Letter: Sen. Creigh Deeds ( Martinsville Bulletin)

Folks, your election is tomorrow. The future of Virginia is in the balance in a way it never has. McDonnell has said he favors uranium mining. At least Deeds is willing to hold off an opinion until more is known about the dangers. The safety and beauty of the Commonwealth cannot be a loose gamble...uranium is forever.

Sunday, November 1, 2009

As a candidate for governor, I’ve laid out a comprehensive plan to meet our future energy needs and reduce Virginia ’s dependence on foreign oil. This means pursuing a range of alternative and renewable energy options, ranging from wind power to clean coal technology to nuclear power. Investments in alternative and renewable energy will create jobs, attract the best and brightest minds to Virginia , and lead to a brighter future for the Commonwealth.

Right now we have a moratorium in Virginia on mining uranium, the fuel used in nuclear power plants. While I believe nuclear power should be part of a comprehensive approach to energy here in the commonwealth, I also strongly believe that the moratorium on uranium mining should remain in place until scientists determine that uranium mining does not pose a risk to the health and safety of any Virginian.

The climate of Southside Virginia poses particular challenges to the safe mining of uranium. Because it often rains, there is a risk that radioactive material produced by uranium mining and processing could leach into groundwater. If such leaching occurred, it could contaminate water supplies and endanger Virginians all over Southside, from Danville to Virginia Beach . I will not let this happen on my watch as governor.

Before considering uranium mining and processing here in Virginia , we should await the results of a nonpartisan, scientific study on its potential risks. As important as alternative energy sources are to our future, protecting the health and safety of all Virginians must remain our paramount concern.

As your governor, I will ensure that our energy future is not only plentiful and clean, but also safe for all Virginians.

Sen. Creigh Deeds
Bath County

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=21163

Marshall for us, and the House

Danville Register & Bee

Published by The Editorial Board
Published: October 29, 2009

As a member of Danville City Council, Danny Marshall supported a then-revolutionary plan to get Danville and Pittsylvania County to work together on economic development projects. As a member of the House of Delegates, Marshall applauded as Yorktowne Cabinetry announced its intentions to open a new factory here, building in the city-county industrial park that Marshall and others worked to make a reality.

The recession has battered companies around the country, including Yorktowne Cabinetry. But some laid off Yorktowne workers learned that their unemployment benefit checks were reduced because of a mistake made by a Virginia Employment Commission bureaucrat.

Marshall knew that was wrong. He knew working people don’t know how much they’re supposed to receive in jobless benefits, and they certainly couldn’t afford to have those benefits cut because of a bureaucratic error. Thanks to Marshall’s efforts, the “overpaid” jobless benefits have been turned into a loan.

It’s a short-term fix to a problem that may be more widespread than anyone knows. But it’s also an example of the kind of solutions-focused delegate the residents of the 14th District are lucky to have representing them in Richmond.

That’s one reason we strongly endorse Danny Marshall for re-election this year.

Marshall not only went to bat for his constituents on the unemployment benefits issue, he also went against the wishes of his party when he fought for expanded jobless benefits paid with federal stimulus dollars. It wasn’t the first time Marshall defied the party bosses — and stood with the people of the 14th District.

As a member of the Tobacco Commission, Marshall supported a grant-funded early childhood education initiative. If that program produces results, it’s a good bet that Marshall — who is the retired owner of a local business — will fight to expand it and similar programs statewide. Marshall knows all too well the importance of increasing the level of educational attainment in this community.

Marshall has also worked to educate himself on an issue that may reach a boiling point in the next two years — uranium mining and milling. He echoes many of the same concerns that others in this community share about the project. But in typical Marshall fashion, he brings fresh perspective — who else has mentioned that the need for a uranium mine in Pittsylvania County could be mitigated by the uranium derived from decommissioned nuclear weapons? (emphasis mine...SB)

Marshall’s easygoing manner and ready smile makes it easy for his critics to dismiss this man of accomplishment and passion, but make no mistake about it — Marshall has worked hard for this community at a time when hard work was all that prevented economic disaster from turning into calamity.

On Tuesday, the voters of the 14th District should send Marshall a message that they are willing to work as hard for him as he has been working for them.

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/editorials/danville_editorials/article/marshall_for_us_and_the_house/15043/

Virginia Energy Resources Inc. Corporate (Investor) Presentation

You really need to read this. There are lots of pictures and graphs...it's not a difficult read. But it sure is an interesting one. Everything is falling into place just like dominoes, for Santoy/VERI, VUI, Va Tech, and all investors. There's plenty of space for tailings and a uranium mill. Tech is offering all sorts of student work experiences. It's amazing, actually, to read just how well, and how quickly, things are moving toward mining. It's as though nothing can possibly get in the way. We are fighting a HUGE machine here...one that's well-organized, well-oiled, and well-funded. When will the rest of the state wake up? It's imperative that Southside have the rest of the Commonwealth behind it in this fight. It's enormity has never been better presented than it is here:

http://www.santoy.ca/i/pdf/CorporatePresentation.pdf

Uranium would be biggest 'eyesore' of all

Amen, Jesse...amen!

Chatham Star-Tribune
Wednesday, October 28, 2009 9:08 AM EDT

If Ben Davenport and Chatham Town Council are so concerned about the appearance of Chatham and how it is perceived by visitors to the town, it seems only logical that they would be more concerned about the potential uranium mine and mill that Virginia Uranium Inc. and its Canadian partners are planning rather than getting themselves into a sweat over a couple of dilapidated buildings.

It seems odd that Mr. Davenport, the driving force behind this "eyesore" cleanup campaign, has to this point remained completely silent about the issue of uranium mining and milling, and yet he describes an abandoned building as "a real shame."

The real shame will occur when the blasting begins at Coles Hill and Chatham becomes known as the most radioactive place on the East Coast.

It is also telling that Virginia Tech would be willing to provide "planning support" for the sanitizing of Chatham when they are at the same time planning massive support for VUI's toxic adventure which will take place a mere six miles from the center of town.

If the town cannot afford to remove an old mobile home from Whitehead Street, how do they think they will be able to pay for cleaning up 30 or 40 years of a uranium mine spewing poison onto its streets and rooftops?

