DOCSLIB.ORG

2005/02/17-Corrected Transcript for the North Anna Early Site Permit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2005/02/17-Corrected Transcript for the North Anna Early Site Permit Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Corrected Transcript Title: Draft EIS for the North Anna ESP Site Public Meeting Docket Number: [Docket Number: 52-008] Location: Mineral, Virginia Date: Thursday, February 17, 2005 Work Order No.: NRC-237 Pages 1-209 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC. Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433 Enclosure 3 1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + + 4 PUBLIC MEETING TO COLLECT COMMENTS 5 ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 6 STATEMENT FOR AN EARLY SITE PERMIT (ESP) 7 AT THE NORTH ANNA ESP SITE 8 9 THURSDAY, 10 FEBRUARY 17, 2005 11 + + + + + 12 13 The workshop was convened at the Forum of 14 the Louisa County Middle School Auditorium, 1009 Davis 15 Highway, Mineral, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m., Francis 16 "Chip" Cameron, facilitator, presiding. 17 PRESENT: 18 FRANCIS "Chip" Cameron, Facilitator 19 JACK CUSHING, License Renewal and Environmental 20 Impact Project Manager 21 ANDREW KUGLER, Section Chief, License Renewal 22 and Environmental Impact 23 MARYANN PARKHURST, Pacific Northwest National 24 Laboratory 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 2 1 PRESENT (Continued): 2 BELKYS SOSA, New and Test Research Reactors, 3 Safety Project Manager 4 RICHARD EMCH, Environmental Impact Section, 5 Senior Project Manager 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 3 1 I N D E X 2 PAGE 3 Introduction, Francis "Chip" Cameron . 6 4 Welcome, Andrew Kugler . 13 5 Safety Review for Early Site Permits, 6 Belkys Sosa . 18 7 Environmental Review Report, Jack Cushing . 22 8 Review of Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 9 Maryann Parkhurst . 36 10 Milestones of the Review, Jack Cushing . 62 11 Statement on behalf of Dominion Power, Eugene 12 Grecheck . ... 66 13 Public Comment: 14 Paxus Calta . 71 15 Sam Forrest . 74 16 Aviele Thiel . 77 17 Asa Vegodski .. 79 18 Sue Chase . 81 19 Dr. Jim Brian . 85 20 Bill Bardune . 91 21 Adel Wood . 95 22 Richard Diamond . 96 23 Ben Sloane . 97 24 Jerry Rosenthal . 101 25 Brendan Hoffman . 103 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 4 1 I N D E X (Continued) 2 PAGE 3 Public Comment (Continued): 4 Rena Martin-Errick . 106 5 Rebecca Faris . 108 6 Michele Boyd . 120 7 Lisa Shell . 118 8 Richard Ball . 124 9 Virginia Rovnyak . 129 10 Jennifer Conner . ... 133 11 Jay Bolan . 134 12 Sama Dilbaoy Leon 137, 194 13 Brian Buckley . 141 14 Arjun Makhijani . 143 15 Scott Peterson . 148 16 Bill Murphy . 152 17 Dick Clark . 153 18 Delbert Horn . 157 19 John McCoy . 162 20 Jim Riccio . 164 21 Louis Zeller . 167 22 Brianne Boylan . ... 170 23 Seamus Allman . 171 24 Sue Frankel-Streit . 174 25 Tyla Matteson . 176 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 5 1 I N D E X (Continued) 2 PAGE 3 Public Comment (Continued): 4 Bill Casino . 178 5 Paul Gunter . 181 6 Jana Cutler . 185 7 Donald Day . 188 8 Elena Day . 190 9 Robert Singleterry . 192 10 Terry Lilley . 194 11 J.M. Montague . 196 12 Todd Flowers . 198 13 John Cruickshank . 200 14 Fred Gruber ... 203 15 Kurt Flage . 204 16 Jim Adams . 207 17 Closing Remarks, Andrew Kugler 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 6 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 (7:04 p.m.) 3 MR. CAMERON: Well, good evening, 4 everybody. Thank you, thank you, thank you for all 5 being here tonight with us to help the NRC in its 6 decision making on this important matter. 7 My name is Chip Cameron, and I'm the 8 Special Counsel for Public Liaison at the Nuclear 9 Regulatory Commission, and it's my pleasure to serve 10 as your facilitator for tonight's meeting, and 11 basically my job is to try to make sure that all of 12 you have a productive meeting tonight. 13 The subject is the draft environmental 14 impact statement that the NRC has prepared as part of 15 its evaluation of an application that we received for 16 an early site permit. We received this application 17 from Dominion Energy for a potential new reactor at 18 the North Anna site. 19 And I just want to go over a couple of 20 things about meeting process before we get into the 21 substance of our discussions tonight. First of all, 22 I would like to talk about format; then to just go 23 through some simple ground rules .for the meeting; and 24 finally to introduce the NRC speakers who will be 25 talking to all of you tonight. NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 7 1 Our format is going to be basically a two- 2 part format, and those two parts match up with our 3 objectives tonight for the meeting. The first part is 4 to give all of you come information on the NRC's 5 process for reviewing these early site permit 6 applications. And we have a few NRC speakers that are 7 going to tell you about that process. 8 And we also want to give you information 9 on what the findings, what the analysis is in the 10 draft environmental impact statement that we prepared 11 on this application, and I want to emphasize the word 12 "draft" because it's not going to be finalized until 13 we evaluate all of the comments that come in from the 14 public, the comments that we hear tonight, the written 15 comments that are submitted on this draft 16 environmental impact statement. 17 Only after that evaluation will the 18 environmental impact statement be finalized. 19 So we have some brief presentations. 20 We'll have a little time for some questions from you 21 on the process and on the findings in the draft 22 environmental impact statement. 23 Then we're going to move into the second 24 part of the meeting, which is our opportunity to hear 25 from you on these issues. Your advice, your concerns, NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234.4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 8 1 your recommendations on the draft environmental impact 2 statement, the process in general. 3 We also are taking written comments on 4 these issues, and the NRC staff will explain how you 5 submit written comments, but we wanted to be here with 6 you tonight personally, and it's just wonderful to see 7 such a great turnout, and again, thank you for being 8 here. 9 Anything that you say tonight will carry 10 as much weight as a written comment that we have 11 received, and as I noted earlier, we are taking a 12 transcript of the meeting. 13 In terms of ground rules, I would just ask 14 that one person speak at a time for a couple of 15 obvious reasons. One is that so we can give our full 16 attention to whomever has the floor at the time. 17 You're going to hear a lot of information 18 tonight not only from the NRC, but from fellow members 19 of the audience. So we want to hear that. We're here 20 to listen, and I think we're all here to listen to 21 those comments. So one person at a time, and that 22 will allow Habte to get a clean transcript so that 23 we'll know who is speaking. 24 I would ask you to introduce yourself to 25 us when you speak and to give us any affiliation, if NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 9 1 that's appropriate, so that we know who you're 2 affiliated with, and I would just ask you to be 3 concise. We have a lot of people who want to talk 4 tonight, and I want to make sure that everybody who 5 wants to speak gets an opportunity to speak. 6 We have to be out of the school, by the 7 school's rules, by 11 o'clock tonight, and we need to 8 pack up. So we're going to go at least till 10:30, 9 and then we're going to have to try to get out of 10 here. Hopefully we can hear from all of you. 11 I'm asking everyone to follow a three- 12 minute rule, a guideline in terms of their 13 presentation. I know that is short, but it will allow 14 us to get everybody on, I hope. And three minutes, I 15 think, is just enough time to summarize your main 16 points, and that's going to accomplish two important 17 objectives for us, one of which is it's going to alert 18 the NRC staff to the important issues that we need to 19 start evaluating right away, and that we want to talk 20 to you about further after the meeting.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • It's Time to Expand Nuclear Power
    Intelligence Squared U.S. 1 01/23/2020 January 23, 2020 Ray Padgett | [email protected] Mark Satlof | [email protected] T: 718.522.7171 It’s Time to Expand Nuclear Power Guests: For the Motion: Kirsty Gogan, Daniel Poneman Against the Motion: Arjun Makhijani, Gregory Jaczko Moderator: John Donvan AUDIENCE RESULTS Before the debate: After the debate: 49% FOR 47% FOR 21% AGAINST 42% AGAINST 30% UNDECIDED 11% UNDECIDED Start Time: (00:00:00) John Donvan: We have a key note conversation because the topic relates to science. Would you please welcome to the stage Bill Nye, the science guy? [applause] Bill Nye: John, so good to see you! John Donvan: Great to see you. [applause] So, that was the appropriate level of applause, I think. Bill Nye: Wow! Intelligence Squared U.S. 2 01/23/2020 John Donvan: There was a really interesting story that relates to you and Intelligence Squared that I want to start with. Bill Nye: Ah, yes. Yes. John Donvan: And you were -- you have been, in the past, a member of our audience. You've been out there. And there was one particular debate that you attended, and an interesting thing happened. Pick it up from there. Bill Nye: So, I was at a debate about genetically-modified organisms, GMOs. And -- John Donvan: The resolution was: Genetically modified food -- Bill Nye: Is good or bad. Or was necessary. John Donvan: No. It was -- it was stated as an imperative: "Genetically-modified food." It was a sentence. Bill Nye: Ah, yes. John Donvan: Okay.
