-------- good news

Brazil moves to protect rainforest

USA Today
03/31/00- Updated 02:52 PM ET
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/nw1.htm#ucul

RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil - Environmentalists have expressed guarded support for proposed changes to Brazil's forestry code that would leave a key protection for the Amazon rainforest intact but reduce reserves in savanna areas. The proposal approved this week by the National Council for the Environment requires that landowners maintain 80% of Amazon rainforest holdings but reduces the amount of savanna area that must be kept intact from 50% to 35%. The forestry code, which was established by executive proclamation in 1996, had long been attacked by the still-powerful farm lobby in the Brazilian Congress.

-------- activism

URGENT, NEED HELP! PLEASE TAKE A FEW MOMENTS TO....CONT'D

From: Pelofson@aol.com
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 04:28:05 EST

Hi Guys, forgive me for asking, but would you ALL please take a few moments to send out an email to the elected officials and political people listed below regarding concern about the practice of burning off vegetation at Superfund site lands for prairie management instead of vigorous hand management techniques? YOUR site will be next if they get away with it here.

Rocky Flats has been a "test" site for many things. When they demolish buildings, they will recontaminate the buffer zone, and then will burn that off too, on down to the communities that lay below. Rocky Flats sits on a large bluff above 3-4 million people in homes that are spread out in all directions as far as the eye can see, with the closest house being only 1/2 mile from the east gate, and only 1 mile in all directions from the RFETS industrial area. It is crunch time, and we need some support. Please cc me with the emails you send out so we can also compile them.

Thanks VERY much in advance, Paula E-G/EIN

I urge everyone that receives this email to call, write, or email DOE, EPA, CDPHE, Governor Owens, Rep. Udall, and the local impacted cities to seek a stop to this plan to burn off the vegetation in the Rocky Flats buffer zone:

Gov. Owens: (303) 866-2471 governorowens@state.co.us USDOE: (202) 586-6210 The.Secretary@hqdoe.gov USEPA: (202) 564-4700 browner.carol@epamail.epa.gov Rep. Mark Udall:(303)457-4500 mark.udall@mail.house.gov Udall's aide Doug Young: doug.young@mail.house.gov CDPHE (303) 892-2000 steve.gunderson@state.co.us City of Arvada (303) 431-3000 kfellman@kandf.com (Mayor) Broomfield (303) 438-6300 bwolff@ci.broomfield.co.us Boulder (303) 441-3002 council@ci.boulder.co.us Denver (303) 640-3012 dencc@ci.denver.co.us Westminster (303) 430-2400 nheil@ci.westminster.co.us (Mayor) DIXISAM@aol.com (Mayor pro-tem) ###

----

Fail Safe' Sparks the Anti-Nuclear Movement
Concerned Citizens Organize Hundreds of 'Watch Parties'

For CBS Television Movie Remake

WASHINGTON, March 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Nuclear disarmament advocates plan to capitalize on heightened public awareness of the danger posed by nuclear weapons thanks, in part, to CBS's remake of the 1964 nuclear weapons thriller, "Fail Safe." Groups such as Project Abolition, Disarmament Clearinghouse, Global Security Institute and Peace Action are organizing hundreds of watch parties for concerned citizens nationwide to view "Fail Safe" on April 9, 2000. For information about watch parties in your area, please call 1-800-997-2224.

In "Fail Safe," a computer glitch triggers an accidental attack by US nuclear bombers on Russia, resulting in the destruction of Moscow and the subsequent annihilation of New York City. Organizers of the watch parties believe that the numerous nuclear weapons accidents that have occurred over the last 50 years are proof that leaving 3,600 Russian and 2000 US nuclear warheads on permanent hair trigger alert, poses an unnecessary risk to our global security.

"The re-make of Fail Safe should help re-awaken the American public to the nuclear danger," says Kevin Martin, Director of Project Abolition. Organizers point to an incident in 1995 that brought the world minutes from an all out nuclear war when a routine satellite launch was mistaken by Russia as a U.S. nuclear missile attack. "Ten Years after the end of the Cold War, we have the opportunity to eliminate the scourge of nuclear weapons from the face of the earth, if enough people demand it," says Martin.

According to former U.S. Senator Alan Cranston who currently heads the Global Security Institute, "Fail Safe" is a dramatic story of how there could have been, and still could be, an accidental nuclear war. There have been more than 1000 false alarms leading to the mistaken assumption that one nuclear super power had fired against the other. At least three of these came dangerously close to triggering a nuclear exchange between the two nuclear super powers, including in 1995 when Russia mistook a Norwegian weather satellite launch for a nuclear attack."

Aids woke President Boris Yeltsin in the middle of the night and alerted him of an approaching U.S. Trident nuclear missile. For what is believed to be the first time in history, the Russian President activated his "nuclear briefcase" for a retaliatory attack against the West. Just six minutes before the final impact of the missile, the Russians switched on a special communications circuit that connected Kremlin headquarters with silo-based missiles, missile-carrying trains and submarines -- the Russians were, in effect, at "Battle Stations." Minutes before the launch of Russia's nuclear arsenal, the alarm was determined to be false.

According to CBS advertising executives, between 20 and 30 million viewers are expected to tune in to the live broadcast of the movie that is based on the best-selling novel by Harvey Wheeler and Eugene Burdick. The groups organizing the watch parties want the US and Russia to take concrete steps to de-alert nuclear weapons and move toward global nuclear disarmament. Currently Representative Edward Markey of Massachusetts is sponsoring Congressional Resolution 177, which seeks to take U.S. nuclear weapons off high alert as part of a diplomatic effort to urge Russia to do the same. Markey has 90 co-sponsors of the measure.

SOURCE Project Abolition
CO: Project Abolition; CBS; Global Security Institute
ST: District of Columbia, Russia, Massachusetts
IN: ENT
SU: LEG
03/31/2000 10:56 EST http://www.prnewswire.com

----

Idaho town counters neo-Nazi image

USA Today
03/30/00- Updated 07:26 PM ET
http://usatoday.com/news/ndsthu04.htm

COEUR D'ALENE, Idaho (AP) - Embarrassed by the sight of neo-Nazis parading through town at the height of tourist season, city leaders have decided they, too, ought to be using the First Amendment to their advantage.

They are hiring a human rights coordinator with public relations experience whose job will include publicizing all the good and decent things people are doing in Coeur d'Alene.

It's the latest tactic in a battle that has seen locals first try to ignore the white supremacist group Aryan Nations, and then stage counter-demonstrations.

The end result was national media coverage showing pictures of swastika-wearing extremists marching down the main street.

''Good deeds and positive activities never garner as much attention as the remarks of a crazy who doesn't represent anybody,'' said Jonathan Coe of the Coeur d'Alene Area Chamber of Commerce.

Mayor Steve Judy will choose the coordinator, who will work with the news media, advertising agencies and religious groups to develop programs that promote respect for others.

The goal is to focus media attention on positive activities, rather than hate marches.

Among other things, the coordinator will set up a Web site, organize public meetings and answer queries from the media about hate groups.

Money for the full-time post of coordinator was donated by the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University. Founder Greg Carr is an Idaho native.

Richard Butler, leader of the Aryan Nations, ridiculed the notion of an Aryan-buster. ''For white people to have to hire somebody like that because other people want to remain white is interesting,'' he said.

The Idaho Panhandle is a region of beautiful lakes and forested mountains that draws thousands of tourists and retirees.

The elegant Coeur d'Alene Resort on the city's lakefront has 18 floors of rooms to fill, at rates of up to $2,500 a night.

In Kootenai County, tourism in 1999 accounted for 5,800 jobs paying $66 million in wages.

With the region's timber and mining industries suffering, tourism is a major reason the population of the county leaped from 69,000 in 1990 to 98,000 in 1997.

Many of the newcomers are moving into $500,000 homes springing up all over the area.

At the same time, Idaho has gained a reputation as a hate-group stronghold.

A recent report by the Northwest Coalition for Human Dignity identified 11 white supremacist groups in Idaho, 10 of them in the Panhandle.

Among them is the Hitler-loving Aryan Nations, which moved to a ranch in the area in the 1970s and declared it was creating a white homeland.

Civic leaders fear that marches by the Aryan Nations in 1998 and 1999 are scaring away tourists and business opportunities.

A 1998 parade attracted about 90 Aryan Nations supporters and 1,000 counter-demonstrators.

Last summer, about 80 white supremacists and 200 opponents scuffled in a park.

A week later, after winning a permit on First Amendment grounds with backing from the ACLU, a few Aryan Nations supporters marched down Sherman Avenue to the screams of thousands of protesters.

Last year, resort owner Duane Hagadone donated thousands of dollars for legal advice in a fruitless attempt to draft a law that would ban the Aryans from marching while preserving First Amendment rights.

At the state level, Gov. Dirk Kempthorne has proposed spending up to $100,000 to change Idaho's image as a haven for racists. ''The idea that this soil is now used as a verbal battleground for hatred and to display swastikas is not Idaho,'' he said at a rally in Coeur d'Alene last year.

In Coeur d'Alene, some merchants were enthusiastic about the idea of countering bad publicity with good.

''We have a really bad reputation,'' said Cathy Shortridge, owner of several stores in the Coeur d'Alene Resort Shopping Plaza. ''Everywhere we go, people mention, 'You live up there with the Aryan Nations.'''

But others wondered whether fighting back against the white supremacists might be counterproductive.

''Ignore them and eventually they will go away,'' said Sandy Jirovski, manager of a recreational vehicle park.

-------- alternative energy

Swiss start solar energy exchange for home users

SWITZERLAND: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6204

ZURICH - A Swiss group has started a solar energy exchange for domestic retail customers and has plans to start two more, a spokeswoman said on Thursday.

A bank of solar panels on top of a school in Nidau is able to produce 45,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity per year and people in the village can buy the power on the exchange.

The price of solar power is around one franc per kWh compared to a price for conventional power of 0.20/0.25 francs. Retail customers prepared to pay the higher price for environmental reasons do so over and above their normal electricity bill and the Nidau utility takes the power from the solar energy collector.

The spokeswoman said there were plans to start a similar project in Basel and, later, a bigger project in the Swiss capital of Berne.

-------- britain

OECD study backs ``Shut Sellafield'' bid -Greenpeace

http://www.envirolink.org/environews/reuters/articles/Environment/03_31_2000.reulb-story-bcenvironmentsellafield.html

COPENHAGEN, March 31 (Reuters) - An unpublished OECD study on nuclear reprocessing backs a drive to suspend or shut down activity at Britain's Sellafield plant, the environment lobby Greenpeace said on Friday. The findings of the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) draft report obtained by Greenpeace show that nuclear fuel reprocessing exposes the public to greater doses of hazardous radiation than storage, the lobby group, which has opposed reprocessing for two decades, said in a statement.

Denmark and Ireland are campaigning to halt activity at or to close down British Nuclear Fuels Limited's (BNFL) troubled Sellafield plant on England's northwestern coast, where it reprocesses uranium used as fuel in nuclear power plants.

But the head of communications at the Paris-based NEA, Jacques de la Ferte told Reuters that the study was unfinished, unapproved and unavailable until the end of May or early June.

``I can't confirm what's in it,'' he said.

Greenpeace officials speaking at a news conference in Copenhagen declined to say how they had obtained the report.

An independent expert, Gordon MacKerron of the Science and Technology Policy Research unit of the University of Sussex, told the news conference he had no doubt the report was genuine.

The NEA official warned the study was ``a very complex report that studies various different cases of nuclear combustion and their effect on the environment, it needs to be talked about in a complete way.''

According to Greenpeace, the fifth draft of the report, dated August 6, 1999, contained ``key evidence which supports Denmark's international initiative to end nuclear reprocessing.''

``Figures in the report show that ending nuclear reprocessing would significantly reduce discharges of nuclear waste into the North-East Atlantic region, and cut doses of radiation to the public,'' it added.

Sellafield was discharging eight million litres of nuclear waste daily into the sea, and the seabed in the vicinity of the plant was so radioactive it should be classified as nuclear waste, Greenpeace UK Senior Scientist Helen Wallace said.

Health data showed excess levels of the deadly disease leukaemia among children near Sellafield and around a similar nuclear reprocessing plant at La Hague in western France run by state-owned Cogema, she said.

In the past few months, BNFL has suffered a series of disastrous safety scares, prompting the British government to rule out planned partial privatisation of the facility until late 2002 at the earliest, and possibly not at all.

Publication of the NEA report, originally requested in 1994 by the 15-nation Oslo-Paris Commission (OSPAR) on protecting the northeast Atlantic marine environment, had been repeatedly delayed, Greenpeace said.

``It is a scandal that this report has been delayed and kept hidden for so long,'' Wallace said, noting that Britain and France were OSPAR signatories.

The annual meeting of OSPAR will be held June 26-30 in Copenhagen. A resolution adopted two years ago said OSPAR would work towards ``substantial reductions or elimination of discharges, emissions and losses of radioactive substances'' by 2000, taking into account the results of the NEA report.

---

ANALYSIS - UK Sellafield closure not a simple option

UK: March 31, 2000 Reuters
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6194

LONDON - A campaign to close British Nuclear Fuels Limited's troubled Sellafield reprocessing plant is gathering pace but experts say shutting down the multi-billion pound facility would not be an easy thing to do.

"Shutting Sellafield is not the same as shutting a car factory," said utilities analyst Nigel Hawkins at Williams de Broe.

Over the last few months BNFL has suffered a catalogue of disastrous safety scares that have angered important customers.

Japan, Germany, Switerzland and Sweden have all banned trade with BNFL because the company falsified Mox nuclear fuel data.

Opposition to the state-owned group is also growing in the U.S. where waste clean up contracts worth nearly $7 billion are under increased scrutiny.

The British government on Wednesday ruled out a planned 1.5 billion £49 percent selloff of BNFL until late 2002 at the earliest and said the group's recent tarnished record meant the much anticipated part-privatisation may never happen.

Ireland and Denmark have called for Sellafield's closure on environmental grounds. Danish and Irish environment ministers met this week in Dublin to discuss ways of pressuring London to shut Sellafield.

Several British newspapers have also joined in the call for dismantling the facility in Cumbria, northern England. "International treaties may force Sellafield's closure," is one of many recent headlines in Britain's Guardian newspaper while a leading article in the Independent said nuclear reprocessing was "unnecessary" and "unsafe."

CLOSURE WOULD BE EXPENSIVE

Sellafield, once known as Windscale, is a collection of nuclear facilities dating back to the 1940s. Although it once boosted Calder Hall, the world's first commercial nuclear power station opened in 1956, its core operation today is a plant called Thorp.

Conceived in the 1970s and started up in the early 1990s at a cost of nearly two billion pounds Thorp reprocesses spent uranium reactor fuel.

During reprocessing highly toxic plutonium is extracted. Critics say the plutonium has no useful purpose and that continued reprocessing will only add to an existing 50-tonne stockpile.

"One would not choose now to build Thorp but the reality is it is here," said Hawkins, adding that getting rid of it would be very expensive.

Estimates vary as to how much it would cost to decommission Thorp although all agree it would be many million pounds. A closure would also seriously dent BNFL's revenue since Thorp generates between 25-30 percent of its 1.5 billion pound turnover and boasts an order book of 12 billion pounds.

These reprocessing contracts with foreign utilities might be extremely difficult to break or prohibitively expensive to do so.

On Thursday BNFL chairman Hugh Collum told the House of Commons select committe on Trade and Industry that any change in the terms of the contract between the group and foreign utilities would require government intervention.

TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES

William Walker, a nuclear author and professor of international relations at the Univeristy of St Andrews said a major hurdle to closing Sellafield is a technical one and could affect Britain's electricity production.

The only outlet for spent fuel from BNFL's eight aging Magnox power stations is B205, a reprocessing plant at Sellafield.

If B205 were shut Magnox power stations would be unable to operate because there are currently no means of storing their spent fuel, according to BNFL.

Reprocessing is the only proven way of dealing with waste fuel, said BNFL spokesman Alan Hughes. Shutting Thorp would not solve the problem of what to do with the stockpile.

Walker said reprocessing should be stopped and the option of long-term secure storage considered. Gordon Mackerron, an economist at Sussex University agreed since he believes BNFL would make more money storing foreign spent fuel than reprocessing it.

But, attempts in the mid-1990s to build a deep underground repositary, Nirex, failed because local planners objected. In addition the government does not permit BNFL to store spent waste after reprocessing it has to be returned.

Story by Matthew Jones

--------

Britain Postpones Privatization Plan

New York Times
March 31, 2000
By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
http://www.nytimes.com/00/03/31/news/financial/britain-nuke.html

LONDON, March 30 -- The British government said this week that it would delay the partial privatization of British Nuclear Fuels until after the next national election.

Separately, the Defense Ministry confirmed a contract order worth £2.2 billion ($3.59 billion) over 10 years to a consortium including British Nuclear Fuels to manage a nuclear weapons production center.

The Trade and Industry Minister, Helen Liddell, said the earliest possible date for the partial privatization "could not be before the latter part of 2002." The next general election will be no later than May 2002.

British Nuclear Fuels had been plagued by problems over safety ranging from falsification of safety documents about reprocessed nuclear fuel shipments sent to Japan to mismanagement of safety controls at a reprocessing plant in northwest England.

--------

Small UK town seeks second wind turbine

http://www.envirolink.org/environews/reuters/articles/Environment/03_31_2000.reulb-story-bcbritainwindpower.html

LONDON, March 31 (Reuters) - A small town in rural east England said on Friday it was impressed with a cutting-edge wind turbine built last year and it wanted another one.

The local council of Swaffham in Norfolk said a second turbine would ensure all 6,000 residents would have their electricity provided by wind power.

``We really want a second turbine. It will make us the greenest community in Europe,'' Town Clerk Di Dann told Reuters by telephone.

Next Generation, the company which built the 97 metre high (320 feet) Eco-Tricity wind turbine, said it hoped to start work on the second turbine later this year.

``We are negotiating for a suitable site now,'' Next Generation's managing director Dale Vince said.

The 1.25 million pound Eco-Tricity turbine has three blades each at over 30 metres longer than a jumbo jet wing.

Its most unusual feature, an enclosed viewing platform at 65 metres, just below the machine house, is a tourist attraction.

``We have been really busy with extra visitors since the turbine went up,'' said Dann.

The second turbine will be the same as Eco-Tricity, an Enercon E-66 model, bar the one-off viewing platform.

Planning permission, often a hurdle in wind developments in the UK, is unlikely to be refused given the council's stand.

Local inhabitants say they are looking forward to 100 percent green electricity.

``It will be good for the town, everyone wants to do their bit for the environment,'' said shopworker Louise Flack.

Vince said the Eco-Tricity turbine is part of a new generation of direct drive, variable speed wind turbines.

With no gearbox or drive train they are quieter than conventional turbines.

