South Carolina Says “NO” To Mountaintop Removal Coal.

Comment: the next Governor of VA needs to stop mt top removal and No uranium mining too!

Monday, May 18th, 2009

Recently South Carolina legislators introduced the Appalachian Mountains Preservation Act. This legislation would prohibit the import of coal extracted using the super aggressive mining method, known as mountaintop removal.

The bill, H. 3955, was introduced by Rep. Carl Gullick, R-Lake Wylie, and has drawn a small but committed group of bi-partisan co-sponsors.

Mountain removal is a method of mining designed from the beginning to take the miner out of the equation. Coal companies use thousands of tons of explosives and enormous machinery to blast the tops off of mountains in order to harvest thins seams of coal. Opting to invest in machinery and explosives leads to a decrease in underground mining jobs.

South Carolina is among the nation’s top ten consumers of mountaintop removal coal, burning millions of tons of it annually.

Carl Shoupe and Rodney Adams both of Harlan County, Kentucky were present in Columbia for a press conference. They both live in direct proximity to active mountain top removal mines and can attest to the harmful effects this mining has on Appalachian communities.

Carl Shoupe a retired underground coal miner and Vietnam veteran spoke passionately about the inherent beauty of his home, and the destruction that mountaintop removal is causing not only to the mountains but also to coalfield communities.

Rodney Adams, also a veteran and retired underground miner, attested to the loss of mining jobs due the highly mechanized nature of strip mining. (so open pit mining does not employ large amount of miners, notice pro uranium people!!)

“We’re trying to put some pressure on,” he said. “So we can put the coal mining back underground where it’s supposed to be.”

South Carolina is the 4th state to introduce legislation that would ban the import of mountaintop removal coal to be used by their electric utilities. North Carolina, Georgia and Maryland have all introduced similar legislation.

For more information contact Austin Hall, Austin@appvoices.org

http://www.ilovemountains.org/all/519

NRC says it can't ban importation of nuclear waste

Comment: Do you really trust the EPA or the NRC to protect us?

By The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says it doesn't have the authority to prevent foreign radioactive waste from being imported into the United States.(do what!!! NRC has a problem, remember they approve uranium mining permits and so call maintain nuclear plants, really????!!!)

The NRC wrote in an April 9 letter to Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., that the Atomic Energy Act doesn't distinguish between domestic and foreign waste.

The NRC says that as long as the material can be imported safely and someone is willing to accept it, the commission can't keep the waste out.(maybe some laws needs to change!!!!!???)

Salt Lake City-based EnergySolutions' is seeking a license to import up to 20,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste from Italy's shuttered nuclear power program.

After processing in Tennessee, about 1,600 tons would be disposed of in the western Utah desert.(don't you think this stuff will come over on a ship and travel our roads!!!)

Matheson and Gordon are sponsoring a bill -- which has yet to get a hearing -- that would ban the importation of low-level radioactive waste unless the nuclear material originated here or the waste was imported for a strategic national purpose.

They contend that the country should restrict space at its dumps to domestic waste.

The site in Clive, Utah, is the only low-level radioactive waste facility available to 36 states, although EnergySolutions says capacity there isn't an issue.

The company has agreed to limit the amount of foreign waste accepted in Clive to 5 percent of its remaining capacity.

Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman has said he doesn't want the waste coming to Utah, but
EnergySolutions is challenging in federal court the state's efforts to keep the waste out.

Matheson, Gordon and Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., sent the NRC a list of questions asking what would happen if the court rules in EnergySolutions' favor. All three serve on the committee that oversees the NRC.

The NRC declined to give an opinion on the court case and said Utah is responsible for regulating the company's facility.

"The NRC will issue a license to import low-level waste if it determines that issuance of the license would not be inimical to the common defense and security or constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety and that an appropriate facility has agreed to accept the waste," the NRC wrote.

While Huntsman has said he doesn't want foreign waste coming here, state law doesn't prohibit it.

