Group items tagged

Record of Decision and Floodplain Statement of Findings--Nevada Rail Alignment for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, NV AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy. ACTION: Record of Decision. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In July 2008, the Department of Energy (Department or DOE) issued the ``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High- Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada--Nevada Rail Transportation Corridor'' (DOE/EIS-0250F-S2) (hereafter referred to as the final Nevada Rail Corridor SEIS), the ``Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Rail Alignment for the Construction and Operation of a Railroad in Nevada to a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada'' (DOE/EIS-0369) (hereafter referred to as the final Rail Alignment EIS), and the ``Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada'' (DOE/EIS-0250F-S1) (hereafter referred to as the final Repository SEIS). The final Nevada Rail Corridor SEIS analyzed the potential impacts of constructing and operating a railroad for shipments of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and other materials in the Mina corridor, and DOE concluded that the Mina corridor warranted further analysis at the alignment level. This further, more detailed analysis is presented in the final Rail Alignment EIS, which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating a railroad along rail alignments in both the Caliente and Mina rail corridors. The final Rail Alignment EIS also analyzed the potential environmental impacts from shipments of general freight (also referred to as common carriage

The World Health Organization has slashed the safety limits of radon to a tenth of its current level, noting that the naturally occurring radioactive gas causes up to 14 percent of lung cancer cases. "In view of the latest scientific data, WHO proposes a reference level of 100 becquerels per metric cube to minimize health hazards due to indoor radon exposure," said the UN health agency in a report published this week. "However, if this level cannot be reached under the prevailing country-specific conditions, the chosen reference level should not exceed 300 becquerels per metric cube," it added. Becquerel is a measuring unit for radioactivity and reference levels represents the maximum accepted radon concentration in a residential dwelling. A previous WHO report published in 1996 had fixed the reference level at 1,000 becquerels per cubic metre. After smoking, radon is the second biggest cause of lung cancer, killing tens of thousands of people a year, said the WHO.

Jason Kish's November 21 letter misses the point I made about Potassium Iodide (KI) pills. I wasn't referring to the effectiveness of KI pills protecting the thyroid gland from a concentration of radioactive iodine released in a nuclear plant disaster. The myth I referred to is the false assumption made by many that KI pills are the magic protector in the event of an accident or terrorist attack at Limerick Nuclear Plant, when in reality, KI pills would only protect one gland from one radionuclide. That inaccurate assumption is made because when handing out KI pills, the public is not provided with full disclosure of all the radionuclides that would be released in a nuclear disaster, for which KI pills will not protect us. It's time to tell the whole truth .

Jason Kish's November 21 letter misses the point I made about Potassium Iodide (KI) pills. I wasn't referring to the effectiveness of KI pills protecting the thyroid gland from a concentration of radioactive iodine released in a nuclear plant disaster. The myth I referred to is the false assumption made by many that KI pills are the magic protector in the event of an accident or terrorist attack at Limerick Nuclear Plant, when in reality, KI pills would only protect one gland from one radionuclide. That inaccurate assumption is made because when handing out KI pills, the public is not provided with full disclosure of all the radionuclides that would be released in a nuclear disaster, for which KI pills will not protect us. It's time to tell the whole truth .

Draft SWEIS Dear Interested Party Letter Summary Table of Contents and Front Matter Chapter 1: Introduction and Purpose and Need for Action Chapter 2: Operations Overview of Y-12 National Security Complex Chapter 3: Alternatives Chapter 4: Affected Environment Chapter 5: Environmental Consequences Chapter 6: Cumulative Impacts Chapter 7: Regulatory Requirements Chapter 8: Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity Chapter 9: Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Chapter 10: References Chapter 11: Glossary Chapter 12: List of Preparers and Contributors Chapter 13: Index Chapter 14: Distribution List Appendix A: Y-12 Planning Process and Facility Information Appendix B: Notice of Intent Appendix C: Consultation Letters and Biological Assessment Appendix D: Human Health and Accidents Appendix E: Impact Methodology Appendix F: NEPA Disclosure Statement for Preparation of the Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Y-12 National Security Complex Reference Materials

