DOCSLIB.ORG

Consent Based Siting

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Consent Based Siting Consent Based Siting From: Christine Speed Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 6:26 PM To: Consent Based Siting Subject: Response to IPC Dear Dept. of Energy, I live in the 49th District of Congressman, Darrell Issa. Unfortunately, I am out of town and missed your presentation in San Juan Capistrano on June 22nd, but would still like to comment on the removal of nuclear waste from the San Onofre Nuclear Station. As you know, San Onofre sits right on the coast of San Clemente. Actually, it’s right on the BEACH— just like Fukushima Daiichi in Japan. San Onofre is on the other side of the Ring of Fire where such a lot of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions occur. I am in support of using the nuclear waste facility at Yucca Mountain. The federal government has spent millions of dollars studying this site and has employed some of the brightest, geologists to do so. These geologists have studied the site from every angle and concluded that its technical characteristics make it an optimally safe site. Their extensive report has been finalized for some time now. Storage of nuclear waste is a critical safety issue, safety that only the federal government can provide. Yet no action has been taken by Congress to permit Yucca Mountain to begin its life as a storage facility. Rather, Yucca Mountain has been treated like a political football— FOR YEARS while WE sit next door to 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste that are at total risk of catastrophic contamination the next time a tsunami or earthquake hits southern California. In other words, we are sitting on a nuclear time bomb just waiting to go off while Congress remains in paralysis. Such non responsive government is what makes citizens feel so helpless and then become so angry. Congress cares about terrorist uses of dirty bombs. What about this dirty bomb? Why is this one different? Please end the political obstruction of the Yucca Mountain repository. You have extensive geological science on your side. Use it. Mount an Executive Branch legislative offensive. March up to the Hill and make your case. Create some noise. Remind those Congressmen that southern California will see to it that every single obstructor will lose his job if San Onofre blows up while they were treating the threat of nuclear destruction like a cute political game— especially — when a totally safe site has been available for some time now and there is no scientific excuse for not using it. Thank you. Sincerely, Christine A. Speed Consent Based Siting From: William P Gloege Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 1:03 PM To: Consent Based Siting Subject: Simplify Dear DOE, Your idea for "Consent Based Siting of Waste" is a good one. But can you streamline the outreach for comments and for explaining the program? Who is your audience for this information? Who do you want to send comments? It better not be the public because they will quickly click away to something else on their busy schedule. Your site looks like something created by a government bureaucrat. How about asking for help from a good web designer, or somebody at Google. You know, someone who knows how to communicate with people. That's the place you should start with this worthy and badly-needed waste storage program. Please get busy ASAP. Thank you. William Gloege Californians for Green Nuclear Power Consent Based Siting From: Leif G Eriksson Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:56 AM To: Consent Based Siting Subject: Re: "Response to IPC" Attachments: Response to IPC-Rev1.-lge-30 June 2016.docx; WM2016-16010-FinalR1.pdf; WM2016 Presentation 16010-FinalR1.pptx Thank you for the permission to correct my initial IPC. Attached please find the revised version. Following are some of the edits I made: I listed the previously missing data source 4 (both the related 16010 paper and the presentation are attached). Listing it resulted in the previous data source 4 now being listed as data source 5. I condensed and included my initial response to question 4 in my updated response to question 3 and, instead, added a more appropriate response to question 4. I defined and replaced a couple of repeated terms/concepts with acronyms, e.g., DAP and S&D. Please let me know if you need any related clarification or additional information. Last, but perhaps not least, in response to one of your other e-mails with a response due by noon (EDT) today, I am relieved to be able to report that I received written permission from Waste Management Symposia LLC (WMS) yesterday for me and DOE to publish the five WMS