Governor’s Hearing On New Nuclear Waste Brings Opposition From SC Activists

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Conservation Voters of South Carolina, South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club, and the League of Women Voters of South Carolina all delivered testimony against the the shipment of hot nuclear waste for “reprocessing” at the Savannah River Site (SRS).

The hearing before the Governor’s Nuclear Advisory Council in Columbia, SC was prompted by backroom  “negotiations” about terms for bringing spent fuel to the DOE’s Savannah River Site.  Speaking to The State, the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability’s Tom Clements called for the secret talks to end:

The alliance’s Tom Clements said behind-the-scenes discussions now are occurring among state leaders to

DOWNLOAD THIS FLYER: “Cleaning up the Cold War legacy:
Speak out against plutonium in your own backyard”. Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.

allow the disposal in exchange for some type of jobs initiative. He did not name anyone, but said “it’s time for those in on these discussions to reveal what they are up to” and tell the public.

A spokesperson for Governor Nikki Haley supports “processing” of spent fuel at the Savannah River Site.  That’s a thinly disguised term for reprocessing. 

Yucca Mountain in Nevada was once considered as a permanent storage site for all US nuclear waste, but the proposal was killed on scientific and political grounds.  Since the successful scuppering of the Yucca proposal,  politicians and the nuclear industry discuss “temporary” storage of nuclear waste at SRS.  But since there is no facility for permanently storing nuclear waste, storage in South Carolina would likely become permanent.  

The State article today continues:

Environmentalists said storing spent nuclear fuel could increase the cry for a reprocessing plant. Reprocessing is supposed to render used fuel available for reuse in commercial plants, but conservationists say it creates more waste and threatens the landscape.

“Our country stands at a nuclear waste crossroads,” the conservation league’s Ryan Black said. “The political failure to develop Yucca Mountain has only complicated this issue further. But Yucca’s demise should not dictate that South Carolina bear the burden, yet again, of our nation’s radioactive waste.”

Many thanks to Tom Clements for helping inform, organize, and publicize the resistance the public about the secret nuclear waste proposals.

Read the full article at The State here.

Occupy Columbia Wins In Federal Court

Occupy Columbia has won in Federal Court!

Article in The State:

Judge: Occupiers can stay at State House

Some limitations are OK, judge says, but says protesters can’t break rules if there are none

Occupy Columbia protesters can continue their around-the-clock demonstration on State House grounds, U.S. Judge Cameron McGowan Currie ruled today.

Currie told attorneys for South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley that if the state wants to regulate who uses the grounds – and how – then it should develop written rules.

Because the First Amendment’s free speech issues are involved, however, any rules would have to be strictly limited and applied equitably.

Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2011/12/14/2080001/judge-occupiers-can-stay-at-state.html#ixzz1gXBJmjoo

More announcements will be made throughout the day.   Check OC media for more breaking information.  We will post a transcript of the press conference when it becomes available.

Website: http://occupycolumbiasc.org

Livestream: http://occupycolumbiasc.org/livestream/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/occupycolumbia

More news reports [UPDATED]

• WIS, Channel 10:   Federal judge: Occupy Columbia protestors can stay: http://www.wistv.com/story/16323441/federal-judge

• WLTX, Channel 19 (via AP): Federal Judge: Occupy Columbia Can Stay at State House: http://www.wltx.com/news/article/163466/2/Federal-Judge-Occupy-Columbia-Can-Stay-at-State-House

Occupy Columbia, Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Together

Tom Clements: No Nuclear Waste Storage In SC

Tom Clements of Friends of the Earth, and the SC Green Party’s 2010 nominee for U.S. Senate, is encouraging the public to let Governor Nikki Haley know where you stand on nuclear waste storage in the state of South Carolina.

It is possible that SC will become a repository for spent nuclear fuel rods. This is a recommendation of the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on nuclear waste storage.

Right now, this old fuel is stored on site at the nuclear plants where it was used.  Many of these rods are stored in water, and are subject to exposure should the water level dropped – as happened at the Fukushima reactors in Japan in April 2011.

These waste rods could be stored in dry concretized containers on site.   But such are the dangers of the waste, that people around the country would rather see them exported to anyplace else that will take them.   South Carolina could be that place.

It is likely that any temporary storage of this waste will become permanent.    There is no permanent repository for the spent nuclear fuel.  Without a permanent plan for disposing of these rods, South Carolina will be made a dumping ground.

Tom covers the controversy completely in a recent opinion column printed in Columbia’s The State newspaper.

Take a moment to print this letter, and mail it to Governor Haley, or fax it to 803-734-5167.  Let her and your local officials know that South Carolina cannot be the nuclear waste dump of the nation.

Print and mail or fax this letter to SC Governor Nikki Haley. Email the text to Governor Haley via this link: http://www.governor.sc.gov/contact/Pages/Contact.aspx.

Read Tom’s guest editorial in The State after the jump:

NLRB and Labor Law: Discussion on C-Span

Labor law professor Charles Craver of George Washington University spoke this morning on C-Span’s Washington Journal program concerning the NLRB-Boeing controversy.

Dr. Craver’s talk is highly informative about labor law generally and should be watched by anyone with an interest in the Boeing controversy. It cannot be embedded here, you must go to C-Span to watch it.

 

Dr. Craver talking on C-Span, Tuesday, June 14 on labor rights in the US and specifically about the Boeing situation in Charleston, South Carolina.

Another link: Dr. Charles CraverWashington Journal for Tuesday, June 14 | C-SPAN

Boeing has been planing on expanding its North Charleston plant in order to build the 787 Dreamliner there.   IAM brought a complaint against Boeing under the National Labor Relations Act, asserting that the shift in production is an attempt to punish the union for past strikes.  There is some evidence that this is correct; Boeing and South Carolina politicians openly stated as much and the NLRB is currently considering the matter.  Union rights being what they are in this country, many people don’t know what the NLRB is or what it does.

The interview with Dr. Craver does provide some much needed context.   It does not however, provide the kind of information that will educate South Carolinians about their rights as workers.   Freedom of assembly is compromised in South Carolina by the state government’s hostility to worker self-organization.   Naturally, we haven’t heard anything about repealing the Taft-Hartley Act from the South Carolina Democratic Party.  We won’t until there is a national movement among working people to protect the right to organize in every county in the country.

We have heard a lot of grandstanding from right-wing SC politicians.  Jim DeMint has called the NLRB “thugs” and “gangsters”, using union-busting language right out of the 1930s.    DeMint really hates the idea of collective action, so his opposition is no surprise.   Nikki Halley and the entire South Carolina political establishment is completely hostile to working people organizing and standing up for themselves.  These politicians have succeeded in framing the issue in such a way that I have heard even progressives in SC agonize over a perceived conflict between respecting worker’s rights and bringing jobs to SC.

Dr. Craver is a professional arbitrator, with a dispassionate view of the law, as should be evident from his digression on the NFL labor dispute.   Those of us who support organized labor can learn a lot about what is at stake here and how the law works in practice.

This is just an informed perspective.  The International Association of Machinists have released an open letter to the workers of Charleston explaining their position and combating some of the anti-union attacks from DeMint, Lindsey Graham and the rest.

Click to go to PDF of IAM President to Charleston Workers.

One thing that Dr. Craver does mention – briefly – is that Boeing’s plant in North Charleston was represented by the International Association of Machinists until a decertification election last year.   There is evidence that Boeing orchestrated the decertification campaign, in order to create an non-union plant.   If this was in discrimination against the union going on strike in the past, then it would be the illegal under labor law.

South Carolina progressives and the SC Carolina Green Party support the repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act and the right of all workers to organize themselves however they see fit.   The State of South Carolina should be encouraging civic and workplace participation, not subjecting workers to the dictates of their employers.South Carolina progressives and the SC Carolina Green Party support the repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act and the right of all workers to organize themselves however they see fit.   The State of South Carolina should be encouraging civic and workplace participation, not subjecting workers to the dictates of their employers.

South Carolina man says new photo ID law will prevent him from voting | Raw Replay

South Carolina man says new photo ID law will prevent him from voting | Raw Replay.

It’s good to see that Raw Story – a nationally known news site – has picked up the SC Progressive Networks campaign against South Carolina’s Voter ID law.  Mr. Butler is just one of thousands who will be disenfranchised under the pretense of a non-existent problem.