They can plant all the flowerbeds they want, but if uranium mining becomes a reality for Pittsylvania County, all the flowers in the world will not attract anyone to Chatham, with the exception of the unemployed uranium miners from other states who will descend on the town.

Rather than panicking about the mouse running across the floor, Davenport and the town council would be wiser to make a plan about the thousand-pound gorilla sitting in the room with them.

Which one poses the greater threat?

Jesse Pyrant Andrews

Halifax

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/10/28/chatham/opinion/opinion02.txt

What would Hurt bring to the race?

Besides his father Henry's money and the promise of uranium mining, we do not believe Robert Hurt would bring much to Southside or Virginia. We here at the blog support Tom Perriello because he's demonstrated that he is vitally interested in his constituents and the issues important to them, even in the areas he didn't carry in the previous election. Plus, and this is a big plus, he is not a shill for the uranium mining industry that begs to destroy Virginia, beginning with Hurt's home district, Southside. His daddy's investment in the mining endeavor at Coles Hill puts VUI and Coles money behind Robert Hurt but that's all the more reason to stick with Perriello who is not in favor of mining Virginia.

By Published by The Editorial Board
Published: October 18, 2009

Republicans in the Fifth District are going to have plenty of choices when they pick a candidate for the 2010 race against Rep. Tom Perriello.

The Virginia General Assembly drew the Fifth District for a Republican, and the GOP has wanted the seat back ever since the State Board of Elections confirmed that Perriello had squeaked out a 727-vote win over Virgil Goode last fall.

The conventional wisdom is that Perriello’s win was a fluke, but John McCain and Sarah Palin won more votes in the Fifth District than Goode did. For that matter, Goode didn’t do as well as the Virginia marriage amendment in 2006.

So, Goode may have been slipping and no one noticed.

To Perriello’s credit, he has voted against the president’s first budget, come out against a new assault weapons ban, worked hard on veterans care issues and publicly declared that he would not vote for public funding of abortion in a health care reform bill — all stances that show is he far from the Nancy Pelosi lapdog that his harshest critics claim he is.

The Republicans who want to beat Perriello know he is a tough campaigner and that the political landscape may be completely different next year. No one can say how strong the economy will be or if Americans will like the final health care reform bill that emerges from Congress.

Robert Hurt, of Chatham, has jumped into this tumultuous political environment, recently announcing his intention to run for the Fifth District seat. For most of us, the 2010 election is a long way off. For the GOP, it’s right around the corner.

Hurt has solid conservative credentials and has sponsored common sense legislation in the General Assembly dealing with criminal justice issues. He is a smart, personable candidate and will no doubt work hard if he gets the nomination.

But Hurt has never had to run against anyone like Perriello. When Hurt speaks, he sometimes sounds more like a lawyer instead of a man who happens to practice law. His father Henry’s involvement with Virginia Uranium Inc. could backfire on him, as could his handling of his dog biting someone in Chatham.

That may sound trivial, but in politics, everything is fair game.

Just as Republicans are motivated to unseat Perriello, Democrats want to hold onto the Fifth District seat, so no matter who the GOP picks next year, expect a lot of out-of-town money and national attention on this race.

We don’t know what kind of candidate the GOP is looking for, so there is no way to know what chance Hurt has to win the nomination. If we thought the Republicans wanted a candidate from the Dan River Region, Hurt would probably be a shoe-in. But all we know for sure is both sides want to win, no matter what.

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/editorials/danville_editorials/article/what_would_hurt_bring_to_the_race/14711/

URANIUM MINING AND THE GOVERNOR'S RACE IN VIRGINIA

The Richmond Times-Dispatch published a letter last month entitled “Mined Uranium Is Harmless Mineral” written by William Schmidt, a long-time power company employee.

We at Southside Concerned Citizens (SCC) have found that Schmidt’s half truths and distortions are typical of many paid nuclear power proponents. Schmidt spoke about weeks of exposure, a U. N. study showing no increased risk of lung cancer in uranium miners, and alpha radiation being harmless. Here is what he didn’t tell us:

Alpha radiation lasts forever (millions of years), and it accumulates in the body.

“Uranium in groundwater leads to health hazards.”

“Normal functioning of kidney, brain, liver, heart and other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because, in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal. Uranium is also a reproductive toxicant.”

“---absorbed uranium tends to bio-accumulate and stay for many years in bone tissue---”

“Alpha radiation is not dangerous to life unless it is inhaled or ingested---it is the most destructive form of ionizing radiation—and can cause any or all of the symptoms of radiation poisoning”.

“It is estimated that chromosome damage from alpha particles is 100 times greater than that caused by equivalent amounts of other radiation.”

“Not only do alphas themselves cause damage, but approximately equal ionization is caused by the recoiling nucleus after alpha emission, and this energy may in turn be especially damaging to genetic material.”

“Miners who worked in uranium filled mines have a very high incidence of cancer relative to the rest of the United States population. Though the Navajo workers and families noticed this in the 1950s, bureaucrats dragged their feet and companies ignored their warnings.”

(Quotes are from Wikipedia’s research of available worldwide information. Also note that our govt. won’t release much health related information related to uranium for liability reasons.)

SO MUCH FOR MINED URANIUM BEING A HARMLESS MINERAL!

Let me repeat the above revelation concerning alpha radiation: Alpha radiation is dangerous to life when it is inhaled or ingested!

Well, duh! Guess what uranium mining does? It blasts and crushes solid bedrock into a fine powdery dust. Then the problems become three-fold:

1. How can the dust be confined to the site during the 40 year mining period?

2. How can a mountain of toxic, radioactive, powdery waste 200ft. tall by 400ft. wide and 14.2 miles long be kept out of our streams?

3. How can millions of cubic feet of deadly radon gas be confined to the site?

The answer to each of the three questions is the same: it cannot be done.

It is also important to remember that aside from being radioactive in all of its configurations, uranium is a toxic heavy metal which has proven to poison and genetically alter humans and animals.

Imagine the devastation to the farming community! Who would buy crops from tainted fields? Who would buy meat products raised on tainted fields or tainted waters?

Imagine the blow to tourism!

Now guess who would be the first candidate for a high level (and low) uranium waste repository? Virginia!

