From: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com (abolition-usa-digest) To: abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: abolition-usa-digest V1 #144 Reply-To: abolition-usa-digest Sender: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-abolition-usa-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk abolition-usa-digest Friday, July 2 1999 Volume 01 : Number 144 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 14:22:34 -0700 From: Jan Harwood Subject: Re: (abolition-usa) IN 191 DAYS RUSSIAN MISSILES ENTER Y2K; ANYONE WORRIED? Here in Santa Cruz, CA, we've been getting signatures on the Abolition 2000 petition to abolish all nuclear weapons worldwide for over a year now, every Saturday downtown, and have gathered nearly 10,000 of them. Our group, a committee of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, has also held public meetings, made talks at churches, and got as much as we could into the local media. De-alerting may be our next big push. Now we're doing radio spots, and your clear and eloquent letter is going to be a take-off point for one of them. Thanks for your efforts and your energy. Peace, Jan Harwood - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 17:57:04 EDT From: DavidMcR@aol.com Subject: (abolition-usa) Kosova Analysis / nuclear link Friends, War Resisters League has just release an analysis I did, titled "Death, Bombs, and Videotape". It does have in it a reference to what I think is substantial damage to any hopes for an early curb on nuclear weapons. For anyone interested I can send this as an attachment and also if you want the printed version, send your name and address. Peace, David McReynolds - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 21:15:01 -0400 From: ASlater Subject: (abolition-usa) Fwd: update on CD impasse Dear Friends, Here is the international take on US nuclear policy in a disheartening= report from the Rebecca Johnson at the Acronym Institute. Peace, Alice Slater=20 >From: rej@acronym.org.uk (rej@acronym.org.uk) > >Update on the CD Impasse >Rebecca Johnson > >The Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva closed the second part of its >1999 session on 25 June, still without any agreement on its work programme, >despite the efforts of successive CD presidents. > >The ad hoc committee on a fissile materials ban is not overtly the problem, >but notwithstanding the attempts from various western delegations, it is >clear that it will not be agreed by itself. The US, Britain and France had >earlier proposed that the fissban committee should be reconvened each year >until it was concluded. Pakistan objected on grounds that creating >permanent >committees was contrary to the CD rules of procedure. India agreed that >there was no provision in the rules of procedure to do this and complained >that "this artificial separation of the elements of work and temmpts to >give >them automatic annual extensions is unprecedented in the CD..."=20 > >Despite immense reluctance from the United States, which preferred less, >and >some non-aligned delegations and China, which wanted more, the principle of >establishing ad hoc groups on nuclear disarmament and outer space seems to >have been accepted, subject to getting consensus on mandates. Therein lies >the rub. The former President, Ambassador Mohamed-Salah Dembri of Algeria, >and his successor, Ambassador Guillermo Gonz=E1lez of Argentina, have been >circulating draft mandates, but so far without agreement. In particular, >the >United States is understood to have serious difficulties obtaining >agreement >from Washington. Now a second problem has been raised: will there be any >point in agreeing a work programme this year unless there is acceptance >that >the same committees, groups and coordinators should continue in 2000? > >In addition to opposing the automatic re-establishment of the fissban >committee, India and Pakistan also appear loathe to go along with the >growing view that if a work programme can be adopted this year, there >should >be some in-principle decision that the CD would work on that basis in 2000 >and not waste months trying to put together a new or different package for >at least the next 12 months. Others fear that the alternative -- beginning >again from scratch in January -- is making the CD look ridiculous. When the >CD resumes on July 26, there will barely be time for any committees or >groups to meet, let alone decide how to address the issues. The CD starts >negotiating on its reports (if any) by mid August, and will then close on 8 >September. After months of bargaining and pressure politics to achieve a >work programme, the Conference should try for a full year to make it work. >That would get fissban negotiations started at least, as well as enabling >the CD to begin to discuss how nuclear disarmament, outer space and the >other issues might be addressed.=20 > >The draft mandate being circulated at the end of the session proposed an ad >hoc group on nuclear disarmament based on the NATO-5 proposal put forward >by >Belgium on February 2 (on behalf also of Germany, Italy, Netherlands and >Norway): to "exchange information and views on endeavours towards nuclear >disarmament and to explore further prospects that could help attain this >objective".