Uranium Mill Project Makes Headway: Advisory commission, county planning director recommend approval

You really need to read Linda Goin's explication of this article at http://lindagoin.blogspot.com/2009/05/uranium-mill-project-makes-headway.html These uranium catastrophes that are on private land, like Coles Hill, are subject to far less governmental oversight than those on public lands. We know how little government oversight is actually done...and we know about the slaps on the wrist the government administers for transgressions. But if mining and milling on private land gets even less oversight, Coles Hill will operate in a shroud of secrecy.

By D. Dion
Editor, Norwood Post

Published: Saturday, May 30, 2009

The approximately 250 people who filled the Nucla High School gym last week were there to witness a different kind of rivalry than the basketball games that usually inhabit the venue. Instead, they came to debate the proposed uranium mill in Paradox Valley, a project that has electrified the fence between area residents who want jobs and those who are wary of the environmental impacts of such a facility.

The Montrose County Planning Commission held the public hearing to gather input about the proposed mill before making a recommendation to the county commissioners about a permit. The 880-acre project site is on private land zoned for agricultural use, not for industrial operations like processing ore, so it will require a special use permit for the proposed mill. The planning commission deferred its decision on the permit to a June 10 meeting, but both County Planning Director Steve White and the West End Planning Advisory Committee (made up of residents who live closer to the proposed project) recommended approval of the permit.

Although the majority of the crowd at the meeting seemed in favor of the project, either wielding signs of support or clapping after every pro-mill comment, there was also a lot of skepticism about the mill. The site’s neighbors and farmers in Paradox asked the commission to deny the permit, which they said was in conflict with how the surrounding lands are used.

“Agriculture is why we bought here,” said Martha Burgess, an organic farmer in Bedrock just a few miles from the proposed mill. “We feel that the contaminants would dangerously compromise our operations for both the animals and vegetables that we produce.”

Residents on the other side of the proposal, in Nucla, were put off by people from Telluride, Ridgway or Utah who expressed concern about the contamination of the water or air. Paradox may still be pristine, but Nucla is nearer to Uravan, the toxic remnants of an old uranium mill that produced yellowcake for the Manhattan Project. The uranium industry, mining and milling, has been a part of the culture in Nucla for generations. West end citizens argued that the advent of a new mill would provide jobs and invigorate the economy. Several remarked that they, or their families, had worked in the uranium industry before and that they don’t “glow in the dark.”

Glowing in the dark is not the real concern, of course — lung and kidney diseases, blood cancers and high mortality rates have been associated with uranium mill workers. Former Nucla resident Ryan Farmer tackled the elephant in the room, the health risks, and said that it wasn’t that the Nucla locals didn’t understand the risks. They do, he said. They just think that they are acceptable.

“Who here has lost a family member?” asked Farmer, and several people raised their hands. “If anybody knows the long term and health effects, it’s them. They’ve lived it. And they think the risks are worth it, and they want [the mill].”

A younger Nucla native, 21-year-old Mallory Rice, had a different perspective.

“The economic benefits are great for the community, however, they are very shortsighted given the history here … Please consider the long-term effects,” she said.

The planning commission gave Energy Fuels, the applicant, the opportunity to rebut the litany of negative comments, from the risks of contamination to the concerns about where the water needed to run the mill will come from or the possibility of earthquakes and accidents to the fact that the project is still under-capitalized, with just $35 million raised for the $150 million mill. After that, the hearing was continued to June 10 at the Friendship Hall in Montrose. Should the planning commission recommend approval, the matter will be heard by Montrose County Commissioners next.

Because the site is on private land [like Coles Hill], the only other agency besides the county that will regulate the mill operations will be the Colorado Department of Health and the Environment. No federal oversight or environmental impact statement will be required. (emphasis mine...SB)

http://www.telluridenews.com/articles/2009/05/30/news/doc4a218b2cbac7f201184926.txt

Navajo leaders seek help with uranium issues

SHIPROCK — Members of the Navajo Nation plan to take to Washington, D.C., their grassroots campaign to compensate uranium mine workers' children affected by diseases and birth defects.

The Navajo Nation Dependents of Uranium Workers Committee met Friday at the Shiprock Chapter House to update community members on the upcoming trip and hear feedback from residents who suffer from cancer, kidney disease, birth defects and other illnesses resulting from prolonged radon exposure from uranium mines.

Organizers plan to take their fight to the nation's capital July 7 to 9 and again July 28 to 31.

"The government is pretty aware of the damage to the family members," said Phil Harrison, Council Delegate for Red Valley/Cove Chapter of the Navajo Nation.

The intent of the trips is to further educate congressional leaders in the issues at hand, request a congressional field hearing in Window Rock or Shiprock, and discuss amending current legislation to extend compensation to family members.

"We are concerned with the children, the wives and the grandchildren," Blue Gap/ Tachee Chapter President Aaron Yazzie said.

Yazzie attended the meeting on behalf of his chapter's residents who still are suffering lingering health effects from previous mining in the area, he said.

"We, the children, are feeling the effects now," Yazzie said.

Residents of the Blue Gap and Tachee chapters still suffer from cancer, kidney disease and other health related problems from exposure, Yazzie said.

The current health problems date back to work done in the 1950s and 60s, Harrison said. During that time, uranium mine workers were exposed to high levels of radon, which has caused inter-generational bouts of illnesses in communities across the Navajo Nation.

By holding public meetings, organizers hope to garner enough support to lobby government officials in Washington, D.C., to amend the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA).

RECA, which was passed by Congress in 1990, authorized funding for people who contracted cancer or other specific diseases from radon exposure while working in the region's uranium mines. It was amended in 2000, and some would like to see it amended further.

With virtually no records from 50-60 years ago, many people are not able to receive workman's compensation, medical care, or compensation for deaths, illnesses, or the on-going birth-defects, Harrison said.

Waterflow resident Tony Kellywood hauled uranium in the 1950s. Now 71-years-old, Kellywood says breathing the fumes 50 years ago caused his current respiratory problems. But Kellywood hasn't received compensation because of a lack of proper documentation.

"Who is going to keep a check stub when you're 14 or 15 years old?" he said.

Kellywood's situation is not unique.

"There is a lot of discrepancy in the uranium workers' claims," Harrison said. "Many workers were not paid with check stubs, they were paid with cash."

Organizers estimate that only 8 percent of Navajo claims from 2004-2005 were paid.

"Money is not going to bring back a person," Yazzie said. "But it's at least something."

Many Navajo are not compensated under RECA because they don't have the proper medical records, marital records, birth certificates, proof of residency or work history required under the act, Harrison said.

As many as 15,000 dependents of uranium mine workers still are affected today from various diseases and birth defects.

Yazzie and other Navajo leaders are calling on leaders in Washington to help end what they call the continued suffering of the Navajo people.

"They thought they had the solution by burying it and covering it up," Yazzie said of the uranium mines. "But then the rains came."

The contaminated water has seeped into the drinking supply for both the people and livestock in chapters across the Navajo Nation.

"Now, to this day, we are concerned about the quality of water on top of the plateaus," Yazzie said.

Organizers want to amend the current legislation to cover Navajo affected but uncompensated. This, they hope, will bring about a change in the way the mines are closed and the health effects some residents still endure.

"It's poison," Harrison said of uranium. "The government should understand that."

It's a problem that affects residents in many communities in the southwest.

"Radiation doesn't recognize boundaries; it doesn't recognize gender," Harrison said.

