Albuquerque, N.M. —To call attention to suffering from the health and environmental effects from 60 years of uranium mining in N.M., the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment has called a press conference today at the Albuquerque Marriott, 3 p.m., before the U.S. Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice conference.  The speakers at the press conference will address why permits for uranium mining in and around the Grants mineral belt should not be granted. 

“We’re sick of environmental injustice,” says Petuuche Gilbert, Laguna-Acoma Coalition for a Safe Environment.

 “Our land and water is being used as a national sacrifice area,” adds Laura Watchempino Laguna-Acoma Coalition for a Safe Environment.

The press conference is set immediately before the U.S. Federal Interagency Working Group (IWG) in Albuquerque, NM. The Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (EJ IWG) was established in 1994 under Executive Order.

Items addressed at the conference include:

1. MASE demands clean up of uranium mining and milling sites to pre-mining and pre-milling conditions.
2. MASE is against all uranium mining and milling projects due to the long lasting uranium legacy in the Grants Mineral Belt.
3. MASE demands the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to conduct a siting study and exploration for a permanent repository for legacy waste.
4. MASE demands Council on Environmental Quality and U.S. Government Accountability Office hold oversight hearings on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s purpose and accountability. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not address environmental justice concerns and public health. MASE demands communities take the lead with technical support from other agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the New Mexico Environmental Department in efforts regarding uranium legacy issues.
5. MASE demands the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sign the Environmental Justice Memorandum of Agreement (MOA).  An Aug. 4, 2011 MOA recommits the 17 agencies and departments that signed the deal to implementing the Clinton-era Executive Order (EO) 12898, which generally required agencies to make environmental justice part of their missions and established a federal Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Environmental Justice.
6. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is disguised as an independent regulatory agency when in fact they use taxpayer money to promote and shield the nuclear industry.WHAT: Press Conference held by the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment (MASE) immediately before the U.S. Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice.
   The National Public Meeting for the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) meets Oct.25-26 at the same location.
   http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/interagency
   http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/nejac/meetings.html
   WHERE: Entrance to the Albuquerque Marriott, 2101 Louisiana Blvd. NE, Albuquerque, NM
   WHEN: Monday, October 24, 2011, 3 p.m.
   SPEAKERS INCLUDE: 
   Nadine Padilla, Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment (MASE)505-486-3499, mz.nadine@gmail.com
   Candace Head-Dylla, Milan, NM resident, 505-401-4349, cheaddylla@gmail.com

The Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment (MASE) is rooted in the experiences of uranium-impacted communities of the southwestern U.S. We are communities working to restore and protect the natural and cultural environment through respectfully promoting intercultural engagement among communities and institutions for the benefit of all life and future generations.

MASE Core Group of Alliances
Bluewater Valley Downstream Alliance, Dineh Bidziil Coalition, Eastern Navajo Diné  Against Uranium Mining (ENDAUM), Laguna-Acoma Coalition for a Safe Environment,  Post-71 Uranium Workers Committee  

MASE Affiliated Groups and Allies
Amigos Bravos, Moquino Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Association, New Mexico Environmental Justice Working Group, McKinley Community Health Alliance, New Mexico Environmental Law Center, Office of Peace, Justice and Creation Stewardship, Partnership for Earth Spirituality, Ramah Navajo Community, Red Water Pond Road Community Association, Sierra Club Environmental Justice Office, Southwest Research and Information Center, Stewards of Creation, NukeWatch, Think Outside the Bomb, Western Mining Action Network, Wise Uranium

 www.masecoalition.org

Contact:
Jennifer Marshall
505-231-1776
jennifer@jmarshallplan.com
www.jmarshallplan.com

Nadine Padilla of the Multi-Cultural Alliance for a Safe Environment urged regulators to deny the permit on both environmental and cultural grounds. “We’re not only concerned about the quality of the environment and possible contamination of the site; we’re also concerned because it’s a sacred place, a place that tribes regard as holy,” said Padilla, who is of Navajo and Pueblo ancestry and grew up nearby.

To read the entire article, click on the jump or follow this link directly to The New York Times article.

