FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

January 7, 2010

Contacts:
Sarah Fields - 435-210-0166; sarah@uraniumwatch.org
John Weisheit - 435-259-1063; Cell: 435-260-2590; john@livingrivers.org

Protest Hearings on Water for Nuclear Reactor to be Held January 12 in Green River, Utah

On January 12, 2010, the Utah Division of Water Rights will hold hearings on the protests of the withdrawal of water from the Green River for a proposed nuclear power plant a few miles west of the City of Green River, Utah. The hearings start at 9:00 a.m. at the John Wesley Powell Museum, 1765 East Main, Green River, Utah.

Living Rivers (LR) and Uranium Watch (UW), along with individuals, organizations, and government representatives will participate in the hearings as parties. The parties include the Grand County Council, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Green River ranchers and farmers and a river recreation company, Grand County citizens, Red Rock Forests, HEAL Utah, Center for Biological Diversity, the Uintah Water Conservancy District, Utah Rivers Council, and the Sierra Club.

The hearings will consider the applications by the Kane County and San Juan County Water Conservancy Districts to change the use, place of use, and points of diversion for 53,600 acre feet of water (about 47 million gallons per day) for the reactor planned by Blue Castle Holdings, Inc. (formerly Transition Power Development LLC). Blue Castle Holdings Inc. (BCH) intends to site the reactor on Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration land that has been leased to Emery County for an industrial park. Although BCH news releases (www.bluecastleproject.com) state that BCH owns the proposed site, BCH has not purchased the land.

The requirements for approval of an application for a new appropriation or a change are found at Utah Code 73-3-8:

http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE73/htm/73_03_000800.htm

According to Section 73-3-8, it shall be the duty of the state engineer to approve an application if: • There is unappropriated water in the proposed source. • The proposed use will not impair existing rights. • The proposed use will not interfere with the more beneficial use of the water. • The proposed plan is physically feasible. • The proposed plan is economically feasible. • The proposed plan will not be detrimental to the public welfare. • The applicant has the financial ability to complete the proposed works. • The application was filed in good faith and not for purposes of speculation or monopoly. • The appropriation will not unreasonably affect public recreation. • The appropriation will not unreasonably affect the natural stream environment.

BCH seeks to accumulate assets, including rights to water in the Green River, in order to develop a "shovel ready" site. There is no information available about who would construct and operate the reactor, where the billions of dollars necessary for such a project would come from, who would purchase the electricity, who would use the electricity, or how, exactly, this very complex project would come together.

Sarah Fields of Uranium Watch says, "This is clearly a speculative venture, which is not permitted when water is appropriated for use in Utah."

There are serious questions about whether the proposed plan is physically and economically feasible. The applicant is supposed to have the financial ability to complete the proposed works; but at this time, the entity that would build and run the proposed reactor is not known. For some reason the DWR has not requested additional information, nor initiated a study of the impacts of the withdrawal of the water to supply the operational and safety related needs of the reactor.

The use of the water would impair existing rights on the Green River, impact public recreation, and damage the natural stream environment. In a time of increasing water scarcity, the availability of water and negative impacts to the endangered and threatened fish species are primary considerations. The USFWS, Center for Biological Diversity, Western Resource Advocates and others are concerned that reducing water quantity and water quality in the Green River will significantly diminish habitat for endangered species and cause three threatened species to be listed as endangered. WRA is a member of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program. The program is a collaborative effort with members from four states, federal agencies, and representatives from water users and conservation groups. WRA has requested that the DWR deny the applications or postpone any decision until DWR develops modeling related to the impacts of the potential depletions on Recovery Flows for endangered and threatened fish in the Upper Colorado River Basin.

John Weisheit of Living Rivers, says, "The Colorado River basin has no water to give anymore. Climate change has already depleted the streamflow of the Colorado River from 15 to 14.1 million acre-feet, and by mid-century streamflow may be a mere 12 million acre-feet."

UW and LR are concerned about the lack of data and information in the applications. The DWR and the public have not been given any of the financial and environmental information that is necessary for the State Engineer to make informed decisions regarding the significant regional impacts of this proposal.

More information: http://www.uraniumwatch.org/bluecastle.htm

To read the latest document on climate change and the Colorado River, please visit these sites:

http://wwa.colorado.edu/current_projects/CO_River/rcn_strmflw_corvr.html

http://www.onthecolorado.com/resources.cfm?mode=section&id=Hydrology

Back | Top
Last Update: October 30, 2007