Draft SWEIS Dear Interested Party Letter Summary Table of Contents and Front Matter Chapter 1: Introduction and Purpose and Need for Action Chapter 2: Operations Overview of Y-12 National Security Complex Chapter 3: Alternatives Chapter 4: Affected Environment Chapter 5: Environmental Consequences Chapter 6: Cumulative Impacts Chapter 7: Regulatory Requirements Chapter 8: Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity Chapter 9: Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Chapter 10: References Chapter 11: Glossary Chapter 12: List of Preparers and Contributors Chapter 13: Index Chapter 14: Distribution List Appendix A: Y-12 Planning Process and Facility Information Appendix B: Notice of Intent Appendix C: Consultation Letters and Biological Assessment Appendix D: Human Health and Accidents Appendix E: Impact Methodology Appendix F: NEPA Disclosure Statement for Preparation of the Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Y-12 National Security Complex Reference Materials

Southern Co.'s Plant Vogtle in Burke County has moved into position to become the demonstration site for the federal licensing process required of all nuclear power plants with the new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. Previously, the Tennessee Valley Authority's Bellefonte site was to be what the Nuclear Regulatory Commission refers to as the "reference site," from which other companies applying for "combined operating license" permits could duplicate documentation already approved by the NRC.

Notice of Availability of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of availability. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center (DOE/EIS-0226-D [Revised]) (referred to as the ``Draft Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship EIS'' or ``Draft EIS''). This Draft EIS revises the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Completion of the West Valley Demonstration Project and Closure or Long-Term Management of Facilities at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center (DOE/EIS-0226-D) issued for public comment in January 1996 (referred to as the ``1996 Cleanup and Closure Draft EIS'').

A meeting of the Department of Energy's Site Specific Advisory Board for clean up and reuse of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Piketon brought forth a tug of war. Much like the Huntington downtown Superblock which lay fallow for nearly 30 years, uses for the contaminated site break down to two camps: Clean up the radioactive waste that still kills former workers versus possibly attracting a so-called new nuclear plant that would allegedly be safe. The latter would bring jobs to an area starving for employment. But, many nearby residents do not trust the statements that a 'new' nuclear plant would not continue the odyssey of cover ups since the former facility opened during the Cold War in the 1950s. However, after an elaborate news conference in the summer of 2009, the project dropped off the radar. Activist and former Piketon employee Vina Colley, referred to past contamination as a reason to avoid nuclear power. "All of their drains and laundry [water] where they washed contaminated clothes and [water from] equipment washed off went into the local creeks, which emptied into the Scioto River, then filtered to the Ohio and down to the Mississippi. We're not the only ones affected. The whole world is affected by what these nuclear facilities are producing and releasing into the environment."

A meeting of the Department of Energy's Site Specific Advisory Board for clean up and reuse of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Piketon brought forth a tug of war. Much like the Huntington downtown Superblock which lay fallow for nearly 30 years, uses for the contaminated site break down to two camps: Clean up the radioactive waste that still kills former workers versus possibly attracting a so-called new nuclear plant that would allegedly be safe. The latter would bring jobs to an area starving for employment. But, many nearby residents do not trust the statements that a 'new' nuclear plant would not continue the odyssey of cover ups since the former facility opened during the Cold War in the 1950s. However, after an elaborate news conference in the summer of 2009, the project dropped off the radar. Activist and former Piketon employee Vina Colley, referred to past contamination as a reason to avoid nuclear power. "All of their drains and laundry [water] where they washed contaminated clothes and [water from] equipment washed off went into the local creeks, which emptied into the Scioto River, then filtered to the Ohio and down to the Mississippi. We're not the only ones affected. The whole world is affected by what these nuclear facilities are producing and releasing into the environment."

A meeting of the Department of Energy's Site Specific Advisory Board for clean up and reuse of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Piketon brought forth a tug of war. Much like the Huntington downtown Superblock which lay fallow for nearly 30 years, uses for the contaminated site break down to two camps: Clean up the radioactive waste that still kills former workers versus possibly attracting a so-called new nuclear plant that would allegedly be safe. The latter would bring jobs to an area starving for employment. But, many nearby residents do not trust the statements that a 'new' nuclear plant would not continue the odyssey of cover ups since the former facility opened during the Cold War in the 1950s. However, after an elaborate news conference in the summer of 2009, the project dropped off the radar. Activist and former Piketon employee Vina Colley, referred to past contamination as a reason to avoid nuclear power. "All of their drains and laundry [water] where they washed contaminated clothes and [water from] equipment washed off went into the local creeks, which emptied into the Scioto River, then filtered to the Ohio and down to the Mississippi. We're not the only ones affected. The whole world is affected by what these nuclear facilities are producing and releasing into the environment."

On September 20th 2008 the Uranium Action Day is announced. One year after the big Uranium Conference in Germany it is planned to do activities in many places in different countries to refer to the bad consequences of uranium mining and the dangers of transport of such material.

Chernobyl. Three Mile Island. Yucca Mountain. When faced with covering the complex and frequently disputed issues of the nuclear age, a reporter knows there is nothing simple about preparing an accurate, balanced, objective, and responsible story about the benefits and risks of radiation and radioactivity. Writers and editors (not to mention libaries, activists, government regulators, and the nuclear industry itself) now have a guide to help them report on these issues: The Reporter's Handbook on Nuclear Materials, Energy, and Waste Management by Michael R. Greenberg, Bernadette M. West, Karen W. Lowrie, and Henry J. Mayer recently published by Vanderbilt University Press). An essential reference, this book presents scientifically accurate and accessible overviews of twenty-four of the most important issues in the nuclear realm, including health effects, nuclear medicine, transport of nuclear materials, spent fuel, nuclear weapons, and global warming. Each "brief" is based on interviews with named scientists, engineers, or administrators in a nuclear specialty, and each has been reviewed by a team of independent experts.

""If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there," the Cheshire Cat said in Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland." The inscrutable feline might have been referring to the tortuous path of U.S. nuclear energy policy over the past 30 years. Unsurprisingly, President Obama has been equally ambiguous in his recent dealings with the nuclear industry. On Tuesday, the president announced with great fanfare loan guarantees worth $8.3 billion for new reactors in Georgia. The act ostensibly makes good on his recent State of the Union pledge to renew federal support for nuclear power as one component in the drive toward national energy independence."

The Project On Government Oversight has obtained hundreds of pages of internal NRC documents from an NRC Inspector General investigation into then-Commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield. The documents outline, among other things, how he disregarded advice from NRC's General Counsel and voted on two matters that "could have potentially" financially benefitted three companies-Shaw Group, Westinghouse, and General Electric-during the time he was directly involved in employment negotiations with those companies. The IG investigation found that in the two months before accepting a job created for him at the Shaw Group, Commissioner Merrifield voted both to approve China's purchase of AP 1000 reactors (in which the Shaw Group had a financial interest) and to change criteria of emergency cooling systems that would directly benefit Westinghouse (of which the Shaw Group owned a 20 percent interest). The IG referred the case to the Department of Justice.

The Project On Government Oversight has obtained hundreds of pages of internal NRC documents from an NRC Inspector General investigation into then-Commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield. The documents outline, among other things, how he disregarded advice from NRC's General Counsel and voted on two matters that "could have potentially" financially benefitted three companies-Shaw Group, Westinghouse, and General Electric-during the time he was directly involved in employment negotiations with those companies. The IG investigation found that in the two months before accepting a job created for him at the Shaw Group, Commissioner Merrifield voted both to approve China's purchase of AP 1000 reactors (in which the Shaw Group had a financial interest) and to change criteria of emergency cooling systems that would directly benefit Westinghouse (of which the Shaw Group owned a 20 percent interest). The IG referred the case to the Department of Justice.

On July 16, 1945, the world's first nuclear device was tested at a remote location in New Mexico, the Alamogordo Test Range, the Jornada del Muerto (Journey of Death). The word "bomb" was never used. Instead, it was referred to as the "gadget" or the "thing." The Manhattan Project was named after the Manhattan Engineer District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, where most of the early research was conducted. While more than 30 research and production sites were used, the bulk of the Manhattan Project was secretly conducted in Hanford, Wash,, Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Los Alamos, N.M.

On July 16, 1945, the world's first nuclear device was tested at a remote location in New Mexico, the Alamogordo Test Range, the Jornada del Muerto (Journey of Death). The word "bomb" was never used. Instead, it was referred to as the "gadget" or the "thing." The Manhattan Project was named after the Manhattan Engineer District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, where most of the early research was conducted. While more than 30 research and production sites were used, the bulk of the Manhattan Project was secretly conducted in Hanford, Wash,, Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Los Alamos, N.M.

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.

Incidences of cancer, deformed babies and other health problems have risen sharply, Iraqi officials say, and many suspect contamination from weapons used in years of war and accompanying unchecked pollution as a cause. "We have seen new kinds of cancer that were not recorded in Iraq before war in 2003, types of fibrous (soft tissue) cancer and bone cancer. These refer clearly to radiation as a cause," said Jawad al-Ali, an oncologist in Iraq's second city of Basra. In the city of Falluja in western Iraq, scene of two of the fiercest battles between U.S. troops and insurgents after the 2003 U.S. invasion, a spike in the number of births of stillborn, deformed and paralyzed babies has alarmed doctors.

