Lead levels OK in water near uranium deposit

Comment: Question, why did it take the Virginia Department of Health so long to test the water? They tested the water 6-7 months later and now the lead is gone. Water moves and the lead were washed down the stream. The leads level was up after the drilling of bore holes. According to local uranium company, they have plugged the holes. Now the Gross's water is okay which is good but this happen 7 months ago and it took the Virginia Department of Health, 7 months to check the water! Why, will it take the state of Virginia that long to test the rivers after a hurricane dumps 21 inches of rain on a uranium-tailing pond? Will it take the state of Virginia, 7 months to check on the open pit mining and the radon releases? Does this make us feel safe in Virginia for future uranium mining? NO! Demand the local leaders to ban uranium mining now!

By TIM DAVIS/Star-Tribune Editor
Wednesday, July 8, 2009 9:41 AM EDT

Allen Gross can drink his water again, but still wonders if exploratory drilling for uranium caused the lead that tainted his well.

After repeated pleas, the Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors voted in April to ask the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Virginia Department of Health to investigate high lead levels around the Coles Hill uranium deposit.

According to Gross, the health department took samples from his well on June 24. He received the results July 1.

The first test showed lead at 0.08 parts per billion. In the second, lead was "undetectable."

The maximum lead allowed for drinking water is 15 parts per billion.

Concerns about well testing around the uranium deposit, about six miles northeast of Chatham, were first raised in March.

Virginia Uranium Inc. was required to collect and test water samples at four ponds and four residential wells as part of an exploratory drilling permit from the Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy in 2007.

It also was required to monitor 15 locations in surrounding creeks and tributaries for heavy metals.

Although not required by the permit, the company sought permission to test wells at homes within about a mile of the site to determine the general water quality in the vicinity of Coles Hill.

More than 80 wells were voluntarily tested.

Gross, who lives on Motley Road, about a mile from Coles Hill, said when the first test was done in 2007 the lead in his well water was 2.8 ppb.

When the last test was done late last year, it had risen to 17.9.

Gross has been drinking bottled water since January.

Virginia Uranium said it is not responsible for high lead levels.

The company released the following statement:

"In response to media reports of concerns over lead levels in some residential wells in the general vicinity of the Coles Hill uranium deposit, we have reviewed the data and can state categorically that our permitted drilling activities have nothing to do with these lead levels."

"Wells with reported lead levels in the water are all in geologically and hydrologically isolated areas that are unaffected by activities conducted by our company.

"While none of the residential wells are located in a watershed that could be affected by our activities, the simple laws of gravity and hydrology preclude water running uphill - whether in the ground or on the surface - as it would have to do to reach these sites."

Virginia Uranium pointed out high lead levels may be caused by any number of possibilities, including household plumbing.

Gross is convinced Virginia Uranium's exploratory drilling contaminated his well and endangered his family's health.

"It is strange my water was safe to drink before they started drilling, unsafe during the drilling, and safe again now that they've stopped and sealed the holes," he told supervisors Monday night.

"Maybe the good Lord is trying to show us all what will happen if we allow uranium mining and milling to come to our county," he said.

Gross urged supervisors to ban uranium.

"You can do it if you want to," he said.

Phillip Lovelace of Gretna agreed, calling the decision a "no-brainer."

"The guy's water was fine before the test drilling, and it got worse when they were drilling. How hard is that to see?" he said.

Lovelace urged supervisors to continue testing for heavy metals in water around the uranium deposit.

"Let's go to the bottom of it," he said. "Let's see where it came from."

tim.davis@chathamstartribune.com
434-432-2791

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/07/08/chatham/news/news50.txt

Opinions split on uranium lawsuit

By JULIAN CAVAZOS •
Originally published June 28, 2009 at 2:54 p.m., updated June 28, 2009 at 2:54 p.m.

Open bore holes blamed

Of the more than 900 bore holes drilled in northern Goliad County, 136 of them were left open longer than 48 hours, which is a violation, said Jim Blackburn, Goliad County's environmental attorney.

Goliad ...

Of the more than 900 bore holes drilled in northern Goliad County, 136 of them were left open longer than 48 hours, which is a violation, said Jim Blackburn, Goliad County's environmental attorney.

Goliad County contends the open bore holes allowed rainwater to cause contamination to the subsurface, also known as illegal injection, Blackburn said.

Blackburn said the county would take another month or so to decide if they will re-file the case in state court.

GOLIAD - Goliad County commissioners presented their case against Uranium Energy Corp. to the public on Saturday.

County residents attended so that they could become more informed and offer input on whether the county should re-file its legal case in state court.

The county sued the uranium company in March 2008. The lawsuit contends the company failed to cap exploratory bore holes, which they county says contaminated the water supply.

A federal judge dismissed the case a few weeks ago. Now, commissioners are debating whether they should re-file the case in state court.

"We're going to have this public meeting before we come up with a solution," said Goliad County Commissioner Jim Krenek.

Some residents who attended supported re-filing the lawsuit, while others opposed the costly move and think uranium mining should continue unimpeded.

Brad Moore, a uranium company exploration and land manager, said the county should avoid spending money on the case.

"It's really amazing that the citizens of Goliad County who support the opposition are supporting the expenditure of their funds to fight their own rights," Moore said. "The federal judge dismissed the groundwater suit, and they want to continue to spend money."

Sherilyn Arnecke, a Goliad landowner, supports the mining. Her family has been in the area for eight generations.

Mining will bring more jobs and pump more money into the county, Arnecke said.

"I just heard yesterday that in the next 20 years, they're going to build 100 more nuclear power plants in the United States," Arnecke said. "This is concerning the climate bill that's before Congress right now. And where is this uranium going to come from?"

All the money the county would spend on the re-filing in state court would cause financial neglect for the rest of the county, Arnecke said.

"They're fighting for one little part of the county," she said. "And what about the rest of the county that's being totally ignored? They're putting half a million dollars into one, little-bitty area of Goliad County, but then you have all these citizens in other parts of Goliad that are going to suffer. (The county) needs to spend their money on something Goliad County needs."

County Commissioner Jerry Rodriguez said the contaminated water was not caused by the open bore holes, but is naturally occurring.

"Muddy water there was supposedly clogged by uranium mining. It just happened to happen when those guys were out doing their drilling," he said. "It's basically one of the reasons federal judge threw the lawsuit out."

The county should negotiate with the company on a cleaning agreement, because the Uranium Energy Corp. is going to mine anyway, Rodriguez said.

"These people are here to stay," Rodriguez said. "We should work with them and put sanctions in place so they can put money in a savings account. That way if they contaminate it, they're responsible to clean it."

On the other hand, other residents oppose mining and support the lawsuit.

Susan Orr's home in Ander is near the proposed mining site.

"I live out there," Orr said. "I don't want it in my backyard. There's too many environmental issues that could come up over the years."

Contaminated water would cause Orr to lose her cattle, she said.

"I don't want to see my property value go down. We have cattle. I don't want to have to end up getting rid of our livestock because of issues of water."

Water is precious and cannot be contaminated, said Julie Fritz, a Goliad county resident.

"Water is water. It's all our water," Fritz said. "It affects everybody in the county, and in other places. Victoria should care."

Krenek agreed. He is unsure what the county will do without water.

"My position has been opposed to the uranium mining since the very first day I heard about it," Krenek said. "It has everything to do with our drinking water. Without drinking water, what do you do? Would you have to import it?"

http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/2009/jun/28/jc_uraniummeeting_062809_56225/

Supervisor Marshall Ecker's report

Comment: Thanks to Mr. Ecker's for the letters, the personal meetings and sending another letter to the EPA! Everyone should contact the Board of Supervisors and demand every one of them call the EPA! The Gross have to buy or bring water to their house everyday! Please everyone in the County and the City Of Danville need to attend the Supervisor Meetings! Some of the supervisors are Pro-Uranium and milling and what happens in the county will not stay in the county! The wind will blow uranium dust to Danville and the rumor is the Uranium Mill will be located on Berry Hill Road RT 863, Danville water will be ruin but you may not have any water left to drink, uranium milling is a water hog!

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 9:47 AM EDT

At the June 1 Pittsylvania County Board of Supervisors meeting, during hearing of citizens, County Administrator Dan Sleeper was asked to send another letter to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality and Pittsylvania County Health Department about lead levels at Allen Gross's residence.

Those letters were sent on June 5.

I was informed by Mr. Gross that the health department will be taking several samples at different times.

It would be nice if they can locate the source of lead levels. I will keep you posted of results.

http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2009/06/24/chatham/opinion/opinion04.txt

Uranium gouging in Goliad

UEC: Don't mess with a Duderstadt. Just, don't.

Comment: review the video at this site, click the lick below, it is about Texas water problems after core samples for uranium mining!

Greg Harman
gharman@sacurrent.com

What can we say but sorry? We haven’t been back to this Texana-licious little burgh since the early days of their battle against the forces of reviving ‘death ore’ mining.

