Another guest, Sid Probsnien, who is the CTO of Ativio. Sid, a Cube alum, good to see you. It's good to be here. Great welcome back to theCUBE.  I'll say yeah, we were here last year, it was my first time here, it was kind of boutique and now it's getting a bigger feel to it. 1400, 1500 people, line out the back. Oracle's here. You know when they're running out of lunches. I won't hold that against them. You know you've made it when Oracle makes it to your show, and Ativio is here. You know, your first, at least sponsor, sponsoring of this event. So what's happening with Ativio and specifically in a Hadoop context? What's going on there? Well, the challenge of getting information into applications into existing infrastructure like business intelligence, quite honestly, has never been higher. And everyone is, you know, totally awash in data.  It's, you know, web pages and message boards and people want to get this stuff under control. They want to bring it together. They want to do it quickly. They want to correlate it, you know, as cheaply as possible. They don't want to get into hand-massaging the data. And so one of the essential elements in the sort of what I'll call your data stack 2.0 or whatever you want to take, the big data world, is using Hadoop in the right way to take massive volumes of data, which may or may not be of interest and reduce that to a summary set of data, that you then load into the traditional applications, business intelligence tools, reporting tools that you use now. And getting that, like, that's one of the essential elements is adding that volume storage, right? So saying, okay, so I have this enormous amount of click data, and if I want to understand customer behavior, I need to, you know, boil it down to a set of, you know, kind of outcomes that I can measure and track and interpret. And so Hadoop is doing that. And it's, you know, the ecosystem, what you can see about the ecosystem is it's a look, it's a raw, emergent technology, right? Where maybe not all the pieces, numerous references during the keynotes, for example, to instability, not having this piece wired up, not having that piece wired up. So it's emerged, it's definitely around the solution, you know, a piece of the solution that people perceive. And so now you see this tremendous way of a company saying, hey, we've got a better way of connecting these together. We've got the integration layer. We've got the thing that makes this more stable. So you have all this kind of ecosystem work, right? It's bringing up around it. Now a tibios angle is to say, hey, there's more to information than just volume, right? We view information as extreme information. That's really what we're dealing with. Volume is one dimension. There's also variety. There's complexity and velocity. And actually some of the, you know, other folks around here in the ecosystem are focused on one or other aspect of that. So it's a very exciting time to say, you know, users want the information they want, whether they consume that through an application, through search, through business intelligence, if the application blurs the lines between those things, that's okay. And what they want the information delivered to them the right way, right? And they want it integrated. The era of silos, of impossible, what I like to call the death of great ideas in the parking lot. I think you've heard me talk about this before, right? But you know, you're taking a shower or you're out on your morning job and you say, if I could identify classic customers who thought this and bought this way and who'd repeated this, you know, pattern over and over again, I could identify this incredibly interesting, valuable group of prospects to go after for cross-selling. Great idea when you're in the shower. By the time you get to work and park your car, right? Or get off the subway, you're thinking, okay, you've thought of all the reasons why that'll never work. I can't get a server fast enough. I can't get a DBA to go look at this. It takes three months to make that kind of change and a change request process. So people want, you know, those kinds of artificial barriers taken down. And that's what's really exciting and Hadoop plays a great role in that. Okay, so you've got this thing called Active Intelligence Engine. I think you just announced the new version, version three, I think. And you play in this unified information access space.  So exactly as you say, Ativio has been focused on the unified information access problem. And one thing we bring to the table is enterprise readiness, right? So our system is monitorable, exposes statistics through JMX. It's a system that's designed to be distributed, not only across a set of servers, but different workloads can be distributed across different servers. We have built-in high availability, fault tolerance, even a self-healing mode, right? So if I have two nodes working the same content, one goes down, when it comes back up, it'll put itself back in production and replay any transactions that it missed. Obviously in reverse order of that.  And if you look back, this is why I referred to Hadoop as emerging, right? If you look back at the relational database, it went through the same pain. You know, when the first versions of relational databases came out, they didn't have replication and backup and clustered operation, and now they all have those. So as Hadoop is solving some problems that, you know, in a way are too expensive to put into that database stack, as you use it more and more to solve more and more of those problems, it will need enterprise readiness. So we've really had it from the beginning. The big thing we've added in 3.0 in addition to geographic distribution is the automatic ability to support real ANSI 92 SQL. So now I showed some demos and in fact you can check it out over at our booth. We're showing examples where we're using Tableau to analyze unstructured information. Literally graphing key phrases over time, showing clusters of interesting text that the user can drill into, correlating that with other structured data. So enterprise readiness can be about, you know, high availability and fall tolerance and monitorability, but it's also about playing with the ecosystem. Companies that have Hyperion or Cognos or business objects or an older system or a newer system like Tableau or a CliqueTech or open source like Pentaho, all of those, you know, work with that open standard and so we're very excited to be able to bring velocity or variety or complexity and volume with Hadoop all to bear and all through those interfaces. So what's, we've talked about this before, Sid, but maybe explain to the folks that aren't familiar with it, Tivia, what's your secret sauce?  Yes. You're not out to be a point product. You're really trying to have a platform on which you can build applications. So what's the secret sauce that you guys have invented? Well, I think our core innovation is the use of the search model, which is the inverted index, marrying that up with a graph engine. So if you think of a search index, right, it's just basically a list of words that point back to the documents or records that they were found in. Okay, that's great and everybody loves search and don't we all wish we had the search box in the morning when we lose our socks, right?  That would be awesome. And the enterprise- And there's one of them. There's one, always one. I hope that if there's an afterlife, you get all your socks back. I think that'd be a great way to start. But my point is this, you approach the problem of search and you say, well, it doesn't work in the enterprise. I don't need individual items. I'm not looking for the documents to mention this. I need to understand data visualized, aggregated, presented in a time series, right? It's a very different animal. So when you lay out data using an index, it's flat. You can have a title and a body, but you don't have relationships. The innovation is that we bring a graph engine to essentially link, build a mathematical structure from one node in the index to another. So essentially that edge is the sort of the relationship and that could be used to say, hey, this term occurs at a table or this table is related to another table. So an ID to a foreign key ID. That gives us the ability to do full-text search exactly the way you'd expect with any search engine, but also to support SQL, anti-92 SQL because we're able to do joins exactly the way a database does. Now we actually have some nice advantages. We don't require referential integrity or some of the other things that databases kind of impose on you because they want to keep the system stable from an operational point of view. We focus on the query side so we can relax some of those rules. Anything that matches can be joined on. That's kind of our special sauce, but all of that great technology is not so useful without the ability to get data into it and out of it quickly. So on getting it out, of course, we rely on things like SQL and ODBC and JDBC, but getting it in, we have a workflow model. We have more than 90 different components that we provide to our users and that's the real, the roll-up of the special sauces or the secret sauce is all of those capabilities, machine learning, classifiers and entity extractors, workflow to link it all together and make it occur in the right order. You have UI's to manage it, manipulate it, right? That's what makes it easy. A lot of people just don't know how hard that is. I mean, just the one search problem of in legacy databases is the structured data and you have new unstructured data, just that by itself is a hard problem. The whole other thing you just mentioned is even harder. I mean, you guys have got elves working in the North Pole. I mean, what's going on? How did you guys get here?  Great question. You know, I asked a question at my talk earlier. I said, how many people here have implemented a map-reduced job? Actually, the number of hands was not as high as I had expected. It was maybe 20 people.  If you've written a map-reduced job that operates on Chinese data, all hands went down, right? I pointed out, I said, that's a much harder problem than operating on a bunch of English log files. We all speak English. We don't necessarily speak Chinese. A Chinese speaker will tell you that two speakers might disagree about where a word begins and ends. There is a lot to the vagaries of human expression, right? Don't we all have a friend who doesn't get jokes or sarcasm, right? Boom, right over their head, right? So, expecting a computer to be able to grapple with that, that's a real, that's a big thought, right? That's a bit of a leap.  They're mostly manipulating structure with, you know, our purchase data. You got to get at all that text data. It's very important that you can manipulate it and understand it and deal with, you know, synonyms and antonyms and acronyms and there's all these different... How many people are working on this? Well, so that's a great question. We've started out, we have 70 people total in the company. We have about 15 engineers at the end of the day of our core team. And look, we took the approach coming out saying, okay, do we need to build another search engine? And we had a lot of folks from the search world, right? Many of us worked at a big search company that was acquired a couple of years ago. We left before the acquisition. And we said, do we need, does the world really need another search engine? Should we just build another search engine? And we said, no.  