ABOUT THE ELECTION

Our Governor has the power to veto any legislation passed by the General Assembly; and that makes this year’s election so very important.

Creigh Deeds is a past member of SCC who has studied the uranium mining issue in depth and has vowed to oppose any uranium mining legislation that threatens the health, safety and welfare of the people.

Bob McDonnell, on the other hand, is a big business Republican who puts corporate profits above the welfare of people. As Attorney General, McDonnell ruled that towns, cities and counties do not have the power to enact legislation to protect their citizens from uranium mining.

Furthermore, he said he will “wait and see what the study says”. Those are buzz words used by the paid supporters of uranium mining! Also, remember the study will be paid for by Virginia Uranium Inc..

VUI is a well funded organization that employs as many as 25 lobbyists to do their dirty work, and they are adept at greasing the palms of pliable politicians. If We, The People, do not stand up for our rights we will have uranium mining with all its problems shoved down our throats.

Sincerely,

Jack Dunavant, P.E.
Chariman, Southside Concerned Citizens

Hold dialogue before mining: UN

Stand up and be counted, Virginia politicians. Do the people of Southside not deserve the same respect as the people of Meghalaya, India with regard to proposed uranium mining? If you cannot or will not say "yes", and then follow through with the necessary dialogue, you do not deserve your office.


Shillong, October 16 (PTI): A UN envoy on Thursday said the government should seek the consent of local people before taking up uranium mining in Meghalaya, an issue hanging fire for over two decades. "Such projects need participation of indigenous people. They should agree that they would like to have such a project on their land," Chairperson of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Victoria Tauli Corpuz told reporters here.

The Forum is an advisory body to the Economic and Social Council, with a mandate to discuss indigenous issues related to economic and social development, culture, environment, education, health and human rights. "The government should hold intense dialogue until they give their consent. By merely saying that such projects would bring in development is not enough. Development packages should not be used as enticement," Corpuz said.

http://www.morungexpress.com/regional/35497.html

NATIONAL DON'T NUKE THE CLIMATE CALL-IN DAY--THURSDAY, OCTOBER 15

PICK UP THE PHONE! KEEP THOSE SENATE PHONES RINGING!

AND KEEP THOSE E-MAILS/FAXES COMING TOO!

TALKING POINTS BELOW

October 14, 2009

Dear Friends,

Tomorrow is the National Don't Nuke the Climate Call-In Day!

Please call both of your Senators offices and tell them to keep nuclear power out of the Senate climate bill. Recent events, like the John Kerry/Lindsay Graham op-ed in Sunday's New York Times calling for more nuclear power in the bill, add to the urgency of this call-in day.
Help keep the Senate's phones ringing all day long!
Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121.

And keep your letters and faxes to your Senators coming, and keep forwarding the action url to all of your lists: http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/5502/t/5846/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=2137

Post it on your Facebook pages, Tweet it, spread the word every way possible. More than 4,000 letters already have been sent to the Senate this week--but we'll need more than that to beat the nuclear lobbyists. And with 16,000+ people on this e-mail list, that means a lot of you haven't yet taken action, and haven't yet helped reach the millions more people across this country who also want to keep nuclear out of the climate bill.

So take action today. E-mail and/or fax your Senators here. Then spread the word to every list you have, everyone you can think of.

And take action tomorrow. Call both your Senators offices at 202-224-3121.
The basic talking point is simple. If you only get 30 seconds with your Senators' offices, or an answering machine, just tell them: No nuclear power in the Senate climate bill, no more taxpayer dollars to support the failed nuclear industry.

But if you get a little more time, below are some talking points you may want to use. These also will be useful for drafting letters to the editor, op-eds, blog postings and the like--all of which will be very helpful as well. The more noise and publicity we can make, the better off we'll be.

Talking Points
*Nuclear power already receives a competitive advantage when a price is placed on carbon. If the nuclear industry cannot compete with such an advantage, that's its own problem, taxpayers should not be expected to provide more help to the industry.

*Projected costs for new reactors are stratospheric. In early 2006, the Nuclear Energy Institute predicted costs for the first few new reactors would run $2,000/kw, going down to $1,500/kw over time. Instead, recent estimates include Turkey Point (Florida) at $8,200/kw and Calvert Cliffs-3 (Maryland) and Bell Bend (Pennsylvania) at about $9,000/kw, or $13-15 billion. For example, see: http://www.bellbend.com/faqs.htm

*Cost overruns have been a constant with the nuclear industry. A 1986 Department of Energy study found the average cost overrun for the first 75 U.S. reactors was 207%. Reactors coming online after 1986 typically experienced even larger overruns. The only two reactors now under construction in the West-Areva reactors in Finland and France-are currently 75% and 20% over-budget, with years to go before construction completion.

*Electricity from new reactors, as expected with such enormous costs, would make the 1980s concept of "rate shock" seem quaint. An August 2009 report from the California Energy Commission, for example, predicts kilowatt/hour costs for nuclear electricity as high as 27-34 cents/kwh-nearly a tripling from today's prevailing rate of less than 12 cents/kwh. This report is available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009publications/CEC-200-2009-017/CEC-200-2009-017-SD.PDF

*Nuclear power is not carbon-free. The nuclear fuel chain is responsible for fairly significant carbon emissions--at least three times those of wind power, for example. A recent study by Virginia Tech professor Benjamin Sovacool on this subject is available here: http://www.nirs.org/climate/background/sovacool_nuclear_ghg.pdf

*Nuclear reactors use enormous amounts of water, and water will become an increasingly precious resource in years to come, especially as we grapple with a warming climate. Allocating water to nuclear reactors now means less water for people and agriculture down the road. An August 2009 Virginia Tech study notes 36 states are projected to experience water shortages during the next decade. http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/water/sr46waterdependency.pdf

*Nuclear power is not even the only baseload alternative, as some in the industry claim. As cited in the August 6, 2009 Wall Street Journal for example, Spain is building large baseload solar thermal power plants for about $5,200/kw. While expensive, this is still $2,000/kw cheaper than the current low estimates for new reactor construction.

