Sunday, February 8, 2009

Uranium Mining Plan Splits Va. County

By Rex Bowman

Published: February 8, 2009

COLES HILL -- Byron Motley's family has lived here in Pittsylvania County for generations. The hay farmer can still look across the narrow blacktop road in front of his house and see the oak tree beneath which his father was born.

But Motley is suddenly pondering a move to North Carolina.

Likewise, Phillip Lovelace, the ninth generation in his family to live in Pittsylvania, is considering moving to South Carolina. "I was born in a farmhouse here, and my daddy paid the doctor who delivered me three ducks and a jar of blackberry preserves," the 57-year-old cattle farmer said. "I've pretty much been in this neighborhood all my life."

Though their roots run deep in Pittsylvania's soil, Motley and Lovelace and other members of the county's Old Guard -- multigenerational families whose ties to the county often run back to the 1700s -- are considering an exodus if their fight to prevent the proposed uranium mine at Coles Hill fails.

At the least, they say, the proposed mine of several hundred acres would wreck the pastoral landscape, increase truck traffic and turn the silence of country life into a cacophony of clanging industrial noise. And at worst, they fear, the mine would pollute the groundwater and streams with uranium and choke the air with harmful residue.

Which is why Motley, 51, is thinking about bugging out if the mine is approved. The alternative, he said, is to "sit here and suck dust."

. . .

Geologists say there may be nearly 120 million pounds of uranium, billions of dollars worth, in two large pockets about 6 miles northeast of Chatham. Urged by a group of more than 30 landowners who have formed Virginia Uranium Inc., the state is now preparing to study whether the uranium can be mined safely.

Buddy Mayhew is one of those landowners. A third-generation tobacco farmer, he described his neighbors' talk of moving away as bluster. He said he is confident they'll stay if the state study shows mining can be done safely. "I don't believe anybody's going to move."

Mayhew noted that Virginia Uranium chief Walter Coles, whose family has been in Pittsylvania since the 1700s, plans to live in his ancestral home located nearly in the middle of the two uranium deposits.

Before any mine work could start, Virginia would have to lift its 27-year-old moratorium on uranium mining, an act that would open up the entire state to the uranium industry. The U.S. Geological Survey says a vast swath of Virginia, from Pittsylvania to Fauquier County, potentially holds the nuclear fuel.

The study of uranium mining being conducted by the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy could take up to two years to complete.

Opponents of the mine plan to use that time to continue to fight. They've organized several opposition groups, circulated petitions, packed public hearings and enlisted the help of environmental groups, all in an effort to urge the General Assembly to keep the moratorium in place.

Virginia Uranium, meanwhile, has agreed to merge with a Canadian mining company to enhance its financial resources. The company and the law firm that represents it have also given more than $7,000 in campaign contributions to some of the 13 legislators who are members of the coal and energy commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee, which is overseeing the study.

Opponents such as Lovelace and Motley contend that an objective study will bear out their fears. Virtually all uranium mining in the United States is done in arid parts of the West. Pittsylvania, pocked by ponds and crisscrossed by creeks, is too wet, too vulnerable to contamination, they and environmentalists argue.

And while they are hopeful the study will say as much, members of the Old Guard are mindful that Virginia Uranium may get its way. In which case, they are preparing to move.

"It breaks my heart, but we'll leave, without a doubt," said Ed Fitzgerald IV, an eighth-generation Pittsylvania resident whose great-grandfather started the county's first phone company. "I can't believe it's safe. I've read too much about it to believe it's safe for my children."

Aside from his environmental and health concerns about the proposed uranium mine, Fitzgerald said it would destroy a big part of what makes Pittsylvania unique -- a quiet way of life now unknown by millions of Americans and even suburbanites in Northern Virginia and the Richmond area.

"It's a place where the night life is church socials," said Fitzgerald, 48. "Sitting on the porch and watching stars is not for everybody, but it's wholesome."

Patrick Wales, a Danville native and geologist for Virginia Uranium, said landowners' fears are overblown: the ore deposits are in an isolated part of the county, and trucks would only occasionally haul uranium from the site. And the upside, he said, is that the uranium would help fuel the nation's nuclear reactors and make the country less dependent on foreign oil, while bringing 300 jobs or more to Pittsylvania.

No one, he said, intends to do any harm to the county: "We haven't been here 4,000 years, but this is our hometown, too."

Lovelace, though, is convinced a uranium mine would be the death of a county his ancestors helped build. "We've got a pretty county, without a doubt it's a pretty county," he said. "I had the time of my life running around these hayfields as a boy. I think my children and the children of my friends deserve the same chance as me."

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/state_regional/article/URAN08_20090207-212206/200937/

Mining Town [in Quebec] Balks at Uranium

Ghislain Lévesque has dealt with many contentious issues during the 12 years he's been mayor of Sept Îles. But nothing has stirred emotions in the regional hub, 650 kilometres northeast of Quebec City, like the proposal to mine uranium on the outskirts of the city.
MARK CARDWELL, Special to The Gazette
Published: Saturday, February 07

"I've never seen people here get so worried and upset over a single subject," Lévesque said about the groundswell of public opposition to the project in recent weeks, included petitions, a demonstration, and a threat by most of the city's doctors to leave the region if it goes ahead.

"It's the only thing people are talking about around town these days, and almost everybody seems to be against it."

That's why, he added, city councillors voted unanimously in favour of a resolution on Jan. 26 asking the province to declare a permanent moratorium on uranium mining in its territory. By so doing, Sept Îles became the seventh municipality in Quebec - and the first on the North Shore - to make a similar request to government in recent years.

And it likely won't be the last.

That's because, after a 30-year lull, uranium is back on the radar of Quebec's mining industry. And that is raising concerns - whether real or imagined - among people who live in areas where there are known uranium deposits.

Although Canada is the world's biggest producer of uranium, accounting for roughly a third of the 100 million pounds that are sold on the global market each year, all of our production comes from three mines in Saskatchewan's Athabasca Basin, which contains the biggest and richest known deposits of uranium on Earth.

About 85 per cent of that production - worth some $500 million annually - is shipped to the United States, Japan and western Europe, where it is used to produce energy in nuclear reactors. The rest is used here at home to produce electricity, mostly at nuclear power plants in Ontario and here in Quebec, and to produce isotopes for cancer treatments and other medical purposes.

Quebec also has the capacity to be a major producer of uranium, a silvery-grey metal that is ubiquitous in nature and weakly radioactive, says Robert Marquis, director general of Géologie Québec, the office within the provincial Natural Resources and Wildlife Department that collects and studies scientific and field evidence of mineral resources and assesses their potential.

"Mining companies are always on the lookout for minerals and they have found many occurrences of uranium here over the years," Marquis, a geologist and past president of the Geologic Association of Canada, said from his office in Val d'Or this week.

Located mostly in four geographical areas - the Otish Mountains in central Quebec, Ungava Bay, Mont Laurier and the Ottawa Valley, and the North Shore - those finds contain relatively low-grade uranium that is not economically feasible to produce when commodity prices are low.

That has been the case since the 1970s, when the world soured on nuclear energy and commodity prices went south. But the price of uranium has been on a tear in recent years. Though it has fallen sharply in recent months due to the global financial crisis, a pound of uranium fetched a record $138 U.S. in June 2007, a tenfold increase over 2004.

Read the rest of this article here:

http://www2.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/saturdayextra/story.html?id=4f03a5a7-6656-48c3-9047-91384a8d30ed

Saturday, February 7, 2009

Report: Region Has Apt Mining Work Force

More details from the Technical Report released by Santoy/VUI earlier in the week (see posts below). All they need to do now is get rid of that pesky moratorium. SB

By John Crane

Published: February 7, 2009

A report on the Coles Hill uranium deposit near Chatham says Southside Virginia has the skilled work force needed for mining and milling uranium.

