*****************************************************************
05/28/02 ****     RADIATION BULLETIN(RADBULL)       **** VOL 10.135
*****************************************************************
   RADBULL IS PRODUCED BY THE ABALONE ALLIANCE CLEARINGHOUSE
*****************************************************************

                         NUCLEAR POLICY
 
1 Iran Will Allow Inspections of Nuclear Plant
2 US: NRC Draft Report Finds Mcguire License Renewal Environmentally 
3 US: NRC to Hold Meeting June 7 in Lynchburg, Virginia To Discuss 
4 US: NRC Announces Workshop on Medical Rule Draft Inspection Guidance
5 Finnish Greens Resign over New Nuclear Power Plant 
6 Finland votes for "renewable" nuclear 
7 Nuclear plant delays expected to jolt pricing
8 Westinghouse to supply nuclear fuel to Ukraine in 2003 
9 Finnish Green Party leaves government to protest plans to build 
 
                         NUCLEAR REACTORS
 
10 Japan: Hamaoka article
11 US: Energy NW considers continued refinancing
12 US: NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 30 - NRC Chairman to
13 US: NRC Orders Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants And GE Fuel 
14 US: Clamp on Drills Seen Raising Risk at U.S. Reactors
15 US: River Bend Nuclear plant gets warning 
16 Ling'ao Nuclear Plant Begins Commercial Operations 
17 Japan: Radioactive water leaks again
18 Hamaoka N-plant pipe not fully checked 
19 Iran Will Allow Inspections of Nuclear Plant 
 
                          NUCLEAR SAFETY
 
20 RU Cancer occurrence going up in Oryol region 
 
                         NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
 
21 US: S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say
22 US: Making the feds pay extra
23 US: Plutonium flap pits feds against S. Carolina - 
24 US: NRC Announces Meetings on Proposed Rule for Packaging and 
25 US: Yucca Mountain lurks on Senate race horizon 
26 US: Nuclear caravan safety stressed
27 US: Nevadans lobbying Utah against Yucca
28 US: Nuclear waste hauling disaster unlikely
29 US: Nuclear waste a mountain of a problem
30 US: NUCLEAR REPOSITORY: Nye County has its own Yucca plan
31 US: S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say
 
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS
 
32 Putin Rejects US Claims on Iran-Russia Nuke Cooperation 
33 Iran to Allow Int'l Nuke Plant Inspections; Some Want US Ties 
34 Why the Bush-Putin Deal Won't Make the World Safer
35 [toeslist] Chossudovsky: USA IS PUSHING INDIA & PAKISTAN TO WAR
36 US: Senate don't let Bush cancel ABM treaty
37 U.S., Russians fight N-threats
38 Rivals compete in deadly race to step up nuclear arms production
39 Fallout would reach Australia 
40 Nuclear rivals 'cannot afford war'
41 Pakistan has secretly built up nuclear arsenal
42 US: Journalists See An Alarming Trend In Terror Warnings
43 The Adventures of 'Intercontinental' Man 
44 Nuclear threat casts dark shadow over NATO summit 
45 World plea to stop first nuclear war 
 
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
                         FULL NEWS STORIES
*****************************************************************
*****************************************************************
 1 Iran Will Allow Inspections of Nuclear Plant

* World - Reuters*

/Mon May 27, 8:44 AM ET/

LONDON (Reuters) - International inspectors will monitor an 
Iranian nuclear power plant, under construction with Russian help 
and the main bone of contention during last week's summit between 
Moscow and Washington, a senior Iranian official told a 
conference Monday.

The head of Iran's parliamentary energy commission Hossein 
Aferideh said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
planned visits over the course of the year to the Bushehr plant.

The IAEA, an arm of the United Nations, said Monday it was 
already advising on safe construction of the plant, though full 
inspections called for under Iran's safeguards agreement with the 
IAEA from 1974 would not begin until nuclear material was 
delivered to the facility.

"The IAEA has visited the site, but regular IAEA inspections will 
begin with the initial receipt of nuclear material at the 
facility," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told Reuters. "That 
should call for about four to six inspections per year."

The IAEA safeguards agreement requires that a country declare all 
civilian nuclear material and permit regular inspections by the 
agency.

Each visit from the Vienna-based IAEA would consist of several 
inspectors and last a couple of weeks, Aferideh said. The site 
would be visited monthly, he added.

The inspection plans should ease concerns in Washington about the 
reactor which Aferideh said was due to come online at the end of 
next year or early in 2004 to help satisfy growing Iranian 
electricity demand.

However, the IAEA's Fleming said Iran had not signed on to the 
so-called additional protocol which permits far more invasive 
inspections aimed at rooting out secret nuclear weapons programs, 
though the agency was urging Iran to adopt it.

"If they do not sign up for this, we still know quite a bit. But 
we do not have the same access as we would with this additional 
protocol," she said.

The issue was the main sticking point during an otherwise 
harmonious summit last week between President Bush.

Bush has labeled Iran part of an "axis of evil," accusing Tehran 
of seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction and sponsoring 
terrorism.

Both Tehran and Moscow insist Iran's atomic energy program is 
confined to civilian use.

Aferideh's comments followed a statement from Iranian Foreign 
Minister Kamal Kharrazi Sunday in which he told the official 
Iranian news agency that the construction of the reactor was 
under the IAEA's supervision.

"So far the project is going very well. We have more than 1,000 
Russian experts there," Aferideh told delegates at a London 
conference on investment in Iran.

He insisted that Iran, rich in oil and gas, had the right to 
develop a nuclear contribution to its energy mix and that the 
reactor was a peaceful application of nuclear technology.

A senior U.S. official last week called Russia's help in building 
the plant the current single biggest worldwide nuclear 
proliferation threat.

/Sun Jun 2,10:13 PM ET/ - (Reuters)

Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 2 NRC Draft Report Finds Mcguire License Renewal Environmentally 
Acceptable; Public Input Sought at Meetings in June
 
   NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 29 - 

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, 
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov

  No. II-02-029           May 24, 2002 CONTACT:     Ken Clark 
(404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     E-mail: 
opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]   
  
  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is seeking public 
comment on its preliminary conclusion that there are no 
environmental impacts that would preclude renewal of the 
operating licenses for the two units at the McGuire nuclear plant 
near Huntersville, North Carolina. The information is contained 
in a draft environmental impact statement on the proposed license 
renewal issued earlier this month. That document is open for 
public comment until August 2, and will also be the subject of 
public meetings on Wednesday, June 12. Two similar meetings will 
be held in the auditorium at Central Piedmont Community College, 
11920 Verhoeff Road, Huntersville. There will be one session in 
the afternoon at 1:30 and one in the evening at 7:00. In 
addition, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour 
prior to each meeting. NRC staff members will be available to 
answer questions and provide additional information about the 
process during those informal sessions, but no comment submittals 
on environmental issues will be accepted then.
 
The two sessions will begin with identical overviews, including a 
discussion by NRC staff and its contractors of the contents of 
the draft supplement to the GEIS. The meeting will then be opened 
for public comment.
 
For planning purposes, interested parties are encouraged to 
pre-register to attend or to present oral comments at the June 12 
meetings by contacting James Wilson of the NRC by telephone at 
(800) 368-5642, extension 1108, or by e-mail at 
McGuireEIS@nrc.gov [McGuireEIS@nrc.gov] no later than June 7. 
Interested persons may also register to speak before the start of 
each session. Time for individual comments at the meetings may be 
limited to accommodate all speakers.
 
Written comments on the draft supplement to the GEIS will also be 
considered by NRC staff. Comments should be submitted either by 
mail to the Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of 
Administrative Services, Mail Stop T-6 D 59, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by e-mail to 
McGuireEIS@nrc.gov [McGuireEIS@nrc.gov] . 

The NRC has been reviewing the application for extension of the 
McGuire licenses since Duke Energy, which operates the plants, 
filed it in June 2001. Under NRC regulations, the original 
operating license for a nuclear power plant is issued for up to 
40 years. The license may be renewed for up to an additional 20 
years if NRC requirements are met. The current operating licenses 
for McGuire will expire on June 12, 2021, for Unit 1 and March 3, 
2023, for Unit 2.
 
The possible environmental effects of an additional 20 years of 
nuclear plant operation are described in the NRC's Generic 
Environmental Impact Statement, or GEIS (NUREG-1437). The NRC 
issues a site-specific supplement to the GEIS on each plant 
requesting license renewal to address the potential environmental 
impacts. Issues specific to McGuire are addressed in Supplement 
8. The NRC staff's preliminary recommendation is that the 
Commission determine that the adverse environmental impacts of 
license renewal for the two units at McGuire are not so great 
that preserving the option of license renewal for energy-planning 
decision makers would be unreasonable.
 
The draft supplement to the GEIS, along with other related 
documents, is available electronically for public inspection in 
the NRC Public Document Room at NRC headquarters, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; or 
electronically on the Internet at 
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/supple 
ment8/. In addition, the J. Murrey Atkins Library at the 
University of North Carolina in Charlotte has agreed to make the 
draft supplement to the GEIS available for public inspection.
 
At the conclusion of the public comment period the NRC staff will 
consider and address the comments provided and issue a final 
supplement to the GEIS. That supplement will contain a 
recommendation regarding the environmental acceptability for 
license renewal.
   


*****************************************************************
 3 NRC to Hold Meeting June 7 in Lynchburg, Virginia To Discuss 
Performance at BWX Technologies Nuclear Fuel Plant
 
 NRC: Press Release Region II - 2002 - 30 - 

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Office of Public Affairs, 
Region II 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, GA 30303 www.nrc.gov

  No. II-02-030           May 24, 2002 CONTACT:     Ken Clark 
(404) 562-4416 Roger D. Hannah (404) 562-4417     E-mail: 
opa2@nrc.gov [opa2@nrc.gov]   
  
  Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials will meet with 
officials of BWX Technologies, Incorporated, in Lynchburg, 
Virginia on June 7 to discuss the agency's latest review of the 
facility's safety performance. The meeting is scheduled to begin 
at 9:30 a.m. (EDT) in the Lynchburg City Hall, located at 900 
Church Street. The meeting is open to observation by the public, 
and NRC officials will be available prior to its conclusion to 
answer questions from interested observers.
 
In a letter to the company dated May 2, Luis A. Reyes, 
administrator of the NRC's Region II office in Atlanta, said that 
the agency evaluated performance at the plant for a period from 
March 11, 2001 through March 9, 2002. He said the evaluation 
determined that the company has "continued to demonstrate a 
strong safety performance" with special strengths in its 
"response to the September 11 event" and its "comprehensive and 
timely licensing actions." He said one area needing improvement 
was identified which was related to management oversight of 
material control and accounting activities.
 
NRC officials said that, based upon the results of the review, 
the agency will continue its current level of inspection at the 
plant. 

Copies of the May 2 letter to BWX Technologies, with enclosures 
outlining details of the performance review, may be obtained from 
the Region II Office of Public Affairs in Atlanta and will be 
available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) in Washington, D.C., or on the NRC's 
Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) internet 
web site at www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the public 
electronic reading room).
   


*****************************************************************
 4 NRC Announces Workshop on Medical Rule Draft Inspection Guidance
 
   NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 65 - 

 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]
  
  No. 02-065     May 24, 2002   
  
  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will conduct a workshop on 
June 6 to discuss and obtain comments on draft inspection 
guidance for medical use licensees. The workshop will be held 
from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. at NRC headquarters in the Auditorium, 
located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland. It will focus on the revised guidance to 
facilitate inspections under the recently published revision to 
NRC's regulations on medical use of byproduct material. NRC is 
especially interested in comments that will improve the guidance 
to be more oriented toward end results and make more use of risk 
information. The workshop will be preceded by an open house at 8 
a.m., which will provide an opportunity for informal interactions 
between NRC staff and meeting attendees. 

The draft guidance will be available at NRC's interactive 
rulemaking web site located at 
http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/cgi-bin/library?source=*&amp;library=rg 
_lib&amp;file=* 
[http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/cgi-bin/library?source=*&library=rg_li 
b&file=*] . For information about this web site, contact Ms. 
Carol Gallagher at 301-415-5905 or by e-mail at CAG@nrc.gov 
[CAG@nrc.gov] . 

The guidance is also available through the NRC Public Document 
Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F23, 
Rockville, MD 20852, telephone 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737. 

Written comments on the draft guidance may be submitted to the 
Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division of Administrative 
Services, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 
20555, by June 21. 

For more information about the draft guidance and upcoming 
workshop, contact Wade T. Loo at 404-562-4727, or by email at 
WTL@nrc.gov [WTL@nrc.gov] .
   


*****************************************************************
 5 Finnish Greens Resign over New Nuclear Power Plant 

[news@ens-news.com]  

HELSINKI, Finland, May 27, 2002 (ENS) - Finland's Green 
Environment Minister Satu Hassi today resigned in protest at 
Friday's parliamentary vote in favor of constructing a new 
nuclear power station. 

Hassi's party voted Sunday to quit the coalition government, 
leaving Greens participating in just two European Union 
governments, down from four just a month ago. 

[Hassi] Environment Minister Satu Hassi (Photo courtesy 
Government of Finland) In the run-up to elections due in nine 
months time, the Finnish Green Party will now campaign in favor 
of renewables and higher energy taxes, a political advisor to 
Hassi told reporters. 

Hassi became environment minister in April 1999, replacing 
another Green. While in office she made strong efforts to support 
international agreement on the Kyoto climate protocol. Hassi also 
promoted adoption of eco-efficiency goals. 

Finland's parliament Friday backed in principle the construction 
of a new nuclear power station, marking the first such approval 
in Europe for over a decade and bucking a trend towards phasing 
out nuclear power in several other EU countries including Germany 
and Sweden. In a free vote, MPs approved the government proposal 
by 107 to 92. 

Nuclear power alone is not sufficient to restrain greenhouse gas 
emissions, Finland's industry ministry said, but is an important 
element. 

MPs agreed that Finnish policies aimed at compliance with the 
Kyoto climate protocol should also include support for renewable 
energy and energy conservation measures. 

Under parliament's resolution, power firm TVO now has five years 
to apply for a construction permit for what would be Finland's 
fifth nuclear power station. Before reaching this stage, it will 
have to decide between two possible sites on which to build the 
plant. 

[reactor] The 27 year old Kola Nuclear Power Plant is one of 
Finland's four existing nuclear plants. (Photo by Thomas Nilsen 
courtesy  [http://www.bellona.org] ) Finland's nuclear decision 
has sparked strong reactions from across Europe. EU Energy 
Commissioner Loyola de Palacio got involved, praising Finland's 
energy and nuclear waste policies and repeating her view that 
nuclear power has a vital role to play in maintaining European 
energy security. 

For the European nuclear energy lobby Foratom, parliament's 
decision "clearly recognized the economic and environmental 
advantages of nuclear." 

Finland's energy industry federation, Finergy, described it as a 
"correct decision" that would "facilitate the achievement of 
national climate objectives." 

But for the Finnish Association for Nature Conservation, the vote 
meant parliament had "rejected sustainable development" and 
delivered a "severe backlash to the environment." 

The Greens in the European parliament also expressed 
disappointment, saying the decision "defies all international 
trends." 

"It is a total illusion to assume that the climate problem could 
be solved with nuclear power," the Greens said in a statement. 
"If nuclear energy use was to be doubled from the current seven 
percent in the world during the next 25 years, one new nuclear 
plant would have to be built every week. This would of course 
produce equally immense safety risks and nuclear waste problems." 

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2002. All Rights
*****************************************************************
 6 Finland votes for "renewable" nuclear 

OSLO - Finland's parliament votes for first nuclear power plant 
in western Europe in over a decade bringing relief sighs out of 
nuclear industry.

  Heidi Hautala, European Parliament member from the greens in 
Finland. Foto: Thomas Nilsen   

Igor Kudrik, 2002-05-28 15:21

European Transport and Energy Commissioner Loyola De Palacio has 
welcomed the recent decision of the Finish Parliament to build a 
fifth commercial nuclear reactor. Russian Minister for Nuclear 
Energy, Aleksandr Rumyantsev, expressed his hopes that Russia 
would win the bid to construct the reactor. Amid this the greens 
abandon the Finish government in protest. 

"It is impossible to reverse the decision now," said Heidi 
Hautala, European Parliament member from the greens in an 
interview with Bellona Web. "The political pressure is quite 
strong, but anything can happen by 2010 before the plant should 
be actually completed." 

The final vote on Friday last week in favour of the proposal to 
allow the power company TVO to build a new nuclear reactor was 
107 to 92 with no absentees or abstentions. 

The authorisation for the construction of the plant will be made 
by the Government that takes office after next year's March 
elections. TVO says that it expects that the new nuclear facility 
should be operational by 2010. 

But the political decision is taken and the job left is 
administrative such as to locate a construction site and complete 
certification. No pool of investors has been formed yet, but as 
the political decision is there it should also be a routing 
procedure. 

Finland currently operates two nuclear power plants — Olkiluoto 
and Loviisa — comprised of two reactor units each. The Loviisa 
reactors are of the pressurised water type (PWR), supplied by the 
Russian company Atomenergoexport. The Olkiluoto plant utilises 
boiling water reactors (BWR) built by Asea-Atom (currently 
Westinghouse Atom) from Sweden. NPPs stand for one third of 
electricity production in Finland, the rest comes from gas and 
bio energy.
 
  Finish Prime Minister Lipponen wants independence from Russian 
gas and believes in renewable nuclear energy. photo: Pentti 
Koskinen / HS   

Independent and emissions free

 The dependence on the Russian gas supplies was one of the 
arguments used heavily in campaign for endorsement of the fifth 
reactor construction. 

"Nuclear power is a climate-friendly form of energy production, 
causing no carbon dioxide or other emissions. Therefore, 
utilising nuclear power is a good method of preventing global 
warming." 

This "straight and forward argument" stands on the Finish energy 
company TVO web site and that was the second argument used by the 
pro-nuclear lobby. Finland has to build the plant to meet the 
emissions quota set by the Kyoto agreement. 

But Heidi Hautala says that it is not exactly right. Finland does 
not have to build a nuclear power plant to meet the Kyoto 
requirements. The country could well do that increasing the use 
of renewable energy sources — such approach was proposed by the 
greens but was rejected. 

"The majority in the government chose not to go ahead with 
revolutionary energy policies but rather to rely on the status 
quo," Hautala said. 

Nuclear breakthrough?

 The nuclear energy debate in Finland has been lasting for the 
past 20 years. In the meantime the western European countries 
have a split in their approach to the use of the "peaceful atom." 
Sweden was the first country to hold a referendum on nuclear 
energy in 1980 and decided to phase it out. Germany and Belgium 
have more recently pledged to avoid this technology in future and 
many other countries have explicitly said they would build no 
more nuclear power plants. France, however, stands traditionally 
pro-nuclear, cultivating nuclear energy as a national pride. 

Although being a great support to the western European nuclear 
industry, some experts play down the significance of Finland's 
decision. 

The International Energy Agency predicts a sharp drop in 
nuclear's importance in western Europe in the next 20 years, its 
share in electricity consumption falling to 16 percent from 31 
percent by 2020. This reduction will be compensated to a greater 
degree by an increase in natural gas and, to a much lesser 
extent, growth in renewable energy. 

But due to unpredicted fossil fuels price fluctuations, those 
countries who have already said no to nuclear still keep nuclear 
power plants in operation for long "phase-out" terms. 

On the other hand, nuclear power will not enjoy the vast support 
by the national governments like it was in the past with 
liberalisation of European energy market, Peer de Rijk from WISE 
said to Reuters. And without governmental support nuclear energy 
may still have hard economy, taking into consideration management 
of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Suffice it to say, 
no country in the world has found a way to dispose of high active 
nuclear waste, primarily spent nuclear fuel, although research 
has been underway for almost two decades. Greens have to be back 
in fight

 Nuclear industry smelling the ripe time is working actively to 
make nuclear a part of renewable energy sources and squeeze it 
into the Kyoto agreement implementation. 

Heidi Hautala says that until today each EU member state was to 
decide whether to develop nuclear energy sector. Now there are 
calls for a new discussion, which suggests European Commission 
involvement into such issues. 

"Including nuclear energy into renewable sources is an illusion," 
says Hautala. But to prove that, using both environmental and 
economic arguments, is the job for the greens relaxed by the 
previous victories.   

  Publisher: Bellona Foundation [bellona@bellona.no] , President: 
Frederic Hauge [frederic@bellona.no] Information: info@bellona.no 
[info@bellona.no] , Technical contact: webmaster@bellona.no 
[webmaster@bellona.no] Telephone: +47 23 23 46 00 Telefax: +47 22 
38 38 62  * P.O.Box 2141 Grunerlokka, 0505 Oslo, Norway
*****************************************************************
 7 Nuclear plant delays expected to jolt pricing

 May 27, 2002

 Nuclear plant delays expected to jolt pricing Pickering 
generator: Electricity producers said to be rethinking Ontario 
investments

 Paul Vieira Financial Post 

  Andy Clark Reuter, Reuters

 NUCLEAR PLANT IN PICKERING, ONT.: Further delay in startup of 
generator.

The delay in Ontario Power Generation Inc.'s efforts to bring its 
troubled Pickering A nuclear plant back into production could 
have an impact on the supply, reliability and price of hydro in 
the province, industry watchers say.

"The delay in returning Pickering A to service, combined with the 
[Hydro One uncertainty] and slowdown in private-sector 
investment, is substantially increasing the risk of big price 
swings and big price spikes," said Tom Adams, executive director 
of Energy Probe. "When you combine all these factors together, 
the consequence for Ontario's power outlook is profoundly 
unfavourable."

The uncertainty surrounding Pickering A, Mr. Adams and others 
say, has forced electricity producers to rethink their investment 
in Ontario, largely because they can't get a grip on where 
electricity prices are headed.

At full capacity, the nuclear plant, located east of Toronto, can 
produce 2,000 megawatts of power -- or enough for a city of two 
million.

"Pickering A has certainly been a factor in evaluating where 
prices will be," said Duane Cramer, vice-president of development 
for Sithe Energies Inc., a New York-based power utility that has 
two projects under way in suburban Toronto. "We see Pickering A 
more as a spectre than an operating unit -- and as long as it is 
out there, there will be a depressing view on the power price."

Prices have been stable since Ontario's $10-billion market opened 
its doors to competition on May 1. Under the new regime, 
utilities can build generation plants in the province and sell 
the power into the market. That, in turn, is suppose to create 
competitive electricity pricing. However, two key elements in 
Ontario's reforms remain unresolved.

First, a court ruling blocked the privatization of Hydro One, the 
Crown-owned transmitter. The sale through an initial public 
offering is in question as the province re-evaluates the 
strategy.

But more recently, OPG, the Crown-owned generator, announced 
another delay in the startup of its Pickering A nuclear 
generator.

Pickering A was shut down in December, 1997, due to safety 
concerns. OPG had planned to get the first of four units at 
Pickering A back into service in early 2001, and forecasts 
developed by Ontario's Independent Electricity Market Operator -- 
which runs the province's wholesale power market -- assumed that 
when it suggested the province had an ample supply of power.

But structural and engineering problems have delayed Pickering 
A's restart -- with the latest setting back generation until late 
this year or early 2003. The cost has ballooned as well, from an 
original estimate of $800-million to the most recent estimate of 
up to $2.2-billion.

John Earl, a spokesman for OPG, said getting Pickering started is 
in the company's, and public's, best interest. "OPG, as 
commercial venture, is returning Pickering A to service based on 
what we believe to be the best advantage for the customer and for 
ourselves as a corporation," he said.

Mr. Adams said Pickering is hanging over the industry like a dark 
cloud. "What the Pickering restart has done is to scare away a 
tremendous amount of investment in alternative generation," he 
said. "And now the absence of Pickering -- since its driven away 
alternatives to Pickering -- leaves Ontario with a big hole in 
its power system."

In an October, 2000, hearing before the Ontario Energy Board, an 
executive with Union Gas Ltd. said forecasts for natural gas 
demand indicated a downward turn because utilities looking to 
build gas-fired plants had scrapped or delayed plans because of 
the Pickering A restart. "[If] the Pickering plant comes back 
into play, the marginal cost of electricity coming out of that 
facility will make it very difficult for a startup operation to 
be able to compete with [OPG]," said Rick Birmingham, Union Gas's 
vice-president of finance and business development.

While a number of companies, such as Sithe and Montreal's Boralex 
Inc., say they have plans to build generation facilities in 
Ontario, "they are no where to be seen and way behind schedule," 
Mr. Adams added.

But one industry insider disagreed, saying utilities are cautious 
because of soft electricity prices. "Low prices are fine for 
consumers and the government, but not for generators," the 
insider said. "The prices are just too low. It makes the game a 
little more confusing." [pvieira@nationalpost.com]    
 	 	
    Copyright © 2002 National Post Online | Privacy Policy |
*****************************************************************
 8 Westinghouse to supply nuclear fuel to Ukraine in 2003 

/Mon May 27, 7:54 AM ET/

KIEV, Ukraine - U.S. energy giant Westinghouse will begin 
supplying nuclear fuel to a Ukrainian power plant next year, news 
reports said Monday.

The Yuzhna Nuclear Power Station in southern Ukraine will begin 
experimental use of six Westinghouse-supplied nuclear fuel 
cartridges at reactor No. 3 next year, the Interfax news agency 
reported. If tests prove successful after one year, Ukraine could 
buy as many as 42 fuel cartridges from Westinghouse.

Currently, Russia supplies all the fuel used by Ukraine's four 
operating nuclear power plants.

No price has been agreed for the sale, but Yuzhna Nuclear Power 
Station director Borys Bilyk said that the cost will be 
comparable to that of Russian fuel, Interfax reported.

Ukraine's costs for nuclear fuel supplies this year are expected 
to total dlrs 246 million.

The Westinghouse deal was made possible by Ukrainian-U.S. 
agreements covering peaceful uses of nuclear energy and fuel 
source diversification programs.

Ukraine was the site of world's worst nuclear catastrophe in 
1986, when a reactor at the Chernobyl power plant exploded and 
caught fire, spewing radiation over much of Europe. Chernobyl was 
closed down for good in 2000.

(tv/adc)

Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The
*****************************************************************
 9 Finnish Green Party leaves government to protest plans to build 
new nuclear reactor 
                                
Sun May 26, 2:17 PM ET 

HELSINKI, Finland - Finland's Green Party said Sunday it will 
withdraw from the government to protest plans to build a fifth 
nuclear reactor in the Nordic country.

The anti-nuclear Green Party is part of the five-party governing 
coalition and has 11 lawmakers in the 200-seat Parliament, as 
well as one seat in the Cabinet — Environment Minister Satu 
Hassi. Hassi will resign on Monday.
 
Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen said he expects a new environment 
minister to be selected from within the remaining coalition 
parties and installed next week.
 
The move was expected and did not threaten the government.
 
The four remaining coalition parties — the Social Democratic 
Party, the Conservative Party, the Left Alliance and the Swedish 
People's party — have 130 seats in Parliament.
 
Green Party Chairman Osmo Soininvaara said Sunday that the group 
will now focus on next year's election, after which they will be 
open to rejoining the government.
 
A majority within the party had called for pulling out of the 
coalition after Parliament on Friday voted 107 to 92 in favor of 
the new reactor. The speaker abstained.
 
Finland has two atomic power stations, each with two reactors. 
One at Olkiluoto, 250 kilometers (155 miles) northwest of the 
capital, the other at Loviisa, 90 kilometers (55 miles) east of 
Helsinki.
 
The site of a fifth reactor has not been decided, but it is 
likely to be constructed at one of the two existing plants.
 
(moz-krg)
 
                          Full Coverage
   
  
                    In-depth coverage about 
                 <b>Nuclear Power and Waste</b>
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/*http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Nuclear_Power_and_Waste/]
                                 
  
  
                      Related News Stories
   
  ·    A Nuclear Confrontation Shapes Up
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20News%20Stories/A%20Nuclear%20Confrontation%20Shapes%
20Up/*http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-060202plu
tonium.story]  - LA Times (registration req'd) (Jun 2, 2002)   
  ·    Alarm as tribe offers land for nuclear dump
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20News%20Stories/Alarm%20as%20tribe%20offers%20land%20
for%20nuclear%20dump/*http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/sto
ry/0,3604,724309,00.html]  - The Guardian (UK). (May 30, 2002)   
  ·    Reservations over Indian tribe's nuclear dump
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20News%20Stories/Reservations%20over%20Indian%20tribe%
26%2339%3Bs%20nuclear%20dump/*http://www.timesonline.co.uk/articl
e/0,,3-311631,00.html]  - The London Times (May 30, 2002)   
  ·    Fears over nuclear pollutant cancer risk
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20News%20Stories/Fears%20over%20nuclear%20pollutant%20
cancer%20risk/*http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_201
4000/2014509.stm]  - BBC (May 29, 2002)   
  ·    Nev. Senator Caught Between a Rock And a Waste Dump
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20News%20Stories/Nev.%20Senator%20Caught%20Between%20a
%20Rock%20And%20a%20Waste%20Dump/*http://www.washingtonpost.com/w
p-dyn/articles/A23812-2002May28.html]  - Washington Post (May
29, 2002)   
  <b>More...</b>
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Nuclear_Power_and_Waste/]   
  
                       Opinion &Editorials
   
  ·    Nuclear NIMBYs
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Opinion%20%26%20Editorials/Nuclear%20NIMBYs/*http://www.bayare
a.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/3364739.htm]  - San Jose
Mercury News (May 30, 2002)   
  ·    Common sense on Yucca
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Opinion%20%26%20Editorials/Common%20sense%20on%20Yucca/*http:/
/www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion/article/0,1299,DRMN_38_11
37403,00.html]  - RockyMountain News (May 10, 2002)   
  ·    The Davis-Besse pill
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Opinion%20%26%20Editorials/The%20Davis-Besse%20pill/*http://ww
w.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Date=20020510&Category=OP
INION02&ArtNo=105100111&Ref=AR]  - Toledo Blade (May 10, 2002)   
  ·    Senate's nuclear choice: Ending 20-year struggle to build
nuclear dump is safety, energy issue
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Opinion%20%26%20Editorials/Senate%26%2339%3Bs%20nuclear%20choi
ce%3A%20Ending%2020-year%20struggle%20to%20build%20nuclear%20dump
%20is%20safety%2C%20energy%20issue/*http://www.mlive.com/news/grp
ress/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/news-0/1021
04370167151.xml]  - Grand Rapids Press (May 10, 2002)   
  ·    Times’ editorial undermines Nevada case against Yucca
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Opinion%20%26%20Editorials/Times%92%20editorial%20undermines%2
0Nevada%20case%20against%20Yucca/*http://www.rgj.com/news/stories
/html/2002/04/21/12626.php]  - Reno Gazette-Journal (May 8,
2002)   
  <b>More...</b>
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Nuclear_Power_and_Waste/]   
  
                        Feature Articles
   
  ·    A New Generation of Chernobyl Victims
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Feature%20Articles/A%20New%20Generation%20of%20Chernobyl%20Vic
tims/*http://dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1434_A_507120_1_A,00.html
]  - Deutsche Welle (Apr 26, 2002)   
  ·    How safe is safe?
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Feature%20Articles/How%20safe%20is%20safe%3F/*http://www.csmon
itor.com/2002/0418/p14s02-sten.html]  - Christian Science
Monitor (Apr 18, 2002)   
  ·    Designing Flowing Liquid Metal Walls to Support Fusion
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Feature%20Articles/Designing%20Flowing%20Liquid%20Metal%20Wall
s%20to%20Support%20Fusion/*http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech
/DailyNews/fusion020205.html]  - ABCNews.com (Feb 5, 2002)   
  
                        Related Web Sites
   
  ·    State of Nevada: Nuclear Waste Project Office
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20Web%20Sites/State%20of%20Nevada%3A%20Nuclear%20Waste
%20Project%20Office/*http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/index.htm] 
- includes sections on the Yucca Project environmental impact
statement [http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/eis/yucca/index.htm]
, comments [http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/comments.htm] by
state agencies and officials, and more.   
  ·    Yucca Mountain Project
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20Web%20Sites/Yucca%20Mountain%20Project/*http://www.y
mp.gov/]  - includes fact sheets, project studies, environmental
impact statements, and information on the proposed storage site.
From the U.S. Department of Energy.   
  ·    Nuclear Waste: Technical, Schedule, and Cost
Uncertainties of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Related%20Web%20Sites/Nuclear%20Waste%3A%20Technical%2C%20Sche
dule%2C%20and%20Cost%20Uncertainties%20of%20the%20Yucca%20Mountai
n%20Repository%20Project/*http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/gao/
yuccamtndec2001rpt.pdf]  - GAO report produced for congress,
released December 2001. In pdf
[http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/adobepdf.html] format,
from FindLaw.   
  <b>More...</b>
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Nuclear_Power_and_Waste/]   
  
                              Audio
   
  ·    Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository proposal
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Audio/Yucca%20Mountain%20nuclear%20waste%20repository%20propos
al/*http://www.kqed.org/audioarchive/frameset/forum/2002/01/2002-
01-15a-forum.html]  - KQED (Jan 15, 2002)   
  <b>More...</b>
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/World/Nuclear_Power_and_Waste/]   
  
                              Video
   
  ·    Bush and Putin sign nuclear arms treaty
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Video/Bush%20and%20Putin%20sign%20nuclear%20arms%20treaty/*htt
p://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/jdrive/smil/ter052402_bush.smi]
 - C-SPAN (May 24, 2002)   
  ·    House Hearing on Transportation of Nuclear Waste to
Proposed Yucca Mountain Site
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Video/House%20Hearing%20on%20Transportation%20of%20Nuclear%20W
aste%20to%20Proposed%20Yucca%20Mountain%20Site/*http://video.c-sp
an.org:8080/ramgen/jdrive/smil/e042502_yucca.smi]  - C-SPAN (Apr
25, 2002)   
  ·    Post-9/11 security at nuclear power plants
[http://dailynews.yahoo.com/r/fcweb/World%2FNuclear_Power_and_Was
te/Video/Post-9%2F11%20security%20at%20nuclear%20power%20plants/*
http://video.c-span.org:8080/ramgen/ldrive/ter011702_nuclear.rm]
 - with Richard Meserve U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Chairman - C-SPAN (Jan 17, 2002)   

  


  Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 10 [Fwd: Hamaoka article on Japan Times]
 
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 00:00:58 +0200

 
-------- Original Message --------
From: - Sun May 26 15:11:15 2002

From: Mari Takenouchi <mari999@pop.jk9.so-net.ne.jp>
Subject: Hamaoka article on Japan Times
Cc: mari999@pop.jk9.so-net.ne.jp

Dear all,

The following is one of the most concerned NPP related problems in Japan.

The four Hamaoka nuclear power plants are located in the middle of an
intraplate earthquake-prone region, where the Great Tokai Earthquake (M8
class one, 15 to 30 times more powerful than the 1995 Hanshin 
Earthquake) is predicted to occur.

Last Novermber, Hamaoka 1 had two major accidents-a pipe rupture by 
hydrogen detonation and water leak from the pressure vessel.  Due to 
these accidents, Hamaoka 1 and 2, both of which were constructed in 
1970s, had been temporarily shut down.

A lawsuit seeking injunction of Hamaoka, with more than 1000 plaintiffs, 
are underway since the end of April.


In the midst of citizens' concern, on May 24, the Hamaoka 2 reactor 
resumed its operation with a very short notice (within a few hours of 
public announcement).  Then, within one day,  a water leak occured from 
ECCS system, resulting in the manual shut down.


Mari Takenouchi
International Relations
Citizens' Nuclear Information Center


Japan Times.

Sunday, May 26, 2002

Nuclear plant leaks radioactive water

SHIZUOKA (Kyodo) Radioactive coolant water was found leaking from a 
valve at a nuclear power plant in Shizuoka Prefecture early Saturday -- 
just one day after it resumed operations. The leak was discovered at the 
No. 2 nuclear reactor at Chubu Electric Power Co.'s Hamaoka Nuclear 
Power Plant in the city of Hamaoka.

A fine mist of coolant water was discovered leaking from a welded spot 
on a valve for the reactor's low-pressure core injection system during a 
regular patrol of the facility at around 2:20 a.m. Steps were taken to 
manually shut down the 840,000-kw boiling-water reactor.
The process was completed at 4:34 a.m. No radioactive material has been 
released outside the reactor, Chubu Electric officials said.

The valve where the leak occurred is part of the reactor's emergency 
core cooling system. The ECCS system is one of the most important 
protection measures to ensure the safety of nuclear reactors as it is 
designed to reduce the temperature of the reactor's core by
flooding it with water in an emergency, according to the officials.

It is estimated that roughly 600cc of coolant water per minute had 
leaked from the valve. Judging from the liquid on the floor, some 20 
liters had probably been released, the firm said.

The company began closing the inner valve at 6:41 a.m. and the leak was 
reportedly stopped at 7:14 a.m. Officials have been unable to pinpoint 
exactly what time the leak began.

The coolant water registered a radioactive density of 103 becquerels per 
cu. cm. Radioactivity in the vicinity of the valve was 0.08 
millisieverts per hour, it added. The total amount of radioactive 
exposure suffered by the 15 Chubu Electric personnel who worked 
tocontain the problem came to 0.12 millisieverts, according to Chubu 
Electric.

The Hamaoka plant was also affected by accidents in November, including 
an incident when steam leaked through a pipe in a high-pressure 
core-injection system of its ECCS. The pipe had ruptured due to a 
ductile fraction caused by extreme pressure -- probably explosive 
hydrogen combustion -- on Nov. 7. A leak of radioactive coolant
water was identified three days later.

The No. 2 reactor was temporarily shut down along with the No. 1 reactor 
after these incidents since the two facilities share the same structure 
and construction. The pipes of the two reactors were exchanged to reduce 
hydrogen build-up.

Saturday's accident occurred as the No. 2 reactor restarted operations 
on Friday. It was to start transmitting power Saturday, Chubu Electric said.

Company officials said tests and inspections at the No. 2 reactor ahead 
of the resumption of operations found nothing wrong with the piping.

"This leak is not an accident that directly affects the safe operation 
of the nuclear power plant," said Junichi Ishihara, head of the 
utility's operations group, at a news conference at the firm's 
headquarters in Nagoya on Saturday morning.

"It is very regrettable that the water leak occurred, since we had been 
conducting thorough inspections since we suspended operations," Ishihara 
said. "While we do not think this is a minor problem, we cannot reduce 
the occurrence of small problems to zero."

But antinuclear groups criticized the latest incident, saying it was 
unacceptable for such an accident to occur so soon after operations 
resumed after an inspection.

They also said that nuclear safety authorities should share the 
responsibility for allowing Chubu Electric to resume operations at the 
plant.

Some experts pointed out that the latest leak is proof that the reactor 
is too old. The No. 2 reactor began commercial operations in 1978, two 
years after the No. 1 reactor.

Later in the day, Chubu Electric Power President Fumio Kawaguchi issued 
a statement apologizing for the incident.

"The trouble occurred after we discover the cause (of the leak) and take 
appropriate measures," the statement said.

Chubu Electric was criticized for its delay in notifying authorities of 
the November accidents. It said it reported the latest leak to the 
central and prefectural governments, as well as the five neighboring 
municipalities, between 3:07 a.m. and 3:20 a.m.

The Japan Times: May 26, 2002
(C) All rights reserved



About us / Contact us / Advertising /






*****************************************************************
 11 Energy NW considers continued refinancing

published 5/27/2002

By Chris Mulick<BR> Herald staff writer

Energy Northwest is studying whether to continue to refinance its 
nuclear plant construction bonds.

The proposals would not further delay the payoff dates for the 
Columbia Generating Station and two abandoned plants but would 
cut the amounts due until 2013.

The cash-strapped Bonneville Power Administration is requesting 
the refinance so it can put off steep payments.

Four transactions since 2000 that were approved by Energy 
Northwest's governing board have delayed the payoff date for the 
1,150-megawatt Columbia Generating Station at Hanford from 2012 
to 2018. Bonds for the two never-completed plants also were 
refinanced, but their payoff dates are unchanged.

Currently, Plant No. 1 at Hanford is to be paid off in 2017 and 
Plant No. 3 at Satsop in 2018. The former Washington Public Power 
Supply System defaulted on $2.25 billion in bonds for two other 
never-completed plants, No. 4 at Hanford and No. 5 at Satsop.

Dave Armstrong, Bonneville's corporate risk manager, said his 
agency does not intend to delay payoff dates further, though BPA 
and Energy Northwest could decide otherwise. Instead, future 
refinancings simply would inflate the balloon payments due 
between 2013 and 2018.

Refunding to date have provided BPA with $1 billion in cash 
relief through 2012. Another $2.2 billion is possible with 
further refinancing, and Bonneville plans to request refunding 
annually.

The agency wants to use the money to pay down higher-interest 
debt it owes the U.S. Treasury for construction and operating 
costs of the 29 federal dams it operates.

The refinancing reduces BPA's interest costs for the next decade. 
The agency is being pressured by its customers to cut costs after 
being forced to raise rates last year and figures to raise them 
again this year. Finding ways to limit rates has become BPA's top 
priority, Administrator Steve Wright said.

"That's going to be our guiding light," he said.

That leaves Energy Northwest in a bit of a pickle. Further 
refinancing could help BPA, and thus the entire Northwest, in the 
short term.

"When you get to the bottom line, anything that helps Bonneville 
helps ratepayers," said Vera Claussen, a member of Energy 
Northwest's executive board. "We have to be fair."

But further refunding will leave the utility carrying the bulk of 
its original construction debt for years longer.

"The longer it's out there, will it still drag down the name of 
Energy Northwest? Who knows?" asked executive board Chairman John 
Cockburn.

Energy Northwest began its refinancing program in 1989 to cut 
interest costs. By 2000, the utility had ensured $1.7 billion in 
savings by cutting its average interest rate from 10.5 percent to 
5.4 percent. Most of those savings already have been realized.

Bonneville has been the primary beneficiary. Had all those 
savings been used to "double up" on nuclear debt payments, 
Columbia and Plant No. 1 could have been paid off in 2008 and 
Plant No. 3 in 2010.

Instead, $6 billion remains due on the original $6.1 billion 
construction debt.

Ratepayers have been paying hundreds of millions of dollars a 
year to retire that debt, but through the refundings, some money 
ultimately has been used by BPA for other purposes. What those 
purposes would be in the future may determine whether Energy 
Northwest allows further refinancing.

If savings were used to build power plants or transmission 
facilities, which could produce revenue and help pay for 
themselves, that would be one thing.

But there is concern BPA ultimately would be tempted to use the 
money for short-term operating costs, like emergency power 
purchases in a drought.

Armstrong said Bonneville is committed to using the refunding to 
restructure its debt portfolio, which in some years will provide 
tens of millions in savings.

"We're looking at the bigger picture here," he said.

Though Bonneville is confident it will be able to generate the 
revenue, Energy Northwest's Vic Parrish worries the region won't 
be able to afford the balloon payments.

"At some point, you're going to run up against that wall," said 
Parrish, Energy Northwest's chief executive officer.

