Feeds:
Posts
Comments

New Laws Offer Hope For Transparency

June 22, 2011 by Public Citizen Texas

from http://www.flickr.com/photos/rmgimages/4882451468/The Texas Legislature has taken steps to offer more transparency in government this legislative year. As a Texas Tribune article  written by Becca Aaronson points out, lawmakers hope this will provide a lot of information to be available online. However, some people are worried that private information could be leaked to the public because of the recent breaches in security online on the Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services website. Some experts are concerned that with the amount of information being released some private information could become public.

As quoted in the article, Sherri Greenberg, former State Representative and interim director at the Center of Politics and Governance at the LBJ School of Public Affairs, says that “we must be very careful when we talk about personal privacy, security and certain data that should never… be online”.  Public Citizen’s own Andy Wilson was also quoted in the article saying that it should not be a problem to take out the private information and that “it should be fairly simple if it is in the form of a spreadsheet or a database to just simply eliminate those columns of [private] data.” Adding that it is “a technical issue, not a privacy issue”.

Many lawmakers and experts hope that the new bills will help with efficiency as well as transparency. Representative Kirk Watson from Austin thinks that when the information is released, some people will “offer ideas for efficiency in government”. Although lofty thinking by Rep. Watson, the public disclosure laws passed in the Legislature will be a major victory in the fight for good government. It is difficult to predict the ramifications of the new laws, but at least now it is up to the public to determine the outcome.

Posted in Good Government, Texas Legislature | Tagged , , , , , , |

Three-quarters of US nuclear power plants have had radioactive tritium leaks

June 21, 2011 by Citizen Carol

According to an Associated Press investigative report, three-quarters of the nation’s commercial nuclear power sites have had tritium leaks (a radioactive form of hydrogen), often into groundwater from corroded, buried piping and the number and severity of the leaks has been escalating as the reactors age, even as federal regulators extend the licenses of more and more reactors across the nation.  Leaks from at least 37 of those facilities contained concentrations exceeding the federal drinking water standard — sometimes at hundreds of times the limit.  Click here to read the entire AP story.

Population near aging Texas nuclear plants.

Comanche Peak

South Texas Project
   
   

Posted in Nuclear, Radiation | Tagged , , , , , , |

New NRC rule would minimize “legacy sites” but might create more waste for WCS

June 20, 2011 by Citizen Carol

Facilities that process large quantities of radioactive material have the potential for significant environmental contamination due to the scale of their operations. Over time, leaks from these facilities can lead to significant radioactive contamination of the subsurface soil and groundwater.  In addition, the high costs of disposing of radioactive material off-site may lead these facilities to store more waste on site, increasing the potential for subsurface radioactive contamination and significantly higher decommissioning costs.

Currently these facilities are required to perform surveys to verify that radioactive releases are below regulatory requirements and do not pose public health hazards.  However, the NRC believes that existing regulations were not clear enough concerning subsurface contamination.

A new Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) rule would now require these facilities to minimize the introduction of residual radioactivity at their sites during operations. It also requires reporting of additional details about a facilities cost estimates for decommissioning and tightens NRC control over certain financial instruments set aside to cover eventual decommissioning costs.

These new regulations, which will take effect December 17, 2012, were designed to prevent future “legacy sites” with insufficient funds for decommissioning. A legacy site is a facility with an owner who cannot complete complex decommissioning work for technical or financial reasons, causing those costs to fall to the taxpayer.

An unintended consequence will be that there is that much more low-level radioactive that will need to be disposed of in sites such as the Andrews County site that the Texas legislature just passed legislation on opening it up to accept waste from outside the original two state compact (Texas and Vermont).  Click here to read more about radioactive waste disposal in the US.

Posted in Nuclear, Radioactive Waste | Tagged , , , , |

Bob Perry Donates to Multiple Presidential Hopefuls

June 19, 2011 by Public Citizen Texas

Tim Pawlenty

Mit Romney

With the 2012 presidential race heating up, candidates have begun to boast about their high-profile donors. In particular, Texas millionaire Bob Perry has been a significant contributor to both Tim Pawlenty and Mitt Romney’s campaigns.  It is not uncommon for big donors to give to multiple campaigns, explains Alexander Burns in his Politico article, but Burns goes on to say “the real test of loyalty here will be who –if any– Perry actually bundles contributions for.”  Bundling is when a large group of fundraisers get together to form their own PAC allowing individuals to funnel more money into an election.

