Group items tagged

Advisory Board on Radiation and Worker Health (ABRWH or Advisory Board), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), and pursuant to the requirements of 42 CFR 83.15(a), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), announces the following meeting of the aforementioned committee: Board Public Meeting Times and Dates: (All times are Eastern Time): 1:30 p.m.-5:45 p.m., July 27, 2009. 9 a.m.-5:30 p.m., July 28, 2009. 9 a.m.-3 p.m., July 29, 2009. Public Comment Times And Dates: (All times are Eastern Time): 7 p.m.-8 p.m., July 27, 2009. 5:45 p.m.-6:30 p.m., July 28, 2009.

"Energy thinker Amory Lovins will speak at Salisbury's Catawba College on Feb. 23. Lovins is co-founder of Rocky Mountain Institute, a "think-and-do tank" that applies market-based solutions to efficient use of resources. Time magazine last year named him one of the world's 100 most influential people. He talked with energy and environment writer Bruce Henderson; comments are edited for clarity and brevity."

Dan Stout, the Dept. of Energy's director of nuclear fuel recycling, said the comment period on the draft programmatic environmental impact statement for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership would be extended beyond the current deadline of Dec. 16. At this time, however, a new date has not been set, Stout said at last night's GNEP hearing in Oak Ridge.l Stout also indicated DOE was considering a request for additional GNEP hearings at other sites. You can submit a comment by clicking here and doing a search for GNEP. Or you can submit comments in writing to: Mr. Frank Schwartz U.S. Dept. of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy -- NE-5 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, D.C. 20585. The draft PEIS is available here.

"A Foreign Ministry investigation into a secret Japan-U.S. pact on U.S. nuclear-armed ships' port calls has ended together with the administration of former Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama. In closing the investigation, Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada commented, "To lose diplomatic documents is to lose history." Normally this would be regarded as a wise saying, but in light of the Foreign Ministry's investigation into the secret pact, it is a stray comment. The reason is that the secret pact is not yet "past history"; it is Japan's nuclear strategy today."

OAK RIDGE, Tenn. - The U.S. Department of Energy is accepting public comments on a draft environmental assessment to evaluate alternatives to safely dispose of approximately 15,300 tons of radiologically-contaminated nickel scrap recovered from uranium enrichment process equipment at the department's Oak Ridge and Paducah, Ky., facilities.

PPL Corp. might sell the Bell Bend nuclear reactor it's hoping to build in Salem Township if it can't secure enough federal nuclear loan guarantees, company chief Jim Miller told reporters in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, Joe Scopelliti, the spokesman for the two-reactor Susquehanna nuclear plant that PPL operates in the township, confirmed Miller made the comments. But the spokesman said the comments might have been taken out of context "a bit" in The Energy Daily newsletter. The publication reported that "the license would be good for 40 years and that if PPL decided not to proceed with a new reactor, the license (according to Miller) 'could be sold to someone who might want to use it.'"

Physicians for Social Responsibility invites the public to "Nuclear Reconsidered-the Start of a Conversation" at 7 p.m. April 6 on the third floor of Owen Hall at UNC Asheville. The League of Women Voters co-sponsor the event with the World Affairs Council and United Nations Association. Advertisement Two short films will be shown, each to be followed by discussion and comments from the audience. To set the scene for the conversation, "Building a World Beyond War" will offer rationale for ending war. After a short question and comment period, "Nuclear Weapons and the Human Future" will be the main presentation, followed by discussion. Two member physicians, Lew Patrie & Don Richardson, will be resource people for questions. Leah Karpen, a member of both Physicians for Social Responsibility and the League of Women Voters, will be the moderator. A member of the league will explain its position on nuclear issues. This event is open to the public at no charge.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on issues associated with blending of low-level radioactive waste and is planning public meetings to discuss blending in Rockville, Md. The issue of blending low-level radioactive waste has received increased attention from the nuclear industry since the 2008 closing of the Barnwell, S.C., low-level waste disposal site. This action left waste generators in 36 states with no disposal options for Class B and Class C wastes, the two classes of low-level waste with higher radioactivity. Blending in some cases can lower the classification of the wastes to the lower-radioactivity Class A, which has available disposal capacity, by reducing the concentration of radionuclides. Blending refers to mixing low-level wastes of different concentrations, primarily Class B or C with Class A. It does not involve mixing radioactive waste with non-radioactive waste, a practice known as "dilution." And it does not imply release of radioactive material to the general environment, either to municipal non-radioactive waste disposal sites or to consumer products. Blended wastes remain low-level waste and must be disposed in a licensed low-level waste disposal facility.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is seeking public comment on issues associated with blending of low-level radioactive waste and is planning public meetings to discuss blending in Rockville, Md. The issue of blending low-level radioactive waste has received increased attention from the nuclear industry since the 2008 closing of the Barnwell, S.C., low-level waste disposal site. This action left waste generators in 36 states with no disposal options for Class B and Class C wastes, the two classes of low-level waste with higher radioactivity. Blending in some cases can lower the classification of the wastes to the lower-radioactivity Class A, which has available disposal capacity, by reducing the concentration of radionuclides. Blending refers to mixing low-level wastes of different concentrations, primarily Class B or C with Class A. It does not involve mixing radioactive waste with non-radioactive waste, a practice known as "dilution." And it does not imply release of radioactive material to the general environment, either to municipal non-radioactive waste disposal sites or to consumer products. Blended wastes remain low-level waste and must be disposed in a licensed low-level waste disposal facility.

