Permit delay worries uranium hopefuls

Comment: In-situ leach mining is not a new mining method! This type of uranium mining was done in Eurpope during the Cold War, it left the land, air and water in ruins!

By DUSTIN BLEIZEFFER
Star-Tribune energy reporter
Sunday, June 21, 2009 12:26 AM MDT

Several proposed uranium mining projects in Wyoming and across the West will be delayed due the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's recent decision requiring a more thorough site-specific analysis for each project.

The NRC will require a supplemental environmental impact statement for each mining project rather than a more simplified environmental assessment, which the agency had considered.

Some officials in the uranium industry claim the NRC overreacted to a groundswell of public concern that they say comes from either ignorance of the in-situ leach mining process or a desire to block uranium mining.

Industry officials have also told the Star-Tribune they worry that investors are losing patience.

However, those who scrutinize the emerging next generation of uranium mining say both the industry and government regulators have a history that deserves skepticism. Shannon Anderson, community organizer for the Powder River Basin Resource Council, said she has researched dozens upon dozens of spills and excursions documented by the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality.

The Star-Tribune has also reviewed DEQ documentation describing dozens of violations related to in-situ recovery of uranium in the state.

Most recently, a 2007 DEQ investigation documented yearslong, regular violations at Cameco Corp.'s Smith Ranch-Highland in-situ uranium mine in Converse County. It resulted in a $1 million settlement, although Cameco and DEQ insist no one was injured as a result of the violations, and there was no long-lasting environmental damage.

"Asking questions isn't necessarily opposition to these projects. We are citizens of Wyoming, and we want to promote development that is beneficial to the state. But we also want to protect citizens and the environment," Anderson said.

Industry officials counter that there have been at least 15 commercial-scale in-situ uranium well-fields successfully restored in Wyoming, and not one documented case of damage to human health or contamination of drinking water.

NRC's caution

Uranium One controls more than 100 million pounds of historically identified uranium resources in Wyoming, and says it has 61 potential mine projects in the state.

The predecessors of Uranium One first filed applications with the NRC and DEQ in October 2007 for the proposed Moore Ranch in-situ mine and processing plant near the Pumpkin Buttes in Campbell County. Company officials said the NRC's decision to require a more thorough environmental analysis means production will begin in 2011 rather than 2010.

"We have been told various firm dates by the NRC, yet every time we get close to ending the process, something changes," said Donna Wichers, senior vice president of Uranium One, Americas.

In moving to the supplemental environmental impact statement requirement, NRC reportedly told some in the uranium industry that the extra analysis makes the new mining projects less susceptible to lawsuits and legal delays.

Wayne Heili, president of mining for UR Energy, said he's obviously disappointed with the delay. However, he said it's hard to blame the NRC for doing its best to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act.

Heili said he believes the NRC's move toward a supplemental environmental impact statement has more to do with public comments insisting on more public involvement in the licensing process, and less about the industry's past track record.

"To the NRC's credit, they're being cautious and making sure these licenses are being issued on solid legal grounding," Heili said.

Anderson said the Powder River Basin Resource Council's membership is pleased with the NRC's decision. However, the group remains concerned that neither the federal nor state government has addressed the "legacy" issues of the industry's past, nor have they addressed the cumulative impacts of possibly dozens of new mines.

Although the in-situ recovery process is supposed to be contained within uranium ore-bearing aquifers that never have been sources of drinking water, individual landowners still deserve to know details about what's taking place underground, Anderson said. There's still no estimate of how much groundwater might be consumed cumulatively.

"(In-situ uranium recovery) can reduce aquifer pressure and affect artesian wells, and it can create draw-down in areas already impacted by coal-bed methane or other industrial development," Anderson said.

Fletcher Newton, executive vice president for marketing and strategic affairs for Uranium One, said the uranium industry is much more sophisticated than it was in the 1970s and 1980s.

"(The industry) certainly learned a lot about safe practices and protecting the environment. There's a big difference between today and the way things were 25 years ago," Newton said. "Nobody wants to go back and repeat the mistakes of the past."

White House uncertainty

Some uranium mining officials say they feel the Obama administration isn't as supportive of domestic uranium development as the previous administration. As evidence, they say the U.S. Department of Energy hasn't made good on loan guarantees promised to the industry under the Bush administration.

While there were 19 applications made to the DOE under the Bush administration, so far the DOE under the Obama administration has issued only $18.5 billion in loan guarantees to four companies that plan to build new nuclear reactors for electrical generation.

"I think this administration is moving very carefully," Newton said. "If they impose a carbon tax on utilities, then that would be an indirect way of supporting nuclear power because, suddenly, nuclear power becomes much more cost competitive."

Last week, the DOE announced it will provide $2.9 million in scholarships and fellowships to 86 U.S. nuclear science and engineering students, and will offer $6 million in grants to 29 U.S. universities for nuclear research infrastructure. None of the grant money was allocated to the University of Wyoming, according to a DOE press release.

According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, about half of the nuclear industry's work force will be eligible to retire during the next 10 years.

* The energy derived from 1 pound of uranium is equivalent to 20,000 pounds of coal.

Source: Wyoming Mining Association

* More than 200 million pounds of uranium has been mined in Wyoming since 1954. More than 300 million pounds of "historic" reserves remain.

Source: Uranium One

About in-situ mining

The conventional method of uranium mining involves carving large pits into the earth to recover ore-bearing material. In-situ recovery involves a series of wells to flush oxygen and carbon dioxide (and sometimes sodium bicarbonate) into a uranium ore-bearing aquifer, which breaks down the uranium ore.

The solution is brought to the surface through production wells where the uranium is recovered. From there, the uranium is isolated through a drying process and trucked to market in secure containers.

This ongoing circulation between injection wells and production wells takes place for two to three years in order to produce about 85 percent of the uranium resource. Monitor wells surround the production zone -- in the formations above and below -- to detect any leaks.

After production is complete, a yearslong remediation process begins. Using the same injection and production wells, the water is circulated through an ion-exchange facility

-- Dustin Bleizeffer

Uranium boom

The price for uranium neared $140 per pound in 2007, sparking renewed interest in the mining industry. The Nuclear Regulator Commission received notice of more than 20 in-situ uranium mine proposals across the West, mostly in Wyoming.

In response, the NRC launched a "generic" environmental impact statement to provide analysis of the in-situ leach mining process. A final version of the document was issued in May.

Today, uranium is selling for about $52 per pound, but companies are still planning many new mining operations.

-- Dustin Bleizeffer

http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2009/06/21/news/wyoming/50d1a9a79c1f0a19872575db005f0300.txt