Despite our 33-percent newsroom enhancement (when you line up our news staff, you have to pull the trigger thrice), we’ve been loaded down with Alamocentric procedural gore and glories.

It seems like forever ago that the Goliad Greyhound was motoring up to Austin in pursuit of justice.

Sierra Clubbers wrote us then:


Over 50 local officials and citizens from Goliad County traveled via bus and trucks today to Austin and were pleased when the three Commissioners of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality allowed a contested case hearing concerning an application by Uranium Energy Corporation to mine uranium in the aquifer just north of the historic mission town of Goliad.

No uranium mining has occurred before in the agricultural garden spot.

“I am so happy. I just thank god for this decision. Thank god for all the people in Goliad County. This has been such a long, long haul and it’s not over yet,” said local landowner Lu Ann Duderstadt who lives near the area targeted for uranium mining.

Craig and LuAnn Duderstadt, were considered by the TCEQ to be affected parties along with several individuals, Goliad County, the Goliad County Groundwater Conservation District, a Lutheran church and a volunteer fire department. The Duderstadts who raise and sell feed hay were forced to purchase water for domestic use in their home after UEC exploration activities allegedly fouled the aquifer near their ranch.

[Yup. That's Lu Ann Duderstadt up above, way back in 2007.]

While the well-intentioned scribe has apparently gotten out of the habit of capitalizing the name of Our Lord (as folks in the rest of Texas are wont to do — double Ahem, amen), they got that “garden spot” reference dead on the Jackson.

Though it has been flanked by numerous uranium mining activities going back to the Atom Bomb days and is squawking distance from a massive federal waste pit known to have fouled the waters outside Panna Maria to the tune of $350 million dollars (Feds don’t see no cause to clean it up, it’s so rural … and so rurally potentially expensive!), Goliad County is stinkin’ gorgeous. And damn tranquil.

Well, count uranium mining up among the things that get folks' blood moving about in these parts. Right up there with beef prices and downstream water rights.

On Thursday,TCEQ will hold a preliminary contested case hearing on the matter.

Check out some of our past ramblings on the topic for some background, then turn your eye to the TCEQ’s notice, included below.


AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING
(To change hearing date and location.)
URANIUM ENERGY CORP
SOAH Docket No. 582-09-3064
TCEQ Docket No. 2008-1888-UIC
Proposed Permit No. UR03075


APPLICATION. Uranium Energy Corp (UEC), 100 East Kleberg, Suite 310, Kingsville, Texas, In Situ Uranium Mining, has applied to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for a permit to authorize an in situ uranium mining operation. The facility is located approximately 13 miles north of the city of Goliad, about 0.9 miles east of the intersection of State Highway 183 and Farm-to-Market Road 1961 in Goliad County Texas.

UEC has also submitted a request to the TCEQ to designate an exempted aquifer. An aquifer or portion of an aquifer may be designated as an exempted aquifer if it does not currently serve as a source of drinking water for human consumption and it will not in the future serve as a source of drinking water for human consumption because it is mineral, hydrocarbon or geothermal energy bearing with production capability. The aquifer exemption is required before UEC can operate the proposed injection wells. UEC requested that a portion of the Goliad Formation be designated as an exempt aquifer. The requested exemption would apply from a depth of 45 to 404 feet and would extend over the approximately 423.8 acre area covered in Goliad County under the proposed injection well area permit.

The TCEQ executive director has prepared a draft permit which, if approved, would establish the conditions under which the facility must operate. The Executive Director has made a preliminary decision that this permit, if issued, meets all statutory and regulatory requirements and that the application for aquifer exemption meets all regulatory requirements. If the aquifer exemption is approved by the TCEQ, the Executive Director will prepare an application to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to revise the state's Underground Injection Control program to reflect the exemption of the relevant portion of the aquifer, which will be in effect until the exemption status is removed. No designation of an exempted aquifer shall be final until approved by the EPA. The application, Executive Director's preliminary decision, and draft permit are available for viewing and copying at County Courthouse, 701 E. End Street, Goliad, Texas 77963.

CONTESTED CASE HEARING. The State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) will conduct a formal contested case hearing at:


10:00 a.m. - May 14, 2009
Goliad Auditorium
925 South U.S. 183
Goliad, Texas 77963


The contested case hearing will be a legal proceeding similar to a civil trial in state district court. The hearing will address the disputed issues of fact identified in the TCEQ order concerning this application issued on March 3, 2009. In addition to these issues, the judge may consider additional issues if certain factors are met.