*Congress must not pre-judge the administration's re-evaluation of radioactive waste policy, which has not yet even begun. Specifically, no money should be spent on expensive, dangerous technologies like reprocessing, especially when the future direction of waste policy is unknown.
Tomorrow, NIRS staff will be going door-to-door in the Senate office buildings, delivering the thousands of postcards you sent to us (Thanks!) and the list of 629 U.S. organizations that have signed on to the simple statement on nuclear power and climate change. We hope to hear those phones ringing in every office we visit!
Thanks for all you do, but this week, let's all try to do just a little bit more....

Michael Mariotte
Executive Director

Nuclear Information and Resource Service
www.nirs.org
nirsnet@nirs.org

Uranium study faces premature doubts [hunh?]

Let's review:

Nowhere on this earth has uranium mining been done safely.

The entity with the most to gain is paying for the study; the state of Virginia hasn't ante'd up one dime.

VUI and Virginia Energy are contributing to every conceivable politician and cause to further their position that Coles Hill should be mined.

Big-name pols are advertising Virginia as being "nuclear friendly" and are touting VA's "nuclear renaissance".

The relationships between politicians, lobbyists, company officials, some Va Tech faculty, and investors are so intertwined that they would appear as a big spider web if reduced to a chart.

So why is expecting that the study will favor mining in Virginia such a leap as to be called "premature"?

The Virginian-Pilot
© September 30, 2009

The respected National Research Council hasn't yet voted on whether to take on a study of uranium mining in Virginia, but the second-guessing has already started.

Some mining opponents in Pittsylvania County dismiss the results - which won't be available for nearly two years - because the study would be underwritten by Virginia Uranium Inc. The company stands to make billions if state officials allow it to tap the estimated 119 million pounds of ore in the county.

Residents are right to feel protective of their community. That's equally true of Virginia Beach leaders, who are concerned that mining could contaminate the city's water supply in Lake Gaston.

But no one has legitimately questioned the integrity of the NRC, the operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences, or suggested a better alternative.

It would be preferable for the state to pay the $1.2 million to $1.4 million for the study, but that's not a realistic option this year. Gov. Tim Kaine recently announced budget cuts that will cost nearly 600 salaried state workers their jobs. Core public safety and mental health services face funding reductions.

The only way to determine whether uranium can be safely mined in Virginia's rainy climate is to allow Virginia Uranium to pay for that assessment. It's an uncomfortable arrangement but one that can work with appropriate safeguards.

The mining company should be required to pay the full amount for the study up front, eliminating any temptation to retract its support if preliminary findings aren't favorable. It should also disclose the source of its money, identifying the investors who are fronting the funds for the study. That's important because no scientists should be permitted to participate in the study if they are employed by a mining company with a financial interest in the project.

William Kearney, a spokesman for the National Academy of Sciences, noted that the organization has a strict conflict-of-interest policy for participating scientists. But state officials must be full partners in preserving the integrity of the study, and they should require VUI to publicly identify its investors before work begins.

The governing board of the NRC is expected to vote on the study proposal in October or November. If it agrees to the project, it will then begin contract negotiations with Virginia Tech's Center for Coal and Energy Research, chosen by state lawmakers to coordinate the study.

The details of that contract, particularly its financial provisions, must be made public. Further, state legislators should hold a meeting to explain the contract and take comments. They should ensure that the scope of the assessment includes an examination of claims by Pittsylvania residents that exploratory drilling at the site has contaminated local wells. Equally important, the state should guarantee that a separate study on the mine's economic impact does not begin until questions of safety are fully addressed.

Opponents who repudiate a study before it even exists risk marginalizing themselves before the real debate begins. But that doesn't negate the fact that many thousands of Virginians who have been less vocal still want and deserve an open, transparent process that puts their health and safety above all other interests.

http://hamptonroads.com/2009/09/uranium-study-faces-premature-doubts

State Money [for uranium study] Must Be Part of Equation

Katie's message is right-on!

Danville Register & Bee
September 29, 2009

To the editor,

The author of, “Welcome funding,” (Sept. 24, page A8) is quite right that these are hard times in Virginia, and hard times call for a wise investment in the future so that things will improve. That’s exactly why it could make sense for the legislature to invest in a thorough and unbiased study of uranium mining. If the legislature wants to consider opening the [entire] state to uranium mining and milling, it should know whether uranium mining in Virginia is sure to lead to safe and sustainable economic development or might cause harm, regional stigmatization and boom-bust economic instability.

The author repeats the assertion frequently made by Virginia Uranium Inc. that the National Academy of Science is “beyond reproach.” The NAS does not make this claim. Rather, as a matter of policy, the NAS does not do studies for private, for-profit corporations or accept money directly from them. The NAS takes the appearance of influence seriously.

While acknowledging great respect for the National Academies, the Center for Science in the Public Interest in a 2006 report “found serious deficiencies in the NAS’ committee-selection process” and instances of “blatant conflicts of interest.” CSPI doesn’t write off NAS, but rather offers constructive recommendations to improve the study committee selection process to ensure independence and objectivity. The report is available at http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nasreport.pdf. [emphasis mine...SB]

This isn’t a matter of “reproach”; it’s a matter of accountability — accountability for avoiding influence and the appearance of influence. It is appropriate that all participants in the study process, whether legislators, citizens, or the esteemed National Academies hold themselves and each other accountable.

Accountability will be equally important in the socioeconomic study.

Virginia needn’t cover the entire cost of a uranium study; any contribution by the commonwealth would have significance. Securing any state funds would involve an approval process that would confirm that the commonwealth wants the study and increase confidence that all evidence will be weighed fairly.

KATIE WHITEHEAD
Chatham

anriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/state_money_must_be_part_of_equation/14205/

NOTICE OF MEETING

To: Members, Renewable Energy Subcommittee, of the Energy and Environment
Commission

From: Angi Murphy, Senate Committee Operations

Re:Meeting Date/Time/Location

Meeting Date: 10/22/2009

Meeting Time: 10:00:00 AM

Meeting Location: Pittsylvania County Public Library--Gretna Branch at 207
Coffey Street, Gretna VA 24557



FOR INFORMATION, PLEASE USE THE FOLLOWING LINK -->

http://dela.state.va.us/Dela/ComOpsStudy.nsf/82965f555b18a72185256c330058a983/11D8A24A68C83B088525763C006011F1?OpenDocument

Virginia's FY 2010 Budget Reductions

FYI...COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FY 2010 REDUCTION PLAN

http://www.pittgov.org/documents/Reductions2010.pdf

States completes final draft permits for two UEC wells

GOLIAD - Uranium Energy Corp. has forged one step closer to mining in Goliad County.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality completed final draft permits for two non-hazardous disposal wells, the uranium company announced Wednesday. The company would use the wells as part of its in-situ recovery operations.