Perry also gave to multiple candidates in the 2008 presidential election. He gave the maximum amount of $2,300 to both Romney and McCain in the Republican primary.  However, Perry is hardly alone in hedging his bets.

Michael Beckel’s OpenSecrets blog shows many donors give to multiple campaigns.  The most interesting discovery from Beckel’s report is that many people cross party lines even when they give a substantial amount to each candidate (talk about hedging your bets).  Perhaps the most surprising of the cross-overs are that two donors gave the maximum amount to Rep. Ron Paul and now Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Beckel offers a quote from an anonymous Democratic campaign operative to explain the multiple donations. The operative said “donations like these are about access. At that level of contribution, you probably get to meet the candidate and have a conversation with them.”

Perry seems to be all about access and creating chances to be in the “winner’s circle” as Larry Sabato describes.  Perry has been a influential person not only in Texas politics but also national politics. He has donated millions of dollars to 527 groups or PACs,  such as Karl Rove’s PAC American Crossroads, Tom Delay’s TRMPAC and ARMPAC (both instrumental in Tom Delay’s criminal conviction) and the highly controversial group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.  It appears the 2012 election cycle will be no different for Perry who will continue to use his large amounts of money for access and influence.

Posted in Campaign Finance | Tagged , , , , , |

NRC testimony inspires fear, not confidence, in US nuclear power plant safety

June 18, 2011 by Citizen Carol

In an earlier blog we mentioned the hearings on Capitol Hill being held by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on the implications of Japan’s nuclear accident for the United States.  Besides the concern that the nation’s nuclear safety rules had failed to consider the possibility of losing both off-site power from the electric grid and on-site emergency diesel generators. (NRC Commissioner George Apostolakis said that this condition produces a station blackout, and the commission has a rule covering such blackouts, but Mr. Jaczko said that the thrust of the statement was that the agency had not thought enough about a single event that would damage both the grid and the diesel backup generators, causing a plant to take longer to recover), there was testimony about the spent fuel rods.

At Fukushima, the spent fuel rods stored on site posed as grave a threat as the reactor cores. They are packed with uranium, are very unstable and generally not well-protected. NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko, when asked by Sen. Tom Carper about the spent fuel pools in the United States, admitted that “we have not given that enough attention.”

Jaczko also said that until Fukushima, the NRC had never really considered the possibility that multiple reactors or even multiple plants could fail at the same time, due to some sort of large-scale natural disaster or other event. “Our traditional approach has always been to assume a single incident at a single reactor,” he said. “Clearly Fukushima-Daiichi showed us that we have to consider the possibility of multiple units at a single site, perhaps multiple spent fuel pools being affected at the same time.”

Commissioners also had no answers about how to fix backup power systems so that they continue to cool nuclear material in the event of a major power outage. The batteries at Fukushima ran for only eight hours, in the United States, the standard length is only four hours.  NRC commissioner George Apostolakis testified that he was not sure what action would/could be taken to address the problem.

Amidst these less-than-inspiring answers, larger questions loom about nuclear regulation. The NRC has frequently been criticized as too close to the nuclear industry (not unlike Japan’s admission in a draft report to the IAEA, that its nuclear regulator was run by a ministry, which has been the chief promoter of nuclear energy for decades – click here to read our earlier blog on the IAEA report).

During the 2008 campaign, President Obama, while promoting nuclear energy as the electric power source of our future, called the NRC “a moribund agency…captive of the industry it regulates,” but little was done to bring it back to it’s primary mandate of being the watchdog for nuclear safety.  Rather, the NRC has been more of a cheerleader for the industry, even after the Fukushima disaster.  A Wall Street Journal MarketWatch article highlights this point:

The Obama administration is considering whether to intervene in a legal dispute between Entergy Corp and Vermont over continued operation of the state’s only nuclear plant, two officials familiar with the matter said Thursday.

At issue is whether the state has the authority to block Entergy’s bid to continue operating the Vermont Yankee plant beyond March 2012. Typically, federal regulators have jurisdiction over the licensing of nuclear reactors.

During a Senate hearing Thursday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and Kristine Svinicki, a member of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the Justice Department is weighing whether to intervene in the case.