(emphases mine...SB)

Brendan Giusti: bgiusti@daily-times.com

http://www.daily-times.com/ci_12482886

Wind-blown dust causes concern over uranium development in Paradox

Mountains, usually visible, are obscured by dust. Photo by Ben Williams

Recent dust storms from strong winds have had the communities of Norwood, Telluride and Mountain Village concerned about future contamination with radionuclides should uranium development in the Paradox valley ramp up.

Winds measuring consistently above 40 mph have mobilized large quantities of dust from the west end of San Miguel County, bringing sands all the way from Utah. Paradox valley, the proposed site for a new uranium mill, is due west of the resort communities of Telluride and Mountain Village, and the ranching town of Norwood.

The dust storms, which occurred over two days at the end of March and early May, brought thick quantities of red dust up into the mountains, obscuring the sky and reducing visibility.

“It was like being in a red fog,” said one Norwood resident. “I couldn’t even see Lone Cone [mountain].”

The dust filled the sky, covered cars and homes, and settled visibly on the slopes around Telluride. It was an eerie portent, a bloody sunset and doom-like sky.

Each spring strong winds race up Wright’s mesa, heading in from the desert. A strong differential is formed by the heat in the low-lying desert areas around Moab and the four corners, and the cool mountain air at elevation. Each year, winds roll in from the west. But this amount of dust was unusual.

“Frankly, I’m worried that once the mining and milling operations crank up in Paradox, this dust will glow in the dark!” Joked a Telluride worker. "Hey, maybe we can go night skiing!"

One resident of Norwood, a recent father, said he would leave the area before construction of the mill began, if the final permits get approved.

“I won’t expose my son to anything like that,” he said, even as property values fall under the faltering economy. "I'll just sell, and get the hell out."

Aside from containing potentially deadly alpha-emitters, the dust has a known impact on the local economy of Telluride and Mountain Village. It speeds snow melt.

As the San Juan Mountains lie at the tip of the watershed, any contaminants borne by the wind will end up in waterways and flow downstream. Ranchers who use irrigation will spray them on crops. Meanwhile, livestock will ingest them in the wind and grasses. This is akin to a secondary pulse of exposure. Exposure repeats as the particles move through the biosphere. As agricultural products are sent to market, and distributed nationally, tertiary pulses become possible.

Energy Fuels is confident it can mitigate fugitive dust. An enormous amount of water will be used to spray down drop-off and tailing sites. Keeping the areas wet will reduce dust. However, fans in area mines that vent mining shafts regularly spray out small dust particles. These mines will kick up again if the mill gets approved.

Nevertheless the perception is there: The dust seemed portentous of the region's uncertain future. In coffee shops and on street corners subdued tones and watchful eyes bespoke the common fear. What does this mean in two years if uranium development increases? Why aren't plume studies a necessary part of any application to develop radioactive resources? Do the regulations imposed by the Colorado Department of Health and the Environment address these concerns? The questions went on, but were swallowed by the wind.

http://www.examiner.com/x-12119-San-Miguel-County-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m5d29-Windblown-dust-causes-concern-over-uranium-development-in-Paradox

Chatham Star-Tribune Provides Uranium Co. With Free Advertising

USEC Inc. (NYSE:USU), a leading supplier of enriched uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants, is being given free advertising by the Chatham Star-Tribune under the guise of a Letter to the Editor. USEC operates the only uranium enrichment facility in the United States [Paducah, KY] and supplies more than half of the U.S. market and more than a quarter of the world market. 2008 revenues were more than $1.6 billion. But they don't have to pay to advocate for mining Coles Hill and advertise in Chatham!

Here's the specious letter from their Vice-President of Marketing and Sales, John M. A. Donelson:

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/05/28/chatham/opinion/opinion02.txt

Uranium offers new economic engine, like lake 45 years ago

Wednesday, May 27, 2009 9:57 AM EDT

About 45 years ago Smith Mountain Dam was completed.

It would take several more years for Smith Mountain Lake to fill and become the wonderful resource many of us enjoy today.

It is certain that if the Smith Mountain Dam project was proposed today, anti-development organizations would scream about the pending danger, doom, and devastation.

They would warn that building a power plant at Smith Mountain gap could ruin the countryside.

Today with decades of safe operation and clean energy created from that hydroelectric power plant, all but the most wild-eyed radicals share the opinion that Smith Mountain Dam and the lake it created have been a blessing for the area.

Smith Mountain Lake was created because people with vision used science and engineering to harness a natural resource and create positive change.

Today Southside suffers from chronic high unemployment and the loss of traditional economic engines.

As the farming and manufacturing sectors struggle, many blue chip employers are gone.

Today we need to again use technology to utilize our natural and human resources and create core jobs.

Just as hydroelectric power from Smith Mountain Lake has benefited this area for the past 45 years, in the future the same will be said of the clean and safe energy that will come from safe uranium mining at Coles Hill.

Let's hope that anti-development organizations don't drown out the voices of reason.

We should strengthen Southside Virginia by developing new economic engines that are under our feet instead of looking for greener pastures.

John M. A. Donelson

McLean

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Meet Mr. Donelson!

From USEC's website http://www.usec.com/donelson.htm :

John M.A. Donelson

Vice President, Marketing and Sales

John M.A. Donelson is vice president, marketing and sales, for USEC Inc. He is responsible for the Company’s revenue generation from the sale of enriched and natural uranium and for managing relationships with customers. He reports to Robert Van Namen, senior vice president, uranium enrichment.

Mr. Donelson joined USEC in 1995 in the advanced technology department. He later became a senior sales executive and most recently served as director, North American and European sales. Prior to joining USEC, he held positions of increasing responsibility at Newport News Shipbuilding and Duke Energy.

Mr. Donelson holds a bachelor of science degree in physics from Hampden-Sydney College, a master’s degree in nuclear engineering from the University of Virginia, and a master of business administration degree from Queens University. He is a registered professional engineer in the state of North Carolina. In 2003, Donelson received USEC’s highest honor, the Chairman’s Award, for outstanding performance.

USEC Inc. (NYSE: USU), a global energy company, is a leading supplier of enriched uranium fuel for commercial nuclear power plants.

Creigh Deeds: Against Mining

Thursday, May 28, 2009

By GINNY WRAY - Bulletin Staff Writer

Creigh Deeds said Wednesday that if he is elected governor in November, he expects to fulfill the state’s commitment to complete the widening of U.S. 58 across southern Virginia.

“You’ve got 680 miles of U.S. 58 from Virginia Beach to Cumberland Gap. The state made a commitment 20 years ago to four-lane” the highway, he said in a phone interview. “I plan on fulfilling that commitment,” particularly from Interstate 77 east. To pay for it, “I would bring Democrats and Republicans to the table. I would bring senators and delegates to the table” to come up with a funding source, Deeds said.

[...]

He also said he supports the study of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County but “the proof threshold is high” to allow such mining in the commonwealth.

“I don’t see how you can mine uranium in any area of Virginia. There’s too much rainfall. How do you develop a liner and cap that will protect tailings from contaminating the groundwater?” asked Deeds, who formerly lived in Danville.
(emphasis mine...SB)

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=19088

Uranium Mining in Virginia: Statement of Task

Hot off the presses...this is the accepted final version of the uranium study for the Commonwealth:

Uranium Mining in Virginia
Statement of Task

Uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia has been prohibited since 1982 by a state moratorium, although approval for restricted uranium exploration in the state was granted in 2007. A National Research Council study will examine the scientific, technical, environmental, human health and safety, and regulatory aspects of uranium mining, milling, and processing as they relate to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of assisting the Commonwealth to determine whether uranium mining, milling, and processing can be undertaken in a manner that safeguards the environment, natural and historic resources, agricultural lands, and the health and well-being of its citizens. In particular, the study will:

1) Assess the potential short- and long-term occupational and public health and safety considerations from uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation, including the potential human health risks from exposure to “daughter” products of radioactive decay of uranium.

