NucNews - September 13, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- britain Greens keen on nuclear assessment By Local London Reporter 2:17pm Tuesday 13th September 2005 http://www.thisislocallondon.com/news/environment/display.var.629930.0.greens_keen_on_nuclear_assessment.php A GREEN politician says a risk assessment on nuclear waste trains will be carried out despite a lack of funding from the London Assembly. Members refused to assign £17,500 to study the terrorist threat to trains going through London including Bromley. But assembly member Darren Johnson hopes London Mayor Ken Livingstone will carry on with the plans. Around 200 trains carry spent nuclear fuel rods through Lewisham each year. They start from Dungeness Power Station, pass through Chislehurst, Hither Green, Lewisham, Peckham Rye, Brixton, Kensington and Willesden Junction on the way to Sellafield nuclear plant. Mr Johnson told News Shopper in July the assessment is an essential use of public money to prevent an attack. -------- europe Germany plans to seal nuclear dump Tue 13 Sep 2005 Scotsman http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1933022005 German authorities plan to seal an underground nuclear dump in the former communist east with four million tonnes of concrete to contain its radioactivity for at least 150,000 years. Sealing the Morsleben waste depot in Saxony-Anhalt state could take up to 20 years and will cost the federal government about £1.4 billion, said Wolfram Koenig, head of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection. State authorities must also approve the plan, which could delay the start of the work until as late as 2009, Koenig said. He said the facility would be the first in the world to be sealed for good. The underground chambers at Morsleben have stored East German nuclear waste since 1971, and began accepting waste from the west in 1994. A court decision in 1998 halted operations at the site, which contains some 37,000 cubic metres of waste. Koenig's agency has carried out filling work since 2001 to avert the risk of collapse in two chambers used for low and medium-level radioactive waste and the government has pledged to close it, citing safety concerns. Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's government plans to shut down all Germany's nuclear power stations by about 2020. But it has put off a decision on the location of a central, permanent storage site until as late as 2030. Opposition conservatives hoping to win Sunday's parliamentary election have pledged to allow nuclear power plants to stay open longer provided they meet safety standards. Koenig said officials had included the possible impact of future ice ages in calculating that the waste at Morsleben will be safe for about 150,000 years. -------- india India's largest nuclear power plant declared commercial Posted by vkthakur on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 (EST) http://kuku.sawf.org/News/2729.aspx Unit-4 of Tarapur Atomic Power Plant (TAPP-4) went into commercial operation on September 12, 2005. Tarapur Atomic Power Project Unit - 3&4 (2 x 540) MWe, Thane Dist., Maharashtra This unit had achieved criticality on March 6, 2005 and has been connected to the grid on June 4, 2005. TAPP-4, at 540 MWe, is India’s largest nuclear reactor. It incorporates the most advanced concepts and state of the art technology and equipment. It has been designed and constructed by the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) a public sector undertaking under the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE). With the addition of TAPP-4, NPCIL now operates 15 reactors in the country having an aggregate capacity of 3310 MWe. It is also constructing another 7 reactors aggregating 3420 MWe. NPCIL plants have been among top performing plants internationally and their safety record has been excellent. Unit-1 of Kakrapar Atomic Power Station (KAPS-1) has been operating continuously since 16th September 2004, and has already achieved 362 days of continuous operation. This is an Indian record. Unit-1 of Tarapur Atomic Power Station (TAPS-1) has been in operation for the last 270 days beating its earlier record. The overall performance of the plants has been excellent. All NPCIL plants combined have been achieving availability factor of above 84% since 1999-2000. The availability factor in 2004-05 was 88%. This is well above the national average and compares well internationally. Nuclear and Industrial safety has been the number one priority of NPCIL. This is evident from the fact that in 238 reactor years of accumulated operation there has been no radiological accident. The Industrial Safety record has been equally good. Recently the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India has announced the National Safety Awards for 2004. The first prize has been awarded to Narora Atomic Power Station (NAPS) and Kakrapar Atomic Power Station (KAPS) has been declared the runner-up. The projects under construction have been making good progress, and are well ahead of schedule. TAPP-3 is in a advanced stage of commissioning and is expected to go critical in early 2006. For Kaiga-3&4 and Rajasthan-5&6, civil work is nearing completion and major equipment and system installation work is in progress. NPCIL has built world-class expertise in life management of nuclear power plants. Unit-1 of Madras Atomic Power Station (MAPS-1) is undergoing major refurbishment. Coolant channel and Steam Generator replacement work has been successfully completed. Feeder replacement work, which has been taken up for the first time in India, is in progress. NPCIL has just completed two important studies covering Level 1 Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) for Tarapur-3&4 and Level2 PSA for Kakrapar-1&2. These studies which have been carried out for the first time in India, have reconfirmed the safety of Indian nuclear plants. NPCIL was founded in 1987 and will be completing 18 years on 16th September 2005. It has in the period acquired expertise in all areas of work relating to nuclear power namely siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance and life extension. -------- iran Iran making 5,000 nuclear centrifuges - exiles Reuters Tue. 13 Sep 2005 By Aine Gallagher http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3693 BRUSSELS - Iran is making 5,000 centrifuges that can be used to produce enriched nuclear fuel for weapons and almost two-thirds of the machines are ready for use, an exiled Iranian opposition group said on Tuesday. The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which has reported accurately about Tehran's nuclear programme in the past, is the political wing of the militant People's Mujahideen Organisation (MKO) and is listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organisation. "In order to enrich uranium to weapons grade, the Iranian regime has been concentrating on ... manufacturing some 5,000 centrifuge machines," Ali Safavi, an NCRI official, told a news conference in Brussels. Centrifuges purify uranium for use in nuclear power plants of weapons. A commercial enrichment plant typically has tens of thousands of centrifuges so 5,000 would be relatively small. But they could however theoretically produce enough highly enriched uranium fuel for several bombs a year. "This will be the first phase for the ultimate goal of manufacturing 50,000 centrifuges which would enable them to enrich weapons grade uranium," Safavi said. In what represents the NCRI's sixth statement to the press in as many weeks, Safavi said Tehran has smuggled centrifuge engines from China through Dubai over the past two years. Last month, the NCRI said Iran had bought tritium, a dual-use substance that can be used to boost a nuclear explosion, from a South Korean firm. Seoul acknowledged that Tehran had attempted to purchase tritium from a Korean company, but denied that the sale had been completed. Europe and the United States are preparing to ask the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council after Tehran resumed uranium processing last month due to fears that Iran may be trying to develop nuclear weapons. The IAEA board meets next Monday. Tehran denies wanting weapons and insists its nuclear ambitions are limited to the peaceful generation of electricity. In August 2002, the NCRI reported the existence of the Arak heavy water facility and a massive underground uranium enrichment plant at Natanz. Iran later declared Natanz and Arak to the IAEA, though the agency launched a full-scale probe of Iran's nuclear programme which it has never completed. ---- Bush backs Iran's right to nuclear power Tue Sep 13, 6:14 PM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050913/ts_nm/iran_usa_dc_3 UNITED NATIONS - President George W. Bush endorsed Iran's right to civilian nuclear energy on Tuesday as efforts to deny Tehran atomic weapons gathered pace ahead of a key U.N. speech by Iran's new president and a meeting next week of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency. The intense Iran-focused diplomacy by the United States and Europe is a subtext of this week's United Nations summit. Diplomats say Wednesday's scheduled speech by Iran's new president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his first on the international stage since his election in June, could have a significant impact on how those efforts unfold. "Some of us are wondering why they need civilian nuclear power anyway. They're awash with hydrocarbons," Bush told a news conference in Washington before flying to New York for the summit. "Nevertheless, it's a right of a government to want to have a civilian nuclear program," he said. Bush said this right could be supported only if Iran and other governments did not gain expertise or materials to build an atomic weapon, including the ability to enrich uranium. "This is a subject of grave concern, and it's something that we're spending a lot of time on in this administration," Bush said For more than two years, the U.S. administration has accused Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons under the guise of a peaceful nuclear energy program and sought to refer the case to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions. Tehran insists its nuclear ambitions are peaceful and says it has every right to pursue atomic power as an energy source. "COLD FEET" The administration explicitly accepted in August that Iran can develop civilian nuclear power when it endorsed a proposal by three key European Union nations -- Britain, France and Germany -- to allow Tehran to do so if it gives up fuel work. That reflected a gradual shift in U.S. policy because Washington believes the EU offer has enough safeguards to prevent Tehran from diverting its civilian work into making nuclear bombs. But Bush's comments elevate the U.S. commitment before the issue comes to a head at a September 19 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency board of governors. Many developing countries are persuaded by Iran's argument that the United States and other nuclear states should not be permitted to deny them access to civilian nuclear energy, U.S. officials say. Iran's new government has worked feverishly to persuade IAEA members to oppose a U.N. referral and U.S. and European officials acknowledged the outlook for referral is not good. "There