Passing such a law would be difficult in Utah, where the company is a major donor to conservative state lawmakers and it employs a relatively large number of lobbyists.(maybe we need to ban Lobbyists too!)

One of the company's former lobbyists is U.S. Rep, Rob Bishop, R-Utah. Bishop's district includes the EnergySolutions' facility.

He has said a national policy on foreign waste isn't needed and that states should decide whether to allow foreign waste.
------
On the Net:
www.energysolutions.com
www.nrc.gov

Senate Introduces Mining Reform Bill

— By Josh Harkinson Thu April 2, 2009 1:30 PM PST

Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico has just introduced a mining reform bill in the Senate, bringing Congress one step closer to updating the nation's most outdated public lands law, the General Mining Law of 1872.

A similar bill from House stalled in the Senate last year, where Majority leader Harry Reid, the son of a gold miner, has been a powerful ally of the hard rock minerals industry.

Mining companies are still allowed to remove minerals from public lands without paying a cent in federal royalties.

As I reported in a recent profile of Reid, Nevada remains an anachronism in a region that is becoming much less tolerant of the America's most polluting industry.

Bingaman's bill is less progressive than a similar House measure, but might win key support from Reid and moderate Republicans.

According to Velma Smith, the manager of the Pew Campaign for Responsible Mining, the bill proposes reducing the House's proposed 8 percent royalty to something between 2 and 5 percent, to be set at the discretion of the Department of Interior.

It would also impose a reclamation fee of .3 to 1 percent.

In what's been a keen interest of Bingaman's, the bill also asks the National Academy of Sciences to perform a study on uranium mining.

Smith says uranium, which is the only energy mineral overseen by the mining law, may be moved to a leasing system.

Environmentalists have been concerned that mining on any one of 1,200 uranium mining claims along the Colorado River could pollute the water supply for Las Vegas and Southern California.(dah, it has already polluted the rivers!)

In other important respects, the Senate and House bills are the same.

Both call for stricter environmental permitting of mines, better ways for lands to be set off-limits to mining, and more financial assurances that mining companies will clean up after themselves.

The cost of cleaning up abandoned mines in the U.S. is now estimated to be at least $32 billion.

Will Reid support the bill? "I really don’t know," Smith says.

"My sense was that Senator Bingaman's office took a long time vetting this with a lot of people.

I don’t see this as an extreme bill by any means.

So I think there’s a chance for the industry and environmentalists to come together."(dah, don't think so, corp wants money and heck with people!)

Uranium found during police raids

Peter Gregory
April 1, 2009

Uranium, cash and chemicals have been seized in a series of raids connected with the leaking of confidential police documents.

Police said three men had been arrested as a result of the raids, carried out by Petra Taskforce investigators in Melbourne and country Victoria today. Members of the police ethical standards department and Office of Police Integrity (OPI) were also involved.

The uranium, and a substantial amount of chemicals and glassware, were allegedly found in a storage facility at Harcourt, near Castlemaine. Police did not say how much uranium was found or how it was stored.

The OPI said today that the arrests arose from a joint investigation into the unauthorised release of highly confidential police intelligence.

It said the investigation had revealed links between police members and criminal elements, however, it was not alleging police were implicated in the activity that led to today's arrests.
Police said a 42-year-old Preston man was arrested after the raid allegedly uncovered a large clandestine laboratory.

They also reported finding about eight litres of a suspected drug of dependence and a large amount of cash at a house in Penola Street, Preston.

Police also searched an address in High Street, Kangaroo Flat, a suburb of Bendigo, where they allegedly discovered about $120,000 in cash, a handgun and chemicals they believe would be used to make amphetamines.


As part of the raids, investigators also allegedly located an amount of uranium and a substantial amount of chemicals and glassware, in a storage facility at Harcourt.

And a hydroponic cannabis plantation of about 50 plants was allegedly found at Bulla Road,

Bulla. Glassware and chemicals allegedly intended for use in amphetamine manufacture were also located.

George Dracoulis, head of the department of nuclear physics at Australian National University, said uranium oxide that was mined and then transported in labelled steel drums, was almost completely benign.

"It's a natural mineral, it's very slightly radioactive, but any sort of simple container controls the radioactivity,'' he said.

"If you ate it, ingested it, you might have some issues,'' he said.

Professor Dracoulis said he would be concerned if "people have somehow got hold of radioactive waste".

"In Australia that would mainly be through medical areas or industrial areas where they use radioactive sources,'' he said.

Police said tonight that Garry McMillan, 42, from Preston had been charged with trafficking a drug of dependence, possessing proceeds of crime and possesing articles for the manufacture of amphetamine.

He has been remanded in custody and is due to appear at Melbourne Magistrates Court at a later date.

Kangaroo Flat man, Andrew McNaughton, 46, was charged with trafficking a drug of dependence and remanded to appear at Bendigo Magistrates Court tomorrow.

A 49-year-old Bulla man has been charged with trafficking, cultivating and possessing cannabis and has been bailed to appear at Broadmeadows Magistrates Court on June 29.

Comment: Everyone should take a pat on the back,

Especially Deborah and Phillip Lovelace - they made this happen!

A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE MINING AND MILLING OF URANIUM IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA IN THE ABSENCE OF AN UNBIASED CONCLUSIVE STUDY ON THE POTENTIAL EFFECTS THEREOF

WHEREAS, in 1983, in response to proposals to mine uranium in the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the General Assembly enacted a legislative moratorium on the mining of uranium in Virginia, which remains in effect today; and

WHEREAS, present-day estimates of uranium ore in Pittsylvania County and the price of uranium yellowcake indicate that uranium deposits in Pittsylvania County may be worth as much as $7 to $10 billion, prompting proposals to study the consequences of repealing the moratorium and developing a regulatory framework for uranium mining; and

WHEREAS, a company known as Virginia Uranium, Inc. has proposed to establish a mining and milling operations in Pittsylvania County; and

WHEREAS, on November 6, 2008, the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission (VCEC) adopted a resolution urging the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research (VCCER) to enter into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences, or other comparable scientific or academic institution independent of the Center, to conduct a wide-ranging study of the impact of uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Hurt is in favor of an unbiased, scientific study of the potential impacts of uranium mining and milling in Virginia by an independent entity such as the National Academy of Sciences.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HURT, VIRGINIA;

That unless and until it can be demonstrated a reasonable degree of scientific certainty that there will be no significant release of radioactive sediments downstream or in the air under any circumstances, the Town of Hurt is opposed to the elimination of the existing legislative moratorium on uranium mining.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED;

That any study commissioned by or used by the Commonwealth of Virginia to determine the feasibility of uranium mining in Virginia should include the following criteria:

(1) The study must thoroughly evaluate the risks, including those resulting from natural events such as floods to the citizens of Virginia and assess whether uranium mining and milling in Virginia can be undertaken in a manner that will completely safeguard the Commonwealth¢s environment, natural and agricultural lands, and the health and well-being of its citizens;

(2) The entire study process must be open to the public and the press;

(3) The Town of Hurt, being within 15 miles of the proposed uranium mining and milling site must be included as active participants in the study process.

(4) The study must be conducted, and the conclusions of such study be determined, by a group of qualified and impartial experts, such as the National Academy of Sciences, who are completely independent of the uranium mining industry, the nuclear power industry, and any state commission that has assumed or been charged with the responsibility for providing such a study;

(5) A peer review group that is independent of the VCEC and the VCCER and includes adequate representation for the environmental public health, water supply and water resource and air quality agencies, including the Army Corps of Engineers, is established to monitor and critique the study; and

(6) That the study must be adequately funded and be given adequate time for the completion of the study.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED;

That the Town Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to each member of the Town¢s Congressional and General Assembly Delegations.

Adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Hurt on the _____day of
____________________, 2009.

Aging NJ nuke plant has fire as license vote nears

By Wayne Parry
Associated Press Writer / February 2, 2009

LACEY TOWNSHIP, N.J.—A weekend fire shut down the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, the nation's oldest commercial nuclear plant, just days before the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is expected to clear the way for a new 20-year license.

Authorities said the fire, which was in a separate building from the nuclear reactor, was not a threat to public safety and released no radiation. It left a thin film of oil on the plant grounds and in a canal, said Beth Archer, a spokeswoman for the plant's owner, Chicago-based Exelon Corp.

The oil was being cleaned up Monday, she said. There was no immediate word of any impact on fish or other wildlife.

The blaze broke out in an electrical transformer just before 10 p.m. Sunday and burned for about 15 minutes before being brought under control with the aid of outside fire companies.

The cause was still being investigated Monday, and the plant remained shut down. The transformer damaged in the fire had just been installed in December, replacing an older unit that had failed.

Later this week, the NRC is expected to reject the last remaining challenge by opponents to the plant's application for a new license that would run through 2029. The plant, whose boiling water design is considered obsolete, would be 60 years old at the end of that license.

NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the fire should have no bearing on the commission's scheduled "affirmation hearing" Wednesday.

Opponents want further analysis of the drywell -- a steel barrier surrounding the nuclear reactor designed to contain radiation in the event of an accident. They claim the liner has corroded and weakened to the point where it is unsafe, a charge denied by the plant's owners.
The agency determined in November that the liner is strong enough to operate safely at least through its next scheduled inspection in 2012.

In addition to concerns about the strength of the steel liner, opponents also cite the threat of a terrorist attack on the plant -- something that the NRC is not considering -- and the fact that the main evacuation route away from the plant is a one-lane road that is often choked with traffic.

Supporters cite the plant's high-paying jobs (as much as $70,000 to $80,000 a year in a region without much industry) and the more than $9 million it pays in state and local taxes each year.

If the NRC's commissioners reject the opponents' claims on Wednesday, the agency can then direct its staff to issue a new license to Oyster Creek, Sheehan said. He could not say how soon such a directive might occur.

Richard Webster, an attorney representing a coalition of environmental and community groups who want the plant shut down, said the fire is just one more example that shows Oyster Creek is too old to operate safely.

"This kind of thing happens pretty regularly down there," he said. "We think it's far too early to move ahead and make a final decision."

Oyster Creek, which last had a transformer fire in the late 1980s, according to plant officials, is located in the Forked River section of Lacey Township, about 60 miles east of Philadelphia.

The Nine Mile Point Nuclear generating Station near Oswego, N.Y., went online Dec. 1, 1969 -- the same day as Oyster Creek -- and has already gotten a new 20-year license. But Oyster Creek's license was granted first, technically making it the oldest of the nation's 104 commercial nuclear reactors that are still operating.

The plant generates 636 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 600,000 homes a year. It provides 9 percent of New Jersey's electricity.

Just a broken pump?

By Published by The Editorial BoardPublished: February 1, 2009

Pittsylvania County Administrator Dan Sleeper gave a common sense explanation as to why the community wasn’t notified about a corroded pump that allowed a small amount of leachate to leak at the county’s landfill in Dry Fork.

The leak was discovered on March 21, 2008, but apparently wasn’t made public until last month during a Board of Supervisors meeting. The county wound up paying a $1,300 civil fine for what Sleeper described as enough spilled leachate to fill a coffee cup.

Leachate is liquid that has passed through rotting garbage or other wastes, picking up contaminants as it goes. The leachate in question contained “metals and organic constituents.”

So what does this incident have to do with uranium mining and milling?

Pittsylvania County’s “sanitary landfill” is a closely monitored facility that is bound by the same set of state laws and regulations as countless other similar facilities around Virginia. While humans have been throwing away their garbage since the dawn of time, they’ve never had to contend with the complex and comprehensive regulations that are in place today for garbage dumps.

It didn’t take long for uranium mining opponents to draw parallels between the leachate leak and what they’re fighting. They drew those parallels because they saw a regulated, government-monitored waste handling system fail without the public’s knowledge.

What if the pump in question had been responsible for handling uranium mining and milling wastes?

What if it took almost a year for the public to learn about a spill at Coles Hill?

What if the public found out about it as a side note during a public meeting?

One of the arguments used by uranium mining opponents is that even a regulated, government-monitored activity can still run into problems that could potentially affect the community. In essence, they believe that even if the rules are followed, the rules themselves aren’t good enough.

It appears they want a margin of safety that’s either perfect or close to it because they believe that even a small amount of uranium mining and milling waste will be a big problem both now — and into the future.

But life isn’t perfect. Machines fail, liquids spill and solids break. Perfection is certainly not a human trait.

The county landfill leachate spill was a minor event with big overtones.

The questions raised by this incident at the landfill are valid — and deserve answers.

To no one's surprise, Rahall reintroduces mining law reform

Comment: Notice the statement in RED

After three decades of trying, West Virginia Rep. Nick Rahall is not about to give up his crusade to bring the "antiquated mining law into the 21st Century."

Author: Dorothy KosichPosted: Wednesday , 28 Jan 2009

RENO, NV -

U.S. House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall of West Virginia has reintroduced legislation to reform the 1872 Mining Law.

Rahall's bill easily won the approval of the House during the last congressional session, but was not approved in the Senate.

The Hardrock Mining and Reclamation Act of 2009 (HR 269) is nearly identical to the previous bill approved by the House in 2007.

It includes an 8% gross royalty on production from future mines on public lands and a 4% gross royalty from mines now operating on federal lands.

It would allows the federal government to withdraw wilderness study areas, area of initial environmental concern, areas in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and imposes strong permitting requirements for mines proposed near national parks, such as the Grand Canyon.

The measure would also end the sales of public lands that contain mineral resources and establish a clean-up fund for abandoned hardrock mines on public lands.

It would also create a community impact assistance account to provide financial assistance for communities impacted by mining, including funds for infrastructure and public services.

HR 269 would also allow for the suspension of mining permits and allow the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to order mines cease operations if serious environmental pollution becomes a crisis.

Mine operators would only be allowed to suspend mining operations for no more than 180 days without seeking the permission of the federal government.

The Secretaries could also deny mining plans of operations or exploration permits.

******The bill also provides for citizen lawsuits against mining or exploration programs. ***********

"I have labored to reform the Mining Law of 1872 for nearly three decades-not just to fight the giveaway of public lands and valuable minerals, and to combat the threats to human health and safety from abandoned mine lands-but because I am a supporter of mining," Rahall said.

"I believe we can no longer expect a viable hardrock mining industry to exist on public domain lands in the future if we do not make corrections to the law today."

Rahall also named Rep. Jim Costa, D-California, to again chair the Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals Resources, which will oversee any hearings on HR 269.

However, National Mining Association President and CEO Hal Quinn said the bill will put "thousands of high-paying mining jobs and mining-dependent communities through the West" at risk.

"These are jobs and operations that play a vital role in rebuilding America, but they cannot shoulder the world's highest royalty and remain competitive in the international markets."

Quinn added that the royalty and other aspects of HR 699 "are duplicative of other U.S. laws and regulations would needlessly jeopardize U.S. metals mining-further increasing our dependence on foreign sources for the metals we will need to rebuild America."

"NMA supports responsible updates to the General Mining Law to keep U.S. mining strong, but this is the wrong medicine for our economy and crushing news for thousands of families in America's mining community," he concluded.

Judges Rule in Favor of Petitioners [Against U Mine Co.]

Story Published: Dec 8, 2008

Story Updated: Dec 4, 2008

PINE RIDGE S.D. – An Atomic Licensing Board (ALB) judges’ panel of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ruled in favor of petitioners who filed interventions in the 10-year license renewal of Cameco, Inc.’s In Situ Leach (ISL) uranium mine near Crawford, Neb.

The petitioners include individuals from Nebraska and the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota; as well as the Oglala Sioux Tribe; the Oglala Delegation of the Black Hills Sioux Nation Treaty Council; the Lakota nongovernmental organization Owe Aku (Bring Back the Way) and the environmental group Western Nebraska Resources Council. “This is a huge victory for us,” said Debra White Plume, representing the Pine Ridge based nongovernmental organization Owe Aku, and a member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe.

ISL uranium mining involves massive pumping of oxygenated water into aquifers to dissolve and strip uranium from sandstone particles at the bottom of the aquifer. The process removes most of the uranium and then pumps toxic water back into the aquifer where it can mix with drinking water aquifers, rivers and streams. The mined water is then stored above ground in evaporation ponds or dumped into a deep disposal well under the drinking water aquifer.

On July 28, 2008, 13 individuals and groups filed to intervene in the license renewal. A petition was also filed in November 2007 to intervene in the North Trend Expansion of the same Crow Butte uranium mine. Plaintiffs oppose the renewal and expansion of the Crow Butte mine’s license because of suspected contamination of drinking water sources with Arsenic, Radium, Thorium, and heavy metals due to the mixing of the mined water with community groundwater.

Further threats are presented by spills and leaks into the White River, which flows from the ISL mine towards Chadron, Neb. and Pine Ridge and which cuts through the land of several of the Petitioners. Plaintiffs said that threats to public health and safety exist due to the faults and fractures that link the mining site and drinking water aquifers and that the license application is missing key information, such as the fact that the Crow Butte mine is wholly-owned by a Canadian corporation and that foreign ownership of the mine is not allowed by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

Following the recent Sept 30 hearing, the ALB judges admitted nine contentions including the failure to disclose non-radiological impacts, failure to consult regarding cultural resources, failure to disclose impact on surface waters, including The White River, failure to disclose fractures and faults connecting the mined aquifer and drinking aquifers, failure to disclose that wastes are released on-site, failure to include recent research, failure to account for the value of non-degraded wetlands, and failure to disclose foreign ownership.

On the issue of foreign ownership of the mine and the concealment of that fact, the Commission ruled, “its resolution in this proceeding is potentially fatal to Crow Butte’s proposed renewal of its license. The Board is of the opinion that it is in the best interest in the management of this proceeding that this issue be segregated from the other contentions and briefed on the merits up front.”

David Frankel, attorney for Consolidated Petitioners, said that briefs on the issue of foreign ownership and concealment are due by end of December, with responses in January, and a decision about 30-45 days thereafter. If the Commission rules against the company on the foreign ownership issue they will either lose their license and start 20 years of full time water restoration or sell the mine to a U.S. company.

“I am glad that the court ruled in our favor, I know we still have a lot of work ahead of us in exposing what’s been going on at the mine and undoing the damage that the mine has already caused to our water supply. Cameco must take responsibility for the damage that their mine caused, and pay to repair that damage. Here at Pine Ridge, we have widespread Arsenic contamination and a rate of diabetes 800 times the national average, said White Plume. “This is about the Human Rights of my clients and their future generations to have clean drinking water,” said Bruce Ellison, attorney for White Plume and Owe Aku.

ISL mines owned by Cameco, Inc. in Nebraska, Wyoming and Canada have all had major spills and leaks and were recently fined for permit violations ($1.4 million in Wyoming and $100,000 in Nebraska). Cameco polluted Lake Ontario from its plant in Port Hope, Ontario which has been discharging Uranium, Arsenic and Radium into the lake.

Petitioners asserted claims that Cameco does not consider the environmental benefits of the ecosystems that are being damaged. The Board admitted the contention regarding wetland impacts and the economic value of the environmental benefits from those wetlands in a non-degraded condition.

“We will appeal aspects of the Board’s ruling such as their refusal to admit our contention about the spiritual value of pristine water for traditional Lakota medicines and cultural ceremonies such as the inipi (sweat lodge),” said Frankel.

The Petitioners expect Cameco to file for license amendments to expand the current mining area to include another two uranium mines, the Three Crow and the Marsland Expansions, and say they will oppose these two applications as well.

http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/national/plains/35565779.html

Bush Violates Law Protecting Grand Canyon From Uranium Mining

Mining Claims Put a Stranglehold on Iconic Canyon

WASHINGTON - October 27 - The Bush administration allowed Phoenix-based Neutron Energy to stake 20 new mining claims south of the Grand Canyon on August 7, in violation of an emergency Congressional resolution passed seven weeks earlier that declared off limits to mining activity approximately 1 million acres adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park.

A new Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of records generated by the Interior department's Bureau of Land Management unearthed evidence of Neutron Energy's claims, filed in defiance of a Congressional resolution aimed at protecting the Canyon and the Colorado River that flows through it from a surge of uranium mining activity sparked by uranium prices escalating in anticipation of new nuclear power plant construction.

"The Bush administration's Grand Canyon giveaway is a direct violation of the law," said EWG Senior Analyst for Public Lands Dusty Horwitt. "This is the environmental equivalent of a subprime mortgage on the nation's most iconic natural treasure. Mining companies get in cheap today, and the public pays tomorrow for what is certain to be a major environmental disaster."

EWG alerted the public and Congress to the rush for mining rights around the Grand Canyon in an August 2007 report called Mining Law Threatens Grand Canyon, other Natural Treasures. This week's updated analysis by EWG shows that as of October 1, 2008, speculators and mining interests have filed 8,568 mining claims in the area protected by the emergency resolution, compared to 110 claims in January 2003.

A satellite map showing the claims is available here.

Federal documents also show that the administration has illegally processed or approved requests to explore and drill for uranium on at least seven claims in the protected area after the House Natural Resources Committee resolution, passed June 25. The resolution invoked a rarely-used emergency provision to protect a million-acre expanse around the canyon.

Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), chairman of the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands, is spearheading legislation that would protect this land permanently. EWG urges Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to include Grijalva's bill in the sweeping public lands package to be considered next month.

The Bush administration has said that it will defy the Congressional resolution. Three conservation organizations -- the Grand Canyon Trust, Center for Biological Diversity and Sierra Club -- have filed suit to force its compliance.

Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and a number of conservation organizations have protested the administration's stance.

Napolitano, the Southern Nevada Water Authority and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California have written Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne expressing concern about the impact the surge in claims would have on the Grand Canyon National Park and the Colorado River, the source of drinking water for 25 million Americans, including residents of Las Vegas, Los Angeles and Phoenix.

The antiquated 1872 Mining Law leaves the federal government virtually powerless to prevent mining activity on public land, even if mining threatens national parks or precious water resources. Last year, the House passed a comprehensive mining reform bill but the measure stalled in the Senate.

Mining has been the nation's leading source of toxic pollution for nine consecutive years according to the Environmental Protection Agency. (emphasis mine...SB)

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/10/27-15

YOU NEED TO READ THIS!

FROM CELDF.ORG

Over a century ago, corporate robber barons and their politicians started creating the nation’s regulatory laws and agencies. Corporate managers, their lawyers and their politicians have been perfecting this system ever since. It’s fine-tuned to the point that most of us think it was us trying to regulate them.

By replacing real governing power with the toothless Regulatory System, corporate schemers have us trudging off to permit application hearings, hat in hand, to beg our elected Zoning Board members and Environmental Agency employees not to let corporations use their pre-engineered regulatory law as a community wrecking ball.

By relying on the Regulatory System to solve problems that effect community health, local economies, environments, and the sustainability of a decent quality of life, we let powerful minorities hiding behind corporations and the legal protections they wield call the shots. They are always one step ahead of us, since they wrote the rules.

Our communities expend time, money, energy, and resources in an endless game in which the right of corporations and those who command them to harm our communities and deny our rights isn’t even on the table.

Decades of experience have convinced growing numbers of people that the Regulatory System operates as an “energy sink” -- forcing communities to expend limited resources on roads to nowhere.