“The litigation posture of the United States is under active deliberation by the Justice Department and they’ve asked that in our testimony today we not comment any further,” Svinicki said, citing an exchange between her staff and the department.

A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment.

Sanders also said the Justice Department had consulted the five-member nuclear commission about the issue and that on Wednesday, commission had privately voted, 3-2, in favor of federal intervention in the case. None of the commissioners would confirm the specifics of that vote, citing the need to keep legal matters private.

Another member of the commission, William Ostendorff, said the discussions between the Justice Department and the nuclear agency were “a matter of whether or not the NRC has an interest in this case, dealing with pre-emption issues.”

“The political reality is that the DOJ is going to have to make a decision,” Sanders responded. Earlier in the hearing, he told the commissioners, “in my very strong opinion, it is not your business to get involved in that fight.”

Entergy wants to extend the life of its Vermont Yankee plant beyond March 2012, but has run into opposition to nuclear reactors that has escalated across the country following a nuclear crisis in Japan and revelations about potentially inadequate disaster preparedness at nuclear plants in the U.S.

Both the nuclear industry and regulators have said they will make changes as a result of the events in Japan. At the hearing Thursday, the NRC members again said they expect to tighten rules governing backup power for nuclear plants.

At the same time, the regulators have not backed away from their normal business of reviewing license extensions and new reactor designs.

In March, the NRC gave the green light to Entergy, approving operations at Vermont Yankee for another 20 years. But when Entergy bought the Vermont facility in 2002, it agreed to give state regulators say over the license extension.

The state passed a law in 2006 requiring Vermont legislators to approve the extension. Now, Entergy says that law invalidates their agreement and the decision should be up to federal regulators.

Senator Sanders (I-VT) repeatedly criticized the commissioners on this point during the hearings, urging them to step back from the issue. “If the state of Vermont chooses energy efficiency and sustainable energy for its future, instead of an aging and trouble-ridden nuclear power plant, it is not the place of the NRC to prevent us from doing that,” he told them. “The NRC’s mandate is very clear. Its concerns begin and end with safety. It is not supposed to be the arbiter of political or legal disputes between a $14 billion dollar energy company and the people of Vermont.”

To view the archived webcast of the hearing, click here.

Posted in Global Warming | Tagged , , |

Austin City Council Run-off Election Debate

June 17, 2011 by

Solar Austin held a debate between Austin City Council Place 3 candidates Randi Shade and Kathy Tovo. The focus was on energy issues. Here is a brief excerpt from the debates where each candidate addresses a question about how an increase of electricity rates should be handled.

[vimeo=25250426]

The election is this Saturday, June 18. You can view the entire debate here:

[vimeo=25244125]

Posted in Energy, Good Government | Tagged , , , , , , , , , |

Disclosure Forms Show Texas Lawmakers Invest in Media While Others Are In Debt

June 17, 2011 by Public Citizen Texas

Public disclosure forms released Wednesday show that Texas lawmakers have widely varying financial situations.  In an OpenSecrets blog post, Tarini Parti breaks down how many members of Congress invest in media organizations.  Parti explains that this could be a conflict of interest because many members have a “vested interest…in the performance of the same organizations that are supposed to be their watchdogs”.

Of the 60 lawmakers that have media organizations investments, 6 of them come from Texas.  They are Congressmen Michael McCaul (R-TX26), Kenny Marchant (R-TX24), Michael Burgess (R-TX10), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX25), William Flores (R-TX17) and Blake Farenthold (R-TX27).

          From left to right: Congressmen Bill Flores, Blake Farenthold, Kenny Merchant, Michael Burgess, Lloyd Doggett, and Michael McCaul.

The largest investor in media organizations from the Lone Star State is Rep. Michael McCaul with anywhere from $179,018 to $505,000 invested in companies like Comcast Corp., Walt Disney Co. and CBS Corp. The disclosure reports only require members of Congress to list their assets and debts in broad ranges.

Disclosure reports also show that not all members of Congress from Texas are wealthy enough to invest in media organizations however. A Washington Post article points out that many Republican freshman lawmakers who campaigned on reducing the federal debt are in substantial debt themselves.  One such freshman lawmaker is Congressman Farenthold.  The disclosure reports show that the Congressman could have anywhere between $45,000 and $150,000 in credit card debt.  However, Flarenthold does list that he has anywhere from $2,002 to $30,000 in personal media investments in the Walt Disney Co.

