Love KM Comments: Another excellent editorial by the R&B. Thank you to Ms. Jackson for her direct questions and reporting to the public. Thank you to the R&B for putting the will of the people in print.
Let the question asked below re-energize you efforts to vocally oppose uranium mining. Let your elected official know you support a ban...make sure they "get the message and let this project die, once and for all".
"The question we have to ask is how many more voices will be needed to speak out before mining supporters in state government — like Bob McDonnell — get the message and let this project die, once and for all?"
Posted: Thursday, August 15, 2013 6:30 am The Editorial Boardnewsadvance.com
Gov. Bob McDonnell’s visit to Danville this week wasn’t about the uranium mining, but this newspaper made it about uranium mining by asking McDonnell where he stood.
Uranium mining, if allowed to go forward, could — and probably will — have profound implications for life in the Dan River Region.
At the core of the issue is whether the development of a naturally occurring resource should be allowed to endanger the water, land and air for everyone else. During the course of McDonnell’s administration, this issue has boiled over several times.
But the General Assembly has never passed a bill to advance uranium mining, and the representatives of local governments, businessmen, environmentalists, farmers and citizens have rallied against uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.
It was no surprise to hear this week that McDonnell is still in favor of uranium mining, but will likely not use his political power to push the issue in his remaining months in office.
"If it can be mined and milled safely, I think we ought to do it, and if it can’t, I think it shouldn’t," McDonnell said this week.
Ultimately, that decision was up to the General Assembly. The study commission felt that it could, but it did not draw the support during the session. It’s taken us 32 years just to get to today from the last time it was considered."
We’ll agree to disagree with the governor; we’ve read those same reports, and there is nothing but more questions — and serious challenges — to the health and safety of this community if uranium is mined here.
For that matter, "… it’s more likely than not that it can be done safely …" is hardly a ringing endorsement of any project.
But what McDonnell is also saying is that Virginia’s Administrative Process Act could be used "to come up with a construct" — not actual regulations, but something close to that.
We’d like to believe this governor is willing to let the legislative process decide what will happen in our state — not the desires of a few pro-mining legislators pushing him to wield executive power.
If McDonnell used the Administrative Process Act to advance uranium mining, we believe he would be circumventing the will of the people who have spoken through their elected representatives.
We know McDonnell supports uranium mining, but he’s in the minority on that issue.
The question we have to ask is how many more voices will be needed to speak out before mining supporters in state government — like Bob McDonnell — get the message and let this project die, once and for all?
Uranium mining, if allowed to go forward, could — and probably will — have profound implications for life in the Dan River Region.
At the core of the issue is whether the development of a naturally occurring resource should be allowed to endanger the water, land and air for everyone else. During the course of McDonnell’s administration, this issue has boiled over several times.
But the General Assembly has never passed a bill to advance uranium mining, and the representatives of local governments, businessmen, environmentalists, farmers and citizens have rallied against uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.
It was no surprise to hear this week that McDonnell is still in favor of uranium mining, but will likely not use his political power to push the issue in his remaining months in office.
"If it can be mined and milled safely, I think we ought to do it, and if it can’t, I think it shouldn’t," McDonnell said this week.
Ultimately, that decision was up to the General Assembly. The study commission felt that it could, but it did not draw the support during the session. It’s taken us 32 years just to get to today from the last time it was considered."
We’ll agree to disagree with the governor; we’ve read those same reports, and there is nothing but more questions — and serious challenges — to the health and safety of this community if uranium is mined here.
For that matter, "… it’s more likely than not that it can be done safely …" is hardly a ringing endorsement of any project.
But what McDonnell is also saying is that Virginia’s Administrative Process Act could be used "to come up with a construct" — not actual regulations, but something close to that.
We’d like to believe this governor is willing to let the legislative process decide what will happen in our state — not the desires of a few pro-mining legislators pushing him to wield executive power.
If McDonnell used the Administrative Process Act to advance uranium mining, we believe he would be circumventing the will of the people who have spoken through their elected representatives.
