Expert Says... Focus on the Study !

(The following is from Katie Whitehead)

Date: January 16, 2008

IF there is going to be a uranium study, make it good.

By Katie Whitehead
Senate Bill No. 525 would establish the VirginiaUranium Mining Commission in order "to assess therisks and benefits of developing Virginia's uraniumresources and to advise the Governor and GeneralAssembly." I urge you to make your opinion-whatever itis-known to your Senator and Delegate.
In writing or calling legislators, please considerthese questions and suggestions:

1) Read Senate Bill 525 before writing or callingsenators or delegates. The text is available onlineat:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?081+sum+SB525.

If you don't have Internet access, your locallibrarian can help.

2) Consider how uranium mining in Virginia mightaffect you and your loved ones. Are your concernsincluded in the study proposal? Will the commissioninclude members who will represent your point of view?I see no reference to public participation, such aspublic hearings, in Senate Bill 525.

3) It is generally easier to identify and measurepotential benefits than potential costs of developingVirginia's uranium resources. Subtle and long-termhealth effects may be impossible to identify andquantify with any certainty, but this is no reason toneglect or underestimate them in a study.

4) Consider the scope of the study: The study done inthe 1980s did not fully consider the potential effectsof uranium mining, milling, and tailings storagestatewide. Lifting the moratorium would allow uraniummining for the indefinite future throughout Virginia,not only by Virginia Uranium, Inc. (VUI) but alsoother companies not yet identified. (VUI estimates itwill mine for 40 years at Coles Hill.) A study shouldconsider costs and benefits for all the years ofuranium mining and for the centuries that minetailings would pose a danger.

5) Emphasize the need to look closely and criticallyat any assumptions made by the study-assumptions suchas whether any radioactive particles may leach out ofthe tailings ponds, and if so what quantity. No costbenefit study should assume that there would be nodesign flaws, accidents, flood, earthquake, ordeterioration of structures over the period when thetailings present a potential danger.

6) Note that the standards used in calculating healthcosts are controversial. For example, there issignificant disagreement about how much radiationexposure should be allowed. Neither governmentagencies nor health physicists agree about whatexposure is acceptable, and different standardsproduce very different health cost estimates. I feelit is appropriate to use conservative standards, buteveryone should be able to agree that estimates basedon a range of credible standards, up to the legallypermitted limits, would give the best idea of what theactual costs might be.

7) Is The National Academy of Sciences, which is theonly entity specifically named in Senate Bill 525, themost appropriate organization to help Virginia withthis study? I don't know if it is or not, but thisVirginia Uranium Inc. recommendation should not beaccepted without question.

8) Is nuclear power a clean, reliable, andeconomically wise energy source? What will happen tothe promised benefits of mining if the national energystrategy takes a different direction?

9) What influence did VUI have on the writing of theVirginia Energy Plan referred to by Senate Bill 525?

10) Does Senate Bill 525 represent the bestpracticable way to judge the far-reaching consequencesof uranium mining in Virginia?

11) What happens if the costs are greater thanprojected? Should the study address the establishmentof a trust fund to cover unanticipated costs toindividuals or the state?

12) It seems only fair that the uranium miningmoratorium should remain in place until the localcommunities most affected are convinced that uraniummining is a good idea, not just the state legislature.Senate Bill 525 includes the task of considering thecompatibility of mining and milling Virginia's uraniumdeposits with Virginia Constitution ARTICLE XI -Section 1 regarding conservation ofnatural resources and historical sites of theCommonwealth. Is the proposed mining and millingcompatible with other parts of the constitution? Willindividuals, towns and counties be protected if themoratorium is lifted?

Your opinion will carry the most weight if it respondsaccurately to the contents of the bill. You might wantto go back and check the text.

Contact information for all General Assembly membersis available at:
http://legis.state.va.us/

Southside Senators: Robert Hurt, Frank Ruff, RoscoeReynolds, Shannon Valentine,

Southside Delegates: Don Merricks, Danny Marshall,Clarke Hogan, Charles Poindexter, Thomas Wright, WardArmstrong

Sponsors of Senate Bill 525: Senators Wagner, Puckett,Saslaw, Watkins, and Whipple

Members of the Senate Agriculture, Conservation andNatural Resources Committee: Senators Ticer(Chairman), Whipple, Hanger, Watkins, Reynolds,Puckett, Ruff, Blevins, Deeds, Cuccinelli, Obenshain,Locke, McDougle, McEachin, and Northam.

Thank you.