I'm certain that Senator Risch will extract a response. I have been on this case for well over 10 years and my denied PRM-50-76 goes back to Mayday 2002.
Today, I e-mailed Senator Risch, asking him to get the NRC to answer my letter of 7 weeks ago.
Subject:
Fwd: Letter to Senator Risch
Date:
3/8/2012 1:41:46 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
Bobleyse@aol.com
Reply To:
To:
kari_emond@risch.senate.gov
Kari:
It appears that NRC s dragging its feet. Perhaps Senator Risch could remind the NRC that a timely response is warranted. Again, I appreciate the work of your office.
Bob
From: Bobleyse@aol.comTo: kari_emond@risch.senate.govSent: 1/19/2012 8:37:02 A.M. Mountain Standard TimeSubj: Letter to Senator Risch
Kari:
Attached is my letter to Senator Risch. I highly value your cooperation as well as the effectiveness of Senator Risch in extracting responses from the NRC. These matters are becoming deeper and deeper.
Now I'll get outside and run my snowblower.
Bob Leyse bobleyse@aol.com
Here is the letter that I sent on Jnauary 19, 2012:
Robert H. Leyse
P. O. Box 2850
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
January 19, 2012
The Honorable James E. Risch
United States Senator
1411 Falls Avenue E Suite 2
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Dear Senator Risch:
Nutshell: Why is NRC reluctant to perform the testing in water-steam per PRM-50-76?
The main appeal of my PRM-50-76, ML022240009, Docketed May 8, 2002, is that further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam are necessary. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories, see ML041210109, April 24, 2004. NRC now says that none of these Canadian tests are applicable and I believe you have already asked NRC for the details of their analysis that I requested in my letter of December 19, 2011.
On December 19, 2011, I wrote you, “I must keep this inquiry brief; hence I am deferring other concerns until very early in 2012,” It turns out that on December 23, 2011, I inadvertently found out that NRC has a huge program that involves corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies, see ML11031A000, page 58 of 226, I have asked NRC about this and they have told me nothing. Then, on January 5, 2011, I accidently ran across an NRC disclosure of a closed meeting that was held on September 30, 2011, that included EPRI and DOE and that included discussions of the corrosion testing of the full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. Here is one reference that was released on January 3, 2012: ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011, (23 page(s), 12/22/2011).
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
Robert H. Leyse
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Armed Guards Forever at Zion?
Subject:
The Zion D&D Game
Date:
2/12/2012 12:34:03 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
Bobleyse@aol.com
Reply To:
To:
btompkins@ans.org
Hello:
The Zion D&D is a continuing game that very likely has armed guards in place 24/7. Maybe Nuclear News could report where that payroll comes from. When ISFSI and its security monitoring building are returned to Exelon it is likely that the requirement for having armed guards in place 24/7 will continue. Who will pay for that? Nuclear News says that remaining trust funds will be returned to the ratepayers after ZionSolutions finishes the D&D. So, Nuclear News, please tell us more about the money games that will be played for a long time to come.
Robert H. Leyse
222 Elkhorn Road
P. O. Box 2850
Sun Valley, ID 83353
The Zion D&D Game
Date:
2/12/2012 12:34:03 P.M. Mountain Standard Time
From:
Bobleyse@aol.com
Reply To:
To:
btompkins@ans.org
Hello:
The Zion D&D is a continuing game that very likely has armed guards in place 24/7. Maybe Nuclear News could report where that payroll comes from. When ISFSI and its security monitoring building are returned to Exelon it is likely that the requirement for having armed guards in place 24/7 will continue. Who will pay for that? Nuclear News says that remaining trust funds will be returned to the ratepayers after ZionSolutions finishes the D&D. So, Nuclear News, please tell us more about the money games that will be played for a long time to come.
Robert H. Leyse
222 Elkhorn Road
P. O. Box 2850
Sun Valley, ID 83353
Friday, February 10, 2012
NRC ECCS Zircaloy Bundle at Sandia - ACRS & EPRI
I addressed the full ACRS on Thursday, February 9, 2012, as follows:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I’ll use 2 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. I wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive corrosion tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
The NRC-EPRI closed meeting discloses that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only.
