Forum

Replies

  • Kaohi April 10, 2010 at 5:37am
    where are you Kamatose, check out Kaleo's Ustream I think you would find it intersting and engaging. How are you I haven't heard from you in a long time. How's the chats? Kaohi
  • Tane December 19, 2009 at 1:08am
    There cannot be secession when there was nothing ceded to the U.S. They are just projecting their myth so it will be regarded as fact. I'd like to see the smirks when the truth is accepted and they have to de-occupy our country.
  • Kamatose December 18, 2009 at 5:04pm
    I think it's pretty evident from their smirks and chuckles that they have tried to 'cover' any possible losses to allow Hawaii to secede from the U.S. No matter how many of their laws they make it cannot defeat our rights to freedom.
  • Kaohi December 17, 2009 at 8:31pm
    Aloha Kamatose,
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
    Before Administrative Judges:
    E. Roy Hawkens, Chairman
    Dr. Anthony J. Baratta
    Dr. Michael F. Kennedy
    In the Matter of
    U.S. ARMY INSTALLATION COMMAND
    (Schofield Barracks, Oahu, Hawaii, and
    Pohakuloa Training Area, Island of Hawaii,
    Hawaii)
    Docket No. 40-9083
    ASLBP No. 10-895-01-ML-BD01
    December 17, 2009
    ORDER
    (Identifying Issues for Oral Argument)
    This Board will hold oral argument on standing and contention admissibility issues
    presented in the hearing requests received from Cory Harden, Isaac Harp, Jim Albertini, and
    Luwella Leonardi (hereinafter referred to as Petitioners). Petitioners challenge the application of
    the U.S. Army Installation Command (Army) for a Source Material License to possess depleted
    uranium at the following two sites in Hawaii: Schofield Barracks, Oahu, and the Pohakuloa
    Training Area, Island of Hawaii.1
    Oral argument will be held in January 2010 at the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
    Panel’s hearing room in Rockville, Maryland. The Army and the Nuclear Regulatory
    Commission (NRC) Staff will appear before the Board in the Rockville hearing room, and the
    Petitioners will participate by either videoconference or teleconference.2 The Board is aware
    1 See 74 Fed. Reg. 40,855 (Aug. 13, 2009).
    2 Because Ms. Harden and Ms. Leonardi have indicated they wish to participate by
    videoconference, the Board is in the process of locating a suitable videoconference facility.
    The Board is awaiting responses from Mr. Albertini and Mr. Harp as to whether they wish to
    participate by videoconference or teleconference.
    - 2 -
    that members of the public in Hawaii have expressed an interest in this proceeding, and the
    Board will therefore take steps to have the argument webstreamed for the benefit of those
    individuals. The Board will issue a subsequent order setting the format of the argument, the
    date and time of the argument, and the videoconference location.
    The Board has identified below topical areas it wishes the participants to be prepared to
    discuss at oral argument. In discussing these topics, and in otherwise answering questions and
    presenting oral argument, the participants should not inject information, topics, or arguments
    that are new or that differ in any significant respect from the information and arguments
    contained in the original pleadings submitted to the Board. The following areas of concern are
    not all-inclusive, and the Board may inquire into other matters raised in the participants’
    pleadings.
    A. All Petitioners
    (1) Please provide the following information: (1) the address of your physical
    residence; and (2) the distance from your physical residence to the closest
    boundary of the Army Installation for which a possession-only depleted
    uranium license is being considered by the NRC.
    B. Isaac Harp
    (1) In your petition, you indicate that the granting of this license would pose a
    health threat to the land and residents of Hawaii. Please clarify the nature of
    this threat as it applies to you, and specify the factual foundation for your
    assertion of the potential for harm and injury.
    (2) In your petition, you state the Army may have used depleted uranium
    munitions in areas other than those discussed in the license application.
    Please provide the factual foundation for this assertion, including any
    information that would dispute the Army’s findings.
    - 3 -
    (3) Your petition invokes Executive Order 12898 and demands consideration of
    environmental justice in regard to the sites being considered in the subject
    license application. Please explain in greater detail your specific claim in
    regard to this specific executive order.
    C. Luwella Leonardi
    (1) Your petition asserts that dust plumes emanating from the Army installation
    are responsible for health issues in your community. Please specify the
    factual foundation for this concern, including the basis for a conclusion that (1)
    the offending dust plumes emanate from the Army installation, (2) the dust
    plumes are radioactive, and (3) there is a causal connection between the dust
    plumes and health issues.
    (2) Your petition alleges that the Army transported contaminated soil to your
    community on the Waianae Coast. Please specify a factual foundation for this
    allegation, including the destination and purpose of the alleged shipments,
    their frequency, the length of time they have been occurring, and the nature of
    and type of the alleged contamination.
    D. Jim Albertini
    (1) Please provide the factual foundation for the assertion in your petition that the
    Army fails adequately to acknowledge the inhalation hazard of depleted
    uranium oxide, including any information that would dispute the Army’s
    findings.
    (2) Your petition indicates you were present when radiation monitors spiked to 75
    counts per minute during a dust storm at Mauna Kea State Park. Please
    clarify the details of the event and explain why you attribute the spike to
    depleted uranium from the Army installation.
    - 4 -
    (3) Your petition indicates that you have visited the Mauna Kea State Park.
    Please specify the distance of this park to the Army installation in question, as
    well as the purpose, frequency, and duration of your visits.
    E. Cory Harden
    (1) The NRC Staff asserts that the material you submitted on October 30, 2009
    should not be considered because it was filed after the October 27, 2009
    deadline and it was not accompanied by a request or justification for submitting
    it out of time. Please address the Staff’s assertion.
    (2) Please clarify the contention(s) being pled in your October 30, 2009
    submission.
    (3) Please clarify the contention being pled in your October 9, 2009 submission.
    F. Army
    (1) Please clarify the quantity of depleted uranium that is involved and the degree
    to which the Army has been able to identify the locations on the sites where
    this depleted uranium is located. Regarding these two issues of quantity and
    location, please address the Army’s confidence in both the quantity of material
    and the possible locations, and the factual basis for such confidence.
    (2) Please provide a map or other geographical depiction that (1) shows the
    boundaries of the military installations, and (2) shows the area(s) within the
    installations where depleted uranium exists. Please provide the distances
    between the depleted uranium areas and the boundaries of the military
    installations. The Army is directed to provide this to the Board and to serve it
    on the other participants by January 5, 2010.
    (3) Please clarify the nature of current and prospective activities on these two
    installations with regard to live-fire exercises, and the location of such
    exercises in relation to the depleted uranium areas. Please address whether
    - 5 -
    the Army has a policy of maintaining a specific buffer distance between live-fire
    exercises and depleted uranium areas.
    (4) In regard to current site monitoring activities, please clarify what, if any,
    monitoring is being performed for either airborne or groundwater radioactive
    contamination. Please address the assertion in Ms. Harden’s submission that
    the Army’s air monitoring program is based on “wrong protocols” and the
    “Army is not getting enough sample to [distinguish] depleted uranium from the
    natural [uranium because] . . . the sample size is too small.”
    (5) In regard to the site characterization, please discuss the nature and results
    from any aerial radiation measurements that may have been made from either
    fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters. If aerial radiation surveys have been, or will
    be, conducted, please describe the methodology that was, or will be, used.
    (6) In regard to the assertions by the petitioners that contaminated soil is being
    removed from the installation(s) please clarify what, if any, activities are
    underway (or may be implemented in the future) to remove either depleted
    uranium or soil containing depleted uranium.
    (7) Please address when the Archives Search Report was made publicly available
    both in print and on a website.
    (8) The verified number of depleted uranium spotting rounds shipped to Oahu
    from the Lake City Ordnance Plant was 714 rounds in April 1962, yet the
    “worst case scenario" estimate of rounds used – based on training/qualification
    criteria, as well as the number of spotting rounds ordinarily fired per practice
    round – is 2,526 rounds. Please reconcile these two figures, and also address
    the possibility that additional rounds may have been shipped to Oahu from
    other ordnance depots.
