-------- NUCLEAR (by country)

-------- canada

Canada to fly in Russian plutonium for test

By Randall Palmer,
July 28 2000
Reuters
From: Ndunlks@aol.com

OTTAWA - The Canadian government said on Friday it plans to fly in a small test amount of Russian plutonium to burn in a nuclear reactor, with the goal of eventually helping Russia with its nuclear disarmament programme.

Plans for the controversial test have been blasted by environmentalists as turning Canada into a nuclear dumping ground and perpetuating the nuclear industry. Government ministers, on the other hand, have trumpeted the benefits of turning swords into ploughshares.

``These tests demonstrate Canada's commitment to nuclear disarmament,'' Foreign Minister Lloyd Axworthy said in a statement.

The original plan was to ship the fuel by sea, up the St. Lawrence Seaway, then by road to the Chalk River nuclear laboratories in eastern Ontario. But that plan was abandoned in the face of fierce opposition from communities en route.

``The...government is feeling the heat. The public is outraged,'' said Elizabeth May of the Sierra Club of Canada.

The idea now is to fly the plutonium unannounced on a chartered aircraft to a military base in Ontario or Quebec, then take it by helicopter to Chalk River in the northern Ottawa Valley, where it would be burned along with U.S. plutonium.

The Russian material will come in the form of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel, which is less than 5 percent plutonium oxide and the rest uranium oxide. The amount of Russian fuel to be flown will be only 14.5 kilograms (32 pounds) of MOX, including 530 grams (1 pound) of plutonium. Canadian officials assured reporters it would be as safe as black-box recorders that survive air crashes.

They said the MOX will have been turned into a ceramic, which cannot spill, ignite or burn except at very high temperatures. It will be encased in a sealed metal rod and transported in internationally approved containers that go through tests similar to those for aircraft flight recorders.

Eventually, it is possible Canada would burn Russian MOX fuel in larger quantities as Moscow dismantles its nuclear warheads, but Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale said this would require extensive regulatory approval first.

Russia has some 50 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium it has identified as excess, and the United States has 34 tonnes.

The test will burn U.S. MOX simultaneously to compare the two countries' fuel, but Goodale said U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson had said Washington would be able to take care of its own plutonium.

``Secretary Richardson has indicated to me that they would deal with their own plutonium, using their own procedures and their own facilities,'' Goodale told a news conference.

A small amount of U.S. MOX fuel was delivered in January. It went by land to Sault Ste. Marie in northern Ontario, then by helicopter to Chalk River. The surprise operation prompted a suit from the Sierra Club and other groups on the grounds that the public was not consulted.

Such fuel has not been approved for flight in the United States, but the Canadian government said it is flown in Europe six times a year.

MOX has been used commercially for years in Belgium, France, Germany and Switzerland but the tests in Canada will involve weapons-grade rather than reactor-grade plutonium.

The Sierra Club's May challenged the idea that the goal was disarmament since she said it was safer to vitrify -- turn the plutonium into a glassified mixture -- on site in Russia.

``The driver here is to prop up a dying nuclear industry which is run by the state,'' she said. ``It's not global peace and security.''

Western officials counter that it would be better to get the plutonium out of Russian hands as quickly as possible.

----

Canada Becomes a Pollution Haven for U.S. Hazwaste

By Neville Judd
July 28, 2000 (ENS)
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jul2000/2000L-07-28-10.html

OTTAWA, Ontario, Canada, The amount of hazardous waste imported by Canada from the United States has more than doubled in some provinces, according to figures released today. The figures reveal more hazardous waste is being dumped in landfills rather than being recycled.

Canadian Environment Minister David Anderson. (Photo courtesy Environment Canada)

The 1999 Canadian statistics on transboundary movements of hazardous waste prompted Environment Minister David Anderson to alert his provincial and territorial counterparts. Anderson wants strengthened provincial standards for all facilities that accept hazardous waste, including landfills.

"Canada does not want to become a pollution haven," said Anderson. "The continuing rise in imports of hazardous waste is raising questions of safety and responsibility."

Hazardous waste is made up of residues from industrial production - used solvents, acids and bases, leftovers from oil refining and the manufacture of chemicals, and metal processing residues. Common household products like car batteries and oil based paints are also hazardous once discarded.

Certain chemicals in many waste products make them potentially hazardous to human health and to the environment. Some can burn skin on contact, or cause long term health or environmental risks due to accumulation and persistence of toxics in the environment.

Unlike the U.S., which has banned the dumping of untreated hazardous waste in landfills, Canada permits such practice. This, combined with a weak Canadian dollar and the fact that U.S. companies face stricter legal liability for the wastes they generate, makes Canada a logical choice for American companies that want to get rid of hazardous waste.

Between 1998 and 1999 there was an 18 percent increase in imported hazardous waste into Canada - 663,000 tonnes as compared to 545,000 tonnes.

In 1998 nearly 60 percent of these imports were recycled. In 1999 only 40 percent of imports went to recycling operations. The trend of increasing imports for disposal, especially landfilling, is especially prevalent in the provinces of Quebec and Ontario.

Imports for disposal in Quebec went from 57,000 tonnes in 1998 to 151,000 tonnes in 1999. In Ontario, imports for disposal went from 174,000 tonnes to 240,000 tonnes. All other provinces combined accounted for less than one per cent of the total imports - 5,200 tonnes. About 80 per cent of that was recycled.

Common household products like car batteries and oil based paints are hazardous once discarded. (Photo courtesy United States Environmental Protection Agency)

Environment Ministry spokeswoman Johanne Beaulieu said the drop in recycling is partly attributable to the type of hazardous waste being imported. "In Quebec, for instance, we saw a lot more contaminated soil imported last year. You can't recycle that easily," she said.

Beaulieu added that it is not simply tougher standards in the U.S. that account for increased imports of hazardous waste to Canada. "The weaker Canadian dollar definitely helps imports, plus there is a lot more space available in Canada for landfilling."

Domestically, Canadians generate about six million tonnes of hazardous waste. Fifty-five percent of hazardous waste generated in Canada is destined for recycling. Canada exports about five percent of this amount.

Anderson wants domestically generated and imported hazardous waste to be pre-treated to render it safe, prior to final disposal. He plans to use strengthened provisions under the new Canadian Environmental Protection Act to enforce this.

But landfilling falls under provincial jurisdiction so Anderson must convince his provincial counterparts. "We must work with all provinces and territories so there is a concensus on how to deal with hazardous waste," said Beaulieu.

The new Canadian Environmental Protection Act requires that reduction plans be prepared for exports of waste sent for final disposal. It introduces an enhanced liability regime so that hazardous waste generators remain responsible for their waste even after it leaves their site.

While the new law does not mention banning untreated hazardous waste from landfills, Beaulieu pointed out that it provides the legal authority to impose such a ban.

Environment Canada's work with provincial and territorial governments on a strengthened regime will take place in the coming months and will be discussed at the next meeting of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment in the fall.

----

Nuclear waste to be flown, not shipped

Fri Jul 28 2000
Canadian Broadcasting
http://cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2000/07/28/plutonium_disposal000728

OTTAWA - Atomic Energy of Canada wants to fly some nuclear waste from Russia to Canada rather than send it by ship through the St. Lawrence seaway.

On Friday, it filed the proposal with Transport Canada. The plutonium from old warheads will be burned in a Candu reactor in Ontario.

"There is no greater risk to global safety than the existence of these weapons," Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale told a news conference on Friday.

"Until surplus weapons-grade plutonium is reduced to a form that cannot easily be used in nuclear weapons, there is that real danger of theft or proliferation," he said.

The plan involves flying 528 grams of plutonium to either Canadian Forces Base Bagotville in Quebec or to CFB Trenton in Ontario.

It will then be transferred by helicopter to Chalk River, Ontario.

Anyone who thinks that's a bad idea has until August 25 to file their objections. Some groups have already filed legal action in the case.

After that, Transport Canada will take a few weeks to assess public reaction before deciding whether to allow the flights

The U.S. and Russia signed a deal to destroy 34 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium. Canada agreed to burn some of the waste in a CANDU reactor to see whether it can be used as fuel.

In January, the U.S. shipped a load of weapons-grade plutonium. It was trucked to Sault Ste. Marie, Ont. and then flown to Chalk River. Critics were furious, partly because they had not been notified ahead of time.

Since then, the U.S. has decided it can dispose of the waste itself.

If the plan goes ahead, the plutonium will travel in the form of a metal alloy - as a pellet. Once it arrives at the Chalk River reactor, scientists will start test-burning the fuel.

-------- depleted uranium

Iraq says depleted uranium clean-up will cost $375 bln
The use of depleted uranium has caused pollution of the environment, soil, water and plant life and is at levels 10 times higher than normal, Iraq said.

July 28, 2000
AFP English

BAGHDAD - Iraq believes 375 billion dollars will be needed to remedy environmental damage caused by the United States and Britain's use of shells tipped with depleted uranium during the 1991 Gulf War, the official INA news agency reported Thursday. "The use of depleted uranium has caused pollution of the environment, soil, water and plant life and is at levels 10 times higher than normal," Iraq's UN ambassador Said Hassan was quoted as saying.

"Repairing that damage ... would cost around 375 billion dollars," he said.

Hassan said the United States and Britain had dropped 300 tonnes of depleted uranium shells on Iraq, which "is causing the deaths of 50,000 Iraqi babies a year." Depleted uranium is used to weight shells rendering them highly effective in piercing tank armour.

---

And who's going to pay for it? Here's the U.S. position...]

http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi://oma.eop.gov.us/2000/7/31/12.text.1

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary (Boston, Massachusetts)

For Immediate Release
July 28, 2000

TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE

July 28, 2000

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C.1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent the enclosed notice, stating that the Iraqi emergency is to continue in effect beyond August 2, 2000, to the Federal Register for publication.

The crisis between the United States and Iraq that led to the declaration on August 2, 1990, of a national emergency has not been resolved. The Government of Iraq continues to engage in activities inimical to stability in the Middle East and hostile to United States interests in the region. Such Iraqi actions pose a continuing unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For these reasons, I have determined that it is necessary to maintain in force the broad authorities necessary to apply economic pressure on the Government of Iraq.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

-------- france

Keep nuclear energy, experts tell French PM

By Bernard Edinger,
July 28 2000
Reuters
From: Ndunlks@aol.com

PARIS - Top scientists said on Friday the way to keep France's electricity bill at its lowest over the next half century was to continue relying on nuclear power, which already provides 80 percent of French electricity.

``Since the nuclear industry exists, it is clear it is in our economic interest to prolong it because the spendings are vastly compensated by the kilowatt hours received in return,'' said Bejamin Dessus, one of three scientists who presented Prime Minister Lionel Jospin with a government-commissioned report on the subject.

Dessus however added that ``while it is true that, on a strictly economic level, nuclear is best, there are also criteria of a political, environmental or societal nature which come into play.''

The scientists insisted at a news conference their report contained no specific recommendations but gave options aimed at enabling France's leaders to prepare for the future.

France currently depends more heavily on nuclear power for domestic energy than any other western European nation but opposition from environmental groups is strong. Public opinion is also more sensitive to nuclear safety than at any previous time.

Neighbouring Germany, which draws about 30 percent of its energy from nuclear power, has already decided to phase out its nuclear power stations with the last one to close in the mid-2020s.

One of the three French experts, Rene Pellat of the Atomic Energy Commission, told the news conference: ``France's nuclear power stations are safe but one can always do better.

``What the public is afraid of is nuclear waste but technological progress is being made in this field which will reduce the amount of waste though never entirely do away with it,'' Pellat said. ``One precent will always remain and what we need to do is to minimise its effects.''

Conclusions of the 300-page report spoke of keeping nuclear power stations operational for life spans of up to 45 years. The most modern French nuclear power stations are four years old.

The scientists said that technological progress was so swift and hard to predict it was difficult to calculate future energy needs. ``The estimates we have for 2050 run between 530 and 720 terawatts,'' Dessus said.

Uncertainty about the future was also tied to possible cooperation between European states in the energy field, the report said.

The scientists told reporters new choices would have to be made from around 2025 when entirely new sources of energy may have been discovered.

One conclusion they reached however was to repeat a basic tenet of French policy, which was to warn against dependency on oil for fear of being held hostage by oil producing nations for political or economic reasons.

France plunged headlong into nuclear power after the 1973 oil crisis born of that year's Arab-Israeli war, during which the public faced severe petrol shortages.

-------- japan

U.S. military PCB must to be disposed of at U.S. responsibility: governors

Fri, 28 Jul 2000
Japan Press Service jpspress@twics.com
JPS 07-121

TOKYO JUL 28 JPS -- Governors of 14 prefectures which host U.S. military bases had their annual meeting on July 28 and called for PCB (polychlorinated biphenyl) waste on U.S. bases to be disposed of at the responsibility of the U.S. government.

The governors have been demanding an "appropriate review" of the application of the Status of U.S. Forces in Japan Agreement (SOFA). This year they raised for the first time the issue of PCB waste.

They called for a proper way of the waste disposal and disclosure of information on the toxic waste inside the U.S. bases.

The request was also included in a petition to the prime minister and the nine relevant ministries and agencies.

The petition consists of 105 items such as concerning nuclear submarine accidents, low- altitude flight training, and night-landing practices (NLP).

--

JPS 07-122
Non-nuclear municipalities have national meeting

TOKYO JUL 28 JPS -- The 15th national assembly of municipalities which have declared themselves nuclear-free began in Nagasaki on July 27.

Nagasaki Mayor Iccho Ito in the opening address told the 260 participants from 129 self-governments that local governments should play their part in the effort to secure a concrete process leading to the abolition of nuclear weapons.

The number of local governments with non-nuclear declaration has grown to 2,514, by 15 from the last year, the secretariat of the council of non-nuclear municipalities said.

The assembly adopted a resolution, which said that they will make tenacious efforts toward the abolition of nuclear weapons and permanent peace in solidarity with the world's people and NGOs, which have expanding networks about problems of nuclear weapons.

They decided to send the resolution to the United Nations Secretary General, the ambassadors of India, Pakistan, and five nuclear weapons possessing countries, as well as the Japanese government. (end item)

-------- korea

Albright calls talks friendly but symbolic

July 28, 2000
Matthew Pennington
Associated Press
http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/friday/news_9328d1a06056a15200ee.html

Bangkok, Thailand --- Secretary of State Madeleine Albright held talks today with her North Korean counterpart, saying the meeting was friendly, but largely symbolic.

Albright said afterward that she learned little from Paek Nam Sun about the reclusive Communist country's reported intentions to curb its missile program.

''My meeting with Foreign Minister Paek constitutes a substantively modest but symbolically historic step away from the sterility and hostility of the past,'' Albright said.

Paek gave Albright no details of an offer made recently by North Korean leader Kim Jong-il to Russia's president to transform the North's missile program into peaceful efforts to launch satellites into space.

''I was direct in stating American concerns about the missile threat, nuclear weapons-related activity,'' Albright said.

Despite Kim's reaffirmation last month of a moratorium on long-range missile launches, his missile program has leaders on both sides of the Pacific jittery.

The United States still has 37,000 troops in South Korea.

U.S. officials have suggested that North Korea should only be allowed to launch satellites from neutral nations and be prevented from obtaining technology that could improve its missiles.

Still, both countries said today's meeting --- the highest-level talks ever between the U.S. and North Korea since the 1950-53 Korean War --- contributed to the thaw on the Korean peninsula, which began with last month's summit between the leaders of the two Koreas.

''I remain realistic in expectations and fully committed to coordination with our allies,'' Albright said. ''I'm also somewhat more hopeful than before for the long-term stability on the Korean peninsula and throughout the region.''

North Korea issued a statement saying the two sides conducted ''serious deliberations on the ways to normalize and expand'' relations and agreed that recent developments led to a ''positive atmosphere.''

Albright smiled and shook hands with Paek three times in front of television cameras, later describing him as ''very nice.''

''He said he had passed me last year at the General Assembly and we had not spoken to each other,'' she said. ''He did, however, tell me I looked younger this year.''

Before the talks, Paek was asked about news reports that North Korea would dispatch a high-level delegation to Washington to discuss improving ties.

The Americans have been seeking such an encounter, Paek said, ''but the atmosphere is not ripe yet.'' North Korea first wants the United States to end economic sanctions and remove it from the list of countries accused of sponsoring terrorism.

New Zealand, meanwhile, agreed today to normalize relations with North Korea and joins Canada in announcing diplomatic relations with the country this week. Foreign Minister Phil Goff said Paek reiterated North Korea's denial that it has nuclear weapons but told him there was ''no secret'' that missile systems had been developed.

''His response was also that this must be expected from North Korea given the fact that other countries also have missiles trained on his country,'' Goff said, adding that he urged North Korea to abandon them

----

U.S. Aid Policy to North Korea 'Naive', GOP Lawmakers Say

FoxNews,
July 28, 2000
http://www.foxnews.com/world/072800/nkorea_fnc.sml

If the Clinton administration considers North Korea a rogue nation soon capable of posing a dangerous nuclear threat, why does the United States continue to provide significant aid to the North Korean military?

That's the question being asked by congressional Republicans in the wake of a new GOP report that found that aid the U.S. supplies North Korea in the form of food and oil is being diverted to the military and used to fund the country's nuclear program.

Despite the Clinton administration's concerns that North Korea is a rogue nation which will one day be capable of delivering nuclear bombs by ICBM, the U.S. continues to provide them with significant aid in the form of oil and food.

The Clinton administration calls the aid it supplies to North Korea "constructive engagement," but according to the report — just released by the House GOP policy committee under the guidance of Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif. — there is evidence that North Korea is converting the oil into cash in order to fund military purchases, and that most of the food the U.S. supplies goes to the military.

The report also said the U.S. sends North Korea twice the amount of oil its economy needs.

Secretary of Defense William Cohen defended the "constructive engagement" policy Friday, saying the program was geared at curbing poverty and was largely successful in that effort.

"The basic purpose of the program is to prevent mass starvation. I believe it's been successful in doing that," Cohen said.

Over 1.5 million North Koreans are believed to have died over the last five years as the Stalinist regime has plunged deeper and deeper into recession and famine.

Cohen said news that some of those resources were being diverted to the military were not surprising given North Korea's political leadership.

"One cannot control with precision whether or not some of that hasn't been diverted to the military, but I think that's a reasonable expectation that they would seek to do so," Cohen said, adding that the military has been responsible for keeping the current regime in power.

"But I think overall the program has been successful in alleviating the suffering of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people in North Korea."

But Cox called the administration's view "naive" and said the report's other major finding — that the Clinton administration is assisting the government with the construction of several light-water nuclear power plants — was even more disturbing.

"The Clinton-Gore administration is proposing to build two light-water nuclear reactors for Kim Jong-Il," Cox said. "Of course the Clinton-Gore administration would never spend tax dollars to build nuclear power for Americans, but they are talking about two nuclear power plants in North Korea which, when they are completed, would provide enough plutonium for 60 bombs a year."

Cohen, however, refuted the allegations that the plants will help North Korea produce nuclear weapons.

"The judgment was made — and continues to have validity — that the program currently under way would not lend itself to creating nuclear materials for making nuclear weapons," Cohen said. "That was the purpose behind the program, and so we think that the agreed framework is the right one."

But Republicans claim the Clinton administration is continuing its "constructive engagement" policy even as the North Koreans fail to honor promises it has made to the U.S. The Clinton administration agreed to assist with the building of the plants in exchange for certain North Korean concessions, but congressional Republicans claim North Korea is not keeping up its end of the bargain — and that the U.S. should not be building up a country when it has so many grave concerns about its nuclear weapons program.

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright met with North Korean officials during an Asian summit in Bangkok, expressing U.S. concerns about the North Korean missile threat and nuclear weapon activity to North Korean foreign minister Paek Nam-sun.

Fox News' Brian Wilson contributed to this report.

----

Russia Assures U.S. on North Korea Missile Program

By Michael Richardson
International Herald Tribune
Friday, July 28, 2000
http://www.iht.com/IHT/TODAY/FRI/FPAGE/asean.2.html

BANGKOK - The United States has been assured by Russia that Moscow wants and expects to see North Korea halt its missile development program in exchange for launchings of North Korean satellites outside of the country, according to a senior U.S. official.

Strobe Talbott, the deputy secretary of state, said that ''explicit'' and ''unambiguous'' Russian clarifications had convinced President Bill Clinton's administration that what Moscow had in mind was a plan that could end the North Korean missile threat. But he said that the ''missing piece'' now was to get confirmation of an acceptable proposal from North Korea itself.

The U.S. secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, was to meet with North Korea's foreign minister, Paek Nam Sun, in Bangkok on Friday to seek such an assurance, U.S. officials said.

It will be the highest-level meeting ever between the United States and North Korea, and the first at the ministerial level.

''It is an introductory meeting,'' said Richard Boucher, a State Department spokesman, ''but also a historic one, and a chance to discuss the issues in our bilateral relationship as it is evolving.''

The U.S. Defense Department has warned that North Korea could develop long-range missiles by 2005 that could reach the United States.

This has fueled demands in Congress for development of a controversial shield against such missiles in the United States and in Asia - where it would be designed to protect U.S. allies, including Japan, and U.S. military forces stationed in the region.

The Chinese and Russian foreign ministers renewed their governments' strong criticism of the plan in an Asian security meeting in Bangkok on Thursday, said delegates to the closed-door meeting.

China's foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, said that the theater missile-defense program for Asia, which has yet to be approved by the United States or Japan, would undermine regional security.

Delegates said that China fears that such a program, which would use rockets to knock down incoming missiles, would neutralize the relatively small Chinese nuclear-missile force.

China also fears that a shield could be extended to protect Taiwan, which Beijing regards as a rebel province, delegates said.

Mr. Talbott, speaking after talks Wednesday in Bangkok with Igor Ivanov, the Russian foreign minister, said that the United States now had ''a quite clear idea of what's in the Russians' minds'' concerning the plan to halt the North Korean missile program.

Last week, President Vladimir Putin of Russia told leaders of the Group of Eight powers that during his recent visit to Pyongyang, Kim Jong Il, the North Korean leader, had offered to convert the program to peaceful satellite launchings. But it was not clear how this would be done, or who would pay for the launchings.

Mr. Talbott said there was concern initially that Moscow might provide North Korea with space-launch capability in North Korea.

''That would have been the opposite of helpful,'' he said. ''It would have contributed to the problem, not the solution.''

But Mr. Talbott said that high-level discussions with Russian officials over the past week had assured the United States that ''they have in mind what we would regard as moving this in a positive direction.'' He added that the United States regarded the North Korean missile program as ''a dangerous and destabilizing development,'' and wanted to see it ended permanently.

The United States would also insist that any satellite launches for North Korea outside the country should be strictly covered by international controls, Mr. Talbott said, to prevent the transfer of military technology to the North.

----

Koreas need to go with the flow

July 28, 2000
William J. Taylor
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/commentary-2000728152456.htm

If we accept the recent history that the Stalinist command economy of North Korea was in immediate trouble with the breakup of the former Soviet Union in 1989, we understand the general background of what is going on in North Korea now.

How badly North Korea was hurt by the loss of Soviet subsidies emerged in statements made to me by North Korea's President Kim, Il-sung in a three-hour private meeting that Charles Vollmer, president of VII Inc., and I had with him in June 1992: "The world is changing all around us with the collapse of the Former Soviet Union. For example, we have lost 100,000 metric tons of oil per year from Russia." He went on to explain that his country's industry was in great difficulty.

Other private conversations with senior North Korean officials in 1991 and early 1992, for example with Kim Yong-sun, secretary of the Central Committee of the Korean Workers' Party, led me to believe the two major North-South Korean agreements of 1991 (Non-aggression, Cooperation, Reconciliation and Exchanges) and early 1992 (denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula) were based on Pyongyang's understanding that there was no way out of its economic malaise except to move toward peaceful coexistence with Seoul. Those two years were full of promise in reducing the probabilities of a mutually devastating war on the Korean Peninsula.

All the good things turned sour with the growing "nuclear crisis" of 1993-94. U.S. policy toward North Korea went into great confusion. The White House sought a way out, but was stymied repeatedly by well-intentioned, but wrong, conservatives in the U.S. Congress who advocated a tougher policy of "carrots and sticks" toward Pyongyang, as if the government of North Korea were a mule. It would have been nice if those members of Congress had looked President Kim in the eyes, as I did, when he said, "We never respond positively to outside pressure."

Even during the crisis, Kim, Il-sung met with former President Jimmy Carter, then signaled to South Korea's President Kim Young-sam that he was prepared to hold a North-South summit - a signal interrupted by the sudden death of Kim Il-sung in summer 1994. The crisis subsided with the Nuclear Agreed Framework of October 1994.

Then, starting in 1995, Mother Nature began to compound North Korea's already severe economic problems with alternating floods and droughts, causing mass starvation. Food aid from South Korea, Japan, the United States, China and a number of nongovernmental organizations could only ameliorate, not eliminate, widespread famine. The situation in the North was becoming increasingly desperate for a regime determined to preserve itself in power. It should have become apparent to all observers that policies needed to be developed to prevent times of high North-South tensions.

A case in point was the North-South crisis generated in September 1996 by an incompetent North Korean submarine commander who crashed his vessel into the rocks during a routine infiltration mission. Such crises could lead to war by accident or miscalculation, the ways most wars have started. And, even though the U.S.-South Korean Combined Forces Command would quickly win a North-South war, it would be a Pyrrhic victory, given the terrible destruction the North would wreak on the South with conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction, many of them delivered by missiles against which there is no defense in the South.

Clearly, an alternative to "carrots and sticks" diplomacy was in order.

Enter the new president, Kim Dae-jung, of South Korea. His Inaugural address in February 1998 was a bombshell - the "Sunshine Policy" toward North Korea. This involved a strong defense; a pledge that the South did not seek to absorb the North; the separation of politics and economics; an offer to help North Korea rebuild its economic infrastructure; a stated objective of peaceful coexistence; an invitation for Free World nations to establish relations with the communist North, and more.

The Clinton administration bought the new approach and placed the highly respected, former Defense Secretary Bill Perry in charge of developing a new U.S. approach to North Korea. Mr. Perry quickly endorsed major aspects of President Kim's Sunshine Policy, wrapped them in the mantle of a comprehensive U.S. policy of Constructive Engagement, and began coordination with: (1) the U.S. Congress, (2) our allies South Korea and Japan and (3) the major powers in Northeast Asia we must deal with, China and Russia.

So where are we now? It is not post-hoc reasoning to suggest that the beleaguered North Korean leadership sees its only salvation in dealing with Kim Dae-jung, a leader whose Sunshine Policy has won the endorsement of every major actor in Northeast Asia, and a man they just may be learning to trust. How else explain North Korea's recent "Charm Offensive?"

Here is the recent record:

• A new search for normalized relations with several countries.

• The moratorium on missile testing, with a new hint North Korea may be willing to abandon its missile development program altogether.

• The historic North-South Summit last month with a five-part set of general agreements.

• Movement on visitations for separated families in the North and South.

• Agreements on North-South ministerial meetings; planned North Korean foreign ministerial meetings with South Korea, Japan and the United States next month.

• Proposed meetings of North-South legislators - and more. What next? The more difficult steps such as arms control, arms reductions, and confidence-building.

Three weeks ago in Seoul, I was privileged to have a 45-minute, one-on-one session with President Kim, the man who removed the veil from the eyes of the North's Chairman Kim Jong-il. He described his conversations at the North-South Summit in Pyongyang, noting that he found Chairman Kim a reasonable man with whom he could do business, a man who changed his mind on some issues when presented new facts or concepts. A careful and thoughtful leader, President Kim cautioned against euphoria but clearly displayed cautious optimism about the new diplomatic process in Northeast Asia.

After a decade and several crises, Pyongyang is ready to deal again. How should we proceed from here? Steady as she goes. Don't rock the boat. Go with the flow.

William J. Taylor is senior adviser for international security affairs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

----

U.S. Hustling to a New Beat in Asia
N. Korea's Diplomatic Debut Sparks a Race for Regional Influence

By Doug Struck
Washington Post
Friday, July 28, 2000; Page A01
http://search.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/2000-07/28/183l-072800-idx.html

BANGKOK, July 28 (Friday)-North Korea's emergence from diplomatic isolation is creating a new political and security environment in East Asia, setting off a scramble for influence by Asian powers and the United States that may diminish America's role, foreign policy analysts say.

The changes could increase pressure on the United States to scale back its troop presence in the region and drop plans for a national missile defense system, according to the analysts.

Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright arrived belatedly today for a regional security forum to find a virtual coming-out party for North Korea, as other countries lined up to establish new ties with Pyongyang's Stalinist government.

Her rushed trip to Bangkok to meet with the North Korean foreign minister--she was delayed because of the Israeli-Palestinian summit at Camp David--was seen as a sign that Washington is trying to catch up with events in which North Korea, Russia, South Korea and China have taken the lead.

"There's a lot of people who are enjoying the sight of Washington being left behind," said Kim Hyung Kook, a scholar at American University who is currently studying in Seoul.

Already the rapprochement between the two Koreas is fueling calls in South Korea for a reduction of the 37,000 U.S. troops stationed there. Moscow and Beijing are looking to expand their presence in the region, taking advantage of past or present friendship with North Korea. And North Korea's reported willingness to stop building ballistic missiles could eliminate the threat cited most often by the United States as a reason for going ahead with its plan for a controversial national missile defense system.

Albright is expected to meet here this afternoon with North Korean Foreign Minister Paek Nam Sun to try to learn more about Pyongyang's offer--made during a recent visit to North Korea by Russian President Vladimir Putin--to give up its missile program in return for international help in launching scientific research satellites. It will be the first meeting by a U.S. secretary of state with a North Korean foreign minister since the Korean War armistice nearly a half-century ago.

Whether Pyongyang's offer to abandon its missile program turns out to be genuine or an enigmatic ploy by North Korean ruler Kim Jong Il, it has served to illustrate that the United States must now share control of the agenda in the region.

"North Korea has changed the diplomacy," said Masao Okonogi, a professor of international relations at Japan's Keio University. "The North Korean leadership is now searching for new relationships."

North Korea's diplomatic openings--it was recognized most recently by Canada on Wednesday--have been publicly applauded by friends and foes as a step toward a less dangerous world.

A senior Clinton administration official said the latest turn of events in northeastern Asia marks a vast improvement over the situation before North Korea's emergence, even if Beijing and Moscow are taking advantage of the new conditions.

"I regard this as a high-class set of problems to have," the official said. Much more worrisome difficulties would include North Korean missile tests, terrorist threats and tensions along the highly militarized border between North and South Korea.

"When your focus becomes how do you work most effectively to deal with a situation that is finally moving in the right direction to produce outcomes all of us want, that is the kind of problem I'd like to have every day," he said. If Russia or China can persuade North Korea to give up its missile program, "God bless them," the official said.

Given the strong U.S. military presence in the region, North Korea's need for a vast infusion of foreign capital over the next 20 years, and close U.S. ties to South Korea and Japan, he said, "I have no concern that the U.S. is going to be marginalized in this whole process."

Beneath the official commendations for North Korea is a swirl of conflicting interests and pointed rivalries. Japan, like the United States, worries about the cost of realignment in the region. It faces demands by North Korea for an apology and reparations for its long occupation of Korea, which ended with the Japanese surrender in World War II.

The two Koreas have much to gain or lose. North Korea desperately needs economic help, but fears political instability if its repressed citizens see the prosperity outside its borders. South Korea, anxious to answer its public's longings for a reunited nation, could raise unrealistic expectations.

"It's a risky business," said American University's Kim. "Almost every country has some reservations about this. But for now, everyone is clapping their hands. The environment will be different in a few months."

The United States remains the chief power broker in the region and the focus of Pyongyang's foreign policy. Despite the belligerence that earned it the label of "rogue state," North Korea has long sought to achieve greater recognition from Washington.

But Pyongyang's remarkably successful diplomatic offensive, capped by the historic summit between North and South Korea last month, has brought the interests of other countries in the region into play.

China sees itself as a main beneficiary of the rapprochement between the two Koreas. For the first time in years, China took an active role in a diplomatic development, facilitating secret talks between the two Koreas in Shanghai and Beijing before last month's summit and hosting Kim Jong Il on his first reported trip outside North Korea in more than a decade.

Russia was close behind with Putin's high-profile visit to Pyongyang earlier this month and the announcement this week that Kim will reciprocate with a trip to Russia.

Both China and Russia are particularly interested in the opportunity to undercut the rationale behind the U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) being considered by President Clinton, which they see as threatening the effectiveness of their nuclear arsenals. By helping promote the image of a less-threatening North Korea, they nourish the opposition to NMD, which envisions placing 100 interceptor rockets in Alaska.

"With North Korea opening to the outside world, China is in a stronger position to say that argument does not make sense," said Li Yihu, a professor of international relations at Beijing University.

For Moscow's part, "It has long been a position of Russia that before trying to do something unilaterally in missile defense, we should try and find a diplomatic solution" with North Korea, said Russian foreign policy analyst Andrei Kortunov. "If these leaders are reasonable, why bother spending all this money on a system which is so irritating to all of us?"

More broadly, a Korean rapprochement facilitated in part by Beijing helps to increase China's influence in northeastern Asia. Chinese officials were proud of their work in helping to put the summit together, they said, and several noted the absence of U.S. and Japanese influence.

"It was palpable in Washington that the U.S. was an outsider during the summit," said Bates Gill, an expert on Asian security at the Brookings Institution in Washington. "All of this unfolded, and the Americans were in the peanut gallery. This obviously pleases the Chinese."

Russia may also be seeing improved relations with North Korea as part of a larger foreign policy strategy to create what officials there like to call a "multi-polar world." This strategy seeks to cut American hegemony, in part by building up ties to countries that are out of favor with the West, such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran.

However, not everyone in Russia supports such a strategy, and Putin himself seems to vacillate between it and a more overtly pro-Western approach. For Russia, the opening to North Korea marks an important shift in its approach to Asia and the Korean peninsula, a byproduct of the leadership change from Boris Yeltsin to Putin last Dec. 31.

Yeltsin led Russia away from Pyongyang in the early years after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Because of his "flamboyant anti-communism," Yeltsin was allergic to the isolated regime, Kortunov said. Putin "clearly realizes his predecessor overdid it," and he wants to try to regain lost influence, the analyst said.

For the United States, while a diplomatic solution to the long-festering hostilities on the Korean peninsula has many benefits, it also involves risks. Even the whiff of peace has pumped up latent U.S. opposition in Seoul and brought more calls for the United States to reduce its troop presence.

America wants to keep the 37,000 troops in South Korea, and another 47,000 stationed in Japan, to maintain its interests and authority in the region. Privately, other countries in the region--by some reports, even North Korea--agree the U.S. presence is needed as a guarantee against a flare-up of old power struggles.

Japan, for its part, is not so eager to join the rush to embrace North Korea. A reduction of the threat by North Korea, which spooked Japan by test-firing a missile over Japanese territory in August 1998, would be most welcome. But unless North Korea reveals the fate of a dozen or more citizens the Japanese government says were kidnapped, the Japanese public will not be inclined to support better relations.

South Korea risks public opinion problems of an opposite kind. The summit brought a wave of euphoria to the country, and unless continued diplomacy brings tangible results toward unification, expectations may turn to discouragement.

Even North Korea plays a risky game. Its diplomatic offensive is its only alternative policy. With few allies and no patrons and its economy and agriculture in virtual collapse, North Korea lacks the resources to continue its revered policy of juche, or self-reliance.

It is unclear why Kim finally acted now, after clinging to isolation through years of famine. Some believe he had finished consolidating his power and feels free to act; others say the internal situation was so bleak that he finally had to make a move.

In opening more to the outside, North Korea seeks food, trade, investment and other aid. But this, too, carries risks. The regime has long sealed its borders and tightly controlled its citizens for fear that contact with "the outside" would put North Korea's borders on the same path as the Berlin Wall.

Correspondents David Hoffman in Moscow and John Pomfret in Beijing, and staff writer Steven Mufson in Washington contributed to this report.

North Korea: Stepping Out
Since North and South Korea promised last month to end a half-century of Cold War hostility, the communist North has begun to emerge from decades of international isolation. As Pyongyang opens or broadens contacts with a number of countries, different historical and security issues are at stake.

UNITED STATES
For decades, the overriding concern about North Korea has been its programs to develop nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of reaching Alaska. It is this danger that Washington has touted most prominently as the justification for building a limited missile defense system. The issue may come up during a planned meeting today between Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright and her North Korean counterpart, Paek Nam Sun.

RUSSIA
After the collapse of Communist rule, Russia and North Korea had become estranged until President Vladimir Putin's recent visit

to Pyongyang. Putin disclosed a North Korean offer under which it would halt its ballistic missile program if other nations would help it launch satellites for scientific research. While Putin has emphasized the offer, U.S. officials have reacted cautiously.

JAPAN
While remaining wary of mending ties, Tokyo will resume talks with Pyongyang next month. Among the prominent issues are North Korea's demand for huge reparations for Japan's 1910-45 occupation and widespread public anger in Japan over kidnappings by North Korean agents of Japanese citizens of Korean origin.

NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT
North Korea has been suspected of developing weapons-grade material based on Soviet-design nuclear reactors. In 1994, North Korea agreed to freeze its nuclear program at Yongbyon complex. In return, the United States and its allies agreed to supply two light-water reactors. Building of the first reactor has been delayed since 1998, when North Korea test-fired a ballistic missile over Japan.

Development of long-range ballistic missiles

Nodong
Range: 620 miles

Taepodong
Range: More than 1,250 miles

Taepodong II
Range: 2,500 to 3,700 miles

Two Koreas at a Glance

South Korea
Population 46.4 million
Government Democracy with a directly elected president.
Economy An export-driven economy, selling electronics, machinery, ships, cars, textiles and steel.
Annual income per person $13,280 (adjusted for purchasing power).
Military 690,000 troops; 37,000 U.S. troops.
Defense budget $13.2 billion in 1999. South Korea has missiles with a range of up to 155 miles but is seeking longer-range missiles from the United States.

North Korea
Population 21.4 million
Government One of the last centrally run communist states.
Economy Floods and general economic decline have caused widespread famine. The economy has been kept afloat by military sales and illegal drug trafficking.
Annual income per person Estimated at less than $900 per person (adjusted).
Military 1.1 million troops.
Defense budget $1.3 billion in 1999. North Korea produces and is capable of using short-range missiles that can reach all of South Korea.

SOURCES: State Department, Department of Defense, U.S. Institute of Peace, staff reports

-------- libya

Libyan nukes

July 28, 2000
Inside the Ring - Notes from the Pentagon.
Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough
http://www.washtimes.com/national/inring-2000728214120.htm

The government of Libya is wasting no time in taking advantage of the U.N. decision last year to lift a seven-year embargo against the North African state. According to sensitive U.S. intelligence obtained by the U.S. National Security Agency, Libya last month went shopping for nuclear weapons components. And a company in Malta is ready to oblige, offering to sell "hundreds" of items of nuclear weapons-related equipment, along with scientific data, to Libya's Tajura nuclear research facility, about 10 miles down the road to the east from the Libyan capital of Tripoli. A report two years ago by the Center for Strategic and International Studies stated that Libya sought a development and production capability for nuclear weapons but had shown little progress. The report stated that Libya "continues to train nuclear scientists and technicians abroad." The nuclear acquisition efforts followed recent intelligence reports on Chinese-Libyan cooperation on missile development and official U.S. protests to Beijing over the sharing.

-------- russia

U.S. Negotiator Warns Russia Must Get Help to Transform Plutonium

Jul 28, 2000
Agence France Presse
http://www.russiatoday.com/news.php3?id=183480

PARIS, Europe and Japan must provide Russia with financial and technical aid to recycle its stocks of military plutonium or international security will face grave risks, said a senior U.S. official here Thursday.

"If Russia's program does not receive sufficient support, the clock on nuclear disarmament will be set back," Michael Guhin, a U.S. representative in the nuclear disarmament talks, told a Paris press conference.

"Large amounts of weapon-grade plutonium would likely be retained indefinitely, providing a ready source to rebuild cold-war arsenals or to tempt the hand of terrorists or states."

The United States and Russia have agreed to destroy 34 million tons of military plutonium each, a 20-year operation which will cost Russia two billion dollars and the United States three billion dollars, said Guhin.

"And if Russia's program fails, the U.S. program will not go forward," warned Guhin.

Russia plans to transform the plutonium into a fuel, called MOX, which can be used in specially adapted nuclear power stations. Once the plutonium has been used as fuel it can no longer be used for military purposes.

"This program won't succeed without major contribution from Europe. The program needs Europe and Japan, (...) technically and financially. We want to spread the burden as wide as we can. (...) but the big contributors will be G7," he continued.

"Can we expect Russia to cover its own cost? The answer is no. They will make sizeable contributions. Can private funding make the difference? Again the answer is no. MOX fuel is not competitive in today's uranium market.

We will have to make a multilateral agreement," Guhin said.

"Who benefits from the program? Every country that cares about arms control," he added.

Commenting on support for the disarmament program at the recent Group of Eight (G8) summit in Nago, Japan, Guhin said the next G8 summit in Genoa, in July 2001, will be crucial to the program.

"This a first step," he said, "By next year, the Genoa summit, we will have developed an international financing plan for the Russian program. That negotiation will be far more intense than the one we have been going through."

The United States plans to eliminate its military plutonium stocks partly by transforming it into MOX fuel and burying the rest in underground sites.

----

Planned reform of Russian missile forces criticized

July 28, 2000
Interfax News Agency
http://www.flatoday.com/space/explore/stories/2000b/072800a.htm

MOSCOW (Interfax) - The plan for reforming Russia's strategic nuclear forces as recommended by Chief of the General Staff Anatoly Kvashnin could result in the country losing its position as a nuclear superpower, warns Sergei Rogov, Director of the U.S. and Canada Institute.

The Kvashnin plan undermines Moscow's position in strategic offensive and defensive weapons talks and "dramatically increases the efficiency of the planned U.S. national missile defense (NMD) system," Rogov offers in an article headlined "Strategic Capitulation" published in Wednesday's edition of Nezavisimaya Gazeta. Kvashnin is advocating the elimination of the country's strategic missile forces by scrapping its mobile missiles and reducing the number of intercontinental ballistic missiles to 100, he says.

If the Kvashnin plan is approved, the Russian strategic nuclear force, as early as sometime in this decade, will consist of as few as 100 single-warhead ICBMs, eight to 110 strategic submarines carrying a total of 160 to 200 missiles and 60 to 70 strategic bombers, Rogov writes. This "unilateral reduction of the Russian nuclear forces would allow the Pentagon to plan a preventive strike without fear of a retaliatory nuclear strike," he argues. "It would be sufficient for the United States to have just two submarines patrolling off Russian shores to destroy in one salvo 100 Russian ICBMs and a score of submarines and heavy bomber bases."

Because incoming U.S. missiles would hit their targets within 10 minutes, "Russia could prove incapable of striking a retaliatory blow before or after the U.S. strike," Rogov writes. If the Kvashnin plan is implemented and the U.S. NMD is more efficient than it is announced to be, "the Russian nuclear potential may be thoroughly neutralized."

"If Russia announces deep unilateral cuts in its strategic weapons, the United States will not be encouraged to reciprocate and any violations of the ABM Treaty will be given a green light," Rogov continues in his piece. Conversely, the threat of a rapid buildup of the Russian strategic nuclear forces "would most probably strengthen the hand of NMD opponents both in the United States and among its allies. That would consolidate the Russian positions in the talks with the United States on START III and the ABM Treaty."

Rogov calls for announcing a program of testing Topol-M missiles with warheads to make it clear to Washington that Russia is prepared to act swiftly to maintain strategic balance.

The Kvashnin reforms could also deprive Russia of advantages over other nuclear powers such as China, Britain and France, Rogov concludes. What is important is that "Russia is dependent on its nuclear arsenal more than other countries, because the might of its conventional forces has dropped dramatically following the disintegration of the USSR," while the conventional forces of the countries and coalitions on the country's western borders are many times stronger than Russia's, he writes.

----

Lower Status for Russia Rocket Force 'Unavoidable'

July 28, 2000
By Reuters
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-arms-ru.html

MOSCOW (Reuters) - A senior general said on Friday a reduction in the status of Russia's nuclear forces was unavoidable under proposed military reforms but that did not necessarily mean their deterrent role was about to be eroded.

Colonel-General Valery Manilov, first deputy chief of General Staff, told foreign correspondents the Kremlin's Security Council would meet in early August to discuss plans for the next phase of defense reforms first started in 1997.

``This is not a simple question but it did not crop up just yesterday and there is no doubt it'll be solved,'' Manilov said.

Russian media have made much of an unusually public rift between Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev and Chief of General Staff Anatoly Kvashnin over the proposals, which cover all the armed forces but include important changes for the Strategic Rocket Forces.

Sergeyev, who ran missile units during the then-Soviet Union's nuclear superpower days, favors holding on to the Strategic Rocket Forces as a fourth branch of the armed forces alongside the army, navy and air force.

Last month, Kvashnin proposed cutting the size of the rocket forces and placing them under air force command. He wants more of the scarce military funding to go on conventional forces.

Manilov denied there was a rift between Kvashnin and Sergeyev, noting the proposals had been drawn up by a special Defense Ministry commission and not just the General Staff. He said Kvashnin's comments had been from a jointly prepared text rather his own personal proposals.

SIMILAR TENSIONS DURING EARLIER REFORMS

But Manilov said: ``It is unavoidable, logical and objectively the case that...the Strategic Rocket Forces must become part of one of the new branches of the armed forces under a three-prong structure.''

He said this did not necessarily mean the missile forces would be reduced in size but that there would be a reallocation of funds toward conventional forces and air- and sea-based nuclear missiles and away from ground-based missiles.

``This is not about the liquidation of the rocket forces,'' Manilov said. ``It is a logical development under which all forces, means and resources have to be consolidated in the three branches.''

There were similar tensions in the military when Russia merged its air defense forces with the air force under the first wave of reforms.

But these strains are more serious as they have brought into the open long-rumored differences between Sergeyev, who is over retirement age, and the younger, ambitious Kvashnin.

Manilov noted the three-branch structure was spelled out in Russia's security concept and military doctrine, which President Vladimir Putin has approved.

The Security Council, which advises Putin and has become even more influential since he took over from Boris Yeltsin on New Year's Eve, is expected to examine the military proposals and choose the most appropriate options in various areas, including nuclear missiles.

The military budget was about $4.5 billion, a fraction of the U.S. defense budget, he said, adding the government had yet to fulfil a pledge to give 3.5 percent of gross domestic product to the military because of the country's economic problems.

As in earlier comments to Interfax news agency on Friday, Manilov took a swipe at NATO's own strategic doctrine, yet said there was scope for cooperation with the alliance.

On U.S. plans for a possible national missile defense system against rogue rocket attacks, Manilov repeated Russia's view it could spark a new arms race. He also said unspecified ''terrible'' types of weapons could be developed in retaliation.

-------- u.s. nuc facilities

NUCLEAR REGULATORS WANT BOOSTED SAFETY FROM FUEL MAKERS

July 28, 2000 (ENS)
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jul2000/2000L-07-28-09.html

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is changing its regulations to increase confidence in the safety margins for facilities that possess and process large quantities of certain types of uranium and plutonium. The changes require licensees to analyze their operations to identify potential accidents, and take actions to reduce the likelihood and effects of those postulated accidents, depending on their consequences. Under the new regulations, licensees must develop a plan for performing their safety analysis within six months of the rule's effective date, and the analysis must be completed within four years.

Such an analysis should identify:

plant and external hazards and their potential for causing accidents potential accident sequences and their likelihood and consequences structures, systems, equipment, components and activities of personnel relied on to prevent or mitigate potential accidents at the facility.

Licensees also must establish a safety program that provides protection against accidents that could result in release of radioactive materials or certain hazardous chemicals in excess of NRC standards. The changes were prompted by an NRC review conducted after a fuel fabrication facility had a near criticality incident - an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction - in May of 1991. As a result of that review, NRC took steps to improve licensee safety programs, event reporting and regulatory guidance. The new rules would apply to existing fuel fabrication facilities and a planned future mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility.

The text of the revised regulations is available at: http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/CFR/PART070/index.html

-------- florida

Fla. Militia Leader Sentenced

Friday July 28
By PAT LEISNER,
Associated Press Writer

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) - A Florida militia leader was sentenced Friday to five years in prison for plotting terrorist attacks on power plants and government offices.

Donald Beauregard, 32, a general in the group called the Southeastern States Alliance, had plotted to steal explosives from a National Guard armory and blow up power plants to paralyze central Florida and Atlanta with blackouts, federal agents said.

Agents said he had planned simultaneous attacks to be carried out on power lines and utility towers feeding Atlanta and St. Petersburg, including bombing the Crystal River nuclear plant 90 miles north of Tampa Bay.

The fact that the acts were never carried out was not because the plan was abandoned, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Kunz told the judge. ``Mr. Beauregard was a general of the SSA. He was in charge,'' Kunz said.

Beauregard, a manager of a Hickory Farms store in St. Petersburg, was arrested in December and pleaded guilty March 10 to one count of conspiracy to degrade government property, destroy energy plants and provide material support for terrorists.

Defense attorneys argued unsuccessfully for a shorter sentence than the maximum five years, contending that Beauregard was impressionable and easily led.

But U.S. District Judge Richard Lazzara said: ``He was clearly contemplating crimes of terrorism. There is no question he was engaged in activity that posed a serious threat of violence.''

According to the indictment, Beauregard's militia activity dates back to 1995.

The indictment described the Southeastern States Alliance as a group created to perform violent, retaliatory acts against government facilities and personnel. Federal agents don't give locations of its groups but say meetings took place in Alabama, South Carolina, North Carolina, Kentucky and Florida.

-------- idaho

Wildfire Nears Idaho Nuclear Facility

Associated Press
07-28-00
From: Ndunlks@aol.com

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) - The nation's worst fire season in four years grew worse Friday as an 18,000-acre blaze near the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory forced hundreds of evacuations.

Some 1,800 employees were ordered out of three buildings at the sprawling eastern Idaho complex as a precaution, said Jason Bohne, a lab spokesman. There were no injuries.

No widespread damage has been reported at the 890-square-mile facility, but Bohne said a small fire ``went into'' a reactor test area before it was contained.

The blaze, which began Thursday and was fanned by 28-mph wind gusts, is the third to threaten a facility with nuclear material in as many months. Fire struck the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in May and a huge fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation in southeastern Washington last month.

Both raised concerns about the release of radioactive material, from rain washing contaminated soil into New Mexico's streams to airborne particles in Washington state. Federal officials have said there has been no danger, though air samples showed an increased - but not harmful - concentration of plutonium in public areas outside the Hanford reservation. Idaho lab officials said tests were being performed.

There were also evacuations in California, where a fire has blackened 19,000 acres of the Sequoia National Forest, creeping up to several homes on the forest's borders early Friday. More than 100 residents were forced to evacuate the area 120 miles north of Los Angeles. No injuries have been reported.

``This fire has shown extreme behavior,'' Forest Service spokesman Tony Diffenbaugh said.

The fire season is the worst since 1996. More than 59,000 fires have burned 3 million acres, according to the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise. Four years ago, the total was 3.1 million acres by this date.

For the first time since then, the fire center has called in Army soldiers for training and eventual posting on the fire lines. Elite hotshot firefighting crews, air tankers and helicopters are in big demand.

Firefighters, meanwhile, have made progress against two huge fires in Colorado and Montana.

In Mesa Verde National Park, Colo., a 40-mile fire line was keeping a 23,000-acre wildfire from spreading. The fire in the nation's largest archaeological preserve was 70 percent contained late Thursday, fire spokesman Bobby Kitchens said.

Park Superintendent Larry Wiese said the park could reopen next week. Its well-known attractions - Balcony House, Cliff Palace, Spruce Tree - have not been damaged.

Firefighters also were inching toward containing the Cave Gulch Fire, which has burned about 17,500 acres east of Helena in Montana's scenic Canyon Ferry Lake region. About 300 families have been forced to evacuate the area because of that blaze and one nearby.

The fires have also destroyed 36 buildings, including nine houses.

On the Net:
National Interagency Fire Center sites: http://www.nifc.gov and http://www.nifc.gov/news/nicc.html
Mesa Verde National Park: http://www.nps.gov/meve

----

Idaho fire threatens nuclear facility

Friday, July 28, 2000
By Associated Press
http://enn.com/news/wire-stories/2000/07/07282000/ap_idafire_15160.asp?P=1

The nation's worst fire season in four years grew worse today as yet another of the nation's nuclear facilities was threatened and hundreds were evacuated.

The 18,000-acre blaze near the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory began Thursday and was fanned by 28 mph wind gusts.

Some 1,800 employees were ordered out of three buildings at the sprawling eastern Idaho complex as a precaution, said Jason Bohne, a lab spokesman. There were no injuries.

No widespread damage has been reported at the 890-square-mile facility, but Bohne said a small fire "went into" a reactor test area before that section of the fire was contained. The fire affected only a grassy section of the fenced-in area and did not damage any buildings.

Ellen Doherty, a spokeswoman for INEEL, said the larger fire was "stable" but not contained late Thursday.

The blaze is the third to threaten a facility with nuclear material in as many months. Fire struck the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in May and a huge fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation in southeastern Washington last month.

Both raised concerns about the release of radioactive material, from rain washing contaminated soil into New Mexico's streams to airborne particles in Washington state.

Federal officials have said there has been no danger, though air samples showed an increased - but not harmful - concentration of plutonium in public areas outside the Hanford reservation. Idaho lab officials said tests were being performed.

There were also evacuations in California, where a fire has blackened 19,000 acres of the Sequoia National Forest, creeping up to several homes on the forest's borders early Friday. More than 100 residents were forced to evacuate the area 120 miles north of Los Angeles. No injuries have been reported.

"This fire has shown extreme behavior," Forest Service spokesman Tony Diffenbaugh said.

The fire season is the worst since 1996. More than 59,000 fires have burned 3 million acres, according to the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise. Four years ago, the total was 3.1 million acres by this date.

For the first time since then, the fire center has called in Army soldiers for training and eventual posting on the fire lines. Elite hotshot firefighting crews, air tankers and helicopters are in big demand.

Firefighters, meanwhile, have made progress against two huge fires in Colorado and Montana.

In Mesa Verde National Park, Colo., a 40-mile fire line was keeping a 23,000-acre wildfire from spreading. The fire in the nation's largest archaeological preserve was 70 percent contained late Thursday, fire spokesman Bobby Kitchens said.

Park Superintendent Larry Wiese said the park could reopen next week. Its well-known attractions - Balcony House, Cliff Palace, Spruce Tree - have not been damaged.

Firefighters also were inching toward containing the Cave Gulch Fire, which has burned about 17,500 acres east of Helena in Montana's scenic Canyon Ferry Lake region. About 300 families have been forced to evacuate the area because of that blaze and one nearby.

The fires have also destroyed 36 buildings, including nine houses.

----

Blazes Run Rampant
Crews Subdue Fire Near Nuclear Facility

The Associated Press,
July 28 2000
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/fires000728.html

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho - Crews gained the upper hand today on an 18,000-acre wildfire that had forced the evacuation of more than a thousand employees at a nuclear facility.

On Thursday, some 1,800 workers had been ordered out of three buildings at the sprawling Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, a nuclear research and storage facility. It was the third time this year that a fire has threatened one of the nation's nuclear facilities.

But decreasing winds overnight quelled the flames, and by this morning only 50 firefighters were on the scene in eastern Idaho, putting out a few remaining hot spots.

No one was injured and no radiation release was detected at the 890-square-mile compound. Workers were allowed back on the job today.

Fire struck the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in May and a huge fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation in southeastern Washington last month.

Both of those fires raised concerns about the potential for release of radioactive material, from rain washing contaminated soil into New Mexico's streams or airborne particles in Washington state.

Federal officials have said there has been no danger, though air samples showed an increased - but not harmful - concentration of plutonium in public areas outside the Hanford reservation. Idaho lab officials said tests were being performed.

Evacuations in California

Elsewhere in the West, wildfires went unchecked in what has become the nation's worst fire season since 1996.

In California, evacuations were ordered as a fire blackened 19,000 acres of the Sequoia National Forest, creeping up to several homes on the forest's borders early today. More than 100 residents were forced to evacuate the area 120 miles north of Los Angeles. No injuries have been reported.

"This fire has shown extreme behavior," Forest Service spokesman Tony Diffenbaugh said.

Firefighters, meanwhile, have made progress against two huge fires in Colorado and Montana. In Mesa Verde National Park, Colo., a 40-mile fire line was keeping a 23,000-acre wildfire from spreading. The fire in the nation's largest archaeological preserve was 70 percent contained late Thursday, fire spokesman Bobby Kitchens said.

Park Superintendent Larry Wiese said the park could reopen next week. Its well-known attractions - Balcony House, Cliff Palace, Spruce Tree - have not been damaged.

Firefighters also were inching toward containing the Cave Gulch Fire, which has burned about 17,500 acres east of Helena in Montana's scenic Canyon Ferry Lake region. About 300 families have been forced to evacuate the area.

Too Many Fires

July 27 - Very high to extreme fire danger indices were reported in 11 Western states and Texas today. Following is a list of major fires in 10 Western states.

Arizona: Five fires. The largest has burned 2,400 acres.

California: Three fires. The largest, which has burned 10,000 acres in the Sequoia National Forest, was 20 percent contained this morning.

Colorado: Nine fires. The largest has burned 23,000 acres at Mesa Verde National Park. Idaho: Eleven fires. The largest was over 52,000 acres in the Salmon-Challis National Forest.

Montana: Six fires. The largest totaled almost 24,000 acres at Canyon Ferry Lake, 20 miles east of Helena, and had destroyed nine residences and 27 other structures.

Nevada: Six fires. The largest blaze has burned 7,500 acres in the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, but is reported completely contained.

New Mexico: One major fire, which has burned 1,900 acres in the heart of a series of lava flows in the El Malpais National Monument and Conservation Area.

Texas: One fire, which has 300 acres 25 miles north of Houston, is threatening campsites, trailers and a timber plantation, but is 60 percent contained.

Utah: Six fires. The largest has burned 5,000 acres 10 miles north of Grantsville.

Washington: Two fires. The largest was 9,500 acres in north-central Washington, and reportedly 75 percent contained.

----

Wildfire contained at Idaho nuclear site
Dozens of blazes elsewhere in the West

July 28, 2000
CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/07/28/wildfires.03/index.html

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho -- Wildfires are out of control Friday in 10 Western states in what has become the nation's worst fire season in four years. One of the fires burned more than 18,000 acres on a sprawling Energy Department nuclear research site in eastern Idaho before firefighters gained the upper hand. No increase in radiation levels was reported.

Officials at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), a nuclear research and waste storage facility, said some 1,900 workers who were ordered out of three buildings at the site as a precaution late Thursday were back on the job Friday. No homes were evacuated.

Decreasing winds overnight quelled the flames, and by Friday morning only 50 firefighters were on the scene, putting out a few remaining hot spots.

A separate 250-acre fire was burning Friday not far from INEEL property, according to a spokesman for the federal government's Bureau of Land Management.

Flames no threat to buildings with nuclear material

Although no structural damage was reported at the 890-square-mile site west of Idaho Falls, flames came as close as 50 yards to one of the buildings on the complex.

"(The fire) came within the fence line for a few minutes at one of the (reactor) test areas, (but) didn't get close to any buildings that contain nuclear material," lab spokesman John Walsh told CNN.

Walsh said all of the buildings at INEEL are made of steel-reinforced concrete and wouldn't burn. "We've been doing constant air sample monitoring, and there has been no increase in radiation levels," Walsh told CNN.

The Idaho blaze, ignited Wednesday by lightning and fanned by 28-mph wind gusts, is the third to threaten a site that contains nuclear material in as many months.

Fire struck the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in May and a huge fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation in southeastern Washington last month.

Both raised concerns about the release of radioactive material, from rain washing contaminated soil into New Mexico's streams to airborne particles in Washington state.

Federal officials have said there has been no danger, though air samples showed an increased -- but not harmful -- concentration of plutonium in public areas outside the Hanford reservation. Idaho lab officials said tests were being performed.

Fire at Sequoia National Forest in California

Elsewhere in the West, fires charred wildland in what has become the nation's worst fire season since 1996.

In California, evacuations were ordered as a fire blackened 25,000 acres of the Sequoia National Forest, creeping up to several homes on the forest's borders early Friday. More than 100 residents were forced to evacuate the area 120 miles north of Los Angeles. No injuries were reported.

Low humidity and blustery winds of up to 15 mph led the blaze to double in size in a 24-hour period, said Doug Johnston, a Kern County fire engineer. The fire, which was 35 percent contained Thursday, was only 29 percent contained Friday.

About 730 firefighters tackled the blaze overnight and four firefighters suffered minor injuries, Johnston said. "This fire has shown extreme behavior," Forest Service spokesman Tony Diffenbaugh said.

Military called in to help firefighters

The current fire season, the worst since 1996, forced federal fire managers Thursday to raise the national fire preparedness level to five -- the highest level possible.

Nearly 18,000 firefighters and support personnel are working on dozens of wildfires from Texas to Washington state, according to the federal government's National Interagency Fire Center.

"All of our civilian resources are fully committed; there's no slack out there anymore," said Ron Dunton, the Bureau of Land Management's fire program manager who helps set priorities for resources on wildland fires across the United States.

The fire center said more than 59,000 fires have burned 3 million acres this year. Four years ago, the total was 3.1 million acres by this date.

For the first time since then, the fire center has called in Army soldiers for training and eventual posting on the fire lines. Elite hotshot firefighting crews, air tankers and helicopters are in big demand.

Mesa Verde National Park may reopen next week

Firefighters, meanwhile, have made progress against two huge fires in Colorado and Montana.

In Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, a 40-mile fire line was keeping a 23,000-acre wildfire from spreading. The fire in the nation's largest archaeological preserve was 70 percent contained late Thursday, fire spokesman Bobby Kitchens said.

Park Superintendent Larry Wiese said the park could reopen next week. Its well-known attractions -- Balcony House, Cliff Palace, Spruce Tree -- have not been damaged.

Firefighters also were inching toward containing the Cave Gulch Fire, which has burned about 17,500 acres east of Helena in Montana's scenic Canyon Ferry Lake region. About 300 families have been forced to evacuate the area because of that blaze and one nearby.

The fires have also destroyed 36 buildings, including nine houses.

Other states battling wildfires are Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah and Washington.

----

Fire Contained Near Nuke Facility

By The Associated Press
July 28, 2000
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Western-Fires.html http://www.accessatlanta.com/partners/ajc/epaper/editions/friday/news_9328d1906056e00b00de.html http://www.courierpress.com/cgi-bin/view.cgi?200007/28+firepdate072800_news.html+20000728

IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (AP) -- Crews gained the upper hand Friday on an 18,000-acre wildfire that had forced the evacuation of hundreds of employees at a nuclear facility.

On Thursday, some 1,800 workers had been ordered out of three buildings at the sprawling Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, a nuclear research and storage facility. It was the third time this year that a fire has threatened one of the nation's nuclear facilities.

But decreasing winds overnight quelled the flames, and by Friday morning only 50 firefighters were on the scene in eastern Idaho, putting out a few remaining hot spots.

No one was injured and no radiation release was detected at the 890-square-mile compound. Workers were allowed back on the job.

Fire struck the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico in May and a huge fire swept across the Hanford nuclear reservation in southeastern Washington last month.

Both of those fires raised concerns about the release of radioactive material, from rain washing contaminated soil into New Mexico's streams to airborne particles in Washington state.

Federal officials have said there has been no danger, though air samples showed an increased -- but not harmful -- concentration of plutonium in public areas outside the Hanford reservation. Idaho lab officials said tests were being performed.

Elsewhere in the West, fires charred wildland in what has become the nation's worst fire season since 1996.

In California, evacuations were ordered as a fire blackened 25,000 acres of the Sequoia National Forest, creeping up to several homes on the forest's borders early Friday. More than 100 residents were forced to evacuate the area 120 miles north of Los Angeles. No injuries were reported.

Low humidity and blustery winds of up to 15 mph led the blaze to double in size in a 24-hour period, said Doug Johnston, a Kern County fire engineer. The fire, which was 35 percent contained Thursday, was only 29 percent contained Friday.

About 730 firefighters tackled the blaze overnight and four firefighters suffered minor injuries, Johnston said.

``This fire has shown extreme behavior,'' Forest Service spokesman Tony Diffenbaugh said.

Firefighters, meanwhile, have made progress against two huge fires in Colorado and Montana.

In Mesa Verde National Park, Colo., a 40-mile fire line was keeping a 23,000-acre wildfire from spreading. The fire in the nation's largest archaeological preserve was 70 percent contained late Thursday, fire spokesman Bobby Kitchens said.

Park Superintendent Larry Wiese said the park could reopen next week. Its well-known attractions -- Balcony House, Cliff Palace, Spruce Tree -- have not been damaged.

Firefighters also were inching toward containing the Cave Gulch Fire, which has burned about 17,500 acres east of Helena in Montana's scenic Canyon Ferry Lake region. About 300 families have been forced to evacuate the area.

-------- kentucky

PADUCAH CLEANUP CAUSING AIR POLLUTION, KENTUCKY CHARGES

July 28, 2000
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jul2000/2000L-07-28-09.html

Kentucky environmental officials are charging the Department of Energy (DOE) with violating clean air laws during the cleanup of a huge pile of radioactive drums at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. While shredding and compacting about 85,000 rusting barrels once used to store uranium, the DOE allowed particulate pollution to escape into the air, the state alleges. A notice of violation issued on July 13 says that a state inspector say dust rising from a conveyer belt that feeds the drums into a baler. "Reasonable precautions were not being taken to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne," the notice reads. Equipment used to prevent air pollution had been removed and a hand held mister used to water down the belt "has little effect on the fine airborne particulate emissions," said inspector Stan Cook.

Heather Frederick, a spokesperson for the state Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, said the inspector did not test the dust for radioactivity, but, "The metals in Drum Mountain are radioactive, so we're treating any particulate matter from the processing of those metals as radioactive." DOE spokesperson Walter Perry said air monitors around the pile of drums have not detected any airborne radioactivity during the entire cleanup process. The state has asked the DOE to install more spraying equipment to prevent dust from becoming airborne. A state inspector said Wednesday that new spray nozzles have been installed. The DOE could be liable for up to $25,000 a day for each violation.

-------- nevada

BUSH WOULD BRING NUKE WASTE TO NEVADA, SENATORS WARN

July 28, 2000
ENS
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jul2000/2000L-07-28-09.html

Nevada's Senators, both Democrats, warned Thursday that a George W. Bush presidency could bring nuclear wastes to a dumping ground in Nevada within six to eight months. Senators Richard Bryan and Harry Reid said remarks on the Senate floor by Senator Pete Domenici, a New Mexico Republican, confirmed their fears about temporary nuclear waste storage in Nevada if Texas Governor Bush is elected President. During a discussion about energy policy on the Senate floor, Reid asked Domenici whether Bush would send nuclear wastes to a storage site in Nevada. Domenici responded, "we will build a short-term nuclear waste facility within six to eight months of the next President if he's Republican because it's totally safe. Whether they'll put it in your state or somewhere else, I don't know."

"Senator Domenici confirmed today what we have been warning everyone about all along - if George Bush is elected President, nuclear waste will be heading to Nevada," Bryan said. "For the last eight years, we have kept nuclear waste out of Nevada because of President Clinton's and Vice President Gore's strong opposition to temporary storage and the weakening of health and safety standards. Today, however, Senator Domenici brought back the worst fear of all - so called temporary storage of nuclear waste at the Nevada Test Site. ... This so-called temporary storage is the worst of all worlds - it would not even have the same kind of health and safety standards that would be required for a permanent storage facility." Domenici said the Nevada Senators were taking his words out of context. "I have no idea what (Bush) thinks," Domenici said. "I think it's rather strange and it's also funny to have my two friends from Nevada making a story out of this."

-------- new york

1997 Nuke Inspection Said Deficient

Associated Press
July 28, 2000
Ndunlks@aol.com

BUCHANAN, N.Y. (AP) - Con Edison's last inspection of the Indian Point 2 nuclear reactor was ``deficient in several respects'' that may have contributed to a radioactive leak in February, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said.

``Con Edison did not recognize and take appropriate corrective actions,'' the commission said Thursday, outlining the preliminary results of its own inspection. ``This increased the likelihood that detectable flaws ... were not identified.''

When one of the 13,000 tubes leaked on Feb. 15, a minute amount of radioactive steam was released. There were no injuries but it was the worst accident in Indian Point history and the plant has been shut down since.

The utility told the NRC in May that it could not have detected the corrosion that caused a crack to open in the tube carrying radioactive water through a steam generator.

However, the NRC said a 1997 utility inspection ``did not fully assess the implications'' of water stress corrosion cracking.

Con Ed has asked permission to restart the plant this summer, but the NRC has asked for more information and many residents and officials are demanding that the plant's aging steam generators be replaced first.

----

1997 Nuke Inspection Said Deficient

July 28, 2000
By The Associated Press
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/a/AP-Indian-Point.html

BUCHANAN, N.Y. (AP) -- Con Edison's last inspection of the Indian Point 2 nuclear reactor was ``deficient in several respects'' that may have contributed to a radioactive leak in February, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said.

``Con Edison did not recognize and take appropriate corrective actions,'' the commission said Thursday, outlining the preliminary results of its own inspection. ``This increased the likelihood that detectable flaws ... were not identified.''

When one of the 13,000 tubes leaked on Feb. 15, a minute amount of radioactive steam was released. There were no injuries but it was the worst accident in Indian Point history and the plant has been shut down since.

The utility told the NRC in May that it could not have detected the corrosion that caused a crack to open in the tube carrying radioactive water through a steam generator.

However, the NRC said a 1997 utility inspection ``did not fully assess the implications'' of water stress corrosion cracking.

Con Ed has asked permission to restart the plant this summer, but the NRC has asked for more information and many residents and officials are demanding that the plant's aging steam generators be replaced first.

-------- utah

N-Waste Plans Face Angry Critics At Public Hearing

Friday, July 28, 2000
BY BRENT ISRAELSEN
THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE
http://www.sltrib.com/07282000/utah/7378.htm

If fear and anger were radioactive, Little America Hotel could be in need to be roped off as a Superfund site Thursday night.

The hotel in downtown Salt Lake City was ground zero for the first major public hearing on a proposal to bring much of the nation's highly radioactive waste to the Goshute Indian Reservation in Tooele County.

Most of the 150 people who packed two of the hotel's small conference rooms opposed the plan, with some calling the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) "unethical" and describing the Indian tribe as greedy.

Leading the resistance was Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, who pleaded with NRC to reject the idea.

"If it's so safe, then the high-level waste can stay where it is," said Leavitt.

The hearing was the first opportunity for the public to comment on a draft environmental impact statement released last month on a proposal by the Goshutes to build a storage site on their reservation in Skull Valley, about 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. The site would hold up to 40,000 tons of spent fuel from many of the nation's power plants. Goshute tribal leaders have signed a lease agreement with a limited liability corporation known as Private Fuel Storage (PFS), which represents eight electric utilities in the East, Midwest and California.

Leavitt said the environmental study is "seriously deficient" because it ignores many issues that could affect Utahns' health and welfare.

For example, the NRC has failed to address earthquakes, adjacent military bombing-range operations, transportation along corridors in populated areas and financial liability in the event of a catastrophe.

"The [draft environmental impact statement] is deficient in so many respects that it cannot serve as a basis for evaluation that a project of this magnitude warrants," the governor said.

State Sen. Scott Howell, D-Sandy, said he opposes the plan because the nuclear industry is using big money to compensate the Goshutes for the inherent dangers that no other community in the country seems willing to accept.

Howell suggested that if the Utah Legislature were to offer the Goshutes the $114 million state budget surplus not to accept the waste, the tribe would take it.

Tribal chairman Leon Bear did not directly respond to Howell's suggestion, but said his tribe has not taken its decision lightly.

"We are not ignorant and improverished people" desperate for any economic development project that comes along, Bear said.

"If anyone can show me this facility is not safe, I'd like to see it," the tribal chairman added.

In the first 105 minutes of the hearing, only one other person joined Bear in supporting the proposal. Steve Barrows, of Salt Lake City, said a storage site for nuclear waste in Utah will guarantee the viability of the nuclear power industry, thereby reducing the threat of global warming caused by coal- and gas- fired power plants.

In addition to Leavitt and Howell, three other elected leaders -- Rep. Ralph Becker, D-Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson (through his representative Juan Arce-Larreta) and Draper City Councilman Bill Colbert -- criticized the Goshute-PFS proposal.

While the politicians were for the most part restrained, concerned citizens and environmental activists were less so.

"This doesn't pass the smell test for the public to comprehend," said Steve Erickson, of Utah Downwinders, an anti-nuclear group. "We [Utahns] should not be used to prop up a dying industry."

Erickson called the NRC "lackeys" of the nuclear industry, saying the agency has already made its decision.

Marianne Webster accused the NRC of unethical behavior by supporting a proposal that would essentially ship to Utah the waste that wealthy Eastern communities do not want in their own back yard. "Why does Utah continue to be on the receiving end of every harebrained scheme that comes out of Washington?" Webster asked, referring to other federal activities in Utah's western desert.

Jim McConkie, a Salt Lake City attorney who is organizing a bipartisan group of prominent Utahns to fight the proposal, said, "It is our intention to make it politically infeasible to place this on the Goshute reservation."

A handful of Goshutes opposed to the plan were in the audience to voice outrage at their tribal leaders, whom they accuse of bribery and other shenanigans in the deal with PFS.

-------- us nuc politics

Calls Needed to the Administration Demanding Environmental Sidebars on the Domenici Amendment

By: Lisa Dix,
American Lands Campaign
From: Steve Holmer wafcdc@igc.org
Date: July 28, 2000

Calls Needed to the Administration Demanding Environmental Sidebars on the Domenici Amendment

Yesterday the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held an investigative hearing on the Cerro Grande/Los Alamos Fire. At the hearing Chairman Frank Murkowski (R-AK) and Sens. Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Larry Craig (R-NM) blasted the Forest Service for not cutting enough trees, thus contributing to the loss of millions of dollars a year by letting these "resources burn away." Sen. Murkowski stated that the Forest Service only logs about one million acres a year, "when 2.5 acres are burning as we speak . . . this is the problem."

The Senators criticized both the Park Service and the Forest Service for being more concerned about resource conservation at the expense human lives and property. Sen. Domenici remarked that the first priority of Congress should be a broad-based fire prevention policy, "we [Congress] have a mission to prevent fires from ever starting when they are close to communities." Domenici continued to argue throughout the hearing that resource conservation should never be a concern when human safety and property were involved. Similarly, Sen. Murkowski stated that if he found out that "chainsaws and bulldozers were not used" because resource conservation was a higher priority than human safety and property, this would be "the most grievous error by far."

Sen. Craig used the hearing as a vehicle to argue that the Administration's roadless policy must be amended to allow access into roadless areas that are at "high risk" for fire. Sen. Craig argued that while the draft roadless EIS estimates that there are eight million acres at high risk for fire, "we know there are twenty-two million acres at very high risk."

The explosive and threatening rhetoric voiced by Murkowski, Domenici and Craig should be of great concern to the environmental community. The Senators used the Cerro Grande fire hearing to justify their preferred fire management strategy: more logging, aggressive fire fighting, fire suppression and road-building. This stance is particularly problematic in lieu of the recent passage of the Domenici amendment. The Domenici amendment was accepted, as a substitute to the Craig anti roadless amendment, to the Interior Appropriations bill.

The amendment would add $120.3 million in emergency spending to the Wildland Fire Management line item to remove hazardous material, with no environmental sidebars. Also, the Forest Service would have unlimited contracting authority including the use of commercial timber sales and stewardship contracting. These environmental sidebars must be added in Conference or by the Administration at the end of the Legislative session. However, the frenzy over the Cerro Grande fire may pressure the Administration to not fight at all for the environmental sidebars necessary to prevent this amendment from being the next Salvage Logging Rider.

The Domenici amendment opens the door to increased logging on National Forests. The worry here is that all $120.3 million can be used for logging and other mechanical fuels removal projects in urban/wildland interface zones. There is no prohibition on the scale of the zone; thus hundreds of acres could be pointlessly logged if there are no safeguards defining how many acres will be used for fuels reductions within the zone. The amendment requires that a complete list of interface communities be published and justifications must be recorded for why treatments are not occurring in these communities. This language basically establishes a logging/fuels treatment 'hit list' for interface communities.

Further, safeguards must be added to the amendment to ensure that only very small diameter material and old slash piles from past logging are removed. Prohibitions on the logging of large trees, entry into roadless areas, and road construction are essential to ensure the projects under this amendment will not cause more harm than good.

Next, sidebars are needed to establish limits on service contracts paid for with the $120.3 million appropriation. Commercial timber sales and "goods-for-services" stewardship contracts create an economic incentive to remove large logs instead of the small fuels, which are the problem. In addition, federal contracting and procurement laws should not be suspended to ensure that the program would be fair, efficient and free of corruption. The amendment also includes vague, expensive and redundant reporting requirements that force the agencies to spend limited resources writing unnecessary reports and explanations rather than addressing fire concerns.

The Administration must get these crucial environmental sidebars added to the Domenici amendment. Tell the Administration that increased commercial logging is not the answer to preventing wildfires in fire-dependent ecosystems. Moreover, increased commercial logging and other aggressive mechanical fire fighting tactics (such as chainsaws and bulldozers) should not be used as a substitute for comprehensive prescribed burn plans, fire preparedness and education.

Please Contact: George Frampton, Council on Environmental Quality, Phone: 202-456-6224; Fax: 202-456-2710

Jim Lyons, Undersecretary of Agriculture, USDA, Phone: 202-720-7173; Fax: 202-720-4732

For more information contact Lisa Dix, Lobbyist, American Lands Campaign, 202/547-9400, mailto:lisadix@mindspring.com

----

Dick Cheney Update

Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:21:05 -0400
From: "Frida Berrigan" BerrigaF@newschool.edu

What follows is a slightly revised version of William Hartung's Richard Cheney piece. The newest tidbit of information is that Cheney's wife, Lynne Cheney, sits on the Board of Lockhhed Martin, and is compensated $120,000 a year for showing up at quarterly meetings.

More to come as the convention unwinds.

Frida Berrigan



MODERATE OR MILITANT: Will the Real Dick Cheney Please Stand Up?

An ATRC Commentary

by William D. Hartung President's Fellow, World Policy Institute at the New School

July 26, 2000

Prior to George W. Bush's decision to choose him to head up his search for a running mate -- a quest which ended on Tuesday, July 25th with the announcement that Cheney himself had landed the job -- for most Americans Dick Cheney was at best a dimly remembered figure from the bygone days of the Gulf war.

Gulf War Myths, Gulf War Realities

If you remember Dick Cheney at all, it is probably from his supporting role in the "Dick and Colin Show" (my title, not theirs), that slick exercise in televised spin control that kept America mesmerized during the 1991 Persian Gulf conflict. The show was so popular that it achieved the ultimate "preemptive strike," displacing the afternoon soap operas on more than one occasion.

While Colin Powell had the star power, Cheney added a certain low-key, matter-of-fact credibility to the Bush administration's effort to sell the Gulf War as an antiseptic, "humane" conflict.

To hear Dick and Colin tell it, every U.S. weapon worked as advertised, "collateral damage" (i.e., deaths of innocent men, women, and children) was limited, and the successful coalition effort to reverse Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait had ushered in a new post-Cold War order in which tyrants and human rights abusers would no longer go unpunished.

Those of us who stayed tuned to the Gulf War story after it dropped out of prime time soon learned that the Cheney/Powell PR machine had badly distorted the fundamental military and political facts of the conflict.

Militarily, it ended up that U.S. "wonder weapons" hadn't been so wonderful after all. MIT weapons scientist Theodore Postol and the Israeli military persuasively demonstrated that the "star" of the air war, Raytheon's Patriot missile, was successful in intercepting Scud missiles just 10 to 40% of the time, not the 90%-plus rate broadcast by Cheney and Powell. (Ironically, just in the past year, Raytheon has been forced to recall as defective hundreds of upgraded Patriot PAC-2 missiles that it had sold to U.S. allies in the wake of the Gulf War).

Iraqi military casualties were much smaller than the Bush administration had originally claimed, in large part because tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers - exhausted from eight years of war with Iran and fed up with Saddam Hussein's empty promises to take care of their basic needs- decided to "vote with their feet" by beating a hasty retreat from the front lines. Meanwhile, deaths of Iraqi non-combatants from disease and hunger spawned by the destruction of Iraq's civilian infrastructure were much higher than originally acknowledged. More than nine years after the Bush administration's glorious victory in Iraq, the flood of unnecessary civilian deaths in Iraq continues, driven by the Clinton/Gore policy of stiff economic sanctions punctuated by periodic outbursts of massive aerial bombardment.

On the global political front, needless to say, the bombardment of Iraq did nothing to stop mass killing and repression in Bosnia, Rwanda, Kosovo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, southeastern Turkey, or East Timor. In fact, in many of these places, the United States armed and trained the perpetrators of ethnic slaughter in keeping with the "Cheney Doctrine" of "arms for our friends and arms control for our enemies." This deeply hypocritical stance helped enrich U.S. arms merchants, but only at the unacceptably high cost of undermining the prospects for arms control and enduring peace in the Middle East, East Asia, and southern Africa.

Yellow ribbons and self-congratulatory rhetoric aside, the main military and diplomatic fallout of the 1991 Gulf War have been the perpetuation of the myth of "war without casualties" (U.S. casualties, that is); the emergence of the United States as the world's leading arms merchant; and the weakening of diplomatic and multilateral approaches to peacekeeping and conflict prevention in favor of a series of ad hoc, U.S.-led "posses" that generally enter zones of conflict too late and use the wrong tools once they got there (e.g., bombing from 15,000 feet as an antidote to ethnic repression in Kosovo).

Cashing In on Connections: Cheney Heads Halliburton

So far, none of the U.S. principals of the 1991 Persian Gulf War have been called to account for the lies and manipulation that they engaged in before, during, and after the conflict. On the contrary, they have profited from the war. And more than any other figure in the war, Cheney had to reap his windfall the old-fashioned way, by exploiting conflicts-of-interest to line his own pockets.

Unlike his more charismatic cohorts, Generals Powell and Schwarzkopf, Cheney didn't get a multi-billion dollar book contract after the Gulf War. And no one was hounding him to run for president (or vice president, for that matter) in the wake of the war, was the case with Colin Powell. Instead, Dick Cheney, the man who helped direct a war that was largely aimed at keeping "our oil supplies" out of the hands of Saddam Hussein's dictatorial regime, decided to get into the oil business, just as his longstanding friends in the Bush administration had done. Wall Street analysts make no bones of the fact that Cheney's new employer, the oil industry services firm Halliburton, hired him NOT for his experience in the industry (he had none), but rather for the doors he could open for the firm in key Middle Eastern markets (including, but not limited to, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia). Cheney has done a damned good job of opening doors, helping the firm pursue new business opportunities with old friends (like Saudi Arabia) and "states of concern" (like Iraq and Iran) alike. He also engineered Halliburton's purchase of the construction giant Brown and Root, which is involved in everything from providing security at U.S. embassies security to building military bases for the United States and its closest allies. This in turn allowed Cheney to trade on his connections inside the Pentagon to boost the firm's level of military contracts to more than $650 million per year, enough to bring into the ranks of the department's top 20 contractors in FY 1999, up from 73rd in FY 1998. Not a bad few years work for a guy everyone assumed had vanished into the woodwork after his 15 minutes of fame expired in the spring of 1991.

Punching Up the Ticket: Bush/Quayle II

Besides offering reassurance to the Pentagon and corporate America that "young" George W. (who at 54, is actually only five years younger than Cheney) won't do anything rash or stupid, Cheney brings another key asset to the ticket: after a distinguished (albeit extremely conservative) career that has included stints as President Ford's chief of staff, a well-regarded member of Congress from Wyoming, and Secretary of Defense in the Bush Administration, Dick Cheney is actually qualified to serve as president of the United States. The same cannot be reliably stated for George W. Bush himself, who has served one term and change as the governor of Texas, a state whose system gives so little power to the governor that pretty much anyone who wants to get anything done goes first to either the legislative leadership, the comptroller, or the lieutenant governor (who presides over the legislature). In fact, Bush/Cheney looks a lot like Bush/Quayle in reverse, with George W. representing the role of the potato-spelling pinhead and Dick Cheney playing the polite but accomplished career politician with a resume longer than your arm.

The Bottom Line: How Conservative Is Cheney

Despite his reputation as a moderate, Dick Cheney is in reality one of the most conservative political figures of the modern era of American politics. During his Congressional career as Wyoming's member of the House of Representatives in the 1980s, he pulled off the conservative equivalent of the "daily double": a 100% rating from the American Conservative Union paired with a 0% rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action. That put him in company with such right-wing luminaries as Jack Kemp, Dick Armey, and Dan Burton, and slightly to the left of Newt Gingrich, who got a whopping 5% ADA rating. Cheney's conservative votes include staunch support for aid to the Contras, opposition to abortion even in cases of rape or incest, and opposition to common sense gun safety measures such as a ban on "cop killer" bullets and an end to the manufacture of plastic guns that can fool airport security devices (a vote on which he was joined by only 3 House colleagues).

His record as a moderate stems largely from his tenure as George Bush's Secretary of Defense, when he presided over significant cutbacks in U.S. troops and opposed several unnecessary weapons programs such as the Navy's A-12 "stealth" fighter plane and the Marine Corps' V-22 Osprey. But as former Reagan administration Pentagon official Lawrence J. Korb of the Council on Foreign Relations has pointed out, Cheney's image as a "budget cutter" is vastly over-rated. Clearly, the defense industry harbored no grudge, as Cheney's wife has sat on the Board of Directors of defense giant Lockheed Martin for years. During his tenure at the helm of the Pentagon, the Berlin Wall fell, Soviet troops were pulled out of Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union itself dissolved into its constituent republics. Yet despite the disappearance of its Cold War adversary, Cheney wanted to cut the U.S. military budget by only 10 percent over a multi-year period, and was only convinced to cut deeper by Colin Powell, who argued that anything less than a phased-in reduction of 25% would be laughed off of Capitol Hill.

A Ray of Hope: Cheney as Internationalist

To his credit, Cheney seems to be more closely allied with respected, internationalist Republicans like former Reagan Defense Secretary George Shultz and former Bush National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, rather than right-wing true believers like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. This difference could be crucial, since it was folks like Shultz and Scowcroft who helped convince the Reagan and Bush administrations to trade off distorted visions of a leak-proof missile defense for real, negotiated reductions in U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals. If he were to use his inherent caution to put George W.'s harebrained National Missile Defense scheme on the slow track while nuclear arms reductions are resumed in earnest after an eight year hiatus during the Clinton term, he could make a positive mark on U.S. security policy. And if his newfound experience in the oil business makes him more open to normalizing relations with former "rogue states" like Iran and Iraq, all the better. But before we can gauge how Cheney might perform as vice president, we will need a much more vigorous and detailed foreign policy debate than either Al Gore or George Bush have offered thus far. There's no time like the present, on the eve of the Republican convention, to get started on that debate.

----

China 'real reason' for missile shield

28/07/2000
By GAY ALCORN, Herald Correspondent in Washington
Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0007/28/text/world03.html

Congressional figures are now openly saying the real reason behind the United States' proposed missile defence shield is a perceived threat from China.

For several years the US has maintained that the shield is a response to unpredictable "rogue states" such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran.

But at a forum hosted by the Heritage Foundation think-tank in Washington on Wednesday, Mr Peter Brookes, the principal adviser to a Republican-dominated congressional committee on East Asian affairs, said the US was disingenuous in insisting that weak "rogue" states posed the primary threat to the US.

"The Clinton Administration fears mentioning the 'C' word: China," he said. "Washington should stop denying that there is a link between China's nuclear modernisation, conventional military build-up and proliferation practices and the requirement for ballistic missile defence."

The view concurs with China's angry charge that the $100 billion shield to shoot down missiles aimed for American shores is really directed at containing its burgeoning power in Asia.

Mr Brookes said the real issue was America's nuclear superiority in Asia, and China's future challenge of US dominance.

This is despite the overwhelming ballistic dominance of the US. It has thousands of warheads, compared to China's 20 long-range missiles capable of reaching the US.

"Washington must acknowledge the possibility of conflict with China, especially over the issue of Taiwan, or even North Korea, and plan accordingly to preserve and protect US national security interests and those of our friends and allies," Mr Brookes said.

"Parity or near nuclear parity with the People's Republic of China is not in the United States' interests."

The Republican view is significant because the party controls Congress, and its presidential candidate, Texas Governor Mr George W. Bush, has vowed an even more ambitious shield than that proposed by the Clinton Administration.

While the Administration has publicly tried to reassure Beijing the shield is not directed at China, the Republicans are beginning to disagree.

President Bill Clinton is due to decide soon whether to proceed with the shield.

Many of America's NATO allies, as well as Russia and China, are opposed to America endangering the nuclear balance through attempts to make itself invulnerable.

China fears the shield would neutralise its small nuclear force and extend protection over Taiwan, and says it would respond by increasing its own arsenal, sparking an Asian arms race.

Mr Brookes dismissed ally concerns, saying it was "not uncommon for new ideas to not be immediately embraced".

Mr Brookes, as well as Dr Richard Kessler, the Democrat staff director of the Senate subcommittee on international security and proliferation, said China had been modernising its arsenal for 15 years and would continue to do so whether or not the US went ahead with the shield.

----

Candidate Bush sizes up the China threat

Washington Observed,
By Joanne Gray,
Australia Financial Review,
July 28, 2000
http://www.afr.com.au/world/20000728/A34229-2000Jul27.html

'When I was coming up, it was a dangerous world ... It was us versus them, and it was clear who 'them' was. Today, we are not so sure who the 'they' are, but we know they're there." - Texas Governor and Republican presidential nominee, George W. Bush, Iowa Western Community College, January 21, 2000.

The most commonly cited reason for the push for a national missile defence is the fear that "rogue" States will indiscriminately shoot off missiles targeted at US cities. But that obscures a greater fear, largely unstated, that China's steady military build-up will soon allow it to challenge American interests.

Bush may not have known back in January who the new enemy of the United States would be, but he is now getting plenty of hints. A sizable chunk of the US Congress and some members of his own foreign policy team argue that China's military modernisation and missile upgrade could transform China into a serious nuclear threat to the United States.

A ginger group in the Congress, calling itself the Blue Team, is on one extreme. It believes China is on the way to becoming the new enemy and must be contained. This loose grouping of members of Congress, aides, lobbyists and think-tank fellows has become influential in pushing anti-China, pro-Taiwan legislation.

Peter Brookes, principal adviser on East Asian affairs to the House of Representatives International Relations Committee and a Blue Team member, says China's "arms race" is one of the main reasons why America is considering a national missile defence shield.

The White House has not named China's ballistic missile build-up nor its weapons proliferation as motivations for building its limited version of NMD. It sees North Korea, Iran and Iraq as the principal concerns, and says the US must be able to protect itself from the 30 countries that possess long-range missiles.

In fact, the White House has assured Beijing that the limited version of NMD, which President Bill Clinton will decide on in coming months, isn't intended to rein in China. It fears China will be motivated to boost its missile program and rhetoric if it believes the US is trying to contain it.

But Brookes says Washington should be transparent about its motivations for NMD. "China's policies are having an effect on American deliberations about national missile defence," he said. "Claiming that missile defence is the product of North Korea and other rogue States is disingenuous, and the Chinese don't believe it anyway."

China already has missiles that can hit the West Coast of the US. The Blue Team believes that with technology stolen from US nuclear labs, China will deploy longer-range weapons with nuclear warheads later this decade that will be able to reach targets anywhere in the US.

Partly to appeal to the hawkish element of the Republican Party, Bush has adopted a more hardline policy towards China than the Clinton Administration. He describes China as "a competitor, not a strategic partner", and in speeches has described the Chinese Government's actions as "alarming abroad and appalling at home". He has also warned that China "has been investing its growing wealth in strategic nuclear weapons and new ballistic missiles".

Bush has already promised to build a more extensive and more robust national missile defence system than Clinton's limited version. Bush's system could have sea- and space-based components as well as land-based interceptors and would cover America's allies and foreign bases. He has also offered to unilaterally slash America's nuclear arsenal, take the remaining weapons off high alert and encourage Moscow to do the same.

It isn't clear whether Bush's hawkish views on China will last. They reportedly originate with his more hardline advisers, such as Paul Wolfowitz, the dean of the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University, who served in the Reagan and Bush administrations and drew up the Pentagon's strategy for maintaining US dominance after the Cold War.

Bush's foreign policy team is divided between the hardliners, like Wolfowitz, and the realists, such as Condoleezza Rice, the former Stanford Provost who is Bush's lead foreign policy adviser and who could be appointed to his cabinet in a foreign policy role.

Rice is an expert in Russian and Eastern European affairs and is less familiar with Asia. But she and Bush agree on an internationalist foreign policy that strengthens America's military, scales back foreign commitments and focuses on China and Russia. And she has said that as president, Bush would move to strengthen US alliances in Asia.

She has described America's one-China policy, which considers Taiwan as part of mainland China, as a "holding device". And Bush has promised to help Taiwan defend itself.

It's not clear exactly what would be in store on China if Bush were to win office, but he would almost certainly be more confrontational and less accommodating towards Beijing than the Clinton Administration. Peter Brookes says Washington must insist on a dialogue with China on nuclear missile issues to seek greater transparency and accountability about the Chinese build-up. If China doesn't explain itself, "it will reinforce the view of the China threat," he said, "and may create a security dilemma in the region which may result in an unintended spiralling arms race with Tokyo, Taipei and Delhi."

The US must also develop a robust and highly capable national missile defence system as a deterrent, he said. It must also acknowledge the possibility of a conflict with China over Taiwan or even North Korea and plan accordingly.

"A vigorous expression of US concerns regarding China's strategic build-up and a firm statement of its willingness to proceed with a highly effective ballistic missile defence program may lead Beijing to rethink the utility of its modernisation program and its proliferation practices."

----

Target Trulock

July 28, 2000
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/ed-house-200072818187.htm

After all these many Clinton years of Chinese espionage during which, coincidence or not, nuclear codes have been downloaded, satellite technology has gone missing, top-secret hard drives have been "lost," supercomputer technology has been sold and nuclear facilities have all but gone up in smoke, Americans may now finally rejoice that the nation's security is assured: The FBI has seized Notra Trulock's desktop computer.

Mr. Trulock, of course, is the former Department of Energy counterintelligence chief who first blew the whistle on Chinese espionage penetrations of American nuclear weapons laboratories two years ago.

Whistleblowers, as everyone knows, make a lot of noise, shrill, penetrating, sometimes commanding - at first. But even the loudest noises fade away. In the bureaucratic calm after the political storm, Mr. Trulock was quietly demoted and then forced out of the Energy Department by senior department officials who disputed his findings that Chinese spies had stolen the know-how to produce every nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal, including that nuke in the crown, the W-88 thermonuclear warhead.

While working for TRW Inc., Mr. Trulock decided this year to write "a 'personal reflections-type' manuscript" about his experiences, as he told National Review Online last week. So he did, taking care, he said, not to include any classified information. He sent the document to the DOE for a security review this spring, before submitting to and passing a polygraph test intended to reveal any disclosure of classified information. Until two weeks ago, there the matter laid - not to mention the article, which, Mr. Trulock said, was just "sitting around in maybe a half-dozen or so people's hard drives."

Then came a cluster of events. Mr. Trulock was fired by TRW, "under pressure from the Energy Department, according to people close to the case," as this newspaper's Bill Gertz wrote. Then National Review magazine published the article, which, while it may not contain information that is classified, contains plenty of information that is damaging to the Clinton administration on its historic bungle of its duty to protect the nation's defense secrets. Then came the knock at Mr. Trulock's door. Without a warrant, FBI agents coerced Mr. Trulock's landlord - "with threats of breaking in doors and bringing in 'media people,' " Mr. Trulock wrote Congress this week - to open up for an unlawful search of Mr. Trulock's Northern Virginia townhouse. Agents seized his desktop computer hard drive, carting away n