Local workers’ comfort with farming and heavy equipment provides the attributes necessary for miners, according to the report, titled Technical Report on Coles Hill Uranium Property. It was conducted by Behre Dolbear & Co. LTD., Marshall Miller and Associates Inc. and PAC Geological Consulting Inc. The report, known as a National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report, is required by the Canadian Securities Administrators. It was submitted by Virginia Uranium Inc.’s minority investor, Santoy Resources of Vancouver.

“We are all painfully aware of the unemployment figures in the city of Danville, Pittsylvania, Halifax and Henry counties, where we could expect to draw the bulk of our 400-500 workers, if the Commonwealth of Virginia decides to permit the development of the Coles Hill resource,” Norm Reynolds, president and chief executive officer of VUI, said in a statement.

The report is a reference tool for potential investors wanting to confirm VUI officials’ claims about Coles Hill. VUI wants to mine and mill the uranium deposit at Coles Hill.

“It’s sort of like an auditor auditing your books,” Reynolds said during an interview Friday.

However, Jack Dunavant, the chairman of Southside Concerned Citizens, said he is “highly skeptical” of the report, adding that farm work and mining are not the same. Dunavant, a civil engineer, said there’s a difference between driving a truck on a farm and maneuvering one in a circle around a vertical mine shaft at a steep angle.

“It’s a pretty dangerous type of job,” he said.

Patrick Wales, VUI spokesman and geologist, cited Danville’s double-digit unemployment and called the report good news for the Danville area. The report also states that the engineering and geology departments at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg can “provide high-quality employees.”

The report confirms old report data VUI had purchased from Marline Uranium, as well as data VUI had collected at Coles Hill, Reynolds said. The firms began work on the report in November 2007 and completed it in September 2008. The 81-page report was released Thursday. The report includes analysis of core samples from Coles Hill. Reynolds said VUI drilled nine samples, with some that Marline had drilled about 30 years ago re-drilled by VUI.

It confirms that the uranium ore deposit is 119 million pounds and that there are 1.5 pounds of uranium per ton of rock. The report also states that the deposit is “relatively clean,” and is absent of heavy metals typically found in uranium deposits in the southwestern U.S., Wales said.

Contact John R. Crane at jcrane@registerbee.com or (434) 791-7987.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/report_region_has_apt_mining_work_force/8899/

Thu Feb 5, 2009 Santoy Files NI 43-101 Technical Report for Proposed Acquisition of an Interest in Coles Hill Uranium Deposit, Virginia

This relates to the Santoy document re: Coles Hill further down on the blog...SB

View News Release in PDF Format


NR: 09-02

Santoy Resources Ltd. (TSX.V: SAN) is pleased to announce that the NI 43-101 Technical Report for the Coles Hill Uranium Deposit is now available on SEDAR and on the Santoy website (www.santoy.ca).

The Coles Hill uranium deposit is located in southern Virginia, USA and 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 (1) (2) at a cut-off grade of 0.025% U308 based on a National Instrument 43-101 technical report on the Coles Hill property prepared for Santoy Resources Ltd. and Virginia Uranium, Inc. by Behre Dolbear and Company, Ltd., Marshall Miller and Associates, Inc., and PAC Geological Consulting Inc. dated February 2, 2009 (the "Behre Dolbear report"). The resource estimate can be summarized as follows:

Excerpt from Table 1.1
Resource Estimates – June 4, 2008
(Millions of Tons and Pounds In-Place)

Cutoff
%U308

Measured1

Indicated1

Total1

Tons2

%
U3083s

Pounds U308

Tons2

%
U3083

Pounds U308

Tons2

%
U3083

Pounds U308

Project Total (South and North Coles Hill Deposits)

0.100

0.755

0.228

3.45

6.27

0.215

26.9

7.03

0.216

30.4

0.075

1.35

0.164

4.44

24.0

0.116

55.9

25.4

0.119

60.4

0.050

2.28

0.124

5.65

35.4

0.101

71.7

37.7

0.103

77.4

0.025

6.62

0.064

8.42

92.1

0.060

111

98.7

0.060

119

1Total tonnage above cutoff grade and average weight % U308 of that tonnage
2Short tons based on a rock density of 2.56 g/cc
3Weight %

1. The "Qualified Persons" (as defined in NI 43-101) who prepared the resource estimate were Betty L. Gibbs for Behre Dolbear and K. Scott Keim for Marshall Miller and Associates, Inc.
2. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing, or other relevant issues.


Santoy has signed of a Letter of Intent ("LOI") with two private companies pursuant to which Santoy will acquire all of the shares of Virginia Uranium Ltd. ("Limited"), a private Yukon corporation, in exchange for shares in Santoy, at the ratio of six shares of Santoy for each one share of Limited. Limited currently holds a 12% minority interest in VA Uranium Holdings, Inc. ("Holdco"), a Yukon corporation. As part of the transaction, Santoy has the right to acquire additional shares of Holdco as described in the Santoy news release of Dec. 22, 2008. Holdco's 100% owned subsidiary, Virginia Uranium Inc., a Virginia corporation, controls the leasehold development and operating rights of the Coles Hill uranium property in south-central Virginia. For more details of the transaction, see the Santoy news release of Dec. 22, 2008. Santoy and Limited are continuing to negotiate in good faith to agree on the definitive terms of a formal agreement in respect of the transaction and have agreed to extend the date for completion of such formal agreement to February 20, 2009.

A statutory framework has been enacted into law for uranium exploration in Virginia. However, the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibits any agency of the Commonwealth from accepting applications for uranium mining until a program for permitting uranium mining is established by statute. Such legislation has not been enacted. In November 2008, Virginia's Coal and Energy Commission announced a state sanctioned study of uranium mining's health, economic, social and other impacts. The commission is expected to engage the National Academy of Sciences, or similar institution, to perform the study.

The technical information in this news release has been reviewed and approved by Michael S. Cathro, P. Geo., Santoy's Vice President of Exploration, a Qualified Person as defined by National instrument 43-101.

View NI 43-101 Technical Report in PDF Format


On Behalf of the Board of Directors

SANTOY RESOURCES LTD.

On Behalf of the Board of Directors

"Ron Netolitzky"

R. K. Netolitzky, President & CEO

Email: netolitzky@gmail.com

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

http://www.santoy.ca/s/NewsReleases.asp?ReportID=337244&_Type=News-Releases&_Title=Santoy-Files-NI-43-101-Technical-Report-for-Proposed-Acquisition-of-an-Inte...

Friday, February 6, 2009

Old radioactive mine tailings pose slow-motion threat

Forest Service seeks comment on still unfunded plan to clean up uranium tailings and seal off mine shafts near Young Ranger District

February 6, 2009

After decades of delay, the U.S. Forest Service is seeking public comments about a slow-motion contamination risk — the radioactive dirt piles left over from now-abandoned uranium mines in the Young Ranger District along popular Workman Creek in the Sierra Anchas.

During the boom years of uranium mining in the 1950s and 1970s, mining companies dug “dozens” of mine shafts following veins of the naturally occurring, radioactive mineral. Most of the once-sealed mine shafts are now open after vandals pried loose the timbers and tore down the warning signs. The mine shafts still have radiation levels that could cause cancer and other health problems.

Moreover, the mining companies left faintly radioactive tailings at the entrance to the mine shafts and in several sites along Workman Creek where they dumped the ore waste, including two public campsites, currently closed.

Many of these tailings dump sites lie along Workman Creek, which drains into Roosevelt Lake, which is a drinking water reservoir for Phoenix. Tests show sufficiently high radiation levels in the creek that the Forest Service advises people against eating fish caught in the creek. However, no dangerous levels of radiation have reached Roosevelt Lake, say Forest Service officials.

