Wednesday February 27 2008
By SUSAN MONTOYA BRYAN
Associated Press Writer
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7339843


ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) - The Navajo Nation Council on Tuesday
approved legislation that would establish a tribal Superfund law,
allowing the tribe to clean up contaminated sites across its
sprawling reservation.

The council voted 50-15 in favor of the law during a special session
in Window Rock, Ariz.

The legislation, which must be signed by Navajo President Joe Shirley
Jr., serves the same purposes as the federal Superfund law. It would
allow Navajo officials to monitor and remove all hazardous
substances, pollutants and contaminants on the 27,000 square-mile
reservation that could endanger the health and safety of residents.

``We're elated,'' Freida White, senior environmental specialist for
the Navajo Environmental Protection Agency.

``This program will be something awesome for the tribe because it
will build the capacity that we've always been looking for'' in
cleaning up contaminated sites, White said.

White said the council's decision was historic since tribal officials
have been working for about 10 years to develop their own Superfund
program. She added that she's not aware of any other tribes that have
their own Superfund programs.

Like the federal Superfund law, the tribal legislation places
responsibility for the cleanup on current and past owners of sites or
those who arrange for hazardous substances to be brought onto the
Navajo Nation.

The legislation also creates a fund to help administer the program
and pay for cleanup work if the tribe cannot immediately identify
those responsible.

``It will allow us to work on sites that didn't meet the federal U.S.
EPA criteria and sites that we wanted to address but couldn't because
it couldn't be funded,'' White said, noting that one of the main
purposes of the legislation was to establish a funding source for the
program.

Navajo EPA officials said there are about 1,000 abandoned uranium
mining sites on the reservation that could be addressed under the
legislation as well as other sites that are leaking toxic chemicals.

The next step for the tribe is to develop regulations that would
spell out the parameters of the Superfund program and set the rate of
a tariff that would fund the program. Tribal officials expect to
accomplish that within a year.

Jill Grant, an attorney who works with Navajo EPA, said the process
would include internal review by tribal officials, a public comment
period and final approval by the council's Resources Committee.

The tariff would apply to those who transport hazardous substances
across the reservation. White could not say how much revenue the
tariff would bring in since the rate has yet to be determined.

George Hardeen, a spokesman for Shirley, said the president supports
the cleanup of legacy contamination - such as that at the abandoned
uranium mines - so the legislation ``is right up the president's
alley.''

Shirley has 10 days to act on the Superfund measure, Hardeen said.

Writer: Desert Rock poll a disservice
Staff Writer
Article Launched: 02/26/2008 11:48:32 PM MST

Editor:

The Daily Times posted an Internet poll for the public to weigh in with their responses to the proposed Desert Rock Energy Project ("Desert Rock issue, An even poll split," Feb. 21). The results are not credible nor should they be considered realistic figures representative of actual opinions on the Desert Rock opposition.

The poll, and the front-page cover story that followed, is a disservice to Four Corners residents because it manufactures a truthful sense of public opinion that is only a reflection of those individuals who happen to participate in these types of Internet media polls. In no way is the poll an accurate reflection of public opinion in this critical matter.

For a true reflection of public opinion and a very broad base of public opposition to Desert Rock, one need not look any further than the 54,000 comments that were submitted to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in September 2007 on the Desert Rock Draft Environmental Impact Statement. At the public hearings, 99 percent of citizen participation at the draft EIS hearings opposed Desert Rock on the grounds of health, existing disproportionate effects on area residents (mostly Navajo), environmental impacts and questionable economic "benefits" to the tribe and its members.

While these polls can be conducted to gain a general estimate of public opinion, we must recognize that they are not true depictions of the range of actual opinions.

There are large numbers of Four Corners residents who do not have electricity, computers and/or Internet access, and to omit their voices from the Desert Rock issue by an Internet poll flies in the face of environmental justice where public participation and fair access to information is central to Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations.

Large numbers of Navajo residents are still without electricity and they oppose Desert Rock because cheap electricity is not worth its genocidal implications.

Further, it is illogical, laughable, and erroneous to deduce the substance of a quantitative poll to a qualitative one: i.e. Bracewell & Guiliani Representative Frank Maisano states there is a "broad swath of people who are interested in the project because of the economic need for it."

We appreciate Mr. Maisano's psychic prophecies. However, there is no evidence whatsoever in a numerical poll for the reasons motivating an individual's vote.

DAILAN J. LONG
Burnham

__________________________
Navajo brothers support project
Staff Writer
Article Launched: 02/26/2008 11:48:32 PM MST

Editor:

During the final development stages to build the Desert Rock Energy Project, my brother and I wish to express and offer our support for this economic development project.

I am a mechanical engineering student at New Mexico Tech and will graduate soon. My brother is an electrical engineering student at New Mexico Tech, graduating soon after I do. We both support this project for the opportunities it may provide to Navajo young people, like ourselves. We are interested in working on a project on or near the Navajo Nation that will utilize and expand our knowledge and skills developed during college training. We estimate Desert Rock Energy and the Navajo Transmission Project provide that opportunity.

First, the Navajo Nation is in dire need of providing private sector employment opportunities for its young people. As we get closer to receiving our degrees, opportunities to stay home and make a livelihood appear bleak. We often agonize over the thought of moving away from our homeland; away from family and friends in pursuit of a career. In essence, employment circumstances on the Navajo Nation may leave us no alternative but to move away to sustain ourselves.

Our support for this project is based on personal experiences of benefits derived from the energy industry. Currently, we live near the proposed Desert Rock Energy power plant; our parents both work in the electric energy industry. My parents have provided their children a quality of life comparable to the middle class in mainstream America. They have provided us the necessities of life; including a roof over our heads, food, access to health care, leisurely pursuits and some family vacations.

The most important reward has been the ability of our parents to pay for our educational costs, including tuition, fees, books, room and board, while my brother and I pursued our engineering degrees. During our college years, our education never hinged on any financial support from the Navajo Nation or any other government.

For reasons stated, we look forward to employment opportunities and ancillary benefits the Desert Rock Energy project may bring to the Navajo people. As we progress toward our baccalaureate degrees, we look forward to obtaining the same benefits for ourselves and others who may depend on us for support in the future. In the event Desert Rock and the Navajo Transmission Projects are authorized, many Navajo families will benefit, as we have, from the energy industry.

DAVIDSON TSOSIE

JUSTIN TSOSIE

Waterflow

By Cindy Yurth
Tséyi' Bureau


(Times photo - Cindy Yurth)

Martin Vosseler, 59, a retired doctor from Switzerland, is walking across the United States to promote renewable energy and climate change awareness. Vosseler will be at the Day's Inn in St. Michaels, Ariz., until Saturday, when he will start walking toward Gallup.

DEFIANCE PLATEAU, Ariz., Feb. 21, 2008

That wiry bilagáana you saw pulling the little wheeled cart along Route 264 the past few days is not a homeless person.

Meet Martin Vosseler: retired physician, Guinness Book record-holder, climate crusader.

Meet him, please - that's what he's here for. Or at least check out his Web site, www.martinvosseler.ch.

Vosseler is walking across the United States- and, at the moment, the Navajo Nation - to promote awareness of climate protection, renewable energy and energy efficiency.

But don't worry, he's not preaching doom. He wholeheartedly believes the earth's people will rally to reverse global warming, led, he hopes, by the Americans.

"We will make it," he says, his smile fracturing his weathered 59- year-old face into pleasant ravines. "I am sure we can do it. We can do it together."

Vosseler is not just some pie-in-the-sky guy either. When he says, "We can make it," it's because he's already shown the way.

A few years ago, Vosseler and four buddies crossed the Atlantic in a boat powered entirely by solar panels. They were the first humans to do so, landing a spot in the Guinness Book of World Records.

The secret, he says, is very, very efficient motors.

"We crossed the Atlantic on 1,700 watts," he said. "That's about the power of a hairdryer."

Vosseler is counting on American engineers - whom he considers the world's most innovative - to come up with ultra-efficient engines to harness the wind and the sun.

"If we could get every engine to 90 percent efficiency," he maintains, "there would be more than enough renewable energy to power the world."

The only reason it hasn't happened yet, he said, is because all the world's energy is in the hands of a few giant corporations, and Planet Earth has yet to become an "energy democracy."

"It's understandable that those who hold the monopoly don't want to let go of that," he shrugged. "But they'll have too. We're almost out of oil."

Vosseler practices what he preaches. He got to the U.S. from Switzerland on a cargo ship - much more energy-efficient than flying, he says, although the rough crossing occasionally made him wish he were miles above the Atlantic instead of right on its surface.

From Boston, he made his way to California by train - a 68-hour ride that was "just beautiful."

It's taken him seven weeks to walk from Los Angeles through the Mohave Desert to the Grand Canyon, Tuba City, through Hopi just in time for the Bean Dance, and now into Diné Bikéyah.