ACRS need not spend much time on this item in its review of the NRC Safety Research Program. There is enough disclosure in the closed meeting, reference ML113140453, pages 3, 4 and 5, so that ACRS may recommend termination of the work.
You may click on the link ML113140453, below, to view the slides on pages 3, 4, and 5, to view the featherbedding at SANDIA:
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
I also considered the following brief, but longer presentation that has more facts:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I have 5 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. So, I’m encouraging ACRS to inform the public and Congress about this research.
I first wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
On October 18, 2010, I told the Thermal Hydraulics Subcommittee, “It is not sound science to combine the testing of single short rods of zirconium alloy with the testing of multi-rod stainless or Inconel assemblies in order to ascertain the performance of ECCS having thousands of zirconium alloy full-length rods.”
On Mayday, 2002, I sent NRC my PRM-50-76, calling for further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories. On January 25, 2012, NRC reported that these Canadian tests were not well suited for reflood assessment of TRACE. NRC now applies more recent tests from the Pennsylvania State University Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) facility, with modern grid spacers and more measurements.
However, since it has no zircaloy, RBHT is sterile and unresponsive.
Return to the slides.
On January 19, 2012, I wrote to Idaho Senator James E. Risch:
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
ACRS should tell NRC to stop the work at SANDIA and to redirect the work.
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I’ll use 2 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. I wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive corrosion tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
The NRC-EPRI closed meeting discloses that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only.
ACRS need not spend much time on this item in its review of the NRC Safety Research Program. There is enough disclosure in the closed meeting, reference ML113140453, pages 3, 4 and 5, so that ACRS may recommend termination of the work.
You may click on the link ML113140453, below, to view the slides on pages 3, 4, and 5, to view the featherbedding at SANDIA:
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
I also considered the following brief, but longer presentation that has more facts:
I’m Bob Leyse, L-E-Y-S-E, and I have 5 minutes.
The two slides are from an NRC presentation at a closed meeting with EPRI, September 30, 2011. NRC released these on January 3.
I first became aware of this activity on December 23, 2011, and I asked NRC to tell me more, however I have received no response. So, I’m encouraging ACRS to inform the public and Congress about this research.
I first wondered, “How is NRC going to cover up the fact that the reaction between zirc and water, in a bundle test, takes off well below 2200?” I got my answer after January 3. As you may read on the NRC slides, the extensive tests with zircaloy bundles are in air only.
On October 18, 2010, I told the Thermal Hydraulics Subcommittee, “It is not sound science to combine the testing of single short rods of zirconium alloy with the testing of multi-rod stainless or Inconel assemblies in order to ascertain the performance of ECCS having thousands of zirconium alloy full-length rods.”
On Mayday, 2002, I sent NRC my PRM-50-76, calling for further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories. On January 25, 2012, NRC reported that these Canadian tests were not well suited for reflood assessment of TRACE. NRC now applies more recent tests from the Pennsylvania State University Rod Bundle Heat Transfer (RBHT) facility, with modern grid spacers and more measurements.
However, since it has no zircaloy, RBHT is sterile and unresponsive.
Return to the slides.
On January 19, 2012, I wrote to Idaho Senator James E. Risch:
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
ACRS should tell NRC to stop the work at SANDIA and to redirect the work.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Again NRC Evades PRM-50-76
I've been after NRC to tell me about several matters regarding the denial of PRM-50-76. In their denial NRC referred to more than 50 tests at NRU, Canada that were managed by Pacific Northwest Laboratories (PNL). Then they narrowed the reference to two tests. More recently the NRC said those two tests were also unacceptable. So , I asked Senator Risch to find out which tests were found to be acceptable and the reasons for rejecting that data.
NRC responded that NRU tests PTH-110 and MT-3 were originally "... proposed as part of our initial assessment matrix for TRACE." NRC adds that RBHT at Penn State was used.