    - 6 -
    (9) Please address whether the Army intends to use depleted uranium munitions
    in the future at the relevant military installations.
    G. NRC Staff
    (1) The Army’s application states that the “Army has not determined that the
    Atomic Energy Act (Act) requires a possession-only license in the instant
    situation,” but that it is nevertheless submitting an application to “promote
    cooperation between our agencies and to the extent required by the Act.”
    Please address whether the Army is required to have a license in this situation.
    (2) Please explain the consequence if the Army is not granted a depleted uranium
    possession-only license for the two sites in this proceeding.
    (3) Please discuss the nature of license conditions that may be placed on the
    Army as a possession-only license holder, including whether such conditions
    could include the location and frequency of radiological monitoring, the ability
    to remove depleted uranium (or soil that might contain depleted uranium) from
    the site, and the permissibility of conducting live-fire exercises in areas where
    depleted uranium may be present.
    (4) The Staff states that Ms. Harden never specifies any injury-in-fact apart from
    the possibility that “very different conditions may eventually be written into the
    Army DU license" depending on the number of spotting rounds found to be
    used. Because the dose associated with a quantity of radioactive material
    depends on the amount present, please address how it is possible to
    characterize with specificity an injury-in-fact if, as alleged by Ms. Harden, the
    amount of radioactive material is unknown.
    (5) The Staff states that Ms. Leonardi’s assertion that she has seen trucks from
    Schofield Barracks unload debris containing radioactive soil directly in back of
    her home is beyond the scope of this proceeding. Please address what the
    - 7 -
    regulations say with respect to the disposal of material held under a
    possession-only license.
    (6) The Staff states that Mr. Albertini's contentions should be rejected because
    they “fail[] to comply with the contention pleading requirements of 10 C.F.R. §
    2.309(f)(1).” Please explain the basis of this statement, and identify with
    specificity the provision of section 2.309(f)(1) that Mr. Albertini allegedly fails to
    satisfy.
    (7) Please address whether Commission regulations require an applicant to fully
    characterize the type, amount, and location of material it will hold under a
    possession-only license. Also, address what percentage of a site is usually
    surveyed to determine a site’s characteristics, and what is the legal and/or
    technical basis for the percentage.
    (8) Please address whether documents referenced in a license application are
    considered to be part of the application.
    (9) Please address whether the telephone conversation that took place on
    October 26, 2009 between the Office of the Secretary of the Commission and
    Ms. Harden constitutes good cause for the allegedly late filing of her October
    30, 2009 Addendum.
    (10) It is claimed that (i) the Army’s presence at the relevant military
    installations is illegal, and (ii) state or local laws may prohibit the Army from
    storing/possessing depleted uranium in the open at these installations. Please
    address whether the NRC Staff’s review of the Army’s possession-only license
    application extends to such claims, and provide statutory and/or regulatory
    support for your position.
    - 8 -
    (11) Please address the claim that the NRC Staff should direct all military
    forces, domestic and foreign, that have trained in Hawaii since 1940 to search
    their classified and unclassified records for forgotten radioactive hazards.
    (12) Please be prepared to address the standing analysis in the following
    decisions as they relate to standing in this case:3
    i. Commonwealth Edison Co. (Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
    2), CLI-00-5, 51 NRC 90 (2000);
    ii. Crowe Butte Res., Inc. (Northern Trend Expansion Area), CLI-09-12,
    69 NRC __ (slip op.) (June 25, 2009);
    iii. Nuclear Fuel Servs., Inc. (Erwin, Tennessee), CLI-04-13, 59 NRC 244
    (2004);
    iv. Tenn. Valley Auth. (Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Watts Bar
    Nuclear Plant, Unit 1), LBP-02-14, 56 NRC 15 (2002).
    It is so ORDERED.
    FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY
    AND LICENSING BOARD4
    /RA/
    E. Roy Hawkens, Chairman
    ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE
    Rockville, Maryland
    December 17, 2009
    3 If a participant has difficulty accessing copies of the listed decisions, he or she may
    request assistance from the Board’s law clerk by email, at katie.tucker@nrc.gov.