From here he goes to Gallup, south to Texas, on to Tennessee where he'll walk a few miles with former vice president Al Gore, then on the Washington, D.C., and ultimately Boston - "my second home." He did a fellowship at Harvard back in the '80s.

Every so often, Vosseler stops for a few days to update his blog and download a few pictures. At the moment, for example, he's at the Day's Inn in St. Michaels, Ariz., so if you live in the area and would like to invite him to speak to your group, this is your chance.

He can be reached by email at vosolar@gmx.net.

Vosseler says he's been overwhelmed by American hospitality - "I could have 30 rides a day," he says, but of course he politely declines. He will accept offers to pitch his tent in your yard for the night.

But if you see a tanned, lean bilagáana walking and singing a tune, do wave to him.

"I wave to everyone, and four out of five people wave back," he said. "It gives me a little boost to keep going."

Talk about renewable energy.

Uranium monsters once again approach

Have the monsters returned? The monsters from the stories of our ancestors who tried to destroy the people are once again approaching Diné Bi Keyah.

Recent news of a mining company that has applied for permits to dig on Navajoland for uranium has surfaced. The monsters are lurking, be advised, be aware.

It's funny how we find things out. As a great admirer of the printed news across the United States, I am always amazed on what the world outside the Navajo Reservation knows about us. I was searching the Internet and came across a Feb. 12, 2008, editorial letter on the online version of the New York Times. The letter was titled, "The Cold War Threat to the Navajo."

Before I even read the article I knew my previous suspicions were correct: the uranium hungry monsters are once again making their way toward our precious Dinétah.

On several occasions I have had conversations with people about the state of the global community and specifically about the ways that war is terrorizing the homelands of the world's people.

In the Middle East the ancestral people are witness to the ravaging of their sacred lands to weapons made to destroy. In Africa the tribal people can only stand and watch their lands being blown up and destroyed all in the name of war.

And here, on the sovereign Navajo lands, our keyah is being sold and mutilated for America's hunger for coal.

Our Navajo ancestors, who suffered great heartbreak and cried many tears of homesickness when they were taken from their homeland, always maintained great reverence for Dinétah. They continually prayed for their return to their birthplace because they understood the need for keeping the connection strong, the people + the land = balance, wholeness to the people.

In the 21st century the thought of our Navajo leaders is quite different. I feel they only see the ways the land is just another "thing" to use, to profit from. I feel our Navajo leaders have forgotten how to pray and be respectful to the land, the creation of God.

As a child of modern times, I know that we need money to live, but as a Navajo I know too that money is just paper that can be exchanged, but the land is in my heart.

So, to the Navajo leaders, I say remember where you came from, remember those ancestors who suffered to keep their land intact and un-desecrated, they are the reason we have the land to live on today.

The sad fact is the world outside Diné Bi Keyah wants our land. If we are truly a sovereign nation of people, we need to stay informed and aware of what conversations are taking place that concern us. Choose not to be ignorant about our status in the global community beyond our Navajo Reservation borders.

Take a break from the shiny, air-conditioned floors of Wal-Mart and McDonald's, step outside and take a good look at your land, our land and think about how you can protect it from the monsters.

What part can you play to keep it intact? What can you do to keep it out of the hands of money hungry monsters that would exploit it?

I do not know what the future holds for the Navajo or our precious land, but if the hunger pangs of those uranium hungry monsters outside our rez keep bringing them closer and closer to our borders, be aware that you and I may lose it.

Venaya Yazzie
Farmington, N.M.
(Hometown: Huerfano, N.M.)

_______________________

Darkest days in Navajo history
We are living in one of the darkest days in Navajo history. Our Navajo Nation continues to decline into the midst of a cultural depression and political arrogance.

The nation is deprived of its vision for economic and political progress. Our young and elderly people alike suffer the effects of tribal government socialism.

This tribal government serves at the wish of an administration that has the complete disregard of the Navajo spirit. Many of the Navajo people continue to depend on government social programs, which disenfranchise the ideas of economic progress through capitalism.

Our tribal leaders spend the people's money with a carte blanche mentality. The sovereignty of the Navajo Nation will continue to decline unless we curb the size of government and share a passion for the Navajo constitution.

Our desire and dream to change government is the last beacon of hope. The people's constitution will remove the shackles of government from its citizens.

Today, the Navajo people want leadership and are cautious of their own leaders in Window Rock. The tribal capital personifies the center of corruption and tribal bankruptcy.

The council and the administration speak of cowardly rumors of federal financial mistreatments on a daily basis when they are the ones who misappropriate federal tax dollars. Our tribal leadership continues to illustrate the blame game on Washington when they are to blame as well for neglecting their responsibility to the people.

We seek higher leadership for securing our land, water, minerals, and culture. We hold our family at heart to continue our tribal existence and self-identity. Our land, within the four sacred mountains, holds all elements for maintaining our way of life.

Our elected leaders have a great responsibility for maintaining our sovereignty and we lose a bit of this every day, especially when water rights diminish, state and federal governments trample on Navajo land, Navajo workers fear retaliation in the workplace for questioning their superiors, and when the ordinary person is deprived of economic progress and to petition their government.

My fellow Navajos, we hold a great deal of responsibility to take back our government and constitute a republic of democracy. The people's desire and ambition to liberate their own nation from a welfare state is the key to global success for our nation.

The future of our tribe is in the hands of every Navajo citizen and we must hold the entire burden for the coming struggles of revolutionizing our form of governance.

A transformation to a constitutional democracy will not be easy, but be assured that we can act on such a move together with optimism and faith.

As one nation, we can promote greater change, but as a divided nation we will fall through the endless pit among pessimistic hell.

Ramsey Tohannie
Scottsdale, Ariz.
(Hometown: Tonalea, Ariz.)

_____________________

Where is our tribe headed?
I would like to see the list of councilmen who approved liquor sales at the casinos.

So when I hear them saying, "Listen to the medicine people. Stay alcohol and drug free. Follow our traditional ways. Respect the elders," I'll know their words are not true.

Imagine how confused tribal members are now, especially the younger generation. It is like telling them all that negativity is OK as long as the tribe is making money off it.

Young Jeff Tom states he represents Church Rock Chapter. Well, he does not represent me. He did not come to my house and ask my opinion on the issue. He only comes around during election time.

If I can't make it to his office or to the chapter meeting, suddenly my vote does not count anymore. I'm sure he listens to and visits people who will give him their assurance. Plus, he has the gall to show up at a sobriety powwow.

Another thing, Moreen Kelly also approved it at the chapter level. Isn't she supposed to be on the board of Diné Council of Elders for Peace. That is some type of domestic violence diversion program. Talk about job security.

Doesn't she realize alcohol has direct correlation to domestic violence? Are these types of people running our nation? Wake up people!

However, that is not the point. Many years ago, they came to annihilate us. Our medicine is too strong. They wanted our land and resources. They wanted to change our way of life. We are still here.

With current laws, they can no longer deliberately pursue this. But, every time we do something like this to ourselves, they celebrate a little bit more.

Why spend all that energy on us? We are doing all the work for them. I believe, if we work together, we'll still be here long after they are gone.

Ervin Tsosie
Gallup, N.M.

Salazar reveals plan for Four Corners
Senator supports ag economy, water rights, better health care
February 21, 2008By Ted Holteen | Herald Staff Writer

U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., stopped in Durango on Wednesday to brief local elected officials and community leaders on his plan for regional legislative priorities in the Four Corners.

The Four Corners plan is one of 10 created by Salazar's office that divides Colorado's 64 counties into regions with similar economic, environmental and social concerns. The Four Corners region includes Archuleta, La Plata, Montezuma, Dolores and San Juan counties.

Salazar's visit included stops at the School District 9-R offices, The Durango Herald, The Commons educational collaborative on Camino del Rio and Mercy Regional Medical Center.

Here are highlights of the plan:

• Support for a strong agricultural economy.

• Protect land and water rights.

• Promote tourism and outdoor recreation.

• Push for a renewable-energy economy.

• Support community development and a fair share of federal dollars for Southwest Colorado.

• Support funding for intergovernmental law enforcement between tribal, state and federal authorities.

• Improve health care.

In his visit with the Herald editorial board and several students from Fort Lewis College newspaper, The Independent, Salazar said he will continue to procure funding for the Animas-La Plata Project and will keep a close eye on developments with the proposed Desert Rock power plant in northern New Mexico.

"We have serious concerns about Desert Rock because of the air-quality issues, and the new energy world that we're living in today is one that's turning away from traditional coal-fired power plants," Salazar said. "So I think that plant's headed in the wrong direction, and I will continue to monitor it to see if we can get it steered in a different direction."

He said other energy options exist in Southwest Colorado, especially solar because the sun shines in several of the counties more than 300 days a year.

"I don't want the southwest part of the state to be left out of what is going to be one of the signature breakthroughs for our world in this century," Salazar said. "It's upon us, how we harness the power of the wind, the sun and biofuels. We'll push the renewable-energy agenda to make sure that it doesn't pass up the opportunity for Southwest Colorado."