---

Star Wars II: Blair risks Europe's ire

31/03/00
By PATRICK WINTOUR in London
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0003/31/text/world01.html

Britain's Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, is willing to proceed with the first stage of a United States-led national missile protective shield despite fears that it could lead to a new escalation of the nuclear arms race.

Cabinet sources, who said ministers were also worried the move could revive mass anti-nuclear protests across Europe, said Mr Blair was ready to allow the US to base a key part of its proposed $US50 billion ($81 billion) anti-missile shield in Britain.

Mr Blair is willing to house a listening station for the defence system, which would identify and destroy hostile missiles heading for America, the sources said.

Mr Blair had already spoken to President Bill Clinton about the missile system, dubbed "son of Star Wars", and given assurances of his support.

The first stage of the defence system is designed to give early warning of a nuclear attack on the US from North Korea and requires changes to the computer software at the existing US satellite base at Fylingdales in North Yorkshire.

The second stage, intended to forestall a nuclear attack from Iran, Iraq and rogue Middle East states, would require a massive extension of an existing US base in Britain. The US has also considered stationing the satellites on one of its warships.

The French and German governments are opposed to the new generation of nuclear weaponry, believing it will breach international treaties and undermine the existing balance of deterrence between Russia and the US.

But a British Cabinet minister said: "How can we turn down a request from our closest ally to change its computer software?"

The missile system is due to be tested again in May, but British sources expect Mr Clinton, who is under political pressure at home, to give the technology the go-ahead in principle, even if the tests do not prove completely successful.

The US Vice-President, Mr Al Gore, will want the system to go ahead to protect himself from political attack by the Republican candidate Mr George Bush, ministers expect.

The British Government claims it has played a key role in persuading the Clinton Administration to share information about the technology with its other European NATO allies.

"We have acted as the bridge between Europe and the US," one Cabinet source said.

But sections of both the French and German coalition governments were deeply sceptical and fear mass street protests.

If Mr Clinton gives the system the go-ahead, the US will build an arsenal of 200 interceptors in Alaska and North Dakota.

Britain and Denmark would be used as bases for the satellites, which would provide early warning of an attack on the US and track the incoming missiles.

A ministerial source said: "The interceptors have to be highly sophisticated. It is equivalent to being able to hit a bullet fired from a gun."

Once fully operational, the system would give the US the ability to track and destroy incoming nuclear missiles, so ruining, critics claim, the delicate deterrence balance known as mutually assured destruction.

The French, in particular, have been pressing the US to share the missile protection technology with Russia and even supply it free of charge. In return, Russia would agree to an amendment to the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty between the two countries.

There has been speculation that the US would like to strike a deal with the new Russian President, Mr Vladimir Putin, in time for the nuclear non-proliferation treaty review conference scheduled for next month in New York.

The US insists the nuclear shield is not aimed at Russia and that Moscow should recognise that it also faces the threat of long-range missile attacks from rogue nuclear states.

British ministers accept that there is tension within the Government over its co-operation with the US.

Last week the Foreign Office minister, Mr Peter Hain, conceded there was a possible conflict between the anti-ballistic missile treaty and a commitment to a new US nuclear shield.

The Guardian; The Telegraph, London

This material is subject to copyright and any unauthorised use, copying or mirroring is prohibited.

---

You can't deny it - nuclear weapons are a stupid risk There are too many ifs and buts in arguments on deployment

Martin Woollacott
Friday March 31, 2000
The Guardian

The Israeli military analyst Martin van Creveld recalls an occasion when one of his students burst into uncontrollable laughter during a seminar on the utility of nuclear weapons. Her reaction, he wrote, was entirely appropriate. Nuclear weapons are so inherently absurd that rational argument about their use is scarcely possible.

In these matters, instinct is often the best guide. Reasonable discourse can lead in dangerous directions: each step may appear reasonable, and yet the whole sequence be the reverse of reasonable. This is the context in which it can be said that some of the arguments about deploying a limited missile defence system in the US are not unreasonable, and some of the arguments against are not particularly strong. Yet, even though this is so, the ultimate effect of deployment could well be profoundly damaging to the security of all countries, including America.

Britain's agreement in principle to changes at the Fylingdales early warning station that prepare the way for this deployment, as reported in the Guardian yesterday, was probably inevitable. In defence matters, the government strives alternately to satisfy both the EU and the US. One for Europe was represented by Tony Blair's recent decision in favour of a European air-to-air missile. One for the US is represented by this potential adjustment at Fylingdales. No doubt the government reserves its position on the much more critical changes that would come later, if the station was to be refurbished to deal with alleged threats from the Middle East as well as from North Korea.

At that moment Britain would be vulnerable to missiles which the US, thanks in part to early warning from Yorkshire, would be able to shoot down. That is, if there are genuine threats; if America's huge array of nuclear weapons were not sufficient to deter them; if a "rogue state" did then target Britain; if the American missile defences actually worked. These "ifs" are a measure of how the rational and the irrational are so riskily muddled in these arguments.

---

Britain backs U.S. missile defence plan

By Thomas Abraham
March 31, 2000,
The Hindu
http://www.indiaserver.com/thehindu/2000/03/31/stories/0331000e.htm

LONDON, MARCH 30. Britain has said it will support a controversial plan by the United States to build a national missile defence system which violates a critical nuclear arms control treaty, the British press has reported. The Guardian, quoting British Cabinet sources, reported that the Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, had given the U.S. President, Mr. Bill Clinton, assurances of his support for the project.

The $ 50-billion national missile defence system is intended to protect the U.S. from missile attacks by ``rogue states'' like North Korea and Iraq. If developed, it will consist of a network of satellites and missiles which will intercept any missiles directed at the U.S. This is a watered down version of the former U.S. President, Mr. Ronald Reagan's ``Star Wars'' anti-missile defence scheme, but it is controversial because it will violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty between the U.S. and Russia. The treaty limited the number of missile defence sites each country had.

It was felt necessary to place these limits, because the Cold War ``balance of terror'' between the U.S. and the then Soviet Union was based on both countries leaving themselves open to nuclear attacks form the other, a policy known as mutually assured destruction.

Other than Britain, other European countries are worried about the impact the U.S. plans to build a missile defence would have on relations with Russia. Russia has so far refused U.S. requests to amend the ABM treaty, and a unilateral U.S. decision to deploy the system could provoke a strong Russian reaction.

Russia has raised its concerns at the United Nation's conference on disarmament in Geneva, and called for strengthening of the provisions banning the testing and deployment of nuclear weapons in outer space, a move that could hamper the proposed U.S. missile defence system. After talks last year between U.S. and Russian officials, Russia made it clear that it was not in favour of amending the ABM treaty, and warned that amendments would ``destroy the entire process of nuclear arms control.'' The U.S. attempts to build a missile shield also comes ahead of next month's review conference in New York of the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Several countries are expected to express worries that the U.S. plans could undermine the global non-proliferation regime.

The Europeans have been urging the U.S. to share its technology with Russia, to calm Russian fears and avoid destabilising relations between Russia and the West. The Guardian quoted British officials as saying that Britain was trying to act as a bridge between the U.S. and Europe to resolve these differences. ``We have acted as a bridge between Europe and the U.S.,'' the newspaper quoted a Cabinet source as saying.

British participation in the project will be limited to allowing U.S. satellite monitoring bases in Britain to be used in the defence system. Denmark is the only other European country to participate in this way.

If approved, the system will comprise around 200 missiles stationed in Alaska and North Dakota, which will shoot down missiles aimed at the U.S. These missiles will be backed by an array of early warning satellite tracking systems. The early warning system will require satellite receivers and monitoring stations outside the U.S., for which the country will require the cooperation of its allies.

It is by no means certain that the missile defence scheme will be approved by Mr. Clinton. An earlier test of the system in January failed when a missile interceptor failed to hit its target. Another test is scheduled in May.

-------- china

Two Chinese States

By Jesse Helms
Friday, March 31, 2000; Page A29
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-03/31/078l-033100-idx.html

Chen Shui-bian's election as president of the Republic of China on Taiwan dramatically and instantly raised the stakes for U.S. policy in the Taiwan Strait.

Lee Teng-hui's election in 1996 was the first direct, popular election of a head of state in Chinese history. President-elect Chen's election marks the first peaceful transfer of power from a ruling Chinese party to its democratic opposition.

Taiwan's democratic transformation, begun by President Lee, is complete. The Republic of China's experiment in democracy is no longer an experiment--it is a proven reality. The nation that was known for the better part of 40 years as "Nationalist China" now is "Democratic China."

No wonder Beijing feels so threatened.

Beijing is worried about the precedent that the people of Taiwan have set. For the past decade, mainland officials have justified their tyrannical rule by dismissing Taiwan's democracy as a ruse. The Nationalists (they told people on the mainland) have held power for 40 years, just as we have held power for 40 years.

No longer. Taiwan's democracy can never again be dismissed so easily, and Beijing is nervous that people on the mainland may now begin to ask: "What about us?" That is why, in the days leading up to Taiwan's election, mainland officials sought desperately to scare Taiwanese voters into rejecting Chen. Premier Zhu Rongji went so far as to warn the people of Taiwan that if they elected Chen, they "won't get another opportunity to regret." The people of Taiwan told Zhu what he could do with his threats. Now it is the United States' responsibility to ensure that Zhu can never fulfill his threat to make Chen's election the final democratic election in China.

For eight years, the Clinton administration has tried to buy peace in the Taiwan Strait by kowtowing to the Chinese Communists and suggesting incredibly that Hong Kong and Macau could serve as models for Taiwan's reunification. Beijing's response has been to engage in a massive military buildup aimed at Taiwan and issue new threats against the island, dramatically lowering the bar for an armed invasion. Yet the administration sticks doggedly by its Chamberlainesque approach, promising this year to reward China's belligerent behavior by seeking permanent most favored nation status for China, while doing absolutely nothing to recognize Taiwan's achievements or help Taiwan deter Chinese aggression.

Those who support economic engagement with China must recognize the Clinton policy for what it is--appeasement. Continuing it in the wake of Chen Shui-bian's election is a recipe for disaster. We must have a new approach. Such a new U.S. approach to Taiwan must have two dimensions: a security dimension, designed to close off Beijing's avenues to destructive behavior; and a political dimension, which recognizes Taiwan's democratic development and seeks to bring Taiwan out of its international isolation.

A new policy must also recognize that the military balance of power of the past 20 years--when it was widely assumed that Taiwan had air superiority and could thereby thwart any attempted invasion or blockade by the mainland--is quickly shifting in Beijing's favor. China is adding 50 missiles a year along the coast of Taiwan in preparation for an attack, and has just begun acquiring Russian destroyers armed with advanced "sunburn missiles." According to the Pentagon, within five years China will have attained air superiority over Taiwan, and will be capable of enforcing a blockade of the island.

The United States must make clear to Beijing that there is no military option in dealing with Taiwan by (1) approving Taiwan's full defense request, including AIM-120 air-defense missiles, diesel submarines and Aegis destroyers with early warning radars; (2) sharing theater missile defense technology with the aim of bringing Taiwan under a regional missile-defense umbrella; (3) passing the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act, which will junk antiquated restrictions prohibiting senior U.S. officers from visiting Taiwan, expand the advice our experts can give them and establish direct, secure communications between our two militaries.

The United States can help Chen restart the cross-strait dialogue only by allowing Taiwan to engage the mainland on the basis of peace through strength. A renewed dialogue with Beijing can be successful only if it is undertaken on the basis of political strength as well. Just as East and West Germany were part of "one Germany," they were nonetheless separate "states." The same holds true for the two Korean states and for the two Chinese states--the People's Republic of China in Beijing and the Republic of China on Taiwan.

Accepting this objective reality does not require abandoning the possibility of reunification. Just as the two German states eventually reunited under democracy, so too do we hope that the two Chinese states may one day reunite--under democracy.

Until then, the United States can no longer continue a policy pretending that the 22 million people of Taiwan do not exist. The United States must recognize the reality of two Chinese states by championing Taiwan's gradual entry, alongside Communist China, into international organizations, such as the World Trade Organization, the World Health Organization and eventually the United Nations.

Chen Shui-bian's election should serve as a wake-up call to the United States and the world: "Democratic China" has arrived and demands recognition.

The writer, a Republican senator from North Carolina, is chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations.

-------- germany

UPDATE - Germany orders checks on Cogema nuclear fuel

GERMANY: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6193

BERLIN - Germany said on Thursday it had ordered safety checks on nuclear fuel supplied to its reactors by France's Cogema after the firm said software problems at one of its plants meant quality controls went unrecorded.

Cogema denied a report that its controls were lax but said some quality statistics on the so-called Mox (mixed oxide fuel) pellets supplied by its Cadarache plant in southern France had not been registered because of the software failure.

A German Environment Ministry spokesman said authorities in the three states where reactors had been supplied with nuclear fuel by Cogema - Baden-Wuerttemberg, Bavaria and Lower Saxony - had been asked to conduct their own checks on the fuel.

"It's hard to say anything until we get the results of the studies next week," the spokesman said. "So far, there have been no indications of quality failings".

Concerns about the safety of the nuclear industry have been prompted by a scandal over falsified safety data on nuclear fuel shipments from the Sellafield plant of British Nuclear Fuel Ltd (BNFL), a main European rival of Cogema.

The French chapter of environmental group Greenpeace demanded a thorough inquiry into the Cogema incident, which it said raised wider concerns about the production of MOX fuel.

SECOND CHECK WENT UNRECORDED

Responding to an article in British newspaper The Financial Times, a spokesman for state-owned Cogema said a recent audit had shown a software failure had led to a lapse in the records of quality control statistics at the Cadarache plant. "The problem had nothing to do with production or quality control. All pellets have been checked one by one," he said.

After a first check on every pellet, a sample is taken for a second check. The Cogema spokesman said the quality control software had failed to register some data of this second check.

Cogema's clients had been informed and another audit was carried out with the Bavarian power company Bayernwerk, which had confirmed that quality control was not in doubt, he said.

German industrial giant Siemens , which conducts fuel purchases for Bayenwerk, said last week apparently only 60 pellets in a shipment late last year were listed as having gone through a second quality check rather than the normal 100.

Siemens said none of the square-centimeter-size 60 pellets, which are used to make fuel rods, showed defects and the software failure had not resulted in any technical problems. Germany, whose centre-left government is negotiating a gradual exit from nuclear power with the energy industry, has banned nuclear fuel shipments from Sellafield.

The environment ministry spokesman said it was still too early to assess the consequences of the Cogema incident. Yannick Rousselet, a spokesman for Greenpeace in France, said it showed that quality control measures at Cogema were deficient and called for an investigation.

"We demand the quick opening of an inquiry into the quality control for combustible Mox used in about 20 French nuclear reactors," he said.

He added that the Sellafield case, which cost BNFL chief executive John Taylor his job, "cast suspicion on all Mox production, either by BNFL or by Cogema."

-------- imf/wto/world bank

China, EU talks suspended

USA Today
03/31/00- Updated 02:52 PM ET
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/nw1.htm#ucul

BEIJING - Talks broke down Friday between Chinese and European Union negotiators without a market-opening agreement that would speed China's entry into the World Trade Organization. Despite progress during four days of negotiations, European Union Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy was leaving Beijing after deciding an agreement ''was not possible at this stage,'' his spokesman said. After 14 years of trying, China has made joining the WTO this year a priority. A divided U.S. Congress was watching the European Union talks before deciding whether to signal its approval for China's WTO entry by granting Beijing permanent low-tariff trade access.

---

Talks Between China and E.U. on W.T.O. End in Failure Again

New York Times
March 31, 2000
By REUTERS
http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/late/31cnd-china.html

BEIJING, March 31 -- Market opening talks between China and the European Union ended on Friday with no agreement, an E.U. statement said, dealing a blow to Beijing's hopes of joining the World Trade Organisation this year.

The E.U. sought to put the best light on the failure of four days of discussions, insisting it was not disappointed and progress had been made.

Nevertheless, E.U. Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy had joined the talks to provide the high-level political push needed to drive through an agreement bogged down by technical disputes over access to China's huge markets in telecommunications and financial services, including insurance.

Lamy said in a statement the talks "were held in a constructive spirit with positive movement on both sides resulting in a certain narrowing of differences on the outstanding issues under negotiation."

But he said: "Conclusion of a bilateral agreement was not possible at this stage."

The talks ended without agreement despite a meeting between Lamy and Premier Zhu Rongji on Wednesday which raised hopes of a replay of China-U.S. talks in November, when Zhu's eleventh-hour intervention helped seal a deal after marathon negotiations.

The E.U.'s failure to nail down a deal with China adds to the uncertainty facing Beijing's 14-year-old W.T.O. accession drive.

President Bill Clinton is fighting an uphill battle to persuade a reluctant Congress to pass legislation to grant China permanent normal trade relations (NTR) to enable the implementation of the China-U.S. W.T.O. pact.

Republican congressional leaders have said approval is in peril due to opposition from House Democrats. Opponents of the pact have demanded that China improve human rights and labour standards before joining the W.T.O..

A Reuters poll showed Clinton was 78 votes short of getting the deal through the House of Representatives, although it is virtually assured of Senate approval.

No date was set for the E.U. negotiations to resume, although Beijing said Lamy was welcome to return for more talks on terms of accession to the body which sets global trading rules.

Beijing's team was led by trade minister Shi Guangsheng, who signalled in the weeks before talks that Beijing was unwilling to go beyond the market access concessions it gave the United States.

The E.U. is the most important of a handful of W.T.O. members yet to sign market-access agreements with Beijing needed for China to join the 135-member body.

China, which says it expects to join the W.T.O. this year, put a similarly rosy gloss on the failure. A trade ministry statement described the talks as "positive, constructive and fruitful."

"Both sides hope to reach agreement as soon as possible, and the negotiations will continue in the future," it said.

Lamy indicated the E.U. had been ready to compromise, but his spokesman, Anthony Gooch, declined to discuss the areas of disagreement.

"The E.U. has shown flexibility," Gooch said.

Lamy's statement said: "A final package should be balanced taking due account of the specificity of the important trading relationship between the E.U. and China."

The previous round of talks in February faltered after the E.U. insisted on 51 percent foreign ownership of Chinese mobile telecommunications networks.

Last week, W.T.O. members set a mid-May date for a major push on finalising China's bid to enter a global free-trade regime, which began in 1986.

"I think it means that more hard work needs to be done by the two negotiators on both sides to reach a sensible settlement on the issues," said Peter Batey, managing director of the Batey Burn consultancy firm.

The E.U. statement quoted Lamy as saying he would report back to the 15 E.U. members "to assess how best to approach a future round of negotiations for which a date has yet to be set."

Gooch said: "We've made progress this week and we are hopeful that we will be able to finalise a deal in the coming period."

"We don't have a reason to be disappointed. We've made progress," he said.

A similar deadlock between U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky and Shi was broken by the personal intervention of Zhu, who has sought to use the spectre of foreign competition to prod Chinese industry to modernise and reform.

