Second of two parts

DANVILLE, Va. — The potential contaminants from any uranium mining in the Roanoke River basin in Virginia could have effects far downstream as the river flows on to the N.C. coast.

The Roanoke River, flowing more than 400 miles from Virginia’s Blue Ridge Mountains to North Carolina’s Outer Banks, provides water to more than one million people for drinking, farming, fishing and boating. It is the backbone of southern Virginia’s agriculture sector, valued at more than $300 million in 2007, and boasts world-class striped bass fishing, drawing thousands of anglers each year.

Roanoke River Watershed

Described as “one of the Mid-Atlantic’s most biologically diverse rivers” by the conservation group American Rivers, the Roanoke was also named one of the country’s Most Endangered Rivers in 2011 by the same organization. Citing the proposal to mine uranium on Coles Hill near Danbury, American Rivers concluded that the river’s assets “could be irreversibly damaged by the toxic run-off” of the proposed uranium mining.

The life and legacy of this prized river is in jeopardy, said Pete Raabe of American Rivers. “This uranium operation would generate millions of tons of toxic, cancer-causing waste,” he said.

Recently, Mike Pucci, a Lake Gaston resident, created the North Carolina Coalition Against Uranium Mining. The lake is one in a chain of reservoirs along the river. The group’s goal, said Pucci, is to “wake up” the public in North Carolina to the potential impacts of uranium mining and processing far up the river.

While he notes that the debate is centered in Virginia, Pucci argues that “there’s no benefit to North Carolina, there’s only risk.” Fourteen local governments and organizations in North Carolina have passed resolution opposing lifting the ban on mining, according to the coalition web site.

Like many opponents, the coalition expresses concern over the potential effects a major accident failure could have for hundreds of years on natural resources and a valued water supply.

Residents from Warren County, N.C., protest at a recent uranium public meeting in Virginia.

Virginia Beach has the same fears. Lake Gaston, which straddled the North Carolina-Virginia border, is the city’s main source for drinking water. Virginia Beach has been the most vocal local government in opposition to the state lifting its existing ban on uranium mining.

A “catastrophic failure” of a tailings disposal site would contaminate the drinking water supply coming from the lake and the river, said Thomas M. Leahy, the city’s director of Public Utilities.The city has done “worst case modeling,” he said, that establishes the likelihood of contamination with “reasonable certainty,” leading to radioactivity levels in the water anywhere from five to fifty times greater than that permitted by current federal law.

In a memo to the city manager, Leahy noted that the uranium’s location on Coles Hill was “prone to significant flooding,” arguing that the moratorium must remain in place until Virginia adopts “a permanent and sustainable culture and philosophy in which compliance with laws and regulations is only the first step to a regulatory approval.

“In my opinion, the opposite—minimum compliance with laws and regulations—is the current norm in Virginia,” he concluded.

Leahy argues that similar risks exist if mining were to occur in other river basins, such as the James, thereby threatening the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.

URANIUM AND CHESAPEAKE  BAY

Thomas Leahy

Gov. Bob McDonnell

The questions surrounding the impacts from mining uranium are not geographically restricted to Southside Virginia and northeast North Carolina. According to a study done by the National Academy of Sciences, there are 55 identified uranium sites in the Commonwealth.  While the Coles Hill site is outside the Chesapeake Bay watershed, others are not. Many of the sites are in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge regions, where the Potomac and James and their feeder rivers flow. To date, however, only the Coles Hill deposit is “large enough, and of a high enough grade, to be potentially economically viable,” the study notes.

The current economics have not prevented debate over the impact of lifting the moratorium in these other regions. Fairfax County, one of Virginia’s most populous and politically powerful jurisdictions, is full of creeks and runs that drain into the Chesapeake’s Potomac River. This includes the historic Bull Run of the Civil War as well as the Occoquan River and Reservoir, a primary drinking water supply for the county.

Mining leases exist in the Occoquan watershed. The county’s Environmental Quality Advisory Council recently adopted a resolution recommending to the Board of Supervisors that it support the retention of the moratorium.

WHAT’S NEXT?

The debate over lifting the moratorium reached the Virginia General Assembly this year with legislators arguing both sides. Five Southside legislators penned a letter to maintain the moratorium in response to the academy study, saying that the report was “sending clear warning signals” against the mining of uranium in Virginia.

