Monday, January 21, 2013

1/21/13 a.m. u-news(Keep the Ban): Uranium mining; penalties /According to Watkins: U mining / Is uranium mine scaring people from Southside? / Uranium Mining: Rewards Do Not Outweigh the Risks / Uranium firm pumps money into assembly



1/21/13 a.m. u-news

If there's good news to be had here, it's that the bill was referred to Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

SB 1353 Uranium mining; penalties.

... notes | add to my profiles

SUMMARY AS INTRODUCED:

Uranium mining; penalties. Establishes a process for the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (DMME) to issue permits for the mining of uranium ore. DMME, in consultation with the Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Health, State Corporation Commission, Department of Conservation and Recreation, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Department of Historic Resources, and Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, is required to adopt regulations governing uranium mining. DMME shall not accept an application for a uranium mining permit from an applicant unless the applicant had a valid permit for uranium exploration on July 1, 2013. DMME shall not accept an application for a permit to mine uranium at a location more than 10 miles from an area for which a uranium exploration permit was in effect on January 1, 2012. Permit holders are required to pay application fees and annual fees, which shall be sufficient to defray the costs of administering the uranium mining program. The measure establishes the Uranium Administrative Fund, Uranium Response Fund, and Long-Term Monitoring Fund, which will be funded by fees assessed on permittees. A permittee that violates a permit condition or provision of law or regulation may be subject to civil penalties. A person who conducts uranium mining without a permit, violates a condition of a permit, fails to comply with a regulation or order, makes certain false statements, violates recordkeeping requirements, or impedes the DMME in its performance of duties is subject to criminal penalties. A uranium mining permit shall not be issued to an applicant unless the applicant is licensed by the State Corporation Commission as a uranium development corporation, the requirements for which are established by this measure. The Commission is authorized to suspend a uranium development license if it finds that a licensee is not in compliance with financial responsibility requirements or if it receives notice of a determination by an agency that an operation is being conducted in violation of a permit or license. The Commission may revoke a uranium development license if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the license holder has failed to correct a condition for which its license was suspended or has committed other specified acts.

FULL TEXT

  • 01/18/13 Senate: Presented and ordered printed

HISTORY

 
Comment:
One might think, after 30 years of experience that Sen. Watkins could read the Code of Virginia or a zoning ordinance. According to the Pittsylvania County Zoning Ordinance, by authority of the Code of Virginia, mining requires a Special Use Permit which is issued by a Board of Zoning Appeals. BZA, according to Code, consist of either five or seven residents of the locality, appointed by the circuit court. Therefore, Watkins is wrong...or worse. The final authority to approve the Coles Hill project will NOT remain in the hands of the elected leaders of Pittsylvania County. However, whether or not to allow a waste disposal facility does... which is unfortunate for Pittsylvania County, those in the Roanoke River watershed and Virginia Beach... given the current make-up of the Board of Supervisors.

Forgive me if I do not th...ank Watkins for his unethical stance on the issue and for discriminatory legislation which "restricts uranium mining and milling to the Coles Hill site in Pittsylvania County". The fact that he "reassures those who fear that uranium mining operations could crop up across the commonwealth" shows he knows the industry will have negative impacts. This reaffirms concern that those in Pittsylvania who are proponents of mining are either stupid or will gain from it personally. So, we have a Senator does not want uranium mining to "crop up" in his backyard and does not know the difference between a Special Use Permit and a rezoning telling us what to do in Pittsylvania County? His bill should be "dead in the water" unless he is willing to allow the risks involved in uranium mining, milling and radioactive waste disposal to be shared by ALL Virginians...even in his own backyard.
 
Posted: Monday, January 21, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 5:16 pm, Sun Jan 20, 2013.
John C.Watkins Richmond Times-Dispatch
It is rare for a legislator to revisit, 30 years down the road, one of the first issues he confronted as a new lawmaker. As a freshman member of the General Assembly in the early 1980s, I was closely involved in the decision-making process over whether to allow uranium mining in Virginia.The discovery of the nation’s largest untapped uranium deposit in Pittsylvania County in the late 1970s sparked hopes of an economic boom for the Southside region and coincided with our national mission to become energy independent from the Middle Eastern oil barons who had a stranglehold on our nation’s energy supply.
Even though four state-sponsored studies concluded that uranium mining could be done safely and with minimal impact to the environment, a downturn in the uranium market in the mid-1980s shelved the idea, and a moratorium originally conceived as a temporary measure has remained in place by default for the past 30 years.
Virginia.
John C. Watkins represents District 10 in the Senate of Virginia. Contact him at district10@senate.virginia.gov or (804) 698.7510.
http://www.timesdispatch.com/opinion/their-opinion/columnists-blogs/guest-columnists/watkins-uranium-can-be-mined-safely-in-virginia/article_21d8cc25-9899-5364-9df3-b9ec974524a4.html
No surprise here...it appears the author is affiliated with the Nuclear Energy Institute
Today’s top opinion: Brookings weighs in
Staff Writer
Posted: 01/21/2013 12:01 AM
To casual observers, the debate over uranium mining in Virginia might fit a common movie template: Corporate interests seeking to exploit natural resources for monetary gain, pitted against ordinary folks trying to protect their way of life and environmentalists trying to protect Mother Earth and human health. But that simplistic formula, so beloved by Hollywood, is growing harder and harder to apply – if it ever had any validity.





