Friday, November 19, 2010

Sides debate effectiveness of uranium rules

NAS?

Comment:  The NRC let's nuke plants be self-regulating and not very good at reporting the truth about nuke plants, so are Uranium Mills will be self-regulated by the uranium industry!   Remember the NRC only gets involved when an accident happens, now this is not a tight controlling industry!  The EPA does not enforce the Clean Air and Water Act in Mt. Top Removal because 2,000 miles of streams have been destroyed; the EPA does not check the air monitors at the MTR, tightly regulated, NO!  So do not listen to Baby Whales comments, the dude has never mined anything in their life!  It is just a spin for nukes and uranium mining!  Plus again, has the NAS discussed anything about the problems of uranium mining and milling on people’s health, water or land?  Why is the NAS focusing on regulations of uranium mining and milling?  Why are the real MD doctors or the professional water people on this panel, there are not on the board just miners and nukes related companies!  Oh, that right, the Virginia Uranium Inc paid for the study, I guess you do get what you pay for, all focus on mining regulations and not on people’s health!

By Tara Bozick
Published: November 16, 2010

WASHINGTON — Lessons learned from the nation’s historic conventional uranium mine and mill sites turned into heavy regulation of the industry, mining interests said.

Regulations and guidelines for conventional uranium mines and mills are decades old and updated standards are needed, environmental interests said.

The National Academy of Sciences’ provisional committee studying uranium mining in Virginia heard from both sides on Tuesday at the Melrose Hotel in Washington.

Understanding the regulatory framework for uranium extraction is key if Virginia leaders would like to determine whether uranium mining and milling can be done in a way that safeguards the public health and environment, said Katie Sweeney, general counsel for the National Mining Association.

Virginia would regulate the uranium mine. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission would regulate the mill (where ore becomes yellowcake). The Department of Energy would own, watch and maintain the mill site after reclamation is complete.

The Environmental Protection Agency sets protection standards, like for radium in soil, groundwater restoration and radon from tailings.

While the regulatory framework may be confusing, the complementary involvement of the agencies and the rigorous and numerous permitting processes ensure heavy regulation of the U.S. uranium industry, Sweeney said.

For instance, the mine would need an extensive operating plan and various associated permits (like for air and water quality). Before the mill can get a license, the NRC commences a site-specific evaluation including everything from waste management and financial assurance to environmental monitoring and historic and cultural impacts.

Over the years, the regulations for conventional mining and milling evolved and improved to protect against hazards, like with the passage of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, Sweeney said.

Yes, there exists a “complicated mosaic” of necessary permits, agreed Geoffrey Fettus, senior project attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington.

But the uranium industry has an “abysmal” track record of regulation and enforcement, Fettus said.

“Conventional uranium mining was essentially unregulated for decades,” Fettus said.

Regulations that evolved are “patchy and holey,” he told the committee. Standards that haven’t been updated for more than 20 years need to change and in a way that shows the country what the tradeoffs are for uranium extraction, he added.

States have the right to require stricter standards, but rarely do so, although Colorado and New Mexico are on the right path, Fettus said.

Meeting attendee Olga Kolotushkina, representing the Roanoke River Basin Association, said presenters showed that while the uranium industry claims a long history, the standards haven’t been updated in years.

“I think the current regulations are antiquated,” she said.

Critics also pointed out that not many uranium mills began operations after regulations in the 1970s were established.

The NAS study is due to state leaders by December 2011. The study committee scheduled town hall meetings in Danville for Dec. 13 to Dec. 15.

Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2010/nov/16/sides-debate-effectiveness-uranium-rules-ar-657940/