And they're like, do we need to build another BI tool? No. The answer was to go and build the new thing. And the approach we took is, do we have to build this and if we have to build this, the key decision point, can we add value? Is there something unique we can create? If not, there's no point. So we were brutal about build-by and we took a lot of free and open source software. We're very aggressive in the way we use it, meaning we only use the permissive license. We use a lot of tools like Black Duck software, big shout out to Black Duck. We use them and others. And we've gone through real deep scrubs with some of our OEM customers who embed our software inside theirs. But at the same time, we also said, hey, for some of the stuff, open source is not there yet. And we used the commercial third party. So we've licensed in a bunch of commercial third party software. And we've also gone and implemented, that's how you focus your implementation, on the things that really make a difference. Text analytics, ours. Not the kind of thing you can license, no good commodity versions out there. Machine independent, language independent, machine language trainable systems, that's much more the kind of thing we focus on. Similarly, the graph engine, the join operations, where we're actually about to be issued a patent for a join on top of a search index. That's where we focus. That's powerful. That's the new model for software now.  We debate, or we commentate aggressively on the same thing, we both agree. Like when HP bought autonomy, we were kind of against that whole huge thing. But autonomy, if you think about it, their key value is the search. Not so much the other stuff, but does, there's an e-discovery component. But now search and managing these fabric, that's the new way. But with Hadoop, you got a lot more opportunities. Can you just elaborate how you see that? I mean, do you agree? I mean, I see that autonomy's done good for themselves, but I'm expecting HP's probably going to take that ativial approach with autonomy, possibly. I think autonomy is really a very old school, unstructured, focused company with the search box. And if you know- You've got to say on-premise. On-premise, on-premise, right, not cloud, not cloud. I actually, I'll tell you, I have a lot of respect for the way that company approached strategy, right? They said, search has a limited life in terms of growth. And so they focused on buying companies that had solutions, like email archiving. Obviously a very successful model for them, if you were to kind of look at that, outcatch, obviously very successful. But I don't know if that is anything that really changes the landscape of HP. I mean, I kind of think of HP as one of the great innovation companies out there. And yet, many analysts have noted they haven't really hit any home runs with databases. They don't have a massively parallel operation. And so I see that they bought Vertica, right? To get into that space before they had NeoView. So they're clearly trying to make a lot of this stuff work. I think Vertica plus Hadoop is awesome because Hadoop lets you deal with the fact that I don't want to pay for CPUs and licenses and storage, right? Necessarily to keep everything ready to query at any moment. So when I have that data, Hadoop will be a great compliment. And on demand, that's what a lot of the integrations are, on demand we could use that to take a big pile of data, reduce it to some set of summary records and put that inside along with the other pieces. But that is still mostly structured. It's structured data in the database, what I would call unstructured data. Meaning not content, not human text, just variable length records, web logs, click logs, et cetera. They're going to have a great solution for that. They all still need to come to terms with the unstructured side. And that's, I think, where the real future is. Being able to understand, we were talking about exception handling during my talk. It's great when you have a business process and you have step A, B, C. And everything goes A, B, C, no problem. But when something stops at B and can't move to C, you are so out of the process almost inverted, right? Whereas you have a small number of people working the process, to deal with an exception, all of a sudden you have this huge, potentially the entire organization. Who knows the answer? How do we solve this, right? Well, that is solving that problem. One great way to do that is enterprise 2.0 approaches, right? So get the right people kind of blogging, tweeting inside the company about what they're doing. But another way is to say, hey, if I could actually query all that information, all that unstructured. And at the same time, query that was structured data. Like say, find the customers who bought this product in this way through this channel. And who said this, let me find that group to focus on. That's where the power is, right? That's compelling. That's the future. I love that. I mean, I think it's a really pragmatic use case, hard to do. So I think that's fantastic. Let me give you a concrete use case. You did ask for use cases. So I'll throw one out there. We work with a major investment bank on IT incident management. And you know, look, it's tough being in financial services, especially in IT. The trend towards budget is down, not up. And so this group needs to do more with less. And recently they got beat up by their business unit. Business unit said, you guys are escalating more than half of the issues that come through here. And that means there's a real problem. So they asked the IT unit to go back and study the problem. And they said, well, we studied it on average for severity one issue. It takes around 27 minutes to resolve. And the problem is silos. And just imagine yourself as a poor system admin.  You know, the illustration system. So first you need to go look at this virtualized landscape. The servers, you know, the system you're looking for might be on different servers than it was on the last time, right? It may have moved. So finally you hunt down these log files. Now you're looking for the log files, not the easiest thing to navigate, right? Often a lot of different people's, different developers' work just coming out free form into a log file. So you got to kind of worm your way through that stuff. Finally you say, hey, that's the thing. That's the problem. Now you got to go to the design documents, the change histories, the knowledge base provided by the vendor, and maybe the SharePoint site that's packed with information by previous system admins, right? They've all put their notes down there over years. No wonder it takes 27 minutes. And if your 15 minute escalation time is there, of course you're escalating more than half. So we integrated all those sources of data, including all the log files from hundreds of physical servers. In index, they're brought together, marshaled, brought in, and indexed every 10 seconds. And this system for the system in cut the time from 27 minutes to three minutes. And that was the bank's own study. Because all of a sudden, instead of wondering, where am I going? You go to one place, a search application, right? You start by saying, what's the system name? That gives you the server map. Now you get the log files. Now you find the smoking gun. Copy that in the search box. Hit the search button. The answer comes up because it's in one of those sources, right? Design documents, change histories, trouble tickets, the wiki, with all the sysadmin comments, and the knowledge base provided by the vendors. So three minutes, it's a real game changer. And by the way, the ROI, and that's hundreds of thousands of dollars every month. But the story doesn't end there. What's even more interesting is that one pile of data or content or whatever you want to call it, that index of information that the sysadmins use through search, there's another group that's interested. The other group is the managers of the sysadmins. They want a dashboard though. They want aggregate trend-oriented data, not the individual items. They want to say, hey, which systems break the most? Which ones take the longest to fix? Which admin fixes them most rapidly? They even have us figuring out when there's a change management collision. Two systems getting the same change during a window of time. So that's the real power of UIA, right? It's not just that it's many different types of data at a large volume with pretty aggressive velocity. It's also that there's a complex mission and two different user communities don't want to have two different systems. My last question for you, Sid. You know, there's a lot of talk these days about who contributes the most to the open source. Do you guys have you or will you contribute to the whole open source Hadoop movement? Not to Hadoop, but we have contributed to other projects, patches and things like that. And we've funded development of Apache Poi, which is actually Poi is not an Apache project. It's used by an Apache project Tica because we think the world needs great format extraction. So we'd love to be part of the ecosystem. You know, we're a commercial company, but our approach is that at the end of the day, customers are going to want all of the best elements in their solution, whether they're open source or commercial source or something else. And we knit it together for them and add innovation on top so they don't have to. And there's definitely a group of buyers out there that that's the solution that they're much more comfortable with now. In time, I think we're going to see every model, all of them linked together, all working together, free, open source, premium, premium, commercial, hybrid models, versions where there's gaming involved, right, to get points and self promote the company. It's a great time to be in software and it's certainly a great time to be in information. Excellent, Sid Propstein, CTO at Tivio. Thanks very much for coming on theCUBE. It was always a pleasure. My pleasure, thank you so much. Great energy, good story. Great to see you guys too. Thanks, all right. Keep up the good work. Thank you.


Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to today's session, New Mexico's Death Map Uranium and Nuclear Energy in the US. My name is Rocio Ortega. I'm an events associate at ProPublica and I'll be your host today. We'll get started in just a few moments. We're just waiting for a few more people to sign on. Thank you so much for your patience. Close captioning of the program is available and can be enabled by clicking on the closed caption option on the bar towards the bottom of your screen. Today, a panel of experts will talk about a small town's experience with the former uranium mill in New Mexico and what it can teach us about a failed federal regulatory system. And it looks like we have just about enough folks on now, so let's get started. If you're just joining again, my name is Rocio Ortega. I'm ProPublica's events associate and we welcome you to today's event, New Mexico's Death Map Uranium and Nuclear Energy in the US. Close captioning of the program is available and can be enabled by clicking on the closed caption option on the bar towards the bottom of your screen. As a final note, the session is being recorded and a link to the video will be emailed to everyone who registered in just a few days. For those new to us, ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom dedicated to investigative journalism. Today, a panel of experts will dive into ProPublica's investigation of the country's roughly 50 former uranium mills and the more than 250 million tons of radioactive waste they generated. The meeting found mills across the west where companies were granted repeated exemptions to groundwater cleanup standards, their waste piles polluting aquifers even as climate change hammers the west and makes water and even scarcer resource. Leading today's conversation is Mark Olalde. Thank you all so much for being here today and I hope you enjoy the session. I'll go ahead and let Mark take it from here. Thanks Mark. Thank you so much for that introduction and thanks everyone for being here. My name is Mark Olalde. I am an environment reporter in the Southwest Office of ProPublica. So I focus on everything from water to oil to uranium in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah. Quickly we're going to show you a little video here to get started. What you're about to see is a resident of the community that we're going to be talking about here today named Elaine Borcher, who was also a former nurse who treated uranium miners suffering from various illnesses associated with underground uranium production. In this process of reporting the story, community voices were key in hearing what was going on in getting a sense of the issues, the perspective here. So we're going to showcase a few of those and we have a former community member here with us as well. So without further ado, let's take a look at that video to get it started and then I'll tell everyone a bit more about ProPublica's investigation into uranium and introduce our panelists. In the summertime when the wind is blowing you can smell it in the air and it smells like rotten eggs. I was disappointed in myself that we bought here. I moved to Grants in January 1st of 2008. This was a contaminated uranium neighborhood. I knew nothing about it. I was a travel ER nurse. The last nine years I worked for a company that took care of the uranium patients. I was kind of shocked that there were that many sick people from the uranium mines in various stages of being sick. You don't realize the magnification of it until you see all these people. Their lungs are giving problems. Their kidneys would give them problems. I don't need to make myself sick by staying here. I would move if they offered a decent price. So Elaine was speaking to a few issues there that our panel of experts will talk about today. One of the first is the uranium miners and sicknesses that they're still dealing with and legislative attempts to get them compensation. Part of the issue is the main topic of the story that we published last week which is the home state uranium mill. It has 22.2 million tons of radioactive waste sitting next to five subdivisions near the towns of Grants and Milan in northwest New Mexico. The question of whose responsibility it is to clean this up, how this gets cleaned up, who pays for it, are all kind of outstanding questions. The public is still in the process of investigating this former legacy of uranium as well as the cleanup system underpinning it for the next few weeks and months here. We found that there are more than 50 of these sites of former conventional uranium bills around the country with more than 250 million tons of waste. Some of it polluting aquifers, some of it near communities and some of it in very rural jurisdictions. So I'd like to invite our panelists to join on screen to talk more about the home state question to talk more about the uranium question in general. So if everyone could jump on screen here. I'm very excited for everyone who is participating and has taken time to talk with us. It's going to be a great discussion. And like I said, we're going to talk about everything from our investigation into conventional uranium bills and their waste to abandon uranium mines. And what is the future of nuclear power look like in the US. Joining me are Candice Haddilla. Candice and her family moved to Murray acres in the in the 80s Murray acres is one of the subdivisions adjacent to the home state mill site that we integrated. She moved back there with her family, or she should move back to another family in the 80s, and spent spent decades advocating for cleanup of that site through a community group called the Blue Water Valley downstream alliance so Candice thank you for joining us. We have Leona Morgan as well. Leona is an indigenous activist who grew up on the Navajo Nation. She works on behalf of communities in the Southwest that are impacted by uranium mining, and is a more recently been turning your attention to waste storage as well so Leona thank you for being here. We have Paul Robinson, who has perhaps some of the most impressive breath and depth of knowledge and uranium I've ever seen. For 43 years as a research director with the Southwest Research and Information Center, which works quite a bit on some of these issues in Albuquerque. His technical assistance work has focused principally on solid waste management, energy and water quality issues as well as the impacts of mining and mineral extraction in the Southwest. The committee rounding out the panel is Senator Jeff Steinborn, who's a member of the New Mexico State Senate, representing District 36 out of Las Cruces, and he is the chair of the Senate's radioactive and hazardous materials committee and the sponsor of some legislation that we're going to talk about a little later today so Senator Steinburn, thank you as well for joining us. So, to get started. Paul, I was hoping you could give us a bit of a foundation, you know, for our readership across the country, uranium might be kind of a new question for them. Maybe people don't live next to giant piles of waste. You know, like, like Leona and Candice have. Can you give us a little bit of a background understanding, you know, in 2004 you published, but I would say is probably the most comprehensive study of these these tailing waste piles to date. Which government agencies need to take responsibility for this cleanup system. And from from your years of research, you know, on the question of mill and mine reclamation around the Southwest and New Mexico. Has the system worked so far to clean up the waste we left behind. Good afternoon, Mark and panelists and others who might be listening and watching. That's a broad set of questions. The current problems at the home steak tailings pile are the legacy of the pollution from the processing of uranium ore. Uranium ore is a rock that is enriched with uranium up to around 1%. And once that or is found the rock is taken to a processing plant, where it's crushed and rinsed in chemicals to remove that 1%. The 99% that's left behind is the mill tailings. And most of the radioactive material. And all the heavy metals associated with the uranium ore are left in the tailings only the uranium itself was removed it's it's decay products like thorium or radium and radar are left in the tailings. And the metals such as selenium or cadmium or lead are also left in the tailings only the values are removed. So the meals that processed uranium ore for the US operated from the 40s. When uranium was being acquired for weapons use and all uranium was owned by the government. There was no commercial market. And through the 60s, when the US decided had enough uranium for all the bombs that could ever imagine making and stop the government purchase and began the commercial purchase. And the commercial purchase of uranium is the current market. The Mexico is the largest producing state historically but is a, hasn't been producing any uranium for several decades. The resources that New Mexico has are quite deep compared to the uranium resources in other regions in the Mexicans resources are too expensive to survive in the current market and like the future markets. So the cleanup of the sites began in the 1970s. Unfortunately, the operators of the mines and mills before that did not manage their waste in a responsible way. None of them were good boy scouts that didn't leave a place better than they found it. And so the waste solid and liquid from the uranium mining through the 70s was left pretty unmanaged. And this is the case for many different kinds of mining not just uranium. There was a law passed in 1978 a uranium mill tailings radiation control act, which was the first law that regulated uranium mill tailings. Previously they were not under a control of a license only the mill operations, and the implementation of the mill tailings act is what's gotten the 50 or so mill tailings to the state they are now mill tailings act ignores minds, and the minds are still without a reclamation requirement. And so the older mill tailings which were all generated from weapons use material, those were all paid for by federal appropriation, and the companies that have been hired by the atomic energy commission had been paid a profitable amount to produce that uranium so the companies were paid good money, and then all their waste management costs were bailed out. When it came to the more recent tailings operations, places like home state, Kermadee and Anaconda, the big three tailings files in New Mexico, they operated during the weapons period, and during the commercial period they're called co mingle. And the next pro congressional delegation made sure that the federal government paid for whatever government purchase tailings were in these piles. The companies were paid the first time for the business activity which was profitable, then paid on the order of $100 million and running for the reclamation of the tailings piles. And that reclamation has not yet been successful in terms of restoring the groundwater to pre existing conditions and has been going on for twice as long as the mill operating. Thank you for the future of uranium industry in a second question but that was a long sound bite to give you. No, I appreciate I assume everyone listening in appreciates the, the lesson there and the nice overview. I'm going to go to you, because, you know, Paul talked about, you know, the, the mill tailings act, and kind of creation of a federal oversight which largely goes through the nuclear regulatory commission which is kind of an independent federal body. Because there's an agreement state status which, you know, New Mexico had a one point no longer has where where they oversaw kind of cleanup in their state at some, some places some parts of this, you know, some abandoned uranium mines for instance things go through the Environmental Protection Agency. But a lot of this world a lot of the world of uranium and really the whole nuclear life cycle has been disproportionately kind of on or adjacent to tribal lands much of this and Navajo Nation. But the Ute Mountain Ute tribes some of the Pueblos in central Northwest New Mexico as well. And so when I say disproportion I mean both the kind of labor and resources for the mining and billing often came from from these reservations, but also now that the impact you know we have more than 520 abandoned uranium mines on Navajo Nation alone. From your work with with tribes around the Four Corners region. How would you characterize those impacts of the Iranian nuclear industries, you know, on Indian country, and what's the view today, you know, of the industry. Who's at fault for cleanup that might be stalled and what should we be doing about it. Thanks Mark. Well, and thanks Paul for the introduction I as a dinner person I always make a disclaimer that I do not live near contamination. I actually live in Albuquerque, but I'm joining you from the reservation I grew up here, and I will return here. I have a home on the res in the eastern side. So my people were very well known and documented for the impacts to the