Is uranium mine scaring people from Southside?
  | Rappahannock News
www.rappnews.com
Delegate Don Merricks, a Republican from Pittsylvania County, said real estate agents are having trouble selling homes in Southside Virginia because prospe...

Uranium Mining: Rewards Do Not Outweigh the Risks

Posted by • January 17, 2013 •     

Comments:  Whenever someone opens a discussion about uranium mining and milling in Virginia with, “trust me – we’ll get it right once the regulations are in place”, it should surprise no one that principled and thoughtful Virginians would seek a more thorough discussion of whether mining and milling should even be allowed in the first place. Such a discussion is now occurring all over the Commonwealth of Virginia, and in the General Assembly, where legislation is being considered which would have the effect of removing the ban on uranium mining in Virginia.
That discussion has been loud and noisy, but as the facts and concerns about uranium mining receive a fair and public hearing, it is becoming obvious that the unknown risks of uranium mining and milling far outweigh any unknown potential rewards.
The roadmap for legislative action is now quite clear.

The General Assembly must maintain the ban on uranium mining and milling in Virginia.
Reasonable people will reach the same conclusion for a variety of reasons, but in the brief space allowed here, the focus will be on three primary issues.
Location, location, location
It is an inconvenient truth for mining proponents that the only active uranium mining and milling operations in the United States and Canada are located in desolate and isolated areas far away from human populations and other economic activities including farming
Fortunately, no one actually lives very close to the mine in Canada. Should there be some kind of accident at a uranium mine in Northern Canada, and in fact accidents HAVE occurred at mines in that region, there is a good chance the incident could be contained before it becomes a public health and economic threat to humans.
Contrast that with the proposed project in Pittsylvania County. Over 100,000 people live within a 25 mile radius of the proposed site.
An accident at the proposed site in Virginia, even a relatively minor incident, would have a significant and immediate impact on the surrounding community. According to Chmura Economics and Analytics, one incident where radioactive materials were released into the environment above federally permitted levels could cause an economic loss $357 million over a five year period.
There are two other significant differences between Pittsylvania County and other regions in the US and Canada where mining operations exist. Virginia receives almost (4) times as much rainfall annually as do more arid areas where uranium is typically mined, and the water table is much closer to the surface at the Virginia site than is typical of mines in the Western US and Canada. These factors alone make uranium mining and milling in Virginia problematic.
Why? Because there are numerous documented incidents of radioactive material above permitted levels being released into the environment at uranium mining operations. Release of these dangerous materials have directly – and negatively – impacted water quality in the proximity of the mining operation. With the water table so close to the surface in Pittsylvania County and with frequent heavy rains in the region, residents in the County and downstream of the mine site are at risk on the occasion of a major rainfall event. It rains in Pittsylvania County. Sometimes a lot. And when storms like Hurricane Fran come through, it REALLY rains a lot. That is a recipe for disaster.
Moreover, Virginians cannot absolutely count on uranium mining and milling regulations, a point that has repeatedly been made by uranium mining proponents, to protect them either. Recently in Finland, increased rainfall at a uranium milling site caused a waste water pond to leak radioactive, contaminated water into the ground water supporting 250 acres of marshland, streams, lakes and ponds. Finland has a very rigorous regulatory scheme for uranium mining and milling, yet a major environmental incident occurred.
This isn’t ancient history. The incident occurred in November, 2012.
Energy Independence and uranium is a clever myth
When proponents of uranium mining and milling in Virginia talk about energy independence, one is almost tempted to put on a Benjamin Franklin suit and run outside and hold a piece of uranium ore up to the sky and look for lightning. It is simply a political myth that uranium mining in Virginia has ANYTHING to do with energy independence.
Uranium, like all other commodities, is sold on a global market.
Any potential market for Virginia uranium is not in Virginia, or even in the United States, for that matter. Uranium, like all other commodities, is sold on a global market and processed uranium will be sold to the highest bidder, regardless of whether that bidder is located in China, Japan, India or the United States. Nuclear energy producers will purchase uranium at the most attractive price, not because it is produced in a particular location.
Nuclear facilities in the United States are fueled by uranium mined from the American west, and largely from two of the US’s best and most reliable trading partners and strategic allies – Canada and Australia. Neither of those countries are a great threat to US security. The very suggestion that somehow uranium mining in Pittsylvania County will add to America’s energy independence is a cynical and clever political ploy that has no basis in fact whatsoever.
Residents in the Region just don’t want it
Finally, and perhaps most telling, residents in the area of the proposed mine site who stand to gain the most from a uranium mining operation don’t want it in their region. And it’s not really even a close call.
This isn’t just idle speculation or anecdotal data, either. Virginia Commonwealth University’s prestigious Survey Evaluation and Research Laboratory conducted a poll of residents in the Danville/Pittsylvania County area and determined, by a wide margin – 53%-29% - that area residents support keeping the ban on uranium mining in place.
The Danville-Pittsylvania County Chamber of Commerce recently passed a resolution of support for maintaining the ban.
The Danville City Council unanimously passed a resolution in support of keeping the ban on uranium mining and milling in place.
The Region’s legislative delegation and Lt. Governor Bolling all support keeping the ban in tact.
In fact, other jurisdictions in Virginia – including almost every county, city and town from Danville to Virginia Beach – have expressed grave concerns about uranium mining in Pittsylvania and have each passed their own resolution in support of maintaining the ban. Other than those who stand to directly benefit from the uranium mine itself, it is difficult to identify Virginians who think we should proceed with such an uncertain and risky enterprise.
Bottom line
The National Academy of Sciences, in its landmark report, acknowledged that there were “steep hurdles” which must be crossed before uranium could be safely mined and milled in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Despite the best efforts of many well intentioned advocates, it has not been proven that uranium mining is safe in the region and climate that all of us in Virginia call home. The unknown risks of uranium mining are just too great to compensate for unknown, anticipated rewards.
Sometimes, the best public policy determinations are the ones which default to the common sense position. In the case of uranium mining and milling in Virginia, the common sense policy position is clear.
The long standing ban on uranium mining and milling should remain in force.
http://www.jeffersonpolicyjournal.com/?p=3194