The public disclosure reports that came out this week provide the public with a better understanding of how lawmakers chose to spend their money. The reports show that some lawmakers have chosen to invest in companies that are supposed to report in a fair and unbiased manner on campaign issues and congressional ethics. The documents show yet another example of why disclosure laws are important. The public has a right to know how lawmakers spend their own money so they can trust them with their tax dollars.

Posted in Good Government | Tagged , , , , , , , , , |

The Shroud of Fukushima

June 16, 2011 by Citizen Carol

The Shroud of Fukushima

Artist rendering of the Shroud of Fukushima

According to the London Telegraph, Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco) has announced that they will start construction of a shroud over the No. 1 reactor at the ill-fated Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant where a hydrogen explosion destroyed the walls and roof of the reactor building on March 12, the day after the cooling system was knocked out by the Japanese earthquake and the tsunami that it triggered.

The shroud will stand 177 feet high and be 154 long with a roof that can be opened to give cranes access to the interior. It will also be fitted with filters that, over time, will scrub the air inside the building of radioactivity, enabling workers to enter the plant.  The frame of the shroud will be put together off-site and once in place, it will be covered with polyester fiber panels coated with a resin designed to prevent further radiation leaking into the atmosphere – at least that’s the plan.

Tepco is using the operation at the No. 1 reactor to test the construction methods and effectiveness of the shroud.  In truth, they are not sure how effective the temporary cover may be in limiting emissions of radiation from the reactors and spent fuel pools, but it will at least prevent more rainwater entering the buildings and becoming contaminated with radiation.  If it proves effective they have plans to build similar covers over the No. 3 and No. 4 reactor buildings, which were also damaged by explosions after the tsunami.

Eventually, Tepco plans to erect a concrete structure around the reactors, but that will take several years to achieve.  A similar concrete sarcophagus was built over the remains of the reactors at the Chernobyl power plant after that facility was destroyed in an accident in April 1986.

In hearings on Capitol Hill, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works was questioning the NRC’s chairman, Gregory B. Jaczko about the implications of Japan’s nuclear accident for the United States.  A statement by a commission official on Wednesday indicated that the nation’s nuclear safety rules had failed to consider the possibility of losing both off-site power from the electric grid and on-site emergency diesel generators.

NRC Commissioner George Apostolakis said that this condition produces a station blackout, and the commission has a rule covering such blackouts, but Mr. Jaczko said that the thrust of the statement was that the agency had not thought enough about a single event that would damage both the grid and the diesel backup generators, causing a plant to take longer to recover.

Let’s hope the US is not the next country designing a sarcophagus for a nuclear facility.

Posted in Nuclear, Radiation | Tagged , , , , |

White Stallion Coal Plant Fails to Obtain Water Contract

June 15, 2011 by

Lake Travis Levels Plummeted During 2009 Drought

Today the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Board of Directors delayed a vote on providing water to the “White Stallion” coal plant proposed for Matagorda County. Though White Stallion’s Chief Operation Officer, Randy Bird, was expecting and asking for approval of a contract today, the board chose to delay action until August 10. This makes sense considering that they were confronted with more than 30 people who signed up to speak against the coal plant, some driving from as far away as the Gulf Coast (some taking off work) in order to be there. This delay is a victory for those opposing the coal plant and a step in the right direction in convincing the LCRA that this project is not a beneficial or responsible use of water from the Colorado River Basin.

Key concerns included the general aspect of this project and the negative effects it would have on the people, environment (and watershed) of the region. There were also, as expected, many concerns regarding the current drought and many agreements that the last thing LCRA should consider is adding more, firm water commitments particularly when LCRA is already asking customers to conserve and scale back their water use. Concerns about how global warming would further worsen dry conditions in the region over the next 55 years (the length of the proposed contract) were also voiced by many of the speakers.

“Even though they haven’t denied it yet, we’re glad they’re taking their time to look into the serious implications of this coal plant request” said Lydia Avila with Sierra Club.  “We’re confident that when they look at the facts they will realize this is a bad deal for Texans and reject it.”

Only one or two people spoke in favor of granting the contract, one of whom was Owen Bludau, Executive Director of the Matagorda County Economic Development Corporation – one of the original entities that worked to bring the White Stallion proposal to Bay City. Those speaking against the contract included Matagorda County Judge Nate McDonald, Burnet County Judge Donna Klaeger, David Weinberg (Executive Director of the Texas League of Conservation Voters), Doctor Lauren Ross (who recently released this report on how White Stallion would affect water in the Colorado watershed), and many others including concerned residents throughout the LCRA region and landowners located right next to the proposed plant site.

Public Citizen applauds LCRA’s decision to table this vote. It shows that the LCRA takes the concerns of their stakeholders seriously. The next two months should prove to the LCRA that this coal plant is both unnecessary and a waste of our most precious and dwindling resource: our water.

Update and thank you!

Public Citizen wants to thank all of you who responded to our emails, blogs, tweets and phone calls and either called, mailed, or emailed comments in, and to those who showed up and packed the meeting room today.  This decision would probably have been very different if you had not made your concerns know to the board.  You are all awesome!

Posted in Climate Change, Coal, Energy, Global Warming | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Aging nuclear plants create radioactive waste in need of disposal, with few options available

June 15, 2011 by Citizen Carol

Critiques of nuclear generation have generally revolved around safety risks and high construction fees, but relatively little attention has been paid to what happens when a nuclear plant powers down for good.

Costs Can Reach Over $1 Billion

Nuclear plants must be decommissioned at the end of their useful life, and operating licenses are generally for 40-60 years. The costly, labor-intensive process involves two major actions: nuclear waste disposal and decontamination to reduce residual radioactivity.

There are currently 104 commercial nuclear power plants operating in the US, most of which were built in the 1970s and are slated for decommissioning during the next three decades.

At least one nuclear plant now running will be shut for good in the next several years, namely Exelon Corp’s Oyster Creek plant in 2019. Before then, we could see Entergy Corp’s Vermont Yankee plant shutter as early as next year, should the state’s veto of a license already granted by the NRC hold up in court.  And New York State politicians continue to wield whatever pressure they can to keep Indian Point from winning a license extension in ongoing proceedings.

South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) in Matagorda County licenses expire in 2027 and 2028, they recently applied for a license renewal which would extend the life of the plants 20 years, and they would expire in 2047 and 2048 respectively.  The license renewal application is being contested and you can click here to find out how you can listen in to the 1st Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) hearing on this license renewal application.  However, even if the license renewal is approved, there is a possibility that at some point before the license expiration dates, the costs of repairs could exceeded the value of the plant, and dismantling it could offer a better financial option.

As of April 2011, there were 23 nuclear units in various stages of decommissioning. Only ten out of the 23 have been completely cleaned up.

Decommissioning costs typically run at $500 million per reactor unit. But actual costs vary based on size and design, and some have reached over $1 billion — that is between 10 percent and 25 percent of the estimated cost of constructing a nuclear reactor today.

About 30 percent of the cost of decommissioning goes towards waste disposal.

A decommissioned plant creates several different streams of waste

  • Spent nuclear fuel rods are kept in dry storage or in spent fuel ponds at the reactor sites. An average nuclear plant generates 20 metric tons (44,092 lbs) of used nuclear fuel annually, or 1,200 metric tons over a plant’s 60-year lifespan. Every 3 to 5 years, one-third of the fuel assembly rods in the reactor are removed and stored in storage pools for about 10 to 20 years. During this period, the fuel loses much of its radioactivity and heat.  After that period, the fuel can be stored in large sealed metal casks that can be cooled by air. Typically a 1000 MWe reactor will discharge about 2 metric tons of high level waste each refueling. A PWR will discharge 40 to 70 fuel rods; a BWR will discharge 120 to 200 fuel rods.
  • Anything contaminated with lower levels of radiation — pipes, tools, workers’ clothing, reactor housings, really, pretty much everything but the spent fuel rods — are sent to special low-level nuclear waste facilities around the country. The remaining non-radiated waste can be disposed of in regular landfills.

Three pathways to decommissioning

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission offers utilities three options for decommissioning plants.

