Wenatchee World Articles
DATE: Friday 22-July-2005
No more DUSEL duke-out - Leavenworth lab site rejected
LEAVENWORTH - The National Science Foundation on Thursday rejected a site near Leavenworth for a possible deep underground laboratory.
"Wonderful! Wonderful!" said critic Hank Drewniany. "What other words can I possibly say?"
But supporters of the University of Washington's $300 million proposal to tunnel under Mount Cashmere from near Icicle Creek were deeply disappointed. They said they think a vocal group of protesters ruined the area’s chances of being chosen for the lab.
"From a scientific point of view, this was clearly the superior site. But a few vocal people prevented the National Science Foundation from selecting it," said Bill Stroud, a retired NASA physicist in East Wenatchee who organized the local lab support group, Citizens for Science and the Environment. "It's a shame that a group of quite dishonest people have played a role in denying this really great opportunity."
"I think the scientists really wanted the community on board, and they didn't have that here," said Leavenworth philanthropist Harriet Bullitt, who initially offered support for the idea but withdrew it because of the strong local opposition. "The people here simply didn't want it."
The National Science Foundation narrowed the list of eight potential sites for a Deep Underground Science and Engineering Lab (DUSEL) to two, and made the finalists public Thursday afternoon.
The two sites are the Homestake Mine in Lead, S.D., where that state formed a new state agency and pledged at least $125 million toward the lab; and the Henderson Mine near Denver, an operating ore mine that already has the needed environmental and operating permits to build a tunnel.
The six other sites were "declined," said science foundation spokesman Curt Suplee. They include the Mount Cashmere site, along with others in California, Minnesota, Virginia, New Mexico and Ontario, Canada.
"From a very strong field, the Homestake Mine and the Henderson Mine stood out as by far the most promising prospects for further consideration," the foundation said in a prepared statement posted Thursday on its Web site.
Wick Haxton and John Wilkerson, the UW physicists who spearheaded the lab proposal, could not be reached for comment Thursday.
Marilyn Cox, director of the university's DUSEL-Cascades office, said community opposition and cost may have played a role in the foundation's decision. She said the two sites that were chosen were both mines, while the Leavenworth site would have had to start from scratch.
"We are very disappointed by the decision," she said. "We thought Mount Cashmere was a very good and appropriate site for this project and were really excited about the potential it would hold for the future of the state."
The university had invested about $300,000 into the proposal, not including staff time, Cox said.
The UW publicly proposed the Icicle Creek site in October 2003. Supporters and opponents quickly organized, with environmentalists, educators, scientists and other residents on both sides of the debate.
The Leavenworth and Wenatchee chambers of commerce supported the proposal, and the Chelan County Port District came out in favor of continuing to study the idea. Wenatchee Valley College’s science department also wanted the lab here.
Supporters touted the potential for new jobs, both during the construction phase and after research began, as well as the possibilities for new spinoff businesses, educational programs for area students, and more tourists drawn by the visitors center.
"We wanted to certainly go down the road and look more closely at what the potential benefits would be. And we saw benefits there," said Craig Larsen, executive director of the Wenatchee Valley Chamber of Commerce.
But the Leavenworth City Council, after receiving predominantly negative feedback from the community, voted unanimously last week not to support the lab proposal.
Leavenworth Mayor Mel Wyles on Thursday lauded the decision and said the lab would have been "horrendous" for the community.
"It would have hurt Leavenworth more than it would have helped us," he said, adding that it would have chased away campers and hikers who spend money in the city. "This was just not the place for this kind of thing."
Opponents cited the heavy truck traffic to remove rock during the tunneling, and the potential impacts to underground water sources, Icicle Creek, the surrounding wilderness and the environment if an accident were to occur once the lab was operating.
Drewniany, a member of the Icicle Valley Protection Alliance, which formed to oppose the lab, said the group had submitted petitions with 3,600 signatures of people opposing the lab to the National Science Foundation by Tuesday.
In its statement, the science foundation, a federal agency formed to promote science, said it still has not decided whether it will ultimately build an underground lab, which scientists of various fields want to in order to study life in outer space and deep underground.
The lab would allow experiments to be shielded from harmful cosmic rays on the Earth's surface.
Bullitt said she hopes the lab will still be built somewhere, but said she had heard from many in the science community that Leavenworth was their preferred site.
"They thought this place had all the best geology," she said. "They thought it was by far the best. The only thing they needed was the community support, and it wasn't there."
The UW held community meetings, asked the Port District to facilitate public involvement and helped fund a study of potential economic benefits.
"They did all the right things when they came to the community with their idea," Bullitt said. "But I think there was a lot of misinformation flying around."
She said supporters of the idea weren't vocal or organized enough, and their voices were drowned out by a small but active group of opponents.
Michelle McNiel can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at mcniel@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Sunday 17-July-2005
DUSEL loses key support
It was the vote that had to be: The Leavenworth City Council unanimously declined to endorse the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory proposed for the beloved and valued Icicle Valley.
The council includes some former outspoken proponents of DUSEL. It includes at least one scientist and high-level educator. Someone might have expected at least some residual support for endorsing DUSEL, perhaps just a few encouraging words. But no, the council's opposition was consistent, its unanimity glaring.
The council voted correctly. Truly, it was the only position the council could possibly take. Community opposition to the DUSEL proposal is that deep, and swelling. The Leavenworth City Council was not going to take a position opposing its own citizens. Leavenworth cannot oppose Leavenworth.
All this may not mean that the prospects of actually building DUSEL are diminishing. The National Science Foundation probably already has chosen sites for further study. The Icicle Valley and the proposed tunnel under Mount Cashmere may or may not be on the list. But if DUSEL is built with its portal in the Icicle Valley, it will be in the face of strong, obvious and consistent local opposition. It's possible, but difficult to imagine.
The opposition to DUSEL long ago transcended anti-growth types and NIMBY forces. It is not all based on misinformation and selfishness, as DUSEL supporters often contend. People with a stake in the community's welfare, who support economic development and commerce, have weighed the evidence, listened to all sides and concluded that DUSEL is not the right project for this region, and the Icicle Valley is the wrong place for DUSEL. The scope and size of the project are so great that they threaten something highly valued: the Icicle Valley, its tranquility, the character of the Leavenworth area itself. It is perceived to be that way, and in a case like this perception itself is truth. The potential economic benefits of DUSEL for the rest of the region start to shrink in significance, considering the Leavenworth opposition.
This doesn't mean the DUSEL project itself is unimportant, or that the science is not necessary, and that we will not benefit from it. It simply becomes easier to imagine it being built in one of the many other communities that dearly want it. They, obviously, do not include Leavenworth.
This is not the last time the community will visit this issue, but a major statement has been made. The talk of DUSEL will have to take a distinctly different tone to accommodate the fact that in the place where it would be built, they don't want it.
This is the opinion of The Wenatchee World and its Editorial Board: Editor and Publisher Rufus Woods, Managing Editor Gary Jasinek and Editorial Page Editor Tracy Warner.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Wednesday 13-July-2005
DUSEL foes get support from Leavenworth council vote
LEAVENWORTH -- Opponents of a plan to build an underground science lab in the Icicle Valley crowded into Leavenworth City Hall Tuesday night fully expecting the City Council to reject the project.
But the audience still gasped in collective surprise when the vote was unanimous not to endorse the University of Washington's proposal to tunnel a lab under Mount Cashmere west of the city.
The council voted 7-0 -- with the support of Mayor Mel Wyles, who did not vote. The mayor said an unofficial tally -- from petitions and public testimony from a meeting a month or so ago -- was running 3,205 people against the lab and nine in favor of it.
The big surprise came when Councilman Rob Eaton, a vocal lab supporter, not only voted with the council but also made the initial motion to oppose the lab. Three other council members quickly seconded the motion and the vote was taken without any discussion among board members or comments from the audience.
The standing-room-only crowd of about 80 people erupted in shouts, cheers and applause.
This morning, John Wilkerson, a University of Washington physics professor promoting the project, said the National Science Foundation probably has decided which sites around the country should be pursued for further study and will be releasing that decision in another week or two. He said that will have a big impact on what happens with the Mount Cashmere proposal.
Opponents of the project have posted "misinformation" about it in the Icicle Valley, which is difficult to combat, he said. "A lot of it is totally fabricated," he said.
A Port of Chelan County citizens advisory committee had taken a more balanced approach to the proposal, and county, state and national interests have to be considered along with Leavenworth's, he said.
Leavenworth's vote may result in not locating the lab's educational and informational facilities there, he said.
At the council meeting, Wyles said the council had been "beat up" over the issue.
"But they listened to you. This council has done what you've asked," Wyles told opponents.
Afterward, Eaton read a prepared statement. In part, he said, "The council must, in good faith, acknowledge the general will of the community."
In an interview after the vote, Eaton said he still supports the lab idea.
"All the council members have their personal opinions," he said. "But we all have a higher responsibility to the community."
Councilwoman Carolyn Wilson said the board members never discussed among themselves how they would vote, and said even she was surprised by the unanimous decision.
"They did the right thing," said Leavenworth resident Hank Drewniany.
"This is the first concrete decision we've had from any public officials against this project," said Cot Rice, president of the Icicle Valley Protection Alliance. "I'm very happy to see that they followed the obvious will of the people."
Wyles cautioned that while the council took a stand against the lab, they have no official say whether it is eventually built near Leavenworth. Those decisions will be made by the federal government, he said.
The National Science Foundation is expected to narrow the field of eight potential sites to three later this month. A final site may not be chosen until 2008.
"We've won a little battle here," said lab opponent Marshall West of Leavenworth. "But we still have a whole war to fight."
World staff writer Dan Wheat contributed to this report.
Michelle McNiel can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at mcniel@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Thursday 7-July-2005
On destiny, the cosmos and the deep science lab -
Visiting scientist leaves audience chuckling about physics - really
WENATCHEE -- Scientist, teacher, lecturer and best-selling author Lawrence Krauss Wednesday delivered a passing plug for a deep underground science lab during a lecture here on the origins and destiny of the universe.
An underground lab, protected from cosmic rays, could help researchers decipher the origins and ultimate lifespan of the universe, he told an audience of about 65 at the Confluence Technology Center in Olds Station.
"That's why we'd like a national underground laboratory," he said. "Whether it's here or somewhere else." A site near Leavenworth is among eight sites being considered for such a laboratory.
Krauss is chair of the Physics Department at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio.
He's known in the research community for suggesting that a mysterious substance called dark energy might be the key to understanding the beginnings of the universe.
Using a formula-filled slide presentation, stunning images captured by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, Krauss' hour-long lecture reached a conclusion that drew chuckles from the crowd.
"That's our picture of the universe," he said. "It's crazy. We don't understand it. Dominant energy resides in empty space. We have no idea why its there."
Krauss has written volumes for the scientific community, but he's best known to general audiences as a guest editorial page writer and author of books with mass appeal. His best-selling book, "The Physics of Star Trek," has been translated into 15 languages. His next book, "Hiding in the Mirror: The Mysterious Allure of Extra Dimensions," will be out in October.
The end of the universe is coming, he said Wednesday, but it will take between 10 billion and 100 billion years to get here.
"You don't need to sell your Microsoft stock," he said.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Tuesday 24-May-2005
If not DUSEL, then what?
When the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory, DUSEL, was first proposed by some University of Washington physicists, it seemed ideal - a world-class laboratory, used by world-class scientists, right here in Chelan County. We would have a world-renowned high-tech resource, luring many very smart and energetic people, the kind of people on which modern economies thrive. We would get a real economic jolt, with the promise of many spin-off benefits to come. And it all would all be tucked out of sight a mile under a mountain.
Sure, there would be environmental concerns. There always are. But DUSEL wouldn't be built by some heartless, obstinate, profit-seekers, but the University of Washington with the National Science Foundation, accountable public institutions. If anybody can mitigate, these people can.
Of course the construction would be a nightmare. Trucks and trucks and trucks, big ones, hauling all that rock, up and down the Icicle Road, for years at least. You wouldn't want to live next to that, but really, this is the kind of thing a lot of communities are willing to put up with to get a facility like DUSEL.
Not Leavenworth, apparently. The opposition to DUSEL is strong and growing. It long ago went beyond the always-against-nearly-everything types to include a fair number of the community's more broad-minded people. Their opposition certainly isn't based on any anti-development misanthropic philosophy. This week the region's most prominent environmental philanthropist and communicator, Harriet Bullitt, joined the ranks of ex-DUSEL supporters, not from some ideological objection, but because a good share of the community doesn't want it. DUSEL is not worth the argument, the hostility.
Leavenworth is deciding that it doesn't need DUSEL. Judging from the public comment, the project is seen not as a potential benefit, but a disruption, an interruption, a threat. If the local economy is a priority, Leavenworth doesn't need a boost - things are going great. A lot of the people who have made their home in the Icicle Valley and environs didn't come here to find prosperity. They have already had that. They are comfortable, often retired. Land and homes are expensive, because so many people want to live there. In this atmosphere, DUSEL is extraneous, unnecessary, not worth the price. The "sense of place" many value above all is threatened. DUSEL is too big, too different. Three years of rumbling rock-hauling is a great sacrifice for something you don't need or want, something that will change what you love.
So you can wonder, if a project like DUSEL prompts such opposition, what kind of big project might win the community's support? If a major high-tech company decided to locate in the area - on the Port of Chelan County's old mill site at Peshastin, for instance - would it meet opposition as broad-based as the opposition to DUSEL? It would be big, an unnecessary disruption, a change, an attractor of many people from outside the tourist-retiree economic continuum, the same reasons some people oppose DUSEL.
Nothing like that is in the offing that I know of, and may never be, but I wonder if we will come to regret this built-in resistance to change.
Tracy Warner's column appears Tuesday through Friday. He can be reached at warner@wenworld.com or 665-1163.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Monday 23-May-2005
Bullitt rescinds support for lab
LEAVENWORTH -- Harriet Bullitt has withdrawn her support for a proposed underground science laboratory in the Icicle Valley, citing community turmoil generated by the proposal.
"An aggressive opposition and a support that shows little evidence of planning for future growth is not the formula for harmony, which this valley needs more than any big project," Bullitt said in an editorial on her KOHO radio station Tuesday.
"We don't need hostility like that," she said.
Bullitt, owner of the Sleeping Lady Mountain Retreat and Icicle Broadcasting Co., and considered by many to be Leavenworth's leading environmental activist, was an early champion of the University of Washington's plan to tunnel a lab under Mount Cashmere.
In an interview with The Wenatchee World in November 2003, Bullitt said she strongly supported the lab idea for its potential social and economic benefits to the region.
"I would love to see a group like that here. Think of what we'll learn," she said in that interview.
In her editorial which aired Tuesday, Bullitt said such an academic center would offer learning opportunities for all ages "beyond the limited choices in our tourist-related trades and fading orchard lands."
But she said public discord was an "overriding reason" why the lab should not be built near Leavenworth.
"A neighborhood like ours is too small to allow a major institution to come in without broad support," she said.
UW physicist Wick Haxton, one of the primary proponents of building the lab near Leavenworth, could not be reached for comment.
The university submitted an application to the National Science Foundation in February for funding to continue studying the lab idea. Mount Cashmere is one of eight sites in the U.S. and Canada being considered, and the NSF is expected to narrow the list to three next month.
Bullitt's editorial buoyed many outspoken critics of siting the lab at Leavenworth.
"I was very pleased to see her change her mind," said Icicle Valley resident Chris Ericksen. "A lot of us who know her could not believe it when she came out in favor of the lab in the first place. ... She kind of got the bandwagon of local support going on this."
Bullitt has joined a number of prominent Leavenworth-area residents to drop their support of the project. Leavenworth business owner Ken Marson, Chelan County PUD Commissioner Werner Janssen and environmental activist Dick Rieman have all changed their opinions in recent months and have spoken out against the lab proposal.
Michelle McNiel can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at mcniel@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Sunday 15-May-2005
Pitching the Bavarian Village as a pure-science heaven: Whatever the natives' opinions of DUSEL, UW scientists are selling the Leavenworth site hard - but the competition is just as enthusiastic about its favorite deep lab locales
WENATCHEE - Gorgeous scenery. Hard rocks. Cheap power. Easy topography. Government support. Mild weather.
Scientists and researchers vying for the nation’s first deep underground lab all have their selling points for pitches to the National Science Foundation.
And from Palm Springs, Calif. to Blacksburg, Va., New Mexico to South Dakota, and a site near Leavenworth, they all have one thing in common:
Their site is the best.
"Everyone that I've talked to thinks their site is the front runner," said John Bahcall, a physicist who led a team of scientists that in 2001 urged the National Science Foundation to fund such a lab.
The University of Washington's proposal to tunnel a lab under Mount Cashmere southwest of Leavenworth claims to offer the lowest power rates, which could save millions of dollars over the projected 40-year life of the lab. A site near Carlsbad, N.M., has completed time-consuming environmental studies, while the area surrounding the site in Virginia was named one of Outside magazine's top 10 places in the country to live, work and play.
Sometime this summer, the NSF is expected to narrow the field of eight down to perhaps three candidates. An NSF advisory committee said in an April 22 report that the most important attributes needed by the lab will be easy access and educational opportunities. It also says the site should accommodate many different science experiments, ranging from the study of dark matter and inner workings of stars in the galaxy to tectonic plate shifts to microbial life deep in the Earth.
The finalists will get at least $500,000 for more studies. But funding to build the lab is not guaranteed and may not come until 2008 or later.
Scientists who are limited in their studies by current depths of underground labs around the world are eagerly awaiting such a deep lab in the U.S., said Bahcall, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Studies in Princeton, N.J., and vice president of the 40,000-member American Physical Society.
"The science needs to happen, no matter where it's done," he said.
Currently, underground labs of varying depths are found in France, Russia, Japan, England, Sweden, Belgium, Canada and Switzerland.
The eight prospective North American sites all have their backers, often including elected officials, government agencies, universities and research facilities.
The state of South Dakota formed a new state office to support the lab proposal, and the state lawmakers in South Dakota and Virginia have pledged millions to develop the labs. Congressional delegations in South Dakota, New Mexico, Minnesota and Virginia have written letters of support for the proposals in their states.
Five of the eight sites are operating or former mines and one is a federal nuclear waste dump, and underground science experiments are already being done at all of them.
Dave Snyder, executive director of the Science and Technology Authority Board, formed by the state of Idaho to support construction of the lab there, said the old Homestake Mine site is the best location because it's already excavated to 8,000 feet.
"It could be done at a very reasonable cost and in a very timely manner," he said. "You don't need the permitting like you would need at a green site, where you are starting from scratch. When you have an existing site, like a mine, you know what you have underground already."
Only two sites - Leavenworth and Palm Springs - are undeveloped sites.
They are also apparently the two proposals facing organized opposition. Critics of the Mount Cashmere site fear it will change the character of the forested Icicle Valley, chase away tourists and pollute nearby Icicle Creek. The Icicle Valley Protection Alliance says it will sue if the project is approved.
The Sierra Club opposes the Palm Springs site "for just about every environmental concern possible," said Jeff Morgan, vice chairman of the organization's Taquitz Group in central California.
"It would be far better off that an existing mine site be used for the lab," Morgan said.
Sites in Canada and New Mexico are not vying to build the entire underground lab, but would like to host some experiments. When renovations are completed at the Canada laboratory, which houses the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory, it will be able to do some of the science planned at the deep underground lab.
According to its application to the NSF, the laboratory does not want to compete with U.S. sites for funding, but would like the opportunity to include more experiments.
The New Mexico site isn't deep enough for all the science at the underground lab, but would like to have some of the research done there, according to its NSF application.
Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's Fermi National Accelerator Lab west of Chicago are paying close attention to the NSF process. The nation's premier particle physics lab would be one of the primary users of an underground facility for research.
"We're getting so close to the core of how nature operates at fundamental levels, but it takes extremely sophisticated tools and environment to get at it," said Fermilab spokeswoman Judy Jackson.
She said the lab has a good working relationship with a lab in northern Minnesota that has applied to NSF for funding to build the deeper research facility.
She said that while scientists at Fermilab would go anywhere a lab would be built, she said they would like to see a facility that is easily reached from a major airport.
"Many of these scientists are associated with universities, they teach and work in labs," she said. "They need to be able to get in and out without taking up too much of their life."
As a sidelight, she said scientists are generally a "cosmopolitan lot" who appreciate culture, a good place to eat, and pleasant surroundings when doing their work.
They also enjoy support from the communities that surround the labs where they work.
"That's a big factor," she said. "One thing we notice when we got to Soudan (Minnesota) is what boosters they are in the community. You can go to the dry cleaner and he can tell you all about neutrinos. The town feels an identification with the science community."
She added, "I think any lab, to survive, ultimately needs not just the tolerance but the support of the neighbors."
Since Fermilab is not directly involved in any of the eight applications, Jackson said it has been fun to watch the application process from a distance.
"It's interesting to look at the differences, the different communities, the climates, the attributes," she said.
"Each one has its own personality. At this point, you can't really discount any of them."
Michelle McNiel can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at mcniel@wenworld.com
********
Eight sites in seven states and Canada, including the University of Washington's bid near Icicle Creek, are competing for a proposed deep underground lab. The National Science Foundation this summer is expected choose up to three sites for more study.
*******
Leavenworth, Wash
Site description: Undeveloped U.S. Forest Service land under the Alpine Lakes Wilderness area
Applicants: University of Washington
Selling points: Cheap power rates, horizontal tunnel access
Boosters: Chelan County Port District voted to support continued study, Wenatchee Area Chamber of Commerce and Leavenworth Chamber of Commerce
Minuses: Organized opposition from Icicle Valley Protection Alliance, unknown impacts to water, uncertainty over wilderness issues
Homestake
Lead, S.D.
Site description: Closed gold mine
Applicants: 60 scientists from around the country, led by scientist at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory in California
Selling points: Early favorite of the nation's science community, hosted world's first solar neutrino detector, site of scientific studies since early 1960s, has existing caverns to 8,000 feet deep
Boosters: State has formed the Science and Technology Authority Board, has pledged $100 million in bonds toward construction, $14.3 million for converting the mine to a lab and $10 million to remove the water; mine site to be donated to the state; strong public support
Minuses: Mine was flooded by owner, will cost millions to drain
San Jacinto
Palm Springs, Calif.
Site description: Undeveloped land at Mount San Jacinto
Applicants: University of California, Irvine
Selling points: No competing uses or retrofitting of old mine caverns like other proposed sites, easy horizontal entry, abundant land for development
Boosters: Support from the city of Palm Springs, other cities in the Coachella Valley and the local business community
Minuses: Under a wilderness, inside a national monument, Sierra Club opposes due to concerns about wilderness, water supply, traffic and endangered bighorn sheep
Henderson
west of Denver, Colo.
Site description: Operating molybdenum ore mine surrounded by Arapaho National Forest since 1976
Applicants: Colorado State University, Colorado School of Mines, University of Colorado, Phelps Dodge Corp., Arapaho Project, Stony Brook University
Selling points: Only operating mine among the U.S. applicants, existing caverns, mine already has environmental and operating permits
Boosters: State legislature, state departments of Natural Resources, Local Affairs and Economic Development and International Trade, governor's office, county commissioners and city councils in Grand and Clear Creek counties, cooperation of mine owner
Minuses: Would need to coordinate ongoing mining operations with science experiments to avoid conflicts
WHIPP
Carlsbad, N.M.
Site description: Department of Energy underground nuclear waste dump
Applicants: University of California at Los Angeles, Temple University, West Chester University, University of Mississippi
Selling points: Physics experiments conducted at site since 1993, already certified by Environmental Protection Agency, existing facilities
Boosters: Letter of support from Department of Energy, New Mexico's congressional delegation, governor's office, state Legislature
Minuses: Proponents acknowledge the site can't host all the experiments that physicists would like to do in a deep underground lab
Soudan
northern Minnesota
Site description: Former mine, now a historic state park
Applicants: University of Minnesota
Selling points: Hosted government-sponsored science experiments since 1980, already has a neutrino beam, producing neutrinos since January
Boosters: Governor's office and the state's 10-member congressional delegation
Minuses: Potential impact to bats, historic structures and wetlands
Kimballton
Blacksburg, Va.
Site description: Butt Mountain at site of former limestone mine on U.S. Forest Service land
Applicants: Virginia Tech, with support from MIT, Duke, Penn State, Princeton, Purdue and Radford universities
Selling points: No obvious environmental impacts, National Science Foundation-funded science experiments already under way
Boosters: State budget for 2004-2006 includes the issuance of $150 million in bonds toward construction; letters of support from Virginia's congressional delegation, Giles County officials and the U.S. Forest Service, widespread public support
Minuses: Potential impacts to ground and surface water flow
Snolab
Sudbury, Ontario
Site description: International underground science lab at Creighton Mine nickel and copper mine
Applicants: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
Selling points: Already doing neutrino research at 6,800 feet underground, lab expansion to be completed by 2007
Boosters: Government already funding expansion of the lab
Minuses: Proponents acknowledge the site can't host all the experiments that physicists would like to do in a deep underground lab
*Note: Site is not seeking National Science Foundation approval to build a new lab, but instead asking for limited funding to possibly expand its current operation and to develop a partnership with whatever U.S. site may eventually be chosen
- Michelle McNiel, World staff
***********
www.dusel.org/
www.nsf.gov/pubs/2005/nsf05506/nsf05506.htm
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Friday 13-May-2005
DUSEL is one hot topic - and Leavenworth City Council is feeling the heat: Leaders get an earful at first public meeting, but so far they aren't taking a public stand
LEAVENWORTH - The Leavenworth City Council may not be able to sit on the fence much longer.
The seven-member council may have to look their friends, neighbors and constituents in the face and take a stand on the University of Washington's proposal to build an underground science laboratory in the city's back yard.
On Thursday, the council took its first step forward by listening to 2 1/2 hours of testimony during a public hearing at the Leavenworth Festhalle.
They heard from longtime residents and newcomers; retirees, scientists, teachers, environmentalists, friends and neighbors. Dozens spoke adamantly against the lab idea. Three were in favor of it.
"On something this big, we better be listening to what our constituents are saying," Councilwoman Carolyn Wilson said after the meeting.
So far, council members have been tight-lipped. Only Councilman Rob Eaton has stated publicly that he's open to the idea. Wilson said she has no idea how her fellow council members feel about it.
The Leavenworth site is one of eight sites in North America that are being proposed for the nation's first Deep Underground Science Engineering Lab (DUSEL).
The National Science Foundation is expected to shorten the list to three sites in June.
"In my opinion, if Leavenworth makes that short list, we as a council need to take a stand," Wilson said.
Councilman Peter DeVries said the council has gone back and forth on whether to take a position. On one hand, the proposed site under Mount Cashmere is not in the city. But on the other hand, it is nearby in an area frequently visited by city residents and tourists.
DeVries said he would have no problem looking his friends and neighbors in the face and making a decision.
"I will vote what's best for the city of Leavenworth," he said. "If people don't like the stand we take, there is an election this fall."
Councilman and mayor pro-tem Bill Wells said there is obviously "terrific polarity" in the community over the lab proposal that will make it difficult to take a stand. But, he said, "Once I find out what I think is best for the city, that's what I'm going to back."
Some at the hearing urged the council to take a stand against the proposal. Councilman Bob Kelly said most of the people who want the council to take a position are in opposition.
"In this job, we've got to be ready to make tough decisions," Wilson said, then added, "As the saying goes, we knew the job was dangerous when we took it."
***********
More comments
"The economy of a pristine wilderness would far outweigh what DUSEL could bring over the lifetime of the project."
Bao Le, Lake Wenatchee
"You all would be responsible for taking the German community started in 1964 and destroying it. I think it would be a horrible mistake."
Donald Grim, Peshastin
"This (the lab) is a good opportunity for my children. It's important for the town, the country and the planet."
José Blazquez, Leavenworth
"Dear council members: I do not want this project."
Elsa Meinig, Leavenworth
"I'm dead-set against it. I think it will be one of the biggest mistakes in the evolution of Leavenworth."
Ken Marson, Leavenworth
"I'm outraged that such a proposal is even on the table for discussion."
Dan O'Connor, Leavenworth
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Wednesday 04-May-2005
DUSEL proposal includes second underground facility near Stevens Pass
LEAVENWORTH - The University of Washington's proposal to build an underground science laboratory near Leavenworth also includes a second underground facility near Stevens Pass.
The second project would be used in conjunction with the proposed lab under Mount Cashmere but would likely be located about 16 miles to the northwest at Cowboy Mountain.
In a Feb. 28 application to the National Science Foundation seeking funding to study the idea of building the lab at Mount Cashmere, the UW included a two-page option for the project near Stevens Pass close to the border of Chelan and King counties.
That project is a $650 million megadetector used to study the common elementary particle known as a neutrino. The work could help scientists understand things like the origins of the universe, how hydrogen and helium were formed, and how stars work.
Neither the lab nor the detector has been funded so far, and the university's Mount Cashmere proposal is one of eight competing for approval and funding from the NSF.
In an e-mail to The Wenatchee World on Tuesday, UW physics professor Wick Haxton said that the U.S. Department of Energy could sponsor construction of the detector but that the work would not begin until 2020.
Jeff Sherwood, a spokesman for the DOE in Washington, D.C., said a beam that works in conjunction with a detector is on the agency's funding wish list, "but it's a far-term priority." He said the beam ranks 21st on a list of 28 projects.
Sherwood said the federal agency has not requested any proposals and said it does not have plans to fund a project like the one the university is proposing.
The detector idea was originally eliminated from the UW's proposal for the science lab at Mount Cashmere because it could interfere with experiments being done at the lab, Haxton said.
The UW even suggested that the detector be built at the Henderson Mine in Colorado.
But Haxton said he learned recently that the science community does not believe the detector needs to go very deep underground, so he proposed building the detector near Stevens Pass.
The proposal is to put the detector on U.S. Forest Service land near Cowboy Mountain over two BNSF Railway Co. railroad tunnels and would require expansion of one of the tunnels. It would require permits from the federal government and from the railway.
The base of the detector would be located about 3,300 feet deep, and the cavern would measure 180 feet by 180 feet by 540 feet.
It would be built near the access for the old Pioneer Tunnel, which was used during construction of the Cascade Tunnel, a 7.8-mile-long railroad tunnel through the Cascades.
Haxton said BNSF Railway Co., formerly known as Burlington Northern Santa Fe, gave the UW permission last fall to study the idea. He said he submitted a report to the company two weeks ago and has not yet heard back from them. A railroad spokesman declined to check with the agency's officials to see whether the report was received or being reviewed.
The detector idea came as a surprise to local critics and proponents of the lab at Mount Cashmere.
"I suspect the university is throwing in everything it can to prove that it can make the lab (at Mount Cashmere) all-encompassing, to show that it can do all the necessary science there," said lab critic Hank Drewniary. "It's very disturbing."
But Mark Urdahl, director of the Port of Chelan County, which has given preliminary support to the lab idea, said, "I don't think this is a case of the university holding something back and then dropping it on us at the end. From the very beginning, they have said the lab idea was a fluid thing and that it was going to evolve.
"I know it will get scrutinized by many, many people before it goes anywhere," he said.
Michelle McNiel can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at mcniel@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Tuesday 08-March-2005
Best to move DUSEL ahead, to answer the questions
The Port of Chelan County recently adopted a resolution encouraging the University of Washington to submit its conceptual proposal to the National Science Foundation for consideration of a Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory under Mount Cashmere in the Upper Wenatchee Valley.
This resolution was the culmination of an early public input process involving a port-appointed Citizens Advisory Committee. The CAC -- representing a wide variety of interests, including residents of the immediate area, environmentalists, retirees, business leaders and educators -- raised a number of very significant and valid concerns about the impacts of DUSEL, in the construction phase, its ongoing operations and even eventual closure of the facility. Concerns expressed included water quality and quantity, traffic, risk of pollution, the ability of the community to absorb a project of the scale of DUSEL without a significant degradation of the community character often described as its "sense of place," the potential for accidents or even terrorist attacks, potential loss of tourism and recreational activity, the openness and transparency of DUSEL decision making, and the impact on the cost and availability of housing in the area. These concerns have been communicated to the UW.
Additionally, there was discussion regarding potential benefits, including the potential for area students at all levels to participate in better science educational activities, the potential to draw visitors to the DUSEL visitors center (which would not be located on Mount Cashmere, but away from the forest and wilderness), and the potential of the project to create jobs and attract businesses whose economic success would be closely linked to the application of the research to be conducted.
Many individuals and some organizations expressed strongly held perspectives and opinions on DUSEL. For some, nothing can change their minds. For many others, much more information is needed to directly address community concerns, especially those related to the environment. After reviewing hundreds of public comments, the Port Commission concluded that Chelan County residents will be best served by encouraging the process to move forward to see whether the concerns can be addressed.
As proposed, DUSEL cannot be built without the issuance of a special-use permit by the Forest Service. The process for issuing such a permit is well established, defined and regulated by federal laws and regulations. The process also requires opportunities for public participation, including the identification of issues that must be addressed in order for a special-use permit to be considered. The process will quite likely require that a comprehensive environmental impact statement be prepared before a permit can be granted. The port has confidence in the ability of the Forest Service to administer the special-use permit process in a fair and open manner, one that provides appropriate opportunity for public involvement and addresses issues through the use of the best available science. It is their charge to do this as stewards of the forest, a forest that does not belong solely to the residents of Chelan County but to the nation as a whole.
The UW, with input from two members of the DUSEL citizens advisory committee and the port's executive director, has retained an economic consultant to examine the potential costs and benefits of DUSEL construction and operation. This study will include the concerns of those who fear an economic loss by disruption of tourism and recreational activities, those who fear increasing the cost of living, as well as analyzing whether the potential economic benefits in terms of job creation and business growth have a reasonable basis in reality. That study is about to commence and will take approximately six months to complete.