workers, our environment, the water, our health, our genetics, our future. But there's also cultural impacts. So for example, contamination and desecration to our sacred places, our sacred elements. This impacts how we use them for our traditional ways. So, for example, water, water is sacred, water is life. And when it is contaminated. Of course, it impacts our health as humans if we ingest it. And this is one of the biggest impacts is the un un. How would you say unrecognized uncompensated unaddressed health impacts, not just to us as humans, but to all of our relatives so the animals the plants are medicines. And again, our sacred places. So as a dinner person. These are things that we need to continue our way of life and to protect ourselves. So when we do prayers and when we do our ceremonies. It's not just for us to survive. It's actually for for all people. It's for all Mother Earth and even the whole universe for everybody. And so for us as dinner people, we, we are seeing the impacts, especially when COVID hit. A lot of folks still don't have running water, 20 to 30% of our people live without running water and electricity. And yet a lot of the resource minerals were extracted from our lands uranium coal. And now we're dealing with fracking. But just to summarize, we are only one people. This has impacted indigenous peoples around the world. We can make the argument that Turtle Island is stolen lands. So the entire North and South America that has been impacted is affecting the indigenous peoples there. So like us down here, our relatives in South Dakota, the Hongpapa, the people in Mongolia, Saskatchewan, DRC, Democratic Republic of the Congo, we are all impacted and we can see the lasting results today. There was a health study. Actually, Paul's colleague Chris Huey did some work with UNM to discover that there is uranium found in newborn babies today. And I just want to take this moment to acknowledge one of the uranium fighters who we just lost. And we attribute these deaths to the uranium industry, much larger than nuclear industry. So the entire fuel chain from uranium to energy, nuclear energy or nuclear weapons. So Carleta Garcia, and her mother, Dorothy Pearly have done extensive work to help and to fight this, this, this problem. We just lost Carleta Garcia and her mother a while ago but I just want to acknowledge there from Carleta is Acoma and Laguna. And, and, and, and her mother was Laguna. And it's all, all people, it's not just Dinef people so I'm here talking about my family, the situation I want to focus on Navajo Nation of course but it is impacting all people and indigenous peoples around the world. We estimate about 70% of the time. So environmental racism, oppression, the military industrial complex, it's still impacting us today in what we call nuclear colonialism. Thanks Leona and I think the points you're making about, you know, what can we attribute in terms of health, you know, do you know what do we know what don't we know about living adjacent to this pollution, you know what that does to to your health. You know obviously isn't an area that has unfortunately been difficult at times and so there's there's thankfully great work being done in the Navajo birth cohort study and others to try to kind of quantify that. Candice I want to go to you because that's a question that you had to grapple with for years health issues in your family, personally your, your neighbors, and just down the street this these massive waste piles. One interesting thing to note in the home state case is that the Environmental Protection Agency in 2014 did come out with a study and that did say there was excess cancer risk from this this mill site, which goes a bit further than than we can say and a lot of other kind of frontline and fence line communities. But Candice can you tell us a little bit about your story and you fought for cleanup at the home state uranium mill for decades. So ultimately decided to sell your house to the company and and move. How do you and your family how did you come to that decision. And how do you feel just what is the feeling from your family and from the community about the company's decision to to proceed the way they're proceeding to buy out the community, move residents and kind of try to eventually hand the site over the DOE. Thanks Mark. Of course our community has been completely decimated on what was once a very lovely farming community with lots of irrigation fields crops. A close knit community, especially the Murray acres community closest to the tailings pond is pretty much gone just a few residents left. I guess it was a slow process I think in the beginning because you know I'm our family moved out there in 1977 and in the beginning. They told us the water was contaminated and the company brought us water to drink and a small group of people filed suit against the company and the result was that we received a municipal water supply. So many in our community had clean water to drink and we were promised that in 10 years this would all be cleaned up. And that was in 1981. And so I think we rocked along as a community thinking this was going to happen that our regulators were on top of it. Our lawmakers and legislators were well aware and we were writing letters and we had made them aware. And so we we felt fairly comfortable. And then the 10 years came and went and and we see that nothing had really changed. And at that point we the company was not paying for our water anymore we were being charged for the water that we use. And we still couldn't use our wells so we couldn't have gardens and some of the things that we'd had before. We still had a deep well that we were irrigating with but unfortunately and I think the KB piece on this issue did a good job of pointing that out to billions of gallons of that freshwater was being used in this really poor system. So what they were basically doing at our site was just flushing the contamination and trying to dilute it. It was a dilution. And so over time. I think, especially when we banded together in the MACE organization the Multicultural Alliance for Safe Environment. I think we began to understand as a group. Laxie the Laguna Akma Community for Safe Environment, Indom the Eastern Navajo Diney against uranium mining, red one, red, red water pond road community and the post 71 folks. I think we began to understand more about the regulatory process. We began to see some of the really huge forces that were arrayed against us in terms of companies that netted billions of dollars every year, and had access to legislators on almost a monthly or every month basis would come in and talk with our, you know, state legislators, senators, etc. And we started to realize not only the environmental factors that were arrayed against us but also the regulatory and legislative factors that we were fighting. So over time I think people in our organization I will say in particular Laura Wachempino really educated us about the effects of radon and we became more and more concerned at least my family did about what that might have been doing to us and I have said I lost my thyroid, it's all been removed my mother had breast cancer is a survivor. And we just started noticing people in our community, having some of these same issues particularly cancers. At a certain point we stopped and did a survey just to see who in the, in the community was sick and what were the illnesses and what were we seeing. And that's the death map that we created because there were a number of deaths right around the pile. And we were shocked I guess we didn't realize until we put it together in one place, how really serious the problem was, and I think we became even more concerned at that point so slow process. And I think being banded together all of these groups in the MACE Alliance really helped inform and educate us and so yeah we actually got out as fast as we could my family, at least in the group that that I think we're the most concerned about the health effects. Thanks so much Candice and you mentioned it and it's a reoccurring theme in our story is that, you know, promises were made, and deadlines were made and targets were made. And then those promises were shifted and those deadlines were shifted and those targets were shifted and, and that that's by no means is home steak. Totally unique in that right in the question of cleaning up a lot of extractive industries, we see that. Perhaps we have a bit of a solution. We have Senator Steinborn here. Senator earlier this year, you sponsored HB 164 the quote unquote uranium mine cleanup bill, which Governor Grisham signed in March. I attended the radioactive and hazardous materials committee meeting that you chaired in Gallup and I think kind of helped spawn this bill. And I was intrigued at that meeting to hear both. There was quite a bit of surprise from some legislators at kind of the scope of the uranium question, as well as what seemed like nearly unanimous interest in addressing it. So, can you tell us, you know, specifically on this new law, what will it accomplish in New Mexico. And then what's the current interest in Santa Fe and addressing legacy uranium and nuclear related environmental and public health issues kind of more in general. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. And again, thank you for having me and thank you all for, for bringing attention to this issue. Now the reason we had this hearing in Gallup that you went to was as somebody who's been in the legislature for a while. I find that this is an issue that we keep having the same conversation year after year decade after decade. And I felt incumbent as a legislature legislator had been around a while to educate the new legislators about this very important issue that needed to be on the radar. But frankly, it's just such a sad environmental legacy that's been given to the citizens of my state and everywhere we've done this mining for the national interest. And that's a really important point because I think that's where the solution needs to be. And that's the point I want to make today with your national audience. It is completely incumbent in my opinion on Congress to write a very big check to take the charge of this situation and remediate these sites and figure out liability and assessing that and, you know, getting done financially, but, but I think it is the federal government's responsibility given that this mining was done for the national defense as you laid out that's a really important point. Morally speaking, but our legislation what we did was, you know, we have this case of kind of the chicken and the egg well who done it whose responsibility is to clean it up and we have in the state of New Mexico and as was stated stated we have, we generated I want to say 50 to 60% I could be wrong and Paul will correct me, but we generated a huge percentage of the country's uranium for our national defense for nuclear weapons. And we have about 1000 sites abandoned sites in the state of New Mexico of abandoned uranium mine sites where there is no known owner. There's no owner currently in existence. There's really no party that legally you can point to any more in existence to say, it's your job to clean this site up they're just abandoned sites. And rightfully we as a state for years have said well federal government. We really ought to do something about that. And we've written letters and Leon and I have been a committee hearings after committee hearings through the years. Let's send a message to the federal government and finally, this legislation that we decided to