David Frew, recreation lands and minerals staff officer for the Young Ranger District, said the Forest Service has opened the public comment period on possible solutions to the problem and in the meantime is struggling to at least post signs at all the potentially hazardous sites and abandoned mines.

“The major message for people is — stay out, stay alive,” said Frew of the numerous open mine tunnels that would still light up a Geiger counter.

“Many of them were boarded up, but people have broken into them over the years. We tried a whole signage program, but people take them down.”

The shafts and the tailings piles contain arsenic, uranium and radium-266.

A Geiger counter taken into one of the mines would register an “evacuation level,” said Frew.

Read the rest of the article here:

http://www.paysonroundup.com/news/2009/feb/06/old_radioactive_mine_tailings_pose_slowmotion_thre/


Hurt Town Council Takes Action on Uranium

Friday, February 6, 2009 3:05 PM EST

Hurt Town Council has adopted a resolution against mining and milling uranium in Virginia without "an unbiased conclusive study" of the potential impact.

Meeting Feb. 3, council voted 5-0 to pass the resolution after hearing from both opponents of uranium mining and officials from Virginia Uranium Inc., the Chatham company interested in mining in Pittsylvania County. The approved resolution was presented by uranium opponents.

Patrick Wales, a project manager with Virginia Uranium, also presented a resolution to council. It resolved that the town supports the current study by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission Subcommittee on Uranium Mining to determine the possible impact of mining in the state.

"The town citizens don't want it. And we represent the town citizens," Councilman Tommy Neal said after the meeting. "If they're going to mine that stuff around here, they need to make sure it's safe."

The current study should take 18-24 months.

Pittsylvania County is home to what is believed to be the largest uranium deposit in the nation. The site is about six miles northeast of Chatham.

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/02/06/altavista/news/news18.txt

Industrial Hygienists Get Kicked Out of Stores For Scanning the [Radioactive] Granite

by John Biggs on February 5, 2009

It’s fairly well known that granite contains trace amounts of radioactivity. Most are harmless but there are situations where your fancy granite countertop contained uranium in as high a concentration as in uranium ore. That’s just nasty!

Linda Kincaid tests granite for homeowners and has often been kicked out of the store for testing slabs.

A San Jose, CA showroom manager told me last August, “This is all propaganda from Silestone”. When I showed him radioactive Niagara Gold granite in his showroom, he insisted, “a sealer will take care of it”. As few minutes later, an assistant asked me to leave the premises.

I was back in that San Jose showroom a few months later, scanning granite for a client. The showroom staff kept me waiting nearly two hours. First, they said they had no record of the client. Then they said they could not find his granite. The manager was quite rude and seemed to prefer losing a customer, rather than allow an industrial hygienist to scan his granite.

A sealer, eh? Hopefully that sealer is made of lead.

http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/02/05/industrial-hygienists-get-kicked-out-of-stores-for-scanning-the-granite/

Hurt Wants Independent Uranium Study; Passes Anti-Mining Resolution

Finally...the news story to go along with the rumor that Hurt, VA had passed an anti-mining resolution.


By John Crane

Published: February 5, 2009

The town of Hurt has passed a resolution opposing the mining and milling of uranium without an independent, conclusive study determining its environmental impact.

Mayor Lillian Gillespie said the town is neither for nor against uranium mining, but it wants a study.

Hurt’s resolution also states the study should include a thorough evaluation of risks resulting from floods and other natural events; be open to the public and press; include the town of Hurt as participants in the study; be conducted by impartial experts such as the National Academy of Sciences; and be given ample time for completion.

Patrick Wales, geologist and spokesman for Virginia Uranium Inc., said he is puzzled by the resolution since a study already is in progress.

“It’s exactly what’s taking place,” Wales said.

VUI seeks to mine and mill a uranium ore deposit six miles northeast of Chatham. The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission approved a study in November and urged the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research to contract with the National Academy of Sciences or another institution to conduct it.

The town’s resolution requests that a peer review group independent of the VCEC and the VCCER monitor and critique the study.

Gillespie said sources of energy, including wind, solar and water, and those from uranium, should be explored.

VUI and members of the community working with Southside Concerned Citizens, who oppose uranium mining in Pittsylvania County, each drafted resolutions and presented them to the town council, Gillespie said. SCC members praised the town’s unanimous decision, which took place during the council’s meeting Tuesday night.

Gregg Vickrey, president of SCC’s Chatham-Pittsylvania County chapter, called the town’s move a “huge victory.”

“It is a great first step,” Vickrey said in an e-mail. “Obviously, this local governing body is trying to protect its citizens – the highest priority of any government that truly serves the people.”

The town of Gretna also is considering a resolution regarding uranium mining and milling. The town council will discuss it during its regular meeting Monday night, Town Manager David Lilly said. Gretna and Chatham both considered chemical-trespass ordinances, but abandoned the idea due to legal constraints of the ordinance.

Contact John R. Crane at jcrane@registerbee.com or (434) 791-7987.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/hurt_wants_independent_uranium_study/8872/

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Sweden Changes Course on Nuclear Power

- Associated Press Writer

STOCKHOLM -- The Swedish government agreed Thursday to scrap a three-decade ban on building new nuclear reactors, saying it needs to avoid producing more greenhouse gases.

Sweden is a leader on renewable energy but is struggling to develop alternative source like hydropower and wind to meet its growing energy demands. If parliament approves scrapping the ban, Sweden would join a growing list of countries rethinking nuclear power as a source of energy amid concerns over global warming and the reliability of energy suppliers such as Russia. Britain, France and Poland are planning new reactors and Finland is currently building Europe's first new atomic plant in over a decade.

The agreement was made possible after a compromise by the Center Party, a junior coalition member which has long held a skeptical stance toward nuclear power.

"I'm doing this for the sake of my children and grandchildren," said party leader Maud Olofsson. "I can live with the fact that nuclear power will be part of our electricity supply system in the foreseeable future."

Lawmakers decided after a 1980 referendum to phase out nuclear power, which provides about half of Sweden's electricity.

The 1980 referendum came about at time of mounting concerns about nuclear safety in the wake of a partial meltdown a year earlier at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania.

Only two of the 12 reactors have been closed and Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said he didn't feel bound by the referendum because it didn't specify how to replace nuclear energy.

The center-right coalition government's proposal, which needs approval from Parliament, calls for new reactors to be built at existing plants to replace the 10 operational reactors when they are taken out of service.

The government's energy plans calls for renewable energy to account for 50 percent of Sweden's energy in 2020. Today that figure is roughly 40 percent, one of the highest in Europe, mostly because of hydropower.

The government also said it aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2020, compared to 1990 levels, partly by expanding wind power and raising taxes on fossil fuels.

Swedish public opinion polls have shown growing support for nuclear energy in recent years because of the lack of alternatives.

http://www.kentucky.com/524/story/684093.html

87 Page Report Prepared for Interested Stockholders - Santoy Resources and VUI


http://www.santoy.ca/i/pdf/43-101ColesHill.pdf

It's 87 pages long and it's protected from copy/paste but it's worth looking at. It's been prepared for those interested in becoming stockholders in Santoy/Virginia Uranium. Looks like they fully expect the study to be completed swiftly and the moratorium against mining lifted quickly.

Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant, Nation's Oldest, Back Online After Fire

By WAYNE PARRY, AP
02.05.09

The nation's oldest commercial nuclear power plant is back online after a fire over the weekend forced it to shut down.

The owners of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station said Thursday that it was restarted early the day before but will operate at 60 percent of capacity for the time being.

