| AGENCY |
DEADLINE |
Where / How to Comment |
Proposal
Summary |
NIRS Concerns and Points |
NRC Import Export
Federal Register
29614
Vol. 74, No. 119
Tuesday, June 23, 2009 |
09/08/
2009 |
rulemaking.
comments@
nrc.gov |
Radioactive Import Export Policy of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 CFR Part 110 RIN 3150–AI16 [NRC–2008–0567]
Export and Import of Nuclear Equipment and Material; Updates and Clarifications
|
Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) encourages strengthening and opposes all weakening or relaxation of the NRC import and export regulations. We also support full disclosure and public notification and opportunity for input on the import and export of radioactive materials and wastes and the import and export licensing and amendments.
It appears to be a clear and objectionable weakening of protection and reduction of public notice to change a required specific license to a general license.
This rulemaking [[§ 110.27 General license for import]] appears to allow a general license for importing radioactive material that currently requires either a general or specific license (with some exceptions). General licenses could presumably be used for unlimited import without public knowledge.
The existing notice to the public is inadequate.
This rulemaking makes it worse.
|
DOE Radioactive Nickel Recycling
no federal register notice
More Information |
09/15/
2009 |
Nickel@
emcbc.doe.gov;
CC comments to:
Inés Triay
DOE Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management in charge of Requests for Proposals;
Paul Sloan of Tennessee
Dept of Environment
and Conservation; and
Congressman Bart Gordon
via his website |
Department of Energy Issues Draft Request for Proposal for "restricted" recycling of radioactive nickel: Nickel Disposition at Paducah and Oak Ridge Facilities ---- the DOE wants to hear from processors who would apply to do the processing--- We taking this opportunity to let DOE know what members of the public have to say.
|
Efforts will be made to "clean" the radioactive nickel but it is not possible to remove all the contamination. Although DOE says the first reuse will be only to other nuclear facilities, it is not clear how it will be tracked especially after the first transfer of ownership. along the way, DOE will use its own "authorization" process which allows the entity responsible for cleaning up a DOE site to determine items and materials are "clean enough" to release from radioctive controls. Because there could be only limited demand for items made from the processeed radioactive metal, the economics could drive the processor to take on nonradioctive metals which could then be contaminated and get into commerce. |
DOE treat and CLEAR/Release Nuclear waste from Radioactive Controls
no federal register notice
More Information |
09/28/
2009 |
mllwtreatment@
emcbc.doe.gov;
CC comments to:
Inés Triay
DOE Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management in charge of Requests for Proposals;
Paul Sloan of Tennessee
Dept of Environment
and Conservation; and
Congressman Bart Gordon
via his website |
DOE RFP for BSFR -- DOE is seeking processors to treat and CLEAR/Release Nuclear waste from Radioactive Controls -- Most of these are in Tennessee, licensed by TDEC ---- The DOE wants to hear from processors who would apply to do the processing --- We taking this opportunity to let DOE know what members of the public have to say. |
We oppose the provisions of the DOE contracts that result in letting nuclear weapons waste be released out of radioactive control. As residents of the State of Tennessee, the state with the most, possibly only, companies licensed to deregulate and release (BSFR Bulk Survey for Release) radioactive wastes to regular landfills and elsewhere, we OPPOSE DOE contracting to have its nuclear weapons waste brought here and potentially released into our landfills and marketplace. Please delete all provisions of the contracts that would allow radioactive wastes to leave radioactive controls. Those of us who do not live in TN could be downwind or downstream and along transport routes thus potentially affected.
|
DOE West Valley
74160 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 235 / Friday, December 5, 2008 / Notices
More Information
|
09/08/
2009 |
Info here
|
Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Decommissioning and/or Long Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and WNY Nuclear Service Center. (Options for the cleanup of the West Valley nuclear waste site)
|
We support the full cleanup option meaning DOE and NYSERDA decide now to clean up the site fully and put all future effort into carrying out that decision. We oppose phased decision making, the government's "prefered alternative" because it allows more waste to leak and doesn't commit to full cleanup of the site. It is the the only way to protect the Great Lakes and communities downwind and downstream. All costs for full clean up should be provided BEFORE ANY MORE TAXPAYER MONEY is used for NEW NUCLEAR POWER AND WEAPONS WASTE or REPROCESSING of IRRADIATED FUEL.
|