The hearing will be conducted in accordance with Chapter 2001, Texas Government Code; Chapter 27, Texas Water Code; TCEQ rules, including 30 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Chapter 331 and the procedural rules of the TCEQ and SOAH, including 30 TAC Chapter 80 and 1 TAC Chapter 155. The hearing will be held unless all timely hearing requests have been withdrawn or denied.

To request to be a party, you must attend the hearing and show you would be adversely affected by the application in a way not common to members of the general public. Any person may attend the hearing and request to be a party. Only persons named as parties may participate at the hearing.

INFORMATION. If you need more information about the hearing process for this application, please call the Office of Public Assistance, Toll Free, at 1-800-687-4040. General information about the TCEQ can be found at our web site at www.tceq.state.tx.us.

Further information may also be obtained from Uranium Energy Corp at the address stated above or by calling Mr. Josh Leftwich at (361) 592-5400.

Persons with disabilities who need special accommodations at the hearing should call the SOAH Docketing Department at 512-475-3445, at least one week prior to the hearing.

Issued: April 7, 2009

LaDonna Castañuela, Chief Clerk
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality



The citizens’ group Uranium Information at Goliad advises interested parties:

If you have been named as an affected person, to be sure you maintain your standing and it is strongly recommended you attend this preliminary hearing. If you are unable to attend, you should make arrangements for someone to represent you.
If you believe you are an affected person and have not asked for a hearing, you may do so at this preliminary hearing. To request to be a party, you must attend the hearing and show you would be adversely affected by the application in a way not common to members of the general public.
Any person may attend this hearing and request to be a party. Everyone is welcome to attend to audience the hearing.
Your attendance at this preliminary hearing may have an impact on whether the contested case hearing will be held in Goliad or Austin.
Please plan to attend – your support is appreciated.

You may also want to check out ALTURA’S site and brave the pianos of the following video to see a Goliad water expert and mining critic handle some befouled water-well filters.

Posted by gharman on 5/12/2009 3:28:05 PM

http://www.sacurrent.com/blog/queblog.asp?perm=69723

Firm plans to drill for uranium near Datil

Comment: More uranium drill holes, this time in NM, where is the uranium going if no new nuke plants?

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Firm plans to drill for uranium near Datil

T.S. Last El Defensor Chieftain General Manager

There's more talk of drilling in Catron County. But this time it's not for water; it's for uranium.

The matter came up at the Magdalena Board of Trustees meeting on April 27.

For informational purposes, Mayor James Wolfe notified the board of a plan to conduct uranium mineral exploration about 15 miles north of Datil.

The plan calls for up to 60 exploratory core holes to be drilled to depths of 250-400 feet in the Cibola National Forest on the west side of the Datil Mountains. The drilling would be completed in the fall of this year.

"It's not that big a deal for us, but it might be for some folks," said Wolfe. The Village of Magdalena is about 34 miles east of Datil.

Among the material the mayor passed on to the trustees to review was a letter from Dennis Aldridge, district ranger with the Magdalena Ranger District. The letter indicates that Red Basin LLC plans to drill the holes for the purpose of confirming exploration data from the 1970s and that the Forest Service is conducting an environmental analysis to gauge the potential impact.

The letter notes that the Forest Service cannot prohibit mining activities in the national forest.

It goes on to warn that mining activities have negatively impacted human health and the environment in the past.

"Uranium is a locatable mineral that is available for exploration and development under the mining laws of the United States," Aldridge wrote in the document, dated April 20. "It is widely recognized that uranium mining activities in New Mexico during the mid-1950s through the early 1980s were sometimes conducted in a manner that created health issues and contaminated environments."

Aldridge writes that it is the agency's responsibility to assure that the impact exploration efforts have on surface resources are minimized. The letter requests that written comments that serve to identify issues and alternatives be sent to the Cibola National Forest office in Albuquerque by Friday, May 22.

Red Basin LLC is a subsidiary of Strategic Resources Inc., a Canadian company working in partnership with another Canadian firm, Running Fox Resources.

According to Strategic Resources' Web site, Running Fox acquired lode claims totaling 3,100 acres in Catron County in 2007.

Catron County is already in the midst of another controversial drilling proposal.

San Augustin Plains Ranch LLC has filed an application with the State Engineer's Office to drill 37 wells for the purpose of diverting billions of gallons of water per year from beneath the San Agustin Plains to supplement the water supply in the Rio Grande Basin.

The application was met with hundreds of protests from citizens and various other entities and is still pending.

tslast@dchieftain.com

http://www.dchieftain.com/news/88877-05-09-09.html