Comments from KM: 
Rhyne and Kidd are correct. Kidd comments, “There’s certainly a correlation between campaign contributions and voting in favor of the company,”However, he noted, correlation doesn’t equal causation.   It's kind of like the stigma issue. We'...re speculative and perceive stigma that will occur if uranium mining, milling and disposal of radioactive wastes occurs. Stigma will occur when the moratorium is actually lifted. We will bear the stigma for many generations.
  Likewise, we're concerned that VUI's deep pockets will turn heads in the General Assembly and influence the vote. Only a vote from the GA to write regulations thus lifting the moratorium will confirm this concern. 
The correlation between campaign contributions and voting in favor of VUI will be validated.
The solution to stigma and malfeasance? Keep the ban.
  Excellent reporting Ms. Jackson.


Uranium firm pumps money into assembly/ The Ugly Battle Over Virginia’s Uranium: Secret tapes, murky finances, and free trips to Paris.

 

Posted: 01/21/2013 4:32 PM
 
The Senate bill proposing to lift the moratorium on uranium mining will be considered by a committee in which 80 percent of its members have taken money from Virginia Uranium.
Sen. John Watkins has said the legislation, filed Friday with the Senate Clerk, will be vetted through the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee; 12 of 15 committee members have accepted campaign money and trips from Virginia Uranium since 2008.
Virginia Uranium wants to mine a 119-million-pound uranium ore deposit in Pittsylvania County, approximately six miles from Chatham. The company has been lobbying the legislature to write regulations for uranium mining and milling, which would effectively lift a 1982 moratorium on the industry.
Watkins, the committee’s chairman, has received the most from Virginia Uranium, according to records from the Virginia Public Access Project. He has received $2,000 in campaign contributions, and has taken two trips paid for by Virginia Uranium. Watkins traveled in 2011 to Canada, for which the company paid $2,658, and traveled to France in 2010, for $12,985. Both trips were to see uranium mining sites.
Some of VUI’s biggest supporters in the legislature are also the biggest recipients of VUI money. Sen. Richard Saslaw, D-Springfield, received $10,000 in campaign contributions from Virginia Uranium in 2011.
The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission made a recommendation that the legislature direct the state to write regulations for uranium mining and milling. Eight of 13 legislators sitting on that committee have received campaign contributions and/or trips from Virginia Uranium, and all eight voted in favor of the recommendation.
Virginia Uranium has put its money into direct lobbying, by campaign contributions and paid lobbyists.

The company has 20 registered lobbyists angling for face time with 140 legislators in Richmond.

http://mobi.godanriver.com/godanriver/db_/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=4xIx38HJ&full=true#display

The Ugly Battle Over Virginia’s Uranium: Secret tapes, murky finances, and free trips to Paris.
By |Posted Thursday, Jan. 10, 2013, at 2:40 PM ET

For all the turmoil it is stirring, the mining company Virginia Uranium operates from a headquarters that is remarkably plain: a beige, corrugated-steel building next to a cattle farm at the edge of the small town of Chatham, Va. You wouldn’t guess the firm is heading a highly controversial effort to build the first uranium mining and milling operation east of the Mississippi River.


The parking lot, holding several cars and pickup trucks, is near the “End of State Maintenance” road sign. Inside, a woman greets me (I’m not expected) and leads me past walls covered with detailed geological maps to the office of Patrick Wales, the youthful-looking project manager. He is scowling at three computers screens on his desk.
“I can’t talk to you today,” Wales says anxiously. “The lieutenant governor has just announced his opposition to the project.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/nuclear_power/2013/01/virginia_uranium_mine_the_scandals_and_dangers_of_the_first_uranium_mine.html