David Benson, a spokesman for the plant's owners, Chicago-based Exelon Corp. (nyse: EXC - news - people ), said a cracked electrical component caused Sunday night's fire.A bushing - an electrical engineering component that insulates a high-voltage conductor - developed a crack that allowed oil inside it to leak out and catch fire on one of the plant's two transformers.

A thin coat of oil caused by the fire has been cleaned up from the plant grounds and a nearby canal, Benson said. No fish were killed, he said.

Federal regulators had been poised Wednesday to clear away the last obstacles to the plant getting a new 20-year license but canceled a vote without explanation.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission had scheduled an "affirmation session" for Wednesday afternoon, when it was expected to uphold the findings of an atomic safety panel that found that the steel liner surrounding the nuclear reactor was thick enough to withstand an accident.

Oyster Creek is in the Forked River section of Lacey Township, about 60 miles east of Philadelphia.

The Nine Mile Point Nuclear generating Station near Oswego, N.Y., went online Dec. 1, 1969 - the same day as Oyster Creek - and has already gotten a new 20-year license. But Oyster Creek's license was granted first, technically making it the oldest of the nation's 104 commercial nuclear reactors that are still operating.

It would be 60 years old at the end of the license it is currently seeking.

The plant generates 636 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 600,000 homes a year. It provides 9 percent of New Jersey's electricity.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/02/05/ap6013563.html

Take the Pledge...Sign the Declaration! Become a Born-Again American!

http://www.bornagainamerican.org/

(click to see video, hear song, and take action)

BORN AGAIN AMERICAN
By Keith Carradine

Just a workin’ man without a job
It got shipped off to China via Washington, D.C.
And I know I’m nothin’ special, there are plenty more like me
Just the same
I thought I knew the rules of the game

I stood up for this country that I love
I came back from the desert to a wife and kids to feed
I’m not sayin’ Uncle Sam should give me what I need
My offer stands
I’ll pull my weight you give me half a chance

I went up to a congressman and said to him “you know
Our government is letting people down”
He said he’d need a lot of help to buck the status-quo
I said there was a bunch of us around

I’m a Born Again American, conceived in Liberty
My Bible and the Bill of Rights, my creed’s equality
I’m a Born Again American, my country ‘tis of me
And everyone who shares the dream from sea to shining sea

My brother’s welding chassis at the plant
He’s earning what our granddad did in 1948
While CEOs count bonuses behind the castle gates
How can they see
When all they care about’s the do re mi

It’s getting where there’s nowhere left to turn
Not since the crash of twenty-nine have things been so unfair
So many of our citizens are living in despair
The time has come
To reaffirm that hope’s not just for some

The promise of America’s surrendering to greed
The rule is just look out for number one
But brace yourself ‘cause some of us have sown a different seed
A harvest of the spirit has begun

I’m a Born Again American conceived in liberty
My Bible and The Bill Of Rights
My creed’s equality
A Born Again American, my country ‘tis of me
And everyone who shares the dream from sea to shining sea

It’s clear my country’s soul is on the line
She’s hungering for something that she lost along the way
The principle the framers called upon us to obey
That in this land
The people’s will must have the upper hand

I felt the calling once before and took a sacred vow
And faithful to that vow I have remained
I hear the calling once again, my country needs me now
And to her cause I have been re-ordained

I’m a Born Again American conceived in liberty
My Bible and the Bill Of Rights, all people living free
A Born Again American, my country ‘tis of me
And everyone who shares the dream
From sea to shining sea
And everyone who shares the dream
From sea to shining sea
A M E R I C A

A $50 Billion Nuke Power Bomb Is Dropping Toward Obama's Stimulus Package

The desperate, dangerous nuclear power industry has dropped a $50 billion stealth bomb meant to irradiate the Obama Stimulus Package.

It comes in the form of a mega-loan guarantee package that would build new reactors Wall Street wouldn't finance even when it had cash. It will take a healthy dose of citizen action to stop it, so start calling your Senators now.

The vaguely worded bailout-in-advance provision was snuck through the Senate Appropriations Committee in the deep night of January 27. It would provide $50 billion in loan guarantees for "eligible technologies" that would technically include renewable sources and electric transmission. But the handout is clearly directed at nukes and "clean coal."

The Stimulus Package is explicitly meant to create jobs within the next two years. But according to sources at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, no new reactors could be licensed for construction within that time. Nor could any new coal plants. And thus the funds in this rider are to "remain available until committed." That means their "stimulus" might not go into effect for many years.

But the nuclear industry does have the ability to spend large sums of money on "site preparation" and other busy work prior to being licensed. Though the guarantees could technically be used for truly green sources such as wind and solar, the provision's backers, including Senators Robert Bennett (R-UT) and Thomas Carper (D-DE), have made it clear that this money is meant to go for new reactor construction.

In late 2007, nuclear power's Congressional Godfather, then-Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), stuck a similar $50 billion loan guarantee package into that year's energy bill. A grassroots uprising, joined by virtually all national environmental organizations, helped defeat the package. Among other things, the fight inspired a music video from Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne, Graham Nash, Keb Mo and Ben Harper (www.nukefree.org).

In late 2008 the industry came back again with a blank check package that went down in flames along with the stock market.

Still unable to get private financing, the industry is back yet again. In the interim, the projected cost of building new reactors has soared to more than $10 billion each, and continues to climb steadily. Many of the previous generation of reactors came in hugely over budget. According to the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, one DOE study places the overall average overruns at 207%. But reactor projects such as Seabrook, in New Hampshire, New York's Shoreham, Pennsylvania's Beaver Valley, California's Diablo Canyon, and many others, far exceeded that.

The Congressional Budget Office now predicts that half the nuclear utilities using such a loan program will go into default. Some $18.5 billion in loan guarantees has already been approved, apparently for such use. But its legality is being hotly disputed, and the money has not been distributed by the Department of Energy.

Washington insiders believe this latest attempt at a pre-arranged bailout has again come from Domenici, who has stayed in Washington to lobby for his radioactive benefactors after apparently retiring from the Senate in January.

This guarantee package was not part of the Stimulus Package that passed the House. Its secretive, late night inclusion on the Senate side is reminiscent of how former Vice President Dick Cheney did business for the fossil/nuclear corporations that funded much of the Bush Administration. The reappearance of this kind of back door dealing has not been well received, especially in the House.

Numerous national groups, including the Nuclear Information & Resource Service (www.nirs.org) are providing sign-ins for sending e-mails to the Senate. They also urge that you call your Senator at 202-224-3121.

Time is fast slipping by for the nuke power industry. As the popularity of renewables and efficiency escalates, the most obvious source of new jobs and prosperity has become truly green technologies. Atomic power has long since been priced out of the market. Only massive federal and ratepayer subsidies could bring it back, to the direct detriment of the revolution in renewables.

Defeating this latest money grab will help drive another nail in the coffin of the 20th century's most expensive failed technology.. It is an essential step toward a truly green-powered future.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/31-4

Answers Don't Add Up About Pittsylvania County Landfill Leak

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 9:22 AM EST



Just this week my wife talked with County Administrator Dan Sleeper about the landfill leak in Dry Fork.

In his conversation, he held up his hand, and with his finger and thumb about 2 inches apart, said "That's all there was, about 2 inches" He stated in the paper less than a coffee cup.

The Department of Environmental Quality stated (in the Star-Tribune) "a small seep was found along the base of the Phase 1 cell (a 10-acre site) and called the seep a "wet spot."

There are all size wet spots to me. If it ran into a storm water system and the county sampled this wet spot in two different locations, Mr. Sleeper must have a heck of a coffee cup.

The paper states the seep or wet spot was observed entering the landfill's storm water system. How can it enter if it is a wet spot?