The U.S. Forest Service is developing an environmental cleanup plan for the San Mateo Uranium Mine under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The site is located on the Mount Taylor Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest, Cibola County, approximately 12 miles northeast of Grants. * The Forest Service prepared an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) to identify and evaluate several cleanup alternatives to address the waste rock piles associated with past uranium mining. The recommended cleanup alternative is to consolidate the waste rock piles and place them in an on-site repository. A geomembrane would be placed above the waste rock in the repository and would be covered with clean soil, re-vegetated, and armored with rock. Rock armoring would reduce the potential for erosion during heavy storm events and reduce the potential risk of exposure to gamma radiation and direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of waste rock. The agency is requesting public input and comments on the EE/CA and the recommended cleanup alternative. The EE/CA and the Administrative Record are available for review at the Southwestern Regional Office in Albuquerque and the Mount Taylor Ranger District Office, 1800 Lobo Canyon Rd., in Grants and also available at the following link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/cibola/projects/index.shtml.

The U.S. Forest Service is developing an environmental cleanup plan for the San Mateo Uranium Mine under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The site is located on the Mount Taylor Ranger District of the Cibola National Forest, Cibola County, approximately 12 miles northeast of Grants. * The Forest Service prepared an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) to identify and evaluate several cleanup alternatives to address the waste rock piles associated with past uranium mining. The recommended cleanup alternative is to consolidate the waste rock piles and place them in an on-site repository. A geomembrane would be placed above the waste rock in the repository and would be covered with clean soil, re-vegetated, and armored with rock. Rock armoring would reduce the potential for erosion during heavy storm events and reduce the potential risk of exposure to gamma radiation and direct contact, inhalation, or ingestion of waste rock. The agency is requesting public input and comments on the EE/CA and the recommended cleanup alternative. The EE/CA and the Administrative Record are available for review at the Southwestern Regional Office in Albuquerque and the Mount Taylor Ranger District Office, 1800 Lobo Canyon Rd., in Grants and also available at the following link: http://www.fs.fed.us/r3/cibola/projects/index.shtml.

"The following is a statement made by Robert A. McConnell, co-founder of the U.S. Ukraine Foundation, on April 21 before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing on stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. Chairman [Howard] Berman, ranking member [Ileana] Ros-Lehtinen and distinguished members of the committee: As the committee looks at the very important issue of nuclear weapons, their proliferation and the potential of their use by terrorists, as well as reviewing the results of the April 12-13 nuclear security summit, I offer comments and a historical perspective related to one country most in the news during the summit: Ukraine. I do not speak for Ukraine or for anyone in Ukraine, however, as you are aware, I am one of the founders of the Washington, D.C.-based U.S.-Ukraine Foundation [a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit organization that hopes to build peace and prosperity in Ukraine through democratic values] that, having established an office in Kyiv in 1990, is among a select few with an American presence in Ukraine since before independence. Therefore, I speak for myself and my comments are based upon personal knowledge gained from trips to Ukraine made before we opened our office there, meetings with Ukrainian government officials that began before independence, hundreds of hours spent with the leadership of Rukh (the "Movement" that was established in 1989 and was a fundamental catalyst to Ukraine's drive for independence), as well as having participated in numerous meetings between officials of the Ukrainian government and officials of our own government in the early 1990s and since."

"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is holding the public meeting to get comments regarding any environmental issues the agency should consider as the addition to Duke Energy's site plan is reviewed. The public will have a chance on June 17 to express concerns over plans to build a pond and dam to provide a back-up water source in case of prolonged drought at the proposed Lee nuclear facility near Gaffney. Duke applied in late 2007 to build and operate two AP1000 reactors at the site and updated the application last September with plans to create an additional water source called Make-Up Pond C, to support the proposed reactors. The NRC is seeking comments specifically regarding the environmental issues associated with creating the pond, said Roger Hannah, an NRC spokesman."