We know McDonnell supports uranium mining, but he’s in the minority on that issue.
The question we have to ask is how many more voices will be needed to speak out before mining supporters in state government — like Bob McDonnell — get the message and let this project die, once and for all?
NOTICE: Meeting:
Roanoke River Basin Association (RRBA)
in Danville, Va
at the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research.
The date is Thursday, August 22, 2013 from 1 PM to 3 PM.
The agenda is as follows:
1. Call to Order and Introduction of Attendees.
2. Secretary/Treasurer Report
3. RRBA Report regarding the Uranium Mining Issue
4. CommonHealthVA Report
5. North Carolina Coalition Against Uranium Mining Report
6. Virginia Coalition Report
7. UpperReach Program Report
8. RRBA/Evergreen Initiative
9. 216 Study Update
10. Additional Reports and Items
11. New Business
The agenda is as follows:
1. Call to Order and Introduction of Attendees.
2. Secretary/Treasurer Report
3. RRBA Report regarding the Uranium Mining Issue
4. CommonHealthVA Report
5. North Carolina Coalition Against Uranium Mining Report
6. Virginia Coalition Report
7. UpperReach Program Report
8. RRBA/Evergreen Initiative
9. 216 Study Update
10. Additional Reports and Items
11. New Business
12. Old Business
13. Adjournment
Come early and join us for a Dutch Treat lunch at the best restaurant for the money in town, the Mega Bytes, located at the Institute main lobby. They have a large buffet, as well as pizzas, salads, and sandwiches, all prepared by a chef and trained staff. Food is served starting at 11:30 AM.
See you there!!
Andrew Lester
Executive Director
Roanoke River Basin Association
Comments from Me: I think the public should be notified for all core drillings of all minerals. Most states include public in core drillings and have regulations for all exploratory drilling. Please write the VA leaders and tell them we have the right to know if a company are drilling for anything near our homes!
More great Comments from KM: The R&B story depicts and agency's arrogance and ineptness.
Take a closer look at DMME. Code of Virginia § 45.1-161.2. states, "The Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy is continued as an agency within the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade. The Department shall be headed by a Director who shall be appointed by the Governor, subject to confirmation by the General Assembly, to serve at his pleasure for a term coincident with his own."
DMME is continued as an agency within the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade. The Secretary of Commerce and Trade oversees the economic, community, and workforce development of the Commonwealth.
Where is it documented that DMME has interest in or responsibility to the public regarding safe mining practices?
It simply issues permits based on regulations. It is "an agency within the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade".
Expecting DAME to protect your ...health and safety during uranium mining is like expecting an amoeba to pay your bills.
Abbott's characterization of the confidentiality of records is absurd and malfeasant.
He says "VOID was required to request continued confidentiality after an initial two years, but were not required to state why — that part is understood." Understood by whom?
§ 45.1-285. Specifically states, "The Chief shall hold confidential all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter by those engaged in the exploration for uranium for a period of two years after the completion of the exploratory activities.
Further, upon written request by any person engaged in the exploration for uranium, the Chief shall hold confidential all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter for all additional two-year periods. Such request shall be granted by the Chief if the requesting party certifies that he considers all such information to be of a proprietary nature relating to his competitive rights.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to deny to the State Geologist the access to all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter. The State Geologist, however, shall be bound to hold this information confidential to the same extent as the Chief is bound."
No such documentation has been provided through FOIA requests.
Abbott appears correct when he states, "because the agency’s duties are dictated by law, any substantive changes would have to come from the legislature."
If Virginia's legislators desire diverse economic development and quality of life for Virginia's citizens, it will craft legislation to ban uranium exploration and mining in our state.
DMME is continued as an agency within the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade. The Secretary of Commerce and Trade oversees the economic, community, and workforce development of the Commonwealth.
Where is it documented that DMME has interest in or responsibility to the public regarding safe mining practices?