Well, I'll send another request via Senator Risch. I'll ask why the NRU data was rejected. I'll point out that the Penn State tests did not include the vital aspect of a zircaloy clad bundle.
The NRC's reply to Senator Risch is copied below.
NRC responded that NRU tests PTH-110 and MT-3 were originally "... proposed as part of our initial assessment matrix for TRACE." NRC adds that RBHT at Penn State was used.
Well, I'll send another request via Senator Risch. I'll ask why the NRU data was rejected. I'll point out that the Penn State tests did not include the vital aspect of a zircaloy clad bundle.
The NRC's reply to Senator Risch is copied below.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
SANDIA and corrosion tests of large zircaloy bundles.
Below is my recent letter to Senator Risch. It turns out that SANDIA, under contract from NRC, is conducting large scale corrosion tests of zircaloy bundles in air only. These are called fire tests.
Robert H. Leyse
P. O. Box 2850
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
January 19, 2012
The Honorable James E. Risch
United States Senator
1411 Falls Avenue E Suite 2
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Dear Senator Risch:
Nutshell: Why is NRC reluctant to perform the testing in water-steam per PRM-50-76?
The main appeal of my PRM-50-76, ML022240009, Docketed May 8, 2002, is that further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam are necessary. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories, see ML041210109, April 24, 2004. NRC now says that none of these Canadian tests are applicable and I believe you have already asked NRC for the details of their analysis that I requested in my letter of December 19, 2011.
On December 19, 2011, I wrote you, “I must keep this inquiry brief; hence I am deferring other concerns until very early in 2012,” It turns out that on December 23, 2011, I inadvertently found out that NRC has a huge program that involves corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies, see ML11031A000, page 58 of 226, I have asked NRC about this and they have told me nothing. Then, on January 5, 2011, I accidently ran across an NRC disclosure of a closed meeting that was held on September 30, 2011, that included EPRI and DOE and that included discussions of the corrosion testing of the full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. Here is one reference that was released on January 3, 2012: ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011, (23 page(s), 12/22/2011).
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
Robert H. Leyse
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Viewing content in the browser is not configured for this document. Content downloading will start shortly.
Robert H. Leyse
P. O. Box 2850
222 Elkhorn Road
Sun Valley, ID 83353
January 19, 2012
The Honorable James E. Risch
United States Senator
1411 Falls Avenue E Suite 2
Twin Falls, ID 83301
Dear Senator Risch:
Nutshell: Why is NRC reluctant to perform the testing in water-steam per PRM-50-76?
The main appeal of my PRM-50-76, ML022240009, Docketed May 8, 2002, is that further tests with zirconium clad bundles in water-steam are necessary. NRC denied that PRM, asserting that sufficient bundle tests had been performed at NRU, Canada, via a contract with Pacific Northwest Laboratories, see ML041210109, April 24, 2004. NRC now says that none of these Canadian tests are applicable and I believe you have already asked NRC for the details of their analysis that I requested in my letter of December 19, 2011.
On December 19, 2011, I wrote you, “I must keep this inquiry brief; hence I am deferring other concerns until very early in 2012,” It turns out that on December 23, 2011, I inadvertently found out that NRC has a huge program that involves corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies, see ML11031A000, page 58 of 226, I have asked NRC about this and they have told me nothing. Then, on January 5, 2011, I accidently ran across an NRC disclosure of a closed meeting that was held on September 30, 2011, that included EPRI and DOE and that included discussions of the corrosion testing of the full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. Here is one reference that was released on January 3, 2012: ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011, (23 page(s), 12/22/2011).
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Please have the NRC tell us about the corrosion testing of full-length heated bundles of zirconium alloy assemblies. The release on January 3, 2012, disclosed that the testing is being done at Sandia, it has 12 foreign participants, the full length assemblies are 17 by 17 arrangements of PWR fuel geometry, and testing is being done in air only. Why is NRC reluctant to perform the Sandia tests in water-steam as called for in PRM-50-76?
