Group items tagged

By letter dated June 12, 2008, Governor Timothy M. Kaine of Virginia requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) enter into an Agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia (Commonwealth or Virginia) as authorized by Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act). Under the proposed Agreement, the Commission would relinquish, and the Commonwealth would assume, portions of the Commission's regulatory authority exercised within the Commonwealth. As required by the Act, the NRC is publishing the proposed Agreement for public comment. The NRC is also publishing the summary of an assessment by the NRC staff of the Commonwealth's regulatory program. Comments are requested on the proposed Agreement, especially its effect on public health and safety. Comments are also requested on the NRC staff assessment, the adequacy of the Commonwealth's program, and the Commonwealth's program staff, as discussed in this notice.

Thanks to everyone who contacted the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE) and their Members of Congress two weeks ago, urging an extension of DOE's public comment period on its proposed weakening of taxpayer protections in its nuclear loan guarantee program. Under pressure from concerned citizens and U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), DOE extended the comment deadline from Sept. 8th to Sept. 22nd. Now we must take advantage of this extension to get our comments in! DOE's most clearly outrageous proposal is to give up its "first lien" in the event of a new reactor loan repayment default. This would mean that taxpayers would be placed behind other lenders, such as foreign export-import banks, in terms of receiving compensation. Thus, taxpayers likely would not be compensated at all, but rather left holding the bag for billions when a new reactor or uranium enrichment facility goes belly up. The Congressional Budget Office has predicted, based on the nuclear industry's history, that well over half of all new reactors could default on their loans. Taxpayers' liability for dozens of new reactor loan guarantees could reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars. DOE's rule change would increase, not decrease, taxpayer risk.

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

Draft Report for Comment AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. [[Page 23220]] ACTION: Announcement of issuance for public comment, availability. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued for public comment a document entitled: NUREG/CR-XXXX, ``Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies.'' The Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) is a calculation of the time to evacuate the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (EPZ), an area with a radius of about 10 miles around a nuclear power plant (NPP). The ETE is primarily used to inform protective action decisions during NPP radiological emergencies and may be used to assist in the development of traffic management plans to support an evacuation. This document is an acceptable template for use by NPP licensees to meet NRC requirements for the development of ETE studies. It also provides guidance for the update and review of ETEs. The format and criteria provided in this document will support consistent application of ETE methodology and will facilitate consistent NRC review of ETE studies.

The National Science Board is seeking public comment on a draft report, "Building a Sustainable Energy Future," released this week. Comments are being accepted through May 1, according to info released to the news media. Comments made be made to NSBenergy@nsf.gov. The National Science Board is the policymaking body for the National Science Foundation and advises the President and Congress on science and engineering issues. The new report recommends a strategy to move from an energy economy dependent on fossil fuels to one that "thrives on sustainable and clean energy."

The U.S. Department of Energy is collecting comments over the next few weeks on its new timeline for cleanup at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. At meetings in Washington and Oregon federal officials will outline the new proposed schedule. It sets a timeline for cleaning up underground tanks of radioactive sludge and building a massive factory called the "vitrification" or "vit plant" to treat that waste. Carrie Meyer is a spokeswoman for DOE. She says the original cleanup and construction schedule drafted in 1989 wasn't realistic.

The U.S. Department of Energy is collecting comments over the next few weeks on its new timeline for cleanup at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. At meetings in Washington and Oregon federal officials will outline the new proposed schedule. It sets a timeline for cleaning up underground tanks of radioactive sludge and building a massive factory called the "vitrification" or "vit plant" to treat that waste. Carrie Meyer is a spokeswoman for DOE. She says the original cleanup and construction schedule drafted in 1989 wasn't realistic.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will solicit public comments at two meetings on Wednesday, Jan. 28, regarding its preliminary conclusion that there are no environmental impacts that would preclude a 20-year extension of the operating license for the Three Mile Island 1 nuclear power plant. A draft environmental impact statement on the proposed license renewal contains the information. The report, which was issued in December, will be discussed first at a meeting to be held at 1:30 p.m. on Jan. 28 at the Sheraton Harrisburg Hershey Hotel, 4650 Lindle Road, Harrisburg, Pa. A second session will get under way at 7 p.m. on the same day at the same location. The two meetings will begin with identical overviews, including a discussion of the contents of the report, then be opened for public comment.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a notification in the Federal Register today that it is extending the comment period on the Draft Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) by 90 days. The public comment period will now end on March 16, 2009.

U.S. Department of Energy Seeks Public Comment on National Transportation Plan for the Proposed Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Washington, D.C. -- The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is seeking public comment on a National Transportation Plan (Plan) that outlines DOE's current strategy and planning for developing and implementing a system to ship spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) safely and securely from where the material is generated or stored to the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

The Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (Deat) has extended the deadline for public comment on the environmental impact report (EIR) for the Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) by two weeks. Environmental consultants Acer Africa said that a number of interested and affected parties had submitted requests for an extension of this deadline, which was originally expected to close on October 24. All interested and affected parties would now have until November 7 to review the EIR and submit their comments.

The NRC is soliciting public comment on its draft report titled ``Tsunami Hazard Assessment at Nuclear Power Plant Sites in the United States of America,'' (NUREG/CR-6966) (ADAMS Accession No. ML082810348). This draft report describes the tsunami phenomenon with the focus on its relevance for hazard assessment at nuclear power plant sites. Any interested party may submit comments

Office of New Reactors; Interim Staff Guidance on the Necessary Content of Plant-Specific Technical Specifications for a Combined License AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Solicitation of public comment. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The NRC is soliciting public comment on its proposed Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) DC/COL-ISG-08 (ADAMS Accession No. ML082520707). The purpose of this ISG is to change the NRC staff position on the necessary content of plant-specific technical specifications (PTS) when a combined license (COL) is issued. This ISG clarifies the staff guidance contained in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.206, ``Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power Plants,'' Section C.III.4.3, ``Combined License Information Items That Cannot Be Resolved Before the Issuance of a License,'' and replaces the related guidance in NUREG-0080, ``Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants,'' Chapter 16.0,

The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced an open house and public comment meeting to be held in Grants this week. On Tuesday the commission will conduct the session to accept comments on the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities. In-situ is one of the uranium extraction methods being considered for use in the Grants area.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects to receive more than 4,000 comments from individuals and organizations regarding a company's proposal to import 20,000 tons of nuclear waste from Italy, process and incinerate the material in Tennessee and dispose the remainder in Utah. "The sheer volume of comments indicates there is serious concern about this proposal," said U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon, who opposes the plan. "When we accept foreign waste, we limit space for our domestic waste, and we also accept the responsibility of monitoring it for generations to come.

GOLIAD - Residents can still comment on the ongoing uranium mining project in Goliad County. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality prepared the draft permit which is now available for public comment until July 25. Uranium Energy Corp. has not yet submitted its affidavit that it has printed a public notice, TCEQ spokeswoman Andrea Morrow said.

SUMMARY: The NRC is soliciting comments from members of the public, licensees, and interest groups related to the implementation of the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP). An electronic version of the survey questions and additional information about the ROP are available at http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/index.html. This solicitation will provide insights into the self-assessment process and a summary of the feedback will be included in the annual ROP self-assessment report to the Commission. DATES: The comment period expires on November 6, 2009. The NRC continues to be interested in receiving feedback from members of the public, various public stakeholders, and industry groups on their insights regarding the calendar year 2009 implementation of the ROP. In particular, the NRC is seeking responses to the questions listed below, which will provide important information that the NRC can use in ongoing program improvement. A summary of the feedback obtained will be provided to the Commission and included in the annual ROP self- assessment report. Questions

The nearest cooling towers rest in Homestead, more than 100 miles away. So why did this small, unincorporated part of Lee County host a meeting about new safety rules for the nation's 63 nuclear power plants, one of only 11 such meetings being held across the nation? Call it the Nuclear Regulatory Commission roadshow. In its effort to cement a slate of new guidelines for preventing and responding to terrorist attacks on power plants, the federal nuclear watchdog recently hit the road to take comments on the proposed changes. Estero made the list of stops when an industry lobbying group, the Nuclear Energy Institute, scheduled its emergency preparation conference at the nearby Hyatt Regency. With scores of emergency experts from plants across the nation gathered in the area, and with a tight deadline to solicit public comment on the changes, the commission headed down to Florida.

The NRC is seeking comments on a proposed rule, published in today's Federal Register, that would change emergency preparedness requirements for operating nuclear power plants, for those that might be licensed and built in the future, and for research and test reactors. The proposed rule would limit the duties of a plant's onsite emergency responders to ensure they are not overburdened during an emergency event, and require specific provisions to protect them and other plant personnel during a hostile action event. In addition, the proposed rule would require all nuclear power plants to incorporate hostile action scenarios in their drills and exercises, which currently primarily focus on nuclear-related scenarios. New requirements for back-up measures for alerting and notification systems are also included in the proposed rule. The NRC has held several public meetings while developing the proposed rule and will be holding additional public meetings at six locations over the next several weeks. At these meetings, hosted jointly by the NRC and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), staff from both agencies will be available to answer questions about the proposed regulations and draft guidance. The first meeting will be held in the Philadelphia, Pa., area on June 2, 2009. Attendees are strongly encouraged to read the documents on http://www.regulations.gov (Docket Nos. NRC-2008-0122 and FEMA-2008-0022) before the meeting. After reviewing all public comments, the NRC staff plans to submit a proposed final rule to the Commission in February 2010.

The NRC has extended the public comment period for a proposed rule on emergency preparedness requirements from 75 to 150 days. The proposed rule, including associated guidance documents, would change emergency preparedness requirements for currently operating nuclear power plants, for those that might be licensed and built in the future, and for operating research and test reactors. Several stakeholders had requested that the comment period be extended based on the extensive nature of the proposed rule and guidance changes, and the need for additional time to evaluate the impact of these changes on their emergency preparedness programs. The proposed rule would limit the duties of a plant's onsite emergency responders to ensure they are not overburdened during an emergency event, and require specific provisions to protect them and other plant personnel during a hostile-action event. In addition, the proposed rule would require all nuclear power plants to incorporate hostile-action scenarios in their drills and exercises, which currently primarily focus on nuclear-related scenarios. New requirements for back-up measures for alerting and notification systems are also included in the proposed rule.

Giant loan guarantees could stick taxpayers with the bill At a time of deep partisan and ideological divi -sion in Washington, there aren't many issues that bring together forces from across traditional divides. So when scholars at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and taxpayer groups such as the National Taxpayers Union agree with environmentalists on something, it's time to sit up and take notice. That's exactly what's happening on the issue of federal subsidies for new nuclear power plants. Fiscal conservatives know that nuclear subsidies are a potential multibillion dollar boondoggle, while environmentalists know that - even beyond the environmental and public safety threats posed by the reactors themselves - there are far better and much cheaper solutions to our energy and global warming challenges."