As to health care, which area residents consistently list as the top issue facing Southwest Colorado in formal and informal surveys, Salazar said no real progress will likely be seen without the cooperation of the federal government.

He said he will work for more Medicare reimbursement for rural medical providers and vote for the Indian Healthcare Reauthorization Act when it comes to the Senate next week, but he said President Bush's recent veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program is an example of why national change needs to start at the top.

"Those are Band-Aids we're putting on a system that's fundamentally broken. It's going to take a new president and a new commitment from the Congress to deal with health care in a comprehensive manner," he said.

On the Net
Salazar’s regional plan for Colorado can be viewed online at salazar.senate.gov/images/pdf/regionalplans.pdf.


Contents copyright ©, the Durango Herald. All rights reserved.

Desert Rock issue: An even poll split
By Cornelia de Bruin The Daily Times
Article Launched: 02/21/2008 12:00:00 AM MST

FARMINGTON — Responses to the latest Daily Times Web poll question hit a new record as 2,422 readers weighed in on whether the proposed Desert Rock power plant is worth building.
Their responses over a one-week period came close to being split evenly, with 1,209 people in support of the proposed plant and 1,213 opposing it.

The Times' poll is not scientifically conducted, but gives the newspaper's readers a chance to voice their opinions on local, regional and national issues that are in the news.

"The proposed new Desert Rock Power Plant promises hundreds of new jobs and economic benefits on and near the Navajo Nation, but opponents to the project say it will add to pollution concerns and isn't worth it," the question stated. "Do you support or oppose plans for Desert Rock?"

Earlier this year Washington, D.C.-based legal firm Bracewell & Giuliani notified Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson that it would sue the federal agency if the power plant's Prevention of Significant Deterioration,

Advertisement

or PSD, permit was not granted within 60 days.
Bracewell & Giuliani represents Sithe Global Power, LLC, which intends to build the plant for Desert Rock Energy Company, LLC, its subsidiary. The clock started ticking on Sithe's intentions Jan. 17, when the letter was sent.

Frank Maisano, an attorney with Bracewell & Giuliani, said estimates indicate the plant would furnish about $50 million in revenue for the tribe and generate "thousands of construction jobs" and about 400 permanent jobs."

"We received a letter from EPA saying they hoped to act soon, but that's what they've said for the last two months," Maisano said.

Regarding the poll question, Maisano said when he cast a ballot early, when about 600 people responded, the poll was strongly in favor of the plant.

"That tells me there's a broad swath of people who are interested in the project because of the economic need for it," Maisano said.

Diné CARE (Citizens Against Ruining the Environment), about a month after Sithe's letter to the EPA was sent, released a report detailing its objections to the pulverized coal-burning plant. They are closely woven with the tribe's fundamental laws — beliefs its members say were taught to them and set out the ways they conduct their lives in balance with the universe.

Sithe's and the tribe's frustrations come from the length of time EPA has held the ruling in limbo. The power company began working with the agency in 2003 to get the PSD permit. The agency determined its application to be complete May 21, 2004. By law it is supposed to issue the permit no later than 12 months after it determines an application is complete. To date no ruling is in hand.

Desert Rock is proposed for construction near Burnham on the Navajo Nation, about 30 miles southwest of Farmington.

The current Web poll question is "If you qualify, what do you plan to do with your tax rebate check: save it, pay toward debt, buy something, travel, pay the bills or other?" Visit www.daily-times.com to cast your ballot.

Cornelia de Bruin: cdebruin@daily-times.com

Not all Diné support Desert Rock

Dear Editors:

The contentious Desert Rock issue on Navajo lands has been successfully delayed by a broad spectrum of civil opposition for three years. The title of theDurango Telegraph article, “Desert Rock heats up: Navajos threaten EPA with lawsuit amid rising concerns over cost” (Feb. 14, 2008) confuses the public by implicating that the Navajo people are lockstep proponents of the Desert Rock project. The article does not present the intermix of Desert Rock opponents who live both on and off the Navajo reservation. I ask, “Where is the Navajo voice?” Frank Maisano may be the spokesman for Desert Rock on Navajo lands but he is not a direct representative of our communities and environmental awareness.

There is a large distinction between the Navajo community members and Navajo Tribal officials; we do not comprise a collective body ready to stand in litigation against the Environmental Protection Agency. As evidenced at 100 percent of the DEIS public hearings around the region last Summer, 99 percent of Navajo community members oppose Desert Rock given the existing disproportionate conditions from clustered industrial facilities in the Four Corners. These issues are not made known by isolated voices separated by geopolitical boundaries. Large numbers of regional citizens are voicing their opposition to Desert Rock and this must be acknowledged in the media to avoid further confusion about the Navajo stance about Desert Rock.

There are major developments against Desert Rock because of local citizen voices. City councils and government officials are taking positions against the project because people and the environment must not be sacrificed for cheap electricity. We recently released a report, “Energy and Economic Alternatives to Desert Rock,” which comes directly from Burnham community members, to show that wind, solar and energy-efficiency technologies can allow the Navajo Nation to pursue sustainable development options. Desert Rock as a merchant coal plant cannot sell electricity to California because consumers choose to buy power from renewable energy sources and not coal plants. Individuals are making conscious demands for clean energy and they are, as Mike Eisenfeld from San Juan Citizens Alliance says, creating a “huge paradigm shift.” This takes a collective effort that includes the Navajo grassroots.

– Dailan J. Long, Burnham, N.M.

(Editors’ reply: TheDurango Telegraph recognizes that the Navajo Nation Tribal Government and many of its members have a difference of opinion on Desert Rock. In fact, we have outlined Navajo opposition to the power plant in more than a dozen news stories over the past several years. Last week’s story was focused on the tribal government’s threatened lawsuit against the EPA, not the ongoing opposition to the planned power plant.)

Controversial Plan Will Create Jobs, But Won't Bring Needed Electricity

By Suemedha Sood 02/20/2008 98 Views | 1 Comment
PART TWO



The proposed Desert Rock energy project in northwest New Mexico could give the Navajo Nation’s struggling economy a boost, supporters say. Navajo President Joe Shirley says the coal-powered plant will provide energy to nearby states, create 1,000 construction jobs, 300 full-time operations jobs and generate $50 million a year for the Navajo Nation. What the power plant won’t do, however, is provide electricity to the thousands of Navajos now living without it.

On the Navajo Nation, 18,000 homes lack electricity—roughly one-third of the population. Many Navajos spend their lives without electric power, because they live in remote areas where it’s difficult and expensive to run power lines. The lack of power can result in health and safety risks for these residents, who must find alternative means for light and heat. The Navajo Tribal Utility Authority, or NTUA, which is working on the electrification of these areas, is pressing for solutions using solar and wind power.

Within the last few years, solar-and-wind hybrid systems have been installed in some homes and now 307 Navajo homes are powered by solar energy. While there are limitations, said Larry Ahasteen, the NTUA renewable energy specialist, small-scale projects like this show what solar and wind can do at a lower cost than conventional energy.

The Dept. of Energy has provided $2 million over two years to fund this program. That isn’t enough to provide electricity to all who need it, since each solar unit is $18,000. These units produce about 2 Kilowatts a day—enough to power some lights, a small TV and possibly a small fridge. "It’s very limited," said Ahasteen, "We have to really educate our customers on how to manage their load."

But, according to Ahasteen, small-scale solar power is better than the alternative. "A lot of times," he said, "we have families in very isolated areas where it’s not feasible to run a power line costing $30,000 per mile. And then you have to maintain that line too."

Providing electricity to this area may be similar to bringing the basics of modern life to other underdeveloped regions. For example, in rural areas of countries like Kenya, communities went from having no telephone land-lines to relying primarily on mobile phones. So planning for Navajo homes to jump to innovative solar technologies is not extraordinary.

Small-scale solar or wind projects are in fact providing a model for anti-coal groups like Dine´ Citizens Against Ruining our Environment, or Dine´ CARE, to build on. Dine´ CARE’s recent study, "Energy and Economic Alternatives to the Desert Rock Energy Project," lays out an argument for replacing the coal plant with a large-scale project that would use sunlight, wind, and natural gas. The report suggests it is possible to generate up to 48,000 megawatts of solar energy on Navajo land and up to 11,000 megawatts of wind power on tribal lands in northeastern Arizona.

The group claims that this could create more revenue and more jobs than Desert Rock. It says that alternative energy could create 2,000 construction jobs and 500 full-time jobs.

The spokesman for Sithe Global Energy, the company behind Desert Rock, strongly disagreed. "They don’t know what they’re talking about," said Frank Maisano, the spokesman. "We build plants for a living, so we know what we’re talking about."