Asked if he thought China's leaders were not giving E.U. talks the same high-level commitment that secured the U.S. deal, Gooch said: "We don't feel that there's any discrimination in terms of treatment that is being given to Europe with respect to other partners."

-------- india

NEWS ANALYSIS
In Charmed India, Clinton Wooed, and Maybe Won

New York Times
March 31, 2000
By CELIA W. DUGGER
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/033100india-assess.html

Issue in Depth
India and Pakistan
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/asia/india-pakistan-index.html

NEW DELHI, March 30 -- Without winning or conceding anything of substance on his tour of South Asia last week, President Clinton may still have helped modestly reduce the risk of war between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan by talking sweet to India and tough to Pakistan.

He spent five days courting India, the region's democratic colossus and rising economic power, with the ardor of a smitten suitor -- and half a day treating Pakistan, America's cold war ally and a nation yet again ruled by generals, like an old girlfriend who is part of the past.

After decades of estrangement, Mr. Clinton gambled that the best way to build a closer relationship with India, a nation of one billion people that is hungry for respect, and to encourage it to act soberly with regard to its smaller, but detested, rival, Pakistan, was to give it a dose of unconditional affection.

He demanded no quid pro quo for his visit here -- for example, requiring India's signing of the nuclear test ban treaty. And he seconded India's demand that Pakistan reduce the violence by militants it supports in Kashmir, the Himalayan territory both countries claim.

American diplomats and experts on the region have become increasingly worried that India, angered by intensified attacks by Pakistani-backed guerrillas, will strike across the so-called Line of Control that divides the Indian- and Pakistan-held parts of Kashmir to hit at militant training camps.

But in an interview, Brajesh Mishra, the national security adviser to India's prime minister, said India had assured the Americans that as long as there were no new large-scale Pakistani incursions into Indian territory, "we will not take any provocative action on the other side of the Line of Control."

The American approach to Pakistan was motivated by a different assumption: that Pakistani generals were operating under the illusion that if they stirred up enough trouble in Kashmir, the United States, fearing a conflict that could turn nuclear, would step in and insist that India make concessions.

In recent months, Pakistan-backed militants have become increasingly bold. At the same time, the Indians have added to an already immense military presence that has been criticized for well-documented human rights violations against the civilian population. Pakistan, weaker than India, has long pleaded for international intervention.

"I think for many years they thought that might get us involved and it won't," Mr. Clinton told Peter Jennings of ABC News days before his trip. "I'm not going to be dragged into something that, first of all, that India doesn't want us to be part of and secondly, that I got dragged into from deliberate acts of violence."

Mr. Clinton's sternly worded warnings, issued privately to Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the army chief who has ruled Pakistan since an Oct. 12 coup, and in a televised address to the nation, were meant to leave the generals with no doubt that further violence in Kashmir would deepen Pakistan's international isolation and fail to bring America to the rescue.

But the significance of the trip was not limited to war and peace. In a traveling exhibition of political performance art, Mr. Clinton also began rebuilding America's long-estranged relationship with India, the world's most populous democracy.

In New Delhi, he wowed one of the world's most hard-boiled groups of politicians, the Indian Parliament. "As Clinton walked to the exit, suddenly, as if the dam of hostility had been breached, almost everyone wanted to shake his hand," the news weekly India Today reported.

In Rajasthan, the president danced spontaneously with village women. In Hyderabad, he sang the praises of India's fast-growing software industry.

Outlook, a national magazine, said Mr. Clinton would be remembered as "a warmhearted, fun-loving man."

Americans in the embassy here and those visiting from Washington were almost giddy with relief and amazement that India seemed to have fallen head over heels for Mr. Clinton. After all, the president was in the final year of a second term tainted by scandal, coming to a country that has had notoriously prickly relations with the United States.

But the good feelings of this moment could quickly fade. The administration had been warming up to India in 1997 and 1998 -- planning the first visit to India by an American president in more than two decades -- when India shocked the world with its nuclear tests in May 1998.

"They've been in the gulag for a couple of years and this was their chance to rehabilitate themselves," said an American diplomat.

A lot of the ground lost at the time of the tests was recovered last week as the Americans simply agreed to disagree with India on its development of a nuclear deterrent. But economic sanctions imposed by the United States after the tests are still in place. And the sensitivities of India to what it has often perceived as American highhandedness are still just below the surface.

It is also far from certain that Mr. Clinton's trip will produce the long-term results he seeks: that both nations accede to the test ban treaty, get back to the negotiating table, calm their hostilities and slow down spending on nuclear arsenals.

Though he did not fundamentally change the American position on Kashmir, the length and warmth of his visit to India and the brevity and coolness of his time in Pakistan left the impression in both that the United States has tilted toward India.

"When it became clear that Clinton would be tough with the Pakistanis when he went to Islamabad -- as indeed he was -- India smiled," said Dennis Kux, author of the definitive history of Indian-American relations, "Estranged Democracies" (Sage Publications, 1993).

A decade after the end of the cold war -- during which India drew close to the Soviets and Pakistan to the Americans -- there is a more solid foundation for cooperation between India and the United States.

Both are great, multicultural democracies.

The United States' thriving high technology industry has spawned a crop of successful Indian-born entrepreneurs who are becoming a force in American politics. India itself has a growing software industry with rapidly rising sales to American companies.

More broadly, India's more open, market-driven economy is producing opportunities for American investors, though the dollar amounts remain relatively small. While Mr. Clinton was in India, American companies signed deals worth about $4 billion with Indian firms and state governments in the high technology and power sectors, among others.

Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has accepted an invitation to visit the White House before Mr. Clinton leaves office and both governments have committed themselves to high-level consultations on nuclear nonproliferation, trade, the environment and terrorism.

Nonetheless, Mr. Kux, the historian, cautioned that one good visit is no guarantee of better relations. "Only time will tell," he said, "if Clinton and his successor, whether Gore or Bush, and the Indians stay the course."

---

Truth Is Hard To Find in Kashmir

Associated Press
March 30, 2000 Filed at 2:52 a.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-India-Kashmir-Questions.html

CHATI SINGHPURA, India (AP) -- Women's anguished wails pour from every other brick house in this Kashmir village surrounded by apple orchards, rice fields and sparkling Himalayan snow peaks.

It has been a week since the killers came in the night, ordered the men from their shops and homes and shot them to death outside the temple and in front of a hay barn. Hardly a family was not touched by the March 20 massacre of 35 Sikhs.

The gunmen wore Indian army uniforms. They spoke Urdu, the language of mostly Muslim Kashmir and neighboring Pakistan. The government has identified the killers as 17 men, mostly foreigners, from two Pakistan-based militant groups, Hezb-ul Mujahedeen and Lashkar e-Toiba, both fighting to separate Kashmir from India.

Home Minister L.K. Advani said the militants carried out the massacre to publicize India's 52-year dispute with Pakistan over Kashmir during President Clinton's visit to South Asia.

Pakistan and the militant groups denied that, and claimed India massacred its own citizens to discredit the Kashmir separatist movement -- a charge India dismissed as ludicrous.

Kashmir is swarming with armed groups, each with its own agenda, creating uncertainty about responsibility for many atrocities. International watchdogs like Amnesty have accused all of them -- including the Indian army -- of human rights violations.

Rumor is often a substitute for fact and there are several versions of every event. Residents take sides based on their religion, race and whether they have been hurt by the army, the militants, or both.

Sikh leaders and Kashmiri Muslims have called for an independent inquiry into the killings.

The Indian army said it killed five of the Chati Singhpura raiders in a gunbattle Saturday in Panchaltan, eight miles east of the prosperous village.

``It is certain that they were the killers,'' said Gurbachan Jagat, director general of Kashmir's police.

The bodies were burned beyond recognition and handed over to Muslims in Panchaltan for burial without any forensic tests.

Police also said Indian security forces gunned down six guerrillas Wednesday who were suspected of involvement in the massacre.

The 50,000 Sikhs in the Kashmir Valley had never before been targeted during the 11-year insurgency that has killed more than 25,000 people. The Indian army says it is fighting about 10 Kashmiri and Pakistan-based militant groups.

A visiting Clinton told India and Pakistan they need to start talking about the disputed area that has caused two of their three wars. But he emphasized that he had not come to mediate between the two nuclear powers.

``I think he understands the complexity of the problem. That is the reason why he doesn't want to be getting too much involved,'' said Omer Farooq, chairman of the All Party Hurriyet Conference, which demands Kashmir's independence from India.

``We still feel that Mr. Clinton has got a role to play in the region,'' said Farooq, the chief Muslim priest in the Kashmir Valley. Farooq suggested Clinton follow up with private, confidence-building measures to ``give some push from the back.''

Jagat said information about the militants who came to Chati Singhpura was provided by a man the government said was a resident of the village and had joined Hezb-ul Mujahedeen. He was arrested after a witness said he was seen with the attackers, Jagat said.

In the village, only two men saw the gunmen and lived. One is in the hospital and the other has gone away. The village women said all they know is that the gunmen were dressed like Indian soldiers and behaved like Indian soldiers.

``I was milking the cow when they came,'' said Jaeet Kaur, 60, whose husband, two sons and two teen-age grandsons were killed. When the gunmen ordered her to go inside, she obeyed because she thought they were soldiers.

And when did she come to know they were not?

``How do we know?'' she said.

``After some time I heard the shots and ran out. I was searching for our people, shouting here and there for someone to come to the rescue. But there was no one.''

Many Sikh men, former soldiers or government servants, became angry and insulted at questions about whether the killers might have been affiliated with the army, as many Muslim Kashmiris believe.

``No one knows what is the truth,'' said Sana Ullah Bhatt, editor of the independent Daily Sun, the most widely read newspaper in the valley with a circulation of 25,000.

Ashok Bhan, inspector-general of the Kashmir police, said 145 militants have been killed this year. Police and security forces are bracing for the spring, when the snow melts in the mountains, and more guerrillas can cross.

Asked whether there will be an attempt to answer the questions about all the killings when peace comes, Bhatt hung his head.

``I have not seen peace since 1947. There will never be peace.''

-------- iraq

Buchanan: Lift Iraq, Iran Sanctions

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 11:45 a.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/p/AP-Buchanan-Oil-Prices.html http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&STORYID=APIS73IDC4O0

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Reform Party presidential hopeful Patrick Buchanan says the United States should stabilize oil prices in part by lifting sanctions on Iran and Iraq, selling them oil-drilling equipment and threatening to withhold military help from Persian Gulf allies unless crude prices fall to $20 a barrel.

``None of these Gulf regimes is worth another war,'' Buchanan says in prepared remarks for his speech today at Boston University. ``We should play hardball with those who play hardball with us.''

His energy plan comes three days after the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries agreed, against objections from Iran, to increase production by 1.7 million barrels a day to fill a 2-million-barrel-a-day shortfall that has tripled crude prices over the last 14 months. Within a day of the OPEC deal, spot prices for oil dropped 64 cents to $26.45 a barrel. Prices reached a high of $34 earlier this month.

Industry officials said it might take six to eight weeks for the additional oil to reach U.S. markets and were not sure that increase in production would immediately be passed through to consumers.

Buchanan blamed the problem on ``a global price-rigging conspiracy, by oil-exporting nations,'' and said the United States' stance toward OPEC should be, ``It is trying to kill me, but I will kill it.''

``This is the dark side of globalization,'' Buchanan says in his remarks. ``The more we rely on foreign nations for the vital necessities of our national life, the greater American's vulnerability to the greed and animosity of regimes that, for whatever reason, resent or despise the United States...''

Some of his half-dozen proposals drew criticism. Middle East foreign policy expert Anthony Cordesman said, for example, that the plan to lift sanctions on Iran and Iraq is simplistic since some sanctions were imposed by the United Nations. Also, he said, such a move has implications the proliferation of nuclear and biological weapons.

``In essence, (Buchanan has) said they can import anything they want whether it can be used as a weapon or not,'' Cordesman said.

Buchanan also proposes that the United States:

--Open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling;

--Put a $1,000 tariff on all cars assembled in Mexico;

--Suspend all foreign aid, world Bank and IMF loans to governments that support ``the OPEC cartel's looting of America.''

--Pump oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and suspend for six months the 18-cents-per-gallon gas tax ``and restock the reserve with cheaper oil as the price falls.''

--Set a floor under oil prices. ``When OPEC conspires to flood the world to kill competition, an import fee kicks in to support domestic prices, to keep U.S. wells producing and the price of our natural gas competitive.''

On the Net: Buchanan campaign: http://www.buchananreform.org
Energy Information Administration: http://www.eia.doe.gov

-------- japan

Japan's nuclear power expansion lags target

http://www.envirolink.org/environews/reuters/articles/Environment/03_31_2000.reulb-story-bcutilitiesnuclearjapan.html

TOKYO, March 31 (Reuters) - Japanese utilities are lagging behind a national target for new nuclear power plants, as public opposition and depressed power demand are forcing many utilities to delay or scrap reactor construction plans.

Long-term investment plans announced by Japan's big electric power companies this week showed that only 13 nuclear reactors are due to begin operating over the next 11 years, far short of a targeted 16 to 20.

The nuclear expansion plan is aimed in part at meeting Japan's commitment to cut conventional power plants' emissions of carbon-dioxide and other greenhouse gases in line with a global effort to combat global warming.

But a recent spate of accidents at Japanese nuclear power facilities have heightened public distrust of nuclear energy, which has always been a sensitive issue in the only country ever attacked with an atomic bomb.

Currently four nuclear reactors are under construction in Japan with a total capacity of 4.66 gigawatts (GW).

Another nine are planned, for a combined total of 12.27 GW in additional nuclear capacity, compared with the current 45 GW, or about one-third of Japan's electricity demand.

The Japanese government had set a target of increasing nuclear power generation by 21 to 25 GW by the fiscal year to March 2011, to meet its 1997 pledge to trim greenhouse gas emissions by an average of six percent in the 2008 to 2012 period from 1990 levels. Nuclear reactors do not emit carbon dioxide.

JAPAN REVIEWS NUCLEAR POLICY

The Japanese government has already said it will review its nuclear policy with an eye to a possible downward revision in planned plant construction.

On Friday, Trade Minister Takashi Fukaya reiterated his doubts about whether Japan would be able to achieve its optimistic target. He has ordered an advisory committee to start a one-year study on the matter in April.

The government's expansion plans were delivered a further blow last month when a prefectural governor, responding to local opposition, pressured Chubu Electric Power Co Inc (9502.T) to scrap a 37-year-old plan for a new reactor.

Numerous accidents since 1995 have fuelled public distrust of nuclear power, especially after the nation's worst nuclear accident at a uranium processing plant last September that left one worker dead.

Despite growing public opposition, nuclear energy remains a high priority for power firms.

``In the long run, (nuclear capacity) will not be a burden but could be an advantage...benefiting not only the country but also the earth,'' said Nobuya Minami, president of Tokyo Electric Power Co Inc (9501.T), Japan's largest utility.

Chubu Electric, undeterred by its recent setback, is seeking an alternative site for its planned reactor.

---

Japan firm in nuke plant accident loses license

JAPAN: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6211

TOKYO - The Japanese government withdrew the business license of a uranium processing plant operator on Tuesday after the country's worst nuclear accident occurred at one of its plants last September.

An official at the Science and Technology Agency said it had revoked the business license of JCO Co indefinitely following investigations into the accident, in which 440 people were exposed to radiation and one later died.

It was the first time a firm has had its license taken away under Japan's nuclear regulatory laws, Kyodo news agency said.

The accident was triggered when JCO workers put nearly eight times the proper amount of condensed uranium into a mixing tank at a processing plant in Tokaimura, about 140 km (90 miles) northeast of Tokyo.

JCO officials have said the company illegally revised a government-approved manual to allow its workers to use buckets instead of a pump to transfer the uranium solution into the mixing tank.

The Science and Technology agency official said the agency's decision was based on JCO's long-term use of unauthorized methods in processing nuclear fuel, such as the use of buckets, which violated specific provisions of the nuclear regulatory law.

----

Japan group applies to reopen nuclear plant

JAPAN: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6196

TOKYO - A Japanese group applied on Monday to reopen a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant that has been closed since 1997 following a fire and explosion that exposed 37 people to radiation.

The state-run Japan Nuclear Cycle Development Institute (JNC) filed an application to reopen the plant at Tokaimura, also the site last year of Japan's worst nuclear accident at a different facility, Kyodo news agency said.

The application was filed with the Ibaraki prefectural government and the Tokaimura town council, the agency said.

The Ibaraki prefectural government plans to allow the institute to resume operations at the plant if it can ensure its safety and get the approval of the residents of Tokaimura, a mostly rural town some 140 km (90 miles) north of Tokyo, prefectural officials quoted by Kyodo said.

The Science and Technology Agency, which administers JNC, inspected the plant last November and said it could resume operations, Kyodo added, noting that a number of residents wanted the plant to remain closed.

Officials were not immediately available for comment. The plant was closed following a fire on March 11, 1997. An explosion nine hours after JNC reported the fire under control exposed 37 workers to radiation.

JNC had originally planned to submit its application in October, but was forced to abandon this when the nation's worst-ever nuclear accident took place in late September at a private nuclear re-processing plant also located in Tokaimura.

That accident, caused by workers putting seven times the proper amount of condensed uranium into a mixing tank, exposed 440 people to radiation, including one plant worker who later died and one who still remains hospitalised.

Workers, ignoring proper safety procedures, used a bucket to transfer uranium and triggered a nuclear chain reaction that was ranked four out of seven on an international scale of nuclear accidents.

Despite the accident, the government says resource-poor Japan, whose 51 nuclear reactors provide about 30 percent of its energy needs, will forge ahead with its nuclear power programme, which calls for another 20 reactors to be build by 2010.

----

Volcano Erupts On Northern Japanese Isle
Authorities Intensify Efforts To Evacuate Exposed Area

By Doug Struck
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, March 31, 2000; Page A19
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-03/31/226l-033100-idx.html

DATE, Japan, March 31 (Friday)-Mount Usu erupted with a huge cloud of smoke and ash today after five days of rumbling threats, further fueling the exodus of thousands of residents on Japan's northern island of Hokkaido.

There were no immediate reports of casualties, but police and ambulance vehicles rushed toward towns that had been largely--but not completely--emptied. Officials confirmed there have been four eruptions and small stones fell on the evacuated town of Abuta. Dozens of buses raced toward Abuta to remove about 1,000 residents who were in a high school evacuation center there.

Officials worried that the explosion would melt snows on this winter-bound island, triggering floods like those that killed three people in 1977.

The 2,416-foot-high mountain erupted on a western slope. A gray, ashen pillar of smoke grew with almost slow-motion majesty to almost 10,000 feet.

Residents came out of shelters where many had been for days to watch the roiling cloud.

"Suddenly, with no sound, in absolute quiet, this smoke started to rise," said Hidetakesu Ametani, 61, a construction worker who lives in Date. "We can stay here if the winds stay as they are, but I don't know if that will happen."