Tri-City Herald Online

*****************************************************************
 12    NRC: Press Release Region III - 2002 - 30 - NRC Chairman to
           Visit Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant on May 30
 
+ 


  [NRC Seal/Skip Navigation]   
  [ border=]     Site Help | Site Index | Contact Us        
Advanced Search   
  


  [ border=]     [ border=] 
[ border=]   
  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission     [ border=]   

  
  [ border=]   
  [ border=]   



  [ border=]     Home     [ border=]     Who We Are     [
border=]     What We Do     [ border=]     Nuclear Reactors    
[ border=]     Nuclear Materials     [ border=]     Radioactive
Waste     [ border=]     Public Involvement     [ border=]    
Electronic Reading Room     [ border=]   



  Home > Electronic Reading Room > Document Collections > News
Releases > 02-030
 
  
  [NRC Seal]     


  NRC NEWS
 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 
Office of Public Affairs, Region III
 801 Warrenville Road, Lisle IL 60532
 www.nrc.gov
   

  
  
  



  No. III-02-030           May 28, 2002   
  CONTACT:     Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663
 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662     E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov
[opa3@nrc.gov]   
  

NRC CHAIRMAN TO VISIT FERMI 2 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ON MAY 30
 

  
  Richard A. Meserve, the Chairman of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, will visit the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant on May
30, and will be available to meet with news media
representatives at 5:00 p.m. when he completes his visit. The
plant is operated by DTE Energy. 
Chairman Meserve will meet with media representatives at the
City Council Chambers, Monroe City Hall, 120 East 1st Street,
Monroe.
 
The Chairman will tour the facility and meet with NRC resident
inspectors, other NRC personnel, and utility and plant managers
to discuss operations, safety and security measures at the plant.
   


*****************************************************************
 13 NRC Orders Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants And GE Fuel 
Storage Facility to Enhance Security
 
   NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 63 - 

 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]
  
  No. 02-063     May 24, 2002   
  
  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued Orders requiring 
all decommissioning commercial nuclear power plants with spent 
fuel stored in water-filled pools and a spent nuclear fuel 
storage facility using pool storage to implement interim 
compensatory security measures for the current threat 
environment. Some of the requirements formalize a series of 
security measures that NRC licensees had taken in response to 
advisories issued by the NRC in the aftermath of the September 11 
terrorist attacks. Additional security enhancements, which have 
emerged from the on-going comprehensive security review, are also 
spelled out in the Orders.
 
The security requirements will remain in effect until the 
Commission determines that the level of threat has changed, or 
additional security measures are needed following a comprehensive 
re-evaluation of current safeguards and security programs. The 
Commission views these compensatory measures as prudent, interim 
steps to address the current threat environment in a consistent 
manner.
 
The Commission recognizes that the licensees have voluntarily and 
responsibly implemented additional security measures following 
the events of September 11. But the Commission determined that it 
should require certain security measures by Order so that they 
are maintained within the established regulatory framework.
 
The specific security measures addressed by the Orders are 
understandably sensitive, but generally include requirements for 
increased patrols, augmented security forces and capabilities, 
additional security posts, installation of additional physical 
barriers, vehicle checks at greater stand-off distances, enhanced 
coordination with law enforcement and military authorities, and 
more restrictive site access controls for personnel. 
  


*****************************************************************
 14 Clamp on Drills Seen Raising Risk at U.S. Reactors
 
Reuters Wire | 05/27/2002 | 

[http://www.macon.com]       
    
 BY LEONARD ANDERSON
 
SAN FRANCISCO - (Reuters) - When nuclear regulators put U.S. 
atomic reactors on high alert after the Sept. 11 attacks, they 
also froze training drills for the plant's security forces, a 
move critics warn weakens their defense.
 
Training exercises to simulate "force-on-force" attacks to test 
security at the plants were postponed while the federal Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission launched a "top-to-bottom" review of 
overall security at the nation's 103 commercial reactors.
 
The security drills, in which a handful of armed commandos 
assisted by an "insider" launch a mock attack on each plant once 
every eight years, may be reinstated but the timing is uncertain, 
said Breck Henderson, a commission spokesman.
 
The commission's continuing security review may turn up a new 
"threat basis" for the power plants that could change the nature 
of exercises to test the plants, Henderson said.
 
"We have not decided when we will do (assault) exercises again. 
We are proceeding very carefully," he added.
 
But critics of the commission said the nuclear industry is moving 
too slowly and should beef up security training now that its 
reactor fleet, which generates 20 percent of the nation's 
electricity, is on the highest alert.
 
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is still living in a pre-Sept. 
11 world," said Massachusetts Rep. Edward Markey, senior Democrat 
on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and a frequent critic 
of the agency.
 
FACING THREAT
 
"They have not permanently upgraded the security regulations at 
nuclear reactors to ensure that they are protected against the 
level of threat we now know we face," Markey told Reuters.
 
The Sept. 11 attacks by hijacked airliners raised the specter of 
a big plane smashing into the hardened buildings housing atomic 
reactors and triggering the release of poisonous radioactive 
material.
 
That concern has widened, however, to include more vulnerable 
plant targets like water intake systems, pools where the used 
radioactive fuel is stored, and adjacent sites for transformers 
and other equipment.
 
Responding to questions by Markey about security at atomic 
plants, the agency said it suspended the exercises because "the 
current elevated threat environment would pose significant safety 
hazards to the (plants') employees and negatively impact security 
effectiveness."
 
Security manpower is a big problem, said Doug Walters, senior 
project manager at the Washington-based Nuclear Energy Institute, 
a trade group for nuclear utilities.
 
"We support doing exercises but you need to involve a lot of 
people. A high-level alert is not the right time," Walters said, 
adding that plants have hired more security workers but about 29 
percent of the employees are working overtime.
 
CHANGING TESTS
 
The industry also is working to make a significant change in the 
way it tests security forces.
 
The nuclear regulators would like to drop their mock attacks 
program in favor of a new utility-run effort called "safeguards 
performance assessment," a training scheme with assault drills 
every three years.
 
The program would shift the regulatory agency's role from manager 
to observer, although the commission would have to approve rules 
for the new system and evaluate results from the exercises.
 
Twenty nuclear plants had agreed to join pilot tests of the new 
training program but the Sept. 11 attacks also put this on hold 
and no start date has been set, Walters said.
 
However, Markey said the changes have been proposed because the 
commission and utilities "are simply embarrassed" by poor results 
from past attack exercises.
 
Nuclear utilities also run separate exercises to test training 
and response to equipment breakdowns that may set off a 
radioactive release.
 
These drills, which are "graded" every two years by the 
commission, to date have not included mock attacks.
 
In the absence of regular exercises, nuclear security forces are 
keeping up their regular training and marksmanship, and utilities 
are meeting more often with military officials and local public 
safety agencies, utilities said.
 
"The emergency planning and communications work is being 
revamped," said Jeff Lewis, spokesman for PG&E Corp.'s Diablo 
Canyon nuclear station in California, one of the biggest power 
plants on the West Coast.
 
Diablo Canyon will run an equipment exercise in October, but 
Lewis said he would not be surprised if "a terrorist incident" is 
part of the scenario.
   
*****************************************************************
 15 River Bend Nuclear plant gets warning 

05/28/02
 
   The Advocate Business: 


Entergy to discuss problems with agency 

By SARA BONGIORNI 
 [sbongiorni@theadvocate.com] 
Advocate business writer 

Entergy officials were scheduled to meet Monday with U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission officials to discuss the regulators' 
preliminary finding that the company's River Bend nuclear plant 
failed to meet emergency-response planning standards.

 The commission issued a preliminary "yellow" finding for the 
plant after completing an inspection of the St. Francisville 
facility in March.

 The agency has issued only a few yellow findings since 
implementing a color-based system to evaluate the safety of 
nuclear plants. Yellow is the third-most serious rating, second 
only to a red finding, according to the commission. Apparent 
violations at the plant "have substantial safety significance," 
according to a summary of findings from an inspection concluded 
in March.

 The June conference in Arlington, Texas, will give 
representatives of Entergy Operations Inc. the opportunity to 
discuss the regulators' preliminary finding. A final 
determination of the finding will follow the conference, 
according to Roger Hannah, a spokesman for the agency in Atlanta.

 Hannah said there have been perhaps a couple of yellow findings 
at the nation's nuclear plants since the color-based system was 
put in place a couple of years ago. But he stressed that the 
finding for River Bend is only preliminary at this point.

 A spokeswoman for Entergy's nuclear operations in Jackson, 
Miss., declined to predict the outcome of the conference, but 
said the company had "some compelling details to offer" 
regulators. "We're hopeful the regulatory process will work to 
our favor," Kelle Barfield said. She added that the safety of 
plant operations is not in question, but that the matter has to 
do with educating the public about emergency plans.

 The West Feliciana Community Development Foundation uses offices 
on the River Bend property, which also has been used for hunting 
and fishing. The commission's preliminary finding is linked to 
three apparent violations of emergency-planning standards, 
according to an April 18 letter from the agency to Energy and 
River Bend.

 According to a summary of the inspector's findings, the 
violations involved failure to establish effective means for 
warning, evacuating and monitoring members of the public on the 
property during an evacuation; failure to disseminate 
emergency-response information to members of the public who 
routinely use facilities located in areas controlled by River 
Bend; and failure to update the emergency plan "after the public 
was permitted access to facilities in the owner-controlled area."
 
Copyright © 1995-2002, The Advocate, Capital City Press,
*****************************************************************
 16 Ling'ao Nuclear Plant Begins Commercial Operations 

  The first two generators at the Ling'ao Nuclear Power Plant in 
Shenzhen, south China 's Guangdong Province began commercial 
operations on Tuesday after passing a series of official tests. 
 
Construction of Ling¡¯ao Nuclear Power Plant Makes Headway

The first two generators at the Ling'ao Nuclear Power Plant in 
Shenzhen, south China 's Guangdong Province began commercial 
operations on Tuesday after passing a series of official tests. 

Construction began on the Ling'ao Nuclear Plant in 1997 and it 
became part of the local power grid on February 26 this year. It 
is Guangdong's second largest nuclear power plant after the one 
at Daya Bay, and was one of China's major power projects for the 
1996-2000 period. 

According to the design plan, four nuclear generators with a 
combined capacity of one million kw will be installed at the 
plant. The project's first phase has seen two nuclear generators 
installed at a cost of four billion U.S. dollars. 

With the first pair of nuclear generators in operation, 
electricity generated will go into the grid for Guangdong 
Province,one of the country's economic powerhouses. 

It is understood that the second pair of nuclear generators which 
are undergoing trials, will begin commercial operations by the 
end of the year. 

At present, four nuclear power projects are being built in China. 
The other three are the second and third phases of the Qinshan 
Nuclear Power Plant in east China's Zhejiang Province, and the 
Tianwan Nuclear Power Plant, a Sino-Russian joint venture, at 
Lianyungang City on China's east coast. 

  Copyright by People's Daily Online, all rights reserved   
*****************************************************************
 17 Japan: Radioactive water leaks again

asahi.com : ENGLISH
 
  Asahi Shimbun     www.asahi.com [http://www.asahi.com/]    
    
  The Asahi Shimbun   
  
Hamaoka nuclear power plant officials had assured residents the 
reactor was safe. 

HAMAOKA, Shizuoka Prefecture-A radioactive water leakage forced a 
nuclear reactor to shut down Saturday, just one day after 
operations resumed following an emergency safety inspection 
triggered by a ruptured pipe. 

The leakage occurred at the 840,000-kilowatt boiling-water No. 2 
reactor of Chubu Electric Power Co.'s Hamaoka nuclear power 
plant. Company officials said no radiation leaked outside the 
area. 

The officials said the leak was found around 2:20 a.m. Saturday 
on a welded spot of a valve connected to the emergency core 
cooling system. The coolant leak, which formed a puddle 
containing about 20 liters of radioactive water, was outside the 
containment vessel that covers the reactor. 

The radioactive water stopped dripping after officials shut down 
operations at 4:34 a.m., company officials said. 

On Sunday, officials from the Nuclear and Industrial Safety 
Agency inspected the reactor and noted that the power company 
should provide a detailed report on inspections it conducted in 
the past six months. 

The inspectors also met with officials of the Shizuoka 
prefectural government and Hamaoka city administration to discuss 
the leakage. 

The leak is a huge embarrassment for Chubu Electric Power and the 
latest blow to the nation's nuclear policy. 

Officials had just completed an emergency checkup of the Hamaoka 
nuclear power plant following a pipe rupture that leaked 
radioactive water at the No. 1 reactor in November last year. 

During the emergency investigation, the No. 2 reactor was shut 
down because it is the same type as the No. 1 reactor. Operations 
resumed at the No. 2 reactor Friday, while the No. 1 reactor 
remains out of service. 

``We conducted the most thorough investigation possible before we 
resumed operations,'' said Junichi Ishihara, an official with 
Chubu Electric's executive department. ``We regret the trouble 
occurred when the reactor was in operation, but small 
malfunctions like these do occur.'' 

Before the leak was found Saturday, company officials told the 
local community that the No. 2 reactor was confirmed safe, and 
there would be no problem with resuming operations. 

Hamaoka Mayor Yoshiaki Honma said Saturday's discovery has caused 
a public relations nightmare for the plant operator. 

``It will now be difficult for Chubu Electric to regain public 
trust in its facilities,'' Honma said. 

Observers said the second radioactive water leakage will also 
affect the nation's nuclear power policy. 

Before the November accident, Chubu Electric was considering a 
plutonium-thermal project-the core of Japan's nuclear policy. 

But residents will likely protest if the company broaches the 
idea of introducing plutonium to the plant.(IHT/Asahi: May 
27,2002)
 
  [Copyright Asahi Shimbun.
*****************************************************************
 18 Hamaoka N-plant pipe not fully checked 

Daily Yomiuri On-Line
 
Yomiuri Shimbun 

Chubu Electric Power Co. neglected to fully inspect a weld 
connecting two pipes in its nuclear reactor in Hamaokacho, 
Shizuoka Prefecture, where a water leak was discovered early 
Saturday, according to sources. 

The Nagoya-based utility firm believed that the pipe in question, 
part of an emergency core cooling system (ECCS) attached to the 
Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant's No. 2 reactor, was too thin to 
cause serious problems even if it was broken, and did not inspect 
it using an ultrasound device, the sources said. 

The Electricity Utilities Industry Law requires plant operators 
to check welded spots in nuclear plants before starting 
operations to confirm that they are not cracked. 

The law describes methods to inspect such pipes, including the 
use of a special paint sprayed on pipes to discover cracks. 
Operators are required by law to conduct further inspections on 
the main, or "first-class" pipes using ultrasound or X-rays to 
check for cracks. 

The sources said Chubu Electric fully inspected the first-class 
pipes attached to the Hamaoka plant's ECCS. 

However, according to the sources, the company neglected to 
perform a full inspection on the leaky pipe despite the fact that 
it was subject to high pressure and heat from the nuclear 
reactor. 

The pipe reportedly was regarded as subordinate to a main pipe 
and was only used to release water when inspections were carried 
out. 

The small size of the pipe, the outer diameter of which measured 
2.7 centimeters, was another factor that prevented the firm from 
inspecting it further, the sources said. 

A Chubu Electric spokesman said, "It's almost impossible for us 
to fully inspect the massive number of pipes attached to the 
reactors." 

Michio Ishikawa, technical adviser to the Nuclear Power 
Engineering Corporation, said, "It's difficult to determine how 
strict the inspections should be." 

Chubu Electric announced Saturday evening that about 110 liters 
had leaked from the plant's No. 2 reactor.   

Copyright 2002 The Yomiuri Shimbun 
*****************************************************************
 19 Iran Will Allow Inspections of Nuclear Plant 
                                
Mon May 27, 8:44 AM ET 

LONDON (Reuters) - International inspectors will monitor an 
Iranian nuclear power plant, under construction with Russian help 
and the main bone of contention during last week's summit between 
Moscow and Washington, a senior Iranian official told a 
conference Monday. 

The head of Iran's parliamentary energy commission Hossein 
Aferideh said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) 
planned visits over the course of the year to the Bushehr plant. 
The IAEA, an arm of the United Nations, said Monday it was 
already advising on safe construction of the plant, though full 
inspections called for under Iran's safeguards agreement with the 
IAEA from 1974 would not begin until nuclear material was 
delivered to the facility. 

"The IAEA has visited the site, but regular IAEA inspections will 
begin with the initial receipt of nuclear material at the 
facility," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told Reuters. "That 
should call for about four to six inspections per year." 

The IAEA safeguards agreement requires that a country declare all 
civilian nuclear material and permit regular inspections by the 
agency. 

Each visit from the Vienna-based IAEA would consist of several 
inspectors and last a couple of weeks, Aferideh said. The site 
would be visited monthly, he added. 

The inspection plans should ease concerns in Washington about the 
reactor which Aferideh said was due to come online at the end of 
next year or early in 2004 to help satisfy growing Iranian 
electricity demand. 

However, the IAEA's Fleming said Iran had not signed on to the 
so-called additional protocol which permits far more invasive 
inspections aimed at rooting out secret nuclear weapons programs, 
though the agency was urging Iran to adopt it. 

"If they do not sign up for this, we still know quite a bit. But 
we do not have the same access as we would with this additional 
protocol," she said. 

The issue was the main sticking point during an otherwise 
harmonious summit last week between President Bush and Russian 
President Vladimir Putin.
 
Bush has labeled Iran part of an "axis of evil," accusing Tehran 
of seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction and sponsoring 
terrorism. 

Both Tehran and Moscow insist Iran's atomic energy program is 
confined to civilian use. 

Aferideh's comments followed a statement from Iranian Foreign 
Minister Kamal Kharrazi Sunday in which he told the official 
Iranian news agency that the construction of the reactor was 
under the IAEA's supervision. 

"So far the project is going very well. We have more than 1,000 
Russian experts there," Aferideh told delegates at a London 
conference on investment in Iran. 

He insisted that Iran, rich in oil and gas, had the right to 
develop a nuclear contribution to its energy mix and that the 
reactor was a peaceful application of nuclear technology. A 
senior U.S. official last week called Russia's help in building 
the plant the current single biggest worldwide nuclear 
proliferation threat. 

  Copyright © 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 20 RU Cancer occurrence going up in Oryol region 

Pravda.


May, 27 2002   

[http://english.pravda.ru]     

Yegor Stroyev, Governor of the Oryol region, southern Russia, 
addressed, Monday, the medical radiological research centre based 
in Obninsk, near Moscow, requesting it to carry out a thorough 
radiological and epidemiological study in the region and 
determine how grave the risk its residents are facing over 
"Chernobyl's echo" is. The probe would aim to find out whether 
the radiation background is still above the norm, with 16 years 
having passed since the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster, 
said Mr Stroyev. 

There are two things which prompted the governor to make the 
above request - a dramatic increase in cancer occurrence and the 
fact that nearly a thousand villages and towns in the region have 
been stricken off the list of victims to the Chernobyl accident, 
the move Mr Stroyev believes to be ungrounded. 

© RIAN 


*****************************************************************
 21 S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say
 
Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 05:54:20 -0500 (CDT)

 
Health & Science: S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say

The Associated Press

COLUMBIA, S.C. (May 26, 2002 10:52 p.m. EDT) - Attorneys for the U.S. Energy
Department say South Carolina's threats to block federal plutonium shipments
to the agency's Savannah River Site facility are unconstitutional.

In response to a lawsuit filed by Gov. Jim Hodges, the attorneys argued in
court papers released Friday that the governor's plan to use a blockade to
keep the nuclear material out of his state would violate the federal
government's right to regulate interstate commerce.

Courtney Owings, a spokeswoman for Hodges, said the governor's attorneys were
still looking over the filing and had no immediate response.

In his motion seeking a temporary restraining order against the plutonium
shipments, Hodges has argued to U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie that the
Energy Department has violated environmental and due-process laws.

Currie is scheduled to hear arguments June 13, two days before the Energy
Department could begin making the shipments of weapons-grade surplus plutonium
from the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant in Colorado.

The plutonium is to be shipped to the Savannah River Site, converted and then
shipped out of state.

Hodges has sued to stop the shipments until the Energy Department and the
state reach an agreement about how the plutonium will be processed and when it
will leave the state.

Hodges also questioned the department's safe-transport capabilities. Last
week, he asked Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham to put any movement plans on
hold.

The Energy Department contends that the shipments to South Carolina are
essential to meeting its goal of cleaning up and closing the Rocky Flats site
by 2006.
*****************************************************************
 22 Making the feds pay extra

Rocky Mountain News: Opinion
 		 		
May 27, 2002

Democratic Rep. Mark Udall and Republican Sen. Wayne Allard have 
come up with a brilliant plan to ensure the timely closure of 
Rocky Flats. Or is it a brilliant plan to supplement the 
depressed state budget with federal funds? 

It's hard to tell, actually, and it probably doesn't matter since 
the bill's chance of passage is effectively nil. Still, if it did 
pass, it would make a great precedent to apply to all of 
government projects. 

Allard and Udall have introduced, in their respective chambers, 
identical bills calling for the Department of Energy to remove 
all the plutonium from Rocky Flats by Nov. 1, 2003, or pay a fine 
of $1 million a day -- up to a maximum of $100 million a year. 
(The deadline for cleaning up all of Rocky Flats is December 
2006, but to make sure that schedule is kept, the plutonium must 
be gone in 18 months.) 

And where would the fine money go? To the state of Colorado, for 
the purpose of "economic impact assistance." 

Tempting, isn't it? If we didn't know better, we could almost 
imagine some state officials secretly hoping that the DOE is a 
full 100 days late. Maybe $100 million isn't what it used to be, 
but every little bit helps in hard times. 

There are six metric tons of plutonium that must be moved by the 
DOE to a nuclear weapons site on the Savannah River in South 
Carolina before Rocky Flats can be closed and converted to a 
wildlife refuge. But Democratic Gov. Jim Hodges, D-S.C., is suing 
to block any trucks loaded with plutonium until, he says, he gets 
"ironclad" assurances that the plutonium will in fact be 
converted into mixed oxide fuel for nuclear power plants -- or be 
moved out. 

If the courts don't block the trucks, Hodges says, he will lie 
down on the road himself. 

It's a too-dramatic-by-half stance born of Hodges' desire to 
attract voters for his re-election campaign this fall. After 
that, well . . . he certainly does not want the feds to move the 
planned $3.8 billion plutonium recycling facility elsewhere -- 
that might be too big a blow to the state's economy. 

As we said, we're not optimistic Congress will ever pass the 
Udall-Allard bill -- and even if it did, that DOE would ever pay 
up. Federal agencies are far more accustomed to collecting fines 
than paying them. But if by some miracle it does pass, we hope 
its principle can be extended. 

For instance, could a similar fine be imposed on the Federal 
Aviation Administration for being long overdue on the rules it's 
supposed to establish for Centennial Airport? The absence of the 
rules has made it impossible for the airport to get the federal 
funding to which it is entitled. 

Then there's the federal money for the T-REX project along 
Interstate 25. Washington promised $525 million but didn't say 
how quickly it would come. Last year planners expected $20 
million, but received only $3 million. This year they got just 
$54 million of the $60 million originally due. 

Why doesn't our congressional delegation start imposing heavy 
fines on the federal highway folks every time they're either slow 
or low with the checks? It would be a good way to expedite the 
project. 

Of course, there's this sticky little fact which almost spoils 
the whole scenario. The federal government has no money of its 
own. To paraphrase the immortal words of Franklin D. Roosevelt, 
we'd owe it to ourselves. 
  
2002 © The E.W. Scripps Co.
*****************************************************************
 23 Plutonium flap pits feds against S. Carolina - 

May 26, 2002
 	 	
CNN.com - 
		 		 		 
COLUMBIA, South Carolina (AP) -- Attorneys for the U.S. Energy 
Department say South Carolina's threats to block federal 
plutonium shipments to the agency's Savannah River Site facility 
are unconstitutional. 
		 		 		 
In response to a lawsuit filed by Gov. Jim Hodges, the attorneys 
argued in court papers released Friday that the governor's plan 
to use a blockade to keep the nuclear material out of his state 
would violate the federal government's right to regulate 
interstate commerce. 
	
Courtney Owings, a spokeswoman for Hodges, said the governor's 
attorneys were still looking over the filing and had no immediate 
response. 
		 		 		 
In his motion seeking a temporary restraining order against the 
plutonium shipments, Hodges has argued to U.S. District Judge 
Cameron Currie that the Energy Department has violated 
environmental and due-process laws. 
		 		 		 
Currie is scheduled to hear arguments June 13, two days before 
the Energy Department could begin making the shipments of 
weapons-grade surplus plutonium from the former Rocky Flats 
nuclear weapons plant in Colorado. 
		 		 		 
The plutonium is to be shipped to the Savannah River Site, 
converted and then shipped out of state. 
		 		 		 
Hodges has sued to stop the shipments until the Energy Department 
and the state reach an agreement about how the plutonium will be 
processed and when it will leave the state. 
		 		 		 
Hodges also questioned the department's safe-transport 
capabilities. Last week, he asked Energy Secretary Spencer 
Abraham to put any movement plans on hold. 
		 		 		 
The Energy Department contends that the shipments to South 
Carolina are essential to meeting its goal of cleaning up and 
closing the Rocky Flats site by 2006. 

Copyright 2002 The Associated Press. 
*****************************************************************
 24 NRC Announces Meetings on Proposed Rule for Packaging and 
Transporting Radioactive Materials
 
   NRC: Press Release - 2002 - 64 - 

 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]
  
  No. 02-064     May 24, 2002   
  
  The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will conduct two public 
meetings on June 4 in Chicago, Illinois, and June 24 in 
Rockville, Maryland, to obtain comments on its recent proposal to 
revise its regulations regarding the packaging and transportation 
of radioactive material. The changes would make the regulations 
compatible with the latest revision of the International Atomic 
Energy Agency standards and codify other NRC-initiated changes. 
The proposed revisions are being coordinated with the Department 
of Transportation, which also recently published a proposed 
change to its regulations to make them consistent with the same 
IAEA standards. The DOT, which is the lead federal agency for 
transportation regulations in the United States, will be 
participating in NRC's meetings. 

The June 4 meeting will be held at the Hyatt Regency, 151 East 
Wacker Drive, Chicago. An afternoon session will run from 1:00 
p.m. until 4:00 p.m., and an evening session will run from 7:00 
p.m. until 10:00 p.m. Both sessions will be preceded by an open 
house at 12:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m., respectively. The open house 
will provide an opportunity for informal interactions between NRC 
staff and meeting attendees. This meeting will be conducted as a 
town hall discussion between representatives of a broad spectrum 
of interests and NRC and DOT staff. 

The June 24 meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. 
at NRC headquarters in the Auditorium, located at Two White Flint 
North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. There will be 
an open house at 8:00 a.m. Although this meeting will be 
conducted as a roundtable discussion among invited participants, 
the public is also welcome to make comments. 

A copy of the proposed revisions, 10 CFR Part 71 of the NRC's 
regulations, may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room 
located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room 
0-1F23, Rockville, Maryland. A copy is also available 
electronically through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System. For help in using ADAMS, contact the Public 
Document Room staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail 
at pdr@nrc.gov [pdr@nrc.gov] . 

Written comments on the proposed rule can be submitted at the 
meetings or in writing to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking 
and Adjudications Staff. Comments can also be delivered to NRC at 
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 a.m. and 
4:15 p.m. weekdays. 

Comments can be provided by e-mail through NRC's interactive 
rulemaking web site located at 
http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/cgi-bin/rulemake?source=PART71_PRULE 
[http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/cgi-bin/rulemake?source=PART71_PRULE] 
. Links to the proposed rule, supporting document, and public 
comment form will be posted there. For information about this web 
site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher at 301-415-5905 or by e-mail at 
CAG@nrc.gov [CAG@nrc.gov] . 

For more information about the proposed rule and upcoming 
meetings, contact Naiem S. Tanious at 301-415-6103, or e-mail at 
NST@nrc.gov [NST@nrc.gov] .
   


*****************************************************************
 25 Yucca Mountain lurks on Senate race horizon 

The Oregonian
                                
05/28/02 HARRY ESTEVE 

Nevada's Yucca Mountain lies more than 300 miles southeast of the 
Oregon border, but it could cast a shadow in this state as a 
target in the U.S. Senate race between Republican Gordon Smith 
and Democrat Bill Bradbury. 

With the Senate set to vote this summer on the question of using 
the remote site for nuclear waste storage, a coalition of 
environmental groups is pressuring Smith, the incumbent, to 
oppose the plan, arguing that shipping the waste poses a hazard 
and a risk of "terrorist attack." 

If Smith doesn't vote against the plan, coalition members say 
they will make it an issue in Smith's re-election campaign. 
They've already begun to publicize Smith's acceptance of $70,500 
in political donations from groups tied to the nuclear power 
industry. 

As yet, Yucca Mountain -- and the environment in general -- 
haven't taken on the political sheen of issues such as economic 
recovery and anti-terror efforts. But Bradbury has said he will 
make the environment a cornerstone of his campaign, and 
environmental groups already are hammering on Smith, hoping to 
get a toehold in the November election. 

"We can't match the nuclear industry's money, but they can't 
match our grass-roots power," said Michel Carrigan, spokesman for 
Oregon Peace Works, an anti-nuclear and anti-war group that is 
helping organize the effort to block the Yucca Mountain project. 
"We have a serious campaign going." 

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., is worried about the safety of 
transporting the waste to the site and probably will vote against 
the project, said Lisa Raasch, Wyden's communication director. 
But Smith indicated he's leaning toward approval, although he's 
willing to give Nevada leaders who oppose it a last shot at 
persuading him to do otherwise. 

In Oregon, the issue centers on hundreds of spent nuclear fuel 
rods at the defunct Trojan Nuclear Plant near Rainier, and 
millions of gallons of liquid radioactive waste at the Hanford 
Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Wash. Shipping the waste to 
Yucca Mountain would involve thousands of truck trips or hundreds 
of train trips through Oregon. 

Smith said a central repository makes more sense than leaving the 
waste in scattered locations. 

"Do we leave it in Oregon for 1,000 years? Or do we move it 
through Oregon once and be rid of it forever?" he said. "That's 
where I see my vote at this point." 

Two-decade debate Yucca Mountain has been at the center of a 
two-decade debate about the best way to store 77,000 tons of 
waste byproducts from 131 nuclear reactors across the nation. A 
1987 law allows the president to designate the disposal site, 
which President Bush did in February. But Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn 
vetoed the decision, as allowed by law, leaving it to Congress to 
decide. 

The House voted 306-117 on May 8 to override Guinn's veto. Now 
the Senate must act by late July or the veto stands. 

Bradbury, Oregon's secretary of state, said it would be 
"irresponsible" to move forward on the Yucca Mountain project 
until transportation safety issues are resolved. The potential 
for a catastrophic accident is too high, he said. 

Bradbury also said Yucca Mountain isn't big enough to handle all 
the nation's nuclear waste, which could reopen a proposal to make 
Hanford a waste depot. 

"What we should be looking for in our senators is a commitment to 
make sure the American public is safe from nuclear waste," 
Bradbury said. He also took a shot at Smith's acceptance of 
campaign money from political action committees and companies 
tied to nuclear power. 

"When you get $70,000 from the nuclear industry, it gives you a 
certain perspective on the issue," he said. "My perspective is 
very clearly the safety of Oregonians." 

PAC cash According to a report published by Public Citizen, a 
Washington, D.C., group that studies political contributions to 
Congress, Smith ranks 15th among senators who received cash from 
political action committees with nuclear energy ties. 

Bradbury has received no political donations from sources 
associated with the Nuclear Energy Institute, the group that 
lobbies for nuclear power. Wyden has received $31,900 from those 
sources, according to Public Citizen. 

Smith takes issue with the argument that trucking the waste poses 
an unacceptable risk. And he downplays any influence campaign 
contributions might have on his decision. 

Most utilities have some ties to nuclear energy, Smith said, and 
he has no qualms about accepting donations from utilities. He 
also pointed out he was among a small number of senators who 
supported energy price caps, which many energy traders and 
generators lobbied against. 

On the transportation issue, Smith said the benefit of storing 
the waste in a central location outweighs what he said is a minor 
risk of trucking it there. "People need to understand that 
nuclear waste is moved about the country constantly" with little 
problem, he said. Moving the waste does not make it more 
vulnerable to terrorists than leaving it at places such as Trojan 
and Hanford, he said. 

For environmental groups, Yucca Mountain has become a rallying 
point in the nationwide effort to stall further development of 
nuclear power. They see the upcoming Senate vote as a turning 
point in the debate, and they see it as a way to turn a fairly 
obscure issue into one with local interest. 

"It's been a Nevada problem," said Amy Hojnowski, Oregon field 
representative for the National Environmental Trust. "Now it's an 
Oregon problem." The waste would be shipped through cities and 
towns and along the Interstate 84 corridor, she said. "It's going 
past our schools, our hospitals, our homes." 

Hojnowski hopes to bring the issue into the state's political 
arena. But environmental issues haven't surfaced as a big factor 
in campaigns yet, said Tim Hibbitts, a Portland pollster who has 
surveyed voters on the Senate race. "We don't see them on the 
front burner right now," he said. 

Smith has never courted support from environmental groups, but he 
has tried to cultivate an image as an environmental moderate -- 
supporting farmers and loggers, but also voting to protect the 
Steens Mountain area in Southeast Oregon and to prevent oil 
drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. 
Environmentalists see the Yucca Mountain decision as another key 
vote and hope Smith heeds their concerns. 

"The fact that he's up for re-election," Hojnowski said, "is 
definitely going to influence everything he does between now and 
November." 

Reach Harry Esteve at 503-221-8226 or 
harryesteve@news.oregonian.com. 


 © 2002 OregonLive.com. All Rights Reserved.
*****************************************************************
 26 Nuclear caravan safety stressed

Charlotte Observer | 05/27/2002 | 

 Associated Press
 
CHARLESTON - The Energy Department says shipments of 
weapons-grade plutonium from the Rocky Flats facility in Colorado 
to its Savannah River Site in South Carolina would be secure.
 
Among security measures would be a global tracking system, armed 
guards and trucks that could withstand attack.
 
"We train for every contingency and every precaution," said DOE 
spokesman Joe Davis, who refused to comment on whether the trucks 
would be camouflaged as ordinary cross-country rigs.
 
The agency said a global tracking system would lock onto the 
whereabouts of every vehicle in the caravan.
 
An undisclosed number of armed guards would carry machine guns 
and other weapons to defend the trucks, which are capable of 
surviving rocket attacks. At night, the convoy would be diverted 
to a military base or other safe government installation.
 
All bridges and roads would be secured ahead of time.
 
If anyone got inside one of the trailers without authorization, 
they could get sealed up and suffocated by a spray of sticky foam 
designed to gel and neutralize both the plutonium and everything 
around it.
 
Gov. Jim Hodges has sued to stop the shipments until the Energy 
Department and the state agree on how the plutonium will be 
processed once in South Carolina and when it will leave.
 
Hodges also questioned the department's safe-transport 
capabilities. Last week, he asked Energy Secretary Spencer 
Abraham to put any movement plans on hold.
 
"It underscores exactly why we have to be so careful here in 
South Carolina," Hodges' spokesman Morton Brilliant said Friday.
 
But DOE officials and U.S. Rep. Lindsey Graham say Hodges' 
concerns are overblown. Transporting the plutonium would run like 
a military operation "of the highest order," Graham said.
 
"Nobody is going to send this material out in the heartland of 
America and into South Carolina in a haphazard way."
 
If the shipments do begin next month, it would take as long as 13 
months to move all the material to SRS, and Graham said security 
would be tight at every step.
 
"Anybody that confronts this situation will get hurt," he said. 
"These people are serious."
 
In fact, the Energy Department argues moving the plutonium 
increases security by reducing the number of potential targets.
   
*****************************************************************
 27 Nevadans lobbying Utah against Yucca
 
Las Vegas SUN
 
May 28, 2002 
 
By Diana Sahagun 
<diana@lasvegassun.com [diana@lasvegassun.com] >

 Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., are
in Salt Lake City today to put pressure on key Utah officials to
side with Nevadans in opposing Yucca Mountain.

 Goodman, Reid and Las Vegas Councilman Gary Reese were
scheduled to hold a news conference today to highlight the risks
and costs of transporting nuclear waste through Utah on the way
to Yucca Mountain.

 They were to be joined by Rep. Jim Matheson, R-Utah, and Salt
Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, who oppose the plan to bury the
nation's nuclear waste in Nevada. Matheson earlier this month
testified before the House subcommittee on highways and transit
against the project.

 The tour comes on the heels of a major public relations
campaign by Nevada that includes several television commercials
airing in Utah. The effort is designed to lobby Utah's senators
-- Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett, both Republicans -- to vote
with Nevada when the issue goes before the Senate in July.

 So far Reid has said he believes he has 35 Democrats to vote
with Nevada in opposing Yucca Mountain. Sen. John Ensign,
R-Nev., has one Republican to vote with Nevada. Nevada needs 51
votes to sustain Gov. Kenny Guinn's veto of the dump.

 Goodman said he hopes the trip gives him the opportunity to
spread the message to all mayors about the dangers of
transporting nuclear waste.

 "I want to get the message out that it's not Nevada's problem,
it's the nation's problem," Goodman said Friday. "Until they do
adequate studies to show us the transportation is not a critical
issue, than we shouldn't even be talking about Yucca Mountain as
a site."

 In addition to the news conference, Nevada's officials were
scheduled to attend a reception with the Salt Lake City Council
at the University of Utah. Goodman said he's also hoping to meet
with members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
to gain their support in opposing the project.

 Anderson, who testified against the Yucca Mountain project
before the Senate Energy and National Resources Committee this
week, continues to urge Salt Lake City residents and Utah's
congressional delegation to oppose the project.

 "Salt Lake City will see more nuclear waste traveling to Yucca
Mountain than any other city besides Las Vegas, exposing many of
use to daily doses of radiation,"' Anderson wrote in a prepared
statement. "Just one major accident or one terrorist attack
could devastate our city."
 
All contents copyright 2002 Las Vegas SUN, Inc.
*****************************************************************
 28 Nuclear waste hauling disaster unlikely

</cover.asp> Sunday, May 26, 2002

Opponents of plan remain unconvinced that safeguards will prevent 
disaster

Hanford was on the list

Before Yucca Mountain was chosen as the site for the nation's 
nuclear waste repository, Eastern Washington was under 
consideration.

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation was removed from the list of 
possibilities for long-term storage in 1987 when Nevada was 
chosen as the primary site.

But Hanford continued to be a temporary home for materials 
contaminated by nuclear production, and still holds some of the 
nation's most toxic nuclear waste as a legacy of some 50 years of 
weapons production.

The U.S. Department of Energy currently has some 53 million 
gallons of nuclear waste in underground tanks at Hanford. Work is 
under way on a new factory that will vitrify that waste -- turn 
it into glass logs -- that can be shipped and stored more safely 
at Yucca Mountain.

Hanford also has stored some 2,100 metric tons of spent nuclear 
fuel from producing plutonium for nuclear weapons. That, too, 
will be sent to Yucca Mountain when the repository is finished.

--Jim Camden

WASHINGTON -- Opponents of the Bush administration's plan to haul 
154 million pounds of nuclear waste across the nation to be 
buried in Nevada's Yucca Mountain warn of "mobile Chernobyls" 
chugging through America's heartland.

They want Congress to reject the plan. To muster support outside 
Nevada, opponents are trumpeting the fact that every year 
starting around 2010, 175 train and truck convoys filled with 
nuclear waste would pass through counties where more than a third 
of all Americans live.

The trains and trucks could be targets of terrorist attacks or 
fall victim to accidents, Yucca opponents warn. Radiation could 
then leak into the air from the sealed containers, killing 
thousands, they claim.

Impartial scientists, engineers and terrorism experts, as well as 
a database analysis that Knight Ridder conducted, concluded that 
such a disaster is extremely unlikely. Nevertheless, a major 
radiation leak would be a catastrophe, and America will have to 
live with its decision about how to dispose of its nuclear trash 
virtually forever.

After more than 50 years in the nuclear era, the nation has 
already accumulated nearly 100 million pounds of radioactive 
waste, which will remain lethal for millions of years. It's 
stored at temporary sites in 39 states. The Bush administration 
wants to haul it all to Yucca Mountain, about 100 miles north of 
Las Vegas, and bury it there for 10,000 years.

The administration's plan would require shipping nuclear waste 
about 1.1 million miles every year, mostly across rural areas. 
Still, more than 125,000 of those miles would be through populous 
suburbs and cities. The casks that contain the wastes are 
designed to withstand almost any shock, and the nature of the 
waste itself helps ensure that it's unlikely to threaten public 
safety even if it's released.

But the margin for error is small. One type of terrorist attack 
could cause more than 18,000 people to die from cancer, according 
to a study sponsored by the state of Nevada. "I'm in favor of 
transporting the materials; I used to be against it years ago," 
said University of Georgia toxicologist Cham Dallas. He has spent 
10 years studying the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear accident 
in the former Soviet Union. "We've got a system now that we can 
live with. É From a risk-management point of view, it's just not 
a major issue."

The storage casks feature layers of steel and lead several inches 
thick. They're designed to withstand being dropped from 30 feet, 
impaled on a spike, then plunged into water. They must withstand 
temperatures of 1,475 degrees for 30 minutes. Even so, skeptics 
note that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission tests only parts of 
the containers, and relies on computer models to test their 
overall strength.

The waste itself is solid ceramic, which means it could not be 
dispersed as easily as a liquid or a gas. Dallas, who consults 
with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on nuclear 
incident health preparations, said that if the casks were 
breached, "nothing is going to happen" because of the waste's 
physics.

"It's a metallic waste. It just goes right to the ground," Dallas 
said. "It's just not mobilized and thrown up in the atmosphere 
like we used to think it would be."

Even if the waste somehow were changed into smaller particles -- 
by fire, for example -- the pieces would be so big they couldn't 
be inhaled, he said.

A missile attack on a nuclear waste truck in an urban area could 
release enough radiation to give 1,820 people lethal doses of 
cancer, according to two reports released by Nevada. That number 
could grow tenfold if missiles blew two holes in a cask, which 
would give better airflow. That could lead to a reaction with 
oxygen that would turn the waste into a powder that could be 
inhaled, the reports say.

Other threats include land mines or a hijacked gasoline tanker 
rammed into a nuclear-waste convoy, which could set off an 
explosion and release radiation, warned James David Ballard, a 
Grand Rapids, Mich., terrorism consultant whom Nevada hired.

Yet virtually every terrorism expert interviewed who isn't being 
paid by Nevada said a terrorist attack on a nuclear convoy would 
be too difficult to coordinate.

"Yeah, (an attack on a convoy) is always a possibility, but there 
are a lot of easier targets," said Amy Sands, a terrorism expert 
and deputy director of the Center for Nonproliferation Studies in 
Monterey, Calif.

"This is one of those activities that is so overplanned, on some 
level it's just ridiculous."

Moving 175 shipments of nuclear waste a year would offer more 
targets, experts conceded. But the shipments would be so 
well-protected and hard to find that a successful attack would be 
harder than the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade 
Center were, said Rusty Capps, a former top FBI 
counterintelligence official who's now president of The Centre 
for Counterintelligence and Security Studies in Virginia.

Such confident assertions don't convince skeptics.

"Terrorist experts haven't been able to allow us to avoid the USS 
Cole or the World Trade Center or the embassies in Africa," said 
David Lochbaum, a nuclear safety engineer for the Union of 
Concerned Scientists, a public interest group that has raised 
concerns about the safety of nuclear power.

Spokane Net
*****************************************************************
 29 Nuclear waste a mountain of a problem
                                
  [St. Petersburg Times Online: World&amp;Nation]   
   
The government wants to do it. Science says it'll work. But 
burying the nation's stockpile in Nevada takes "not in my back 
yard'' to a whole new level. 

By DAVID BALLINGRUD and ALEX LEARY © St. Petersburg Times 
published May 28, 2002 

Feeling angry and forsaken, the citizens of Nevada stand alone. 
Alone against Congress and a popular president. 

Alone against Florida and most other states, which see in 
Nevada's plight a solution to a problem of their own. Alone 
against the money and political power of the nuclear power 
industry. 

And alone, some think, against common sense and the national 
interest. 

After 20 years and $4-billion in research, the federal government 
has decided to make Nevada home to the nation's first high-level 
nuclear waste repository. 

It has chosen Yucca Mountain, a 6-mile-long, 1,200-foot-high 
volcanic ridge about 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas. There, over 
time, the government plans to entomb 77,000 tons of extremely 
dangerous radioactive material, most of it from the nation's 110 
commercial nuclear power plants. 

Most of those plants are east of the Mississippi -- an irritating 
reminder to westerners that political power is concentrated 
there, too. Five of the nuclear reactors are in Florida. 

Nevadans say they are mad as hell. They are fighting back, and 
they think they are going to win. 

Nevada has suffered enough, they say, at the hands of distant 
bureaucrats anxious to take advantage of its open spaces and 
modest political clout. 

"Show me another state, another population that has done as much 
for this country's nuclear programs as Nevada has done," said 
Robert Loux, executive director of the state's Nuclear Waste 
Project Office. 

"We were the guinea pigs for the last big nuclear experiment in 
this country -- the above-ground nuclear weapons testing 
program," he said. "The government is still paying compensation 
to the people they irradiated." 

The state's 2-million people are so irked, Loux said, that Gov. 
Kenny Guinn is routinely challenged to call out the National 
Guard to occupy the mountain, should the feds try to build the 
facility. 

According to a recent poll sponsored by the Las Vegas 
Review-Journal, 83 percent of Nevadans disagree with the decision 
to build the facility on Yucca Mountain, even if the state would 
win favors from the government in return. 

More startling is that 73 percent -- nearly three of every four 
people -- don't think the government is being honest in its 
scientific research. 

More than one-fifth of those polled, 21 percent, said they will 
consider moving out of state if waste is buried beneath Yucca 
Mountain. 

The government plan calls for the repository to begin accepting 
shipments in 2010, though some think it unlikely everything could 
be in place by then. 

For now, the nation's nuclear waste is piling up around the 
country. It comes from power plants, nuclear aircraft carriers, 
bomb factories and university labs. Over time, it will emit 
thousands of times more radiation than was released at Chernobyl 
and millions of times more than the bomb that fell on Hiroshima. 
Nevada officials scoff at the government's assurances that such 
material can be stored safely under their mountain. 

"In this state no one trusts the DOE (Department of Energy)," 
Loux said. "No one believes a thing they say." 

But the nation is running out of time and choices. 

"There is no more (storage) space, there are deteriorating 
storage conditions and you have the challenge that so much of it 
is located near population centers and waterways," Secretary of 
Energy Spencer Abraham said. "No one believes you can bring in 
David Copperfield, wave a wand and it all goes away." 

At Florida Power's Crystal River nuclear facility, every atom of 
uranium fuel split since 1977 remains in underwater storage, and 
space will run out by 2016. 

"If the spent fuel can't be moved from its current location or we 
can't add additional storage, there would come a point where we 
couldn't operate the plant," spokesman Mac Harris said. 

Florida has four other commercial nuclear reactors, all owned by 
Florida Power &Light: two at St. Lucie, outside Fort Pierce, and 
two at Turkey Point, 25 miles south of Miami. 

Limitations at those plants are even more pronounced, with space 
expected to run out between 2005 and 2011. 

"Something has to be done," Harris said. 

Bombs on wheels?
 
Yucca Mountain is on dry, unoccupied land the federal government 
owns. 

The repository design calls for spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
radioactive waste to travel there by truck or rail in specially 
designed, shielded containers called casks. 

The routes generally will follow rail lines and the interstate 
highway system, but will be adjusted in consultation with the 
states, said DOE spokesman Joe Davis. 

"Gov. Bush could suggest preferred routing," he said, "but the 
NRC will have the final say." 

Once the materials arrive at the repository, they would be 
removed from the casks and placed in double-layered, 
corrosion-resistant packages for burying underground. Special 
rail cars would carry the waste underground, and 
remote-controlled equipment would place it on supports in a 
tunnel. 

And there it would sit, for no one knows how long. 

Yucca Mountain's dryness is important because water could carry 
radioactive material from the repository. To counter that, the 
repository would be about 1,000 feet below the surface. At that 
level it would be another 1,000 feet above the water table. 

Rain or melted snow would have a long way to go to the 
repository, and then another long journey to the water table. 

That's how DOE scientists see it. 

Nevada scientists note that tunnels bored deep into the rock a 
few years ago revealed that the inside of the mountain was wetter 
than expected. They say the rock is laced with fissures, some 
that move water in very small amounts, some that flow like a 
hose. 

The uncertainties of the project trouble many people, and they 
don't all live in Nevada. 

Who knows what our planet will look like millions of years from 
now, when plutonium and other deadly wastes still pack a wallop, 
they ask? Engineers don't know how to build a container that 
outlasts radioactive waste. 

"This is not an issue we've faced on this scale before," said 
Lester R. Brown, president of the Earth Policy Institute in 
Washington, D.C. "We're doing things with consequences we don't 
understand." 

To make the safety issues resonate nationally, Nevada officials 
lately have been saying that terrorists might find the 
transportation casks tempting targets. 

Jim Hall, a former chairman of the National Transportation Safety 
Board, argued earlier this month that the whole plan should be 
put on hold until the casks have been more thoroughly tested. 

"One of the things that immediately got my attention after (Sept. 
11) is the potential of each one of these casks to be a dirty 
bomb," said Hall, who led the safety board under former President 
Bill Clinton. 

Hall is a paid consultant to the state of Nevada, and his 
impartiality was quickly questioned. "The opponents of Yucca 
Mountain paid for that opinion, and I'm sure they are happy with 
it," DOE spokesman Davis said. 

But others have expressed concerns, too. 

"We will create thousands of weapons for terrorists," said U.S. 
Rep. Joe Baca, D-Calif. 

"Mobile Chernobyls," said U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Texas. Those 
concerns were dismissed by U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., who 
said there have been 3,000 shipments of nuclear waste, and "not 
one threatened the environment or public safety." 

"We have done it safely, and we will do it safely," Davis said. 
"Besides, if you leave it where it is being stockpiled, it is 
still vulnerable." 

Loux is not convinced. 

The government would make 108,000 shipments over 38 years to 
"load" Yucca Mountain, he said, and highways and rail lines "are 
convenient targets for people who want to make mischief." The 
large casks that would carry the waste materials are susceptible 
to the hand-held missiles that a terrorist might be able to get, 
he said. 

"A TOW antitank rocket would penetrate like a hot knife through 
butter," he said. 

A showdown comes this summer
 
In February, President Bush, acting on a recommendation from 
Abraham, the secretary of energy, designated Yucca Mountain as 
the nation's choice for a nuclear waste repository. 

Following procedures spelled out by Congress in 1987, Nevada Gov. 
Guinn vetoed the selection in April. Congress was then given 90 
legislative days to sustain or override the veto. The House 
overwhelmingly voted against the governor, and the battle has 
moved to the Senate. 

If the Senate overrides the veto, the Energy Department will be 
free to apply to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license. 

"But we still have a chance to stop this in the political arena," 
Loux said. 

The Senate's energy committee is expected to take up the issue in 
June, and it could be heard by the full Senate in July. "Let me 
be clear," warned DOE spokesman Davis. "There is no other 
alternative (to Yucca Mountain)." 

If Congress approves the choice, Nevada will take the fight to 
federal court, where a handful of lawsuits have been filed 
against various government agencies. 

For now, however, the battle is for public opinion, and the money 
is flowing freely. 

Consumer advocacy group Public Citizen says U.S. senators and 
senatorial candidates have taken more than $5-million from the 
nuclear power industry in political action committee 
contributions since 1997. 

Sen. Bob Graham received $55,787 and Sen. Bill Nelson $30,478, 
according to the group's survey. Neither senator, both Florida 
Democrats, was among the top 20 recipients. 

Nevada is spreading money around, too. "We've spent several 
million so far in lobbying and ad campaigns in Utah and Vermont," 
Loux said, "and in other states where we think we still can win 
support." 

When Nevada lobbies a senator it provides him or her a list of 
the highways in their states that might carry waste shipments, 
along with a description of how accidents might happen. 

Fiscal conservatives are told that Yucca Mountain's estimated 
cost could run as high as $58-billion. 

Asked if there is a better location than the one in his state, 
Loux answers, "I don't really know. I just know they never really 
looked anywhere else." 

Stable granite formations run through parts of the Midwest and 
the Northeast, he said, but those never received serious 
government consideration. 

"Yucca Mountain was attractive because it was on government land, 
and it was politically easier to do. We've always said that the 
only real science DOE knows is political science." 

Florida's stake: How long can Crystal River wait?
 
Early this spring, Florida Power threw a party to mark the 25th 
anniversary of its nuclear plant in Crystal River. 

Rock music blared from under a big white tent, where workers ate 
barbecue chicken and baked beans. Commemorative coffee mugs were 
handed out, veteran employees honored with plaques. 

"I think the future is bright for Crystal River," said Scotty 
Hinnant, chief nuclear official for Florida Power's parent 
company, Progress Energy. 

He then announced, to the cheers of the crowd, that the nuclear 
plant would seek a 20-year license extension with the NRC. Among 
the obstacles in the way of that bright future, none might be 
more basic or more frustrating to Florida Power than its growing 
pile of radioactive waste. 

To the nation's nuclear plants, which together produce 2,000 
metric tons of waste each year, the answer to these space woes 
has long been a national repository. 

When the plants were constructed, the idea was that waste would 
be stored there temporarily until the government came to take it 
away. The industry has spent millions to remind lawmakers of 
that. 

"Developing the Yucca Mountain repository is an important and 
necessary step in following through with the commitment Congress 
made in 1982 for the nation to have a central location for used 
nuclear fuel and defense wastes," said Dale Young, vice president 
of the Crystal River plant. 

Since Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the utilities 
and their customers have contributed about $17-billion toward the 
development of a national repository -- $788-million, including 
interest, coming just from Florida utilities. The money is 
earmarked for research and construction. 

With 3-foot-thick concrete walls reinforced with steel bars the 
diameter of a Coke can, a nuclear plant is an imposing 
construction. But despite the heft, the power behind the system 
can fit on the tip of your finger. 

Nuclear fuel consists of uranium pellets the size of a pencil 
eraser. Thousands of these pellets -- each of which contains the 
same amount of energy as nearly a ton of coal or 3.5 barrels of 
oil -- are encased in 12-foot-long metal rods bundled together in 
fuel assemblies. There are 208 rods in each fuel assembly and 177 
assemblies, each weighing 1,550 pounds, in the Crystal River 
reactor core. 

The fuel bundles produce nuclear energy when tweaked by control 
rods, unleashing a chain reaction of neutrons within the uranium. 
Heat produced by the splitting of atoms is used to generate steam 
for turning turbines that are connected to electrical generators. 

In a reaction, the chain reaction is managed by control rods and 
water. The rods, which penetrate the 18-ton steel lid of the 
reactor, are made of special metals that absorb neutrons released 
by fission. 

When inserted into the core, they will stop the chain reaction. 
Water in the core contains boron that absorbs neutrons, 
preventing the reaction from occurring too quickly. 

Every 18 months to two years, fuel that can no longer effectively 
generate heat is taken from the reactor and placed in racks in 
giant concrete pools also filled with 25 feet of water, which 
acts as a radiation shield. 

During its last outage in fall 2001, Florida Power replaced a 
third of the assemblies, using a mechanical arm to guide the used 
fuel through a water-filled channel and into open racks in the 
pool. 

Today 824 bundles, two decades of waste, sit in the pool, with 
650 spaces remaining. Florida Power gained 117 slots a few years 
ago by adding racks. 

Other nuclear operators have done the same or are considering 
doing so. Florida Power &Light says it can add up to five more 
years of space at St. Lucie by reracking. 

Companies don't consider it much of a solution, though. 

"Reracking is like putting new shelves in a library," Harris 
said. "You might get some space but there is a limit to how many 
books you can put in there." 

The industry says new fuel pools are not an option because they 
are costly and hard to fit into existing plant layouts. 

Increasingly power companies are forced to store excess waste in 
steel-lined concrete "dry casks." Twenty utilities use casks and 
19 others plan to, according to the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission. 

Building a dry storage facility requires an initial investment of 
between $10-million and $20-million, according to the Nuclear 
Energy Institute, the industry's lobbying arm. 

"The costs," Florida Power &Light spokeswoman Rachel Scott said, 
"are ultimately going to be borne by customers." 

-- Times researchers Cathy Wos and Kitty Bennett contributed to 
this report. Some information from Times wires was used. 

Key events leading to Yucca Mountain decision
 
1946: Atomic Energy Act establishes a federal monopoly over the 
use, control and ownership of nuclear technology. 

1957: National Academy of Sciences recommends the best way to 
protect the environment and public health and safety would be to 
dispose of nuclear waste in rock deep underground. Also calls for 
study of salt domes as storage medium. 

1964: Congress amends Atomic Energy Act to allow private 
ownership of nuclear materials (i.e. fuel) but maintains certain 
controls over its possession and use in the interest of public 
health and safety, including the obligation for disposal. 

1970: Atomic Energy Commission proposes salt deposits near Lyons, 
Kan., for permanent repository. Idea is withdrawn two years later 
because of concerns that drilling in the vicinity might have 
compromised the salt deposits' geologic integrity. 

1974: Energy Reorganization Act creates two new agencies: the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to regulate the nuclear power 
industry and the Energy Research and Development Administration 
(forerunner of the Department of Energy) to manage the nuclear 
weapon, naval reactor and energy development programs. 

1981: After evaluating numerous alternatives, Department of 
Energy opts for geologic disposal of civilian high-level nuclear 
waste. 

1982: Congress passes Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which calls for 
permanent repository for nuclear waste. Utility customers are 
charged a fee (about $1 per month for residential customers) to 
help prepare facility to be ready by Jan. 31, 1998. 

1983: Department of Energy selects nine locations in six states 
for consideration as repository sites. 

1986: President Ronald Reagan approves three sites for intensive 
scientific study: Hanford, Wash.; Deaf Smith County, Texas; and 
Yucca Mountain, Nev. 

1987: Congress amends Nuclear Waste Policy Act and directs 
government to study only Yucca Mountain. 

1994: Utilities, including Florida Power and Florida Power 
&Light, and 20 states sue the DOE for violating its contractual 
obligation to begin accepting waste by 1998. 

DECEMBER 2001: General Accounting Office urges Bush 
administration to indefinitely postpone construction of 
repository at Yucca Mountain because of unresolved technical 
issues. Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham calls the report's 
conclusions "fatally flawed" and maintains that "it was assembled 
to support a predetermined conclusion." 

FEBRUARY 2002: Acting on recommendation from Abraham, President 
Bush declares Yucca Mountain project scientifically sound and 
says it is essential to the future of the nuclear power industry 
and the nation's security. 

APRIL 2002: Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn vetoes President Bush's 
decision, his right under federal law. "I am outraged, as are the 
citizens of Nevada, that this decision would go forward with so 
many unanswered questions," Guinn said. 

MAY 2002: U.S. House votes 306-117 to override Nevada veto. 
Senate expected to take up the issue this summer. 

-- Source: Nuclear Energy Institute, Department of Energy, news
*****************************************************************
 30 NUCLEAR REPOSITORY: Nye County has its own Yucca plan

Jeff Taguchi 
Nye County Commission chairman

Monday, May 27, 2002
 Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal 
 
Commission lobbies Congress for economic benefits if state loses
its battle against dump 

By STEVE TETREAULT 
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU 

WASHINGTON -- Nothing steams Jeff Taguchi more than when Yucca 
Mountain is described as being 100 miles from Las Vegas. 

He says that description overlooks the fact that Yucca Mountain, 
the proposed repository for tens of thousands of tons of nuclear 
waste, is in Nye County. 

"Who is the most affected county? We are," says Taguchi, chairman 
of the Nye County Commission. 

Trying to raise its voice in the Yucca Mountain debate, Nye 
County has stepped up its visibility in Washington as Congress 
conducts climactic votes on the repository. 

Taguchi has met with all the players: Nevada lawmakers and 
staffers for lawmakers from other states, bureaucrats at the 
Energy Department and representatives from the nuclear power 
industry. 

But the 40-year-old minister and small-business owner from Beatty 
has walked a fine line in the half-dozen times he has traveled 
east this year. 

That's because Nye County's message differs from that of Gov. 
Kenny Guinn and the state's other leaders. Guinn and the others 
say Nevada will fight Yucca Mountain to the end and will never 
discuss compensation for a repository. 

Taguchi says Nye County doesn't want a nuclear waste repository 
either; but if it's going to happen, the county wants to be sure 
it gets "protection" in the form of influence and economic 
benefits. 

"If you're asking us whether we welcome the site like a prodigal 
child, the answer is no," Taguchi said. "But if you ask if we're 
for it for the purpose of seeking protection because we see it 
coming on the horizon like storm clouds, then yes. Really, that's 
responsible government." 

Nye County stepped up its political outreach after its 
five-member Republican county board adopted a resolution April 
16. It states that the government and the nuclear industry "have 
a special obligation to the single local jurisdiction to which 
they would transfer their unwanted radioactive wastes." 

In Washington, Taguchi hands out packets of Nye County facts and 
figures and a discussion of the county's historic relationship 
with the federal government as the home of the Nevada Test Site 
and the Nellis Bombing and Gunnery Range. 

Also presented is a list of concessions Nye County would like to 
receive if Yucca Mountain opens for business, a development the 
Energy Department says will not occur before 2010. 

Nevada's senators are aware of Taguchi's efforts, and they don't 
approve. 

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., described Nye County as a "marginal" 
player in the Yucca Mountain debate. "They've been coming here 
for years," he said. 

Still, Reid said, "it does not help us" to have Nevadans in 
Washington conveying a message that doesn't jibe with the state's 
official position. 

"I wish they weren't here doing that, but it is part of American 
freedom," said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev. "If I thought it was 
hurting our case, it would be something I'd be very concerned 
about." 

Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., sees no problem. 

Taguchi "is not trying to make a deal or sell out on this 
important issue," Gibbons said. "He is merely trying to represent 
the needs and concerns of the people he represents." 

"Nye County has been in this posture almost from inception," said 
Bob Loux, director of the Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. "I 
don't think the state has a problem with that," since the county 
is not advocating for the repository. 

Loux said the state's fight against the government will continue 
in the courts and before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission if it 
loses in Congress. 

"A lot of folks are seeing the political process coming to an 
end, and it doesn't dawn on them there are these other processes 
left to go," Loux said. 

Nye County nuclear waste consultant Les Bradshaw said county 
officials have met this year with aides for pro-Yucca Sens. Frank 
Murkowski, R-Alaska, Larry Craig, R-Idaho, and Mary Landrieu, 
D-La. 

Two years ago, Murkowski agreed to insert a Nye County land grant 
into a nuclear waste bill that eventually was vetoed by President 
Clinton. 

Bradshaw said to avoid crossing Reid and Ensign, who are lobbying 
to kill the project in the Senate, Nye officials have made it a 
point not to contact undecided senators. 

To counter the imposition of a nuclear waste site, Nye County 
wants the government to turn more than 230,000 acres for private 
development. That would double the amount of taxable land in a 
county whose 18,200 square miles are 97.8 percent federally 
controlled. The county also wants access to government tax credit 
and bond programs to encourage private investment. 

County officials also propose that the Energy Department create a 
local research center for radiological waste. Additionally, they 
want the government to locate future repository-related offices 
within Nye County rather than in Clark County. 

Nye officials also want to make sure they can continue to collect 
money the federal government currently provides for the county to 
monitor Yucca Mountain operations. The county gets about $8 
million per year, but that money would be cut off once Yucca 
Mountain opened. 

Taguchi insists the county is motivated by self-protection. He 
says Nye has received "minimal benefits" from being home to the 
Test Site and the Nellis Range. In 1999, the two giant federal 
facilities contributed over $1 billion to the state economy but 
less than $60 million to Nye coffers, county officials estimate. 

If the repository becomes a reality, Taguchi said, Nye County may 
get little unless it aggressively makes itself known. 

"I don't want us to fall into that irrelevant, insignificant 
category," he said. "We have to prepare for what they're going to 
do to us, and that's what we're doing." 

Taguchi wanted to speak formally before Congress this spring but 
was unable to get permission to address House and Senate 
committees that held Yucca Mountain hearings. 

He fumed when Clark County politicians Jon Porter and Dario 
Herrera were granted time to speak before the House 
transportation committee last month. 

Last week, Taguchi sought to testify before the Senate energy 
committee, but Reid was in charge of forming Nevada's witness 
list and Taguchi was told it wasn't going to happen. 

Taguchi admits the Nye County message conveyed in such a public 
forum would not be helpful to Guinn's goal of killing the 
repository program. 

"I don't want to get cross-wise with the governor," he said. "The 
hard part is, we're playing ball with people the state doesn't 
necessarily like." 

Among them is the Nuclear Energy Institute, the leading pro-Yucca 
industry lobby. Nye officials have met several times with NEI 
executives including Steve Kraft, who heads the group's Yucca 
Mountain division. 

NEI spokesman Mitch Singer described the meetings as "purely an 
exchange of information about what's going on in Nye County with 
respect to their own scientific studies and what they'd like to 
see happen in the future as the repository program goes forward. 
Bottom line is, they see the repository as inevitable." 

He said one important thing to remember is Nye County gets no 
funding at all from NEI or the industry. 

NEI did promote Taguchi's latest trip to Washington, however, 
offering to connect reporters with him. 

"We have a good working relationship with NEI," Taguchi said. 
"They're going to have a significant impact on our future." 

He said NEI at some point may help write legislation to get Nye 
County what it wants from Congress.
 

Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal, 1997 - 2002
*****************************************************************
 31 S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say
 
  The Nando Times: 

  Updated: May 27, 2002 12:51 p.m. EDT 

The Associated Press 

COLUMBIA, S.C. (May 26, 2002 10:52 p.m. EDT) - Attorneys for the 
U.S. Energy Department say South Carolina's threats to block 
federal plutonium shipments to the agency's Savannah River Site 
facility are unconstitutional. 

In response to a lawsuit filed by Gov. Jim Hodges, the attorneys 
argued in court papers released Friday that the governor's plan 
to use a blockade to keep the nuclear material out of his state 
would violate the federal government's right to regulate 
interstate commerce. 

Courtney Owings, a spokeswoman for Hodges, said the governor's 
attorneys were still looking over the filing and had no immediate 
response. 

In his motion seeking a temporary restraining order against the 
plutonium shipments, Hodges has argued to U.S. District Judge 
Cameron Currie that the Energy Department has violated 
environmental and due-process laws. 

Currie is scheduled to hear arguments June 13, two days before 
the Energy Department could begin making the shipments of 
weapons-grade surplus plutonium from the former Rocky Flats 
nuclear weapons plant in Colorado. 

The plutonium is to be shipped to the Savannah River Site, 
converted and then shipped out of state. 

Hodges has sued to stop the shipments until the Energy Department 
and the state reach an agreement about how the plutonium will be 
processed and when it will leave the state. 

Hodges also questioned the department's safe-transport 
capabilities. Last week, he asked Energy Secretary Spencer 
Abraham to put any movement plans on hold. 

The Energy Department contends that the shipments to South 
Carolina are essential to meeting its goal of cleaning up and 
closing the Rocky Flats site by 2006. 

Copyright © 2002 Nando Media
*****************************************************************
 32 Putin Rejects US Claims on Iran-Russia Nuke Cooperation 
 
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 00:29:28 -0500 (CDT)

 
Putin Rejects US Claims on Iran-Russia Nuke Cooperation

Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit

Tehran Times - May 25, 2002
http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=5/25/02&Cat=2&Num=038

Putin Rejects Washington's Claims on Iran-Russia Nuke Cooperation, 
Says Iran Singled Out Unjustly for Its Use of Nuclear Energy

TEHRAN -- Russian President Vladimir Putin, talking in a joint news
conference with his visiting U.S. counterpart George W.

Bush in the Kremlin Friday, rejected Washington's claims that
Moscow's nuclear cooperation with Iran could lead to Tehran's
development of weapons of mass destruction.

"The nuclear cooperation between Iran and Russia does not undermine
the non-proliferation treaty," Putin said, according to IRNA.

He suggested that Iran was being singled out unjustly for its use of
nuclear energy.

Washington is claiming that Russian assistance to Iran to construct a
nuclear energy plant in the Persian Gulf port of Bushehr may enable
the Islamic Republic to acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Both Tehran and Moscow have repeatedly rejected these claims, with
Iran opening the plant to regular supervision of the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which has confirmed its intention for

Putin defended Moscow's nuclear cooperation with Iran and dismissed
U.S.  fears it could help the Islamic Republic develop weapons of
mass destruction.

Putin and U.S. President George W. Bush, who signed a landmark
nuclear disarmament treaty at their Kremlin summit, appeared at odds
over Iran after Bush said his Russian counterpart shared his worries

"I worry about Iran and I'm confident that Vladimir Putin worries
about Iran, and that was confirmed today," Bush told a joint press
conference after three hours of talks.

But Putin stoutly defended Russia's contract to build a nuclear power
plant at Bushehr, denying it would help Tehran to develop
weapons-grade plutonium that could be put to military use.

"Russia's cooperation with Iran does not harm the non-proliferation
process. ... our cooperation with Iran is limited to energy, it only
has an economic character," Putin said.

Putin also suggested that the role played by Western companies in
building up nuclear programs in countries suspected of trying to
acquire weapons of mass destruction was greater than their Russian co

"The missile and nuclear programs of those countries in large part
are developing on the basis of technology provided by Western firms,"
he said.

A top Russian government official said Friday that Iran would not be
able to use Russia's nuclear cooperation program for military ends.

"Iran cannot and will not use for any ends enriched nuclear fuel" at
the Bushehr nuclear power plant, and this fuel will be shipped back
to Russia once used, the ITAR-TASS news agency quoted Deputy Nu.
 
=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems 
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us          
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012             
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org 
=================================================================
 
nytcov-05.26.02-03:06:39-28284
*****************************************************************
 33 Iran to Allow Int'l Nuke Plant Inspections; Some Want US Ties 
 
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:25:20 -0500 (CDT)

 
Iran to Allow Int'l Nuke Plant Inspections; Some Want US Ties

Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit

Reuters via Yahoo - May 27, 2002
Iran to Allow Inspections of Nuclear Plant 

By Tom Ashby 

LONDON (Reuters) - Iran said Monday that international inspectors
would monitor the construction of a Russian-designed nuclear power
plant, which the United States believes is the biggest nuclear
proliferation threat worldwide.

The head of Iran's parliamentary energy commission Hossein Aferideh
said the International Atomic Energy Agency planned several visits
over the course of the year to the Bushehr plant.

"We are going to construct a power plant for the production of
electricity under direct observation of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) so this is peaceful application of nuclear
energy," he told reporters at a conference in London.

"We are members of the International Atomic Energy Agency so we are
following the rules of the IAEA and investigators from the agency are
visiting routinely Iran."

The issue was the main sticking point during an otherwise harmonious
summit last week between President Bush and Russian President
Vladimir Putin.

Bush has labeled Iran part of an "axis of evil," accusing Tehran of
seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction and sponsoring
terrorism.

Aferideh said the plant was scheduled to come on line at the end of
next year or early in 2004 to help satisfy growing Iranian
electricity demand.

"So far the project is going very well. We have more than 1,000
Russian experts there," he told reporters.

Bush said last week on a European trip that Russia should be
concerned about nuclear proliferation to Iran, which could one day
view Moscow as an enemy.

A senior Bush official on the same trip said Iran's nuclear program
was the "single-most important proliferation threat there is."

The IAEA, an arm of the United Nations, said it was already advising
on safe construction of the plant, though full inspections under a
"safeguards agreement" dating from 1974 would not begin until nuclear
material was delivered.

"The IAEA has visited the site, but regular IAEA inspections will
begin with the initial receipt of nuclear material at the facility,"
IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told Reuters. "That should call for
about four to six inspections per year."

The IAEA safeguards agreement requires that a country declare all
civilian nuclear material and permit regular inspections by the
agency.

Each visit from the Vienna-based IAEA would consist of several
inspectors and last a couple of weeks, Aferideh said. The site would
be visited monthly, he added.

"This is an Iranian right to produce electricity by nuclear power and
nothing to do with non-peaceful application," Aferideh said.

His comments followed a statement from Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal
Kharrazi Sunday in which he told the official Iranian news agency
that the construction of the reactor was under the IAEA's
supervision.

The IAEA's Fleming said Iran had not signed on to the so-called
additional protocol which permits far more invasive inspections aimed
at rooting out secret nuclear weapons programs, though the agency was
urging Iran to adopt it.

"If they do not sign up for this, we still know quite a bit. But we
do not have the same access as we would with this additional
protocol," she said.

                            *

Retuers via Yahoo - May 27, 2002

Iran "Reformers" Vow to Meet Again on U.S. Ties 

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Leading reformers in Iran's parliament vowed
Monday to continue to explore ways of improving ties with the United
States despite a judiciary ban.

Reformist MPs allied with President Mohammad Khatami held a
closed-door session last week to try to end two decades of
hostilities between Tehran and Washington.

The move drew sharp rebukes from Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali
Khamenei leading to threats by the hard-line judiciary to prosecute
anyone who publicly advocates dialogue with the "Great Satan."

About 2,000 hard-line clerics and Muslim seminary students staged a
protest in the holy city of Qom Monday to back the supreme leader and
the judiciary ban on contacts with the U.S.

But reformers were unrepentant, pledging to pursue what they see to
be in their country's "national interests."

"The judiciary ban has no bearing on our decision. The Iran-U.S.
meetings will continue," said Elaheh Kulai, a member of the
parliamentary committee on national security.

"We are trying to study the horizon for future ties and reach a clear
understanding of the situation," she told Iran's IRNA news agency.

Khamenei, known for his tough line toward the United States, has
until now been the only one in Iran with the authority to pursue
contacts with the United States.

But the reformist-dominated parliament, fighting for greater freedoms
and democracy, has tried to assert itself and enter realms
traditionally controlled by the powerful clergy and off-limits to
elected bodies.

Koulai said Mohammad Javad Larijani, a prominent rightist
theoretician, and Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi were expected to
attend the closed-door meetings Tuesday and next week.

Reformist deputies insist they should be allowed to meet U.S.
congressmen to resolve differences 23 years after the two states
severed ties in the wake of the 1979 Islamic revolution.

They hope an ease in U.S. pressure and sanctions may help the Iranian
economy by paving the way for foreign investment.

"Because of U.S. sanctions we have a lot of problems and are deprived
of modern technology. Even our trade ties with Europe are in danger,"
MP Ali Zafarzadeh told ISNA news agency.

"We have to fine-tune our behavior in a way that would benefit our
people. We can negotiates with America while thinking about our
interests," he said.

But conservatives fear Iran would lose face by approaching the United
States, at a time of growing U.S. belligerence.

President Bush has called Iran part of an "axis of evil," accusing it
of seeking to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
 
=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems 
           Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us          
              339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012             
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org 
=================================================================
 
nytmid-05.27.02-16:03:55-21532
*****************************************************************
 34 Why the Bush-Putin Deal Won't Make the World Safer
 
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:26:57 -0500 (CDT)

 
Via NY Transfer News * All the News That Doesn't Fit

The Observer - May 26, 2002
http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,722644,00.html

Why Bush's deal with Putin doesn't make the world safer

The current American deal with Russia was on offer a decade ago. 
Meanwhile the Republican right continues to make the world a less
safe place.

by Dan Plesch

As President Bush travels around Europe this week, he faces many
familiar criticisms of his aggressive stance in international
affairs.  He hopes to assuage these concerns by concluding new
agreements with Russia. But a closer look at these deals shows that
they have done little to change the wider Bush approach to
international affairs. It is the Republican right's refusal to deal
the world in any way beyond insisting that America must have
everything it wants which guarantees not just continuing dissent in
Europe and beyond, but also a less stable world for American
interests.

Let's start with the nuclear arms reduction treaty. Bush has
described it as finally ending the Cold War. Of course, the Cold War
ended ten years ago with the collapse of the Soviet Union. I still
recall the shock that went around the NATO press room as the NATO
Secretary General Manfred Worner read out the fax he had just
received from President Boris Yeltsin announcing the new Russian
Federation.

Of course, George Bush must know this. What he appears to be claiming
is that the nuclear confrontation is now also over. But this too is
untrue.  He has signed a treaty which is said to cut two-thirds of US
and Russian nuclear missiles but still keeps thousands ready to fire
at a few minutes notice. But this is also a decade-old news. His
treaty is similar to the START 2 Treaty signed by his father in 1992.
It was never implemented because of opposition in the US Senate from
those Republicans than now make up Bush's administration. This latest
agreement does not even require the missiles to be destroyed and can
be cancelled at ninety days notice.

Bush junior's wing of the Republican Party came to office on a
platform of outright rejection of any more nuclear arms treaties with
Russia, condemning them as agreements of a byegone age. But after
little more than a year they had to concede to Russian insistence
that a treaty was essential. In the meantime a decade has been lost
that could have been used to manage and eliminate nuclear and other
weapons of mass destruction. These weapons are forever being desribed
as the greatest threat to peace by world leaders including Blair and
Bush. But the problems of proliferation in the third world, of "loose
nukes" in Russia and of the continuing US-Russian standoff all remain
off the agenda of the Moscow Summit.

In the US, the details of the thousands of Russian weapons and
enormous quantities of nuclear materials are publicised by many
non-governmental groups anxious. That they be brought under control.
Unfortunately they did not even make enough headway when President
Clinton was in office.  Today their voices fall on deaf ears.

These "loose nukes" and radioactive materials in other nations,
including Britain, remain the source fo supply for terrorists and yet
Bush is blocking global efforts to control them. The consensus
amongst his supporters is that efforts at control are doomed to
failure and should never be attempted. Their view is far more extreme
even than Ronald Reagan who dealt with the Soviets according the the
motto "Trust but Verify". Abandoning these efforts at control is
reckless incompetence which his agreement with Putin does little to
rectify.

The next order of business for Bush and Putin is a new NATO-Russia
agreement. Again, it is certainly better to have some deal that none,
but it offers little more than the existing NATO-Russia Permanent
Joint Council. This fell into disuse after the Kosovo war. The new
agreement calls for cooperaton on counter-terrorism, missile
proliferation and missile defence. One result of this new
relationship has been that despite Bush's rhetoric on freedom,
Russian abuses in Chechnya are no longer criticised by the White
House. Even on the spread of missile technology the US has ignored a
Russian plan that recommends much greater restrictions than anything
NATO has contemplated.

Also on Bush's itinerary is a trip to the Normandy beaches where he
will attempt to wrap himself in the aura of the many who died there
liberating Europe. But Roosevelt and his generation of Americans
sought to build the UN and other international insitutions to prevent
the renewal of war, Bush on the other hand is bent on belittling the
UN and dispensing with international security agreements wherever
possible.  According to US government officials this refusal to play
ball except when they can be guaranteed victory has reached new
heights. There is now a formal State Department edict that the US
should not even begin a negotiation if it thinks it might have to
make concessions. This shows an astonishing lack of confidence in the
US's ability to make constructive agreements even when it wields such
immense power.

At first sight this strong-minded approach may suit the lone
superpower.  But any considered view shows that this lack of
flexibility and imagination in the application of power has not
produced security.  Israel is out of control, the Indo-Pakistan
conflict has occurred after sanctions caused by the nuclear weapons
programmes had been lifted by Washington (in order to bring both
South Asian states on board for the war on terrorism); in Afghanistan
military victory seems far off and US soldiers keep telling
reporters, "It is just like Vietnam". The US military is now advising
Bush that despite a near $300 billion budget they cannot attack Iraq
for another six months to a year.

The militarist culture has yet to face up to the real requirements of
intelligence and secrecy. On a recent trip to Washington, talking to
experienced writers on American intelligence, I was shown two graphic
examples of the failure of the national security culture. On one
occasion I was shown pictures of secret Al-Qaeda bases which US
soldiers were sending around the internet. On another, pictures of
the supposedly secret faces of US commandos taken by a US General on
tour and handed out to the public at a special forces museum event
back home.

These are not simply isolated lapses but are indicative of a far
broader lack of understanding of the real requirements of meeting the
threat that certainly does exist from Al Qaeda and its imitators. For
the Bush team a military solution is the only solution they are
interested in.  Nation-building and other "social work" is suitable
only for the Europeans. In the real world the military have a role to
play but not the only role and on many occasions not even the most
important.

The Bush approach can be compared to trying to keep law and order
just using a riot squad. If the riot squad is all one has, then it
will be used more and more. Debate will turn to the need for more and
better tear-gas, riot shields and the like. In reality social
programs, cops on the beat, economic development and a legal system
are essential to our security. Denying that these are essential tools
of global governance plays into the hands of the wreckers.

[Dan Plesch is Senior Research Fellow at the Royal United Services
Institute and author of Sheriff and Outlaws in the Global Village.]

=================================================================
  NY Transfer News Collective   *   A Service of Blythe Systems
            Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 
                339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012
  http://www.blythe.org                  e-mail: nyt@blythe.org
=================================================================
*****************************************************************
 35 [toeslist] Chossudovsky: USA IS PUSHING INDIA & PAKISTAN TO WAR
 
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:50:19 -0500 (CDT)

 
Centre for Research on Globalisation

The outbreak of a war between India and Pakistan, not only raises the
spectre of a nuclear holocaust in a region which encompasses almost a
quarter of the World's population, it also raises the possibility of a
broader war which could potentially engulf a much larger region, with
far-reaching implications for the future of humanity.

WASHINGTON IS PUSHING INDIA AND PAKISTAN TO THE BRINK OF WAR
by Michel Chossudovsky

Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), http://www.globalresearch.ca, 23
May 2002
The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO205C.html

India and Pakistan are currently at the brink of war.

     Presented by the media as a conflict regarding the status of Kashmir,
the role of US foreign policy in feeding this conflict is invariably
overlooked. Since the end of the Cold War, Washington has deliberately
contributed --through covert intelligence operations-- to fuelling the
Indo-Pakistan conflict. In the wake of September 11, amidst new terrorist
attacks and ethnic riots in India, conditions have developed which favour
the outbreak of war between the two countries.
     The Indo-Pakistan conflict must also be seen in the broader regional
context. The US is presently involved in several related war theatres
extending from the Middle East to Central Asia:
     1) The war in Afghanistan is marked by the militarisation of the entire
Central Asian region with US troops stationed in several of the former
Soviet republics.
     2) The Bush Administration has supported Israel in the invasion of
Palestine under a Secret Plan dubbed "Operation Justified Vengeance". The
latter seeks to destroy the Palestinian Authority.1
     3) Washington has announced its intention to wage an all-out war
against Iraq, which could potentially spill over into the entire Middle East
region.2
     The outbreak of a war between India and Pakistan, not only raises the
spectre of a nuclear holocaust in a region which encompasses almost a
quarter of the World's population, it also raises the possibility of a
broader war which could potentially engulf a much larger region, with
far-reaching implications for the future of humanity.
     Both countries have nuclear weapons and a sophisticated missile
delivery system. This week, Pakistan reportedly deployed its Shaheen
missiles , which have a range of 750 kilometres,... " 3 The Pakistani
government has stated that the "country would exercise the nuclear option if
its survival was at stake" 4 Pakistan's president General Pervez Musharraf,
had advised the United States government, "that in case of any moves,
Pakistan will use all options for security of the land. In this case, it
will be an unlimited war."5 India's nuclear arsenal is also on high alert.
     US military and intelligence planners have no doubt analysed the
linkages between these various war theatres. Intelligence operations in the
broader region are carefully coordinated. The evidence confirms that the
same CIA sponsored insurgencies --using Pakistan's ISI as a go-between-- in
support of Islamist groups are carried out in a large number of countries.

US SPONSORED INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS IN THE INDIAN SUB-CONTINENT

     It is important to understand the background of the Indo-Pakistan
conflict and the history of US sponsored intelligence operations in the
Indian subcontinent, channelled through Pakistan's military intelligence
(ISI).6 Backed by the CIA, the ISI has, since the 1980s, provided support to
several secessionist Islamic insurgencies in India's Kashmir. Although
officially condemned by Washington, these covert ISI operations were
undertaken with the tacit approval of the US government.
     Coinciding with the 1989 Geneva Peace Agreement and the Soviet
withdrawal from Afghanistan, the ISI was instrumental in the creation of the
militant Jammu and Kashmir Hizbul Mujahideen (JKHM).7
     The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian Parliament --which
contributed to pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of war-- were
conducted by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba ("Army of the
Pure") and Jaish-e-Muhammad ("Army of Mohammed"), both of which are covertly
supported by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).8
     The powerful Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), which plays a behind
the scenes role in the formulation of US foreign policy confirms (in a CFR
background document) that the Lashkar and Jaish rebel groups are supported
by the ISI:
     "through its Interservices Intelligence agency (ISI), Pakistan has
provided funding, arms, training facilities, and aid in crossing borders to
Lashkar and Jaish. This assistance-an attempt to replicate in Kashmir the
international Islamist brigade's "holy war" against the Soviet Union in
Afghanistan-helped introduce radical Islam into the long-standing conflict
over the fate of Kashmir
     "Have these groups received funding from sources other than the
Pakistani government?
     "Yes. Members of the Pakistani and Kashmiri communities in England send
millions of dollars a year, and Wahhabi sympathizers in the Persian Gulf
also provide support.
     "Do Islamist terrorists in Kashmir have ties to al-Qaeda?
     "Yes. In 1998, the leader of Harakat, Farooq Kashmiri Khalil, signed
Osama bin Laden's declaration calling for attacks on Americans, including
civilians, and their allies. Bin Laden is also suspected of funding Jaish,
U.S. and Indian officials say. And Maulana Masood Azhar, who founded Jaish,
traveled to Afghanistan several times to meet bin Laden.
     "Where were these Islamist militants trained?
     "Many were given ideological training in the same madrasas, or Muslim
seminaries, that taught the Taliban and foreign fighters in Afghanistan.
They received military training at camps in Afghanistan or in villages in
Pakistan-controlled Kashmir. Extremist groups have recently opened several
new madrasas in Azad Kashmir." 9
     What the CFR fails to mention are the links between the ISI and the
CIA. Confirmed by the writings of Zbigniew Brzezinski (who happens to be a
member of the CFR) the "international Islamic brigade" was a creation of the
CIA.

ATTACK ON THE INDIAN PARLIAMENT

     The December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, followed by the
terrorist attacks and ethnic riots in Gujarat in early 2002, were the
culmination of a process initiated in the 1980s, financed by drug money and
abetted by Pakistan's military intelligence. These ISI supported terrorist
attacks serve the geopolitical interests of the US. They not only contribute
to weakening and fracturing the Indian Union, they also create conditions
which favour the outbreak of a regional war between Pakistan and India.

CROSS-CUTTING MILITARY ALLIANCES

     In late 1998, Russia signed a "long term military cooperation
agreement" with India, which was followed in early 1999 by a defence
agreement between India and France. The agreement between Delhi and Paris
included the transfer of French military technology as well as inves-tment
of French multinationals in Indias defence industry. The latter includes
facilities for the production of ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads in
which the French companies have an expertise.
     This Franco-Indian agreement has a direct bearing on Indo-Pakistani
relations. It also impinges upon US strategic interests in Central and South
Asia. While Washington has been pumping military aid into Pakistan, India is
being supported by France and Russia.
     Barely a few weeks into the 2001 bombing of Afghanistan, France and
India conducted joint military exercises in the Arabian Sea. Also in the
immediate wake of September 11, India took delivery of large quantities of
Russian weapons under the Indo-Russian military cooperation agreement.
     While France and the US seem to be on opposite sides of the
India-Pakistan conflict, France also supplies military equipment to
Pakistan, in competition with US weapons producers. More generally, this
conflict means billions of dollars of profit for Western and Russian arms
suppliers. In this regard, US foreign policy is geared towards securing a
market for the Big Five weapons producers, now allied with British Aerospace
systems, against their French and Russian competitors.
     In early May, France rushed its defense minister Michele Alliot-Marie
to Pakistan following a terrorist attack which led to the death of 11
Frenchmen of the Direction des Constructions Navales (DCN) involved in the
construction of three Agosta submarines for the Pakistan navy. The attack,
which in all likelihood was politically motivated, could lead to the
suspension of weapons deliveries by France to Pakistan. The suspension would
serve the interests of US weapons producers..

ON THE BRINK OF WAR

     This week, Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee stated that India is prepared
to go to war in response to the terrorist attacks. Delhi has warned
Islamabad of a ``decisive battle'' against terrorism and "told its soldiers
on the tense Kashmir border to be ready for sacrifice". Pakistan retorted
"that any cross-border action by India would provoke retaliation", which
could predictably "trigger a wider conflict between the nuclear-armed
neighbours." 10
     Meanwhile Indian warships have positioned themselves in the Arabian
Sea, in proximity of the Pakistani coastline. A report by Jane Defense
Weekly confirms that India's Strategic Nuclear Command (SNC) is expected to
be in place by June.11 The SNC will be commanded by the Indian Air Force
(IAF). India is said to have some 60 nuclear warheads compared with
Pakistan's 25. The use of nuclear weapons cannot be dismissed. Both
countries have activated their reserve forces.

THE ROLE OF THE US

     General Pervez Musharraf is a US puppet. Since the beginning of the
bombing campaign of Afghanistan, the US Air Force controls Pakistan's
airspace as well several military facilities in Pakistan. US military and
intelligence advisers are working closely with the Pakistanis:
     The United States is now heavily engaged in the region. It has full use
of two Pakistani military air bases and since the start of the war has taken
control of about one- third of Pakistan's air space to facilitate its
military operations over Afghanistan.
     Up to 35,000 Pakistani troops have been assigned to protect the US
forces stationed inside Pakistan. In addition, 60,000 Pakistani troops have
been dispatched to the Durand Line, the 1400km Pakistani-Afghan border, to
catch any al-Qa'ida agents, including Osama bin Laden, who might be tempted
to cross over. 12
     Under these conditions, a war cannot in practice be waged by Pakistan
without Washington's green light. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
has been dispatched by Washington to the region for consultations with both
governments. Armitage was one of the main architects during the Reagan
Administration behind US covert support to the Mujahedin and the "militant
Islamic base, both during the Afghan-Soviet war as well as in its aftermath.
US covert support was financed by the Golden Crescent drug trade. "Armitage,
who was denied a 1989 appointment as Assistant Secretary of State because of
links to Iran-Contra and other scandals, served as Assistant Secretary of
Defense for International Security Affairs in the Reagan years. U.S.
Government stipulations in the Oliver North trial specifically named
Armitage as one of the DoD officials responsible for illegal transfers of
weapons to Iran and the Contras."13
     In other words, is Richard Armitage on "a peace mission" or is he part
of an ongoing intelligence operation, which ultimately consists in fostering
political instability, by pushing one country against the other?

WASHINGTON'S PLOY: ARMING BOTH SIDES

     The US has military cooperation agreements with both India and
Pakistan. America sells weapons to both countries (as does France). At the
same time, Washington controls the types of advanced systems made available
to each country.
     Ironically, while America is Pakistan's closest ally, US-India military
cooperation has been stepped since September 11. In November, US Defence Sec
retary Donald Rumsfeld on an official visit to India, stated the need "to
strengthen the military and defence ties between our two countries" in the
context of the war on terrorism.14 An Indian defence delegation led by India
s Defence Secretary Yogendra Narain was at the Pentagon this week, "to
discuss prospective military cooperation, including expanding the scope,
size and frequency of joint exercises between their armed forces"15
     Meanwhile, Washington was beefing up it military support to Pakistan.
The Bush Administration, through the CIA, also oversees the ISI sponsored
covert intelligence operations in support of Islamic insurgents inside
India.
     In country after country, these insurgencies are used by Washington to
destabilize national societies. The underlying pattern is very similar that
used recently in Macedonia, where the KLA sponsored insurgencies were being
supported by NATO and US military aid. Meanwhile, the US had an ongoing
military cooperation agreement with the Macedonian Ministry of Defense in
the context of the Partnership for Peace Programme.16
     While Washington is arming Pakistan, it also has a military cooperation
agreement with India, which is intended to deter armed aggression and defend
Indian territory. Moreover, behind the scenes --using Pakistan's ISI as a
"go-between"-- the CIA is funnelling support (money and weapons) to the
Kashmiri separatist forces. In a cruel irony, Washington is arming and
advising both sides under military and intelligence authorization acts
approved by the US Congress.
     "Divide and Rule": Advise both sides on the conduct of war. Arm both
sides in the conflict, fuelling America's military-industrial complex.
Develop joint military and intelligence cooperation with both countries,
enabling the US to oversee the theatre of an eventual war. Fracture and
impoverish both countries. Restore the Empire.
     The hidden agenda is to eventually extend America's sphere of influence
not only in Central Asian but also in the Indian sub-continent.

NOTES

1. See by Ellis Shuman, Is Israel preparing to dismantle the Palestinian
Authority? http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/SHU204A.html , Centre for
Research on Globalisation (CRG), www.globalresearch.ca 7 April 2002

2. See Ian Bruce, Military planners at the Pentagon have drawn up a
blueprint for a two-pronged invasion of Iraq, CRG 1 February 2002) .

3 India Daily, 21 May 2002.

4. Quoted in Hindustan Times, 23 May 2002

5. India Daily, 22 May 2002

6. Michel Chossudovsky, Coverup and Complicity, The Role of Pakistan's
Military Intelligence, CRG,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html , 2 November 2002.

7 See K. Subrahmanyam, Pakistan is Pursuing Asian Goals, India Abroad, 3
November 1995.

8 Council on Foreign Relations, Terrorism: Questions and Answers, Harakat
ul-Mujahedeen, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Muhammad,
http://www.terrorismanswers.com/groups/harakat2.htm Washington 2002.

9. Ibid.

10. Dawn, 22 May 2002

11 Jane Defence Weekly quoted in India Daily, 22 May 2002

12 The Independent, 29 December 2001

10 See Murali Ranganathan, Human Rights Report Draws Flak, News India, 16
September 1994.

13. Michael Ruppert, Richard Armitage Quietly confirmed as Deputy Secretary
of State, From the Wilderness, 25 March 2001

14. The New York Times, 5 November 2001

15. The Hindustan Times, 22 May 2002.

16. For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, NATO Invades Macedonia,
CRG, http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO108C.html , August 2001

Copyright ) CRG 2002. Permission is granted to post this text on
non-commercial community internet sites, provided the source and the URL are
indicated, the essay remains intact and the copyright note is displayed. To
publish this text in printed and/or other forms, including commercial
internet sites and excerpts, contact the Centre for Research on
Globalisation (CRG) at editor@globalresearch.ca

The URL of this article is:

http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO205C.html

# # #

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
FREE COLLEGE MONEY
CLICK HERE to search
600,000 scholarships!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/DlIU9C/4m7CAA/Ey.GAA/NJYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
toeslist-unsubscribe@egroups.com

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
*****************************************************************
 36 Senate don't let Bush cancel ABM treaty
 
Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 22:52:44 -0500 (CDT)

 
Reply-To: Jim Harris <Jim@ProgressiveSecretary.Org>

Here is a new Progressive Secretary Letter.

[  ] Send - Send this letter to congress people for zip code ________
[  ] Send - Send this letter to congress people for the state of ____
Sign my letter _____
[  ] No   - Don't send this letter

Note: This letter supports a campaign of the WAR and LAW League.  It goes to
the Senate.  Further information:

http://www.warandlaw.homestead.com/files/index.html

 ******************************************
Written by PM 5/7/02

From:    Your Name and eMail Address
To:      Your Senators

Subject: Senate don't let Bush cancel ABM treaty

Dear Senator:

President Bush has announced he plans to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistics
Missile Treaty.  This is unwise, unconscionable, and possibly
unconstitutional.

The ABM Treaty was approved by the Senate 88-2 in 1972.  Is it fair or lawful
for a president to announce he plans to scrap such a treaty without prior
concurrence of the Senate?

I urge you to let the President know that the Senate is NOT agreed on
scrapping the ABM Treaty, and advise him to consult the Senate before he takes
any further action or makes any announcements that he plans to withdraw.

Sincerely,

Your name

Sincerely

Jim Harris <Jim@ProgressiveSecretary.Org>
 http://www.ProgressiveSecretary.Org.
Make Your Voice Heard.  Enroll in http://www.ProgressiveSecretary.Org.

Progressives send far fewer letters than conservatives. This is an easy way to
level this field.

( ~#\L=ABM___1\P=22216\S=P)

*****************************************************************
 37 U.S., Russians fight N-threats
 
[deseretnews.com] 

    Monday, May 27, 2002

By Judith Ingram
 Associated Press writer 

      MOSCOW — Led by the architects of the decade-old U.S. 
campaign to reduce the threat of weapons of mass destruction in 
the former Soviet Union, American and Russian experts gathered in 
Moscow on Monday to set an agenda for jointly combating nuclear, 
chemical and biological terrorism.

       "I believe that the gravest danger in the world today is 
the threat from nuclear, biological and chemical weapons," said 
former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn, one of the co-authors of the U.S. 
cooperative threat reduction program, which has helped reduce and 
secure former Soviet weapons stockpiles.

       "The likeliest use of these weapons is in terrorist 
hands," he said.

       Nunn and program co-author Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., 
noted that President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin 
have said preventing terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass 
destruction was their top priority. Bush repeated that during his 
latest summit with Putin, which ended Sunday.

       "These are encouraging words, but if this is our priority, 
what is our strategy? Where are we putting our resources?" Nunn 
asked.

       The Nunn-Lugar program helped the ex-Soviet republics of 
Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus eliminate their nuclear arsenals, 
and helped Russia dismantle nuclear weapons, secure nuclear and 
chemical arsenals and provide alternative employment for former 
Soviet weapons scientists.

       Lugar noted that much remained undone: Only 40 percent of 
nuclear storage sites in Russia have received U.S. assistance to 
upgrade security, and only 20 percent had received complete 
security systems.

       In spite of the program's success, Lugar said it faced 
some opposition in the U.S. Congress because of Russia's failure 
to provide full information about its activities in the chemical 
and biological weapons area — including Moscow's refusal to allow 
monitors into four biological laboratories run by the Ministry of 
Defense.

       "Continued (Russian) transfers of weapon technology to 
Iran are also disturbing and weaken support for an expanded and 
improved relationship," Lugar said.

       Conference participants suggested new programs modeled on 
Nunn-Lugar to address global threats. Russian foreign policy 
expert Sergei Karaganov proposed what he called an international 
coalition or "holy alliance" to prevent catastrophic terrorism, 
and to jointly develop civil defense programs.

       Lugar called for the Nunn-Lugar program to be expanded to 
target what he called the nexus between terrorists and weapons of 
mass destruction.

       Specifically, he proposed that the program be extended to 
fund dismantlement of conventional submarines, many of which are 
fueled by highly enriched nuclear fuel; to reduce the threat from 
tactical nuclear weapons, which are more portable than the 
strategic ones the program addresses; and to complete security 
upgrades for nuclear storage facilities.

       "Acquiring weapons and materials is the hardest step for 
the terrorists to take, and the easiest step for us to stop," 
Nunn said.

       The joint threat reduction program was launched in 
December 1991 and has been promoted through more than two dozen 
projects that have cost the United States about $5 billion so 
far.
 
  
 © 2002 Deseret News Publishing Company 
*****************************************************************
 38 Rivals compete in deadly race to step up nuclear arms production
 	 
  Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | 

India asserts its right to strike at Pakistan Last orders for New 
Delhi's expats Hijackers 'trailed by CIA before attacks' Nuclear 
attack film thrills America
 			 		 		 			 		 		 			 		 			 		 			 		   	 	
Rory McCarthy in Islamabad
Monday May 27, 2002
 [http://www.guardian.co.uk]  		
 		
International nuclear experts believe technicians in India and 
Pakistan are stepping up the production of weapons-grade uranium 
and plutonium as the threat of serious conflict over the disputed 
mountains of Kashmir intensifies. 

Military analysts in Islamabad and New Delhi have begun openly 
discussing scenarios in which the guerrilla war in Kashmir might 
flare into a nuclear confrontation. 

Zia Mian, a Pakistani physicist at Princeton University, said the 
two countries were racing to expand their nuclear arsenals. "The 
Pakistani uranium enrichment facilities, as far as we know, are 
working three shifts around the clock," he said. 

"The trouble is that both sides imagine that a nuclear bomb just 
makes a bigger bang," said Brian Cloughley, a south Asia military 
analyst and retired Australian army officer. "They have got no 
concept of the sheer magnitude of the disaster of a nuclear 
exchange. Radioactive fallout in the Himalayas would mean the 
death of the subcontinent." 

With 1.2m soldiers, the Indian army is the world's third largest 
and more than twice the size of the Pakistani force. Officers in 
Islamabad admit privately that in a conventional war Pakistan's 
army, although widely regarded as better trained, could hold out 
for barely three weeks. 

After the two rivals held tit-for-tat nuclear tests in 1998, it 
appeared there was at last a balance between them. But it quickly 
became apparent that this was not the nuclear deterrence of the 
cold war. Unlike the host of "confidence-building" agreements 
which tempered the hostility between the Soviet Union and the US, 
the only measure currently in place is an agreement not to attack 
each other's nuclear installations. Few believe it would stick in 
the event of war. With limited real-time intelligence, the chance 
of unleashing a nuclear attack by mistake is considerable. 

While India has committed itself to a "no first-use" policy, 
Pakistan's generals are prepared to use the nuclear option in a 
war, analysts here say. 

Pakistan's army believes it would be difficult to contain a 
conflict in Kashmir and stop it spiralling out of control. 

"The idea of keeping this as a limited conflict is very 
difficult. Where do you draw the line?" said Lieutenant General 
Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani officer and security analyst. 
"Because of the arithmetic Pakistan becomes very vulnerable and 
then you have to consider the nuclear option." 

Pakistan has between 25 and 50 nuclear warheads, according to 
Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems. India is believed to have 
between 100 and 150. 

Perhaps the strongest weapon in Pakistan's arsenal is the threat 
of a first strike. 

"Pakistan relies on first use. We have to have the option, 
otherwise there would be no deterrence," Khalid Ahmed, a 
commentator and former foreign ministry official, said. 

In Rawalpindi, the military leadership long ago drew up the three 
worst cases in which it might resort to its ultimate weapon. The 
most likely would be a massive Indian strike into the province of 
Sind, in the south, which would cut Pakistan in half. Second 
would be the loss of Lahore, Pakistan's second largest city which 
sits 30 minutes drive from the Indian border.

The final risk is the collapse of the its army in the face of 
overwhelming odds. 

Indian analysts suggest their generals are aware that forcing 
Pakistan into a desperate position could be the final trigger.

"If the Indians made an incursion deep into Pakistan and didn't 
show signs of stopping, the Pakistanis might threaten the use of 
nuclear weapons," said Sumit Ganguly, a political scientist at 
the University of Texas. "But everything about Indian military 
culture speaks of prudence." 

Yet as both states push their armies closer towards their fourth 
war, care and prudence appear in short supply. 
	
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002
*****************************************************************
 39 Fallout would reach Australia 

      news.com.au - 

[28may02]

By Mark Dunn

MELBOURNE nuclear scientists yesterday began to calculate the 
human toll Australia would suffer if the Pakistan-India conflict 
broke into nuclear war.

They believe the city would not be significantly affected by 
radioactive fallout in the first 48 hours. 

After that, contamination in southern Australia would depend on 
the power of the nuclear device. 

"Australia would not be immune from it," said Australian 
Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency spokesman Brendan 
Elliott. 

As one million Pakistan and Indian soldiers squared off along the 
disputed Kashmir border, the weather bureau began running 
computer programs to help estimate Australia's human and 
environmental risk. 

"We are looking at the aspect of nuclear exchange (between 
Pakistan and India) at the moment," Mr Elliot said. 

"Within 48 hours, should there be a nuclear exchange, it is 
thought to be unlikely we would be significantly affected," he 
said. "That's the best estimate at the moment. 

"It depends on how many kilotons they actually possess and how 
many they might use. 

"But what the fallout would be – how in real terms it affects us 
– has not yet been determined." 

Australia has four radiation monitoring stations testing for 
radio-nuclides and feeds constant data to the International 
Atomic Energy Agency in Austria under our commitment to the 
comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. 

"(Contamination) would be detected fairly early in the piece," Mr 
Elliott said. 

"It is real-time data that is fed to Vienna." Based on past 
nuclear testing experience in the northern hemisphere, the health 
risks to Australians would be small to negligible. 

But detailed modelling was yet to be completed, he said. India 
has an estimated 50 to 100 nuclear devices and Pakistan has 
between 30 and 50. 

Pakistan yesterday entered a third day of missile tests as 
hostile forces across northern Jammu borders again traded heavy 
mortar and machinegun fire. 

An Indian guard died and three soldiers and a civilian woman were 
wounded in exchanges at the so-called Line of Control, a 
ceasefire line dividing the Kashmir region. 

The fiercest firing saw Pakistan release remote control launcher 
weapons for the first time in the conflict. 

Analysts predict that unless a diplomatic resolution can be 
brokered, war between the countries would be almost inevitable 
within two months. 

Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has already promised 
his country a "decisive fight" and Pakistan President Pervez 
Musharraf has come under intense pressure after Pakistan-based 
Islamic extremists killed 31 people during a May 14 raid on an 
Indian army base in Kashmir. 

Respected defence commentator the Janes organisation describes 
the situation as exceptionally dangerous. 

Janes lists the biggest deterrent for nuclear conflict as being 
the "balance of terror". 

"India and Pakistan will be constrained by the near certainty 
that if one side uses nuclear weapons against the other, the 
victim will retaliate," it said.                                

Herald Sun
 				 
News Limited 
*****************************************************************
 40 Nuclear rivals 'cannot afford war'

BBC News | SOUTH ASIA | 

 			 
27 May, 2002

[Pakistani troops at line of control near Muzaffarabad ] Talk of 
war worries many Pakistanis
 	 	 
By Owais Tohid                                                          
BBC correspondent in Islamabad                                     

Tension was tangible in the Pakistani capital as General 
Musharraf addressed the nation for the first time since 
hostilities began mounting again with India. 
	
 Vajpayee and Musharraf both want to convince their countrymen 
they are prepared for war, so when they sit down for talks, it 
doesn't seem like backing down  
   	
   Mohammad Ateeq, market trader     

 One hawker in central Islamabad advertised the newspapers he was 
selling by shouting "another slap in India's face". "Pakistan 
carries out another successful missile test," shouted another 
teenage boy, brandishing copies of an evening tabloid with 
pictures of missiles on the front page. Many here are feeling the 
strain as tensions mount along on the Line of Control (LoC) which 
divides the disputed territory of Kashmir valley. 

"My heart tells me there is a threat of war, but my brains tell 
me there can't be a war," says an old bookseller, Mohammad Ateeq, 
in one of Islamabad's busy markets. 
		 			
[President Musharraf]                                                                           
Musharraf: Caught between a rock and a hard place
 		 		 		 			  
"No matter how seriously Musharraf is portraying the war threat, 
America can't afford a war between Pakistan and India. "Americans 
need Musharrraf and our country for its war against Osama and his 
al-Qaeda in Afghanistan," he says. "Look, Bush has involved 
Russia for initiating talks between Pakistan and India. I think 
Vajpayee and Musharraf both want to convince their countrymen 
they are prepared for war so when they sit down for talks, it 
doesn't seem like backing down," Mr Ateeq says. 

'Mullahs angry' 

But many believe Indian Prime Minister Atal Behair Vajpayee has 
put General Musharraf in a fix. 
	
 If they [Indians] strike at us, then we have the atomic bomb   
   	
   Mohammad Babar, taxi driver       

 Pakistan's president has already opened too many fronts 
internally after siding with the international community in its 
campaign against "terror". 

"Musharraf has already made the mullahs angry. They are after his 
government," says Mohammad Naseem, a student at Quaid-e-Azam 
University. 

"If Musharraf only talks about peace with India, then these 
people would criticise him, and if he says he is ready for war 
like Vajpayee then America would pressurise him. "So Musharraf 
has to appease both of them. He is talking of peace on one hand 
and on the other carrying out missile tests every day." 

Deterrent 

Many think the testing of missiles and Pakistan's nuclear status 
would prevent a war in future. 
	
 We both cannot afford a war - we cannot even have three proper 
meals a day     
   	
   Niaz Ahmed, grocer    

 "If they [Indians] strike at us, then we have the atomic bomb. 
We are less in numbers, but our atomic bomb is more powerful than 
the whole population of India," Mohammad Babar, a driver, angrily 
says. 

"Vajpayee can't take Kashmir from us by using force. If they use 
power, we will use our power." 

But Niaz Ahmed, a 70-year-old who makes 150 rupees (less than $3 
a day) running a grocery, believes "we both cannot afford a war". 

"Both the countries spend billions of rupees on these atmi 
[nuclear] weapons and here we cannot even have three proper meals 
a day." 
*****************************************************************
 41 Pakistan has secretly built up nuclear arsenal

Times Online

May 27, 2002

From Zahid Hussain in Islamabad
 		   		 		
PAKISTANI scientists have secretly been working round the clock 
for the past three years to accelerate production of 
weapons-grade uranium for atomic warheads. According to a leading 
Pakistani nuclear physicist, the country could have more warheads 
than previously thought. 

Pakistan successfully tested a ballistic surface-to-surface 
missile yesterday for the second day running, increasing tension 
with its nuclear rival, India, and once again proving that it 
also has the means to deliver its weapons. 

On the other side of the border, Atal Behari Vajpayee, the Indian 
Prime Minister, said his country’s patience with Islamic militant 
attacks was running out: “There is a limit to our patience,” he 
said in a national television address. 

Pervez Hoodbhoy, professor of nuclear physics at Quaid-e-Azam 
university in Islamabad, told The Times: “The scientists have 
been working in three shifts over the past three years since the 
Kargil conflict.” Dr Hoodbhoy said there were clear indications 
that the nuclear warheads were already in place on missiles. “We 
are much closer to a nuclear confrontation with India than at any 
other time,” he said. 

The disclosure raised the possibility that Pakistan could 
assemble more nuclear warheads than the estimated 30 to 50. Each 
warhead is thought to have the same explosive power as the US 
atomic weapon dropped over Hiroshima in 1945. Reports say that 
India has already taken its warheads out of storage to be fitted 
to delivery systems. 

Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, leaves for the region today to 
try to ease tensions and to open dialogue. He will propose 
establishing greater contact between Islamabad and New Delhi to 
avoid either side accidentally triggering a nuclear holocaust. 

President Bush appealed to President Musharraf to “show results” 
by clamping down on attacks in India by militants from Pakistan. 
Mr Musharraf, who is due to deliver a televised address to the 
Pakistani people today, said that he had acted to stop all 
military actions and insisted he was not looking for 
confrontation with India. But he also vowed to defend himself if 
attacked. 

In an interview with the Washington Post, he accused India of 
trying to “destabilise me, my Government and Pakistan” in the 
past weeks and gave warning that if war broke out “we’ll take the 
offensive into Indian territory”. 

India, which outnumbers Pakistan in conventional and nuclear 
weapons, paid particularly close attention to the missile tests 
over the weekend. 

Pakistan successfully tested a short-range Ghaznavi missile 
capable of hitting targets 180 miles away yesterday. On Saturday 
it tested a Ghauri missile with a range of 950 miles. It is 
widely expected to test fire its long range Shaheen 2 missile, 
which can reach targets 1,800 miles away. 

“The flight data indicated that all design parameters have been 
successfully validated,” a military spokesman said. The 
development is said to have enhanced Pakistan’s tactical nuclear 
strike capability. 

The Ghauri missile is capable of hitting Delhi, Bombay and other 
major Indian cities, while the Ghaznavi, according to defence 
experts, could be used against the Indian forces on the front 
line. “Ghaznavi underscores Pakistan’s capability for tactical 
nuclear strike,” a defence analyst said. 

The tests were conducted in defiance of an appeal by President 
Bush and President Putin who, on Saturday, expressed concern over 
the missile launches and urged Mr Musharraf to halt raids into 
Indian-controlled territory. 

Pakistan welcomed Mr Putin’s suggestion for a meeting between 
Indian and Pakistani leaders in Kazakhstan next month. Pakistani 
officials said that President Musharraf was prepared for talks 
with Indian leaders “anytime, anywhere”. 

Pakistan insisted that the missile tests were routine. “The tests 
were merely a technical requirement and it should not be seen as 
an offensive measure,” Nisar Memon, the Minister for Information, 
said. Nevertheless, the timing was a defiant gesture that added 
to world alarm. 
  	 		
Copyright 2002 
[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,549,00.html]           
Times
*****************************************************************
 42 Journalists See An Alarming Trend In Terror Warnings

(washingtonpost.com)
 
By Howard Kurtz
 Washington Post Staff Writer
 Monday, May 27, 2002; Page C01 

Journalists say the Bush administration has been pushing the 
recent spate of scary stories about possible new terrorist 
attacks.
 
"Right now they're putting out all these warnings to change the 
subject from what was known prior to September 11 to what is 
known now," says CBS's national security correspondent, David 
Martin.
 
But national security adviser Condoleezza Rice calls that notion 
"simply not true. We haven't talked about it among ourselves. 
We've just answered the questions. We've just reported the facts 
as we know them. We've been saying all along that we could not 
assure that another attack would not take place." There was, Rice 
says, "no secret meeting" on press strategy.
 
"This is largely media-driven," says White House spokesman Adam 
Levine.
 
Whatever the origin, it's clear that this sort of reporting -- 
based on murky claims often described as intelligence "chatter" 
-- is extraordinarily difficult.
 
"It's a double layer of mystery," says Newsweek's Evan Thomas. 
"The press doesn't really know what the government does in 
secret, and the government doesn't really know because its 
information is put together from amorphous patterns. Everyone is 
pretty much in the dark."
 
In the space of several days, there were reports that another 
attack on America is almost certain (Dick Cheney), that nuclear 
weapons will one day be used (Donald Rumsfeld), that suicide 
bombers are next (FBI chief Robert Mueller) and that the Statue 
of Liberty and Brooklyn Bridge could be targets (unnamed 
officials). Senior officials may have been responding to press 
questions, but they are practiced in the art of finessing such 
questions.
 
"We didn't want anybody to be complacent," Rice says. "Obviously 
post-September 11 everyone has a heightened sense of how 
information will play. I'm not surprised that's the case with the 
press, too."
 
There was little reaction in 1998 when Time's Elaine Shannon, 
citing intelligence sources, wrote that Osama bin Laden "may be 
planning his boldest move yet -- a strike on Washington or 
possibly New York City."
 
"Everybody I've been covering for years has been telling me, 'It 
is only a matter of time,' " Shannon says. Still, she says, "we 
have always laced the story with plenty of caveats. The officials 
we're talking to have made no bones about their own 
reservations."
 
But sometimes they give mixed signals. Shannon recently reported 
an FBI warning about possible attacks against large apartment 
buildings -- which, she says, an FBI spokesman strongly denied 
before the bureau confirmed it days later.
 
Even with qualifiers and caveats, though, media headlines tend to 
create the impression that an attack may well be coming. CBS's 
Martin, who broke the story on President Bush having received an 
intelligence briefing last August about possible plane 
hijackings, notes that some recent threats are based on accounts 
by captured bin Laden aide Abu Zubaydah -- and could amount to 
disinformation.
 
"If you have a detainee in Guantanamo Bay telling you there's 
going to be an attack on the Statue of Liberty, chances are it's 
a crock," he says. "But are you going to ignore it after 
September 11? It's impossible to ignore. . . . 

"You have Condi and other senior administration officials on 
background, telling anyone who will listen about this 'chatter,' 
which anyone familiar with intelligence knows is synonymous with 
communications intercepts."
 
Can the media strike the right balance? For years, says Thomas, 
"I almost had a paragraph in my computer about how the threat was 
coming and experts were warning the U.S. They were all related to 
Osama. . . . After a while it was sort of crying wolf and no one 
was paying any attention." Flying Blind?
 

Justice Department officials are ticked off at Dan Rather.
 
On the "Imus in the Morning" radio show last Wednesday, the CBS 
anchor said that Attorney General John Ashcroft "just before 
September 11 started taking private aircraft. . . . Well, that 
would indicate that somebody somewhere was getting pretty 
worried. . . . Why wasn't it shared with the public at large?"
 
Justice spokeswoman Barbara Comstock calls Rather's comments 
"irresponsible," saying: "The implication here is outrageous. 
He's acting like the attorney general found out there were going 
to be hijackings and started to fly on private planes." She says 
CBS and other news outlets were told days earlier that the 
warnings in early 2001 concerned Ashcroft's personal safety, not 
hijackings, and that his family kept flying on commercial jets.
 
Rather called Don Imus back Friday to protest that he "never said 
the attorney general was warned specifically about 9/11 threats 
and therefore covered his own security." But Rather escalated the 
dispute instead, insisting that Ashcroft's conduct "doesn't look 
particularly good" when contrasted with the failure to warn 
American passengers. "Maybe it would be better for him to spend a 
little less time trying to sully up my reputation in a way and 
cover his backside and more time trying to get things straight." 
Going Soft
 

Despite the publicity surrounding the recent threats, network 
news has returned to its old ways.
 
On the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts, national and 
international stories have fallen by 35 percent since October, to 
half of all stories, says the Project for Excellence in 
Journalism. Lifestyle coverage, which had basically vanished, 
again makes up 20 percent of the broadcasts. In short, the 
evening news "now looks much as it did before September 11," the 
study says.
 
The pattern is similar on the morning shows, where hard news has 
fallen by more than half since October and celebrity and 
lifestyle coverage is up threefold. Still, these programs carry 
more hard news than they did last summer.
 
All this is a dramatic change from last fall, when television 
news turned decidedly serious. Critics said it couldn't last, and 
they were right.
 
Not surprisingly, coverage of military stories is up threefold on 
the evening news, to 15 percent of all stories, since last 
summer. But coverage of domestic issues such as health care is 
down by almost half, to 10 percent of all stories. And one in 
five stories involved such lighter fare as male nannies on NBC, 
El Nino predictions on CBS and America's fattest cities on ABC. 
Mystery Man
 

The Washington Times has printed two Middle East stories in 
recent weeks by Sayed Anwar -- which, it turns out, is a 
pseudonym.
 
"He said his life would be in danger," says Deputy Foreign Editor 
Willis Witter, adding that the stringer has also written for the 
paper under his real name. "He's very good. He's broken some 
pretty good stories for us."
 
In the May 13 Times, the writer accused a group of now-expelled 
Palestinian militants of preying on Christians through "a 
two-year reign of terror that included rape, extortion and 
executions." Australian Broadcasting correspondent Tim Palmer 
says the piece included rumor and unconfirmed charges -- as he 
concluded when an Australian legislator demanded to know why he 
hadn't reported the information. Witter says he would "defend 
every word."
 
Managing Editor Francis Coombs says future "Anwar" stories will 
carry a disclaimer, and adds, "A legitimate case could be made 
that we at least should have informed the reader." Downer
 

The Cybercast News Service last month ran a satire -- helpfully 
labeled "satire" -- that began as follows:
 
"A top researcher says a new study strongly suggests the music of 
country singer Patsy Cline contributes to depression, suicide and 
violent behavior by women." This was according to "Dr. Lenore 
Morose, head of the Womyn's Studies Department at Radcliffe 
College."
 
On May 17, Newark Star-Ledger columnist Larry Hall wrote a 
dead-serious piece complaining about the work of Dr. Morose. 
"That's a stretch," he wrote. "You could make the same argument 
about scads of other singers." The paper has run a retraction for 
lifting -- and misreading -- the story. Ejected
 

New York Post sports columnist Wallace Matthews lost his job 
after writing a column accusing the tabloid's gossip columnist, 
Neal Travis, of "deplorable journalism" for printing a rumor 
suggesting that Mets catcher Mike Piazza is gay. (Travis didn't 
name Piazza, who has dismissed the rumor.) Matthews, who posted 
his column online after the paper refused to run it, says he 
quit; the Post says he was fired for "insubordination."
 
2002 The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
 43 The Adventures of 'Intercontinental' Man 

(washingtonpost.com)
 
White House Notebook 

By Dana Milbank Tuesday, May 28, 2002; Page A15 

While traveling in Europe this past week, President Bush proposed 
a novel plan for dealing with Russia's old nuclear weapons. He 
said industrialized countries would pay $20 billion "to help 
Russia securitize the dismantled nuclear warheads."
 
Many people assumed Bush misspoke and intended to "secure" the 
nuclear material. Presumably he did not mean the literal 
definition of "securitize," which is to turn a commodity into a 
stock that can be traded -- Russian nukes on the Chicago Board of 
Trade.
 
The phrase was one of several artful ones Bush employed in his 
European tour. At the U.S. ambassador's home in Moscow, he 
weighed in on an issue involving the Declaration of Independence. 
Thomas Jefferson wrote about "inalienable" rights. Linguists have 
suggested that "unalienable" is the proper word. Bush offered a 
third possibility: "uninalienable rights."
 
At other points, Bush brought his Texas folksiness to the 
capitals of Europe. Arriving for a caviar dinner at Russian 
President Vladimir Putin's country residence, Bush viewed the 
immaculate grounds and told his host: "Nice of you to mow the 
grass for us." At the French president's palace, he noted that 
Jacques Chirac is "always saying that the food here is 
fantastic."
 
But if snobs in Europe still doubt the U.S. president's smarts, 
Putin is not among them. After a quick tour of the State 
Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg, Putin said he had showed Bush 
a portrait of Catherine the Great. "And Mr. Bush, without missing 
a beat, said, 'Oh, and by the way, where is the portrait of 
Potemkin?' " 

That's a sure sign Bush is, to use a word he coined in Paris, an 
"intercontinental" gentleman.
 
At the request of the Secret Service, security throughout Europe 
has been even more extraordinary than for past presidential 
visits. Authorities generally clear the streets of people within 
several blocks of Bush. Asked whether he missed interaction with 
the common folk, Bush replied, "I live in a bubble. . . . That's 
just life."
 
Even Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was caught in the 
security web keeping people from the president. While Bush's 
motorcade made its way into the Putin residence, 25 minutes west 
of Moscow, security guards let Bush pass but stopped the 
limousine containing Powell, Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans 
and Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. The high-ranking officials 
were detained for 10 minutes until, after a series of frantic 
phone calls, the Russians were convinced that they posed no 
danger. As Powell noted later, "My bubble isn't as big as the 
president's bubble."
 
For lower-level U.S. officials and the White House press corps, 
of course, there is no bubble whatsoever. And getting into the 
presidential bubble presents ever more exotic challenges.
 
To get to Bush's news conference with German Chancellor Gerhard 
Schroeder in Berlin, the German government required visitors 
first to visit the German Press and Information Ministry, where 
they were required to show a pass, circle the ground floor, show 
the pass again and descend into a basement corridor leading to a 
tunnel, where German police performed security screening. Then, 
they boarded new buses, were ordered to switch buses once again, 
and waited in the tunnel for another half hour.
 
The Russians did the Germans one better. When the press plane 
arrived in Moscow, Russian authorities detained the Americans at 
the airport for a 90-minute "procedure" in which they collected 
and confiscated each person's passport. The confiscated passports 
presented a problem the next morning at the Kremlin, where 
Russian officials required attendees at the arms treaty signing 
to present -- their passports.
 
In addition, large numbers of correspondents, including 
Moscow-based American reporters, were turned away at the Kremlin 
gates because they were not on a "list" that had been circulated 
-- in Berlin. A Secret Service agent and U.S. military officials 
were also told "nyet." People on the "list," once arriving at the 
hall for the signing ceremony, were also blocked from entering. 
"Too late," a Russian official said. "Full." U.S. Embassy 
officials finally persuaded the Russians to relent moments before 
the signing. The hall was mostly empty.
 
President Bush's father, when he was in the White House, 
introduced the world to "speed golf," involving a breathless race 
through 18 holes. The younger Bush, on his European trip, 
practiced a variation: robo-tourism.
 
After a lunch inside the Kremlin, Bush and Putin, with their 
wives, took a stroll of the Kremlin's Cathedral Square, a 
treasure chest of churches and historic points. "It's really 
beautiful," Bush remarked to a group of lucky tourists (they had 
been through metal detectors and were thus exempt from the 
presidential "bubble" restraints). The tour was scheduled to last 
30 minutes. After seven minutes, Bush and Putin went back to 
Putin's office.
 
Rapid tourism has become something of a custom for Bush. In 
Beijing, he raced up and down the Great Wall so fast the first 
lady intervened to slow him down. On Saturday in St. Petersburg, 
though, there was no holding Bush back. He visited the Hermitage 
-- which has 14 miles of corridors and some of the world's 
greatest art -- in half an hour. His St. Petersburg trip also 
included a church (15 minutes), a synagogue (20 minutes), the 
Russian Museum (30 minutes) and a boat cruise (one hour, 15 
minutes).
 
The highlight of robo-tourism, though, came Saturday night at the 
ballet. Bush attended "The Nutcracker" at Mariinsky Hall. The 1 
hour, 40-minute performance, according to a consular official in 
attendance, was abridged from the original to accommodate the 
president's schedule.
 
© 2002 The Washington Post Company
*****************************************************************
 44 Nuclear threat casts dark shadow over NATO summit 

Tue May 28,11:24 AM ET 

By NICOLE WINFIELD, Associated Press Writer 

PRATICA DI MARE AIR BASE, Italy - NATO and Russia urged India and 
Pakistan on Tuesday to back down from the brink of nuclear war — 
a message the Russian leader is to personally deliver to the two 
leaders next week.

The message was unusual since the alliance traditionally does not 
comment on conflicts and issues outside of the North Atlantic 
region. The messenger — Russian President Vladimir Putin is also 
unusual, representing a practical result of the new agreement 
signed here Tuesday making Russia a junior partner in NATO.
 
"All the heads of state and government here today are committed, 
and commit themselves, to doing whatever is necessary to maintain 
peace," on the subcontinent, NATO Secretary General Lord 
Robertson said.
 
He told a press conference that the crisis between the 
nuclear-armed neighbors had dominated discussion of a working 
lunch with Putin, U.S. President Bush and NATO's 18 other members 
following the signing ceremony.
 
"All 20 nations here, all 20 presidents and prime ministers share 
a deep common concern about the situation and its risks not just 
for that region but for all the world," Robertson said.
 
"Presidents and prime ministers strongly urge both sides to 
de-escalate and to resume talking together so that their problems 
can be resolved peacefully."
 
Tensions between the rivals have been rising for weeks.
 
On Tuesday, Pakistan test-fired a missile capable of carrying 
nuclear warheads into Indian territory, the third and final 
launch in a series of much-criticized tests.
 
Robertson said Putin had been asked to tell Indian Prime Minister 
Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistan leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf of 
NATO's concern when he meets with them at an Asia conference in 
Almaty, Kazakhstan June 3-5.
 
Putin would urge that they "recognize their wider obligations to 
the world and sit down and talk peacefully and constructively 
about moving forward from this crisis," he said.
 
Turkish President Necdet Sezer, NATO's only Muslim member, told a 
press conference he too would be in Almaty to try to mediate 
between the two.
 
Putin said last week he would invite Musharraf and Vajpayee to 
meet together. However, India's foreign minister said Tuesday 
said there was little chance of a one-on-one meeting.
 
Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi encouraged Putin to "offer the 
commitment" of the NATO alliance in the search for peace.
 
Speaking to reporters separately, German Chancellor Gerhard 
Schroeder said "there is a great worry" in Moscow and NATO 
capitals about rising tensions between the two.
 
"We must do all we can to achieve a de-escalation ... to make 
clear our interest in a peaceful solution," he said.
 
And French President Jacques Chirac said NATO members had to 
endeavor to "amicably pressure (India and Pakistan) to avoid the 
worst."
 
Robertson stressed that he spoke in name of the 19 NATO allies 
and Putin. NATO officials said, however, that his statement 
didn't indicate the alliance was considering any action in the 
region.
 
The officials said an exception was made in NATO's traditional 
refusal to comment on issues outside the North Atlantic because 
of the prospect of nuclear war between the two rivals.
 
rr/pa/nw/rw
 
  Copyright © 2002 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
*****************************************************************
 45 World plea to stop first nuclear war 

- theage.com.au
 
By Lawrence Bartlett
Islamabad
 May 27 2002
 
The spectre of the world's first nuclear war has galvanised world 
leaders into action in a bid to force Pakistan and India back 
from the brink of a conflict in which millions could die.
 
While the threat of a nuclear conflict between the superpowers 
during the Cold War seemed too horrific to be realised, the edgy 
standoff between the south Asian archrivals has set alarm bells 
ringing in Western capitals.
 
The US and Russian Presidents, having agreed to slash their own 
nuclear arsenals, urged restraint at the weekend when Pakistan 
testfired nuclearcapable missiles amid bellicose exchanges with 
India. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin said he was "very concerned that 
this conflict will escalate". US leader George Bush said: "We are 
deeply concerned about the rhetoric." 

France's Jacques Chirac told Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf 
in a telephone conversation that the spiralling tension "could 
lead to disaster". 

US Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "Every time you have two 
armies that close with that level of tension, there is the 
likelihood of an outbreak of hostilities. And when both are 
nuclear armed, that should cause us all concern." 

Their fears were not calmed by Mr Musharraf's assessment of the 
situation as "extremely explosive" in an interview with The 
Washington Post. 

Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee held urgent talks with 
Defence Minister George Fernandes and national security adviser 
Brajesh Mishra yesterday, as India tried to play down Pakistan's 
latest missile test as routine. And a survey by the British 
magazine New Scientist put the potential conflict into 
perspective: at least three million people would be killed and 
another 1.4million seriously injured if even a "limited" nuclear 
war broke out, it said.
 
Pakistan's first test of a nuclear weapon in 1998 rocked the 
Western world, which saw it as evidence of a new and dangerous 
element in the balance of terror: a "Muslim bomb". 

Again, these fears will have been exacerbated by Mr Musharraf 
himself, who told an Islamic conference after yesterday's missile 
test: "We should be proud of this achievement. AllahoAkbar, 
AllahoAkbar, AllahoAkbar (God is great, God is great, God is 
great)." 

Islam is central to the tension between Pakistan and India, based 
as it is on the dispute over Muslimmajority Kashmir, which came 
under Indian rule after the partition of the subcontinent at the 
end of British rule in 1947. 

The spark for the latest sharp deterioration in relations was a 
massacre of 35 people on May 14 blamed by New Delhi on 
Pakistanbased insurgents. 

Ties had already been strained by an attack by militants on the 
Indian parliament in December.
 
But there is a vital new element in the equation: Pakistan is a 
key ally of the West in the USled war on terrorism, which is 
focused at the moment on neighbouring Afghanistan. 

Pakistan is believed to have withdrawn some troops from its 
western border with Afghanistan and deployed them on the eastern 
frontier with India. 

Mr Bush yesterday pressured Pakistan to honour its promise to 
crack down on Islamic militants blamed for crossborder attacks in 
Kashmir. But Pakistan is under intense internal pressure not to 
abandon its support for a campaign by Kashmiri Muslims to free 
themselves from Indian rule.

- agencies
 
Copyright © 2002 The Age Company Ltd     advertise
    
*****************************************************************

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: 
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> 
    
*****************************************************************