  • The first option is immediate cleanup after the plant shuts down.
  • In the second option, called SAFSTOR, the plant is closed and awaits cleanup at a later time, offering plants extra time to increase their decommissioning funds.While there is a requirement for operators to set aside funds for decommissioning, some plants have had to shut down before they had sufficient decommissioning funds and once they shut down, the revenue stream dries up.  This means they must wait until their funds accrue sufficient interest to begin decommissioning.The NRC gives utilities up to 60 years to complete decommissioning.This waiting period adds flexibility for plant owners with multiple reactors that shut down at different times. Once all the reactors cease operation they will be decommissioned together to save money and resources.

Of the 13 reactors currently being decommissioned, six chose immediate decontamination and seven remain in SAFSTOR conditions.

  • No U.S. plant has ever chosen the third decommissioning option, called ENTOMB.Workers would begin by moving the fuel rods into dry storage casks removing 99.9 percent of the plant’s radiation, but which currently must be stored on site.  Next, they use solvents and filters to clean up other contaminated surfaces.The other radioactive material onsite is sent to low-level waste facilities, and the plant is left to sit for decades.With ENTOMB there is no requirement to build extra containment buildings because the NRC postulates that most of the radiation will already be gone, though plant operators would continue to monitor the site for security.After 80 to 100 years, the plant would be safe enough to enter while wearing street clothes, and workers could dismantle the plant with just “a plasma torch and dust mask”.Still utilities don’t like the ENTOMB option because they don’t want to deal with the long-term liability.

Radioactivity for Volume

Low-level radiation waste comes in three varieties: Class A, B and C. Class A waste contains the lowest levels of radiation.

There are three low-level nuclear waste facilities in the United States — in Clive, Utah; Barnwell, South Carolina and Hanford, Washington. Clive only accepts Class A waste; the other two sites accept Class B and C waste but only from select northwestern and eastern states.

The new low-level waste facility under construction in Andrews County, Texas will accept Class A, B and C waste, and originally limited its intake to nuclear waste from Texas and Vermont, but the Texas legislature just opened the site up to take waste from outside the original compact, meaning it could take waste from anywhere in the United States.  However, a study by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality indicates the site only has the capacity to take the low-level radioactive waste from the six Texas and Vermont reactors.

When Barnwell and Hanford started restricting their operations, nuclear plants adjusted their practices. Operators began changing filters more often to selectively create Class A waste that could be sent to Clive.  As a result, Class B and C now make up less than 15 percent of low-level nuclear waste.

So after nearly 60 years, with 104 nuclear reactors approaching the end of their useful life, it remains unclear how this country is going to deal with the decommissioning waste.  How foolish would a nuclear renaissance be in the face of this unsurmounted problem?  The industry continues to insist, over-optimistically, that we will find a long-term solution, yet ,pessimistically, doesn’t think we can find a replacement renewable energy source in the same time frame.  The industry dost protest too much, methinks.

Posted in Nuclear, Radioactive Waste | Tagged , , , , , |

LCRA board names first female general manager

June 14, 2011 by Citizen Carol

Becky Motal has just been named the first female to become general manager of the Lower Colorado River Authority in its 76-year history.

Motal, executive manager of external affairs, was chosen by a unanimous vote of the LCRA board of directors and assumes the helm of the energy and water management agency effective July 2. She replaces Tom Mason who is resigning July 1.

The news ends speculation that Ken Armbrister, the former Texas senator and current legislative director for Gov. Rick Perry, would be chosen for the job.

We don’t know much about Ms. Motal, but will post more as we learn more about her history.

Posted in Utilities | Tagged , |

Baseline health assessment of residents near WCS site being conducted

June 14, 2011 by Citizen Carol

Residents living near the WCS low-level radioactive waste dump in Andrews County in West Texas near the New Mexico border will soon be asked to complete a health survey commissioned by state environmental and health officials and conducted by the University of North Texas to assess about 24,000 people who live within a 35-mile radius of Waste Control Specialists LLC’s site.

The survey, which was part of legislation passed in 2003, will provide a baseline assessment before material is buried for the first time at the site later this year. Letters encouraging residents to participate will go out in the next few days and the results will not be made public.

Posted in Global Warming | Tagged , , , , , |

STP license renewal application oral arguments on June 27th

June 14, 2011 by Citizen Carol

An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) will hear oral argument on June 27, via teleconference, on the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development [SEED] Coalition’s request to participate in the South Texas Project operating reactor license renewal proceeding. The ASLB is the independent body within the NRC that presides over hearings where the public can challenge proposed licensing and enforcement actions.

Oral arguments will begin at 10 a.m. EDT on Monday, June 27, and the Board expects the session will conclude by noon. The session is open for public observation, but participation will be limited to the parties in the proceeding (the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development [SEED] Coalition, the applicant – South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company [STPNOC] – and NRC staff).

Members of the public interested in listening to the oral arguments should contact ASLB staffer Jonathan Eser (301-415-5880 or jonathan.eser@nrc.gov) for the telephone number and passcode.

NOTE: STPNOC submitted an application Oct. 28, 2010, to renew the licenses for both South Texas Project reactors near Bay City, Texas. The NRC’s environmental and safety evaluations of the application are underway. The current license for South Texas Project Unit 1 expires Aug. 20, 2027, and the license for Unit 2 expires Dec. 15, 2028. Documents related to the South Texas Project license renewal application are available on the NRC website.

The ASLB is considering the SEED Coalition’s petition to intervene in the proceeding, including the group’s objections, or contentions, against STPNOC’s application. The ASLB will hear oral argument on several aspects of the petition. Documents pertaining to the ASLB proceeding are available in the agency’s electronic hearing docket. More information about the ASLB is available on the NRC website.

Posted in Nuclear | Tagged , , , , |

Power Plants Suck – lots and lots of water! Your water, Central Texas!

June 13, 2011 by Citizen Carol

The 2009 record drought left the lower Colorado river basin stricken, but rains following the drought had made major inroads to recovery.  Now as Texas sees more than half the state in an “exceptional” drought with no end in sight, the board of the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) could decide on Wednesday to sell at least 8.3 billion gallons of water a year to the proposed White Stallion coal-fired power plant near the Gulf coast in one of its first major water contracts since the last drought.

As I look out at the crisp brown vegetation baking in the easement outside my window, and the relentlessly hot air shimmering and dancing before me, I am concerned that there isn’t enough water right now for current stakeholders — cities, farmers, the environment and all the businesses that currently depend upon Lake Travis and Lake Buchanan for their existence.

Manufacturing and electric generation required 184,329 acre-feet of water in 2010 , according to estimates by the Lower Colorado Regional Water Planning Group, which provides statistics for the state water plan. By 2060, that number is expected to rise to 356,430.

Despite active opposition to the plant in Matagorda, the LCRA is likely to award the 40-year contract.  It has long held that it is OBLIGATED to sell water as long as it has water to sell and the use is a beneficial one.

John Dickerson, the LCRA board member who represents Matagorda, wants more time to review the contract saying, people in his district are against the plant and this is played out in a public outcry.  The LCRA board has received 2,260 letters and emails opposed to the project and only one letter in support.  In addition to local opposition to this plant, the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) recommended against granting the permit.  But true to their nature, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) granted the permit.  Sierra Club sued in district court and we are currently awaiting the final judgment that will remanded the permit application back to TCEQ to start all over again.

TAKE ACTION

It is important that Texans show up at the LCRA board meeting to speak out against this disastrous water contract.  This is no need to hurry this process and no need to tie up precious Central and South Texas water for an unwanted project.

When:              15 Jun, 9:00 AM

Where:             LCRA Headquarters
3700 Lake Travis Blvd.
Austin, TX 78703 (Map)

Host:               Josh Nelson

Status:             Public, open for RSVP, 10 Guests (Max 100)

To RSVP click here and sign up through CREDO Action

If you can’t attend the meeting, email or call and tell them that you oppose the Lower Colorado River Authority approving the White Stallion coal plant’s requested water contract.

Main Switch Board number is 1-800-776-5272, tell them you want to leave a comment on a board agenda item for Wednesday and they should direct you to the right person.

Or you can submit (their online form says question and they don’t seem to have an option to submit comments, but you can use this) by clicking here.   Be sure to reference the board member if you live in their service area county.

