NucNews - October 18, 2005 -------- NUCLEAR -------- australia ALP will allow for uranium growth Katharine Murphy, Catherine Armitage October 18, 2005 The Australian http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16949767%255E2702,00.html KIM Beazley has cleared the way for an expansion of uranium mining, claiming federal Labor would not shut any new mines approved by state or federal governments before it comes to power. The Opposition Leader, whose party is deeply divided on the issues of uranium mining and nuclear power, said yesterday he did not support new uranium mines beyond the three currently operating in Australia. But he said to protect and encourage investment in the mining industry, a federal Labor government would not close any new uranium mines opened before it won office. "We would not impose on the mining industry a sovereign risk issue," Mr Beazley said. "(Our) policy says that, when Labor comes into office federally, whatever mines are in operation, they will be sustained." But he warned supporters of the expansion of the industry -- such as ALP resources spokesman Martin Ferguson and Queensland trade union powerbroker Bill Ludwig -- that Australia was as far into uranium mining "as we want to be". He also categorically ruled out Australia moving to nuclear power, saying the world had not resolved proliferation risks and the issue of radioactive waste. Mr Beazley's commitment would effectively allow Australia to have any number of uranium mines beyond the three in operation -- Ranger in the Northern Territory and Olympic Dam and Beverley in South Australia. A fourth site -- Honeymoon in South Australia -- secured construction approval from the previous state Liberal government. And the state's current Labor Government is allowing that site to proceed despite the fact that it technically breaches the national ALP's "three mines" policy. Premier Mike Rann has mounted the same arguments as Mr Beazley -- that stopping a previously approved uranium mine would send a strong signal to the resources sector not to invest because of regulatory uncertainty. Labor and the Howard Government yesterday backed uranium exports to China. However, Peter Costello said any attempt by a sovereign government to buy Australian uranium deposits raised "whole new policy questions" and would need to be carefully scrutinised. China and Australia are negotiating a safeguards agreement allowing for uranium to be bought by Beijing and potentially allowing Chinese resources companies to explore in Australia. But the Treasurer, in China, said there was "no need" for China to buy directly into Australian uranium mines because it could get what it needed from Australian suppliers. -------- canada Klein says nuclear energy not a good option canada.com October 18, 2005 (CP) http://www.canada.com/calgary/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=fb70a7f7-c478-4501-afce-452b55261a46 EDMONTON _ Premier Ralph Klein is dismissing the possibility of allowing a nuclear power plant to be built in Alberta's oilsands region. Atomic Energy of Canada has previously confirmed ongoing discussions with several oilsands companies about the possibility of using nuclear power. But Klein says Alberta has banned the production of nuclear power because there's no proven method of disposing of nuclear waste. Klein also says he's firmly against Alberta's oilsands companies using natural gas from the proposed Mackenzie Valley pipeline. He says this would be ``a tremendous waste of a resource.'' The premier says coal, hydroelectricity, coal bed methane and even burning bitumen to create power are all much better alternatives than using natural gas. ---- Auditor general to review power deal Canadian Press October 18, 2005 http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=8796d28e-ab57-4158-80f6-3cd946b4a695 TORONTO -- Ontario's auditor general will review a controversial government deal to restore two idle nuclear units to the electricity grid. Premier Dalton McGuinty says he's confident the review will back up his government's claim that the province went as far as it could to protect taxpayers. Critics say the deal with Bruce Power allows the private firm to charge too much for the nuclear energy it will produce from the two units being restored. There's also complaints that the deal leaves taxpayers on the hook for cost overruns. McGuinty says the province will only have to foot the bill for 50 per cent of cost overruns if the project goes $618 million over budget. He says that's better than what was seen in overruns at past refurbishments of nuclear reactors, which were 100 per cent paid by the province. -------- china China's Nuclear Capabilities By Caterina Dutto Published: October 18, 2005 http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=17609&prog=zgp&proj=znpp Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s first visit to China since taking office is designed to promote dialogue with China’s military. Some recent administration reports and statements argue that China is building up its nuclear forces and is a growing threat to international security.Rumsfeld’s visit comes ahead of President George W. Bush’s scheduled visit to China in November. For current data and analysis of China’s strategic forces, we have provided an excerpt from the China chapter in Carnegie’s recent publication, Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear Biological, and Chemical Threats. Nuclear Weapons Capability China is a recognized nuclear weapon state under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and possesses enough nuclear material for hundreds of nuclear weapons (see table 7.1 at the end of the chapter). China has approximately 400 nuclear weapons and various delivery platforms, mostly short- and medium-range missiles. [Some analysts believe the West routinely overcounts China’s arsenal. See Jeffrey Lewis, “Ambiguous Arsenal,” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2005.] Approximately 20 Chinese weapons are deployed on missiles that can reach the continental United States. After developing its first nuclear weapon in 1964, China became a major supplier of sensitive nuclear and missile technology to the developing world. The United States and other countries have worked to draw China step-by-step into the international nonproliferation regime. Over three decades, these efforts have achieved important progress. Proliferation issues exist, but they are now a relatively minor aspect of the United States–China relationship. China has not officially released details about the size or composition of its nuclear arsenal, making estimates difficult to develop. Much of the unclassified information compiled on China’s forces is from unverified media reports and occasional statements by intelligence or government officials. From these, it is possible to estimate that China fields approximately 152 warheads on land- and sea-launched missiles, 130 bomber weapons, and 120 weapons on artillery, short-range missiles, and other weapons.1 Beijing also maintains a fairly extensive nuclear weapons production and research complex. China has conducted 45 nuclear weapons tests, the first of which took place on October 16, 1964, and the last on July 29, 1996. China has signed but not yet ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Aircraft and Missile Capabilities China is in the process of modernizing its strategic missile forces, although historically its progress has been slow and has lagged well behind foreign estimates. Although China deploys several types of ballistic missiles, only the DF-5 (13,000- kilometer range) is an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) by Western standards and is capable of reaching the continental United States. Currently, China deploys approximately 20 DF-5 ICBMs and 12 DF-4 intermediate-range missiles (5,500-kilometer range).2 China is developing and may have deployed the DF-31, a mobile, three-stage solid-fueled ICBM with an estimated range of 8,000 kilometers. China conducted three flight tests of the DF-31, the last one on January 2002. One source concludes that 8 missiles were deployed in 2004. Plans to develop another land-based missile, the DF-41, a solid-fueled ICBM with a range of 12,000 kilometers, appear to have been canceled in favor of an extended-range version of the DF-31, the DF-31A. The U.S. Department of Defense estimates that the number of Chinese ICBMs capable of hitting the United States “could increase to around 30 by 2005 and may reach up to 60 by 2010.” China’s medium-range ballistic missiles include an aging force of 40 DF-3As (2,900-kilometer range) that it is phasing out after 30 years in service. China also has 48 DF-21As (1,800-kilometer range), but it has converted some to conventionally armed missiles. China is also developing the Julang-2, a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) based on the DF-31. China has only one ballistic missile submarine, however, which has never left coastal waters and is not operational. There are some reports that a new missile submarine may be ready to enter service in the next few years. China’s bomber force consists mainly of aging H-6 aircraft based on the Soviet Tu-16 Badger bomber, with a range of 3,100 kilometers. China purchased 24 Su-30 fighter aircraft and SA-20 surface- to-air missile systems from Russia in 2004, but these are not thought to have been modified for a nuclear role.1 Biological and Chemical Weapons Capability China is believed by U.S. intelligence to possess chemical and biological weapons research and development programs, and some offensive chemical weapons. There is no publicly available evidence of such weapons. China is a signatory to the Biological Weapons Convention and the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and has denied having any biological warfare programs. It declared under the terms of the CWC that it previously had a chemical weapons program but that it destroyed those agents before joining the treaty. Related Links: Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Threats, Joseph Cirincione, Jon B. Wolfsthal, and Miriam Rajkumar, July 2005 http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=16650&prog=zgp&proj=znpp "The Ambiguous Arsenal," Jeffrey Lewis, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2005 http://www.thebulletin.org/article.php?art_ofn=mj05lewis "China's Nuclear Forces," Proliferation News and Resources Website http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/numbers/china.cfm "Deadly Maps," Proliferation News and Resources Website [taken from Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear Biological, and Chemical Threats] http://www.carnegieendowment.org/static/npp/deadlymaps.cfm China Resources Page, Proliferation News and Resources Website http://www.carnegieendowment.org/npp/country/index.cfm?fa=view&id=15 -------- depleted uranium The Truth about Iraq 10/18/2005 13:05 Pravda http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/16319_Iraq.html The American-led invasion has taken Iraq back one hundred years in just two years The puppet regime set up by Washington, full of political Islamists, have even legislated recently in favor of husbands beating up wives who misbehave. The State has collapsed, because it was destroyed by the United States, and nothing has been set up, two and a half years later, to help the people. There are two forms of terrorism in Iraq. The state terrorism perpetrated by the USA and the Islamist terrorism practiced by the unwanted Islamists. The people are caught in the middle. Women are raped, people are shot at arbitrarily. Houzan Mahmoud, Iraqi political activist, came to Lisbon, invited by Pravda.Ru, to inform us about what is really taking place in Iraq. For those who wish to learn the truth, what she says is imperative to read. Houzan Mahmoud, Co-Founder of the Iraq Freedom Congress (IFC) which was founded by many workers and women's leaders, socialists, intellectuals and secularists of Iraq among those organizations is Organization of Freedom for Women in Iraq (OWFI) and the Federation of Workers' Councils and Unions in Iraq (FWCUI), in which Houzan is one of their leading activist and also she is a member of the political bureau of the Worker Communist Party of Iraq, came to Lisbon, invited by the Portuguese version of Pravda.Ru to participate in a conference/debate on Iraq. Apart from the debate, which was the source of great interest, bringing together various personalities from the most varied sectors of political life, among others, Houzan Mahmoud had meetings with representatives of the Left Block (Bloco de Esquerda), Communist Renewal Movement (Renova??o Comunista), the Trade Union Confederation CGTP, the Unions FENPROF and SPGL and gave interviews to the newspaper P?blico, the magazine Vis?o and the Portuguese news agency, Lusa. The message Houzan has to tell is simple: the American-led invasion has taken Iraq back one hundred years in just two years. Shocked at what she saw this April and May on her return to Iraq, she paints a picture which few, if any, organs of communication, present to the public. On the freedom of women "Women are not free in Iraq today", declares Houzan Mahmoud, who explains that they had more freedom under the fascist dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. The puppet regime set up by Washington, full of political Islamists, have even legislated recently in favor of husbands beating up wives who misbehave. The OFWI has set up shelters to receive women who have been raped by American soldiers or are threatened by Islamist extremists or who are victims of domestic abuse and threats of so called "honour killings." Women are forced to wear the veil and to cover their arms and legs and those who refuse to, are often attacked, raped and even beheaded in public, in daylight. On the government "The government is a puppet regime installed by the United States, which has no power at all beyond the Green Zone in Baghdad, in which it lives comfortably, practising corruption and leaving the people to their own fate at the hands of the Islamists and terrorists who run rife". The State has collapsed, because it was destroyed by the United States, and nothing has been set up, two and a half years later, to help the people. Running water and electricity have still not been established in vast areas of the country. On security "There is no security in Iraq. People do not feel safe, even in their houses. In the middle of the night, a gang of armed thugs cam break in, steal, rape and murder." Houzan Mahmoud said that there are armed gangs of men everywhere, imposing their will, stealing and terrorizing people. The authorities are holed up in the Green Zone, powerless to do anything. On terrorism "There are two forms of terrorism in Iraq. The state terrorism perpetrated by the USA and the Islamist terrorism practiced by the unwanted Islamists. The people are caught in the middle." According to Houzan Mahmoud, these Islamic groups did not exist before in Iraq. The American-led invasion gave them the space they needed to pour into the country and the puppet regime, full of political Islmaists, gives these elements the cover they need to impose Sharia law on the people. The present day of the US-led occupation of Iraq: Photo gallery These terrorists murder fifty to one hundred people every day under the excuse that they are fighting occupation. It is not safe to go to cinemas, to restaurants or to bars because "these cowards choose these soft targets to kill as many people as possible." They recently target barbers' shops "because men are supposed to have long beards, not shave them off." On the religious strife "Being a Sunni or a Shiite was never an issue before this invasion. People got along fine and religious practice was a private question. Now the people are being told they are Sunni and must act like this, or Shiites and must act like that." The American invasion has created massive and deep cleavages inside Iraqi society, which never existed before. The