do would be to have the state take a little bit more aggressive role in number one documenting all these sites, working with federal agencies were with tribal governments, private landowners and start to come up with a plan for navigating these sites, and to document that plan to come up with dedicated staff people in the state of New Mexico that would be responsible for abandoned uranium mine remediation so this bill we actually also raise the money in the state budget to hire coordinator positions and both the New Mexico Environment Department and the New Mexico Energy and Minerals and Natural Resources Department, which they will now be hiring these positions as we speak, which are coordinator positions. And so it's really kind of getting an organized process around identifying these sites documenting mapping them coming up with a plan, but, but make no mistake it's going to cause billions of dollars to remediate them. And the federal government needs to write a very big check, they need to get the checkbook out. And that ought to be our message today, federal government, it's time to write the check. And I've reached out to our federal delegation I know Senator Heinrich I will give him a shout out because he's working to get billions of dollars in various different piece of legislation to do some of this work. I know that Senator Lujan's office and Congressman Teresa Ledger Fernandez, they're all very interested in doing this work. But of course they need support from their colleagues. And I would remind people from other states and their congressional representatives, New Mexico. They periodically did this for the National Service, and we were left with a huge environmental catastrophe environmental hazard destroyed land, water, people's health, and it's time to make right. And so, so New Mexico we passed this great bill, we're going to have an effort that we can now have accountability that can come before us and testify and tell us hey here's where we're at, but we need the federal government to write a very big check. And I do want to mention on that point that we did in the lead up to this event reach out to several members of the New Mexico congressional delegation right scheduling conflicts. Also on the note of other parties we reached out to in the course of the story home steak, the mining company in question did say they've done all they can to clean up the groundwater. And they do say that the, that the health implications of this, you know, that that Candice documented and others document on the death map. They do push back and say, there's not definitive proof of that in speaking with the NRC. They, you know, they do acknowledge the delays. And they do express regret for the delays in the cleanup at the home steak site but say that they are focused on on cleanup, as opposed to on the deadline of cleanup, and, and the local regional EPA office did not respond to us although multiple attempts for me to did want to make sure that that was those points were made clear, because there are obviously lots of lots of voices in this issue. I want to open up the panel a little bit more to, to everyone and this is, this is going to be a bit of a broader question. But I think from the kind of different angles that that all four of you are involved in this, the uranium question, have a bit different perspective on, and that's the question of public health right that's that's kind of why we're the major reason one of the major reasons we're here today. So, could each of you just take two, three minutes to talk us through kind of the, the major public health question concern solution, if there is one that you see from your work in uranium. In this you've obviously worked on the death map Leona and Paul I'm hoping one of you can mention and help explain for our audience, the Navo birth cohort study and some of that work that's ongoing. You know, signer Steinborn, some of the federal questions we're talking about might be the radiation exposure compensation act if you could kind of give us a quick detail of your stance there and if there is a role for the state if this needs to totally be a federal check but we just go through the line. Maybe Candice let's start with you and, and, you know, the major public health question and if there is a solution in your mind. I do think there is a partial solution. And I'm going to push back a little bit on having the federal government alone write a check because I think the responsible parties need to also be responsible for the contamination and the fact that they, they took the, the money from us and they made money on these operations. They promised to clean up they were, they were liable for cleanup and I think they need to be included in the solution. So the responsible parties are very important in this, in this solution. Because I think we need some sort of compensation we know the kinds of illnesses that are related to exposure to rain on into the kinds of contaminants that were in the water that we drank and I think for those people who develop those illnesses. It needs to be support for them they need to and, and people who have died. The same sort of program that the, that Rika has right now for uranium miners and millers needs to be expanded to those who worked post 71 as Linda Evers has worked tirelessly for all of these years in their group and needed to be added to it are people like those at the Redwater pond road community. Those at the jackpile site in Laguna and Acoma. Folks at all of these communities need to be part of a program like Rika that compensates them and helps them with the illnesses that may be related to living near this site drinking the water. I'm going to jump in there and thank you and can as I agree with you totally I guess I was referring primarily to all the abandoned sites where where there is no responsible party, but I agree with you responsible parties absolutely should be held to account including for any malfeasance or deception. I think there, there should be up to criminal exposure for for people's lives who were harmed through through dishonesty but the question you had asked mark about health impacts they continue to this day, Leona took me to just a heartbreaking side of one of the biggest if not the biggest spell in the country's history at church rock. Mike Mike is that the right name of it Leona church rock.  It's just such a heartbreaking situation and and and of course these water plumes these, you know, contamination spreads it migrates so you really have to to deal with it it remains a really serious threat for for the lands where we are working to expand the radiation exposure compensation act for what we call downwinders people affected New Mexicans tested by the Trinity testing of nuclear weapons New Mexico was left out of that bill. And we have an incredible group organization in New Mexico. I'm led by Tina Cordova and many good advocates to do that. And unfortunately we had some extreme members of Congress who oppose that and because of them and them alone seemingly even though we had bipartisan support. They did not expand that exposure compensation in Mexicans. I love your idea Candace about also styling a model after that to take care of people who have been affected by uranium mining I think that is a really terrific idea. It's totally appropriate because again this was all done to support the national mission and, and it's all back to this theme that that federal government needs to be good citizens themselves and do right by people who are hurt for the national mission. So, those are my thoughts. Yeah, I thank you so much. So, Candace mentioned Rika, the radiation exposure compensation act leaves out quite a few people, namely the very first victims of the very first atomic weapon which it was the Trinity test also in New Mexico. It leaves out different downwinders of different projects and, you know, no, no downwinders of uranium mining, and then even only some workers. And then there's the date as well it only compensates uranium workers before 1971. So Paul mentioned in the opening, you know some of these timelines and the depending when the mining occurred what the use was for and, you know, all of these different conditions, it determines today what laws are used who oversees them where the money's coming from, and makes it incredibly complicated for grassroots people, community people to follow. So we have Homestake Barrett Gold, United Nuclear Corporation, energy fuels, we have all these companies that came in, they took the profit, and they left the mess. Yes, they are responsible parties. However, all of the abandoned uranium mines. So any of the mines that were left here with no PRPs or potentially responsible parties. You mentioned Navajo Nation has, they estimate 523 AUM's abandoned uranium mines. The people that live on the land. They say it could be upwards of 2000, because the government doesn't count everything the industry didn't report everything. The industry is largely, you know, self regulated, they self report. I've never seen a NRC coming out or, you know, any, any agency to measure radiation levels at the fence line and things like that. In Church Rock, what happened on July 16 1979 was 93 million gallons of liquid radioactive sludge washed 100 miles westward and none of that was ever characterized in 2015 along the river where this contamination was carried. There was a community in Sanders, New Mexico that was measuring twice the legal limit of uranium in their drinking water. There was a community outbottled water at the schools and the people attribute this to that to that 1979 spill. Yet, what we're told is it's naturally occurring. So these are some of the ways the company skirt responsibility, as well as the government. So if we cannot find companies that are responsible to do the cleanup. So the government's responsibility at the end of the day, they are the responsible party. And to answer your question mark, the very, very, very simply, how do we address this public health problem. We, we stop making more waste, we stop mining uranium, we stop producing nuclear weapons, we stop putting billions into nuclear bailouts, we stop putting trillions into the nuclear weapons industry. We put that money into environmental cleanup with the strongest, most stringent cleanup standards, not just, you know, in white communities, but across the board, because this, these are some of the discrepancies that we've seen where some communities, white communities in Colorado have received some type of cleanup where Dine communities, communities and, you know, people of color in poverty and poverty communities do not receive the same kind of cleanup. And so I'm just going to finish my, my thoughts here with a statement from the Navajo Nation EPA director, Belinda Shirley. Belinda Shirley has informed me that her clan grandpa. So in our culture we have our, our clan system. She said, one of our former chair chairpersons Peter McDonald, he had made a lot of noise about the abandoned uranium mines to the federal government. He told me that today, 55 years later as the EPA director for the Navajo Nation, she is still waiting on some attention from the federal government. What they're saying is when, when this happens in a non native community in an urban community, like three mile island. This was in also the same year as the church trucks bill. In 1979, the nation's eyes were on three mile island. And when you talk about Dinepakea or Navajo Nation, what, what Belinda said is the attention paid by the federal and state authorities is minimal at best.  