    4 In addition to being filed through the e-filing system, copies of this Order were sent this
    day by Internet email to: (1) Cory Harden; (2) Jim Albertini; (3) Isaac Harp; (4) Luwella
    Leonardi; (5) counsel for the U.S. Army; and (6) counsel for the NRC Staff.
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    In the Matter of )
    )
    U.S. ARMY INSTALLATION COMMAND ) Docket No. 40-9083-ML
    )
    (Depleted Uranium at Pohakuloa Training )
    Area and Schofield Barracks, Hawaii) )
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing ORDER (Identifying Issues for Oral Argument) have
    been served upon the following persons by E-mail with additional service on representatives of the
    NRC Staff and the U.S. Army Installation Command by Electronic Information Exchange (EIE).
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
    Mail Stop T-3 F23
    Washington, DC 20555-0001
    E. Roy Hawkens, Chair
    Chief Administrative Judge
    E-mail: erh@nrc.gov
    Anthony J. Baratta
    Administrative Judge
    E-mail: ajb5@nrc.gov
    Michael F. Kennedy
    Administrative Judge
    E-mail: mfk2@nrc.gov
    Katherine Tucker,
    Law Clerk
    E-mail: Katie.tucker@nrc.gov
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    Office of the General Counsel
    Mail Stop O-15 D21
    Washington, DC 20555-0001
    Catherine Scott, Esq.
    Kimberly Sexton, Esq.
    Brett Klukan, Esq.
    E-mail:
    catherine.marco@nrc.gov
    kas2@nrc.gov
    brett.klukan@nrc.gov
    OGC Mail Center: OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication
    Mail Stop O-7H4M
    Washington, DC 20555-0001
    E-mail: ocaamail@nrc.gov
    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
    Office of the Secretary of the Commission
    Rulemakings & Adjudications Staff
    Mail Stop O-16C1
    Washington, DC 20555-0001
    E-mail: hearingdocket@nrc.gov
    Docket No. 40-9083-ML
    ORDER (Identifying Issues for Oral Argument)
    2
    U.S. Army Installation Command
    Environmental Law Division
    901 N. Stuart St., Suite 402
    Arlington, VA 22203
    Kent Herring, LTC, JA
    E-mail: kent.herring@us.army.mil
    Cory Harden
    P.O. Box 10265
    Hilo, Hawaii 96721
    E-mail: mh@interpac.net
    Malu ‘Aina Center for Non-violent
    Education & Action
    P.O. Box AB
    Kurtistown, Hawaii 96760
    Jim Albertini, President
    E-mail: JA@interpac.net
    Amelia Gora
    P.O. Box 861781
    Wahiawai, Hawaii 96786
    E-mail: hawaiianhistory@gmail.com
    Isaac D. Harp
    P.O. Box 437347
    Kamuela, Hawaii 96743
    Imua-hawaii@hawaii.rr.com
    Luwella K. Leonardi
    85-1363 Halapoe Place
    Waianae, Hawaii 96792
    E-mail: phonicsworks@gmail.com
    Angela Rosa
    P.O. Box 43
    Hawi, Hawaii 96719
    E-mail: angelarosa48@hotmail.com
    Barbara Moore
    E-mail: dfly@dragonflyranch.com
    [Original signed by Linda D. Lewis]
    _________________________________
    Office of the Secretary of the Commission
    Dated at Rockville, Maryland
    this 17th day of December 2009.
  • Pomaikaiokalani December 17, 2009 at 7:13am
    ALOHA Kakou, e Ke Aupuni Moi O Hawaii, After the passage of Public Law 103-150 the issue of Succession of Hawaii from the United States is not the Big Issue. In the past many people have told me that I want Hawaii to "Succeed" from the United States. I would tell them that if Hawaii was not lawfully part of the United States, there is nothing for Hawaii to "Succeed" from the United States. Queen Liliuokalani and our ancestors went on documented record opposing annexation of Hawaii to the United States. The Big Issue is the Revival of the Lawful Government of the Hawaiian Kingdom of Queen Liliuokalani.
    Imua Ke Aupuni Moi O Hawaii Nei, o Pomaikaiokalani

This reply was deleted.