"Uranium Energy Corp. is roughly 95 percent through the permitting process," said Harry Anthony, the uranium company's chief operating officer.

So far, the company received from the state final draft for its:

Mine permit.

Production area permit.

Disposal wells permit.

The company submitted its radioactive material license application to the state a year ago. The radioactive materials license represents the final permit the state reviews in this sequence of permitting. Already, the uranium company prepares a response to the state's technical review of its application, and plans to submit the response within 30 days.

"The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is well along with their review," Anthony said.

Goliad County sued Uranium Energy Corp. in March 2008. The county claims the company contaminated well water when it failed to properly plug many of its 1,100 exploratory wells. Both sides say science supports their arguments.

Goliad County Commissioner Jim Kreneck, who opposes uranium mining, said the state permitting process remains slanted in favor of big business.

"The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality is funded 85 percent by permitting fees. Who wouldn't push a permit through to get a paycheck?" Kreneck said. "That's been one of my concerns all along. Permits are pushed through without proper evaluation and to keep their operations going."

Anthony disagreed. He called the state review process "thorough."

A follow-up remark by our friend Mark Krueger:

..."unexpected geological or hydrological conditions" is part of the disclosure on the mining company's website.

This is a transcribed account of a recent conversation (today) with a local water well driller.

“I’m not gonna tell you they can control it. When you pressure down and lose circulation in the formation, it could be going anywhere. Sometimes you find it in an old well 100 yards away,(drilling mud) or sometimes you don’t find it at all.”

“It’s very simple when you are drilling a hole in the ground 400-500 feet deep, as you build up weight pushing down, wherever you are, under sand, whatever formation, maybe a dry formation of sand, then it’s gonna go into it. It will follow the path of least resistance. When you hit a cavity or honeycomb caliche, everything goes south on ya. Simple as it is. Especially if you weight it up, lose return, sometimes you just have to abandon the hole.”

What this water well driller is referring to is what the scientific world calls "heterogeneous fabric", meaning that many variations of the soil beneath us exist, including the well known water-bearing gravel beds of Victoria County. If an unknown gravel bed were to exist adjacent to an injection zone, the fluid under pressure could migrate to and saturate the gravel bed. If this were to happen, the probability of recovery would be greatly reduced. In other words, once it's gone then it's gone. To whose well? Your guess is as good as anyone's.

...still looking for good news regarding uranium mining, still haven't found any.

http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/2009/sep/23/gs_uec_update_092409_67219/?news&goliad-county

Pittsylvania County residents speak out on comprehensive plan

Oh, Mr. Sides! You've just divulged that you're most likely a mine investor! That means you have a serious conflict of interest with what's best for Pittsylvania Co. and should resign from the BOS immediately! How the prospect of a uranium mine can be left out of a comprehensive plan is stupefying to me! (Having served on a Planning and Zoning Commission that had to do a comprehensive plan every 5 years, I know a bit about the process.) You really said, "We honestly don’t know what’s going to happen" regarding the mine?? Where have you been for the past 2 years? There have been several presentations in your county telling you, and others, exactly what's going to happen if a mine is situated in PittCo. If I'm not mistaken, you were provided a DVD with the complete presentation on it just so you and other elected officials could see what's going to happen if you permit the uranium mine! You've had it a year...have you not watched it yet?? Geez, Mr. Sides...what have you been doing?

To ignore the possibility of something as devastating to the area as a uranium mine is utterly irresponsible. Frankly, PittCo needs to develop 2 comprehensive plans...one including the mine and the other not including the mine. They will be radically different. Much of PittCo will no longer be habitable if a mine is premitted. There will be no need for a "Cultural Heritage/Tourism Commission" since no one will be able to (or want to) tour the area once the mining commences and deadly radon gas begins to permeate everything in its path. The rich heritage of the area will be lost. Mr. Giles will be left with nothing to do! Awww! But he's drunk the VUI Kool-Aid...we've commented on it here. He knows that what he proposes is foolish in the face of a uranium mine!

Sooo, Mr. Sides...it's time for you to move on. It's apparent you have no interest in preserving or protecting what's good about Pittsylvania Co. if you've gotten to the point that you can exclude a uranium mine's presence from a comprehensive plan.

By John Crane

Published: September 22, 2009

BLAIRS — Pittsylvania County officials heard from residents during a public-input meeting on the update of its comprehensive plan Tuesday night, with one person recommending that the county form a Cultural Heritage Commission.

The 18-year-old plan covers an array of topics and provides a guideline for county development. It would be the first time the county has revamped its plan since adopting it in 1991.

The Pittsylvania County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors will use the plan as a guide for making future land-use decisions, including those for rezonings and special-use permits, transportation improvements, public facility and economic development investments and utilities enhancements.

The document covers a plethora of subjects relating to the county including quality-of-life, economic development, the natural and cultural environment, demographics, health care, housing, education, zoning, land use and growth management, transportation, public safety and other issues. State law mandates that the county review its comprehensive plan every five years.

Glenn Giles, a Mount Hermon resident with the Pittsylvania Historical Society, said a Cultural Heritage Commission would benefit the county economically and would be tasked with developing a strategy for future programs focusing on the county’s heritage.

“…It will provide an economic development resource through the long overlooked benefits of a Cultural Heritage Tourism initiative,” Giles said during the meeting held at Chatham Middle School on Tuesday night.

A commission would also “promote the interests of culturally-endowed citizens” and coordinate “the activities of current cultural and heritage organizations,” Giles said. It would also promote county pride and knowledge among citizens and young people, Giles said.

It’s paramount that the county have a commission in place for its 250th anniversary in 2017, less than eight years away, Giles said.

Attendance at the meeting was sparse, but attendees were outspoken about their viewpoints.

