Swarm of quakes bedevils Hanford

by Eric Mortenson, The Oregonian
Friday March 20, 2009, 8:41 PM

It's been a jittery week at eastern Washington's Hanford Nuclear Reservation, where more than 100 small earthquakes have been detected in the past seven days.

The quakes are part of an earthquake "swarm" that has puzzled scientists since it began at the first of the year. As of Friday, monitors at Hanford had detected more than 700 earthquakes since Jan. 4, said Alan Rohay, senior scientist and seismologist with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, which operates at Hanford.

The quakes haven't disturbed the extensive stores of radioactive waste at Hanford or interfered with cleanup operations there.

The plant processed plutonium for nuclear weapons during World War II and the Cold War.

Highly contaminated liquid material is stored in underground tanks that have a history of leaks, and critics are wary of leaks or spills that could migrate to the nearby Columbia River.

Some of the quakes jolted farms and vineyards across the Columbia River from Hanford, but most were not felt by people and only a half-dozen have approached magnitude 3, Rohay said. Still, a significant increase in quakes during the past week caused Rohay on Friday to deploy two additional seismic monitors in an attempt to better track the activity.

"It's of concern because sometimes in swarms the magnitude has gotten up to 4, or 4.5," Rohay said. "That's getting to the size that things could get knocked off shelves or electrical systems can chatter.

"It would not do damage to a building or a (storage) tank, but it could cause some electrical equipment to fail or chemicals on a lab bench might spill."

Storage tanks at Hanford were built in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, when earthquake standards were not as defined as they are today. Rohay said underground tanks such as those at Hanford generally aren't susceptible to earthquake damage, but a quake of magnitude 6 might cause material in the tanks to slosh and perhaps spill or leak.

Each increase in magnitude is a tenfold increase in power; the quakes registered at Hanford this year have been mild compared with a magnitude 6 event.

The earthquakes are centered near Wooded Island on the Columbia River, about eight miles north of Richland, Wash. Earthquake swarms were reported in the area in 1970, 1975 and 1988.
Scientists believe the quakes are occurring in layers of Columbia River basalt. The area is under steady geologic compression north and south, which causes brittle edges of the basalt layer to break. One researcher called it a "snap, crackle, pop" effect that results in a flurry of small earthquakes.

The seismic monitors Rohay deployed Friday may help pinpoint the depth at which the quakes are occurring. If the quakes are confined to a single layer of basalt, they are likely to remain small, he said.

"If they're within 100 meters of each other in depth, you might think they are in the same basalt flow, and you wouldn't expect them to get bigger," he said. If seven or eight layers are cracking, it could cause a magnitude 4 quake.

Swarms were first noticed in the area after nearby farms began using groundwater for irrigation.

Some researchers speculate the basalt layers may be sensitive to changes in the water table or water pressure.

Hanford shares monitoring equipment with the University of Washington's Pacific Northwest Seismic Network. Researchers at UW recorded 103 earthquakes in the past week; Rohay said his count shows more than 200, however, because Hanford's computers are set to recognize smaller events as earthquakes.
-- Eric Mortenson; ericmortenson@news.oregonian.com

NAACP to Host Uranium Meeting

(From www.chathamstartribune.com 03-041-09 )

NAACP to hold special meeting on uranium mining, Harville, Pritchett invited to answer questions

The Pittsylvania County Branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People will hold a special meeting on uranium mining Thursday, March 12.

The meeting, which is open to the public, is scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. at Pittsylvania County Community Action Inc.'s Senior Center on North Main Street in Chatham.Board of Supervisors Chairman Coy Harville and Banister District Supervisor William Pritchett have been invited to answer questions about political issues involved in uranium mining in the county, said NAACP president Willie Fitzgerald."NAACP members and minority residents will have an opportunity to become informed about the role of the Board of Supervisors and other county agencies in uranium mining on Coles Hill and other localities in Virginia," Fitzgerald said.The planned study on uranium mining in Virginia and the state's moratorium on uranium mining will be discussed.

Supervisors took a stronger stand on uranium mining in February when they voted unanimously in favor of a resolution stating that a study determine "no damage or harm" will be done to the county.The county's resolution will be sent to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee, which is conducting a comprehensive study on the dangers and benefits of mining uranium.

The county is home to what is believed to be one of the largest uranium deposits in the United States.Marline Uranium Corp. discovered the Coles Hill deposit in the early 1980s, but later abandoned the project when the price of uranium dropped.Two years ago, Walter Coles, who owns the land and a majority of the ore, formed Virginia Uranium Inc. to explore the possibility of eventually mining the deposit.The deposit, about six miles northeast of Chatham, is worth between $8 billion and $10 billion.

The board's latest resolution was offered by Chatham -Blairs District Supervisor Henry "Hank" Davis Jr."I think there's much more to mining than just safety," said Davis, a Chatham lawyer who once did legal work and mineral leases for Marline.

"This is my idea of at least a starting point on a statement to the commission."In his one-page resolution, Davis repeated the board's position in 2007, which called for a "neutral, comprehensive legislative study" on uranium mining, but added language strengthening the county's stand on the controversial issue.

"Be it hereby resolved that the state mining study commission determine by its study and report that no damage or harm will be done to Pittsylvania County, its business, institutions, environment and its citizens by uranium mining," the resolution states.I

t goes on to oppose a "cost-benefit approach" to uranium mining or "simply accepting minimal damages.""It goes a little bit further and a little bit deeper," said Davis.

Brick Company Folds Hand-Withdraws Request

(From http://www.wpcva.com/chatham/news/ 03-03-09)

Brick company pulls plug on Pittsylvania County project

A North Carolina company that had planned to make a $50 million investment in a clay mining and brick manufacturing operation in Pittsylvania County has withdrawn its zoning applications.Triangle Brick Company of Durham, N.C., which has a 1,328-acre site on Berry Hill Road and Buford Road west of Danville, applied to rezone the land from A-1, Agricultural District, to M-2, Industrial District, Heavy Industry, for brick manufacturing.

The company also applied for a special-use permit on 1,000 acres for open-pit clay and shale mining.Public hearings on both zoning applications were scheduled Tuesday night before the Pittsylvania County Planning Commission in Chatham.At the start of the meeting, however, the county's zoning administrator, Odie Shelton, told planning commission members he received an email late Monday from Scott D. Mollenkopf, president and chief executive officer of Triangle Brick.Mollenkopf said the company was withdrawing its rezoning and special-use permit applications and would not attend the meeting.

Mollenkopf did not give a reason, and efforts to reach Triangle Brick late Tuesday were unsuccessful.The planning commission voted unanimously to allow the company to withdraw.

Protestors to Say "NO" to Immigrant Jails

(From Barry Carter, associate of THE Alliance)

Immigrant's Rights Groups to March in Farmville, VA. Against Immigrant Detention Center

Farmville, VA - Hundreds are expected from across Virginia at a 3/7 rally
and march in Farmville, VA in opposition to plans for a new privately-run
immigrant detention center slated to open in June of this year. The
project, a partnership between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),
the private company Immigration Centers of America (ICA) and the Town of
Farmville has generated criticism since it was approved in the fall of
last year. The protest is organized by the Virginia Immigrant People's
Coalition, a network of organizations concerned with immigrant justice.

"This is an extension of a failed immigration policy," said Ricardo
Juarez, of the immigrant's rights group Mexicanos sin Fronteras, that
coordinated the campaign against the controversial anti-immigrant
resolution in Prince William County, VA last year. "The jobsite raids and
detentions are hurting the families in our communities while doing nothing
to address the root causes of forced migration. Real security for our
communities will come when we renegotiate trade agreements like NAFTA that
have hurt workers on both sides of the border."