Sacred N.M. Mountain Remains at Center of Uranium Fight

By APRIL REESE of Greenwire

Published in The New York Times: August 18, 2011

GRANTS, N.M. — With Mount Taylor looming in the distance, western New Mexico citizens, elected leaders, environmental groups and tribal members clashed at a hearing before state regulators last night about whether a mining company should be allowed to further delay cleaning up a dormant mine on the mountain that may or may not reopen in the next few years.

The mountain, located about 15 miles northeast of here, is held sacred by many tribes and pueblos in the Southwest, including the Navajo Nation, the Hopi tribe, and Acoma, Laguna and Zuni pueblos. It also holds the nation’s largest uranium deposit.

Rio Grande Resources Corp., a subsidiary of San Diego-based General Atomics, applied last year for renewal of its 2005 standby permit for the Mount Taylor mine, which has remained shuttered since 1990. The new application (pdf) marks the second time the company has sought to renew the permit, which allows it to put off remediating the site with the understanding that the mine will reopen at some point. Under New Mexico’s mining laws, standby permits must be renewed every five years, for a maximum of 25 years.

More than 8 million pounds of “yellow cake” were produced from the mine before it was closed more than two decades ago due to plummeting uranium prices. Rio Grande Resources, which acquired the mine from Chevron in 1991, estimates that more than 100 million pounds of uranium remain unplumbed.

At the hearing, held by the New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division, testimony was divided roughly equally between those who support the renewal of the company’s five-year standby permit, with an eye toward the local economic benefits that could come from reopening the mine, and those who oppose it out of concerns that contamination could worsen if the site remains un-remediated for another five years.

Joe Lister, who manages the Mount Taylor mine site for the company, said there is a high likelihood that the mine will reopen within the next few years, and therefore it makes sense to receive an extension of standby status. State law requires mining companies seeking standby permits to show they are likely to resume mining operations.

But Eric Jantz, an attorney with the New Mexico Environmental Law Center, which requested the hearing, noted that the New Mexico Environment Department has found elevated levels of nitrates and uranium in an old underground waste lagoon at the mine site, and expressed concern that delaying a comprehensive cleanup could put the environment further at risk.

‘Everybody’s fighting for survival’

Others warned that jobs and financial gains should not come at the expense of ecological health.

“Everybody’s fighting for survival — we need that economic viability,” Steve Juanico of Acoma Pueblo told the hearing officer. “But it’s short lived. … We really need to protect our water resources. Are we doing the right thing?”

Lister said the company has worked with the New Mexico Environment Department to develop an abatement plan to address contamination in the lagoon, which involves planting salt cedar trees to soak up contaminated water. The trees will then be uprooted and destroyed. But Lister also acknowledged that salt cedar, while efficient at absorbing nitrates, is unproven as an absorber of water-borne uranium.

The mine site is being closely monitored, and no problems have been found beyond the contaminated water in the underground lagoon, Lister noted.

State Sen. David Ulibarri (D), who represents the city of Grants in the state legislature, testified in favor of the standby permit renewal, which would allow the company to bring the mine back online quickly. “The mine has proved to be a safe site for many years,” he said, adding that reopening the mine has “tremendous potential for bringing economic viability back” to western New Mexico.

Cibola County Commissioner Pat Simpson, speaking as a resident, said he also believes the company should receive a new standby permit, and hopes the mine will resume operations soon.

But to some area residents, the cultural significance of the site outweighs any economic benefits the mine could bring.

Nadine Padilla of the Multi-Cultural Alliance for a Safe Environment urged regulators to deny the permit on both environmental and cultural grounds. “We’re not only concerned about the quality of the environment and possible contamination of the site; we’re also concerned because it’s a sacred place, a place that tribes regard as holy,” said Padilla, who is of Navajo and Pueblo ancestry and grew up nearby.

Acoma and other area pueblos and tribes successfully petitioned the state to permanently designate the upper part of the mountain a “traditional cultural property” in 2009. The designation, which does not cover the existing mine, allows tribes to have greater input in development decisions on Mount Taylor, but it does not prohibit development.

Market uncertainty

When and if the mine opens also depends in large part on the notoriously volatile uranium market, which was further disrupted by this year’s nuclear reactor meltdown at Fukushima, Japan following that country’s devastating earthquake and tsunami.