And she today, she said, I ask myself daily, when will the federal government bear the responsibility of the abandoned uranium mines in Dinepakea. And this is not just coming from me but also community people. Again, going back to Rika. If you look at Rika and the health impacts. I can say in my immediate family in my extended family, who has each of those different health impacts and maybe not in my community but of course in our extended community, we do know people that have suffered cancers. Problems with the babies, thyroid disease like Candice mentioned pulmonary fibrosis and all of these autoimmune diseases and different things. And then what we don't know that is still yet to come we have we are we really need to study the stuff so stop making ways stop mining stop weapons and start cleaning up. Thank you, Leona and thanks for sharing that statement from we didn't catch from the Linda Shirley who is the executive executive director of the Navajo Nation EPA so thanks for sharing that you mentioned studies. And we've got the man himself Paul Robinson. Paul, could you tell us a little bit about what we do know, like I mentioned in the, the homestay case the company says, you know, we didn't cause us directly a judge, several judges agreed with them and said, you know, we can prove that for as these health implications are one to one. What do we know about health in uranium and he tells a little bit about ongoing work in that space. Sure. Thank you. The first several generations of uranium mining we've done without any health studies at all. It wasn't until the early 70s that the first studies of lung cancer among minors who were had a much higher exposure than people who live near mines. And the no data no problem. Legacy of the atomic enters industry begins at the front end where there was a denial about the lung disease. There was occurring among the uranium miners around the world. There was no education done, much less preventive equipment provided. And so there have been. That's one of the reasons the federal government is now liable for the radiation exposures of the minors that are covered by the recently expanded legislation. That's the third time that legislation has been extended I was testifying on the first round in 1990. The federal government has no legacy of proactive mine reclamation. You talk about your oxymorons proactive mine reclamation that's something the federal government has ever invested in, and only after litigation has the multi billion mine reclamation for the Navajo uranium mines been accumulated. It's not that there was an appropriation made. It was that liability was found. And that multi billion dollar fund is the biggest employment source for uranium jobs in Navajo country, and other parts of the Southwest. The problem of the home state site where so much has been invested by the company in dysfunctional reclamation methods. That's not the only tailings pile, which is in a floodplain, which is going to be a perpetual source of leakage and trying to move that pile source control moving out of the stream bed where it was placed. When the tailings operation generation began in the 50s. That's the only way to prevent releases on that site because the sites to porous and the ways of barracks of predecessors. The previous site was to make sure a flushing was easy to do. In the future. We are going to see continued need for reclaiming of these sites. The sites are going to need perpetual monitoring and maintenance funds. They're never going to be finished. In the in situ minds the types of solution mining which is preferred around the world and for which there's many sites in the US license. Those all have alternative concentration limits they're not able to restore to their original standards. There's no example of uranium sites returning to preexisting conditions. So some of the health studies that have been ongoing are very important. The North cohort study is a study that involved the Navajo Nation Department of Health and federal authorities and University of New Mexico, and it studied mothers and babies prior to birth and after birth for about five years. That study showed that the blood samples taken from those infants had urine uranium levels and blood uranium levels higher than a normal adult human. So there already was evidence in urine of a high content of uranium in these infants and there's been no uranium mining on Navajo Nation for three generations. So how the third and fourth generation of children got this uranium burden is a very distressful and concerning matter and the generosity of the mothers and families to share that. There are fluids with scientists who allow this study to be done is also a very brave thing because that's not an easy to do within a cultural context. The current study is a study called mental exposure on tribal lands in the hour at Southwest, and it is looking at the dust from uranium mines, and finding that there's a high occurrence of very fine particle breathable dust that includes not only uranium and arsenic but other heavy metals in the air near the uranium mines. So this is a source of airborne pollution that hadn't been demonstrated until these tests were done in Navajo country and in Laguna so trying to demonstrate not only that that dust occurs that it causes lung damage. That's what that work is done and that's diseases in addition to cancer. The last thought I want to share is that, even though there's an effort to buy the land around the home steak site. The home steak site is at the confluence of two large watersheds, Bluewater Creek and San Mateo Creek, and it's on top of where an irrigation system had been for 30 years. It's very porous materials those streams are going to continue to flow in those areas there's pictures of floods that some of Candace's neighbors have that demonstrate how vulnerable those sites are. So, the home steak may be able to acquire land and move its neighbors back, but the city of Milan it can't move. It's dependent on those sites for its water supply wells, and the home, the Acoma. Pueblo they're not moving. This is part of their ancestral land as well as other communities in in the Western New Mexico and they want to protect those resources they're not subject to a land acquisition. So the problems of having tailings in the middle of a watershed with intermittent flooding. That's a permanent defect to maintaining the effort to dispose at that site. Tailings ought to be moved like the Department of Energy is currently doing with the 14 million ton Moab tailings pile in Utah. Thank you very much, Paul, and just a note on that home steak does say that they've done groundwater modeling showing their contaminants won't move off where their site boundaries will eventually be. Of course, we are still waiting on that on that model into made public. So we will dig further into that once we see the numbers underpending that claim but thank you all for that. We're going to shift in in just five minutes here to some questions from you all I see a lot of great questions coming in through the chats and want to make sure that that we're getting to some of those as well but one last question for me. Maybe Senator Simon let's start with you, but we can kind of lightning through if everyone's got a quick one just one or two thoughts on this. We've been looking backwards we've been talking about cleanup at home so we've been talking about cold war era stuff that's still out there. Nuclear energy is not gone. It I believe accounted for about 8% of a power generation in America last year for better or worse it is still greener than fossil fuels in terms of carbon emissions. You know so it's still it's still has a place in the energy mix for now. But the the uranium industry looks very different than it did before it's moved out of the Southwest in large part to Wyoming, Texas and elsewhere, and we're talking about different types of reactors that of course still have a waste that needs to be stored somewhere. So what is the future of the nuclear industry looking like, and Senator Steinborn anything that you can say about this, what the state's stance is on the question of waste from it and how we deal with it today and then anyone else who's got a very quick thought to add on that I would love to hear. Well, you know New Mexico is the poster child for challenging the notion or the statement that nuclear energy is quote clean energy. And yes, undoubtedly agree, some of the emissions are absolutely cleaner than the alternatives but when you're dealing with, you know, tailings pile of uranium mining now nuclear energy still uses uranium still uses to create the fuel for for nuclear fuel in the reactors used in our country. When you're in a state that's dealing with tailings pile that have to be babysit set, whatever the right, the right way to frame that by the federal government for 10,000 years we have legacy sites here that are managed by the Department of Energy that will have to be babysat for literally thousands of years. That is a huge cost to pay as a civilization for for choosing this energy source. And so we should do so with eyes wide open and frankly find other clean energy fuels like when in solar that don't leave us this legacy of environmental destruction that we're finding from nuclear waste and and I will say that we are also dealing with this battle for what to do with now the nuclear waste that we've generated at all the nuclear power plants around the country and they are trying to shove that down New Mexico through which is another battle I'm at the spear tip of trying to get the state of New Mexico to pass legislation actually making it illegal to store that waste here as Texas has done in Texas where there was also site and we all know Texas isn't exactly an environmentally liberal state, but the federal government does need to find a home for permanent deep deep geological repository level storage of this waste, but right now there's a very ham handed industry driven. It's totally irresponsible and disrespectful proposal to just ship it all New Mexico under the guise of some interim proposal by a private company and it would be completely risky to our state and quite disrespectful and just add to the environmental legacy of disrespect that we've seen in the state. So we're fighting that. And again, as far as embracing more nuclear energy we should be eyes wide open about the environmental high environmental costs that come with that and seek alternatives that are superior in terms of their environmental consequences for the country. I'd like to jump in here because I'm a senator Steinborn's talking about full tech, and this is a fight that a lot of us are engaging in. There's nowhere to put the high level radioactive waste from all of the nuclear power plants in the country. So the idea is to store all of it in New Mexico temporarily. They are looking at a 40 year permit. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission just completed the final environmental impact statement for whole text consolidated interim storage site located in southeast New Mexico. There's two sites actually about 40 miles apart, one in New Mexico one in Texas. And so, while we're trying to make noise about the uranium waste, the federal government is entertaining this proposal from whole tech, and then this other company called waste control specialists to bring the waste to the Southwest by rail. And so something I wanted to point out in the article, the, your article that is shedding light on the mill, the home steak barric mill, the home steak barric gold mill. This company, like all the companies, they will be due promises, but once they get their profit, they're gone. And so this is what we're concerned about with full tech. They want to bring the waste as a private company, but there is no permanent place so New Mexico will be stuck with it forever, if we don't stop it. And earlier, I see one of the questions in the chat is asking, how can this happen on Native American lands. The Navajo Nation has a law against uranium mining. The Navajo Nation has a law against transport of radioactive materials. However, we are only a quasi sovereign nation. We are still subject to the federal government. And our hands are tied when it comes to transport of waste across the Navajo Nation. The railroad goes all the way across the Navajo Nation from the Arizona side on the west end all the way through New Mexico. And so we are, we can't move in the article people are selling their land they're leaving indigenous people do not move. And so one of the other issues I'm working on with the uranium mining. The Grand Canyon is a place that's very sacred. Everyone around the world has heard of the Grand Canyon. They just, there's a company energy fuels, they just got a permit for new mining at the Grand Canyon in April. So we are still dealing the Navajo Nation, we're going to be facing the transport of that waste from the Grand Canyon through Navajo to the white mason mill, and, and, and we can't stop it. We need help from the states of Arizona the states of New Mexico to confront the federal government. The state of New Mexico did pass a law to open a uranium office. It's a start, but we don't have a lot to ban this waste, and we need a standalone law. We need a lot of laws in New Mexico, and we really need our state officials to uphold its own sovereignty as a state. Right now, it's like the federal government is just telling us what's going on there. They want to expand whip, they want to expand land on Los Alamos National Labs. So we're dealing with several fronts, not just uranium cleanup and whole tech but all of the nuclear sites in New Mexico. A friend of mine Petuche says, we are addicted to nuclear monies as a state. So New Mexico, we have benefited a little bit, there were some jobs at some roads, things like that. But in order to realize that we have a problem, just like in any kind of problem, and then, except that there is a problem and start to address it. So, yeah, thank you. Mark, it's very disappointing to hear you accept the concept that nuclear power has some ability to demonstrate that it is a low emission energy source. If you think about all the concrete that's got to be made and all the piping that's got to be slapped into those enormous machines, and none of them have been to decommission. That energy is going to take to decommission those things. You're going to have to have reactors for power to decommission the reactors. I don't think there's any basis in saying nuclear power is green. Only if you isolate the reactors themselves from all the different stages in the fabrication. And there is no waste management. Once they're generated, they're still trying to put their second interim storage site in New Mexico, because the first one they got in colonnade interim, and I was 40 years ago do. So there's not really a lot of good will once, once the mines and tailings piles are all cleaned up. Maybe somebody would believe the nuclear industry can actually clean up after itself but there's no demonstrated capacity to do that. Because nuclear power is the most expensive way to boil water. And it used to be. And so you don't have the opportunity to have distributed nuclear power where people can generate their own power on their homes and store their own power. Increased energy efficiency reduces demand. So just building new reactors is a very poor approach unless you're invested in the reactor companies. I'd like to ask Paul to mark if I may, would he agree that the market the private market has for those who are fans of Milton Friedman and like the private market is spoken in terms of nuclear energy. Private investors have have shied away from it the cost, the cost overruns the safety factors. I don't think without the, the government's tremendous subsidies that it would be something that the private sector would be interested in at all. Similar sort of a tone mark in the discussion of the other kind of uranium mining the in situ mining where it doesn't make tailings, and it doesn't make shafts and pits. So, how bad could it be. Well, it can ruin ground. The leach chemicals into the groundwater they can't be stabilized effectively and groundwater is the only water available in most of the West with the uranium deposits. So, the water trumps the resource value, and the people who have to live in the places during and after the mining, the water is a much more important commodity than the resource that is a temporary boom in the local economy. Thank you for that nuance ball and canis. Yeah, I think a lots of lots of factors that have to be considered any sort of energy energy production. And so thank you for for kind of highlighting all the various aspects of that. Thank you all for thoughtful discussion so far want to open up to questions from from the audience I see a number of questions already starting to roll in. Also please share feedback today about about today's events and suggestions we have a great events team here at the public that host these types of discussions about our stories. So any feedback for future events is is greatly appreciated and that link is being shared in the chat now also want to take a moment. This type of investigations type of research has is is wide ranging. You're seeing my face today but I'm just one of a team so a quick shout out to my Miller reporter who co wrote this story, as well as Marisa Rodriguez pawns at who Alex my Jesse Molly Simon, and many others who helped report shoots the story and and highlight highlight the issues here. Again, if you got like to ask a question quick the q amp a click the q amp a icon at the bottom of your screen to submit those. I'm seeing a few roll in asking at home steak and more generally can further groundwater cleanup to Paul's point of the groundwater kind of being the main concern here or one of the main concerns at these mill sites can groundwater be cleaned up here. Are the exemptions that are being given are they are they necessary I guess they're really no more we can do. And related question that I want to toss in there because I think it's a pretty interesting kind of tech type question is could we go back to this waste and remind it or remit to pull more out more of the uranium and other materials out of it. Maybe as an economic cleanup solution. So, what else can be done with this waste what what are your thoughts for the panel. So interesting prospect and many people have looked at that in great detail and we're still companies trying to recover valuable uranium off the remaining debris from our first round of recovery. But the problem is that as you get to that last five or 3% the values are increasingly expensive to recover and the cost of recovering all of the minerals are making for pure sand rinsing all the metals out the technology isn't yet available but it's a it's a common direction for research, both within this metals research program I mentioned a UNM and also among other investigators, you have to pick up the stuff you've got out there process it and then clean up underneath the waste piles. So getting a clean source of material is much more difficult than cleaning up a dirty site. I would say to mark that one of the problems that the home state bear gold site was that they never committed the type of the level of reverse osmosis to the site that was needed. So they had probably, I mean, Paul can speak to this better than I maybe a 10th to a 20th of the, the amount of reverse osmosis that needed to happen at the site, and even what they had only operated at about 25% capacity, most of the time. I've never really dealt and committed the resources to the cleanup to actually cleaning the water that were needed at the site, much less the other things that Paul's mentioned. I also see an interesting question here, and Leon I think you were responding to it in the chat but would love the thoughts on someone asked about the kind of mental health of, you know frontline communities.  How do you either on the on the kind of academic side of their studies that get into a sort of question of, you know, is pollution also mental health thing in addition to a physical health thing. So but also just kind of what, you know, Leona because I saw your answer that let's start with you first. You know, from the other side, what do we, what do we know about it what can we say about that that question. Well as far as I know it's not being addressed. I, for example, on the Navajo Nation. I know my internet's a little unstable. The Navajo Nation we are working on cleanup, and the, the process is to work under the federal. There's what what they call a cleanup plan first it was a five year plan and then a 10 year plan. And even some of the people who work within the Navajo EPA are suffering health effects from your contamination, and the mental health impacts are really not being stated or even studied or addressed. The National Association of Social Workers in New Mexico, the New Mexico chapter has identified what they call eco social work. So they're seeing these mental impacts, the to the communities that are scared of radiation, they're scared of what they don't know will come because of the latency period for these health impacts, it could take 20 years before you develop cancer. So that fear that that anxiety and stress. No, it's not being addressed at all. And on the Navajo Nation, just to add a little bit more, not so much on a personal level, but I would say as a as a indigenous government. We are subject to the United States federal government five year cleanup plan like I was mentioning, where EPA region nine out of San Francisco takes the lead and they make all the decisions on the contract, the cleanup contracts. Daryl Yazzie, who works at the Navajo Nation Superfund department he has been extremely vocal that the United States government needs to listen to Navajo Nation when it comes to cleanup and how to do the cleanup, because it's not just about processing and nuclear science. We have, we have to put prayers into this, we have to consider the impacts to our past ancestors are generally our generations that we lost before us. And we're also considering the impacts to our future. So it's not just about us today, and we have to consider the metaphysical integrity of our cultural resources, and that is completely overlooked. So when Daryl Yazzie is talking about cleanup contracts, we're not just talking about the remediation, we're talking more holistically about how do we address this problem from a cultural and spiritual way, because that's how we deal with stuff and the Navajo Nation has absolutely no authority on on what happens with cleanup. It's the federal EPA region nine out of San Francisco. So New Mexico just passed this law to start an office, but I'm wondering how much will New Mexico push back on the federal government. When we come to the actual cleanup and how it's done. Will they be listening to locally impacted communities. Will they be taking the lead from the people who have lived the contamination who have lived through our families in these deaths. That's what needs to happen the federal government needs to look at the human impact.  