Maisano says renewable energy projects should not be done alone. "I’m an advocate for renewables," he said. "We need to have both renewables and the coal project. It can’t be one or the other. It has to be both. For those who say renewables can do more and create more jobs, they’re wrong…They can’t produce the baseload power that the region needs."

George Hardeen, communications director for the Office of the President of the Navajo Nation, which supports the coal-powered plant, agrees. "What they’re recommending," he said, talking about Dine´ CARE, "is simply not feasible. Where are you going to get the land to put solar panels up that will equal the amount of electricity Desert Rock will create?"

But William Beckman, the director of the University of Wisconsin’s Solar Energy Laboratory, says the region is prime for solar power. Beckman says solar energy’s potential is greatest in remote areas of the U.S. Southwest. Photovoltaic, or solar, systems can convert about 10 to 20 percent of incident sunlight into electrcity, he says. In the Southwest, where sunlight is abundant and land inexpensive, this could translate to a lot of energy.

The biggest obstacle to solar energy is usually cost, said Beckman, though this is less of an issue in remote areas. In populated areas, the cost of Photovoltaic-generated energy is higher than the cost of conventional energy; but, in isolated areas, solar plants tend to be more cost effective, Beckman said.

Job creation is also one of solar energy’s draws, according to James Mason of the Solar Energy Campaign, a pro-solar group in New York. "Our research indicates that a 1-gigawatt PV manufacturing…creates 15,000 jobs," said Mason, "whereas the same number of jobs for a 1-gigawatt coal plant is 5,000 jobs."

So far, renewable energy projects of the size Dine´ CARE is suggesting have not garnered support from the local Navajo government, which continues to focus on Desert Rock. The Navajo Nation council, which has high hopes for the plant, approved the project by a vote of 66 to 7.

For now, Navajos, some living without power, have only federal government funding to rely on. Even for already existing renewable energy projects, though, funds are sporadic, said Lizana Pierce, project manager for the Dept. of Energy’s Tribal Energy Program. But, she said, "Many of the tribes are looking at very large scale. Most of the tribes in the Great Plains are looking at large-scale wind production. In the Southwest, there’s predominately a lot of interest in solar."

Since 2002, the Tribal Energy Program has been able to fund 91 tribal projects. This year, funds will amount to $6 million for such projects. But Pierce’s program is relatively small. The Tribal Energy Program—the only government program working on electrification of tribal lands—employs just five full-time employees.

Even these small-scale projects can bring energy only to those who really need it, one house at a time, said Ahasteen of the NTUA. "Right now, everybody takes it for granted that you have electric power," he said, "but a lot of these families, they don’t have nothing. Once you give them the opportunity to get that electric power, whether it’s conventional or through renewable, you kind of give an opportunity for that family to be more self-sustaining and be more active."

For many Navajos, electricity is not just a modern convenience. Most families, said Ahasteen, use kerosene lamps for light, wood stoves for heat and propane for cooking—which create serious health risks, not to mention fire hazards. Kerosene, for example, generates a large amount of CO2 inside the confined space of small houses, which, even with ventilation, can be harmful when inhaled.

Mason and his colleagues laid out a model for a national solar energy plan in the January issue of Scientific American magazine. He says their findings are consistent with Dine´CARE’s conclusions. According to Scientific American, the "grand solar plan" to use solar energy to end U.S. dependence on foreign oil by 2050 would require $420 billion in subsides over 39 years.

The Dine´ CARE study on energy alternatives states that the use of renewable natural resources can be viewed as part of traditional Navajo beliefs. According to Navajo fundamental laws, the report says, wind, or Nílch’í, "generates and sustains all life forms," and the sun, manifested by the sun god Jóhonaa’éí, is a "supernatural entity which restores balance after social ills and abuse of freedom and powers wreak havoc in the worlds prior to modernity."

"In Navajo philosophy," the NTUA’s Ahasteen said, "Mother Earth is the mother, our sky is our father, we take reverence to that, we give offering, and we protect that…Renewable energy is a Navajo concept because it’s using Mother Earth as a way for providing for us."

By Suemedha Sood 02/19/2008
PART ONE

Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley can’t wait for the Desert Rock coal-fired energy plant to be approved. That’s why he’s planning to sue the Environmental Protection Agency over its failure to rule on the project’s long-awaited air permit. The agency began assessing the application four years ago.

Usually the process takes about a year. This is longer, the EPA spokesperson Francisco Arcaute said, "due to the complexity of the Desert Rock facility and the high level of public interest." One factor may be that, if approved, the plant will be within a 15-mile radius of two of the country’s largest coal plants.


Desert Rock is designed for northwest New Mexico, roughly 20 miles south of Shiprock. The Navajo Nation covers 27,000 square miles, extending into New Mexico, Arizona and Utah. Pollution from the prospective plant could affect communities in this entire Four Corners area. The $3-billion project is a partnership between Dine Power Authority, an enterprise of the Navajo Nation, and Sithe Global Energy. The location is a contentious issue among Navajo citizens, for the plant would be near the Four Corners Power Plant and the San Juan Generating Station.

Local citizens’ groups are fighting Desert Rock and the environmental problems they say it could bring. Many Navajos say they are worried that the plant will harm the local environment, add to global warming and increase already high rates of respiratory illnesses and other health problems linked to the burning of coal. Desert Rock promoters say, however, that the plant will have stricter emissions regulations than any other coal plant.

The Navajo government commissioned the project to bring revenue and create jobs. The Shirley administration says Desert Rock will generate 1,000 temporary construction jobs, 300 full-time operation jobs and $50 million a year for the Navajo Nation. The proposed plant will generate 1,500 megawatts of energy—though buyers have yet to be determined.

But Navajo citizens are not convinced this is enough to outweigh the damages the plant could cause to the local environment and to public health. The grass-roots group Dine Citizens Against Ruining our Environment, or Dine CARE, has released a 168-page report discussing the perceived dangers. In "Energy and Economic Alternatives to the Desert Rock Energy Project," Dine CARE also examines the feasibility of large-scale renewable energy projects. The report is part of a strong local effort to fight Desert Rock.

In July 2007, the Bureau of Indian Affairs held public hearings on the project’s environmental impact statement. Navajo citizens submitted 54,000 comments against building the plant. In addition, the EPA received 1,000 letters during its public comment period. This large number of comments may be one reason the agency has taken so long to rule. "It is typical for the majority of comments on a proposed permit to be negative," said Arcaute.

Sithe Global insists that the plant will be the cleanest the country has yet seen. "The air permit," said the Sithe representative, Frank Maisano, "is one of the strictest air permits the EPA will ever issue. Because some local people had concerns about additional regional haze—because of other power plants in the region—we have offered to write into an additional agreement with the Navajo Nation stricter limits and offsets for emissions."

Maisano says the plant’s supercritical, or high heat, boiler will increase efficiency—significantly reducing emissions. The technology will capture 98 percent of particulate matter, reduce sulfur and NOx emissions by 95 percent, reduce mercury emissions by 90 percent, Maisano says, and reduce CO2 emissions by 20 percent compared to older plants. As a result, the Sithe Global spokesman says, Desert Rock won’t present the health risks other plants do. "The regional haze pollution that causes health issues will be virtually nonexistent," said Maisano. By haze pollution, he means particulate matter, mercury and other aerosols.

But a leading climatologist James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the plant will most certainly cause damages to public health, as well as to the local and global environment. "Despite the grievous problems that pollutants such as mercury and particulates cause for individuals," said Hansen, "the most damaging pollutant for humans and other species, by far, is carbon dioxide. [Desert Rock is] not capturing that pollutant at all—by 20 percent reduction, they mean that the efficiency has been improved, so more energy is obtained per unit fuel. But all of the CO2 in the coal is being released to the air."

Hansen says Sithe Global’s claims are "terribly misleading." "Desert Rock is not going to ‘reduce’ regional emissions," he said. "[T]his is double-speak again—it is going to increase regional emissions, just not as much as the other plants. It is a case of piling on a region that is already suffering from emissions."

Mark Chandler, a climatologist who is also at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, points out that Desert Rock’s attempts to limit health risks for the Navajo community will ultimately make the situation worse for global warming. "The classic problem in cleaning up coal plants," said Chandler, "is that coal has a lot of bad things that we don’t want in our backyard [like] particulates and mercury…[Eliminating those] is great in terms of cleaning up some of the most obnoxious issues. But it’s harmful for the climate change issue. Aerosols in the atmosphere—a lot of which come from coal burning—have slowed global warming because aerosols actually reflect some of the sunlight coming to the earth and tend to cool the atmosphere." So, Chandler says, Desert Rock’s effort to curb global warming by reducing CO2 emissions will be counteracted by its reduction of other emissions.

As for potential health problems, says Chandler, not just the local community should be concerned. In fact, he said, people living close to a coal plant may not even be affected if they live upwind. But those living thousands of miles away could feel the effects—if they live downwind. "To give a sense," said Chandler, "of how non-local it is, a lot of pollution in the U.S. is coming from China."