2) Review global and national uranium market trends.

3) Identify and briefly describe the main types of uranium deposits worldwide including, for example, geologic characteristics, mining operations, and best practices.

4) Analyze the impact of uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation operations on public health, safety, and the environment at sites with comparable geologic, hydrologic, climatic, and population characteristics to those found in the Commonwealth. Such analysis shall describe any available mitigating measures to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts from uranium operations.

5) Review the geologic, environmental, geographic, climatic, and cultural settings and exploration status of uranium resources in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

6) Review the primary technical options and best practices approaches for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation that might be applicable within the Commonwealth of Virginia, including discussion of improvements made since 1980 in the design, construction, and monitoring of tailings impoundments (“cells”).

7) Review the state and federal regulatory framework for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

8) Review federal requirements for secure handling of uranium materials, including personnel, transportation, site security, and material control and accountability.

9) Identify the issues that may need to be considered regarding the quality and quantity of groundwater and surface water, and the quality of soil and air from uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation. As relevant, water and waste management and severe weather effects or other stochastic events may also be considered.

10) Assess the potential ecosystem issues for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

11) Identify baseline data and approaches necessary to monitor environmental and human impacts associated with uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation.

12) Briefly characterize a potential public education and outreach program in the Commonwealth of Virginia for a uranium mining operation (for example, health and safety issues, inspection and enforcement, community right-to-know, emergency planning).

By addressing these questions, the study will provide independent, expert advice that can be used to inform decisions about the future of uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia; however, the study will not make recommendations about whether or not uranium mining should be permitted nor will the study include site-specific assessments.

Labor Dept Pays More Than $500M To Ill Uranium Plant Workers

WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Current and former employees of the Kentucky-based Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant have received more than $500 million in compensation and medical benefits from the U.S. Labor Department.

The Energy Department plant produced more than 1 million tons of uranium during the plant's Cold War history. Exposure to radiation, silica and beryllium led to cancer diagnoses, along with beryllium diseases and silicosis.

Federal legislation created to assist workers who were sickened as a result of working in the atomic weapons industry provided 4,798 of those eligible with financial assistance. Survivors of those who became ill may also be eligible for benefits.

"Employees of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant sacrificed their health to help the nation build its nuclear defense program," said Rachel Leiton, director of the Energy Department's occupational illness compensation division.

"We hope that this aid has assisted in easing the hardships experienced by this community," Leiton said in a statement.

-By Darrell A. Hughes, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6684; darrell.hughes@dowjones.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090526-710652.html

Uranium Mining Study Under Way

The uranium-mining study is under way with public safety and the health impact No. 1 in the revised study statement of tasks.

The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee revised the study’s final draft Thursday in Richmond, moving public safety and the health impact from No. 7 on the statement to No. 1.

The uranium subcommittee approved the study document in an 8-2 vote with Delegate Watkins Abbitt, I-59th District, and Delegate William Janis, R-56th District, opposing.

A moratorium on uranium mining is currently in effect in Virginia.

Virginia Uranium Inc. wants to mine a large ore deposit in Pittsylvania County located about six miles northeast of Chatham at Coles Hill.

Uranium mining opponents were vocal at the subcommittee meeting Thursday.

Katie Whitehead, chairman of the Dan River Basin Association Mining Task Force, speaking on behalf of DRBA, called for changes in the study’s scope as well as specific task amendments at the Richmond meeting.

“I think the National Academy will give us reliable information, a way to look at the big picture and the complexity and will point to areas where additional information is needed,” said Whitehead.

However, Whitehead emphasized, “The need for amendments to clarify what the study will and will not do were not included.”

(emphases mine...SB)

http://www.gazettevirginian.com/news/news/uranium/675-uranium-mining-study-under-way.html

NC Utility Improving Nuclear Plant Near Raleigh

AP 05.22.09

A North Carolina utility is making progress in upgrading equipment at a nuclear plant in order to meet federal safety standards.

The News & Observer of Raleigh reported Friday that Progress Energy is working to improve its Shearon Harris nuclear plant southwest of Raleigh.

Progress is making 45 safety changes at the nuclear plant as part of a five-year, $32 million project that is to be completed late next year.

Some of the changes are designed to meet new fire safety standards approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The newspaper reported one of the main problems concerns the material used to wrap electrical conduits, to ensure it can withstand fire damage.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/05/22/ap6455893.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a41:g26:r9:c0.000878:b24681688&partner=loomia

Urgent Questions Remain Regarding the Two Uranium Studies

The mining study is shaping up to be one big expensive joke with potentially lethal consequences. Socio-economic aspects are getting short shrift and tailings containment, one of the gravest dangers of mining, will be ignored. Katie Whitehead makes a compelling argument for the inclusion of socio-economics here. SB

News reports regarding the work and responsibilities of the Uranium Mining Subcommittee do not begin to inform the public about the true status and complexity of the uranium study process. There may not be a market for such information, yet there is certainly a need. Urgent questions remain unanswered.

Contrary to some reports, the uranium mining study has not started. We need to remember, as well, that “the study” is now two studies – a technical study and a socio-economic study. The subcommittee is negotiating the technical study with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Before NAS can call for nominations for a study committee, both parties must agree on the scope of work, the NAS has to draw up a budget and timeline, and someone has to come up with money and sign a contract.

Subcommittee members have yet to discuss the equally important, complicated, and challenging socio-economic study.

Will there be a socio-economic study?

If a technical study is done, a socio-economic study should also be done.

Some people have gotten the impression that the Uranium Mining Subcommittee sees the socio-economic study as secondary and perhaps unnecessary. The Danville Register and Bee reported on May 13^th that subcommittee member Sen. Phillip Puckett opposes conducting a socio-economic study if mining is found to be unsafe in the technical study: “If that is a ‘no,’ we don’t have to answer any more questions.”

One could make the same argument for the socio-economic study: if uranium mining is undesirable for social and economic reasons, we don’t have to know absolutely whether it is safe or not. Contrary to what we have been led to believe, the technical study will not make a final judgment on whether mining is safe or unsafe. A socio-economic study might provide greater clarity.

The stigma associated with uranium mining and tailings has real social and economic impacts, as does the volatility of the market for uranium. We need to understand how uranium mining might influence perception of a region for current residents, as well as for business executives, farm product consumers, families, students and their parents, retirees, tourists, and others contemplating coming to the area to live or to visit. We should look at available evidence about whether uranium mining harms or enhances a region’s character, quality of life, and economic well-being.

The only way to ensure that the socio-economic study is done and done adequately is to identify an independent and objective research institution, get budget estimates, and secure full funding for both studies before either study begins. This is not happening.

Who will do the socio-economic study? Will it be objective?

The Coal and Energy Commission chose as its advisor Dr. Michael Karmis, a world-renowned mining engineer and director of the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research (VCCER). Whether he is an appropriate advisor regarding a socio-economic study is a valid and important question that implies no disrespect.