Robert H. Leyse
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Viewing content in the browser is not configured for this document. Content downloading will start shortly.
CLOSED MEETING: EPRI, NRC, DOE September 30, 2011
On January 3, 2012, the NRC released the following restricted amount of contents of the closed meeting. You may view the any of the four documents at NRC's ADAMS.
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Following is the two page memo of the closed meetiong that is dated 12/22/2011. Note that on page 2 we are told: "In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public."
Closed Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI.
Accession Number: ML113120189
Date Released: Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Package Contents
The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
ML113120182 - Memo re: Closed Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; The U.S. Department of Energy; and the Electric Power Research Institute. (3 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120193 - Meeting Agenda for 9/30/2011 Btwn. NRC, DOE, and EPRI. (2 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113120203 - Meeting Participants List - 9/30/11 Mtg. Btwn. NRC, DOE and EPRI. (1 page(s), 12/22/2011)
ML113140453 - RES Staff Presentation Handouts Materials NRC-RES/EPRI Coordination Meeting Friday, September 30, 2011. (23 page(s), 12/22/2011)
Following is the two page memo of the closed meetiong that is dated 12/22/2011. Note that on page 2 we are told: "In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public."
December 22, 2011
MEMORANDUM TO: Brian W. Sheron, Director
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
FROM: Brett A. Rini, Technical Assistant /RA/ B. Holian for B. Rini
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
SUBJECT: CLOSED MEETING BETWEEN THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH;
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; AND THE ELECTRIC POWER
RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC.
On September 30, 2011, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) staff met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) and Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (EPRI) to:
(1) Discuss ongoing and future research including potential projects as a result of the
Fukushima-Daiichi accident.
(2) Exchange current research and development (R&D) activities and plans of interest to all parties to identify potential opportunities for collaborative research projects.
(3) Identify progress made and any obstacles to making progress in tasks identified in the addenda to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NRC and EPRI on Cooperative Nuclear Safety Research (ADAMS Accession No. ML092290122).
Enclosure 1 of this meeting summary provides a list of the meeting participants.
A closed meeting notice was issued to the meeting participants on September 21, 2011
(ADAMS Accession No. ML112640017). A high-level draft agenda was included as an
attachment to the meeting notice.
The meeting consisted of several presentations by RES staff and representatives of DOE and EPRI. These presentations were organized by topic areas of interest that had been coordinated among the meeting participants in advance.
Enclosure 2 provides the final meeting agenda that identifies these topic areas and includes a detailed schedule for the meeting.
Enclosure 3 provides handout materials that RES staff used for their presentations. Following staff review of the RES handouts used during the meeting, staff determined that the handouts could be released to the public.
CONTACT: Brett Rini, RES
301-251-7615
Brett.Rini@nrc.gov
-2-
The meeting objectives were accomplished through discussions that accompanied and followed presentations throughout the day. In the future, staff will evaluate whether part or all of the meeting can be opened to the public.
Enclosures:
1. List of Meeting Participants
2. Final Meeting Agenda
3. RES Staff Presentation Handout Materials
DISTRIBUTION
Jennifer Uhle
Brian Holian
Michael Case
Richard Correia
Kathy Halvey Gibson
Richard Rivera-Lugo
Jeanne Dion
Vered Shaffer
Thomas Nicholson
Ghani Zigh
Marty Stutzke
Steven Schaffer
Richard Lee
Rosemary Hogan
Aladar Csontos
Mirela Gavrilas
Annie Kammerer
Kevin Coyne
Patricia Santiago
David Stroup
Russell Sydnor
Sean Peters
David Skeen
Friday, January 27, 2012
The Obama Growth Gap
The following is copied from the Wall Street Journal, January 25, 2012, page A17.
Ronald Reagan: He and advisers such as George Schultz shunned the idea of stimulus and agreed on "the need for a long term point of view."
Ronald Reagan: He and advisers such as George Schultz shunned the idea of stimulus and agreed on "the need for a long term point of view."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
