NucNews - March 24, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- accidents and safety Plutonium in Paint Cans at Weapons Labs From: marylia@earthlink.net (Marylia Kelly) Date: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:26pm for immediate release, March 24, 2005 DOE Fails to Provide Technical Criteria for Safe Nuclear Storage Watchdog Groups Appalled at Current Conditions;Plutonium Stored in Paint Cans, Food Pack Cans, Slip-Lid Containers at Weapons Labs Santa Fe, NM and Livermore, CA -- On March 21, 2005, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) announced in the Federal Register a proposed formal recommendation "to improve the packaging and storage conditions of [DOE's] large inventory of nuclear materials once used for weapons manufacture." The DNFSB is an independent board commissioned by Congress to oversee safety issues pertaining to the Department of Energy's (DOE's) nuclear weapons complex. In its Federal Register notice, the Board stated: "Other than two narrowly focused standardsŠ there is no explicit DOE-wide requirement to ensure the safe storage of nuclear materials" such as plutonium. The Board observed "Yet sites continue to rely on container types that have been used historically, but have no technically justified safety or design basis. These container types are generally forms of packaging typically used in non-nuclear applications (e.g., paint cans, food pack cans)." Thin-walled "slip-lid cans" with loose fitting covers closed only by tape are also used, even for plutonium-238, which is 100's of times more radioactive than the more common plutonium-239. In what perhaps seems like a painfully obvious necessity the Board recommended that DOE "[i]ssue a requirement that nuclear material packaging meet technically justified criteria for safe handling and storage." Nuclear Watch New Mexico and Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment call on DOE to quickly do just that, given that it is long overdue. Moreover, the two groups applaud the DBFSB's action. Present and recent halts to operations at DOE's major plutonium facilities, in large part caused by unsafe nuclear materials storage, illustrate how serious these issues are. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL) Plutonium Facility has been idle since January 15th due to safety problems. In this latest action, the Board found that LLNL had not fully considered the potential effects of gas generation, oxidation due to leaky seals, and damage from drops and tools in its choice of nuclear materials storage containers. The Board also found that 15% of weapons-related nuclear materials are stored in technically unjustified packaging more than five years old. Meanwhile, LLNL is pushing to increase its plutonium inventory from a storage limit of 1,540 pounds to 3,300 pounds. DOE's other major nuclear weapons-related plutonium facilities are at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), and both LANL and LLNL are managed by the University of California. Los Alamos had serious plutonium-238 contamination incidents of multiple workers in August 2001 and August 2003, the latter due to leakage from a slip-lid can which has still not been cleaned up. In its recommendation the Board observed that "the technical adequacy of packaging - the combination of containers and other components providing a contamination barrier - for nuclear materials, including liquids, is dependent on the safety bases of individual facilities." Yet, in a separate report, the DNFSB has found that LANL's plutonium facility has not had an updated, approved safety basis since 1996. Further, an August 2004 audit by the DOE's own Inspector General found that '[t]hese materials are kept in containers that are not acceptable for long-term storage", and that the Lab's nuclear materials stabilization program had to be extended from 2002 to 2010, increasing taxpayers' costs by an additional $78 million. Finally, the so-called stand down to all operations at LANL because of security and safety issues has cost taxpayers at least $367 million. Jay Coghlan, NWNM Director, commented: "The Safety Board has done the public a great service alerting us to these serious inadequacies in the storage of some of the world's most dangerous materials. It is unfathomable that the Labs could be so negligent in issues that can have such serious consequences. It's time for them to truly prioritize nuclear materials stabilization above the indefinite preservation and so-called improvement of nuclear weapons." Marylia Kelley, Executive Director of Tri-Valley CAREs and a close neighbor of LLNL, stated: "Safety procedures at Livermore Lab's Plutonium Facility are out of compliance with regulations. Faulty gloveboxes and other equipment have been found in use at the facility. Plutonium is stored in paint cans and food pack cans. As shocking as this is, it is perhaps even more shocking to realize that these are all repeat violations and safety lapses. Worker and public safety dictate that the Livermore Lab Plutonium Facility remain shut down this time -- and not be allowed to reopen on mere promises from management of reform at a later date. Further, the Department of Energy should move to de-inventory the plutonium at the Lab, not double it." # # # The DNFSB's full recommendation is available at http://www.dnfsb.gov/pub_docs/dnfsb/rec_2005.html. For further information, please call Tri-Valley CAREs at (925) 443-7148 or Nuclear Watch of New Mexico at (505) 989-7342. Or, visit their websites at http://www.trivalleycares.org and http://www.nukewatch.org. Marylia Kelley Executive Director Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94551 http://www.trivalleycares.org - is our web site address. Please visit us there! (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax for more information, contact Marylia Kelley, Executive Director, Tri-Valley CAREs (TVC), 925.443.7148 Jay Coghlan, Executive Director, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico (NWNM), 505.989-7342 -------- business ING disinvests (partly) from controversial weapons Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:23:00 +0200 From: Laka Foundation Press Release Brussels, 24 March 2005 Netwerk Vlaanderen vzw, Belgium ING, the largest private financial institution in the Benelux countries, and the 11th largest in the world, has decided to no longer invest in companies producing controversial weapons. The types of weapons excluded by ING are: anti-personnel mines, cluster bombs, depleted uranium weapons, biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. Netwerk Vlaanderen, Forum voor Vredesactie, For Mother Earth and Vrede have been campaigning since 2003 for an end to investments of Belgian banks in the arms trade. Their campaign "My Money. Clear Conscience?" has put pressure on ING to make this important step in the direction of a peaceful investment policy. Controversial weapons The weapons systems from which ING is disinvesting are indeed controversial. They make no distinction between military and civilian targets, and their use causes disproportionate suffering. Cluster bombs have been responsible over the past decades for thousands of civilian casualties, often years after the end of the conflict in which they are deployed. They were extensively used in Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. Landmines are dirty weapons. Every year there are between 15,000 and 20,000 new victims caused by landmines. In more than 75% of the world, landmines have been declared illegal. Nuclear Weapons are the most destructive weapons ever developed. These weapons of mass destruction continue to threaten the whole world. Despite signing treaties that commit them to disarm, the nuclear powers continue to modernise their arsenals. Uranium weapons have been used in armed conflicts over the last 15 years, despite the fact that they are chemically toxic and radioactive. Even after the end of the conflict in which they are used, they cause serious health problems for soldiers and civilians. ING adopts a stricter weapon policy ING has decided to implement strict criteria for defence-oriented companies involved in the production, maintenance, or sale of these controversial weapons. ING will no longer finance these companies, and will no longer make its own direct investments in these companies. Indirect investments are still permitted. For example, investors will still be able to purchase investment funds from ING, including shares from these companies. Big companies in the spotlight In a report published in early 2004 - http://www.netwerk-vlaanderen.be/actie/dossierwapensengelsdef.pdf - Netwerk Vlaanderen revealed that AXA, DEXIA, Fortis, ING and KBC all invested in producers of these controversial weapons, including some of the largest arms companies in the world. Companies that Netwerk Vlaanderen believes that ING should disinvest from include ATK, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Singapore Technologies Engineering and General Dynamics. ATK is the most important ammunition supplier for the US army, and is involved in the production of uranium weapons and cluster bombs. Lockheed Martin is the largest arms producer in the world, and produces nuclear weapons and cluster bombs, amongst other weapon systems. This new policy should lead to ING abandoning direct links with some of the largest arms companies in the world. Important step from ING, but still some reservations Netwerk Vlaanderen, Forum voor Vredesactie, For Mother Earth and Vrede applaud the step that ING has made, and hope that the other bank groups will follow this example. After KBC, which last year withdrew from a number of controversial weapon systems, ING is the second bank group to take a clear standpoint on this issue. There are still some important omissions in the policy of ING. Netwerk Vlaanderen and its partners regret that this new policy is not valid for indirect investments made by ING. This means that producers of controversial weapons will not be removed from the investment funds that ING offers to its customers. For the customer that invests in ING funds, nothing has changed. Their money can still be invested in producers of these highly controversial weapon systems. The new policy is clearly a step forward in the development of a peaceful investment policy. ING must now work on making this policy solid, strict and transparent. The organisations that have taken the initiative in the campaign "My money. Clear Conscience?" hope that in the future ING will apply this policy to indirect investments, and other weapon systems. End press release Netwerk Vlaanderen vzw Vooruitgangstraat 333/9 1030 Brussel Tel. +32 (0)2 201 07 70 - Fax. +32 (0)2 201 06 02 http://www.netwerk-vlaanderen.be Press spokesperson: Christophe Scheire e-mail: christophe@netwerk-vlaanderen.be -------- europe EU Leaders Want Nuclear Fusion Agreement by July REUTERS BELGIUM: March 24, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/30071/story.htm BRUSSELS - European Union leaders want an international agreement to build the world's first nuclear fusion reactor in France by July, a document said on Wednesday, adding pressure on Japan to give up its bid to host the site. European Research Commissioner Janez Potocnik has said the 25-nation bloc wants to start building the reactor in Cadarache, France, and will do so without an international agreement if it has to. That has irked Japan, however, which wants it built in Rokkasho, a Japanese fishing village. Six partners are involved in the project, including the EU, Japan, China, the United States, Russia and South Korea. "The European Council stresses the need to begin building the international thermonuclear experimental reactor on the European site by the end of 2005," the EU heads of state and government -- known as the Council -- said in a draft statement during a meeting in Brussels. They called on the executive Commission "to make every effort to achieve that aim, in particular by finalising the international agreement by July 2005". The EU has called for high-level political talks with Japan to resolve the issue. But Japan refused, saying they would only lead to deadlock. The 10 billion euro ($13 billion) project, known as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), would use sea water as fuel, creating a low pollution energy source. Nuclear fusion has been touted as a long-term solution to the world's energy problems, but years of research have so far failed to produce a commercially viable fusion reactor. ---- Europe Nuclear Revival Depends on Government Help Story by Anna Mudeva REUTERS NETHERLANDS: March 24, 2005 http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/30076/story.htm AMSTERDAM - Nuclear power is back in vogue but talk of a revival in Europe may be premature unless governments offer incentives to persuade companies to invest in new reactors, analysts say. Atomic plants are expensive to build and, despite producing almost no greenhouse gas emissions, face fierce opposition from environmentalists on safety grounds. "It takes 8 to 10 years to build a new nuclear plant and it costs at least 3 billion euros," said Frank Barnaby, a nuclear security specialist at the independent Oxford Research Group. "Private industry is not interested because it takes 10 years to get a return on investment and governments regard it as too expensive," he said. Europe's pro-nuclear lobby, which has struggled to shake off the legacy of the world's worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl in 1986, believes the tide has turned in its favour. Finland