ICA, a new company run by two real estate developers and the CEO of an
industrial bakery supply, has no experience in detention. They propose to
address this deficiency by hiring experienced staff from Piedmont Regional
Jail. "This does nothing to reassure us," said Sue Frankel-Streit, an
organizer with The People United. "With two detainees dying from medical
neglect in two years, Farmville has a terrible track record,"
Frankel-Streit continued referring to a scandal that erupted in the New
York Times and Washington Post last month and ultimately resulted in ICE
halting all detentions at Piedmont. Two members of the Farmville Town
Council, which is to have oversight of the proposed new facility, had
upper-level management positions at Piedmont when the deaths occurred -
Edward Gordon as Medical Director, and Donald Hunter and Assistant
Superintendent.

In the wake of increased jobsite raids in Virginia, plans for the
detention center have sent ripples of fear through the immigrant community
and generated organized resistance to the project. "We are here to say No
More Jails," said Margarita Gonzalez, a Mexican immigrant to Louisa
County, VA. "We are only trying to create secure lives for ourselves just
as you are and we hope you will leave us to live in peace."

"We didn't cross the border, the border crossed us," said Angeles Carter
of Occoneechee Village, one of the member organizations in the VIP
Coalition, "We are indigenous people to America and never agreed to any
borders on our land. Thus we are not illegal and should not be
imprisoned." Carter echoes the sentiments of many detainees who identify
with indigenous ancestry.

Protest organizers expect buses and caravans from Tidewater, Richmond,
Fredericksburg, Northern VA, DC, Winchester, Harrisonburg,
Charlottesville, Blacksburg and Lynchburg. Interviews are available with
organizers from each of these locations.

Barry Carter 434-374-5178252-521-1821 cell

Uranium Sub-Committee to Report on Scope of Study

Meeting Date Set to Report on Scope of Study

Public Invited to Comment

The Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy's Uranium Mining Sub-Committee will meet on Tuesday, March 24, 2009, 2:00 p.m. in House Room D, General Assembly Building in Richmond, Virginia.

The public (that means "us" and "you") is invited to attend and make comments. We encourage you to do so!

Below is the published agenda for the meeting:

I. Welcome & Call to Order
Delegate R. Lee Ware, Chairman


II. Scope of Study­; Recommendations of Virginia Center for Coal & Energy Research
Dr. Michael E. Karmis, Director of Virginia Center for Coal & Energy Research and Stonie Barker Professor, Department of Mining and Minerals Engineering at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
III. Scope of Study; Recommendations and Discussion of Subcommittee
IV. Public Comment
V. Adjourn

Sub-Committee Members
The Honorable R. Lee Ware, Jr., Chair
The Honorable John Watkins
The Honorable Charles W. Carrico, Sr.
The Honorable Phillip P. Puckett
The Honorable William R. Janis
The Honorable Frank W. Wagner
The Honorable Watkins M. Abbitt, Jr.
Mr. Harry Dean Childress
The Honorable Kristen J. Amundson
The Honorable Terry G. Kilgore, Ex Officio
The Honorable Clarence E. Phillips

Staff
Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services, 786-3591
Marty Farber, Division of Legislative Services, 786-3591
Bill Owen, House Committee Operations, 698-1540

Va Beach Groups to Meet on Uranium Mining

A Discussion on Uranium Mining in Virginia

From Va Beach State Delegate Joe Bouchard's website http://www.delegatebouchard.com/event?key=971 :

The Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy and the Tidewater Sowers of Justice will host a discussion for concerned citizens about Uranium mining in Virginia, with remarks by Delegate Joe Bouchard and members of the Virginia Beach City Council. March 18th - 7:30pm

Emmanuel Episcopal Church - 5181 Princess Anne RoadVirginia Beach, VA 23462

RSVP requested........Respond through the website noted above.

Uranium mining plan splits Va. county

Radioactive topic. Billions of dollars worth of uranium lies buried in Southwest Virginia. Would mining it harm public health and the environment?

By Rex BowmanPublished: February 8, 2009

COLES HILL -- Byron Motley's family has lived here in Pittsylvania County for generations. The hay farmer can still look across the narrow blacktop road in front of his house and see the oak tree beneath which his father was born.

But Motley is suddenly pondering a move to North Carolina.

Likewise, Phillip Lovelace, the ninth generation in his family to live in Pittsylvania, is considering moving to South Carolina. "I was born in a farmhouse here, and my daddy paid the doctor who delivered me three ducks and a jar of blackberry preserves," the 57-year-old cattle farmer said. "I've pretty much been in this neighborhood all my life."

Though their roots run deep in Pittsylvania's soil, Motley and Lovelace and other members of the county's Old Guard -- multigenerational families whose ties to the county often run back to the 1700s -- are considering an exodus if their fight to prevent the proposed uranium mine at Coles Hill fails.

At the least, they say, the proposed mine of several hundred acres would wreck the pastoral landscape, increase truck traffic and turn the silence of country life into a cacophony of clanging industrial noise. And at worst, they fear, the mine would pollute the groundwater and streams with uranium and choke the air with harmful residue.

Which is why Motley, 51, is thinking about bugging out if the mine is approved. The alternative, he said, is to "sit here and suck dust."
. . .
Geologists say there may be nearly 120 million pounds of uranium, billions of dollars worth, in two large pockets about 6 miles northeast of Chatham. Urged by a group of more than 30 landowners who have formed Virginia Uranium Inc., the state is now preparing to study whether the uranium can be mined safely.

Buddy Mayhew is one of those landowners. A third-generation tobacco farmer, he described his neighbors' talk of moving away as bluster. He said he is confident they'll stay if the state study shows mining can be done safely. "I don't believe anybody's going to move."

Mayhew noted that Virginia Uranium chief Walter Coles, whose family has been in Pittsylvania since the 1700s, plans to live in his ancestral home located nearly in the middle of the two uranium deposits.

Before any mine work could start, Virginia would have to lift its 27-year-old moratorium on uranium mining, an act that would open up the entire state to the uranium industry. The U.S. Geological Survey says a vast swath of Virginia, from Pittsylvania to Fauquier County, potentially holds the nuclear fuel.

The study of uranium mining being conducted by the Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy could take up to two years to complete.

Opponents of the mine plan to use that time to continue to fight. They've organized several opposition groups, circulated petitions, packed public hearings and enlisted the help of environmental groups, all in an effort to urge the General Assembly to keep the moratorium in place.

Virginia Uranium, meanwhile, has agreed to merge with a Canadian mining company to enhance its financial resources. The company and the law firm that represents it have also given more than $7,000 in campaign contributions to some of the 13 legislators who are members of the coal and energy commission's Uranium Mining Subcommittee, which is overseeing the study.

Opponents such as Lovelace and Motley contend that an objective study will bear out their fears. Virtually all uranium mining in the United States is done in arid parts of the West. Pittsylvania, pocked by ponds and crisscrossed by creeks, is too wet, too vulnerable to contamination, they and environmentalists argue.

And while they are hopeful the study will say as much, members of the Old Guard are mindful that Virginia Uranium may get its way. In which case, they are preparing to move.

"It breaks my heart, but we'll leave, without a doubt," said Ed Fitzgerald IV, an eighth-generation Pittsylvania resident whose great-grandfather started the county's first phone company. "I can't believe it's safe. I've read too much about it to believe it's safe for my children."

Aside from his environmental and health concerns about the proposed uranium mine, Fitzgerald said it would destroy a big part of what makes Pittsylvania unique -- a quiet way of life now unknown by millions of Americans and even suburbanites in Northern Virginia and the Richmond area.

"It's a place where the night life is church socials," said Fitzgerald, 48. "Sitting on the porch and watching stars is not for everybody, but it's wholesome."