The Star-Tribune stated the county sampled the seep in two locations in March and April and it was contaminated with metals (I wonder what kind?) and organic matter and represented a leachate outbreak. These results of these tests should be made public.


Dewberry stated in the Star-Tribune the leachate pump 80 feet below the garbage wasn't working properly.

It seems to me that DEQ's seep at the base of Phase 1 cell means the contamination would have to work its way through a thick holding cell wall.

I just don't understand how Mr. Sleepers "2 inches" in a coffee cup of contamination could do all this.

Again the Star-Tribune states Mr. Hawker (assistant administrator) as saying they could not determine there was any release, and then turns around and said the seep was about 1,600 feet from the nearest wetlands and 2,500 feet from the Banister River.

The county installed a new pump with a flow meter. This is great, but if there is no buildup of leachate, the flow meter won't tell them anything and if the pump stops working again the flow meter won't show anything. It looks like to me they are back at square one.

My point is: all these errors could happen with uranium mining cells.

Now county, do your job and protect your citizens.

Our county can stop the uranium mining with our ordinances already in place, but if they wait until after this biased study, they can't.

The citizens of Pittsylvania County should have been notified. Is your well downstream? Have they done any water tests to see if the leachate reached your wells?

The "mistake" happened in March 2008 and almost a year later we are finding out about it. Why?

Our county spent a total of $9,300. That included a $1,300 civil penalty (fine) of our tax dollars.

DEQ sampled the seep in two locations in March and April and determined it was contaminated. DEQ issued a notice of violation in July.

Call your county supervisors and tell them you want answers!

Phillip Lovelace

Gretna

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/02/05/chatham/opinion/opinion02.txt

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Expanded Uranium Mine Approved in CO

By Matthew Beaudin, Editor
Published: Wednesday, February 4, 2009 9:23 PM CST
The Bureau of Land Management inked an approval for expanded uranium mining in the Big Gypsum Valley last Friday, agreeing to a proposal brought forth from Denison Mines Corporation, a Canadian company.

New activities at the Sunday Mining complex — which lies near Naturita — will include the expansion of waste rock areas and the addition of vent holes along with access roads and additional drilling.

The existing land disturbance at the complex is about 80 acres; the proposed new surface disturbance would affect about 20 additional acres of public land in the area.

According to the BLM, the Denison Mines Corporation acquired the entire mining complex — it was multiple mines before — and will run it as one operation.


Jamie Sellar-Baker, the Dolores Public Lands Office associate manager, signed a Finding of No Significant Impact and Decision Record for the project, meaning its existence will have “no significant impact” on the environment surrounding it.

Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance was disappointed with the decision to allow expansion.

“We hope that this region will usher in a new era of renewable energy exploration as opposed to old technologies that damage the environment as well as human health,” she said.

Across jurisdictions — from the Department of Energy to the Bureau of Land Management — the uranium boom is rippling.

In the summer of 2007, the Department of Energy also announced its intent to renew 13 active leases in southwest Colorado for 10 years, effectively rolling out the welcome mat for mining companies.

The Sunday Mines lies in Uravan Mineral Belt, which arcs west from here to Utah through the bust town of Uravan. The resource is as storied as the industry itself, as some of its ore went toward the Manhattan Project.


Now, yellowcake isn’t used to make weapons but to supply the world’s 400-plus nuclear power plants with fuel.

The Department of Energy has said the belt can produce some 2 million pounds of uranium ore every year and create jobs, though it could put as many as 300 trucks on regional roads each day when operating at its peak, far beyond only the Sunday Mines.

The county has voiced its opposition to the second uranium boom in the past but has little teeth to sink into the federally-permitted programs.

http://www.telluridenews.com/articles/2009/02/04/news/doc498a5ae835df3095591068.txt

Public Is Awake And Aware

By Paula Bryant
The Gazette-Virginian

Halifax Town Councilman and Halifax County’s Southside Concerned Citizen (SCC) Chairman Jack Dunavant has brought to our attention what he terms as “the bureaucratic disregard for public safety that is abroad” that he experienced during last week’s meeting of the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors.

According to information provided in the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors’ executive summary for their January 20 meeting, under the topic of discussion, it says, “In July 2008, on one of our closed landfill cells, during an inspection of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), an area was discovered that appeared to be wet and possibly be releasing leachate.”

The DEQ document beginning on the next page, under Section C, #1 reveals that DEQ staff actually discovered the seep on March 21, 2008.

Jack believes this three-month discrepancy in discovery date “must be corrected for the record.”

Also in the DEQ document, under Section C, #4, it says “the seep was indeed landfill leachate, and was contaminated with ‘metals and organic constituents.’”

The Halifax Councilman points out the DEQ must reveal the list of those contaminants by name and percentage.

Section C, #5 also mentions “a significant volume of leachate.”

How much, exactly? Jack wants to know.

It also states that the “periodic checks” by “facility personnel” – county employees -- “were not sufficient to detect failures of this nature.”

According to the SCC chairman, it is incumbent upon the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors to reveal to whom these “facility personnel” reported. What was in the know about this problem?

Section C, #6 said the county replaced the leachate pump impeller, installed leachate flow meters and instituted procedures to check the meters weekly.

When was this accomplished? And how long was the leaching allowed to continue?

Section C, #9 says, “County representatives and their environmental consultants met with DEQ staff on July 31, 2008 to discuss the noncompliance issues and the corrective action undertaken to address the same.”

Does this mean that the leaching (which had been ongoing for how long?) was allowed to continue from March 21, 2008 until after July 31, 2008 -- four months -- before any “corrective action” was taken?

Approximately how much leachate was released?

That’s the SCC chairman’s prime concern.

Although this leaching occurred in Pittsylvania County, Jack wants to know did DEQ test the Banister River to determine how much “metals and organic constituents” seeped into the river that flows downstream into Halifax County? If so, those test results must be revealed to the public, Jack adamantly believes.

However, the DEQ maintains the seepage did not get into the stream or river.

Will the $1,300 civil charge be paid with county tax dollars, or can county officials and staff be held responsible for picking up the tab? That’s another question that taxpayers in Pittsylvania County should be asking.

According to county staff recommendations, the board of supervisors was asked to authorize the county administrator to sign the consent order and pay the $1,300 civil charge out of the operating budget.

Pittsylvania County’s SCC Chairman Gregg Vickrey finds this latest development “outrageous in light of the potential uranium mining and milling in our area.”

“If the ‘newest’ technology and regulations can’t keep a landfill from leaking, what makes anyone confident, no matter what a ‘study’ shows, that the Coles Hill Uranium Project can be done in such a way as to keep the citizens and natural environments safe?” he asks.

Citizens have the right to know and must demand all the facts regarding this landfill leak, and if the two SCC chairmen are any indication of whose watching, politicians will quickly learn a concerned public is awake and aware.

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:gxZQo6lTpOQJ:www.gazettevirginian.com/opinion4.htm+Public+Is+Awake+And+Aware+Paula+Bryant&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Hurt, VA Passes Anti-Uranium Mining Resolution

We've heard through the grapevine that Hurt, VA has passed a resolution against uranium mining at Coles Hill. Go, Hurt!

We've also heard that Henry Hurt, major VUI investor and father of Senator Robert Hurt (R-19), appeared before the council with a resolution in favor of the mining and was ignored.

If anyone has a link to a local news story, please pass it along so that we can publish the article with attribution.

Thanks!

Update: A copy of the Resolution as it was filed and prior to its signing can be found on the SCC blog, http://sccchatham.blogspot.com/

Local Residents Should Learn About Uranium

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Uranium has never been mined safely anywhere in the world in the past nor in the present, and it won't be mined safely here in Virginia.