It simply issues permits based on regulations. It is "an agency within the Secretariat of Commerce and Trade".
Expecting DAME to protect your ...health and safety during uranium mining is like expecting an amoeba to pay your bills.
Abbott's characterization of the confidentiality of records is absurd and malfeasant.
He says "VOID was required to request continued confidentiality after an initial two years, but were not required to state why — that part is understood." Understood by whom?
§ 45.1-285. Specifically states, "The Chief shall hold confidential all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter by those engaged in the exploration for uranium for a period of two years after the completion of the exploratory activities.
Further, upon written request by any person engaged in the exploration for uranium, the Chief shall hold confidential all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter for all additional two-year periods. Such request shall be granted by the Chief if the requesting party certifies that he considers all such information to be of a proprietary nature relating to his competitive rights.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to deny to the State Geologist the access to all logs, surveys, plats and reports filed under this chapter. The State Geologist, however, shall be bound to hold this information confidential to the same extent as the Chief is bound."
No such documentation has been provided through FOIA requests.
Abbott appears correct when he states, "because the agency’s duties are dictated by law, any substantive changes would have to come from the legislature."
If Virginia's legislators desire diverse economic development and quality of life for Virginia's citizens, it will craft legislation to ban uranium exploration and mining in our state.
State group responds to report’s claims over uranium
BY MARY BETH JACKSON
mjackson@registerbee.
mjackson@registerbee.
The Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy has reviewed the Robinson reports and says the agency and Virginia Uranium are in the clear.
The department’s public relations manager, Mike Abbott, says the law — and the agency — has succeeded in protecting citizens and the environment. “We believe the requirements in place are doing the job,” he said.
The Roanoke River Basin Association released the final report of Paul Robinson, research director of the Southwest Research and Information Center, in July, which reiterated concerns of the preliminary report issued in June. The Southwest Research and Information Center works with community groups to provide technical assistance on environmental and resource development issues. One of its facets is a uranium assessment program.
Robinson reviewed Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy records for the report, prepared for the basin group. He says there is a lack of sufficient public and governmental oversight of uranium exploration in Virginia.
The report claims that Virginia is flying blind on uranium exploration, that the few requirements in place have not been enforced, and that VUI has failed to comply with what little is required.
Abbott said the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy never planned to issue a point-by-point rebuttal of Robinson’s claims, instead choosing to address key areas of concern Wednesday in person-to-person conversations with reporters.
Those concerns include the lack of public participation in the exploratory permitting process, confidentiality of certain records and bonding.
Abbott characterized Robinson’s report as poorly presented and inaccurate, “showing lack of basic understanding of permitting in Virginia and what the code requires.”
He said some of the perceived inaccuracies could be due to how Robinson sourced his information.
Robinson obtained state departments records through the FOIA requests of Virginia citizens, who furnished him the information. State and local governments can deny out-of-state FOIA requests.
“There’s not a thing wrong with doing that in one respect, but we can’t guarantee what he had was complete information,” Abbott said.
The Robinson report was critical of DMME’s record keeping, claiming missing documents and inadequate tracking.
“If we had problems with the paperwork, we would have been issuing violations. None were issued.”
Abbott said there isn’t an opportunity for public comment prior to uranium exploration because the law doesn’t require it. Neither does law require one for coal drilling, which is a similar process, he noted.
“Generally speaking, you have minimal ground disturbance,” he said.
He added, “The state and legislature have determined that this is a low-impact activity. I think time has borne that out. Once they [the drill holes] are completed properly, they do not constitute an environmental risk.”
Confidentiality of records
Another area of the statute sharing common ground with other minerals is confidentiality. Virginia law allows for confidentiality of some uranium exploration records in the same manner it does for natural gas. Under the statute, VUI was required to request continued confidentiality after an initial two years, but were not required to state why — that part is understood, Abbott said.
The confidentiality clause is meant to protect the applicant’s proprietary information in a competitive business environment.
