Thursday, May 21, 2009

In-situ mining remediation not as reliable as you think

Comment: State Gov't at its worse.....Greed$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Howard Williams,

It’s not over, but there is good news in the battle to keep our water resources from being contaminated by in-situ leach (ISL) uranium mining.

Hydrologist B.K. Darling, Ph.D., is the author of a comprehensive report on 27 ISL uranium mines in Texas. He was commissioned by the Houston law firm of Blackburn and Carter to compile a report on the condition of these mines and their impact on groundwater quality.

The full report and summary can be found at the Web site listed below. Five of the mines on the report (listed in red on the summary) are mines that Powertech Uranium Co. identifies on its Web site as ISL uranium mines that have successfully restored groundwater.

The Darling report proves that statement is misleading because those mines are (as you will see in the report) as polluted as the other Texas ISL mines. In fact, the report indicates that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) has on 51 occasions approved mining company requests to lower water quality requirements for the restoration phase of these mining operations.

The Environmental Protection Agency standard for water quality as it pertains to uranium is that it not exceed 0.03 parts per million.
The TCEQ has allowed mining companies to leave as much as 5.0 ppm of uranium in the aquifer after mining has been completed.
That uranium level is 167 times the EPA standard.
That water quality may have satisfied the TCEQ standard, but it does not change the fact that the ground water is no longer safe for household use or for livestock.

The Blackburn and Carter law firm is representing landowners in Goliad County, Texas, in a lawsuit against a mining company for, among other issues, their losses of land value and future ranching and farming income due to the contamination of their water wells from recent uranium exploration drilling.

No matter the outcome of this and other legal battles, the groundwater will still be contaminated. The negative economic impact of the proposed ISL mine near Wellington should be reason enough to deny all land-use permits for uranium mining, to say nothing of the potential negative health effects associated with this toxic process.

Up until now, uranium mining has been conducted in very remote places. Proposing an ISL mine 11 miles from Fort Collins, with a population of 130,000, Windsor, population 15,000, and four miles from Wellington, with a population of 4,500, is unprecedented. Remember, if they are allowed to mine here, they will have set the precedent and could mine anywhere in Colorado, perhaps right next to your expensive subdivision.

The answer to this very real problem is for you to contact your elected representatives. Encourage them to oppose all permits for uranium mining in eastern Colorado, preserve our environment and aquifers, and retain the status of “best place in America to live.”

Even the Canadians are placing more and more restrictions on uranium mining and prospecting. For instance, New Brunswick, Canada, on July 4, 2008, banned uranium prospecting and mining in designated watersheds and well fields.

They said the residents of that region were entitled to clean drinking water.
The citizens of eastern Colorado are also entitled to clean drinking water. We need to stop in-situ leach mining before it starts.

To see Dr. Darling’s full report and the summary, there are several Web sites posting it, including www.PowerTech exposed.com. View a 10-minute video of uranium mining and milling in Colorado at www.downtheyellowcakeroad.org.

Howard Williams is a retired federal manager for Veterans Affairs who has lived in Weld County for the past nine years and owns land near Wellington.

http://www.greeleytribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090521/READERS/905209957/-1/rss07&template=printart

http://www.greeleytribune.com/article/20090521/READERS/905209957/-1/rss02

No comments: