Big question for lawmakers: What to do with uranium?

Officials in Virginia Beach, Chesapeake and Norfolk are united in opposing efforts this year to lift a ban on uranium mining in Virginia.

There's less agreement, however, among the region's state legislators on an issue that's inspired a muscular lobbying campaign and is expected to be a dominant topic in the General Assembly session that starts Wednesday.

A survey by The Virginian-Pilot found opinions differ sharply among the local delegation, which may have significant sway in the statewide debate because of mining's possible effects here. Two support lifting the ban, seven oppose doing so, and the majority say they're either undecided or it's too soon for them to make a call.

At stake is the right to mine an estimated 119 million pounds of uranium - one of the largest deposits in North America - buried beneath historic Coles Hill farm in Chatham, about 200 miles west of downtown Norfolk. The radioactive ore, when processed, is used to fuel nuclear power plants.

Critics, including many environmentalists, say the health and safety risks are too great. Supporters contend the mine could make America more energy-independent and would create hundreds of jobs in Southside Virginia, a rural region hard hit by lost manufacturing plants and the recession.

The company that controls the tract, Virginia Uranium Inc., is making an all-out push to state legislators this year for the go-ahead.

Politically, what's unique about the uranium debate is that Republicans and Democrats find themselves together in each of the two camps, for or against mining, debating the issue on regional, economic and environmental grounds.

Those who favor a slower approach say there hasn't been enough time to digest a study by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences, released Dec. 19.

The study did not make a recommendation on whether to lift the ban - it was intended to give lawmakers advice on what issues to consider as they weigh that question. The report said that before allowing uranium mining and processing, Virginia would need a new system of rigorous, transparent procedures for mining operations, environmental protection and proper long-term monitoring of radioactive mining waste.

Some point to language in the study's contract that called for a five-month period of public discussion after publication as reason enough to put off the decision until next year.

"I think we need to be as prudent as possible and take our time," said Sen. John Miller, a Newport News Democrat who called for a series of public hearings before lawmakers act. "I don't think there's a need to rush to judgment over the next 60 days."

"You defeat things by delaying them," countered Del. Bob Purkey, R-Virginia Beach, who said a thorough scientific vetting would inform his decision on whether to move forward.

Much of the concern in Hampton Roads centers on fears that radioactive wastes, known as tailings, could cause contamination of Lake Gaston, a drinking water supply for Virginia Beach, Chesapeake and Norfolk, as well as numerous towns and counties along the Virginia-North Carolina border.

Safe storage of tailings, which retain their naturally occurring radioactivity for hundreds of years, is also one of the concerns voiced by environmentalists, who note that a uranium mill in Colorado that's been leaking for 30 years has been declared a Superfund site.

Gaston flows into Norfolk's reservoirs, serving about 1 million people in all, including local military bases. Water from that system also can go to Portsmouth, Suffolk and Isle of Wight County in emergency situations such as a drought.

Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Chesapeake leaders support keeping the ban, at least this year, to allow for further analysis or until officials are satisfied risks can be mitigated.

The Navy, too, is concerned that water for its local bases may be in jeopardy from mining activity and accidents. Portsmouth and Suffolk haven't taken formal positions.

The stakes are high for Virginia: There has been little uranium mining east of the Mississippi River in U.S. history and none here.

The General Assembly imposed the moratorium in 1982 to allow for additional study of mining.

Mining proponents say the benefits of lifting the ban now are clear with uranium prices rising and the nation eager to develop more domestic energy sources.

Virginia Uranium values the Coles Hill deposit at $7 billion, and company officials say mining would occur over 35 years, supporting more than 1,050 jobs over time and providing an annual economic impact of $135 million.

"This is a game-changer for Southside Virginia," said Patrick Wales, project manager for Virginia Uranium, noting that America imports 92 percent of the uranium it uses.

For work to begin, lawmakers have to lift the moratorium so the state can develop mining and environmental regulations. That process alone would take a few years, making it likely mining would begin five to eight years after the state were to endorse it.

Wales and other supporters argue the uranium mining industry has become more sophisticated and responsible in recent years, and they point to studies that describe how uranium can be extracted, processed and managed safely if modern technologies and tough regulations are employed.

But a Keep the Ban Coalition boasts dozens of supporters for a continued moratorium, including the Virginia Municipal League, church organizations, environmental groups, the NAACP, schools, universities, towns, cities, and outdoor clubs.

"We simply want to keep the status quo," said Mary Rafferty, chief lobbyist for the Sierra Club of Virginia. "This is a common-sense situation. Uranium mining is just too dangerous for Virginia."

No bill had been introduced as of last week, and Wales said his company opposes waiting a year just for the sake of waiting.

Gov. Bob McDonnell hasn't taken a definitive stand, saying the potential economic benefits are appealing but public safety must be the top priority. One option, he suggested Thursday, is to begin drafting regulations for future review by the General Assembly. Environmentalists oppose that idea.

A big political swing occurred last week with the release of a letter, dated Dec. 28, signed by five representatives, Republican and Democratic, of the Southside region. It asks fellow lawmakers to shelve the idea of lifting the moratorium, at least for now.

"We are being asked to push through a proposal to lift a 30-year-old ban on an industry with an abysmal environmental record that, under the most optimistic assumptions, experts conclude the most that can be expected is to reduce some of the quite serious risks to the health and welfare of the surrounding community," wrote the five representatives: Sen. Frank N. Ruff Jr. and Dels. James E. Edmunds II, Danny W. Marshall, Donald W. Merricks and Thomas C. Wright Jr.

Industry opponents pounced on the letter, arguing that if the local leaders in Southside are against mining, how can anyone else vote for it?

Virginia Uranium said it was "disappointed" by the letter and hoped that legislators might at least start what would be a long process of crafting industry regulations.

Pilot writers Harry Minium, Marjon Rostami, Jeff Sheler, and Dave Forster contributed to this report.

Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, julian.walker@pilotonline.com

Scott Harper, (757) 446-2340, scott.harper@pilotonline.com