  • Timothy Timmerman, chair, Travis County
  • Rebecca A. Klein, vice chair , Bexar County
  • Kathleen Hartnett White,  secretary, Bastrop County
  • J. Scott Arbuckle, Wharton County
  • Steve K. Balas, Colorado County
  • Lori A. Berger, Fayette County
  • John C. Dickerson III, Matagorda County
  • John M. Franklin, Burnet County
  • Jett J. Johnson, Mills County
  • Sandra Wright Kibby, Comal County
  • Thomas Michael Martine, Blanco County
  • W.F. “Woody” McCasland, Llano County
  • Michael G. McHenry, San Saba County
  • Vernon E. “Buddy” Schrader, Llano County
  • Franklin Scott Spears, Jr., Travis County

Posted in Global Warming | Tagged , , , , |

Austin Taxi Industry Influences City Council Race

June 13, 2011 by Public Citizen Texas

Although the taxi cab industry in Austin is not often considered a power player in politics, individuals, top executives and owners have spent thousands of dollars in this city council election cycle. In particular, the election for the Austin City Council Place 3 seat has seen substantial amounts of money flow into it from the taxi cab companies. The race is between incumbent Randi Shade and newcomer Kathie Tovo. With well over $210,000 raised by the candidates, the taxi companies have accounted for nearly $18,000 of that money.

The influx of money can be attributed to disagreements within the industry by management and cab drivers as described in the Austin American Statesman article by Ben Wear. In the article, General Manager of Austin Yellow Cab Edward Kargbo is quoted as saying that they donated to “council members who we have found to be open to sitting down and hearing both sides.” The main debate is over whether legacy permits should be issued by the city council. The permits would allow drivers with at least 5 years of experience to bypass the three major taxi companies in Austin. The taxi companies are worried that this would lead to a loss of control in the marketplace. In the Place 3 election, Tovo has stated she is in favor of legacy permits whereas Shade has said she is opposed to it.

The large proportion of money that the taxi industry has devoted to this campaign has some people worried like Electric Cab owner Chris Nielsen who has said that City Council members were influenced by donations by cab executives. From The Statesman:

Yellow Cab and Austin Cab were granted five-year franchises in May 2010 by the council. Both votes were unanimous, although Morrison and Riley were not present when the Austin Cab vote occurred. The taxi drivers association at the time argued that given its concerns over the taxi fees and other issues, the term of the franchises should have been much shorter than five years.

The council’s response to the drivers’ concerns was to pass a resolution ordering the city’s staff to develop recommendations on a variety of issues involving taxis. In September, city staffers gave the council a briefing that included some immediate recommendations and items for further study.

Those recommendations included putting into the city code regulations for “low-speed electric vehicles,” a suggestion that has complicated the taxi dynamic this election season.

That proposed ordinance, which was to come before the council on April 21 , would allow the sole Austin company running those golf cart-like vehicles to potentially compete directly with taxis for short trips downtown. The company, Electric Cab of Austin, currently operates only as a shuttle contractor for hotels, rather than as a taxi service.

Two days before it was to come up, however, Shade raised concerns at a council work session about authorizing a new business while study of the overall taxi industry was ongoing. The council decided to table that matter for three to six months.

Electric Cab owner Chris Nielsen , who had flirted earlier in the year with running against Shade, claimed that she and other council members were influenced by the donations they had received from the cab executives. No, Shade said.

“It’s not the city’s job to create a special niche for one guy’s business,” she said.

Nielsen, still angry about the delay, said last week that on the May 14 election day he talked to Yellow Cab employees passing out Shade campaign fliers near the O. Henry Middle School polling place.

He said they told him they were from Houston and were paid by their company to travel to Austin and do the electioneering.

Not so, Shade said, after checking with Kargbo with Yellow Cab. Kargbo said that the Yellow Cab contingent did include employees from Houston, none of them drivers, and some nonemployees.

They were campaigning exclusively for Shade, he said.

Regarding Nielsen’s claim about the workers being on the Yellow Cab payroll during their Austin stay, Kargbo said: “That is 100 percent inaccurate. No one was paid to come up and do anything for Shade.”

With the election coming to a climax later this week, it is likely we are going to see even more money flow into the two campaigns. However, almost 12% of the money raised so far came from the taxi cab industry. It appears that of all the issues facing the city of Austin, the taxi cab debate is one of the most influential yet least talked about issues in the race. Yet the least talked about issue could be the one that decides the City Council Election for the Place 3 seat.

Posted in Campaign Finance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , |

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »