July, 13 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Rose Gardner, Alliance for Environmental Strategies (AFES), Eunice, NM, nmlady2000@icloud.com
Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, Austin, TX,
Susybelle Gosslee, League of Women Voters of Texas, sgosslee@airmail.net
Terry Lodge, legal counsel for Don't Waste Michigan, et al., tjlodge50@yahoo.com
Wally Taylor, legal counsel for Sierra Club Rio Grande Chapter, wtaylorlaw@aol.com
Michael Keegan, Don't Waste MI & Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes, mkeeganj@comcast.net
Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, kevin@beyondnuclear.org
Stephen Kent, KentCom LLC, skent@kentcom.com
60 Groups to NRC: Suspend ISP/WCS High-Level Radioactive Waste CIS Dump Proceeding, Till Covid-19 Emergency Ends
Coalition calls for DEIS public comment meetings along targeted transport routes in Texas and beyond.
ANDREWS, TEXAS
A coalition of 60 environmental and environmental justice groups, from 22 states, has written the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regarding Interim Storage Partners, LLC's (ISP) proposed Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for irradiated nuclear fuel targeting the Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) site in Andrews County, Texas. See the letter, here.
The coalition's letter to NRC advises:
All of the undersigned organizations hereby request that the Commission indefinitely extend, for the duration of the national COVID-19 pandemic emergency, the ongoing public comment period for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the ISP/WCS CISF proposed for development in Andrews County, west Texas. At the formal termination of the national emergency, as via a safe and effective vaccine available to all people regardless of socio-economic status, we request that the public comment period then be extended for a period of 180 days, post-pandemic. We further request that when in-person public comment meetings again become safely possible that the NRC conduct plenary-style, in-person public comment meetings in the following six Texas locations: San Antonio, Dallas/Fort Worth, Houston, El Paso, Midland, and Andrews. We also request that in-person public comment meetings likewise be held, post-pandemic, in more than a dozen cities nationwide, on impacted transport corridors in states outside Texas.
The 180-day public comment period (as opposed to NRC's current 120-day public comment period, currently set to end on September 4, 2020), and nearly two-dozen public comment meetings in more than a dozen states, would match the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) public comment proceeding at the DEIS phase of the proposed Yucca Mountain, Nevada permanent repository scheme, targeted at Western Shoshone lands. This ISP/WCS CISF proposal is more than half as large as the Yucca scheme: 40,000 metric tons of irradiated nuclear fuel, versus 70,000. But because the CISF is supposedly "temporary," export shipments would double the transport risks and impacts, thus matching those of the Yucca dump targeting Western Shoshone land.
The coalition letter came after U.S. Representative Lloyd Doggett (TX-35th) wrote NRC, also urging public comment meetings across the Lone Star State be delayed until after the pandemic emergency -- currently raging in Texas -- ends, and the public comment period be held open until after the in-person meetings are completed, including in his congressional district. Similarly, U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD-8th) has written NRC, urging the comment period be extended "throughout the duration of the pandemic," and to end it "no sooner than six months after this FEMA-declared emergency has passed."
Of the 60 groups on the letter, six are from TX: Energia Mia; Nuclear Free World Committee of the Dallas Peace and Justice Center; Public Citizen (Texas Office); Peace Farm; Sierra Club (Lone Star Chapter); and Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition. Alliance for Environmental Strategies (AFES), a largely Hispanic environmental justice organization, is based just five miles from the WCS site, across the state line in Eunice, New Mexico.
Of these, Public Citizen Texas Office, Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter, and SEED Coalition have officially intervened against the ISP/WCS CISF in the NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board proceeding. Rose Gardner, founder of AFES, has provided legal standing to Beyond Nuclear in its legal intervention against the WCS/ISP CISF, as well.
Terry Lodge, an attorney based in Toledo, Ohio, represents Public Citizen and SEED Coalition. Wally Taylor, based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, serves as legal counsel for Sierra Club.
Rose Gardner of Alliance for Environmental Strategies (AFES) in Eunice, NM said: "NRC has not even yet set up meetings in New Mexico or Texas for the public to comment on the ISP/WCS DEIS, and unfortunately this proceeding comes at a time when the whole nation, including New Mexico and Texas, are under stress and even dangerous conditions which do not allow for the common folk to even go to the grocery store or a doctor. NRC must stand down and postpone these meetings, as well as extend the comment period. The most vulnerable in our communities would be put at risk if these hearings were held now."
Gardner added: "I also admit that I am unable to concentrate on the dangers associated with the storage of high-level radioactive waste just five miles from my home even though that should be an important thing to discuss as this could possibly impact the futures of everyone in this area. NRC must take into account that these are not normal times and that regular communities are encountering abnormal situations every day that we never thought we would have to deal with. Living in the oil patch is especially difficult now because jobs are being lost and companies are pulling out of town at an amazing rate. I don't even know where we will be in two weeks as the dangerous contagious coronavirus pandemic seems to be getting worse, not better."
Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition based in Austin, TX said: "A private company seeks to profit by dumping the nation's deadliest nuclear reactor waste in West Texas, a massive environmental injustice. The facility could get licensed by NRC, an agency that's been ignoring the voices of thousands of Texans and people across the country who live along transportation routes. So far the process has been a sham. Well-documented health and safety concerns were tossed out by hearing judges. The NRC must start listening, and hold real public meetings on the DEIS, once the Covid-19 risks are over. More than 5.4 million Texans have been represented by county and city resolutions opposing nuclear waste dumping."
Hadden added: "These voices must count and the NRC must stop ramming massive deadly waste projects through at a time when many people are struggling just to keep their families healthy and fed."
Don't Waste Michigan, et al. legal counsel Terry Lodge said: "The NRC's official position, that potentially tens of thousands of extremely dangerous radioactive waste shipments are not even worth discussing in a scientific and public manner, is a dramatic red flag. There is zero justification to rush this ill-considered cash cow to licensing. The NRC must not be allowed to take advantage of the pandemic to ramrod a decision in the shadows."
Wally Taylor, Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter's legal counsel, said: "The DEIS for this project implicates so many issues and requires intense study, and probably expert review and opinions, that 120 days is clearly not enough time to submit the thorough and technically based comments that the NRC will require. ISP/WCS, and the NRC, want to fast-track this process to prevent genuine public input. We will not allow that to happen."
In its letter, the locations along major transport routes where the coalition urges NRC to hold public comment meetings include: Andrews, TX; Atlanta, GA; Boston, MA; Chicago, IL; Cleveland, OH; Dallas/Fort Worth, TX; El Paso, TX; Detroit, MI; Houston, TX; Kansas City, MO; Miami, FL; Midland, TX; Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN; Nashville, TN; New York, NY/Newark, NJ; Omaha, NE; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; San Antonio, TX; San Luis Obispo, CA; St. Louis, MO; Salt Lake City, UT; and Tampa, FL.
Beyond Nuclear aims to educate and activate the public about the connections between nuclear power and nuclear weapons and the need to abandon both to safeguard our future. Beyond Nuclear advocates for an energy future that is sustainable, benign and democratic.
(301) 270-2209LATEST NEWS
Mehdi Hasan Launches Media Platform With Naomi Klein, Greta Thunberg, and More
The journalist says Zeteo will feature "hard-hitting interviews and unsparing analysis" in op-eds, podcasts, and streaming shows.
Apr 15, 2024
After a few weeks of "soft launch" mode, journalist Mehdi Hasan on Monday officially debuted his new media platform, Zeteo, and declared that "this is not a one-man band."
The former MSNBC and Peacock host—whose show was canceled in November and wrapped up in January, after his incisive criticism of Israel's assault on the Gaza Strip—revealed nine of the contributors he has lined up so far, calling them "some of the biggest, boldest, and best names from media, activism, entertainment, and beyond."
They are Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Spencer Ackerman, comedian and podcaster W. Kamau Bell, Palestinian Canadian lawyer Diana Buttu, former CNBC and CNN correspondent John Harwood, foreign policy analyst Rula Jebreal, author Naomi Klein, novelist Viet Thanh Nguyen, actor and activist Cynthia Nixon, and Swedish climate campaigner Greta Thunberg.
"The tough interviews and knowledgeable analysis are all coming back, along with a global cast of contributors," Klein said on social media Monday. "I was honored when Mehdi asked me to be one of them, along with Rula Jebreal and Greta Thunberg and many others yet announced."
"Mehdi and I will be having a regular conversation called 'Unshocked,'" noted Klein, who authored The Shock Doctrine.
Hasan—who has also produced content for Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and The Intercept—has saidZeteo will feature "hard-hitting interviews and unsparing analysis" in a variety of forms, from op-eds and podcasts to streaming shows, beginning with "Mehdi Unfiltered."
"To keep Zeteo's journalism independent and free of advertiser and corporate influence," Hasan explained ahead of the formal launch, "and to allow us to continue investing in the future, we have to rely on our individual paid subscribers."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Catastrophic': Biden Admin Approves Largest Offshore Oil Export Terminal
"Nothing about this project is in alignment with Biden's climate and environmental justice goals," said one campaigner.