    [Show full text]
  • Dear President Obama
    OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA FROM U.S. ORGANIZATIONS Mr. President: It’s time to move from talk to action on nuclear disarmament. April 28, 2014 Dear President Obama, During the closing session of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague on March 25, 2014, you cited a number of concrete measures to secure highly-enriched uranium and plutonium and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime that have been implemented as a result of the three Nuclear Security Summits, concluding: “So what’s been valuable about this summit is that it has not just been talk, it’s been action.” Would that you would apply the same standard to nuclear disarmament! On April 5, 2009 in Prague, you gave millions of people around the world new hope when you declared: “So today, I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Bolstered by that hope, over the past three years, there has been a new round of nuclear disarmament initiatives by governments not possessing nuclear weapons, both within and outside the United Nations. Yet the United States has been notably “missing in action” at best, and dismissive or obstructive at worst. This conflict may come to a head at the 2015 Review of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). We write now, on the eve of the third Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) meeting for the 2015 Review Conference of the NPT, which will take place at UN headquarters in New York April 28 – May 9, 2014, to underscore our plea that your administration shed its negative attitude and participate constructively in deliberations and negotiations regarding the creation of a multilateral process to achieve a nuclear weapons free world.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW TITLES in BIOETHICS Annual Cumulation Volume 20, 1994
    NATIONAL REFERENCE CENTER FOR BIOETHICS LITERATURE THE JOSEPH AND ROSE KENNEDY INSTITUTE OF ETHICS GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC 20057 NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS Annual Cumulation Volume 20, 1994 (Includes Syllabus Exchange Catalog) Lucinda Fitch Huttlinger, Editor Gregory P. Cammett, Managing Editor ISSN 0361-6347 A NOTE TO OUR READERS . Funding for the purchase of the materials cited in NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS was severely reduced in September 1994. We are grateful for your donations, as well as your recom­ mendations to your publishers to forward review copies to the Editor. In addition to being listed here, all English-language titles accepted for the collection will be considered for inclusion in the BIOETHICSLINE database, produced at the Kennedy Institute of Ethics under contract with the National Library of Medicine. Your efforts to support this publication and the dissemination of bioethics information in general are sincerely appreciated. NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS is published four times Inquiries regarding NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS per year (quarterly) by the National Reference Center should be addressed to: for Bioethics Literature, Kennedy Institute of Ethics. Gregory Cammett, Managing Editor Annual Cumulations are published in the following year (regarding subscriptions and claims) as separate publications. NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS is a listing by subject of recent additions OR to the National Reference Center's collection. (The subject classification scheme is reproduced in full with Lucinda Fitch Huttlinger, Editor each issue; it can also be found at the end of the (regarding review copies, gifts, and exchanges) cumulated edition.) With the exception of syllabi listed NEW TITLES IN BIOETHICS as part of our Syllabus Exchange program, and docu­ National Reference Center for Bioethics ments in the section New Publications from the Ken­ Literature nedy Institute of Ethics, materials listed herein are not Kennedy Institute of Ethics available from the National Reference Center.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bravo Test and the Death and Life of the Global Ecosystem in the Early Anthropocene
    Volume 13 | Issue 29 | Number 1 | Article ID 4343 | Jul 20, 2015 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Bravo Test and the Death and Life of the Global Ecosystem in the Early Anthropocene Robert Jacobs Introduction contaminating fish, birds, animals and plants far from nuclear test sites. As many of these On March 1st 1954 the United States tested its radionuclides remain dangerous for hundreds first deliverable hydrogen bomb at Bikini Atoll of thousands of years, the dangers inherent in in the Marshall Islands. The weapon yielded a thermonuclear detonations would produce force three times as large as its designers had legacies still not well understood. planned or anticipated.1 The radioactive fallout cloud that resulted from the weapon would kill As radiation from Bravo the test spread around a fisherman located 100 km away, cause illness the Pacific Ocean, contaminating fish that in hundreds and perhaps thousands of people would be caught thousands of miles away, across hundreds of miles, and contaminate human conceptions of warfare and of nature entire atolls with high levels of radiation also began to mutate and change. displacing residents most of whom have never been able to return to their homes. Slowly it U.S. strategic nuclear planners quickly would become evident that, while this weapon recognized the radiological fallout as a had been tested in the Marshall Islands, its powerful tool of war, separate from the power detonation was a global event. of blast and heat that were fundamental to nuclear war fighting strategies. Over time both People around the world were shocked by the the United States and the former Soviet Union devastation wrought by the American nuclear would integrate the capacity of this weapon to attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki near the poison vast swaths of the Earth with lethal end of World War Two.