papers and presentations listed in the attached IPC. Sincerely, Leif G. Eriksson Public Comment To Inform the Design of a Consent-Based Siting Process for Nuclear Waste Storage and Disposal Facilities” (IPC) TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN The December 23, 2015, Federal Register “Invitation for Public Comment To Inform the Design of a Consent-Based Siting Process for Nuclear Waste Storage and Disposal Facilities” (IPC), as well as the handout provided at the first related public meeting held in Washington, D.C. on March 10, 2016, solicited public responses on five “key” questions. Please find below responses to the aforementioned five questions from Leif G Eriksson, . The ensuing responses are based upon my active involvement in and monitoring of nuclear waste management programs in the USA and abroad since 1978 (resume available on request by e-mail to or by phone at . 1. “How can the Department ensure that the process for selecting a site is fair?” Put simply, it can’t, because the “Department” does not control the process. Case in point, since the enactment of the still applicable, but not enabled since FY2011, Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended in 1987 (NWPAA), both the Secretary of Energy and the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), have been controlled both financially and productively by one or more of the U.S. President, the U.S. Congress, the majority leaders of the U.S. Senate, and the majority leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives. The related results, or rather the globally-embarrassing lack thereof, are not conducive to instilling confidence in either the Secretary of Energy’s or the “Department’s” ability to be able to ensure a “fair” process in the future. With a peripheral glance beyond the current legal situation, as elaborated upon in e.g., the attached Waste Management (WM) 2013 [1], WM2015 [2 and 3], and 2016 [4 and 5] papers and the therein listed references, the new organizational Executive Branch structure for the siting and development (S&D) of future spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and other high- level radioactive waste (HLW) storage and disposal facilities unsuccessfully introduced hitherto in the U.S. Senate in 2013 (S.1240-IS) and 2015 (S.854-IS) to replace the Secretary of Energy’s responsibilities under the NWPA, i.e., the OCRWM, would exacerbate rather than decrease the political control and financial chokeholds imposed upon the DOE/OCRWM in the past. Page 1 of 4 - Rev. 1. (lge-05-Jul-16 2:19 PM) Public Comment To Inform the Design of a Consent-Based Siting Process for Nuclear Waste Storage and Disposal Facilities” (IPC) In summation, to imply or suggest that the “Department” would be able to ensure a fair process for the S&D of future storage and/or disposal facilities for SNF and HLW fails to account for the related historical record. 2. “What model and experience should the Department use in designing the process?” Put simply, “consent-based” is a qualitative term/concept lacking exactitude that accommodates a broad variety of amorphous interpretations. As elaborated upon in several of the attached WMS papers [1-5] and related slide presentations, the siting pre-process could be a never effort unless a measurable definition of “consent-based” is provided from the outset. One of several potential measurable- quantitative “consent-based” S&D models is described in a couple of the attached WMS papers and illustrated in the related slide presentations. With regard to relevant experience, as suggested by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) in 2011 and 2012, the voluntary-based S&D process for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) transuranic radioactive waste (TRUW) repository in New Mexico, USA, and the societally-equitable repository S&D process designed and re-designed in Sweden based upon LOCAL public opposition and continuous involvement, embody particularly-relevant experiences, as do their respective licensing processes and the related parties involved in them (please also see question 3 for additional information). Suffice it to also mention here that an acute experience issue in the USA is the continually diminishing availability of relevant domestic institutional subject-matter intellectual and hands-on professional resources. A large number of professionals involved during the past 30 years or longer in the S&D of deep geological disposal systems (repositories) for SNF and HLW (and TRUW) in the USA have retired or passed away. Furthermore, based upon the premise that valuable lessons can also be learned from failures, it should also be noted that the USA’s only candidate SNF/HLW repository since 1987 at the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada, which may be considered by many to represent a domestic antithesis to “consent- based” S&D, have been on hold since 2010 and its implementing organization, the OCRWM, was de-staffed in 2011. 3. Who should be involved in the process for selecting a site, and what is their role? As elaborated upon in several of the attached WMS papers and schematically illustrated in them and their related slide presentations, all interested parties residing legally in the USA should have the opportunity to access relevant information and expressed their respective opinion and Page 2 of 4 - Rev.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mf-$0.65 Hc$13.16
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 058 710 EM 009 437 AUTHOR Sachs, David Peter; Rubin, David Mark TITLE Mass Media and the Environment: Volume Two, The Environmental information Explosion: The Press Discovers the Environment. INSTITUTION Stanford Univ., Calif. Dept. of Communication..; Stanford Univ., Calif. School of Medicine. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE Sep 71 NOTE 322p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC$13.16 DESCRIPTORS *Ecology; Environmental Criteria; *Environmental Education; Environmental Research; *Information Dissemination; *Mass Media; *News Media; Newspapers; Radio; Social Responsibility; Television IDENTIFIERS *San Francisco Bay Area ABSTRACT In an interdisciplinary study the role of the news media in environmental problems is examined. A description of the environmental problems of the San Francisco Bay Area and of the many news media which serve this area introduces this second volume of the study. The dimensions of the information explosion in the Bay Area news media are documented in quantitative terms. The study identifies the groups in the Bay Area which can be expected to use the information offered by the news media and the implications of this for the press. The difficulties for the press in reporting environmental deterioration and the damage caused by "environmental" advertising are pointed out. The study also examined: the difficulties of gaining access to information about the plans of public utilities; the interrelationship of a growing community and its newspapers and the possible effects of newspaper coverage of urban land use patterns; and the possibilities of getting along without the news media and becoming informed on one's own. The study concludes that the media have alerted the public to environmental hazards, but that continued efforts topinpointlocal problems will be necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Package of Six Comments Opposing Proposed Rule
    /- 1 | 4 J0CKET NUMBER . | 8 monwn gg - d(/ |' ' - ,_ WALBRIDGE J. POWELL [62 g-' .n: I ENGINEER & GEOLOGIST (206) 232- 5295 w 4314 island crest way mercer island,WA 98040 JUNE 23,1987 * 7 JUN 29 P2 :21 d SECRETARY A/OTE $ /VS0 YI /Q usNRC defnhoh n menp#&& 9' 1 WASHINGTON K 23 55 a '' ! i ATIN: DOCKETIfG AND A ND SERVICE BRANCH | 1 GENTLEENJ SUBJECT: INTENTION OF Tm NRC TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF " HIGHtEVEL ! RADICACTIVE WASTE." l REQUEST THAT 'YOU CEASE AND DESIST IN YOUR EFFORTS TO LIBERALIZE THE DEFINITION OF HIGH L'EVEL RADI0ACTIVELIT WOULD ONLY RESULT IN DISASTROUS EXPOSURE OF THE POPULATION TO RADICACTIVITY. 1 ALL OF THE RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE THAT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERED "HIGH1EVEL" SHOULD ret %IN IN M AT CATEGORY. SOE OF THE RADICACTIVE WASTE CURRENTLY CONSIDERED '" LOW 1EVEL" SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE "HIGHtEVEL CATEGORY". NRC SH0llD CONSIDER t%TERIALS THAT ARE EITHER LOJG-LIVED OR HIGH Y RADICACTIVE OR BOTH AS"HIGH-LEVELRADIDACTIVEWASTE".TEYSWULDNOTNEEDTOBEBOTH. 4 ETHER IT IS TERMED "HIGHtEVEL, "LovtEVEL", TRANSURANIC, OR SOE OTHER DESIGNATION, ALL WASTE SHOULD BE ISOLATED FOR AS LONG AS IT ret % INS HAZARDOUS. CURRENT LAWS.AND REGULATIONS DO NOT REQUIRE ALL HIGH LEVEL WASTE GO TO TK HIGH LEVEL WASTE DlNP THAT MAY SOE DAY BE ESTAB.!SKD. IDR IS IT NECESSARY THAT WASTE BE CLASSIFIED AS HIGHtEVEL IN ORDER TO BE PLACED THERE. ITiDOES SEEM LOGICAL, HWEVER, TO CATEGORIZE ALL L0tG-LIVED WASTE AS HIGH LEVEL SO AS NOTTDMINIMIZEITSHAZARD.THISREDEFINITIONSHOULDNOTREQUIREOVERAPONTHTOIMPLEMEMT. IT 1%S COME TO MY. ATTENTION WHILE READING NUREGM REPORT TO CONGRESS ON ABtORt%L @CURRENCES AND f0 REG /BR@51 PtMER REACTOR EVENTS THE THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fNISSION HAS ' BEEN EXCEEDINGLY LAX''IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF CURRENT REGULATIONS WHICH ARE tOCP ' AND NARROW IN TEIR SCOPE.
