©
By Steve Szkotak
RICHMOND
A company seeking to mine one of the world's largest uranium deposits is asking Virginia localities to reserve judgment on endorsing the continuation of a 1982 state ban on mining the ore until two key studies are completed.
Virginia Uranium Inc. has sent letters signed by its chairman, Walter Coles, to about 30 cities and towns urging them to "examine the evidence when the results of these studies are available," according to a company official.
"Too much is at stake to do otherwise," the letters say.
Virginia Uranium is seeking to mine a 119-million-pound uranium deposit in Pittsylvania County, the seventh-largest known deposit of the radioactive ore in the world.
First, however, it must convince the General Assembly to end the nearly 30-year moratorium on uranium mining. The company has flown legislators to France to view a closed mining operation as part of a lobbying campaign.
The company had signaled it was aiming at the 2012 session but now appears to be softening on that date.
The studies mentioned by Virginia Uranium include a National Academy of Sciences analysis on the statewide impact of uranium mining and a separate look at the socio-economic impact of tapping the uranium deposit near the North Carolina line.
"We've always supported the study and we think it's very important," Patrick Wales, Virginia Uranium's project manager, said in an interview Monday of the National Academy of Sciences study. "Of course, we have great confidence this industry can operate safely. It's operated safely all over the world."
The NAS study will not include a recommendation on whether the ban should be lifted.
Opponents have argued that mining in Virginia, which is subject to extreme rainfall and hurricanes, is a risky proposition. Mining involves milling in which the ore is separated from rock, creating vast amounts of waste byproduct.
The Keep the Ban Coalition, which opposes ending the ban, said more than 50 localities and organizations in Virginia and North Carolina have taken actions to keep the ban in place. The coalition has followed up the Virginia Uranium dispatches with its own letters, arguing that by lifting the ban communities risk inviting mining in their own backyards.
The discovery of the Coles Hill deposit in the 1970s spawned a gold rush in some parts of Virginia by mining companies that leased thousands of acres of mineral rights. The Southside Virginia find, however, is the only known commercially viable uranium deposit in the state.
An epicenter of that leasing activity was in central and northern Virginia, specifically Orange and Fauquier counties. One of Virginia Uranium's letters went to the town of Orange.
Town Manager Greg Woods said letters have been received by both sides, and the board decided not to take action on either appeals.
Orange County, citing the "threat to the county water supply and its agriculture products," passed a resolution in 2007 in support of the moratorium.
Coles said localities that endorse the ban "would disregard the conclusions from the scientific and economic impact studies that are expected to be announced later this year."
The letter also cites a study about "the enormous positive economic impact" the mine and milling operation would bring to economically depressed southern Virginia. It promised 250 construction jobs and 350 direct hires during the 35-year-life of the mine.
Keep the Ban cites its own study, by Virginia Beach, which raises the risk for contamination of water supplies from uranium waste in the event of a hurricane. The region supplies drinking water to parts of Hampton Roads.
A top company executive told investors earlier this year that Virginia Uranium will have a bill in the General Assembly in January 2012 to lay the groundwork for a state regulatory framework for mining.
Wales suggested Monday that Virginia Uranium was not wedded to that schedule, which he said is subject to science, policy and politics.
"We will be prepared if 2012 legislation is introduced," Wales said. "We have a lot of support on both sides of the aisle."

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo

Everything has risks, are the rewards worth it
I wonder how eager the mining company would be to continue if it had to post a bond guaranteeing enough bond money to re remediate any and all damages that arise from this mining operation. That is say well water is contaminated the bond would have to pay to provide municipal water to all around, or to remove and properly dispose of contaminated soil with no expiration date. If this operation is as safe as they say, here should be no problem getting a bond.
I agree if they can and will post a bond and they show that
they have containment plans for heavy rainfalls like the ones we get from the remnants of tropical storms then I have no problem. On the other hand if they balk at posting a bond or the containment plans don't pass with intelligent engineers examining the plans then I say keep the ban in place. We must be sure that in the event of say a year's worth of rainfall in 30 days that their containment of waste would remain contained. We have had 30 inches of rain in 30 days in the past when the remnants of 4 storms in 30 days just dumped on us. Therefore to be prepared for that level of rainfall and possibly worse is a necessity. None of these 100 year storm preparations. They should show that they can handle 40 inches of rain in 30 days.
bourgeois capitalism
Walter Coles is much more than the "CEO" of this fabricated company: he owns the land! He wants to get rich at the expense of Virginia citizens.
And, he's not above bribing our legislatures. Paying for members of the VA house of delegates and senate to travel to the south of France is not a fact finding mission: it's a legal form of bribery.
We will see if our representatives in Richmond truly represent us.
Close-by
Having retired from the Norfolk USPS nearly 19 years ago to the area east of Chatham,Va. and about 30 miles east of it, I've wred(I like wred more than read 'cause it is less ambiguous)most accounts waging war on the advisability of possibly contaminating area wells with the byproducts of Uranium mining and I'm considering obtaining laboratory sample bottles to sample my 125 foot deep well-water before drilling and along the way, to provide a gage of effects(if any)of expected mining operations over time. Anyone want to hire me?
Leave it in the Ground
Of course industry lobbyists can and will provide assurances of safety but the history of the nuclear industry is a bad one and the risk is not worth the benefits, which in themselves are questionable and far more temporary than the dangers. Much of Boulder Colorado remains radioactive from uranium tailings mined many decades ago. And then there's Japan: http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/06/201161664828302638.html