Dr. Karmis, in his rough draft scope for the socio-economic study, recommended a site- and region-specific study, not a study anticipating statewide consequences of lifting the moratorium. He envisioned a smaller, shorter, less complicated, less costly study than the technical study. He also advised that the National Academy of Sciences would not likely be interested in undertaking the socio-economic study. We should ask the academy. The National Academy of Sciences does socio-economic studies and some original research and is, of course, known for its independence and objectivity.

The NAS might well be willing to study by analogy how introduction of a controversial industry can influence the perception of a region and its economy. The academy is also able to study the potential for boom-bust cycles in mining communities and their effects on regional economic activity and quality of life. Real-life examples of uranium mining communities and regions with analogous industrial activities can help researchers tell us what we might be facing.

An alternative approach would specifically identify businesses, institutions, schools, government bodies, and other entities in a region of interest and study in detail how each might be affected by the potentially disruptive introduction of a stigmatized industry. Two entities have been named in private conversations as perhaps being capable of this sort of socio-economic study, but one of these institutions may have been suggested by industry lobbyists after prior contact with researchers. Such contact could inappropriately influence the framing of a study and compromise the independence of the research.

Who is paying for the studies? Who should pay? Will adequate funds be available?

According to various members of the Uranium Mining Subcommittee, Del. Terry Kilgore, Chairman of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission and ex-officio subcommittee member, is responsible for finding money to do the two studies. Del. Kilgore listened to the May 21^st subcommittee meeting by telephone. He did not participate in discussion or respond to questions or comments about funding. Kilgore has asked for donations to pay for the studies. No other information is publicly available.

The National Academy of Sciences cannot perform a study directly for a private industry.

The Virginia General Assembly has not budgeted money for a study. The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission cannot accept contributions to spend on a study.

The Virginia Citizens have emphasized to the subcommittee the need to consider the whole study process, secure appropriate funding, and ensure independent experts give adequate time and attention to both studies. Even the best study process does not ensure a sound public policy decision. The current process raises serious doubts.

Katie Whitehead of Chatham is chairman of the Dan River Basin Association Mining Task Force.

Santoy Resources - Virginia Uranium Plan of Arrangement approved

Tuesday , 26 May 2009

Santoy Resources Ltd. (TSX.V: SAN): is pleased to announce that shareholders have voted overwhelmingly in favour of a business combination by way of a statutory plan of arrangement involving the Company and Virginia Uranium Ltd. at the Company's Annual & Special Meeting on May 21st in Vancouver ((initial transaction announced in a news release dated Dec. 22, 2008).

Virginia Uranium Ltd. owns an interest in the Coles Hill Uranium Deposit, located in southern Virginia. Coles Hill is considered to be one of the largest undeveloped uranium deposits in the United States. It has an estimated measured and indicated resource of 119 million pounds of U308 at a cut-off grade of 0.025 per cent U308 based on a National Instrument 43-101 technical report on the Coles Hill property prepared for Santoy by Behre Dolbear and Company Ltd., Marshall Miller and Associates Inc., and PAC Geological Consulting Inc., dated Feb. 2, 2009 and revised April 29, 2009. This report is available on SEDAR and on Santoy's website at www.santoy.ca

Virginia Uranium Ltd. shareholders have also simultaneously voted overwhelmingly in favour of the business combination with Santoy. The final closing of this transaction is expected mid-June, 2009.

At this same meeting, Santoy shareholders also voted in favour of management's proposed slate of directors, being Ron Hochstein, P. Eng. (chairman); Ron Netolitzky, M.Sc. (CEO); Pat Barry, CFP; Robert Ingram, CA; William James, B.Sc.; and Robert Matthews, CA. The ratification of the Company's "rolling" stock option plan, re-appointment of Smythe Radcliffe as auditors, a potential consolidation of the outstanding shares at the discretion of the Board of Directors and a continuance of the corporation from the Province of Alberta to the Province of British Columbia were also approved.

http://www.santoy.ca

http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page674?oid=83818&sn=Detail

New Paper Offers Off-Shore Oil and Gas Fact and Fiction

5/26/2009 - As the political debate over drilling for gas and oil off Virginia's shores heats up, the Thomas Jefferson Institute today released an updated version of its paper, Virginia Off-Shore Oil and Gas: Fact and Fiction.

The seven-page fact sheet - a particularly useful tool for researchers and reporters - reviews available data for both petroleum, coal, and natural gas resources, production times, environmental implications, revenue potential, and public support.

It notes that there are significant oil and natural gas resources off our coast, and their development can not only help Virginia create new jobs but add to the state treasury. Among the paper's specifics -

· No one knows for certain how much oil and natural gas is available off Virginia's shores, but it is most likely well in excess of Federal estimates, although not likely as large as some have suggested.

· Development of off-shore resources is about reducing U.S. dependence of foreign oil and gas. It is not about global warming. It is about keeping jobs in the U.S. rather than losing them to other nations. It is about expanding Virginia's economic base and it is about reducing the cost of living for Virginia and U.S. citizens. 72% of citizens support off-shore drilling.

· Using modern drilling techniques, off-shore oil reserves may produce from 130 million to 2 billion barrels of oil, an amount that would provide from less than one year's worth of Virginia crude oil needs to 14 years of our crude oil needs.

· Estimates for off-shore natural gas reserves range from 1.14 to 36 trillion cubic feet, an amount that would provide 3.6 to 100 years worth of Virginia natural gas consumption.

· Off-shore production could produce about $69 million in state royalties for the Commonwealth, if that production supplied 100 percent of Virginia's oil and gas needs and no more.

· Estimates of $200 million a year in royalties for natural gas alone do not seem likely at this time.

· Environmental impacts from offshore exploration and production are negligible.

· Sixty-three percent (63%) of adults now say finding new sources of energy is more important than reducing the amount of energy Americans currently consume.

The fact sheet may be found here: www.thomasjeffersoninst.org/pdf/articles/Virginia_Offshore_FactBrief.doc.

The paper is authored by Dr. David Schnare, Director of the Thomas Jefferson Institute's Center for Environmental Stewardship. Dr. Schnare is available for interviews by calling (571) 243-7975.

Uranium Study Set

The News & Record / May 25, 2009

More than a year after first being proposed, a scientific study of uranium mining in Virginia will soon get under way.

The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee on Thursday adopted a 11-point “Statement of Task” that set formal terms for a review of the environmental, economic and safety impacts of the proposed Coles Hill uranium mine near Chatham. The study, to be conducted by the National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, is expected to take two years.

The subcommittee vote broke a political logjam that had held up movement on a study, the first step in possibly overturning Virginia’s 25-year moratorium on uranium mining. After a study bill died in the General Assembly last year, legislators asked the Coal and Energy Commission to take over the task of setting the parameters for a review. Left unanswered after Thursday’s vote is who will pay for the study, expected to cost in excess of $1 million.

Advocates say the Coles Hill project will pump billions of dollars into the Southside economy and create hundreds of new jobs, but opponents warn that uranium mining will have devastating environmental and health impacts in the region and across Virginia.

About 100 people, mostly mining opponents, attended the subcommittee meeting in Richmond to express their concerns to legislators who make up the subcommittee. After listening to their input, the panel reordered the list of tasks to be presented to the National Research Council, asking that the group make public safety and health impacts the top priority of its study.

Previously, the lead topic on the subcommittee’s 11-point priority list was an analysis of global and national uranium market trends. But speakers implored members to make their first order of business determining whether mining can be done safely, without harm to Pittsylvania County and other parts of the Commonwealth.

“Your decisions will affect the citizens of Pittsylvania County and the citizens of Virginia forever,” said Marshall Ecker, a Pittsylvania County supervisor who spoke at the meeting.