While uranium prices had risen before the Fukushima disaster, they are currently below levels that would allow the mine to operate at a profit, Lister said. But he said he expects the mine to become economically viable within the time frame covered under the new permit.

“We expect the long-term market in uranium to continue to improve, and we expect in this 5-year term to resume operations,” he said. He declined to say what price would trigger reopening the mine, or how much it would cost to resurrect it.

Despite recent moves by China and Germany to nix planned nuclear power plants, there is still growing worldwide demand for uranium, Lister added, especially as uranium from old weapons stockpiles is depleted. “The world market is much larger than those countries that canceled their new nuke plants, and we’re seeing interest continue to grow,” he said, responding to a question about global demand in the wake of the Japan disaster.

But critics noted the company already received one renewal of its standby permit, in 2005, based on the same argument that resurrection of the mine was imminent.

Michael Jensen of Amigos Bravos, a New Mexico-based environmental group, noted that uranium prices skyrocketed during the previous standby permit period, yet the company did not reopen the mine. “I find it hard to believe that we can honestly take them at their word that they really want to get this mine going,” he said during his testimony.

No danger?

Mount Taylor lies within the Grants Mineral Belt, which helped make New Mexico one of the country’s primary uranium-producing states from the 1950s through the 1980s. But many miners have fallen ill in subsequent years, and they link their health problems to either direct radiation exposure from working in the mines or from the impacts of mining-related contamination.

But Lister said that today, the mine site does not pose a threat to the environment or to human health, and officials note that if the mine reopens, it will have to meet modern environmental and health standards.

Lister tried to allay critics’ concerns by touting the company’s containment and monitoring program, and he noted that just last May, the state environment department wrote a favorable letter to the mining and minerals division that helps clear the way for the standby permit’s renewal.

According to Rio Grande Resource’s permit application, stormwater, which the application says contains “low levels of radioactive contaminants,” is contained with diversion ditches and a network of underground pipes that discharge the water into an evaporation pond. And while there is a 15-acre waste rock pile at the site, “there is no indication the rock pile is any danger to humans or wildlife,” according to the application.

“I’ve lived here my whole life and I plan to die here,” Lister said during the hearing. “I’m just concerned about water as everybody else. We should take the opportunity to develop that resource.”

Click here (pdf) to read Rio Grande Resources’ standby permit application.

Reese writes from Santa Fe, N.M.

Copyright 2011 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

By Wren Abbott

Santa Fe Reporter | sfreporter.com

The New Mexico Mining and Minerals Department will issue a decision Thursday, Sept. 1 regarding the Mt Taylor Mine operator’s application to keep the site open.

At a four-hour hearing last night at Cibola Convention Center in Grants, the state MMD listened to testimony from mine operator Rio Grande Resources as well as environmental groups and the public regarding the status of the mine. The site, which is located about 12 miles northeast of Grants outside the tiny town of San Mateo, has the US’s largest store of high-grade uranium, but has not been actively mined since 1990. Partly because the profitability of mining for any substance fluctuates over time based on various factors, RGR has sought to keep the site on “standby” for the next five years, with the option to begin mining again within that period.

New Mexico Environmental Law Center represented two environmental groups at the hearing—Taos-based Amigos Bravos and Albuquerque-based Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment. The latter group sought to protect not only environmental but also cultural interests, based on the significance of the Mt Taylor area to many native American groups.

The public in attendance at the hearing was polarized on the issue, with members of the public aggressively cross-examining other public speakers. At one point a man tried to shoot down arguments made by Juan Juanico of Acoma Pueblo, who expressed concerns about the mine’s effects on water quality and noted that several of his family members died of cancer. Acoma is about 20 miles southeast of the mine site.

“We have yet to identify the causes of cancer in the majority of people who passed on here,” Juanico said.

The other man stood up and began questioning Juanico regarding whether smoking is allowed in casinos at Acoma, suggesting an alternative source of carcinogens.

Walter Leach was among the mine’s cheerleaders, asking mine manager Joe Lister how many jobs the mine could bring to Grants if it goes back into operation.

“If we operate at full capacity, in historical terms it would be somewhere around 1,000 men,” Lister replied.

Leach pointed out that the mine could potentially bring a boost to the area’s tax base if it went into operation.

“If we’re going to re-start America it starts locally,” Lister said in agreement. “It starts in rooms like this across the country.”

But Candace Head-Dylla scored a point for the anti-mining contingency, getting Lister to admit that RGR contributed to environmental contamination at the site in the past, though at first he said RGR hadn’t, to his knowledge. When Head-Dylla then asked whether he could promise that RGR wouldn’t cause contamination again, Lister replied, “I can’t make that statement.”

For more of SFR’s coverage of Mt Taylor Mine, see the print edition that comes out Wednesday, Aug. 24.

Photo by the Department of the Interior

The Interior Department has extended a ban for six months on new mining claims on more than 1 million acres near the Grand Canyon, outlined in red on this map. Interior is eyeing a 20-year ban on those lands, in addition to cross-hatched areas where mining is already banned.

By Matthew Trotter, Cronkite News

Link to original story

July 12, 2011

WASHINGTON – A proposal to reverse a federal ban on new mining claims near the Grand Canyon survived a committee vote Tuesday and could go to the full House as early as next week.

Opponents were unable to strip the language from the Interior-Environment appropriations bill, but not before contentious debate among House Appropriations Committee members about the true impacts of uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.

“Let’s not screw up the Grand Canyon,” said Rep. Ed Pastor, D-Phoenix, who asked what would happen to the environment and to the steady flow of tourism dollars if land around the Grand Canyon were industrialized.

But Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Mesa, who last week added the language to reverse the federal ban, defended his rider, saying Congress should be making such decisions and not the Secretary of Interior.

“The gulf between rhetoric and reality on this is as wide as the Grand Canyon,” Flake said, adding that in more than two years of study, the Interior Department has not been able to come up with a reason to stop uranium mining in the area.

Flake’s rider was a response to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who last month announced an emergency six-month ban on new mining claims on more than 1 million acres near the Grand Canyon. He was extending a two-year ban that would have expired this month, saying the extra time is needed for Interior to finish analyzing potential impacts of uranium mining in the area.

Salazar said at the time that his preferred action once the analysis is complete is a 20-year moratorium.

Rep. James Moran, D-Va., urged the committee Tuesday to strike Flake’s rider, saying uranium mining would poison the Colorado River water that millions of Americans rely on and blight the canyon’s scenic landscape.

Others argued — for and against the rider — by citing concerns over the level of foreign influence on American uranium mining.

Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., said it is mostly foreign companies competing for uranium mining rights in the U.S. Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, R-Mo., echoed his concern and offered a cautionary tale from her home state: Only one beryllium mine in Missouri is under an American company’s control, she said.

Several committee Republicans expressed concern about the amount of uranium the U.S. buys from foreign sources, claiming the nation imports about 90 percent of its uranium, mostly from Russia. Opening land near the Grand Canyon to mining was necessary for America’s economy and security, they argued.

But Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., countered that there is a reason the U.S. buys so much Russian uranium. “We buy Russian uranium because it keeps it out of the hands of Iran,” Jackson said.

“We buy Russian uranium because it keeps it out of the hands of North Korea.”

He said Flake has a “particular interest” in mining going forward.

“This is a Flake earmark for the mining industry,” Jackson said, drawing a smirk from Flake, who built a reputation for battling earmarks. “And for companies we can’t even name.”

Moran had the last word before the vote on his amendment.

“It (the rider) should be struck, we should protect the Grand Canyon, we should leave these decisions to the Secretary of the Interior,” he said.

The amendment failed on a 23-26 vote that split mostly on party lines. Three Republicans voted for the amendment: C.W. Bill Young of Florida, Frank Wolf of Virginia and Steven LaTourette of Ohio.

Flake called Moran’s amendment an attempt to “go around the deliberative process” in deciding whether to allow new mining claims on more than 1 million acres around the Grand Canyon that contain significant uranium deposits.

Until the funding bill wins final approval from the House and Senate, the ban imposed by Salazar remains in effect.

A committee staffer said the bill could reach the full House for consideration by next week or it could be delayed until after the House takes its August recess, depending on other business.