=20 > >On outer space, the draft mandate would establish an ad hoc working group >under agenda item 3 entitled =91Prevention of an arms race in outer space= =92, >"with a view to preventing the weaponisation of outer space, to examine and >identify, through substantive and general consideration, specific topics or >proposals that might be a basis for subsequent in-depth consideration, >including aspects related to possible confidence-building or transparency >measures, general principles or treaty commitments". This carefully fuzzy >language is much less than China proposed in March, but may be further than >the United States is prepared to go, in view of its plans for missile >defence and the intense politicisation of the issue in US Congressional >politics. China had earlier proposed an ad hoc committee "negotiate and >conclude an international legal instrument banning the test[ing], >deployment >and use of any weapons, weapon systems and their components in outer space, >with a view to preventing the weaponisation of outer space" but is willing >to compromise on a lesser mechanism as a first step.=20 > >Besides ad hoc groups on nuclear disarmament and outer space, the draft >work >programme would include the ad hoc committee under agenda item 1 to >negotiate a ban on the production of fissile materials for weapons and >other >explosive purposes (fissban) and a committee to deliberate on negative >security assurances. It is probable that special coordinators for the >agenda, expansion, and the much-need =91improved functioning=92 of the CD,= as >well as landmines would also be agreed. Though names are beginning to be >floated it is too early to speculate on who would become the special >coordinators or chairs of the committees and groups. > >Outer Space >Following China=92s focus on outer space, Pakistan devoted significant time >on >June 3 to this issue. Referring to "updated [American] blueprints designed >to achieve =91full spectrum dominance=92 in the twenty-first century," >Ambassador Munir Akram continued: "Together with other revolutionary >military technologies, covering every aspect of modern-day armaments, >recommendations have been made for a constellation of space-based lasers to >provide global coverage for an array of space-orbiting vehicles which could >unleash high-density kinetic energy weapons on ground targets. We believe >that efforts towards militarisation of outer space, or deployment of other >weapon systems relying on a space dimension, will create new and dangerous >instabilities. They would deal a serious blow to efforts for nuclear >disarmament and possibly lead to a new race for more lethal and denagerous >weapons systems, including nuclear weapons." > >Russia=92s Ambassador, Vasily Siderov, also raised serious concerns, >stressing >that "outer space is a property common to all mankind". Noting that the >1967 >Treaty on outer space did not establish a general prohibition for the use >of >outer space for military purposes, Siderov said that "progressive >development of space equipment and state-of-the-art high technology weapon >systems can provide a positive incentive for some states to use this legal >loop-hole for purposes inconsistent with the peaceful activities in the >space around the earth". He argued that one of the principal tasks of the >international community should be to negotiate a "legal regime prohibiting >deployment of offensive weapons in outer space". Echoing Pakistan=92s= remark >that "prevention is better than cure", Russia considered it "better to >consider today the means of preventing an arms race in outer space rather >than waste tomorrow huge amounts of resources to disarm it".=20 > >France=92s ambassador Hubert de la Fortelle characterised prevention of an >arms race in outer space as its second priority for CD work. France >considered that the importance of this issue were borne out by recent >developments, such as the North Korean ballistic missile test and >discussion >of the possibility of adjusting the ABM Treaty, which France regarded as >the >cornerstone of stategic equilibrium. De la Fortelle made clear France=92s >support for an ad hoc committee on outer space by endorsing both the 1998 >UNGA resolution and last year=92s special coordinator=92s report, and >reasserted >its 1993 proposal for notification of launches of ballistic missiles or >space vehicles. =20 > >Others also emphasised the urgency of addressing outer space issues in the >CD, although Ukraine=92s Ambassador Mykola Maimeskoul also commented that >"not >only weaponisation, but also militarisation of outer space is perceived by >many states as a threat to their security". Some countries who deploy or >use >military surveillance satellites in outer space, including China, have >insisted on a distinction between the weaponisation and militarisation of >outer space. They want the CD to address weaponisation but not >militarisation. While many delegations accept this distinction, recognising >that preventing the weaponisation of space would be a more manageable goal >at this point than opposing the militarisation of space, some do not. In >particular, a growing number of NGOs are drawing attention to the role of >military satellites in espionage, intelligence gathering, targetting and >weapons guidance. While supporting efforts to set up a CD mechanism to >consider these issues, it is clear that much discussion will be needed to >lay the groundwork for more substantive consideration. > >Fissban >Several statements stressed the importance of convening the committee to >negotiate a fissban, as agreed in August 1998. For France, the cut-off >treaty was the major priority for CD work and de la Fortelle castigated the >CD=92s inability to get started. He said that the treaty should be >multilaterally negotiated, non-discriminatory and internationally and >effectively verifiable. Siderov also called for speedy re-establishment of >the fissban committee and said that Russia considered it wrong to "waste >time searching any alternative issues in the field of nuclear disarmament >topics...ignoring the repeatedly re-confirmed consensus on FMCT." >Ambassador >Savitri Kunadi recalled that the G-21=92s proposal for a work programme had >included a committee to negotiate the fissban and therefore India "had no >difficulty going along" with such a decision. She particularly emphasised >various other aspects of the work programme, however. Referring again to >the >proposal from Britain, France and the United States to add to the fissban >mandate that the committee be reconvened each year until negotiations are >concluded, Akram, warned that "if the FMT consensus is to be reopened, >Pakistan would also seek inclusion of the concerns reflected in the >amendments we proposed to the Canadian resolution" to the 1998 UN General >Assembly (such as reducing and controlling existing stocks).=20 > >Nuclear Disarmament >In his valedictory statement to the CD after eight years as Egypt=92s >ambassador, Mounir Zahran called the CD "totally handicapped" in its >failure >to achieve nuclear disarmament. He recalled the gains in other fora, such >as >the Canberra Commission, the 1996 advisory opinion of the International >Court of Justice, and the August 1996 G-21 programme of action for >achieving >the elimination of nuclear weapons in three stages. Like Zahran, Kunadi >harked back to the priorities set at the first UN Special Session on >Disarmament in 1978. India, which just two months earlier prevented >agreement in the UN Disarmament Commission on holding a fourth special >session on disarmament, said that although it wanted more, in the spirit of >flexibility it would support a working group on nuclear disarmament, as >proposed by the ambassador of Venezuela, when he was CD President >(CD/1575). >Akram, like the rest of the G-21 also said that Pakistan would accept an ad >hoc group as "a first step" and the "least common denominator".=20 > >While arguing against a role for the CD in nuclear disarmament, Siderov >reminded delegations that "nuclear disarmament is a time-consuming and >costly process, which requires solutions to a whole range of financial, >technical and environmental problems" despite which, the "two major powers >have already done a lot" during recent years. Russia was "in favour of >other >nuclear powers joining our efforts aimed at reducing nuclear arsenals". >Siderov also recalled that President Yeltsin=92s 1994 proposal for a Treaty >on >nuclear security and strategic stability was "still on the negotiating >table". > >Other issues >There have been angry exchanges between North and South Korea over recent >clashes in adjacent waters, further exchanges between India and Pakistan >over Kashmir, and several comments on NATO=92s bombing in Yugoslavia, >prompting a furious reply from the US ambassador, Robert Grey. In >particular, Siderov argued that "the NATO aggression against the sovereign >Yugoslavia has gravely complicated the international climate". Like Russia, >several speakers raised concerns about the role of the one remaining >superpower and attempts to dictate by force. Russia raised concerns about >ecological damange and NATO=92s use of "indiscriminate inhumane weapons,= such >as cluster bombs and depleted uranium, which bring sufffering mainly upon >the civilian population".=20 > >Ambassador Peter N=E1ray announced Hungary=92s ratification of the >comprehensive >test ban treaty, emphasising the importance of this accord, negotiated at >the CD. Ambassador Ian Soutar spoke of Britain=92s efforts to increase >transparency by providing more detailed information on its exports of arms >and military equipment. Several, including Ecuador, called for decision on >enlarging the CD by five additional countries to be taken forthwith. There >were routine references to negative security assurances, landmines and >other >disarmament-related matters, but without any new ideas or sense of urgency. > >Conclusion >While the CD=92s lack of a work programme is deplorable, the discussions >about >the priority issues are themselves diplomatic negotiations of political >importance, reflecting changing political relations among some of the major >states. Although the importance of the political difficulties should not be >masked by attempts to reach procedural compromises, it would be absurd to >get agreement on a work programme for a few weeks this year unless the >Conference is also prepared to make a commitment to give that work >programme >at least a year=92s try. Even if it is not possible under the present rules >to >make such an undertaking binding on the next CD session, every effort >should >be made to get agreement in good faith, either through the CD report or a >presidential declaration. For the four weeks interval, diplomatic attention >has turned to attempts to negotiate a verification protocol for the >Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). > >The CD will reconvene 26 July and run for barely 6 weeks, to 8 September. > > > > >The Acronym Institute >24, Colvestone Crescent, London E8 2LH, England. >telephone (UK +44) (0) 171 503 8857 >fax (0) 171 503 9153 >website http://www.acronym.org.uk > =20 Alice Slater Global Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) 15 East 26th Street, Room 915 New York, NY 10010 tel: (212) 726-9161 fax: (212) 726-9160 email: aslater@gracelinks.org GRACE is a member of Abolition 2000, a global network working for a treaty to eliminate nuclear weapons. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 14:34:36 -0400 From: Bob Tiller Subject: (abolition-usa) DOE reorganization One of the key issues pending in Congress is the reorganization of the Department of Energy in the wake of the Cox and Rudman reports. Sen. John Kyl (R-AZ) is pushing a dangerous plan which has far-reaching implications for those who are concerned about either nuclear proliferation and nuclear facilities clean-up. Kyl expects to offer his plan as an amendment to the Intelligence Authorization bill, which will probably be on the Senate floor in mid-July. He expects broad support because many Senators who are concerned about security lapses will not study the content of his legislation carefully. Though we have voiced many criticisms of DOE over the years, PSR (with other organizations) is actively opposing Kyl's proposal, because it provides for less oversight and accountability of DOE's nuclear weapons activities, not more. This legislation would enhance, entrench and protect the nuclear weapons establishment in this country. A different version of DOE reorganization has already passed the House as part of the Defense Authorization. Some Republican committee chairs (Commerce and Science) were miffed that their jurisdictional issues were swept under the rug, and they may revisit the issue. Below is a letter that was sent to all Senators by PSR, ANA, NRDC and a dozen other groups. Feel free to use it. Your contacts with Senators on this issue during the upcoming ten-day recess could be very helpful. Shalom, Bob Tiller, PSR - ------------------------------------------------ June 30, 1999 Dear Senator: We strongly urge you to oppose the proposed Kyl-Domenici-Murkowski measure calling for the establishment of a semi-autonomous "Agency for Nuclear Stewardship" at the Department of Energy (DOE). The sponsors intend to offer this legislation as an amendment to the Intelligence Authorization Bill. We believe that the proposed legislation will adversely affect efforts to achieve the safe, secure and environmentally sound management of the Department of Energy. The recently released "Science At Its Best -Security At Its Worst" report of a Special Investigative Panel of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB report) provides a cogent analysis of many problems at the Department of Energy's weapons labs. The PFIAB report highlights the need to reform what Senator Warren Rudman characterized as a "culture of arrogance" at both DOE headquarters and the laboratories. Unfortunately, this proposed legislation does not address the serious problems that lead lab and contractor personnel to disobey, avoid, and deflect Presidential and Secretarial directives. Instead, this proposed legislation elevates those same recalcitrant bureaucrats to new levels of authority with less oversight. The proposed Agency for Nuclear Stewardship would bury essential security, non-proliferation, environment, safety, and health operations within a new semi-autonomous agency reminiscent of the Cold War days of the Atomic Energy Commission. It is that era that gave us a legacy of disasters ranging from secret radiation experiments on human guinea pigs to widespread nuclear contamination which continues to pose a threat and burden to the public. We have many concerns about the proposed Senate legislation. These are some of the most egregious problems: The same "culture of arrogance" at DOE that creates security problems, also leads to compliance problems with fundamental environment, health and safety standards which are often cavalierly regarded as a hindrance to the weapons program work. This results in mishaps that injure and kill workers, and contamination that is seeping into the ground and polluting the air. Rather than granting the labs more autonomy to regulate themselves, the Office of Environment, Safety and Health, reporting directly to the Secretary, should be given greater enforcement authority to ensure lab compliance with fundamental health and safety safeguards. The proposed legislation places nuclear non-proliferation programs within the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship. This creates a dangerous conflict of interest by allowing the same programs generating the technologies and materials that create proliferation concerns to monitor and control their own activities. In order for DOE's nuclear non-proliferation programs to provide effective advice and carry out essential non- proliferation work with other countries, these programs should have an independent and unbiased mandate. The security and counter-intelligence programs report to the Director of the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship under this proposed legislative scheme. This leaves in question how the security and counter- intelligence issues at the rest of the DOE complex, including sites and operations not reporting to the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship, will be addressed. For example, what about safeguarding plutonium at former production sites such as Hanford and Rocky Flats, or unregulated release of information about reprocessing technologies? The Senate should be concerned about preventing proliferation of sensitive technologies, information, and nuclear materials from the entire DOE complex; but this requires a new approach which ensures that security and counter-intelligence programs provide oversight for the entire DOE complex and report directly to the Secretary of Energy. The proposed legislation would provide the new Agency for Nuclear Stewardship unique authority to bypass the standard budget process. The Agency for Nuclear Stewardship is directed to send its budget wish list, along with supporting legislative comments to Congress, unedited by the Secretary of Energy or the President's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This will serve to ensure that the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship never competes with other funding priorities at DOE such as cleanup. Further, there will be less information and opportunity for lawmakers to identify and challenge wasteful programs and policies. It is even possible that policies in direct conflict with the views of the Secretary or the President would be sent to Congress. This provision reveals the true intent of the sponsors of this legislation: giving as much unrestrained power and authority to the nuclear weapons programs as possible. The best way to address mismanagement and disarray at nuclear weapons labs, production facilities, and the entire DOE is more oversight, not less. All of DOE's programs need to be held accountable to the public, and to Congress. They should not be elevated and removed from most oversight as a reward for their failures in management and lab security. Removing the ability to exercise oversight, and shine public light on the labs and production facilities, would re-create the same set of problems that led to the current state of affairs. Indeed, the new isolated structure could lead to even greater abuses and errors of judgment. Therefore, we strongly urge you to reject this measure calling for establishment of the Agency for Nuclear Stewardship at DOE. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 15:07:37 -0700 (PDT) From: marylia@earthlink.net (marylia) Subject: (abolition-usa) DOE + Labs-Wrong Rx Hi. One of the issues in the following article is a wrongheaded approach to DOE reorganization. Please, please consider calling your Senators or Rep. to oppose it. Read on.... Wrong Medicine Prescribed for What Ails Weapons Labs by Marylia Kelley from Tri-Valley CAREs' July 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch Let no one say that politics does not offer up a bounty of irony. The nation's nuclear weapons design labs at Livermore and Los Alamos are embroiled in a scandal over U.S. nuclear secrets that have allegedly been leaked to China. Yet the individual scientist at the center of this particular maelstrom has not been charged with any crime let alone convicted as of this writing. It is well understood by weapons physicists and their critics alike that the term "nuclear secrets" is a bit of an oxymoron. When any of the nuclear-armed states makes a significant advance in its weaponry, the how-to information becomes known to other interested nations within five years. So says Edward Teller, co-inventor of the hydrogen bomb and co-founder of Livermore Lab, to give but one example. Weapons design data leaks out in numerous small dribbles: in the publication of unclassified papers on nuclear phenomena relevant to weapons advances, in the margins of discussions between scientists at international seminars and conferences where one mistakenly believes the other already knows a piece of information, and so on. Furthermore, once an interested nation knows that a particular advance in a warhead design is possible, its physicists can postulate pathways and conduct experiments to come up with the same result independent of leaked information. These facts have enormous implications when one considers the nuclear proliferation risks of the U.S. "Stockpile Stewardship" program. It is a central goal of "Stockpile Stewardship" to attract more University and other researchers to weaponeering by providing facilities, like the National Ignition Facility and supercomputers, along with the financial means to conduct unclassified experiments that yield data of interest to the nuclear weapons program. Weapons designers call this "spin back" as non-military sources are used for military purposes, the opposite of "spin-off." Common sense tells us that anything of use to the U.S. nuclear weapons program is likely to be of some interest to other countries with a technological base (e.g., a nuclear reactor) and nuclear aspirations. Moreover, the U.S. government has been, and is now, officially sharing our "nuclear secrets" selectively with other countries. Exactly with which countries we share what information shifts over time as our geopolitical goals and alliances change. "Stockpile Stewardship" will exacerbate the situation. Our government has made promises, both formal and whispered, regarding NIF and other "Stewardship" data to a number of countries. This needs to be called by its real name - nuclear proliferation. Practically the only thing that can be said for certain about the security scandal at the labs is that current U.S. nuclear weapons policy will lead to more nuclear proliferation, with or without espionage. Yet, "Stockpile Stewardship" is just about the only angle not being covered by the mainstream news media, the pundits or Congressional hearings. Cold Warriors and agendas Witness the hearings going on now in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Testifying in the Senate on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Report, the chair of the panel that produced the report, former Republican Senator Warren Rudman characterized the weapons labs as having a "culture of arrogance" that contributed to security leaks and needed to be reformed. A chorus then went up from Rudman and Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM) and John Kyl (R-AZ) to reward that arrogance by giving Defense Programs and its weapons labs semi-autonomous status and increased authority within DOE- making the scandal-ridden bureaucracy even more self-regulating and less accountable than at present. Later in that day, when Rudman appeared before the House with his same autonomy message, Rep. Dingell (D-MI) brought a small measure of reality to the discussion when he declared: "None of us wants to use these serious security problems as an excuse to put the inmates in charge of the asylum." Watchdog groups including Tri-Valley CAREs were quick to respond, charging the Republican proposals to "reorganize" DOE were really an attempt to go "back to the future," returning the agency to the bad old days when Defense Programs was in charge of its own environment, safety and health programs - and massive contamination in communities across the nation, including in Livermore, was the result. Then, almost as if scripted to underscore our objections, Domenici offered a reporter the name of someone he thought might run the new, semi-autonomous weapons agency, James Schlesinger. Schlesinger directed the Atomic Energy Commission, the notorious predecessor agency to the DOE. More recently, he has been writing editorials advocating a return to full-scale nuclear testing. The truth is that DOE's Defense Programs, which still generates huge volumes of plutonium and other nuclear waste, as well as chemical waste, has been unable and unwilling to protect the environment and the public. Past scandals connected to nuclear weapons programs have included milk supply contamination from above ground testing, radiation experiments on humans and the dumping of nuclear wastes directly into streams, rivers and the ocean floor. The best way to address mismanagement at the nuclear weapons labs is more oversight, not less. Weapons programs need to be held accountable to the public. Unfortunately, that is not the tenor of discussion going on this month in the hearing rooms and halls of Congress. In a related development, the head of Defense Programs, Vic Reis, was rumored to be a supporter of the Republican proposals. This put him in direct conflict with his boss, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson, who has been testifying against the reorganization proposals - and in favor of his own plan - at every opportunity. Reis resigned, effective July 30. On June 25, the FBI put forward its own proposal to benefit from the spy scandal. The plan calls for a separate FBI division for counterintelligence to root out spies and protect our nation's nuclear secrets. One wonders, what if the morning papers reported some fine day that the FBI has arrested the entire U.S. weapons establishment for sharing sensitive "Stockpile Stewardship" data? Naw, probably not. (Copies the Rudman report, letters, press releases and more are available on request.) ++ Please note that my email address has changed to on 3/1/99 ++ Marylia Kelley Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94550 - is our web site, please visit us there! Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has changed on 3/1/99. (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983, Tri-Valley CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear weapons. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 15:16:42 -0700 (PDT) From: marylia@earthlink.net (marylia) Subject: (abolition-usa) Nuke waste facility/Lab/letters needed! Hi. Can you write a short note to the Governor's office supporting our request for an Environmental Impact Report on Livermore Lab's hazardous and radioactive waste? We have about a 30 day window, and your letter could make a huge difference. Please read on for details. The address and contact person at the governor's office are at the end of the article. Thank you. Peace, Marylia Governor Fails Important First Test by Marylia Kelley from Tri-Valley CAREs' July 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch Last month, newly-elected Governor Gray Davis made his first big decision under our state's key environmental law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This law is California's equivalent of the federal National Environmental Policy Act. CEQA governs decisions made by state agencies, and was enacted expressly to protect public health and our communities. The Governor's decision? Davis' senior staff reportedly pressed the state Dept. of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to grant Livermore Lab a final permit to build and operate a new $32 million hazardous and radioactive waste treatment facility. Further, the governor's office and DTSC decided it was not necessary to conduct an Environmental Impact Report before making the permit determination, instead relying on information provided by the Lab that is years old, inaccurate and/or incomplete. The published rationale? According to the permit decision, the state certifies that Livermore Lab's hazardous and radioactive waste operations could not possibly have a negative impact on workers, the surrounding community or the environment. This, at a site that sits on the EPA's Superfund list as one of the most heavily polluted places in the nation. This, at a major nuclear weapons research & development center with 880 pounds of plutonium (enough to make nearly 100 modern nuclear weapons), 440 pounds of highly-enriched uranium and a multitude of other radioactive and toxic materials on hand. This, at place with a long - and continuing - history of accidents, spills to the environment, employee injuries and safety violations involving hazardous and radioactive wastes. Tri-Valley CAREs' response? Our organization, with the assistance of a fine team of attorneys, will file a petition appealing the permit decision before the July 2nd deadline. The DTSC will consider our petition, and the Lab will be prohibited from going forward with construction during the process. The state usually responds to appeals in a reasonably quick time frame, about 30 days. One very important point: based on our appeal the state can, if it chooses, reverse its current decision, revoke the Lab's permit and require an Environmental Impact Report before any new decision is made to grant or deny the Lab a permit. If the state rejects our appeal, we will have the further option of filing a lawsuit. What do we urgently need? Over the next 30 days we have an opportunity to convince the governor's office and DTSC of the wisdom of reversing their decision. Write a letter today to Governor Gray Davis, Attn: Lynn Schenk, Chief of Staff, State Capitol Bldg., Sacramento, CA 95814. The fax for Ms. Schenk is (916) 445-4633. She may be reached by phone at (916) 445-2841. ++ Please note that my email address has changed to on 3/1/99 ++ Marylia Kelley Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) 2582 Old First Street Livermore, CA USA 94550 - is our web site, please visit us there! Our web site will remain at this location. Only my email address has changed on 3/1/99. (925) 443-7148 - is our phone (925) 443-0177 - is our fax Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983, Tri-Valley CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member of the international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear weapons. - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 11:38:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Nuclear Age Peace Foundation Subject: [none] G R A S S R O O T S N E W S L E T T E R J U N E 1 9 9 9 *** NEW ABOLITION 2000 ORGANIZATIONS Welcome to the following organizations, and thanks to all who have joined in the effort to reach 2000 organizations... People with Disabilities Uganda/Africa Pujehun Youths for Development/Africa WCPA/GREN Youth/Canada Toronto Raging Grannies/Canada Jubillenium/Canada Peace Movement of Esbjerg/Denmark Nuclear-Free Future Award/Germany SEEDS/India Milli Parliament/India International Council for Adult Education/India Chernobyl Relief Group of Kansai/Japan Global Peacemakers Association/Japan WISE Amsterdam/Netherlands Tibet Group (in Exile)/Nepal Thosey Youth Club/Nepal Service Civil International/Nepal South Asian Forum/Netherlands Rainbow Valley Community/New Zealand Tui Community/New Zealand All Pakistan Federation of United Trade Unions Citizens Peace Committee/Pakistan UPCH Universidad Pervano Cayetano Heredia/Peru Sociedad Cientifica de Estudiantes de Medicina/Peru St. Petersburg Peace Council/Russia U.S. Military Base Return Committee/South Korea Bicommunal Citizens Group for Peace in Cyprus/Turkey Eirene Community/UK Nation 1/UK Burlington Association for Nuclear Disarmament, VT/USA Canadian Campaign to Free Vanunu, VT/USA Citizens Opposing a Polluted Environment, CA/USA Cleveland Peace Action, OH/USA Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, MN/USA Little Friends for Peace, MD/USA Peabody Watch Arizona/USA Peace Links, Washington DC/USA Public Citizen/Washington DC/USA Resource Center for Nonviolence, CA/USA Sing Sing Quaker Worship Group, NY/USA Women for Peace, East Bay Chapter, CA/USA Villa Montessori School, AZ/USA Washington DC Area War Tax Resistance/USA World Citizen Diplomats, NJ/USA *** NEWS *HAP-Exciting News! The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice - now a UN Document! As of Wednesday, June 23, the "Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 21st Century" (the action plan discussed and launched at the Hague Appeal Conference) will be available in all of the United Nations languages: Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The UN reference for the Hague Agenda is A/54/98. Because this is now an official UN document, it will be delivered to all UN delegates and Secretariat staff upon its release. * Mr. Tom Rauch, the president of the Colorado Coalition for the Prevention of Nuclear War, announced that as of November 17th, 1998, the mayor of Denver, Wellington E. Webb declared, "DENVER IS A NUCLEAR FREE ZONE". Mr. Rauch also will bring a resolution similar to the one signed by the mayor before the Denver City Council this fall to seek their support. In the past, the resolution was turned down by the City Council because it did not have the mayor's support. Mr. Rauch is optimistic that the resolution will pass in the Denver City Council now that the mayor has signed a similar proclamation. * Ottawans in Nanoose Bay have united to oppose renegotiating a lease extension on a seabed owned by the province The seabed has been used as a torpedo testing range by U.S. and Canadian Forces since 1965. However, the Federal lease on the seabed expires on September 4th of this year. To date, more than 150 official objections have been filed by peace activists, community groups, church affiliated organizations, native bands, labor unions, environmental groups and other concerned citizens. Since B.C. legislative approval in 1992, the province has been a Nuclear Free Zone. This recent attempt to expropriate provincial lands has sparked a new peace movement in B.C. that highlights the need to ban nuclear weapons and the desire of activists and citizens alike to achieve it. For more information related to this issue or to obtain a copy of the petition, please refer to the Nanoose Conversion Campaign Website for a Nuclear Free Georgia Strait at: http://www.user.dccnet.com/lagasse/Nuclear_Free_Georgia_Strait/nanoose.html *** PETITION UPDATE ABOLITION 2000 PETITION COUNT June 1999 Argentina 162 Austria 12,000 (Soka Gakkai) Australia 9000 Belgium 1175 Canada 845 Costa Rica 30 Czech Republic 10 France 34,375 (Mouvement de la Paix) 17,000 (Soka Gakkai) 5,388 (Stop Essais) Germany 1220 Greece 17 India 260 Italy 55,819 (Soka Gakkai) 968 (in house) Japan 13,016,568 (Soka Gakkai) 3,800 (in house) Malaysia 80 Netherlands 10 New Zealand 70,000 (Soka Gakkai) Phillipines 10 Puerto Rico 134 Russia 10 Singapore 15 South Africa 70 Sweden 67 Switzerland 230 Ukraine 40 U.K. 940 U.S. 37,000 (in house) 10,000 (Maine) Miscellaneous (on-line + conferences) 3,475 Total: 260,350 Total including Japan: 13,280,718 *** ACTION YOU CAN TAKE * Peace Action's Nuclear Abolition Petition can now be signed on-line at http://www.peace-action.org/abolitionpetition.html. Please circulate this message widely. We are