And, said Dine CARE treasurer Lori Goodman, "It’s not just what’s going up in the air, it’s what they’re dumping. There’s all the coal combustion waste. It’s not even regulated by EPA."

Contaminated water from coal combustion wastes has already been a problem for people [living] near the Four Corners and San Juan plants, says Dine CARE spokesman Dialan Long. "Some of the people that I’ve spoke to," said Long, "have said that they’ve lost cattle, so a lot of them have stopped taking their livestock to Chaco Wash [the tributary of San Juan river]…It’s really easy to point to coal combustion waste because it’s the only thing that’s there."

Stephen Austin, a senior hydrologist with the Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency, hasn’t heard about livestock dying, but he is aware of concerns about contaminated water. "There have been past complaints," he said, "by local people about cattle, and some have been investigated." Austin says his agency is looking into possible connections between coal waste disposal and water quality. "Some of the water used to slurry [coal] ash may have leeched into the groundwater of the Chaco Wash," he said.

According to Long of Dine CARE, some Navajos say that Desert Rock will lead to the problems of asthma, respiratory diseases, and cancer associated with other plants. "It is erroneous to claim that Desert Rock will not perpetuate these," he said. "We know better."

Dine CARE says that dust from coal mining, greenhouse gas emissions and coal combustion wastes are all causes for concern. Exposure to pollutants can also exacerbate existing health conditions. High health care costs are a big issue on the Navajo Nation, where Indian Health Service clinics are severely underfunded.

The EPA says it is taking all these concerns into account as it moves toward a decision on Desert Rock. "The EPA," said spokesperson Arcaute, "received a large number of comments that focused on the stringency of the emissions limits for certain air pollutants, the adequacy of the air quality modeling, alternative sources of energy, and whether global warming should be considered in the permitting process. A number of comments also focused on mercury emissions and concerns related to environmental justice…[W]e are carefully considering those comments before making a final decision."

The Navajo Nation government says it wants a decision as quickly as possible. "It is taking longer than we think it should," said Hardeen, spokesperson from the president’s office. The longer it takes for Desert Rock to get its air permit, he says, the longer the Navajo Nation has to wait for the economic benefits the project promises.

If Desert Rock goes ahead, Shirley says it could generate yearly tax revenue equal to 30 percent of the Navajo Nation’s annual spending budget. That would make a big difference to the reservation’s struggling economy. Where that money might go, however, is still far from decided.

The Diné people are at a quandary of energy crossroads.

This fancy word "quandary" is defined by the colonials as dilemma: state of uncertainty or perplexity, especially as requiring a choice between equally unfavorable options directions made by the current "Shirley" administration and council delegates will dictate what happens to your children and your children's children in the next decade.

The overpowering notion to get the money now and deal with the repercussions later seems to be the flag the current Diné governing body is waving.

Where will these people be when unemployment exceeds 75 percent and consumables goes to inflation by an outrageous percentage?

Will the Desert Rock consortium and mining companies provide rebates to help the Diné people that are in need? What sort of culture will exist with an inflated colonial population living on a project area of the reservation?

Will these people respect the land? Will the crime rate accelerate and more young Diné youth are enclosed by drug traffic and usage?

You read and hear the media, what are the headlines? The tribe levying a lawsuit against the EPA? The oversaturated advertisement for young people to work in a progressive mining company? The ever- constant rhetoric of fable mounds of gold and money awaiting at the deliverance of casinos?

The struggles of the people that are trying to keep stability in the environment - Diné Care, opposition groups of Desert Rock?

You have to note that we as Diné, this is home. We are not like the colonial that comes to build the energy structure or mine the coal. They are managers, engineers and tourists that have homes outside the reservation, they will not retire here in an area that may have environmental health repercussions due to massive amount of coal power plants.

What exactly will be the true answers to this quandary? We are not helpless, contrary to other people's opinions. We have the ability to develop green power, and to feed our own people. We know where all the natural resources are on the reservation, to develop it without forsaking the land and people.

Fossil fuel is not the answer. The world can attest to this, look around you, has it been warm winters, has it been drier than you remember? Are the polar ice caps melting?

You see in the media of flooding in New Orleans, eight-foot snow in Chama, N.M., flooding in the Midwest? Ice storms in the Washington state and Oklahoma. Tornadoes during winter in the Midwest. Is this doom and gloom? No! It is reality!

We are a gifted nation. Mother Earth has allowed us to live and raise our children on her back. Treat her with utmost respect. Talk with your families and friends and query each other. Ask, "How can we do the right thing?"

Ken Augustine
Nageezi, N.M.

Indian leader asks NM for economic help

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - Navajo Nation Vice President Ben Shelly told New Mexico lawmakers that his tribe is seeking the state's help in spurring economic development and creating jobs on the sprawling reservation.
Shelly said Wednesday that prosperity on the Navajo Nation would not only benefit the tribe, but would result in additional tax revenue for New Mexico.

'We're seeking economic development, we're seeking jobs for the Navajo people. As you know, this is a win-win situation for the state of New Mexico and also for the Navajo Nation,' he told a Senate chamber packed with American Indian leaders from the Navajo Nation and from New Mexico's pueblos.

Shelly said the tribe -- from his office to tribal lawmakers and the Navajo judicial branch -- wants to continue government-to-government relations with the state and form partnerships that can 'better the lives of New Mexicans and the Navajo people.'

Wednesday marked Native American Day at the Legislature. Joe Garcia, governor of Ohkay Owingeh Pueblo in northern New Mexico and president of the National Congress of American Indians, was among those who addressed a crowd in the Capitol Rotunda.

Navajo Nation Council Speaker Lawrence Morgan also visited the Legislature on Wednesday. He thanked state lawmakers for making Navajos part of the legislative process and pushed for even greater communication between the two governments.

'There are bigger issues that we all need to cooperate and work on continuously -- be it water rights, be it land resources, be it health issues and education issues,' Morgan said. 'We have common issues.'
Shelly said the Navajo Nation has thrown its support behind several measures during the 30-day legislative session, including bills that aim to improve Indian health care and create a commission to study off-reservation health care in Bernalillo County.

Supporters of the proposed commission say the county is home to nearly 50,000 Indians representing hundreds of different tribes. They say off-reservation tribal members often have limited opportunities to help shape policies that affect their access to health care.

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved.

by Missy Votel

While Desert Rock proponents tick away the days on a threatened lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency, opponents are also saying that time may be running out for the massive proposed power plant.

Among the stumbling blocks still facing developers of the coal-fired power plant planned on Navajo land hear Shiprock, are more than a dozen federal permits, including the long overdue air quality permit from the EPA, as well as a record of decision on the environmental impact statement, the draft of which was released in June 2007. Meanwhile, opponents charge, costs for the proposed 1,500-megawatt facility, pegged at $1.5 billion in 2005, continue to balloon, now hovering at heights of $3.6 billion.

“Desert Rock’s developers always spoke of the immense need for the plant’s electricity and the immense need for the Navajo Nation to have a project that makes sense,” said Mike Eisenfeld, New Mexico energy coordinator for the San Juan Citizens Alliance. “But this may not be the money-making venture that they think it is.”

In addition to skyrocketing construction costs, Eisenfeld said that Desert Rock partners Sithe Global and the Dine Power Authority may be facing the possibility of carbon taxes in the not-too distant future. Under the Bush administration, such a program, which would impose a fee on carbon dioxide producers, has been brushed under the carpet, he said. However, with the impending regime change in Washington next year, such a program could become reality. “We are talking about a fine of anywhere from $10 to $100 per ton of CO2 emitted,” said Eisenfeld.

According to Sithe Global’s estimates, Desert Rock is expected to emit 12.7 million tons of carbon dioxide a year. A carbon tax could translate to as much as a 50 percent jump in electricity prices, with either the Navajo Nation, as operator of the plant, or utility consumers picking up the tab. “The difference will be passed on to consumers or the Navajo Nation, which would lose its potential profits,” Eisenfeld said.

In addition, Eisenfeld casts doubt on whether the local aquifer will be able to supply the 5,000 acre-feet of water a year required for the project. He also points out that the Navajo Transmission Project, the actual power lines that would deliver the power from the plant, has neither been built nor funded. “All these schemes they were counting on have yet to materialize,” he said. “I think they thought it would be a slam dunk, but things are much more complex than that.”

All this could stack up to a risky investment in today’s tightening financial market. Sithe is a privately held, independent power company based in Houston. Desert Rock is backed financially by Wall Street’s Blackstone Group, formerly the world’s largest private equity firm which recently went public. “If I was an investor, I would be very, very hesitant to put my money into Desert Rock,” said Eisenfeld.

However, Desert Rock planners are still pledging to put their money where their mouths are. According to Desert Rock spokesman Frank Maisano, the project’s cost is currently estimated at about $3 billion, slightly down from opponents’ estimates. While he admits the price has gone up, he maintains it is all due to normal inflationary pressures. “The costs have gone up, but not more than they would have anyway,” he said.