People have suffered from uranium mining in thousands of ways. Air, water, soil, plants, animals, homes, things you touch and eat, your hair and everything else around each person and for hundreds of miles around a mine get polluted by radioactive uranium, radon or other poisonous byproducts of mining. Once uranium and radon have been released and extracted from the ground, you can be sure it will find its way into your food, clothing, water, homes and, of course, your cells and DNA. You may experience sicknesses of all kinds, including cancer.

Please protect your family and yourself by educating yourself about uranium mining and what it really is. Don't take the word of politicians, mining company technicians and scientists paid by the mining companies or for that matter anyone else, nor mine either.

You won't get rich or even get a job. Special trained people will be imported to do jobs you think you will get. The economy in our area will not get richer. You will see people sicker, home and land values go down the drain forever and your family will suffer for the rest of the generations because DNA changes do not show up immediately, but will be in your children, grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren and so on. Also, your water and soil and homes will never get cleaned up because radioactive materials don't disappear. Once our area is polluted, it will stay polluted for hundreds of years.

The mines in Australia, quoted often as examples of safe mining, are some of the worst polluters of all, causing great harm to thousands of people and thousands of acres of land.

Don't take my word for it, but look it up for yourself. Look up "danger of uranium mining" and find out what curse would be brought upon us if we allow uranium mining in our state anywhere. It is worse than terrorism, the turn down in our economy and anything else you can think of.

If you neglect to get involved to fight for your home, family, health and everything dear to you, then you are allowing people who have no interest in you or our community to open a Pandora's Box that will spew out poisons that will eat up everything you have.

We can't be complacent. I went through World War II. No one thought it was really going to get to us and so we did nothing. We then were swallowed up in the horrors of war and our lives were changed forever.

This is worse. We will never recover from the pollution that uranium mining will bring! So don't allow it to happen right under our noses.

Educate yourself first, then educate your grown children, then get involved educating neighbors and friends, and join organizations that are fighting uranium mining. If you look up "danger of uranium mining" and follow some of the links given you there and look at some of the movies, you will see how bad uranium mining would be for our area. You can join organizations that can fight for you. Look up "Danville, Virginia SCC against uranium mining."

Just think what the flooding of 1996, which covered many towns in this area, including Coles Hill, where the mines would have been, would have done to all of our water sources and wells, land, trees, gardens, homes and animals.

Don't think pollution couldn't happen here.

I pray and hope this letter will inspire some people to educate themselves on this important subject, which will affect their lives in the near future if nothing is done to stop uranium mining.

Irene Buss

Gretna

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/02/04/altavista/opinion/opinion01.txt

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Lawrence Partners Fund Manager Given Second Chance

In his letter, Mr. Sood said his firm "significantly reduced the value" of several positions in December after reviewing the fund's illiquid investments with its auditor, KPMG LLP.

"Our holdings in Athabasca Oil Sands, Canadian Bioenergy Corp., MagMinerals and Virginia Uranium were written down and represented the bulk of the reduction in net asset value," he wrote.

FUNDS REPORTER

Shareholders of Lawrence Partners Fund yesterday voted to let its manager, Ravi Sood, have another crack at reinvesting some of the struggling hedge fund's assets.

Toronto-based Lawrence Asset Management Inc. had been proposing a restructuring for its flagship fund, which lost 81 per cent last year amid the market turmoil. The fund had assets of $43-million at the end of December, compared with $202.5-million a year ago.

More than 90 per cent of shareholders agreed to creating two classes of investments - reinvest and windup shares, said Brian Viveiros, sales manager at Lawrence Asset Management.

He would not disclose the breakdown of the share choices, but sources said about two-thirds of shareholders had opted for the reinvest alternative.

Proceeds from the sales of investments would be redeployed in the fund for those who have chosen the reinvest shares. Those who elect the windup shares will eventually be paid in cash. Shareholders could also elect to get part of their capital back as investments are sold and leave the rest in the fund.

In his recent letter to shareholders, Mr. Sood, president of Lawrence, said the firm and its principals would vote in favour of two share classes and choose the reinvest option.

The reinvest shares will be subject to restrictions. They will not be able to use leverage, but will be able to be sold short. Eligible securities in the fund must be publicly traded on a Canadian stock exchange and have a market capitalization of at least $100-million.

According to the information circular for the shareholder meeting, the Lawrence Partners Fund currently has illiquid holdings in Russian companies. It owns shares in Russo-Forest Corp., set up in 2007 to exploit timber leases in Russia. The fund also lent money to two Russian companies to acquire and develop oil leases.

The management fee will be reduced to 1 per cent on the existing portfolio, but will return to 1.5 per cent on capital that is reinvested. There will be no performance fee on the reinvest shares.

Lawrence Partners Fund suspended redemptions in early November to present alternatives to investors because the fund was left with private investments not easily sold.

In his letter, Mr. Sood said his firm "significantly reduced the value" of several positions in December after reviewing the fund's illiquid investments with its auditor, KPMG LLP.

"Our holdings in Athabasca Oil Sands, Canadian Bioenergy Corp., MagMinerals and Virginia Uranium were written down and represented the bulk of the reduction in net asset value," he wrote.

"We do not expect the market to provide much return to investors in and of itself in 2009, but the current situation has provided an opportunity to buy great companies at great prices."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090203.RLAWRENCE03/TPStory/Business

Southern Missouri Targeted for Uranium Drilling

These folks are really being sold a bill of goods too. Someone's trying to convince them that in situ leaching is safe! Sure hope they'll fight back!

CHARLESTON, Mo. (AP) — In Mississippi County, where nearly a fourth of the residents live in poverty, farmers have a long history of making a living off what springs from the flat, fertile lowlands — soybeans, corn, timber.

But now a geologist has come to the area armed with decades-old charts, promises of millions of dollars in jobs and benefits and a theory about what may be tucked deep inside the crevices under the Mississippi River Valley and the New Madrid Seismic Zone.

It could be one of the "biggest deposits of undiscovered uranium in the U.S.," says John Gustavson, a geologist whose former consulting firm analyzed data about the county in the 1980s. That data was collected for the National Uranium Resource Evaluation program, which was started by the federal government in the 1970s to locate U.S. uranium.

"We are now past 30 years where uranium was of no interest," says Gustavson, 76. "Now with the need for clean energy ... the future market for uranium is there."

While the money uranium mining could bring southeast Missouri appeals to some, others raise concerns about mining in the farm-rich Mississippi River Valley and below its massive aquifer, a major source of water for irrigation and drinking.

Gustavson, who has been coordinating new uranium testing in southeast Missouri, is part of a recent push for uranium spurred by rising prices and some renewed global interest in nuclear power, which is fueled by uranium. The number of mining claims within five miles of the Grand Canyon alone went from about 10 in 2003 to more than 1,100 in 2008, most for uranium, according to Dusty Horwitt, senior analyst for the Washington, D.C.-based Environmental Working Group.

While uranium mining in the western U.S. has a long and controversy-filled history, it would be new to Missouri. Gustavson has also made initial moves toward testing in southeast Kansas and hopes to acquire forest lands along the eastern side of the Mississippi River for testing.

In Mississippi County, levels of uranium — which has been linked to cancer and kidney damage after long-term exposure at elevated levels — were below the federal standard of 30 parts per billion for drinking water when tested 30 years ago. But Gustavson says he believes higher levels could be deeper underground if the uranium became trapped in the New Madrid Seismic Zone, an area of frequent small earthquakes that runs along the lower Mississippi Valley and includes areas of Missouri, Arkansas, Illinois and Kentucky.

"It would be like finding a gold mine," he said.

Gustavson has about 20,000 acres in the county signed up for testing. Results on several wells are expected in February.

Gustavson, who retired from his Colorado-based firm a year ago, said he would spend about $1 million in Mississippi County the first year of testing and $4 million the next year, depending on the results.

If uranium is found, he says it would be mined and shipped to a facility in Kentucky for processing into fuel for nuclear power plants. Landowners would receive a percentage of the haul, Gustavson said.

The prospect of jobs and money is important for Mississippi County, where towns rely on agriculture, unemployment hovers around 7 percent, and according to the U.S. Census, about 23 percent of the residents live below the poverty level.

"What he's planned sounds like a great opportunity for the people of Mississippi County," said County Commissioner Martin Lucas. "But it's speculative."

And Bob Criss, professor of earth and planetary sciences at Washington University-St. Louis, says uranium mining could pose risks to the area's aquifers. About 15 percent of the state's groundwater, or 75 trillion gallons, is found in this southeastern corner.

"We know that aquifer is huge, it's utilized, and it's incredibly important," he said. "To risk its integrity would be very serious."

While uranium mining in the western U.S. has led to claims of cancer and land and water contamination, industry officials say new regulations make such concerns outdated.

"You have the onset of major environmental laws like the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ... which simply didn't exist before," said Luke Popovich, spokesman for the National Mining Association.

Gustavson too dismisses concerns about negative effects of uranium mining. He said if uranium is found and a company becomes involved, it would use in situ mining, which involves injecting a mixture such as oxygen and sodium bicarbonate into the site to draw the uranium out. He says that would not disturb land or water.

But a 2007 report prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said while in situ mining operations were considered "more environmentally benign" than traditional mining, "they still tend to contaminate groundwater."

Gustavson said he considers a uranium operation in southwest Texas as a model for Mississippi County. A different uranium development operation, however, has encountered opposition from Goliad County, Texas, which filed a federal lawsuit in 2008 against Uranium Energy Corp., claiming groundwater contamination.

The company denies allegations of groundwater violations in Goliad County, said Lindsay Christianson, with UEC's investor relations.

Art Dohmann, president of the Goliad County Groundwater Conservation District, advised Mississippi County residents to become educated about the process.

Mississippi County farmer Martin Stallings said it took some convincing for him to sign over about 460 acres for exploration.

"I thought they were going to ruin the land," said Stallings. "We have highly productive farmland, and we have taken good care of it for a long time. ... Why destroy something that works?"

He stands to make $5 an acre for testing, and if uranium is found on his land, Stallings would receive between 4 percent and 6 percent of the price of the uranium withdrawn, Gustavson said. The higher the price for uranium, the higher the payout.

Lucas said many farmers find those numbers tough to turn down.

"At current (uranium) prices they're told they could get $300,000 a year on a 40-acre well field," he said. "You won't want to farm that land."

Gustavson would not detail how much money he and his investors stand to make.

"I'm not in it for the money," he said. "I'm a geologist."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i1ueDnGT-iS0uXSEjWWVBQs52PLQD963LQA81

Uranium opponents lash out at county

Poor Li'l Walt...Waaaaaa!

Walt Coles Jr., executive vice president of VUI, said opponents’ attacks on the company’s plans are unfair. “All we’ve ever proposed is a state-sanctioned study,” Coles said after the meeting. “We need a fair chance to do something safely.”

Published: February 2, 2009

By John Crane, Danville Register & Bee

CHATHAM — The leader of a local group opposing uranium mining blasted the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors on Monday night after the board voted not to discuss a uranium-mining study commission listed on its agenda.

‘We don’t trust you,” Gregg Vickrey, president of the Chatham/Pittsylvania chapter of Southside Concerned Citizens, said to supervisors during their regular meeting Monday night.

Vickrey warned the board not to “give the impression you’re sweeping things under the carpet.”

“We will take appropriate action when it comes time to vote,” he said.

Chatham-Blairs Supervisor Hank Davis had put the item on the agenda, but Dan River Supervisor James Snead requested it be removed because there was no explanation of the topic in the board’s agenda packet.

“I don’t know what it’s about,” Snead said. “I don’t know how we can consider anything when there’s no information.”

Vickrey, along with two other mining opponents, voiced their displeasure to the board when it came time for residents to address supervisors about topics not on the agenda.

Vickrey drew parallels between the county’s delayed public notification of a leachate leak at the county landfill in Dry Fork and the implications it could have for a possible similar incident at the proposed uranium mining and milling operation at Coles Hill. Virginia Uranium Inc. wants to mine and mill a uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill about six miles northeast of Chatham.

“What if it took almost a year for the public to find out about a spill at Coles Hill?” he said.

After the meeting, Davis said he will bring the topic back to the board at a later date. Davis would not reveal why he entered the agenda item.

Walt Coles Jr., executive vice president of VUI, said opponents’ attacks on the company’s plans are unfair.

“All we’ve ever proposed is a state-sanctioned study,” Coles said after the meeting. “We need a fair chance to do something safely.”

Contact John R. Crane at jcrane@registerbee.com or (434) 791-7987.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/local/danville_news/article/uranium_opponents_lash_out_at_county/8794/

Monday, February 2, 2009

NRC: Pa. Nuclear Plant Workers Fear Retaliation

By MICHAEL RUBINKAM , 01.28.09, 05:29 PM EST

Some workers at a Pennsylvania nuclear power plant are afraid to raise safety issues because they fear retaliation, federal regulators said Wednesday.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued a warning letter to Allentown-based PPL Corp. about its Susquehanna plant in northeastern Pennsylvania, citing indications that workers are unwilling to come forward with their concerns.

The Susquehanna plant led the nation last year in the number of anonymous allegations its employees made to the NRC regarding perceived improprieties or inadequacies, according to agency statistics.

PPL must take steps to preclude a "chilled" work environment at the power plant, regulators said. The utility was given 30 days to respond.

Joe Scopelliti, community relations manager at the power plant, said PPL encourages all its employees to speak up about safety issues. Workers can go to their supervisors or plant management, or submit their concerns anonymously to an "employee concerns representative" or to the NRC itself, he said.

"Of course, PPL takes all concerns raised by our employees seriously. And it's vitally important that they feel they can raise any issues freely without any fear of retaliation," Scopelliti said.

Regulators did not identify any instance of a worker not reporting a safety violation for fear of retribution, agency spokesman Neil Sheehan said Wednesday. Rather, the agency is concerned about a worsening climate at the plant, he said.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2009/01/28/ap5978740.html

Areva Building Nuclear Manufacturing Plant in VA; Wants Nuclear Waste Recycling Plant Too

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn., Feb. 2 (UPI) -- France-based Areva would like to build a nuclear waste recycling plant in the United States.

Jacques Besnainou, the president of the company's U.S. branch, has appealed to U.S. President Barack Obama to allow nuclear power to provide a larger percentage of the country's power needs, the Chattanooga Times Free Press reports.

"It will be very good for our children and our grandchildren to have a clean, carbon-free source of energy from nuclear power," Besnainou told the Chattanooga chapter of the American Nuclear Society. "Nuclear power is not the only solution, but there is no solution without nuclear."

Besnainou expects there to be about 100 new nuclear reactors built around the world in 2030, and Areva Inc. hopes to build more than 30 of those new plants.

Areva is building a uranium reprocessing plant in Idaho and a nuclear manufacturing plant in Virginia.

Areva officials also want to build a nuclear waste recycling plant in the United States, but it would cost more than $15 billion.

http://www.upi.com/Energy_Resources/2009/02/02/Areva_exec_pursues_US_nuclear/UPI-85641233615879/


Uranium Committee Should Carefully Weigh Benefits, Risks

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Editor's note: The following letter was submitted to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee.

Thanks again for appearing in Chatham as a committee to let us discuss our concerns regarding uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

There is very little doubt that the U.S. needs additional sources of energy. Our town, county and state would be greatly served with the influx of wages and additional purchasing power that this proposed project would bring.

