[ RadSafe ] If they really want a SNF repository...

Steven Dapra sjd at swcp.com
Thu Sep 23 19:01:51 CDT 2010

Sept. 23

         "P" or "N" could be decided by a majority vote of the 
residents within (perhaps) ten miles of the proposed site.  This is 
assuming that the geology and hydrology and general physical 
requirements of the proposed site were suitable, such as suitable 
roads, or the cooperation of the local taxpayers in financing 
construction of roads.  The same would go for a railhead.

Steven Dapra

At 05:07 PM 9/22/2010, you wrote:
>And who would decide if we should have a "P" or an "N"?
>John R Johnson, PhD
>4535 West 9th Ave
>Vancouver, B. C.
>V6R 2E2, Canada
>idias at interchange.ubc.ca
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Dapra" <sjd at swcp.com>
>To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
>List" <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 3:53 PM
>Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] If they really want a SNF repository...
>>Sept. 22
>>         Instead of namby pamby, we need a PIMBY with no NIMBY.
>>Steven Dapra
>>At 10:47 AM 9/22/2010, you [Mike Brennan] wrote:
>>>If the Government REALLY wanted a repository, all they would have 
>>>to do is give the minimum physical requirements, and state that 
>>>residence of the host county would be exempted from Federal income 
>>>tax, starting when SNF started arriving, but that income tax would 
>>>be back in effect at any time that shipments were stopped due to 
>>>legal actions, etc.
>>>I suspect it would create a PIMBY (Please In My Back Yard) movement.

More information about the RadSafe mailing list