George Stanhope, a Chatham resident, told county planner Greg Sides he wondered what uranium mining would do to the Chatham-Gretna area. Sides said the plan will not take a position on uranium mining and that the topic was talked about in 1991, the last time the county had a new plan.

“We honestly don’t know what’s going to happen,” Sides said.

Charles Miller, a member of the Pittsylvania County Planning Commission, said during an interview residents in the Hurt and Sycamore areas have to cross the county line into Altavista to shop because businesses have left Hurt. Also, area young people who go to college must leave the region to find a career to match their skill sets, Miller, a father of four, said.

“I’d like very much to see my family to be able to come back here and find positions commensurate with their skills and training,” Miller said.

Miller, who also serves on the Pittsylvania County School Board, said the county school district’s high-quality education system makes this area ripe for economic development.

“Pittsylvania County needs to be marketed,” Miller said.

The plan will include six goals and other strategies in a rough draft. The goals include:

• Stimulating economic activity and encouraging development supporting a healthy, stable and diverse economy.

• Anticipating and planning for population change and accommodating it in an orderly and efficient manner.

• Promoting the preservation of the natural and cultural environment for present and future residents of the county.

• Providing public services and community facilities necessary to support development as economically and efficiently as possible.

• Encouraging aesthetic, health-promoting residential communities, and providing choices in housing so that all residents may find affordable, comfortable, safe and sanitary housing.

• Promoting the efficient and financially sound operation of the county government and minimizing the financial burden on county taxpayers.

More public input meetings will be held, beginning at 7 p.m. and ending by 9. The remaining meetings are Monday at Dan River Middle School, Tuesday at Tunstall Middle School and Oct. 1 at Gretna Middle School.

The draft plan will be posted later on Pittsylvania County’s Web page at http://www.pittgov.org with another opportunity for public comments online. When the draft is finalized, the Planning Commission will vote whether to recommend the plan to the Board of Supervisors. The board will hold a public hearing before voting on the matter, Sides said.

Sides the plan will go before the board by the end of the year.

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/pittsylvania_county_residents_speak_out_on_comprehensive_plan/14082/

VUI cares nothing about us

Amen, Jesse...amen.

By Published by The Editorial Board

Published: September 22, 2009

To the editor:

The announcement that Virginia Uranium Inc. will be paying for the “study” of the feasibility of mining and milling uranium in Virginia only goes to point out how ridiculous this process has been up to this point. Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Gate City, sounded almost giddy with delight that this boondoggle has found a backer, even though having VUI pay for its own study is an obvious conflict of interest.

A look at the events leading up to this announcement is a textbook example of how big business controls government. In 2007, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors caved into Walter Coles’ request that they do nothing and ask no questions about his uranium-mining plan. Only Hank Davis and Marshall Ecker had the courage to raise doubts about what this might mean to the county. The rest of them bowed down and agreed to do nothing. They passed on their responsibility to the citizens of Pittsylvania County.

They and the county administrator sold us down the river to Richmond.

Then Chatham Town Council agreed to do nothing as well. Even though Mayor George Haley tried valiantly to persuade them to consider the consequences of acceding to the uranium interests, they as well chose the head-in-the-sand option. They sucked up Coles’ fairy tale of “a glorious new era for Southside” and were blinded by his promises of billions of dollars being thrown around like free candy at the Christmas parade.

As soon as the local politicians were dealt with, VUI focused its attention on the “study.” The Uranium Mining Subcommittee, appointed by the Coal and Energy Commission, set off on its own trip to Oz, with Del. Kilgore in the role of Dorothy. And that meant that we were not in Kansas anymore. The push for uranium mining had moved to Richmond and the bigger arena of the state legislature, where politics as usual dictates that what is done or not done is directly proportionate to the amount of lobbying dollars being thrown at the legislators.

So now we are at the mercy of the Coal and Energy Commission, the entity that has overseen the virtual destruction of much of Southwestern Virginia with mountain top removal coal mining, including in Del. Kilgore’s own Scott County. Now they are looking at Southside and licking their chops over the proposed uranium mine and mill. They finally have the money they need to set in motion a “study” of that mining that can only reach one logical conclusion, that uranium can in fact be mined safely with certain regulations in place — regulations that would be written with a large portion of help from the mining industry itself.

We don’t have to look far to see what a dismal record the mining conglomerates have regarding the environment and public safety. If they will allow the mountains of Southwest Virginia to be destroyed and the toxic waste products bulldozed into the streams and rivers of that part of the state, why would they care about what happens to Southside?

VUI paying for this “study” and the uranium industry crafting the regulations is akin to handing a 3-year-old a shotgun at the family reunion. Someone is likely to get hurt. In this case, what VUI is planning (“away from everything”) as Del. Kilgore claims in his ignorance of geography, a great many people stand to suffer, both near the proposed mine site and as far away as Virginia Beach. Obviously no one is paying much attention to the folks living within a mile, or five miles or 50 miles of Coles Hill.

If Coles is willing to destroy his own home and the land his family has owned for hundreds of years, it is foolishness to imagine that he or the Canadian mining conglomerate he sold out to would give even a passing thought to what might happen to the rest of us. This will not be the hometown business VUI has claimed it would be.

The Canadian speculators who would destroy Pittsylvania County do not care one way or another. To them, the people on the periphery are simply expendable.

And so it will be interesting indeed to see how this greatly anticipated and heavily burdened “study” will turn out now that we know who is putting up the big bucks. It is also interesting that the National Academy of Sciences has yet to agree to anything concerning uranium mining in Virginia.

But as Del. Kilgore said, “We’re hoping to get everything signed, sealed and delivered on the scientific, technical study.” That is exactly right — signed, sealed and delivered straight to VUI’s mailbox.

JESSE PYRANT ANDREWS

Halifax

http://www2.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/danville_letters/article/writer_vui_cares_nothing_about_us/14040/

It’s No Big Deal Who Pays For Uranium Mining Study [HUH??]