    [Show full text]
  • The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What Price?
    Volume 6 | Issue 3 | Article ID 2697 | Mar 03, 2008 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What Price? Arjun Makhijani, Endo Tetsuya The Japanese Nuclear Power Option: What particular, energy-hungry China and India- but Price? also for the region as a whole. In Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere, plans for and Endo Tetsuya and Arjun Makhijani expressions of interest in nuclear energy have been expanding. In the midst of rising oil With the price of oil skyrocketing to more than prices, expectations are growing that nuclear $100 a barrel, many nations including Japan energy will fill the gap between energy demand and the United States, are looking to the and supply. nuclear power option among others. Is nuclear power a viable option in a world of expensive In the area of global warming, the Fourth and polluting fossil fuels? Japan Focus, in the Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental first of a series of articles on energy options Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that centered on renewable options and thethe global temperature will increase by 2.4 to environmental costs of energy options, presents 6.4 degrees Celsius by the end of the 21st the case for nuclear power recently made by century if fossil-fuel dependent economic Endo Tetsuya and a critique of the nuclear growth is maintained. It is now universally option by Arjun Makhijani. recognized that the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a matter of urgency, and necessitates seeking viable, reliable alternative sources of energy. In this sense, Atoms for the Sustainable Future:nuclear energy can be expected to contribute Utilization of Nuclear Energy as a Way to to global efforts to cope with the global Cope with Energy and Environmental warming problem as its carbon dioxide Challenges emissions are much smaller than those of fossil sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Asian Nuclear War Radioactivity Reach North America
    Institute for Energy and Environmental Research For a safer, healthier environment and the democratization of science Could Asianhttp://ieer.org Nuclear War Radioactivity Reach North America? (Earthfiles Interview with Arjun Makhijani) © 2002 by Linda Moulton Howe Reporter and Editor, Earthfiles.com Red arrow points at India and Pakistan on opposite side of the world from Canada and the United States. The Marshall Islands where the U. S. experimented in the 1950swith many atomic tests is at the far left in the Pacific Ocean. From Marshall Island and Nevada Test Site nuclear explosions, radioactive fallout riding on the prevailing westerly winds reached North Carolina and New York, distances nearly equivalent to the 10,000 to 12,000 miles India and Pakistan are from the west coast of the United States. June 4, 2002 Takoma Park, Maryland – If India and Pakistan strike each other with Hiroshima-sized bombs, how much radioactivity could reach the atmosphere and fall out around the world? That is a question I began asking a week ago and discovered that very little is known about the consequences downwind of such a catastrophe. The National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California seemed like it should know. NARAC’s public affairs office describes its “primary function is to support the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD) for radiological releases.” But when I asked an page 1 / 7 Institute for Energy and Environmental Research For a safer, healthier environment and the democratization of science informationhttp://ieer.org officer there for information about the spread of radioactivity in the atmosphere from a nuclear war in Asia, the answer was, “That information is classified in the interests of national security.” One scientist who wants to talk about potential radioactive fallout and its threat to earth life is Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D., President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) in Tacoma Park, Maryland.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 Q Denotes “Subcritical” Introduction Test