collecting as many signatures as possible to present to presidential candidates in the 2000 election. * July 16th marks the 54th anniversary of the first nuclear test in New Mexico. This July 16th you are encouraged to call your U.S. Senator and ask them to do everything in their power to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Make sure to speak directly with your Senator's Aide who manages issues relating to CTBT and leave your name and address with them. Aide's names are listed at http://www.psr.org/ctbtaction.html. For more information, contact: Joan L. Wade Disarmament Clearinghouse Coordinator 202-898-0150 (phone) or via email: disarmament@igc.org * Sign an International Appeal opposing US and French Explosive Nuclear Fusion Programs. For more information and to obtain a petition is available at the Tri-Valley CARE (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment) web site at http://www.igc.org/tvc or call Tri-Valley CAREs at 925-443-7148. * Fax Interior Secretary, Bruce Babbitt at 202-208-5048 and ask him to instruct the US Delegation to the World Heritage Committee to actively support an "In Danger" listing for Kakadu National Park in Australia. *** EVENTS July 23-25th-The 4th Tokyo forum on nuclear non proliferation and disarmament takes place. 26th -The third session of the Conference on Disarmament (CD) begins. August 3rd-8th-Tromp Trident Trek III is a 52 mile peace walk commemorating the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It begins in Ashland and ends at Project ELF. For more information, contact Nukewatch at 715-472-4185 or email at nukewtch@win.bright.net. 6th-Hiroshima Commemoration at Livermore Lab. It begins at 2:30 PM at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, where nuclear weapons are designed and a new weapons facility is currently under construction that is intended to create thermonuclear blasts in a reactor vessel, called the National Ignition Facility. The gathering will be at the corner of East Avenue and Vasco Road. After a program of speakers and music, there will be a procession to the gates of the Laboratory. This annual commemoration is sponsored by many San Francisco Bay Area peace and environmental organizations, including the Livermore-based Tri-Valley CAREs. For more information, call 925-443-7148. 6th-9th-Peace Action and Peace Action Education Fund National Congress are calling for students, activists and concerned citizens form across the nation and from around the world to join them in Albuquerque, New Mexico to commemorate the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For more information, please contact: Peace Action www.peace-action.org 202-862-9740 ext. 3038 1819 H St. NW Suite 420 Washington, DC 20006 September 24th-Anniversary of the signing of the CTBT. 27th-Clinton to address the UN General Assembly in New York. 29th-1st-CTBT Ratification States to hold first conference. October 25th-NGO Committee on Disarmament to hold a symposium throughout the week in New York. December Millennium 2000: Walking the Ways of Peace-December 29,1999 to January 2, 2000 Join a midnight candlelit procession onto the Nevada Test site on December 31st. For more information, contact: Nevada Desert Experience nde@igc.org (702) 646-4814 P.O. Box 4487 Las Vegas, NV 89127 ***SPECIAL * Special thanks to Jan Harwood and the committee of Women's International League for Peace and Freedom for their continued efforts in Santa Cruz, CA to educate and bring to the forefront the Abolition 2000 petition to abolish nuclear weapons. * A special thank you to Lori Beckwith for all her hard work as the Abolition 2000 coordinator located at the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation and a welcome to Carah Ong who will be her replacement. ***RESOURCES * The 47th edition of Houseman's Peace Diary 2000 will be published in September. The Peace Diary is a complete directory of 2000 organizations in 170 countries. It includes calendars, a forward planner and notes. To request a copy, please write: HOUSMANS, 5 Caledonian Road, London NI 9DX, England, UK * Esther Farnsworth has recently completed a book about the Vermont Walk to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, which took place last August. The book is entitled Grass Routes and contains speeches given by speakers along the way. Some of the speakers include: Jonathan Schell; Dr. Victor Sidel, from the International Physicians to Prevent Nuclear War; The Rev. William Sloan Coffin; Ambassador Thomas Graham, former negotiator for the U.S.; Stephen Dycus, a law professor from Vt Law School and David Montgomery, a physicist from Dartmouth. The book is available at $10.00 US per copy. To obtain a copy, please contact Esther Farnsworth at efarns@together.net. Carah Lynn Ong Coordinator, Abolition 2000 Nuclear Age Peace Foundation 1187 Coast Village Road PMB 121, Suite 1 Santa Barbara CA 93108 Phone (805) 965 3443 FAX(805) 568 0466 Email: A2000@silcom.com Website http://www.abolition2000.org To subscribe to the abolition-usa listerve, send a message (no subject) to abolition-usa-request@lists.xmission.com To post to the list, mail to: abolition-usa@lists.xmission.com To subscribe to the international abolition-caucus, send a message (no subject) to majordomo@igc.org To post to the list, mail to: abolition-caucus@igc.apc.org - - To unsubscribe to abolition-usa, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe abolition-usa" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message. ------------------------------ End of abolition-usa-digest V1 #144 *********************************** - To unsubscribe to $LIST, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe $LIST" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.