Slashdot Mirror


New Mexico Levies $54M Against Energy Dept. For Violations At Nuclear Repository

mdsolar notes that New Mexico has asked the US Department of Energy to pay over $54 million in fines stemming from violations that led to the indefinite closure of the nation's only underground nuclear waste repository. The state Environment Department delivered a pair of compliance orders to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, marking the state's largest penalty ever imposed on the agency. Together, the orders outline more than 30 state permit violations at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southeastern New Mexico and at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The orders and the civil penalties that come with them are just the beginning of possible financial sanctions the Energy Department could face in New Mexico. The state says it's continuing to investigate and more fines are possible. The focus has been on a canister of waste from Los Alamos that ruptured in one of WIPP's storage rooms in February. More than 20 workers were contaminated and the facility was forced to close, putting in jeopardy efforts around the country to clean up tons of Cold War-era waste."

36 comments

  1. new mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Let's give New mexico back to Mexico.

    1. Re:new mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right after Mexico gives Mexico back to the Incas.

    2. Re: new mexico by WindBourne · · Score: 2

      Why? It was never theirs. Any land ends up belonging to those with the greatest number of ppl. The area claimed by mexico was never theirs. It was owned by native Americans or indian tribes that had 5-10x as many ppl as Mexicans had here. Sadly, the genocide that the Mexicans started in America was continued by the other Europeans that had moved to america.

      But to claim that any of this belonged to new Spain or mexico is a joke.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:new mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The end is an absolute idiot? What?

    4. Re:new mexico by sillybilly · · Score: -1, Flamebait

      Hispanics are the fastest growing ethnic group inside the US, faster than urban blacks. Which is the only thing that counts in long term voting power, rate of population growth. San Francisco CA, San Diego CA, San Jose CA, San Angelo TX, San Antonio TX, San Marcos TX, San Luis, CA, San Clemente CA, San Bernandino CA, San Mateo CA, Santa Rosa CA, Santa Fe NM, Santa Maria CA, Santa Barbara CA, Santa Monica CA, Santa Cruz CA, Los Angeles CA, Los Alamos NM, Las Cruces NM, Las Vegas NV, Amarillo TX, Mesa AZ, Costa Mesa CA, Salinas CA, Sacramento CA, Pueblo CO, Durango CO, Natchez LA, El Paso NM, El Dorado AR, (Baton Rouge LA, french also Laplace and New Orleans too), these non-English names describe the long history of who was there first, of course mixed in and interspersed with English names. In the old days territory was conquered with swords or gunpowder, in these days of peace it's done with the phallus, the horny erect penis getting stuck into moist vaginas that are unable to say no to that dick. The whole world is playing chicken with overpopulation issues, and as long as there is voting, and welfare against starvation, popping babies on welfare as fast as you can is what any sane ethnic group should do, until we drag the government welfare funds so deep into debt that they can no longer send out the welfare checks, and then if we still hit that bootay and pop a new "individual" with equal protection in the eyes of the law, the natural consequence will be starvation if we do it in a non economically conscious way. The capacity of lifeforms to breed is or should be infinite until they hit the economic limitations, which is the normal controlling check on population levels. With free welfare money and equal protection under the law to all individuals regardless of race, skin color, eye color, hair color or lack of hair, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or economic status, the economic check is lifted because everyone is guaranteed unlimited access to inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In the modern days all these terms are monetized, converted into money, which is why I revised the Our Father a few posts back. Money buys you rights, money buys you life, money buys you territory, and money buys you fame, money buys you reputation, money buys you good ethical standing, money buys you youth (through a plastic surgeon), money buys you weapons, money buys you corrupt politicians who can revise your credit history. Most importantly money buys you territory. Which is really at the core of my personal problems, territory, and in that ethnic control of territory. I bough my house for peanuts in Da Hood trying to show how on minimum wage people in desolate urban areas full of opportunity (cheap housing, public transportation, utilities, TV and radio stations, supermarkets, libraries, monuments) can make ends meet and live extremely happily. However I'm a white guy, and I entered a territory as a white person which was conquered by blacks during the race riots in the late 70's away from Czech and Slovak ethnics, who moved on. They put up a fight for it, and they ain't just gon give it back to white people encroaching on their conquered territory. My girl cousin living with her husband in a still fairly upscale territory around 2000 was told in that apartment bldg by some black folk that "this is already ours." Black folk consider an apartment bldg they rent or even a city block as territory. Like Eddie Griffin says it in this flick, west side west side, nigga dyin over a block you don't even own. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... But he does own it in the end if he succeed harassing and chasing white people away from it, then taking over the county government, and harassing the landlords away with bullshit things like minimum service fees on utilities. I had a homeless black man who called himself Lloyd move into the junk house I bought, and he'd rip the water line down and flood the basement with a tiny puddle in the depression no

    5. Re:new mexico by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Really?
      Why would they need to give Mexico back to South Americans?

