|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two groups join opposition to uranium bill
With the uranium mining study going to the Rules Committee of the House
of Delegates this week, several environmental groups have expressed
their opposition to Senate Bill 525 which was approved by the State
Senate two weeks ago.
In a letter dated February 15, Lisa Guthrie, Executive Director of the
Virginia League of Conservation Voters, wrote that her organization is
opposed to SB 525 "which purports to be 'just a study,' but is
considerably more than that."
Guthrie enumerates five concerns of her group, the first being that a
study is premature. "The proponents of the industry have put forward
nothing but assertions that vast improvements have been made in uranium
mining, milling and waste disposal technology during the 23 years since
the General Assembly declined to open Virginia to uranium mining. That
information should be provided and evaluated before a 'study' is
endorsed by this body," she writes.
Secondly, she notes that as the bill is currently written, the
conclusion of the 'independent, scientific study' will be that uranium
mining should proceed in Virginia. "If there is a study, its
conclusions should be subject to public hearings before work begins on
a statute which would lift the current moratorium," she says.
Another concern she raises is simply that "an underfunded, poorly
designed study is not in the public interest." Language in SB 525 does
not guarantee appropriate funding and the fund should have at least $1
million before the commission and the public starts work.
Guthrie also says that membership on the study commission should also
reflect the reality that uranium mining is a matter of statewide
concern, not just of Southside Virginia. In the 1980's, she writes,
"tens of thousands of acres of land were leased for uranium mining in
the northern and southern piedmont. Virginia's most populous
communities are downstream of these areas. Whatever was in the ground
in the 1980's is still, there," she points out.
Finally, she says "the timeline for the study is entirely unrealistic.
A serious, independent study cannot be completed by December 15, 2009.
And bear in mind the bill as written assumes the scientific study and
the development of the statutory and regulatory scheme will have
happened by that date."
In her letter to members of the House Rules Committee Guthrie points
out that Secretary Bodman of the federal Department of Energy said it
would be 2028 before his department could complete the clean-up of 130
acres of uranium mill tailings deposited near the Colorado River
decades ago and the estimated cost is $500 million in public monies.
"This record does not support the industry's claim of great
technological advances since the 1985 General Assembly decided not to
lift the moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia," she writes.
In conclusion, she reminded Rules Committee members, the bill "does not
have our support and it does not deserve yours."
Also seeking to preserve the moratorium on uranium mining passed in
Virginia in 1982 is the Dan River Basin Association (DRBA) which has
some 500 members in Virginia and North Carolina.
The DRBA on January 16, 2008 passed a resolution supporting the
continued moratorium on uranium mining in Virginia. That resolution
points to a host of serious problems, including toxic and radioactive
contamination of groundwater and surface water in addition to the risk
of cancer and other health problems for workers and the public and the
fact that a recent increase in energy prices has prompted the
re-emergence of interest in uranium mining at the Coles Hill deposit in
Pittsylvania County, located within the Banister River Watershed of the
Dan River Basin which provides drinking water for the City of Virginia
Beach and other communities downstream.
The DRBA membership points out that the proposed study should remain
statewide in scope and not focus solely on the Coles Hill deposit and
that statutory and regulatory mechanisms should apply across the
Commonwealth. They also say that while Virginia Uranium, the company
wanting to do the mining, should bear the funding costs, the study
should be commissioned by an independent party and parties with a
vested interest in the outcome of the study should not be involved.
Furthermore, they say, the study must conclusively demonstrate that the
proposed mining methods are safe and free of short and long term
impacts to human health, air quality and surface and ground water
quantity and quality. The study must also include examination of the
areaís hydrology, vegetation, wildlife, soils, archeology, cultural,
historic and recreational resources, seismology and meterology. And the
impacts of mining on land values, tourism and downsteam water resources
must be assessed.
The DRBA asks legislators to consider the fact that the uranium mining
proposal appears to be at odds with efforts to foster the economic
stability and well-being of Southern Virginia since studies of
successful efforts to attract investment to rural America show that
long term, sustainable economic growth will depend on a regionís
ability to offer a high quality of life, to foster formation of small
businesses and to encourage entrepreneurship.
The group also points out that the uranium market is unstable and tied
to unforeseeable events and that capital investment in uranium mining
is extraordinarily high relative to the number of jobs created and the
long term costs of doing business often falls to taxpayers. Costs of
mining have been passed on to taxpayers long after mines are closed and
ìrehabilitationî has occurred.
Also international reports reveal that the work related death rates for
uranium mine workers are 50 times or more those of manufacturing
workers and the disposal of highly radioactive spent fuel is very
problematic.
The group concludes that a broader, long term economic strategy points
to the advantages of attracting small businesses invested in
alternative energy sources, energy conservation and commercialization
of energy efficient technologies and the support of sustainable nature
and heritage tourism and Southern Virginiaís attempt to brand itself as
a desirable destination.
ìLocal nature and heritage tourism initiatives and national recognition
of the areaís special historical, cultural, recreational and natural
resources ó the legacies of ways of life that have shaped the land and
the people of our region ó will take the region in a positive
direction,î the group says.