By: | WSLS
Published: February 07, 2012
Published: February 07, 2012
Uranium mining and milling and its risks continue to leave
residents asking questions about what would happen if Virginia Uranium Inc.
develops the Coles Hill site.
About 200 people packed the Institute for Advanced Learning
and Research on Tuesday night to hear the findings in the National Academy of
Sciences’ report on uranium mining in Virginia and to ask questions of study
panel members and staff.
Repeatedly, study committee chairman Paul Locke told residents
many of their specific questions regarding impacts of the proposed Pittsylvania
County project would need to be answered by a site-specific study.
“Nothing is as important as a site-specific study,” said John
Cannon, chairman of the Halifax County Industrial Development Authority and
president of The Virginia Coalition.
Cannon said he’ll take the questions raised at the meeting to
legislators and a state workgroup that would be studying the issue and drafting
a regulatory framework as requested by Gov. Bob McDonnell last month. The
Virginia Coalition hired a lobbying firm and plans, as possible, to attend every
public meeting of the workgroup to ensure questions are answered even after the
NAS study committee disbands after hosting public meetings on its report, he
added.
Cannon asked the NAS panel to host meetings in the Hampton
Roads area as well.
Sarah Epps of Halifax asked if based on the NAS report, could
she tell her two teenaged boys whether uranium mining can be done safely, as
they live downstream of the proposed site on the Banister River. She added the
report seems to say there is no guarantee of that.
Locke explained, as he did to several questions, that the $1.4
million uranium report commissioned by a state legislative commission and
indirectly funded by Virginia Uranium does not answer the question as to whether
uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia, as that was not included in the
assigned project scope.
Locke also explained in his presentation that uranium
operations of the past two decades have greatly improved and that
internationally accepted best practices could mitigate the risk of radioactive
contamination. He said the issue of long-term management of waste exists with
any engineered waste structure and not just uranium structures.
Kay Patrick of Gretna asked if best practices would help those
living near the site, but the panel told her that would best be answered by a
site-specific study.
William Clark, who raises cattle for beef outside of Gretna,
wanted to know how much his land and business would be worth if contamination
occurred. He asked how long would it take for contamination to reach him if an
earthquake damaged the radioactive tailings (uranium mill waste) containment
cell.
Sue Poe of Gretna wanted to know how far away she would need to be away from the
site to stay within safe levels for radon exposure.