The mountain, part of the still-active volcanic chain that keeps Japan restless, has been shaking southern Hokkaido since Sunday with increasing frequency. More than 100 quakes or tremors an hour today kept residents nervous and jumpy.

"In the last two days, I never felt so many earthquakes in my life. I couldn't sleep," said Kumiko Kawai, 62, who remained in her home in Date. "I'm really scared. But I'll stay here if I can."

The Japanese Self-Defense Force, ordered into service earlier, had evacuated most of the area of residents and the tourists who come here for hot springs and cool mountain air. But when the eruption occurred, the remaining residents were herded into buses and vans for a hasty retreat.

Mount Usu sits in southern Hokkaido between Lake Toya and Uchiura Bay, with the city of Date and the towns of Abuta and Sobetsu forming a triangle around it.

About 50,000 people live in the three muncipalities, which are two to three miles from the volcano. A popular hot spring inn, Toyako Onsen, hugs the north side of the mountain and is now deserted.

More than 4 million tourists visit the area every year, which recovered from the blanket of ash and mud left by the eruption 23 years ago.

The Japanese government was criticized for its slow response to the Kobe earthquake in 1995, and for poor disaster management after an accident at the Tokaimura nuclear plant last September.

Mount Usu is one of 86 active volcanoes in Japan, according to the Meteorological Agency. In 1991, Mount Unzen in southern Japan exploded and killed 43 people, including journalists and scientists who were observing the eruption.

Correspondent Kathy Tolbert in Tokyo and special correspondent Shigehiko Togo in Date contributed to this report.

----

Japan nuke plant stays open despite volcano

March 31, 2000

TOKYO, March 31 - The electric utility covering an island in northern Japan where a volcano erupted on Friday said its lone nuclear plant was operating normally, though some other power plants were closed and there had been several outages.

A spokesman for Hokkaido Electric Power Co Inc (9509.T) said its nuclear plant, with two 579,000-kilowatt (kw) reactors, was continuing uninterrupted as it was about 100 km (60 miles) away from the Mount Usu volcano.

The 732-metre (2,402 ft) volcano sent out a huge column of smoke and ash in its eruption on Friday, sending a flood of volcanic ash and rock towards a small nearby town.

"We won't shut down the nuclear power plant unless the eruption gets worse,'' the spokesman said.

Most residents of areas where there had been outages had already been evacuated, he said.

The power outage involved less than one percent of the utility's power supplies, he said, and checks were being made to see how many households had been affected.

More than 10,000 people had been evacuated from the area after government warnings that the volcano was about to erupt.

Hokkaido Electric had closed several power plants near the volcano earlier in the week as a precaution after the warnings. The plants concerned had a total capacity of 725,000 kilowatts (kw).

((Tokyo Energy Desk +81-3 5473 3708

tokyo.energy.newsroom+reuters.com))

-------- russia

Putin Urges START II Ratification

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 2:33 p.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Russia-Politics.html
http://usatoday.com/news/world/nwsfri03.htm
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS73ILHF80

MOSCOW (AP) -- In his first major policy statement since being elected, President Vladimir Putin called Friday for the quick ratification of the START II nuclear arms reduction treaty, an accord that has been stalled for years by hard-liners and communists in parliament.

Putin also called on parliament to make even deeper cuts in atomic missiles, a signal that he wants good relations with the West after recent tensions and unpredictability under Boris Yeltsin. Western governments are likely to see the move as a sign that Putin intends to create a stable and pragmatic government.

It also could contribute to thawing Russia-NATO relations that were nearly frozen a year ago over the alliance's bombing of Yugoslavia.

However, Putin did not address the most sensitive nuclear arms issue between Moscow and Washington -- the United States' desire to modify the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

Speaking in the eastern city of Snezhinsk, a major nuclear weapons design and production center, Putin said he has ordered defense and foreign ministry officials to step up consultations in parliament to prepare for START II ratification and for even deeper cuts envisioned under a proposed START III.

``We are setting the task to free the world from piles of excessive weapons,'' Putin said, according to Russian news reports.

START II calls for the United States and Russia to reduce their nuclear arsenals to 3,000 to 3,500 warheads each. Russia now has about 6,000.

The treaty was drafted in 1993 and ratified in the U.S. Senate in 1996. But Russian lawmakers repeatedly blocked ratification, claiming the treaty would undermine the country's security.

But the communists and hard-liners who oppose START II lost their dominance of parliament in last December's election and Putin, who won a four-year term last Sunday after three months as acting president, is now in a stronger position to push ratification through.

Putin won the election largely on the strength of his promises to restore Russia's status as a world power and on Friday emphasized that reducing its nuclear arsenal would not make the country weaker.

``Our aim is to make our nuclear weapons complex more safe and effective,'' he said. ``We will preserve and strengthen the Russian nuclear weapons complex even though we don't plan to build it up.''

Pushing for START II also could be seen as a concession to the inevitable, given the deterioration of cash-strapped Russia's arsenal. Analysts have said the arsenal is in such poor condition that only 600 to 800 warheads would be usable.

In addition, maintaining the arsenal is an enormous expense for the economically struggling country with a pricetag as high as $3 billion a year -- more than 10 percent of Russia's entire national budget.

Quick approval of START II could also give Russia additional leverage in its dispute with the United States over the ABM treaty. The Clinton Administration is seeking to amend the treaty to allow creation of a limited shield against nuclear missiles.

Russia has bitterly opposed the plan, saying it would destroy the treaty's deterrent intent. The ABM treaty is based on the theory that nuclear powers will not launch missile attacks if they are unable to defend themselves from retaliatory strikes.

On another issue that has grated at U.S.-Russian relations, Putin pledged to help market Russian nuclear technology worldwide, tacitly dismissing U.S. criticism of a deal to build a nuclear reactor in Iran.

``We will protect Russia's interests in global markets, and won't allow anyone to push Russia from those markets under the guise of falsely formulated values,'' Putin said when asked about prospects of cooperation with Iran.

Nuclear Power Minister Yevgeny Adamov said Iran has asked Russia to build another three reactors -- a plan that would vex the U.S. administration which fears that it would help Iran develop nuclear weapons.

On the Web:

The U.S. Defense Department's ballistic missile defense site: www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/html

The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research: www.unog.ch/UNIDIR/EHOME.HTM.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute www.sipri.se.

--------

Putin bans Russian army use of Windows

Friday 31 March 2000
http://www.timesofindia.com/310300/31info3.htm

MOSCOW: Russian president-elect Vladimir Putin has banned the use of operating systems and software developed by US software giant Microsoft by the country's armed forces and military-industrial complexes to ensure "information security", reports here said.

A secret directive was sent by the defence ministry to all the concerned units and organisations a day after the announcement of the preliminary results of the presidential polls on March 27, Internet-based Russian private news agency Lenta Ru reported Wednesday.

The clones of Dos and Linux Red Hat have probably been put on the list of indigenous operating systems recommended by the Russian defence ministry, the agency said, pointing that the move came amid reports of secret codes and keys integrated in Microsoft Windows of all versions, which act as 'bugs' or 'back door' for the America's omnipotent National Security Agency to 'peep' into the computers of users world-wide.

On its website, Lenta Ru has also posted a part of Windows program pointing to the keys left for the US National Security Agency.

--------

Putin Wants Better Nuclear Arsenal

MOSCOW, Mar 31, 2000 -- (Reuters)
http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=147611

Vladimir Putin, on his first trip out of Moscow since being elected president, said on Friday he wanted Russia to have a better nuclear arsenal while continuing international talks on arms cuts.

Putin, a 47-year-old ex-KGB agent, was elected last Sunday mostly thanks to his image as a decisive man who wants to restore Russia's national pride and status after years of decline and humiliation which accompanied reforms.

"We must increase the effectiveness of our nuclear deterrence potential," RIA news agency quoted him as telling atomic industry chiefs in Chelyabinsk 70, one of Russia's nuclear cities which until recently was closed off.

But he also said: "Russia holds and will continue to hold talks on further cuts in strategic offensive weapons, aiming at making the world safer and ridding it of piles of arms."

He said the government would step up efforts to persuade the State Duma lower chamber of parliament to ratify START-2, an arms reduction treaty between Russia and the United States signed in 1993.

The Duma elected in December is more responsive to the Kremlin than the previous, Communist-dominated legislature, and the treaty has better chances of being ratified now.

The meeting, also attended by Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev and top energy and government officials, is due to consider problems of Russia's nuclear industry and atomic weapons sector, the second biggest in the world.

Russia has hundreds of nuclear-capable missiles on land in silos and on mobile launchers as well as on strategic bombers and in submarines.

Russia has started to deploy a new-generation Topol-M ballistic missile in silos and is working on mobile-launched and naval versions. But despite what defense experts say is preferential treatment for strategic arms, funding is tight.

Putin said the nuclear industry was of strategic importance and Russia's status "as a state capable of defending itself" rested on the sector's success.

Itar-Tass news agency quoted Putin as saying the importance of the entire nuclear industry was growing and the task was to make it safer and more effective.

Russia's nuclear power stations produced last year 16 percent more energy than the year before, Putin said.

He said the nuclear industry as a whole should be transformed but not through "mechanical" staff cuts, calling it the easiest but also most dangerous way.

-------- sweden

Sweden Approves Defense Cuts

Associated Press
March 30, 2000 Filed at 5:29 p.m. EST
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Sweden-Defense-Restructuring.html http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=EUROPE&STORYID=APIS73HT16G0

STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) -- Swedish lawmakers voted Thursday to drastically slash the size of Sweden's military, revamping it to deal with new threats like terrorism instead of its old nemesis, the Soviet Union.

Among other changes, the army, navy and air force will reduce the number of military compounds by half and the military will cut seven of its 13 brigades, each of which comprises 5,000 conscripts and officers.

Four of the six remaining units will be primed to participate in a rapid-reaction force being created in Europe. In addition, a smaller amphibious brigade will replace the obsolete coastal artillery unit to protect the nation's vast archipelago.

The cuts, which parliament passed by a 180-125 vote, were to begin taking effect July 1 and were expected to be completed in about four years.

Supporters said the cuts were necessary to modernize the forces to rapidly meet new threats. Criticism largely came from officials in areas that will lose an employment base when military facilities are closed.

``During the Cold War, we had a defense like most other countries that had one purpose only -- to be prepared to mobilize and face a massive invasion,'' armed forces spokesman Peter Larsson said. ``Now we have units you could use both for traditional military operations and for new threats like terror groups who are able to use nuclear, biological weapons.''

Supreme Commander in Chief Gen. Owe Wiktorin welcomed the new policy, though he said he regretted that uncertainties remain over which facilities will be closed.

``Never before in modern times has there ever been such extensive defense decision,'' he was quoted as saying by the Swedish news agency TT. ``But there is still a defense left after this parliament decision.''

The government said the cuts will allow for savings in the defense budget, which it intends to cut from about $4.6 billion to $4.1 billion per year.

Sweden has steadily reduced defense spending since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, saying Russia no longer poses a threat. In the early 1990s, about 38,000 young Swedish men were called to compulsory military service each year. Last year, about 16,000 were drafted.

--------taiwan

Taiwan Seen Vulnerable to Attack
Pentagon Study Says Isolation Keeps Defense Weak

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2000; Page A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-03/31/232l-033100-idx.html

Taiwan is far more vulnerable to attack from China than is generally recognized because its isolated military has fallen behind technologically, according to a new and highly classified Pentagon report.

The 40-page report points out "a host of problems" with the Taiwanese military's ability to defend against airplanes, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, said a Clinton administration official familiar with it. It concludes that Taiwan's military capability has been weakened by the island's diplomatic isolation, and faults the military for allowing poor security at its bases, for tolerating bitter interservice rivalries, and for failing to develop a professional corps of senior enlisted troops to operate its weapons systems.

"There is no other military in the world that experiences the kind of isolation Taiwan's does," the administration official said in summarizing the report. "They don't train or have contacts with anyone. And as warfare has become more complex, it has become more difficult for them to handle all these new technologies."

The Pentagon report comes after a spell of unusually bellicose Chinese rhetoric over the presidential election in Taiwan, which concluded with the victory earlier this month of a pro-independence candidate opposed by Beijing. By validating reports of Taiwan's military inadequacy, the Pentagon view could sway a decision by the Clinton administration, which is wrestling with the nettlesome question of whether to sell four sophisticated Aegis destroyers and other advanced military gear to Taiwan, including long-range radar that could look thousands of miles into the Chinese mainland.

The administration is expected to make a decision on the sale by the end of April, when a Taiwanese delegation is scheduled to arrive here to discuss the requested arms. A senior Chinese official warned earlier this month that a U.S. transfer of high-tech military equipment to Taiwan would be considered a hostile act and would be "the last straw" in U.S.-China relations.

"I can't begin to tell you how tense and sensitive this is," the administration official said in requesting anonymity.

"The drafting of this was an extraordinarily difficult process, because it is such an extremely sensitive issue," echoed a Pentagon official involved in producing the study.

The report was produced by officers on the staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and by officials in the policy formulation office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Overall, it outlines "not a very pleasant picture" of Taiwan's defenses, the Clinton administration official said. He added: "These guys don't know how to do a lot of this stuff."

Taiwan's armed forces essentially have sat out the information revolution, the report argues, and so have failed to assimilate several generations of advances in information processing. While such advances have attracted public notice in the military arena for leading to precision-guided munitions, they also have led to less flashy but equally significant increases in the ability of modern militaries to first detect fast-moving and hidden targets, then transfer that information to weapons systems and finally guide the fired weapon to its target.

A defense official at the Taiwan government office here declined to comment on the report. The Taiwan government is believed to be aware of the report's existence but is not thought to have seen it yet. Senior Taiwanese officers have said in recent interviews that they understand they have severe weaknesses, and say that is why they want Aegis ships, which feature a high-powered phased-array radar able to simultaneously track and target hundreds of incoming missiles and aircraft. "Antimissile defense and air defense is our highest priority," Adm. Lee Jye said last month.

But some U.S. defense experts argue that the Aegis ships would be too sophisticated for the Taiwanese military to use properly and also would, at about $1 billion apiece, soak up funds better spent on other gear. "The Aegis could help with sea-based defense, but it doesn't speak to their core military problem of island-wide air defense," said Michael Swaine, a specialist in the Chinese military at Rand Corp. "What their situation demands is a lot of software integration, especially linkages between their army, navy and air force."

The report is the first in a series of studies of the military balance between Taiwan and China ordered by the Pentagon's policy office. Generally, that office, which is dominated by civilians, is seen as taking a harder line in favor of Taiwan than does the uniformed U.S. military. The policy officials argue that for the Clinton administration's policy of engagement with China to succeed, it is necessary to maintain the cross-strait military balance, ensuring that neither is able to impose its will on the other. The new report implicitly argues that that balance now may be tilting too much in favor of Beijing.

Richard Fisher and William Triplett, two China specialists associated with conservative congressional Republicans, said they believe the Pentagon is deliberately suppressing the report. "This report is extremely significant," said Fisher.

The Pentagon report was completed in January, but since then has been labeled a "draft." Some congressional aides suspect it has been kept in that form because it makes it easier for the Pentagon to refuse to show it to them. The report has been widely discussed in foreign policy circles, but very few people actually have been permitted to read it.

Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon responded that the report isn't being supressed. In addition, he said, a planned briefing to Taiwanese officials was postponed simply for logistical reasons. "We always planned to brief the Taiwanese on the contents of the assessment before releasing it to the appropriate people in Congress," he said. He declined to discuss the contents of the report, citing its classified nature.

--------

Taiwan Seen Vulnerable to Attack - Report

March 31, 2000 Filed at 1:47 a.m. ET
By Reuters
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-03/31/232l-033100-idx.html
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-taiwan-.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Taiwan is more vulnerable to attack from China than generally recognized because its isolated military has fallen behind technologically, the Washington Post reported on Friday, citing a new Pentagon report.

The highly classified 40-page report points out problems with the Taiwanese military's ability to defend against aircraft, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles, the Post said, citing a U.S. official familiar with the report.

It concludes that Taiwan's military capability has been weakened by the island's diplomatic isolation, and faults the military for allowing poor security at its bases, for tolerating bitter interservice rivalries, and for failing to develop a professional corps of senior enlisted troops to operate its weapons systems, according to the Post report.

``There is no other military in the world that experiences the kind of isolation Taiwan's does,'' the official told the paper. ``They don't train or have contacts with anyone. And as warfare has become more complex, it has become more difficult for them to handle all these new technologies.''

After pro-independence politician Chen Shui-bian won Taiwan's presidential election earlier this month, Beijing threatened to attack the island if it attempted to secede, although both sides have since toned down their rhetoric.

The U.S. government is wrestling with a decision over whether to sell four sophisticated Aegis destroyers and other advanced military gear to Taiwan, including long-range radar that could look thousands of miles into the Chinese mainland.

The administration is expected to make a decision on the sale by the end of April, when a Taiwanese delegation is scheduled to arrive here to discuss the requested arms.

A senior Chinese official warned earlier this month that a U.S. transfer of high-tech military equipment to Taiwan would be considered a hostile act and would be ``the last straw'' in U.S.-China relations.

In an editorial also published in Friday's Washington Post, Sen. Jesse Helms, who heads the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, accused the Clinton administration of ``kowtowing to the Chinese Communists'' and doing nothing to ``help Taiwan deter Chinese aggression.''

He urged Washington to send a clear signal to Beijing by approving Taiwan's request for defense purchases; including Taiwan in a regional missile-defense strategy; and backing a bill that would allow U.S. military experts to visit and advise Taiwan.

``The United States can help Chen restart the cross-strait dialogue only by allowing Taiwan to engage the mainland on the basis of peace through strength,'' the powerful North Carolina Republican wrote.

The Pentagon report was produced by officers on the staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and by officials in the policy formulation office of the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Overall, it outlines ``not a very pleasant picture'' of Taiwan's defenses, the Clinton administration official said.

A Pentagon official involved in producing the study said it was a tough job. ``The drafting of this was an extraordinarily difficult process, because it is such an extremely sensitive issue,'' the official told the Post.

A defense official at the Taiwan government office here declined to comment on the report for the Post.

The report is the first in a series of studies of the military balance between Taiwan and China ordered by the Pentagon's policy office. Generally, that office, dominated by civilians, is seen as taking a harder line in favor of Taiwan than does the uniformed U.S. military.

The Post quoted Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon as saying a planned briefing to Taiwanese officials on the report was postponed simply for logistical reasons.

``We always planned to brief the Taiwanese on the contents of the assessment before releasing it to the appropriate people in Congress,'' he told the paper. He declined to discuss the contents of the report, citing its classified nature.

---

Cohen: Taiwan Can Defend Itself

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 12:29 p.m. EST
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-US-Taiwan.html http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/ncsfri05.htm http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS73IDRJ80

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary William Cohen said today he feels certain that Taiwan has not lost the military strength to defend itself against mainland China. He would not comment directly on a published report that the Pentagon believes Taiwan has a ``host of problems'' that make it vulnerable.

