[ RadSafe ] Editorial: (Nuclear) Waste Matters

Wed Jun 7 13:27:13 CDT 2006

Dr. Long,
Is it possible these new plants are not even in this
country?  What party brought this development?  If
they are in China, it is the Communist Party.

I am sorry to hear the facts are not important to you.

--- howard long <hflong at pacbell.net> wrote:

> Brent,
>   Twelve, expanded from just 2 applicants for
> NPReactors, was stated in either a WSJ article or
> Fox News just a couple of weeks ago. I don't
> remember the specific reference. Hopefully, someone
> here will have a better source, perhaps from the
> DOE, which should have it.
>    Howard
> 
> Rogers Brent <Brent.Rogers at environment.nsw.gov.au>
> wrote:
>   Howard,
> 
> I must've missed the story that told of these 12
> applicants. Could you
> provide a source, please?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Brent Rogers
> Manager Radiation Operations Unit
> NSW Environment Protection Authority
> Department of Environment and Conservation
> *+61 2 9995 5986
> *+61 2 9995 6603
> * PO Box A290 Sydney South 1232
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: howard long [mailto:hflong at pacbell.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 June 2006 10:28 AM
> To: John Jacobus; RADSAFE
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Editorial: (Nuclear) Waste
> Matters
> 
> 
> I do. There is a rebirth of freedom, as in the now
> 12 applicants for nuclear
> power reactors. Vote tomorrow for the party that has
> brought it.
> 
> Howard Long
> 
> John Jacobus wrote:
> Dr. Long, 
> I suggest that you contact your government
> representatives if you think that reprocessing
> should
> be considered. This is an old issue that has been
> discussed many times on this e-mail list and others.
> 
> --- howard long wrote:
> 
> > Yes, Jaro. This explains why only the most
> > government-controlled option is discussed by the
> > "government appointed Committee -". On-site
> storage
> > and reprocessing managed more by the utilities
> than
> > DOE, since it would not involving interstate
> > commerce, could eliminate thousands of federal
> jobs
> > averaging $103 K/y vs $57 K/y for private equal
> > work.
> > 
> > Cynically, Howard Long
> > 
> > Jaro wrote:
> > Howard,
> > 
> > Does the following answer your question ?
> > 
> > Jaro
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > 
> > 
> > NUCLEAR NEWS FLASHES - Tuesday, May 16, 2006
> > US NEWS:
> > --MOVEMENT OF SPENT FUEL IN THE US COULD BE
> FURTHER
> > DELAYED, according to
> > Senator Pete Domenici, the New Mexico Republican
> who
> > chairs the Energy and
> > Natural Resources Committee. Domenici indicated
> > during a status hearing on
> > DOE's
> > repository program at Yucca Mountain, Nevada that
> it
> > was unrealistic to
> > proceed
> > with a status-quo repository project and later
> > factor in spent fuel
> > reprocessing
> > waste and recycling activities associated with
> DOE's
> > new fuel-cycle
> > initiative,
> > the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership.
> > It ought to be pretty clear to everyone that spent
> > fuel rods won't be put
> > into Yucca Mountain, Domenici said in an
> > apparent reference to GNEP, which is aimed, in
> part,
> > at closing the nuclear
> > fuel cycle in the US and abroad.
> > Recycling will determine what kind of repository
> the
> > US needs, he added.
> > "It's a mess," Domenici said, of the Yucca
> Mountain
> > program as reporters
> > approached him after the hearing. He said that he
> > believes any legislation
> > on Yucca Mountain would have to include language
> on
> > spent fuel recycling.
> > Draft legislation DOE sent to Congress last month
> > did not include language
> > on spent fuel reprocessing.
> > 
> > --DOE MUST MAKE "VISIBLE AND MEASURABLE PROGRESS"
> IN
> > IMPLEMENTING a national
> > spent fuel management program, Nuclear Energy
> > Institute President and Chief
> > Executive Officer Frank "Skip" Bowman said today
> in
> > written testimony NEI
> > submitted to the Senate Energy and Natural
> Resources
> > Committee. He added
> > that
> > DOE must address several issues to provide
> > stability, clarity, and
> > predictability to its spent fuel policy. According
> > to Bowman, industry
> > priorities for the program include: DOE should
> move
> > spent fuel to a secure
> > federal facility as soon as possible; Congress
> > should codify its confidence
> > that
> > utility spent fuel can be safely managed; Congress
> > should lift the 70,000
> > metric
> > ton cap now placed on the disposal capacity of the
> > planned repository at
> > Yucca
> > Mountain, Nevada; DOE should be given direct
> access
> > to annual waste fee
> > receipts, now estimated at $750 million; and
> federal
> > licensing for a
> > repository should be streamlined.
> > 
> > --YEARS OF "REVOLVING-DOOR DOE OFFICIALS" AND
> > UNFILLED PROMISES to improve
> > management and control costs associated with the
> > vitrification plant being
> > built at DOE's Hanford site in Washington state
> have
> > led members of the
> > House
> > Appropriations Committee to the point where they
> no
> > longer have confidence
> > in
> > DOE, the Government Accountability Project
> asserted
> > today. The watchdog
> > group
> > pointed to a House Appropriations subcommittee's
> > push last week to make the
> > nuclear safety oversight of the facility NRC's
> > responsibility. The full
> > House
> > Appropriations Committee will take up the
> > subcommittee recommendation
> > Wednesday
> > when it marks up the energy funding bill for
> fiscal
> > 2007. The subcommittee
> > bill
> > would cut DOE spending on the vit plant to $90
> > million and would order DOE
> > to
> > halt construction of the facility until design
> work
> > is 90% complete.
> >
>
======================================================
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> > [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
> 
=== message truncated ===

+++++++++++++++++++
"You get a lot more authority when the workforce doesn't think it's amateur hour on the top floor."
GEN. MICHAEL V. HAYDEN, President Bush's nominee for C.I.A. director.

-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 