The UW has submitted its conceptual proposal. Other DUSEL sites have been invited by the National Science Foundation to submit proposals as well. The port has forwarded its resolution to the university. That resolution encourages the UW to submit its conceptual proposal as a means of addressing community concerns. It is by no means an unconditional endorsement of the DUSEL proposal.
An economic analysis will soon be under way. If the conceptual proposal meets with the approval of the NSF, the UW (along with perhaps one or more of the other sites) will be awarded NSF funds for more engineering studies. These engineering studies, along with the process required by the Forest Service, will go a very long way toward answering the community's questions. The additional information generated may cause the UW, the Forest Service, or the NSF to conclude that a DUSEL in Mount Cashmere should not be done. Or, it could result in substantial changes to the UW proposal. And it might even find that some concerns aren't as significant as originally feared, or even that there are concerns that have yet to be thought of.
The port cannot support DUSEL at the cost of the environment we love, an environment that is the basis for our quality of life and our quality of livelihood. The process the UW must follow and the integrity of the Forest Service in administering that process have convinced us that such a mechanism is in place that is both fair and open. That process should begin so that answers to our many questions can be determined, and that opinions on DUSEL be as informed as possible. The submittal of the conceptual proposal by the UW will move that process along.
With the passage of our resolution, the port's role as facilitator of the early public input process has concluded. For the foreseeable future, our role will be limited to participation in the economic assessment. We will make the progress of the economic assessment available through our Web sites and through the good work of our two DUSEL committee members.
The University of Washington is well aware of community opinion and some of the deep divisions within the community over this proposal. Since the port's early public input process has concluded, those wishing to make comments should direct them to David Thorud, Acting Provost, University of Washington, Box 351273, Seattle, WA 98195-1273.
Jim Knapp, Mike Mackey and John Stoltenberg are commissioners of the Port of Chelan County.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Thursday 03-March-2005
Eight deep-lab candidates identified
WENATCHEE -- The National Science Foundation received eight applications Monday for building an underground science laboratory -- including the University of Washington's proposal near Leavenworth -- setting the crowded field of competition for locating the nation's first research facility of its kind.
UW physics professor Wick Haxton, who is leading the effort to tunnel the lab under Mount Cashmere southwest of Leavenworth, confirmed Wednesday that he turned in an application.
The National Science Foundation is expected to take up to six months to narrow the applicants for the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL) to two or three, said NSF spokesman Curt Suplee. He said the finalists could receive up to $500,000 each for further development of their plans.
The NSF did not release the names and locations of the eight applicants who submitted proposals on Monday. However, many of the sites are commonly known among scientists and have been identified in the past.
Haxton said he believes the eight sites are Mount Cashmere, the Homestake Mine in South Dakota, Henderson Mine in Colorado, Mt. San Jacinto near Palm Springs, Calif., Soudan Underground Laboratory in Minnesota, Kimballton in Virginia, WIPP (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) in New Mexico and Sudbury, Ontario, in Canada. The eight sites are also identified on the Web site for the Kimballton proposal.
Haxton said the proponents of the lab at Sudbury submitted an "information document" rather than a full proposal, and that the WIPP site is not proposed for a deep lab, so he thinks the field may actually be six, not eight.
He said the applications submitted on Monday were limited to 15 pages, "so it is basically a Reader's Digest summary of the preproposal" that he gave the National Science Foundation last year.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Thursday 17-February-2005
Procedure for DUSEL proposal
The University of Washington will submit a more detailed proposal to the National Science Foundation Feb. 28.
The National Science Foundation is expected to narrow the field of possible lab sites from at least a half dozen to three by summer, and then provide funding for more detailed engineering studies of the sites due in 2006.
UW hopes to open a satellite office in Leavenworth and submit an application for a special-use permit to the Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests late this summer.
The National Science Foundation could take several years to choose a site and has said that funding would not be available until at least 2008.
The U.S. Forest Service will take at least three years to decide whether to issue a special use permit for an underground science lab at Mount Cashmere.
Officials from the Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests told the Port of Chelan County Wednesday that they have not yet received an application from the University of Washington for the project. Once they do, the reviews, environmental studies and appeals process could take three years or longer, said Susan Carter Craig, environmental coordinator for the two forests.
One of the first questions to be addressed, which will likely be answered by the agency's headquarters in Washington, D.C., is whether such a project can be done underneath a designated wilderness area, forest officials said. Mount Cashmere, in the Icicle Valley, is inside the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, but the tunnels to the lab would begin outside the wilderness boundary.
"It actually sets national precedence," Carter Craig said of the lab proposal.
Project leader Wick Haxton of the University of Washington said he probably won't submit an application to the Forest Service for the permit until late summer, and only if the project makes the cut when the National Science Foundation narrows the list of possible sites for building such a lab.
- Michelle McNiel, World staff
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Thursday 3-February-2005
Deep lab proponents, foes eager to extend the debate
WENATCHEE - For now, the Port of Chelan County just wants to know what you think about the wording of its proposal to support an underground science lab near Leavenworth — not your opinion on the lab itself.
But that didn't stop a parade of speakers from offering their support or opposition to the University of Washington's lab idea at a public meeting Wednesday before port commissioners at the Confluence Technology Center.
Marcia Willman of Leavenworth pleaded with the commissioners not to support a project she believes will destroy the Icicle Valley, saying, "Please don’t take it away from us."
Proponents touted the potential benefits to education and the economy in urging the port to adopt a resolution supporting the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory at Mount Cashmere.
"We're not here to debate the pros and cons of DUSEL," deputy port director Joyce Stewart told a crowd of about 80 people.
The commissioners allowed about two dozen people, equally divided between supporters and opponents, to speak for 90 minutes during the hearing. Then a University of Washington representative was allowed to testify.
Few people offered any changes to the wording of the port's proposal. Supporters said they liked the wording, and the opponents said it should be scrapped altogether.
The commissioners are expected to take a position Feb. 16 in support of the lab. The meeting is scheduled for 9 a.m. at the Confluence Technology Center at Olds Station.
Among those offering support from the project was Craig Larsen, executive director of the Wenatchee Valley Chamber of Commerce, who said 70 percent of the chamber’s 600 members supported the lab in a December survey.
Hank Manriquez, interim director of the Leavenworth Chamber of Commerce, said fewer than 20 of its 480 members oppose the lab, though no formal survey has been done.
Representatives from the Wenatchee Valley College science department and the Wenatchee chapter of the Washington Society of Professional Engineers also offered support for the project on Wednesday.
WVC biology professor Dan Stephens asked to be able to join the process of studying and developing the lab, and said it would offer an incredible educational opportunity for students at the school.
On the other side, Wenatchee attorney Wes Hensley, representing the Cascade Orchard Irrigation Co., spoke against the lab, along with members of the Icicle Valley Protection Society.
Hensley said the port should not support the lab before studies can be done to determine any potential impacts to water supply and Icicle Creek.
"It's all about water," Hensley said. "Without water, economic development ... means nothing."
Hank Drewniary of Leavenworth compared the city’s $10 million operating budget to the hundreds of millions of dollars that would be poured into the lab, and said the city would lose local control. "Which end of the dog is going to be wagging when this comes to town?" he asked.
Leavenworth Mayor Mel Wyles said he's received 527 letters, e-mails and other correspondence opposing the lab, and only four supporting it. The city has not taken a formal stance on the proposal.
A few speakers said they were undecided on the UW proposal, and wanted more studies done before forming an opinion.
Larsen, a Wenatchee City Council member who was speaking on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, said, "We see this as economic development, certainly in the purest sense."
Larsen and several other supporters who spoke compared the inconveniences of the lab's construction, such as the hauling of rocks and excavation of dirt, to those experienced during construction of Rocky Reach Dam. The benefits far outweigh those temporary problems, they said.
Others compared the potential importance of the lab to that of Alcoa, the now-closed Cannon Mine in Wenatchee, and the Washington State University Tree Fruit Research Center in Wenatchee, which all faced opposition at some time because of potential disruption to neighborhoods or environmental damage, supporters of the lab said.
Chelan resident Phil Long said that with the struggling fruit industry, the impacts that the lack of snow is having on the closed-down ski industry, and the possibility that Alcoa could shut down again someday in the future, Chelan County needs a major economic project to stay healthy.
John Wilson of Cashmere, a former personnel director for the now-closed Cannon Mine in Wenatchee, said environmental fears raised by opponents of that mine never materialized — and the mine had lasting economic benefits to the city.
But Kathy King of Malaga asked, 'Are we so poor in this area that we are willing to sell our sacred places?"
UW’s Marilyn Cox, director of capital planning and lead staff for the new Dusel-Cascades Office, said the university has already incorporated some of the community’s concerns into its plans for the lab.
The university plans to submit a conceptual proposal to the National Science Foundation for funding to build the lab and could know by summer whether Mount Cashmere is one of three finalists for locating the lab.
Michelle Partridge can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at partridge@wenworld.com
__________
What's next for the lab
University of Washington will submit a more detailed proposal to the National Science Foundation on Feb. 28.
The National Science Foundation is expected to narrow the field of possible lab sites from at least a half dozen to three by summer, and then provide funding for more detailed engineering studies of the sites due in 2006.
UW hopes to open a satellite office in Leavenworth this summer.
The National Science Foundation could take several years to choose a site, and has said that funding would not be available until at least 2008.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Monday 27-December-2004
DUSEL is more than just a Leavenworth issue
My observations draw on the facts that I am a retired NASA scientist and
executive, a retired orchardist, a citizen-at-large in the Douglas
County Watershed Planning Association and that I have attended all of
the Citizens Advisory Committee's meetings except one, as well as the
Chelan County Port Commission's meeting on Dec. 6.
This is my response to The Wenatchee World Editorial of Dec. 19
concerning the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory. It
was a thoughtful, serious editorial, well done.
It is important to note that the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC)
appointed by the port commissioners did not attempt to reach a consensus
in reporting to the port commissioners and that it made no
recommendations to the port commissioners as a group.
I would like to respond to two issues raised by individuals in the CAC
-- one a "sense of place" and two, concern/distrust of the project
managers.
No one defined "sense of place," so each of us is free to figure out
what is meant by it, especially since the theme used was "to refresh
one's soul." In reality, Leavenworth is a tourist town, a fake Bavarian
village. Crowds don't come to Oktoberfest or the month-long Christmas
lightings to sniff the mountain air (too much auto pollution) or hike
the mountains (too cold and snowy).
If the promoters of this "idea" are talking about the wilderness, the
DUSEL is one mile underground when it enters the wilderness area.
Again, in reality, the only things being "refreshed" are the pocketbooks
of the merchants and the linens in the motel rooms.
I do not mean to disparage the work and creativity that have gone into
making Leavenworth the commercial success it is.
It is important to recognize that DUSEL is NOT only a Leavenworth issue.
Chelan and Douglas counties (the valley), the state and the nation, even
the international community, have stakes in ensuring that DUSEL comes
into being.
Others, including members of the CAC and the professionals at the
University of Washington, have defined the educational, economic and,
indeed, the environmental benefits to all of us of a successful DUSEL.
The issue, in my opinion, is how do we, as a community, insure these
benefits?
There are two things we must do:
1. Establish an independently staffed and funded oversight committee,
bring in members of the local governments, the local communities, state
and federal agencies of interest, professional (ag, irrigation, range
development) groups, interested environmental organizations, and
citizens-at-large.