    [Show full text]
  • ••Bertell Finding Aid Without Subdoc Codes••
    Manuscript Division des Division manuscrits Dr. Rosalie Bertell fonds MG 31 K 39 Finding aid no. 2081/Instrument de recherche no 2081 Prepared by Judi Cumming of the Préparé par Judi Cumming pour la Economic and Public Archives Section, Section des archives économiques et in 1996,1997, 2002 and 2003. publiques en 1996,1997, 2002 et 2003. TABLE OF CONTENTS Biographical Description......................................i-ii Series Descriptions........................................ iii-vi Original Writings Volumes 1 to 6, 143 ................................ 1-16, 103 Rotary Work, Early Writings Volumes 7 to 9 ........................................ 17 Case Files Vols. 10 to 42, 129, 132, 133 and 137, 139-140, 144-150. 18-48,. 92, 95-99, 105-114 International Institute of Concern for Public Health Volumes 43 to 45, 57 to 94, 135-136, 141 to 142 ..... 49-51, 57-73, 99-101 Nuclear information used in the book No Immediate Danger: Research files and Publicity Volumes 46 to 57 ..................................... 52-56 General Research Volumes 95 to 110, 140, 142 to 143 ................... 74-80, 98-99 General Research: Subject Files Volume 111 to 122, 134 ......................... 81-87, 101-103 International Commission of Health Professionals for Health and Human Rights Volumes 123 to 125 ................................... 88-90 Travel and Speaking Engagements Volumes 126 to 128, 143 ...............................91, 103 Right Livelihood Award and other awards Volumes 129-130 ..................................... 92-93 International Institute of Concern for Public Health: Bibliographic Database Volumes 130 and 138 .................................... 94 International and other press clippings Volume 131 .......................................... 95 Robert Del Tredici Volume 132 .......................................... 95 Atomic Veterans Volume 150 . .. 112-114 Audiocassettes......................................... 115-122 Video recordings ....................................... 123-130 Slides and Photographs..................................
    [Show full text]
  • A-BRIEF-HISTORY-NEC-1971-To-1995-RETYPED-BY-NICOLE-CONRAD.Typos-CT.In
    Note and request for comments: The account above has been the fruit of endless hours of work, rereading, note taking and recollection by the two principals, former Presidents and still Trustees, Sylvia Field and Diana Sidebotham. Their dedication and commitment has served this organization well for many years. The typist and copy editor, Jim Perkins, is responsible for the errors. Please send notices of errors of fact, glaring omissions, and basic typos to his attention promptly at Rt 1 Box 423, Wayne ME 04284 or call at (207) 685-9604. A final draft will be completed and printed in quantity for distribution to contributors in this, our twenty-fifth year. A Brief History Twenty-five years with the New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution Compiled by Sylvia and Diana Sidebotham Page 2 of 12 1971: The New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution was founded in February by citizens and scientists in southern Vermont and western Massachusetts as a public education organization, and was incorporated in April. The founder’s goals’ were to inform themselves and the public about all aspects of the U.S. civilian nuclear power program, to ask all relevant questions about design, construction, operation, public health and safety, and environmental effects before the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant (VY) received a license. Few answers were received and NECNP intervened in the operating license proceeding to oppose the issuance of the license. Larry Bogart, veteran nuclear opponent, had made his fiftieth trip to Vermont and Massachusetts the weekend before. NECNP retained the Washington, DC, law firm of Berlin, Roisman and Kessler, and petitioned the Atomic Energy Commission for intervenor status.