    6. Re:new mexico by sillybilly · · Score: -1

      I woke up thinking this: 900/mo x 12 =10,800 on 8 x 2080 hrs/yr =16,000 gross minimum wage for a family of 4. Insanity. Out of that 16,000 comes the near 10% sales tax, or 1,600, then social security, medicare, and only then income tax, if any. But still aint no fucking tax gonna take 11,000 from 16000 which is what Obamacare tries to be. It's economic nonsense, and it shows that either the democracy is on its last kicks, and whoever owns the system is abandoning a sinking ship and trying to squeeze whatever wealth they can still extract from it during the last minutes before it implodes, or they want to maintain the system but have an arbitrary tax that takes all your money dependent on how Da Man feels like, what he thinks the government should pitch into your Obamacare aid, whether all 10,800 is "on paper" given to you, meaning you get free health care, or you have to pay it all out of pocket. Bullshit. And if you do not agree, we can make you really sick by force. A hell of a world is coming. All I know people don't rebel as long as the stomach is filled each day, so as long as they can guarantee food on the table for everybody, they can get away with anything, such as making sure everyone has a credit score of less than 50, full of bankruptcies, a mile long criminal record, declared a liar, and 8 million dollar in debt on paper, per person, it's all abrakadabra numbers and letters on pieces of paper or computers and don't really matter as long as there is food on the table every day, that's the only thing that really matters. And as long as that's guaranteed the urban populations grow out of control, and when it's no longer guaranteed and hunger starts, that's when any kind of violence and massive riots begin. Even racial riots don't really happen, unless some races have been kept on really tight food supply for a while. The daily bread, food, is the top priority above almost anything else to all lifeforms, besides of course air and water, which are free or almost, and roof over the head and clothing, roof over the head being the single major cost in a distorted way from what's normal on most of today's list of expenses, far outdoing food cost, for now. That's gonna change, eventually it has to, big time.

  2. The real problem of nuclear is close ties to gov't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who manage nuclear projects tend to get the impression they are above and beyond government regulations and accountability, and then shit ensues with the corresponding PR fallout.

    Happened in the US, happened in Europe, happened in Japan, will happen in China, too.

    Too bad.

  3. how can New Mexico regulate a federal site? by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    Next maybe they'll fine the military over activities at White Sands Missile Range?

    1. Re:how can New Mexico regulate a federal site? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You can fine or sue the Federal government all you want. As to whether they care, it's up to them.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  4. So much for ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... Yucky Mountain.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:So much for ... by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 2

      Cold war era waste is in all kinds of difficult to manage forms. A system of tight regulation & oversight, including fines for violations, is the best way to deal with it. If there are no fines or violations occurring, then either oversight or regulation is too lax, or both.

    2. Re:So much for ... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      A system of tight regulation & oversight, including fines for violations, is the best way to deal with it.

      But if you let the market take care of it, you'll surely boost sales for bottled water, Fallout 3 style!

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  5. new mexico by tarellel · · Score: -1

    You're an absolute idiot, the end!

    --
    http://theworkaround.com/
  6. non-enforcible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And "asks" is the key word, since unless Congress has explicitly agreed prior to give the state the right to fine it, then there is no way that they can enforce a fine against a federal agency.

  7. Sovereign Immunity/Federal Supremacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless the state of New Mexico has a prior agreement with the Federal Gov't granting it the ability to levy fines against the DOE, then these "fines" are strictly for show, since they are unenforcible against the federal government under principles of soverign immunity. Furthermore, since they apparently occurred on a federal facility, they fall outside of the state's jurisdiction and are properly investigated/enforced by the federal EPA.

  8. neo-cons stealing from the feds. by WindBourne · · Score: -1, Troll

    NM is currently under neo-con control. This spill occurred on federal land within WIPP. The state had nothing to do with cleanup or trying to get the gov to do so. Yet, this neo-cons trash wants to demand loads of money to make up for their mismanagement of the state.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:neo-cons stealing from the feds. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      It's all a bit of political posturing. The Feds can decide if they will allow Nevada to sue them (Federal Tort Claims Act). Thus, the Feds can essentially dictate whether or not they want to give Nevada some money. Everybody knows this. It's just a game.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:neo-cons stealing from the feds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The state of NM is currently under control of the Governor and legislators duly elected by the people who live there. They reflect the desires of the majority of the people who actually live there, or they will be replaced in due time. The fact that you need to resort to name calling says more about you than it does about the merits of the state's actions.

    3. Re:neo-cons stealing from the feds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all a bit of political posturing. The Feds can decide if they will allow Nevada to sue them (Federal Tort Claims Act). Thus, the Feds can essentially dictate whether or not they want to give Nevada some money. Everybody knows this. It's just a game.

      When did Nevada come into the picture?

    4. Re: neo-cons stealing from the feds. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Name calling? It is no more name calling than referring to Obama as a dem, liberal, or even left-winger.

      In addition, nm went from 1 of the top 5 ran states to 2nd to last worst ran state.
      The level of incomprtence shown by neo-cons like Martinez is nothing less than staggering. She and her cronies took a state in a great position, and destroyed it.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    5. Re: neo-cons stealing from the feds. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      He obviously meant NM.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re: neo-cons stealing from the feds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The level of incomprtence"

      incomprtence

  9. Mostly Smallpox by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Informative

    Way off topic, but European diseases such as Smallpox killed Incas. Quoting: "Even before the arrival of Pizarro, smallpox had already devastated the Inca Empire..." And: "... the viruses tore through the continent, killing an estimated 90% of Native Americans."