I am using the Douglas County Watershed Planning Association success as
a model. The focus of such a committee/board should be, "How do we best
accomplish/execute the objectives of the project?"
2. Put trust in the UW project. The UW is an honored and honorable
citizen. The project is not a commercial endeavor, it is a scientific
project permitted under the Wilderness Act of 1964. To succeed it must
go through a very demanding permitting process -- Environmental Impact
Statements, State Environmental Policy Acts and National Environmental
Policy Acts -- each requiring citizens' inputs.
It is so important to me that we provide our grandchildren and
great-grandchildren a future in our community.
What alternatives can we offer them? Flipping hamburgers, clerking in
novelty shops or the chance to contribute to our understanding of the
universe in which we live.
The opportunity to say, "I helped create a new, vibrant community. I did
something important."
We, the valley, are faced with a once-in-a-lifetime choice! We cannot
refuse to grasp the challenge.
Bill Stroud lives in East Wenatchee.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Sunday 19-December-2004
DUSEL and the delicate balance
It is difficult to consider the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory without being excited and concerned simultaneously.
Certainly there is great potential human benefit in a laboratory of this unique quality and size. The University of Washington proposes it be built near Leavenworth, with backing of the National Science Foundation, to create a super-clean atmosphere for intense scientific inquiry. It promises to advance knowledge of the fundamental forces of nature. It will add to our technological resources in an age when knowledge is crucial to the economic and social advancement of nations. There will be a significant resource for the local economy, adding to its diversity with a stable source of high-paying jobs. There is an opportunity to add a sizable asset for local education, to advance interest in science when it is most in the region's and nation's interest.
But all that comes at a cost. DUSEL will be a construction project of immense intensity and breadth, and certainly depth -- two parallel tunnels three miles long, beginning at a portal a short way off the Icicle Road near Bridge Creek, ending deep under 7,000-foot Mount Cashmere. Nearly three years of construction could be enormously disruptive, not just for the residents along the Icicle Road, but all of Leavenworth. The town's appeal to residents and visitors alike is based on beauty and tranquility, exactly what a massive construction effort will mar. And once completed, there will be an influx of residents and visitors. It may be that the community will be noticeably changed.
The question then is whether the expected benefits of DUSEL outweigh the dangers. Here is vast latitude for honest disagreement, but on balance the answer is, yes they do. That is a hesitant and qualified yes, acknowledging that the closer you live to the proposed DUSEL portal the heavier the balance tips to the negative.
The effort to inform and gather public opinion for this project was superb. The 27 members of the Citizens Advisory Committee, appointed by the Port of Chelan County to gauge public opinion, met over four months. They produced no endorsement or condemnation, but gave a report filled with heartfelt concerns, reasonable questions and valid recommendations.
Environmental questions, over water, geology, drainage, power, potential accidents and contamination, will have to be answered. Expect that they will be. The tunnels will be underneath the Alpine Lakes Wilderness but will have little or no discernible effect and set no dangerous precedent. The hikers who might be offended by the knowledge of a lab a mile beneath them will themselves have the far greater impact inside the wilderness boundary.
Leavenworth's "sense of place," and how a lab might affect it, is more difficult to quantify. That atmosphere is well worth protecting, but the region's population is rising and its character changing without a lab. In terms of new residents, the lab's impact may not be as great as the process of change and growth already well under way.
That leaves the primary and very genuine concern -- the effects of excavating 650,000 cubic meters of fist-sized granite and disposing of it, somewhere. This will require 90 truck trips a day up a narrow road, through some of the state's most scenic areas, past well-loved and once-tranquil homes, past some of the state's prime outdoor recreational areas. The construction period will be more than 21/2 years. No wonder homeowners on Icicle Road are horrified. The disruption will be temporary, but its intensity great and its impact very real. With the region's main economic asset its appeal to tourists seeking natural beauty and outdoor recreation, the construction could rattle more than just nerves. It could do significant damage. If the lab is ever built, this fear must be addressed, and the impact of construction minimized to the greatest degree possible.
The DUSEL under Cashmere Mountain is just a proposal, one of several competing for the same prize. It is far from being funded and far from being built. If it ever is, we sincerely hope the local community eventually will be grateful for its existence. The evidence so far should lead to support for the project, but that is a close thing. The balance is delicate and could easily tip to the negative. Much will depend on how the community's questions and concerns are answered. They will be and must be.
This is the opinion of The Wenatchee World and its Editorial Board: Editor and Publisher Rufus Woods, Managing Editor Gary Jasinek and Editorial Page Editor Tracy Warner.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Friday 19-November-2004
Deep lab committee divided three ways
LEAVENWORTH -- A 27-member advisory group for the Port of Chelan County is split over whether an underground science lab should be built in the Icicle Valley.
The group, which met for the last time on Thursday, will present its divided report to the port district on Dec. 6. The document will include three different opinions that most of the committee members hold: outright support, staunch opposition, and waiting until after environmental studies are completed to make a judgment.
"I think it's kinda wimpy not to take a stand," said Lee Milner of Leavenworth, a retired radiologist, who urged his fellow committee members to go a step further and include their individual opinions in the report.
"I think that we've been very kind to each other over the last three months," he said. "But I think we should become more polarized."
Facilitator Jim Reid, who was hired by the port to guide the committee's work, and several committee members pointed out that the group was assembled to gather public opinion -- and not just their own -- on the lab project.
Two University of Washington physicists are proposing to tunnel a laboratory 7,000 feet Mount Cashmere to primarily study how stars make energy. They have submitted a proposal to the National Science Foundation, which could take several years to decide whether to fund such a lab and then choose from several proposed sites around the country to build it.
The port district decided to appoint a citizens' committee to gauge public opinion before taking a formal stand on the lab proposal.
A few committee members have expressed strong support for the project, including Cashmere businesswoman J.C. Baldwin and Peshastin orchardist Dennis Nicholson.
"I have a strong interest in economics and educational values," Nicholson said.
Others said they have not yet made up their minds, but would like to see the lab proposal move forward with more studies.
"I don't know if I can be convinced" to support the lab, said Carl Florea, a Leavenworth minister and community activist. "But I'm open to being convinced."
Dean Johnson, a retired Northwest Airlines pilot and member of The Nature Conservancy, said he's "70 percent" in favor of the lab, but still questions some of its potential impacts to the community.
Retired Wenatchee business owner Bill Asplund said he trusts federal agencies will make a thorough environmental review before allowing the project to proceed.
Buford Howell, a retired math and science teacher at Icicle River Middle School and environmental activist, said he wished Mount Cashmere wasn't located in the middle of the Icicle Valley. "But if all things can be addressed, then let's do it," he said of building the lab. "If they can't be addressed, then do it in Colorado."
Nancy Piestrup, chairwoman of the Leavenworth Chamber of Commerce, said she is not afraid to explore the lab idea more, as did Wenatchee labor leader Mike Baird.
"The footprint, to me, seems palatable if the environment can be protected," he said.
While few committee members have changed their positions on the lab since they began meeting three months ago, Peshastin orchardist Dick Rieman said he has.
Rieman, vice president of the Icicle Canyon Coalition, said after initially supporting the idea he now believes the lab is too big and complex for the Leavenworth area.
"It doesn't fit into the community," he said. "It's like trying to fit a logging truck into my garage."
"Amen!" said Icicle Valley resident Bill Kampen, who opposes the lab.
"For the first time in 26 years, I agree with Dick Rieman," added Cot Rice, a retired school teacher, coach and administrator from Leavenworth.
Leavenworth business owner Ken Marson also spoke against the lab, saying, "It's a grave mistake if we give any input to the port that we want it."
Some committee members called the report that Reid prepared "watered down" and said it did not strongly enough represent the varied opinions of committee members.
But Reid said, "I worry that the three (port district) commissioners could ignore you if you are too divided."
Michelle Partridge can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at partridge@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Wednesday 10-November-2004
The DUSEL project: Good for science and the environment
Anyone who has lived along the eastern slopes of the Cascades, and especially those of us who have grown up here, can recognize the value of preserving our mountains, including their gateway valleys. Recently we have learned that the same majestic mountain topography that pulls us to the Icicle Valley and the Stuart Range can also become a world-class science resource, a deep laboratory that will explore the next generation questions of physics, geohydrology, and geomicrobiology.
Our community is currently discussing whether a Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL) is compatible with our shared goal of conserving the scenic and recreational value of the Cascades for ourselves and for future generations. Although some may argue that DUSEL's benefits are few and its environmental impacts many, those impacts will be minor and will directly affect only a few people. In fact, DUSEL offers a singular opportunity to improve environmental stewardship in the Icicle Valley both now and in the future.
Scientists of many disciplines have stressed that DUSEL will be a crown jewel in world science. DUSEL's basic research in physics will fundamentally alter our perception of the natural universe, enabling an understanding of the amount and nature of matter as yet undetected. Research in geomicrobiology will help us to assess upward movement of hydrogen and methane that may sustain deep microbial life. Beyond basic science, the tools DUSEL scientists will develop include sensitive detectors important to environmental remediation, medical instrumentation and the early warning of potential post-9/11 threats. DUSEL research on ultra-pure materials is important to the computer industry, and its earth science will help us protect our subsurface water supply and predict the effects of global climate change on mountain watersheds.
In our community, DUSEL would bring significant economic and educational benefits that include a science center in Leavenworth. Center staff will work with local K-12 teachers and their students on programs to inspire interest in science and engineering. Data from underground observatories will be transmitted to DUSEL's Administrative Center where scientists and support staff will work, including about 100 local residents hired and trained by DUSEL. Small businesses providing support services will also be drawn to the area and there will be an average of 100 visiting scientists using local hotels and restaurants.
DUSEL advocates acknowledge that the project will disrupt "business as usual" during construction. But extraordinary steps, described in the University of Washington pre-proposal, will be taken to preserve the solitude of the forest. One of the main concerns is that DUSEL will bring environmental degradation like that of mining. In reality, the tunneling to the interior of Mount Cashmere will produce hand-sized fragments of granite, material that can be beneficially used as aggregate.
Hauling those rocks out is a bigger concern and will affect people living along Icicle Creek during the tunnel construction phase of something less than three years. DUSEL haulage will temporarily increase traffic on the lower portion of Icicle Creek Road by about 4 percent and on the upper, national forest portion by 16 percent. We can all appreciate that no one relishes the idea of trucks traveling up and down their road. In recognition of this impact an unusual and lengthy list of steps will be taken to reduce rock haulage and the associated traffic, noise and possible environmental impacts.
Once construction is complete, few campers and hikers in Icicle Valley and surrounding mountains will even know DUSEL is there, because its only visible sign will be a portal with an opening akin to a typical two-lane highway tunnel. Even then the portal will only be noticeable upon close approach. Critics have argued that DUSEL is an inappropriate land use because its tunnels will extend about 700 yards beyond the wilderness boundary. However, the Wilderness Act lists science and education as two of the five reasons Congress decided to set aside such lands for noncommercial public use. As DUSEL will be undetectable inside the wilderness area, it will not interfere with any of the other allowed wilderness purposes, such as recreation and scenic beauty.