And so that aspect also needs to be considered. So short answer now, none of it is being studied or addressed. I wanted to take one more step kind of forward looking because I'm seeing a number of questions come through and I'm going to do my best to kind of synthesize them to get as much information out there as possible in a short time. And I will start with you, Senator Steinborn, because when I get an opportunity to pick someone's brain who's who's got the ability to set the policy that impacts that when I want to take advantage of that. So questions with people bringing up uncapped unplugged orphan oil wells, bringing up the specter of future uranium mining, kind of the next really the next what's the next extractive issue or what's the next, you know, what's the next industry that we're going to need to clean up. And so has a long history of resource extraction, many different types of resources. Also, many of those haven't been fully properly regulated and fully properly cleaned up I think it's probably a fair thing to say. From Santa Fe, or from you personally, are there lessons learned that the state and other regulators can apply to, okay, here's how we can have responsible development. And that's how we can properly have oversight, you know, of these these types of things moving forward. Great question and not just great question for New Mexicans but great for everybody listening. Economic development is great and it's important for states, but it should never come at the expense of selling out your state's environment or human health. So what that means is that your state shouldn't just be blind cheerleaders and you shouldn't elect people who are just cheerleaders for industry. You need watchdogs, and you need to drive a very tough bargain and it's okay to say no to some endeavors all together because they want that they want they want that at the cost of your environment and your health we are fighting all kinds of battles. And the state of New Mexico that I now have a front row seat for is the chair of the radioactive hazardous waste committee, and I sometimes wonder are we making headways on these issues or are we losing ground on them it feels like a little bit of both. But we just had a hearing the other day in Clovis, where we not only dealt with high level nuclear waste and proposed to bring in all this waste. And all of it from the entire country will end up on a rail line going from communities called Clovis Roswell and Portala small rural communities rule New Mexico up to 10,000 cast via armed guard. Imagine living in one of those communities for decades, but also we have a nearby military base who has contaminated a water supply for some of the one of the area dairies and a contaminate called PFAS, which is known as a forever chemical. In the lab we're dealing with a massive chromium spill. And then of course we deal with uranium. So we have all these legacies so as we look forward, we need to be aggressive in protecting as policymakers but as citizens and protecting our water air land. We should expect that from our elected officials. We should draw a very tough bargain on what we allow to come into our states. You know, I mean look at what happened in the Gold King mine, you know in Colorado that blew out and then it polluted and you know you have a lot of people in this country and politicians who like to bash federal regulatory agencies like the EPA or the environmental department but boy when there's an environmental catastrophe in their neighborhood. They're the first ones going hey where were you to protect it's the is the biggest hypocrisy and irony. You could ever see, but, but we need to invest in our regulatory agencies like the EPA, like the environment department, and really invest in a strong protection scheme. So what I'm certainly doing as a legislature is trying to add in layers of protection, you know, things like we did with the uranium mining, but also, you know we're trying to do it with PFAS and all these other issues so it's. You need the resources to be able to do the work because you were definitely up against well healed adversaries, and they will absolutely run rough shot over you if you let them. So last questions running short on time last question for everyone I want to get your thoughts I've seen a number of responses come through the Q amp a I've had a number of people email myself or other team members. Over the past couple days since the story published. If people are so moved and want to get involved somehow in in these issues. You know, whatever side of that might be. What would you suggest. I'll start. I, I believe that one thing they can do is go to the NIRS website, the nuclear information resource services. They have some good information about nuclear in terms of the infrastructure act. And I think that's a good place to start and to start speaking out, because we can't just sit back passively I think as citizens of a democracy we have to get informed and speak out. I'd also recommend the multicultural alliance for a safe environment I believe their website is southwest uranium impacts.org. They have lots of information and there may be places where you for there where you could donate to their work, or help them out. So those would be good places and I just want to shout out, not only to ProPublica, but to the team at PBS. And I want to say something for one of our local reporters her name was Kathy Helms. And over the years and the Gallup independent she has done some incredible just mind boggling been at every hearing and cranked out story after story so people in this region were informed and I want to thank her. But we need to stand up and be citizens of a democracy because that's our job. I think that was perfectly put anyone else have other other thoughts. They want to add to what Candice said. These efforts, these multi generational efforts to try and get remedies to problems they are worth fighting and they can be successful. And for communities whose land is at risk there. Sometimes there's no other way than to keep that effort up and that's how long it takes to get attention to and try and get a problem solve the idea of vigilance is the price of freedom. No one's going to protect your area or land, unless you make the effort to try and do that so staying informed and communicating among your neighbors and community colleagues and your leaders and representatives or that's the way the changes that have brought what has happened now which is improvement over the lack of any effort that we saw for so many years when I was younger. Mark, maybe I can make one final comment. Sorry, and I just say you jump on as an elected official. I think a lot of times, people look towards maybe elected officials or government or just someone else, and they, they expect that they will be the agent of change they will be the watchdog. They will be the person protecting that they'll say somebody should do something about that. We all are that somebody in New Mexico recognize your legislature we're volunteer legislators believe it or not. We do the best we can someone can do a heck of a lot better as for sure. But, but number one in New Mexico, our government is very accessible. We have webcasting you can send an email you can participate, never be fearful or intimidated by that play an active role and wherever you're at in the country. And that's what you just said Paul about, you know, ever all and can us about all of us being responsible for being watchdogs in our community. Feel free to send an email to your local mayor or whatever about an issue that you're it's important and you become, you become the agent of change, we all are agents of change. And, and that's so important in today's world. Yeah, just to add. I've been doing community organizing for a long time. I started as a student organizer at the University of New Mexico. 20 years ago. So my experience just doing organizing is talk to your neighbor, tell your friends tell your parents tell your grandparents because those are the folks who vote. Indigenous people don't vote it's a colonial thing, but what Senator Steinborn just said, we're at these meetings all the time and I would love to see new faces. I think I met Paul and Candice, you know, oh 15 years ago and and we are the same people all the time, not in Mexico, but on a national scale. So I've been doing work nationally, and then sometimes even internationally going to the United Nations convening of parties, which is a meeting regarding climate change. And, and all we do there is talk about how nuclear energy is not a solution to climate change. And one of my colleagues going to air Meyer, he made incredible inroads to communicate with his minister of environment in Germany, simply by talking about these issues, it's not hard, all you have to do is, you can make a phone call. You can show up to a meeting, you can write a letter. If someone listening here today really wants to make some bold movements. The best thing I think is to have formal statements of opposition, formal statements of what kind of cleanup you want whether that's resolutions or, or whatever, go to your city council go to your chapter house go to your state legislature, right to your members in Congress, because a lot, almost every nuclear thing is under the federal government. Everyone only has two senators, all you got to write is two letters. It's so easy. So that's what you can do. People can say, we need to find a solution to the waste. I disagree with deep geological repository for high level ready radioactive waste with the mill tailings I'm not sure. But all I know is these things have to be contained and kept away from humans, the environment, all life. And we have to figure it out together. It cannot be this top down approach, this oppressive colonial way that we've been dealing with for so long, we need to listen to each other, and the people who know the land the best, because they are the ones who will know how to deal with it. Well, in just a moment, we'll close by sharing a clip of a song from john boomer who's an artist who lives just down the road from the home steak mill site. It's a song that tells the story of the boom and bust of the uranium industry in New Mexico's grants mineral belt. But first just huge thanks to Leona and Candice and Paul and Jeff for taking the time for sharing your, your deeply personal stories. I've appreciated every time we've talked and I know that our audience appreciates learning from you all as as well. I want to thank our, our, our special thanks to our, our partners on this Los Angeles Times cable before and Albuquerque, the PBS news hour for the partnership on this occasion, as well as on this event. And we're grateful to the audience for joining us for your thoughtful questions for engaging with the story. Thank you this is the engagement that that that we're talking about or at least the start of it. Again this event has been recorded, you'll receive an email, shortly from our events associate CEO with a full video of today's event, and we'll also post the recording on the ProPublica YouTube channel. Anything ProPublica you can find at propublica.org. From all of us ProPublica thank you for joining us have a great rest of your afternoon. And please enjoy this closing clip. Thanks all. They made really good money for just hard labor. With no, no technical skills they just were laborers. And to show them how to use a air hammer and put them down in the mines. For ten. Putting it all on the line. Working for a man. Trying to hang on. Promises hard work and pretty good pay.