[NukeNet] FW: investigation suspended; do you have any idea what this is all about?

Sun Dec 30 13:38:32 EST 2007

 See Federal Register notice below:  
 The  background states that the  purpose was to keep uranium prices high.  How convenient.  What do you all make of this whole thing? 

I can see the impact of allowing more Russian high enriched  uranium imports, which would be a good thing from a proliferation standpoint. It keeps Russia from selling it to nations who would not downblend, but would use it to make their own nuclear bombs.   We have been relying on downblended uranium for fuel for our  power plants for a while now.  Relieves the need to mine, mill and enrich uranium.  This is completely different from MOX fuel, which relies on plutonium reprocessing, as even the bomb grade plutonium will require before it can be made into nuclear fuel.    

  So, does this amendment seek to suppress Russian high enriched uranium imports, to maintain high uranium  prices, and create an environment to benefit those who will  profit from more mining, milling, and enrichment, in the U.S. and abroad.   What has been the environmental consequences of downblending high enriched uranium and retooling it into fuel?  Who has done research on this?  

The poor folks in Indian country oppose more mining, and milling and rightly so.  Their water supply is still contaminated from past mining activities.  Some have to drive 50 miles or more to fill tanks which they hall back to their homes because there is no safe drinking water.  Their wells are still contaminated.  There is no public drinking water supply in some areas.   The piles of mill tailings are still blowing in the wind. Kathy Helms has written extensively about it.  The Indians are sick, and have been denied benefits.  My son Russ spent two weeks out there photographing and interviewing the victims.  The stories he has sent me break my heart.   

The best solution, of course is a shut down of the entire nuclear industry, except for nuclear medicine,  but we tried that, and it failed.  Now with this revival, things are worse than ever before. 

What do you make of this?

Jeannine > > [Federal Register: December 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 249)]> [Notices] > [Page 74272]> From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]> [DOCID:fr31de07-28]> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------> > DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE> > International Trade Administration> > [A-821-802]> > > Extension of Time to Submit Comments Concerning the Initialed> Draft Amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping> Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation> > AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,> Department of Commerce.> SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') and the> Russian Federation's Federal Atomic Energy Agency (``Rosatom'') have> initialed a draft amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping> Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation (``Suspension> Agreement''). See Initialed Draft Amendment to the Agreement Suspending> the Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation;> Request for Comment, 72 FR 68124 (December 4, 2007) (``Draft> Amendment''). On December 20, 2007, Power Resources, Inc. (``PRI'') and> Crow Butte Resources, Inc (``CBR''), U.S. producers of uranium> concentrates, requested a one-week extension to the comment period> outlined in the Draft Amendment. The Department is granting this> request in full.> > FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally C. Gannon at (202) 482-0162,> Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.> Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, N.W.,> Washington, D.C. 20230.> > SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:> > Background> > On October 30, 1992, the Department suspended the antidumping duty> investigation involving uranium from Russia on the basis of an> agreement by its government to restrict the volume of direct or> indirect exports to the United States in order to prevent the> suppression or undercutting of price levels of U.S. domestic uranium.> See Antidumping; Uranium from Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia,> Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan; Suspension of Investigations and> Amendment of Preliminary Determinations, 57 FR 49220 (October 30,> 1992).> The Suspension Agreement was subsequently amended, by agreement of> both governments, on March 11, 1994, October 3, 1996, and May 7, 1997.> See, respectively, Amendment to Agreement Suspending the Antidumping> Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation, 59 FR 15373> (April 1, 1994); Amendments to the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping> Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation, 61 FR 56665> (November 4, 1996); and Amendment to Agreement Suspending the> Antidumping Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation, 62 FR> 37879 (July 15, 1997). On July 31, 1998, the Department notified> interested parties of an administrative change with respect to the> Suspension Agreement. See Agreement Suspending the Antidumping> Investigation on Uranium from the Russian Federation, 63 FR 40879 (July> 31, 1998). On November 27, 2007, the Department and Rosatom initialed a> new draft amendment to the Suspension Agreement.> > Extension Request> > The Department provided parties with thirty days from the> publication date of the Draft Amendment in the Federal Register to> submit comments on the proposed amendment. The Draft Amendment> published in the Federal Register on December 4, 2007, and, therefore,> comments were due on January 3, 2008. On December 20, 2007, PRI and CBR> requested a one-week extension to the deadline for submitting comments> on the proposed amendment. PRI and CBR stated in their submission that> the complexity of the Suspension Agreement and Draft Amendment, coupled> with the December holiday, necessitate additional time for PRI and CBR> to review and analyze the Draft Amendment and submit meaningful> comments.> For the reasons stated in PRI's and CBR's submission, the> Department is granting this request in full. The comments on the Draft> Amendment are now due on January 10, 2008.> > Dated: December 21, 2007.> David M. Spooner,> Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.> [FR Doc. E7-25390 Filed 12-28-07; 8:45 am]> > BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S> > 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.energyjustice.net/pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20071230/901422b7/attachment.html 