An immediate return all of us will get as part of the DUSEL project is electric shuttle transportation in the valley during and after construction. The shuttle will travel from the visitor and science centers to the Snow Lakes and other trailheads, the tunnel portal, and on up the valley. Hikers and campers will be able to board the shuttle in Leavenworth, ride to a trailhead, do a loop trail and return. Without DUSEL such a shuttle will almost certainly never happen and the amount of polluting traffic on Icicle Road would continue to increase. If we are fortunate enough to have DUSEL in our community, those who live along Icicle Road will, in the long term, see reduced traffic, cleaner air and enjoy a quieter valley.
To help bring this world-class laboratory to our community, we need to articulate a vision to DUSEL proponents of what needs to be included in DUSEL planning that would make DUSEL-Cascades work for local citizens. The citizen's committee currently studying the DUSEL-Cascades pre-proposal is an excellent beginning. We need to form a follow-up group to develop this shared vision and to focus attention on constructive discussion with the University of Washington to further improve the DUSEL-Cascades proposal. We also need to engage regional and national environmental groups to closely and fairly examine the opportunity DUSEL offers to strengthen both science and breadth of support for novel approaches to conservation of the Cascades.
The opportunities for enhanced conservation of the Cascades and Icicle Valley, for a sustained improvement of our economy and for educational benefits to our community are unparalleled. In embracing DUSEL, we will not only help ourselves and our environment, but we will also contribute in a unique way to our understanding of our planet and universe.
Philip Long is a resident of Chelan and a geologist and senior program manager at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, where he studies the use of natural subsurface microbes to reverse pollution damage to the environment. The opinions expressed here are his own.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Friday 17-September-2004
Leavenworth has to weigh the value of the wild
Leavenworth is one of the most successful towns in both the Northwest and the nation to make the conversion from an Old West economy based on logging to a postmodern New West economy rooted in theme-based tourism. Its success is also proven by the number of people who have moved to live in the surrounding region because of its beauty and quality of life. For that it is to be congratulated. Other places have either resisted adapting to a changing American West, or they have tried and failed.
Not only have tourists been coming to the area in droves but people moving into the region are driving much of its growth. Chelan County grew 28 percent between 1990 and 2000 and continues to increase in population. It will continue because the strength of rural areas now lies in providing what more developed areas cannot: solitude, wildness and beauty. Counties with protected wildlands like wilderness areas and national parks grow more than twice as fast as counties without protected areas.
Leavenworth and Chelan County are literally just over the mountains from Seattle, which some say has grown too rapidly with poor planning and is beginning to suffer the same ills as Los Angeles and Phoenix. Chelan County will continue to become an even more attractive place for people both to visit and to move to, especially from the Seattle metropolitan area.
People moving to more rural areas have to make sacrifices and tradeoffs. We would all like to live in a rural small town environment and make the higher wages common to urban areas. Unfortunately, for most of us this is not possible. However, if we can't raise our wages very easily, we can try to maintain and improve the quality of life of where we live.
I have found that people often consciously accept lower pay to live in an area with a high quality of life. The higher quality of life, less stressful conditions and more friendly neighbors is like a second paycheck. Many people also seek out places and move first, hoping to find or create a job once they are there. And they are often successful. These people are pursuing a lifestyle, not higher incomes.
The controversy around the proposed Deep Underground Science and Engineer Laboratory project is over the likely impacts and risks for Leavenworth and the Icicle Valley. Will it maintain, improve or detract from the quality of life people currently enjoy? More and more citizens as well as academics recognize that protecting the environment, whether on a local, national or global scale, is the basis for our prosperity and chances of living the "good" life.
The DUSEL project promises higher-income scientific jobs in the long term, after the mining and construction phase. However, the longer the time frame -- three, five or seven years -- the greater the potential risks surrounding the project. Government-funded projects often follow a boom and bust cycle. Recall the long-term impacts on towns built around energy extraction or the creation of "new" synthetic fuels. They had their days in the sun with lots of construction-related employment, but they also created additional demands on local schools and other services requiring rising infrastructure costs and increased taxes to cover the temporary boom.
The DUSEL project in the three- to five-year projected construction phase is essentially a mining project where most of the employment and other impacts, both negative and positive. will take place. Most of the young workers and their families associated with such projects come during this phase and then leave, creating the boom-and-bust affect.
The impacts on tourism of the construction phase of the DUSEL project are uncertain, though probably not positive. Time will tell if the increased number of trucks, delays and other construction-based activities will keep the tourists away. However, people from outside the area who use the Icicle Valley for outdoor activities will probably go elsewhere given the wide variety of alternatives available in the region. Nearby property values will also be negatively affected.
Mining activities are not very popular in the West. When asked to rate the kinds of activities that should be allowed on public lands, people -- whether merchants, teachers, ranchers or loggers -- consistently rate mining lowest on the list of how they want to see public lands used. And there is no longer much mining on public lands and none as yet taking place under a wilderness area, as this project proposes to do.
The question facing local citizens is whether the three- to five-year certain degradation of the environment and other longer-term issues such as water availability and quality is the best prospect for enhancing the continued prosperity of the area and maintaining the quality of life that they presently enjoy. The quality of life issues, and not short-term employment booms or promises of future employment, should be at center stage when considering how best to ensure the vitality of the area.
Gundars Rudzitis, professor of geography at the University of Idaho, is the author most recently of "Wilderness and the Changing American West" (John Wiley !*! Sons) and the forthcoming "The Ongoing Transformation of the American West" (University of Chicago Press).
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
DATE: Wed 28-July-2004
An open process to assess lab proposal
Jim Reid has a daunting task.
Beginning tonight, he'll lead a diverse group -- if "diverse" can even describe the breadth and disparities of interests and opinions of those 23 people -- toward creating a report on one of the region's most controversial, if intriguing, proposals.
Reid, a Seattle consultant and facilitator, was hired by the Port of Chelan County to tap public opinion about the mellifluously named DUSEL, short for the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory.
Some scientists think DUSEL would be a perfect fit in a deep pit under Mount Cashmere. As you probably know, more than a few area residents think it would ruin the serenity of that wilderness area, undermine the water table and otherwise spoil forever the Icicle Valley and vicinity. Others think it would be an enhancement, a boon to the economy and prestige of the region.
Reid, fortunately, has not been charged with the impossible task of somehow congealing those views into a consensus. This won't be a negotiation, he said. The report of the group he'll guide is intended instead, as he put it in a conversation Tuesday, to "take a reading of the community's temperature, and to record accurately the community's broad spectrum of positions and concerns."
Beyond simply listing concerns, Reid will encourage the group to dig a layer or two deeper, past simply what they're worried about and into what might be done to address those worries. As Reid put it, he wants to "identify community interests beyond the catch phrases."
Reid said that, in interviewing 115 people to come up with the 23-person committee, he was struck by the depth of caring and thoughtfulness he encountered, and also by a thread that ran through every conversation: concern for preserving the environment.
So environmental issues involving the proposed lab are a given. Reid's job will be to extract from the advisory group answers to the question, "If the lab is a challenge to the environment, how might it be done to protect it?"
"I'm counting on the community to be creative," Reid said.
The port was wise to hand over this gathering of public sentiment to a third party. That agency is, after all, an engine of economic development. Any report it would compile itself on the $300 million plan might be viewed skeptically by opponents.
It's true that the port, along with the state Department of Community Trade and Economic Development, is paying for Reid's work, which will cost about $45,000. But even a staunch opponent of the lab, Cot Rice, who previously expressed misgivings about the port's involvement, said he thought the group Reid came up with (Rice is a member) is well rounded.
The process will not involve only these two-dozen people. The port also expects wider grass-roots public involvement.
Toward that end, every meeting of the committee will be open to anyone interested. A couple of the group's 10 or so meetings will be specifically intended as public forums.
Port Director Mark Urdahl pointed out that, in most significant land-use decisions, the public is brought in much later in the process than now, when even a decision on funding for the lab is many months away and by no means a slam-dunk. Officially neutral for now on the proposal, the port eventually will either oppose it, recommend it or recommend it with conditions.
In any case, "Hopefully our recommendation will represent the views of Chelan County," Urdahl said. And he made a good point:
Even if DUSEL never is built, having come together as a community to work through the process Reid will lead may make the discourse more civil and productive for whatever the next project of significance might be.
"I hope the debate will be less mean-spirited, and that through this process we can create empathy, where the sides understand each other better," he said.
The public is welcome at tonight's first meeting, which will begin at 7 p.m. in the Fire District No. 3 Community Room, 228 Chumstick Highway in Leavenworth. More information is available online at www.duselprocess.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Underground lab panel chosen
LEAVENWORTH — Opponents and supporters of a proposed underground science laboratory near Leavenworth were to be appointed today to a citizens group that will gauge public opinion about the project.
The new 22-member committee, to be formally appointed by the Port of Chelan County at a late-morning meeting, is made up primarily of Leavenworth-area residents, with a handful of people from Entiat, Wenatchee, East Wenatchee and Cashmere.
The group includes educators, scientists, farmers, environmental activists and business owners.
In a written statement, the port district said all of the committee members are “good listeners, tough questioners, inquisitive, thoughtful and articulate.”
Among them is Cot Rice of Leavenworth, president of the Icicle Valley Protection Alliance, which publicly opposes the lab and the role of the port district — an economic development agency — in overseeing the public process.
Rice said Tuesday he believes the committee is “pretty well rounded” and represents a wide range of opinions and interests.
“It looks pretty divided,” he said. “I expect it will be pretty rough going for awhile, and I think there might be some hard feelings generated. I don’t know if we will be able to arrive at a positive direction one way or another on the lab.”
The port is overseeing public discussion on the $300 million underground lab at Mount Cashmere being proposed by two University of Washington physics professors.
The citizens committee will help the port district report to
the UW and the National Science Foundation whether the lab is largely supported or opposed by local residents.
The mountain southwest of Leavenworth in the Icicle Valley is one of about a half-dozen sites around the country being considered for a national science lab. The National Science Foundation expects to take several years to decide where the lab should be built, and construction would not start until 2008 at the earliest.
The lab would be used primarily for scientific research of solar neutrinos, trying to find out how stars make energy. The work must be done several thousand feet underground, away from the interference of cosmic radiation.
The Port of Chelan County hired Seattle consultant and mediator James Reid to help assemble the citizens committee. Reid will oversee the committee’s discussions, which will begin on July 28. A report is to be submitted to the port by November.
“I think the report will reflect the whole gamut of opinion on this project,” Reid said today. “There are a lot of people who oppose the lab, and I don’t really expect them to come around and change their opinions.”
__________
Who’s on the committee
Here are the members of the citizens advisory committee that were to be appointed today for the proposed Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory near Leavenworth:
u Bill Asplund, Wenatchee, retired science teacher and founding member of the Alpine Lakes Protection Society
u J.C. Baldwin, Cashmere, owner of GTC, a technical support center for telephone and Internet service providers
u Mall Boyd, Leavenworth, marketing director for Wenatchee Valley Medical Center
u Bob Branch, East Wenatchee, dean of transfer programs at Wenatchee Valley College
u Hank Drewniany, Leavenworth, board member for Icicle Valley Protection Alliance
u Bob Duncan, Leavenworth, owner Duncan Construction
u Carl Florea, Leavenworth, executive director of the SHARE community land trust program
u Pat Fromm, Leavenworth, farmer and retired schoolteacher
u Paul Hessburg, Wenatchee, research scientist for U.S. Forest Service and board member of the Chelan-Douglas Land Trust
u Buford Howell, Leavenworth, former science teacher and member of Water Conservancy Board and Icicle Creek Watershed Council
u Dean Johnson, Leavenworth, retired Northwest Airlines pilot
u Bill Kampen, Leavenworth, retired schoolteacher
u Jeff Kraus, Peshastin, orchardist and chairman of the Peshastin Irrigation District
u Connie McCauley, Leavenworth, organic chemistry student at Central Washington University
u Lee Milner, Leavenworth, retired radiologist
u Alan Moen, Entiat, Chelan County chairman of the North Central Citizens Coalition for Responsible Government
u Dennis Nicholson, Blewett Pass, orchardist and Chelan County Planning Commission member
u Nancy Piestrup, Leavenworth, owner of Pie in the Sky gift shop and president of Leavenworth Chamber of Commerce
u Cot Rice, Leavenworth, retired schoolteacher and administrator, president of Icicle Valley Protection Alliance
u Kevin Rieke, Leavenworth, science teacher at Cascade High School
u Dick Rieman, Leavenworth, orchardist, retired United Airlines pilot and vice president of Icicle Canyon Coalition
u Craig Root, Leavenworth, scientist at WSU Tree Fruit Research Center
Source: Port of Chelan County
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Taking sides on the tunnel: It's neighbor vs. neighbor in the debate over locating a
deep-mountain lab near Leavenworth
*****
5/10/04 CORRECTION
MEMBERS, NOT GROUP
Some members of the Icicle Valley chapter of Trout Unlimited support an underground laboratory near Leavenworth. A Page A1 weekend story incorrectly stated that the local chapter favored the lab. Its board of directors has not taken a formal stand on the idea.
*****
By Michelle Partridge, World staff writer
LEAVENWORTH — An extraordinary plan to conduct science experiments inside a rugged mountain has some Leavenworth residents seeing dollar signs and their neighbors crying environmental ruin.
The proposal to tunnel a science laboratory under Mount Cashmere to the southwest of Leavenworth — still years from reality if it happens at all — is dividing the community like nothing before.
And unlike the typical faceoff of environmentalists vs. developers or residents vs. outsiders, this debate has business and home owners, recreationists, educators, scientists, tourism advocates and environmentalists on both sides.
“It has really cut across a lot of the stereotypical borders and divided this town,” said Michael Kane, a self-employed environmental consultant from Leavenworth. “If they were going to bore tunnels into the mountain and extract gold or silver or oil, everyone would oppose it. But this is science, and that makes it a pretty interesting story.”
People are lining up on either side of a proposal by two University of Washington physics professors to build an underground laboratory for scientific research of solar neutrinos, trying to find out how stars make energy. The work would be done 7,000 feet under the mountain's solid rock, away from the interference of cosmic rays.
The project would require the construction of parallel three-mile-long tunnels that would start near Bridge Creek Campground and end under the Alpine Lakes Wilderness.
Opponents who have put up signs and pasted bumper stickers on their vehicles to protest the lab have been labeled by some supporters as closed-minded radical environmentalists. Last month, some of their yard signs were reported stolen along East Leavenworth Road.
One opponent has donned a gas mask and handed out flyers at the Leavenworth Post Office during festivals. A Web site set up by the opposition group, Icicle Valley Protection Society, warns that lakes could be drained, dangerous gases could be released into the air, and that the U.S. Department of Defense may use the lab to analyze weapons of mass destruction.
A flyer posted on the front door of the Chumstick Grange by the group reads, “The water of Icicle Creek could be polluted by toxic spills ... Leavenworth's watershed is in jeopardy.”
Supporters also have gotten into the act. Along East Leavenworth Road, just 75 feet from a neighbor's anti-lab yard sign, a resident has a sign above a mail box reading, “Support NUSEL. Good Science. Good for the Community. Responsible Stewardship.”
The National Science Foundation has said it will begin soliciting proposals this month for building an underground science lab in the United States. The Mount Cashmere site is expected to be one of six possible locations, which will be narrowed to one or two by next year.
Federal funding for the project likely would not come before 2008.
***
A town divided
“There are a lot of very passionate feelings about this whole idea,” said Jeff Parsons, executive director of the Leavenworth Audubon Center, which has not yet taken a position. “It's not a simple argument. People are really drawing lines in the sand.”
City Councilman Rob Eaton said the conflict should make the community stronger and better informed long before a lab could ever be built.
“Any big issue like this has the potential to polarize a community,” he said. “But it won't be the decline of Leavenworth.”
But many say the conflict far surpasses the rift in the 1960s over whether the former logging and railroad town in the foothills of the Cascade mountains should adopt a Bavarian theme to attract tourists and save it from economic ruin.
The theme town and the stunning setting of the community has drawn millions of visitors each year and an eclectic mix of full- and part-time residents, from loggers to Microsoft executives.
Local lab supporters — like businesswoman and environmentalist Harriet Bullitt, Mayor Mel Wyles, the Leavenworth Chamber of Commerce, and local members of the national conservation group, Trout Unlimited — say the project could have huge benefits for Leavenworth and Chelan County, starting with the estimated $300 million investment in construction and development of the lab and accompanying administrative and science centers.
They say it would create jobs, both during the three- to five-year construction phase, and after the research begins. The project also would attract scientists from around the world, some of whom would move to the community; would bring in even more visitors to the tourist town; and would likely spawn new support businesses, proponents say.
***
Good for business?
“The city is ripe for something like this,” said Trout Unlimited member Jan Carpenter, who worked at the University of Washington for 15 years in facility planning.
She said people should wait for geologic and environmental studies to be completed before judging what kind of damage could be done.
“People are afraid of what they don't know,” said Carpenter, who opposed the expansion of the Mission Ridge Ski Area a few years ago because of potential impacts to the environment. “But if they would sit back, relax and get all the facts, they may realize the wonderful opportunity they have here and see that, wow, would this ever be exciting.”
Wyles said people need to look past the temporary inconveniences of construction to the longterm benefits of the project.
“If it's for the good of Leavenworth, and we have to live with the construction for a few years, then get over it,” he said.
But those opposed to the lab say the noise, dust and heavy-truck traffic during the initial construction phase is only the beginning of the devastation the project would bring to the scenic and popular valley that draws nearly a million hikers, rock climbers, campers and other visitors each year.
They've organized themselves and hired a Seattle-area scientist to assess the potential threat to water quality in the pristine Icicle Creek drainage, which provides water to the city of Leavenworth, the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery and two irrigation districts that serve hundreds of customers. They've also started a petition drive.
Environmental reviews that may answer many of the community's concerns have yet to be conducted.
***
Fears unleashed
But some have used scare tactics to get their point across. Lisa Magee donned a gas mask and handed out flyers at the Post Office earlier this year. Others are spreading the word that Icicle Road would be straightened and popular rock climbing areas destroyed to accommodate big trucks, and that alpine lakes could be drained through cracks in the mountain during the tunnel drilling.
Magee, a 25-year resident of Leavenworth and daughter of former Mayor Will Martinell, said she hopes her gas-mask ploy tempers local enthusiasm for the lab.
“Everybody seemed to be jumping on the band wagon,” she said. “City government, the chamber, Harriet Bullitt. They were looking at the short-term benefits, the money, and saying this will be good for us. I just want to tell people that we're not getting all the facts here.”
But Cot Rice, a retired irrigation water manager who is heading up the opposition, said such scare tactics aren't sanctioned by his group.
“We're trying to do this through education and common sense,” he said. “We're trying to deal with the facts, and the very real threat that this project poses to our water.”
Many of the opponents say they think an underground research laboratory is a good idea, but it doesn't belong in a scenic recreation area or underneath a wilderness.
***
Threat to the mountain?
“To me, there's a tremendous amount of inspirational value in Mount Cashmere,” said Roger Schoenhals, who owns a publishing business in Edmonds and lives on Icicle Road.
“I just can't imagine that anyone will be able to look at the mountain, knowing there's all this stuff going on down inside it, and have the same response to the mountain,” he said. “It would take away the mystique and sense of antiquity that it has.”
Surprising to many is the fact that national and regional environmental groups that sue to stop many commercial activities in forested areas have not taken a strong stand against the project. Some, like Bullitt and the local Trout Unlimited chapter, have even come out in favor of the lab.
Many, like the National Audubon Society and Sierra Club, are taking a wait-and-see approach.
“I think it's important to have all the information before we make a decision,” said Parsons, former director of the state chapter of the Audubon Society. “Let's not become enemies before we even know if the project is going to happen.”
In the January-February issue of its Cascade Crest newsletter, the Audubon Society wrote that it neither opposed nor supported the lab, but that it planned to closely monitor the environmental review.
Meanwhile, the scientists who want to build the lab are moving forward with their plans, and hoping to eventually win over the opposition.
“We're pretty confident that this is an awfully good project for the Leavenworth area,” said Wick Haxton, the University of Washington physics professor leading the proposal to build the underground lab. “People need to be patient and get as much information as possible. At this early stage, one sees all the potential problems. The trick is to imagine all the good things that will follow a project of this sort.”
Supporters warn that too much contention could kill the project before it gets a fair review. Opponents say they are counting on that.
“It's going to hurt some feelings before it's all over,” Wyles said of his community. “There's no doubt about it.”
Michelle Partridge can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at partridge@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Many comments will be coming
The debate over the potential benefits or detriments of a massive underground science laboratory off Icicle Road grows more interesting by the day. Opponents of the project, their volume increasing, say the laboratory will have enormous destructive power. It will be, their Web site says, a “massive industrial project” built by people “who would think nothing of destroying one of the most beautiful valleys in the Northwest.” Not only that, they say, it will do irreparable harm to the regional economy by discouraging the tourists who flock to the pristine Icicle. Fewer tourists, bad for the economy.
Or, perhaps it will be an economic boon, which is also reason to be suspicious, they say. The lab critics, along with a regional government watchdog group whose members also oppose the laboratory, to complain about the agency assigned to handle local public comment on the project, the Port of Chelan County. The port will be biased and should be replaced, they say, because the laboratory will have huge economic benefits. On huge economic benefits this agency tends to look favorably, which makes its judgment suspect, say the critics.
The port represents “business interests,” the opponents say, and therefore will not be impartial. “I'm sure the port would like to see the lab happen because it would be a real economic boon to the county,” said Alan Moen of the North Central Citizens Coalition for Responsible Government.
If we are going to be against this laboratory, we should decide somewhere along the line whether we should oppose it because it will be an economic drag or an economic asset. It is possible to be neither, but it is difficult to be both.
Whatever it is, it isn't a sound reason to disqualify the Port of Chelan County from collecting public comments. The port is an agency that prefers economic development, but it is run by elected commissioners who, perceptions aside, don't necessarily represent “business interests.” The port plans to hire a consultant to oversee the process, conduct interviews, compile a report and report to the commissioners. It will be a public process. If bias is injected it should be detectable, and if that isn't good enough, critics should seek out a local public agency that is completely indifferent to huge economic boons, and let everyone know what it is.
The critics are right in that public opinion will be important if the decision ever comes to actually build something. The project is called the National Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory. A consortium of physicists has proposed to build it 6,000 feet under Cashmere Mountain, with access through miles-long tunnels with portals off Icicle Road near Bridge Creek. The lab is intended to be a clean facility to conduct advanced experiments, and the Icicle site is just one of several proposed. The National Science Foundation will choose the site and seek funding from Congress. If construction ever starts at the Icicle site, it is a long time away. They say 2009 at the earliest.