    Western States Legal Foundation Nevada Desert Experience Information Bulletin Summer 2005 update 1,000+ U.S. NUCLEAR The Nevada Test Site: Desert Annex of TESTS SINCE the Nuclear Weapons Laboratories 1945 q denotes “subcritical” Introduction test Aardvark 1962 Abeytas 1970 The Nevada Test Site (NTS), an immense tract of desert and mountains northwest of Las Abilene 1988 Able 1946 Able 1951 Vegas, is the test range where the United States government set off over 900 nuclear Able 1951 Able 1952 explosions during the Cold War phase of the arms race. For most Americans, the Test Site is Abo 1985 Absinthe 1967 only a symbol of a closed chapter of history, a time of great danger that now is over. Even Ace 1964 Acushi 1963 those who know that the Nevada Test Site still is used for “subcritical” testing of nuclear Adobe 1962 Adze 1968 weapons materials and components underground may think operations largely have been Agile 1967 Agouti 1962 Agrini 1984 suspended, with unused facilities retained only against the eventuality of a return to full scale Ahtanum 1963 Ajax 1966 underground nuclear testing. But the Test Site remains an important part of the nuclear Ajo 1970 Akavi 1981 weapons complex, both a remote site where dangerous activities can be conducted with little Akbar 1972 Alamo 1988 public knowledge and a weapons laboratory unto itself. High risk programs involving nuclear Aleman 1986 Algodones 1971 material, such as nuclear criticality experiments, are slated for transfer to the Test Site, and it Aligote 1981 Aliment 1969 Allegheny 1962 also is being considered as a location for a proposed factory to mass produce plutonium pits, Alma 1962 Almendro 1973 the atomic explosive “triggers”at the core of most nuclear weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Defense Institute Court Ordered DOE Documents Released
    Environmental Defense Institute News on Environmental Health and Safety Issues February - March 2010 Volume 21 Number 2 Court Ordered DOE Documents Released Show Major Reactor Vulnerabilities In 2005 Keep Yellowstone Nuclear Free, Environ- other documents, including updated ore revised versions, or portions of updated ore revised versions, of the mental Defense Institute and David McCoy (Plaintiffs) documents at issue in the lawsuit or from litigation any filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with refusal by the Defendants to release such other documents the Department of Energy (DOE) for documents related to to the Plaintiffs.” the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) located at the Idaho Environmental Defense Institute (EDI) conducted an National Laboratory. DOE refused to release the extensive review of the 1400 pages released by DOE by information claiming “national security” exemption. Court Order, This EDI review is blocked from including Plaintiffs subsequently filed a lawsuit in U.S. Federal more than 210 pages of DOE censored redactions in this District Court of Wyoming. FOIA disclosure that include; The Court issued a decision. In that 2007 decision the a.) Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) – Court rejected the DOE's arguments that the Documents >104 pages; could be withheld for security reasons. The Court, b.) Emergency Management Hazardous Assessment balancing the need for open government with the possible (HAD) – >98 pages; threat of a terrorist attack at INL, stated "blocking public c.) Engineering Design Files
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear-Spent Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Preface and Acknowledgments 5
    Nuclear-Spent Science Matters, LLC Science Matters, Bethesda, Maryland Fuel and High-Level Radioactive December 2019 Waste Disposal A Review of Options Considered in the United States An independent report Deepcommissioned Inc. Isolation, by Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D. Table of Contents Preface and Acknowledgments 4 Executive Summary 8 i. Early considerations 9 ii. The 1980 Environmental Impact Statement and geologic disposal 11 iii. Retrospective on the geologic disposal decision 13 iv. The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act 14 v. The Continued Storage Rule 15 vi. Conclusions 16 I. From the 1950s to the mid-1970s 18 i. The 1957 National Research Council Report 20 ii. Lyons, Kansas 26 II. The changing framework in the 1970s 33 i. The energy front 34 ii. A change in nuclear power prospects 35 iii. The Indian nuclear test 38 III. Options for spent-fuel and high-level waste disposal 41 i. Transmutation 45 ii. Disposal in space 48 iii. Ice-sheet disposal 54 iv. Sub-seabed disposal 58 v. Island disposal 61 vi. Well injection 61 vii. Rock melt 64 viii. Disposal in very deep holes 66 ix. Disposal in a mined geologic repository 69 IV. Retrospective on disposal options 78 i. Breeder reactors and reprocessing 80 ii. Reprocessing-dependent disposal approaches 83 iii. Non-reprocessing dependent disposal concepts 88 iv. Deep-vertical borehole disposal 93 v. Horizontal borehole disposal 95 V. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act 98 VI. The NRC’s Continued Storage Rule and geologic isolation 106 i. The Continued Storage Rule 107 ii. Comments on continued storage and geologic isolation 108 VII.
    [Show full text]
  • Thank You for Listening
    Thank you to our hosts for this opportunity to speak; and Thank You World Family, so many of you gathering here; thank you for listening. Nuclear, is war of human consequences. The Cold War promised “mutual destruction.” Cities were made into targets. Vaporizing large numbers of people was the strategy. Now we know, even regional us of nuclear weapons would cause global damage. It is my job to give a summary of the medical consequences of using these weapons. My slides will be published on line with citation and references. *** Resources: International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War: http://www.ippnw.org/pdf/1998ForrowJAMA.pdf “From Hiroshima to Mutual Assured Destruction to Abolition 2000.” Lachlan Forrow, MD; Victor W. Sidel, MD; reprinted from the Journal of the American Medical Association, August 5, 1998; Vol 280, No 5, pages 456—461. European Leadership Network: 2014. Ambassador A. Kmentt. http://www.europeanleadershipnetwork.org/avoiding‐the‐worst‐re‐framing‐the‐debate‐ on‐nuclear‐disarmament_1558.html 1 A nuclear explosion is composed of three types of energy: Blast, Heat, and Radiation. All of these have both immediate and long‐term medical consequnces. *** Broad Resources: The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists; http://thebulletin.org/search/topics/nuclear‐weapons Union of Concerned Scientists: http://www.ucsusa.org/our‐work/nuclear‐weapons#.VHpzhDHF8xI International Atomic Energy Agency – Tools for Nuclear Inspection (factsheet): http://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/inspectors.pdf Reaching Critical Will: http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org The disarmament arm of Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom. 2 I am using four ICONS to track how each type of energy from these weapons impact human health: • Yellow is Blast.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    'RANDOM MURDER BY TECHNOLOGY': THE ROLE OF SCIENTIFIC AND BIOMEDICAL EXPERTS IN THE ANTI-NUCLEAR MOVEMENT, 1969 - 1992 LISA A. RUMIEL A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY GRADUATE PROGRAM IN HISTORY YORK UNIVERSITY, TORONTO, ONTARIO AUGUST 2009 Library and Archives Bibliotheque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington OttawaONK1A0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-54104-3 Our file Notre r6f6rence ISBN: 978-0-494-54104-3 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vita of Arjun Makhijani
    \ Curriculum Vita of Arjun Makhijani Address and Phone: Institute for Energy and Environmental Research 6935 Laurel Ave., Suite 201 Takoma Park, MD 20912 Phone: 301-270-5500 e-mail: [email protected] Website: www.ieer.org A recognized authority on energy issues, Dr. Makhijani is the author and co-author of numerous reports and books on energy and environment related issues, including two published by MIT Press. He was the principal author of the first study of the energy efficiency potential of the US economy published in 1971. He is the author of Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy (2007). In 2007, he was elected Fellow of the American Physical Society. He was named a Ploughshares Hero, by the Ploughshares Fund (2006); was awarded the Jane Bagley Lehman Award of the Tides Foundation in 2008 and the Josephine Butler Nuclear Free Future Award in 2001; and in 1989 he received The John Bartlow Martin Award for Public Interest Magazine Journalism of the Medill School of Journalism, Northwestern University, with Robert Alvarez. He has many published articles in journals and magazines as varied as The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Environment, The Physics of Fluids, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and The Progressive, as well as in newspapers, including the Washington Post. Dr. Makhijani has testified before Congress, and has appeared on ABC World News Tonight, the CBS Evening News, CBS 60 Minutes, NPR, CNN, and BBC, among others. He has served as a consultant on energy issues to utilities, including the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Edison Electric Institute, the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, and several agencies of the United Nations.
    [Show full text]