Patrick Wales, a Danville native and geologist for Virginia Uranium, said landowners' fears are overblown: the ore deposits are in an isolated part of the county, and trucks would only occasionally haul uranium from the site. And the upside, he said, is that the uranium would help fuel the nation's nuclear reactors and make the country less dependent on foreign oil, while bringing 300 jobs or more to Pittsylvania.

No one, he said, intends to do any harm to the county: "We haven't been here 4,000 years, but this is our hometown, too."

Lovelace, though, is convinced a uranium mine would be the death of a county his ancestors helped build. "We've got a pretty county, without a doubt it's a pretty county," he said. "I had the time of my life running around these hayfields as a boy. I think my children and the children of my friends deserve the same chance as me."

Contact Rex Bowman at (540) 344-3612 or rbowman@timesdispatch.com

Cameco Corporation: Cigar Lake Re-visited!

Comment: A Flooded Modern Uranium Mine

Posted By Uranium Stocks On February 6, 2009 @ 10:57 pm In Uranium Mining

Friday, February 13, 2009 is a date for your diary, as ominous as it may be, as that is when Cameco will publish its next quarterly news release containing a summary of the progress being made at Cigar Lake. As a reminder this it what Cameco said in its last quarterly news release in 2008.

On August 12, 2008, Cameco suspended remediation work in shaft 1 at Cigar Lake after an increase in the rate of water inflow to the mine.We are continuing to investigate the source of the inflow. Based on the information collected to date, we have identified a potential source at the 420 metre level of the shaft.

This area was developed many years ago to assess the practicality of developing a working level above the orebody. This proved to not be feasible due to poor ground conditions. A concrete bulkhead was put in place and the remainder of the level was subsequently used for minor mine infrastructure and storage.

Our investigation is currently focused on this area. However, we continue to review the area in and around the plug that was poured subsequent to the October 2006 inflow, as well as the two areas where it was previously determined additional precautionary measures were not necessary. Information collected to date does not suggest any problem in these areas.

Submersible remotely operated vehicles (ROV) are being deployed in the mine to explore the potential sources, provide visual and sonar imaging of the mine workings and measure parameters like water flow and temperature. At the same time, we are pumping water from the mine to create water flow to assist in identification of the inflow source. While the work is time consuming (some items like doors and pipes have to be cut away to allow the ROVs access), it is progressing steadily and providing good information to the investigation team.

Once the source of the inflow is identified, we will develop a remediation plan.

Progress on the remediation of shaft 2 continues. The inflow sources have been sealed and the effectiveness of the seal has been demonstrated. The shaft is now ready for dewatering and will be scheduled as part of the overall remediation plan for Cigar Lake.

In order to keep our stakeholders informed on the progress of remediation activities, we will provide updates with each quarterly MD&A or more frequently if there are significant developments.

Hopefully Cameco will have determined the source of water ingress in shaft 1 and have compiled at least an outline plan of action for its containment. On shaft 2 its fingers crossed that the seals are still holding, however it is not clear to us just when the dewatering will commence, hopefully this next update will contain a little more detail of the engineering problems, the alternative solutions available and an outline schedule for the works to completion.

The provision of a doable schedule and an achievable end date would give investors a well deserved boost. Its now a case of watch this space!

Over the last month or so Cameco’s stock price has deteriorated from around the $24.00 level to close yesterday at $20.00 so we are looking for some good news in order to reverse this downward trend.

Cameco Corporation has a market capitalization of $7.31 billion, a 52 week high of C$44.38 and a 52 week low of C$14.33, turnover yesterday was 3.67 million shares and trades as CCO on the Toronto Stock Exchange and as CCJ on the New York Stock Exchange.

For disclosure purposes we do not own this uranium stock.

Mining town balks at uranium

Ghislain Lévesque has dealt with many contentious issues during the 12 years he's been mayor of Sept Îles. But nothing has stirred emotions in the regional hub, 650 kilometres northeast of Quebec City, like the proposal to mine uranium on the outskirts of the city.

MARK CARDWELL, Special to The GazettePublished: Saturday, February 07

"I've never seen people here get so worried and upset over a single subject," Lévesque said about the groundswell of public opposition to the project in recent weeks, included petitions, a demonstration, and a threat by most of the city's doctors to leave the region if it goes ahead.

"It's the only thing people are talking about around town these days, and almost everybody seems to be against it."

That's why, he added, city councillors voted unanimously in favour of a resolution on Jan. 26 asking the province to declare a permanent moratorium on uranium mining in its territory. By so doing, Sept Îles became the seventh municipality in Quebec - and the first on the North Shore - to make a similar request to government in recent years.

And it likely won't be the last.

That's because, after a 30-year lull, uranium is back on the radar of Quebec's mining industry. And that is raising concerns - whether real or imagined - among people who live in areas where there are known uranium deposits.

Although Canada is the world's biggest producer of uranium, accounting for roughly a third of the 100 million pounds that are sold on the global market each year, all of our production comes from three mines in Saskatchewan's Athabasca Basin, which contains the biggest and richest known deposits of uranium on Earth.
About 85 per cent of that production - worth some $500 million annually - is shipped to the United States, Japan and western Europe, where it is used to produce energy in nuclear reactors. The rest is used here at home to produce electricity, mostly at nuclear power plants in Ontario and here in Quebec, and to produce isotopes for cancer treatments and other medical purposes.

Quebec also has the capacity to be a major producer of uranium, a silvery-grey metal that is ubiquitous in nature and weakly radioactive, says Robert Marquis, director general of Géologie Québec, the office within the provincial Natural Resources and Wildlife Department that collects and studies scientific and field evidence of mineral resources and assesses their potential.

"Mining companies are always on the lookout for minerals and they have found many occurrences of uranium here over the years," Marquis, a geologist and past president of the Geologic Association of Canada, said from his office in Val d'Or this week.

Located mostly in four geographical areas - the Otish Mountains in central Quebec, Ungava Bay, Mont Laurier and the Ottawa Valley, and the North Shore - those finds contain relatively low-grade uranium that is not economically feasible to produce when commodity prices are low.

That has been the case since the 1970s, when the world soured on nuclear energy and commodity prices went south. But the price of uranium has been on a tear in recent years. Though it has fallen sharply in recent months due to the global financial crisis, a pound of uranium fetched a record $138 U.S. in June 2007, a tenfold increase over 2004.

"When prices get that high," said Marquis, "uranium production here has the potential to be profitable."
That's what prompted Terra Ventures, a small, publicly-traded Vancouver mining company that is involved in uranium projects in the Athabaska Basin, to stake a claim over a 2,166-acre property around Lac Kachiwiss in March 2007.

Located 20 kms north of Sept Îles on high hills that are sparsely covered with trees, the site was first drilled for diamonds in the 1970s. Instead, it was found to be chock full of low-grade uranium, with an estimated 5 million pounds of the material locked in the granite rocks that cover the area.

According to Terra Ventures geological director, Mike Magrum, the company spent about $3 million at the site last year diamond drilling 12 holes totalling 4,000 metres. The results of those assays, which were announced in January, suggested the site "is of similar character" to Rio Tinto's Rossing mine in Namibia, which produced seven per cent of the world's uranium.

"To get the uranium out we'd need to build a standard mill with a leeching process in which an acid dissolves the uranium, which is then extracted," explained Magrum. From a practical operating point of view, he added, the low grade of the ore means it would be no more dangerous to handle and process than iron ore, a commodity that is already heavily mined in the area and is important to the local economy.

Sept Îles is Canada's second largest bulk port, after Vancouver. Iron ore made up roughly 85 per cent of the 23 million metric tonnes of cargo shipped from the facility in 2008.

"We're still a long way from a mine but we're interested in pursuing the project," said Terra Ventures's Magrum. "But we want to work with the community and we are sensitive to social concerns."

Those concerns were first heard last summer, when local media began reporting on Terra Ventures's exploration efforts around Lac Kachiwiss.

"I couldn't believe it," said Marc Fafard, an engineer by training and a father of four who lives with his family in the old English school on the now-closed military radar station at the mouth of the Moisie River, just west of Sept Îles.

The Terra Ventures project would be a disaster for the region, says the self-described social activist who read up on uranium and uranium mining. In addition to creating unsightly mountains of crushed rocks, Fafard said, a uranium mine would necessarily result in the concentration and release of the metal's radioactive particles, called radon, which could contaminate underground aquifers and end up in rivers and drinking water.
"We live in a natural paradise here," said Fafard, who complained to city hall about the project and condemned it in letters to local media. "Why risk all that?"

Others felt the same. One was Rasvan Popescu, a local engineer who immigrated to Canada from Romania. A former employee in an old Soviet-era nuclear generating station who says his mother and other family members died from the fallout of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster in nearby Ukraine, he made headlines last fall with a public call for a permanent moratorium on uranium prospecting on the North Shore.

Popescu said he is aware of the water contamination caused by the uranium mines that operated in Elliot Lake, Ont., until 1996. And, he notes, even during exploration, the drilling breaks through aquifer lines, contaminating water tables.

He said he has heard talk in the mining community of plans for as many as a half-dozen uranium mines along the North Shore, including one at Port Cartier.

"It would be a disaster for all of us. It would change our way of life," Popescu said.

In December, 31 doctors in the city of 25,000, which is already struggling with a doctor shortage, signed a public letter also calling for a moratorium on the Terra Ventures project - and threatening to leave if a uranium mine is developed. "I chose Sept Îles for the quality of the environment," pneumologist and letter author Bruno Imbeault told a local journalist. "(But) if I'm going to be poisoned like I would be (living in) Montreal, I'll leave."

Around the same time, Fafard launched a one-man movement - Sept-Îles sans uranium 2009 - that he said received 3,000 phone calls, Christmas cards and emails of support from local residents. He also started a petition that was copied and circulated across town, calling on the city council to declare a moratorium. "After that," he said, "everything just kind of snowballed."

In response, the council held a closed-door meeting on Jan. 19 with public health and mining officials to learn more about the potential effects of the uranium project. Among other things, the city councillors were told the risks posed by uranium exploration were almost non-existent and that actual mining, when done according to the stringent rules and regulations set down by the Quebec and federal governments, would also be relatively safe.

"There really is no danger," says Dr. Rénald Cloutier, director of public health for the North Shore. He attended the meeting and later issued a public advisory in the region that gave detailed information about uranium. It concluded that risks associated with the project were "controllable," but that it was "legitimate for the community to weigh the socio-economic benefits and socio-environmental costs and ethical questions about the commercial and military uses of uranium."

In an interview, Cloutier said: "The most worrying thing is how people in Sept Îles are so worried. That's why we issued (the release), to try and defuse some of the tension and bring some balance to the debate."
Sept Îles Mayor Lévesque agrees there's probably no danger but, he says, people's preoccupation with the project became his main concern.

"Who are we to say whether they are right or wrong to be worried?" he asked. "We want mining, we're a mining town. But we don't want something that is so divisive."
- - -
On Jan. 26, the day the council voted on the resolution asking the province to declare a permanent moratorium on uranium mining in its territory, Fafard organized a noontime march through downtown Sept Îles. Despite frigid temperatures, some 300 people showed up. About 100 also attended a late-afternoon vigil outside city hall and cheered the announcement that the council had voted in favour of the moratorium.

The resolution has been sent to the Quebec Natural Resources and Wildlife Department, where it joins similar ones made by seven other municipalities across the province since 2007, including Cantley, Chelsea and La Pêche in the Outaouais region, and Lac St. Paul, Chute St. Philippe, Rivière Rouge and Ferme Neuve in the Laurentians.

"The government of Quebec has a role to protect people from projects that threaten them," junior minister Serge Simard told The Gazette.

"And the people of Sept Îles aren't the only ones who are worried about uranium."

Simard refused to speculate on when, where or if the Liberal government might pass a moratorium on uranium mining. Instead, he said, there will be more public debate on the matter, beginning with a forum of North Shore mayors later this year.

"We want people to well understand all the issues that are involved with uranium," Simard said. "Transparency is the key."

Though concern over the project has subsided in Sept Îles since last week's council vote, Fafard says people remain wary and they are not letting their guard down.

"We don't want to talk about or debate the pros and cons of uranium exploration and mining," he said. "We don't want a uranium mine here, period."
- - -
Mining industry employs 50,000 in Quebec

Only a handful of the 270,000-plus claims currently staked in Quebec will ever develop into working mines, says Robert Marquis, director general of Géologie Québec.

According to government figures, mining companies spent $430 million on exploration in Quebec in 2007, almost three times more than in 2003. Including the activities of the 20 mines and dozens of quarries and sandpits that extract commodities like gold, iron, copper and salt from Quebec bedrock, the mining industry employs some 50,000 people across the province.

Often ranked No. 1 in the world by the Fraser Institute for its favourable mining policies and mineral potential, as well as the quality of its training facilities and labour pool, Quebec is doing all it can to keep the industry churning. "Our objective is to diversify," said Marquis. "That's the key to success."

Because investment follows market forces, money tends to flow to projects aimed at finding and developing minerals with the hottest stock prices. "There tends to be a flavour-of-the-month approach," said Marquis.
"A decade ago it was diamonds. Today it's gold and uranium.

Hurt council takes action on uranium

Comment: Yeah, Hurt!!!

Friday, February 6, 2009 3:05 PM EST

Hurt Town Council has adopted a resolution against mining and milling uranium in Virginia without "an unbiased conclusive study" of the potential impact.

Meeting Feb. 3, council voted 5-0 to pass the resolution after hearing from both opponents of uranium mining and officials from Virginia Uranium Inc., the Chatham company interested in mining in Pittsylvania County.

The approved resolution was presented by uranium opponents.

Patrick Wales, a project manager with Virginia Uranium, also presented a resolution to council.

It resolved that the town supports the current study by the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission Subcommittee on Uranium Mining to determine the possible impact of mining in the state.

"The town citizens don't want it. And we represent the town citizens," Councilman Tommy Neal said after the meeting.

"If they're going to mine that stuff around here, they need to make sure it's safe.

"The current study should take 18-24 months.Pittsylvania County is home to what is believed to be the largest uranium deposit in the nation. The site is about six miles northeast of Chatham.

See next week's Journal for more on the story.

Pittsylvania County landfill fined for waste leak

Comment: Sleeper said the small size of the leak is the reason why the county didn’t notify the public of the leak last spring. (Secret leaks, is this the future, is it legal?)

By John CranePublished: January 27, 2009

Pittsylvania County must pay a $1,300 penalty to the state for a leachate leak discovered last spring at its landfill in Dry Fork.

The leak, a violation of the Virginia Waste Management Act and Virginia Solid Waste Management regulations, involved a “very minimal release of leachate,” Marvin Booth III, enforcement representative with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality’s Lynchburg office, said Tuesday. “Leachate” is liquid that has passed through solid waste and contains waste material, according to the DEQ.

“No matter how small it is, we have to address it,” Booth said.

Booth said there was little chance that leachate reached the Banister River watershed. (was the leake check?)

During an unannounced, routine quarterly inspection on March 21, DEQ staff discovered a seep in a waste cell entering the landfill’s storm water conveyance system that drains into a sedimentation pond before potentially discharging into a wetlands area next to the Banister River, according to the order from the Virginia Waste Management Board.

Chemical analysis of seep samples by a county environmental consultant found contamination by “metals and organic constituents,” the state board said.

County investigation revealed that a leachate pump impeller had corroded and it no longer pumped leachate from a waste cell at the landfill. The landfill had no flow meters or hour meters, but the county has since installed them and replaced the leachate pump impeller, Booth said.

County Administrator Dan Sleeper said the amount of water involved in the leak was only enough to fill a coffee cup and that the $1,300 civil charge is the department’s minimum fine. Leachate is pumped to a holding pond and is sent to a treatment plant in Chatham, Sleeper said, adding the leak occurred at a closed facility.

The order from the Virginia Solid Waste Management Board states that procedures during periodic inspections of the pump “were not sufficient to detect failures of this nature.”

The county has since instituted procedures for weekly checks of the leachate flow meters, the board said.

Sleeper said the small size of the leak is the reason why the county didn’t notify the public of the leak last spring.

The Deepest Cuts State Budgets in Crisis

Send an e-mail to David A. Fahrenthold" Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, January 26, 2009; Page B01

One in a series of reports exploring the impact of budget cuts being contemplated by elected officials in Maryland and Virginia.

The state of Virginia has eliminated more than one-fifth of its air-pollution inspectors -- who police everything from massive power plants to neighborhood dry cleaners -- as part of its attempt to make up a budget shortfall estimated at $3 billion or more, officials said.

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) wants to cut about $12 million this fiscal year from the $420 million budget of the state secretary of natural resources, who oversees state parks, Chesapeake Bay restoration and anti-pollution efforts.

Under Kaine's plan, some of the cutbacks would come through deferring maintenance, eliminating training and replacing quarterly surveys of state-park visitors with annual ones. Kaine also proposed cutting 43 positions.

One small section of the secretary's domain -- the air-enforcement division of the Department of Environmental Quality -- has already made serious cuts. A spokesman for the department said 14 of the roughly 54 inspector positions had been eliminated.

No inspectors were laid off, department spokesman Bill Hayden said. He said most had left the department through voluntary early retirement programs and a handful were moved to other jobs.

Air inspectors oversee about 5,000 sites statewide, checking their paperwork and the emissions from smokestacks and exhaust. At power plants, those emissions can include soot and the building blocks of smog. At dry cleaners, they can include cleaning chemicals that irritate lungs.

State officials said the inspectors will still be able to check Virginia's largest air polluters, about 500 power plants and factories, as often as U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rules require. That's once every two years for the very largest, and once every five years for the rest.

But officials said that the rest of the sites would be checked much less often.
Jerome Brooks, who oversees the air compliance division, said that in previous years, inspectors were able to check 1,400 sites a year.

This year, he said, they will check fewer than 800.

He said they would try to target sites with a history of violations and those that draw complaints from neighbors.

"If [polluters] are out of compliance, we may or may not find it as quickly or easily as we once did," said L. Preston Bryant Jr., state secretary of natural resources.

S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, said the loss of inspectors could embolden Virginia's polluters to bend or break rules.

"This is akin to having pollution-control cops on the beat. When sources of air pollution know that their facilities are being inspected, they will . . . do a better job" of controlling emissions, Becker said.

Becker said he fears other states will also lay off inspectors this year as the national recession cuts into the tax revenue that makes up state budgets. Becker said it is too early to know how many jobs might be lost nationwide.

Two jobs were also lost from the Department of Environmental Quality office in charge of policing water polluters, Hayden said, although he said this was also done without layoffs.

In Maryland, Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) released his proposed budget last week and actually added money for the oversight of power plants.

The state's Chesapeake Bay 2010 Trust Fund, a new program that funnels money into efforts to stop pollution on farms and in suburban neighborhoods, did not fare as well.

The fund, which draws from a tax on fuel and car rentals, was heavily raided this fiscal year. As the state's budget tightened, $25 million was shifted into the state's general accounts. Only about $9.6 million was left.

For the next fiscal year, O'Malley proposed taking money from the trust fund again, this time about $6.5 million. The rest of the fund, projected to be about $25 million, will be spent on the Chesapeake, according to state officials.

O'Malley "has made a huge commitment to bay restoration here," said Mark Hoffman of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources. "He could have very easily said, 'We'll continue to take $25 million.' "

Senate panel OKs bill encouraging wind-farm leasing off Va.

By Dave ForsterThe Virginian-Pilot© January 26, 2009
RICHMOND

The Virginia Marine Resources Commission would get the authority to lease underwater land for an offshore wind farm under a bill that passed a Senate committee today.

State Sen. Frank Wagner, R-Virginia Beach, is sponsoring the bill, SB1350. The legislation also directs the Marine Resources Commission to study whether there is suitable land off Virginia’s coast to support a commercial offshore wind farm, and if there is, to try to lease it for development.

The legislation would pave the way for wind energy production in Virginia, especially off southern Virginia Beach, where some of the most ideal spots appear to be near False Cape State Park and the Back Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Wagner said.

“There would be no one to have to look at it,” Wagner said of the soaring windmills typical of such projects.

Agenda, Public Hearing Jan. 6, 2009 Chatham High School

Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy Uranium Mining Sub-Committee

Tuesday, January 6, 2009,

6:00 p.m.

Chatham High School Auditorium Chatham, Virginia

Agenda I. Welcome & Call to Order Delegate Lee Ware, Chairman

II. Public Comment on Scope of Study The Sub-Committee on Uranium Mining invites members of the public to recommend points of concern that should be included in the scope of any study on the mining of uranium in the Commonwealth. Speakers will be provided with three minutes to address the sub-committee and may not cede their time to other speakers. A sign-up list will be available at least one hour prior to the start of the hearing. Comments should be specific to the scope of the study on uranium mining and not on whether uranium mining should be permitted.*

IV. Discussion V. Adjourn Sub-Committee Members

The Honorable R. Lee Ware, Jr., Chair
The Honorable John Watkins
The Honorable Charles W. Carrico, Sr.
The Honorable Phillip P. Puckett
The Honorable William R. Janis
The Honorable Frank W. Wagner
The Honorable Watkins M. Abbitt, Jr.
Mr. Harry Dean Childress
The Honorable Kristen J. Amundson
The Honorable Terry G. Kilgore, Ex Officio
The Honorable Clarence E. Phillips

Staff
Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services, 786-3591
Bill Owen, House Committee Operations, 698-1540

* The Sub-Committee on Uranium Mining also welcomes written comment on the scope of the study and extends the deadline for public comment until Monday, January 19th. Please send correspondence to the Coal & Energy Commission, c/o Ellen Porter, Division of Legislative Services, 910 Capitol Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219 or eporter@dls.virginia.gov.

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:Q_aUFft82cgJ:leg1.state.va.us/091/oth/c%26eum_ag_1609.pdf+january+6+chatham+high+uranium&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us

Partnership May Mine Pittsylvania Uranium

Apparently things are moving more quickly re: the moratorium than we've been led to believe...

A Virginia company that wants to mine uranium from a deposit in Pittsylvania County plans to partner with a Canadian company for the project.

Virginia Uranium Inc. has announced a merger plan with Santoy Resources of British Columbia, Canada. If completed, it would provide more money and expertise to help mine one of the world's largest deposits of the radioactive ore, worth an estimated $10 billion.

Walter Coles Sr., whose family farm sits atop the uranium deposit, said the partnership is a way to raise money for the long-term future of the project.

Virginia officials are weighing whether to overturn a 25-year-old ban on uranium mining. (emphasis mine...SB)

http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/business/local/article/BBBB25_20081224-205613/161962/

Virginia Uranium Company Teams with Canadians

By Scott Harper
The Virginian-Pilot
© December 24, 2008

The Virginia company that wants to mine an estimated 60,000 tons of uranium from rolling farmland in Pittsylvania County has a new business partner: Santoy Resources Ltd., based in British Columbia, Canada.

Virginia Uranium Inc. and Santoy Resources announced their intention to merge late Monday, with a proposed exchange of stocks, cash and future interests.

If the merger is completed early next year, with approvals by company boards and regulators, the new hybrid will have more money, investment clout and expertise to pursue what geologists describe as one of the largest untapped uranium deposits in the United States - at Coles Hill, near the historic town of Chatham, about three hours west of Norfolk.

"It's really a way for us to raise money, for the future and long term of the project," said Walter Coles Sr., whose family farm sits atop the Southside uranium deposit, estimated to be worth $10 billion.

Santoy is considered a junior mineral exploration company that has been acquiring interests in uranium deposits across Canada, as well as the rights to oil, gas, methane and gold resources.

Coles and his allies still need a favorable study to be concluded on the potential environmental, public health and social implications of mining so much radioactive material from the ground.

Then they would need the votes to overturn a 25-year-old ban on uranium mining in Virginia.

And after that, state regulations would have to be written, permits obtained and infrastructure built before any uranium could be extracted and converted to fuel for nuclear power plants.

Environmentalists and the city of Virginia Beach are among the opponents. Virginia Beach is especially worried that uranium wastes could leach into streams that feed Lake Gaston, the city's primary drinking water supply.

Todd Benson, with the Piedmont Environmental Council, said the proposed merger illustrates an increasingly complex web of companies and interests in Virginia that poses a fundamental question:

"Who ultimately is responsible for cleaning up an accident or spill?" Benson asked. "Is it Walter Coles and Virginia Uranium? A Canadian company? Or someone else that we may or may not know about?"

He noted that there are at least three companies mixed into the Santoy merger: Virginia Uranium Inc., Virginia Uranium Ltd. and Virginia Uranium Holdings.

In a statement, Virginia Uranium said it "welcomes the pending strategic merger," that VU Ltd. currently owns a 12 percent stake in VU Holdings, and that as a result of the deal, Santoy's interests in VU Holdings will jump to 20 percent from 12 percent.

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

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/12/virginia-uranium-company-teams-canadians

This is what's known as a holiday dump...putting forth important info at a time when it's least likely to be read, or read in-depth, due to everyone's attention being diverted by the impending holiday celebrations.

Interesting that the press release isn't for distribution/dissemination to the US! Too late for that now! If it's on the web, it's disseminated.

Dec 22, 2008 14:23 ET

Santoy Merges With Virginia Uranium Ltd.

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwire - Dec. 22, 2008) -


NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES


Santoy Resources Ltd. ("Santoy" or the "Company") (TSX VENTURE:SAN) is pleased to announce the signing of a Letter of Intent ("LOI") between Santoy and two private companies pursuant to which Santoy will acquire all of the shares of Virginia Uranium Ltd. ("Limited"), a private Yukon corporation, in exchange for shares in Santoy, at the ratio of six shares of Santoy for each one share of Limited. Limited currently holds a 12% minority interest in VA Uranium Holdings, Inc. ("Holdco"), a Yukon corporation. Holdco's 100% owned subsidiary, Virginia Uranium Inc., a Virginia corporation, controls the leasehold development and operating rights of the Coles Hill uranium property in southside Virginia. Santoy following the transaction is hereafter referred to as "Newco").


As part of the transaction, certain shareholders of Holdco will exchange their Holdco shares for shares of the Company on the same six for one basis. In addition, Santoy will invest $1,000,000 in Limited which will be secured by a promissory note issued by Limited and a pledge of shares of Holdco. The note will be convertible into 1,666,666 shares of Limited upon the successful completion of the contemplated transaction. Santoy will invest up to an additional $2,500,000 in exchange for up to an additional 4,166,666 shares of Holdco at an issue price of $0.60 per share. The above transactions will result in Newco holding a minimum of 20% of Holdco (increasing to approximately 25% following completion of the Newco Financing). Newco will have the same rights of first refusal as currently held by Limited on future financings required by Holdco as it advances the Coles Hill uranium project.


In addition, shareholders of Santoy immediately prior to closing will receive 1/4 of one warrant for each Santoy share held, with each whole warrant (an "Incentive Warrant") being exercisable for one Newco share at a price of $0.12 per share for a period of 12 months following the closing of transaction. If the closing price of the common shares of Newco for any 10 consecutive trading days exceeds $0.18, then Newco may accelerate the expiry of the warrants to the date which is 30 days following the end of such 10 trading day period. In turn, Holdco will issue warrants to Newco entitling Newco to acquire Holdco shares equivalent to the number of common shares of Newco underlying the Incentive Warrants, multiplied by the 1/6 share exchange ratio, at a price of $0.72 per share for a period of 12 months following the closing of the transaction.


The board of directors of Newco will consist of nominees of Santoy and Limited of which Newco expects to have up to seven directors with a minimum of three being independent. Norm Reynolds, currently Chief Executive Officer of Limited, is expected to be appointed as Chief Executive Officer of Newco. Walter Coles Jr., currently Executive Vice President of Limited, is expected to be appointed Executive Vice President of Newco. Ron Netolitzky, currently Chief Executive Officer of Santoy, will continue his active involvement in the company as a director of Newco. Mike Cathro of Santoy will remain as VP of Exploration for Newco.


The LOI contemplates that the Company will acquire Limited pursuant to a plan of arrangement under the Business Corporations Act (British Columbia). Both of Santoy and Limited will continue their jurisdictions of incorporation to British Columbia to facilitate the transaction. It is expected that Newco will have approximately 234,189,430 issued shares on completion of the above. At the meeting to approve the Arrangement, Santoy will seek shareholder approval for the continuance of its jurisdiction to British Columbia, approval of the arrangement and approval for a consolidation of the Newco shares on a one for six basis. All dollar and share figures given in this news release are provided on a pre-consolidation basis.


The Coles Hill uranium deposit is located in southern Virginia, USA and is considered to be one of the largest undeveloped uranium deposits in the United States. It has an estimated measured and indicated resource of 119 million pounds of U308(1)(2)(3) at a cut-off grade of 0.025% U308 based on a National Instrument 43-101 technical report on the Coles Hill property prepared for Virginia Uranium, Inc. by Behre Dolbear and Company, Ltd., Marshall Miller and Associates, Inc., and PAC Geological Consulting Inc. dated June 30th, 2008 (the "Behre Dolbear report"). A summary of the findings of this report is available on Virginia Uranium Inc.'s website at www.virginiauranium.com :

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPT FROM TABLE 1.1
RESOURCE ESTIMATES - JUNE 4, 2008
(MILLIONS OF TONS AND POUNDS IN-PLACE)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Measured(1)           Indicated(1)            Total(1)
       ---------------------  ---------------------  ---------------------
                   %                      %                      %
Cutoff   Tons    U3O8  Pounds   Tons    U3O8  Pounds   Tons    U3O8  Pounds
%U3O8      (2)     (3)   U3O8     (2)     (3)   U3O8     (2)     (3)   U3O8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Total (South and North Coles Hill Deposits)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.100   0.755   0.228    3.45   6.27   0.215    26.9   7.03   0.216    30.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.075    1.35   0.164    4.44   24.0   0.116    55.9   25.4   0.119    60.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.050    2.28   0.124    5.65   35.4   0.101    71.7   37.7   0.103    77.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.025    6.62   0.064    8.42   92.1   0.060     111   98.7   0.060     119
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Total tonnage above cutoff grade and average weight % U3O8 of that
   tonnage
(2) Short tons based on a rock density of 2.56 g/cc
(3) Weight %
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. The "Qualified Persons" (as defined in NI 43-101) who prepared the
  resource estimate were Betty L. Gibbs for Behre Dolbear and K. Scott
  Keim for Marshall Miller and Associates, Inc.
2. Mineral resources which are not mineral reserves do not have
  demonstrated economic viability. The estimate of mineral resources may
  be materially affected by environmental, permitting, legal, marketing,
  or other relevant issues.
3. Santoy has not conducted appropriate due diligence work to verify this
  resource estimate. Santoy plans to immediately commission its own
  NI 43-101 compliant technical report.

A statutory framework has been enacted into law for uranium exploration in Virginia. However, the Commonwealth of Virginia prohibits any agency of the Commonwealth from accepting applications for uranium mining until a program for permitting uranium mining is established by statute. Such legislation has not been enacted. In November 2008, Virginia's Commission on Coal and Energy endorsed commencement by a state panel of a study of uranium mining's health, economic, social and other impacts. A subcommittee of the commission must approve an outline of the study before it moves forward.


Mr. Ron Netolitzky, Chief Executive Officer of Santoy, is also a director and a shareholder of Holdco. To increase the number of Holdco shares available to Santoy, Mr. Netolitzky has offered that Santoy may acquire his Holdco shares at cost as part of the transaction. If this exchange completes, Mr. Netolitzky would receive Newco shares representing his cost of approximately US$400,000 for the Holdco shares ($0.20 US per Holdco share) plus interest. The LOI has been negotiated by an independent committee of the Board of Santoy and has received full Board approval. Toll Cross Securities has been retained to provide a fairness opinion with respect to the contemplated transaction. The ultimate structure and form of the transaction will be mutually determined by Limited and the Company based on tax, securities and corporate law and other considerations.


The parties will negotiate in good faith to agree on the definitive terms of a formal agreement in respect of the transaction by January 31, 2009. The completion of the plan of arrangement is subject to various conditions, including applicable regulatory approval, approval by the shareholders of Limited and the Company; the approval by the Supreme Court of British Columbia of the fairness to Santoy shareholders of the terms and conditions of the plan of arrangement satisfactory negotiation of other transaction-related documents; and the structure being satisfactory to the parties from a tax and securities law perspective. It is contemplated that the Company will change its name to reflect the significance of the transaction to the Company. Limited and Santoy will use their commercially reasonable efforts to complete the transaction by April 15, 2009.


Santoy is pleased to proceed with this transaction as it gives the Company a significant position in a uranium project situated in a stable political location. At the same time, Limited shareholders will gain diversification and will benefit from Santoy's exploration properties. The acquisition complements Santoy's portfolio of uranium exploration properties in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan, the Otish Mountains in Quebec and the Central Mineral Belt of Labrador. The Company is also the largest shareholder of Boss Power Corp. which owns the Blizzard uranium deposit in British Columbia.


The technical information in this news release has been reviewed and approved by Michael S. Cathro, P,Geo., Santoy's Vice President of Exploration, a Qualified Person. The Qualified Person has not verified the data disclosed in the news release as the Company plans to immediately commission a NI 43-101 compliant technical report to confirm the resource estimate.


This news release includes certain "forward-looking statements". All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding potential mineralization, exploration results and future plans and objectives of the Company are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company's expectations include market prices, exploitation and exploration results, availability of capital and financing, general economic, market or business conditions, uninsured risks, regulatory decisions, regulatory changes, defects in title, availability of personnel, materials and equipment, timeliness of government approvals, unanticipated environmental impacts on operations and other exploration risks detailed herein and from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators. The Company expressly disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise except as otherwise required by applicable securities legislation.

For more information, please contact

Santoy Resources Ltd.
R. K. Netolitzky
President & CEO
(604) 669-4799
(604) 669-2543 (FAX)
Email: netolitzky@gmail.com

http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Santoy-Resources-Ltd-TSX-VENTURE-SAN-932703.html

Uranium Mining Study Should Face Realities Of Today’s Uranium Industry

Excellent editorial from the Gazette-Virginian:

Chamber Uranium Study Group Urges Looking Beyond Good Ideas, Intentions To Focus On Evidence From Experience

Health and environment, economic impact, scope and methodology of study as well as quality of life issues were areas of concern outlined by the Halifax County Chamber of Commerce Uranium Mining Study Group in a 131-page report submitted to the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission last week.

Last month, the Commission appointed a subcommittee of its members to oversee a study of the impact of uranium mining in Virginia.

Virginia Uranium Inc., which controls an estimated $7-$10 billion uranium deposit near Chatham, is seeking a study. Currently, a moratorium on uranium mining in the commonwealth exists, one that has been in effect over 25 years.

The HCCC Uranium Study Group’s work came at the behest of Del. Clarke Hogan, who asked chamber of commerce organizations in Halifax and Pittsylvania County to form a joint committee to seek citizen input regarding issues of concern. Only Halifax County’s chamber participated.

The chamber’s Uranium Study Group’s conclusion called on commissioners to look beyond conceptual, theoretical and hypothetically safe conclusions, and instead “to look squarely at existing operations and communities and face the realities of today’s uranium industry.”

“The results of a study will depend heavily on whether commissioners and researchers look beyond good ideas and good intentions and focus on evidence from experience,” noted the study group’s report.

“Our citizens accept that the ‘idea’ of safe mining is possible,” noted the report. “However, prudence and experience demand a thorough consideration of what could happen in practice if human beings undertake uranium mining, milling, and tailings storage in Virginia.”

One study conclusion: ”It is not rational, realistic, or scientific to presume that mine operations in Virginia - however ingenious, honest, professional, hardworking, caring, responsible, and patriotic they may be - would do better than other experienced professionals already involved in modern, regulated uranium mining. Virginia climate and population density would add considerably to both the risk of failures and the consequences of those failures.”

The study group described Virginia’s uranium debate as “not about the cost-benefit of remedying an existing problem,” but about “whether the state should create a situation that carries with it the potential for real risks to real people and the environment, as well as affecting people’s right to the safe enjoyment of their property.”

“In considering whether to lift Virginia’s moratorium, legislators will make a decision regarding an ‘acceptable’ level of risk - but acceptable to whom?” asked the report. “To a single mother of two small children living a mile from Coles Hill on land that once belonged to her grandparents? To a dairyman and his family and hundreds of cows three miles and a light breeze from the proposed mine? To community citizens wondering if it’s safe to drink the water, shower, swim, garden, buy local produce, fish, hunt, start a business, or buy a home?

“In considering whether to enable a voluntary act by a private company, legislators will decide what involuntary and unwanted risks to impose on private citizens who want nothing more than to live peacefully, safely and without worry in their own homes and on their own land,” the report concluded.

Study’s Four Areas of Concern

Health and Environment: Uranium mining in the United States has a history of environmental pollution. Virginia’s climate, geology and population density make that history all the more problematic, particularly in light of information indicating there is no safe level of exposure to radiation, radon, and the heavy metals that are associated with uranium mining.

Economic Effects: The economic effects of initiating uranium mining in a community are unclear. Increases in tax revenue and industry related jobs may be offset by negative impacts on economic development and the costs of containing and monitoring hazardous wastes literally forever. Individuals have an intuitive sense that property values will decline sharply. It seems likely that one group of stakeholders may gain benefits, while a different group bears the costs.

Scope and Methodology of the Study: The credibility of the study will depend upon the independence and qualifications of the research institutions, the transparency of the study, the facilitation of public education and participation, the degree to which the study addresses the community’s specific concerns, and the extent to which study conclusions are based upon actual experience. Our citizens endorse the selection of the National Academy of Sciences.

Quality of Life: Virginia’s Piedmont is a mix of cities, small towns and rural areas. Livestock and agriculture are plentiful; the area has abundant rivers and lakes and streams; fishing, hunting and water sports are popular pastimes. Many people choose to reside in the area because of these natural resources. Any perceived or real contamination would have a devastating effect.

Within the Uranium Study Group’s report are several series of questions. For each operating site studied, the study group proposed the research institution should develop and consider, at a minimum, 28 questions and issues. Once that data has been gathered, an additional 13 questions are proposed.

Also, recurring questions from “our citizens” included the following:

•Is there a health or economic risk to people whose water intake is downstream of a site?

•Is there a health or economic risk to area residents who depend on wells for consumption and for agricultural purposes.

•Is there a health or economic risk to area property owners?

•Is there economic risk to businesses that depend on the recreational resources in the area?

•How will a farmer or homeowner be compensated if their source of water becomes unusable or unavailable?

•Who is responsible if property values do fall?

•What guarantees exist to insure that taxpayers bear no cost of monitoring, remediation, or reclamation of the site?

•How will damage claims be investigated and compensated?

•What are the beneficial and negative economic impacts on distinct groups and interests: 1)owner and investors, 2) workers, 3) nearby residents, 4) area farmers, 5)local counties, 6) recreation, 7) tourism, 8) historic and archaeological resources, 9) existing businesses/schools/institutions, 10) regional economic development, 11) downstream water users, and 12) state governments.

•Are there health or economic risks due to transportation of waste products, ore, and uranium?

•Are area residents disturbed by noise and/or dust from blasting? If so, at what maximum distance?

•How can area residents be certain their water and air are not being adversely affected before damage is done?

•What are the economic impacts of perceived risk or stigma associated with uranium and mining?

•What Does uranium mining provide jobs to local citizens, and at what average wage?

•What is expected net financial effect on local and state governments?

•What happens if mining proceeds and all the assurances prove to be wrong? Who will unring the bell?

•If my water quality is reduced, how will I know if it is adversely affecting my children’s long term health?

•My children play outdoors, and swim in the creeks and rivers. How do I know they will not be affected?

•Given the research that indicts predictive modeling, the complex hydrogeology in Virginia, the severe weather events, the population density, the criticality of groundwater, and the repeated failures of the uranium mining industry to meet regulatory standards, why should Virginia’s citizens be expected to rely on the assurances and models of a for-profit company and its paid consultants?

•How much is peace of mind worth?

http://www.gazettevirginian.com/news1.htm

Uranium Mining Opposed By Citizens Group Leaders

Jack Dunavant and Wallace Nunn traveled to Martinsville on 12/16/08 to speak to the Rotary Club.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

By KIM BARTO - Bulletin Staff Writer

The head of a Southside citizens group spoke out against mining a Pittsylvania County uranium deposit during a Martinsville Rotary Club meeting Tuesday night.

Jack Dunavant of Halifax County, an engineer and chairman of Southside Concerned Citizens (SCC), said he does not believe uranium can be mined safely in Virginia, citing the risk of radiation exposure and the creation of waste products that he said remain hazardous for hundreds of thousands of years.

The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, chaired by Del. Terry Kilgore, R-Scott, has agreed to study the possibility of uranium mining in the state, which passed a moratorium on it in 1981.

Virginia Uranium Inc., a company formed in 2007 by Chatham families whose land sits above an untapped uranium deposit believed to be the largest in the country, has expressed interest in tapping the estimated 119 million pounds of ore under the Coles Hill site. The uranium there would be worth about $10 billion over 30 years, VUI geologist Patrick Wales told the Rotary Club in November. During his talk, Wales made the case that uranium mining at Coles Hill could be done safely.

However, Dunavant said Tuesday there is no sure way to protect the air, water and local people from contamination. “(Uranium) has never been mined anywhere safely,” Dunavant said during the meeting.

“There’s nothing good that comes out of this, except a few people are going to get rich, and we’re going to be left with the price tag,” he said.

Dunavant said uranium waste sites would have to be “monitored forever,” and “any cleanup or remediation will be at taxpayer expense.” He said he has “not made a judgment” about using nuclear power, but he opposes mining east of the Mississippi.

He handed out information from the Southern Environmental Law Center stating that “virtually all uranium mining in the U.S. has occurred in sparsely populated areas of the arid west.”

Mining in Virginia, a more densely populated area with much higher precipitation levels, would risk water contamination from seepage or flooding, according to the SELC.

“Mining can be done much more safely in arid regions, and this is certainly not the place,” Dunavant said. “You don’t want a really wet area like we have here; you want desert” to lower the risk of water contamination.

Waste products left over from uranium processing, called tailings, would have to be contained, and the liquid waste would be impounded in massive slurry ponds.

The SELC stated these wastes pose the risk of spreading through wind or leakage. Dunavant did calculations showing how much waste would be produced from mining 110 million pounds of uranium at Cole’s Hill. The amount of usable uranium ore extracted from mined rock can be as low as a half-pound per ton, according to the SELC.

Based on that figure, mining would create enough radioactive tailings that if the waste was stacked in a triangle 200 feet tall and 400 feet wide at the base, it would be 14 miles long, Dunavant said.

“The danger is not so much that you’re going to stand next to yellowcake (uranium) and get irradiated,” he said, but that people could ingest the dust and radon gas produced by mining operations, causing cancer.

“The problem is, radiation is cumulative,” he said, meaning exposure causes radiation to build up in the body, “and if you get enough, it’ll do you in.”

Dunavant urged people not to “let the genie out of the bottle” by lifting the mining moratorium. “If they lift the ban, they can mine it anywhere,” Dunavant said.

He held up a map from the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission showing there are strips of uranium deposits up and down Virginia. “If they do one (mine) in Pittsylvania County, they’ll have a precedent” to do it in places that may be upstream of Henry County, or in Henry County itself, he said.

Dunavant encouraged concerned residents to contact their political representatives and urge localities to adopt resolutions such as the one Virginia Beach issued earlier this month. The Virginia Beach City Council adopted a resolution Dec. 2 against uranium mining, citing fears the mining could threaten the city’s water supply.

When one Rotarian asked him if he thought technology has changed enough over the years to mine uranium safely, Dunavant answered, “If I thought that, sir, I wouldn’t be here tonight.”

http://www.martinsvillebulletin.com/article.cfm?ID=17042

Virginia Beach, Lobbying Firm Part Ways Over Uranium Mining

By Aaron Applegate
The Virginian-Pilot
© December 16, 2008

VIRGINIA BEACH

The city and its hired lobbying firm are parting ways after 10 years, a split instigated by conflicting views on the possibility of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County.

The City Council this month came out in opposition to mining, citing water quality concerns. The city’s lobbying firm, The Vectre Corp., also represents Virginia Uranium, Inc., the company who wants to mine the radioactive substance used in nuclear power plants.

The city told Vectre to choose who they want to represent. “You can’t serve two masters,” Vice Mayor Louis Jones said. “We need someone representing our viewpoint.”

The city pays Vectre $68,900 a year. Last year, the firm was paid $30,800 working for Virginia Uranium, which wants state legislators to lift a 25-year moratorium on uranium mining.

The Beach asked Vectre to make a choice: represent the city or Virginia Uranium, not both. Vectre President Benson Dendy said he chose to stay with the mining company, which it represented long before Virginia Beach took a position against the uranium project.

"This is not acrimonious or anything," said Bob Matthias, assistant to City Manager Jim Spore.

No decision has been made whether to hire a new lobbying firm, Matthias said.

The mining site in south central Virginia is about 200 miles from Virginia Beach. City officials fear that flooding from a hurricane could damage mining operations and unleash radioactive material that could contaminate Lake Gaston, the city's water source, which is about halfway between the proposed mine and the city.

Aaron Applegate, (757) 222-5122, aaron.applegate@pilotonline.com

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/12/mining-issue-causes-va-beach-lobbyists-part-ways