puppet government and the Constitution have been drawn up based on sectarian, ethnic and tribal differences and are bound to create more problems than they solve. The way forward "We are caught between two factions which nobody wants. On one side is the unwanted American-led invasion force, which does not protect anyone. Women are raped, people are shot at arbitrarily. If an American soldier sees Islamists attacking someone on the street, they turn their backs and walk away. They travel around in massive convoys terrified for their lives. "On the other hand, we have a puppet regime which looks after its own interests in the Green Zone and has no authority outside it." "Hiding behind these two factions are the Islamists, who have found a safe haven inside Iraq. The victims are the innocent and defenseless civilians." According to Houzan Mahmoud, what Iraq needs is a third option: a strong civil society which sets up a secular and progressive state, based on the will of the people and not political, ethnic and religious divisions, which is what the puppet government represents. Therefore, whether the Constitution is adopted or not (and here is it important to remember that many people are either coerced into voting by the Shiites, Kurdish Nationalists and traibalists in power tricked by the lies of the government which hides its real agenda or else simply do not know what they are voting for), the outcome will be the same: a government out of control, terrorists running rife and the people, unprotected. The organizations which Houzan represents are setting up networks of workers' councils and trade unions, are organizing strikes and fighting for workers' rights, fighting for women's rights and are calling for support from the international community to ensure that Iraq and its people do not fall victim to Islamism. The women of Iraq want to walk freely in the streets without being attacked or decapitated because they are not wearing a veil. Houzan Mahmoud sees the immediate withdrawal of the occupying force as being imperative, because the invasion created all the problems in the first place. The Americans are responsible for a decade of sanctions which has murdered hundreds of thousands of children and created a generation of disabled or sick children, through the deployment of Depleted Uranium, one hundred thousand people have been murdered in the war, civilian infrastructures have been destroyed, terrorists have poured into a country where they did not exist before and the country is in chaos. The puppet regime, supported by the Americans, is composed of factions on the margins of Iraqi society, gathered together in London by the CIA before the invasion and given power that they have never earned. Only through a civil and progressive movement supported by the people in a government, which is progressive and secular, not religious, can Iraq becomes a safe place for its people. "Under Saddam, we had one fascist dictator. Now, we have many fascist dictators. We are worse off than under Saddam". For more information, contact Houzan Mahmoud at houzan73@yahoo.co.uk http://www.equalityiniraq.com http://www.uuiraq.org *A special mention of thanks to PpravdaA.Ru journalist and collaborator, Luis Carvalho, for his considerable contribution in organizing this event in Portugal -------- europe Bulgaria's Nuclear Plant Manager Views Negative Consequences of Reactors Closure Source: BBC Monitoring European Text of report in English by Bulgarian news agency BTA website Tuesday, 18 October 2005 http://www.rednova.com/news/science/275816/bulgarias_nuclear_plant_manager_views_negative_consequences_of_reactors_closure/index.html?source=r_science Kozloduy, on the Danube, 18 October: The price of electricity generated by the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant will increase 56 per cent after the plant's Units 3 and 4 are shut down, Kozloduy Executive Director Ivan Ivanov told a joint meeting of the plant management and Parliament's Energy Committee on Tuesday [18 October]. The price increase will be partly caused by the repayment of loans received for the upgrading of Units 5 and 6, which will remain as the only operational reactors at Kozloduy, he said. Units 1 and 2 were shut down at the end of 2002, and Units 3 and 4 are to be closed permanently by 2006 under an agreement with the European Commission. The decommissioning of the plant's four older reactors is a condition for Bulgaria's accession to the EU, which is planned to take place on 1 January 2007. Ivanov said the planned closure of Units 3 and 4 will upset the energy balance in the Balkans because Bulgaria will no longer be able to offset the electricity deficit in the region. He recalled that under Bulgaria's Accession Treaty with the EU, the date of the reactors' closure should be linked to the building of a new generating facility. Such a facility is the future Belene Nuclear Power Plant, he said. The committee members said the new government should take into account a Supreme Administrative Court judgment, according to which the former government's decision on the closure of Units 3 and 4 was unlawful. Some committee members suggested that the closure deadline should be reviewed in the context of regional security. The question was also discussed, what will happen with the two reactors if the so called safeguard clause is invoked and Bulgaria's accession to the EU is delayed by a year until 2008. The Kozloduy management raised with the MPs questions concerning electricity price restrictions imposed by the State Commission on Energy and Water Regulation (SCEWR), which are expected to inflict a 40m leva (20.45m euro) loss on Kozloduy in 2006; the low negotiable pricing quota of 5 per cent; and a request to reduce from 15 per cent to 4 per cent the rate of Kozloduy's contribution to the Nuclear Reactors Decommissioning Fund, which will allow the plant to save some 80m leva (40.9m euros) annually. The finances accumulated in the fund already amount to 800m leva (409m euros), which the plant management believes is enough for the time being, but is managed ineffectively by the central bank. Parliament's Energy Committee Chairman Ramadan Atalay said all these issues will be discussed at a special committee meeting. Economy and Energy Minister Rumen Ovcharov and SCEWR Chairman Konstantin Shushulov will be invited to the meeting. -------- india India to forge plan with US to separate civilian, military nuclear facilities NEW YORK (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051018194434.qlh35lxd.html The United States and India will draw up a plan separating India's civilian and military nuclear facilities to pave the way for implementation of their landmark atomic energy cooperation deal by early 2006, a senior US official said Tuesday. Nicholas Burns, undersecretary of state for political affairs, said he would discuss the separation plan with Indian officials during a trip to New Delhi this week. "Part of the purpose of my trip to Delhi this week is to work with the Indian government on a plan that will separate civilian and military nuclear (programs and facilities) of India over the coming years," he told a forum of the New York-based Asia Society. He said that the US Congress would be in a position to amend laws prohibiting US nuclear cooperation with India once New Delhi committed itself to the separation scheme. "Once that plan has been clearly enunciated and once it has been committed to by the Indian government, I think it will be a very short time before the United States Congress makes the necessary legislative changes to bring this into being and that would be a very welcome moment indeed," Burns said. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush agreed on a deal last July in which Washington would give India access to civil nuclear energy related technology once India agreed to separate civilian and military nuclear programmes and place its nuclear reactors under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. India is a nuclear-armed nation but not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The United States had placed sanctions on India after its second round of nuclear tests in May 1998, but agreed after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks to waive those and other sanctions in return for support in the war on terrorism. Under the July deal, the United States had agreed to lobby allies to adjust international regimes to enable full civil nuclear energy cooperation and trade with India. "I think by the time that President Bush visits New Delhi in early 2006 we will see that both of our countries would have met our commitment in this landmark agreement," Burn said as he gave a comprehensive account of US policy toward India in his speech to diplomats, analysts and government officials. The US-India nuclear deal was part of a groundbreaking pact on a wide range of cooperative initiatives and the launching of a new strategic partnership by Bush and Singh. Burns was instrumental in developing the partnership agreement, including civil nuclear energy cooperation, which he called "the high-water mark of bilateral relations in nearly 60 years. India last month was accused by some groups of caving in to US pressure in supporting a resolution that opens the door to reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for violating international nuclear safeguards. ---- Nicholas Burns coming on Oct. 20 New Delhi, Oct. 18, 2005 (PTI) http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/holnus/002200510182066.htm U S Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, will arrive here on October 20 to further consolidate the new momentum in bilateral relations while reviewing with his Indian interlocutors progress in civilian nuclear energy cooperation. During his visit, bilateral official consultations (Asian Security Dialogue) will be held on October 21 and 22. The Indian side will be led by Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran. "There will also be a meeting of the working group which has been constituted to follow up on the July 18 India-US agreement," External Affairs Ministry spokesman Navtej Sarna, said today. Saran heads the working group from the Indian side. Burns will also call on External Affairs Minister K Natwar Singh, and National Security Adviser M K Narayanan, during his stay here. In Washington, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said Burns would "further our historic partnership to promote democratic values, combat terrorism, support economic growth, expand bilateral activities and commerce and achieve peace and stability in the region and beyond." Ahead of his visit, Washington said the Indo-US Nuclear Agreement is an important one based on commitments by both sides. "We did sign an important agreement and we thought it was based on a realistic assessment of things and a commitment by India to abide by certain agreements, as well," White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, said. The landmark agreement on civil nuclear cooperation was reached in July between Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and President Bush in Washington. It offered New Delhi comprehensive access to civilian nuclear technology in exchange for, among other things, voluntarily bringing its power reactors and other civilian nuclear facilities under safeguards. -------- iran Iran readies to suspend NPT additional protocol Tuesday, October 18, 2005 Pakistan Daily Times http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2005%5C10%5C18%5Cstory_18-10-2005_pg4_14 * Suspension bill discussed in Supreme Council, passed by majority vote * British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw again rules out military action against Iran following Rice meeting TEHRAN: The Majlis’ National Security and Foreign Policy Commission on Sunday approved the general outlines of a single-urgency bill providing for the suspension of the government’s voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Talking to IRNA, commission member Mahmoud Mohammadi said the general outlines of the bill was discussed by the commission during its Sunday session and was approved by a vote of the majority. Members of the commission gave their proposals on various details of the bill and agreed to put one of the proposals to a vote on Tuesday, he added. “In this proposal, the government would be obligated to suspend voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol if the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports Iran’s nuclear case to the UN Security Council,” he said. The government of former president Mohammad Khatami implemented the Additional Protocol as a voluntary measure in order to build confidence on the part of the international community on the government’s nuclear programmes. This opened the way for the IAEA to undertake snap inspections on the country’s nuclear sites, but the decision was never passed into law by the Majlis. In the wake of the September resolution against Iran passed by the IAEA’s 35-nation Governing Board, over 155 MPs introduced a single-urgency bill in Majlis urging the government to suspend implementation of the Additional Protocol. The bill was passed on September 28 with 162 votes in favour. The bill now binds the government to suspend its voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) until Tehran succeeds in obtaining recognition of its right to complete the nuclear fuel cycle. The IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution proposed by the EU-3 (France, Britain and Germany) on September 24 urging Iran to fully suspend uranium enrichment at its Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) and construction of its heavy water power plant in Arak. Military action not on agenda: Military action against Iran is not on anyone’s agenda, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said on Sunday after a meeting with US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Iran’s controversial nuclear programme. “Military action is not on anybody’s agenda in respect of the Iranian nuclear dossier,” Straw said on Channel 4 television. “My own belief is that military action in respect of the nuclear dossier in respect of Iran is inconceivable,” he stressed. Iran denies allegations by the United States that it has sought to develop nuclear weapons, and insists it needs nuclear energy to replace oil stocks when they run out. On Sunday it reiterated its refusal to suspend uranium fuel work, as sought by EU-3 as a precondition of resuming talks with Tehran. The remarks by Jack Straw follow a war of words between Iran and Britain with mutual allegations of interference. Iran’s hardline president said on Sunday he suspected British involvement in a double bomb attack in the southwest of his country, an allegation that closely followed British complaints of Iranian meddling in Iraq. irna/ agencies ---- Iran says French nuclear position sad and a hindrance TEHRAN (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051018191544.t01hmqky.html Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that France's position on Iran's nuclear programme had saddened the Iranian people and hindered relations between the two countries. "France's position with regard to Iran's peaceful nuclear programme is a brake on the development of bilateral relations," Ahmadinejad said as he received the new French ambassador, Bernard Poletti. "The Iranian people have been saddened by the French position and are waiting for the French government to take positive steps to repair the damage to relations between the two countries." The so-called EU Three of Britain, France and Germany have been leading negotiations with Iran over its suspect nuclear programme. In September, France supported an International Atomic Energy Agency resolution that could see Iran hauled before the UN Security Council over its atomic ambitions. ---- ElBaradei 'confident' nuclear talks will resume with Iran VIENNA (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051018132643.ysq5hp26.html The head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, Mohamed ElBaradei, said Tuesday he was "confident" that negotiations would resume soon with Iran over the nature of its nuclear program. "Things are moving in the right direction," said ElBaradei, noting that Iran was cooperating with United Nations nuclear inspectors and several "third parties" were urging Tehran to return to the negotiating table. ElBaradei, who led the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to receive this year's Nobel Peace Prize, said that South Africa had notably suggested a compromise to end the standoff between Iran and Western powers over its nuclear program. Negotiations between Iran and the so-called EU-3 -- Britain, France and Germany -- broke off in August after Tehran rejected the European proposals on cooperation and trade and instead resumed its uranium enrichment activities. Enriched uranium is used to produce nuclear energy but also to make weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes but the United States claims the Iranians are secretly seeking to develop a nuclear arsenal. The Europeans want to find a solution that will allow Iran to have a civil nuclear program while also allaying any fears about weapons development. On Sunday, Tehran said it was ready to resume meetings with negotiators but it also refused to suspend again its nuclear activities, which is one of the conditions set by the Europeans. The IAEA board has until November 24 to decide whether to refer Iran and its nuclear activity to the UN Security Council which could impose sanctions on the Islamic republic. -------- israel Israel Maintains Option To Strike Iran Nukes By Joel Leyden Israel News Agency, September 18, 2005 http://www.israelnewsagency.com/iranisraelmissilesnuclear8730918.html Tel Aviv -- Israel's greatest threat today remains the missiles which are pointed at her from Iran. Missiles which will soon have a capability of striking Israel, her neighbors and much of Europe with nuclear payloads. Although Iran's extremist Islamic regime has been warned that either Israel or the US could use a preemptive strike against her at any moment, no different from when Israel took out the nukes in Iraq, Iran remains obsessed with continuing her aggressive and unchecked nuclear policy. In 2002, a former Iraqi nuclear engineer told a Senate hearing Wednesday that the country could have nuclear weapons by 2005. Khidir Hamza, who defected from Iraq in 1994, and other experts on Iraq testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the start of two days of hearings on the Iraqi threat to the United States and possible U.S. responses -- including a military attack. Citing German intelligence estimates, Hamza said Iraq had more than 10 tons of uranium and one ton of slightly enriched uranium. Hamza said that could give Iraq enough weapons-grade uranium to build three nuclear weapons within three years. In addition, Hamza said, Iraq was trying to extend the range of its missiles in order to reach Israel. This was one of the key elements for the US led war against Iraq. It was never about oil. The Iraqis struck Israel and US, Saudi bases with Scud missiles during the first Gulf War. In 1981, Israel attacked a Baghdad nuclear reactor. Israel combat jets bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq's capital, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel. It was the world's first air strike against a nuclear plant. With remarkable precision, an undisclosed number of F-15 bombers and F-16 fighters destroyed the Osirak reactor 18 miles south of Baghdad, on the orders of former Prime Minister Menachem Begin. The Israel Defense Forces stated that all the Israeli planes returned safely. The 70-megawatt uranium-powered reactor was near completion but had not been stocked with nuclear fuel so there was no danger of a leak, according to sources in the French atomic industry. The Israeli Government explained its reasons for the attack in a statement saying: "The atomic bombs which that reactor was capable of producing whether from enriched uranium or from plutonium, would be of the Hiroshima size. Thus a mortal danger to the people of Israel progressively arose." It acted because it believed the reactor would be completed shortly - either at the beginning of July or the beginning of September 1981. The Israelis, at the time criticised the French and Italians for supplying Iraq with nuclear materials and plegded to defend their territory at all costs. The statement said: "We again call upon them to desist from this horrifying, inhuman deed. Under no circumstances will we allow an enemy to develop weapons of mass destruction against our people." The attack took place on a Sunday, they said, to prevent harming the French workers at the site who would have taken the day off. There were no reported casualties. The Osirak reactor is part of a complex that includes a second, smaller reactor - also French-built - and a Soviet-made test reactor already in use. Iraq denies the reactor was destined to produce nuclear weapons. A similar strike against Iran is said to be more than ready, with Israel and the US awaiting the right time and the right place. Israel is prepared to take out Hizbullah based Iranian offensive missiles already sitting on the Lebanese and Syrian border. Last month, for the first time, Hizbullah test-fired an Iranian medium-range rocket near the Lebanese border into Israel. Lebanese sources said Hizbullah tested the Fajr-3 rocket on Aug. 25. The sources said three Fajr-3s were launched about six kilometers north of the Israeli-Lebanese border. This was the first time Hizbullah fired a Fajr-3 rocket from Lebanon. The sources said Hizbullah was provided with the Fajr-3 in 2001, but the rocket remained under the supervision of Iranian military personnel. One of the 240 mm rockets landed in Israel and the other two fell inside Lebanon. Nobody was reported injured, Middle East Newsline reported. The sources said the Fajr-3 marked an extended range version of the Soviet-origin Katyusha. They said Hizbullah received training to operate the Fajr-3 by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The Fajr-3 has a range of 43 kilometers and contains a 45-kilogram warhead. The rocket can strike the northern suburbs of Haifa when fired from the Israeli-Lebanese border. The Beirut-based Daily Star reported that the Fajr-3 rockets were launched from Wadi Salouqi, east of the village of Majdal Silm, where Hizbullah maintains a military outpost. The newspaper said two of the rockets landed in Lebanon between Houla and Meiss Al Jabal. Hizbullah was said to have deployed up to 15,000 missiles and rockets in southern Lebanon. The lion's share of the weapons was said to consist of 107 mm Katyusha rockets, with a range of eight kilometers. The Fajr-3 was said to be more than five meters in length and with a weight of more than 400 kilograms. Hizbullah was also believed to possess the Fajr-5, a 330 mm rocket with a range of 70 kilometers. Lebanese sources said the Fajr-3s flew only six kilometers and fell three kilometers from each other. They said this could have marked a failure of the rocket launch. "Because of their bulk, the three [Fajr-3] rockets fired on Thursday would either have been driven to Wadi Salouqi and launched from the back of a specially adapted truck or fired from a permanent artillery position," defense analyst Nicholas Blanford wrote in the Daily Star. "Rogue Palestinians, or their hired hands, may be able to infiltrate the border zone and 'shoot and scoot' with a couple of 107 millimeter rockets from time to time, but launching Fajr-3s is out of their league." The US recently shared highly classified intelligence with India to prove Tehran's alleged efforts to develop a missile capable of developing a nuclear warhead. The decision to share the intelligence with India and China "is a measure of resistance the US is meeting as it pushes, along with the Europeans, for Iran's nuclear activities to be referred to the UN Security Council", the Wall Street Journal said. Even as Iran resumed some sensitive nuclear activities last month and ended negotiations with the Europeans, the US and its allies face a challenge persuading China, Russia "and other key nations that the situation is grave enough for international reprisals. As Iran test fires missiles into Israel, Iran's president proclaimed to the United Nations his country's "inalienable right" to nuclear energy and offered foreign countries and companies a role in his nation's uranium enrichment program to prove Tehran is not producing nuclear weapons. In a fiery speech to the U.N. General Assembly Saturday, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad rejected a renewed offer from the European Union, backed by the United States, to halt uranium enrichment in exchange for economic and other incentives. He claimed Iran continues to abide by the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and accused some "powerful states" - an apparent reference to the United States and some Europeans - of engaging in "nuclear apartheid" by discriminating against access by NPT members to material, equipment and peaceful nuclear technology. The European Union's three biggest powers began drafting a resolution today urging the United Nations nuclear watchdog to report Tehran to the Security Council for possible sanctions, an EU diplomat said. "The drafting of a resolution sending Iran to the Security Council has begun," the diplomat from one of the three EU countries Britain, France and Germany, known as the EU3, told Reuters on condition of anonymity. "Tonight the [EU3] political directors will meet to discuss the key elements of the resolution." Advertisement Seeking to deflect criticism of his country's nuclear program, the Iranian president on Saturday called for a UN probe into how Israel acquired the nuclear weapons it has long been assumed it possesses. France's Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy welcomed Ahmadinejad's rejection of nuclear weapons and adherence to the NPT but reiterated that Tehran should not have a nuclear fuel cycle. "We don't see what the involvement of third countries will contribute to establish confidence," he said. A senior U.S. State Department official called it "a very aggressive speech" that appeared to go beyond European "red lines." A British Foreign Office spokesman called the speech "unhelpful." Both spoke on condition of anonymity. Ahmadinejad said Iran's religious principles prohibit the country from obtaining nuclear weapons. He implicitly accused the Europeans and Americans of "misrepresenting" Iran's desire for civilian nuclear energy "as the pursuit of nuclear weapons." "This is nothing more than a pure propaganda ploy," he said. Ahmadinejad rejected European and American claims that Iran doesn't need to enrich uranium because it can obtain it from other countries. He insisted repeatedly that Iran would not be dependent on anyone else for its energy needs, and said "the peaceful use of nuclear energy without a fuel cycle is an empty proposition." The United States and the Europeans have threatened to refer the Tehran nuclear dossier to the U.N. Security Council, which could impose sanctions, if Iran doesn't stop enriching uranium. Washington has led efforts to line up support at Monday's board meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, for a referral to the council. But Rice suggested earlier this week that Washington might accept a delay, a recognition that veto-wielding council members Russia and China oppose any sanctions against Iran. Taking direct aim at the United States, Ahmadinejad accused "those who have actually used nuclear weapons, continue to produce, stockpile and extensively test such weapons" of using uranium-depleted munitions and arming Israel with weapons of mass destruction. Instead of occupying itself with Iran, he said, a new General Assembly committee should investigate how Israel acquired weapons of mass destruction and propose measures to achieve total disarmament and a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East. To reassure the international community of Iran's peaceful intentions, Ahmadinejad said his government is prepared to take "far-reaching" steps beyond the requirements of the Non-Proliferation Treaty to ease other nations' fears of its intentions. The IAEA has already installed cameras to monitor Iran's nuclear activities, he said. As a further "confidence building measure and in order to provide the greatest degree of transparency the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to engage in serious partnership with private and public sectors of other countries in the implementation of uranium enrichment programs in Iran," he said. "We will work with public and private companies in the context of Iranian and agency laws," Ahmadinejad said at a news conference afterward. He noted that U.S. President George W. Bush said recently that he approves of Iran having a peaceful nuclear program. "This is a step forward," he said, "but this means that others are to produce the fuel and sell it to us to use and for us to be always dependent on others -- this is outside the NPT and this is not acceptable to my nation." Momentum for Security Council action grew after Tehran last month rejected incentives offered by Britain, France and Germany -- negotiating on behalf of the EU -- and resumed uranium conversion. The Europeans say Tehran broke its word by unilaterally restarting that activity while still discussing ways to reduce international suspicions about its nuclear agenda. Ahmadinejad said Iran has made clear its peaceful intentions and is cooperating with the IAEA. "So when they threaten us this means they have no rationale, no logic or backup and we are not going to cave in to the excessive demands of certain powers," the Iranian leader told reporters. "We believe we should not give up to bullying in international relations," he said. "Iran is presenting in good faith its proposal for constructive interaction and a just dialogue," Ahmadinejad said. "However, if some try to impose their will on the Iranian people through resort to a language of force and threat with Iran, we will reconsider our entire approach to the nuclear issue," he warned. The AP contributed to this report. -------- russia Chechen terrorists rumored to possess nuclear weapons provided by disgraced Russian oligarch 10/18/2005 17:36 Pravda http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/88/354/16321_Berezovsky.html An anonymous man says that fugitive Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky, is personally interested in the continuation of the war in Chechnya A spokesman for the Chechen diaspora in Russia accused the notorious Russian oligarch, Boris Berezovsky, of terrorist insinuations, assassinations and selling weapons of mass destruction. Boris Berezovsky was staying in Russia during a wild outburst of terrorist attacks in the country, when extremists exploded several apartment buildings in Moscow and Volgodonsk, killing hundreds. The oligarch left Russia several months later and never returned to the country afterwards. Two years later, though, the oligarch in disgrace personally participated in the work on a book and a documentary, in which Russia's Federal Security Bureau (FSB) was accused of organizing the explosions in Russia. Both Russian and Western readers and viewers did not believe those stories, although Berezovsky and his accomplices managed to launch a campaign to undermine the authority of their prime enemy - the Russian government. The oligarch's name has become a direct association of all kinds of political provocations since that time. There is no direct evidence to prove Berezovsky's implication in the organization of the above-mentioned explosions, although one has to acknowledge that it was Boris Berezovsky, who needed the war in Chechnya most. There are certain witnesses who say that Berezovsky was doing his best to maintain highly unfriendly relations between Chechnya and Russia in spite of the fact that he utterly hated the two sides of the conflict. The Chechen Community newspaper issued by the Institute of the Public Development has recently published a rather curious letter signed by a man named only as Zakhar. The letter shed some light on Berezovsky's ties with Chechen separatists. There were certain reasons for the letter to appear. Boris Berezovsky released a public statement on 24 October 2004 and said that he had prevented a terrorist act. The oligarch told The Associated Press that he had had a meeting with a man who introduced himself as Zakhar and offered to purchase a compact nuclear device for $3 million. Very unexpectedly, Boris Berezovsky exercised his qualities of a "professional intelligence officer, Russia's true patriot and peacemaker." The now-fugitive oligarch organized a meeting with a potential seller, taped the conversation and shared his information with USA's CIA and the head of Russia's FSB, Nikolay Patrushev. "They apparently came to me thinking that I was a staunch adversary of Putin's regime, so I would be interested in the offer," Berezovsky said in the interview with the AP. The oligarch also supposed that the person named as Zakhar could be connected with the leader of Chechen separatists, Aslan Maskhadov. As it turned out later, Berezovsky's story was absolutely true, or almost true, to be more precise. People of his team met someone named as Zakhar indeed, although they talked about an opportunity to sell a powerful weapon. Furthermore, the seller was Mr. Berezovsky himself, not the mysterious Zakhar. Zakhar wrote the above-mentioned letter in an attempt to clear his name. "The London-based billionaire Boris Berezovsky has launched a massive campaign in mass media to slander and discredit my name, trying to portray me as a dangerous terrorist who has access to nuclear weapons," the man wrote in the letter. "Berezovsky told me at one of our meetings in 2000 in Paris that he would never agree to let Chechnya become an independent state," the author of the letter wrote. "A man from Berezovsky's team offered me to take certain actions against several individuals, billionaire Roman Abramovich was among them. The man promised me on Berezovsky's behalf that if I could clear up certain matters with those people and do something else then I would bring a lot of good for the people of Chechnya. When I asked the man about Abramovich's participation in the Chechen problem, the man told me that Roman Abramovich was funding the war in Chechnya. I realized that there was a dangerous game stirring up and I accepted the offer fearing that they could find someone else to do the dirty job, pronounce Chechens terrorists or deliver them to the authorities and obtain new levers of power," Zakhar wrote in the letter. Mr. Berezovsky apparently disliked such disturbing questions: he decided to put an end to the talks and make a scapegoat of Zakhar. The oligarch did that only two years later, though. To all appearance, Zakhar was not the only person, whom Boris Berezovsky made such a proposal, and the story would have never surfaced. However, it transpired later that Boris Berezovsky provided Chechen terrorists with bacteriological weapons. Most likely, the oligarch did not manage to sell his arsenal of weapons, and the matter ended during the stage of negotiations. It brings up an idea that the essence of the talks leaked outside a very narrow circle of people, and Boris Berezovsky was not enthusiastic at all to become a suspect for US and European special services. That is why, the oligarch recollected the conversation with the man named as Zakhar, which he had on a tape. One has to acknowledge that Mr. Berezovsky's intrigue worked, although there was one more detail left in the story. An old friend of Boris Berezovsky instinctively sensed a dirty trick and decided to tape all details of secret negotiations. The person, who currently resides in Europe, is not willing to get into trouble with law-enforcement authorities, which already started evincing rather disturbing interest in him. As a result, Zakhar submitted documents to the Strasbourg-based European Court for Human Rights on 8 September 2005, seeking an opportunity to file a lawsuit against Boris Berezovsky in a London court. "I am sure that Boris Berezovsky is capable of giving a command to use an A-bomb and then lay the blame for the attack on Chechens. He can do it when he or his Moscow companions need it," Zakhar believes. The recent events in the southern Russian city of Nalchik can only play in Berezovsky's hands at this point. Rostislav Granin You can discuss this article on Pravda.Ru FORUM Read the original in Russian: http://www.pravda.ru/politics/2005/1/1/7/21072_BAB.html (Translated by: Dmitry Sudakov) -------- security Suit over nuclear waste site States, groups want dump shut until terror risk studied Bob Egelko, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer Tuesday, October 18, 2005 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/18/BAGN2F9TG91.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea Anti-nuclear and environmental activists, backed by California and three other states, asked a federal appeals court on Monday to shut down a new storage facility for nuclear waste at Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s Diablo Canyon plant until a federal agency studies the risk of a terrorist attack. "Everything has been done in secret that relates to security at Diablo Canyon,'' Diane Curran, lawyer for San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace and the Sierra Club, told a panel of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Referring to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's current security planning review, Curran said, "The nuclear industry has been invited but the general public has not.'' She acknowledged that Congress has ordered the NRC to study anti-terrorism precautions at nuclear plants, but said the commission plans to limit its review to the possibility of small-scale attacks and not a cataclysm such as the crash of a jumbo jet. The two advocacy groups claim the federal commission should have examined the environmental consequences of a large-scale terrorist attack, invited public comments and explored alternatives before licensing PG&E to store high-level radioactive waste in casks in a new structure at the plant on the San Luis Obispo County coast. Those alternatives might include more fortification or underground storage, Curran said. The suit relies on a law that requires federal agencies to study and propose protective measures to guard against environmental harm that a federally regulated project might cause, before approving it. The law allows a court to halt a project until the environmental review is completed. California Attorney General Bill Lockyer has joined the case, along with the states of Washington, Utah and Massachusetts, which said they might face similar circumstances in the future. In written arguments, Lockyer's office cited President Bush's assertion in 2002 that diagrams of U.S. nuclear plants had been found at al Qaeda bases, and administration warnings that terrorists were looking at nuclear facilities as targets. But lawyers for the federal commission and PG&E told the court that federal environmental law does not require public review of the impact of remote possibilities, like a terrorist attack against a particular facility. "It is not reasonably foreseeable ... that there will be a terrorist attack at Diablo Canyon or any specific nuclear plant,'' NRC attorney Charles Mullins told the court. PG&E lawyer David Repka added that the law requires the federal commission to study only the environmental consequences of its licensing decision, and not the effects of an unforeseen criminal act. Judge Sidney Thomas, part of the three-member panel, seemed skeptical. He noted that the NRC includes earthquake planning in its licensing reviews for nuclear plants, and in 1994 -- after a bombing at the World Trade Center and an attempted attack on the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania -- required plant operators to take safety measures against truck bombs. Judge Stephen Reinhardt said the NRC's position appeared to contradict the Bush administration's message that the nation is in a state of war that requires unending vigilance against terrorism. "Isn't that what we're being told constantly?'' he asked. "Not by us,'' Mullin replied. "Then by the president,'' Reinhardt said. E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com. -------- space NASA In Talks With Japanese About Nuclear Reactors on the Moon Keith Cowing Tuesday, October 18, 2005 SpaceRef http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=1073 NASA Administrator Mike Griffin made a trip to Japan this week - accompanied by Space Operations Mission Directorate Associate Administrator Bill Gerstenmeier. Topics under discussion include NASA's new exploration architecture and the International Space Station (ISS). Specifically, talks were to focus on how the U.S. wants to change Japan's contribution to the ISS. NASA planners have already decided not to fly the Centrifuge Accommodation Module - a specialized gravitational biology laboratory which includes a 2.5 meter centrifuge and associated life sciences equipment. NASA entered into a special barter deal with Japan in the late 1990s where by Japan would develop and build the module. When delivered, it would be considered as a U.S. research laboratory module. In exchange, NASA gave future credits to Japan for the cost of launching its JEM (Kibo) module and part of the common ISS operational costs that would be charged once Kibo was on orbit. Now NASA has financial problems and is trying to reduce space shuttle flights to a bare minimum. NASA also has lost interest in doing meaningful life science research on the ISS - thus relegating the Centrifuge to the "no longer needed" category. As part of the deal being negotiated, according to NASA and industry sources, Griffin is considering offhaving Japan build a nuclear reactor that would be delivered to the lunar surface - a task once considered part of NASA's now evaporating Project Prometheus. Japan would also likely get the chance to place astronauts on a lunar mission. Of course, all of this is a long way off - the soonest that the reactor - and any Japanese astronaut - are likely to be heading for the moon is the end of next decade. It is is not clear if Japan will agree to such an arrangement or when a formal deal will be struck. Japan had encountered developmental problems and cost overruns on the Centrifuge project - an effort which turned out to be more difficult than it had been expected. Allowing the formal reason for canceling this module to be blamed on NASA financial problems and/or a shifting ISS research focus would allow the Japanese to exit the project while publicly saving face. Other international partners - most notably Europe - are watching these negotiations as closely as they can. Word is circulating that NASA may try a similar tactic with Europe as well. -------- u.n. Statement by Paula A. DeSutter, Assistant Secretary for Verification, Compliance, and Implementation, on Compliance with Nonproliferation, Arms Control, and Disarmament Agreements, in the First Committee, October 17, 2005 October 18, 2005 United Nations US Mission http://www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov/05_175.htm Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Verification, Compliance, and Implementation, I am grateful for the opportunity to address this body on a subject of great professional interest to me. As some may recall, I spoke on this matter last year, and I believe that it is critical that we continue our dialogue in light of progress made and challenges remaining since that time. Mr. Chairman, the United States this year is sponsoring a resolution entitled “Compliance with nonproliferation, arms control, and disarmament agreements.” This is not the first time that we have introduced such a resolution. We hope, however, that delegations will view our resolution as an opportunity for the international community to reflect upon the changing face of the global arms control and nonproliferation challenge we all face. The resolution is intended not only to bring the issue of compliance to the attention of the international community, but also to emphasize that compliance with international treaties and obligations is critical to international peace and security, and to exhort governments to seek common cause in pursuit of diplomatic means to bring intentional violators back into compliance. Just this past August, Secretary Rice, on behalf of President Bush, submitted to the U.S. Congress the most recent noncompliance report prepared by my Bureau in full coordination with all the relevant departments and agencies of the United States Government. This report, the unclassified version of which is available to all interested persons on the State Department’s website, lays out the findings of the United States regarding questions of noncompliance by other nations. It provides, in as much detail as possible in an unclassified document, the evidence and the reasoning behind our compliance judgments. The Noncompliance Report, which I believe is the only document of its type produced in the world, seeks to alert the Executive and Legislative Branches of the U.S. Government and the public, to both existing noncompliance and potentially emerging violations. Mr. Chairman, the United States and most of the other nations represented here today have sought to supplement our national efforts at strengthening security with multilateral tools. These tools have included arms control, nonproliferation, and disarmament agreements. The United States, however, generally does not join regimes or sign international agreements that constrain the freedom to exercise our national right to pursue our security when U.S. compliance is not going to be reciprocated. This is just common sense. Few of you sitting here today would be likely to enter into any agreement – be it multilateral or bilateral – if you believed that other parties were unlikely to comply with its terms. Therefore, when the United States adheres to a treaty, we want to know whether the other parties also are complying, and we want to discover noncompliance early enough to be able to deny violators any benefit from such noncompliance. Thus, the United States views verification, compliance and compliance enforcement as critically interrelated. For example, verification has two purposes: detection and deterrence. If detection has no consequences for the violator, then verification has no meaning, and deterrence is unachievable. Making Compliance Judgments Mr. Chairman, the cases of North Korea and Iran illustrate vividly the importance of two concepts that are inherently part of compliance: compliance assessment and compliance enforcement. The U.S. process of reaching noncompliance judgments is defined in U.S. law, based in international obligations. Our Congress has established specific institutions -- my Bureau, most notably -- to ensure that the compliance assessment process is rigorous, systematic and objective. While the U.S. experience is in many ways unique, the methods we use are available to all. While all nations have sources of valid or corroborating information for reaching their own noncompliance judgments, some states have expressed concern that they lack the technical capabilities that commonly have been associated with verification -- satellites, for example, to watch the activities of their treaty partners. The United States believes that the means by which states parties can acquire relevant information for reaching noncompliance judgments are far more extensive than has been generally acknowledged or than was true in the past. The old verification concept -- national technical means of verification -- fails to capture the totality of resources available to states parties. The modern concept of National Means and Methods recognizes that every state has access to information that can be relevant to reaching compliance judgments -- whether from its international diplomats overseas, reports from dissident groups that reveal the noncompliance of their governments, reports from international inspectorates, commercial satellites, or other means. While all information, whatever its source, warrants evaluation, information that can be independently confirmed is considered to be the most reliable, especially when it can be confirmed from multiple sources. When the information available to us suggests that there may be a compliance question, one of the first steps we take is to study the international agreement or other commitment in question to see what States Parties are obligated to do. Mr. Chairman, it is always important, and sometimes decisive, to establish clearly what the precise obligation is in the case under review. While the review of obligations and commitments is underway, we seek all possible additional information regarding the activities of concern. Multiple sources of information are especially important when the matter is grave. In cases where the information is troubling, but insufficient to reach a firm finding of violation, we will "caveat" it by noting explicitly uncertainties or ambiguities in the evidence. Whenever we can, we distinguish between inadvertent and deliberate violations, because this distinction can have an important bearing on what action will need to be taken in order to address the problem. We also endeavor to communicate the degree of seriousness of a violation, and to identify the steps that might be needed to bring the party back into compliance, or to respond in other ways that rectify the concern. Let me underscore, Mr. Chairman, that making a determination as to whether another state is in violation with its international obligations is not a simple matter. The process is time-consuming, rigorous and systematic. However, as a State Party to arms control, nonproliferation and disarmament agreements and commitments, we rest our safety and security in part upon other countries’ compliance with those agreements and commitments. Therefore, the compliance assessment process is, for us, a key component of our national security and a necessary early warning call to action. Verification Along with compliance assessments and compliance enforcement, Mr. Chairman, we consider verification as an essential part of what we call the “compliance process.” It is impossible to consider any of these three elements except as part of a whole. I am often asked if the U.S. demands "perfect" verification. Let me be clear, there is no such thing as perfect verification. The term "effectively verifiable" does not mean, and should not be taken to mean, that there is, or can ever be, certainty that every violation will be detected. This phrase indicates the aspiration to achieve reasonable confidence that, under the circumstances, detection of noncompliance will occur in sufficient time for appropriate remedial responses to be undertaken. The U.S. considers an arrangement or treaty to be effectively verifiable if the degree of verifiability is judged sufficient, given the compliance history of the parties involved, the risks associated with noncompliance, the difficulty of response to deny violators the benefits of their violations, the language and measures incorporated into the agreement and our own national means and methods of verification. The degree of verifiability must be high enough to enable the United States to detect noncompliance in sufficient time to reduce the threat presented by the violation and deny the violator the benefits of his wrongdoing. It is a common misperception, Mr. Chairman, that a combination of international data declarations, international cooperative measures (including technical measures) and on-site inspection regimes by themselves will be sufficient for detecting noncompliance. In fact, data declarations, cooperative measures and on-site inspections can provide useful and often invaluable information. They are useful tools for investigating indications of non-compliance -- as we’ve seen the IAEA do in Iran, for example -- and for detecting inadvertent violations. However, inspections provide information according to the agreed access and collection capabilities negotiated by the parties, and only provide such information as is available at the specific time and place of the inspection. They provide, at best, a snapshot in time. Even cooperative measures, such as remote cameras and seals for continuous monitoring -- while quite powerful -- are limited to the locations where they are employed. The degree of verifiability is not judged solely on the basis of whether or not the agreement contains detailed provisions for data exchanges, on-site inspections or other types of cooperative arrangements. Such measures are tools that may help to increase our confidence that other states are complying, but may or may not facilitate detection of noncompliance; thus –their efficacy is limited. Verifiability assessments are also informed by a much broader array of factors. These include, but are not limited to, the proven reliability of our negotiating partners in adhering to agreements, the incentives given parties may have to cheat on a given agreement, and the relative significance of cheating pursuant to the obligations. The United States considered all these factors, for example, when we conducted our verification assessment of the proposed Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. After two years of concerted effort studying the problem, we concluded that a quote “internationally and effectively verifiable Treaty” unquote, was not achievable, even with a highly intrusive inspection regime. Having come to such a conclusion, we believe that attempts to negotiate “good enough” verification, as some have suggested, are not only futile, but also harmful, delaying completion of the treaty. Furthermore, an ineffective regime could lull the international community into a false sense of confidence that obligations were being adhered to. It is for this reason, Mr. Chairman, that the United States urges our colleagues at the Conference on Disarmament to join us in concluding a normative FMCT that relies on each state using its own resources to verify compliance. Pending the conclusion of such a Treaty, we call on all nuclear weapon states and states not party to the NPT to make a public commitment to not produce fissile material for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Four of the five nuclear weapons states, including of course, the United States, have made such a commitment. Why do I mention FMCT in a discussion of compliance? Simply to make the point that there is a need for international acceptance of the fact that not all agreements need to take the form of the arms control, disarmament and nonproliferation agreements of the 20th century. For example, the Moscow Treaty model and our experiences with Libya, which reflect less detailed and extensive negotiated regimes, offer other models for consideration in situations in which the relationship is one of partnership and/or where there is a genuine, accepted strategic commitment. Enforcement Mr. Chairman, the international community is facing significant proliferation challenges, none more dangerous than noncompliance with nuclear nonproliferation obligations. It is well known that the DPRK has a nuclear weapons program and concealed it while a party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. I would note that the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency did its duty in reporting the DPRK’s noncompliance with its nuclear safeguards agreement to the UN Security Council on several occasions. The Agreed Framework signed in 1994 froze plutonium production; however, the DPRK embarked on a covert uranium enrichment program. The DPRK then expelled the IAEA inspectors in late December 2002. Reinforced by the concern of the international community, the last round of the Six Party Talks concluded with a public commitment by the DPRK to give up all its nuclear weapons and all existing nuclear programs and return to the NPT and its nuclear safeguards agreement. Obviously there is much work yet to be done, and again obviously given the DPRK’s past record of disregard for its international commitments, the international community will expect sufficiently strong verification measures to ensure that North Korea is meeting its obligations. As Ambassador Hill stated in Beijing following the adoption of the Joint Statement, the DPRK must promptly eliminate all nuclear weapons and all nuclear programs, and this must be verified to the satisfaction of all parties by credible international means, including the IAEA. Mr. Chairman, Iran’s nuclear program marks another area of concern. Last month the Board of Governors of the IAEA formally declared what many of us have known for some time, that is, that Iran’s breaches and failures of its obligations to comply with its Safeguards Agreement constituted noncompliance in the context of Article 12c of the IAEA Statute. As you know, by a simple reading of the IAEA Statute, such a finding requires a report to the United Nations Security Council. The Board will discuss the timing and content of that report at its next session. In that regard, it is important to note that such a report in and of itself will not resolve the Iranian nuclear issue. Resolution requires Iran’s rulers to make the strategic decision to comply with their international obligations, not flout them. In both of these cases, parties to international agreements undertook actions over years and even decades to cheat. Their noncompliance isn’t what is sometimes called “technical.” These weren’t accidents or oversights. If they were, it would be reasonable to expect that expressions of concern would result in timely resolution. We have seen this work numerous times, including cases described in the U.S. noncompliance report I referred to earlier. In Iran and the DPRK we are dealing with cases of intentional noncompliance. North Korea and Iran made strategic decisions to pursue programs and undertake activities that they knew full well violated their obligations. They invested vast national resources to pursue these covert programs – resources their people may well have wished were being invested in other ways. These programs were pursued covertly. These regimes took advantage of the period before discovery to reap benefits, such as technical cooperation and assistance, which flowed from being parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. There is some good news in this regard, however. The international community in various fora is addressing the problem of proliferation and abuse of “peaceful cooperation.” For example, the Nuclear Suppliers Group has developed new guidelines that support suspension of transfers of trigger list items to states that have been found in noncompliance of their safeguards obligations. In these circumstances, a special plenary of the NSG would be called to review the situation and consider an appropriate response. In Iran’s case, we look forward to participating in the extraordinary NSG Plenary to be held October 19th in Vienna. What is to be done now, Mr. Chairman? How can the international community use its collective diplomatic resources to bring these countries back into compliance? How can we address these cases and others that may still be undiscovered in a way that strengthens deterrence of future and further noncompliance? If these countries benefit from their noncompliance, what lessons will other nations learn, and which of our other regimes will come under assault next? We cannot allow the violators to benefit from their violations. Doing so undermines the regimes, our faith in the regimes, and reduces security for us all. Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I believe that each of our countries will need to consider these questions. The challenge posed by noncompliance is great. There are no easy answers. The question is, are we up to the challenge? The United States believes that we are. Thank you again Mr. Chairman, and members of the Committee, for your attention to these issues. -------- u.s. nuc facilities -------- arizona Palo Verde nuclear plant set to restart Utility officials say emergency system is safe Brent Whiting The Arizona Republic Oct. 18, 2005 12:00 AM http://www.azcentral.com/business/articles/1018aps18.html The nation's largest nuclear generating plant will be cranking out power again by the end of the week. The announcement was made Monday evening as workers began the start-up process to get two of three reactors back on line at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix. The word came nearly a week after concerns about plant safety forced the first total shutdown since Palo Verde began operation in 1986. Unit 1 remains down for a previously scheduled refueling, but Units 2 and 3 are expected to be at full power later this week, officials said. Jim Levine, an executive vice president for Arizona Public Service Co., the Palo Verde operator, said Monday the emergency system is safe. Analysis performed over the past six days proves conclusively that the emergency core cooling system will perform as intended under all possible scenarios, Levine said. "The decision to take the units off line was the right one and demonstrates our full commitment to safe operation," Levine said. Units 2 and 3 were operating at full power when they were shut down last Tuesday over worries about a key safety system used for emergencies. The two units, which generate about 2,600 megawatts, were shut down after APS experts could not prove conclusively to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission the system would function properly during an emergency. Jim McDonald, an APS spokesman, said the agency has been informed of the decision to restart the two units and has not offered opposition but plans to review the decision. Victor Dricks, an agency spokesman, could not be reached for comment. The potential safety problem involved whether pumps that provide water to the emergency core cooling system would sense that a tank was getting low on water and switch to another source. Such a problem could prevent the system from performing its safety function under certain scenarios, officials said. The issue arose earlier this month after NRC inspectors, following up on earlier problems with the cooling system, raised questions and Palo Verde engineers did an analysis. Apparently, it was the first time the issue had come up since the plant opened in 1986. Levine, the APS executive vice president, said the latest analysis confirms the system would flood a reactor with water in the unlikely event of a loss-of-coolant accident. The NRC has estimated such an event might occur once every 2,000 years of reactor operation, Levine said. Getting Palo Verde back in operation was viewed as good news for utilities and consumers in the Western power grid. On Friday, the stock for Pinnacle West Capital Corp., the parent company of APS, hit a 52-week low as investors reacted nervously to the shutdown. The stock closed at $40.71 per share. On Monday, before the start-up announcement, the stock rebounded by closing up 41 cents, or 1.01 percent, at $41.12 per share. APS power supplies during the outage were more than adequate to meet the needs of consumers, officials said. McDonald, the APS spokesman, declined to say rates may increase because of the problems at the nuclear plant. It's unclear whether a "rate adjustment may be necessary" because a full array of financial data needs to be evaluated, he said. Reach the reporter at brent.whiting@arizonarepublic.com or (602) 444-6937. -------- idaho Plutonium Consolidation Not Welcome in Idaho BOISE, Idaho, October 18, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2005/2005-10-18-09.asp#anchor6 More than 30 regional and national public interest groups are calling on elected officials in Idaho and Wyoming to stop the consolidation of radioactive plutonium at the Idaho National Laboratory. In a letter addressed to the Idaho and Wyoming governors and Congressional members, the groups requested that officials urge the Department of Energy (DOE) to draft a new environmental impact statement (EIS), citing the DOE’s lack of legal obligation to respond to public comments beyond the draft. The state of Idaho and public interest groups alike criticized the draft EIS released in July for its lack of substantive information on worker safety, environmental protection, project need, and waste production and disposal. Last week, Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal, a Democrat, announced his opposition to plutonium consolidation at Idaho National Laboratory. “The plutonium impact statement was completely inadequate, and if we proceed with what DOE is proposing, there will be accidents and there will be contamination,” said Jeremy Maxand, executive director of the Snake River Alliance. “The DOE has no legal obligation to respond to public comments beyond the draft EIS, so if major problems still exist, and we anticipate they will, the public has no recourse beyond litigation.” The groups are particularly concerned with the DOE’s plutonium management track record and the likelihood of workers being exposed to deadly isotopes. As recently as 2003, workers at Los Alamos were contaminated with Pu-238. An investigative report by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) concluded that one of the reasons for such accidents is that DOE places a higher value on plutonium than on workers. The DNFSB is an independent board chartered by Congress to oversee safety issues at DOE nuclear weapons sites. “DOE’s projected probabilities of worker exposure in this EIS are ridiculously low, which the direct experience at Los Alamos utterly contradicts,” said Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, a watchdog organization. The most recent Pu-238 operations and resulting accidents have taken place at the Los Alamos National Laboratory." Coghlan said, “Idahoans should reject the DOE proposal because there is no clear need for it to begin with and DOE has no pathway certain for waste disposal. Haven’t Idahoans heard that before?” Despite a project in Los Alamos to recover up to eight kilograms per year of existing Pu-238, more than the DOE says it needs, the agency still plans to consolidate new Pu-238 production activities at the Idaho National Laboratory. s These future operations will involve virgin production of Pu-238 in the 40 year old Advanced Test Reactor and construction of a $230 million facility to extract the plutonium through reprocessing, purify it, place the plutonium in specially-welded capsules, and install the capsules in space batteries. Pu-238 is particularly dangerous to humans if inhaled, and the form the DOE plans to use is the most dangerous because of its small particle size, the opponents warn. “Plutonium is a very dangerous and toxic material,” said Judith Murray, executive director of the Idaho Nurses Association. “The DOE has a pretty bad track record, so when a project like this comes knocking on your door, you better take notice and start asking questions.” The Final EIS for plutonium consolidation is scheduled for release in the spring of 2006. -------- indiana Indiana U hazardous materials secured Official says harmful substances are protected By Kathleen Quilligan Published Tuesday, October 18, 2005 http://www.idsnews.com/story.php?id=31860 An ABC News investigation revealed that the 25 colleges with nuclear reactors across the country severely lack security. Because of the report, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is investigating five universities, including the University of Wisconsin, Ohio State University and Purdue University. While IU does not have a nuclear reactor, the campus is not free from hazardous materials. Radiation safety officer Greg Crouch said almost 450 laboratories at IU use potentially hazardous materials for research and teaching. He estimates close to 100 laboratories use radioactive materials and close to 20 use high-powered lasers. But Crouch said safety and security is not an issue at IU with these materials. "My job is to make sure we work with radiation safely," Crouch said. IU is also home to a particle accelerator at the Cyclotron Facility which accelerates particles to a high velocity for medical purposes and research. But Crouch said there is little danger of radiation with the accelerator. "If you compare an accelerator to an X-ray machine, there is no radiation if power is off," he said. "That's not true for a reactor -- the radiation comes off perpetually." Ten journalism graduate students working for ABC News tested the security at the nuclear facilities by asking for tours, taking in cameras and tote bags. "We review our security effort frequently to ensure it meets the guidelines set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission," said Purdue spokeswoman Jeanne V. Norberg. "We will continue to do so. Should the NRC suggest new guidelines, we will respond." According to the ABC News report, the Purdue facility had no guards, no metal detectors and no advance background checks. It also reported the students taking the tour were allowed to take their tote bags into the facility even though the reactor room tour policy says, "No boxes, parcels, book bags, purses or other such 'containers of volume' may be brought into the Reactor room." Norberg said the news story misrepresented the potential security danger. The reactor, PUR-1, is fueled with highly enriched uranium and is embedded in concrete three stories below the Electrical Engineering Building and under 17 feet of water. "We operate with a very small amount of fuel," Norberg said. "Anyone wanting to obtain a similar amount would find it much easier to just buy smoke detectors at the hardware store. You are in more danger from the corner gas station than you are from this reactor." -------- vermont VY meets standards NRC: Acceptance doesn't guarantee approval of uprate By K. CECCAROSSI Brattleboro Reformer Staff Tuesday, October 18, 2005 http://www.reformer.com/Stories/0,1413,102~8860~3096527,00.html BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont Yankee owners have revised their plan to boost the nuclear power plant's output to 120 percent, meeting conditions set by the federal agency that must approve the power increase. Last week, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told Entergy Nuclear they must agree to added precautions before they could win approval for a so-called "uprate" at the Vernon reactor. Entergy had until Monday to agree to the conditions. Entergy's uprate request has been under review by the NRC for more than two years and owners have already invested millions of dollars in upgrades to accommodate the change. Meanwhile, state officials and nuclear watchdog groups have challenged the proposal, saying it neglects important safety measures. The NRC's conditions address some of those concerns. Rob Williams, spokesman for Vermont Yankee, said on Tuesday that owners had no problem with the NRC's requirements and were "pleased that now the process can move forward." Entergy's consent to the conditions doesn't guarantee approval by the NRC. In a letter the agency sent to the company last week, NRC staff said "your acceptance [of the conditions] does not constitute completion of the staff's review." The NRC will issue a draft report, or safety evaluation, on the uprate by Friday. A staff recommendation will then go to an agency panel called the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety for review. The NRC also plans to come to Vermont in November to collect public comment on the proposal. A final ruling is expected in late winter. The crux of the NRC's latest conditions is that Entergy gradually increase power to 120 percent and, along the way, keep closer review of any possible hazards the added pressure creates. The main condition deals with the plant's steam dryer, a piece of equipment that has cracked in other nuclear power plants that have been "uprated." The steam dryer is at the top of the reactor and is designed to remove moisture from the steam made in the reactor. The NRC has asked Entergy for a series of steam dryer stress gauge readings, and for plant officials to keep the agency apprised of the issue. "It's good, but it's less than the best," said Raymond Shadis, technical adviser for nuclear watchdog group the New England Coalition, referring to the NRC's conditions. "Instead of requiring proper analysis, the NRC is willing to let this plant experiment on the banks of the Connecticut River." The New England Coalition, along with the state Department of Public Service, is challenging the uprate before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, an independent branch of the NRC. That challenge, dealing with safety issues not addressed by the NRC's latest conditions, is still pending. However, the uprate could be approved by the NRC while hearings before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board are still under way. If that happens, the plant could begin running at increased power even as the safety of the uprate is being challenged. The state's Public Service Board must also sign off on the uprate. Although the quasi-judicial panel already approved the proposal, it's not final. The board has yet to decide whether the safety assessment conducted by the NRC is satisfactory of an independent safety assessment is necessary. ---- Vt. Yankee's owner agrees to conditions Preliminary OK for power boost may come this week October 18, 2005 By Susan Smallheer, Rutland Herald Staff http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051018/NEWS/510180360/1003/NEWS02 BRATTLEBORO — Entergy Nuclear agreed late Monday to the new license conditions set by federal regulators last week — setting the stage for the company to get a preliminary federal permit later this week that would allow it to boost power by 20 percent. In a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Jay K. Thayer, Entergy site vice president, said the company accepted the operating conditions which include increased monitoring of key, stress-prone components. The conditions also call for installation of new gauges and monitoring devices, and a requirement that the increase in power production be gradual — and closely monitored for problems. "We see no problem in complying," Entergy spokesman Robert Williams said Monday. He said the company had agreed to a "slight" change in the reactor's operating characteristics. "We're pleased the process can now move forward," Williams said. Thayer's two-page letter noted that Entergy and NRC staffers talked on the telephone both Friday and Monday and made revisions for "clarity." NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the NRC staff is expected to issue its safety evaluation report on the proposed power increase by Friday. "This is what the technical staff has been struggling with for over two years now," he said. The draft safety evaluation report is expected to be released four weeks before an independent panel of nuclear experts, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, comes to Vermont for two days of hearings in November about the proposed power boost. Sheehan said the committee will take testimony from the company, the state and the general public at hearings set for Brattleboro's Quality Inn on Nov. 15 and 16. Sheehan said it was not a foregone conclusion that Entergy would receive overall federal approval merely because it agreed to the operating conditions. Raymond Shadis, senior technical advisor for the nuclear watchdog group New England Coalition, said it was hardly surprising that Entergy had accepted the conditions. "Entergy proposed most of these, including the penalty on fuel," he said, referring to the condition that Entergy not operate at full power with its new enriched uranium fuel manufactured by General Electric. Shadis said the multiple conditions placed on the power boost's impact on the plant's steam dryer was proof that neither the company nor NRC's engineers were sure what that impact would be. "Instead of these experiments taking place in national laboratories, it will be taking place on the Connecticut River," Shadis said. Steam dryers, which are not a key safety component, remove the moisture from steam before it goes into the plant's generators. The steam dryers have failed in two other nuclear reactors, similar in design to Vermont Yankee, that have undergone similar power increases. Sheehan said the regulatory process was far from over. The quasi-judicial Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which is hearing concerns raised by both the state of Vermont and Shadis' group, has said that the two groups' concerns have been deemed valid. But no hearing has been held yet. The state's Department of Public Service is concerned about the impact of the increased power on emergency pressure conditions in the reactor core. Contact Susan Smallheer at susan.smallheer@rutlandherald.com. ---- Entergy agrees with new operating conditions October 18, 2005 AP http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/10/18/entergy_agrees_with_new_operating_conditions/?rss_id=Boston.com+%2F+News http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=3992830 BRATTLEBORO, Vt. --The owners of Vermont Yankee have agreed to comply with new operating conditions set by federal regulators reviewing its proposed power boost. In a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Jay K. Thayer, Entergy Nuclear site vice president, said the company accepted the operating conditions which include increased monitoring of key, stress-prone components. The conditions also call for installation of new gauges and monitoring devices, and a requirement that the increase in power production be gradual -- and closely monitored for problems. "We see no problem in complying," Entergy spokesman Robert Williams said Monday. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the NRC staff is expected to issue its safety evaluation report on the proposed 20 percent power increase by Friday. "This is what the technical staff has been struggling with for over two years now," he said. The draft safety evaluation report is expected to be released four weeks before an independent panel of nuclear experts, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, comes to Vermont for two days of hearings in November about the proposed power boost. Sheehan said the committee will take testimony from the company, the state and the general public at hearings set for Brattleboro's Quality Inn on Nov. 15 and 16. Sheehan said agreeing to the operating conditions does not guarantee federal approval. Raymond Shadis, senior technical adviser for the nuclear watchdog group New England Coalition, said it wasn't surprising that Entergy had accepted the conditions. "Entergy proposed most of these," he said. Shadis said the multiple conditions placed on the power boost's impact on the plant's steam dryer was proof that neither the company nor NRC's engineers were sure what that impact would be. "Instead of these experiments taking place in national laboratories, it will be taking place on the Connecticut River," Shadis said. Steam dryers, which are not a key safety component, remove the moisture from steam before it goes into the plant's generators. The steam dryers have failed in two other nuclear reactors, similar in design to Vermont Yankee, that have undergone similar power increases. -------- washington Board says vit plant's moving forward Last updated Tuesday, October 18th, 2005 By Annette Cary, Tri-CityHerald staff writer http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tch/local/story/7101471p-7008256c.html Safety issues at the $5.8 billion vitrification plant being built at Hanford are being resolved, and there's no reason not to continue with design and construction of plant buildings that will handle even the most radioactive waste, according to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The board, which provides independent oversight of the Hanford nuclear reservation and raised concerns about the earthquake design standards of the plant as early as 2002, sent a status report to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman on Monday. DOE has responded to safety issues raised by the board, though not always in a timely manner, and has provided technically sound paths forward for their resolution, the letter said. DOE has slowed construction on the two buildings at the plant that would handle large volumes of high-level radioactive waste. The slowdown came after a new earthquake study in 2004 showed the design of those buildings might not be adequate for a severe earthquake. The slowdown also has allowed time to resolve other technical issues and to move engineering and purchasing further ahead of construction. No further slowdown of construction is planned, said Erik Olds, a spokesman for DOE in Richland. The plant is being built to turn the worst of 53 million gallons of radioactive waste held in underground tanks into a stable glass form for disposal. The waste is left from more than 40 years of production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program. DOE came up with a more robust working design standard for the two critical buildings at the vitrification plant this year based on an earthquake that could cause more ground movement than previous estimates considered. "Although the board believes that the interim criteria provide a reasonably conservative basis for continuing with the plant design, some important uncertainties remain," the letter said. More measurements need to be taken of the soil and rock properties beneath the vitrification plant, the letter said. More bore holes will be drilled at the vitrification plant site in a two-year effort to develop a final earthquake design standard, according to the board and DOE. The board does not believe that significant reconstruction of work already completed at the plant will be required, but it won't know for certain until the additional analysis is completed, the letter said. Construction on the Low-Activity Waste building, the Analytical Laboratory and ancillary buildings continues at a normal pace, and DOE headquarters officials are approving specific construction activities at the High-Level Waste and Pretreatment buildings that will handle high-level radioactive waste. The letter also discussed structural engineering, chemical process safety and fire protection issues. Progress is being made and most concerns related to those issues have been resolved or are close to resolution, the letter indicated. However, the board remains concerned that contractor Bechtel National appears to be willing to accept some risk with hydrogen in pipes or ancillary vessels if there is no danger of the public or workers being harmed. DOE will need to demonstrate that the likelihood of a hydrogen detonation or fire is extremely remote and that people would be protected, the letter said. The board urged DOE not to rush its evaluation of the plan and to demand a full understanding of the potential impacts of the design approach. "DOE also needs to consider the entire spectrum of risk associated with these types of accidents ... before approving a design with any inherent weaknesses," the letter said. "The board believes this will be a difficult undertaking." -------- us nuc waste Radioactive waste contract with former DOE manager questioned Tue, Oct. 18, 2005 Associated Press http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/12934361.htm OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - Some trucking executives contend their companies got jilted when a former U.S. Department of Energy manager received a contract from the agency to haul radioactive waste out of Ohio and then bought shipping trailers and hired the truckers. David Bennett, executive vice president of Joplin, Mo.-based Tri-State Motor Transit Co., described the bid process and contract as "dirty pool." "We calculated how much it would take to do the job, and then they changed the contract without telling anybody and without giving us a chance to rebid," Bennett told the Chattanooga Times Free Press in a story published Tuesday. Cavanaugh Mims, a nuclear engineer who left DOE in 2000 to start Visionary Solutions LLC, the Oak Ridge company awarded the contract, said his company submitted the lowest and best proposal. The contract calls for Visionary Solutions to ship up to 7,000 containers of nuclear materials from the abandoned Fernald plant about 20 miles northwest of Cincinnati. After getting the contract, Mims bought the trailers needed for shipments and contracted out much of the work to trucking companies. Visionary Solutions now is the only DOE-approved transportation broker for such shipments. Mims said his company can offer greater expertise at less cost. "We have as much transportation knowledge as anyone out there," said Mims, who has had other shipment contracts and has done training for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Bennett said his company's drivers are more experienced than the independent contractors Visionary Solutions hired and the setup has turned Mims into a middleman between DOE and those hauling its shipments. "It raises costs and decreases security," Bennett said. Fluor Fernald Inc., DOE's contractor for the Ohio site, issued the initial request for bids, providing details on how, when and where the radioactive material should be shipped. After the contract was awarded, some key parts changed, including the destination and truck requirements, according to those who bid. A Fluor official said the company is pleased with Visionary Solutions. "They've made about 400 shipments so far, and they have an excellent safety and driving record," spokesman Jeff Wagner said. "We stand behind our decision to use this company." When the destination for the waste was changed from the Nevada Test Site to a Waste Control Specialists facility in Andrews, Texas, it reduced the hauling distance by more than 30 percent, or nearly 600 miles, records show. Wagner said the destination changed because Nevada's attorney general threatened to sue DOE if the material was shipped to the Nevada Test Site. Visionary Solutions bid $8,600 per load to remove the uranium wastes from Fernald, compared with a $15,000 bid by Fluid Transports Inc. and a $14,750 bid from Tri-State Motor Transit, records show. DOE changed other specifications after the bid was awarded. It dropped the requirement for a 21-foot setback between the cab of the truck and the containers of radioactive material, allowing less expensive trailers to be used, and changed how containers must be tied to each trailer. Billy Smartt, president of Fluid Transports Inc. in Snyder, Texas, asked the DOE to investigate the shipment contract last year. "To me, the process just didn't seem to be fair, because Visionary Solutions bid much lower than anyone else because they must have known about the changes in the initial bid," Smartt said. DOE officials dismissed Smartt's complaint. Mims said his company has no inside knowledge or personal contacts with officials making contracting decisions at Fernald. Visionary Solutions was better at bidding, has lower overhead and has other lines of business to generate operating income, he said. -------- MILITARY -------- arms Serbian factory bombed by NATO to make arms for US company BELGRADE (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051018202008.zwvuzn1f.html A Serbian factory bombed by NATO in 1999 is to make arms for US weapons manufacturer Remington in a contract worth 3.2 million dollars (2.6 million euros), a report said Tuesday. Zastava Arms of Serbia and Remington signed the agreement in Kragujevac, 120 kilometers (72 miles) west of Belgrade, for the supply of the weapons in 2006, the private Beta news agency reported. The arms would be sold under the joint brand name "Remington-Zastava" in a contract for 24,000 carbines and small-calibre sporting rifles and arms, with the first shipment to be made in January. The NATO military alliance, including the United States, bombed the Zastava factory several times during a campaign aimed at ending a 1998-1999 crackdown by then Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic's forces against Albanian separatists. The Zastava company is known also for its automobile production and recently signed a deal to build cars for giant Italian automaker Fiat. -------- balkans NATO probes armed groups in Kosovo PRISTINA, Serbia-Montenegro (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.spacewar.com/2005/051018191208.yxwfs4ai.html NATO forces in Kosovosaid Tuesday they were investigating reports that armed groups are active in a tense part of the disputed province. Kosovo media reported Tuesday that one armed group presenting itself as the Army for Kosovo Independence, or UPK, was setting up illegal road blocks at night in the province's west. NATO and local police launched the probe "due to isolated incidents related to the existence of irregular check points in limited areas," the head of KFOR's southwest press office, German Lieutenant Colonel Siegfried Jooss, told KFOR's top commander, Italian General Giuseppe Valotto, on Tuesday assured the Kosovo public that the "illegal operations of several persons cannot endanger the security situation in general." "I am sure 95 percent of citizens want peace and a calm situation," he said, stressing KFOR was ready to confront any disturbance to maintain security. The Koha Ditore newspaper said the armed groups who were wearing camouflage fatigues and masks had recently even stopped a KFOR vehicle during the night at one of its checkpoints in the region. Kosovo's electronic media reported they recently received an email in which the UPK claimed it was operating in the area in order to prevent any possibility of the province becoming "conditionally independent". The UN Security Council is expected to launch delicate talks next week on the status of Kosovo, a divided province whose ethnic Albanian majority is seeking full independence, which Belgrade firmly opposes. The UN-administered province's authorities said they are yet to identify the existence of any armed groups in Kosovo. "There is only one army in Kosovo. That's KFOR," Jooss said adding, "There is no evidence of any irregular organisation" in the west of the province. "From time to time we see reports of unspecific groups who claim that they are operating in Kosovo," Neeraj Singh, the UN mission in Kosovo spokesman, said last week. "We have no reason to believe that they exist, at the same time the police do investigate all such (media) reports," Singh said. The remote and mountainous western part of Kosovo has been a stronghold of hardcore nationalist Albanians and criminal groups involved in arms and drugs smuggling since the start of the 1998-1999 Kosovo war. It is widely believed another shadowy group calling itself the Albanian National Army, which was put on UN and US lists of terrorist organisations last year, has been active in the region. Still technically part of Serbia, Kosovo has been run by the United Nations and NATO since a bombing campaign by the military alliance ended a crackdown by Serbian forces against Albanian separatists in June 1999. -------- un Decline in armed conflict due to U.N., study says Posted 10/18/2005 2:14 PM (AP) http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10-18-unstudy_x.htm UNITED NATIONS — Armed conflicts have declined by 40% since the end of the Cold War primarily because the United Nations was finally able to launch peacekeeping and conflict-prevention operations around the world, according to a new study. The first Human Security Report paints a surprising picture of war and peace in the 21st century: a dramatic decline in battlefield deaths, plummeting instances of genocide, and a drop in human rights abuses. (Related site: Security report) The only form of political violence that appears to be getting worse is international terrorism, a serious threat but one that has killed fewer than 1,000 people a year on average over the past 30 years. Tens of thousands were killed annually in armed conflicts during that time, said the report, which was financed by five governments and released Monday. Despite the dramatic improvements in global security, the report warned against complacency, noting that 60 wars are still being fought around the world, including serious conflicts in Iraq and Sudan's western Darfur region. "The post-Cold War years have also been marked by major humanitarian emergencies, gross abuses of human rights, war crimes, and ever-deadlier acts of terrorism," it said. "The risk of new wars breaking out — or old ones resuming — is very real in the absence of a sustained and strengthened commitment to conflict prevention and post-conflict peace building." Nonetheless, the report said there also was no cause for pessimism. Andrew Mack, a professor at the University of British Columbia who directed the study, said the end of the Cold War eliminated tensions between capitalism and communism, cut off U.S. and Russian funding for proxy wars, and most importantly liberated the United Nations. "With the Security Council no longer paralyzed by Cold War politics, the U.N. spearheaded a veritable explosion of conflict prevention, peacemaking and post-conflict peace-building activities in the early 1990s," the report said. A Rand Corp. study earlier this year concluded that the United Nations was successful in 66% of its peace efforts, but even the 40% success rate some believe is more accurate would be an achievement considering that prior to the 1990s "there was nothing going on at all," Mack said. "We think the United Nations, despite the many failures, has done in many ways an extraordinary job ... very often with inadequate resources, inappropriate mandates, and with horrible politics in the council," said Mack, who was the director of strategic planning in U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's office from 1998-2001. "If the politics were less horrible, the resources more adequate ... the U.N. could do a much better job." According to the report, armed conflicts have not only declined by more than 40% since 1992, but the deadliest conflicts with over 1,000 battle deaths have dropped even more dramatically — by 80%. Notwithstanding the genocides in Rwanda in 1994 and in the Bosnian town of Srebrenica in 1995, mass killings because of religion, ethnicity or political beliefs plummeted by 80% between the 1988 high point and 2001, the report said. The year 1988 was marked by the end of the bloody Iran-Iraq war and Saddam Hussein's Anfal campaign, in which hundreds of thousands of Kurds were killed or expelled from northern Iraq. Since the post-World War II era, the average number of battle-deaths per conflict per year — the best measure of the deadliness of warfare — has also been falling dramatically, though unevenly, the report said. In 1950, the worst year, the average war killed 37,000 people directly, Mack said. "By 2002, it was 600 — an extraordinary change." The postwar period also saw the longest period of peace between the major powers in hundreds of years, and attempted military coups have been in decline for 40 years, the study found. "Today most wars are fought in poor countries with armies that lack heavy conventional weapons — or superpower patrons," the report said. But a few high-tech wars have been fought by the United States and its allies since the end of the Cold War, first against Iraq to liberate Kuwait, then in Kosovo and Afghanistan where the huge military advantage led to quick victory and relatively few battlefield deaths. "The current conflict in Iraq is the exception. While the conventional war that began in 2003 was over