is building the region's first new nuclear plant for years while Britain has left the option open to build new plants and Italy and Poland have talked of venturing into nuclear power. Analysts attribute the swing in the political climate to Europe's commitment to deliver big cuts in carbon dioxide emissions under the Kyoto protocol on global warming. But the financial difficulties the sector can face were highlighted recently in the UK when the country's main nuclear generator British Energy came close to insolvency and had to be rescued by the government. Europe is only likely to see a nuclear revival if countries provide economic incentives to encourage private sector investment, experts say. "I don't see how it would happen without some form of government subsidies," said Prof. Geoffrey Hammond, of the nuclear department at the UK University of Bath. Fraser McLaren, an analyst at ING Barings, agreed. "Private sector involvement in new build may need some form of financial assistance," Fraser said, referring to the UK. The Netherlands, which is considering prolonging the life of its only existing reactor, has ruled out the option of building new plants as too expensive. DELAYING SHUTDOWNS? Some analysts predict that a majority of European countries, including the ex-communist bloc, will keep the nuclear option open by extending the life of existing plants if not building new ones. Support for keeping nuclear plants open longer is being voiced in Germany, the UK and Sweden. "I expect that countries like Germany would at least extend the life of reactors. Until there are other alternatives to cover the shortfall, it doesn't make sense to give up nuclear," said Frank Umbach from the German Council on Foreign Relations. He said abandoning nuclear energy at a time when Europe's energy consumption was rising and North Sea oil and gas reserves were falling, would make it more dependent on imports from Russia and unstable regions, such as the Middle East. Surging oil prices and Europe's growing reliance on gas imports are helping calls to keep plants open, analysts say. Nuclear generation costs are well below those of power produced from oil, coal, gas and renewable sources. The need to replace aging coal-fired power plants and doubts that wind, solar and hydro plants could make up for the gap as well as deliver big enough CO2 cuts are also making the nuclear option look compelling, supporters say. "If countries in Europe have to meet their Kyoto protocol targets then nuclear energy is going to be very welcome," said Luis Echavarri, head of OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency. But environmental problems and proliferation worries add to the obstacle of high capital costs and remain key in the argument against nuclear. "Before thinking about a nuclear renaissance, we should consider how to store the nuclear waste in a politically and publicly accepted way," the Oxford Research Group's Barnaby said. "We also need to be sure that there won't be a proliferation problem and a world full of nuclear weapons". Environmental groups, such as Friends of the Earth, argue that nuclear power would only be a marginal solution to climate change as it contributed a small part of world electricity -- 16 percent according to data from the World Nuclear Association. ---- EU studying Iranian proposal to do small-scale uranium enrichment PARIS (AFP) Mar 24, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050324110952.wbf32brl.html The European Union is studying an Iranian proposal to allow the Islamic republic to produce enriched uranium on a small scale, despite the EU's stated position that Tehran must abandon the process to guarantee it will not make atom bombs, officials and diplomats said Thursday. Iran made the proposal to be able to run a pilot centrifuge project for enrichment at a meeting Wednesday with EU negotiators Britain, France and Germany, a European official, who asked not to be named, said. The official said the European trio were "going to look at this with experts. "If the experts find a way to monitor this in an effective way (to guarantee that Iran cannot enrich uranium to make nuclear weapons), then why not?" the official said. Iran and the European trio had agreed Wednesday to continue nuclear talks after a round in Paris failed to secure an agreement persuading Tehran to abandon uranium enrichment to show it does not seek to develop atomic weapons. Iran had threatened to break off the talks that had begun in December if Wednesday's meeting in Paris failed to make progress, a reference to European promises of trade, technology and security rewards if Iran would give up on uranium enrichment. Enriched uranium can be used as fuel for civilian nuclear reactors but can also be the explosive core of atom bombs. -------- iran Iran Seeks “Latent” Nuclear Capability, Expert Says By David Ruppe Global Security Newswire Thursday, March 24, 2005 http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2005_3_24.html#CF5B39DB WASHINGTON — Iran appears to be developing a “latent” nuclear weapons capability that does not include assembling complete bombs or violating the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, a U.S. expert said yesterday (see GSN, March 23). “They absolutely want to stay within the existing rules of the NPT and regime and … they will do everything they can to play by the rules,” said George Perkovich, vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, speaking at an event here hosted by the U.S. United Nations Association and the Business Council for the United Nations. “The rules allow you — and in their argument give you the right — which I dispute … to acquire a capability to enrich uranium or to separate plutonium,” he said. In addition to producing nuclear fuel for energy, Iran seeks to follow the model of Japan, which has maintained large stockpiles of plutonium without international recrimination, he said. “Just like Japan, what [Iran] will get as a benefit of that is not only nuclear energy but also a latent deterrent capability. In other words, no other country is going to attack Japan today. In part because if they did, Japan has the capacity to produce nuclear weapons,” though it has not built them, he said. “I think the way the Iranians conceive the strategy is, they would then have the same kind of deterrent power as Japan has,” he said. Perkovich attended a two-day conference on nuclear issues in Tehran earlier this month, during which Iranian officials and negotiators spoke both formally and informally about what they were attempting to accomplish through negotiations with European countries over their nuclear capabilities. Others Say Iran Wants Weapons Despite Iran’s claims that it plans to comply with the NPT, the Bush administration and other experts have charged that Tehran is probably conducting clandestine weapons work that violates the treaty. Danielle Pletka, vice president of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, disputed Perkovich’s contention that Iran is not attempting to build nuclear weapons. “I have yet to meet anybody in any European government or anyone frankly at IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] who disagrees [with the idea that] that Iran has a nuclear weapons program,” she said. “Iranians have a nuclear weapons program because Iranians want nuclear weapons,” she said at yesterday’s event. Robert Einhorn, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a former senior Clinton administration official, said in November he believed Iran would pursue nuclear weapons clandestinely even if it suspended its acknowledged uranium enrichment activities (see GSN, Nov. 10, 2004). Perkovich acknowledged that might be the case. “One of the great unknowns,” he said during his presentation, is that “there may be a disconnect between the [Iranian officials] who are articulating this strategy and what is actually happening on the ground,” he said. “It’s likely that none of the negotiators knows actually every detail of what is happening in the nuclear establishment,” he said in an interview today. Blaming the United States Perkovich said, though, that the idea that Iran does intend to play by the rules makes sense because it potentially offers Iran a strategic advantage, by reducing incentives for neighboring countries to build their own nuclear arsenals. Furthermore, it would serve Iran in its competition with the United States for the support of the international community and particularly the European Union, he said. The United States and Iran are each seeking to isolate the other from the international community, he said. To that end, he said, Iran says it is playing by the rules of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty while Washington seeks to rewrite them. Iran’s argument is, “We want to play by the rules, but the Americans want to change the rules. That the Americans want to do what they always do, which is conveniently interpreting international law, tearing up the parts they don’t like, and then dictating new terms for the developing world,” he said. Iran argues that the United States has backed away from following Article 6 of the treaty, which requires the declared nuclear powers to work toward disarmament, “and is now in the process of tearing up Article 4, which in the Iranians view says, which we could debate, that you have to have cooperation in nuclear technology.” Article 4 specifically declares an “inalienable right” of parties “to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.” It says also that parties should facilitate and have a right to participate in, “the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and scientific and technological information for the peaceful uses of nuclear energy.” Perkovich said that he believed the United States in fact is trying to change the rules, but said he believed rules on nuclear technology cooperation need to be changed. “What we have learned … is that some technologies, in particular uranium enrichment and plutonium separation technology, are just too inherently dual use, they have too many inherent weapons applications to be allowed to proliferate to new countries,” he said. He said, though, that to avoid the potential that new rules would readily be violated, they need to be constructed in ways that are perceived fair by the international community, so that they are “largely self-enforcing.” An unresolved “issue is how do we do that so that there is enough consensus so that it’s a fair change … so that people will line up with us on it,” he said. ---- Iranian Exile Says Uranium Enriched at Secret Site By REUTERS Published: March 24, 2005 Filed at 5:53 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-nuclear-iran-exile.html PARIS (Reuters) - An Iranian exile accused Tehran on Thursday of secretly purifying uranium for use in nuclear weapons at a recently-constructed underground facility at a military complex called Parchin. ``Iran has completed an underground tunnel-like facility in Parchin, which is now engaged in laser enrichment,'' said Alireza Jafarzadeh, an Iranian exile who has reported accurately in the past about hidden atomic facilities in Iran. ``This underground site is camouflaged and built in an area of Parchin that deals with the chemical industry,'' he told Reuters by telephone from Washington, citing ``well-placed sources inside the Iranian regime.'' Iranian officials were not immediately available for comment, and Tehran has repeatedly denied carrying out any nuclear work at Parchin. Jafarzadeh said the enrichment work was linked to ``Iran's secret nuclear weapons program.'' Enrichment is a process of purifying uranium for use as fuel for power plants or weapons. Iran says it no longer does any work with laser enrichment, a high-tech but inefficient method of purifying uranium. Iran has said a tunnel complex under a uranium conversion plant at Isfahan had been built to store equipment for protection in case of U.S. or Israeli attack. As the former spokesman for the Iranian exile group, the National Coalition of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), Jafarzadeh revealed in August 2002 information about two hidden sites in Iran -- an underground uranium enrichment at Natanz and a heavy-water production plant at Arak. Iran later declared both sites to the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA declined to comment on Jafarzadeh's accusation, though spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said the agency ``follows up every credible lead.'' ACCESS BLOCKED Iran has been reluctant to allow inspectors from the IAEA into Parchin, which lies some 30 km (19 miles) southeast of Tehran. Earlier this year Iran permitted limited inspections at the site but refused to allow them to return when the agency requested a follow-up inspection. Iran is under no legal obligation to permit inspections at sites like Parchin, which are not officially or demonstrably linked to Tehran's nuclear program. Washington, which accuses Iran of developing nuclear weapons under cover of an atomic energy program, believes Tehran has been conducting tests and experiments related to nuclear bombmaking at Parchin. Jafarzadeh said the underground enrichment site was in a section of Parchin known as ``Plan 1.'' Iran denies wanting weapons and insists its nuclear ambitions are limited to the peaceful generation of electricity. The IAEA has found no compelling evidence that Iran has a weapons program, but agency inspectors say they are not convinced Iran has declared all of its nuclear facilities. Jafarzadeh made his latest allegation one day after Iran agreed to continue talks with France, Britain and Germany, who are trying to persuade Tehran to abandon its enrichment program in exchange for economic and political incentives. But he denied the timing was anything other than a coincidence. ``This information just came in. I received it yesterday. It is very fresh, not something that came in weeks ago,'' he said. Iran refuses to consider terminating its enrichment program, but decided not to withdraw from the talks and continues to suspend its uranium enrichment program as a confidence building measure. The United States, which lists the NCRI as a terrorist organization, has shut down the NCRI's Washington offices. Jafarzadeh now runs a think-thank there called Strategic Policy Consulting, Inc. ---- Exile Alleges Secret Storage Area in Iran By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS March 24, 2005 Filed at 6:54 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Nuclear-Iran.html VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Iranian engineers have built a secret underground storage area for use as a uranium enrichment facility in a restricted military area of interest to the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, an Iranian exile said Thursday. The exile -- Alireza Jafarzadeh -- said by telephone from Washington that the ``camouflaged tunnel-like facility'' was completed recently at Parchin, a sprawling Iranian military complex about 20 miles southeast of Tehran. An Iranian official who asked to remain anonymous dismissed the allegation as ``ridiculous'' and a senior diplomat familiar with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. watchdog, said the IAEA was unaware of such developments. The senior diplomat told The Associated Press that if such construction did occur without the agency being notified, it would constitute a violation of an agreement by the Iranians to suspend all uranium-enrichment activity. Corey Hinderstein, with the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, said that satellite imagery made public by her organization last summer showed ``some kind of tunneling ... like a major excavation'' at the Parchin site. Because ISIS has not seen more recent satellite images, it cannot comment on whether the construction has been finished, she said. She said that because of that time lag she could not comment on another assertion by Jafarzadeh that Iranian engineers were now in the process of building another weapons-related project in an area of Parchin normally reserved for missile work. In separate e-mailed comments, ISIS said the construction visible in the images from last year ``may have also have involved tunneling into the side of the hill, (but) the actual purpose of this site is difficult to discern.'' The freeze is in effect while Iran and European negotiators discuss ways of banishing international suspicions that Iran wants to use the technology to make nuclear weapons. France, Germany and Britain, the main European negotiators, insist that Iran pledge to scrap or permanently suspend its plans to enrich uranium. Tehran, which says it needs the technology to generate electricity, refuses to go beyond a suspension during the talks. The third round of talks wound up in Paris on Wednesday with Iran refusing to mothball the program but apparently willing to maintain the temporary freeze. Jafarzadeh, asked specifically if enrichment activities were going on at the underground storage area, said his contacts, whom he described as ``having access to information inside the Iranian regime,'' did not know whether the equipment was just being stored or was active. Jafarzadeh is the former spokesman of National Coalition of Resistance of Iran, banned in the United States by Washington, which considers it a terrorist organization. IAEA inspectors visited Parchin early this year and were allowed to take environmental samples from some of its buildings to test U.S. allegations that Iran may be testing high-explosive components for nuclear weapons by using an inert core of depleted uranium as a dry run for a bomb that would use fissile material. But Tehran turned down a renewed agency request to visit other parts of the site last month, arguing it was not bound under agreements with the agency to open Parchin or other facilities not clearly linked to Iran's nuclear program to outside survey. Jafarzadeh, who now runs the Washington-based Strategic Policy Consulting think tank, revealed key information about two hidden nuclear sites in Iran in 2002 that helped uncover nearly two decades of covert Iranian atomic activity -- and sparked present fears that Tehran wants to build the bomb. On the Net: http://www.iaea.org --------- korea U.S. sees N. Korea as an equal in nuclear talks - Seoul Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:54 PM ET http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=5GCTQCIQ2JNXYCRBAEOCFEY?type=topNews&storyID=8001295 SEOUL (Reuters) - The United States is prepared to talk to North Korea as an equal, and Pyongyang should take recent comments by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as a signal of that commitment, South Korea's foreign minister said on Friday. Rice, during an Asian visit last week, called the North "a sovereign state," which foreign policy analysts said was an attempt to appease Pyongyang's demand that she apologise for having called it "an outpost of tyranny." "North Korea keeps talking about not getting treated right at the six-party talks, so (Rice) was noting a willingness to have dialogue as equals," South Korea's Yonhap news agency quoted Foreign Minister Ban Ki-moon as telling a seminar. North Korea has said a condition for a resumption of stalled six-party disarmament talks would be for the United States to cease a policy toward it that Pyongyang sees as hostile. Three rounds of the talks by the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia have produced little progress. Pyongyang has said joint military drills by South Korea and the United States, which end on Friday, were proof that Washington was planning a nuclear war against it. Ban said North Korea had not shut the door on the six-party talks completely. He also denied there was a June deadline, mentioned by a diplomatic source in Tokyo, for the North to return to the talks. "President Bush said there was no deadline, and we haven't set a deadline," Ban said, but added, "We have waited considerably, because June would be one year (from the last round.)" U.S. President George W. Bush has denied there was a deadline and urged the North to return to the talks. North Korea's premier Pak Pong-ju is visiting China, its key ally, but there was no breakthrough in any decision on the six-party talks, Beijing said on Thursday. Pak, a technocrat whose specialty is in economic policy, was likely seeking a large-scale aid package from China, linking it to returning to the talks, a key South Korean expert on the communist state said. "Depending on the scale of assistance, North Korea's position can soften or turn to a more cooperative one," former Unification Minister Jeong Se-hyun said. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- idaho Nuclear Development Booms in Idaho IDAHO FALLS, Idaho, March 24, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2005/2005-03-24-02.asp Big changes are taking place at the Idaho National Laboratory on the Snake River Plain in southeastern Idaho. A new contractor has been chosen to clean up the large amounts of highly radioactive nuclear waste at the U.S. Energy Department facility. Advanced nuclear energy systems are planned for development there, and the lab may become the production site for plutonium-238 power systems. The plutonium-238 fueled radioisotope power systems are used to provide power for classified national security missions. The Department of Energy (DOE) is preparing an environmental impact statement for producing plutonium-238 in Idaho that is due out in late April. Meanwhile, the DOE is changing contractors at the Idaho National Laboratory. Under a contract announced Wednesday, CH2M-WGI will take over management of the cleanup work on May 1 from Bechtel BWXT Idaho. CH2M-WG Idaho will be responsible for treatment and disposal of radioactive waste; retrieval, disposal and other remediation related to buried waste; safe management of spent nuclear fuel; disposition of nuclear materials; disposition of reactor and non-reactor nuclear facilities; and other environmental remediation activities through the year 2012. “We are pleased to announce this selection to ensure a seamless transition and continued excellence in our cleanup effort,” Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Wednesday. “The Idaho Cleanup Project is a very complex and technically challenging project requiring significant skill and expertise," Bodman said. "By awarding this contract, we are one step closer to achieving the vision laid out by Idaho’s 2012 plan.” The contract, which runs through September 20, 2012, is valued at about $2.9 billion and was selected as a result of competition to determine the best value for the taxpayer, said Bodman. It requires that over 2,600 employees now employed in the cleanup effort be offered employment by CH2M-WGI. About the size of the state of Rhode Island, the Idaho National Laboratory is located on 890 square miles in southeastern Idaho, west of the Snake River and 32 miles west of the city of Idaho Falls. The laboratory lies within the original aboriginal territories of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall reservation. Known until February as the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), the site then was expanded to include the Argonne National Laboratory West and is now known as the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). The laboratory is situated above the upstream end of the Snake River Aquifer. It was established in 1949 for nuclear reactor research, nuclear navy research, training, nuclear waste storage, reprocessing irradiated fuel, and for the storage and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste from nuclear weapons production. Fifty-two test reactors, most of them first-of-a-kind, were built and operated at the site, including the Navy's first prototype nuclear propulsion plant and the first reactor to utilize nuclear fission to produce a usable quantity of electricity. Of these, three reactors are still operating. "Most had meltdowns, either intentionally or unintentionally. This legacy of nuclear waste either has, or is today, contaminating the Snake River Aquifer," warns the Snake River Alliance, a citizen watchdog group. The Snake River Aquifer is North America's second largest unified aquifer, containing about the same amount of water as Lake Erie. The aquifer has been designated a "sole-source" aquifer by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as it is the only source of drinking, cooking, cleaning, and bathing water for more than 270,000 people in southern Idaho. "Twenty-five percent of the nation's potatoes and 75 percent of the nation's trout are produced with Snake River Aquifer water," says the Snake River Alliance. The legacy of radioactive waste at INL is expected to take at least 11 more years to clean up, even on the accelerated schedule announced by the DOE in 2002. From the 1950s through the 70s, waste containing plutonium from the production of nuclear weapons was buried in shallow unlined pits and trenches at the facility. In addition, "millions of gallons of high-level liquid waste from reprocessing the Navy's spent nuclear fuel to recover weapons grade uranium was stored in underground tanks, often with leaking pipes contaminating the soil and groundwater," the Snake River Alliance says. Today, the Idaho National Laboratory houses naval spent fuel as well as spent fuel and debris from the Three Mile Island reactor in Pennsylvania, where the nation's worst nuclear accident occurred in 1979. In addition, INL houses some 65,000 cubic meters of transuranic waste, at least half of the U.S. burden of this type of waste. It is being trucked to the WIPP isolation facility in New Mexico at the rate of about 2,000 cubic meters per month. All transuranic waste must be out of the state by December 31, 2018. The INL site now contains at least one million gallons of liquid sodiumbearing waste, as well as newly generated waste, at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC), which occupies about 200 acres of the laboratory site. In addition, 4,400 cubic meters of solid high-level nuclear waste is stored at INL. INL is still accumulating spent nuclear fuel from naval vessels. Under a 1995 court ordered settlement agreement with the state of Idaho and the EPA, the laboratory can receive only those shipments of naval spent fuel that are necessary to meet national security requirements to fuel or refuel nuclear powered submarines, surface warships, or naval prototype or training reactors. In any case, shipments of naval spent fuel to INL from 1995 through 2035 may not exceed 55 metric tons of spent fuel, equivalent to about 500 truck shipments. INTEC is a focal point for implementing the 1995 settlement agreement. Key objectives of this agreement are to remove all spent fuel from Idaho by the end of 2034, and to treat all high-level waste currently stored at INEEL so that it is ready to be moved out of Idaho by 2035. This highly radioactive waste is supposed to be headed for the Yucca Mountain geologic repository in Nevada, now undergoing a contentious licensing process