    1. Re: Mostly Smallpox by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Any reason why you quoted something that was NOT in that link? In POF, the link kindof refutes what you said by stating that it killed UP TO 95%, while you unequivocally state that they were killed. In addition, that was in 1400, 3-400 years before mexico would form and then start trying to attack north american Indians.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  10. Another mdsolar submission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Los Alamos doesn't represent anything except Los Alamos.

  11. Re:The real problem of nuclear is close ties to go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people who manage nuclear projects tend to get the impression they are above and beyond government regulations and accountability, and then shit ensues with the corresponding PR fallout.

    Happened in the US, happened in Europe, happened in Japan, has happened in China, too.

    Too bad.

    FTFY

  12. Nuclear disaster area in the United States by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a nuclear disaster area in the United States, the Hanford nuclear site. I've heard about the some of the problems over many years from a manager of one of the departments of the U.S. Department of Energy, and the Wikipedia article mentions some of the problems. Here is one quote:

    "Citing the 2014 Hanford Lifecycle Scope Schedule and Cost report, the 2014 estimated cost of the remaining Hanford clean up is $113.6 billion..." [my emphasis] Retrieved Dec. 3, 2014.

    Here is another quote from the Hanford Wikipedia article: "From 1944 to 1971, pump systems drew cooling water from the river and, after treating this water for use by the reactors, returned it to the river. Before being released back into the river, the used water was held in large tanks known as retention basin for up to six hours. Longer-lived isotopes were not affected by this retention, and several terabecquerels entered the river every day. These releases were kept secret by the federal government."

    What is called cleaning Hanford has now taken more than 50 years. The Wikipedia article is not, at present, completely clear about that fact, apparently because, as the quote above says, the U.S. government managed the information so that it did not get into the news, although much of the information was not actually a secret, but was known to people living in the area.

    1. Re:Nuclear disaster area in the United States by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      The only thing I want to point out about Hanford is that it was a nuclear weapons facility, not a nuclear power one.

      Sadly, this shows that when it comes to weapons, the USA wasn't that much better than the USSR in keeping it's activities clean.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    2. Re:Nuclear disaster area in the United States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the USA wasn't that much better than the USSR

      Actually we were. Mayak, the Soviet equivalent of Hanford in the Chelyabinsk Oblast in the Ural mountains actually lofted most of their hottest cold war waste into the atmosphere by neglecting a waste storage tank until the nitrates coalesced into a huge bomb. This is called the Kyshtym disaster, and nothing of its scale ever happened at Hanford.

      In another disaster, the little lake behind the plant where they had been dumping high level waste for years dried up completely in 1967 during a dry summer. Winds blew the waste around contaminating everyone/thing in the region. The lake and the waste is still there and they are still dumping supposedly only 'medium' level waste into it, and low level waste is still being dumped into the lakes in the immediate area. Some nations in Europe, you see, employ Mayak to refine reactor fuel.

      Hanford did discharge highly diluted, long lived isotopes into the river. The GP mentions retention basins and leaves out several other mitigations Hanford used in dealing with the waste. The Soviets made no such effort. Waste from Mayak when directly into the Techa river, undiluted in any manner during the early years of operation.

      There are many legitimate parallels between Hanford and Mayak, physics and the urgency of the nuclear arms race being the same for both Americans and Soviets. The Soviets, however, produced a couple orders of magnitude more damage. A difference easily large enough to be one of kind, rather than degree.

    3. Re:Nuclear disaster area in the United States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think project Green Run tells us how much the military cared about not contaminating the civilian population.

  13. Rah rah nuclear power! by Tetetrasaurus · · Score: 0

    Although this was a nuclear weapons facility, this is just one example of the dangers of nuclear power. It ain't worth the risk, and thorium is a pipe dream at this point. Invest in renewables, which are making amazing gains practically every week!

    1. Re:Rah rah nuclear power! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Yes, thank you for your post, Coal industry.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  14. Re: The real problem of nuclear is close ties to g by Rostin · · Score: 1

    WIPP was designed, owned, and run by the government, or at least by contractors who may as well be government employees. The problematic waste was packed by employees of Los Alamos National Labs, a government facility. I don't know exactly where you intended to go with this, but I very much doubt anyone involved felt that they were somehow beyond government accountability.

  15. There were no more Incas. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 1

    That's one of the problems with Slashdot commenters writing comments that are so off-topic. One person said, "Let's give New mexico back to Mexico." The response was "Right after Mexico gives Mexico back to the Incas."

    I intended to say that there were no more Incas, because the Incas contracted European diseases.

  16. What is the sources.list entry? by Optali · · Score: 1

    And more importantly, does it work in vanilla Ubuntu or is it Debian Unstable only?

    --
    -- 29A the number of the Beast