quickly and with relatively few casualties, tens of thousands have been killed in the subsequent — and ongoing — urban insurgency," the report said. Mack, who directs the Human Security Center at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said the report relies on new data from the Conflict Data Program at Sweden's Uppsala University and other sources. He said its statistics were probably the best available but emphasized that decent data on wars and conflicts remained hard to obtain. The report was funded by Canada, Sweden, Norway, Switzerland and Britain. Mack said a second report in 2006 will focus on the indirect costs of warfare. -------- POLITICS -------- voting Iraq Vote Results Questioned After "Unusually High" Returns Tuesday, October 18th, 2005 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/18/1356215 Iraq's referendum on a draft constitution is being called into question after the country's electoral commission announced it will audit what it calls "unusually high" voting results. Sunni leaders, who mostly advocated a "no" vote in Saturday's nation-wide poll, have alleged widespread electoral fraud, citing allegations of ballot-stuffing and unlawful absentee voting. The New York Times reports "yes" votes in areas with large Shiite and Kurdish populations - groups known to support the draft - were reported to reach over 99 percent. An official with the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq told the Associated Press voting numbers seemed unusual in areas "all around the country", but it remained too early to draw conclusions. The referendum required a simple majority to be approved into law but can be rejected if two-thirds of the population in at least three provinces vote against it. -------- ENERGY -------- alternative energy China may Emerge as World Top Wind Power - Greenpeace HONG KONG: October 18, 2005 REUTERS NEWS SERVICE http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33030/story.htm HONG KONG - Greenpeace on Monday called for greater investment in wind turbines in China, the world's top coal consumer, saying Beijing's ambitious target for renewable energy means it could emerge the global top wind power by 2020. "We need to stop financing problems and have to start financing the solution," campaigner Robin Oakley told reporters on board vessel Rainbow Warrior, operated by Greenpeace, as a blanket of smog covered Hong Kong. "It (China) has enormous wind resources ... The Chinese government is recognising that," Oakley said, while announcing a study on wind potential in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong, known as the world's manufacturing centre. In February, China's parliament passed a renewable energy law, which will take effect next January, which sets tariffs in favour of non-fossil energy such as water, wind and solar power. With Beijing aiming to build 20 gigawatts of wind power by the year 2020, Graham White, managing director of Garrad Hassan Pacific Pty Ltd. from Australia said China was likely to overtake Germany, Spain, the United States and India as the top wind user. The official from Garrad Hassan, which conducted the study on behalf of Greenpeace, said the target compared with the world's total installed wind capacity of 55 gigawatts presently. "Onshore wind will be the cheapest energy source of all the options for Europe in the year 2020 ... Same economics are going to be true for China," White added, referring to a 2003 study, commissioned by the U.K. government. In Guangdong, the local government has set its own target to raise wind power to 3,000 megawatts by 2020 from 86 megawatts, he said, while its potential was estimated at 20,000 megawatts. Wim Lansink, general manager of Shantou Dan Nan Wind Power Co. Ltd in Guangdong, calculated this would require investment of $15-$20 billion. Shantou Dan Nan is a joint venture between Dutch utility Nuon and the power authorities of Shantou city. Asked if his 24-MW wind farm was profitable, Lansink said: "Yes, we are. Otherwise, we would have left." ---- Navy Flips the Switch on Hawaii's Largest Federal Solar Array PEARL HARBOR, Hawaii, October 18, 2005 (ENS) http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2005/2005-10-18-09.asp#anchor7 The largest array of solar cells on federal property in Hawaii was formally dedicated on Thursday. Located atop the U.S. Navy's Ford Island Building 54 at Pearl Harbor, the array covers 31,000 square feet of roof space. The 309 kilowatt PowerLight PowerGuard solar electric rooftop system will generate clean and reliable electricity for the Navy. It incorporates 1,545 solar panels made by Sharp Corporation. During the daytime, this solar system generates enough energy to power the equivalent of 300 homes. “The deployment of solar power at NAVFAC Hawaii demonstrates the Navy's commitment to using energy management practices that reduce operational costs and protect the environment,” said Captain Richard Roth, commanding officer of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Hawaii. “Using clean generation is very consistent with the Navy's ongoing efforts to leverage superior operational expertise and technologies.” The array's solar power will be added to the Navy's electrical grid at Pearl Harbor and provide additional power during the busiest part of the work day. Not only will it reduce the demand on Hawaiian Electric Company's power grid, it will improve air quality by avoiding thousands of tons of polluting nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon dioxide emissions. In addition, the solar power array is expected to save the Navy $40,000 per year, at current rates. “Installing photovoltaics at governmental facilities is a sound, sensible way for us to use distributed energy resources to meet our renewable energy goals as well as reduce operating costs,” said Captain Roth. “In addition, deploying these technologies assures our energy independence and national security.” Pearl Harbor's solar power system began as a Hawaiian Electric Company (HECO) initiative and joint venture with the Navy. Originally, HECO offered to finance and build a photovoltaic array on Navy land, which they would lease. Over time, the project was adjusted and what began as a 100 kW photovoltaic system in a large-scale energy park to be located in Pearl Harbor's West Loch area, evolved into a 309 kW system placed on the roof of Building 54. The historic, pre-World War II aircraft hanger on Ford Island, Building 54, received endorsements from Navy Region Hawaii's Historic Preservation architect and the State Historic Preservation Office. It was chosen for its suitable roof structure and lay out for the array. “Solar power proved to be a wonderful energy solution,” said Kevin Saito, energy manager, NAVFAC Hawaii. “By leveraging Hawaii's abundant sunshine, this photovoltaic system combines the environmental benefits of solar with the ability to provide onsite power. This project provides a more, cost-stable source of electricity, mitigating the sharp increase in fuel prices with which we are so familiar.” The 309kW photovoltaic system was designed and installed by PowerLight Corporation of Northern California. Funding for the project was obtained by the state of Hawaii's Congressional Delegation. “We commend the U.S. Navy for taking such a strong leadership role in implementing clean, renewable solar power,” said PowerLight President Dan Shugar. “Wider deployment of onsite solar generation is helping to secure our nation's energy independence and national security." PowerLight also designed and installed the Navy's largest photovoltaic system, the 750 kW solar array at Naval Base Coronado, San Diego, California. "NAVFAC Hawaii's vision to implement innovative technologies is terrific; our collaboration with the Navy has been instrumental in making this project, as well as one at Naval Base Coronado, a reality," Shugar said. "PowerLight is committed to helping make the Navy more energy and cost-efficient, with minimal impact to the environment.” -------- OTHER -------- environment Ozone hole third largest on record GENEVA (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.terradaily.com/2005/051018133636.8orw8n5i.html This year's seasonal ozone hole over Antarctica was the third largest on record, but forecasters are uncertain how it will behave in the future, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) said Tuesday. The hole peaked last month at almost 27 million square kilometersmillion square miles), and then began shrinking as usual, the WMO said in a statement. That was just short of the record 28 million square kilometersmillion square miles) set in 2003, the WMO said. The second-largest hole was logged in 2000. "Because of uncertainties linked to climate change, we don't know if we reached the biggest ozone hole ever in 2003 or if it will be bigger sometime in the future," said WMO ozone expert Geir Braathen. "But it's not likely that it will get much bigger. It seems like we have reached a plateau." "The question is how long it will take before we get back to pre-ozone hole levels," he told reporters. The hole in the ozone layer, discovered in the 1980s, is created by atmospheric conditions and pollution, and fluctuates according to season and prevailing weather. Ozone, a molecule of oxygen, is a stratospheric shield for life on Earth, filtering out dangerous ultraviolet rays from the Sun that damage vegetation and can cause skin cancer and cataracts. The protective layer has been increasingly damaged by man-made chemicals, especially bromine, chlorine and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). CFCs are an aerosol gas, previously used in refrigerators, whose use was belatedly controlled by an international treaty, the Montreal Protocol signed on September 16, 1987. "As the amount of chlorine and bromine will continue to decline over the next decade -- very slowly -- one expects the ozone whole to get smaller and smaller," Braathen said. "But at the same time there is also this issue of climate change, which leads to high temperatures on the ground while in the stratosphere temperatures will decrease. And that will encourage more ozone loss in the Arctic and Antarctic." "This is an open question. We don't know what the effect will be." ---- Wilma becomes hurricane, likely to pack 'major' wallop MIAMI (AFP) Oct 18, 2005 http://www.terradaily.com/2005/051018164918.cqe9ob52.html Tropical Storm Wilma, the 21st named storm of the Atlantic season, became a Category 1 hurricane on the Saffir-Simpson intensity scale Tuesday and was expected to develop into a "major" storm, weather officials said. At 1500 GMT, Wilma's winds accelerated to 75 miles (120 kilometers) per hour, making it the 12th hurricane of the 2005 season. It was expected to strengthen later Tuesday. "Wilma is forecast to become a major hurricane in the northwestern Caribbean Sea," the Miami-based US National Hurricane Center said in a statement. "And as it progresses, high pressure over the Gulf of Mexico is expected to weaken, ... allowing Wilma to move through the northwestern Caribbean and enter the southeastern Gulf of Mexico in about three days." The center of the storm was located 195 miles (320 kilometers) south-southeast of Grand Cayman island. The storm had been creeping northwestward at seven miles (11 kilometers) an hour and was expected to continue moving in that direction for the next 24 hours, the hurricane center said. "Hurricane-force winds extend outward up to 15 miles (30 kilometers) from the center, ... and tropical storm-force winds extend outward up to 120 miles (195 kilometers)," it added. Wilma, matching a record set during the 1933 Atlantic hurricane season, in which there were also 21 storms, gathered force in the Caribbean on Monday, threatening storm-battered Central America and pushing oil prices up sharply. The storm threatened Honduras, where authorities issued a red alert and prepared for evacuations. Authorities in neighboring Nicaragua and El Salvador also kept a close eye on the storm's course, while the storm dumped rain on Cuba, which evacuated more than 5,000 people from flood-prone areas. A tropical storm warning and hurricane watch also remained in effect for the Cayman Islands. Forecasters said the storm could enter the Gulf of Mexico this week and threaten the hurricane-battered US Gulf Coast, which is still clearing up after Hurricane Katrina killed more than 1,200 people before being followed by Hurricane Rita. Wilma also raised concerns regarding oil production in the Gulf of Mexico. A climate study released Monday said the continental United States will face more extreme temperatures during the next century and worse rainfall along its hurricane-battered Gulf Coast. The study, published on the online edition of the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, warned that greenhouse gases will likely swell to twice their current levels by the century's end. It also predicted that the southwestern United States could endure as much as a 500 percent increase in hot events, leaving less water for the growing population; that the Gulf Coast region would receive more rainfall in shorter time spans; and that summers in the northeast would be shorter and hotter. The 2005 Atlantic hurricane season has been particularly severe. After Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida in August, Central America was slammed earlier this month by deadly Hurricane Stan, whose rains triggered floods and mudslides that left more than 2,000 dead in Guatemala alone. Dozens more were killed in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Mexico. Meanwhile, police evacuated several thousand people from the Massachusetts city of Taunton as a dam threatened to burst and send a 10-foot (three-meter) surge through the downtown area. Officials said heavy rainfall over the past week had placed enormous pressure on the wooden Whittendon Pond Dam, which controls water flow along the Mill River that passes through Taunton. If the dam were to fail, officials said a second dam farther upstream would also likely collapse, emptying two lakes at the same time. "If the dams go, they're expecting a 10-foot surge," said Taunton Police Department spokesman Eric Nichols, who put the number of displaced people at 5,000 in the northeast city of some 50,000 residents. -------- ACTIVISTS Rights Activist and Ex-Greenpeace Head Wuori Dies FINLAND: October 18, 2005 REUTERS NEWS SERVICE http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/33036/story.htm HELSINKI - Top Finnish lawyer and human rights campaigner Matti Wuori, who was chairman of Greenpeace in the 1990s and advised South Africa's truth commission, has died. Wuori died in Helsinki on Saturday of lung cancer, aged 60, his office said. He was a member of the European Parliament's green group for five years from 1999 and combined serving as an MEP with campaigning for greater democracy in the EU. A prominent environmental activist, Wuori was chairman of Greenpeace International from 1991 to 1993. He was a special adviser from 1996 to 1998 to South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which was chaired by Nobel Peace Prize-winner Desmond Tutu to probe apartheid-era crimes. Wuori, who spoke five languages and read 13, wrote several books, including a critical essay "Faust's Dream" and "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic". He also played a cameo role as a lawyer in the Finnish comedy-drama "The Man Without a Past", which won the Grand Prix at the Cannes Film Festival in 2002. ---- 18 Grandmothers Arrested at Iraq War Protest Tuesday, October 18th, 2005 Democracy Now! Headlines http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/18/1356215 Here in this country, eighteen grandmothers from the Raging Grannies were arrested Monday after they tried to enlist at a military recruiting center in Times Square. The women, ranging in age from 40 to 90, sat down in front of a recruiting booth, chanting "We insist, we want to enlist." The 18 arrested face charges of disorderly conduct.