    [Show full text]
  • Print Version (Pdf)
    Special Collections and University Archives UMass Amherst Libraries Mitzi Bowman Papers 1925-2008 (Bulk: 1976-2008) 10 boxes (14 linear ft.) Call no.: MS 761 About SCUA SCUA home Credo digital Scope Overview Series 1: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Series 2: Nuclear Economics Series 3: Environmental Impacts Series 4: Nuclear Management Series 5: Health Effects Series 6: Anti-Nuclear Activism Inventory Series 1: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant Series 2: Nuclear Economics Series 3: Environmental Impacts Series 4: Nuclear Management Series 5: Health Effects Series 6: Anti-Nuclear Activism Admin info Download xml version print version (pdf) Read collection overview For years, Mitzi Bowman and her husband Pete were stalwarts of the progressive community in Connecticut, and tireless activists in the movements for social justice, peace, and the environment. Shortly after their marriage in 1966, the Bowman's settled in Newtown and then in Milford, Conn., where Pete worked as an engineer and where Mitzi had trouble finding employment due to her outspoken ways. In close collaboration, the couple became ardent opponents of the war in Vietnam as well as opponents of nuclear weaponry. The focus of their activism took a new direction in 1976, when they learned of plans to ship spent nuclear fuel rods near their home. Founding their first antinuclear organization, STOP (Stop the Transport of Pollution), they forced the shipments to be rerouted, and they soon devoted themselves to shutting down nuclear power in Connecticut completely, including the Millstone and Connecticut Yankee facilities, the latter of which was decommissioned in 1996. The Bowmans were active in a wide array of other groups, including the New Haven Green Party, the Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone, the People's Action for Clean Energy (PACE), and they were founding members of Fight the (Utility Rate) Hike, the Progressive Action Roundtable, and Don't Waste Connecticut.
    [Show full text]
  • Title |Tems-In-Secretary-General's Statements
    UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title Page 66 Date 5/10/2006 Time 11:59:44 AM S-0985-0007-04-00001 Expanded Number S-0985-0007-04-00001 Title |tems-in-Secretary-General's Statements Date Created 4/1/1977 Record Type Archival Item Container s-0985-0007: Secretary-General's Statements Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit TOAST BY THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OH THE OCC7iSION OF THE LUNCHEON GIVEN IN HONOUR OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SPAIN, SENOR DON ADOLFQ SUAREZ GONZALEZ - 27 APRIL 1977 MR. PRESIDENT,. MR. FOREIGN MINISTER, YOUR EXCELLENCIES, GENTLEMEN. IT IS PARTICULARLY GRATIFYING FOR RE, MR. PRESIDENT, TO WELCOME YOU ON THIS, YOUR FIRST VISIT TO THE UNITED NATIONS. I KNOW THAT YOUR COUNTRY STANDS ONLY A FEW WEEKS AWAY FROM AN EVENT WHICH WILL MARK A DECISIVE TURNING-POINT IN ITS RECENT HISTORY - A PERIOD OF ITS HISTORY IN WHICH YOU PERSONALLY ARE DEEPLY INVOLVED. YOUR VISIT AT THIS TIME, LIKE THAT LAST YEAR OF HIS MAJESTY KING JUAN CARLOS SO EARLY IN HIS REIGN, IS A MOST IMPRESSIVE AFFIRMATION OF SPAIN'S INTEREST IN THE WORK OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND ITS SUPPORT FOR THE IDEALS OF PEACE, JUSTICE, AND INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION EMBODIED IN OUR CHARTER. 2 - I SHOULD ALSO ADD TH7\T WE ALL REMEMBER, WITH GREAT PLEASURE, THE PRESENCE OF HIS MAJESTY, AND OF QUEEN SOFIA, WHEN I HAD THE HONOUR TO RECEIVE THEM LAST JUNE AT THE UNITED NATIONS. MR. PRESIDENT, WE IN THE UNITED NATIONS ARE DAILY CONSCIOUS OF THE WORLDWIDE INFLUENCE OF SPAIN, FOR SPANISH IS ONE OF OUR OFFICIAL LANGUAGES, WHILE THE PRONUNCIATION MAY NOT ALWAYS BE THAT OF YOUR NATIVE CASTILLA, IT NONETHELESS RECALLS THE ASTOUNDING SPREAD OF SPANISH CULTURE OVER THE CENTURIES„ SPAIN TODAY IS UNDERGOING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES AND, AS IN THE PAST, WHAT HAPPENS IN SPAIN IS OF IMPORTANCE FAR BEYOND ITS BORDERS.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 July 7, 2005 Re: Private Fuel Storage, LLC Application for Commercial Irradiated Nuclear Fuel