The Washington Post reported today that a highly classified Pentagon report concludes Taiwan could have trouble defending against air and missile attack from China and that the island's military capability has been weakened through years of diplomatic isolation.

Cohen was asked about the Post report during a brief question-and-answer session with reporters in the Pentagon.

``I'm not in a position to comment publicly other than to say that as I read the report that was in the newspaper it appears that Taiwan is still very capable in terms of military capability, but that there are recommendations -- there are always recommendations -- for ways to improve its capability through training and exercises,'' he said.

Cohen was asked whether the Pentagon has changed its view that China lacks the military power to successfully invade and hold Taiwan.

``I'm not going to comment in terms of what the relationship is,'' Cohen said. ``I'm satisfied that Taiwan is still very capable.''

The 40-page internal Pentagon report, as described to the Post, said Taiwan's military is technologically outdated and faces a ``host of problems'' that make the island more vulnerable to attack than is generally recognized.

Cohen said the Pentagon periodically assesses Taiwan's military capabilities and recommends ways to improve it. Other officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the report is designed to suggest ways of addressing weaknesses in Taiwan's current military structure other than through new arms sales.

The Pentagon report says the Taiwanese military has poor security at its bases and is failing to train senior personnel to properly operate weapons systems.

Taiwan's military has missed the information revolution, the report suggests, failing to integrate advances in information processing into its operations. Among other things, these advances allow for militaries to detect fast-moving and hidden targets, transfer the information and guide weapons to their targets.

``There is no other military in the world that experiences the kind of isolation Taiwan's does,'' a Clinton administration official told the Post, summarizing the report. ``They don't train or have contacts with anyone. And as warfare has become more complex, it has become more difficult for them to handle all these new technologies.''

The newspaper did not identify the official, who described the report as highly sensitive.

The report could become important in the debate over whether the United States should sell Taiwan four sophisticated Aegis guided-missile destroyers and other advanced military equipment. That includes long-range radar that could peer deep into the Chinese mainland.

China opposes a sale, saying such action would be a hostile ``last straw'' in U.S.-Chinese relations. The Clinton administration is expected to decide what to do by the end of April.

The report sheds further doubt on whether the equipment would be too sophisticated for Taiwan to use properly.

The report was produced by officers who work for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and by officials in the policy office of the defense secretary.

An official with the Taiwan government office in Washington declined to comment to the Post.

Beijing still claims Taiwan as part of its territory even though they have been governed separately since splitting 51 years ago.

---

Cohen Confident of Taiwan's Defense

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 3:25 p.m. EST
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-US-Taiwan-China.html http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS73IGJ680

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Defense Secretary William Cohen expressed confidence Friday that Taiwan has the military strength to defend itself against China, despite China's vast numerical superiority.

Cohen was asked about a Washington Post article Friday quoting a secret report as saying the Pentagon believes Taiwan's military is technologically outdated and has a ``host of problems'' that make it vulnerable to potential Chinese invasion.

The secretary said because of the report's security classification, he could not discuss it directly.

``I'm not in a position to comment publicly,'' he said, ``other than to say that as I read the report that was in the newspaper it appears that Taiwan is still very capable in terms of military capability, but that there are recommendations -- there are always recommendations -- for ways to improve its capability through training and exercises.''

The Post reported that the highly classified Pentagon report concluded Taiwan, militarily weakened through years of diplomatic isolation, could have trouble defending against air and missile attack from China.

Cohen was asked whether the Pentagon has changed its view that China lacks the military power to invade, conquer and hold Taiwan.

``I'm not going to comment in terms of what the relationship is,'' Cohen said. ``I'm satisfied that Taiwan is still very capable.''

The 40-page internal Pentagon report, as described to the Post, said Taiwan is more vulnerable to attack than is generally recognized.

Taiwan's armed forces number about 400,000, compared to China's 2.5-million-strong People's Liberation Army. Taiwan maintains a qualitative edge, however, due to arms purchases from the United States.

Cohen said the Pentagon periodically assesses Taiwan's military capabilities and recommends how to improve it. Other officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the quoted report was designed to suggest ways of addressing weaknesses in Taiwan's current military structure other than through new arms sales.

The Pentagon report says the Taiwanese military has failed to train senior personnel to properly operate weapons systems. This would appear to reflect the Pentagon's view, expressed in a public report to Congress last year, that Taiwan's military was having trouble recruiting technically oriented people.

Taiwan's military has missed the information revolution, the latest report suggests, failing to integrate advances in information processing into its operations. Among other things, these advances allow for militaries to detect fast-moving and hidden targets, transfer the information and guide weapons to their targets.

The report could become important in the debate over whether the United States should sell Taiwan four modern Aegis guided-missile destroyers and other advanced military equipment. That includes long-range radar that could peer deep into the Chinese mainland.

China opposes a sale. It has said such action would be a hostile ``last straw'' in U.S.-Chinese relations. The Clinton administration is expected to decide what to do by the end of April.

The report sheds further doubt on whether the equipment would be too complicated for Taiwan to use properly.

Beijing still claims Taiwan as part of its territory, even though they have been governed separately since splitting 51 years ago.

---

Taiwan's Chen Supports US Arms Deal

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 1:56 p.m. EST
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Taiwan-Chen.html http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ASIA&STORYID=APIS73IF9P00

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) -- Taiwan's newly elected president on Friday defended a plan to push for a U.S. weapons deal that would likely raise tensions with rival China, saying the arms were essential for preserving peace.

Since his election two weeks ago, Chen Shui-bian has tried not to rile Beijing. But the former Taipei mayor was not ready to placate Chinese leaders by suggesting that Washington postpone an annual decision expected later this month about selling weaponry to Taiwan.

``The weapons are needed for Taiwan's security and peace,'' Chen said in an interview with The Associated Press. ``They are not for war, but for peace.''

China fiercely protests arms sales between Taiwan and the United States, one of the only nations willing to risk Beijing's ire by selling the island defensive weapons.

Analysts and lawmakers have said Taipei's wish list includes upgraded Patriot missiles, advanced radar systems, and guided-missile destroyers equipped with the sophisticated AEGIS battle management system. China considers the ships part of an emerging regional anti-missile shield.

China and Taiwan split when the communists took over the mainland in 1949, and reunifying the two sides is still Beijing's sacred goal. China has threatened to attack Taiwan if it tries to break away permanently or indefinitely rebuffs reunification talks.

During the presidential campaign, China's leaders made it clear that Chen, 49, was their least favorite candidate. Beijing distrusts the former Taipei mayor because he was once a vocal supporter of Taiwan independence.

Since his upset victory, Chen has expressed his goodwill by offering to travel to China and discuss any topic, and he has invited Chinese leaders to visit Taiwan. In recent months, he has also softened his position on independence, saying Taiwanese should only vote on the issue if China attacks.

``Time will prove that the government under my direction will be prudent, responsible, rational, pragmatic and flexible,'' Chen said in his spare, tidy office decorated with framed international magazine articles of his political successes. ``We aren't just seeking lasting peace. We also want to have talks.''

Many believe that in the coming months, Chen might make new goodwill gestures that would help restart talks with China.

Some have speculated he might call for a one-year moratorium on arms purchases from America. Others have said he might send a high-profile delegation of lobbyists to Washington to help China push for permanent normal trade relations with the United States.

Chen said he has no plans to do either.

But he said that he hoped that U.S.-China trade relations would improve because that would further open up the mainland and help its leaders become more liberal on political issues.

``It would be helpful to China's democratization,'' Chen said. ``A democratic China, just like a democratic Taiwan, must help foster peace in Asia and the Pacific.''

Although Chen and Beijing have repeatedly said they want to negotiate, both sides disagree over the terms of setting up talks.

China has insisted that before any meeting is arranged, Chen must agree on its ``one China'' principle, which holds that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. Chen has refused to accept any conditions for talks, but has agreed to meet with Chinese leaders and discuss the concept of a ``one China.''

Chen on Friday declined to discuss in detail possible interpretations of ``one China'' and said both sides should meet and talk about it.

``If you keep magnifying the differences, you can't expect to reach agreements on some of the things,'' he said.

Chen also said that he had no plans to visit the United States before he takes office in May, even if he got a rare invitation from President Clinton.

``Our substantial relations with America will improve and upgrade,'' he said. ``Whether I personally can visit the United States before my inauguration, in fact, is not that important.''

--------ukraine

Ukraine Nuclear Reactor Stopped

Associated Press
March 30, 2000 Filed at 9:09 a.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/i/AP-Ukraine-Nuclear.html

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) -- A nuclear reactor was stopped at a Ukrainian atomic power plant Thursday to fix a metal flaw in its steam pipe, the third unplanned reactor shutdown in the former Soviet republic this month.

The Rivne plant's reactor No. 3 was expected to resume operation Friday, the state nuclear company Energoatom said.

The same reactor was stopped earlier this month to fix an oil leak. Another reactor, at the Yuzhnaya plant, also was halted in March for unplanned repairs.

Several reactor output reductions, caused by various malfunctions, also were reported in March at the Zaporizhia plant and Chernobyl, site of the world's worst nuclear accident in 1986.

Environmentalists are concerned about the state of Ukraine's five nuclear power plants, but officials insist that their reactors are generally safe.

The government has promised to shut down Chernobyl, which causes special worries, by the end of 2000 but wants foreign aid first to build two new reactors that would compensate for Chernobyl's lost power.

Ukraine's 14 operational reactors provide for some 40 percent of the country's electricity.

-------- ukraine

Ukraine's Chernobyl cuts output after malfunction

UKRAINE: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6197

KIEV - The only working nuclear reactor at Ukraine's troubled Chernobyl station cut its capacity by 50 percent on Monday after the plant's safety system shut down one of its turbo-generators, an official said on Monday.

A spokeswoman for the state nuclear power company Energoatom told Reuters the accident had taken place on Monday at 2:59 a.m. (2359 GMT on Sunday). No increase in radiation levels was recorded. She said repairs would be completed by March 30.

Ukraine has promised to shut down Chernobyl station, site of the world's worst nuclear disaster, in 2000 in return for Western funds to complete construction of two replacement reactors at its western Rivne and Khmelnytska plants.

The explosion and fire at Chernobyl's reactor number four in 1986 sent clouds of poisonous radioactive dust over neighbouring Russia and Belarus, where thousands of people have died, and across vast territories in Europe.

----

Ukraine's Chernobyl to close by year-end - Kuchma

UKRAINE: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6192

KIEV - Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma on Thursday reiterated official plans to shut down the troubled Chernobyl nuclear power plant by December this year.

"In line with a government decision, the Chernobyl nuclear station will be shut down no later than December, 2000," Kuchma told reporters.

"Today I signed an order setting up a special expert commission which will thoroughly examine this issue, and then we will name the (closure) date."

Ukraine's nuclear officials said last week Chernobyl's only working reactor might be closed in November. The government said in an official statement on Wednesday that the accident-prone station would be closed by the end of 2000.

Chernobyl's number four reactor exploded in April, 1986, spewing a cloud of radioactive dust over Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and parts of Western Europe. Another reactor was halted in 1997 after it exceeded its safe lifespan and a fourth has not restarted since a 1991 fire.

"We should have no doubts that this station must be closed," Kuchma said. Before the reactor is stopped Ukraine expects guarantees of international assistance to close the plant, as well as to complete construction of two nuclear reactors at other stations to compensate for lost capacity at Chernobyl.

Ukraine signed a memorandum with the G-7 group of the world's leading industrialised nations in 1995, vowing to close Chernobyl by 2000 in return for $3 billion in assistance.

Fourteen years since the Chernobyl disaster, Ukraine, a country of 50 million people, still relies heavily on nuclear power which generates up to 45 percent of its electricity.

-------- us nuc facilities

Daybook
TODAY'S HEADLINERS SENATE COMMITTEES

March 31, 2000
http://www.washtimes.com/national/daybook-200033121484.htm

9:30 a.m. - Energy and Natural Resources energy research, development, production and regulation subcommittee holds a hearing on the Energy Department's findings at the gaseous-diffusion plant in Paducah, Ky., and plans for cleanup at the site.
Location: 366 Dirksen Senate Office Building. Contact: 202/224-4971.

Missile defense system discussion - 2:30 p.m. - Georgetown University holds a panel discussion, "Should the United States Proceed Now With Plans to Deploy a National Missile Defense System?" The participants include Marshall Billingslea of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and Michael O'Hanlon of the the Brookings Institution. Location: McGhee Library, Georgetown University, 37th and O streets NW. Contact: 202/687-1639.

---- kentucky

U.S. may scrap plan for Paducah incinerator
Uranium plant project has cost $30 million

March 31, 2000
By JAMES R. CARROLL and JAMES MALONE
The Courier-Journal
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2000/0003/31/000331uranium.html

PADUCAH, Ky. -- After the government has pumped $30 million into a waste incinerator at the Paducah uranium plant, a U.S. Department of Energy review has recommended scrapping the 4-year-old project as too costly.

The incinerator has yet to be built at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, and it could take between $22 million and $26 million more to get the project up and running, according to the department. The company that would build and operate the incinerator, Vortec Corp., of Collegeville, Pa., contends the additional cost would be about $15 million.

"After consideration of the relevant facts and information provided by Vortec and PGDP personnel, the review team recommended that the demonstration not continue," said a draft of the Feb. 28 internal Energy Department report, which was obtained by The Courier-Journal.

The recommendation to halt the incinerator contrasts with Energy Secretary Bill Richardson's support for the project as recently as eight months ago.

In a July 20, 1999, letter to Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., who has been a supporter of the incinerator, Richardson said the Energy Department considered the Vortec project a "promising innovative approach."

Lisa Cutler, a department spokeswoman in Washington, said no final decision has been made on Vortec funding. A pilot project, the incinerator technology could be used at other nuclear facilities if it proves successful in Paducah.

Doubts have surfaced in the Energy Department about the cost of the incinerator just as Congress holds another hearing today on the status of cleanup at the Paducah plant. The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's subcommittee on energy research, development, production and regulation is scheduled to hear from Energy Department officials about plans for addressing the widespread environmental damage in and around the vast complex.

Bunning is a member of that panel and pushed for the hearing. He was unavailable for comment yesterday.

Vortec, meanwhile, has hired former U.S. Sen. Vance Hartke of Indiana to help make its case in Washington.

"The answer to nuclear waste has to be in technology, not in landfills," said Hartke, who said he has been a consultant to Vortec "for a couple of months."

Hartke, a Democrat, said Vortec made a Feb. 22 presentation to Energy Department officials arguing that the project should go forward.

Hartke now has a law firm in Falls Church, Va., outside Washington. He is not registered with Congress as a lobbyist, nor is Vortec registered as having a lobbyist, according to Capitol Hill records.

Hartke said he has been talking with Bunning about the Vortec project, and that Bunning "is very active on their behalf."

Hartke also said he has known the energy secretary "very well and for a long time."

But that connection apparently goes only so far. Although the former senator and Vortec officials have asked to see the internal Energy Department report critical of the incinerator project, they have not been given one.

THE PROPOSED incinerator uses a process called vitrification. It heats contaminated soil, rock and concrete rubble at temperatures up to 2,800 degrees. The incinerator would handle both low-level radioactive waste and hazardous chemical waste.

Vortec says the waste residue is an inert glass-like substance that can be stored safely for thousands of years.

At the project's 1996 groundbreaking at Paducah, Clyde Frank, then the Energy Department's assistant secretary for science and technology, said: "The Vortec process is a big winner for the taxpayers -- our customers."

But the internal department report said the project, under all but the rosiest forecasts, would be more costly than alternative disposal methods, including using an on-site landfill. The report said Vortec's projections about the volume of waste it would handle and costs are based on overly optimistic assumptions.

"DOE has invested a great deal of time and funding in the development of Vortec technology for the cleanup of DOE wastes," the draft report concludes. "Under expected conditions, a Vortec facility at Paducah would not be economical compared to the costs of much less risky alternatives. The probability is reasonably high that the technology would not be permitted or deployed on a timely basis."

At the moment, the incinerator consists of a concrete pad and some unassembled machinery.

IN HIS LETTER last July to Bunning, Richardson was noncommittal about the longer-term prospects of a full-scale incinerator at Paducah, saying that would require additional environmental analysis and study of "alternative technologies."

That last phrase took on added weight this week, when Richardson canceled a plan to build a nuclear-waste incinerator in southern Idaho. In announcing the halt to that project, the secretary stated that he wanted "a careful examination of new technology as an alternative to incineration."

"I'm not satisfied that that has been fully explored," he said.

Vortec President James Hnat, a former Energy Department employee, said his company is seeking the additional $15 million from the Energy Department to buy the final components needed to assemble the pilot plant. He estimated it would take two years after the company gets the money to complete the monthlong test burn to prove the technology.

Despite serious technical problems and cost overruns at a pilot vitrification plant at the Fernald, Ohio, uranium refinery in 1995, the Energy Department seemed eager to bring Vortec's Paducah project on line. The department was so eager that the agency issued an unusual exemption the following year to exclude the project from the National Environmental Policy Act, which calls for a detailed analysis of the incinerator's effect on the environment.

THAT MOVE brought a 1997 federal court challenge from environmentalists, who claimed the exclusion was illegal. The suit was resolved in late 1997 with an agreement under which Vortec was allowed to take delivery of the components it already had ordered and paid for but was barred from proceeding with construction until an environmental analysis for the pilot plant.

Leah Dever, who heads the Energy Department's Oak Ridge operations office, recently issued a finding that the Vortec incinerator would not have a significant impact on the environment. That removes a legal and procedural obstacle for the project, but a state regulatory hurdle looms.

The Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet is waiting for more information from Vortec before it considers issuing a "treatment permit" for the incinerator, spokesman Mark York said.

Hnat said the amount of federal funding that Vortec needs is a "touchy question." He said he had not seen the Energy Department analysis that was critical of the Vortec project.

DELAYS CAUSED by the lawsuit have created a financial hardship for the small company, and the Energy Department has given the firm some interim funding -- about $200,000 to $300,000 a month -- to maintain its staff and pay for activities at Paducah, said Hnat.

Hnat said the department wants to save money by placing waste directly into landfills without treating it.

If given the chance, the Vortec incinerator could pay for itself, Hnat said. And if the technology was deployed across the complex, it could save the government up to $2 billion in environmental cleanup costs, he added.

The internal Energy Department report estimates that it would take up to $26 million more to complete the Vortec project -- far more than Hnat's estimate of $15 million.

The draft report also was skeptical of Vortec's claims that a full-scale incinerator could process up to 72 tons of waste a day.

The review team that prepared the report also noted that it could take up to two years to obtain regulatory approval to burn certain types of waste -- a delay that could further affect costs. The report also said that future legal challenges could not be ruled out.

MARK DONHAM, a Brookport, Ill., environmentalist who filed the 1997 suit against the department, said the new report should have been provided to the federally chartered community oversight board that makes recommendations on the environmental cleanup at Paducah. Donham is a member of the board.

"Obviously, the Energy Department was not interested in having an honest dialogue about Vortec," Donham said Wednesday. He said he has been waiting for three years for the department to release Vortec records under a Freedom of Information Act request he has filed.

-----

Nickel ingots not the only concern in classified burial area

Paducah Sun,
March 31, 2000
Editorial
http://204.120.16.85/cgi-bin/view.cgi?/200003/31+0067_editori al.html+20000331+editorial

EDITOR: Recently there was a story covering the nickel ingots in The Paducah Sun that might have misled readers. While I don't hold The Paducah Sun accountable for the information contained therein (it was probably based on information forwarded by individuals at the site), as a former site investigator, I do want to outline the facts as I understand them. To substantiate the following information, I have forwarded copies of relevant internal documents to the Sun.

The article stated that the ingots contained only trace amounts of transuranics and technetium. In fact, internal studies found that all of the ingots contain technetium, some with levels in the 50,000 parts per billion range. Reporting that the ingots had only trace amounts of contamination implies that these materials and the processes that generated them were largely benign and present no tangible risk. Nothing could be further from the truth as indicated by "the rest of the story."

The contaminated nickel and aluminum ingots largely represent the final form of scrap diffusion plant material from the big diffusion rebuild efforts at the three diffusion sites. The bulk of these metals came from the replacement of compressor and converter units. Prior to the rebuild, several studies noted that a grayish material that accumulated in these units contained, among other things, high levels of transuranics and technetium. This material (called "cosmic dust" by some at the PGDP), represented one of the greatest exposure risks to workers who disassembled and cleaned the units and handled the resultant materials.

After the initial tear down and shredding of scrap materials (so it would fit in drums), more studies were conducted on how the material, that now resembled fingernail-sized potato chips, could be melted and, hopefully, sold. It was found from numerous tests that although the raw nickel chips contained plutonium and significant amounts of neptunium, technetium, uranium and thorium; only technetium was found at high levels in the ingots. So, anyone with sense would ask, where did the other contaminants go?

Pre-smelting tests showed that the more toxic and radioactive materials were concentrated in slag that formed at the top of the melt with lesser quantities adhering to the liner of the melting unit. The slag and most furnace liners were buried in unlined pits in the classified landfill. Oh, I should have mentioned, much of the scrap (from Portsmouth and Oak Ridge) would have been contaminated with enriched uranium. Placing the somewhat porous slag where it would be exposed to ground water would have resulted in leaching of contamination at a minimum (I will leave it for those of you with a background in radiation to imagine other potential concerns).

So, is this one more thing to worry about when it comes to dealing with the classified landfill? Certainly, but my real concern is that former workers had/have not been given the whole story on the conditions where they worked and they deserve to be informed. The lack of awareness (concern?) was pretty obvious to me when I found slag spheres being used for decoration on a desk in the smelter office.

Don't start to believe that this is the only concern in this burial area. In the past, many of the materials in classified items were themselves classified. Now it has been confirmed that many weapons contained regulated hazardous metals. When a list of components and the metals used is reviewed, the hesitancy for DOE and Lockheed to come clean on the beryllium issue is laughable.

I will always remember that the classified burial area was the one location that a former burial manager told me to never dig in, but could not tell me exactly why because it exceeded my security clearance level. Other locations did not warrant such cautions and one can only surmise the serious nature of the problem by other occurrences. For example, when we drilled in a different landfill and went right through a drum of PCBs, solvents, and uranium metal shavings, not an eyebrow was raised.

JOHN TILLSON
Sharpe

---- new york

NY PSC fights state legislature on ConEd nuke leak

USA: March 31, 2000
http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=6210

NEW YORK - The New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) and the state legislature locked horns Thursday over which branch of the government has the power to regulate Consolidated Edison Inc. following a radiation leak last month that shut its nuclear reactor.

The state Senate and Assembly have proposed bills to block Con Ed from raising ratepayers' electric rates to cover the extra costs stemming from the shutdown of the New York City utility's Indian Point 2 nuclear plant.

But the PSC, arguing it already has jurisdiction to prevent Con Ed from passing on those costs, has asked for more time to review the company's actions leading up to the radiation leak. "If we determine Con Ed is responsible for the radiation leak then we will punish Con Ed and refund the ratepayers' money," said PSC spokesman David Flanagan.

On February 15, a tube in one of Indian Point 2's four steam generators cracked, releasing radioactive water into the generator and environment surrounding the 931 megawatt plant in Buchanan, N.Y. along the shores of the Hudson River about 35 miles north of New York City.

The PSC sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno (R) asking that the state Senate withhold consideration of its version of the bill, which has been tied up in a committee for most of this week.

"Until the investigations and proceedings are completed, there is no basis for finding...(Con Ed's) failure to replace (Indian Point 2's) generators caused increased risk of radioactive leakage or plant outages," the PSC said in the letter to Senator Bruno.

In 1988, Con Ed took delivery and mothballed four new steam generators following a lawsuit against Westinghouse, the manufacturer of the generators, in which the utility alleged the tubes in the old generators were subject to corrosion and cracking.

On Monday, the state Assembly passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support a similar bill sponsored by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D) of Manhattan.

State Senator Guy Velella (R) of the Bronx and Westchester County, who has sponsored the Senate bill, vowed Thursday to continue his efforts.

"My concern is not with the Utility or the PSC, it is with the ratepayer. My goal is to ensure that not one cent for one replacement kilowatt is paid for by Con Ed consumers," said Senator Velella in a statement.

Since the shutdown, Con Ed has been passing down roughly $600,000 a day in replacement power costs to its three million ratepayers in New York City and neighbouring Westchester County.

Under past regulations, Con Ed was allowed to pass on to its customers the cost of purchasing replacement power when any of its generating facilities were shut down.

The PSC argued the proposed law punishing Con Ed would divert the resources of the company and the state away from the most important goal, which the PSC called "the safe operation of the Indian Point 2 plant and protection of ratepayers."

Story by S DiSavino

---- washington

Board Warns of Plutonium Storage

Associated Press
March 29, 2000 Filed at 6:39 p.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Hanford-Plutonium.html

RICHLAND, Wash. (AP) -- Bulging canisters of plutonium that could rupture and leak have not been adequately monitored at the Hanford nuclear reservation, an independent safety panel warns.

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board contends Hanford managers have pushed their luck at the Plutonium Finishing Plant, where the canisters are stored.

The canisters bulge when air mixes with the plutonium inside what are supposed to be sealed stainless-steel containers. Rustlike plutonium oxide forms on the plutonium metal, and the oxidation can bend and crack the canister.

In the past 10 years, two-thirds of the canisters -- the actual number is classified -- have not been checked for the weight gains that would indicate oxidation is occurring, according to a Feb. 25 defense board memorandum.

Plutonium-laced emissions from a cracked container could contaminate workers and the storage vault, creating possible health hazards and delays in plans to convert 4.4 tons of scrap plutonium into safer forms by mid-2004.

The number of containers managers believe could crack is classified.

``We're not finding anything so far that is causing us extraordinary concern,'' said George Jackson, vice president for nuclear materials stabilization at Flour Hanford, the main contractor at the government site.

Hanford was established as part of the secret Manhattan Project to build an atomic bomb during World War II. Today, the mission at the 560-square-mile site in southeast Washington state is cleaning up the radioactive and hazardous waste created during 40 years of plutonium production for the nation's nuclear arsenal.

----

11 Hanford workers to sue, allege a cover-up
Plaintiffs say '97 blast caused severe injuries

Friday, March 31, 2000
By ANGELA GALLOWAY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT
http://www.seattlep-i.com:80/local/hanf311.shtml

Eleven workers who claim they received botched medical help after an explosion at a Hanford plutonium plant nearly three years ago plan to file a lawsuit today.

The current and former workers allege they suffered severe, disabling injuries in a May 1997 tank explosion and the subsequent mishandled emergency response.

They seek medical treatment and unspecified financial compensation, said Hugh Plunkett, a Minneapolis lawyer representing the workers.

Above all, the workers want answers about the explosion at the nuclear reservation near the Tri-Cities, said plaintiff Ron Irvin, a 46-year-old electrical worker.

"Come out with the truth about what really happened that night," Irvin said yesterday.

Eight electrical workers were taking a break behind the Hanford Plutonium Finishing Plant when they noticed an explosion in a fourth-floor mixing room. They were directed to take cover in the plant, but to do so they had to walk through a plume of brown smoke that smelled of metal and chlorine.

Hanford officials said no radioactivity was released, but managers were found to have failed to properly test the workers for exposure to chemicals and did not have adequate testing equipment on hand. The men had to drive themselves to hospitals for checkups. Three other Hanford workers have joined in the lawsuit.

Plunkett said contractors for the Department of Energy have given Irvin and other workers inadequate information and assistance in dealing with subsequent medical problems, such as blood abnormalities, numbness, migraines, inability to urinate, sexual dysfunction and memory loss.

Each of the workers has had health problems since the explosion, and some can no longer work, he said.

"One man can't even hold a hammer," said Plunkett, who added that the workers want medical monitoring. "They want to know when (their health) turns a corner because they live in constant fear of cancer."

Plunkett said Fluor Hanford, one of the site's top contractors, will be a primary defendant in the suit to be filed in U.S. District Court in Spokane. Several subcontractors that advised Fluor also will be named.

Two governmental agencies hit Fluor with hefty fines following the explosion, which blew a hole in the defunct plant's roof, which was supposed to help prevent release of nuclear material.

Keith Karpe, a Fluor spokesman, declined comment until the lawsuit is filed.

Plunkett contends that Fluor and others lied to the workers and staged a cover-up.

Soon after the incident, the workers were told tests showed they were not exposed to toxic levels of chemicals or radiation "until (Hanford management) finally admitted there hadn't been any testing."

Most of the workers weren't tested until last year, when the government paid for tests at the University of Texas, Plunkett said.

Those examinations indicate the workers were exposed to radioactive or similar contamination, but the workers still lack a clear picture of what they were exposed to when supervisors led them through a brown plume after the eruption, Plunkett said.

Worse yet, the lawyer said, workers who pushed for answers were threatened and harassed.

Plunkett said homes and cars of several workers who asked questions about the incident were broken into. Nothing of value was ever taken, but some personal records were stolen. One worker discovered two dead, plucked crows in his lawn -- their heads buried in the ground, he said.

The workers "were abused. They were exposed. And they have been left out in the wind," said Gerry Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest, a Hanford watchdog group. "There was just a plain, old-fashioned cover-up."

Several months after the explosion, the state Department of Ecology fined the federal Department of Energy $110,000 -- the largest fine ever related to Hanford.

"The Department of Energy had not adequately identified the risk posed by the chemicals and did not manage them right, which led to the explosion," said Steve Moore, a state Ecology compliance inspector. "We found deficiencies overall in the emergency response system.

Then in March 1998, the Energy Department levied its own fine, one of the largest in the history of its nuclear safety program: $140,625 against Fluor for its handling of plutonium.

-------- us nuc weapons

Clinton: GOP Congress Has 'No Shame'

Associated Press
March 31, 2000 Filed at 3:25 a.m. EST
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/w/AP-Clinton.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Clinton says it takes ``real gall'' for Republicans to torpedo the nuclear test ban treaty, then fault him when India and Pakistan spurn his pleas to end their nuclear weapons rivalry.

In a trio of speeches in New York City on Thursday that raised $1.7 million for the Democratic National Committee, Clinton portrayed Republicans as choosing the wrong side on a long list of issues, including the economy, taxes, the future of Medicare and Social Security, and gun safety.

But he became unusually personal when he responded to criticism by congressional Republicans that he had failed to broker a nuclear weapons pact between arch enemies Pakistan and India during his South Asia trip last week.

``They have no guilt and no shame,'' the president said of his GOP critics. ``I mean, they'll say anything. ... You never see them blink about it.''

House Republican Whip Tom DeLay and other congressional Republicans triggered Clinton's remarks when they said he has little or nothing to show for his week of diplomacy.

Clinton said of Delay: ``What he didn't point out is that I lost all the leverage I had when the Republican Senate defeated the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.''

``I thought, that is real gall,'' Clinton said. ``Man, for a guy to stand up and say that. That requires a lot of moxie, you know.''

Last year, Clinton lost a bitter, 51-48 vote for ratification of the test ban treaty. Only four Senate Republicans voted for the treaty.

The United States thus became the first nuclear power to specifically reject the 154-nation agreement on ending nuclear weapons testing, and Clinton called the vote ``reckless partisanship.''

Both India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998. They also have tested medium-range and short-range missiles since then.

Clinton called GOP opposition to the test ban ``stunning'' and incomprehensible.

``I think it would be folly for us to walk away from arms control,'' Clinton said.

Speaking more generally, the president said some congressional Republicans tell him that they vote against certain administration policies because they fear losing ground in the congressional power structure.

``I've had these Republicans come up to me in virtual tears and apologize for the way they were voting on first on one thing and then another, and just say they had to do it because they didn't want to lose their committee position,'' Clinton said.

He criticized Texas Gov. George Bush, the apparent GOP presidential nominee, for opposing hate crimes legislation in his state after the murder of a Texas man, James Bird. Bird was chained to the back of a pickup truck and dragged to death.

Clinton attributed Bush's lack of support to Republican fears that such legislation would be extended to include crimes targeting homosexuals.

``All he had to do was to lift his hand and they would have had a hate crimes bill,'' Clinton said of Bush. ``And it did not pass because they (Republicans) did not want it to pass. Because they do not believe that gays and lesbians should be protected by hate crimes legislation.''

Speaking of his campaign to persuade Congress to pass gun safety legislation, Clinton said he is undisturbed by attacks against him on that issue by the National Rifle Association.

``This is not about me and the NRA; this is about whether people stay alive or not,'' Clinton said.

-----------

PRESENTATION TO THE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE ON STRATEGIC FORCES UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT: Space Policy, Programs, and Operations

STATEMENT OF: MR. KEITH R. HALL Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Space) and Director, National Reconnaissance Office

MARCH 8, 2000
http://www.nro.gov/speeches/sppo3-8.html

Introduction

I am pleased to be here today to discuss my vision for space and I applaud your continued interest in this highly important arena. As both the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Space) and the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), I am in a unique, dual-hatted role. As Director, NRO, I have responsibility for the design, acquisition, and operations of all the nation's reconnaissance satellites, reporting to the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence. As you know, in my Air Force role I have responsibility for policy and interagency coordination as well as advising the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force on space matters. Acquisition and operation of space capabilities are the responsibility of the Assistant Secretary for Acquisition and Air Force Space Command, respectively. In this role I have the opportunity to leverage good ideas from both the Air Force and the NRO as well as facilitate exchanges and partnerships where they make the most sense.

Today I will address both areas of my responsibility, though most of the information concerning the NRO is highly classified and must be covered in closed session. Within the context of the Air Force vision for space, I intend to highlight a number of important programs and concepts. These include the numerous partnerships with other space sectors and organizations, some of the most important space-related investments I foresee, and a number of the challenges the Air Force and the nation face with respect to maintaining dominance in space. With regard to the NRO, I will highlight some initiatives and unique partnerships in the areas of operations, acquisitions, and research and development.

I should note that this year, I look forward to working with two Congressionally chartered commissions. Your committee created the Commission to examine, among many other things, the relationships between "white and black" space. The second commission, I'll call the "NRO Commission," is charted to review the NRO's current organization and practices. I am eager to work with both commissions to explore ways our future programs can better meet national security needs.

Criticality of U.S. Space Capabilities

As highlighted again in Kosovo operations, U.S. space capabilities are an indispensable tool of global leadership. They allow our political leaders to base decisions on remarkably timely, detailed, and accurate information. Space systems enable our military leaders to achieve dominant battlefield awareness by providing global communications, precision navigation, accurate meteorological data, early warning of missile launches, and near-real time signals and imagery intelligence support. The global presence of space systems makes it possible for the U.S. to more effectively respond to the wide range of threats presented by the post-Cold War world.

For example, during Operation Allied Force, the Air Force proved many lessons. Among them, "Reachback" was a particular success story. Relying on satellite communications, warfighters were able to reach back to the United States for real-time information and analysis (some of that space based, as well), while avoiding the need to deploy in-theater systems. Additionally the use of precision weapons was enabled by use of the space based Global Positioning System.

Today, U.S. forces rely on space systems for global awareness of threats, swift orchestration of military operations, and precision use of smart weapons. As we move into the new millennium, one of the key goals of military space power will be the employment of appropriate Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) sensors. Aerospace power requires ISR assets in space and in the air that are interoperable and that can communicate information back to centers where data can be fused and commanders can use that fused information to command their forces and the battlespace. The constant requirement for data, communications, and systems that turn data into information, in turn, requires capabilities that run the gamut from prediction of solar weather to satellite command and control to computer network defense. In addition to a robust ISR capability, I foresee a time in the not-too-distant future when other military functions will be carried out in, through, and from space. The employment of these military capabilities in space, when combined with global communications and high speed information processing, will facilitate the delivery of precise military firepower anywhere in the world, day or night, in all weather. Our goal is to find, fix, track, and target anything of significance worldwide and to ensure targets are engaged by the most appropriate means available. This capability will allow the U.S. to maintain a non-intrusive global presence and deliver precision weapons on target to maximize combat power while minimizing collateral damage.

The Air Force Vision

In my role as ASAF (Space), I serve to enable the Air Force vision for space. The vision of global reach, global power and global vigilance is the guiding principle behind our strategic plan and programs for aerospace power. The genesis of the Aerospace Force is the integration of military capabilities across the aerospace medium in order to best shape the military and geopolitical environment on the ground. This merger of air and space operations is a continuing journey. For the past decade, the barriers between air and space planning and operations have diminished substantially. Through further integration, we seek to produce the most efficient military effects for the joint force commander without regard to where platforms reside.

Today's Air Force is in a unique position to continue this shift to an aerospace paradigm. We are developing the right partnerships and making the right investments in programs and technology. It is within the current Air Force trade space to identify functions best suited for air, space, and aerospace.

Air Force / Department of Transportation

The Global Positioning System (GPS), initially developed to provide situational awareness for military forces, has now grown into an international utility for civil and military applications. In 1996, the President established the U.S. GPS policy which directs providing the Standard Positioning Service (SPS) for peaceful civil, commercial and scientific use, free of direct user fees; the intention of discontinuing the use of Selective Availability no later than 2006, and encouraging the international acceptance of GPS as the worldwide standard for position, velocity, and time information. The Interagency GPS Executive Board (IGEB), co-chaired by ASD(C3I ) and Deputy Secretary of Transportation, was established to manage this dual-use system and to implement the Presidential policy and congressional direction to enhance GPS.

Air Force / National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) / NASA

The Air Force's Defense Meteorological Satellite Program will soon converge with NOAA's Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellites into the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System, a Tri-agency DoD, Department of Commerce and NASA program. The convergence of these operational AF and NOAA meteorological satellite systems will save the U.S. government $1.8 billion and create a more robust environmental sensing architecture. This architecture will also include a European partner, the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites. Further savings will be realized through this international cooperation where the Europeans are providing one of the three satellites needed to meet U.S. requirements.

Air Force / Industry

In addition to the formal partnerships within the government, the Air Force and the NRO have reached out to private industry in some innovative ways. Until very recently, military and other government users have been the primary customers of the U.S. space industry. That trend, however, has taken a dramatic shift. Commercial space revenue now outpaces government spending. Private industry now provides high-resolution imagery, global communications, and exploits the navigation solution transmitted by our GPS constellation. Industry is now in a position to lead, rather than follow, the government customers. The changes we've made to our launch procurement strategy reflect this new reality.

Built with a focus on cost savings, improved reliability, operability, and maintainability, the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) team will re-engineer the entire Government launch process. No longer does the Government buy individual launch vehicles tailored to specific missions, but instead the Air Force buys a fixed price commercial "launch service," ensuring for the first time that the contractor will have total systems performance responsibility for each launch under a single contract for a single price.

This commercial approach, when coupled with contractor cost sharing and partnering arrangements, has permitted the contractors to lease government land, launch facilities, and support buildings, thereby reducing government launch site presence and ensuring equitable sharing of launch base O&M costs between Government and commercial missions.

The EELV program has instituted a fundamental shift in the way DoD develops and acquires space related products and services. Cost-sharing, civil/military integration, and commercial services are now part of DoD's ever-growing acquisition reform arsenal. In addition to innovative partnering relationships, the Air Force has planned critical investments in numerous space programs. The next several paragraphs discuss a number of key investments the Air Force is making as we move into the 21st Century.

Air Force Investments

The Air Force is investing heavily in space systems, programs, and technology as it moves toward its vision of an Aerospace Force. Key investments include the Global Positioning System (GPS) Modernization, the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV), the Space Based InfraRed System (SBIRS), satellite communications programs, Space Control, and a number of important technology demonstrators such as the Space Based Laser (SBL), Discoverer II, and spaceplane.

GPS Modernization

The Air Force continues to sustain and modernize the GPS Space, Control, and User Equipment (UE) segments. Current satellites continue to perform longer than expected. The Mean Mission Duration (MMD) for Block IIA satellites has increased from 8.6 to 10.6 years, and the MMD for Block IIR and Block IIF satellites is contractually required to be 7.5 and 12.7 years respectively, and will likely increase with on-orbit experience. Twenty-one Block IIR satellites have been produced to replenish the current aging constellation from now to 2003 - everything is on track to support the next launch in Apr 00. To provide long-term sustainment of the GPS constellation, the first six Block IIF satellites have been procured to support launches projected to begin in 2005.

While sustainment of the constellation is a top priority, navigation warfare (Navwar) requirements and inherent system vulnerabilities have driven the need to modernize. The President's FY01 Budget includes the funding to modernize all segments of GPS. Modernization of the space segment targets the last 12 Block IIRs and includes the addition of a second civil signal (C/A on L2) and new military signals (M-code) to enable more robust Navwar operations in the future. The first 6 Block IIFs, called IIF "Lite," will include all of the above enhancements as well as a third civil, safety-of-life signal (L5). The remaining Block IIFs, called "fully modernized," will also include a +20dB M-code spot beam. We are also progressing with user equipment modernization. In the near term, our UE modernization activities include integration of the Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SAASM) into GPS receiver applications modules (GRAM); investments in anti-jam (AJ) filters and direct access to the encrypted signals; and the integration of these capabilities onto receiver cards to support FY01/02 procurements of hand-held and avionics units. In the mid-term, UE investments include digital receivers, small, high-AJ antennas, as well as a security module (and receiver) to process the new military signals. The modernization of the control segment includes the transition from the legacy mainframe to a distributed architecture system that will ensure command and control of all Blocks of GPS satellites on orbit (II/IIA/IIR/IIR Modernized/IIF "Lite"/etc.). Since the submission of the FY01PB, OSD has completed a Defense Science Board review of the modernization plan and made recommendations to DepSecDef. As soon as adjustments are determined, this new plan will be brought forward to Congress. Finally, the Air Force is supporting a Joint Staff review of current and projected future prevention systems to enable military operations without the need for Selective Availability. All of these activities reflect our commitment to implementing Presidential policy and congressional direction to enhance GPS.

Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) On October 16th 1998, the EELV Program culminated a three year effort to begin modernizing the U.S. space launch fleet with the award of two $500 million EELV development agreements and two EELV Initial Launch Services (ILS) contracts valued at $2 billion. The ILS contracts cover 28 launches, 12 payload types, and 15 first-time payload integration efforts, with the first government launch in FY02 and the first commercial flights projected in FY01. In addition to the establishment of two internationally competitive commercial families of launch vehicles capable of meeting all Government and commercial needs, EELV's benefits include a 31% life cycle cost reduction over current Atlas, Delta, and Titan launch systems and $6.2B in validated savings. EELV will provide enhanced mass-to-orbit capability, broader operational flexibility, over $1B in launch infrastructure upgrades, and the formal transition to commercial launch services for all Air Force and NRO payloads. Challenged with the primary goals of meeting DoD's key performance parameters (mass-to-orbit, reliability, standardization) and reducing the cost of space launch by at least 25% over current launch systems, the EELV Program Team crafted and executed a comprehensive acquisition strategy. Their efforts simultaneously leveraged commercial competition and international market forces to reduce development risk, dramatically shorten first article delivery time to less than 36 months, incentivize industry investment of over $2.5B of their own funds, and create a true dual-use national launch system.

EELV represents a quantum leap in product, process, and service improvements over current launch systems. Examples include the introduction of a standard payload interface (SIS), standard launch pads, and contractor assumption of all launch site operations and maintenance (O&M). The SIS, a common mechanical, electrical, and environmental payload to booster interface, is an industry first. The benefits include a standard 24-month payload integration timeline, a common set of checkout/mating procedures, the ability to substitute payloads, and a rapid 45-day call-up capability (a 400% improvement over current 180-day call-up cycles). Beyond shortening integration timelines by up to 50% and streamlining integration activities, the SIS establishes a civil/military baseline for current and future satellite designs, potentially reducing payload development costs and schedules.

Standard launch pads and processes are also reducing launch costs and shortening on-pad cycle time. EELV is expected to be on the pad for 1-8 days versus 60-180 days for today's Atlas, Delta, and Titan systems. Pad operations have been further enhanced through the use of commercial launch operations and ISO 9000 quality standards versus old Military Standards. Over the past year, the Air Force has sponsored numerous meetings with industry, NASA, FAA, and other interested federal, state and local agencies to ensure that we understand the needs of the civilian space industry. We will continue to work in partnership with industry and civilian agencies as we modernize our ranges for the future. We believe the EELV program will provide the U.S with the critical launch capability necessary to compete more successfully for launch services in the international commercial marketplace and will ensure a more cost-effective space transportation capability for future national security space missions. Space Based InfraRed System (SBIRS)

The Defense Support Program (DSP) has been a vital ISR system for many years. As the DSP nears the end of its service, the Air Force will gradually replace it with the more capable SBIRS, adding significant capability to our Theater Missile Defense (TMD) architecture. The global coverage of SBIRS-High, with improved sensitivity and revisit rates over DSP, will allow better launch point determination, missile trajectory determination, and impact point prediction. These improvements will also ensure we can continue to detect, track, and assess the increasingly complex ballistic missile threats being fielded. SBIRS-Low will provide critical mid-course track data to the battle manager to allow accurate targeting and engagement of hostile threats. SBIRS' improved early warning and tracking capabilities reduce the military utility and terror value of the weapons of mass destruction by greatly enhancing the response and effectiveness of active and passive defenses. In addition, SBIRS supports the missions of Technical Intelligence and Battlespace Characterization, which will greatly improve our assessment of enemy capabilities, our situational awareness during conflict, and our engagement results. SBIRS will provide the nation with new and improved warning and sensing capabilities for the next century, allowing the accomplishment of a greater number of missions from space. As we initiate our SBIRS deployments, the DSP program, which currently has four replacement satellites awaiting launch, will be sustained to allow continuous global surveillance during this transition period.

The completed SBIRS will consist of constellations of geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO), highly elliptical orbit (HEO), and low earth orbit (LEO) spacecraft as well as a supporting ground infrastructure. SBIRS-High will be composed of 4 GEO spacecraft to provide hemispherical coverage and 2 HEO sensors to provide polar coverage. SBIRS-Low will be composed of approximately 24 LEO satellites, with the actual number to be determined during the program definition phase. The SBIRS ground segment consists of a consolidated ground station, overseas-based Relay Ground Stations, and Mobile Multi-Mission Processors. SBIRS-High first GEO launch is now scheduled for FY04. The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's National Missile Defense Capability 1 (NMD C1) will have initial operational capability in FY06; the current SBIRS High constellation supports this date. The SBIRS-Low first launch is now scheduled for FY06. A SBIRS-Low launch in FY06 supports the NMD schedule for Capability 2 in FY10.

Satellite Communications

Our space-based communications systems continue evolution towards Air Expeditionary Force and Joint Vision 2010 operations based on seamless movement of information to joint warfighters in any theater of operations around the globe. The mix of MILSATCOM systems being acquired by the Air Force for DoD provides responsive and flexible connectivity with a range of services from high survivability to wide-band capacity to one-way broadcast. These systems meet the DoD MILSATCOM Architecture as validated by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC).

We continue to pursue the Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS) upgrade to provide a more than 200%-increased capacity to theater tactical users on the last four satellites. In addition, we are deploying the Global Broadcast Service (GBS) Phase 2 infrastructure that will provide very high data rate communications directly to small terminals in the battlefield. Also, commercial-like Wideband Gapfiller satellites launched in 2004 and 2005 will augment DSCS and early GBS as we transition to the Advanced Wideband satellite scheduled for first launch in 2008. GBS, Wideband Gapfiller and Advanced Wideband will reduce costs and fielding time by making maximum use of commercial technology and practices.

We will continue to launch Milstar, the Air Force's highly survivable SATCOM system, and plan to replenish it with the higher capacity Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) system starting in 2006. To support the AEHF development, we are investing in the enabling technologies to reduce cost and risk, and take maximum advantage of commercial digital satellite investments. All these new systems will be acquired with supporting control subsystems and terminals for the new frequency bands and waveforms being fielded. Specifically, we plan to begin developing and procuring more airborne terminals to communicate over Milstar and the higher capacity AEHF system. Our program also includes the development and acquisition of terminals to replace unsupportable MILSATCOM terminals.

Space Control

The Air Force is committed to maintaining leadership in space with technology readiness for a full range of space control capabilities. Our overall strategy is to deter threats to our assets in space, protect them, and, when directed, to deny space capabilities to our adversaries. Our approach is to provide a balance between space surveillance, protection, prevention, and negation capabilities commensurate with emerging threats. The Air Force has budgeted approximately $10M per year across the FYDP to sustain development of a comprehensive space control plan and a range of space control technology activities.

To ensure the Air Force has the proper oversight of this important mission area, we have formed the Counterspace Oversight Council to oversee the requirements generation process.

The Air Force, in coordination with the NRO, the other Services, and NASA, is leading a task force focused on defining our future space surveillance capabilities. The Air Force requires a robust space surveillance capability; this task force will be instrumental in the development of the required interagency modernization strategy and investment plan to make this requirement a reality. In the areas of protection, we are working to enhance the Global Positioning Satellite system to protect its use by friendly forces and to have the capability to prevent its use by adversaries. Additionally, we are conducting a comprehensive review of our space-related infrastructure. This review will provide us the information required to determine system vulnerabilities and identify those actions necessary to assure space-related services to our warfighter in the field. Consistent with the Deputy Secretary of Defense's testimony to you last year and the additional $3M Congress provided for FY 00, we are planning to pursue negation efforts that could lead to capabilities that have localized, temporary, and reversible effects as part of our broader information and force protection capabilities.

The Air Force has played a leading role in the Defense Department's Space Control Broad Area Review (BAR). This BAR was initiated early last year and will report final recommendations within the next few weeks. The Air Force FY02 and future POM submissions will likely reflect many of the recommendations from this important effort.

Space-Based Laser (SBL)

The Air Force and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) awarded a Joint Venture (JV) contract in February 1999 to the SBL Community Team of Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and TRW. The SBL team will develop an Integrated Flight Experiment (IFX) to accomplish the technical advancement and collection of engineering data needed to make sound decisions on the future of an operational SBL system. The IFX will integrate the high energy laser, beam control system, and acquisition, tracking, and pointing elements into a space platform. After launch in the 2010-2012 time frame, the IFX will perform a series of on-orbit experiments to acquire engineering design and performance data consistent with extrapolation to an operational system, determine the capability of the integrated system to deposit enough energy in a short enough time span to destroy a boosting ballistic missile, and investigate possible contributions to global aerospace superiority. The SBL Joint Venture team is best positioned to resolve the technical challenges and conduct a successful experiment to demonstrate boost phase intercept capability from space, while enhancing competition for future procurement.

Thus far the SBL program has been successful in reducing the cost and technical risks of deploying and operating multi-megawatt lasers in space. The high power laser testing completed in 1998 and 1999 successfully demonstrated the capability to operate critical SBL laser and beam control subsystems at high power. The SBL program has developed, simplified and proven several key subsystems such as uncooled optics and mirrors, resulting in a 40 percent reduction in spacecraft weight and significantly reducing optical component production cost and time. In spite of the SBL program's technical achievements, there was concern that an IFX would not be launched soon enough to enable an operational SBL system in time to meet the projected threat. In response, the Air Force and BMDO increased funding for the SBL program to $139M per year through the FYDP. This additional funding will be used to accelerate risk reduction and technology development prior to the IFX. BMDO sponsored a third Independent Review Team (IRT-3), chaired by General (Ret) Larry Welch, as part of the assessment of technological readiness, role, and content for an effective IFX. The IRT-3 concluded the range of appropriate time frames for an IFX launch is 2010 to 2012. Currently planned budget levels and priorities lead to a launch planned for 2012. The team noted that achieving operational capability is less dependent on an IFX launch date than DoD commitment to deployment and "the IRT perceives that the Department is embarking on such a program." The IRT-3 recommended the Air Force lay out a specific series of near-, mid-, and far-term milestones to ensure disciplined progress toward the IFX and enhance readiness to deploy an operational system. The team also recommended including deployable optics in the IFX to reduce risk for the overall SBL effort. Finally, IRT-3 reiterated the need for a ground facility to provide end-to-end system checkout before launch, and that such a facility should be operational at least 2 years before planned launch.

Space S&T

The Air Force is committed to transitioning to a fully integrated Aerospace Force. Preparatory work in Science and Technology must lead the way. Building on the Air Force "Doable Space" Study, the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board (SAB) produced a detailed "Space Roadmap for the 21st Century Aerospace Force." In response to this and in preparation for the transition to an Aerospace Force, the Air Force S&T community has more than doubled its S&T investment in "space-only" technologies from about 13% in FY 1999 to 32% a year by FY 2005. This increase in investments is primarily focused in five areas: space-based radar, space-based lasers, reusable launch vehicles like the space operations vehicle, satellite survivability, adaptive optics, and hyperspectral imaging--all areas highlighted in the SAB Roadmap. Furthermore, AFRL, SMC, and AFSPC are working together more closely than ever through the Air Force's Modernization Planning Process to link S&T investments to mission needs.

As space technology requirements are growing, it is important to leverage all the S&T efforts of government and industry in development of space technology to avoid duplication and overlap. The Space Technology Alliance was founded to coordinate the development of affordable, effective space technology products among all space technology developers for the greatest return on investment of government technology funds. The STA is developing coordinated roadmaps which will increase leveraging.

The technology pipeline is bearing fruit. For example, miniaturization is an important ingredient of developing space technology and the Air Force is doing this across the board from microcontrollers that fit on postage stamps to Transmit/Receive Antenna Modules (TRAMs) that are 75% smaller than current state of the art and from phased array antennas to miniaturized on-board satellite natural space hazard alert warning systems. One of these systems is scheduled to fly on a Defense Support Program (DSP) mission. The pervasive impact of Air Force Space S&T is not always clear. For example, a majority of U.S. satellites (government and commercial) incorporate AFRL sponsored electronics technology.

The Air Force recognizes it is in the best interest of national security to have low cost reliable access to space. While NASA has the lead in developing reusable launch vehicle (RLV) technology efforts, the Air Force has been the lead for ensuring that technologies to support unique military requirements for reusable launch vehicles are developed. For example, the spaceplane includes the Space Operations Vehicle (SOV), an upper stage like the Space Maneuver Vehicle (SMV), the common Aero Vehicle, and the Modular Insertion Stage. The SMV is envisioned to be a reusable, unmanned orbiting vehicle with integral propulsion that completes an on-orbit mission, reenters the atmosphere and lands for retasking. On August 11, 1998, a 90% scale model SMV demonstrator made a very successful test at Holloman AFB, New Mexico. This unmanned vehicle demonstrated an autonomous, unpowered approach and landing following release from an Army helicopter 9,000 feet above the ground. As the next step in developing SMV technologies, the Air Force has partnered with NASA following their selection of Boeing's X-37 Advanced Technology Vehicle (ATV) as a NASA Future-X Pathfinder. The Air Force is investing $11.1M beyond the $5M from the FY98 funds to make the ATV more SMV-like (i.e., more militarily useful) by primarily increasing its ability to stay on orbit and to maneuver. We are also working plans for a second demonstration vehicle as directed in the FY00 appropriations act.

Discoverer II

Before I consider my unique NRO responsibilities, I would like to highlight our flagship program for black/white space integration. The Discoverer II program takes the concept of "Force Multiplier" to a new level by putting teeth in the front-end of the Find Fix Track Target and Engage (F2T2E) construct. Furthermore, it serves as a program for Air Force partnership with the NRO in space, leverages Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) expertise and investment in advanced sensor and information technologies, and directly integrates operational Army C4ISR assets for data exploitation.

The objective of this technology demonstration program is to establish the technical feasibility and affordability of a robust operational space-based Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI) and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imaging system. We envision such a system providing near-continuous global surveillance, reconnaissance, and precision mapping directly to the theater or joint task force commander. The Air Force, NRO, and DARPA jointly and equally funded the program in response to the Defense Science Board's recommendation to develop leading edge, higher-risk technologies to meet warfighters' needs at lower cost. The Army will contribute a tactical ground system and funding to integrate the system into the demonstration. The program is jointly managed and Air Force administered and is structured to provide for a phased decision process leading to launch and on-orbit demonstration in FY05. The on-orbit demonstration ends in FY05, at which point key decision-makers can make an informed decision for fielding an operational radar constellation that will support our troops in the 2010 timeframe. Assistant Secretary Larry Delaney and I are committed to the successful deployment of this revolutionary system.

NRO Initiatives and Partnerships

As Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, I direct vital national security space programs that are indispensable tools of U.S. global leadership. As I said earlier, much of what we do in the NRO must be discussed in closed session; however, I would like to address a few unclassified points. First is the area of partnerships. We are aggressively pursuing partnerships in operations, acquisitions, and R&D. In this era of tightened budgets, the nation cannot afford, nor should it accept, completely separate domains for intelligence, military, and civil space programs. Continued U.S. space dominance will rely on the successful collaboration between the NRO, Air Force, and NASA to deliver future space systems faster, better, and cheaper. The NASA Administrator, Dan Goldin, CINCSPACE, now Gen Eberhart, and I meet regularly to ensure we are exploring and implementing every opportunity for collaboration across our national, military, and civil space programs.

Operations Support

With the unequivocal support of General Eberhart, we will continue to provide "one stop-shopping" for the warfighter by fully coordinating "black and white" space operations. Combined national space capabilities are bearing fruit every day with proven results ranging from our nation's efforts in Kosovo to the skies over Iraq.

Training as we fight is one of our major requirements. Last year I requested your help in authorizing funds that were appropriated to expand our operational support activities. I would like to thank the committee for your action on this request. Your authorization of these funds has helped ensure our military customers are fully engaged in NRO programs. In fiscal year 1999, the NRO supported 39 military exercises of which, 34% were Joint sponsored, 24% were with the Air Force, 19% were with the Army, 12% were with the Marine Corp, and the remaining 11% were with the Navy.

The NRO has also partnered with the Navy in a joint program called "Quick Bolt". This Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) created with enthusiastic support from this Committee, uses National capabilities and infrastructure to support the suppression of enemy air defense. This ACTD, sponsored by the U.S. European Command, will integrate a miniaturized Trap Data Dissemination System (TDDS) receiver into an upgraded High Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) in order to provide the shooter with the latest tactical data prior to launching a missile. Quick Bolt will also integrate a low probability of intercept transmitter into the missile to report missile position and other battle damage indicators back to the shooter and to the theater in near real time.

Research and Development

In 1997, Major General Dick Paul, Commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory, Dan Goldin, the Director of NASA, and I created the Space Technology Alliance (STA) to coordinate the development of affordable, effective space technologies. This will allow us to avoid duplication of effort and ensure that we get the most out of our R&D funds. The program includes an exchange of personnel among the three agencies and biannual senior technology summits to review programs.

During the past year, the STA has kicked off a major effort to coordinate technology programs across the government in the area of space power, spectral imaging, large optics, advanced communications, and micro-satellites. A first-ever community technology roadmap for space power has been completed as well as a roadmap for spectral imaging. The space power roadmap has also been reviewed by industry while the spectral imaging is now being reviewed. We are well on our way to completing a community technology roadmap for large optics. These roadmaps, and the process by which they were created, have identified fruitful areas for collaborative efforts. They have also given the managers of technology programs a far more comprehensive picture of the R&D activities ongoing in their respective areas - allowing them to better plan their programs, and more effectively focus on the breakthrough mission enabling technology. In 1999, the NRO joined with the Air Force Research Laboratory, NASA, the Department of Energy, and Intel Corporation to develop a new radiation-hardened computer chip for space and defense applications. The chips will mark at least a 10-fold increase in processing capability over currently available radiation-hardened microprocessors at much reduced power consumption compared to the current Pentium design. If successful, this chip would allow the NRO to develop higher performance, smaller satellites that are resistant to the effects of radiation in space while providing enhanced information to our customers.

In an effort to create a foundation for identifying and investing in revolutionary new ideas and concepts, I have created the Director's Innovation Initiative. This is a program that awards small studies and initiatives of limited duration to "outside the box" thinkers using the Internet to solicit proposals. Our strategy here is to transform the few "golden nuggets" into future solutions. This year 523 respondents submitted ideas for further investigation. Of these, 58 were awarded small dollar contracts. For only a small investment, we have the potential to reap tremendous dividends.

The Air Force - NRO Integration Planning Group

The Air Force - NRO Integration Planning Group was established in June 1998 to find opportunities where cooperation will save taxpayer dollars or increase mission effectiveness. This small investment will pay huge dividends. They've spearheaded initiatives to operationalize tools that provide rapid precision targeting for our nation's most advanced weapons, share communications infrastructure to avoid redundancy, and increase awareness of exploitable national contributions to Air Force visions & needs. They're currently exploring the cost and capability benefits of multi-mission space systems and the possible efficiencies of acquiring these systems through a joint Air Force and NRO program office. A similar effort is also beginning between the NRO and the Navy.

Budgetary Stability

Through partnerships and investments, this nation is clearly positioned to continue its leadership role in space and is well on the way to achieving the vision of an integrated Aerospace Force. That is not to say, however, that the path will be easy. We must overcome important challenges to this vision. The primary challenge is funding.

We have demonstrated our commitment to space in our stable funding of key space programs and our increased investment in space-related technology. We've reached out to the rest of the government and to private industry to create relationships which increase our efficiency and effectiveness. Finally, we are looking hard at our own internal organization to ensure we are best positioned to exploit space and all that it offers the military and the nation. We do, however, need your help in providing robust, stable funding. We must be fiscally prepared to maintain the readiness and force structure required for today's needs while still preparing for tomorrow's challenges. With your strong support we can vigorously exploit the technologies required to create operational capability.

Conclusion

The Air Force and NRO are proud to be the nations leaders in military space operations and stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. In an environment of declining budgets we have consistently been able to deliver more bang for the buck. We are also working hard to deliver more breakthrough programs for the future. These investments in space programs and technology are a strategic investment for the national security of the United States. I ask that Congress support our efforts in space with a robust and stable budget that will allow us to maintain reliable support to our warfighters and to the nation. This Committee and the two Space Commissions have the opportunity to define our future roles and missions and establish the imperatives for 21st century space systems. I look forward to working with this Committee and the Commissions to chart a course for the future.

-------- us nuc facilities

Nuclear Arms Plant Sued
Workers Say Operator Lied About Blast Dangers

By Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2000; Page A27
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-03/31/110l-033100-idx.html

Eleven workers who became ill after a smoky 1997 nuclear weapons factory explosion are accusing plant contractors in a lawsuit of lying about the accident and deliberately blocking them from learning whether they had been exposed to deadly plutonium.

The suit, to be filed today in federal court, describes a string of missteps--from missing medical supplies to a doctor's refusal to perform routine screening tests--that workers say left them confused and frightened nearly three years after the accident at the U.S. Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Wash.

After complaining to managers, the workers allegedly were subjected to repeated vandalism and harassment, according to a draft of the lawsuit. One worker had medical records stolen from his house, and another found the plucked carcasses of crows in his front yard.

"These workers have to live with the illnesses they have, and with the uncertainty about the radiation that may be ticking away inside them," said Hugh Plunkett, a Minneapolis lawyer for the workers. "But when they tried to find out what was wrong they were literally treated like enemies of the state."

The civil suit accuses plant operator Fluor Daniel Corp. of fraudulently concealing details about the accident, and says the company's actions inflicted emotional distress and increased the workers' risk for developing cancers.

An independent medical investigation last year concluded the workers suffered from respiratory and skin ailments as well as genetic abnormalities "consistent with exposure . . . to low-level radioactive or radiomimetic chemicals." The finding prompted one female worker to abandon plans to have children, the suit says.

Fluor Daniel had not been served with the suit yesterday and declined comment on the allegations. Earlier investigations by state officials and the U.S. Department of Energy faulted the company for lapses in safety procedures, and prompted an apology to the workers two years ago by a top Fluor Daniel official.

The chemical explosion on May 14, 1997, occurred in a former plutonium processing facility within the sprawling Hanford complex, a 620-square-mile nuclear fuel factory that is now the site of the nation's costliest environmental cleanup. The plant is owned by the federal government; the workers are employees of Fluor Daniel.

The 11 workers were in nearby buildings at the time of the blast, but all were later engulfed in a plume of smoke and fumes that caused several to become immediately ill. Some developed blisters and others suffered nausea and headaches, the lawsuit says.

"The next day, I couldn't even get out of bed," Joe Hennessy, a former Hanford electrician who is one of the plaintiffs, said in an telephone interview. "We've all had a hard time, and some of us still are having problems."

But in the hours and days following the accident, company officials thwarted the workers' attempts to learn what they been exposed to, the lawsuit alleges. Some examples cited in the complaint:

* Soon after the blast, workers requested a "nasal smear" test, a standard procedure that can detect exposure to radioactive chemicals. But when workers reported to another building for testing, crucial testing materials were inexplicably missing from the supply cabinet. An inventory of the cabinet a week earlier had found it fully stocked.

* As a crude substitute for a normal nasal smear test, technicians obtained mucus samples from the workers using a pencil and medical gauze. Within hours, the workers and the public were told the tests showed no exposure to radiation. Yet, company officials later acknowledged the gauze samples had been locked inside a safe and never properly tested until a month after the incident, the suit contends.

* On the night of the accident, the workers were told to drive to a local hospital, where they were met by plant officials and doctors in radiation-protection gear. But despite repeated requests, the workers were refused blood and urine tests for radiation exposure. The next day, several workers sought the tests at a different clinic but were again refused.

"The contractors didn't want to know the truth and they made sure the truth was covered up," said Plunkett, the attorney. "Nothing else explains the total lack of follow-up for these people after their exposure."

-------- us military

[Federal Register: March 31, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 63)]
[Notices] [Page 17321-17322]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr31mr00-99]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 040-06394]

Consideration of Amendment Request for Decommissioning of Department of the Army , U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Depleted Uranium Study Area of the Transonic Range, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and Opportunity for a Hearing

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of consideration of amendment request for decommissioning of Department of the Army, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Depleted Uranium Study Area of the Transonic Range, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and Opportunity for a Hearing.

-----------------------------

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering issuance of an amendment to Source Material License No. SMB-141 (SMB-141), issued to the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground (the licensee), to authorize decommissioning of the Depleted Uranium Study Area (DUSA) of the Transonic Range at their facility in Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.

On December 15, 1999, the licensee submitted a Decommissioning Plan for the DUSA that summarized the decommissioning activities that will be undertaken to remediate the structures and areas of the surrounding soil at

[[Page 17322]]

Aberdeen Proving Ground. Some remaining structures and some areas of soil are contaminated with depleted uranium (DU) resulting from licensed operations conducted during the period 1973 to 1979.

The NRC will require the licensee to remediate the DUSA to meet NRC's decommissioning criteria, and during the decommissioning activities, to maintain effluents and doses within NRC requirements and as low as reasonably achievable.

Prior to approving the decommissioning plan, the NRC will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and NRC's regulations. Approval of the Decommissioning Plan for the DUSA will be documented in an amendment to License No. SMB-141.

The NRC hereby provides notice that this is a proceeding on an application for amendment of a license falling within the scope of Subpart L ``Informal Hearing Procedures for Adjudication in Materials Licensing Proceedings,'' of NRC's rules and practice for domestic licensing proceedings in 10 CFR Part 2. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.1205(a), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding may file a request for a hearing in accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(c). A request for a hearing must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of publication of the Federal Register Notice.

The request for the hearing must be filed with the Office of the Secretary either:

1. By delivery to the Docketing and Service Branch of the Secretary at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852- 2738; or

2. By mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Attention: Docketing and Service Branch.

In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR part 2 of the NRC's regulations, a request for a hearing filed by a person other than an applicant must describe in detail:

1. The interest of the requester in the proceeding;

2. How that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding, including the reasons why the requester should be permitted a hearing, with particular reference to the factors set out in 10 CFR 2.1205(g);

3. The requesters areas of concern about the licensing activity that is the subject matter of the proceeding; and

4. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is timely in accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(c).

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(e), each request for a hearing must also be served, by delivering it personally or by mail, to:

1. The applicant, Department of the Army, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21005-5066, Attention: David W. Ore, Site Manager; and

2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Executive Director for Operations, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

For further details with respect to this action, the decommissioning plan for building 611B is available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street N.W., Washington, DC 20555.

Dated at King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, this 21st day of March, 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Francis M. Costello, Deputy Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, RI. [FR Doc. 00-7965 Filed 3-30-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

--------us military

USA Today
03/31/00
http://usatoday.com/news/states/all50.htm

Delaware Dover - The discharge of Air Force Maj. Sonnie Bates, 35, was finalized at Dover Air Force Base. Bates' 14-year career ended because he refused to take the anthrax vaccine, officials said . Census - 50%; Wilmington 41%.

--------

Notes from the Pentagon.
Taiwan report held

March 31, 2000
Inside the Ring
Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough
http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring-2000331214310.htm

The Pentagon recently conducted an assessment of Taiwan's air defenses and graded as poor the island's ability to defend itself against Chinese aircraft and missiles.

A defense source said the report shows "Taiwan cannot defend itself from aerial threats."

The assessment made in February by military and civilian specialists is becoming a political football in the latest clash over Taiwan arms sales.

According to several U.S. officials, the report was initially unclassified but quickly stamped "secret" and kept from Congress. We are told that pro-Beijing officials in the Clinton administration have "perverted" its findings to bolster the Clinton administration's freeze on advanced arms sales to Taiwan, despite the buildup of Chinese offensive and defensive missiles opposite the island.

These officials say Taiwan's air-defense shortcomings mean it can't "absorb" newer or more modern air-defense weapons beyond its current arsenal of Patriot, HAWK and other anti-aircraft missiles.

Pentagon officials say the report shows the urgent need to provide more defense assistance -both hardware and training - to the Taiwanese.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, organized a group of seven congressmen who asked to review the Taiwan air-defense report. But the Pentagon thus far has said no. Mr. Rohrabacher Thursday asked the House Committee on Government Reform in a letter to subpoena the study.

Interagency discussions on Taiwan's requests for Aegis-equipped warships, anti-radar HARM missiles, long-range air-launched missiles and other weapons will begin in about a week, we are told. The talks are expected to be contentious.

Uplifting commandos

President Clinton took so many Air Force cargo jets and tankers on his recent South Asia trip that the commando community is starting to worry. Members wonder whether there will be too few planes left to take them to a crisis spot during a presidential trip.

The just-concluded India-Bangladesh-Pakistan-Oman-Switzerland jaunt required one-third of the Air Force's total cargo lift capacity. This comes at a time when the service is conducting a study expected to confirm it already has a shortage of strategic lift capability in relation to operational requirements.

"This is fundamentally causing the military to do more with less," an administration source tells us.

The 10-day trip required 177 strategic lift missions and a total of 460 mission launches. This number included the cargo jet missions (defined as going from point A to B and back to A) as well as flights by aerial refuelers and spare aircraft.

The service's Air Mobility Command at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois operates all the planes. But a spokesman said he is not allowed to comment on presidential travel. He referred questions about cost to the White House.

"I don't think we've got any kind of a final cost figure on the trips," said White House spokesman P.J. Crowley.

Outside experts expect the trip - Mr. Clinton's most costly - to hit taxpayers for $40 million to $50 million.

"Obviously there was a substantial investment of resources in support of the president's trip," Mr. Crowley said.

He said it required a larger number of long-range cargo jets because of the great distances traveled. Extra helicopters were also required because the infrastructure in the host countries was not conducive to road travel.

"This was a very complex trip of a scale that probably presidents don't do that often, and clearly it involved a substantial commitment of resources by the Air Force. They did a great job of supporting the president.

"That investment will yield handsome returns when you think of new trade possibilities, environmental improvements and progress on proliferation and security issues."

Illegal talks

President Clinton is violating another law - in addition to Privacy Act violations identified by a federal judge this week. The president stated in a report to Congress last week that his administration "is not implementing" a 1997 side agreement to the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. The certification allows the Clinton administration to spend money on ABM Treaty talks that began in Geneva last week. The ABM side agreement, called a memorandum of understanding, will add Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to Russia as the legal replacements for the defunct Soviet Union.

The agreement is viewed by critics as a deliberate White House trick to make formal ABM Treaty changes - like those permitting a national missile defense - more difficult. It would give Russia three additional votes in sessions of the Standing Consultative Commission (SCC) in Geneva, where ABM Treaty issues are discussed. The U.S. side has only one vote.

The White House, fearing it would be voted down, is refusing to submit the ABM memorandum of understanding on the successor states to the Senate for approval despite promising senators it would do so. Congress then passed a law last year prohibiting the administration from spending any money on the SCC talks until the president certifies the successor-states agreement is not being implemented.

Well, the secret instructions to U.S. negotiators at the Geneva talks, which began March 22, told American diplomats they may "negotiate, and may reach agreement with other SCC delegations on the text" of a missile-defense accord on testing interceptor missiles.

The instructions also tell U.S. delegates that by negotiating but not signing an agreement, they can avoid violating the law. The Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian and Kazakhstani sides will be told at the meetings that "it is the U.S. position that our efforts to ensure that the SCC agreements receive favorable advice and consent in the U.S. Senate could be undermined by giving our Congress the impression that their approval has been circumvented," according to the secret instructions.

State Department lawyers told White House arms-control specialist Steven Andreasen during a meeting March 20 that the latest Geneva talks would in fact be implementing the agreement, thus violating the law. Mr. Andreasen then accused them of "disloyalty to the president" and forced them to back down and approve the questionable certification to Congress.

A White House spokesman said "all agencies concurred" in the report to Congress.

"If the administration is negotiating with Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine over what will become binding agreements . . . it is implementing the MOU," said one official close to the dispute. "The administration's contention that withholding signatures from negotiated documents is sufficient to meet the law is likewise arbitrary and absurd."

Readiness uptick

A bit of good news on the combat readiness front.

Yes, the Army, Navy and Air Force are still struggling to find enough recruits. And yes, a spare-parts crisis persists, increasing the number of unusable aircraft cannibalized for gadgets

But the shortages of able-bodied men and women in front-line combat units is slowly being remedied.

The Army, for instance, reports a gap of 5,151 soldiers in its 10 active divisions totaling 161,204 personnel. That's down from 6,500 a few months ago.

Army officers said the improvement can be traced to a drive by Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, to man the 10 divisions at full strength.

"Shinseki wants them manned," said an officer. "I think the Army is doing better at moving people around. Just in talking with commanders in the field, he recognized that was a problem. He's going to make the war-fighting units the best they can be."

Among the hard-to-get specialties: fire-support artillerymen, wheeled-vehicles mechanics, fuel handlers, voice-intercept analysts and intelligence analysts.

Another officer said the goal is to have 10 divisions and two regiments fully stocked by Sept. 30. The rest of the operational Army would meet that goal by 2002 and the institutional Army a year later.

"We're having great difficulty meeting the chief's directives to fully man the force structure," this soldier said.

The Air Force is doing a better job of retaining critically needed pilots.

Air Force Secretary F. Whitten Peters said the service projected a 2,000-pilot gap by now, but it actually has a shortage of 1,200.

"Our enlisted retention rates for the last few months have been better than the same month last year," he said. "And indeed, in February, we retained almost 60 percent of our first-term airmen against a goal of 55 percent, and we retained almost three-quarters of our second-term airmen against a goal of 75 percent.