The real losers, however, are the Navajo people, who are losing an estimated $5 million dollars in tax revenue every month that the project is delayed, according to tribal leaders. Maisano also reiterates that Sithe was approached by the Navajos about building the project, not vice versa. “The project is something the Navajo Nation needs,” he said. “Every day they don’t get the project done is another day they don’t get the economic benefits, they don’t get jobs.”

To that end, Navajo leaders sent a letter warning the EPA that if there is no action on Desert Rock’s air quality permit (also known as a Prevention of Significant Deterioration, or PSD, permit) by March 17, they will sue the agency. The notice, dated Jan. 17 and written by Blackwell and Giuliani, the law firm of former presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, charged that under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to issue a decision within 12 months of PSD applications being filed. Sithe submitted its permit in May of 2004, making the EPA about three years late, the lawyers charged. As such, Sithe has the right to sue the EPA for a decision within 60 days of the notice.

Connie McKaughn, associate director of air quality for the EPA’s Region 9 in San Francisco, admitted that a decision on the permit has been a long time coming. However, the agency is by no means dragging its feet. She noted that the sheer complexity of the project, as well as constantly changing EPA rules on the matter, have contributed to the lengthy review process. “A permit of this type is extremely complicated,” she said. “There were a lot of air quality models that had to be run, and it took several years to get them done.”

Furthermore, she noted that the comment period for the draft PSD in 2006 registered more than 1,000 comments, each of which had to be responded to individually. “We’re trying to do the best we can, given the controversial nature of the project,” she said. “We are trying to resolve complicated policy issues, and of course they keep changing. If everything would just hold still, we’d be fine.”

If the lawsuit does come to fruition, McKaughn said the EPA will likely try to settle out of court. “We usually try to negotiate first,” she said.

And while she could not give an exact timeline on the decision, she said the agency is in no hurry. “The purpose of the Clean Air Act is to provide for growth without degrading the environment,” she said. “That’s one of the things we need to make sure won’t be happening here.”

However, Maisano is optimistic that the plant will break ground late in 2008 or early 2009. He maintains the longer the delay, the worse off the Four Corners’ airshed will be. Pointing to Desert Rock’s much-touted state-of-the-art technology, he said sidelining it only means more pollution at the hands of the San Juan Generating Station and its neighbor, the Four Corners Power Plant. The two plants rank among the top 10 dirtiest coal-fired plants in the West.

“The reality is, Desert Rock will provide us with a cleaner environment,” he said. “With three or four plants like Desert Rock, you can take the San Juan or Four Corners plant off line and still see a reduction in CO2 and pollution.”

However, the bottom line, Maisano pointed out, is the booming Southwest’s insatiable appetite for electricity. “There are huge, vast power needs in the Southwest,” he said. “Desert Rock addresses those needs.”

While Maisano does not discount the need for renewable energy sources, as promoted by Desert Rock foes, he said coal and alternative power are not mutually exclusive. “This is not an ‘either/or’ situation, it’s an ‘and’ situation. We need both.”

However, Eisenfeld, with the San Juan Citizens Alliance, is not quite ready to buy off on Desert Rock’s argument. “I think there’s been a huge paradigm shift in the past couple of years, and massive, coal-fired power plants are being seen as inappropriate,” he said. “We better start thinking of new ways to generate electricity and raise our kids in a reasonable way.”

Investing in renewable energy development and energy efficiency could provide more jobs and economic benefits for the Navajo Nation than building the proposed $3 billion Desert Rock Energy Project

Diné CARE’s analysis, prepared in consultation with Ecos Consulting, compares sources of clean energy, such as solar and wind power, with coal, assessing economic factors such as short- and long-term employment, financial risks, environmental and health impacts, potential costs of carbon pollution, and profitability for the tribe. When the estimated economic benefits and costs of the proposed 1,500-megawatt pulverized coal power plant are weighed against benefits and costs of renewable energy development, the analysis determined that “developing clean-energy resources rather than coal provides a net economic advantage.”

* TO DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE REPORT (cut and paste link into url)

http://www.box.net/shared/static/tirr6zsw0g.pdf

* ATTACHED: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REPORT

FARMINGTON — Navajo tribal members who believe their voices are needed in the fight against the proposed Desert Rock Power Plant their government supports claim a host of alternatives to burning coal exist on the Navajo Nation.
The group, called Diné CARE, holds a viewpoint that is squarely opposite of Desert Rock supporters, such as project spokesman Frank Maisano, of the Washington, D.C., law firm Bracewell & Giuliani LLC.

"It's a Navajo project and the Navajo are choosing to take part of their vast resources, which include coal, and advance the cause of their people," Maisano said. "The plant will generate $50 million in revenue per year, bring thousands of construction jobs, 400 permanent jobs and a wealth of indirect benefits."

The massive project, however, is held up in the federal permitting process. Project developers hope to begin construction sometime this year near Burnham in San Juan County.

Diné CARE's recent release of a report stating its views about the Desert Rock Power Plant project preceded by less than two weeks letters from Navajo President Joe Shirley, Jr. and the Bracewell & Giuliani firm notifying the Environmental Protection Agency of the tribe's intent to sue to force EPA's release of its Prevention of Significant Deterioration (air) permit.

Desert Rock organizers submitted its air permit application to the EPA in May 2004. A draft permit was issued in August 2006, followed by a series of public meetings and hearings. EPA officials are still evaluating and responding to concerns from comments received at those meetings.

In addition, Desert Rock is awaiting a final Environmental Impact Statement from the federal government.
Despite seeming to be new information submitted at the last minute, Dailan Long, spokesman for Diné CARE, said the group's 168-page report is an extension of comment it submitted to EPA in July 2007.

The report, titled "Diné Citizens Against Ruining the Environment," throws down the gauntlet to the Nation's elected officials by using the tribe's fundamental laws to make a case against the $3.7 billion power plant.

"The fundamental laws are the guiding post, the guiding principles which have existed since the dawn of life for us," Long said.

Based on the heart
of Navajo culture

The fundamental laws are based on "K'é," the Navajo word describing the principle of relations among the Navajo people, and between individual tribal members and their environment.

"The Navajo Nation used these laws to ban uranium mining," Long said. "We assert that coal extraction and uranium mining are synonymous: they're equally destructive, so it's not fair to ban one substance and totally pursue another."
With that assertion, Diné CARE has set the table and invites its tribal government to discuss the issues of alternative energy in light of the tribe's fundamental laws.

"We consulted with the Center for Diné Studies, the Diné Policy Institute, the Navajo Medicine Man Association and even the peacemaking program," Long said. "We talk about the significance of water, the significance of air, how we conceptualize the health and environment, and how solar, wind and energy development comport with these fundamental laws. It's very much from a Navajo perspective."

The fundamental laws state that the Navajo, the Diné, are responsible for maintaining "Hozhó," harmony, in their lives, the report's introduction states.

"Everything comes in pairs and bipolar opposites counterbalance each other as insinuated within the Navajo concept of "Alch'i Silá," it states. "The definition implicates Mother/Father, male/female, up/down, Earth and Sky; these opposites are not mutually exclusive but they related to each other and are interconnected to maintain equilibrium."
The state of balance resulting from living in accordance to the laws leads to "k'é; that everything relates to another and nothing is independent in and of itself."

"We have not seen it," George Hardeen, spokesman for Navajo Nation President Joe Shirley Jr., said regarding the Diné CARE report. "They've been invited to the table and they are the ones who walked out."

Hardeen referred to the Dooda Desert Rock group that has also protested the power plant project.

"President Shirley went out to talk to them when they first started their roadblock (to the Burnham site) in 2006," Hardeen said.

Long, spokesman for Diné CARE, said the group plans to get a copy to President Joe Shirley, Jr. and other selected tribal council members soon.

Group: A better way
to generate power

Diné CARE claims renewable energy sources such as wind and solar exist on the Nation to create more high-quality, life-long jobs for the Navajo than Desert Rock would give the tribe. It also raises the point that having a third power plant built near where two plants already are sited does not equal environmental justice for the people who live nearest to the facilities.

Arizona Public Service operates the Four Corners Power Plant in Upper Fruitland, while Public Service Company of New Mexico operates San Juan Generating Station in Waterflow. The Four Corners Plant is located on the Navajo Nation. Both plants, which are two of the larger coal-fired operations in the West, employ hundreds in San Juan County.
Long is a resident of Burnham, where the Desert Rock plant would be built.

"When the draft environmental impact hearings took place in the summer of 2007, 99 percent of the grassroots Navajo people opposed Desert Rock," he said.

Dooda Desert Rock founder Lucy Willie joined Diné CARE when it unveiled its alternative energy study in Santa Fe Jan. 18.
"She was still standing with us, which speaks to how Navajo grassroots oppose the project," Long said. "It really counters what Navajo Nation President Shirley says about the Navajo Nation supporting the plant when it's really his administration and DPA (Diné Power Authority)."

The tribe formed Diné Power to promote development of power using Navajo coal. The entity works closely with Sithe Global Power, LLC, to develop the Desert Rock plant.
Diné CARE characterizes the project as a money hog.

"The Navajo Nation is putting money into the coal furnace without any type of returns," Long said.
The tribe, he said, has invested about $14 million on the project since the 1990s. Diné CARE said it's a matter of throwing good money after bad.

"I think the misuse of funds is pretty apparent given the fact that the Navajo Nation did send some individuals to Hawaii. There's outrage on the reservation about that," Long said. "This mistrust and mismanagement of funds is coming out, and Desert Rock is carrying on that spirit."

At least 400 people claiming ties to the Navajo Nation attended an education conference in Hawaii last fall, hundreds more representatives than any other tribe represented at the event except for the Hawaiian delegation, in whose state it was held.

What those most affected say

Ecos Consulting of Durango, Colo., the firm that prepared the report for Diné CARE, sent a person fluent in Navajo to interview 39 people whose homes are nearest the Desert Rock Power Plant site — those people who are being told to move off of land their families have occupied for generations.

Their characterization of the tribe's government underscores the anger of which Long speaks.
"We need to save our cultural traditional prayer sites, as well as our traditional burial grounds from energy corporations in any possible way we can," stated Stakeholder No. 9, of Fruitland. "We can try to get our government to listen, but sadly they only care about what money they can get for themselves, for example, the RINGS."

The stakeholder referred to a Tribal Council expense of $50,000 that Navajo Nation Council delegates approved on a 71-10 vote in July 2007 that they tacked onto a $3 million measure that would provide funding for summer youth employment. The money came from an Undesignated, Unreserved Fund, a sort of emergency fund that the council regularly taps, according to the Associated Press. Delegates wanted to "help identify and distinguish officials from the public," according to Legislative Counsel Ray Etcitty.

"They never asked me for my permission, they just came and told me to accept their payment and not to build anything on the home site, or construct any more homes on the land," said Stakeholder No. 1, identified as a farmer/rancher, of an experience with Navajo Mine representatives. "I still remember the day we came home from Window Rock, my father was very happy he was going to get a nice house with different rooms. He died waiting for a good house from Utah International, and to this day we haven't got a nice house out there. They have not brought the power or the water."

And from Stakeholder No. 14, a tribal business administrator: "We have had oil and gas fields, coal mines, power plants, uranium mines in the past but we still live in poverty with nowhere to go. We have our children going on drugs and alcohol instead of living in harmony like we were taught by our parents. We need good leaderships in Navajo government and local government to save our children's future."

Tribe seeks to force
EPA into action

At the same time the grassroots group extends its invitation to the tribe's government, those elected officials put the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on notice that they are tired of waiting for an operating permit to be issued for Desert Rock.

Bracewell & Giuliani, the tribe's legal firm, informed EPA of its plans in a letter sent Jan. 17, claiming the federal agency should have acted within one year of its deeming the Desert Rock application to be complete.

"Every day, every month, every year they don't have this (permit) is another day, month, year the tribe doesn't get the economic benefits of the plant," said Bracewell & Giuliani's Maisano, a spokesman for Desert Rock. "Forty months when it should have been 12 months is a little over the top."

"We have no other option open to us," Hardeen said. "We understand that EPA tends to go over that, that it's tough for EPA to go through its process in a year."

"We found it to be complete May 21, 2004," Colleen McKaughn, assistant director of EPA Region Nine's Air Division, said. "We were supposed to act on it within 12 months; the Clean Air Act states that, but I don't know why it says that. I don't think it's possible to act that fast."

The federal entity has no estimate of when it will make a decision regarding the permit application, she added.

It's been a long
time coming

In the case of Desert Rock, McKaughn and her colleagues are working their way through responses to the 1,000 people and entities that filed comment regarding the Desert Rock application.

Some of the comments are from outside the Four Corners region, but 750 of them center on the subject of environmental justice and were received from people who described themselves as locals. Comment came from the Hualapi Nation, Ute Mountain Ute and Southern Ute tribes, McKaughn said. Global warming was also of concern to them.
EPA's permit consideration process was further hampered by a long discussion of how to conduct the modeling process it planned to use to collect data, McKaughn said, by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on greenhouse gases and by a challenge to EPA's mercury emissions standard.

"The issues were very difficult to work through and people expressed very strong opinions," she said. "PSD permits are very complex, as is the type of process that's used for areas that have clean air."

Sithe Global Power, LLC, seeks a Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit for the facility.

"We looked at emissions from everywhere and found no adverse impact on the ambient air quality and Class 1 areas," McKaughn said. "Our data shows that Desert Rock won't have the effects that people say that it will. This permit can't be the end-all, be-all for everything."

Shirley maintains, nonetheless, that EPA's delay in permitting the plant holds the tribe hostage economically.

"All we ask is that EPA leaders ... act without delay to complete the permit review and analysis, and issue the final permit as soon as possible to avoid further burden to the Navajo Nation," he wrote in his letter to EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson.

"I feel for the tribe. It's frustrating to be at the end of the process and see the goal post moving farther away," Maisano said.

Cornelia de Bruin: cdebruin@daily-times.com

February 12, 2008

EDITORIAL

The Cold War Threat to the Navajo

It is alarming that the nuclear power industry is talking about resuming uranium mining near a Navajo reservation. A mining company has applied for permits for a new mine on privately owned land in New Mexico just outside the reservation's formal boundaries but within what is commonly known as Navajo Indian Country. Regulators must not allow this to proceed until the enormous damage inflicted by past mining operations has been fully addressed.

Residents of the Navajo Nation are haunted by radiation threats from more than a thousand gaping mine sites abandoned after the cold war arms race. After decades of uranium mining — and accumulating evidence of spikes of cancer and other diseases — mining companies walked away from their cleanup responsibilities.

The federal government has also shamefully failed its tribal trust obligation to deal with what Representative Henry Waxman has aptly termed "an American tragedy."

The California Democrat is investigating a history of shocking neglect that would not be tolerated elsewhere. Among the horrors: shifting mountains of uranium tailings; open mines leaching contaminated rain into drinking water tables; wind-blown radioactive dust; home construction from uranium mine slabs; and even the grim spectacle of children playing in radioactive swimming holes and ground pits.

Tribal elders finally forbade mining, alarmed at the sudden rise in cancer deaths. Federal help across the years has been sporadic at best, with only half the mines ever sealed. Prodded into action by Congressional hearings and detailed reports in The Los Angeles Times, a half-dozen agencies are now vowing stronger remedies, including the resumption of long-stalled toxic testing. Far greater resolve is called for. The House oversight committee is rightly demanding a coordinated five-year remediation plan from the agencies most involved.

The government must finally honor its obligation to seal the mines and deal with their myriad dangers. Talk of opening even one new mine — which could, of course, lead to others — adds grave insult to the severe injury already done.

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: February 8, 2008
Filed at 7:41 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal appeals court said Friday the Bush administration ignored the law when it imposed less stringent requirements on power plants to reduce mercury pollution, which scientists fear could cause neurological problems in 60,000 newborns a year.

A three-judge panel unanimously struck down a mercury-control plan imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency three years ago. It established an emissions trading process in which some plants could avoid installing the best mercury control technology available by buying pollution credits.

Environmentalist and health experts argued that such a cap-and-trading mechanism would create ''hot spots'' of mercury contamination near some power plants. Seventeen states as well as environmental and health groups joined in a suit to block the regulation, saying it did not adequately protect public health.

Power plants are the biggest source of releases of mercury, which finds its way into the food supply, particularly fish. Mercury can damage developing brains of fetuses and very young children.

The court decision was the latest in a string of judicial rebukes of the Bush administration's environmental policies. The Supreme Court last year took the administration to task for not regulating greenhouse gases. Courts have also rejected administration attempts to overhaul federal forest policies and streamline fuel economy standards for small trucks.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said that the EPA violated the federal Clean Air Act when it scrapped a mercury-control policy established in December 2000 under the Clinton administration. Utilities were required to install the best available technology to capture mercury from power-plant smokestacks.

That policy was anticipated to capture more than 90 percent of mercury releases. The cap-and-trade approach imposed by the EPA in March 2005 envisioned capturing 70 percent of emissions by 2018.

The court held that the EPA failed to show that its new approach would not harm the environment or that emissions at all plants not ''exceed a level which is adequate to protect public health with an ample margin of safety.''

''This three-judge panel has done the world a favor and helped save lives,'' said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, whose state participated in the lawsuit.

EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said the agency was reviewing the decision, but he indicated it was not giving up on the cap-and-trade approach to reducing mercury.

''This rule is still our policy until we evaluate how to move forward,'' said Shradar. He emphasized that the court did not rule directly on the merits of the cap-and-trade approach but that ''they ruled against the process.''

