http://www.aps.org/policy/issues/nrcpetition11.cfmComment on NRC Licensing Regulations
Deadline for Comments: Tuesday, March 8, 2011
Why Does This Petition Matter?
Proliferation Risks Should Be Minimized
APS filed a petition with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requesting the agency change its licensing rules to include a review of the proliferation risks associated with smaller, more efficient nuclear fuel technologies.
Detection Difficulties Need to be Addressed
In its recently released report, Technical Steps to Support Nuclear Downsizing, an APS Study Group found that smaller uranium enrichment technologies could represent proliferation game changers, leading to more efficient methods for production and use of nuclear materials that would be harder to detect.
Where Can I Read the Petition?
Long and Short Versions of the Petition
The longer original version APS sent to NRC has more background information than the abbreviated NRC summary of the same petition.
Original APS Petition to NRC
NRC Docketed Petition
How Can I Comment?
Comment Online
You can comment online at the NRC site.
Comment on the Petition
Questions?
Please contact the APS Washington, DC office of Policy and Advocacy if you have any questions. We are glad to hear from you.
Francis Slakey
202-662-8706
slakey@aps.org
Background Information
Related Nuclear Information
APS Council Nuclear Energy Statement (1993)
"Nuclear Power and Proliferation Resistance: Securing Benefits, Limiting Risks"
APS/POPA Report (2005)
"Readiness of the US Nuclear Workforce for 21st Century Challenges"
APS POPA Report (2008)
Technical Steps to Support Nuclear Arsenal Downsizing (2010)
Full Report
Executive Summary
Stoopid anti-nuke scientists!!!
Don't they know there is no relation between nucular energy and nucular weapons???
I red it on the internutz so I know it's true!!!
There is NOT ONE NOT ONE NOT ONE scientist in the APS!!!
:sarcasm:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