In contrast, Sen. John C. Watkins concludes that we will solve the nation’s air pollution problems only through the use of nuclear energy and favors lifting the moratorium.

Virginia can have “a full examination” on how to conduct mining to “ensure the safety of the community and of the people working in the mines,” Watkins said.

Acknowledging that the safety of the environment is an equally essential element of mining, Watkins argues that a moratorium is nothing but a not-in-my-backyard statement of “don’t bother me with the facts.”

According to the Keep the Ban coalition, more than 10,000 people have told the General Assembly to continue the moratorium and 85 government entities and nonprofit groups have expressed “deep concerns” over lifting it.

In the midst of the debate, Gov. Bob McDonnell asked the legislature to forego taking any action and issued a directive establishing a Uranium Working Group. McDonnell acknowledged in the directive that there are “important questions related to the health and safety of workers, the public and the environment” that “must be addressed before an informed determination” on lifting the moratorium should be made. The charge he gave to the working group, though, was to create “a draft statutory and conceptual regulatory framework that could be used to govern all aspects” of mining uranium in the Commonwealth. The group is to present its findings to the Coal and Energy Commission by Dec. 1, just before the 2013 General Assembly session.

Robert G. Burnley, the former director of Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality and now partnering with the Southern Environmental Law Center in its efforts to maintain the moratorium, challenges the legitimacy of the Uranium Working Group process. He notes that the development of the “regulatory framework” is not being conducted under the open-government parameters established by Virginia’s administrative process. To further emphasize his concern, Burley notes that he has been advised that the current work products of the group are classified as “governor’s working papers,” making them inaccessible under Virginia’s Freedom of Information Act.

Confusion and criticism over the transparency of the work group’s process led Martin L. Kent, McDonnell’s chief of staff, to issue two recent letters correcting “mischaracterizations” regarding public comment, participation and openness.  He advised the Coal and Energy Commission that the Uranium Working Group will “periodically report its progress and accept input from the public during four open meetings.”

“Ultimately, it is the General Assembly that must decide whether or not to lift the uranium moratorium,” notes Kent.  If it does, the legislature could direct state agencies to devise regulations, using a process that “will follow the Administrative Process Act.”

First of two parts

DANVILLE, Va. — There’s a debate going on up here that North Carolinians, especially those living along Roanoke River, should pay attention to. Virginia is considering lifting a moratorium to allow uranium mining. One of the world’s largest undeveloped deposits lies north of this town in the heart of the Roanoke basin, and mining it could threaten the river.

Thomas Jefferson knew little about uranium when, as governor of Virginia, he granted property in Pittsylvania County to the Coles family. Some 230 years later the gift is at the heart of a public debate that pits national energy policy and local economic opportunities against regional environmental concerns.

So far, the debate has:

• Raised serious doubts about the potential economic benefits for the Coles and others in Virginia with lands laden with uranium.
• Prompted a study by the prestigious National Academy of Science that confirms the risks that extraction could present across the Commonwealth and down in North Carolina.
• Driven the state’s governor to issue an unprecedented directive for the development of a “conceptual regulatory framework” for mining even while a statewide moratorium exists.

The debate has also led Rebecca Hanmer, a former senior official with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to conclude that uranium mining presents an environmental risk to Virginia and its natural resources so great that “everything else past and present pales in comparison.”

And the river that will flow past these uranium mines continues on to coastal North Carolina.

The Uranium of Coles Hill

The Roanoke River downstream of the possible mine site. Because of the threats posed by the mine, American Rivers last year placed the Roanoke on its Most Endangered Rivers list.

Pittsylvania County, straddling the N.C. line in “Southside” Virginia, is in the heart of the Roanoke River basin. With a history dating to 1767, this rural county hosts the city of Danville, the birthplace of Nancy and Irene Langhorne. The witty Nancy eventually married well and become Lady Astor, the first woman to sit in the British Parliament. The lovely Irene also chose well. Her husband, Charles Dana Gibson, was an artist whose satirical “Gibson Girl” illustrations defined femininity at the turn of the 20th century. His wife was one of his models.

With a median annual household income of less than $40,000 and an unemployment rate of up to 10 percent — compared to Virginia’s statewide rate of 6 percent — the county faces serious economic challenges.