Others hold onto the hope that if they make the right presentation, hire the best lawyers, become experts in hydrology, toxicology, traffic patterns...the people working at the regulatory agencies will notice and protect our communities.

What some of us have learned is this: we have been letting corporations regulate us. We’ve been letting corporate mangers LEGALIZE corporate assaults with their deadly technologies, disruptive constructions, and denials of rights. We know this because their Regulatory System has been issuing the permits.

The story of the corporate theft of people’s rights reaches back to the 1600s, when the very first global corporations included the East India Company, the Royal African Company, the Hudson’s Bay Company, The Virginia and the Massachusetts Bay Companies. Like today’s multinationals, they exploited cheap or slave labor, appropriated ineffectually defended public resources, and swindled markets.

In 1787, when the U.S. Constitution was drafted behind closed doors, the same institutionalized culture of promoting privileges for the privileged left all women, blacks, Native Americans, and un-propertied white men with no claim to constitutional rights. In 1886 it granted those rights to corporations, which then proceeded to challenge the rights of people.

In 1893, when the very first regulatory agency, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), was established, then Attorney General Richard Olney assured the president of the Burlington Railroad that there was nothing to worry about:

The [ICC]...is, or can be made, of great help to the railroads. It satisfied the popular clamor for a government supervision of the railroads, at the same time that the supervision is almost entirely nominal. Further, the older such a commission gets to be, the more inclined it will be to take the business and railroad side of things. It thus becomes a sort of barrier between the railroad corporations and the people and a sort of protection against hasty and crude legislation hostile to railroad interests.

Regulatory agencies established after the ICC are no different. They protect corporations from being governed by the people with laws that would clearly subordinate the powerful minorities commanding them to community majorities. The Regulatory System has, in fact, erected a nearly impenitrable barrier between the soveriegn people and their legal creations, the mighty corporations of today. (e.g. see: PA local officials condemn attempt to usurp authority to govern corporate ag.) And there is much more. The true history of corporations is largely untaught and therefore cannot instruct us as we attempt to protect our communities from the harm they inflict, unless we take the initiative to ferret out the truth, and learn it. Citizens who are interested in uncovering this history are encouraged to attend the Daniel Pennock Democracy School.

Our authority to simply decide what kinds of communities we want to live in has been robbed from us through an ingenious bait-and-switch. Regulatory agencies create the illusion that we have legal remedies in the face of corporate assaults on our communities and families.To safeguard the future for our children and the planet it is time we confront these usurpations. What needs to become clear is that it is no use just fighting a particular corporation, a site battle, a permit. In every campaign, we are fighting hundreds of years of accumulated law and custom that have stolen democracy, rights, and self-determination from us. And it matters what you will do next.

Read: "TRIAGE" from CELDF's March 2008 Newsletter, Susquehanna

"It is business control over politics (and by 'business' I mean the major economic interests) rather than political regulation of the economy that is the significant phenomenon of the Progressive Era. Such domination was direct and indirect, but significant insofar as it provided a means for achieving a greater end -- political capitalism. Political capitalism is the utilization of political outlets to attain conditions of stability, predictability, and security -- to attain rationalization -- in the economy. Stability is the elimination of internecine competition and erratic fluctuations in the economy. Predictability is the ability, on the basis of politically stabilized and secured means, to plan future economic action on the basis of fairly calculable expectations. By security I mean protection from the political attacks latent in any formally democratic political structure.

"I do not give to rationalization its frequent definition as the improvement of efficiency, output, or internal organization of a company; I mean by the term, rather, the organization of the economy and the larger political and social spheres in a manner that will allow corporations to function in a predictable and secure environment permitting reasonable profits over the long run. My contention...is not that all of these objectives were attained by World War I, but that important and significant legislative steps in these directions were taken, and that these steps include most of the distinctive legislative measures of what has commonly been called the Progressive Era." -- Gabriel Kolko in The Triumph of Conservatism