NucNews - May 9, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR Montana Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 2005 (Introduced in Senate) S 977 IS 109th CONGRESS 1st Session http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:19:./temp/~c109WSIrJw:: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.00977: S. 977 To include claims for injuries and death due to exposure during certain time periods from fallout emitted during the Government's above-ground nuclear tests in Nevada that exposed individuals who lived in the downwind affected area in the State of Montana. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES May 9, 2005 Mr. BURNS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary A BILL To include claims for injuries and death due to exposure during certain time periods from fallout emitted during the Government's above-ground nuclear tests in Nevada that exposed individuals who lived in the downwind affected area in the State of Montana. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the `Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 2005'. SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE; APOLOGY. (a) Findings- Congress finds the following: (1) Ninety-nine percent of the Iodine-131 (hereinafter referred to as `I-131') in the atmosphere of the United States came from 90 tests in Nevada, mainly in the years 1952, 1953, 1955 and 1957. I-131 is a leading cause of thyroid cancer in America. The United States national average dosage per person is 2 rads. (2) Of the 25 counties with the heaviest average dose of I-131, which is between 9 and 16 rads, 15 counties (Meagher, Broadwater, Beaverhead, Jefferson, Powell, Judith Basin, Madison, Fergus, Gallatin, Petroleum, Lewis and Clark, Blaine, Silver Bow, Chouteau and Deer Lodge) are in the State of Montana. (3) The county with the highest per capita thyroid dose of I-131 in the country is Meagher county in Montana with 16 rads, which is 800 percent higher than the national average. (4) Of the 56 counties in Montana, only Yellowstone County has an I-131 exposure level near the national average. None of the counties in Montana have an I-131 exposure level below the national average. (5) As thyroid cancer takes 10 to 40 years to develop, radiation exposure in the late 1950s might not manifest in cancer until the late 1990s. (6) While the national average for thyroid cancer has remained steady over the past 30 years, the rate of reported thyroid cancer in Montana has increased steadily. In 1980, Montana had a rate of thyroid cancer 6.2 times the national average. In 1990, that rate had increased to 10.8 times the national average and in 2000 the rate of reported thyroid cancer in Montana was 17.5 times the national average. (7) When this data is age-adjusted, it is clear that the diagnosis rates for thyroid cancer in Montana have increased dramatically over the past decade, even relative to an increase in national rates. Between 1989 and 1993, the age-adjusted rate of thyroid cancer in Montana was 4.4 people per 10,000 persons, compared to the national average of 5.5 people per 10,000 persons. Between 1994-1998, that rate increased to 6.3 in Montana, but the national average only increased to 6.5. Between 1999 and 2003, that rate in Montana increased again to 10.0, surpassing the national average of 7.6. (8) Between 1989 and 2003, the national age-adjusted rate of thyroid cancer diagnosis increased by 38 percent. During that same period of time, the rate in Montana increased 127 percent. (9) These increases in the thyroid cancer rate correspond with the expected delay for the manifestation of thyroid cancer from exposure during the nuclear testing in the 1950s. (10) The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note), enacted in 1990, establishes in the Department of the Treasury the Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust Fund for claims for injuries and death due to exposure during certain time periods to radiation from: (1) nuclear testing in Utah, Nevada, and Arizona; or (2) uranium mining in Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, or Utah. (11) None of the 5 counties with the highest I-131 exposure, which are located in Montana and Idaho, are covered under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act . Only 3 of the 25 counties with the highest I-131 exposure are covered. No counties in Montana are currently covered by the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act. However, 3 counties in Nevada with dosage rates nearly equal to the national average are covered. (12) The Board on Radiation Effects Research at the National Academy of Sciences has conducted studies on the effects of this radiation exposure in all 50 States and found that the calculated absorbed dose to the thyroid of a person born in 1948 who resided for the entire period evaluated in Montana is 250 milligrays, higher than any of the counties in Utah currently eligible for compensation. (13) Fallout emitted during the Government's above-ground nuclear tests in Nevada exposed individuals who lived in the downwind affected area in Montana to radiation that is presumed to have generated an excess of cancers among these individuals. (14) The United States should recognize and assume responsibility for the harm done to these individuals. (15) The lives and health of innocent individuals who lived downwind from the Nevada tests, in the State of Montana, were involuntarily subjected to increased risk of injury and disease to serve the national security interests of the United States. (b) Purpose- It is the purpose of this Act to establish a procedure to make partial restitution to individuals described in subsection (a) for the burdens they have borne for the Nation as a whole. (c) Apology- Congress apologizes on behalf of the Nation to the individuals described in subsection (a) and their families for the hardships they have endured. SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO RECA. (a) Compensation in General- Section 4(b)(1) of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended-- (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking `and' at the end; and (2) by adding at the end the following: `(D) in the State of Montana, the counties of Meagher, Broadwater, Beaverhead, Jefferson, Powell, Judith Basin, Madison, Fergus, Gallatin, Petroleum, Lewis and Clark, Blaine, Silver Bow, Chouteau, and Deer Lodge; and'. (b) Additional Relief- Section 4 of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended by adding at the end the following: `(c) Additional Relief- `(1) OTHER AREAS- `(A) IN GENERAL- An individual who resided in a region of Montana not covered under subsection (b)(1)(D) during the time period described in subsection (a)(1)(A)(i) may apply for compensation under this Act. `(B) PROCEDURE- The National Cancer Institute, in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shall evaluate whether an individual submitting an application under subparagraph (A) is eligible for compensation under this Act on a case-by-case basis. `(2) OTHER EXPENSES- An individual who is eligible for compensation under subsection (b)(1)(D) or paragraph (1) shall also receive compensation from the Fund for the costs of screening, complications of screening, follow-up referrals, work-up diagnosis, and treatment related to the specific disease contracted by the individual.'. (c) Authorization of Appropriations- Section 3(e) of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note) is amended by adding at the end the following: `(3) RECA AMENDMENTS OF 2005- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Fund $200,000,000 to carry out the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 2005. Any amounts appropriated pursuant to this paragraph are authorized to remain available until expended. Of the funds appropriated to carry out the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments of 2005, not less than 95 percent of the funds expended shall be distributed directly to victims of radiation exposure.'. SEC. 4. EDUCATION PROGRAM. The Health Resources and Services Administration shall conduct an enhanced program of education and communication about the health risks posed by radiation exposure from fallout from United States nuclear-weapons testing. -------- depleted uranium Toxic Tours of Duty? Historic legislation would ensure uranium testing for local soldiers By Jan Clifford, Contributing Writer May 9, 2005 Louisiana Weekly http://www.louisianaweekly.com/cgi-bin/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20050509j According to some military and science experts, the U.S. military has been using the equivalent of dirty bombs in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom; and the resulting contamination is biogenetically affecting U.S. and Iraqi soldiers and civilians and will continue to do so for generations to come. The Louisiana House of Representatives became the first legislative body in the nation to acknowledge the toxic effects of depleted uranium (DU) when it passed a bill on Tuesday that guarantees DU testing for war veterans as a medical benefit. The bill passed by a vote of 101-0. No state expenses will be incurred since the federal government subsidizes the $170 test. The bill will become law if passed by the state Senate and signed by Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco. "The Army calls it the silver bullet. But the team that was assigned to go in and clean up after the first Gulf War was one hundred men," said Ret. Marine Corps Command Sgt. Maj. Bob Smith, who served three tours of duty in the elite Green Berets during the Vietnam War. "A third of them are already dead," he said. Smith is responsible for bringing the issue to the attention of House Rep. Jalila Jefferson. Jefferson enlisted House Rep. Juan LaFonta, who agreed to sponsor the bill. "Louisiana is very service friendly," LaFonta said. "We're concerned about our troops." During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, Army officials assembled a team to clean up the DU contaminated tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles. Most team members became sick within 48 hours, with the first cancers developing within nine months and first deaths from lung cancer within two years. Today, 14 years later, some veterans are still attempting to obtain medical testing and care, but say that military and Veterans Administration (VA) officials simply refuse to provide mandated services. Permanent contamination, impossible containment Many U.S. weapons, such as missiles, bombs, bullets, and tank shells contain DU, and act as "kinetic energy penetrators" that ignite during flight, and break into burning fragments upon impact. DU weapons are effective because they can penetrate and destroy all targets, including boring through 20 feet of super-reinforced concrete bunkers. DU is virtually cost-free, since it is a by-product of nuclear weapons production. The U.S. ADAM and PDM sub-munitions are called "the perfect dirty bombs" as each has a uranium casing filled with high explosives. But these weapons are the proverbial double-edged swords. On detonation, uranium particles vaporize into a radioactive dust (uranium oxide) that coats everything within proximity. The dust can be swept high into the atmosphere, where upper level winds redistribute toxins across national boundaries. When inhaled, these nano-particles, 100 times smaller than a cell, follow the respiratory system to attack the master code of DNA, and disable the immune system. Uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, so contamination is permanent, and containment is impossible. According to Leuren Moret, a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, depleted uranium is coming back into the U.S. "in veterans' uniforms and trophies and bags." It's also coming back in their bodies, transferred through semen. Moret cited a U.S. government study, conducted by the VA on post-Gulf War babies in a group of 251 soldiers in Mississippi who all had normal babies before the Gulf War. The study found 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. Some were born without eyes (anophthalmos), ears, with missing organs, missing legs and arms, fused fingers, thyroid or other organ malformations. Moret said that in some families, the only healthy members are those born before the Gulf Wars. A WMD used against our own? The health repercussions in Iraq are unprecedented. In babies born in 2002, the incidence of anophthalmos was 250,000 times greater (20 cases in 4,000 births) than the natural occurrence, one in 50 million births. The Army and Air Force fired at least 127 tons of DU shells in Iraq last year, according to Pentagon spokesman Michael Kilpatrick, in an interview with the New York Daily News. "Because of its density, it is the superior heavy metal for armor to protect tanks and to penetrate armor," Kilpatrick said. In fact, the effects of DU meet U.S. government standards of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). According to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Joint Publication 1-02, WMDs are "Weapons that are capable of a high order of destruction and/or of being used in such a manner as to destroy large numbers of people. Weapons of mass destruction can be high explosives or nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological weapons." "DU is illegal in any sense of the imagination," said Dr. Doug Rokke, a retired U.S. Army Major, nuclear health physicist, and the Pentagon's expert on the health effects of DU ammunition on the battlefield. Rokke was director of the Army's DU project, and wrote the Army regulations for handling and clean up for DU -- regulations he says the U.S. government is blatantly refusing to enforce. Today, although US Army Regulation 700-48 (http://www.traprockpeace.org/rokke_du_3_ques.html) requires DOD officials to provide medical care to all DU casualties and clean up DU contamination, Rokke said they simply refuse to do so. Rokke said that by continuing to use DU, and by refusing to admit the acknowledged adverse environmental and health effects, DOD officials violate their own orders and regulations. "When we can no longer clean up the environment and we can no longer provide medical care for anybody that's exposed, then that weapon must never be used in conflict," Rokke said. Long-term casualties The official number of wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991 was just 467. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in the first Gulf War, 11,000 are now dead, and more than 325,000 are on permanent medical disability. That means 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems. According to a Department of VA Fact Sheet, "Several scientific studies have shown that as a group, Gulf War veterans are reporting symptoms or diseases more frequently than non-Gulf comparison groups." Additionally, the Fact Sheet reports that a Center for Disease Control (CDC) epidemiological study found "multiple symptoms more prevalent in Air Force Gulf veterans compared with controls who served in other areas of the world. Although 39 percent of Air Force Gulf War veterans who were still on duty and were studied by CDC suffered from chronic problems with fatigue, mood, thinking and muscle aches and pains, this was also reported by 15 percent of the non-Gulf group." And pediatricians for the VA are gathering data to enable "a comparison of child health not only among the Gulf War theater veterans and control cohorts, but also between children in the same family born before the Gulf deployment compared to those born after the conflict." Marilyn Brown is the customer service coordinator for the Veterans Health Program in New Orleans. Brown said that her office is taking a proactive stance, and making visits to local units to inform veterans of available services. Returning veterans are entitled to two years free medical care, including psychological services; but they must apply within 90 days of returning from active duty. Brown said that she had no record of recently returning veterans suffering from symptoms related to contact with DU. Veterans can apply for services or simply discuss options by calling (504) 568-0811, extension 5913, or 1.800.985.8387. The office is at 1601 Perdido Street. -------- iran Iran Confirms Uranium - To - Gas Conversion By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS May 9, 2005 Filed at 11:00 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iran-Nuclear.html?pagewanted=print TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- Iran confirmed on Monday that it converted 37 tons of raw uranium into gas, its first acknowledgment of advances made in the production process for enriched uranium before it formally suspended nuclear activity in November under international pressure. The announcement, which means Tehran is in a position to quickly start enriching uranium if it lifts the suspension, comes as European negotiators are trying to seal an agreement to ensure that Iran's nuclear program does not produce weapons. Enriched uranium is useful in the generation of electricity, which is permitted under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but it also can be turned into nuclear weapons. Iran insists its program has only peaceful purposes, while the U.S. government says Tehran wants to obtain atomic arms. Iran processed the uranium ore concentrate into UF-4 gas before halting enrichment-related activities, Mohammad Saeedi, deputy head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, told The Associated Press. If processed further into UF-6 gas, the material could be fed into centrifuges and enriched. ''We converted all the 37 tons of uranium concentrate known as yellowcake into UF-4 at the Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility before we suspended work there,'' Saeedi said. France, Britain and Germany, which are negotiating on behalf of the European Union, had agreed in talks ahead of the November suspension that the Islamic Republic could finish processing the 37 tons of raw uranium into gas. But Saeedi's comments were the first confirmation that the project had been completed and came as talks with the Europeans have deadlocked, with the EU powers pressing for a complete end to Iran's enrichment program in return for economic incentives Nuclear experts say that when fully processed, the 37 tons of yellowcake could theoretically yield more than 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium, enough to make five crude nuclear weapons. To avoid referral to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions, Iran agreed to suspend actual enrichment at its Natanz uranium enrichment plant in 2003. It then suspended other uranium enrichment-related activities -- including the conversion of yellowcake into gas and the building of centrifuges -- in late 2004 to bolster international confidence. To show its dissatisfaction with lack of progress in the talks with Europe, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Sunday that Iran had decided to resume some uranium reprocessing activities. Saeedi said that might happen in two or three days. UF-6 gas can be enriched to a low level to produce fuel for generating electricty. But the nuclear treaty bans Iran and other member states except the five nuclear powers -- the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France -- from enriching the uranium further and making it suitable for producing a bomb. The Natanz enrichment plant and a uranium conversion facility in Isfahan house the heart of Iran's nuclear program. The Isfahan conversion facility reprocesses uranium ore concentrate into gas, which is taken to Natanz and fed into centrifuges for enrichment. Iran's top nuclear negotiator Hasan Rowhani said Iran already has produced some UF-6 and completed work on its uranium reprocessing program before the formal suspension in November. ''Last year, we could not produce UF-4 and UF-6. We didn't have materials to inject into centrifuges to carry out enrichment, meaning we didn't have UF-6,'' Rowhani said. ''But within the past year, we completed the Isfahan facility and reached UF-4 and UF-6 stage. So, we made great progress,'' he said in comments reported in two Iranian magazines in March. His office confirmed the comments to AP on Monday. Iran also made progress in building centrifuges before the suspension, Rowhani said. ''It's true that we are currently under suspension, but we conducted a lot of activities in 2004. Today, if we want to restart enrichment, we have sufficient centrifuges at least for the early stages, while we didn't have such a capacity 15 months ago,'' he said. Rowhani was responding to criticism from Iranian hard-liners that suspension of uranium enrichment-related activities had harmed Iran's technological advancement. Iran's nuclear program has turned into a matter of national pride for both reformers and hard-liners. Rowhani said Iran also has gone a long way in building a 40-megawatt heavy water nuclear reactor that will be capable of producing plutonium in the central city of Arak, although it is believed to be years from completion. ''In technical terms, we didn't have suspension in the Arak heavy water plant even for one day,'' he said. ''That means we've constantly made progress. It's possible that production of heavy water will be completed in the upcoming months.'' -------- iraq / inspections Leaked Memo: U.S. "Fixed Facts" To Justify Iraq War Monday, May 9th, 2005 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/09/148237 In Washington, 88 members of Congress have signed a letter calling on the Bush administration to respond to reports that the U.S. and Britain had a secret agreement to attack Iraq. Last week the Sunday Times of London revealed the text of the minutes to a secret briefing from July 2002 by the head of Britain's MI-6. In the briefing Richard Dearlove told Prime Minister Tony Blair that the U.S. had already made plans to attack Iraq. According to the leaked minutes, Dearlove said the US attack would be QUOTE "justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD." He went on to say QUOTE "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." ---- Iran to resume some nuclear activities 'in days' TEHRAN (AFP) May 09, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050509181139.a8s2beaz.html Iran will resume some sensitive nuclear activities "in the next few days", an Iranian official negotiating with the EU over the Islamic republic's controversial nuclear programme told AFP Monday. "We will relaunch in the next few days uranium conversion installations at Isfahan," said Mohammad Saidi. "It concerns activities that we suspended," Saidi said when asked which activities would be resumed. The plant at Isfahan is used to convert uranium, prior to it being enriched. Enriched uranium can be used for peaceful power generation but also as the explosive core of a nuclear bomb. Iran agreed in November last year to suspend its fuel cycle work -- the focus of international fears the country may be seeking the bomb -- and open talks with Britain, France and Germany. But the clerical regime has since voiced frustration over the negotiations, in which the EU-3 are offering a package of incentives in return for "objective guarantees" from Iran that it will not develop weapons. And Iran has repeatedly said it will resume the uranium enrichment work if an agreement is not reached with the European Union. "If the Europeans don't take our proposals into account, we will resume our activities," said Saidi, without specifying which. "But for the time being the resumption only concerns the conversion installation." "Iran masters nuclear technology and, in two years, can attain (nuclear fuel) production," he said. Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi Asefi had warned on Sunday that Iran would resume sensitive work on the nuclear fuel process. "The decision has been taken to start some of our activities" at Iran's uranium conversion facility in Isfahan, he said, but added: "We have not decided what we will start or when." Uranium conversion is a process that turns raw "yellowcake" into the feed gas that can then be refined in centrifuges in the enrichment process -- which in turn can make fuel for nuclear reactors, or constitute the explosive core of atomic bombs. Foreign Minister Kamal Kharazi on Saturday said that Iran might break off the negotiations with the European Union. "We told the Europeans that, if the negotiations did not bear the expected results, their continuation was useless, " Kharazi was quoted as saying by state television. The Europeans have meanwhile warned that if there is no deal, they would support the idea of Iran's nuclear dossier being sent to the UN Security Council which could impose sanctions. The last round of talks between Iranian and EU negotiators was held in London last month but no new negotiations have been arranged. -------- korea IAEA: North Korea Can Make Atomic Arms By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS May 9, 2005 Filed at 8:49 a.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Nuclear-Agency-NKorea.html?pagewanted=print VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- North Korea appeared to soften its position on international demands that it return to nuclear disarmament talks Monday as the United States urged Pyongyang anew not to test any nuclear weapons it may have developed. The reclusive communist regime may have enough weapons-grade plutonium to make up to six nuclear bombs, the head of the U.N. atomic watchdog agency said in another warning about the country's secretive nuclear program. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei told CNN on Sunday that Pyongyang has the nuclear infrastructure to convert the material into atomic weapons. ''We knew they had the plutonium that could be converted into five or six North Korea weapons,'' ElBaradei told CNN. Recent satellite imagery suggests North Korea may be preparing to test a weapon underground, and the IAEA has been urging the international community to increase pressure on Pyongyang to refrain from any such test. IAEA inspectors were expelled from North Korea in 2002, and the agency has stressed that there is no way to know for sure whether the country is close to producing a nuclear weapon or is getting ready to test one. Agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said Monday that estimates of the amount of nuclear material North Korea holds were based on pre-expulsion inspections of the country's 5-megawatt reactor at Yongbyon. ''When our inspectors were there, they were monitoring the freeze at the Yongbyon facility and in particular the 8,000 spent fuel rods that were stored there,'' he said. ''We can estimate the amount of plutonium they could contain.'' On Monday, South Korea said it was too early to explore alternatives to diplomacy to solve the standoff. The North, meanwhile, appeared to soften its position on returning to disarmament talks, saying it wasn't demanding direct negotiations with the United States. ''We have never requested the DPRK-U.S. talks independent of the six-way talks,'' the official KCNA news agency quoted an unidentified North Korean foreign ministry spokesman as saying. DPRK stands for the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the North's official name. ElBaradei described the latest developments as a ''cry for help'' on Pyongyang's part. ''North Korea, I think, has been seeking a dialogue with the United States, with the rest of the international community ... through their usual policy of nuclear blackmail, nuclear brinkmanship, to force the other parties to engage them,'' he said. ''We know that they had the industrial infrastructure to weaponize this plutonium. We have read also that they have the delivery system,'' ElBaradei told CNN. ''I do hope that the North Koreans would absolutely reconsider such a reckless, reckless step.'' Last month, diplomats told The Associated Press that the United States was warning its allies that North Korea may be ready to carry out a nuclear test as early as June, basing the assessment in part on satellite photographs that suggested it was digging an underground test site. ''I hope that we can persuade them in some way not to go that route, down that road,'' Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., told ABC. The reported U.S. warnings reflected growing fears in Washington that the North is going ahead with efforts to develop nuclear weapons after South Korean officials said Pyongyang had recently shut down a reactor, possibly to harvest plutonium that could be used in an underground test. The Yongbyon reactor generated spent fuel rods laced with plutonium, but they must be removed and reprocessed to extract the plutonium for use in an atomic weapon. They can be removed only if the reactor has been shut down. The U.S. intelligence community believes North Korea has one or more nuclear weapons, and has untested two- and three-stage missiles capable of reaching U.S. soil. But it has been unclear whether Pyongyang has yet developed the technology to miniaturize a nuclear weapon so it fits on a missile, and provide it with the guidance systems so it can hit a target. Six-nation talks aimed at getting Pyongyang to give up its nuclear ambitions have been stalled for nearly a year. They involve North and South Korea, the United States, China, Japan and Russia. North Korea has boycotted the talks since June, and on Friday it reaffirmed it would stay away unless the United States dropped what it called hostile policy toward the communist regime. On Monday, The Washington Post reported that U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill had asked China -- the North's main benefactor -- to cut off oil supplies to Pyongyang to pressure it to resume the talks. South Korea's top official on dealing with the North called for more active diplomacy on the issue. ''I think we are at a point where we should still be working harder for a diplomatic solution,'' Unification Minister Chung Dong-young said Monday. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said Sunday that grave concerns over North Korea's nuclear program soared during the first Clinton administration, when ''we were afraid that ... North Korea was the most dangerous place in the world.'' On the Net: IAEA, http://www.iaea.org Hopes for talks revive as N Korea warned against "reckless" A-bomb test SEOUL (AFP) May 09, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050509082903.sy1i6t4s.html North Korea breathed life into battered hopes for a resumption of dialogue to end its nuclear weapons drive Monday amid conflicting reports that it was ready to test an atomic bomb. Capping a week of rising tension with a conciliatory note, a foreign ministry statement issued late Sunday said Pyongyang was ready to sit down and resolve the standoff through six-party talks. "Our will to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula and seek a negotiated solution to (the nuclear standoff) still remains unchanged," the statement said, according to the official Korean Central News Agency. It also dropped a precondition to a resumption of the six-way talks by denying it had ever asked for separate, one-on-one talks with Washington, a demand the United States has rejected. "We have never requested the DPRK (North Korea)-US talks independent of the six-way talks," the foreign ministry spokesman was quoted as saying. The apparent concession was referred to as a "a step forward," by Japanese government spokesman Hroyuki Hosoda. "I believe the US will take this as a way to lead to the resumption of talks," he said. But the concession failed to disperse the gloom cast by indications that the Stalinist state may be only weeks away from kicking over the negotiating table by testing a nuclear device. International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei sounded the latest warning when he said North Korea had little to gain but deeper global enmity by testing a nuclear device. "I'm not sure they will gain anything by testing other than provoking every member of the international community and bring -- and play a brinkmanship policy, which nobody will benefit," said ElBaradei on Sunday on CNN television. "I do hope that the North Koreans would absolutely reconsider such a reckless, reckless step." Recent media reports from the United States have quoted US officials as saying North Korea has been preparing to launch an underground nuclear test since March and might conduct one as early as June. The New York Times reported Friday that US officials familiar with satellite and intelligence data believed Pyongyang was building a reviewing stand and filling in a tunnel, clear pointers to a potential underground nuclear test. ElBaradei issued an appeal to world leaders to call Pyongyang to dissuade it from going ahead with the plan. A North Korean test would cause "a lot of insecurity fallout," ElBaradei said. "The impact on the whole East Asian and Japan, South Korea is tremendous." The US government believes North Korea has one or two crude nuclear devices and may have extracted enough plutonium for six more since the nuclear standoff erupted in October 2002. As early as October 2003 North Korea threatened to give a "physical demonstration" of its nuclear deterrent -- North Korea code for a nuclear test. On February 10 Pyongyang said it had nuclear weapons and planned to build more. South Korean officials, however, are sceptical that North Korea is preparing an underground nuclear test at Kilju, in northeastern North Korea, where satellite images show the suspected tunnel. Defence Minister Yoon Kwang-Woong said Friday there was no solid information that would make any assessment possible. A military intelligence official also said on condition of anonymity that Kilju was an unlikely test site as it was a well-populated area in which a large number of residents would likely be exposed to fallout. Another official told the Joongang daily on Friday the South Korean government had been aware of the tunnel since the late 1990s and that "there has been no sign indicating preparations for a nuclear arms test." Talks between the two Koreas, Russia, China, Japan and the United States on the North's nuclear programs have been stalled since a third round of discussions last June. ---- Japan presses Russia to use its influence on North Korea MOSCOW (AFP) May 09, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050509175715.1e31jhvt.html Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told Russian President Vladimir Putin Monday that he counts on Moscow's influence to help persuade North Korea to return to six-party nuclear talks, an official said. Koizumi discussed the issue with Putin on the sidelines of commemorations in Moscow of the end of World War II. "Prime Minister Koizumi emphasised the importance of reopening the six-party talks," said the official, referring to talks involving the two Koreas, China, Russia, the United States and Japan which have been stalled for 11 months. During a 30-minute meeting he "told the Russian president that he counts also on Russia's role in persuading North Korea" to return to the talks, said the official, who requested anonymity. "President Putin responded that he understands well the concerns that Japan has, and said that Russia also wants to put in efforts on this issue," he added. Asked what Moscow could do, he answered: "We believe that Russia will have its own way of doing that at their discretion." The six-party talks halted in June last year after three inconclusive rounds. North Korea did not show up for a fourth round due in September 2004, and declared in February that it had nuclear weapons for self-defence against what it called a hostile US policy. -------- russia India, Russia agree to expand nuclear energy cooperation FROM M SHAKEEL AHMED MOSCOW, MAY 9, 2005 (PTI) http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.asp?id=297005 Cementing their strategic ties, Russia today expressed its readiness to further expand cooperation with India in civilian nuclear energy, defence and space as the two sides decided to set up a study group to examine the feasibility of a comprehensive economic cooperation agreement. At a meeting lasting more than the scheduled 30 minutes with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, President Vladimir Putin expressed Moscow's willingness to look into issues of civilian nuclear energy cooperation with India, including the supply of nuclear fuel for Tarapore plant and new nuclear power reactors. During the talks, held in a very warm and cordial atmosphere, "Putin agreed to look into these issues after the festivities of the 60th anniversary of Nazi defeat were over," National Security Advisor M K Narayanan told reporters here after the meeting. Russia is helping India in the construction of Kudankulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu under a deal signed in 1985 by then Prime minister Rajiv Gandhi and erstwhile Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev. However, after the break up of the USSR, Russia joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) which bans it from selling civilian nuclear technology to non-signatories of the NPT, including India. The Prime Minister apprised Putin of India's non-proliferation efforts and plans for the adoption of non-proliferation bill by the Indian Parliament soon. Singh expressed happiness and appreciated the support given by Russia for the Kudankulam nuclear power plant. Narayanan said cooperation in space-related activities also figured in the discussions and the fact that the agreement on Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONAS) have been signed showed that "we are working further to enhance cooperation in this sector." "As our economic relations do not mirror our strategic partnership, the Prime Minister has proposed to set up a Joint Working Group to study the feasibility of an Indo-Russian economic cooperation agreement," Narayanan said, adding it was immediately accepted by Putin. The two leaders felt that the economic cooperation between the two countries was not in keeping with their strategic relationship, he said. In the "win-win" discussions, Putin assured Singh that Russia has "always stood by India and will always stand by India," Narayanan said. Putin on more than one occasion has emphaised that all issues between India and Russia would be addressed in the spirit of the special relations that existed between the two countries, he said. Putin said "in terms of expanding our trade and economic cooperation, you will probably agree that the level of our bilateral trade does not live upto possibilities that Russia and India have." The Russian President said that he was looking forward to a visit later this month by his Indian counterpart APJ Abdul Kalam and by Singh in November for the annual Indo-Russian summit. Indian Ambassador to Russia, Kanwal Sibal, also said the cooperation in the fields of defence, energy and space figured prominently in the Singh-Putin talks. Putin, who is hosting 53 heads of state and government in connection with the 60th anniversary celebrations of the Allied victory over Nazi Germany in World War II, had only a few bilateral meetings, including with Singh. Reflecting the special and enduring Indo-Russian relationship, Putin said "there are a lot of guests but India is one." The meeting extended beyond the slated 30 minutes and lasted 45 minutes. "The agenda and quality of the meeting was same as full-fledged bilateral summit," Sibal said charactersing the range of discussions between the two leaders. Narayanan said Putin was particularly positive in regard to his government's support to Indian companies investing in Russian energy sector and building upon the investment that ONGC's foreign operation arm OVL has made in SAKHALIN-I proj ect. He said both sides were of the view that areas of cooperation in various fields should be expanded. Putin told the Prime Minister that cooperation with India was based on high level of trust. Narayanan said that the issue of UN reform did not figure in the discussions. Sibal went on to add that Russia has on more than one occasion said it supported India's candidature in an expanded Security Council. Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran said during their meetings with the Prime Monister, Tajik President Imamali Rahmonov and Kazakh President Noorsultan Nazarbayev have reaffirmed their support to India in its bid for a permanent membership in the Council. -------- treaties Nations say US shirks its arms vows The spotlight shifts at nuclear conference By Farah Stockman, Boston Globe Staff | May 9, 2005 http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/05/09/nations_say_us_shirks_its_arms_vows?mode=PF UNITED NATIONS -- The United States is seeking to use a major UN conference on nuclear nonproliferation to highlight the dangers of North Korea and Iran, but has been undermined by allegations from some developing countries that Washington itself has backtracked on commitments to reduce its nuclear arsenal, according to UN diplomats and delegates to the conference. One week into the four-week conference, delegates have failed to agree on an agenda, while the United States insists on focusing on the threat of rogue states and terrorist groups and developing countries insist on talking about unfulfilled US pledges. The conference is aimed at strengthening the landmark 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, widely considered to be the world's most important arms-control blueprint. Nearly every nation in the world has signed on. Three that haven't -- Pakistan, India, and Israel -- have either acquired nuclear weapons or are believed to have done so. Many delegates say the treaty is in jeopardy, as member states wrestle with how to handle Iran, which is suspected of developing a military nuclear program, and North Korea, which pulled out of the treaty in 2003 and could be preparing for its first nuclear test. Some delegates warn that the treaty could unravel if the states with nuclear weapons give up on their promises to eliminate them. The Bush administration, which has expressed skepticism about the usefulness of several international agreements, is addressing the challenges outside the formal discussions about the treaty in talks with North Korea's neighbors and by supporting negotiations between Iran, Britain, France, and Germany. Washington is also hoping to build a consensus for enforcement measures that could eventually result in sanctions against Iran and North Korea, according to UN officials and delegates. US officials also said they are hoping to win support for a series of unilateral actions to stem proliferation, including an initiative to intercept ships believed to be carrying nuclear supplies and tougher national safeguards of nuclear facilities. But the US efforts have been frustrated by a block of developing countries, led by Egypt, that have insisted the gathering should also address US disarmament pledges. The United States is under fire for what some nations see as its violations of agreements made under the nonproliferation treaty in 1995 and 2000 to dismantle some of its weapons. In preparatory meetings with other countries before this year's conference, the Bush administration distanced itself from those commitments and refused to sign on to an agenda for the conference that explicitly referenced past pledges, saying those commitments were not binding, according to the UN officials and delegates involved. That assertion alarmed many arms-control advocates. ''I think it's unprecedented," said Ben Sanders, an adviser to the Dutch delegation who has attended every treaty-review conference. The UN undersecretary general for disarmament, Nobuyasu Abe, said the US delegation showed more flexibility last week, seeking only a ''weaker reference" to the 2000 pledges. ''You just cannot erase it from the record of the conference," Abe said. But the general US resistance to discussing such pledges -- and Egypt's insistence on doing so -- appeared to be at the heart of the failure to reach an agenda for the meeting Friday. The treaty rests on the premise that nonnuclear states will seek only peaceful nuclear technology if the five nuclear powers who are party to the treaty work toward irreversibly and verifiably destroying their own nuclear arsenals. But the Bush administration has talked openly about developing new nuclear weapons technology, rejected a treaty banning new nuclear tests, and has negotiated a pullout from an accord with Russia that had strict benchmarks for destroying weapons. Instead, US officials entered into a new agreement with Russia that requires a reduction in quickly deployable strategic warheads, but does not require the destruction of dismantled parts. US officials say that the Bush administration has taken major steps to reduce America's nuclear arsenal, but that the real threats in the world today are rogue states and terrorist networks. ''We hope that the delegates recognize that the world is much different than the last time we met and that we all must work together in creative ways to combat those who try to go around the NPT," said Richard Grenell, spokesman for the US mission at the United Nations. To some analysts, the US stance undermines Washington's ability to play a leadership role in brokering deals at the conference. ''It's self-defeating," said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, a Washington-based research and advocacy group. ''By denying the decisions taken at the 2000 conference, they are cheapening the value of outcome at this conference and risk that other states may cherry pick which commitments they wish to honor." ''The nuclear weapons states . . . continue to develop and modernize their nuclear arsenals," Syed Hamid Albar, Malaysia's foreign minister said at the conference last week, speaking on behalf of a bloc of ''nonaligned" developing countries. ''We must call for an end to this madness." Albar said the moves by nuclear states threatened to ''unravel" the treaty, and he reiterated calls for nuclear states to make a legally-binding pledge not to attack countries that do not possess nuclear weapons. The United States has rejected that proposal. The makeup of the US delegation has also raised questions about the Bush administration's interest in the treaty. ''I took as a sign the fact that [Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice did not come down," said one UN official working on arms-control issues, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. ''I took it as sign that this was very low-level attention and they weren't necessarily putting that much focus and emphasis on it." The most senior US official in this year's delegation is Stephen G. Rademaker, assistant secretary of state for arms control, in part because Robert Joseph, nominated for undersecretary for arms control, has not yet been confirmed for the post. In past years, the United States took a more active and high-level role in the conference, which takes place every five years. In 2000, Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright delivered the opening address. In 1995, Vice President Al Gore headed the US delegation that worked to renew the treaty, which was to expire that year. ''The Bush administration cares about the NPT, but it doesn't care that much," said Thomas Graham Jr., special representative for arms control under President Clinton. ''From 1968 to 2001, the NPT was absolutely at the center of US foreign policy. Now it is not at the center." -------- u.s. nuc weapons 134 Lawmakers Call for Cancellation of Nuclear Bunker Buster UN Nuclear Chief says North Koreans have 6 nuclear weapons News from Ed Markey United States Congress Massachusetts Seventh District FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Tara McGuinness May 9, 2005 (202) 225-2836 http://www.house.gov/markey/Issues/iss_bunkerbuster_pr050509.pdf Washington, D.C. - Representative Edward J. Markey (D-MA), the Co-Chair of the Nonproliferation Task Force, today released two letters signed by a total of 134 House Members calling for the immediate cancellation of the Bush Administration's proposed nuclear bunker warhead, also known as the "Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator" or RNEP. "These letters show that