    July 7, 2005 Re: Private Fuel Storage, LLC application for commercial irradiated nuclear fuel "interim" storage site at the Skull Valley Goshutes Indian Reservation in Utah Dear Commissioners Diaz, Jaczko, Lyons, McGaffigan and Merrifield, On behalf of the millions of members our 437 organizations represent (31 Native American, 26 national, 366 regional/state/local, and 15 international organizations), we urge you not to approve the license application by Private Fuel Storage, LLC (PFS) to open an "interim storage site" for commercial irradiated nuclear fuel at the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation in Utah. The need for PFS is far from clear, given approvals for on-site dry cask storage at a growing number of reactors, and the fact that true consolidation of waste is not possible as long as nuclear utilities continue to produce it. The proposal is also plagued by many problems, and its location poses unacceptable risks. The facility has no contingency plan for faulty containers, the storage/transport containers are of questionable structural integrity, and there is an increasing risk that PFS could well become de facto permanent storage. The plan also raises serious transportation safety concerns, and is beset with environmental justice violations. In short, the proposal is neither safe, sound, nor just. Skull Valley is not an appropriate site for storing irradiated nuclear fuel. The adjacent complex of Hill Air Force Base and the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) represents one of the biggest and busiest bombing ranges in the country, with thousands of over-flights annually posing the risk of accidental crashes into PFS.
    [Show full text]
  • X Arranged; X Not Organized
    COLLECTIONS OF CORRESPONDENCE AND MANUSCRIPT DOCUMENTS NAME OF COLLECTION: CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT Papers SOURCE; gift Of MrSt Irene P. Dickinson, 1979 SUBJECT; Environment; Nuclear pover plants; Consolidated Edison Company, New York$ U..S. Atomic Energy Commission/Nuclear Regulatory Commission DATES COVERED; 1966-1979 NUMBER OF ITEMS; ca. STATUS; (check appropriate description) Cataloged; x Listed; x Arranged; x Not organized: CONDITION: (give number of vols., boxes, or shelves) Bound; Boxed; 22 Stored: LOCATION: (Library) Rare Book & Manuscript CALL-NUMBER Ms Coll/CCPE RESTRICTIONS ON USE None DESCRIPTION: Papers of the Citizens Committee for the Protection of the Environment, Ossining, N.Y., a citizens action group, include correspondence, memoranda, reports, statements, notes, news releases, U.S. Atomic Energy/Nuclear Regulatory Commission hearing records, and printed material. Founded in 1968, this organization has devoted its activity to the quality of the environment in the lower Hudson River Valley, particularly the environ- mental hazards of Consolidated Edison's Indian Point nuclear power plants. The correspond- ence contains letters from supporters, members of other environmental groups, New York State legislators, U.S. senators and congressmen, scientists, and CCPE's attorney for the Indian Point hearings. Chief correspondents of the group are Larry Bogart, Executive Director, Dr. George Candreva, President, and Irene P. Dickinson (Mrs. Leon A.), Executive Secretary and Coordinator, whose files these are. There are numerous letters from Congressmen John G. Dow, Richard Ottinger and Peter Peyser. The cataloged correspondence contain three letters from Senator Jacob K. Javits, and one each from Senator Edmund S. Muskie, Senator Margaret Chase Smith, and Louis J.