The subcommittee made a number of other changes defining the scope of the study, including adoption of a motion by Del. Watkins Abbitt (R-Appomattox) to review the public health and safety impacts of uranium mining operations similar to what is being proposed in Pittsylvania County.

However, the subcommittee rejected an Abbitt motion to study methods for storing uranium tailings, designed to keep mining wastes from leaking into nearby water sources.

Abbitt and Del. William Janis dissented in the 8-2 vote adopting the framework for the study. Janis opposed the motion after missing most of the debate due to a scheduling conflict. Abbitt said he could not vote for the study after his motion to analyze methods for tailings storage failed.

Reaction to the subcommittee’s decision was mixed. Patrick Wales, chief geologist for Virginia Uranium, Inc., which is seeking to mine the Coles Hill site, told subcommittee members Thursday that VUI is committed to mining uranium only if can be shown that it can be done safely.

In a follow-up interview with the Danville Register & Bee, Wales said VUI was “very gratified” after Thursday’s vote. “An independent study of uranium mining and milling has been the one thing we’ve been proposing since the inception of our company,” Wales told the newspaper.

Katie Whitehead, chair of the Dan River Basin Association Mining Task Force, issued a follow-up statement saying that “(t)he best news of the day was unanimous approval of Del. Abbitt’s amendment” to study uranium deposits elsewhere in the world similar to the Pittsylvania County site.

Whitehead also said it was “noteworthy” that “subcommittee members expressed concern about potential government ownership and financial liability after closure of a mining operation or in the event of a business failure,” although members did not include that concern in the written list of study topics.

An outspoken opponent of uranium mining, Karen Maute of Chatham, said she skipped the subcommittee meeting because “everything I’ve read ... says this just brings us a step closer to mining, and I believe that.

“I think it’s being used as a way to legitimize uranium mining in Virginia,” said Maute. “It’s stupid to even consider mining uranium in Virginia ... The facts are out there that this is not going to beneficial — it’s not been beneficial anywhere it’s been done,” she said.

http://www.thenewsrecord.com/index.php/news/article/uranium_study_set/

Santoy Resources Jump-Starts Growth with Virginia Uranium Stake

By James West
MidasLetter.com
Monday, May 25, 2009

As far as uranium companies go, there aren't many who can say they are developing one of the largest undeveloped deposits in the world. But Santoy Resources (TSX.V:SAN), through its acquisition of a minority stake in Virginia Uranium, is doing just that. Santoy is in the process of acquiring a 20% interest in the holding company ("Holdco") that controls the leasehold development and operating rights of the Coles Hill uranium property in southside Virginia.

The transaction is structured as a plan of arrangement that also provides Santoy with a right of first refusal on future financings. Santoy's ambition is to earn a 30% interest over the next few years through various financing transactions.

Ron Netolitzky, Chief Executive Officer of Santoy, is also a director and a shareholder of Holdco. To increase the number of Holdco shares available to Santoy, Mr. Netolitzky and Santoy have agreed under the Business Combination Agreement that Santoy will acquire his 2,000,0000 Holdco shares in exchange for Santoy shares at the same ratio of six shares of Santoy for each one share of Holdco. The transaction has been negotiated by an independent committee of the board of Santoy and has received full board approval with Mr. Netolitzky abstaining.

It is contemplated that Santoy will, subject to regulatory approval, change its name to "Virginia Energy Resources Inc." or such other name as approved by the Santoy Board to reflect the significance of the transaction to Santoy.

According to Virginia Uranium CEO Norman Reynolds, who will become CEO of Santoy upon the transaction's closing, "What this gives Santoy is a very substantial interest in one of the largest undeveloped uranium projects in the world. Its in an area that is very nuclear friendly, Virginia has four reactors generating more than a third of the state's electricity needs. Forty miles from the project there are two nuclear facilities, one owned by Areva that manufactures fuel rods for the commercial reactors and the other one manufactures the fuel rods for the navy. When the Atlantic fleet is in its home port of Norfolk Virgina, there are in the neighborhood of 50 reactors in the various aircraft carriers and submarines, so it's a state that is very comfortable and supportive of nuclear energy."

Reynolds was the president of Marline Corp. when the deposit was discovered in the '80s.

Dominion Virginia Power has four nuclear plants in Virginia that provide about a third of the state's energy, but the uranium used at the facilities is imported. The situation in neighboring states is similar, including in Maryland, which gets 31 percent of its electricity from nuclear power, according to the federal government.

Marline Corp. began searching for uranium deposits in the Eastern US in the late 1970s and in 1982 said it discovered 30 million pounds of uranium oxide in Pittsylvania County, potentially worth $1 billion or more.


Since then, the estimate of available ore has climbed to 119 million pounds, worth perhaps $10 billion. However, Virginia placed a moratorium on uranium mining in 1982, until such time as uranium mining regulations are enacted into law. Marline was working with the state legislature in the 1980's to develop the appropriate laws and regulatory framework for uranium mining in Virginia when the price of uranium declined to the point that the project was abandoned. Santoy's will support Virginia Uranium's efforts to pick up today where Marline left off 25 years ago. In the meanwhile, the state continues to import all of its nuclear fuel requirements.

In 1982, Virginia did pass laws covering uranium exploration. Per those regulations Virginia Uranium Inc. applied for and received a permit from the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy in November 2007 to conduct uranium exploration drilling on 194 acres in and around the Coles Hill deposit in Pittsylvania County.

Baseline water quality has been established for water wells, surface water ponds, and streams in the area. An archeological, cultural, and historic resources review of the area has been completed. There are no threatened or endangered species within or near the permit area.

The Virginia governor's energy plan issued in the Fall 2007 mentioned this project about 50 times, saying that studies needed to be done to assess the potential for developing it, and generally supporting the idea of a developed uranium mining industry in the state," said Reynolds "That was largely the catalyst that motivated the Coles and Bowen Families to begin developing Coles Hill more aggressively."

Family patriarch Walter Coles said in January 2008, "There's too much uranium here. Somebody's going to mine it. I felt like while I was alive, it was my duty to make sure it was done right."

Virginia Uranium is focused on and committed to best practices in terms of environmental protection and community relations. To that end, the company is:

* Supporting an independent study authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia to analyze the effect of mining on the community with emphasis on agriculture;
* Actively working with the Virginia Farm Bureau to assist the county's efforts to preserve the agricultural traditions of the region, and;
* Supporting local and regional colleges and universities with research, scholarships, grants and job opportunities related to agriculture, mining and geology.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) supports a study, and a state energy report released this fall recommends one. Virginia currently gets more of its energy from nuclear power than almost any other state -- about 35 percent, almost twice the national average.

In addition to the Virginia acquisition, Santoy has actively been exploring its strategically located uranium properties within three main geographic locations in Canada; the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan, the Central Mineral Belt of Labrador and in the Otish Mountains of Quebec. These projects are located on favourable geological trends and are in close proximity to known deposits.

The company currently holds interests in 12 uranium properties within or on the margins of the prolific Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan.

Santoy and its 50-50 joint venture partner Denison Mines Corp. (TSX:DML, AMEX:DNN) have approved a $300,000 budget for fieldwork on the Hatchet Lake and Murphy Lake properties for 2009. Ground electromagnetic surveys are currently underway on the Tuning Fork and Tuning Fork West grid on the Hatchet Lake property.

Santoy will also spend $1 million on nine claim blocks within and on the margins of the Proterozoic Otish basin it controls in the province of Quebec.

The company has an experienced management team which is supported by a veteran board of directors who have been directly involved with the discovery and development of three major gold discoveries in Canada that have subsequently been put into production (Eskay Creek, Snip and Brewery Creek mines); of coal and coalbed methane projects in Western Canada; of producing "green power" projects throughout Canada; of conventional oil & gas discoveries throughout North and South America; and of taking uranium discoveries through to feasibility study.

Visit the company's web site at www.Santoy.ca and also at www.VirginiaUranium.com to learn more.

SOURCE: http://www.midasletter.com/news/09052506_Santoy-resources-jump-starts-growth-with-Virginia-Uranium-stake.php

Water and Energy BHA Report - 1979

A comprehensive look at how aquifers are formed, the toxic state of water and the implications to humans and animals of Uranium mining.

http://www.republicoflakotah.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/water_and_energy_bha_1979.pdf

–Excerpts–
-Uranium tailings move easily in wind or water because they are fine particles like sand. But they are very different from most sand, because they retain 85% of the radioactivity of the original uranium ore.

-The radiation is measured in “picocuries” per liter of water; a “picocurie” isn’t much, but the U.S. Public Health Service limit for safe water is only 3 picocuries per liter of water.
About 60 water samples taken in the Southwest had from 0.5 to 65 picocuries of radium per liter. Several streams have been declared unfit for irrigation and for drinking by stock and humans. Unfortunately, animals can’t read, and they continue to drink (and die) from dangerous streams.
Another pollutant, selenium, was present in wells near the United Nuclear/Homestake mill at levels 340 times the recommended maximum for drinking water. Studies show that water from mill activities move from streams to aquifers, and that effects on groundwater are “marked.”

-To make things worse, tailings are often stored mixed with water, so they move unexpectedly in a flood or if the dam used to hold them breaks. there have been over a dozen tailings-dam breaks in the U.S., none of which has been cleaned up. The biggest was a spill at the United Nuclear mill in Church Rock, N.M. in July 1979.

The dam break spread 100 million gallons of tailings and water for 50 miles down a river, despite the fact that the dam was “of the newest and safest type approved by federal and state agencies.” Radioactive readings were more than 6,000 times the drinking water standard.

-In 1962, the problem was aggravated by spilling 200 tons of tailings, much of which washed 25 miles then sank into the Angostura Reservoir. Current plans for moving the tailigs will reduce the release of radiation into the air and the Cheyenne, but will not stop seepage through the ground — only slow it down.

http://www.republicoflakotah.com/?p=1678

Radioactive Virginia .com - - A Right-Brain Approach to Preventing Uranium Mining

Using humor, sarcasm, satire and artistry with a sprinkle of wisdom and laid against the backdrop of Greek mythology, Uraniumhead and the Erinyes have arrived to do their part in the local anti-uranium fight.

http://www.radioactiveva.com/

It's a clever, right-brain approach to an issue that is more often thought of as a left-brain problem...hard science and logical argument.

Take a look...visit the Art Gallery...click on the Hot Topics Button! It's different...and it might not be your cup of tea...but it certainly has its place in the battle!

Welcome, Uraniumhead!

Southside Virginia Targeted as 'Sacrifice Zone'; Wake Up, Southside

The video mentioned here is pure propaganda, masterfully made. Ominous music, scary faces of "unstable" foreign leaders...soothing music and lovely shots of beautiful Pittsylvania Co. and the lane to Coles Hill, the answer to all looming energy woes. "Virginia Energy" should be ashamed of itself for its blatant attempt to deceive the video's viewers.

From the Chatham Star-Tribune
May 20, 2009

From the Danville Register & Bee
May 24, 2009

Southside Virginia is being targeted as a sacrifice zone.

Don't believe it? Take a look at this seemingly all-American video produced by the Virginia Energy Independence Alliance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFScxZ8VozU.

It touts bringing in jobs and securing our energy independence from other countries like Russia, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.

Sounds all good, doesn't it?

The video shows pristine views of Southside Virginia. But where, oh where, are the mountains of radioactive tailings piles and chemical-laden holding ponds that will also come with uranium mining and milling?

No panoramic views of them!

And there's no mention of air and groundwater pollution, sickness and cancer death that also follows the industry.

All U.S. states where the mining and milling of uranium has occurred seek federal funding to cleanup the radioactive toxic waste left behind by the industry.

It also touts, "Support the Study" by the National Academy of Sciences, which is to determine whether uranium mining and milling can be done safely in the state of Virginia.

Seems the pro-mining groups already know what the study's findings will be, doesn't it?

Wake up, Southside!

This may be a future that is a few years down the road in coming to fruition, but it's just like the holidays each year - they finally arrive.

I don't want to move away from Southside to protect my family's health. Do you?

Scarier still, once the state of Virginia lifts the moratorium on the mining and milling of uranium, other uranium-rich areas beyond Southside will be subject to becoming sacrifice zones.

Where will we move where the air and drinking water will be safe?

Anne Cockrell

Danville

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/05/20/chatham/opinion/opinion04.txt

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/wake_up_southside/11229/

Uranium mining could help reduce taxes

I too am retired and on a fixed income. I don't like taxes either. But in my spare time, I've looked at every resource available to me to find evidence of just one "safe" uranium mine anywhere in the world. There is none. Why would anyone be so naive as to presume that the world's very first "safe" U mine will be at Coles Hill? Wake up, Mr. Shelton...the possibility of somewhat lower taxes versus thousands of generations of contaminated air, water, wildlife, crops, etc. and cancer-ridden humans, including children. And you're choosing this gamble to save yourself a few dollars?

From the Chatham Star-Tribune

Before these noisy anti-everything folks run off this multi-billion dollar uranium project, I'd like to point out what a great development this can be for our whole region.

It can provide solutions to the multitude of troubles that have an impact on us all.

Like a lot of people, I am retired and on a fixed income.

I worked hard throughout my life, saved money, and invested it I what seemed to be stable enterprises with little risk.

It turned out that no matter how stable you thought your investments were, they took a terrible beating in the recent economic collapse.

I know I've lost a good portion of my life's savings.

I'm too old for a new job in a mining industry, but I'm not too old to have to pay these skyrocketing taxes our supervisors keep piling on us.

These uranium people are eager to pay county taxes of all sorts, and this would be the biggest corporation we've ever had.

We need to tell them to come on and get started.

That is the smart way to reduce the tax burden on us all-especially those of us on fixed incomes.

In other words, let's tax the ones who have money instead of those of us who don't have money.

And with all the new jobs, there will be more money in our local economy and the tax burden will be spread among more people.

I'm glad the state is going to study the safety issues of uranium mining, but I can guarantee you one thing: No matter how safe it is, this crowd yelling about the dangers will just keep on yelling.

My view is that if we can get a man to the moon and back safely, we can sure extract one of God's natural resources and put it to use for mankind.

Philip Shelton

Blairs
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/05/20/chatham/opinion/opinion02.txt

No money worth destroying air, water

From the Chatham Star-Tribune
May 20, 2009

This is a reply to a letter to the editor by Frank Cole from Sheva (Hats off to Virginia Uranium).

His statement that VUI said if mining and milling can't be done safely, it won't be done at all, is untrue.

If it was true, VUI and Mr. Coles would have told me that my drinking water had became unsafe to drink during their test drilling.

They got copies of my test just like I did. I wonder if they even looked at them.

VUI has all these high-paid people that don't care about my water, because if it did get contaminated by the drilling, they might lose their jobs.