Congressional opposition to the nuclear bunker buster, which Congress already disapproved last year, remains strong," said Rep. Markey, who organized the lawmaker's letter. In the letters sent to the House Armed Services Committee and House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, which will soon be taking up the defense spending bills for fiscal year 2006, the lawmakers noted that despite the fact that Congress zeroed funding for the Department of Energy's nuclear bunker buster last year, the Bush Administration's budget request had included $4 million in DOE funding to revive the program, along with another $4.5 million in Air Force funding for testing of the weapon. In addition, the budget request also indicated that another $14.7 million would be requested by DOE in fiscal year 2007. The lawmaker's letter urged that this request be rejected, noting that: "The United States faces a serious national security threat from the proliferation of nuclear weapon materials and technologies, most notably in North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. We believe that the pursuit of new nuclear weapons such as RNEP sends a dangerously mixed signal to the rest of the world and erodes our nonproliferation credibility. Nations that see the U.S. expanding and diversifying our nuclear arsenal are encouraged to seek or maintain nuclear deterrents of their own and ignore nonproliferation obligations. Additionally, a U.S. move toward expanding and diversifying our nuclear stockpile is contrary to our legal obligations under Article VI of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which clearly requires the United States to work toward reducing our nuclear arsenal." Rep. Markey concluded, "Today, the UN nuclear chief estimates that North Korea may have six nuclear weapons. We are sending this letter to make it clear to this Administration that there is widespread concern in the Congress about the adverse impact of the nuclear bunker buster on America's credibility to lead on nuclear nonproliferation with North Korea and around the world. We can't preach nuclear temperance from a barstool, and if we're going to ask other countries to refrain from acquiring their own nuclear weapons, we should refrain from developing new ones here at home." Today, Representative Markey will join Hans Blix at the United Nations Non-Proliferation Treaty (UN NPT) Review Conference in New York at 5:00 pm in Room 226. Also, Rep. Markey will be blogging at from the UN NPT Review Conference: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ or for more information on Rep. Markey's work on non-proliferation check out http://www.house.gov/markey/ The following members signed on to the letter: Rep. Neil Abercrombie, Rep. Gary Ackerman, Rep. Tom Allen, Rep. Robert Andrews, Rep. Brian Baird, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, Rep. Xavier Becerra, Rep. Shelley Berkley, Rep. Howard Berman, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, Rep. Robert Brady, Rep. Corrine Brown, Rep. Sherrod Brown, Rep. Lois Capps, Rep. Michael Capuano, Rep. Benjamin Cardin, Rep. Dennis Cardoza, Rep. Julia Carson, Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, Rep. John Conyers, Rep. Jim Cooper, Rep. Joseph Crowley, Rep. Elijah Cummings, Rep. Danny Davis, Rep. Jim Davis, Rep. Susan Davis, Rep. Peter DeFazio, Rep. Diana DeGette, Rep. William Delahunt, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Rep. Norman Dicks, Rep. John Dingell, Rep. Lloyd Doggett, Rep. Michael Doyle, Rep. Vernon J. Ehlers, Rep. Eliot Engel, Rep. Anna Eshoo, Rep. Lane Evans, Rep. Sam Farr, Rep. Chaka Fattah, Rep. Bob Filner, Rep. Barney Frank, Rep. Raul Grijalva, Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Rep. Jane Harman, Rep. Alcee Hastings, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, Rep. Rush Holt, Rep. Michael Honda, Rep. Darlene Hooley, Rep. Steny Hoyer, Rep. Jay Inslee, Rep. Steve Israel, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, Rep. Edie Bernice Johnson, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Rep. Marcy Kaptur, Rep. Patrick Kennedy, Rep. Dale Kildee, Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick, Rep. Ron Kind, Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Rep. James Langevin, Rep. Rick Larsen, Rep. John Larson, Rep. Barbara Lee, Rep. John Lewis, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Rep. Nita Lowey, Rep. Stephen Lynch, Rep. Carolyn Maloney, Rep. Edward Markey, Rep. Jim Matheson, Rep. Doris Matsui, Rep. Betty McCollum, Rep. Jim McDermott, Rep. James McGovern, Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Rep. Martin Meehan, Rep. Michael Michaud, Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, Rep. Brad Miller, Rep. George Miller, Rep. Dennis Moore, Rep. Gwen Moore, Rep. James Moran, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Rep. Grace Napolitano, Rep. Richard Neal, Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Rep. James Oberstar, Rep. John Olver, Rep. Frank Pallone, Rep. Ed Pastor, Rep. Donald Payne, Rep. David Price, Rep. Steven R. Rothman, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard, Rep. Bobby Rush, Rep. Tim Ryan, Rep. Martin Sabo, Rep. Linda Sanchez, Rep. Loretta Sanchez, Rep. Bernard Sanders, Rep. Janice Schakowsky, Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Allyson Schwartz, Rep. Jose Serrano, Rep. Christopher Shays, Rep. Brad Sherman, Rep. Louise Slaughter, Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Vic Snyder, Rep. Hilda Solis, Rep. John Spratt, Rep. Pete Stark, Rep. Ted Strickland, Rep. Bart Stupak, Rep. Ellen Tauscher, Rep. Mike Thompson, Rep. John Tierney, Rep. Edolphus Towns, Rep. Mark Udall, Rep. Tom Udall, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep. Diane Watson, Rep. Henry Waxman, Rep. Anthony Weiner, Rep. Lynn Woolsey, Rep. David Wu and Rep. Albert Wynn -------- u.s. nuc facilities An Assertive Scientific Advisory Group Challenges Federal Policies By PHILIP M. BOFFEY May 9, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/09/opinion/09mon4.html?pagewanted=print The National Academy of Sciences, once thought of as a timid, somnolent adviser on national affairs, has shown an unusually tough and independent streak in recent weeks. In rapid succession the academy's operating arm, the National Research Council, has criticized some pet projects and policies of powerful federal agencies and even the White House. That is a welcome onslaught of truth-telling at a time when rabid partisans routinely shade the facts for political gain. The academy, which is based in Washington, operates a vast array of advisory committees that provide advice to the federal government and other sponsors who contract for its services. Typically, Congress or a federal agency might ask the academy to review the evidence and render a verdict on some important technical issue - everything from improving the census to protecting the environment from genetically engineered animals. The academy will then round up experts to produce a report that is supposed to be the definitive word on the subject. In years past the academy was routinely denounced for being too cozy with its federal patrons - for pulling its punches and muting any criticism in hopes of gaining future contracts for advisory work. But recently, some committees have shown a feisty independence. Take a committee that examined whether the spent fuel pools at domestic nuclear power plants might be vulnerable to terrorist attacks. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission had issued bland reassurances that the pools were well protected, but Congress wasn't sure, so it ordered the regulatory agency to have a study done by the academy. The agency undermined the effort by denying the academy information and slowing release of an unclassified version of the report, but the academy ultimately made its voice heard. It found that credible terrorist attacks might release large quantities of radioactive material, and it called for steps to mitigate the risk. A similar fate befell the Bush administration's plan to develop a nuclear weapon that could penetrate the earth and destroy enemy bunkers buried deep underground. Caught in a swirl of conflicting claims as to how well the weapons would work and how much collateral damage they might cause, Congress called for an academy study. A panel found that while such a warhead would indeed destroy a buried bunker efficiently, it could not go deep enough to avoid huge numbers of casualties at ground level. Suddenly a weapon that had been touted as relatively small and clean looked a lot less appealing. The space agency has come under similar fire from academy experts. One academy panel has just warned that the nation's Earth-monitoring program from space is "at risk of collapse," mostly because the president's long-range program to explore the Moon and Mars has been forcing NASA to siphon off funds needed for earth sciences. An even sharper jab came last December when an academy panel concluded that a robotic mission to rescue the Hubble Space Telescope would have little chance of success and recommended an astronaut mission instead - precisely the opposite of what the NASA administrator wanted to do. The academy may be winning that fight. The new administrator of NASA has ruled out robotics and said he will reconsider a possible astronaut mission. The reason for the surge of critical reports from the academy is uncertain. One theory is that it is an accident of timing, that various contingencies have conspired to yield a spate of tough reports in close succession. Spread out over many months, they might be less noticeable, especially when mixed among reports that the administration has welcomed, such as an assessment of perchlorate in drinking water last January. An earlier report on fuel economy standards was cited favorably by the White House chief of staff a week ago. Another theory is that scientists feel beleaguered at a time when the religious right is attacking everything from evolution to embryonic stem cell research and are thus more inclined to flex their muscles. That may explain the academy's eagerness to promote stem cell research despite the president's ethical qualms about the field, but it seems remote from nuclear warheads and space missions. Yet another theory is that Congress and the White House budgeteers and science advisers, besieged with conflicting assessments from special pleaders, actually want the academy to "tell it like it is." The prototype for this approach may have been a 2001 request from the White House for a quick assessment of global warming to inform the president before he headed off to international conferences. That assessment was led by Ralph Cicerone, an atmospheric chemist who has just been elected to a six-year term as academy president. Let's hope he can continue the upsurge in forceful, independent reports. With Washington so polarized and distrustful of late, politicians and the public need technical advice they can trust. ---- Duke Agrees to Buy Cinergy in Deal Valued at $9 Billion By JAD MOUAWAD May 9, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/09/business/09cnd-utility.html?pagewanted=print Duke Energy, one of the nation's largest utilities, said today that it had agreed to buy Cinergy in an all-stock deal valued at $9 billion to expand its power and gas businesses into the Midwest. The acquisition would create a company with 5.4 million customers, 54,000 megawatts of electricity generation, and operations in two-thirds of the United States, as well as Canada and throughout most of South America. The deal adds momentum to the industry's consolidation at a time of rising costs for supplies like natural gas. After several quarters of streamlining their businesses in response to the fallout from Enron's collapse, which put the sector under tough scrutiny, utility companies are now trying to grow through acquisition. Last December, for instance, the Exelon Corporation agreed to buy Public Service Enterprise Group, the parent of New Jersey's largest utility, P.S.E.&G., for about $13 billion to create a power giant in the Northeast. The combined Duke-Cinergy and the post-acquisition Exelon would be about equal in size. "You're going to grow in this business by virtue of saving money" by becoming bigger, said James R. Halloran, an equity research analyst at National City Private Client Group, a money management firm that owns two million Duke shares and 55,000 Cinergy shares. "And if you have to buy it rather than build it, that's what you do." The purchase of Cincinnati-based Cinergy would enable Duke, based in Charlotte, N. C., to extend its reach into Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. Financially, the companies had $27 billion in combined revenue and $1.9 billion in net income last year, with assets totaling $70 billion. The deal is expected to revive the fortunes of Duke Energy North America, the company's unprofitable merchant power business. In the first quarter, the unit had an operating loss of $35 million. "This improves the weakest aspect in our portfolio, the Midwest," Paul M. Anderson, Duke's chairman, said during a meeting with industry analysts today that was broadcast via a conference call. "Duke's gas position in the Northwest complements Cinergy's coal positions in that region." One of the key benefits of the transaction are cost savings that are expected to reach $400 million a year, according to executives from both companies who were the analyst meeting in New York. Another benefit is that Duke will be able to offset its reliance on gas-powered electrical plants with cheaper-to-operate coal-fired plants owned by Cinergy. Duke will add 1.5 million electric customers to its current 2.2 million and 500,000 gas customers to its current 1.2 million. It also more than doubles the territory it services to 47,000 square miles. "The company achieves much more scale, geographic diversity and fuel diversity," analysts at Merrill Lynch wrote in a note to investors. They highlighted that Cinergy's electricity generation was mainly fueled by coal while Duke used mainly gas. It cost $48.43 per megawatt-hour to produce electricity at the most efficient gas-fueled plants, compared with $19.07 from coal, Bloomberg News said, citing figures by Energy Velocity for 2003, the last year for which such statistics are available. Duke said it would offer 1.56 of its shares for each one Cinergy share, valuing the transaction at $45.80 a share, or 13 percent more than Cinergy's stock price, based on closing prices on Friday. Cinergy shareholders will own about 24 percent of Duke after the deal is completed. Today, Cinergy's shares rose $1.94, or 4.8 percent, to close at $42.32 on the New York Stock Exchange. They have gained 18 percent in the past year. Duke's shares slipped 54 cents, or 1.8 percent, to $28.82. Still, they have gained 48 percent in the past 12 months, outperforming the Standard & Poor's 8.4 percent increase. Mr. Anderson, Duke's chairman and chief executive, will become chairman of the combined company, and James E. Rogers, Cinergy's chairman and chief executive, will become president and chief executive, providing a successor to Mr. Anderson. "Jim Rogers has been one of the most vocal executives that the industry must be more proactive, that environmental laws will get tougher and that the industry should lead the parade in antipollution norms," said Charles Fishman, an analyst at A.G. Edwards in St Louis. "He probably didn't make a lot of friends, and he now has a bigger base to talk from. You might find him visiting Washington more to set energy policy." In an interview, Mr. Anderson said Duke would speak up about issues like taxes on carbon emissions as well as climate change. "If we don't speak, regulators will make rules and we will have to live with them," he said. "It's better to be part of the process. A carbon tax, for example, makes a lot of sense. It's a no-regrets approach to global warming." To help reduce costs, Duke and Cinergy expect a cut of about 1,500 employees, or 5 percent of their combined work force of 29,350. The cuts will be "primarily through attrition, early retirements and other severance programs," the companies said in a statement. Duke also said it would increase its dividend by 12.7 percent, or 14 cents, to $1.24, effective in September. The acquisition was endorsed by the boards of both companies. It is still subject to the approval by the shareholders of both companies as well as state regulators in North Carolina, South Carolina, Ohio, Kentucky and Indiana, as well as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice. The deal is expected to close in July 2006. Duke was advised by UBS Investment Bank and Lazard, and Cinergy by Merrill Lynch. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom was Duke's legal adviser and Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz advised Cinergy. Jennifer Bayot contributed reporting for this article. ---- Nuclear Energy Industry Sustains Near-Record Levels of Safety, Operating Performance PR Newswire - May 9, 2005 http://www.canelect.ca/english/article.html?SMContentIndex=9&SMContentSet=0 (*Excerpt*) WASHINGTON, May 9, 2005 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- America's nuclear power plants, providing electricity to one of every five U.S. homes and businesses, continued to operate at high levels of efficiency and safety in 2004, according to plant performance indicators compiled by the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO). The U.S. nuclear energy industry set record-high levels of electricity production and efficiency, while also nearing record performance in areas including safety system performance, worker safety and programs to protect workers from radiation exposure. These areas are among the performance indicators tracked by London-based WANO. The milestones were achieved even as many facilities conducted major equipment replacement projects that position the power plants to better serve customers and sustain excellence over the long term. In 2004, 103 nuclear power plants located in 31 states generated 788.5 billion kilowatt-hours (kwh) of electricity, enough to supply electricity for 60 million people. Electricity production in 2004 was one percent higher than the record-high 780 billion kwh of electricity generated in 2002. -------- colorado Drilling Near Nuclear Blast Cavity Called Risky Business By Julie Cart Times Staff Writer Mon May 9, 7:55 AM ET http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/drillingnearnuclearblastcavitycalledriskybusiness BATTLEMENT MESA, Colo. — On a bright fall afternoon 36 years ago, the Atomic Energy Commission and a Texas oil company detonated a 40-kiloton nuclear device inside an 8,000-foot shaft on a high meadow, an effort to crack into a bounty of natural gas trapped in a dense subterranean rock formation. Here on Colorado's energy-rich Western Slope, the nuclear experiment yielded mixed results. A rich lode of gas was indeed shaken out of its rock casing, but the gas that rushed to the surface was too radioactive to be commercially useful. Federal officials assured the community that the Rulison test site, named after a nearby community, was safe. Still, they forbade oil or gas drilling on 40 acres surrounding the blast. Last year, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission added another half a mile to the federal off-limits zone. But now, another Texas energy company has proposed drilling within the half-mile zone. The company, Presco, says it will extract the gas using a nonnuclear process called hydraulic fracing, which like the original experiment is designed to shatter underground rock and tap into embedded stores of natural gas. The company says this can be done without disturbing the radioactive material that remains buried in the blast cavity. Presco, which is based in The Woodlands, Texas, north of Houston, insists there is no danger. One company official said that the original blast cavity was so stable "it would even be safe to drill into the cavity itself." But the thought of shaking the earth here again has many residents of surrounding Garfield County greatly concerned about what lies sleeping beneath the ground. The residue from the 1969 blast contains some of the most radioactive and toxic substances on Earth, including tritium, carbon-14 and krypton-85. "Let's see, you drill a hole, put a nuclear bomb in it, explode the bomb, then come back and frac it. Real smart," said Scott Brynildson, tapping the side of his head through a white straw cowboy hat. "I think it's very dangerous. They ought to leave a bad thing alone," said Brynildson, who owns a plumbing company and grows alfalfa in the nearby town of Rifle. His opposition to drilling on Battlement Mesa is widely shared by residents of a region that owes much of its current prosperity to a boom in oil and gas drilling. Many people in this middle-income retirement community about halfway between Glenwood Springs and Grand Junction remember the explosion in 1969 and how a radio station in Rifle broadcast the blast countdown. Although residents within a five-mile radius of this rural mountainside were paid to evacuate for the day, a handful remained. They said they were thrown about half a foot into the air by the blast, which registered a magnitude 5.5 on the Richter scale. The experiment on Battlement Mesa was one of 27 nuclear blasts detonated as part of Project Plowshares, a government program that was created to harness the power of atomic weapons for civilian purposes. Plowshares was the brainchild of Edward Teller, best known as the father of the hydrogen bomb who died in 2003. Other Plowshares projects sought to use nuclear explosions to dredge canals, carve out harbors and blast tunnels through mountains. Teller, who was on hand for the Rulison blast, later expressed disappointment that Plowshares did not succeed. The program was abandoned in the 1970s. In coming weeks, the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is scheduled to consider Presco's application to drill. Commission director Brian Macke said the agency was proceeding carefully and would consider a wide range of public health and safety issues. The commission, which never has denied a drilling permit, already has approved about a dozen natural gas wells within three miles of the blast site, an intermediate buffer zone established by federal authorities. Alarmed officials in Garfield County last month asked the commission to hold a public hearing to debate the issue. County officials have since voted not to oppose drilling in the half-mile zone but have asked for considerable testing of water wells. At least one of Garfield County's three commissioners, Tresi Houpt, is adamantly against the drilling. "I'm not convinced that we should deviate from that half-mile radius," she said. "Nobody knows whether they will hit radioactive gas. We've seen human error before in this county with respect to drilling." In 1969, scientists told residents that because of the density of the underground rock, the radioactive materials would remain undisturbed for eternity. They explained that the blast created underground temperatures hotter than the surface of the sun. The searing heat melted the sandstone surrounding the blast cavity; as the substrata cooled, a puddle of glass formed and sealed the bottom of the well bore, while a chimney of collapsed rock filled in the top. Today, the energy industry, as well as government scientists, maintains there has been no migration of radioactive material from the blast site. They say testing of water wells shows only background levels of radioactivity, or acceptable levels of radioactive material such as tritium. However, scientists from the Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos national laboratories reported that lethal radioactive substances from an underground weapons test in Nevada migrated almost a mile from the blast site over a 30-year period, contradicting Department of Energy predictions that such material would move just a fraction of an inch in a decade. That 1997 study found that plutonium attached itself to particles in groundwater. Another study from the same labs had earlier found that radionuclides — radioactive particles — moved more than 1,000 feet from a blast site that bomb experts said had been sealed off because of melted rock. David Smith, the studies' lead scientist, said in an interview that similar movement might not occur at every blast site. But for hydrogeologist John Bredehoeft, for more than 30 years the U.S. Geological Survey's expert in tracking movement of underground water, there are too many unknowns to approve drilling at the Rulison site. "I'm surprised that the oil and gas commission doesn't require people stay a certain distance away," he said. "You don't really know what will happen. Why risk it? I would be a bit more prudent. If I were the oil and gas commission, I would try to keep people away from the blast site." The massive sandstone formation that contains the gas is one of the nation's most productive gas fields. Oil and gas permits are running at an all-time high in Colorado. About 50% of the state's operating drilling rigs are in Garfield County. In Parachute, a town of 3,000 a few miles from the blast site, hotels and cafes are jammed with oilfield workers. For longtime residents, it's not difficult to pick out who's local and who's an outsider: The big pickups without a cattle dog in the back are the ones owned by rig workers. The concentration of oil and gas rigs has pushed out most farming and ranching, and some have taken to referring to the area as Gasfield County. The community is accustomed to and benefits from the energy business, and few say they are against all drilling. Jaunita Satterfield, Parachute's town administrator, calls herself a "piece of oilfield trash from Oklahoma." She said the town's main concern with drilling near the Rulison site was protecting its reservoirs and water sources, which sit just below the blast zone. Residents also worry that toxic radionuclides could make their way into the air when excess gas is burned off or "flared'' from wells and drilling mud dries out. Pat and Randy Warren live on Battlement Mesa, less than a mile from the Rulison site on a 37-acre ranch where they expect to retire. Like most families in this area, they rely on well water drawn from their property. The Warrens worry that their well could become tainted. "Our biggest concern is they've never done this before," she said, as three dogs curled around her legs while she stood on a bluff overlooking Grand Valley, a broad area bisected by a slow slice of the Colorado River. "They don't know what will happen. If there's something that gets in the air or water, we're dead — so to speak. We want to be assured nothing's going to happen. I don't think they can offer us that." Opponents to drilling say they hold out little hope for stopping the Presco plan, but some argue for postponing it until the Department of Energy completes a final report on the risks. The report is expected to be completed in 2007. "Why not wait until we get that report?" asked Orlyn Bell, a retired state water engineer and a member of the newly formed Garfield County Energy Advisory Board. "Why do we have to push the envelope here? Why is this place so special that we have to do that?" asked Bell who has four gas wells on his property. Since 1972, federal inspectors have regularly sampled groundwater in the blast area, said Pete Sanders, a Department of Energy geologist who oversees the Rulison site. They are looking in particular for tritium, or radioactive hydrogen, which is highly mobile. He said more than 30 years of water tests never found harmful levels of tritium. Sanders said it was likely that radioactive gas still existed in the cavity but noted that a sophisticated, two-year computer modeling study would be part of the federal report. The agency has produced an interim report, based on a simpler computer model, that concludes that there would be no gas or water migration from the blast site to a well located 1,500 feet away. Nor does the agency expect that the underground fractures from the blast site and the new wells would intersect. So far, it's the only report that addresses the scientific questions about drilling. "It is what it is, we are not representing it as the end-all," Sanders said. "This is a simple, simple model. I want to stress that. We want to finish the detailed work. We will hold our judgment." But based in part on that preliminary hypothesis, Presco and others assert the safety of the plan, which would eventually sink multiple wells within the half-mile buffer zone right up to the final 40-acre off-limits area. "We intend to do that in the future; we've never tried to hide that," said Kim R.W. Bennetts, vice president of exploration and production at Presco. "Hopefully, a year from now we will have proven that there's no risk." Bennetts is well aware of widespread public concern about the company's plans and said Presco would conduct regular tests of drilling fluids, rock cuttings and the gas from the new well. "We have people say we are going to unleash a nuclear holocaust in the Grand Valley," he said. "People who are distrustful of the petroleum industry say to me, 'Can you say to me there is absolutely 100% no risk?' I'm a scientist, I can't guarantee you 100% of anything." -------- nevada Nuclear review board will reserve Yucca judgment until investigation completed By Suzanne Struglinski WASHINGTON BUREAU Las Vegas SUN May 09, 2005 http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/text/2005/may/09/518727906.html WASHINGTON -- The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board will examine the outcome of investigations into scientific work on the Yucca Mountain project once they are complete, Board Chairman B. John Garrick told Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. Porter, chairman of the House Federal Workforce and Agency Organization Subcommittee, held a hearing last month regarding e-mails discovered by the Energy Department that suggest U.S. Geological Survey Employees falsified scientific information on the Yucca Mountain project. The Energy Department aims to build the nation's high-level nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In response to questions left unanswered at the hearing, Garrick sent a letter to Porter April 29 outlining the board's position. Garrick said if the data or analyses were falsified, as suggested by the e-mails, and if the data or analyses significantly affected the proposed repository's performance estimates, "the consequences could be serious." But Garrick made clear that the board won't know the answers to those questions until the investigations are completed. "The Board has no evidence at this point to indicate that that is the case," Garrick wrote. "It is not clear how a change in a single parameter would affect the DOE's (Energy Department's) estimates of repository performance, which are based on a range of values." Garrick also said problems with quality assurance, a program designed to to assure the accuracy of Yucca research, "may or may not significantly affect the DOE's technical and scientific findings." Congress created the board to perform technical oversight of the Yucca Mountain project but it does not regulate it. Investigations by the Interior and Energy department's inspector generals' offices, along with the FBI and U.S. attorney's office are still ongoing and may not be finished for several months. Porter's subcommittee is also working on its own investigation. -------- pennsylvania In Search of Safe Energy May 9, 2005 New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/09/opinion/l09nuclear.html?pagewanted=print To the Editor: Re "The Nuclear Power Option" (editorial, May 4): I live in the shadow of the nuclear power plant in Limerick, Pa. It stands there, the ultimate of "dark Satanic mills," announcing by its presence what you do not acknowledge: that nuclear power is essentially inimical to life. There is no safe nuclear power, no safe way to store or transport the waste, and precious little public honesty about the frequent release of radioactivity or about elevated cancer rates. Nuclear power is a nightmare whose end is patiently or impatiently awaited by almost everyone I know. I would hope to hear the United States government supporting conservation and alternative energies, but I am not surprised at its lack of wisdom. Peter D. Luborsky Kimberton, Pa., May 5, 2005 • To the Editor: Nuclear electric generating plants could have an important role in our energy future. The nuclear option makes good sense. Nuclear power plants, which emit no greenhouse gases, greatly offset global warming. They can also use fuel blends derived in part from huge existing stockpiles of weapons-grade plutonium and uranium, thereby beating our swords into plowshares. Concerns over waste disposal, security and proliferation are resolvable. In fact, they must be addressed whether or not new nuclear plants are allowed, because existing military and civilian nuclear materials need to be properly managed in any case. G. S. Peter Bergen Port Washington, N.Y., May 4, 2005 The writer was an assistant commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, 1995-99. -------- washington Nuke Facility ‘Downwinders’ Take Energy Department to Court Some people who grew up around a facility where nuclear weapons were produced are certain that their current, severe health problems are directly related – and they’re taking the feds to court and demanding accountability. May 9, 2005 NewStandard by Rebecca Clarren http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1785 Growing up in the shadow of the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Richland, Washington, where plutonium was produced and used to manufacture bombs, Trisha Pritikin, 54, never imagined that the milk she drank or the air she breathed was poisonous. Throughout the 1940s and ’50s, the United States government intentionally released radioactive material, in particular, iodine-131, into the environment. As this byproduct of nuclear weapons production fell onto the surrounding grass, it was eaten by cows, which then transferred the radiation to their milk, which local children like Pritikin drank by the glass. At the root of the trial is the simple but sordid fact that the government and its contractors have a history of obscuring the truth about the health impacts of nuclear activity. While scientists have known for over 50 years that iodine-131 can collect in the thyroid gland and lead to cancer or other diseases, neither the federal government nor the contractors who ran the facility even alerted nearby residents of their activity. Although there was no history of thyroid illness in their family, both Pritikin’s mother and father developed thyroid disease and died of cancer. Trisha herself has extreme hypothyroidism, a condition where the body lacks sufficient thyroid hormones, resulting in slow metabolism, and a general lack of energy. "Had the [Department of Energy] let people know about the radioactivity or attempted to protect us when we were kids, I’m convinced my parents would still be alive," said Pritikin. Now she and over 2,000 others who grew up downwind of the reservation claim that iodine-131 emissions crippled their health. On April 25, after fifteen years of legal wrangling, the "downwinders" brought a case to federal court, suing General Electric and DuPont, the contractors that ran the Hanford Reservation for the federal government in the ’40s and ’50s. "Right now people like me are very disheartened and disillusioned by a government that told us everything was safe at Hanford and then basically let us die," said Pritikin, who lives in Berkeley, California but traveled to Spokane, Washington to attend to the first week of the trial. "We sacrificed our health for the cold war. It’s amazing that you could do this to people and just not talk about it." Expected to last four to five weeks, the trial will focus on six "bellwether" plaintiffs; three with thyroid disease and three with thyroid cancer. While the case is not filed as a class action lawsuit, if the jury finds that there is adequate scientific evidence to prove that the Hanford Reservation is culpable in these incidences of thyroid illness, it would set the stage for Pritikin and the other 2,200 downwinders to settle for damages out of court. Under the 1957 Price-Anderson Act, the government indemnified the contractors, so any claims – which could amount to tens of millions of dollars – will be paid by taxpayers. Nuclear activists around the country are watching the trial to see what sort of precedent could be set for an agency that has long ducked responsibility for health and environmental problems. At the root of the trial is the simple but sordid fact that the government and its contractors have a history of obscuring the truth about the health impacts of nuclear activity. The public was never told about the emissions or any related health hazards until the late-1980s when activist groups and a local newspaper filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act. Despite widely accepted scientific research that links radioactivity with cancer and other disease, the Energy Department continues to stall on cleaning up the Hanford Reservation – in late April, the Environmental Protection Agency fined the DoE $75,000 for failure to meet a legal deadline for moving radioactive sludge into underwater containers. Nuclear activists around the country are watching the trial to see what sort of precedent could be set for an agency that has long ducked responsibility for health and environmental problems. "In general, the DoE’s position has been that nuclear weapons production is essentially as harmless as making widgets," said Len Ackland, author of Making a Real Killing: Rocky Flats and the Nuclear West, in an interview with The NewStandard. "The Department of Energy, despite its name, is in charge of producing nuclear weapons of mass destruction, and the DoE wants to do whatever it can to make the public accept that nuclear weapons are important for national security and that they are a good idea. It’s in their interest to brush off any health concerns and paint nuclear weapons with smiley faces." In general, it is almost always challenging to prove whether environmental contamination contributes to an individual’s illness because so often the diseases associated with pollution are common and can be caused by a variety of factors. With radioactive emissions conducted over 50 years ago, there are even more uncertainties. "It’s difficult to pin down the relationship of a specific person’s cancer to a specific environmental toxin; it’s not like a germ in your body that you see," said Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, who has a PhD in nuclear fusion from UC Berkeley. "Because of the latency period the iodine is long since gone [from the body]." This inherent challenge is the crux – and the strength of the defense team’s argument in the Hanford case. While the DoE, DuPont and GE declined to comment for this story, on the trial’s opening day, defense attorney Kevin Van Wart said that over 23,000 people in the country have thyroid cancer and they obviously don’t all live near Hanford. He added that there is no way to prove that people who lived near Hanford had any increased risk of the disease. "Hanford is no atomic bomb," said Van Wart. The Hanford Thyroid Disease Study (HTDS), a congressionally-ordered $20 million project conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in conjunction with the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, found no increased risk for thyroid disease among those who were exposed to Hanford’s releases of iodine-131. "If there is an increased risk of thyroid disease, it is too small to observe," wrote the scientists in the report. "Those studies vindicate what the contractors believed; that the plants did not pose a hazard," said Van Wart in his opening statement. Yet a 1999 review of the study’s draft report by the National Academies of Sciences (NAS) drew substantial criticism. For 38 percent of the nearly 5,000 individuals interviewed for the study, no parent or close relative was available to provide information about childhood milk consumption. Without proper information about participants, the study was flawed, found the NAS report. "The negative results the study obtained are less definitive than the report and press releases stated," reads the NAS review. Furthermore, other scientists and activists are critical that the HTDS did not compare those living near Hanford to a sample population from the general public who would not have been exposed to iodine-131 emissions. When the Northwest Radiation Health Alliance, a group of scientists and doctors affiliated with Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, surveyed 800 downwinders and compared their health problems with those in the canon of medical literature, they found that the downwinders had a 300 percent higher rate of some types of thyroid disease. The research, published last year in Society and Natural Resources, found strong evidence of a link between Hanford’s emissions and juvenile hypothyroidism, and hyperthyroidism, a condition where the thyroid is overactive, leading often to fatigue, weight loss and depression. They also found that Hanford downwinders had high rates of cancers of the thyroid, central nervous system and female reproductive organs. "The Hanford Thyroid Disease Study is a worthless study," said Rudi Nussbaum, a retired Portland State University professor of physics and environmental studies and an author of the Society and Natural Resources paper. Regardless of the varying scientific data, activists say the bottom line is that the government, in its rush to produce nuclear weapons, failed to take human health concerns into account. Susan Gordon, director of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, a national coalition of 33 member organizations said this lack of precaution explains why there was very limited monitoring established at the time. "People deserve to be compensated," said Gordon. "But the people we work with are less interested in a monetary settlement than wanting to know what happened to them and in getting help with their health" She added, "This trial could offer some hope to downwinders harmed at other facilities throughout the country. Right now, it’s very demoralizing." -------- MILITARY -------- arms U.S. Approves Sale of Missiles to Pakistan By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS May 9, 2005 Filed at 12:11 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-US-Pakistan-Missiles.html?pagewanted=print WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration has authorized the sale of Harpoon antiship missiles and Sidewinder air-to-air missiles to Pakistan. The missiles will upgrade stockpiles of older versions of each missile, the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency said in statements issued Monday. Pakistan is seeking 40 AGM-84L air-launched Harpoons and 20 RGM-84L surface-launched versions of the missile in a deal worth up to $180 million, the military said. The Pakistani navy uses an older version of the missile, and the U.S. statement said the new missiles are less likely to hit noncombatant targets in a naval engagement. The prime contractors on the deal are Boeing in St. Louis and Delex Systems of Vienna, Va. In addition, Islamabad is seeking to purchase up to 300 AIM-9M Sidewinder missiles, which fighter aircraft use to shoot down other planes. The deal is worth up to $46 million, and the prime contractor is Raytheon Systems in Tucson, Ariz. The deal will allow Pakistan to fly armed surveillance aircraft along its western border, the military said. West of Pakistan are Afghanistan and Iran. ''The Pakistani Air Force currently lacks this self-defense capability. These missiles are needed to allow Pakistan to defend its borders, participate in coalition operations and exercises and operate a modern Air Force,'' the military statement says. Neighboring India often criticizes U.S. weapon sales to Pakistan, ruled by pro-U.S. President Pervez Musharraf since he seized power in a coup in 1999. Experts fear Pakistan's government could fall to Islamic fundamentalists, turning powerful weapons over to people who could use them to oppose U.S. interests. -------- business Contracts Awarded By Judith Mbuya Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, May 9, 2005; E04 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/08/AR2005050800715_pf.html Anteon International Corp. of Fairfax won a five-year, $10.6 million contract from the Army to provide scientific and technical support services for the service's biomedical research program. BAE Systems North America Inc. of Rockville won a $3.3 million contract from the Coast Guard's research and development center to build a port security alert system. BearingPoint Inc. of McLean won an $18.9 million contract from Purdue University to modernize business systems by implementing enterprise resource planning software. SRA International Inc. of Fairfax won a five-year, $12.7 million contract to provide information assurance services for the Securities and Exchange Commission. BAE Systems Applied Technologies of Rockville won a $1.5 million contract from the Navy for logistic support services. PBS&J of Beltsville won a $3 million contract from the Air Force for architect and engineering services. SOS International of Reston won an $81 million contract from the Drug Enforcement Administration of the Justice Department for translation and interpretation services. Beretta USA Corp. of Accokeek won a $6.54 million contract from the Army for guns. Northrop Grumman PRB Systems of Hollywood, Md., won a $24 million contract from the Air Force to design and develop a joint service airspace management and "deconfliction" network-centric information service/system. Raytheon Systems Co. of Reston won a $6.1 million contract from the headquarters electronic systems center at Hanscom Air Force Base to build eight shipboard and six subsurface receive suites for installation of Naval fleet assets. AAI Corp. of Hunt Valley won a $9.9 million contract from the Army Aviation and Missile Command for engineering services for the Shadow unmanned aerial vehicle system. R&K Engineering of Roanoke won a $6.24 million contract from the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Washington for development of a building facilities condition assessment program tool to be used Navy-wide. Thomas Associates Inc. of Stevensville, Md., won a $29.9 million contract from the Naval Surface Warfare Center for the damage control program, engineering, logistics and technical support for Navy ships. AT&T Wireless Services Inc. of Beltsville won a $4.3 million contract from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration for international roaming services for the AT&T Wireless Blackberry. JHPiego Corp. of Baltimore won a $1.3 million contract from the General Services Administration for management, organizational and business improvement services. Dimensions International Inc. of Alexandria won a $15.41 million contract from the Army to provide tank and automotive basic research. Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. of Linthicum Heights won a $2.7 million research and development contract from the Air Force for dynamic tactical targeting: tactical exercises and system testing. Emmes Corp. of Rockville won a $12.3 million contract from the Health and Human Services Department to provide a clinical coordinating center for a National Institute on Drug Abuse clinical trials network. Informational Management Services Inc. of Rockville won a $1.4 million contract from the Human Services Department for technical assistance to support a data management system for the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection program. University of Maryland at Baltimore won a $5.7 million contract from the Health and Human Services Department for the collection and evaluation of human tissues and cells from donors with an epidemiology profile. BlueForce LLC of Hampton, Va., won a $5 million contract from the General Services Administration for management, organizational and business improvement services. Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. of Norfolk won a $1.7 million contract from the Navy for maintenance, repair and rebuilding of equipment. Machining Technologies Inc. of Hebron, Md., won a $1.42 million contract from the Army for guns. Odoi Associates Inc. of Greenbelt won a $2 million contract from the General Services Administration for commercial facility management services at the Postal Square building in Washington. Envirosystems Inc. of Columbia won a $16.54 million contract from the Environmental Protection Agency for multi-level, multi-matrix organic sample analyses. Oxley Enterprises Inc. of Stafford won a $2.5 million contract from the General Services Administration for management, organizational and business improvement services. Northrop Grumman Advanced Information Systems Inc. of Falls Church won a $44.7 million contract from the United States Postal Service for staffing of the postal service National Customer Support Center. Information from Washington Technology was used in this report. -------- russia Despite Tension, Bush-Putin Meeting Is Called a Success By ELISABETH BUMILLER May 9, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/09/international/europe/09prexy.html?pagewanted=print MOSCOW, May 8 - President Bush met Sunday night with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in what was widely expected to be a tense encounter after days of recriminations over Russian rollbacks of democracy and the Soviet Union's actions in the World War II era, but the top foreign policy advisers to both men swiftly pronounced the meeting a success. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, appeared in an unusual joint briefing at a guest house on the grounds of Mr. Putin's presidential dacha outside Moscow to say the two leaders had talked extensively about nuclear proliferation and Israel's plan to withdraw from Gaza this summer. Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin even took a brief spin on the dacha grounds in a gleaming 1956 Volga, with Mr. Bush at the wheel. In a photograph that is likely to become a symbol of the good will that the White House and Kremlin sought to portray here on a damp spring evening, the two presidents waved from the windows as the car, purchased by Mr. Putin last year, emerged from a forest of birches. "I'm having so much fun, we're going for another lap," Mr. Bush told reporters. But the two sides announced no formal agreements or breakthroughs, and the meeting seemed more of a place holder until Russia holds a summit meeting of the world's major industrial democracies, the Group of 8, in St. Petersburg next summer. The session also appeared to be a public relations corrective after the awkward news conference that Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin held in Bratislava, Slovakia, in February, when Mr. Putin was reported to have lectured Mr. Bush for 40 minutes in a meeting beforehand about what he considered America's imperfect democracy. Before leaving for Moscow, senior Bush administration officials said they expected that Mr. Putin would express his unhappiness about Mr. Bush's five-day itinerary in Europe, which is centered on the celebration planned for Monday in Red Square for the 60th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany. Mr. Bush has tried to temper the spectacle of his planned attendance at a military parade in the shadow of the Kremlin with stops to promote democracy in Latvia and Georgia, two former Soviet republics that are now independent nations with contentious relationships with Russia. Mr. Bush - who had said only the day before in a speech in Latvia that the Nazi defeat gave the Soviet Union the opportunity to occupy much of Eastern and Central Europe, including Latvia - struck a new emphasis on Sunday with Mr. Putin at his side. "I am looking forward to the celebration tomorrow," Mr. Bush said. "It is a moment where the world will recognize the great bravery and sacrifice the Russian people made in the defeat of Nazism." "I'm glad you invited me and Laura to dinner tonight," he added. "Having had one of your meals before, I'm looking forward to this one a lot." Mr. Bush's itinerary has angered the Russians, as has his criticism of Mr. Putin's rollbacks of democracy. In the speech in Latvia, Mr. Bush warned Mr. Putin not to interfere with the young democracies on his borders. Moscow has furiously responded that the Soviet Union was invited to march into Latvia and other Baltic nations and that it is Mr. Bush who is meddling in the affairs of the former Soviet republics. In an interview with the CBS News program "60 Minutes" for broadcast in the United States on Sunday night, Mr. Putin said the United States had no business lecturing him about democracy after the contested American presidential election of 2000. "Four years ago, your presidential election was decided by the court," Mr. Putin told the correspondent Mike Wallace. "But we're not going to poke our noses into your democratic system, because that's up to the American people." But Ms. Rice and Mr. Lavrov, as well as Stephen J. Hadley, the United States national security adviser, played down the rancor that appeared to build as Mr. Bush made his way toward Russia. They repeatedly said the meeting between the presidents - 40 minutes with just the two leaders and interpreters, followed by 45 minutes when they were joined by aides - was "open" and "constructive." "These two men have developed a relationship in which they can talk about any subject, and talk about it in a constructive and friendly manner," Mr. Lavrov said. Ms. Rice said: "I would characterize the relationship as absolutely straightforward. They say what they think, they say what they mean, and then they act on that." Ms. Rice, Mr. Lavrov and Mr. Hadley, who briefed reporters after a two-hour dinner with Mr. Bush, Mr. Putin, their wives and aides, said that the most extensive discussions centered on the Middle East and a meeting in Moscow on Monday of representatives from the United States, Europe, the United Nations and Russia to discuss Israel's plan to withdraw from Gaza. On Monday in Moscow, Mr. Bush is to attend the parade in Red Square, have his picture taken with about 50 other world leaders and attend a lunch at the Kremlin before leaving for Georgia to visit President Mikhail Saakashvili, who rose to power in the 2003 "Rose Revolution," a street uprising against Russian domination. Earlier in the day, Mr. Bush spoke before the sweeping arcs of white crosses and Stars of David at the Netherlands American Cemetery in Margraten, where he said the 8,301 Americans buried there in World War II "underscore the terrible price we pay for that victory." In a speech on a cold, windy morning, Mr. Bush sought to tie the Allied victory over Hitler six decades ago to his call for the spread of democracy now. "At the outset of the war, there were those who believed that democracy was too soft to survive, especially against a Nazi Germany that boasted the most professional, well-equipped and highly trained military forces in the world," Mr. Bush said. "Yet, this military would be brought down by a coalition of armies from our democratic allies and freedom fighters from occupied lands and underground resistance leaders. They fought side by side with American G.I.'s, who, only months before, had been farmers and bank clerks and factory hands." The "world's tyrants" learned a lesson, he said: "There is no power like the power of freedom, and no soldier as strong as a soldier who fights for that freedom." The cemetery, the third largest of the American war cemeteries in Europe, lies in the lush farmland of the southeastern Netherlands, where in 1944 and 1945 the Allies liberated the country. Prime Minister Jan Pieter Balkenende, in a speech that preceded Mr. Bush's, told the crowd of 10,000 that "our gratitude is too great to express in words." Mr. Balkenende opened his speech with a tribute to two Americans: "Sixty years ago today, Jack B. Blackett and Max E. Good died. They came from California and Georgia. They fought for freedom and peace in Europe. And they were laid to rest here, in Margraten." Mr. Bush in turned thanked the Dutch for bringing flowers to the cemetery's graves every Memorial Day, a tradition of six decades. "Your kindness has brought comfort to thousands of American families separated from their loved ones here by an ocean," the president said. "And on behalf of a grateful America, I thank you for treating our men and women as your sons and daughters." ---- At World War II commemoration, Russian air force wins battle against weather MOSCOW (AFP) May 09, 2005 http://www.terradaily.com/2005/050509103019.7bq956m2.html Specially equipped Russian Air Force planes won a white-knuckle battle with the weather over Moscow on Monday and managed to prevent rain from marring a Red Square military parade attended by more than 50 world leaders. Beginning at dawn, a fleet of 11 Ilyushin-18 and Antonov-12 planes seeded chemical dispersal agents into bad weather upwind of Moscow, Air Force Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky told the state-run ITAR-TASS news agency. Until the last minute, it appeared that their efforts, honed with decades of experience dating back to the Soviet era, would fail. Huge clouds gathered over Moscow and the Red Square parade ground where thousands of troops were massing to commemorate victory over Nazi Germany 60 years ago. Drizzle forced Russian President Vladimir Putin to greet guests outside the Kremlin under umbrellas. About 15 minutes before the parade, the rain stopped and patches of blue sky appeared, announcing a dry spell that held for the duration of the hour-long military extravaganza. According to Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov, the close timing was intentional. "If the air force had carried out their sky-clearing operation a moment later, one cannot exclude -- in fact it is almost sure -- that the rain would have fallen on the parade," he told RIA-Novosti news agency. "You can only clear the sky at a very precise moment, especially so when the clouds are so heavy." The planes flew at altitudes of between 3,000 and 8,000 metres (10,000 and 25,000 feet) in an area between 50 and 150 kilometres (30 and 90 miles) from the capital, Drobyshevsky said. -------- us Army revises weapons training 5/9/2005 By Dave Moniz, USA TODAY http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-05-09-shootings_x.htm WASHINGTON — The Army is toughening its safety training following 16 deaths and at least 121 injuries from accidental gunfire in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. The Pentagon said many of the accidental shootings, which the military calls "negligent discharges," resulted from simple carelessness and the lack of rigorously taught safety habits. But even some highly qualified veteran troops, some ranked as high as captain, have had accidents, said David Martin, a civilian who manages troops safety in Iraq. Defense Department figures show that 14 troops in Iraq were killed in accidental shootings. The total could rise; 17 more deaths from "non-hostile" gunshot wounds are under investigation, Pentagon spokesman James Turner said. Such shootings wounded 121 U.S. troops in Iraq, Martin said. The Pentagon has not provided statistics for wounds from accidental gunshots in Afghanistan. Deaths and injuries from accidental weapons discharges are an occupational hazard of the military. Although statistics aren't available for all wars, the number of incidents in the past three years seems smaller than in other wars, said Conrad Crane, director of the U.S. Army Military History Institute in Carlisle, Pa. Crane said about 8,000 troops suffered "non-battle" gunshot wounds during World War I, and 224 were killed and 3,000 wounded during the Korean War. The current problem, however, is serious enough for the Army to overhaul training and stress safety. Soldiers in basic training now must carry their M16 rifles everywhere — even to the bathroom and chow hall — to become more familiar with safety procedures. The Army has also started teaching rifle marksmanship and weapons handling in the first few days of training, instead of three weeks into boot camp. (Related story: Tragedies lead to reform) Col. Kevin Shwedo, a senior Army training supervisor at Fort Monroe, Va., said training soldiers early is essential, "so commanders in the field don't have to." The ways troops can inadvertently fire their weapons include not activating a "safety" switch; stumbling or losing balance with their finger on the trigger; and not realizing a weapon is loaded. Army soldiers have tougher procedures for carrying and storing their weapons. When entering a dining hall, for example, soldiers must remove ammunition from their rifles and double-check they're clear by pulling the trigger while the rifle is pointed into a sand-filled barrel. -------- war crimes Algerians Remember Massacres Of 1945 Reuters Monday, May 9, 2005; Page A18 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/08/AR2005050801150.html ALGIERS, May 8 -- President Abdelaziz Bouteflika has called on France to admit its part in the massacres of 45,000 Algerians who took to the streets demanding independence as Europe celebrated victory over Nazi Germany on May 8, 1945. Algeria is marking the 60th anniversary of the repression of pro-independence demonstrators under French colonial rule as Europeans celebrate the end of World War II in Europe. "The paradox of the massacres of May 8, 1945, is that when the heroic Algerian combatants returned from the fronts in Europe, Africa and elsewhere where they defended France's honor and interests . . . the French administration fired on peaceful demonstrators," Bouteflika said in a speech published in state media on Sunday. Colonial forces launched an air and ground offensive against several eastern cities, particularly Setif and Guelma, in response to anti-French riots, in which about 100 Europeans wee killed. The crackdown lasted several days and according to the Algerian state left 45,000 people dead. European historians put the figure at between 15,000 and 20,000. It marks one of the darkest chapters in the history of Algeria and France, which ruled the North African country from 1830 until 1962. France's ambassador to Algeria said in February that the Setif massacre was an "inexcusable tragedy." It was the most explicit comments by the French state on the event. Several remembrance events were held across oil-rich Algeria. More than 20,000 people, including ministers, took part in a march on the same route protesters took in Setif in 1945. The repression sparked the anti-colonial movement and a long war of independence, in which as many as 1.5 million Algerians were killed. Algeria also called on Sunday for international help in removing about 3 million landmines France planted along its borders with Morocco and Tunisia during its war of independence. -------- POLICE -------- courts Court Debates Ruling in Wen Ho Lee Case By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS May 9, 2005 Filed at 7:53 p.m. ET http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Reporters-Sources.html?pagewanted=print WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court debated on Monday whether to overturn a contempt ruling against five journalists who have refused to identify their sources for stories on Wen Ho Lee, the nuclear scientist whose career was cut short when his name surfaced as an espionage suspect. Lee is suing the government for leaking his name to the news media during a political frenzy late in the Clinton administration when Republicans accused the White House of ignoring China's alleged theft of U.S. nuclear secrets. Lawyers said that the journalists have a qualified First Amendment privilege to protect the confidentiality of their sources and that a lower court judge erred in finding the reporters in contempt. A $500-per-day fine was suspended pending appeals. Lee Levine, representing Associated Press reporter H. Josef Hebert and Los Angeles Times reporter Robert Drogin, said the judge in the case ''simply bundled