Apparently the News & Advance has not seen the report on the rampant conflicts of interest within the NAS. We'll be sending it to the editor. Apparently the News & Advance doesn't care about neutrality, even when it comes tosomething as dangerous as uranium mining, something that's never been done safely anywhere in the world to date. Apparently the uranium industry owns Lynchburg and the News & Advance. In our opinion, the News & Advance has done a great disservice to its readers and to everyone who will be adversely affected by uranium mining throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Please know that Coles Hill, in Pittsylvania Co., will not be Virginia's only uranium mine...it will just be the first. A map of the uranium deposits in VA is at the top of this post. The link to the report about the lack of neutrality within the NAS is here: http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nasreport.pdf and here: http://sccagainsturanium.blogspot.com/2009/09/ensuring-independence-and-objectivity.html

The News & Advance
Published: September 13, 2009

The story from Danville last week about Virginia Uranium Inc. agreeing to pay for a state study on the safety of mining uranium near Chatham has raised some questions. And rightly so.

Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Gate Ctiy and chairman of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, said Virginia Uranium will pay for the study by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to determine whether uranium can be mined safely in Virginia.

But doesn’t that create the potential for a conflict of interest — even the perception of a conflict? Can the firm that wants to mine uranium get the best safety study that money will buy?

The answer to the first question is yes. The answer to the second question is not really.

Kilgore himself acknowledged the concerns about VUI backing the study financially, but he quickly added that the National Academy of Science’s research abilities are “great.”

While it would be more appropriate for the coal and energy commission or some other state agency that doesn’t have a vested interest in the outcome of the study to put up the money for it, a Virginia Tech department will coordinate funding and will contract with NAS for the study. Virginia Tech’s Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research will coordinate the study’s first phase on the technical and public safety aspects of mining uranium.

The study is expected to cost between $1.2 million and $1.4 million and could begin by the end of this year.

VUI seeks to mine and mill a 119 million pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. Walter Coles Sr., VUI chairman, has said he expressed willingness to provide funding for the study since the beginning of the mining proposal.

Mining opponents have questioned the credibility of a study paid for with VUI money and one even went so far last week as to brand NAS as being pro-nuclear.

A spokeswoman for NAS responded that the agency is perfectly capable of performing unbiased studies without regard to who is paying for them. Jennifer Walsh said the academy has performed unbiased, federal level studies in the past involving the tobacco and cell phone industries.

When an industry pays for a study, she said, the NAS usually works with a third organization that provides funding on behalf of a company or industry.

“We would not work directly with them (VUI),” Walsh said. “We would only got to them with questions and concerns. They would have no say-so in the study.”

Walsh added that information-gathering meetings involved in the study would be open to the public and posted on the NAS Web site ahead of time.

The public, then, can follow the progress of the uranium mining safety study, just as it can any other studies being conducted by the agency.

The National Academy of Sciences is a well-respected agency whose expert scientific studies have held up as being as solid as they come. That reputation outweighs the concerns raised about where the money is coming from for the study. And that reputation is not for sale to the highest bidder — not even the owner of Virginia Uranium Inc.

http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/opinion/editorials/article/its_no_big_deal_who_pays_for_uranium_mining_study/19413/

Mining study’s scope should be broader

Thanks, Katie, for yet another well-written, well-considered letter on this most serious of issues. For reasons I still cannot fathom, the Commonwealth still doesn't seem to 'get it' that the uranium studies will look at U mining all over the state, not just Pittsylvania Co., and that if they ever gets off the ground, will not be site-specific, they will be state-wide. Get ready, Virginia...you're about to go from one of the loveliest states in the country to one of the most lethal and least desirable to live in...all for the greed of a few. Listen to Katie...

Lynchburg News and Advance
September 13, 2009

Most people are understandably confused about the uranium studies. Will the National Academy of Sciences undertake a uranium technical study funded solely by a mining company? Del. Terry Kilgore, chairman of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, doesn’t know. No one knows. We know even less about the uranium socio-economic study.

A governing board will decide whether NAS will do the technical study. This board has not yet made a decision, or even discussed Del. Kilgore’s very recent request for a study. The board must also determine whether accepting 100 percent of the funding — however indirectly — from a uranium mining company is consistent with the board’s responsibility to safeguard the academy’s unique reputation for independent, unbiased scientific research.

Del. Kilgore has held open the possibility that other organizations (besides Virginia Uranium, Inc.) will contribute money for the technical study, but so far no one has. It’s not clear whether any organization has been solicited to contribute. So far no legislator has offered to ask the legislature for funding to cover even a small portion of the cost. If it’s important to the state to do this study, why are our legislators unwilling to pay for even a token part of it?

Though second in the time sequence, the uranium socioeconomic study is arguably the more important of the two studies. The technical study will address the safety issue by providing legislators with evidence regarding whether uranium mining, milling, and tailings storage are being done safely elsewhere under conditions comparable to those in Virginia. It should also identify knowledge gaps. The socioeconomic study will address the issue of whether uranium mining is something we want in our state. It should provide evidence about how introducing the uranium industry affects the overall health, economic well-being, and quality of life in communities.

Perception, as well as science, plays a critical role in whether introducing this industry is a good idea. The state policy decision depends not only on the safety question, but also on the much larger and less tangible question of what life we want for our communities.

KATIE WHITEHEAD
Chatham
Chairwoman, Dan River Basin Association Mining Task Force

http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/article/letters_to_the_editor_for_sunday_september_13_2009/19414/P10/

Time/Place Changes for October 6th meeting of the Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment

Take a look at the agenda...link is in the meeting text. Virginia Energy is set to lob a few over the net unopposed...unless there's a substantial turnout of citizens!

SENATE OF VIRGINIA
OFFICE OF THE CLERK
RICHMOND

September 09, 2009

CHANGE IN MEETING LOCATION

TO:	Members, Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment
FROM:	Patty Lung, Coordinator, Senate Committee Operations
RE:	Change in Meeting Date/Time/Location

The time and location for the Tuesday, October 6th meeting of the Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment has been changed. The Commission will meet in conjunction with the Southern Virginia Bioenergy Conference at the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research, 150 Slayton Avenue, Danville, Virginia. Directions to the facility are on the Institute website. The conference begins at 9:00 a.m. and the Commission meeting is scheduled for 3:15 p.m. The agenda for the conference is posted on the Commission website. Additional information will be sent to Commission members as available. If you have questions regarding the meeting content, please contact Ellen Porter or Patrick Cushing with the Division of Legislative Services (804) 786-3591. If I may assist you in any other manner, or if you are a member and cannot attend, please call me at (804) 698-7450.