"With regard to our energy independence, the BP oil disaster should be a call to action. Everyone knows we are dependent on fossil fuels coming from foreign sources yet; no one to date has the will to do anything serious and credible about it. Nuclear energy is the Holy Grail of clean, safe and affordable energy that America can produce and exploit without detriment to the environment. I recently had the pleasure of meeting Glen L. Mc Cullough, Jr., the former chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Glen wrote a terrific paper entitled, "Five Smart Energy Steps for America." This is what Glen said with regard to nuclear power:"

"If we take seriously the protection of human health, we have to phase out coal- and nuclear-powered electricity. Coal kills hundreds of Ontarians and triggers more than 100,000 illnesses (e.g., asthma attacks) annually. It is also the most climate-destructive fuel around, emitting twice as much carbon as natural gas does. Whether the issue is respiratory disease or global warming, coal is a catastrophe. But nuclear is extremely unhealthy as well. A scientific review by the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment found all functioning reactors release radioactive materials on a routine basis. A 2008 German government study showed children (younger than five) living within five kilometres of a nuclear plant are at elevated risk for leukemia. And Scientific American recently reported nukes harm the climate: "Nuclear power results in up to 25 times more carbon emissions than wind energy, when reactor construction and uranium refining and transport are considered.""

"Paul Spence says the nuclear industry expects to pay the full cost of decommissioning a new generation of nuclear power stations (Response, 15 June). But his words about "our full share of waste management and disposal costs" were carefully chosen. The consultation document reveals that EDF considers their full share of these costs to be around 20% of the total. As our report Nuclear Power? No Point! highlighted last year, nuclear is only responsible for 4% of the energy consumed in the UK. More energy can be saved by energy conservation measures in homes and businesses. Focusing on the nuclear industry takes resources away from building new renewable capacity, which, given sufficient political will, could provide more than enough electricity for the UK. Darren Johnson Green party spokesperson on Trade and Industry * EDF's claim that they "have not asked for subsidy for new nuclear" is not all that it seems. The nuclear industry, owned by British Energy (in turn owned by EDF), will be receiving huge sums of windfall profits under government proposals for a floor price on carbon emission allowances. British Energy will greatly expand its profits for no increase in nuclear power production, all subsidised by electricity consumers."

"Belarus seems to be finding it increasingly hard to sell its nuclear energy plans to European nations, both near and far. This time, Minsk's desire to build a nuclear power plant (NPP) close to the Lithuanian border was thwarted by vigorous objections from Austria: representatives of Austrian NGOs and federal authorities expressed a strong disapproval of Belarus's intent at a hearing in Vienna in mid-May. Hearings similar to the one that took place in Vienna have previously been held in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius and Kiev, the Ukrainian capital. Ever since it first brought up the subject of building a nuclear power plant to a controversial Russian project, Belarus has been finding itself more and more hard-pressed to convince its neighbours that they have nothing to fear from the future site. For its location, Belarus has settled on the town of Ostrovets, in Grodno Region, just 23 kilometres off the Lithuanian border, and Lithuania has already made its position known, both as a matter of public opinion and on a state level: No, thank you, Minsk."

"Nearly three-quarters of opinion formers in Britain think the government should either scrap the country's nuclear weapons or look for a cheaper alternative, according to a poll published on Tuesday. Just under a third of business leaders, politicians, academics and journalists polled by YouGov for the Chatham House think tank said Britain should abandon its nuclear deterrent after it expires in 2024. This is higher than a fifth of ordinary voters polled by YouGov who want to scrap it. The replacement of Britain's submarine-launched Trident missile system is expected to cost at least 20 billion pounds, a sum critics say is unthinkable at a time of drastic spending cuts pushed by Prime Minister David Cameron."

"We are now confronting the problems of nuclear power - the waste generated and the radioactivity of the reactor generators that need to be "decommissioned." Bruce Power will pay Studsvik $1 million for each of the planned 17 generators to be "cleansed" in Sweden. Normally an intelligent country, Sweden is embarking on a process that will harm its workers and proliferate the material throughout its industries. Of course the ship may not run into trouble on its journey through the Great Lakes and across the Atlantic. Retrieving the behemoth from the bottom of the Atlantic would be difficult. It would probably be left there along with the sunken nuclear submarines corroding away."

Proposal to increase nuke waste capacity in Nevada makes a bad idea worse On Tuesday the Energy Department asked Congress to pass legislation so the proposed high-level nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain could be built to handle far more of the deadly radioactive material than was intended when the site was first selected for study, in 1987. Congress had set a limit of 70,000 metric tons of waste for the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas but the department said in its report that Yucca Mountain "can be expanded to accommodate three times, or more, the current statutory limit." That is based on past studies that have suggested the dump, which is now proposed to encompass 1,250 acres, could be expanded to cover as much as 4,200 acres.

Way back in August of 2007, Barack Obama having declared he was a candidate for the Presidency of the United States, some "reporter" asked him whether he would be willing to use nuclear weapons, either in the War on Terror or to prevent "nuclear proliferation" by those dirty Mullahs. To the absolute delight of (a) Dubya the Dimwit, (b) Bomb-Bomb-Iran McCain and (c) Hillary the Chicken-Hawk, candidate Obama replied; "I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance - involving civilians. Let me scratch that. There's been no discussion of [using] nuclear weapons. That's not on the table."