You stated before the study even started the naysayers declared it bogus and publicly accused the Uranium Mining Sub-Committee of taking bribes. You said this is untrue.

Mr. Frank Cole, you and the rest of VUI members need to check the facts at www.vpac.org.

Since the naysayer brought this out, two of the sub-committee members admitted taking donations from VUI or the lobbyists they pay.

You also stated that in the next decade the supply for domestic energy will nearly double.

So why is it Mr. Walter Coles and VUI investors are spending all their time and money on uranium mining and milling.

They only have enough ore to last the United States for two years and it will take 30 or 40 years to get it out of the ground. That is a lot longer than 10 years, don' you think?

If Mr. Walter Coles or VUI were really concerned over the energy crisis, they would have invested their time and money on alternate energy.

They have 3,000 acres. How many solar panels or wind mills would that handle?

They could be up and running long before 30 or 40 years and would keep on producing energy for more than two years, and it would not harm the environment.

VUI, Mr. Walter Coles, and the sub-committee "cannot" guarantee that there won't be an accident at the mine or mill that could harm the environment and our way of life in Pittsylvania County.

Mr. Frank Cole, you did not mention that your wife works for VUI. Could that be the reason for your letter?

I wrote this letter because my water is contaminated, and I love this county, and no money is worth destroying life, water, air, or any living thing.

Allen Gross

Sheva

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/05/20/chatham/opinion/opinion01.txt

Decision Delayed on Montrose County [CO] Uranium Mine for Second Meeting in June

Wednesday, May 20, 2009
By DENNIS WEBB/The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel

The promise of new jobs brought out supporters in force this week for a public hearing on the proposed Piñon Ridge uranium mill proposal in western Montrose County.

At the end of a five-hour meeting Tuesday night in Nucla, the county Planning Commission decided to delay a decision on the matter until after it can hold a second public meeting June 10 at 6 p.m. in Montrose.

However, the county’s West End Planning Advisory Committee voted Tuesday unanimously in support of the proposal. The county’s planning staff also has recommended approval.

Energy Fuels Resources Corp. is seeking to process locally mined uranium and vanadium ore on 880 acres off Colorado Highway 90 about 12 miles west of Naturita and seven miles east of Bedrock.

The county said in a news release approximately 250 people attended Tuesday night’s meeting in the Nucla High School gym, and the majority of residents living in the county’s west end supported the mill. Opponents included a few Montrose County residents, and mostly residents from neighboring San Miguel County and Moab, Utah, the county said.

Energy Fuels says the mill would employ up to 85 people and process about 500 tons of ore per day.

“The overall economic impact seems to be the theme from supporters,” said the company’s chief operating officer, Stephen Antony.

He called the advisory committee’s endorsement “a first step in a long trail that will thoroughly evaluate all of the issues involved with the facility.”

Among those opposing the mill is Julie Schneider, whose family owns a farm about 15 miles from the proposed site. She said concern about the proposal put an end to a potential sale of the farm.

“When the mill was announced the buyers said that was a deal-breaker and walked away from the sale,” Schneider said.

She said she worries the mill could expose the public to radioactive materials and toxic chemicals, and she thinks the county should promote stable jobs rather than ones she considers unsafe and subject to booms and busts.

Antony said Energy Fuels can run a safe operation, and it will be up to the state to consider health and environmental issues surrounding the project.

(Emphases mine...SB)

The permit application and staff reports on the application are available at www.montrosecounty.net/landuse/uranium_mill_sup_information or at the county Planning & Development Department at 317 S. Second St. in Montrose.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/content/news/stories/2009/05/20/052109_9A_uranium_mill_meeting.html

US [Congressional Panel] Rejects Nuclear in Renewable Power Goal

By Ayesha Rascoe

WASHINGTON, May 20 (Reuters) - U.S. lawmakers pushing to include greater recognition for existing nuclear power in a national renewable energy standard failed to win new breaks for the industry when a U.S. congressional panel on Wednesday voted down an amendment to a controversial climate change bill.

The sweeping bill, which seeks to cap greenhouse gas emissions, includes a renewable energy mandate that would require utilities to generate 15 percent of electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar by 2020.

Under the legislation sponsored by Democratic Representatives Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, utilities' renewable mandate would be reduced in proportion to the portion of any electricity sales from new nuclear plants, but not existing nuclear plants.

Republican Representative Cliff Stearns of Florida, who offered the failed amendment, said the measure would have helped states meet the renewable electricity standard with a source that has no carbon emissions.

Waxman argued that the bill was not discriminating against nuclear power, but that nuclear was not renewable energy because it requires uranium, a limited resource. Also, he said the renewable standard was aimed at promoting new power sources and technology.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee is in its third day of debate of a nearly 1,000-page climate change bill, which seeks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020.

The panel approved a measure that would require the State Department and U.S. Trade Representative to annually prepare and publicize a report on whether China and India have adopted greenhouse gas emission reduction programs as stringent as those found in the United States.

An amendment requiring the Energy Department to develop rules for enforcing any national energy efficiency building code established through this legislation was also approved.

Republicans have blasted the legislation, warning that it could drastically curb the United States' economic growth by making U.S. companies less competitive internationally with countries such as China and India that will likely not have strong climate change regulations.

"A cap and trade program will never be made to work in an economy as diverse and complex as the United States. It's just not possible. It's going to cost a lot of money and a lot of jobs," Republican Representative Joe Barton of Texas told reporters on the sidelines of the hearing.

A poll conducted by Reuters found that Democrats have the votes to get the climate legislation passed by the committee. Of the 59 members on the House committee, 30 lawmakers, all of them Democrats would definitely vote "yes" or were likely to support the bill, according to the survey.

Barton predicted, however, that the Waxman-Markey bill would not make it into law.

"This cap and trade exercise that we're about to engage in, is an exercise in futility on their side. Even if they muscle it out of committee, it's not going anywhere."

The heart of the historic bill would set up a system limiting carbon dioxide and other pollutants by gradually reducing the amount of greenhouse gases that utilities, steelmakers, oil refineries and other companies can emit. Businesses would be required to acquire an ever-decreasing number carbon pollution permits.

A separate report from the Energy Information Administration on Wednesday said U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels fell by 2.8 percent in 2008, the largest drop since the agency began reporting greenhouse gases. The agency said high oil prices and the slowing economy were factors in the decline.

(Additional reporting by Tom Doggett, Richard Cowan; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN20533760

Uranium Safety Priority Leaves Doubts

By John Crane

Published: May 22, 2009

The Uranium Mining Subcommittee’s approval Thursday of the final draft of a study to determine whether uranium can be mined and milled safely in Virginia drew a variety of reactions from local opponents and a supporter.

“We’re very gratified,” Patrick Wales, geologist and spokesman for Virginia Uranium Inc., said Friday. “An independent study of uranium mining and milling has been the one thing we’ve been proposing since the inception of our company.”

VUI seeks to mine and mill a 119-million-pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. Virginia currently has a moratorium on uranium mining.

Among changes the subcommittee brought to the final draft of the 11-item statement of task was to move the public health and safety aspect of the study from the No. 7 spot to No. 1. The previous first priority of the study was a review of global and national uranium market trends. The subcommittee also added language that calls for analysis of mining impacts on public health and safety in areas with comparable geologic, hydrologic, climatic characteristics and population density to Pittsylvania County.

A request that study language include methods for tailings management to prevent or mitigate leakage was nixed. However, Delegate Lee Ware, the subcommittee’s chairman, said after the meeting that Michael Karmis, director of Virginia Tech’s Center for Coal and Energy Research, has assured him that tailings will be included in the study. Karmis will take the approved final draft to the National Research Council and the study will begin, Ware said. The study will take about two years.