all the reporters together'' without drawing distinctions in the stories they wrote or broadcast. The other journalists found in contempt in the case are James Risen and Jeff Gerth of The New York Times, and Pierre Thomas, formerly of CNN and now of ABC. Lee's lawyer framed the case in terms the judges readily understood. ''There is, especially in this town, a culture of leaks,'' Brian Sun said. ''This town?'' U.S. Court of Appeals Court Judge David Sentelle asked in mock surprise, bringing laughter in the courtroom. Sun said he unsuccessfully questioned 21 government witnesses about the leaks before turning to the news media for answers. ''We were asking them questions every which way from Sunday to find out who they were talking to,'' Sun said of interviews with government witnesses. Lee was fired from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. He said government officials leaked information about him to reporters, violating the Privacy Act in pointing to him as a suspect in the possible theft of nuclear secrets for China. Indicted on 59 felony counts alleging he mishandled nuclear weapons information, Lee pleaded guilty to a single charge after spending nine months in solitary confinement. His treatment drew an apology from a federal judge, who said the case had embarrassed the nation and every citizen. Appeals court judges A. Raymond Randolph and Sentelle reacted skeptically to the news media's suggestion that Lee should have done more interviews with government witnesses to find out the sources of the leaks. Randolph pointed to other cases in which far less questioning of witnesses had been done before the plaintiffs targeted the news media. First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, representing The New York Times reporters, pointed to a case in which 60 witnesses had been interviewed before turning to the press. The number is irrelevant to the Lee case, Sentelle replied. Sentelle is a Reagan-era appointee. Randolph is an appointee of President Bush's father. The third member of the appeals panel, Judith Rogers, is a Clinton appointee. The Lee case is among several recent high-profile examples of reporters facing punishment for refusing to reveal sources. Last month a federal appeals court in Washington declined to reconsider a three-judge panel's ruling that Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Judith Miller of The New York Times must testify before a federal grand jury about their sources or go to jail for up to 18 months. The two reporters have been called to testify about the leak of an undercover CIA officer's name. Both publications plan to take their appeal to the Supreme Court. Last year, Rhode Island TV reporter Jim Taricani was sentenced to home confinement after he refused a court order to reveal the confidential source of an undercover FBI videotape of an alleged bribe. He served four months. -------- ENERGY When It Comes to Replacing Oil Imports, Nuclear Is No Easy Option, Experts Say By MATTHEW L. WALD May 9, 2005 NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/09/politics/09energy.html?pagewanted=print WASHINGTON, May 8 - President Bush has proposed reducing oil imports by increasing the use of nuclear power, which he said in a recent speech was "one of the most promising sources of energy." There is a problem, though: reactors make electricity, not oil. And oil does not make much electricity. Nuclear reactors produce about 20 percent of the electricity used in the United States and about 8 percent of the total energy consumed. Oil accounts for 41 percent of energy consumption. Could a few dozen more reactors, in addition to the 103 running now, cut into oil's share of the energy market? "Indirectly, but very indirectly," said Lawrence J. Goldstein, president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation, a nonprofit group that studies the economics of oil. People who think nuclear power is a way to reduce oil imports are "confusing several issues," he said. Peter A. Bradford, a former member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, added, "No one knowledgeable about energy policy would link nuclear power and gasoline prices." In the puzzle of energy consumption and production, however, experts point to three intersections of oil and nuclear power that would offer opportunities to cut demand for oil, pushing down its price and strategic significance. But all are limited, clumsy, expensive or dependent on new technologies whose success is not guaranteed, the experts say. The first option is to replace the oil used to make electricity with new nuclear reactors. But most of the oil in the electric sector has already been replaced, by coal. According to the Energy Department, last year the electric utilities used about 207 million barrels of oil, or less than 600,000 barrels a day. (Total American consumption of oil is about 20.5 million barrels a day.) Even the 600,000-barrel figure is higher than what nuclear reactors could replace, because some of that oil is used in generators that run only a few hundred hours a year. Reactors must run continuously, so they could not replace the oil-fired plants that are used only intermittently. The electric system consumes another fuel that nuclear power could replace: natural gas. Last year, American utilities burned just under 5.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, out of total consumption of 22.3 trillion cubic feet. "You can get a scenario where nuclear would free the gas to go to other things," replacing oil and gasoline, said Thomas Capps, the chairman of Dominion, one of several electric companies that have expressed interest in building new nuclear reactors. "You can run cars on natural gas," he said. The technology for that is available, but not many people use it. According to the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition, a lobbying group, about 130,000 such vehicles are on American roads today, out of more than 200 million. After decades of promoting natural gas, federal and state governments have made some headway in persuading commercial fleets to switch. But they have essentially given up on selling natural gas to ordinary consumers, who have been unwilling to convert their vehicles to use it. There is also little economic incentive behind using natural gas. Mr. Goldstein noted that the current wholesale price of gas, about $7 per million B.T.U. (the standard unit by which gas is sold), is the equivalent of $42 per barrel for oil. But oil now sells for about $50 a barrel, which means the price difference is not enough to induce a switch. Gas must also be pressurized for a car to hold enough to travel more than a few miles; pressurizing it and distributing it to service stations would add expense. But there is another way that nuclear reactors could influence the oil supply, one that bypasses electricity completely. Nuclear engineers are working on designs and materials for a new class of reactors - which could be ready in about 20 years - whose main product would be heat. The Idaho National Laboratory in Idaho Falls, which is owned by the Department of Energy, is working on ways to take very hot steam from a nuclear reactor, then run a small electric current through it to separate the water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. If that can be done more cheaply than the current method of producing hydrogen, which uses natural gas, the hydrogen could be used at refineries to make components of gasoline. Gasoline is made of molecules with a certain ratio of carbon to hydrogen. Part of each barrel of oil consists of molecules with too much carbon to be useful in gasoline; instead, those molecules are used only in low-value products like asphalt and tar. The technology exists for refineries to break up those molecules and add hydrogen, until the hydrogen-carbon ratio is suitable for making gasoline or diesel. David Lifschultz, chief executive of Genoil, a company that makes systems for using hydrogen at refineries, says the oil supply being exhausted first is light oil, which has many components that can be used in gasoline. Heavy oil, with components high in carbon, is far more abundant and often sells at a discount of $20 or $25 a barrel, he said. Available technology could convert 16 million barrels a day of heavy oil, about a sixth of the world supply, into gasoline components, Mr. Lifschultz said, driving down the price of light oil. J. Stephen Herring, a consulting engineer at the Idaho lab, explained two other ways for reactors to make motor fuel. Canada has vast reserves of shale oil, now being converted to ingredients of motor fuel by using natural gas. The gas is used to heat the shale to make its oil flow more easily, and hydrogen, also obtained from the natural gas, is incorporated into the oil to make it suitable for use in gasoline. But a nuclear reactor could do those jobs, delivering both hydrogen and steam for cooking the oil out of the rock, Mr. Herring said. Another strategy, he said, would be to break down coal, shale oil or other hydrogen fuels into a gas comprising hydrogen and carbon monoxide. At high pressure, these materials could form molecules suitable for making gasoline or diesel. A reactor could provide the energy required. But using a reactor to make the ingredients of gasoline is many years away; the new reactors being considered by utilities are similar to the ones running now. The experts say that only after several of those have been built and have run for a few years is a private company likely to try something more adventurous. Mr. Herring did not fault that strategy. "If I were responsible for spending the billion dollars," he said, "I'd be conservative, too." -------- ACTIVISTS Animal Rights Activists Step Up Attacks in N.Y. Families of Drug Executives Are Harassed By Michelle Garcia Special to The Washington Post Monday, May 9, 2005; Page A03 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/08/AR2005050800793_pf.html LAUREL HOLLOW, N.Y. -- Early one recent morning, the wife of a pharmaceutical executive was followed to her workplace, her car was broken into and her credit cards were stolen; later $20,000 in unauthorized charitable donations were billed on the cards. It was the latest in a series of attacks by the Animal Liberation Front on the Long Island family. The activists, who have asserted responsibility, once scrawled "Puppy Killer" in red paint on the executive's house and have posted the couple's phone, license plate and bank account numbers on the Internet, along with this threat: "If we find a dime of that money granted to those charities was taken back, we will strip you bare." The Animal Liberation Front has targeted the executive's employer, Forest Laboratories Inc., as part of a six-year campaign against one of the company's contractors, Huntingdon Life Sciences. Huntingdon, a British-based firm, uses animals to test household products and medications. "Anybody who does business with this company, they become a legitimate target for the campaign," Jerry Vlasak, an ALF spokesman and a physician in Los Angeles, said in a telephone interview. The campaign is not just against the Long Island family, authorities said. The FBI and at least two New York police departments have launched an investigation into attacks on about 30 Forest Laboratories employees in the New York metropolitan area. Investigators said that in the past six months the animal rights activists have escalated their attacks, moving from protests at the homes of their targets to vandalism to theft and threats. "You feel powerless against what's going on around you," said the executive's wife, who asked that her name not be printed while the investigation continues. "We are victims; we are innocent. These people have no clue what they do." In New Jersey, seven animal rights activists face trial on federal terrorism charges for allegedly inciting others to harass and threaten employees of other companies connected with Huntingdon Life Sciences. The trial is scheduled to start in June. "We've been seeing it steadily increase over a couple of years -- the number of incidents, the costs and the change in the rhetoric," said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University at San Bernardino. "They see themselves in an asymmetrical war, that's what we're seeing on the hard left." FBI officials estimate that in the past decade, ALF supporters have committed 700 criminal acts and caused $112 million in damage. In the United States, the number of incidents attributed to ALF decreased slightly last year, but their attacks have grown in size and cost. Federal and New York officials acknowledge that they have made only a few arrests. The challenge, they say, is cracking an amorphous movement. The ALF has no leader or organizational chart, and the activists are methodical and careful, attacking only after conducting extensive surveillance. "They aren't street criminals," said Detective Lt. James T. Rooney with the Suffolk County police on Long Island. "A lot of them are college educated, and they are aware of the limits of what they can do. You're dealing with intelligent people." Vlasak, who is a former animal researcher, asserts that he does not know the identity of the animal rights activists, saying he receives information from anonymous communiques sent to the press office and Internet postings. He said the movement does not condone violence against people. "The above-ground campaign writes letters, and it's the underground actions that capture the interest," Vlasak said. Founded in England in the 1970s, the ALF took root in the American West a decade later, the FBI said. The organization gained notoriety for its "animal liberation" actions in which activists broke into university and biomedical labs to rescue rabbits and mice. In the past decade, ALF activists spread to the East Coast, with their activity growing against the biomedical industry, which often relies on testing animals. "They share philosophic and spiritual ethics and find each other in the American landscape, often in small numbers, and learn about activities of the so-called liberation front," said Bron Taylor, a professor at the University of Florida who has studied radical environmental movements. The FBI said U.S. animal rights activists have not committed violence against people. In England, however, three ALF activists used a pickax to beat the managing director of Huntingdon Life Sciences outside his home. A British court convicted David Blenkinsop in the attack. Huntingdon Life Sciences has lost investors, banking support and insurers in Europe, after it became the target of harassment, including death threats. In New Jersey, federal prosecutors say members of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, a group affiliated with the Animal Liberation Front, used the Internet to incite 20 attacks, including threats, vandalism -- slashing car tires and breaking windows -- and detonating a smoke bomb in Seattle, according to the indictment against the seven animal rights activists in New Jersey. The New Jersey members, like ALF activists, post the personal information on "targets" along with suggested "direct actions." "We'll be at their offices, at their doorsteps, on their phones or in their computers," read one SHAC announcement, according to the indictment. "There will be no rest for the wicked." Defense attorneys say that employee information is publicly available and covered by the First Amendment. But in Pennsylvania, a state court granted a temporary injunction to another pharmaceutical company, ruling that the New Jersey activists had set up a Web site that incited and encouraged violence. On Long Island, the pharmaceutical executive and his wife live cautiously but refuse to change their lives after the attacks. Their nameplate still marks the entrance to the planned community where they live. Letters arrive at the black mail box planted on the main road, and they still rely on local police to patrol the area. "We all have things we believe in, but do we set bombs and light cars on fire?" the executive's wife asked. "We live in a country where people shouldn't live like that."