It would be beyond belief that you would recommend, or our government would authorize and empower the mining of something so potentially lethal without adequate safeguards.

Hopefully, you would do your very best to build in sufficient clean-up regulations that would alleviate that danger.

It has been my experience, once money is taken, there is never an enforceable penalty strong enough, or with sufficient enforceable penalties, to keep residents out of harm's way.

It simply would not be cleaned up. I'm certain all of you know of similar cases from your own experiences.

There have been several articles on lead mines with similar results in the U.S. Mining and waste left made the areas uninhabitable and whole towns were lost. Many explained and unexplained deaths and illnesses occurred. Much damage was caused by the mining, but a great deal came from improper clean-up and disposal.

Another item of concern: There have been numerous articles in recent years about lead paint used in children's toys. Approximately 6 parts per million has proven harmful.

An article I read said it would be satisfactory if it was reduced to 3 parts per million. If so little amount of lead in paint on toys can prove harmful to the health and life of our children, it would be extremely difficult for your committee to prove to us that mining of uranium, run-off, dust and other hazards would or could prove less harmful.

There is another area that should be explored. That is asbestos. Asbestos has been used for generations to insulate houses, for roof shingles, and many other products.

Are uranium tailings, run-off, and dust less hazardous than the amount of asbestos used in these areas?

Or do we (and/or our survivors) have to look at ads from lawyers similar to the ones we see so often for mesothelioma?

The committee should also address the economic downside of loss of all the jobs promised and will be lost when this is completed.

What happens to the town, county, surrounding counties and Commonwealth of Virginia when we only have several "billionaires" left?

We are forced to trust your judgment, and implore you to make sure there is something left for all the families here in future generations.

They now are facing an enormous financial debt burden we forced on them. Please do not also force them to face annihilation, loss of life and/or their property.

We have such a great community, surrounding area and state. Let us be very careful and not destroy it all.

Please take your challenge for our future very carefully, and if it's proven the thing to do, let's do it. But don't make an irreversible error of judgment.

James A. Davidson

Chatham

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/02/02/chatham/opinion/opinion01.txt




Uranium Seminar in Gretna Tues, Feb. 3, 2009 7pm

Uranium Seminar


Tuesday, February 3, 2009

7 p.m.
Mt. Olive Baptist Church

10465 Rockford School Rd.

Gretna, VA

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Just a Broken Pump?

By Published by The Editorial Board

Danville Register & Bee

Published: February 1, 2009

Pittsylvania County Administrator Dan Sleeper gave a common sense explanation as to why the community wasn’t notified about a corroded pump that allowed a small amount of leachate to leak at the county’s landfill in Dry Fork.

The leak was discovered on March 21, 2008, but apparently wasn’t made public until last month during a Board of Supervisors meeting. The county wound up paying a $1,300 civil fine for what Sleeper described as enough spilled leachate to fill a coffee cup.

Leachate is liquid that has passed through rotting garbage or other wastes, picking up contaminants as it goes. The leachate in question contained “metals and organic constituents.”

So what does this incident have to do with uranium mining and milling?

Pittsylvania County’s “sanitary landfill” is a closely monitored facility that is bound by the same set of state laws and regulations as countless other similar facilities around Virginia. While humans have been throwing away their garbage since the dawn of time, they’ve never had to contend with the complex and comprehensive regulations that are in place today for garbage dumps.

It didn’t take long for uranium mining opponents to draw parallels between the leachate leak and what they’re fighting. They drew those parallels because they saw a regulated, government-monitored waste handling system fail without the public’s knowledge.

What if the pump in question had been responsible for handling uranium mining and milling wastes? What if it took almost a year for the public to learn about a spill at Coles Hill? What if the public found out about it as a side note during a public meeting?

One of the arguments used by uranium mining opponents is that even a regulated, government-monitored activity can still run into problems that could potentially affect the community. In essence, they believe that even if the rules are followed, the rules themselves aren’t good enough.

It appears they want a margin of safety that’s either perfect or close to it because they believe that even a small amount of uranium mining and milling waste will be a big problem both now — and into the future.

But life isn’t perfect. Machines fail, liquids spill and solids break. Perfection is certainly not a human trait.

The county landfill leachate spill was a minor event with big overtones. The questions raised by this incident at the landfill are valid — and deserve answers.

http://www.godanriver.com/gdr/news/opinion/editorials/danville_editorials/article/just_a_broken_pump/8762/

Uranium, Other Conflict-of-Interest Issues Cause Lobbyists To Walking a Fine Line w/ GA

It appears that transparency could expose conflicts, double-dipping, etc.

JEFF E. SCHAPIRO, COLUMNIST

TIMES-DISPATCH

Published: January 31, 2009

Chuck Duvall is a lobbyist of the old school. Quiet, droll, with a purposeful stride, he carries his office in his pocket. What was said of a House speaker from Duvall's 'hood might apply to Duvall: He can walk through the woods without rustling the leaves.

But Duvall's mix of clients and this year's blend of legislation have state Capitol habitues stirring over a perceived conflict of interest.

Duvall, who came to Richmond from Frederick County as a legislative aide in the early 1970s, deals with this dilemma by intentionally not dealing in the issues that put his clients at cross-purposes.

For lobbyists, conflicts of interest are a growing challenge, if not problem, that can be largely attributed to Virginia's rapidly changing political and economic landscape. However, the principal safeguard against possible abuses remains unchanged: self-policing.

Given the amount of money spent influencing the General Assembly -- $20 million last year, up from $16 million in 2007 -- a skeptical public may have little confidence that lobbyists can be relied upon to keep their nest clean.

Another complication: lobbyists' innate aversion to scrutiny. Many lobbyists believe the most effective way to ply their trade -- that is, peddling information that molds government policy -- is to be heard and not seen. In other words: Leave the headlines to the politicians.

Del. Sam Nixon, R-Chesterfield, hopes to promote some transparency with legislation forcing lobbyists to report bill-specific spending -- the gifts and entertainment showered on a lawmaker for this vote or that.

Nixon got the idea from contract lobbyists who complain about opaque post-General Assembly disclosures to the state by their counterparts at the high-roller firms.

Duvall lobbies for hospital giant HCA, which favors higher tobacco taxes for Medicaid. He also represents Bailey's cigarette maker S&M Brands, a foe of additional levies. And Duvall has 7-Eleven. The convenience-store chain is against more tobacco taxes as well as a proposal to strip retailers of their cut for collecting the sales tax.

For the 2009 legislature, Duvall -- with his clients' OK -- skirts a possible conflict by not lobbying on these issues. That way, he preserves long-standing -- and lucrative -- business relationships. Further, Duvall avoids disrupting ties to lawmakers, who look to him for the straight skinny and the occasional campaign contribution.

Duvall isn't the only lobbyist bumping into conflicts.

Lawyer Alan Albert represents Virginia Beach. His partner, Tom Lisk, schmoozes for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association. The city favors tougher controls on smoking in public; the group opposes them. The firm and Virginia Beach decided Albert would not lobby on smoking bills.

Albert snapped up Virginia Beach as a client because of a conflict of interest by another lobbyist. Ben Dendy represented the city for years. The relationship ended because Dendy signed with a proposed uranium mine that Virginia Beach fears will poison its water supply.

More troublesome than conflicts of interest may be the protocols -- or lack thereof -- for identifying and avoiding them. Lawyers risk public punishment by the Virginia State Bar for breaching the profession's canons. Not nonlawyers.

The best solution may be to let daylight upon the mystery. That's assuming the lobbyists, and their assembly friends, don't lock the shutters first.

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/news/columnists_news/article/JEFF01_20090131-220546/194252/