Apr 15, 2024
Climate action groups are vehemently rejecting the Biden administration's claim that the approval of a new offshore oil terminal—planned to be the largest in the U.S.—is in the "national interest," after the U.S. Department of Transportation announced the project had met several federal requirements and could begin operations by 2027.
The agency's Maritime Administration said last week that Enterprise Product Partners, a Houston-based pipeline company, had been granted a deepwater port license to build the Sea Port Oil Terminal (SPOT) near Freeport, Texas following a five-year federal review process.
The federal government determined the $1.8 billion terminal project had undergone sufficient environmental impact reviews and would overall benefit the country—even as it was projected by the Sierra Club, which has fought SPOT for several years, to emit greenhouse gases equivalent to those of nearly 90 coal-fired power plants.
"The evidence is clear that SPOT would be catastrophic to the climate, wildlife, and frontline communities of the Gulf," said Devorah Ancel, senior attorney with the Sierra Club. "It threatens the future existence of the endangered Rice's whale with a population of less than fifty, and its ozone pollution would compromise the health of thousands of Gulf residents who have endured decades of fossil fuel industry pollution. Make no mistake, SPOT is not in the national interest."
The project is expected to include two pipelines that would carry crude oil to the deepwater port each day, enabling the export of 2 million barrels of crude oil, loaded onto two supertankers at once, daily.
"Nothing about this project is in alignment with Biden's climate and environmental justice goals," said Kelsey Crane, senior policy advocate at Earthworks. "The communities that will be impacted by SPOT have once again been ignored and will be forced to live with the threat of more oil spills, explosions, and pollution. The best way to protect the public and the climate from the harms of oil is to keep it in the ground."
Allie Rosenbluth, U.S. manager at Oil Change International, noted that the project has been approved despite the International Energy Agency's clear assessment in 2021 that "all new investments in oil and gas projects must stop if the world is going to reach its climate goals," including limiting planetary heating to 1.5°C.
"The Biden administration's decision to approve the Sea Port Oil Terminal is a grave mistake. This approval will only harm local communities and ecosystems, and lead to even more devastating impacts of the climate crisis," said Rosenbluth. "The U.S. is already the largest producer of oil and gas and has the largest expansion plans globally. Instead of continuing this legacy of harm by approving fossil fuel projects, President Biden should be listening to the science and the masses of his constituents calling for an end to fossil fuels."
The direct action group Climate Defiance expressed doubt that the approval of SPOT will help Biden win over any voters as the 2024 election approaches.
Nine in 10 Democratic voters and Democratic-leaning independents told Pew Research Center last year that they believe the U.S. should prioritize developing renewable energy sources—and two-thirds of Republican voters under age 30 agreed.
"This project would be the single-largest oil export terminal in the U.S." said the group. "We are being boiled alive here, literally burned to death by 'moderate' politicians who see fit to torch us in the name of quarterly profits. How can we live like this? How can this go on?"
Last year was the hottest on record, and the first three months of 2024 have each broken records for high global temperatures. Scientists found last year that climate disasters including wildfires in Canada and extreme heat in Europe were made far more likely by fossil-fueled planetary heating.
Local organizers in Texas condemned the Biden administration's decision to ignore campaigners who have warned of the danger SPOT poses to marine habitats as well as people who live in the area where two crude oil pipelines have now been given final approval to run.
"We continue to struggle to see why Biden and [Transportation Secretary Pete] Buttigieg prefer to protect the corporate profits of billion-dollar oil giants like Enbridge and Enterprise over the hardcore objections of the people who would have to live with the consequences of pipelines criss-crossing our beaches," said Trevor Carroll, Brazoria County lead organizer with Texas Campaign for the Environment. "If you care about environmental justice and the climate, you just can't support a monstrosity like SPOT. The local community and the global climate justice movement are continuing to fight... This is not over."
Melanie Oldham, director of Better Brazoria, said SPOT will be "an oil spill waiting to happen that would not only lower property value, but harm our local ecosystems, ecotourism, beaches, recreation, and kill marine life like the endangered Rice's whale and Kemp's Ridley sea turtles."
"Those of us residents, beachgoers, and voters that have for the past four years opposed the SPOT offshore terminal and pipelines are very disappointed with the approval of the project license," said Oldham. "President Biden has again broken promises to protect frontline communities in Surfside and Freeport."
The administration's approval came three months after the White House announced it was delaying consideration of new gas export terminals, and the same day the federal government said fossil fuel companies will have to pay higher royalties in order to drill on federal lands.
But those climate actions paired with the SPOT approval amount only to "flip flopping," said Climate Defiance.