Wales said that public health and safety has “always been our No. 1 priority.” Wales, who attended the meeting, told the subcommittee he hopes “it will follow scientific evidence where it leads us.” VUI also hopes the study’s results will include recommendations on how mining and milling can be done safely in a manner that protects public health and the environment, Wales told the subcommittee.

“This is our home, our community,” Wales said Friday.

But not everyone was pleased with Thursday’s vote. Mining opponent Karen Maute, who did not attend Thursday’s meeting, said Friday she wasn’t surprised by the decision and that elevating public health and safety to the top of the list makes no difference.

“You’ve got seven rocks in your pocket and you take one out first, it’s still a rock,” Maute said.

Also, there’s no guarantee that the study will provide a clear answer to the question of mining’s safety, Maute said. She questions the credibility of a study that arose from a circumvention of the legislative process. A proposal for a study in the General Assembly, Senate Bill 525, was killed in a House of Delegates subcommittee in early 2008. But the following November, the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission approved the study and tasked the Uranium Mining Subcommittee with overseeing it.

“The whole thing is bogus,” she said.

Although public health and safety now head the list, it’s not enough, said Eloise Nenon, a board member of Southside Concerned Citizens, which opposes uranium mining.

“I’m still concerned that they are ignoring the people,” Nenon said.

Health is an important part, Nenon said, but the study still needs to examine the economic impacts of mining and milling on the community, its effects on agriculture and the people who have lived and farmed here for several generations. In addition, taxpayers will be left with the bill to clean up the site, she said.

Nenon said she was disappointed that the subcommittee didn’t wait 60 days to allow more public comment before making a decision on the study. Delegate Danny Marshall, R-Danville, had asked the subcommittee to post Thursday’s citizen input on its Web site and wait 60 days before deciding whether to approve the study.

“There needs to be more time to allow for more public input,” she said.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/uranium_safety_priority_leaves_doubts/11213/

Gov. Kaine Declares Hurricane Preparedness Week May 24-30; Offers Sales Tax Holiday

Hurricane preparedness in VA is so vital that Gov. Kaine has designated a special "Hurricane Preparedness Week". He is also announcing the 2nd Annual "Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday". Given the dire statistics quoted in the article below, it's no wonder that hurricane preparedness is serious business in VA.

So...how can anyone want to throw uranium tailings into this already weather-endangered state? If uranium mining becomes a reality in Virginia, hurricane preparedness will take on a whole new meaning...preparing to keep radioactive sand in place. And since no other uranium mines are in an area related, climate-wise, to Virginia, there will be no way to advise the populace on safety measures. The governor's proclamation will be for "Hurricane Preparedness /Nuclear Avoidance Experimentation Week".

By Staff Reports on May 22nd, 2009

Governor Timothy M. Kaine has recognized May 24-30 as National Hurricane Preparedness Week and today reminded Virginians that the Commonwealth will mark its second annual Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday from Monday, May 25, through Sunday, May 31.

“Hurricane season will soon be here and now is a good time to start thinking about what you will need if one of these devastating storms affects Virginia,” Governor Kaine said. “These tax breaks should help everyone buy the items they need to see them through the difficult days that follow the storms.”

During the sales tax holiday many items that are very useful during and after a hurricane will be exempt from the 5 percent state and local sales tax. Twenty-two items will be tax exempt, including batteries, flashlights, bottled water, smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, first aid kits, and generators that cost $1,000 or less. A complete list of tax-exempt products and frequently asked questions is available on the Tax Department’s Web site at www.tax.virginia.gov. All Virginia retailers who sell the tax-exempt products are required by law to waive the sales tax on these items during the seven-day exemption period.

“This sales tax holiday is the perfect time to go shopping and buy tax-exempt items that will help you get through a hurricane or other large storm when there are usually power outages and other problems,” said Tax Commissioner Janie Bowen.

Since 2003, Virginia has had 49 fatalities and suffered over $2 billion in damage from storms including Hurricane Isabel, Hurricane Jeanne, and Tropical Depression Gaston. This year also marks the 40th anniversary of Hurricane Camille, which left more than 100 dead and damage of more than $1 billion in Virginia.

Governor Kaine also encouraged Virginians to take advantage of the resources available on Ready Virginia to ensure that they are prepared for a hurricane, other natural disaster, or any emergency. Ready Virginia provides information to help Virginians prepare emergency kits, make emergency plans, and stay informed in the event of an emergency.

During the sales tax holiday, retailers are also permitted to pay the sales tax themselves on any non-qualifying item or items they sell and pass the 5 percent savings on to customers. Virginia will have two additional sales tax holidays this year - for school supplies and clothing from Aug. 7-9, 2009, and for Energy Star and WaterSense products will from Oct. 9- 12, 2009.

http://www.appomattoxnews.com/2009/hurricane-preparedness-week-may-24-30.html

Virginia OKs Uranium Mining Study

A proposal to mine uranium in south-central Virginia advanced this week when a key state body approved a study of the matter. The targeted site is in Virginia's Pittsylvania County just north of the city of Danville and close to the border with North Carolina's Rockingham and Caswell counties.

A subcommittee of the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy OK'd the study yesterday after deciding on exactly what issues should be examined, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports:

Some opponents asked the panel to vote against the study, hoping that would kill the mining proposal.

But state Sen. John Watkins, R-Powhatan, a member of the subcommittee, said approval of the study did not mean approval of mining in Pittsylvania.

"That decision is a long way down the road," Watkins said.

The panel will look at mining's effects on people's health and ecosystems, identify pollution issues and review current mining regulations. But it denied a request by Del. Watkins M. Abbitt Jr. (I-Appomattox) to consider how water pollution specifically might be prevented. The subcommittee's chair, Del. Lee R. Ware Jr. (R-Powhatan) argued that the study already included that issue.

The study, which will be conducted by the U.S. National Research Council, is expected to cost $1.5 million and last about 18 months. It remains unclear how the work will be funded, according to the paper.

As Facing South reported previously, Virginia has banned uranium mining for the past 25 years. Virginia Uranium -- a privately-held company formed several years ago by the owners of the land where the uranium was found -- has been pressing to get the ban lifted. To that end, Virginia Uranium contributed almost $30,000 to state lawmakers last year alone.

The Pittsylvania County site is believed to hold the largest undeveloped uranium deposit in the United States and the seventh-largest in the world. It holds an estimated 60,000 tons -- enough uranium to power all the commercial nuclear plants in the country for about two years. The company estimates its value at about $10 billion.

While the company has maintained that the uranium could be mined safety, uranium mining has a history of causing serious environmental health problems, having been linked to chromosome abnormalities, birth defects and cancer in communities from Texas to Germany.

Uranium mining also poses a serious threat to drinking water. In 1979, for example, a dam holding uranium mining waste at a New Mexico facility owned by the Virginia-based United Nuclear Corp. burst, sending more than 1,100 tons of toxic discards and 90 million gallons of contaminated water into the Rio Puerco. Once an important drinking water source for nearby Navajo communities, the river remains dangerously contaminated today.

Officials in Virginia Beach are among those opposing the uranium mining plans. They have noted that a tropical storm or hurricane could breach the mine's waste impoundment and pollute downstream water bodies including Lake Gaston, the city's drinking-water source.

(Map showing location of proposed uranium mine from Virginia Uranium's website)

http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/05/virginia-oks-uranium-mining-study.html