Members:

The Honorable Mary Margaret Whipple, Chair The Honorable J. Chapman Petersen The Honorable Richard H. Stuart The Honorable Charles D. Poindexter, Vice Chair The Honorable Samuel A. Nixon, Jr. The Honorable Clarke N. Hogan The Honorable Joseph P. Johnson, Jr. The Honorable Mark D. Sickles Patrick G. Hatcher Karen Kennedy Schultz Hugh E. Montgomery, Jr. August Wallmeyer Arlen K. Bolstad David K. Paylor Stephen A. Walz

cc:	The Honorable Susan Clarke Schaar The Honorable Bruce F. Jamerson Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services Patrick Cushing, Division of Legislative Services Mail List, Virginia Commission on Energy and Environment

http://dela.state.va.us/Dela/ComOpsStudy.nsf/82965f555b18a72185256c330058a983/C489563D01DC82C28525762C006BF481?OpenDocument

Individuals requiring interpreter services or other special assistance should telephone Senate Committee Operations at (804) 698-7450, TDD (804) 698-7419. Persons making audio-visual presentations to the committee should call for specifications.

A comment on outrageous doings

Bless you, Mr. Dixon...and thanks!

Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Chatham Star-Tribune

With the news that Virginia Uranium will pay for a study to determine the future of uranium mining in Virginia, this very major issue now moves into the realm of the absurd.

The acquiescence of the government of the commonwealth to this situation is stunning in its stupidity and bald-faced corruption.

Our elected officials have shown little judgment and even less common sense in this decision. The fate of their careers as elected officials must be in doubt.

Every state-wide representative who did not stand up to oppose this corrupt bargain has abrogated his responsibility as a guardian of the people's interest. They are unworthy of our votes and have earned our collective disdain.

I am sure the National Academy of Science is indeed a "neutral" organization through which to conduct this study, bought and paid (quiet literally) by our Canadian friends and their cadre of wealthy local and foreign investors.

The scientists at Virginia Tech would never think of the opportunity to use Pittsylvania County as a laboratory and its citizens as guinea pigs in their investigations of the affects of uranium mining on the environment east of the Mississippi.

They are responsible individuals first, and scientists second. In fact, this new relationship could be the beginning of several new National Academy/Virginia Tech studies.

Let's see what else they could do. Here's one: "The Feasibility of Bank Bailouts as a Means of Helping the Economy."

That one would be paid for by Wachovia and Bank of America. I wonder what the National Academy of Science would find?

Here's another: "The Positive or Negative Effects of Socialism in America."

That one would be funded by the American Communist Party. I am sure the folks at Virginia Tech will come up with a fair and balanced conclusion.

Finally, in the area of sports we have, "Steroids: Good or Bad for Baseball?" This one has the financial backing of Jose Canseco, Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds.

I am on tenterhooks awaiting that conclusion.

Pardon my sarcasm, but I fear the deck is stacked against Pittsylvania County. Is this the sad fate that must play out over the next two decades?

The "study" will conclude that uranium mining is safe "under certain circumstances."

The fine print of the extreme conditional approval will be ignored by the uranium industry and they will embrace the study as definite "scientific" proof that all is well.

Mining regulations will move swiftly through the hapless House of Delegates; mining will begin with a flourish of heady pronouncements about employment and the economic prosperity that is headed our way.

Blasting activity will begin; tailing ponds will be dug; all will move quickly forward. Then, somewhere down the line, there will be an economic (price of uranium falls) or environmental (water ruined) catastrophe.

Government and uranium industry officials will throw up their hands and declare that no one could have foreseen this (remember Katrina?), and they are not to blame.

The mines will close; the investors will go silent and Virginia Uranium will creep back to its Canadian homeland.

By that time, the people of Virginia will be left to tend the mess that Virginia Uranium began: the two 800-foot holes in the ground; the ruined landscape, poisoned water and contaminated air.

Unemployment will rise, now that tobacco and non-mining businesses have long left the area. Taxes will rise; land values will fall.

The National Academy will assert the fine print of its study (i.e. that mining probably could not be done successfully) and the scientists at Virginia Tech will have their laboratory and guinea pigs just down the road from them in Pittsylvania County.

My father used to say that if you can't pay for something, you can't buy it. If the Commonwealth of Virginia cannot pay for a study, they should not have one.

Virginia Uranium is a biased funder; the conflict of interest is so apparent that it is embarrassing for a private citizen to have to point this out to officials who should know better.

If Virginia cannot pay now for a study of this sort, how are they going to pay for the regulation and upkeep of the area once mining begins? Where will that money come from?

Until these basic questions are answered completely, all citizens of good faith must remain opposed to any study of any kind paid for by the very people who profit from its slanted outcome.

We shall and must regard the findings of this tainted study, and the people who support it, with a cynical and suspicious eye.

Richard Dixon

Chatham

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/09/09/chatham/opinion/opinion05.txt

Kaine Expected to Slash Budget by $1.3 Billion

August 18, 2009

(AP) - Gov. Timothy M. Kaine will cut the state's cash-strapped budget by about $1.3 billion in an address Wednesday before legislative budget writers, legislators told The Associated Press.

His address to members of the House and Senate money committees will mark the fourth time since September that the governor has been forced by the worst economy since the 1930s to scale back state spending.

Kaine said earlier this month he would cut at least $700 million or at most $1.5 billion in comments to lawmakers forced by significant month-after-month declines in state tax collections.

Legislators from both parties and from both the House and Senate said Kaine decided after speaking to economists and his board on revenue estimates to make cuts on the higher side, reflecting lingering uncertainty that a recovery is imminent.

The lawmakers and staffers spoke on the condition of anonymity in deference to the fact that the governor had not announced the figure publicly.

Kaine's quarterly briefing to the House Appropriations and Finance committees and the Senate Finance Committee comes as the economy forms a key issue in this fall's gubernatorial and legislative elections. It's also shortly before a special legislative session Kaine called for Wednesday to address a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that prosecutors say is jeopardizing some criminal cases.

http://www.charlottesvillenewsplex.tv/news/headlines/53603772.html