But it was clear the agency now would have to re-examine its approach to capturing mercury from power plants. ''Because of the court's action the U.S. now has no national regulation to cut mercury emissions from existing power plants,'' he said.

Environmentalists, hailing the decision as a victory for public health, predicted it will require the EPA to issue the more stringent emissions requirements that were proposed eight years ago.

''This means the EPA is going to have to go back and do a real job of regulating all the toxics coming out of these plants,'' said Earthjustice attorney James S. Pew, who argued the case on behalf of several environmental organizations. He said EPA ''is now under a simple, legal obligation to get those overdue rules out.''

Industry organizations had strongly supported the cap-and-trade mercury plan, arguing that the requirements for the best available technology at all plants would be too costly, may not even be achievable, and delay mercury reduction.

Dan Riedinger, a spokesman for the Edison Electric Institute, an association of power companies, called the court decision ''a major setback ... to establish clear mercury regulations for coal-burning power plants.''

''Now EPA has to go back to the drawing board, pushing mercury regulations far off into the future,'' said Riedinger .

Mercury is a powerful neurotoxin. About 8 percent of U.S. women of childbearing age have enough mercury in their blood to cause concern for a future pregnancy. The National Academy of Sciences estimates that 60,000 newborns a year could be at risk of learning disabilities because of mercury their mothers absorbed during pregnancy.

''The mercury emitted by our nation's coal-fired power plants pose serious health risks for all Americans,'' said Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. The association was among a number of public health groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, that filed papers in support of the states' lawsuit.

Joining New Jersey in the lawsuit were: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

^----

Associated Press writers Matt Apuzzo in Washington and Cara Rubinsky in Hartford, Conn., contributed to this report.

NEW YORK TIMES

February 10, 2008

Editorial
Clean Power or Dirty Coal?

Opposition to new coal-fired power plants built without new technology — that is, without the capacity to capture greenhouse gas emissions — is rising on both Wall Street and Main Street. Citizen opposition has led companies to cancel some high-profile projects, including a proposed plant near the Florida Everglades. Pressure from environmental organizations has persuaded major banks to begin weighing the risks of global warming when deciding whether to finance new plants.

This is good news. Coal-fired power plants are big contributors to global warming. In the United States alone, they generate half the country’s electricity and nearly a third of its emissions. Meanwhile, scientists have left no doubt that the world has just a few years to make deep cuts in emissions or begin to suffer the worst consequences of rising temperatures. This means that scientists will have to figure out a way to capture carbon dioxide from coal plants, or coal will have to be replaced with cleaner fuels.

Given that task, the failure — by both the Bush administration and Congress — to encourage alternative sources of power is distressing. Bowing to veto threats from the White House, Congress stripped from an otherwise admirable energy bill two important provisions on alternative fuels.

One would have required states to generate an increasing share of their power from renewable sources like wind and solar energy. The other would have rolled back about $12 billion in wholly unnecessary tax breaks for the oil industry and used the proceeds to develop cleaner fuels and new energy technologies.

There is a way that Congress can quickly begin to make amends. That is to extend important tax breaks for alternative energy sources that are set to expire at the end of this year. These incentives have been critically important to the development of wind and solar power; wind power has become increasingly cost-competitive with natural gas, although not yet with coal. Investors are unlikely to pump much new money into clean power unless they are sure the credits will be available next year. The American Wind Energy Association has already detected a drop in new capital spending.

As we have said before, the surest and probably the only way to encourage meaningful and swift commercial development of cleaner fuels and energy sources is to put a stiff price on carbon emissions. That, in turn, would inspire — indeed require — industry to invest heavily in energy efficiency and low-carbon fuels.

But until Congress sets such a price, through a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade program — and it is a long way from doing so — every effort should be made to encourage the development of alternative energy sources. The first step is to extend the tax credits for alternative sources like wind and solar power.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

NEW YORK TIMES

February 10, 2008

Editorial
Clean Power or Dirty Coal?

Opposition to new coal-fired power plants built without new technology — that is, without the capacity to capture greenhouse gas emissions — is rising on both Wall Street and Main Street. Citizen opposition has led companies to cancel some high-profile projects, including a proposed plant near the Florida Everglades. Pressure from environmental organizations has persuaded major banks to begin weighing the risks of global warming when deciding whether to finance new plants.

This is good news. Coal-fired power plants are big contributors to global warming. In the United States alone, they generate half the country’s electricity and nearly a third of its emissions. Meanwhile, scientists have left no doubt that the world has just a few years to make deep cuts in emissions or begin to suffer the worst consequences of rising temperatures. This means that scientists will have to figure out a way to capture carbon dioxide from coal plants, or coal will have to be replaced with cleaner fuels.

Given that task, the failure — by both the Bush administration and Congress — to encourage alternative sources of power is distressing. Bowing to veto threats from the White House, Congress stripped from an otherwise admirable energy bill two important provisions on alternative fuels.

One would have required states to generate an increasing share of their power from renewable sources like wind and solar energy. The other would have rolled back about $12 billion in wholly unnecessary tax breaks for the oil industry and used the proceeds to develop cleaner fuels and new energy technologies.

There is a way that Congress can quickly begin to make amends. That is to extend important tax breaks for alternative energy sources that are set to expire at the end of this year. These incentives have been critically important to the development of wind and solar power; wind power has become increasingly cost-competitive with natural gas, although not yet with coal. Investors are unlikely to pump much new money into clean power unless they are sure the credits will be available next year. The American Wind Energy Association has already detected a drop in new capital spending.

As we have said before, the surest and probably the only way to encourage meaningful and swift commercial development of cleaner fuels and energy sources is to put a stiff price on carbon emissions. That, in turn, would inspire — indeed require — industry to invest heavily in energy efficiency and low-carbon fuels.

But until Congress sets such a price, through a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade program — and it is a long way from doing so — every effort should be made to encourage the development of alternative energy sources. The first step is to extend the tax credits for alternative sources like wind and solar power.

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

The Durango Herald 02/07/2008, Page B01
Desert Rock dims by the day

We’ve not heard much from Sithe Global and the other backers of the masÂsive Desert Rock coalÂburning power plant proÂposed near Shiprock, N.M., recently. Perhaps it’s time for a quick checkup on Desert Rock’s vitals.

Desert Rock backers abanÂdoned efforts this year to pocket $85 million in subÂsidies from New Mexico taxpayers.
Gov. Bill Richardson made clear his lack of enthuÂsiasm for Desert Rock while on the presidential camÂpaign trail last summer. ComÂbined with last year’s defeat of a similar tax rebate request, Sithe Global apparently read the handwriting on the wall and pulled the plug on its lobbying efforts.

The Wall Street Journal this week reported more bad news for Desert Rock on the financial front. Three huge Wall Street investment banks – Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Morgan StanÂley – adopted new financial standards to require plant proÂponents like Sithe Global prove the plants will be economically viable even under potentially stringent federal caps on carbon dioxide. As one of the bankers noted, “What is earth-shakingly different between now and two years ago is the focus on CO 2 .”

The financial squeeze is parÂticularly tough on Desert Rock because its costs keep balloonÂing. Sithe Global now figures the plant will cost at least $3.6 billion, up 20 percent in just the last couple of years, and already twice the original cost touted when the plant was first proÂposed. Throw in another $400 million for the new transmisÂsion line needed to carry Desert Rock’s electricity to distant marÂkets in Arizona and Nevada, and we’re starting to talk real money at a time when Wall Street bankers are ever more skeptical of coal plants like Desert Rock.

Sithe Global generated an amusing piece of news recently when its lawyers at Bracewell & Giuiani sent a piquish letter to the Environmental Protection Agency threatening a lawsuit if the EPA didn’t promptly issue Desert Rock its necessary air pollution permit. Sithe’s attorÂney at Giuliani’s law firm is one Jeffrey R. Holmstead. Before his job represent ing Sithe GlobÂal, Holmstead was in charge of all of the EPA’s air programs, including global warming, where he was the chief architect of the EPA’s now discredited approach that it lacked the auÂthority to regulate global-warmÂing pollution under the Clean Air Act. Holmstead’s erroneous legal views were rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court last April when the court ruled that the EPA may in fact regulate carÂbon dioxide just like any other pollutant.

One experienced air-quality advocate described HolmÂstead’s tenure at the EPA as “deny, delay, obstruct” any acÂtion to address global warming. Now, here he is representing the largest new source of globÂal warming-causing pollution planned for the Southwest U.S., and insisting that EPA hurry up and issue a permit rather than consider the conseÂquences of 12 million tons of carbon dioxide spewed into the atmosphere each year.

I’ll almost be sorry when Desert Rock bites the dust in the not-so-distant future.

Where else can one find so much fine entertainment proÂvided by its army of spokesÂpeople, lawyers, public relaÂtions staff and investors?

mpearson@frontier.net Mark Pearson is director of the San Juan Citizens Alliance.