is trying to
develop nuclear arms. But German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder,
fresh from a victorious re-election campaign that angered
Washington with its loud opposition to a war on Iraq, was
unimpressed.
"What we read there does not differ from what the German
government already knew," government spokesman Uwe-Karsten Heye
said Wednesday. Still, talks between Schroeder and Blair on
Tuesday evening were a "helpful" start in the German leader's
efforts to rebuild trust in Washington, Heye said. He refused to
give details on the talks in London, Schroeder's first trip since
the election Sunday.
U.S. and British efforts to threaten Saddam Hussein with military
force if he fails to readmit weapons inspectors under stringent
conditions have led to the worst U.S.-German rift in decades - a
dispute that has raised concern among other NATO countries about
the unity of the 53-year-old alliance. U.S. and German officials
blamed each other Wednesday for the diplomatic chill, even as the
Berlin government signaled growing eagerness to patch up the
differences.
Safely re-elected, Schroeder began making amends with Washington
this week. A Cabinet minister who reportedly compared President
Bush to Adolf Hitler won't retain her job, and Germany has
offered to take command of the international security force in
Afghanistan along with the Dutch. But the sour mood carried over
to a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Warsaw, Poland, that
ended Wednesday with a warning to Germany by Defense Secretary
Donald H. Rumsfeld.
"We have a saying in America: If you're in a hole, stop digging,"
he said. During the conference, Rumsfeld left the room just
before his German counterpart spoke, a move he insisted Wednesday
was not meant as a snub. German officials vented their own anger,
bristling at a Financial Times report that quoted National
Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice as saying the U.S.-German
atmosphere was "poisoned" - a word Rumsfeld repeated at the NATO
meeting.
"I think that all those who feel that way should reconsider
whether that was such a fortunate remark," Heye said.
He disputed that Germany was to blame for the tension, insisting
that Berlin rejects what it views as a change of U.S. strategy
from pressing Iraq to readmit weapons inspectors to ousting
Saddam. Other allies are concerned the rift will give comfort to
NATO's enemies. "It's important that we make an effort to bridge
this gap," British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon said at the NATO
meeting.
Though Germany has been most categorical in rejecting war on
Iraq, French and Chinese leaders also sounded skeptical about
Blair's Iraq dossier. French President Jacques Chirac reiterated
that he saw no need for a proposed Security Council resolution
threatening war if Saddam keeps U.N. arms inspectors out.
Only inspectors can provide the needed proof about Saddam's
weapons, he said, adding: "I do not think at all that war is
unavoidable." China's prime minister, Zhu Rongji, applied
pressure on Baghdad, saying: "We request that Iraq comply with
U.N. resolutions without any preconditions." But he also warned
that any attack against Iraq without a U.N. blessing "will lead
to severe consequences."
Britain and the United States are two of the five permanent,
veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council, and they have
been trying to win the support of the three others - China,
France and Russia - for a new resolution threatening Iraq for its
continued defiance. U.N. sanctions were imposed and inspectors
sent to Baghdad at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War to disarm
Iraq and certify that the country's weapons of mass destruction
have been destroyed. But after seven difficult years, often
peppered with crisis over access to sites and cooperation,
inspectors left Iraq in December 1998 ahead of punishing U.S. and
British airstrikes. --
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
57 AU: Critic hits out at dossier 'evidence' -
theage.com.au
September 26 2002
Australia could produce nuclear weapons within six months while
Iraq was still a year or two off nuclear capability,
international lawyer Geoffrey Robertson said today.
And the evidence against Iraq contained in a dossier unveiled by
British Prime Minister Tony Blair overnight would never stand up
in a court of law, he said.
Mr Blair claimed Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein could launch
chemical and biological weapons attacks within 45 minutes.
Mr Robertson said the dossier provided a compelling case for the
return of weapons inspectors but that was all.
"It's a rather reassuring report when you read it ... it says
Saddam is one or two years off getting nuclear capability," Mr
Robertson told Seven Sunrise. ");document.write("
"Well look, Australia could put a nuclear weapon together in six
months, Japan can do it in 20 days, New Zealand could probably do
it as fast as Saddam Hussein."
Mr Robertson said while Saddam Hussein was in serious breach of
UN accords, there was no case against him warranting war.
"It's not evidence at all that would stand up in court, it's
assertion, it's allegation, it's intelligence sources say or
intelligence reports show; that's not evidence," he said.
UN inspectors should return with the strongest possible mandate
and powers to search for weapons of mass destruction but the
dossier failed to produce evidence that justified unilateral
military action, he said.
AAP
Copyright © 2002 The Age Company Ltd
*****************************************************************
58 Uranium heads secret shopping list
Times Online
September 25, 2002
By Michael Evans, Michael Dynes, Catherine Philp, Richard Beeston
and Alice Lagnado
SADDAM HUSSEIN’S agents have been secretly shopping for uranium
in the 13 African countries that possess it as a natural
resource. The government dossier on Iraq’s weapons of mass
destruction makes only a passing reference to the African quest,
referring to recent attempts to acquire “significant quantities
of uranium from Africa”. But evidence supplied to the Cabinet
Office’s Joint Intelligence Committee showed that Iraqi
procurement agents had visited many African countries but had
failed in their attempts to buy uranium. “If Iraq had succeeded
in buying uranium from Africa, the dossier would have said so,”
one Whitehall source said.
The fear is that Saddam is secretly trying to import natural
uranium to Iraq where it could be enriched to form the core of a
nuclear weapon. Four African countries — South Africa, Gabon,
Niger and Namibia — account for 20 per cent of the world’s supply
of uranium, which is regulated by the Vienna-based International
Atomic Energy Agency. The other African countries that have
uranium are Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, the
Democratic Republic of Congo, Republic of Congo, Equatorial
Guinea, Somalia and Zambia, although there are no mining projects
in many of them. There were signs that the Iraqis concentrated on
the Democratic Republic of Congo, where there is a black market
in uranium. Large uranium deposits there have not been mined for
some years. The largest mine is at Mbuji Mayi, from where the
uranium used in the two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in 1945 was extracted.
The mine, in an area controlled by Zimbabwean troops, is in
disrepair.
The dossier reveals that for its secret nuclear project Iraq has,
since 1998, tried to buy a range of equipment for converting
uranium into bomb-grade quality. Equipment included “vacuum pumps
which could be used to create and maintain pressures in a gas
centrifuge cascade needed to enrich uranium (and) an entire
magnet production line of the correct specification for use in
the motors and top bearings of gas centrifuges”.
Other nuclear-related equipment on the list included “a large
filament winding machine for manufacturing carbon-fibre gas
centrifuge rotors”. Since 1998 Iraq had also tried to acquire
anhydrous hydrogen fluoride and fluorine gas, “commonly used in
the petrochemical industry . . . but it is also used in the
process of converting uranium into uranium hexafluoride for use
in gas centrifuge cascades”.
The dossier says that Iraq had also often tried covertly to buy
“a very large quantity (60,000 or more) of specialised aluminium
tubes (which) are subject to international export controls”. The
tubes have a potential application in building gas centrifuges
for uranium enrichment. Missile components have also been on the
list.
“Iraqi procurement agents and front companies in third countries
are seeking illicitly to acquire propellant chemicals for Iraq’s
ballistic missiles,” the dossier says. This includes
“production-level quantities of near-complete sets of solid
propellant rocket motor ingredients”.
An Indian chemical engineering company, NEC Engineers Private
Ltd, is named as having provided a key ingredient for solid
propellant rocket motors. The Delhi-based company is under
investigation by Indian and American agencies over shipments to
Iraq between 1998 and last year. Rajiv Dhir, the general manager,
was arrested and charged in June with shipping banned materials
to Iraq through middlemen in Dubai and Jordan.
He is in jail awaiting trial. Despite the United Nations arms
embargo against Iraq, in force since 1990, Baghdad has bypassed
the ban by illegally exporting oil and using the money to import
military components for its weapons of mass destruction programme
and conventional forces. “The steady increase in the past three
years in the availability of funds will enable Saddam to progress
the programmes faster,” the dossier said. It claimed that this
year Baghdad would get about £2 billion in revenue from smuggled
oil. Oil is smuggled mainly through Syria, which is also
suspected as the main conduit for the illegal import of military
equipment.
Yesterday Ukraine became the latest country accused of illegal
arms-smuggling. Washington is reported to have suspended aid to
Ukraine after intelligence reports that Kolchuga, a complex
anti-aircraft radar system, had been smuggled into Baghdad and
could threaten US and British warplanes patrolling no-fly zones
over Iraq.
Despite denials from Kiev, the allegations are based in part on
1,000 hours of recorded telephone conversations, which include
details of the arms deal being discussed with President Kuchma.
Belarus, too, has been implicated in the sale of arms to Iraq and
training Iraqi troops to use the S300 anti-aircraft missile. This
year Steven Pifer, a senior US diplomat, told Belarus that it was
putting the lives of British and American pilots in danger.
[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,549,00.html] Times
Newspapers Ltd.
*****************************************************************
59 UK: Blair's dossier assessed
BBC NEWS | Middle East |
Tuesday, 24 September, 2002, 12:23 GMT 13:23 UK
Analysis
By Paul Reynolds BBC News Online World Affairs correspondent
This dossier explains the determination of the United States and
British Governments to tackle Saddam Hussein. It is even clearer
now that if Saddam Hussein does not comply with the demands to
disarm and allow unlimited inspections, the pace of diplomacy
will become a torrent of war.
The report will strengthen the case for action among governments
which are looking for reasons to support a new Security Council
resolution with an ultimatum and a threat
This is the case for the prosecution.
The report will strengthen the case for action among governments
which are looking for reasons to support a new United Nations
Security Council resolution with an ultimatum and a threat. They
will find it compelling. It does however leave enough loopholes
for others to say that it is not conclusive.
Nuclear weapons
As expected, there is no claim that Iraq has made a nuclear
weapon. But a great deal of the detail supporting the charges
that Iraq is trying to make one is new.
In particular, the list of equipment Iraq has allegedly been
trying to buy abroad to build gas centrifuges to extract weapons
grade uranium is important.
The weakness of such reports is that nobody actually knows what
is going on in such factories. And the report acknowledges that
the factories can also be used for benign industrial purposes
The list includes the attempted acquisition of uranium from an
unspecified African country, vacuum pumps needed to maintain
pressure in a centrifuge, an entire "magnet production line" for
use in the motors and top bearings of centrifuges, anhydrous
hydrogen fluoride (AHF) and fluorine gas used in the extraction
process, a large filament winding machine, a large balancing
machine and 60,000 or more aluminium tubes which could be used to
construct the centrifuges.
The lists sounds impressive but critics will point out that Iraq
does not seem to have actually managed to get hold of these items
and that some (including the aluminium tubes, which have been
mentioned before) could be used for other purposes, as the
dossier itself accepts. Nor is the raw intelligence, on which the
claims are made, revealed.
The accumulation of this kind of detail will convince some;
others will say that the threat is not imminent
The conclusion can be used by both those supporting and those
opposing immediate military action.
It says on the one hand that "while sanctions remain effective,
Iraq would not be able to produce a nuclear weapon".
That is an argument for sanctions.
But it adds: "If Iraq obtained fissile material from foreign
sources, Iraq could produce a nuclear weapons in between one and
two years." That is an argument for action.
Chemical and biological weapons
The dossier says that Saddam Hussein did hide stocks of chemical
and biological weapons after the Gulf War.
It says that 360 tonnes of bulk chemical agents were unaccounted
for, including 1.5 tonnes for the most deadly gas of all, VX.
Growth media for three times the 8,500 litres of anthrax to which
Iraq admitted have also not been found, the report says.
As concerns links to international terrorism, well, this issue is
not dealt with in this report
But the key elements in the dossier relate to Iraq's efforts to
rebuild its ability to manufacture chemical and biological
weapons. It points to several factories which have been rebuilt.
It says that a new chemical research centre has been built and is
run by a scientist who used to work on the nuclear weapons
programme.
On the biological side, it claims that a castor oil plant, which
could be used to produce the biological agent ricin, has been
rebuilt. It also refers to information from defectors that Iraq
has made mobile laboratories to help produce biological weapons.
The weakness of such reports is that nobody actually knows what
is going on in such factories. And the report acknowledges that
the factories can also be used for benign industrial purposes.
There is new information about Iraq's plans and ability to deploy
chemical and biological weapons on the battlefield within 45
minutes. Again, this claim cannot be proved, and is possibly
based on defector' reports.
Delivery systems
The section on Iraq's programme to develop its ballistic missiles
is not the most interesting part of the dossier.
It accuses Iraq of hiding up to 20 al-Hussein (Scud) missiles
with a range of 650 km.
That claim has been made before.
One dramatic claim -- that Iraq has a missile which could hit
British bases in Cyprus -- is a little misleading. It sounds as
if this capability is new. It is not. Scud missiles could have
hit those bases in the Gulf War. And it is not even certain that
Iraq still has any Scuds. Something new is alleged in a
photograph said to be of an engine testing-bed to be used to
develop a rocket with a range of over 1,000 km. Such a rocket
could hit well into Europe.
As expected, there is no claim that Iraq has made a nuclear
weapon, but a great deal of the detail supporting the charges
that Iraq is trying to make one is new
It repeats a charge that Iraq is trying to extend the range of
two shorter range missiles which it is allowed to possess. The
dossier suggests that Iraq could use chemical or biological
warheads on its rockets but has no evidence that these have been
made. A photo is shown of a Czech-made L 29 jet trainer which
could be converted into a drone to spray chemical weapons.
Again, that charge is not new, but it is potentially significant.
However, the report speaks only of Iraqi "attempts" to convert
this plane. The accumulation of this kind of detail will convince
some; others will say that the threat is not imminent.
As concerns links to international terrorism - well, this issue
is not dealt with in this report.
*****************************************************************
60 AU: UN must take charge: Crean
theage.com.au, Breaking News
CANBERRA|Published: Wednesday September 25, 8:30 PM
Britain's dossier on Iraq strengthens the case for the entry of
UN weapons inspectors and would help the federal government move
further away from war talk, Labor said.
Labor welcomed the disclosure of information and urged the
government to produce any new information it had to ensure the
public was kept informed.
The British document would strengthen the hand of advocates of a
tough UN decision on getting weapons inspectors into Iraq, Mr
Crean said.
"I think it is a welcome and important contribution to the
debate, but the debate has to lead to the next step," Mr Crean
told ABC Radio.
"And that's the United Nations taking charge and enforcing its
own mandate.
"That's the correct course of action and that's what this
document supports."
British Prime Minister Tony Blair released a dossier last night
and spent 40 minutes meeting with Prime Minister John Howard in
London.
Mr Howard said the dossier provided compelling evidence that Iraq
had military plans for the use of weapons of mass destruction.
But he said Britain and Australia were concentrating on getting
the United Nations security council to agree to a resolution
forcing Iraq to destroy its biological, chemical and nuclear
weapons, rather than preparing for battle.
The Prime Minister was stepping back from his war footing, Mr
Crean said.
©2002 [aap]
Copyright © 2002 John Fairfax Holdings Ltd. All rights
*****************************************************************
61 Blair dossier: Iraq to reply -
CNN.com -
Sep. 25, 2002
A detailed response to Tony Blair's dossier was promised by a
cabinet chaired by Saddam
BAGHDAD, Iraq -- President Saddam Hussein's Cabinet says it will
reply in detail to the dossier on weapons of mass destruction
published by British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The Cabinet meeting chaired by Saddam condemned on Wednesday as
"lies and allegations" Blair's dossier alleging Iraq's weapons
programme is "active and growing."
"This dossier is full of false propaganda which lacks material
and convincing evidence," said a statement issued from the
meeting and carried by state television.
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on Wednesday became the
second European leader in two days to face their national
parliament over the Iraq crisis and offer support for U.S.
President George W. Bush.
Italy must support U.S. diplomatic and military efforts to ensure
that Iraq is disarmed, Berlusconi said in a hard-hitting address,
offering Washington total backing for its handling of the crisis.
UK DOSSIER
• Main points of the dossier • Read the full text (PDF
file)[external link]
10 Downing Street [external link]
"Our way of life, our destiny, both as Europeans and Italians, is
tied to that of the United States," Berlusconi said.
But other European -- and world -- politicians were slow to
follow the lead showed by Blair and his dossier published on
Tuesday. (Main points)
France -- who said it wanted to "study" the document -- and China
both said any action against Iraqi president Saddam Hussein
should be through the United Nations.
Greece was against any form of unilateral action against Iraq,
Prime Minister Costas Simitis said following a two-day meeting
between European Union and Asian leaders in Copenhagen.
Germany's Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was re-elected on Sunday
on a platform of opposing a war with Iraq and on Tuesday
travelled to London to meet Blair, seen as a bridge-building
exercise with Washington through Bush's most reliable European
ally. (Full story)
In the UK parliament on Tuesday night 56 rebel Labour MPs used a
technical motion at the end of a day-long emergency parliamentary
debate to register their opposition to a war.
Blair had told parliament that President Saddam Hussein may be
only a year or two away from possessing a nuclear bomb, and has
"military plans" for the use of chemical and biological weapons
-- "deployable within 45 minutes of an order to use them."
He also revealed that Baghdad had been "shopping" among African
countries to buy uranium to make an atom bomb. (Key quotes)
Berlusconi urged the U.N. on Wednesday to come up with a "new,
strong, clear and pressing" resolution on Iraq that could
authorise the use of force if Baghdad fails to comply with it.
The Italian premier said the international community must not
remain inactive before Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's regime.
He gave no indication, however, of what role Italy might play in
any military action.
"The historic cost of inaction might be incalculable," Berlusconi
told the lower house of parliament. "Let us proceed with courage
in the political, diplomatic and military effort that the bare
facts impose on us as our national duty," he added.
The Italian premier, a staunch Bush ally, likened Saddam's regime
to Nazism.
"Those who have lived through World War II recognize in these
words the echo of the ravings that brought on in the 1940s the
German and global catastrophe," the conservative premier said of
Saddam's regime.
[start quote] His evidence is a hotchpotch of half truths, lies,
short-sighted and naive allegations[end quote]
-- Iraq's General Amir Sadi
After the release of Blair's dossier, Bush praised the British
prime minister for bolstering his case against Iraq, in what the
White House called a frightening portrait of Saddam's "murderous
ways."
But Europe's newspapers were not so sure. The Financial Times
said the government dossier offered no compelling evidence that
immediate military action was needed.
"Nor does it present a strong argument against a policy of
enhanced containment. Its strongest impact might be in
reinforcing the case for a U.N. resolution that requires
aggressive inspections," the business daily said.
The French daily Liberation called the partnership between Bush
and Blair -- a muscular Republican and a centre-left moderate --
"an improbable duet."
"By binding his fate to that of Bush, Tony Blair takes a
significant personal risk," the paper said.
[Berlusconi]
Berlusconi was the second European leader in two days to offer
support for U.S. President George W. Bush
"In Great Britain, the opponents with an armed intervention are
much more numerous than at the time of the crisis of Kosovo, and
the absence of political and military objective clearly returns
the exit of a new war of the Gulf even more dubious."
In Germany, Berliner Morgenpost said the dossier "does not supply
spectacular pieces of news." But the paper noted that it was only
British and U.S. pressure which brought Saddam to agree to
readmit U.N. weapons inspectors.
Noting one Labour politician's view that the possible conflict
with Iraq was "a war in search of a pretext," Spain's El Pais
called the dossier "unconvincing."
"The report essentially constitutes an exercise of public
relations in support of the position of Bush," said the paper.
In Dublin the Irish Independent carried its comment under the
headline: "The death of 500,000 Iraqi children is a real war
crime."
The paper says: "Tony Blair's 'dossier' on Iraq is a shocking
document. Reading it can only fill a decent human being with
shame and outrage."
Copyright 2002 CNN. All rights reserved. This material may not be
*****************************************************************
62 The difficult burden of proof |
csmonitor.com
from the September 25, 2002 edition
EVIDENCE: Pages from the dossier presented by British Prime
Minister Tony Blair Tuesday as justification for military action
against Iraq. Blair said Iraq could launch a weapon of mass
destruction on 45 minutes' notice. DAN CHUNG/REUTERS
The difficult burden of proof
British Prime Minister Tony Blair Tuesday released a dossier on
Iraq's weapons programs.
By Scott Peterson | Staff Writer of The Christian Science Monitor
MOSCOW – To convince the world in 1962 that the USSR was
threatening the US by building missiles in Cuba, President John
F. Kennedy authorized the release of satellite photos that
clearly showed missile construction sites. While that may have
tipped the Soviets off to US intelligence capabilities at the
time, any trade-off was deemed to be worth it: The photographs
dispelled any doubt that the missile threat was real.
Forty years later, another American president is trying to
convince skeptics that Iraq presents a new, critical threat with
chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. In an effort to help
bolster Bush's case – and silence critics at home of his
pro-American stance – British Prime Minister Tony Blair Tuesday
made public a long-awaited dossier on Iraq incorporating
intelligence sources, circumstantial evidence and previously
known data.
Read before an emergency session of parliament, the report said
Iraq's chemical and biological weapons are ready for use on 45
minutes' notice. While stopping short of saying Iraq has nuclear
weapons, it said Iraq has tried to acquire uranium from Africa,
despite having no nuclear power program. According to the dossier
– which Baghdad rejected as "scaremongering, exaggeration and
lies" – Iraq has also illegally retained up to 20 missiles with a
range of 400 miles that can carry chemical or biological weapons,
and has tried to extend the range of other, smaller missiles.
Analysts say that making public such information to dispel doubt
at home may also inadvertently help the Iraqi regime prepare for
conflict. Revealing what the West knows – or doesn't know –
experts say, draws a fine line between convincing an uncertain
public to go to war and while ensuring that such revelations do
not compromise intelligence sources or potential targets.
"You don't really want to tell Saddam what you know already,
because he can use that to his own advantage," says Paul Beaver,
an independent military analyst based in London.
So far, little hard evidence about Iraq's illegal programs or its
alleged links to terrorism has surfaced. A 20-page document
released by the Bush administration less than two weeks ago, as
evidence that Iraq was due for regime change, contained, like
Blair's dossier, little new data, critics say.
Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, who is overseeing a
return of inspectors to Iraq for the first time since late 1998,
said there are "many open questions" about Iraq's efforts. "If I
had solid evidence that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction
or was constructing such weapons, I would take it to the Security
Council," Mr. Blix said earlier this month. "The satellites don't
see through roofs. So we are not drawing conclusions from them."
How far the US will go in revealing what it knows is a measure of
resolve for an eventual strike, says one official. Andrew
Krepinevich, a retired US Army strategic planner, and head of the
Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington
military affairs think tank, says: "I think you [reveal all your
evidence] when you've made the commitment that you are going to
forcibly remove [the threat], one way or another. That's the
bridge the administration has crossed."
How that evidence is presented will determine its usefulness to
Iraq, Mr. Krepinevich says. Revealing the locations and
quantities of suspect materials could cause them to be hidden
elsewhere; whereas, calculations based on what UN weapons
inspectors could not account for up to 1998 – and compelling
analysis about how that material could have been built upon in
the meantime – would not give away US target plans.
"It is more risky not to present a strong case, and to go in with
no coalition," Krepinevich says, "than to present a strong case,
and get strong backing for military action – [even if you] then
go in and do the job thoroughly by yourself."
Compromising sources is also a danger. "Doubtless, they have a
mole in the [Iraqi] system, who is telling them things, but you
can't release that because it puts the guy at risk," says Andrew
Brookes, an air war specialist at the International Institute of
Strategic Studies in London, which released its own Iraq threat
assessment two weeks ago. "So [officials] have to say, 'Trust us,
this is the game plot.'"
A smoking gun – like the Cuba photographs – may be out of reach.
"If you're looking for a dagger with a piece of paper that says,
'I'm going to kill everyone–signed, Saddam,' you're not going to
find that," Mr. Brookes says. "Those people who are in the loop
will accept the Prime Minister's word, and those who aren't may
never accept it."
Part of that skepticism is based on a recent history of
intelligence weaknesses, in which official information was
exaggerated or ignored, sometimes resulting in civilian deaths.
During the Kosovo campaign in 1999, for example, NATO airstrikes
hit more decoys than real Serb tanks; refugee columns were
accidentally struck; and the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was hit.
Anthony Cordesman, a military expert with the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington, notes in one
report that Operation Desert Fox, in which cruise missiles were
dropped on Iraq in 1998 barely impacted the regime.Earlier that
year, US bombs hit a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan, which had
been mistakenly characterized as a chemical-weapons facility. In
the first Gulf War of 1991, the US military first over-estimated
the strength of Iraqi forces, and then the damage inflicted
against Iraqi units during the 100-hour ground offensive.
Such cases raise the bar for evidence, as US and UK leaders make
the case for a new war. "Unlike the Cuba Missile crisis, you
can't provide a photo of it," says Krepinevich. "If you are a
skeptic, the last Gulf War demonstrated that you had no clue
about how many [WMD] stocks Iraq had."The question is: What kind
of evidence are the fence-sitters going to find persuasive?"
Krepinevich adds. "There will be the track record to go up
against, and, quite frankly, there are probably some people who
will never be convinced."
Copyright © 2002 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights
*****************************************************************
63 Brazil uranium sales to Iraq stir debate*
By Carmen Gentile Published 9/24/2002 8:52 PM
RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil, Sept. 24 (UPI) -- Recent allegations by a
dissident Iraqi scientist that Saddam Hussein's regime is
constructing nuclear weapons using uranium supplied by Brazil
during the early 1980s have led to the re-emergence of claims
that the country smuggled large amounts of the material to Iraq
in exchange for oil and nuclear weapons technology.
In an interview with The Times of London last week, Khidir Hamza
-- who defected from Iraq in 1994 -- told the British newspaper
that 1.3 tons of low-enriched material bought from Brazil was
being processed for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
However, according to Brazil's Jornal da Tarde newspaper, which
recently reprinted a 1990 expose entitled "The dark history of
the relationship between Brazil and Iraq," Brazil sold three
large shipments of uranium to Iraq in clandestine transactions.
An International Atomic Energy Agency report says that U.N.
weapons inspectors, during a 1991-97 investigation into Iraq's
nuclear capabilities, found some 27 tons of uranium originating
from Brazil.
An investigation by Jornal da Tarde and its parent publication,
Estado de Sao Paulo, claims that Brazil exported "dozens of tons"
of uranium to Iraq between 1979 and 1990 in undocumented deals.
Brazil's National Commission of Nuclear Energy still maintains
that any nuclear material sold by Brazil to Iraq during that time
was powdered uranium dioxide, a raw material used for nuclear
reactor fuel.
"That material -- which is not the same as the material known as
'yellow cake' (uranium freshly mined from the ground that cannot
be used for nuclear weapons) -- was not smuggled," said a
statement sent to United Press International.
"The chemical or physical form of the element is not the same as
the element used to manufacture nuclear weapons.
"That uranium was under international safeguards of the IAEA,
properly identified, catalogued and sealed, which can be
confirmed by inspectors of the agency itself," the statement
said.
An IAEA official told UPI from the organization's headquarters in
Vienna that the statement was "valid" and that "what remains of
the original Brazilian-sourced uranium is indeed stored at a
facility in Iraq, which is under ongoing IAEA safeguards."
"That is, our inspectors visit annually to verify that the same
quantity of material remains and that IAEA seals on the
containers remain intact," said the official.
Despite the Brazilian nuclear commission's insistence that it
engaged in no wrongdoing at the time, the Iraqi scientist's claim
has rekindled interest in Brazil's former relationship with Iraq,
now considered the next target for the U.S.-led war on terror.
Word of clandestine uranium shipments from Brazil to Iraq first
surfaced in a 1981 report by Bernardo Kucinsky, a former
correspondent for Britain's Guardian newspaper.
Now a professor of journalism at Sao Paulo University, Kucinsky
told UPI that Brazil didn't really "smuggle" uranium to Iraq some
20 years ago. Rather, it engaged in "secret shipments without the
knowledge of the Americans or international nuclear regulatory
authorities."
Kucinsky recounted how in the '70s and '80s, Brazil's military
regime forged an agreement with the Iraqi government, based on
established relations regarding civilian work contracts granted
to Brazilian companies.
That agreement, he said, would oblige Brazil to ship uranium to
Iraq in exchange for a steady oil supply after the 1979 oil
crisis.
"There was a strong possibility of oil from Iraq being
interrupted," recalled Kucinsky. "In those days, the Brazilian
state company (Petrobras) depended largely on Middle East oil
Unlike the U.S. policy, Brazil didn't attempt to diversify its
sources."
Because Brazil relied heavily on Middle Eastern oil (more than 70
percent of its imports came from that region), officials in the
regime were "panicked at the time," said Kucinsky.
"They said that was the reason (for shipping uranium to Iraq);
they wanted an exchange of two forms of energy," he recounted.
Authorities at the time stressed that Brazil could not supply
enriched uranium to Iraq because it lacked the technological
ability to transform the material into the weapons-ready variety.
It is a stance that Brazil maintains to this day. The nuclear
agency's statement noted that "in order to produce a nuclear
weapon, the uranium needs to be enriched, a complex technology
that is mastered by a restricted group of countries."
Despite the denials, Kucinsky said that he believes Brazil's
military dictators had an ulterior motive in the early '80s for
forging a relationship with Iraq -- namely, the creation of the
country's own nuclear weapons program.
Brazil was conducting what many then referred to as "parallel
nuclear programs." One was an aboveboard financing of projects
utilizing nuclear power as an energy source; another was the
regime's unofficial pursuit of nuclear warheads.
"So it is possible that the agreement included also the exchange
of nuclear information," said Kucinsky. "Brazil would get nuclear
help from Iraq as oil in exchange for its uranium."
What aroused suspicions at the time that Brazil's relationship
with Iraq wasn't what it appeared was the June 7, 1981, bombing
by Israeli fighter jets of an Iraqi nuclear reactor in Osirak.
"This is what attracted attention to the whole issue," he said.
Twenty-one years later, a possible new clue to the exact nature
of Brazilian-Iraqi ties is adding further credence to the theory
that Brazil indeed sold weapons-ready uranium to Iraq in exchange
for help in developing its own nuclear program.
Jornal da Tarde reported last week that about 40 Brazilian
scientists were in the Osirak power plant during the 1981 Israeli
bombing.
"This brings forth the suspicion that this agreement between Iraq
and Brazil was not only in exchange for oil but also there was
some sort of nuclear, scientific cooperation between the two
countries to develop nuclear weapons," Kucinsky said.
While not an admission to collaborating with Iraq on nuclear
weapons, a Brazilian nuclear commission official told UPI on
condition of anonymity that during the 1980s, "Iraq was seen as
just one more commercial partner." The official said that "Saddam
was not at that time, the monster that he is today."
The Times interview with Hamza notes another possible clue tog
the nature of Brazil-Iraq relations in the early 1980s.
Before leaving Iraq in 1998 -- just days before U.S.-led air
strikes -- U.N. weapons inspectors had dismantled an illegally
imported German centrifuge installation that had been used to
refine progressively natural or low-enriched uranium until it
became suitable for weapons, the Times reported.
German scientist Karl-Heinz Schaab -- who had been sought by
German authorities since 1990 on charges of selling German
uranium enrichment technology to Iraq before the Gulf War -- had
spent time in Rio de Janeiro while eluding German authorities. He
was captured returning to Germany and convicted of treason in
1999.
In March 1998, Brazil's Federal Supreme Court turned down an
extradition request for Schaab, saying he was charged with a
politically motivated crime, which meant that under Brazilian
law, could not be extradited.
While the Hamza interview might have revived old memories of
Brazil's one-time relationship with Iraq, some experts said they
found his comments on Brazilian uranium exports misleading.
David Albright, president of the Washington-based Institute for
Science and International Security, said that there is no
evidence that the non-enriched uranium sold by Brazil is being
used for nuclear weapons development in Iraq, as indicated by
Hamza's remarks to The Times.
"What we understand from our own work is that it's inspected
every year because it's under the non-proliferation treaty," said
Albright, referring to the 1968 U.N. Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty that now includes 187 countries -- including Iraq.
"It was all there, last inspection, though there are worries that
if there's war, Iraq may divert it."
What also concerns Albright is the seemingly arbitrary singling
out of Brazilian uranium by Hamza as the alleged material used
for suspected weapons development.
According to IAEA data, several nations -- including Italy,
Nigeria and Portugal -- sold uranium of varying levels of
enrichment to Iraq, some in quantities greater than Brazil.
And France and Russia sold relatively small amounts -- 50
kilograms -- of highly enriched, weapons-ready uranium to Iraq
during the same period.
Iraq could use Brazilian uranium in weapons of mass destruction
if it had the time and technology to complete the sophisticated
process of enriching the material, said Albright.
"There is some uncertainty about what Iraq has, but most people
view that it is a problem of the future -- that Iraq could build
a uranium-enrichment plant ... if it was under pressure it may
use the uranium from Brazil or other places," he said, noting the
process would take "several years."
"This thing that Hamza caused is inexcusable," said an irate
Albright, who in conversation with UPI railed against the Iraqi
scientist's allegations.
He called them "speculative" and "misleading" on several
occasions and added: "You can quote me on that."
Copyright © 2002 United Press International
*****************************************************************
64 CROET chasing second land transfer
The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News --
a.m. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002
by R. Cathey Daniels Oak Ridger staff
Another piece of real estate is headed down the DOE-to-CROET
pipeline, should a transfer request to the federal agency be
granted. The Department of Energy property in question is a
parcel on the far east end of Oak Ridge, 175 Oak Ridge Turnpike,
just prior to the Elza Gate center. The property, approximately
14 acres, has been home to DOE's Office of Scientific and
Technical Information and other government programs.
The property is not on the city's list of self-sufficiency
parcels. The Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee
placed the Aug. 26 request under the "transfer rule," a
little-used DOE mechanism devised to speed up land conveyance and
assist energy communities with economic development. Since its
institution in 2000, only five applications from across the DOE
national complex have been made under the federal rule, and Oak
Ridge has three of those in the hopper.
CROET is responsible for two of those requests, one for the OSTI
parcel and one for a portion of the Horizon Center property; and
Methodist Medical Center in mid-summer made a request for
property on Vance Road in the heart of its medical complex.
The Horizon Center transfer is expected to be completed by the
end of the year, but the final deadline has for months been a
moving target. The local DOE office has a 90-day window to
respond to requests under the rule, but there are no time
restraints on headquarters. "CROET and its subsidiaries have
always been pioneers, and we're pioneers in the 770 process,"
CROET Executive Director Lawrence Young told the organization's
board of directors Tuesday. Jim Cayce, senior real estate officer
at DOE headquarters in Washington, D.C., said this morning that
the department continues to encourage energy communities to
utilize the rule, but that he shares frustration with CROET that
the process has thus far been slow.
As to the other two applications, one in Portsmouth, Ohio, was
halted due to the incompatibility of economic and environmental
considerations, and one in Idaho Falls was granted.
Two other applications were granted prior to institution of the
rule, but with the rule in mind, said Cayce. The rule resides
under Code of Federal Regulations 10, Part 770, and gives
authority to the department to transfer land at less than fair
market value -- including giving the land away.
Applications must be in the form of "a proactive request from an
outside entity" and must prove economic development need and show
how it will benefit the community.
CROET's request does not preclude other entities from applying
for the transfer.
The rule also spells out existing legislation that the DOE will
be liable for impacts of contamination it has caused on the
property prior to transfer. Indemnifying second and third parties
has been a sticking point with the Horizon Center transfer, but
Cayce noted that language that would allow indemnification to
"run with the land" has been handed off to congressional
representatives.
The rule has been harshly criticized locally by Advocates for the
Oak Ridge Reservation for encouraging land transfer without
environmental assessment and minus adequate planning.
Land transfer without adequate environmental review has long been
a controversy in Oak Ridge and is one reason the DOE formed the
Land Use Planning Focus Group which just completed its work.
In other CROET news, the board passed its fiscal year 2003 budget
that Young said is designed to move away from DOE largess toward
private funding. According to Chief Financial Officer Charlotte
Maraman, DOE grants fund about 48.6 percent of the new budget,
with the bulk of that from a $1.4 million final installation of a
DOE grant. Young said that minus that grant, which is not
expected to be renewed, the CROET is edging toward the zero mark
in DOE funds.
"We've been attempting to become self-sufficient and the entire
budget is predicated on that through the sale and lease of land,"
said Young. The budget increased about 30 percent in
administrative costs over FY 2002, which is attributed mostly to
increased insurance costs and additional training for staff,
Maraman said this morning. CROET is investing over $170,000 of
the $1.4 million grant toward workforce development, and is
currently accepting proposals for that grant money. For more
information, organizations should contact the CROET offices,
482-9890.
The majority of the $1.4 million grant will go to Heritage Center
and the National Transportation Research Center. Young noted that
in allocating the funds CROET is fulfilling a 1998 commitment to
the DOE, which is when the funds were originally requested.
In other news, employment numbers were down in August at Heritage
Center, or the K-25 site. Tenants and subcontractor employees
totaled 383 in August, compared to 415 in July. About 23 percent
of those are displaced federal workers.
At BNFL, the workforce stood at 770 for August, down from 819 in
July. The CROET board met at 4 p.m. at the Oak Ridge Mall. R.
Cathey Daniels can be contacted at (865) 220-5515 or
danielsrcd@oakridger.com [danielsrcd@oakridger.com] .
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
65 Questions surface on USEC deal
The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News --
a.m. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002
by R. Cathey Daniels
Oak Ridger staff
The accelerated cleanup schedule has bumped up against another
federal endeavor, but Department of Energy officials say both
programs can be accommodated.
USEC, a private company specializing in supplying enriched
uranium fuel for commercial power plants, plans to lease from the
Department of Energy space in four buildings at the Oak Ridge
K-25 site for research and development.
Problem is, at least two of those buildings are on the DOE
take-down list.
"That's part of the negotiations," said Dale Jackson, director of
the office of nuclear fuels security and uranium technology with
DOE's Oak Ridge Operations office.
"At this time that's where we are, but we're negotiating that,"
said Jackson. "We're not making a commitment that compromises the
closure schedule. USEC may have to accelerate operations, but we
just have to work that out. The department made a commitment to
facilitate both programs, and we'll just have to work through
that."
Other leasing arrangements at the K-25 site are in jeopardy due
to the closure schedule through accelerated cleanup, and most of
those are associated with the DOE's reindustrialization program,
which is an attempt to lure industry to the K-25 site to assist
economic development.
At least one local group recently outlined concerns about the
start-up of the USEC research and development project. Those
concerns were registered as part of public comments to DOE on a
draft environmental assessment for transfer of the facilities.
The Citizens' Advisory Panel, which supports the Oak Ridge
Reservation Local Oversight Committee, expressed concerns with
the conflict of programs, as well as health and safety of
workers, oversight and costs associated with the project.
The Local Oversight Committee, funded by the state, provides
advice on environmental issues surrounding DOE decisions and
operations.
"The environmental assessment does not examine how these
buildings can continue to be used and the workers kept safe in
the presence of large-scale D, including vibration, noise, dust
(including radioactive or hazardous-materials dust), heavy
equipment and potential disruption of utilities," wrote the
Citizens' Advisory Panel.
"Buildings K-1600 and K-101 are scheduled for demolition under
the new accelerated cleanup plan. Are these buildings in
sufficiently good condition to accommodate a new mission? What is
the status of any contamination they may contain?"
Also of concern is removing oversight from the purview of state
and other federal entities and instead placing it in the hands of
DOE.
"If state and federal regulations are waived in favor of DOE
oversight, then how will the public interest be served regarding
emissions and worker health and safety?" asked representatives of
the Citizens' Advisory Panel, which suggested leasing the
facilities through the Community Reuse Organization of East
Tennessee rather than through DOE.
Susan Gawarecki, executive director of the Local Oversight
Committee, asked the CROET board Tuesday to look into that
option.
"There are ways to return more to the community that DOE could
explore," said Gawarecki.
CROET is leasing a small portion of one building to USEC for
administrative needs.
As to health and safety, Jackson said: "Subject to completion of
a satisfactory environmental assessment, DOE would implement
effective health and safety through our requirements and
work-smart standards. We're developing those work-smart standards
currently to address these issues."
Also of concern are possible costs accruing to taxpayers.
"Once USEC is finished with its lease, possibly after the cleanup
of the rest of the site is complete, the question arises as to
who will be financially responsible for decontamination and
decommissioning of the remaining facilities," the Citizens'
Advisory Panel wrote.
"If DOE, then there will be a considerable increased cost in
having to hire another contractor, reopen the Š disposal cell (or
ship off-site) and ensure sufficient environmental management
funding to complete the job.
"If USEC will have responsibility for the (cleanup), then the
community will want financial assurance that they will be able to
follow through on their commitment."
Jackson stressed that the project is fully funded by USEC.
According to Cindy Hunter, Oak Ridge Operations realty officer,
about 105,000 square feet of four buildings will be leased to
USEC by the DOE for the work.
Those buildings are K-1600, K-101, K-1037 and K-1220.
USEC has signed a $121 million, five-year agreement with the
Department of Energy to work with the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory to validate equipment and technology already developed
for future deployment at a new centrifuge facility to be sited
either in Paducah, Ky., or Portsmouth, Ohio.
The project will be performed under a Cooperative Research and
Development Agreement which extends through 2007, and will be
funded entirely by USEC, according to DOE officials.
ORNL will receive $28.5 million from USEC over the next few years
for design, testing and analysis work.
Jackson said he could not comment on specifics of the work inside
the buildings due to "proprietary reasons."
R. Cathey Daniels can be contacted at (865) 220-5515 or
danielsrcd@oakridger.com. [danielsrcd@oakridger.com.]
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
66 DOE to prepare an environmental impact statement for plutonium
pits
The Oak Ridger Online -- Area News --
a.m. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002
from staff and wire rpeorts
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- The Department of Energy says it will prepare
an environmental impact statement on a proposed $4.1 billion
factory for nuclear weapons cores, called plutonium pits.
As reported in The Oak Ridger's Sept. 19 edition, neither the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory nor the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant,
both in Oak Ridge, Tenn., were among five possible sites to be
examined, DOE said. Earlier reports suggested Oak Ridge might be
on the list, but Oak Ridge Lab spokesman Bill Stair said, "To my
knowledge we have never been considered as a potential site for
this facility." DOE's Savannah River Site, a former nuclear
weapons complex in Aiken, is considered the front-runner for the
pit facility. Other DOE sites in the running are Los Alamos
National Laboratory in New Mexico; the Nevada Test Site near Las
Vegas;
Pantex Plant at Amarillo, Texas; and the Waste Isolation Pilot
Plant at Carlsbad, New Mexico. The United States' pit production
operations shut down in 1989 at DOE's Rocky Flats facility near
Denver, and no pits have been made since. Los Alamos is
developing an interim facility that could make as many as 50 pits
a year by 2007. DOE wants a permanent facility operating by 2020.
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
67 Patton says USEC deal still priority -
[http://www.paducahsun.com/] The Paducah Sun Paducah, Kentucky
Wednesday, September 25, 2002
Local leaders had been concerned his attention may have been
elsewhere this week.
By Bill Bartleman bbartleman@paducahsun.com--270.575.8650
Associated Press Patton meets the press: Gov. Paul Patton speaks
with reporters in Frankfort.
Gov. Paul Patton said he is spending considerable time this week
fine tuning an incentive package to attract USEC Inc.'s pilot
plant for testing the gas centrifuge technology for enriching
uranium. At stake for western Kentucky is a $250 million plant
and hundreds of high-paying jobs and possibly a $1 billion
enrichment plant that USEC plans to build in 2010 or 2011. The
new plant would replace the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
which employs more than 1,000 workers. "I am fully engaged in the
USEC project," Patton said Tuesday in a telephone interview. "It
is one that I am personally involved in. At the present time it
is the most important project we are working on." McCracken
Judge-Executive Danny Orazine and Paducah Mayor Bill Paxton
expressed concern Monday that Patton might be preoccupied with
personal problems and not focused on finalizing the USEC
proposal, which must be filed by Oct. 25.
Since Patton admitted Friday that he had a sexual affair with
Clinton businesswoman Tina Conner, he has cut back on his public
schedule. But he said he is continuing to run state government
and focus on "being the best governor I can be for the next 14
months." One reason Orazine and Paxton expressed concern was that
they were unable to schedule a meeting with the governor on
Thursday to discuss details of the USEC proposal.
Patton said Tuesday that he was unaware Paducah officials had
requested a meeting. "If I had been aware they wanted a meeting,
I certainly would have met with them," he said.
Orazine said a plan to meet with the governor's staff and
officials in the Economic Development Cabinet on Thursday has
been canceled. Instead, they hope to meet with Patton after he
meets with his staff and members of a task force he appointed to
work on the USEC proposal. Mike Haydon, secretary of the Finance
Cabinet, said the meeting will be Monday. He said discussion will
focus on the details of the proposal and speculation on how
competitive it will be with the one by Piketon, Ohio, which is
also trying to land the plant. Orazine said after talking with
Haydon and other members of Patton's staff Tuesday, he is
convinced the governor is actively involved.
"I know now he made some calls Monday and today (Tuesday), not
only to his economic development staff but also to some here in
Paducah who have been actively involved," Orazine said. "Since he
is having a meeting with his task force on Monday, there is no
need for us to meet with him until after the meeting," Orazine
said. Patton promised a competitive package but would not discuss
details. "These things have to be done in confidence," Patton
said. "You don't play your cards on the table, because we are in
very fierce competition. Ohio isn't telling us what they are
doing, so we don't want to tell them what we are doing.
"We'll have a proposal that will be fair to USEC, fair to the
commonwealth and fair to the community. But the sky's not the
limit. We have to weight the cost-benefit ratio by evaluating the
benefit to the commonwealth and the cost to taxpayers."
Patton said the proposal won't be presented to USEC until the
Oct. 25 deadline. "We don't want to risk the chance that somebody
might reveal something to Ohio," he said.
Patton said that if his economic development officials think it
will help, he'll meet with USEC officials to help present the
package. Also Tuesday, local officials briefed the McCracken
County legislative delegation on elements of the proposal that
could require legislative action. State Rep. Charles Geveden,
D-Wickliffe, whose district includes the USEC plant, said it
involves tax incentives, but he wouldn't be specific. He said the
proposal is likely to be considered when lawmakers meet in
February. "It is a very reasonable request and something that I
certainly think can be done," Geveden said.
*****************************************************************
68 David Broder: Bush rewriting classic definition of conservatism
The Oak Ridger Online - Opinion -
p.m. on Wednesday, September 25, 2002
WASHINGTON -- The restatement of the United States' fundamental
defense doctrine issued by the Bush administration last week --
substituting pre-emption of potential threats for containment of
aggression -- is probably the most dramatic and far-reaching
change in national security policy in a half-century.
But it is also part of a pattern of radical revisionism in basic
governmental philosophy and structure engineered by George W.
Bush, who is quietly rewriting the classic definition of
conservatism.
The word, as this president uses it, has little or nothing to do
with the traditional conservative inclination to preserve the
status quo. Instead, it suggests a very bold and risk-taking
readiness to re-examine, revise and restate basic tenets of
government. It is a pattern that now pervades Bush's economic,
social and foreign policy and makes this, in some respects, a
truly radical government.
Consider economics. The centerpiece of Bush's policy is his
belief in the efficacy of tax cuts under any and all
circumstances. It was hardly novel for a Republican president to
push for lower tax rates early in his term, as Bush did last
year. And the budget surpluses then accumulating caused
opposition Democrats to agree that revenue reductions, slightly
smaller in scope, were appropriate.
What is different is Bush's insistence that tax cutting should
continue, even with the return of budget deficits and even with
the prospect of staggering, long-term additional spending on the
military, homeland defense and the war on terrorism. Facing
deficits in his second year, Ronald Reagan acquiesced in
Congress' rollback of some 1981 tax cuts. In a similar situation
in his second year, the president's father made the same
concession to a Democratic Congress. This George Bush has broken
the pattern.
Consider education. The hallmark of conservative thinking has
been the insistence on local control of schools. Bush has pushed
through the largest expansion of the federal role in education of
any president since Lyndon Johnson, not just in dollars but, more
importantly, in standards of performance and measures of
achievement, backed by real sanctions. Consider social programs.
Bush has backed an ongoing effort to shift the line on
church-state relations, bringing civil and religious authority
much closer together. He proposed direct public funding of
parochial schools and applauded when the Supreme Court approved
the Cleveland voucher plan. He has lobbied hard for legislation
that would route much more federal money aimed at meeting the
needs of troubled individuals and families through churches,
synagogues and mosques. For good or ill, he is trying to narrow a
gap that has existed between the clergy and the government since
the start of this republic. Consider retirement security.
In the face of cautions from members of his own party and strong
criticism from the Democrats, Bush has kept on his agenda the
proposal to change the Social Security program -- that staple of
New Deal policy -- to permit individual workers far more freedom
to devise their own basic pension plans, with all the potential
risks and rewards such a change might entail. If Republicans
regain control of Congress in this election, he almost certainly
will try to make this concept law. And now Bush has put before
the world, first in his West Point speech and last week in a
formal state paper, a fundamental revision of American foreign
and national security policy.
That policy developed in stages, from the imperialism that marked
the decades before World War I, to the isolationism that
prevailed between the wars, to the bipartisan "containment''
policy that evolved during the Cold War. The common
characteristic of the whole 20th century was the readiness of the
United States to respond to threats to its security and its
reluctance to initiate conflict or issue ultimatums to anyone.
When aggressors pushed forward, we pushed back -- hence, Korea,
Vietnam and the Gulf War. But we did not start fights ourselves.
Now, with the doctrine of pre-emption justified by the all too
real threat of terrorism, Bush is proposing to scrap that
distinction. Instead, he asserts the right of the United States,
as the only superpower, to judge the degree of potential danger
itself -- and to take whatever action it deems necessary to
eliminate that threat.
You may think any one of these changes is wise or foolish. What
is remarkable is that all of them have come in so short a time
from the hand of a man whose campaign seemed so bland and whose
election was so narrow. Bush really is redefining what it means
to be a conservative. (c) 2002, Washington Post Writers Group
All Contents ©Copyright The Oak Ridger
*****************************************************************
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:
*****************************************************************