Concerns of the critics center on the “integrity” of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, which the lab will be 6,000 feet below, and the impact of the construction process. That, the scientists say with characteristic specificity, will take “2.6 years.” The tunneling will require removing 647,000 cubic yards of crushed rock, mostly during an intense period of “1.3 years.” Over the 2.6 years there will be an average of 44 truckloads of rock removed per day, more during the “intense” period.
Whether local people are willing to tolerate this disruption for either the economic boon or the economic disaster that the laboratory is said to be, remains to be seen. Public opinion has yet to be gauged, but we do know the period of exaggeration has already begun.
Tracy Warner's column appears Tuesday through Friday. He can be reached at warner@wenworld.com or 665-1163.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Deep-lab critics say port brings bias to project: Icicle Valley Protection Alliance wants neutal party to oversee collection of public comments
LEAVENWORTH — Critics of a proposed underground laboratory in the Icicle Valley and a government watchdog group say the Port of Chelan County should not be allowed to oversee the gathering of public comments on the project.
“You have asked the fox to guard the hen house,” members of the Icicle Valley Protection Alliance wrote to Chelan County commissioners and other local officials in an April 8 letter.
The port's mission is to promote economic development and, therefore, it cannot be partial, said Cot Rice, president of the group critical of the proposed lab.
“I'm sure the port would like to see the lab happen because it would be a real economic boon to the county,” said Alan Moen, the Chelan County chairman of the watchdog group, North Central Citizens Coalition for Responsible Government.
But port officials and county commissioners, who met Tuesday morning, said the port district will set up a fair process for gathering public comment and providing information on a proposal by two University of Washington physics professors to tunnel a science lab under Mount Cashmere. An application for the $300 million project will be submitted to the National Science Foundation later this year and will be considered along with a half-dozen other proposals. The earliest such a project could be funded would be 2009.
County commissioners asked the port district to serve as the facilitator after an informal meeting of county, city of Leavenworth, U.S. Forest Service and port officials in January.
“We recognize that people are skeptical that we, as an economic development agency, can be objective,” port Director Mark Urdahl told The Wenatchee World. “But I assure you that we are taking great pains to make the process as transparent and as fair as possible.”
The port plans to hire a consultant, James Reid of the Falconer Group, today to head up the effort, Urdahl said.
Reid is founder and principal of the Falconer Group, a Seattle consulting, communication, and mediation firm. He previously ran the King County Department of Planning and Community Development and is a guest lecturer for the University of Washington.
He will be paid by the port and possibly also by the state Department of Community Trade and Economic Development. Urdahl said officials have not yet determined how much to pay Reid.
Joyce Stewart, deputy director of the port, said Reid plans to interview up to 80 people, such as irrigators and environmentalists, who have an interest or stake in the Icicle Valley, and put together a steering committee to gauge public opinion on the project.
“At that point, the port district will disappear” and the committee will work with the public, Stewart said. “It will truly be a neutral process.”
By November, Reid will submit a report to the port and a series of recommendations to the University of Washington. At that time, port commissioners will decide whether to support, oppose or take a neutral stand on the lab proposal, Stewart said.
“It sure sounds like there will be opportunity for anyone and everyone to be involved,” said Chelan County Commissioner Keith Goehner.
But Moen said he believes an independent organization should be used as a facilitator. “It certainly shouldn't be an agency that represents just the business interests,” he said.
Rice said county commissioners and Leavenworth city officials should be responsible for gathering public input.
“They are the elected representatives of the people,” Rice said. “Yet they just hand this off to somebody else and get rid of it.”
Michelle Partridge can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at partridge@wenworld.com
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Deep lab years from reality: With all the red tape, it could be 2009 before first
experiments
ARLINGTON, Va. — Top scientists at the National Science Foundation laid out a plan earlier this week that could lead to construction of a national underground laboratory — but it could be 2009 before experiments are under way.
“It will take that much time if we run like the dickens,” NSF particle physics program director Eugene Loh told a meeting of nearly 100 scientists at the agency's headquarters in Arlington, Va.
NSF officials explained how the agency proposes to bring order to the search for an underground-lab site that began as a brainstorm four years ago, inspired by the announcement on Sept. 11, 2000, that Homestake gold mine in Lead, S.D., would close.
Two weeks later, University of Pennsylvania physicist Ken Lande proposed converting Homestake into a national underground laboratory. Seven sites, including one near Leavenworth, are contenders for the lab, which would use an underground site to shield sensitive experiments from cosmic radiation. Lande and his colleague, Nobel Prize winner Ray Davis, operated a small neutrino detector at Homestake for decades.
South Dakota officials, including a representative of the governor's office, attended the meeting.
Wick Haxton, the University of Washington physics professor leading the proposal to build an underground lab near Leavenworth, also attended and said he was encouraged.
“I think there is a lot of support for the type of project we envision,” he said Thursday. “We have an emphasis on doing the very cleanest physics at a very deep level.”
He said his application for a lab under Mount Cashmere is nearly complete, and will be ready for submission when the National Science Foundation calls for proposals.
In addition to the South Dakota and Washington proposals, five other sites are contending for the lab in southwestern Virginia, west of Denver, San Jacinto Mountain in Southern California, Northern Minnesota and New Mexico.
Monday's meeting was called by Loh's boss, astrophysicist Michael Turner, who heads the NSF's Mathematical and Physical Sciences Directorate. Turner announced a series of three NSF “solicitations” for proposals.
The first two solicitations will come almost simultaneously, in May. The first will focus on science and on the general requirements for experiments, without reference to a site. Turner hopes the scientific community can agree on one general proposal. “Before you tell me what you want me to build, tell me what questions you want to answer,” Turner said.
The NSF will also ask for science proposals in modules, designed so they can share infrastructure and so that the lab could be built in stages.
The second solicitation will ask for proposals from individual sites.
The NSF will award $300,000 grants to develop those first two proposals, which would be due in six months. Marshak said Homestake proponents could easily meet that deadline, but advocates for the newer sites in Virginia, Colorado and Washington argued for more time.
Next year, the NSF will narrow the site proposals down to one or maybe two, then ask for a third, more detailed proposal.
Turner emphasized that the series of three solicitations would be only the beginning of the process. Large NSF science projects must survive a process called “Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction.” After divisions and directorates in the NSF approve big projects, they go to an MREFC committee. Then they must be approved by the National Science Board and included in the NSF budget request, which comes from the agency's director. Then the White House decides whether the project goes into the administration's budget. Then the project goes to Congress.
Turner said the soonest an underground lab could be funded would be in fiscal 2008, but the project would be competing with other big projects, some of which would be ahead of it in line.
Most scientists at the meeting Monday said they'd rather the NSF moved quicker, but most agreed that, given the budget process, Turner's plan was the best they could hope for.
University of Pennsylvania physics professor emeritus Al Mann, an early advocate for underground science who has helped develop the South Dakota proposal, was blunter about the process. “It is too long, it is too slow, it stifles the imagination and creativity,” Mann said.
World staff writer Michelle Partridge contributed to this report.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
Clean slate for bids on lab location: Mount Cashmere gets even start in competition to host
research site
The National Science Foundation has returned all bids for a deep underground laboratory, saying it will start anew to solicit applications for the proposed multimillion-dollar facility.
A main backer of an Icicle Creek site near Leavenworth said Wednesday the action is good news and that the site will formally join the competition after the National Science Foundation asks for proposals, perhaps in the fall.
Until earlier this month, an abandoned gold mine in South Dakota was the foundation's favored site. California and Minnesota groups also made proposals.
Flooding at the South Dakota site, however, bumped it from the No. 1 spot. Its lead supporter, University of Washington physics professor Wick Haxton, defected and instead proposed the Icicle Creek site.
National Science Foundation spokesman Curt Suplee said all of the applications for building a lab were unsolicited by the organization, and the agency had no formal process set up to review them.
Homestake was only chosen as the top site based on its geology, he said.
“Then we had Dr. Haxton leaving the Homestake proposal and focusing on Icicle Canyon,” he said. “The whole thing was really getting complicated. At that point we said this is getting ridiculous. We decided to return all the proposals and tell people we are going to a take proactive steps to help them organize their thinking.”
The Feb. 6 letter from the National Science Foundation halts, at least for now, the competition for funding a lab while its officials “consider again all the possibilities for an underground lab, including a re-evaluation of the suitability” of the South Dakota site.
Haxton called the action a victory. “Now we're no longer a backup,” he said of the site near Leavenworth.
In addition to the sites in Washington, South Dakota, Minnesota and California, Haxton said he expects a few more locations to be proposed, including one in New Mexico.
In the letter, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for mathematical and physical sciences, Michael Turner, said the agency's process for developing plans and proposals “must be open and transparent to all interested parties, including civic, cultural and environmental groups.”
The lab would be used for research in physics, astrophysics, earth science and geomicrobiology. Shielded from cosmic rays by being under layers of rock, much of the work would be in solar neutrinos to find out how stars make energy.
Turner's letter came as South Dakota took steps to land the laboratory.
Gov. Mike Rounds signed a bill last week creating the South Dakota Science and Technology Authority, which has the ability to sell more than $100 million in bonds to build the laboratory, said Dick Gowen, interim director of the new authority.
The state also reached an agreement with the mine's owner to transfer ownership to the new authority if the NSF agreed to fund a lab there, he said.
State lawmakers also set aside $14.3 million for the conversion of the mine to a laboratory.
“We literally are in the position where we are ready to lay construction bonding on the project,” Gowen said.
Federal funding for the project, however, is not certain. The Feb. 6 foundation letter said, “Like all major research projects contemplated for funding, an underground lab would have to compete for priority and resources with dozens of other promising programs.”
Meanwhile, in Washington, Haxton said he had planned to submit his application next month for building the lab at Mount Cashmere.
He said he still plans to offer the application for public review, possibly as early as next month, to interested people in Chelan County and to other scientists.
The Port of Chelan County on Wednesday agreed to help with the initial gathering of public comment, including identifying concerns, related to the proposal to locate a lab near Leavenworth.
The move came at the request of Chelan County Commissioner Keith Goehner and Leavenworth City Councilman Rob Eaton.
“We have not endorsed the project, but as economic developers, we approach it as a project with significant economic opportunities, as well as potential impacts,” said Port District Manager Mark Urdahl. “We're interested in it, but we can't take a stand until we learn more about it.”
Michelle Partridge can be reached at 664-7152 or by e-mail at partridge@wenworld.com
***
Lab foes to meet
Opponents, who have organized themselves into the Icicle Valley Protection Alliance, have scheduled a meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at Icicle River Middle School. The group has hired hydrogeologist Anne Udaloy of Seattle, who will speak at Tuesday's meeting. For more information, call Cot Rice at 548-4341 or Hank Drewniany at 548-1192.
-reprinted with permission of
Wenatchee World
By Michelle McNiel, World staff writer
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
By Christine Pratt World staff writer
By Tracy Warner, Editorial Page editor
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
Eight-way race for a deep lab
Cascades
On the Web
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
By Jim Knapp, Mike Mackey and John Stoltenberg
By Michelle McNiel World staff writer
By Michelle Partridge World staff writer
By Bill Stroud
By Michelle Partridge World staff writer
By Philip Long
By Gundars Rudzitis
By Gary Jasinek, World managing editor
By Michelle Partridge, World staff writer
By Michelle Partridge, World staff writer
By Bill Harlan, Rapid City (S.D.) Journal uc-jp
By Michelle Partridge, World staff writer es