is a distinct atmosphere of cold feet," one European diplomat involved in the nuclear issue said. The IAEA meeting could forgo any voting and end inconclusively by deferring a decision, U.S. and European diplomats said. U.S. officials still hope to win China's support for a U.N. referral but Russian backing is unlikely. Bush said he would be "speaking candidly about Iran" with Chinese President Hu Jintao and Russian President Vladimir Putin while all are in New York. U.S. congressmen have warned India that a sweeping new nuclear agreement with the United States could be at risk if New Delhi does not side with Washington on Iran. In an effort to rally at least 18 votes, a majority of the IAEA board, the United States is still working to secure support from South Korea, South Africa, Brazil and Mexico, a U.S. official said. Some experts have suggested that instead of a U.N. referral, the IAEA board could be asked to take action itself by denying Iran IAEA technical assistance. However, U.S. and European diplomats said that seemed unlikely at this point. -------- israel BEHIND THE SCENES AT U.N., ONE FOCUS FOR SHARON: IRANIAN NUKES By Ron Kampeas JTA September 13, 2005 http://www.cjp.org/content_display.html?ArticleID=163056 or http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=15833&intcategoryid=3 (registration required) WASHINGTON -- Ariel Sharon won't have much time to savor this week's expected plaudits at the United Nations for the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. One word tops the Israeli prime minister's behind-the-scenes U.N. agenda: Iran. Sharon's preoccupation at the launch of the 2005-2006 U.N. General Assembly will be the Islamic republic's potential to build nuclear weapons, Israeli officials said. Israel hopes to persuade board members of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, to refer Iran to the Security Council for sanctions when the IAEA board meets Monday in Vienna. "It's going to be a good session" because of the successful Gaza withdrawal, said one Israeli official, who spoke anonymously because Israel prefers to maintain a low profile when it comes to Iran. "But next week's meeting is on everyone's minds." The entire Israeli political spectrum regards Iran and the bomb as a worst-case scenario. After all, Iran's president has spoken publicly of attaining nuclear weapons so that Iran can annihilate the Jewish state, even if millions of Iranians are killed in an Israeli counterstrike. Israel long has had the Bush administration as a powerful ally in pressing the international community to force sanctions on the Iranians, but three developments in recent weeks have dramatically aided Israel's case: . On Aug. 10, Iran broke the IAEA inspectors' seals on a uranium-enrichment plant after rejecting a compromise solution from the European Union that would have granted Iran political and economic incentives and allowed it to continue a civilian nuclear program. Israel never favored such dangling-carrot gestures, saying sticks -- particularly economic sanctions -- were more likely to be effective. Iran continues to insist that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful energy purposes, though its huge cache of oil and its own past pronouncements suggest otherwise. The election this summer of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a hard-line Islamist widely seen as forced through by the country's powerful clerics, doesn't help matters. . A Sept. 2 report from IAEA director Mohammed ElBaradei -- otherwise known for his cautious language when it comes to nuclear violators -- catalogs in 15 pages Iran's systematic efforts since 1985 to cover up its attempts to achieve nuclear weapons, concluding with unusually tough language: "In view of the fact that the Agency is not yet in a position to clarify some of the important outstanding issues after two and a half years of intensive inspections and investigation, Iran's full transparency is indispensable and overdue." . The European Union -- particularly the trio of Britain, Germany, and France that had been negotiating with Iran -- is off the fence and now actively advocates sanctions. "German high-level diplomats are traveling around the globe to IAEA board members with the aim to gain their support to transfer the issue of Iran to the attention of the Security Council," Martina Nibbeling-Wriessnig, the spokeswoman for the German Embassy in Washington, told JTA. It's none too soon for Israel, where intelligence officials believe Iran is less than a year away from knowing how to put a nuclear bomb together. There's generally a two-year gap between know-how and production, which would forecast a bomb by as early as 2008 if Israel is correct. Other nations' intelligence agencies are slightly more sanguine, suggesting an Iranian nuclear bomb could be as far off as 2015, but pro-Israel lobbyists -- who have made Iran their No. 1 priority in recent years -- say the timeline is less important than containing a rejectionist, anti-Western regime. "Iran is approaching the point of no return," said Josh Block, a spokesman for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "In order to slow their progress and prevent them from getting the nuclear bomb, you need a united international community making good on its threats of economic and political isolation. Without that kind of serious application of will, Iran will continue to flaunt, embarrass and ignore international community demands that they end their nuclear program." President Bush made clear again Tuesday that he believes the matter is a high priority. "It is very important for the world to understand that Iran with a nuclear weapon will be incredibly destabilizing," he said in remarks before a meeting with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. "We must work together to prevent them from having the wherewithal to develop a nuclear weapon." No one is optimistic. There are 35 IAEA board members, and some of them have reasons of their own to keep the United Nations out of the nuclear-monitoring business. Israel, the United States and European nations are expected to work especially hard next week on persuading India -- a country that itself defied nuclear protocol -- to back Iran's isolation. Even if the IAEA refers the matter to the Security Council, chances are still slim that sanctions will be forthcoming anytime soon. Russia -- another country that chafes at nuclear protocols -- has declared that it believes Iran is still in compliance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, and China is believed to have the same view. Both countries have Security Council vetoes. Bush said he would raise the matter specifically with the Russian and Chinese leaders when he meets with them in coming days. Complicating matters is Israel's own reported nuclear-weapons capacity, believed to number close to 200 warheads. The Israeli government has never confirmed that Israel has nuclear weapons, though Vice Prime Minister Shimon Peres confirmed it in a speech to visiting American Jewish leaders in 2003, when he was not in government. Bush suggested that whatever the outcome, the United States and its allies are still willing to find a way out of the impasse. "It's a right of a government to want to have a civilian nuclear program," he said. "But there ought to be guidelines in which they be allowed to have that civilian nuclear program. And one such guideline would be in such a way that they don't gain the expertise necessary to be able to enrich" uranium. -------- korea North Korea rebuffs US on reactors 13/09/2005 09h01 (AFP) http://www.afp.com/russian/news/stories/050913083938.9xc4jp9n.html BEIJING - North Korea has vowed to keep pushing for the right to peaceful atomic energy, putting it on a collision course with the United States as six-way talks on its nuclear weapons drive were set to resume. Repeating the demand that broke up the talks five weeks ago, the Stalinist state said it would not accept opposition on the issue from Washington, which rejects nuclear reactors for Pyongyang. The now-familiar impasse was underlined as the six nations -- also including China, Japan, Russia and South Korea -- prepared a return to the negotiating table at 0900 GMT. The off-and-on bargaining is aimed at persuading the North, which expelled international monitors and now says it has nuclear weapons, to give up the bomb in exchange for security guarantees as well as energy and economic aid. "(North Korea) has a right on peaceful nuclear activity. This right is neither awarded nor needs to be approved by others," the country's chief envoy to the talks, Kim Gye-gwan, told Xinhua news agency at Pyongyang airport. "We have this right, and the more important thing is that we should use this right. If the United States tries to set obstacles to the DPRK's (North Korea) using this right, we can utterly not accept that." US envoy Christopher Hill reiterated before leaving the United States that North Korea must get out of the nuclear business altogether. He refused to be drawn Tuesday on whether progress could be made in Beijing following North Korea's latest comments. "If I were optimistic or pessimistic it wouldn't really make very much difference. The fact is we have to talk to them and see where we are and then we get a better sense of where we are," he said on arrival in Beijing. As part of any deal, North Korea wants the international community to complete construction of two light-water reactors, a five billion dollar project suspended two years ago. The United States says the North should not have the facilities and that Pyongyang has acknowledged using its civilian program in the past as a cover for making weapons. It argues that there is no need for the North to maintain civilian programs because South Korea has pledged to provide its neighbour with electricity. But that would make North Korea reliant on the South. While the US has Japanese backing on this point, China, South Korea and Russia are on the record as supporting Pyongyang. The standoff sent the last round of talks in August into recess without any apparent progress. Under a now defunct 1994 agreement, the two light-water reactors were to have been built by a US-led consortium to replace North Korea's existing graphite-moderated reactors, which can produce weapons-grade plutonium. But construction was suspended after the United States accused the North of developing a secret uranium-enrichment program. Pyongyang has denied the US uranium charges but declared in February this year that it had already built nuclear bombs. In Washington, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice dangled the prospect of diplomatic relations in front of Pyongyang, saying "there is a lot on the table for the North Koreans if they choose to take it." Normalization of ties could be expected if North Korea made a "strategic choice" to disband its nuclear arsenal, Rice told the New York Times. Despite little sign that the main protagonists are ready to back down, the delegates were to expected to resume the talks with a review of a draft statement outlined by China on the principles of how to denuclearise the Korean peninsula. In Tokyo, Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura said he expects the talks to be "constructive," after four previous rounds of inconclusive negotiations and countless hours of shuttle diplomacy aimed at resolving the standoff. "But I can't say what the outcome will be," he said. -------- pakistan Pak didn't want deals like Indo-US N-pact: Pervez Press Trust of India New York, September 13, 2005 http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1490890,00050001.htm Pakistan appears to have given up efforts to persuade the US to lift restrictions on the supply of technology and equipment for its civilian nuclear energy requirements as has been done in the case of India. President Pervez Musharraf, who had a meeting with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in New York on Sunday, told The New York Times that he made no demand for an agreement that would match the Indo-US nuclear deal reached in July. India and the US had signed the historic deal during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington under which the US offered to resume nuclear fuel supplies to Indian reactors and help New Delhi in its civilian nuclear energy programme. Rejecting Pakistan's demand for parity with India in accessing civilian nuclear technology, the US had said that the landmark accord with New Delhi was a "mechanism to deepen" further its commitment to international non-proliferation. "We view India as an exceptional case, and see civil nuclear cooperation as a mechanism to deepen further India's commitment to international non-proliferation," Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert G Joseph told the House International Relations Committee on September 8. -------- russia Russia warns U.S. against new nuclear doctrine Tue Sep 13, 2005 2:59 PM ET (Reuters) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050913/ts_nm/usa_nuclear_russia_dc;_ylt=Ap4G6YPCmZu_WCvzLqglls5g.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA4b3FrcXQ0BHNlYwMxNjkz BERLIN - Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov warned the United States on Tuesday against any change of its defense doctrine to allow pre-emptive use of atomic weapons, saying it would prompt others to seek nuclear arms. A draft revision of the U.S. Defense Department's nuclear operations doctrine was made available at the weekend, outlining the use of nuclear weapons to pre-empt an enemy's attack with weapons of mass destruction. "Lowering the threshold for use of atomic weapons is in itself dangerous," Ivanov told a news conference ahead of a NATO defense ministers meeting in Berlin. "Such plans do not limit, but in fact promote efforts by others to develop (nuclear weapons)," said Ivanov, who was speaking through an interpreter. He said he hoped U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would inform him if such a change to the U.S. military doctrine were planned. The draft "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations," dated March 15, revised the "discussion of nuclear weapons use across the range of military operations." According to the document, combatant commanders could request approval from the president to use nuclear weapons under a variety of scenarios, such as to pre-empt an enemy's use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States, multinational or alliance forces or civilian populations. A Defense Department spokesman said at the weekend the document had not yet been given to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It is due to be signed within the next few weeks by the director of the Joint Staff, the spokesman said. The unclassified document was available on numerous Web sites such as GlobalSecurity.org, a defense policy Web site. A Pentagon site, however, listed the document as unavailable. -------- ukraine Additional funding will not be available from the U.S. to complete Ukraine Nuclear Fuel Quantification Project 13 September 2005 Ukraine ForUm http://eng.for-ua.com/news/2005/09/13/174746.html Letter from U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman to Mr. Ivan Plachkov, Minister, Ukraine Ministry of Fuel & Energy Dear Minister Plachkov, Thank you for your letter regarding our cooperative efforts on the Ukraine Nuclear Fuel Quantification Projects. The collaboration that has taken place over the past several years between the government of Ukraine and the United States Department of Energy on this project has been noteworthy. Up to the present, the United States has invested more than $50 million in assistance funds for Ukraine. However, reduced levels of funding to the International Nuclear Safety Program recently forced the Department of Energy to reduce the scope of its assistance work. The reduction impacted the Ukraine Nuclear Fuel Quantification Project and funding for the core reload is not currently available. Due to the great strides made by Ukraine's nuclear energy sector in recent years, both financially and technically, we are confident that Ukraine now possesses the ability to independently pursue a commercial agreement with Westinghouse to supply the core reload batch of 42 nuclear fuel assemblies. We look forward to our continued cooperation and to the enhanced energy security and independence of Ukraine. Sincerely, Samuel W. Bodman [U.S. Secretary of Energy] The Action Ukraine Report (AUR) -------- u.s. nuc weapons Pentagon Foresees Preemptive Nuclear Strikes by Jim Lobe September 13, 2005 (Inter Press Service) http://www.antiwar.com/lobe/?articleid=7246 Amid increasing tension between the United States and Iran over Tehran's nuclear program, and growing concern about overstretched U.S. ground forces, the George W. Bush administration is moving steadily toward adopting the preemptive use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states as an integral part of its global military strategy. According to a March document by the Joint Chiefs of Staff that was recently posted to the Pentagon's Web site, Washington will not necessarily wait for potential adversaries to use what it calls "weapons of mass destruction" before resorting to a nuclear strike against them. The document, entitled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations [.pdf]," has yet to be approved by Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld, according to an account published in Sunday's Washington Post. However, it is largely consistent with the administration's 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which was widely assailed by arms control advocates for lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons by the U.S. "What we see as significant is that they are considering using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear powers in preemptive first strikes," said Ivan Oelrich of the Federation for American Scientists (FAS) about both the NPR and the new Doctrine. The Doctrine would also appear to contradict the administration's oft-stated claim that it is significantly reducing the role of nuclear weapons in its global military strategy. "[T]he new doctrine reaffirms an aggressive nuclear posture of modernized nuclear weapons maintained on high alert," according to Hans Kristensen of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "[T]he new doctrine's approach grants regional nuclear-strike planning an increasingly expeditionary aura that threatens to make nuclear weapons just another tool in the toolbox," he wrote last week in Arms Control Today. "The result is nuclear preemption, which the new doctrine enshrines into official U.S. joint nuclear doctrine for the first time, where the objective no longer is deterrence through threatened retaliation but battlefield destruction of targets," according to Kristensen. The Doctrine is the latest in a series of documents adopted by the administration that has moved the U.S. away from the traditional view that nuclear weapons should be used solely for the purposes of defense and deterrence. Along with the NPR, which called for the development of new delivery systems for nuclear weapons and noted that China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya could all be targets, the new view was expounded by Bush himself in his September 2002 National Security Strategy document. "We cannot let our enemies strike first," he warned at the time. In mid-2004, according to national security analyst William Arkin, Rumsfeld approved a top-secret "Interim Global Strike Alert Order" that directed the military to be prepared to attack potential adversaries, notably Iran and North Korea, that are developing WMD. "Global strike," according to a classified January 2003 presidential directive obtained by Arkin, is defined as including nuclear, as well as conventional, strikes "in support of theater and national objectives." The new document is the first to spell out various contingencies in which a preemptive nuclear strike might be used, including: * If an adversary intended to use WMD against the U.S. multinational or allied forces or a civilian population; * In cases of an imminent attack from an adversary's biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy; * Against adversary installations, including WMD; deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons; or the command-and-control infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the U.S. or its friends and allies; and * In cases where a demonstration of U.S. intent and capability to use nuclear weapons would deter WMD use by an adversary. The previous Doctrine, promulgated under the Clinton administration in 1995, made no mention of the preemptive use of nuclear weapons against any target, let alone describe scenarios in which such use would be considered. Moreover, the new Doctrine blurs the distinction that existed during the Cold War between strategic and theater nuclear weapons by "assign[ing] all nuclear weapons, whether strategic or nonstrategic, support roles in theater nuclear operations," according to Kristensen. Another particularly worrisome aspect of the latest Doctrine, according to Oelrich, is its conflation of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons as one "WMD" threat that could justify a U.S. nuclear strike, particularly given the huge disparity in destructive and lethal impact between chemical weapons, on the one hand, and nuclear arms on the other. "What we are seeing now is an effort to lay the foundations for the legitimacy of using nuclear weapons if [the administration] suspects another country might use chemical weapons against us," he said. "Iraq is a perfect example of how this doctrine might actually work; it was a country where we were engaged militarily and thought it would deploy chemical weapons against us." Critics also fear that resorting to nuclear weapons may have become increasingly attractive to the administration as the Army and Marines have become bogged down in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. "[U.S. Strategic Command] planners, recognizing that U.S. ground forces are already overcommitted, say that a global strike must be able to be implemented 'without resort to large numbers of general purpose forces,'" according to Arkin's account of recent directives received by commanders charged with contingency planning. The new strategy may also be relevant to the situation in Iran, which is known to have chemical weapons but whose nuclear program Washington insists is being used to produce weapons as well. Writing in The American Conservative last month, columnist Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer who also worked at the Defense Intelligence Agency, reported that Vice President Dick Cheney's office had tasked the United States Strategic Command with drawing up a contingency plan for a "large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons" in the event of another 9/11 terrorist attack. "Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option," he wrote. In fact, it is questionable whether even U.S. nuclear weapons could reach their hardened targets underground, which is why the Pentagon has been pressing Congress for several years to finance research into the development of the so-called Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator. Democrats and a small minority of Republicans in the House of Representatives have so far blocked the administration's request, although it will be taken up later this fall by a joint House-Senate conference committee. The new Strategy may be aimed in part at exerting pressure on the lawmakers to approve the request. Meanwhile, however, administration critics warn that instead of deterring potential adversaries from pursuing nuclear weapons, the new Doctrine is almost certain to have the opposite effect. "We make it seem that nuclear weapons are essential to our security," noted Oelrich. "So it immensely enhances the cachet of nuclear weapons to others." -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- connecticut Complaint filed over power plant payments 09/13/2005 04:25:58 AM Connecticut Post ROB VARNON rvarnon@ctpost.com http://www.connpost.com/business/ci_3024719 Connecticut and the region's electric grid operator are fighting over $970 million in consumer payments to nuclear and coal-fired power plants that the state says are unjustified. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, COMPLAINT Mary Healey, the state's consumer counsel, and lobbyists representing manufacturers and other businesses filed a complaint about the payments with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on Monday. According to the FERC, both sides will have a chance to argue in favor or against the filing; the FERC will then review it. There is no specific time frame for a decision, but FERC said it is expediting the complaint. In a statement, Blumenthal and Healey said that payments to nuclear and coal-fired plants are examples of how the Independent System Operator New England, the region's grid operator, and the FERC have failed to set up a fair and competitive market for electricity. The state officials contend that only three power plants in Connecticut — Dominion Power's Millstone Nuclear Power Plant, PSEG Power's Bridgeport Harbor coal unit and a small Norwich-based coal-fired plant — are participating in the competitive market. The reason there are three is because the FERC exempted the oil and gas-fired plants from the competitive market after some threatened to shut down because they weren't making enough money, Connecticut officials said. Under the rules for the competitive market, all generators "receive the highest rate paid for power in any hour," the officials said. Because oil and natural gas prices have increased dramatically in the past few months, power plants that rely on those fuels have been charging more for electricity to cover those costs. For example, if a nuclear or coal plant were selling power at the same time as a gas-fired plant, the nuclear or coal plant would receive the same high price for electricity as the gas-fired plant. But nuclear and coal plants are being paid the same rate as the gas-fired plants, despite not facing the same increase in fuel costs, said Blumenthal, who estimates that Connecticut consumers could save $970 million in costs if the FERC repeals the market rules. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, nuclear power provided 1.09 million megawatts of electricity to Connecticut between January and May. Coal-generated electricity totaled 319,000 megawatts and natural gas 949,000 megawatts during the period, the Energy Department said. ISO New England, Dominion and PSEG dispute the state's analysis of the situation. However, when asked whether nuclear and coal plants are being paid the same rate as power plants using natural gas and oil, the companies did not answer. ISO New England did not address the issue in a statement sent to the Connecticut Post in response to a call for comment. Neal Brown, a PSEG spokesman, said his company puts the Bridgeport unit's electricity out for sale on the open market at a price that is based on its operating costs — but he did not say whether the company receives the highest price per hour referenced by the complaint. Dominion spokesman Mark Lazenby said his company is reviewing Connecticut's filing. In its statement, the grid operator took issue with Connecticut's call to repeal the market rules ISO and FERC created over the past seven years. "This proposal would take us back to the days when utilities were guaranteed profits from their investments through a regulated rate of return and consumers were responsible for the full investment risk, whether those investments were wise or not," ISO said. ISO New England said its market rules have saved consumers $700 million annually because the rules have encouraged companies to build new power plants, which created more electricity and competition. Prices, though volatile in the short term since the state started deregulating the electricity market in 1998, have remained virtually flat in Connecticut. In 1999, the average price per kilowatt-hour for electricity was 11.46 cents; in May 2005, it was 11.61 cents, according to the Energy Department. Rob Varnon, who covers business, can be reached at 330-6216. -------- nevada EPA official: Yucca radiation standard most stringent in nation September 13, 2005 Associated Press http://www.kesq.com/global/story.asp?s=3845425&ClientType=Printable LAS VEGAS An Environmental Protection Agency official is defending proposed new radiation safety standards for the Yucca Mountain project -- calling them the most stringent in the nation. The director of the E-P-A Office of Radiation and Indoor Air told the Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board yesterday (Monday) in Washington, D-C, that the standards will protect public health for a (M) Million years. The board's a branch of the National Academies of Sciences -- which is monitoring plans for the national nuclear waste repository in Nevada. The E-P-A's taking public comment on proposed safety rules it unveiled in August. The Energy Department needs to show it can meet the standards in order to obtain a license to open the repository 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. -------- north carolina Progress prepares N.C. Brunswick nuke for hurricane Tue Sep 13, 2005 8:13 AM ET (Reuters) http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticleSearch.aspx?storyID=145512+13-Sep-2005+RTRS&srch=nuclear NEW YORK, Sept 13 - Progress Energy Inc. (PGN.N: Quote, Profile, Research) issued a hurricane warning at the 1,838 MW Brunswick nuclear power station in North Carolina as Ophelia, now a Tropical Storm but expected to strengthen, targets the North Carolina coast. Both units at the plant, which is not currently experiencing hurricane force winds, are still operating at full power. Progress Energy declared an unusual event due to the hurricane warning. An unusual event is the lowest of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's four emergency classifications. Workers are coordinating with local, state and federal officials, checking on emergency diesel generators and other equipment and preparing the site for the high winds. Nuclear units usually do not shut down unless meteorologists predict hurricane force winds will likely hit the plant site within the next 24 hours. Entergy's Waterford nuclear unit in Louisiana, which is still out of service, shut as Hurricane Katrina approached the Louisiana coast. Topical Storm Ophelia, which has the potential to become a hurricane again later today, is nearly stationary about 130 miles east-southeast of Charleston, South Carolina. The U.S. National Hurricane Center expects the storm, which is packing maximum sustained winds near 70 miles per hour, will start to move slowly toward the northwest and north over the next 24 hours. On its projected path, the NHC projected the storm would hit the North Carolina coast just north of the South Carolina border where Brunswick is located on Wednesday, and follow the state's coastline northeast through the Outer Banks before returning to the Atlantic Ocean on Thursday. The 1,838 MW Brunswick station is in Southport in Brunswick County, about 160 miles south of Raleigh. There are two units at the station: the 938 MW unit 1 and the 900 MW unit 2. One MW powers about 800 homes, according to North American averages. Progress Energy operates the station for its owners Progress (81.7 percent) and North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency (18.3 percent). Progress Energy's subsidiaries own and operate more than 24,000 MW of generating capacity and transmit and distribute electricity to more about 2.9 million customers in North Carolina, South Carolina and Florida. -------- utah Utah pledges fight against nuclear dump near Salt Lake City By Paul Foy ASSOCIATED PRESS 1:23 p.m. September 13, 2005 http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20050913-1323-wst-goshutes-nuclear.html SALT LAKE CITY – Utah is planning its challenge to a federal ruling that would allow shipments of nuclear waste to an impoverished American Indian reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, with Gov. Jon Huntsman pledging Tuesday he would "stand in the middle of the railroad track" if necessary to stop the shipments. In his biggest challenge since taking office in January, Huntsman made the vow as state lawyers prepared to ask a federal appeals court to overturn the decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Utah has 60 days to appeal Friday's decision and is assessing whether it will fare better at the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver or the District of Columbia Circuit, said Denise Chancellor, an assistant state attorney general. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is equally furious over the use of the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation as a ground-level storage depot for spent nuclear fuel rods. He called it dangerous and reckless, with F-16 fighter jets from Hill Air Force Base making 7,000 runs yearly over the reservation to the Utah Test and Training Range. Utah made its strongest argument over the chance one of those jets could crash into a canister of highly radioactive fuel, or that terrorists could make a target of the concrete pad. The NRC rejected the arguments Friday after eight years of hearings and deliberations by its Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which split 2-1 on the safety questions. The dissenting judge, a nuclear engineer, questioned assumptions used to assess the likelihood of a jet crash. The NRC then voted 3-1 to approve the license for Utah's version of Yucca Mountain, the troubled federal project to build a nuclear-waste repository in Nevada. The dissent was made by Commissioner Gregory Jaczko, who questioned the lack of a definitive analysis of the spread of radiation from a breached container. The split on both boards opens a legal argument for Utah, which can argue in court that the NRC didn't satisfy its own safety standards for a nuclear-waste repository. "Some deference will be given to NRC but they have to comply with their own regulations, and I think we can demonstrate that while there have been a lot of hearings and computer modeling, there hasn't been a thorough analysis of the radiation consequences if and when a storage cask gets hit by an F-16 or a bomb," Chancellor said. "They basically looked at this without any standards whatsoever." Hatch has insisted the Skull Valley proposal was "dead on arrival." The state's congressional delegation fired off a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton asking her to block construction of a rail spur across federal land to the reservation. Utah's leaders also plan to lobby the Bureau of Indian Affairs to withhold its approval for a lucrative lease that Private Fuel Storage offered the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians. Asked Tuesday how the state would respond to an earthquake or other disaster hitting Skull Valley, Huntsman flatly said, "They won't be successful." He was referring to Private Fuel Storage, the consortium of nuclear-powered utilities looking for a temporary way station for nuclear waste. If it comes to it, Huntsman said he would personally block rail shipments at Utah's border. "But meantime, we have an executive-branch strategy, we have a legislative strategy, we have a legal strategy," Huntsman told radio station KCPW on Tuesday. "All of them we're deploying to the best of our ability. I discussed this with everyone from the president right on down, and I will continue to harass and harangue until we get some action on it." The NRC decision drew a rare rebuke from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which issued a statement last week complaining the project lacked scrutiny. "The first thing that came to my mind is: 'What has the past eight years been about, if it hasn't been about intense scrutiny?'" Private Fuel Storage spokeswoman Sue Martin told The Salt Lake Tribune. On the Web: Nuclear Regulatory Commission: www.nrc.gov ---- Governor Says He'll Fight Against Nuclear Waste in Utah September 13th, 2005 @ 7:36am (AP) http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=106941 SALT LAKE CITY -- Governor Jon Huntsman says he'll pester President Bush and his Cabinet to keep nuclear waste from crossing Utah's borders. He says the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's decision to license a nuclear waste storage site 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City is reckless. Though the fight against the storage facility on the Skull Valley Goshutes' reservation has spanned eight years and two other governors, it may be up to Huntsman to finish the fight. He's already asked Interior Secretary Gale Norton to "unilaterally cancel the lease." He supports U-S Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's legislation that would require on-site storage of the waste at the nuclear power plants that produce it. Huntsman says he's determined that trainloads of used nuclear fuel rods will NOT enter the state on his watch. ---- State Planning fight Against Nuclear Dump September 13th, 2005 @ 2:54pm (AP) http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=107087 SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah is planning its challenge to a federal ruling that would allow shipments of nuclear waste to an impoverished American Indian reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. Gov. Jon Huntsman said Tuesday he would "stand in the middle of the railroad track" to stop the shipments, although a court battle seems much more likely. In his biggest challenge since taking office in January, Huntsman took the vow as state lawyers prepared a case asking a federal appeals court to overturn the decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Utah has 60 days to appeal Friday's decision and is assessing whether it will find more sympathetic or critical judges at the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver or the District of Columbia Circuit, said Denise Chancellor, an assistant attorney general for the state. U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is equally furious over the use of the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation as a ground-level storage depot for spent nuclear fuel rods. He called it dangerous and reckless, with F-16 fighter jets from Hill Air Force Base making 7,000 runs yearly over the reservation to the Utah Test and Training Range. Utah made its strongest argument over the chance one of those jets could crash into a canister of highly radioactive fuel, or that terrorists could make a target of the concrete pad. The NRC rejected the arguments Friday after eight years of hearings and deliberations by its Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which split 2-1 on the safety questions. The dissenting judge, a nuclear engineer, questioned assumptions used to assess the likelihood of a jet crash. The NRC then voted 3-1 to approve the license for Utah's version of Yucca Mountain, the troubled federal project to build a nuclear-waste repository in Nevada. The dissent was made by Commissioner Gregory Jaczko, who questioned the lack of a definitive analysis of the spread of radiation from a breached container. The split on both boards opens a legal argument for Utah, which can argue in court that the NRC didn't satisfy its own safety standards for a nuclear-waste repository. "Some deference will be given to NRC but they have to comply with their own regulations, and I think we can demonstrate that while there have been a lot of hearings and computer modeling, there hasn't been a thorough analysis of the radiation consequences if and when a storage cask gets hit by an F-16 or a bomb," Chancellor said. "They basically looked at this without any standards whatsoever." Hatch has insisted the Skull Valley proposal was "dead on arrival." The state's congressional delegation fired off a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton asking her to block construction of a rail spur across federal land to the reservation. Utah's leaders also plan to lobby the Bureau of Indian Affairs to withhold its approval for a lucrative lease that Private Fuel Storage offered the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians. Asked Tuesday how the state would respond to an earthquake or other disaster hitting Skull Valley, Huntsman flatly said, "They won't be successful." He was referring to Private Fuel Storage, the consortium of nuclear-powered utilities looking for a temporary way station for nuclear waste. If it comes to it, Huntsman said he would personally block rail shipments at Utah's border. "But meantime, we have an executive-branch strategy, we have a legislative strategy, we have a legal strategy," Huntsman told radio station KCPW on Tuesday. "All of them we're deploying to the best of our ability. I discussed this with everyone from the president right on down, and I will continue to harass and harangue until we get some action on it." The NRC decision drew a rare rebuke from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which issued a statement last week complaining the project lacked scrutiny. "The first thing that came to my mind is: 'What has the past eight years been about, if it hasn't been about intense scrutiny?"' Private Fuel Storage spokeswoman Sue Martin told The Salt Lake Tribune. -------- vermont Averting disaster at VT Yankee September 13, 2005 Rutland Herald http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050913/NEWS/509130306/1037 As we look at the devastation of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast communities in Mississippi and Alabama in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and the bungling of the rescue efforts by FEMA, we would do well to reflect on what it would take to deliver our Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts communities here into such a state of social, governmental, and economic breakdown. What it would take is a nuclear accident at Vermont Yankee. Recent reporting and letters in our local papers have raised issues about the behavior of our Vermont Department of Public Services and Public Services Board, as well as the Vermont State Nuclear Advisory Panel. These governmental entities are responsible for making sure that every reasonable precaution is taken to prevent a catastrophic nuclear accident at the 33-year-old Vermont Yankee nuclear plant in Vernon, a plant in the last throes of its design life. As we confront the price gouging and high gas and utility costs triggered by the tragedy in Louisiana, it is tempting to allow the cheapest priced kilowatt hour become our primary criteria for deciding on the uprate and licensing extension for Vermont Yankee. But the responsibilities of all these entities and of their members are broader than that. A complete cost-benefit analysis of the uprate is certainly in order, but it must take account of the increased risk of a nuclear accident after the proposed 120 percent uprate at Vermont Yankee; the increased risk due to any license extending the life of this old plant past its current design life; the increased risk of indefinite dry cask storage of highly radioactive nuclear wastes on the banks of the Connecticut River. These are all vital issues that have yet to be addressed, but cost is not the only — nor the most important — criterion here. Public safety and public health have to carry even greater weight in the decisions of our governmental bodies and the citizens who serve on them. It is clear that the NRC is not concerned with the safety of Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts citizens, as they have committed only 2 percent of the resources that were committed to guarantee the safety of the citizens of Maine, when Maine Yankee was inspected. The burden on our appointed and elected officials has accordingly become more acute. We need only look to New Orleans to see what can happen in a matter of hours when catastrophe strikes. And to see what happens when we leave oversight to the federal government. SCOTT AINSLIE Brattleboro -------- washington Another Hanford waste treatment project prompts concern THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Tuesday, September 13, 2005 · Last updated 5:32 p.m. PT http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=WA%20Hanford%20Bulk%20Vitrification RICHLAND, Wash. -- A project to demonstrate a new method of treating radioactive waste at the Hanford nuclear reservation is seeing increasing costs that could jump even higher as a federal overseer raises concerns about the safety of the new plant. The pilot project, called bulk vitrification, would treat the less radioactive waste stewing in 177 aging underground tanks at the south-central Washington site. The more highly radioactive waste will be treated at a so-called vitrification plant at the site. Construction on the vitrification plant has been halted amid skyrocketing costs and seismic issues. Now, the U.S. Department of Energy has paused construction on the bulk vitrification pilot project as well. The Energy Department, which manages cleanup at the Hanford site, has estimated the cost of the pilot plant at $160 million, up from a $102 million estimate in July 2004. Three years ago, a preliminary estimate of the project price was $45 million. The agency halted construction and procurement on the plant in May, though design and research are continuing. In addition, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has raised safety concerns about the design of the plant, based on a preliminary hazard assessment. "The report notes potential weaknesses in such areas as the confinement of materials and worker protection that need to be considered in finalizing the design of the facility," board Chairman A.J. Eggenberger wrote in a letter to the Energy Department. Some concerns may be resolved by more thorough planning. But the board's concerns about preventing radioactive materials from escaping could require design changes, such as enclosing what is largely a mobile facility, further increasing the cost. "We still believe the process is viable," Howard Gnann, senior technical adviser for the Energy Department's Office of River Protection, told the Tri-City Herald for a story published Tuesday. The Energy Department has estimated waste would cost 35 percent less to treat with bulk vitrification than at the large-scale plant. However, the pilot plant is not likely to be ready in time to meet the next legal deadline for the project, Gnann said. A report is due to regulators June 30 comparing bulk vitrification with other alternatives for the less-radioactive waste. The pilot plant, which has a permit to operate for as long as 400 days, was to have its first test melt of radioactive waste by the end of the year. Contractor CH2M Hill said in August that melt will not take place until late May or early June of 2006. Bulk vitrification is being tested as a less expensive way to treat some of the 53 million gallons of radioactive and hazardous chemical wastes that accumulated during decades of plutonium production for the nation's nuclear weapons program. For bulk-vitrification, waste would be dried, mixed with silica-rich dirt and packed into insulated boxes up to 24 feet long. Electrodes inserted into the mixture would melt it into a huge brick of glass to be permanently buried - container and all. -------- MILITARY -------- arms Arms fair criticised for using Iraq war to market weapons By Terry Kirby, Chief Reporter Published: 13 September 2005 UK Independent http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article312204.ece British and American arms companies have been criticised for marketing weapons used in Iraq at Europe's biggest arms fair. Campaigners against the arms trade have criticised the Government for inviting countries with dubious human rights records, such as Indonesia and Colombia, to the fair. The campaigners also accused companies such as Lockheed and BAE Systems of "revelling" in the opportunity to sell equipment "battle-tested" in Iraq to those countries. A massive police presence is expected at the Defence Systems and Equipment International (DSEi) exhibition at the Excel Centre in London's Docklands when it officially opens this morning to invited guests only. There were angry confrontations between police and demonstrators at the last arms fair two years ago, and similar protests are expected this time. The bill for policing is likely to cost the taxpayer millions of pounds. The exhibition has been criticised by the Metropolitan Police for diverting resources during a period of heightened terror alert. Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, has also criticised the fair. Among the 1,200 exhibitors from 34 countries are many which have made equipment used in Iraq. At the stand of Lockheed Martin, there are replicas of the Hellfire and Thaad (Theatre High Altitude Area Defence) missiles, both of which have been deployed in Iraq. Although the Hellfire is mainly as an air-launched missile, the version being promoted at DSEi is a new type for ground or sea launch. "It has been used regularly and very successfully in Iraq and this one is exactly the same," said Doug Terrell, a Lockheed Martin executive on the stand. "The US Army, Marine Corps and Special Forces absolutely love it." Almost 20,000 Hellfires have been sold worldwide. The exhibition is run in conjunction with the Defence Export Services Organisation (Deso), the arm of the Ministry of Defence that promotes the sale and licensing of British-made military equipment. Yesterday's press preview day included a catwalk-style show organised by Deso, with soldiers in full battledress posing with weapons. These included the British L96 sniper rifle used in Iraq as well as chemical detection equipment, airfield illumination systems and light anti-armour weapons. A spokesman for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade said: "The arms fair will include nearly all the main providers of the weapons used in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They will not be embarrassed about a conflict undertaken on a false premise that has cost tens of thousands of civilian lives, but will be revelling in the use of their weapons in the conflict and the promotional material that it provides." The spokesman said the invasion and occupation of Iraq had been "good news" for the major arms companies. "It has allowed them to label their arms as battle-tested and provided them with promotional material for their missiles, bombs, fighter aircraft, artillery, tanks and armoured vehicles. They will be marketing their weapons to countries from around the world with the full support of the UK Government and the perverse promotional assistance provided by the ongoing conflict in Iraq." The campaigners, who are backed by the Liberal Democrats, say it is wrong that the exhibition should be a venue for countries which have been criticised by the Foreign Office for their record on human rights to purchase arms. Deso said invitations were issued after consultation with other departments such as the Foreign Office and the intelligence services. It also pointed out that an invitation did not mean that a licence to export would automatically follow. The exhibition organisers say the event is "not an arms fair". A spokesman said: "You can't just walk in off the street and buy weapons." He stressed that only a small proportion of exhibitors sold actual weapons and that the majority were concerned with such areas as disaster relief, peacekeeping and humanitarian activities and homeland security. What to buy this week * L96 sniper rifle. Made by Accuracy International and used by British troops, often as cover for bomb disposal experts. * Hellfire Missile. Made by US-based Lockheed Martin. Normally fitted to Apache helicopters. * The Nlaw (Next Generation Light Anti-Tank Weapon) is a disposable, one man, portable high explosive system made in Britain by the French company Thales. * THAAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defence). Designed, says Lockheed, to destroy attacking missiles. The countries * CHINA Invited despite an EU embargo on arms sales and Tony Blair's statement in Beijing this month that there was a "question mark" over human rights. * INDONESIA Dubious human rights record over the conflicts in Sumatra and Irian Jaya has kept Indonesia on the uninvited list since 1999. Campaigners have documented "extrajudicial executions, arbitrary detention, torture, sexual violence and destruction of property" by the military in 2004-05. * COLOMBIA The Foreign Office said "members of the security forces collude with paramilitaries and are involved in drug trafficking". * SAUDI ARABIA Third-largest recipient of UK arms exports, where Amnesty International last year reported an escalation of "killings by security forcesexacerbating the already dire human rights situation in the country". Foreign Office said the state "continued to violate human rights". * ALGERIA The Foreign Office says there are "numerous documented allegations of human rights abuses by the security forces and state-armed militias". British and American arms companies have been criticised for marketing weapons used in Iraq at Europe's biggest arms fair. Campaigners against the arms trade have criticised the Government for inviting countries with dubious human rights records, such as Indonesia and Colombia, to the fair. The campaigners also accused companies such as Lockheed and BAE Systems of "revelling" in the opportunity to sell equipment "battle-tested" in Iraq to those countries. A massive police presence is expected at the Defence Systems and Equipment International (DSEi) exhibition at the Excel Centre in London's Docklands when it officially opens this morning to invited guests only. There were angry confrontations between police and demonstrators at the last arms fair two years ago, and similar protests are expected this time. The bill for policing is likely to cost the taxpayer millions of pounds. The exhibition has been criticised by the Metropolitan Police for diverting resources during a period of heightened terror alert. Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, has also criticised the fair. Among the 1,200 exhibitors from 34 countries are many which have made equipment used in Iraq. At the stand of Lockheed Martin, there are replicas of the Hellfire and Thaad (Theatre High Altitude Area Defence) missiles, both of which have been deployed in Iraq. Although the Hellfire is mainly as an air-launched missile, the version being promoted at DSEi is a new type for ground or sea launch. "It has been used regularly and very successfully in Iraq and this one is exactly the same," said Doug Terrell, a Lockheed Martin executive on the stand. "The US Army, Marine Corps and Special Forces absolutely love it." Almost 20,000 Hellfires have been sold worldwide. The exhibition is run in conjunction with the Defence Export Services Organisation (Deso), the arm of the Ministry of Defence that promotes the sale and licensing of British-made military equipment. Yesterday's press preview day included a catwalk-style show organised by Deso, with soldiers in full battledress posing with weapons. These included the British L96 sniper rifle used in Iraq as well as chemical detection equipment, airfield illumination systems and light anti-armour weapons. A spokesman for the Campaign Against the Arms Trade said: "The arms fair will include nearly all the main providers of the weapons used in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. They will not be embarrassed about a conflict undertaken on a false premise that has cost tens of thousands of civilian lives, but will be revelling in the use of their weapons in the conflict and the promotional material that it provides." The spokesman said the invasion and occupation of Iraq had been "good news" for the major arms companies. "It has allowed them to label their arms as battle-tested and provided them with promotional material for their missiles, bombs, fighter aircraft, artillery, tanks and armoured vehicles. They will be marketing their weapons to countries from around the world with the full support of the UK Government and the perverse promotional assistance provided by the ongoing conflict in Iraq." The campaigners, who are backed by the Liberal Democrats, say it is wrong that the exhibition should be a venue for countries which have been criticised by the Foreign Office for their record on human rights to purchase arms. Deso said invitations were issued after consultation with other departments such as the Foreign Office and the intelligence services. It also pointed out that an invitation did not mean that a licence to export would automatically follow. The exhibition organisers say the event is "not an arms fair". A spokesman said: "You can't just walk in off the street and buy weapons." He stressed that only a small proportion of exhibitors sold actual weapons and that the majority were concerned with such areas as disaster relief, peacekeeping and humanitarian activities and homeland security. What to buy this week * L96 sniper rifle. Made by Accuracy International and used by British troops, often as cover for bomb disposal experts. * Hellfire Missile. Made by US-based Lockheed Martin. Normally fitted to Apache helicopters. * The Nlaw (Next Generation Light Anti-Tank Weapon) is a disposable, one man, portable high explosive system made in Britain by the French company Thales. * THAAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defence). Designed, says Lockheed, to destroy attacking missiles. The countries * CHINA Invited despite an EU embargo on arms sales and Tony Blair's statement in Beijing this month that there was a "question mark" over human rights. * INDONESIA Dubious human rights record over the conflicts in Sumatra and Irian Jaya has kept Indonesia on the uninvited list since 1999. Campaigners have documented "extrajudicial executions, arbitrary detention, torture, sexual violence and destruction of property" by the military in 2004-05. * COLOMBIA The Foreign Office said "members of the security forces collude with paramilitaries and are involved in drug trafficking". * SAUDI ARABIA Third-largest recipient of UK arms exports, where Amnesty International last year reported an escalation of "killings by security forcesexacerbating the already dire human rights situation in the country". Foreign Office said the state "continued to violate human rights". * ALGERIA The Foreign Office says there are "numerous documented allegations of human rights abuses by the security forces and state-armed militias". ---- 'It may be legal, but it's immoral' By Anna Browning BBC News Tuesday, 13 September 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4243204.stm Campaigners hope to stop another arms fair in two years' time As soon as you leave the Docklands Light Railway for the Excel exhibition centre it is clear something is up. There are police everywhere - hundreds of them. For four days a place more often used to hosting the likes of Place in the Sun Live! and antiques trade shows is staging one of the world's largest arms fairs - Defence Systems and Equipment International. And that, said Anna Jones of the Campaign Against Arms Trade, makes it no normal trade fair. Fancy a M4 Carbine? A M16A2 equipped with M203 grenade launcher? Depleted uranium? They are all for sale and they are a magnet for the peace protesters intent on preventing a 2007 return for the bi-annual event in east London. Speaking after its last London trade fair, Defence Systems and Equipment International spokesman Paul Beaver said: "It is like any other trade exhibition, it is like the motor show in Birmingham or exhibitions at Earl's Court, this happens to be for the defence industry." Campaigners have planned a week of protests, including a rally on Tuesday, which saw several hundred march through the streets of East Ham to the Excel centre itself - or as close as the police would allow. "This is the global arms trade come to our community," said Anna Jones, the rally's co-ordinator. "But we are not going to let the global arms trade do its business in our communities or anybody else's around the world. "We want to show the UK government the level of opposition against the arms fair. "We have walked through the streets of East Ham and we have had a lot of support from local people on the way." Green Party member of the London Assembly Jenny Jones visited the arms fair last time it was in town. "The most interesting, but the most shocking, about the visit to me was the fact that it looked like any kind of trade fair," she said. And it was this trade, rather than the weapons themselves, she took more issue with. "Arms go on to be traded again and again. These arms aren't only sold to the people who come to this building, they fall into the wrong hands," she said. "We sold them to Saddam Hussain, and then they were used against us. "[The trade] creates the desire for newer and better things and things that kill better and faster and more, and I think that's incredibly unhealthy." The event has also caught the attention of the local community, more specifically the local borough council, Newham, which vociferously opposes it. "Many residents are one with you," Labour councillor John Saunders told the rally. "Nobody, but nobody wants this arms fair here," said another councillor, Alan Craig. Referring to September 1940, when the area was heavily bombed by the Germans, he said: "The people of the East End know what it is to suffer from the arms trade." Among the protesters were life-long conscientious objectors William and Mary Barnes, from north London. "I just think this fair is so disgraceful, that the government should be encouraging it," said Mrs Barnes. Libya has given up its weapons of mass destruction and as such there's no reason why they can't attend Ministry of Defence "I believe that it is immoral to sell arms to some of the dreadful regimes around the world that we do sell to," said Joy Winterbottom, also from north London. "It might be legal but I don't think it's moral. Some of the arms being sold, such as depleted uranium, are dreadful." But a spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said there was nothing to stop those countries that had been invited to the event attending. He said: "For example, Libya has given up its weapons of mass destruction and as such there's no reason why they can't attend." Countries were looking for equipment that would help with peacekeeping, security and such things as protection of fisheries. He said that all countries would be adhering to a "strict export licence policy". -------- nato Nato to open academy near Baghdad Iraqi officers are already being trained by Nato countries September 13 2005 BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4242596.stm Nato is set to open a military academy outside Baghdad to train Iraqi army officers, a spokesman said. The academy will located in the Baghdad suburb of al-Rustamiyah on the site of an old Iraqi military base. "Before mid-October it will be up and running," said Nato spokesman James Appathurai. Nato has been training Iraqi soldiers in Baghdad since August and hopes 1,000 officers a year will pass through the new military academy. However, not all Nato countries will be taking part. France and Germany refused to send troops onto Iraqi soil, but will contribute by helping train Iraqi officers outside the country. -------- POLICE / PRISONERS / COURTS / JUSTICE FBI hit in handling of secret informers By Jerry Seper THE WASHINGTON TIMES September 13, 2005 http://jerrykilgore.com/contents/issues/transportation_ad.shtml Guidelines governing the FBI's handling of confidential informants, which were established in the 1970s and revised in the wake of September 11, are violated frequently by supervisors and agents, according to a report released yesterday. The Justice Department's Office of Inspector General, in a 301-page report, said it found "significant non-compliance" by the FBI in its handling of confidential informants. "The attorney general's investigative guidelines govern some of the FBI's most important investigative powers, including its authority to operate confidential informants," said Inspector General Glenn A. Fine. "Our review found several significant shortcomings in the FBI's adherence to the guidelines which need correction, particularly the guidelines governing its use of confidential informants." The report says the guidelines were violated in 87 percent of the confidential-informant cases examined and that errors occurred in several of the most important aspects of the FBI's management of its criminal-informant program, including reviews aimed at assessing the suitability of people who serve as informants. It says instructions FBI agents are required to give confidential informants were not followed in 49 percent of the reviewed cases, and the agency's use of its power to authorize confidential informants to participate in "otherwise illegal activity" showed a noncompliance rate of 60 percent. "Guidelines violations can jeopardize Justice Department prosecutions of criminals and can also lead to civil liability claims against the government," Mr. Fine said. "We are concerned the FBI has not taken the necessary steps to ensure that FBI agents and their supervisors adhere to these important requirements." The FBI yesterday said that although the report listed several instances of administrative noncompliance, it found that the bureau was "generally compliant with the guidelines." Noting that confidential informants are critical to the bureau's ability to carry out its "counterterrorism, national security and criminal law-enforcement missions," the FBI said it began a project several months ago to review and revise its confidential-informant program. FBI spokesman Edwin C. Cogswell said the review seeks to develop policies and processes to simplify and standardize administrative procedures and to clarify and improve compliance requirements. The Justice Department set the guidelines in the 1970s in response to FBI's surveillance and infiltration of civil rights groups. The guidelines address the bureau's investigations of people and groups, its use of confidential informants, undercover operations and warrantless monitoring of verbal communications. After the September 11 attacks, Attorney General John Ashcroft ordered a review of the guidelines to identify revisions necessary to enhance the department's ability to prevent terrorist attacks. The revised guidelines gave FBI field managers greater authority to conduct preliminary inquiries, criminal intelligence investigations and undercover operations. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy Indiana Town To Turn Stinking Hog Manure into Power September 13, 2005 — By Reuters http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=8772 CHICAGO — They cannot escape the stench, but residents of tiny Reynolds, Indiana, hope the oceans of hog manure produced nearby will power their homes and businesses some day soon. "We're very excited," town president Charlie Van Voorst. "They're advertising us as a showcase for the world." Indiana's energy conservation-minded Gov. Mitch Daniels will take his ethanol-powered recreational vehicle to Reynolds Tuesday to designate the single stoplight town the world's first "Biotown." Initially, the 500 townspeople will lease or buy vehicles that run on high concentrations of corn-based ethanol or soy diesel from soybeans. The second phase will install power-generating equipment that burns gas made from manure, said Deborah Abbott of the state agriculture department said. The electricity generated will power homes and businesses. "The goal is to create a new use for the manure that's surrounding the town -- as a biofuel," Abbott said. "The hog farms are all around us. We're used to that smell -- something we live with," Van Voorst said. She added: "And they're talking about using our own (human) waste as a renewable resource." -------- OTHER -------- environment Senate Fails in Bid to Block Bush Mercury Plan By J.R. Pegg WASHINGTON, DC, September 13, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/sep2005/2005-09-13-10.asp The Senate today narrowly defeated a resolution to block the Bush administration’s controversial plan to cut mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. The 51-47 vote upholds a federal rule that permits a mercury emissions trading program, which critics contend violates the Clean Air Act and fails to address the serious public health and environmental concerns associated with the toxic metal. "The rule is not based on sound science," said Senator Susan Collins, a Maine Republican, "and it will harm human health and the health of our environment." Exposure to mercury, usually through eating fish contaminated by mercury emissions that fall upon waterways, can cause permanent neurological damage in humans and reproductive harm in wildlife. Some 44 states have issued fish consumption advisories due to mercury contamination in some or all of their waters. Young children and women of childbearing age are most at risk – the federal government estimates at least one in eight American women of childbearing age has unsafe levels of mercury levels in her blood. Senator James Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, said sponsors of the resolution were wasting time on a measure that had no chance of affecting the implementation of the Bush rules. Inhofe called the vote "purely political and essentially meaningless," noting that the White House had pledged to veto the resolution and that the House was unlikely to even consider it. Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat and cosponsor of the resolution, said the Senate action "let some healthy sunshine into the Senate to exposed a flawed rule that puts special interests over the health of the American people." "This was a debate that powerful special interests had been able to prevent, until now," said Leahy. "We have garnered more support than anyone thought possible just a few months ago when we began this effort." Debate on the measure reflected sharp disagreement about the Bush administration’s mercury plan - divisions that breach party lines. Six Democrats joined 45 Republicans in voting against the resolution; nine Republicans, 37 Democrats and the Senate’s lone Independent supported the measure. Mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants are currently unregulated - these facilities emit some 48 tons of mercury each year, accounting for about 40 percent of the nation's mercury pollution. Proponents say the Bush plan, which aims to reduce these emissions some 70 percent by 2018, is the most cost effective way to cut mercury pollution and is modeled after a program that has successfully cut acid rain pollution. Deeper cuts would hurt the industry, supporters say, and raise electricity costs without much benefit to public health. But the Bush plan has drawn broad criticism and is the subject of several federal court challenges by more than a dozen states and an array of public health and environmental groups. Critics say it is an inappropriate regulatory approach because of the danger posed by the toxic metal. The cap and trade plan puts industry-wide limits on mercury emissions and issues tradeable credits to plants that reduce emissions below the limits. But it allows some plants to avoid making any reductions. Opponents contend this will create local hot spots of pollution, disproportionately impacting individual communities. "I am confounded by the failure of this rule to meet either the spirit or letter of the law," said Senator Olympia Snowe, a Maine Republican. "It is clearly delinquent in protecting all Americans equally from the hazards of mercury." Industry supporters are overstating the economic impact of stricter regulations, Leahy said, and underplaying the health benefits that would accompany cuts in mercury pollution. A peer reviewed study released last week by the Mount Sinai School of Medicine’s Center for Children’s Health and the Environment estimated some $2 billion a year is lost due to the public health impacts of mercury pollution, Leahy said. "We are telling a whole generation of women and children that their health is less important than energy companies’ profits," Leahy said. The Senate resolution took specific aim at a March 2005 rule that allows the federal government to implement the cap and trade plan. That rule, finalized in March 2005, reversed a previous decision by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that determined mercury emissions from power plants should be reduced using maximum achievable control technology (MACT). Supporters of the resolution say that reversal is a clear violation of the Clean Air Act and noted that development of the mercury policy was littered with controversy. Large passages of the draft rule were lifted verbatim from industry memos and a report by the EPA Inspector General found that senior agency officials manipulated the development of the mercury rule in order to favor the emissions trading plan. In addition, the Government Accountability Office determined the EPA’s economic analysis of the mercury rule was seriously flawed and violated the agency’s own policy guidelines. The facts point to "an intentional and illegal effort to circumvent the law … designed to benefit big energy companies at the expense of the public," said Senator James Jeffords, a Vermont Independent. Opponents of the Bush mercury plan contend power plants should be forced to cut emissions much more quickly than the goals outlined in the current regulations. They note that in a presentation to an industry trade group in 2001, EPA officials said a MACT standard could reduce mercury emissions 90 percent - to 5.5 million tons - four years after a rule is finalized. MACT standards have been used to rein in the two other major sources of mercury pollution in the United States - medical and municipal waste incinerators. Utility groups have lobbied hard against a mercury MACT standard, arguing that commercial technologies are too new and expensive to achieve such reductions, and noting that U.S. power plants only contribute one percent of global mercury pollution. The resolution’s sponsors would derail the only mercury regulation on the books and fail to see that mercury pollution is "a global issue," according to Senator George Voinovich, an Ohio Republican. "The technology does not exist to accomplish what proponents want," added Senator Kit Bond, a Missouri Republican. "If I had a magic wand, I would be happy to wave it and support a 90 percent reduction. But I don't." Advocates of a stronger mercury rule say the United States should lead by example. They contend advanced emissions reduction technology does exist and will be commercially available once there is a strong market demand for it. "It is all well and good we want to reduce emissions in 2018 by 70 percent," said Senator Tom Carper, a Delaware Democrat. "We can do better than that. We ought to do better than that." -------- ACTIVISTS Weapons of Mass Destruction in Bush’s Own Backyard September 13, 2005 Greenpeace http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/weapons-of-mass-destruction-in Today, as residents, tourists and workers were enjoying a typical Tuesday morning in Washington D.C., dozens of people collapsed in front of the U.S. Capitol. These Greenpeace activists simulated the disastrous fate that innocent people would suffer in the result of a real chemical accident or attack. The enactment also included a 40 by 12-foot replica of a ninety-ton rail car in view of the Capitol, releasing simulated steam and a recorded hissing sound. All of the people representing victims wore T-shirts reading “Reroute and Phase-Out Chemicals of Mass Destruction.” These fallen bodies represent the fatalities that would occur if one railcar of chlorine or similar chemical experienced an accident or attack. Scientists estimate as many deaths as 100 people PER SECOND, were this to occur. Every day, tons of hazardous materials are speeding toward our nation’s metropolitan areas, including Washington, D.C. Not to mention the chemical facilities that are scattered throughout the United States. These structures are prime terrorist targets and the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 26 states are home to a plant that puts more than one million people at risk. A Matter of Time Sadly, we’ve had multiple, concrete reminders of the possibility of attacks and accidents since September 11, 2001. Both London and Madrid were targeted by terrorists and victims of Hurricane Katrina can attest to the hardships in the wake of a toxic tragedy. Following the massive storm surge, the chemical plants in the affected area flooded, releasing untold amounts of toxic poisons into the region’s waterways. Floodwaters of up to 20 feet in some areas exposed local homes to toxins such as chlorine, vinyl chloride, gasoline and used motor oil. Countless experts have warned that a major chemical disaster is possible on U.S. soil. Richard Falkenrath - former deputy homeland security adviser to President Bush – disclosed, “Of all the various remaining civilian vulnerabilities in America today, one stands alone as uniquely deadly, pervasive and susceptible to terrorist attack: toxic-inhalation-hazard industrial chemicals.” Four years after September 11, we are still waiting for the federal government to act to protect its citizens from a preventable disaster. The Bush administration is needlessly risking American lives for the benefit of the chemical industry. If Bush is seeking out weapons of mass destruction, he need only look in his own backyard. Re-route, Phase-Out Chemicals of Mass Destruction The Bush administration has failed to make our citizens safer. It’s up to Congress to reroute these freight trains away from densely populated areas. Several cities, including the District of Columbia, Baltimore, Cleveland, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are already debating such legislation. Other bills are being considered to address increased security. More importantly, these hazardous chemicals must be replaced with safer alternatives. Re-routing and added security is an important temporary safeguard, but the only real solution to this looming catastrophe is a full phase-out of toxic chemicals. Take Action! Ask your senators to support common sense measures to protect our families, our community and our health from chemical accidents or attacks. Visit our Action Center. http://usactions.greenpeace.org/action/start.php?action_id=63 Find out if YOU live in a vulnerability zone near a chemical plant. Visit the EPA’s Web site. http://yosemite.epa.gov/oswer/CeppoWeb.nsf/frmVZIS?OpenForm Solutions ARE Possible Mike Marcotte – chief engineer of the Blue Plains sewage treatment plant in Washington, D.C. – admitted that September 11, 2001 was a "sleepless night" for him, knowing the chlorine used at his facility was a potential terrorist target. Within eight weeks after the terrorist attacks, the plant had switched to a safer alternative.