“It’s not up to us to predict who’s out there waiting in the wings if they see there’s an economically viable mineral to be extracted,” Abbott said.
Abbott said Robinson’s report afforded a chance to reflect, but that no changes are necessary.
“One thing it provided us with was the opportunity to go back in and look at the process we’re using,” he said. “Once we did that, the consensus was that the program ... is doing the job.”
He said the agency reviewed the forms it uses in 2007, when interest reignited in uranium exploration in Pittsylvania County.
Furthermore, he said, because the agency’s duties are dictated by law, any substantive changes would have to come from the legislature.
“At this point in time, we’re not aware of any steps being taken to submit any changes,” he said.
The department’s public relations manager, Mike Abbott, says the law — and the agency — has succeeded in protecting citizens and the environment. “We believe the requirements in place are doing the job,” he said.
The Roanoke River Basin Association released the final report of Paul Robinson, research director of the Southwest Research and Information Center, in July, which reiterated concerns of the preliminary report issued in June. The Southwest Research and Information Center works with community groups to provide technical assistance on environmental and resource development issues. One of its facets is a uranium assessment program.
Robinson reviewed Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy records for the report, prepared for the basin group. He says there is a lack of sufficient public and governmental oversight of uranium exploration in Virginia.
The report claims that Virginia is flying blind on uranium exploration, that the few requirements in place have not been enforced, and that VUI has failed to comply with what little is required.
Abbott said the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy never planned to issue a point-by-point rebuttal of Robinson’s claims, instead choosing to address key areas of concern Wednesday in person-to-person conversations with reporters.
Those concerns include the lack of public participation in the exploratory permitting process, confidentiality of certain records and bonding.
Abbott characterized Robinson’s report as poorly presented and inaccurate, “showing lack of basic understanding of permitting in Virginia and what the code requires.”
He said some of the perceived inaccuracies could be due to how Robinson sourced his information.
Robinson obtained state departments records through the FOIA requests of Virginia citizens, who furnished him the information. State and local governments can deny out-of-state FOIA requests.
“There’s not a thing wrong with doing that in one respect, but we can’t guarantee what he had was complete information,” Abbott said.
The Robinson report was critical of DMME’s record keeping, claiming missing documents and inadequate tracking.
“If we had problems with the paperwork, we would have been issuing violations. None were issued.”
Abbott said there isn’t an opportunity for public comment prior to uranium exploration because the law doesn’t require it. Neither does law require one for coal drilling, which is a similar process, he noted.
“Generally speaking, you have minimal ground disturbance,” he said.
He added, “The state and legislature have determined that this is a low-impact activity. I think time has borne that out. Once they [the drill holes] are completed properly, they do not constitute an environmental risk.”
Confidentiality of records
Another area of the statute sharing common ground with other minerals is confidentiality. Virginia law allows for confidentiality of some uranium exploration records in the same manner it does for natural gas. Under the statute, VUI was required to request continued confidentiality after an initial two years, but were not required to state why — that part is understood, Abbott said.
The confidentiality clause is meant to protect the applicant’s proprietary information in a competitive business environment.
“It’s not up to us to predict who’s out there waiting in the wings if they see there’s an economically viable mineral to be extracted,” Abbott said.
Abbott said Robinson’s report afforded a chance to reflect, but that no changes are necessary.
“One thing it provided us with was the opportunity to go back in and look at the process we’re using,” he said. “Once we did that, the consensus was that the program ... is doing the job.”
He said the agency reviewed the forms it uses in 2007, when interest reignited in uranium exploration in Pittsylvania County.
Furthermore, he said, because the agency’s duties are dictated by law, any substantive changes would have to come from the legislature.
“At this point in time, we’re not aware of any steps being taken to submit any changes,” he said.
Meeting: VRRBAC Meeting
When: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 1:00 PM-3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).
Where: Visitor's Center at John H. Kerr Dam & Reservoir
1930 Mays Chapel Road: Boydton,VA 23917