before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. INTEC is responsible for INL's High-Level Waste Tank Farm - 11 underground stainless steel tanks used to store the radioactive liquid waste generated during the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel and plant decontamination work. Most of the tank farm liquid has been calcined, reducing the volume and converting it to a more stable solid form. About one million gallons of liquid waste remains stored in underground tanks. The corrosion-resistant tanks are encased in concrete vaults which have sumps and leak detection. One tank is always kept empty for use as a transfer backup should a problem develop with one of the other 10 tanks, says INTEC. While no leakage has been detected from the tanks, "Some leaks from transfer lines outside the tanks have occurred, and this drives the current cleanup program," INTEC says. Under an agreement with the state of Idaho, all waste must be removed from the tanks by 2012. DOE is currently evaluating technologies to accomplish that. Waste that has been buried for decades is being retrieved from a half-acre portion of the INL’s Subsurface Disposal Area at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. In January, workers began removing selected waste containing uranium, plutonium and americium from a portion of an area known as Pit 4. The project will also remove volatile organic compounds, which are the most mobile constituents in the waste. Pit 4 was chosen for this retrieval action because it is known to contain some of the highest levels of transuranic contamination in the Subsurface Disposal Area. Under a 1991 federal-state agreement, all INL environmental cleanup activities were to be completed by the year 2070. Then, in 2002, DOE, the EPA and the state agreed to accelerate cleanup at INL. Under the accelerated timeline, all cleanup work is to be completed by 2020 or even as early as 2016. By accelerating the remediation activities, not only will the risks to human health and the environment be reduced faster, the DOE and citizens' groups say, but cleanup costs can be reduced by billions of dollars. The cleanup status of all major areas across the laboratory site is detailed here. New Nuclear Missions for the Idaho National Lab While cleanup of legacy waste is taking place, the Energy Department is planning new nuclear activities at INL. In February, the Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC (BEA) assumed the management and operational responsibility for the Idaho National Laboratory under a $4.8 billion, 10 year contract to transform the Idaho facility into the what the DOE calls the nation's “preeminent” nuclear energy laboratory. BEA is owned by the Battelle Memorial Institute. Team members include BWXT Services Inc. of Lynchburg, Virginia; Washington Group International of Boise, Idaho; the Electric Power Research Institute and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Leading the Battelle team is Laboratory Director John Grossenbacher. “We have been given a unique opportunity to lead a national renaissance in nuclear energy and build a world class national laboratory,” he said. One of the laboratory's major tasks is to develop a system that uses nuclear energy to produce hydrogen as a transportation fuel, to reduce the nation’s dependence on imported fossil fuel. "This work supports the President’s National Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and is an important element in the development of a clean and efficient hydrogen economy in the United States," the DOE said in a February statement. The new plan for the laboratory includes programs in areas such as materials science, chemistry, environmental science, computation and simulation. The lab will help protect the country’s critical infrastructure and prevent the proliferation of nuclear material, the DOE said. One of the laboratory’s major tasks will be to lead an international research and development effort to create advanced nuclear energy technology to provide for U.S. electrical demand. INL and Argonne National Lab are organizing and coordinating the Generation IV Initiative to develop nuclear technologies that achieve safety performance, waste reduction, and proliferation resistance. The DOE says Generation IV should provide a nuclear energy option that is economically competitive and ready for deployment before 2030. Internationally, the two labs have organized meetings of the Generation IV International Forum. Ten countries have so far joined the United States: the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Canada, Argentina, South Korea, Republic of South Africa, Switzerland, and Brazil. Six advanced nuclear technologies have been chosen for exploration. They are described here. Production of Plutonium-238 Power Systems at INL The INL is being considered as the site for locating all of the nuclear activities associated with production of plutonium-238 fueled radioisotope power systems. Currently this work is done in New Mexico and Tennessee, as well as Idaho. Brad Bugger, spokesman for the DOE's Idaho Operations Office, says the DOE is currently looking at two alternatives for producing plutonium-238 power systems from radioactive neptunium-237. The process involves placing neptunium-237 targets into the Advanced Test Reactor at the INL, and irradiating it, thereby converting some of the neptunium into plutonium-238. "The first would involve shipping neptunium-237 from Idaho, where it will be stored, to Oak Ridge in Tennessee, where it would be fabricated into targets. Then it would be shipped back to Idaho for irradiation, then down to Los Alamos in New Mexico for processing, then finally back to Idaho for construction of the radioisotope power systems. The second alternative would be to consolidate all of that work in Idaho," Bugger said. DOE officials maintain they intend to begin construction of the INL plutonium facility in October of this year. The Snake River Alliance is organizing public meetings across Idaho to inform people of the potential risks involved with such a proposal. The DOE is in the scoping phase of developing the environmental impact statement. The agency has held meetings in Wyoming, New Mexico, Tennessee and Washington, DC, asking the public for other alternatives that the department should consider. Bugger acknowledges that "some citizens are concerned that plutonium or other potentially hazardous materials might escape from the production facilities. In particular, they questioned the reliability of the high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters that are used to protect the air from hazardous particles, especially under accident scenarios." While he could not answer this concern, Bugger said, "The Department has heard the public, loud and clear, about how important it is to look at this concern." At the scoping meetings some citizens have questioned why the DOE cannot discuss the classified national security uses of the radioisotope power systems. "Some have inferred from this that the systems will be used in nuclear weapons. Others have noted that Pu-238 has been used in nuclear weapons systems in the past," said Bugger. "I understand that some citizens may never accept the fact that we can’t tell them what those uses are, but we can’t change the rules of the game," said Bugger. "I can tell you that the systems produced for national security are not intended for use in nuclear weapons or to support nuclear weapons, and will not be used in space. The systems will be used to produce power for the national security mission." There has been a good deal of concern raised about nuclear waste, how much would be generated by this project and what would happen to it. In reply, Bugger said, " DOE will do everything it can to minimize the amount of waste generated by this project, and to reuse as much neptunium and plutonium as possible, because they are both very valuable materials. We also will comply with all existing laws and regulations governing this waste, and we intend to ship whatever waste is finally generated off-site to regulated disposal facilities." There has been concern raised about the transportation of the nuclear materials that will be used in the production of the plutonium-238, and of the finished radioisotope power systems, especially by the Shoshone-Bannock tribes whose lands would be crossed by trucks bearing the radioactive materials. Some at scoping hearings asked if the consolidation of the plutonium-238 in Idaho might make the INL a bigger terrorist target. To this concern, Bugger would only say, "Terrorism is always a concern we take very seriously at the INL, no matter what the potential target – a reactor, waste storage, special nuclear materials, etc. – might be. We have a well trained, well-armed security force, a sophisticated information network and the full resources of the United States government to rely upon." The laboratory will also lead the establishment of the Center for Advanced Energy Studies, a collaborative effort between the state of Idaho, the laboratory and universities in Idaho and across the country. This center will bring academia into the life of the laboratory and provide students and professors access to the laboratory’s unique capabilities. The DOE intends that through this center, the INL will become a nationally and internationally recognized focal point in the advancement of education in energy science and technology. -------- nevada Porter requests falsified papers regarding Yucca By Suzanne Struglinski LAS VEGAS SUN WASHINGTON BUREAU March 24, 2005 http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/sun/2005/mar/24/518501154.html?"yucca%20Mountain" WASHINGTON -- Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., has asked the Energy and Interior departments to turn in all alleged falsified documents related to the Yucca Mountain project to his House subcommittee by the end of the month. Porter, who is chairman of the House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee, plans to conduct a hearing April 5 in Washington, examining the recently discovered documentation problems now under investigation by both departments. Last week, the Energy Department announced that it discovered e-mails from 1998 that indicated U.S. Geological Survey employees might have falsified scientific data while studying Yucca Mountain to serve as the nation's repository for nuclear waste. The fabricated data could affect water and climate studies at the mountain. Porter wants the departments to produce all 20 e-mails and any other documents and records related to the problems, unredacted, by March 29. Ron Martinson, the subcommittee staff director, said it is important for the subcommittee to get the clearest information and as close to the original documents as possible. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., are scheduled to testify before the panel as well as Gov. Kenny Guinn and Virginia-based attorney Joe Egan, who represents the state on Nevada issues. Bob Loux, executive director for the Agency for Nuclear Project and Steve Frishman, a technical consultant for the state will also testify. Porter has also invited Charles Groat, director of the U.S. Geological Survey, Ted Garrish, deputy director of the Yucca Mountain project, Earl Devaney, the Interior Department inspector general and Gregory Friedman, the Energy Department inspector general and B. John Garrick, chairman of the Nuclear Waste Techincal Review board to testify. -------- new york Entergy gets permission to increase capacity at Indian Point 3 March 24, 2005, 4:31 PM EST (AP) http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--indianpoint0324mar24,0,5789292.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork BUCHANAN, N.Y. _ The Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted permission on Thursday for an upgrade of the Indian Point 3 nuclear power plant in Westchester County, which will increase its generating capacity by about 5 percent. The power plant, currently off-line for refueling and maintenance, will be allowed to produce up to 1,024 megawatts of electricity when it reopens next month, up from 979 megawatts. Its twin plant, Indian Point 2, was upgraded last year to 1,040 megawatts, up from 995. Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owner of the plants in Buchanan, said the combined extra power is enough to serve about 90,000 homes. Upgrades are achieved by improving minor plant components and demonstrating that a plant's existing design can handle the increased power level, the NRC said. The commission said it received no comments about Entergy's upgrade application during a public comment period. -------- MILITARY -------- asia Mandatory military service turns Singapore boys into fighting men SINGAPORE (AFP) Mar 24, 2005 Agence France-Presse http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050324030850.znbmjmzq.html It's a scorching day and the breezy beaches and air-conditioned shopping malls beckon Singapore's youth, but for hundreds of teenage boys, hanging out is totally out of the question. The latest recruits for the city-state's mandatory National Serviceprogram are sweating their way through basic military training at Pulau Tekong, a fortified Singaporean island bristling with rifles and testosterone. "Where's your aggression?" an officer growls at trainees, their pimply faces grimacing under camouflage paint as they kick at imaginary enemy troops or squirm on their backs to make it past a prickly canopy of barbed wire. Elsewhere on the island, trainees march in tight columns, undergo marksmanship training and learn parade precision in the shadow of jetliners taking off and landing at Changi international airport. All able-bodied boys in Singapore, including both citizens and permanent residents, are eligible to be conscripted for two years of full-time military service once they turn 18. "Whether you are Malay, Chinese or Indian, or any other race, whether your father is rich, your father is a hawker, or your father is a banker, we put them in together to train together," says Colonel Winston Toh, the military's director of national service affairs. Not that the kids have much choice. Any eligible Singaporean boy who fails to turn up for National Service can be prosecuted. If he is convicted, the penalty is imprisonment for up to three years or a fine of up to 5,000 Singapore dollars (3,000 US), or both. While some parents and youngsters see it as an interruption in studies and careers, others accept it as an inevitable, and beneficial, rite of passage for Singaporean boys. Bespectacled recruit Andy Lee, who had just completed junior college, looks sullen and a little dazed when he arrives with a fresh batch in Pulau Tekong. He hugs his parents tightly when it is time for them to leave him on the island for two weeks of orientation, after which he will enjoy weekends off. "I'm definitely ready for NS. It's time, it's now my turn," he says. Pulau Tekong is where it all begins for fresh recruits, with nine gruelling weeks of basic training before they are farmed out to officer school or duties in the various armed services. After their National Service stint, they join the reserves and resume their education or enter the workforce. Reservists are called up annually until their mid-thirties to refresh their skills and make sure they remain physically fit. The NS program was launched two years after Singapore's bitter separation from Malaysia in 1965. Singapore's long-term prospects at the time were uncertain, its phenomenal rate of industrialization just a dream. "We thought it important that people in and outside Singapore know that despite our small population, we could mobilize a large fighting force at short notice," founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew wrote in his memoirs. Singapore got crucial help from Israel, which sent advisers to help set up its armed forces in 1965 after other countries refused. But there was the risk of a backlash from Muslims in the region against the presence of Israelis. "To disguise their presence, we called them 'Mexicans'. They looked swarthy enough," Lee wrote, adding that a large standing army would have been costly and conscription "would bring political and social benefits". Four decades later, Singapore can call up some 350,000 fighters within hours for combat, mostly reservists trained under the National Service program, a staggering number for a country with just 3.4 million citizens and permanent residents. Backed by Southeast Asia's most lethal military arsenal -- thanks to heavy defense spending and explosive economic growth -- this "people's army" serves as a powerful disincentive for any country to mess around with Singapore. "The whole defense concept is anchored on two very fundamental principles. One is diplomacy, the second one is deterrence," Col. Toh tells AFP in an interview in a suburban camp. "If all else fails and really there's no choice, we must have the capability to deter people from even thinking about any ill intent at all." Col. Toh says Singapore's defense policies underpin the stability that has brought in massive foreign investment through the years, and National Service promotes social cohesion in the multi-racial, predominantly ethnic Chinese immigrant society. To test the readiness of reservists, coded messages periodically appear on cinema and television screens alerting members of specific units to turn up at rendezvous points in full military uniform, under pain of a fine. In the event of a real war, they would be handed rifles and ammunition. Because of its small land area and high population density, Singapore also sends trainees to friendly countries like Thailand, Taiwan, Brunei and Australia for exercises. Permanent residents who reach the cutoff age must undergo the same military training if they want to continue living in Singapore. As a result, children of westerners or mixed-raced couples train alongside "native" Singaporeans. Nicolas Huang, a broad-shouldered half-German boy, completed basic training in early March. Asked if he felt he received any particular treatment from officers, he smiles and says: "I've been in the Singapore system since I was born. They just call me 'ang moh' (white person), but it's all just for fun, no harm done." The physical training is still tough -- obese boys usually leave National Service as buff young men -- but times have changed since the rudimentary years of the program. In a concession to the much more comfortable modern lifestyle of Singaporeans, trainees get commercially catered food in Pulau Tekong. The mattresses in the bunks are thick and comfortable, and there's a television in the lounge. The recruits are even asked to grade the canteen food in order to keep the caterers on their toes. And for a generation raised on electronic video games, technology plays a key role in sharpening recruits' combat skills. Before firing a real weapon in the rifle range, recruits use M-16 simulators in an air-conditioned room with a surround sound system, shooting at static or moving targets on a large video screen occupying the far wall. The results are immediately flashed on the screen, and mistakes in body position, breathing technique and weapon angle are pointed out. Commercially available computer games with combat themes are also modified for use by the military to complement live or simulated exercises. Even exercise routines like sit-ups and chin-ups are electronically tallied in a wired gymnasium to make sure recruits perform the minimum repetitions. "Yes, the boys love it," Lieutenant Colonel Ng Wai Kit, head of the Singapore Army's training development branch, says of the widespread use of technology. "They are into it." -------- prisoners of war Army Documents Shed Light on CIA 'Ghosting' Systematic Concealment Of Detainees Is Found By Josh White Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, March 24, 2005; Page A15 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61206-2005Mar23.html Senior defense officials have described the CIA practice of hiding unregistered detainees at Abu Ghraib prison as ad hoc and unauthorized, but a review of Army documents shows that the agency's "ghosting" program was systematic and known to three senior intelligence officials in Iraq. Army and Pentagon investigations have acknowledged a limited amount of ghosting, but more than a dozen documents and investigative statements obtained by The Washington Post show that unregistered CIA detainees were brought to Abu Ghraib several times a week in late 2003, and that they were hidden in a special row of cells. Military police soldiers came up with a rough system to keep track of such detainees with single-digit identification numbers, while others were dropped off unnamed, unannounced and unaccounted for. Military policemen guard a processing center at the Abu Ghraib prison, where unregistered CIA detainees were brought several times a week in late 2003, documents show. (John Moore -- AP) The documents show that the highest-ranking general in Iraq at the time acknowledged that his top intelligence officer was aware the CIA was using Abu Ghraib's cells, a policy the general abruptly stopped when questions arose. CIA operatives began looking for a central place to put detainees captured during secret missions in Iraq in mid-2003, and an early choice was the high-security Camp Cropper near Baghdad International Airport, where CIA officers hoped to deposit a few of their prisoners without registering their names. Lt. Col. Ronald G. Chew, the military police commander there, told Army investigators later that he "argued against the practice" and turned the operatives away. Instead, according to the documents, the CIA quickly looked to Abu Ghraib, then a dusty and decrepit compound outside Baghdad that was slated to be transformed into the central U.S. detention center for the war. According to statements investigators took from soldiers and officers who worked at the prison, a stream of ghost detainees began arriving in September 2003, after military intelligence officers and the CIA came to an arrangement that kept the International Committee of the Red Cross and other humanitarian organizations from knowing the detainees existed. The investigative documents show that Col. Thomas M. Pappas and Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan, the top two military intelligence officers at the prison, took part in discussions with the CIA on how to handle agency detainees. Pappas and Jordan are still under investigation, and Army officials said they believe a decision about whether to discipline them could come by the end of the month. Keeping ghost detainees was harshly criticized by Army investigators who looked into abuse at the prison, and human rights groups condemn the practice. The Red Cross regularly inspects prisons and is supposed to have access to all inmates to ensure their rights are protected. The most recent Pentagon review of detainee abuse was released this month by Vice Adm. Albert T. Church III, who told reporters that his probe found 30 cases in which prisoners were held off the books, including one kept secretly for about 45 days. According to investigative statements by some soldiers, such detainees were left in isolation cells for weeks without being interrogated, they were sometimes registered under fake names and essentially lost, and the rules that applied to thousands of other detainees did not always apply to them. Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the top Army officer in Iraq at the time, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last spring that there was no system of keeping such detainees at Abu Ghraib, but he later acknowledged two cases in which it had happened, including that of one detainee who died in custody and another who was kept without registration at the behest of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. In a deposition on Sept. 1, 2004, however, Sanchez said he learned after the hearing that there had been a "staff officer understanding" that allowed ghosting by the "Other Government Agency," a code term for the CIA. He said in the deposition that Maj. Gen. Barbara Fast, his top intelligence officer in Iraq, "had been made aware of the allocation of cells for use by OGA." Fast has been cleared of wrongdoing in Abu Ghraib investigations and last week assumed command of the U.S. Army Intelligence Center at Fort Huachuca, Ariz. "I do know now that there was not a procedure in place to properly inprocess and assign ISNs [internee serial numbers] for those individuals," Sanchez said, according to a transcript of the deposition obtained by The Post. "And when we found out about that, that was fixed." One of the highly publicized incidents at Abu Ghraib was the death of an unregistered CIA detainee in a shower room in November 2003. Another case that year allegedly gained Sanchez's attention as well, when the CIA logged three Saudi nationals into Abu Ghraib under false names. In one of several Pentagon studies of detainee abuse, Army Maj. Gen. George Fay reported last August that the three hospital workers had been swept up by the CIA. The Saudi government asked the United States if it held the three but was told no, because their real names were not registered. A statement to investigators provided more detail. Darius Khaghani, chief of interrogation operations under Sanchez's command, said it became "a very political situation." Over several weeks, he said, requests to locate the Saudi citizens came from L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh and then from the office of Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Finally, soldiers "came up with the idea to question three detainees" who had been brought to the prison by the CIA, "even though they were registered under other names," Khaghani said. "In short order, the three were released and transported to Saudi Arabia on a CIA aircraft, and later I heard the chief of station was relieved over this matter and recalled back to Washington." An intelligence official last week disputed the allegation that the station chief was removed for that reason, and said the change was made to bring in a more experienced person. Nail Jubeir, spokesman for the Saudi Embassy in Washington, said that as Saudi officials made unsuccessful requests to find the three men, they kept emphasizing that they were humanitarian workers helping the coalition. "It's always disturbing when you have citizens detained under false names," Jubeir said. "It took some time to get them released." The investigative documents showed that several soldiers and civilian contractors reported seeing ghost detainees and being confused about their status and rules pertaining to them. Luke Olander, a civilian intelligence analyst, said: "We had intelligence reports from one particular detainee and the report showed we did not have him at our facility, but he was there." Spec. John Harold Ketzer, an interrogator, said that the ghosts were "off-limits for Army interrogators" and that "some OGA detainees have waited for months for OGA interrogators to see them, violating the 30[-day] isolation limit rule." Capt. Carolyn Wood, a military intelligence officer in charge of interrogations at Abu Ghraib, told investigators that she was one of a few who objected to the CIA using her facility for "overnight parking" of unregistered prisoners and that she expressed her "disapproval" to Pappas and Jordan. "But I was overridden," she said, and ghosting continued at least until her departure on Dec. 4, 2003. Chief Warrant Officer Jon D. Graham, a member of the 519th Military Intelligence Battalion, told investigators that "OGA [CIA] had what we refer to as ghost detainees that were 'buried' or hidden in our facility," adding that he also objected to the practice. Jordan, in his statement to investigators, said there was a memorandum of understanding between his unit and "OGA" to guide the housing of prisoners brought in by the CIA and Task Force 1-21, a secret Special Operations unit. He said they "dropped off a detainee about two to three times a week." Pappas told investigators he initially "had concerns over this arrangement" and asked Col. Steven Boltz, then the second-ranking military intelligence officer in Iraq, if they were going to continue housing ghosts. "He said yes, to facilitate their request," Pappas said, according to his statement. "They would drop off detainees without notifying us." -------- space Lockheed Martin To Build A2100 Small-Class GEO Satellite For SES Washington DC (SPX) Mar 24, 2005 SpaceDaily http://www.spacedaily.com/news/satellite-biz-05zm.html Lockheed Martin announced at the Satellite 2005 conference Wednesday that it has been awarded a contract for an A2100 geosynchronous satellite by SES Global, to be built for and operated by SES Americom, an SES Global company. The satellite, designated AMC-18, will be located at orbital location 105 degrees West and will provide distribution of premium cable programming across North America. Contract terms were not disclosed. "AMC-18, which is based on our A2100A platform, marks Lockheed Martin's 11th satellite ordered in the 1- to 4-kW small-class satellite range. It is a testament to the A2100's versatile power capability and competitiveness for small GEO-class missions," said Lockheed Martin Commercial Space Systems (LMCSS) President Ted Gavrilis. "We are extremely gratified with the continuing support from a world-class organization such as SES entrusting its critical business requirements to Lockheed Martin and the A2100 platform." Bryan McGuirk, Senior Vice President, SES Americom North American Media Services, said, "The plan to launch the AMC-18 satellite is a reflection of the success of our HD-PRIME neighborhood on AMC-10 and 11 and underscores our commitment to the growth of HDTV program services in the U.S." He continued, "The AMC-18 spacecraft will take full advantage of the quality performance heritage built into the A2100 since its inception more than a decade ago." AMC-18 will carry twenty-four 36 MHz C-band transponders and will be used to provide cable television services to the 50 United States and the Caribbean. AMC-18 is expected to provide more than 15 years of design life and is scheduled for launch during the second half of 2006. The satellite will expand SES Americom's fleet of satellites, which provide distribution of cable, broadcast television and radio, telecommunications services, business television and broadband data throughout the Americas and transoceanic regions. AMC-18 is the 14th A2100 series spacecraft designed and built for SES Americom by Lockheed Martin. In 2004, Lockheed Martin successfully delivered four satellites for SES Americom: AMC-10, launched in February; AMC-11, launched in May; AMC-15, launched in August; and AMC-16, launched in December. The Lockheed Martin A2100 geosynchronous spacecraft series is designed to meet a wide variety of telecommunications needs including Ka-band broadband and broadcast services, fixed satellite services in C-band and Ku-band payload configurations, high-power direct broadcast services using the Ku-band frequency spectrum, and mobile satellite services using UHF, L-band and S-band payloads. The A2100's modular design features a reduction in parts, simplified construction, increased on-orbit reliability and reduced weight and cost. -- AMC-12 Successfully Completes IOT; Slated For Operations In Early April Princeton NJ (SPX) Mar 22, 2005 SES Americom, an SES Global company, announced Monday that the Americom-12 (AMC-12) satellite that was launched on February 3, 2005, has successfully completed a full battery of in-orbit-tests and is now being drifted into its 37.5 degrees West orbital location. -------- spies Pentagon Increases Its Spying Markedly By Mark Mazzetti and Greg Miller, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers, March 24, 2005 http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-intel24mar24,1,7133421.story?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true WASHINGTON — The Pentagon's new emphasis on intelligence gathering overseas has led to a major expansion of espionage operations and a more prominent role for intelligence officers in military decision making and war planning, Defense officials said Wednesday. As part of the plan, the Pentagon is expanding the number of spies and special operations forces abroad and creating new intelligence analysis centers inside military commands worldwide, the officials said. Providing new details about the Pentagon's expanding role in intelligence operations, the officials also acknowledged that the effort is controversial in Washington. The ramped-up activity "rubs some people the wrong way," said a Defense official involved in the expansion. But the Pentagon insists that it is not encroaching on the CIA's turf and says all its activities are permissible under existing laws and executive orders. In some cases, the clandestine operations involve inserting U.S. military personnel in countries unaware of the intrusion. Officials emphasized that the military has previously executed such delicate missions, but never before on such a large scale. "The volume of these smaller-scale clandestine activities has expanded dramatically," said the Defense official. Pentagon officials declined to provide details about specific operations or discuss countries where clandestine activities are underway. But their descriptions make it clear that the Pentagon is seeking to improve its ability to gather intelligence within the borders of such countries as Iran, North Korea and China. "Our ability to collect inside the national territories of these potential adversaries — that is a challenge to us," said another Defense official. "There's no silver bullet here." Defense officials say they have been granted no new authority since the Sept. 11 attacks to carry out "covert" operations — missions that the U.S. government can deny knowing about and that require presidential authority. Covert operations are designed to influence the political, economic or military conditions within another country's borders, and traditionally are carried out by CIA operatives. At the same time, the Pentagon is using a broad definition of its current authority to conduct what it describes instead as "clandestine" operations around the globe — dispatching military teams to gather intelligence about potential adversaries. Unlike covert operations, clandestine missions are not intended to influence the internal dynamics of another nation, according to U.S. officials. "If we're getting information, then the last thing we want to do is influence the country, because then we're detectable," said the first Defense official. Using that definition, Defense and congressional officials said military personnel could enter other countries to gather intelligence without getting advance approval from the president or giving notice to Congress. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has chafed at the Defense Department's reliance on CIA spies to provide on-the-ground intelligence to U.S. military commanders. Rumsfeld ordered an overhaul and upgrade of the Pentagon's intelligence apparatus in 2003, and Wednesday four Defense officials involved in the restructuring discussed some of the results of the effort in interviews with The Times. The changes outlined by the officials lay out the significantly expanded espionage role for the U.S. military. Former officials said there was friction between the Pentagon and the CIA. "This is a turf battle," said retired Army Col. W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle Eastern affairs for the Defense Intelligence Agency. "All of this represents that clandestine human intelligence in the Department of Defense is a growth industry and that it is no longer regarding itself as under the control of the CIA." Defense officials, in interviews Wednesday, outlined an expansion of the military's intelligence-gathering capabilities across an array of fronts, from low-level soldiers canvassing neighborhoods in Baghdad to highly trained Defense Department "case officers" working in undercover assignments overseas. Some senior military officials are concerned about increased emphasis on espionage, fearing that soldiers caught while carrying out clandestine operations might lose the protections accorded under international law for captured military personnel. Unlike CIA operatives, U.S. troops enjoy Geneva Convention protections and their activities are traditionally acknowledged by the U.S. government. One Defense official said that these traditional lines may have blurred, and that in some cases, Washington might not acknowledge the identity of a soldier or civilian captured during an intelligence-gathering mission. "The decision about whether to reveal the affiliation [of that individual] is something that would be handled on a case-by-case basis," he said. The Pentagon is planning to increase the authority of military intelligence officers within each geographic combatant command. Each command will have a general or admiral directing an intelligence apparatus known as a Joint Intelligence and Operation Command, or JIOC, charged with gathering and analyzing intelligence collected in that theater of operations. The first JIOC will be established inside Central Command, based in Tampa, Fla., which has military authority over the Middle East and Central Asia. Under the new plan, the senior intelligence officer within each combatant command could be given authority equivalent to that of the senior Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine and special operations commanders. Much of the Pentagon's new intelligence activity is centered in the Defense Intelligence Agency, the military's main spying service. Under a program called the Strategic Support Branch, the DIA is assembling teams of interrogators, analysts and other intelligence operatives that are being deployed with special forces units on operations around the globe. A DIA official said the teams are to be based in the United States but will have expertise in the language, issues and customs of the region to which they are likely to be deployed. The DIA is also in the midst of a major expansion of its "Defense Humint Service," the military's equivalent of the CIA's overseas spying branch. DHS spies are trained alongside CIA case officers at "the Farm," the CIA's training center in southern Virginia. The number of DHS case officers, which hovered around 100 in the late 1990s, has multiplied in recent years. The DIA official declined to say how many officers are part of the service now, but noted that the agency added 1,200 positions across all job categories last year, and expects to add an additional 600 to 800 this year. Former military and intelligence officials said the DIA's mission was also expanding. Military operatives have long studied other nations' militaries and conducted surveillance of landing zones and bridges where U.S. forces might be inserted. "But DIA is now engaged in doing far grander things with regard to trying to penetrate foreign organizations," said Lang, the former DIA official. "They're trying to penetrate jihadi organizations and they're doing battlefield reconnaissance in preparation for special operations in various places. "It's happening all over the Islamic world." A congressional official familiar with the military's clandestine activities said the Pentagon had "gotten much more aggressive in intelligence collection in a variety of areas" over the last two years. The congressional official also said that though intelligence-gathering operations by the Pentagon weren't considered "covert action," the military nevertheless was often required to provide advance notice to Congress. In particular, sections of the 1947 National Security Act require the military or other agencies to notify lawmakers in advance of "significant" intelligence activities. That is generally interpreted to mean operations in which operatives risk being captured or killed. It also applies to missions that could damage U.S. foreign policy if they were uncovered. Under that definition, almost any operation inside Iran "would qualify as a 'significant' intelligence activity," the congressional official said. He declined to say whether the intelligence committees had received notification of such an operation. ---- Uncovering the Architect of the Holocaust: The CIA Names File on Adolf Eichmann Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 16:06:20 -0500 From: NSARCHIVE National Security Archive Update, March 24, 2005 UNCOVERING THE ARCHITECT OF THE HOLOCAUST: THE CIA NAMES FILE ON ADOLF EICHMANN CIA Surprised by Adolf Eichmann Capture in 1960, File Review Uncovered Eichmann Ties to CIA Assets National Security Archive Posts CIA Names File on Adolf Eichmann Released Under Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act For more information contact: Tamara Feinstein - 202/994-7000 http://www.nsarchive.org Washington D.C., March 24, 2005 - The CIA was surprised by Israeli agents' capture of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Argentina in 1960, and a subsequent CIA file review uncovered extensive ties between Eichmann and men who served as CIA assets and allies, according to the CIA's three-volume Directorate of Operations file and their Directorate of Intelligence file, posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University. Obersturmbannfuhrer (Lt. Col.) Eichmann was originally a member of the SD (Sicherheitsdienst or Security Service ), and went on to head Gestapo Section IV B4 (responsible for Jewish affairs) where he helped plan and implement the Holocaust. Eichmann was captured at the end of World War II by allied forces, but managed to escape the internment camp where he was confined in 1946. On May 2, 1960, Eichmann was apprehended by Israeli secret agents in Argentina - where he had been hiding under an assumed name - and smuggled back to Israel to stand trial for his crimes. After a highly publicized trial in 1961, Eichmann was sentenced to death and executed in 1962. The 289-document names file on Eichmann was compiled by the CIA in response to the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act. It is one of 788 names and subject files released to the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG). The CIA names and subject files total close to 60,000 pages, all of which are available to the public at the National Archives and Record Administration in College Park, Maryland. The names files are unique because they contain post-war operational files from the CIA which are normally exempt from review under the FOIA. (The National Security Archive has previously posted names files on Reinhard Gehlen and Adolf Hitler.) The Eichmann names file reveals CIA attempts to locate relevant documents among captured German records, files in the Berlin Document Center in Germany, and other sources like the International Tracing Service. To help strengthen the close ties between the CIA and Israel's intelligence agencies, the Counterintelligence Staff at the Directorate of Operations (headed by James Angleton) combed through the archives and submitted for further research other German officers names that were mentioned in the Eichmann documents. The consequence was the discovery that some of those linked to Eichmann also had ties to the CIA and the CIA-sponsored West German intelligence service (BND). Click on the link below to view documents from the CIA's Adolf Eichmann names file: http://www.nsarchive.org -------- us 2005 Defense review By David Isby March 24, 2005 Washington Times http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050323-091220-4090r.htm While still largely unnoticed by official Washington, the upcoming 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) has the potential to make lasting changes in how America will be able to fight future conflicts. The results are likely to be more significant and less pre-determined than thought likely a few months ago. Earlier this year, the accepted wisdom in Washington was that the 2005 QDR, scheduled to be completed by February 2006, would reflect the predetermined priorities and course corrections of Presidential Budget Decision 753, which was approved in December. Seen in the context of the perceived conflict between Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the services — one of the many long-running policy games that Washington loves to score — the 2005 QDR would be a top-down solution. Imposed by the office of the secretary defense, it would have minimal service involvement, either to secure "buy-in" to the results or at least to keep them busy and not preparing to implement their preferred agendas regardless of QDR results. Accepted wisdom — once more — may have gotten it wrong. There is an emerging realization that national security would be poorly served by a low-key policy-affirming QDR. The requirements of the continuing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the threats from Iran and North Korea, the war on terrorism and the need to incorporate transformative technologies all constitute critical, and in many ways, competing priorities. The potential cost of avoiding hard questions was perhaps best stated last month by Missouri Democratic Rep. Ike Skelton, ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee: "We can win this war and come out the weaker for it, if we're not very careful." Views such as this have had considerable resonance, especially among those who remember how the military concentration on Vietnam for a decade contributed to the "hollow forces" era of the 1970s. In January, at a meeting with Mr. Rumsfeld of combatant commanders — the four-star senior military warfighters — Gen. John Abizaid of the Central Command, reportedly argued that a narrow-focused QDR would be inadequate. There was an emerging consensus for the view that hard defense decisions have to be made now and cannot be postponed until "after": after Iraq, after budget crises or after Paul Wolfowitz's successor is fully briefed. As a result, the focus of the QDR was broadened, which made it less of a predetermined and limited top-down exercise. It also raised the difficult question of how the Defense Department will be part of the larger national security strategy and how it will operate integrated with other federal agencies that are not involved in the QDR process. These arelarger issues raised — but not resolved — in terms of capabilities required for implementation by the recently issued National Military Strategy and National Defense Strategy documents. Yet it also appears that by originally setting the agenda and budget bottom line in December, Mr. Rumsfeld cut through potential intra-service and inter-service disputes over what is put on the table that could easily have consumed months. The services, already pressed in adjusting their long-range spending plans to new realities, now have limited time to lobby for additional resources. This limited timeframe is further compressed by the decision that 2005 will be a "rolling QDR," with decisions made and implemented before its completion. QDR results will be used to establish priorities for modernizing forces and future threats. Maj. Gen. Ronald Bath, director of Air Force Strategic Planning, described the 2005 QDR as a "marathon run at a sprinter's pace." The services, which have greater resources in terms of skilled personnel to call on in the process, may find this appealing. Whether there will be time to answer the difficult questions raised by the broadened QDR mandate remains to be seen. The Department of Defense may use this emerging momentum to put in place a QDR with guidance that reflects the lessons of September 11, Afghanistan and Iraq, and will last past the end of this administration. Even if this is its goal, it is uncertain whether they will select the 2005 QDR as a vehicle for its implementation. But the failure to do so — producing the limited QDR that Washington originally anticipated — would send a message that this administration is going instead to concentrate on solving the near-term challenges to the military in Iraq and elsewhere. David Isby is a Washington-based author and consultant on national security issues. ---- The Pentagon and 'lawfare' March 24, 2005 Washington Times http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050323-091218-7514r.htm The Pentagon didn't quite call it "lawfare," but there it was, amid the bureaucratese of this year's National Defense Strategy, a candid reference to the ill-intentioned use of international law and the courts to harm American interests. As it reads: "Our strength as a nation state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international fora, judicial processes, and terrorism." We've finally come around, then, after much talk of "asymmetric warfare," to officially defining one type of asymmetric warfare as the use of law for nefarious ends. Better to talk turkey about "lawfare" -- especially in an important document like the NDS, which lays the groundwork for the 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review -- than to pretend it doesn't ever happen. It does. It's not so much the activists and lawyers that the Pentagon is worried about as the people who spin them. For example, U.S. officials know al Qaeda briefs its cadres on U.S. law to prepare them in case of capture. This isn't just a matter of detainees either: During the Iraq war, too, Saddam Hussein's forces intentionally ensnared civilians in combat and sought to portray coalition forces as unlawful attackers. The Iraqis knew Westerners observe the laws of war and condemn attacks on civilians, so they figured -- correctly -- that portraying American and British forces in that light would be a uniquely effective defensive tactic. As it happened, Saddam was routed and the plans were exposed. But the lesson any spin-doctor could tell you, and others undoubtedly learned, was that perception matters. That's not to say Westerners are always innocents in this game. Last year, for instance, the International Court of Justice grossly distorted Article 51 of the U.N. Charter -- the guarantee of self-defense for states under attack -- in its opinion condemning Israel's security fence. Specifically, it claimed that Article 51 applies only when states are the attacker. Such reasoning would seem to require calling the U.S. war against the Taliban illegal. Clearly, these are not the people we want making our security decisions. Some, particularly on the left, are appalled at the Pentagon's language in the NDS. They are confusing wishes with facts. The sad truth is that our enemies know we're a law-abiding people, and that this at times can make us vulnerable. Better to admit it than pretend every well-intentioned prosecutor at the International Criminal Court has all the relevant information. We're pleased and surprised to see acknowledgement of this cropping up in what, by all accounts, is a consensus document. Maybe Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's refusal to sugar coat is rubbing off after all. -------- POLITICS -------- us politics Bush approval slips to 45%, lowest of his presidency By Bill Nichols, USA TODAY 3/24/2005 11:05 PM Updated 3/25/2005 9:07 AM http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-03-24-bush-poll_x.htm WASHINGTON — President Bush's approval rating has fallen to 45%, the lowest point of his presidency, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll. The new poll found the largest drop for Bush came among men, self-described conservatives and churchgoers. By Tom Hanson, AP The finding, in a poll of 1,001 adults Monday through Wednesday, is a dip from 52% in a poll taken last week. Bush's previous lowest rating, 46%, was recorded last May. The White House declined to comment. Republican National Committee spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said that Bush is taking on "tough issues, whether it's to reform Social Security, promoting the spread of democracy or making a renewed pitch to Congress to pass comprehensive energy reform." Independent political analysts said the drop may reflect opposition to the White House and Congress intervening in the Terri Schiavo matter. "You have to wonder if people didn't feel that the president and the Congress couldn't be spending their time working on Social Security and other problems," said Charlie Cook, editor of the non-partisan Cook Political Report. On Monday, Bush signed a bill passed in an unusual weekend session of Congress allowing federal courts to take jurisdiction over a decision by Schiavo's husband, Michael, to have her feeding tube removed. A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll last weekend found that 61% would have a spouse's feeding tube removed under similar circumstances. The new poll found the largest drop for Bush came among men, self-described conservatives and churchgoers. The poll also found an increased number of Democrats. In this survey, 37% said they were Democrats and 32% said they were Republicans. Last week, 32% said they were Democrats and 35% said they were Republicans. Bush's handling of the economy also appears to have contributed to the poll's findings. Bush's economic ratings: • 59% said economic conditions are getting worse, Bush's highest negative number on the economy in two years. • 32% rated economic conditions good or excellent, the lowest rating in over a year. • A Gallup Poll taken in the same period found rising concern about gas costs. Fuel and oil prices tied with unemployment, jobs and wages for top economic concerns. "Any politician pushing a Social Security privatization plan that cuts benefits and increases the national debt by $4.3 trillion would see his or her approval ratings tumble," said Josh Earnest, Democratic National Committe spokesman. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy Ethanol Joins Fuel Mainstream With CBOT Contract USA: March 24, 2005 REUTERS NEWS SERVICE http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/30081/story.htm CHICAGO - Ethanol's role as a viable alternative fuel marched ahead on Wednesday as the Chicago Board of Trade, the No. 2 US futures mart, added corn-based ethanol to its stable of agricultural contracts, helping US producers and users manage market risk. Ethanol is an alcohol usually made from fermented corn or sugar and blended with gasoline. About 12 percent of the US corn crop is projected to be used for ethanol in the coming year, according to the US Department of Agriculture. US ethanol production rose to a record 3.4 billion gallons in 2004, a 21-percent increase on the year and up some 145 percent since 2000. Bernard Dan, CBOT president, said the exchange's corn-based ethanol contract would gain traction with users although one at the New York Board of Trade for sugar-based ethanol had not. "We will leverage the vast liquidity of the corn trading pit and have a prominent market maker," Dan said. "We were also actively engaged with ethanol consumers and producers to make sure our contract meets the need of the underlying market." Noble Americas Corp. will serve as a market maker for the new contract, posting bids and offers to generate liquidity. "The advent of risk management marks a big step forward for the industry," said William Covey, vice president of the clean oil products department at Noble Americas. Promoted as a home-grown, renewable alternative to imported gasoline, corn-based ethanol output in the United States has accelerated in recent years, with production facilities popping up across the nation's corn belt. About 30 percent of all US gasoline supplies now contain ethanol, typically the E10 blend or a 90 percent gasoline/10 percent ethanol mix, said Mark Maher, executive director for powertrain and vehicle integration at General Motors Corp. Ethanol currently accounts for about 3 percent of total US gasoline production. E85 fuel, made from 85 percent ethyl alcohol and 15 percent gasoline, is available on a limited scale and automakers have added E85-capable vehicles. Maher said GM, the largest US automaker, will produce about 400,000 vehicles in 2006 that can run on E85 as well as on regular fuel. GM offers the option for vehicles such as the Chevrolet Avalanche and GMC Yukon and will add an E85 option to the Chevrolet Impala for the 2006 model year. "There's a potential for ethanol to be a significant component of fuel supplies. It won't happen overnight, but it's something we need to nurture," Maher told Reuters at a CBOT bell-ringing ceremony for the new contract. A few hundred US gas stations now offer E85 fuel, including more than 20 in Illinois, according to the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition of Jefferson City, Missouri. If all E85-capable vehicles produced in the United States ran exclusively on the high-ethanol fuel, the US would save about 45 million gallons of gasoline a year, Maher said. CBOT ACTS FIRST TO TRUMP CROSS-TOWN RIVAL The CBOT's close associate and sometime rival the Chicago Mercantile Exchange plans to launch ethanol futures trading on March 29. The CBOT brought forward its launch from an originally planned April 8 to get first-mover advantage. David Lehman, CBOT's managing director for business development said being first to market was important but less so than having "collaboration with the industry" to create a viable hedging tool. Lehman said a new type of futures strategy could be used by producers to help manage processing margins by locking in their purchase price of corn and their sales price for ethanol. "The futures contract will provide stability and certainty to the US ethanol market, which will encourage its production," said Congresswoman Judy Biggert, R-Ill., whose district is a big corn producer. -------- OTHER -------- environment Polluters Pay for Huge New Jersey Hazwaste Landfill Cleanup March 24, 2005 EDISON, New Jersey, (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2005/2005-03-25-094.asp Twelve defendants, including Waste Management, Inc. and Transtech Industries, Inc. have agreed to pay $2.6 million to reimburse federal government costs for the ongoing cleanup of hazardous waste at at one of the largest Superfund sites in New Jersey. Clean-up activities at the the Kin-Buc Landfill Superfund site in Edison are expected to continue for at least the next 20 years, at a total estimated cost of close to $100 million. In a consent decree made public Tuesday by the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the defendants - all former owners and operators of the landfill and former transporters of hazardous substances there - agreed to pay an aditional $100,000 civil penalty for their late performance of certain cleanup actions required by the EPA. The defendants also agreed to invest over $900,000 worth of land and cash in a supplemental environmental project that will protect over 100 acres of land, including sensitive estuarian wetlands, as open space in perpetuity. The defendants are also contributing at least $83,000 toward a wetland restoration and land management project on that land. The decree is subject to a 30 day public comment period. The Kin-Buc site is a 200 acre former municipal, industrial and hazardous waste landfill that began operations in 1947. It accepted large quantities of hazardous liquid waste from 1973 to 1976, when the state of New Jersey revoked its operating permit due to violations of state and federal environmental laws. Kin-Buc is one of the largest Superfund sites in New Jersey, having received over 90 million gallons of hazardous waste, in both drummed and bulk form, during its period of operation. Releases of hazardous substances from the site led the EPA in 1983 to add Kin-Buc to the Superfund List of the most contaminated hazardous waste sites. The agency then issued a series of clean-up orders under which the site has been and continues to be remediated. Under EPA oversight, the defendants have installed underground walls and above-ground caps to contain the contamination and have been operating an on-site treatment plant. “We’ve made great progress in cleaning up Kin-Buc, ensuring that the landfill no longer poses a threat to people’s health,” said Acting EPA Regional Administrator Kathleen Callahan. “This settlement, which includes a penalty and supplemental environmental project beneficial to the Edison community, sends the message that EPA will pursue polluters and compel them to pay for cleanups.” The consent decree also requires Transtech and affiliates to transfer title to over 100 acres of land in and near the site to a nonprofit conservation organization and to record conservation easements prohibiting most forms of use and development of that land. It also requires the preparation and implementation of financing plans, an open space land management plan and a wetland restoration plan - intended to identify, restore, and maintain both historic and current wetlands - and to manage the land in a way that preserves and enhances its value for the environment and for the local community. The nonprofit Clean Land Fund has entered into a contract to assist in reaching out to the community during the planning and development process, an activity required by the consent decree. “We are extremely pleased that Transtech and Waste Management stepped up and agreed to this settlement,” said Assistant Attorney General Thomas Sansonetti. “The people of New Jersey could not have asked for a better result and should feel confident that this agreement will help protect and restore the environment.” Conti Environmental has been the prime contractor and construction manager for the remediation of the Kin-Buc landfill. They have installed a landfill gas collection and flaring system, a 7,000 foot long slurry wall, construction of an aqueous phase leachate collection system of equal length, and installation of a 1,200 linear-foot oil phase leachate collection system. Conti also stabilized 10,000 cubic yards of sediments contaminated with PCBs before placement in the landfill, which was capped with a geomembrane tied into an existing cap installed by Conti in 1980. -------- -------- ACTIVISTS At Least 765 Anti-War Actions Around the U.S. Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:59:35 -0800 (PST) From: UFPJ Action Alerts ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545 ============================================ AT LEAST 765 ANTI-WAR ACTIONS AROUND THE U.S. MARK TWO-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF IRAQ INVASION In at least 765 towns and cities around the United States, people gathered for peace last weekend on the two-year anniversary of invasion of Iraq. Thousands marched, rallied, participated in religious services, and solemnly read the names of those who have been killed in this unjustified and futile war. The extraordinary breadth of the weekend's anti-war activities reflect the vitality of grassroots peace activism. Anti-war events were held in all 50 states, and in more than twice as many communities as during last year's anniversary of the war. Bad weather throughout the country didn't deter people from taking to the streets for peace. Sister Bay, Wisconsin, saw a doubling in the number of local residents willing to protest publicly against the war, as six people braved a snowstorm to display peace signs to passing cars. Despite pouring rain, more than 300 people took part in a two-mile anti-war march in Tucson, Arizona. There were courageous acts of civil resistance: Thirty-five people occupied the office today of Congressman Tom Allen in Portland, Maine, to protest his recent vote in favor of the $82 billion war appropriation. Seventy people shut down a military recruiting center in Eugene, Oregon, for an entire day. In New York City, thirty people were arrested at simultaneous civil disobedience actions at military recruiting centers in Brooklyn and Manhattan. Many events featured family members of active-duty soldiers, veterans of this and previous wars, and relatives of slain servicepeople, all speaking out against the continued U.S. military occupation of Iraq. In Fayetteville, North Carolina, the home of Ft. Bragg, more than 4000 people joined military families and vets to say real support for the troops means bringing them home. It was the largest protest there since Vietnam. We've now received reportbacks from more than 175 different communities where anti-war events took place. (If you haven't sent yours in yet, please write to reportback@unitedforpeace.org) The reports we received from smaller towns and cities are particularly inspiring, reflecting a real growth in anti-war sentiment and organizing in many conservative areas of the country. Some examples: In Sandpoint, Idaho -- a town with a population of about 7000, in a county that voted almost 2-1 for Bush over Kerry -- a lively crowd of 195 peopple took part in a peace march through town, and 120 attended a community forum on war and peace. "The energy was great. Democracy is burgeoning!" wrote Evan Martin, one of the organizers. In Barre, Vermont, a group of 70-100 people held a vigil in front of the Barre Army Recruitment Center. "Though Barre is typically a conservative town many cars and SUVs on this very busy main road were honking in favor of the vigil," wrote Debra Stoleroff. "We felt surprised and hopeful." In Terre Haute, Indiana, organizer Cathy McGuire reports, "Our fear was that it would only be our core group of ten who would come [to our demonstration], and when it turned into 40 we were thrilled…. It looks like we are back in the demonstration business again." In Providence, Rhode Island, the Community Coalition for Peace held a peace march with about 450 participants. "As a result of the event," organizer Mark Stahl reports, "we doubled the size of our listserv membership and experienced a resurgence of enthusiasm and initiative in building for the future." Glade Church in Blacksburg, VA, hosted a candlelight peace vigil with about 20 participants -- the first directly anti-war event held at the church in recent years. A vigil, march, and town hall meeting in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, drew more than 500 participants -- making it, in the words of organizer Matthew Smucker, "the largest anti-war event in Lancaster at least in the past three ddecades, possibly ever." Finally, from Emporia, Kansas, Ellen Hansen writes, "e were a small group of only 6 people. Nevertheless we lit candles, hiding them from the wind blowing across the Kansas plains. … We discussed the importance of participating even in a small gathering such as we held, in order to make the statement that we are against the war in Iraq and that it is not being conducting with our support or in our names. We live in a very RED state, in a small city where no Democrats won at the local level last November.…We're small, but we'll keep making a noise for change." UFPJ's strategy for this year's anniversary of the war was to emphasize local protests and local movement-building, rather than to focus on a handful of large mobilizations in major cities. Judging from the reports we've received, it was an extremely successful approach, helping to deepen and broaden anti-war sentiment all across the nation. Congratulations to everyone who helped make this such an important weekend in our struggle to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home! =========================================== MAY 1: END THE WAR! ABOLISH NUKES! NYC March and Rally for Peace in Iraq and Disarmament Worldwide Visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org for leaflets and more information =========================================== ACTION ALERT * UNITED FOR PEACE AND JUSTICE http://www.unitedforpeace.org | 212-868-5545 To subscribe, visit http://www.unitedforpeace.org/email