Incidences of cancer, deformed babies and other health problems have risen sharply, Iraqi officials say, and many suspect contamination from weapons used in years of war and accompanying unchecked pollution as a cause. "We have seen new kinds of cancer that were not recorded in Iraq before war in 2003, types of fibrous (soft tissue) cancer and bone cancer. These refer clearly to radiation as a cause," said Jawad al-Ali, an oncologist in Iraq's second city of Basra. In the city of Falluja in western Iraq, scene of two of the fiercest battles between U.S. troops and insurgents after the 2003 U.S. invasion, a spike in the number of births of stillborn, deformed and paralyzed babies has alarmed doctors.

An estimated 3,000 people have joined a march in French Polynesia to demonstrate against the new French law to compensate nuclear weapons test victims, saying it doesn't go far enough. The march in Papeete had been organised by test veterans, the Maohi Protestant church and the pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira Party of Oscar Temaru. The demonstration coincided with a visit to the territory of a French defence ministry delegation, which excluded the minister after he decided to pull out the day before he was due to leave Paris. The marchers claim that the compensation law, which is to be voted on in Paris this week, is too restrictive as it only considers the fallout in parts of the territory and excludes a reference to the environment.

An estimated 3,000 people have joined a march in French Polynesia to demonstrate against the new French law to compensate nuclear weapons test victims, saying it doesn't go far enough. The march in Papeete had been organised by test veterans, the Maohi Protestant church and the pro-independence Tavini Huiraatira Party of Oscar Temaru. The demonstration coincided with a visit to the territory of a French defence ministry delegation, which excluded the minister after he decided to pull out the day before he was due to leave Paris. The marchers claim that the compensation law, which is to be voted on in Paris this week, is too restrictive as it only considers the fallout in parts of the territory and excludes a reference to the environment.

On October 29, ELI will hold the principal policy event of its 40th anniversary year, the ELI-Miriam Hamilton Keare Policy Forum. The topic this year will explore whether expanded use of nuclear power and coal is inevitable in our climate-constrained future, and if so, how best to manage them. This issue has gained greater salience in recent years, as advances in technology promise a new generation of safer nuclear reactors and the possibility of sequestering coal emissions. In 2007, Sir Patrick Moore, the founder of Greenpeace, proclaimed that nuclear power is essential to combating climate change. Producers of coal maintain that it is impossible to ignore the most-abundant fossil fuel -- and that it can compete with lower-carbon energy sources. The Hon. Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, will be among the panelists participating in the Forum. Representing an entirely different viewpoint, Wellinghoff once told reporters, "we may not need any, ever," referring to new coal and nuclear power plants. State regulators, meanwhile, are responsible to ratepayers and pollution control mandates. Environmental organizations have mostly opposed expanded use of both energy sources, but that opinion is by no means monolithic.

On October 29, ELI will hold the principal policy event of its 40th anniversary year, the ELI-Miriam Hamilton Keare Policy Forum. The topic this year will explore whether expanded use of nuclear power and coal is inevitable in our climate-constrained future, and if so, how best to manage them. This issue has gained greater salience in recent years, as advances in technology promise a new generation of safer nuclear reactors and the possibility of sequestering coal emissions. In 2007, Sir Patrick Moore, the founder of Greenpeace, proclaimed that nuclear power is essential to combating climate change. Producers of coal maintain that it is impossible to ignore the most-abundant fossil fuel -- and that it can compete with lower-carbon energy sources. The Hon. Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, will be among the panelists participating in the Forum. Representing an entirely different viewpoint, Wellinghoff once told reporters, "we may not need any, ever," referring to new coal and nuclear power plants. State regulators, meanwhile, are responsible to ratepayers and pollution control mandates. Environmental organizations have mostly opposed expanded use of both energy sources, but that opinion is by no means monolithic.

IN Jonathan Leake's article ("Britain 'must go nuclear' to control climate", News, last week) Professor David MacKay cites Sizewell B as a model to follow. But it took 13 years to build and cost taxpayers the equivalent of £4 billion. Hardly a glowing reference. What's more, if the nuclear industry's track record is anything to go by, MacKay is whistling in the wind if he thinks it is possible to build the number of reactors he suggests in time to do anything to save the climate. The government of Ontario was recently quoted almost £14 billion for two reactors.