    [Show full text]
  • Lille D'easum, 1899-1980
    Lille d'Easum, 1899-1980 An Inventory of her Research Collectio n in The Library of the University of British Columbi a Special Collections Division Prepared by : Riina Tamm Aspi Balsara March- April 1984 Introduction Lille d'Easum (1899-1980) was B .C. Voice of Women executive member, Executive secretary of the B .C . branch, Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, freelanc e writer and an anti-nuclear activist . Lille d'Easum's involvement during the 1960s and especially the 1970s in the anti - nuclear movement, particularly her work as Executive-secretary for the B .C . branch o f the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility (CCNR), is the focus of the collection . There is extensive information (Magazine articles, fact sheets, corporate and governmen t publications and newspaper clippings) on nuclear power plants, uranium mining, the hazard s of the nuclear industry, and nuclear terrorism . Disarmament and the international peace movement, particularly in Japan, are also significant topics . There are several folder s of CCNR correspondence, especially with other anti-nuclear and environmental organizations . The collection contains numerous articles written by Lille d'Easum on variou s nuclear energy issues, and a variety of her other writings, such as her prize-winnin g short story, "Return to P'yong-yan g " , and the article on the Amchitka Nuclear Test . Also in the collection is extensive information on the energy crisis, alternativ e energy sources, alternative technology and lifestyles, environmental concerns, intern- ational politics - particularly imperialism in "Third World" countries - and informatio n on individuals in the anti-nuclear and environmental movements, such as Helen Caldicot t and Amory Lovins .
    [Show full text]
  • Water-Purification-Equipment and Supplies-Catalogs. Water-Thermal Properties. Water Bloom-Minnesota-Medicine Water Quali1y-Minne
    WATER-PURIFICATION-EQUIPMENT AND SUPPL1ES-CATALOGS SUBJECT CATALOG WATER-PURIFICATION-EQUIPMENT AND WATER QUALITY see alsoWATER- WATER QUALI1Y-MINNESOTA-BASSETT SUPPLIES-CATALOGS. POLLUTION CREEK WATERSHED-YEARBOOKS. Little (Anhur D.) inc. Guide to water cleanup. 1974. Camp. Thomas R. Water and its impurities. 2d ed. Barr Engineering Company. Water quality ITD433.L57 1974 ECOL 1974. TD420.C34 1974 ECOL monitoring program. fID224.M6B37a ECOL WATER-QUALITY seeWATER QUALITY Swerdon. FaulM. Sediment nmoff controlat WATER QUALITY-MINNESOTA-DAYTON highway construction sites. 1973. POND. WATER-SOFTEN ING--CONGR ESS ES. Barr Engineering Company. Water quality Conference.14th. ITAI.P35 no.1011ECOL Water Quality Universityof monitoring of storm water treatmentfacilitiesat IllinoisatUrbana-Champaign.1972. Groundwater Symonds. James M. Water quality behavior in Ridgedale Center. March. 1974-October. 1975. 1976. quality and treatment. 1972. reservoirs (sic). 1969 i.e. 1970. TD395.S97 ECOL TD466.W37 1972ECOL 1TD225.M62B37 1976 ECOL United States. National Technical Advisory WATER QUALITY-MINNESOTA-DULUTH. WATER-THERMAL PROPERTIES. Committee on Water Quality Criteria. Water quality McElroy. A. D. Water pollution investigation. 1974. Peterson. D.E.Potential thermal effects of an criteria. 1968. TD370.U497 ECOL 1TD225.D9M32 ECOL expanding power industry. 1970. fID223.4.P48 ECOL Water quality criteria 1972. 1973, i.e. 1974. WATER QUALITY-MINNESOTA-GOLDEN 1T0370.W38 ECOL VALLEY PONDS. WATER-BIRDS. Barr Engineering Company. Survey of water quality. Scott. Peter. A coloured key to the wildfowl of the Zieminski. Stefan A. Induced air mixing of large 1975. ffD224.M6B37 1975 ECOL world. [Rev. ed.] 1972.QL696.A55349 1972ECOL bodies of polluted water. 1970. fTD370.Z54 ECOL WATER QUALITY-M1NNESOTA-MEDICINE WATER-BIRDS-BEHAVIOR.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientists' Say Cerro Grande Ash Not a Health Hazard %Ofot
    Scientists' say Cerro Grande ash not a health hazard %ofot . The Associated Pfess tration~ of ~adionuc.lides and The assessment team said the study co~taining sediments co.lle~t- . nonradlOactlve carcmogens. " " . " . ed m and around the Pa]arIto But they said the study shows no difference In chrome-health Plateau and Los Alamos lab LOS ALAMOS - Sediment shows no difference in chron- . ff t f' d" t· t before and after the fire and and water containing ash ic-health effects from direct e ec s rom Irec exposure 0 in and around the Viveash from last year's Cerro exposure ~o ash-containing . ash-containing water or soil. fire, which burned 28,800 '. Grande fire pose no health water or SOlI. acres northeast of Pecos last threat, a team of scientists The scientists· also said spring .. has concluded. such Samples taken after the group, the Los Alamos Study The team was made up of The Interagency Flood cOI?mo~ activi~ies, ~s s:VImmm~, WhICh r~sult m fire primarily showed higher Group, said his group has scientists from the state Risk Assessment Team said dlrec~ s.km contact wIth as~- levels of copper, manganese, never thought the Cerro Environment .and Health Thursday it has finished its conta!m,~g water or se~I- iron and zinc in ash-contain- Grande fire caused much of departments, the nuclear- study of areas around Los .~ents, pose no su?stantlal . ing sediments in nearby 'an increased risk. weapons lab and several fed- Alamos in the wake of the mcreased health rIsk over'.
    [Show full text]
  • EXTENSIONS of REMAR.KS PRAYER in the PUBLIC SCHOOL Lie Prayer Is, Thus, a Fight to Eradicate Tion, of Course, Is Better Than Nothing
    February 27, 1970 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 5305" To be lieutenants Thomas C. Howell III John J. Lenart William M. Hornick, John D. Busman Hugh B. Milburn John E. Colt David M. Chambers Stephen ........ Foster Jr. Roger J. DeVivo Dennis L. Graves Gerald W. McGill RichardS. Young Gregory R. Gillen Wayne A. Hoyle Robert M. Dixon James M. McClelland William B. Knight, Jr. Bruce W. Fisher William R. Daniels Robert L. Johnson Donald A. Drake John C. Veselenak Charles L. Hardt TedG.Hetu Lynn T. Gillman Raymond Louis Stephen M. Dunn Brent H. Traughber Roderick S. Patwell Michael Kawka Floyd Childress II Stewart McGee, Jr. Dale M. Hodges Michael J. Moorman To be lieutenants (junior grade) Charles N. Whitaker Donald W. Nostrant Lewis A. Lapine Philip D. Hitch Robert V. Smart Harvey L. Parry, Jr. Glenn H. Endrud Glenn M. Garte Gregory L. Miller Clarence W. Tignor Jonathan R. Carr Raymond W. Reilly Carl F. Peters II John H. Snooks Melvyn C. Grt:nthal Robert C. Roush James P. Travers Lawrence C. Hall To be ensigns William G. Pichel Douglas F. Jones William D. Neff Stephen E. Anderly Ronald L. Gester Robert W. Rushing John L. Robbins Kenneth W. Sigley V. Kenneth Leonard, John R. Annett Thomas M. Goforth Stephen C. Schwartz Dean R. Seidel Efrem R. Krisher Jr. Archibald C. Davis III Howard W. Herz Ronald J. Smolowitz Thomas W. Richards Gordon F. Tornberg Douglas A. Danner George C. Fuller William A. Viertel Lester B. Smith, Jr. EXTENSIONS OF REMAR.KS PRAYER IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL lie prayer is, thus, a fight to eradicate tion, of course, is better than nothing.
    [Show full text]