Farming is the main occupation for many in the county, including the members of the Coles family. They currently raise cattle on land given to their ancestors by Jefferson and dominated by a hill that bears the family name. Five generations of the Coles have worked this land. For years, they grew tobacco as did other farmers in the county. Now, they want to mine its uranium.

Virginia Uranium Inc. states that it is “working to bring the economic benefits of uranium development to Virginia and advance the energy independence of America.”  Its mission may be more succinctly described as wanting to mine the uranium beneath the Coles family farm and surrounding land.

Founded by the Coles, the company is Virginia-owned and Virginia-managed. It now trades on stock markets in the United States and Canada as “Virginia Energy Resources.”  Its original investors included over 30 Virginia farmers and business owners, and the company says that local families still control 78 percent of the company stock. The local character of Virginia Uranium, though, is now supplemented by people with worldwide mining experience. For example, one member of its board is the CEO of Denison Mines Corp., a company that works on uranium mining around the world, from Mongolia and Zambia to the western United States.

Since 2007, $39 million dollars have been invested in Virginia Uranium’s effort to allow uranium mining in Southside Virginia, the company reports.

The Moratorium

Uranium was discovered on Coles Hill in 1978. Four years later, the Virginia General Assembly placed a temporary moratorium on uranium mining in the Commonwealth.  The law prohibits the mining until “a program for permitting uranium mining is permitted by statute.”  Virginia currently has no such program.

Uranium mining was the topic of considerable study after the ban was passed, noted John C. Watkins, a state senator. That work led the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission—a legislative commission and not an executive branch permitting agency like the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy—to conclude that Virginia could lift the moratorium “if essential recommendations” from a uranium mining task force were enacted into law.

The legislature, though, did nothing and the moratorium stayed in effect. Virginia Uranium, which wanted to mine Coles Hill, determined at the time that mining was not economically viable.

There things stood until 2007. The company considered mining profitable again, and the legislative commission instigated two major studies.  The National Academy did the first study. Its focus, according to Watkins, was whether mining could be “undertaken in a manner that safeguards the environment, natural and historic resources, agricultural lands and the health and well-being of [Virginia’s] citizens.”  The second study, conducted by the Richmond firm Chmura Economics & Analytics, focused on the socioeconomic effects.

The Study Results

Unlike other historic locations for uranium mining, Virginia has a much wetter climate with more extreme weather events. Uranium mining in the United State has, to date, been done in dry climates. The academy study noted that “large precipitation events and earthquakes” in Virginia had the potential to “lead to the release of contaminants if facilities are not designed and constructed to withstand such an event.”  The study noted that there is also a lack of technical expertise and experience in federal and state agencies for “applying laws and regulations” in climates like Virginia’s.

The academy study also raised concerns about “tailings,” the name given the waste left after the uranium is separated from the ore. Uranium tailings contain a substantial level of radioactivity that could contaminate local waters, the study said. “Tailings disposal sites represent significant potential sources of contamination for thousands of years, and the long-term risks remain poorly defined,” the report stated.

Hanmer agrees, arguing that uranium mining could leave a “legacy of toxic spoils that will not go away for centuries.”

Academy researchers advised that if Virginia were to rescind the moratorium, “there are steep hurdles to be surmounted before mining or processing could be established within a regulatory environment that is appropriately protective of the health and safety of workers, the public and the environment.”

The socioeconomic report by Chmura concluded that “the mining and milling operations would bring substantial and much-needed economic benefits to Pittsylvania County, the immediately surrounding areas and the state.”

Mining could provide 1,000 jobs annually for 35 years and an annual net economic impact of around $135 million, the report said.

Chmura specifically noted that these millions of dollars were the “net positive economic impact” after subtracting out a “broad array of potential socioeconomic costs, such as public health and the environment, and the negative ‘stigma” effects on sectors such as tourism and agriculture. However, Chmura premised its conclusions on the assumption that federal regulations would reduce these environmental and public health risks to “negligible” levels.

Should the operation and decommissioning of the mining have a “severe environmental impact,” then the net economic impact would be negative, not positive.  Chmura defined a “severe environmental impact” as one where contamination of “both water and at least one other area (air, soil or noise) exceeds the limits set by current federal standards.”

Thursday: Effects on the Roanoke River

Editor’s note: A version of this story first appeared in the Chesapeake Bay Journal.