IN Jonathan Leake's article ("Britain 'must go nuclear' to control climate", News, last week) Professor David MacKay cites Sizewell B as a model to follow. But it took 13 years to build and cost taxpayers the equivalent of £4 billion. Hardly a glowing reference. What's more, if the nuclear industry's track record is anything to go by, MacKay is whistling in the wind if he thinks it is possible to build the number of reactors he suggests in time to do anything to save the climate. The government of Ontario was recently quoted almost £14 billion for two reactors.

Noting that there is not going to be a magic cure for Pakistan's ailing energy sector, the Obama Administration has said the US is looking to transform energy economy of the country. However, it made no reference to the nuclear energy as one of the option to bail out Pakistan from its deepening energy crisis. Following the US-India civilian nuclear deal last year, Pakistan has been asking for a similar agreement with the US, but America has been resisting from it, given the concerns it has about Islamabad's past record with regard to nuclear proliferation, in particular the A Q Khan network.

Noting that there is not going to be a magic cure for Pakistan's ailing energy sector, the Obama Administration has said the US is looking to transform energy economy of the country. However, it made no reference to the nuclear energy as one of the option to bail out Pakistan from its deepening energy crisis. Following the US-India civilian nuclear deal last year, Pakistan has been asking for a similar agreement with the US, but America has been resisting from it, given the concerns it has about Islamabad's past record with regard to nuclear proliferation, in particular the A Q Khan network.

Splurge till you drop. Ask and you won't get. Nearly a century after King Chulalongkorn's departure, which is being commemorated nationwide today, our kingdom has been effectively split into two countries. The divide goes deeper than the confrontations between the Democrats versus Puea Thai, Prem versus Chavalit/ Thaksin, yellow versus red, or even between Siam and Patani.. Here I am referring to a Thai-land-of-wastefulness, and on the other hand folks have to fight tooth and nail for years before they receive a single satang of compensation from the powers that be. And even then they may still be accused of being too greedy.

Splurge till you drop. Ask and you won't get. Nearly a century after King Chulalongkorn's departure, which is being commemorated nationwide today, our kingdom has been effectively split into two countries. The divide goes deeper than the confrontations between the Democrats versus Puea Thai, Prem versus Chavalit/ Thaksin, yellow versus red, or even between Siam and Patani.. Here I am referring to a Thai-land-of-wastefulness, and on the other hand folks have to fight tooth and nail for years before they receive a single satang of compensation from the powers that be. And even then they may still be accused of being too greedy.

Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone. I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this important conference. The concept of managing risk to avoid adverse consequences has been with us since the first human beings appeared on the planet. Over time, the application of the principles of risk management to ever broader fields of activity has been constant and is still expanding. Some view this as progress and others as the unwelcome price we have to pay for the increasing complexity of our existence. In the regulatory field, the concept of risk as a management tool is relatively recent. At the NRC, it was not until 1995 that the Commission issued a policy statement that encouraged the application of probabilistic risk assessment "as an extension and enhancement of traditional regulation." As a regulator and based on the agency's experience over the last two decades, I strongly support the use of risk analysis as a means to focus on the events and activities that pose the greatest risks to public health and safety and to ease unnecessary burdens on licensees. I believe we have come a long way since 1995. I also believe, however, that we can and should expand the systematic use of risk analysis to areas where, up to now, it has been used intermittently. I am referring here to the security arena. This will be a difficult task, however, and will require the concerted effort of the NRC and the industry to carry it out.

Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone. I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this important conference. The concept of managing risk to avoid adverse consequences has been with us since the first human beings appeared on the planet. Over time, the application of the principles of risk management to ever broader fields of activity has been constant and is still expanding. Some view this as progress and others as the unwelcome price we have to pay for the increasing complexity of our existence. In the regulatory field, the concept of risk as a management tool is relatively recent. At the NRC, it was not until 1995 that the Commission issued a policy statement that encouraged the application of probabilistic risk assessment "as an extension and enhancement of traditional regulation." As a regulator and based on the agency's experience over the last two decades, I strongly support the use of risk analysis as a means to focus on the events and activities that pose the greatest risks to public health and safety and to ease unnecessary burdens on licensees. I believe we have come a long way since 1995. I also believe, however, that we can and should expand the systematic use of risk analysis to areas where, up to now, it has been used intermittently. I am referring here to the security arena. This will be a difficult task, however, and will require the concerted effort of the NRC and the industry to carry it out.