"It is not enough that the administration stopped new gas exports if they are going to back stab us with this death-sentence decision now," said the group. "This is not us being 'ungrateful.' This is the science. The pure, unvarnished, science."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Spying Expansion Could Hand 'Stasi-Like Powers' to Trump, Privacy Advocates Warn
"In my opinion no country that has something like this to enter into force can still be considered to be free," said Edward Snowden.
Apr 15, 2024
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden is among the privacy advocates sounding the alarm over a major expansion of mass surveillance that the U.S. House approved in a bipartisan vote last week, a step toward handing the federal government—and a potential second Trump administration—even more power to spy on Americans' communications without a warrant.
Sean Vitka, policy director of Demand Progress, used social media to press the top Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on the implications of an amendment that the lower chamber approved as part of a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
"Did you know your FISA [electronic communications service provider] amendment facilitates Stasi-like powers, very plausibly for [former President Donald] Trump? I asked your staff if you were lied to about it or if you knew. Can you confirm?" Vitka asked Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. (Trump, the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee, has postured as a FISA opponent, but as president he signed an extension of Section 702 authority.)
Vitka noted Sunday that Himes repeatedly characterized the amendment—which was led by HPSCI Chair Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio)—as narrow, even though it would dramatically expand the kinds of businesses that can be forced to help the government conduct surveillance operations under Section 702, possibly handing a would-be authoritarian chilling surveillance powers.
As the Brennan Center for Justice explained, "Although the amendment exempts hotels, libraries, restaurants, and a handful of other types of establishments, an enormous range of businesses could still be conscripted into service, including grocery stores, department stores, hardware stores, laundromats, barber shops, fitness centers, and countless other locations Americans frequent—even the offices in which they work."
"Moreover, although the targets would still have to be non-U.S. persons overseas, many of these businesses would lack the technical ability to turn over specific communications, so they would be forced to give the NSA access to entire communications streams—trusting the government to retain only the communications of approved targets," the group added.
Section 702 permits U.S. agencies to spy on non-citizens located outside of the country, but the communications of Americans—including activists, journalists, and lawmakers—have
frequently been swept up under the surveillance authority, sparking a bipartisan reform push.
Himes, an
opponent of reform efforts, responded dismissively to Vitka's question on Sunday, writing that "life is really too short to engage with people who need to use bombastic absurdities like 'Stasi-like.'"
"Yes I know exactly what is in there," Himes added, referring to the Turner-led amendment. "Some of it is classified. And none of it is remotely 'Stasi-like.' Sell your nonsense elsewhere."
Snowden, who in 2013 exposed the NSA's
illegal mass surveillance program, said in response that "the 'it's classified' dodge" by Himes "is a bright red flag."
"This amendment radically—and I repeat radically—expands the range of who the gov't can force to spy on their behalf. It may be law in DAYS!" Snowden wrote on social media.
Snowden went on to argue that Vitka's "invocation of 'Stasi-like' is not only a fair characterization" of the amendment, "it's probably generous."
"Frankly, it's hard to imagine any modern communication beyond the reach of this thing—which is, of course, the true reason they're trying to sneak it into law so quietly," he added. "It is unbelievably overbroad, and in my opinion no country that has something like this to enter into force can still be considered to be free."
"The House bill represents one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history."
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program,
said the "disregard for Americans' civil liberties" in Himes' reply to Vitka "is staggering."
"This provision allows the NSA to force a huge range of ordinary U.S. businesses to assist the NSA in Section 702 surveillance," Goitein added. "That's not 'nonsense,' that's a fact. And this is your response?"
URGENT: Please read thread below. We have just days to convince the Senate NOT to pass a “terrifying” law (@RonWyden) that will force U.S. businesses to serve as NSA spies. CALL YOUR SENATOR NOW using this call tool (click below or call 202-899-8938). 1/25 https://t.co/HAOHURZoJQ
— Elizabeth Goitein (@LizaGoitein) April 15, 2024
The Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), described by some as "Patriot Act 2.0," passed the House in an overwhelming bipartisan vote last week after mass spying supporters—including the Biden White House—defeated an effort to add a search warrant requirement to the bill.
But the legislation still has to clear a procedural hurdle to reach the Senate. Later Monday, the House is expected to vote on whether to table a motion to reconsider RISAA's passage.
If the bill does reach the closely divided Senate, privacy advocates are expected to continue their fight for meaningful reforms.
"The House bill represents one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history," Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a statement following Friday's House vote. "It allows the government to force any American who installs, maintains, or repairs anything that transmits or stores communications to spy on the government's behalf. That means anyone with access to a server, a wire, a cable box, a Wi-Fi router, or a phone."
"It would be secret: The Americans receiving the government directives would be bound to silence, and there would be no court oversight," he added. "I will do everything in my power to stop this bill."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular