Questions flow at Danville uranium meeting

Uranium mining and milling and its risks continue to leave residents asking questions about what would happen if Virginia Uranium Inc. develops the Coles Hill site.

About 200 people packed the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research on Tuesday night to hear the findings in the National Academy of Sciences’ report on uranium mining in Virginia and to ask questions of study panel members and staff.

Repeatedly, study committee chairman Paul Locke told residents many of their specific questions regarding impacts of the proposed Pittsylvania County project would need to be answered by a site-specific study.

“Nothing is as important as a site-specific study,” said John Cannon, chairman of the Halifax County Industrial Development Authority and president of The Virginia Coalition.

Cannon said he’ll take the questions raised at the meeting to legislators and a state workgroup that would be studying the issue and drafting a regulatory framework as requested by Gov. Bob McDonnell last month. The Virginia Coalition hired a lobbying firm and plans, as possible, to attend every public meeting of the workgroup to ensure questions are answered even after the NAS study committee disbands after hosting public meetings on its report, he added.

Cannon asked the NAS panel to host meetings in the Hampton Roads area as well.

Sarah Epps of Halifax asked if based on the NAS report, could she tell her two teenaged boys whether uranium mining can be done safely, as they live downstream of the proposed site on the Banister River. She added the report seems to say there is no guarantee of that.

Locke explained, as he did to several questions, that the $1.4 million uranium report commissioned by a state legislative commission and indirectly funded by Virginia Uranium does not answer the question as to whether uranium mining can be done safely in Virginia, as that was not included in the assigned project scope.

Locke also explained in his presentation that uranium operations of the past two decades have greatly improved and that internationally accepted best practices could mitigate the risk of radioactive contamination. He said the issue of long-term management of waste exists with any engineered waste structure and not just uranium structures.

Kay Patrick of Gretna asked if best practices would help those living near the site, but the panel told her that would best be answered by a site-specific study.

William Clark, who raises cattle for beef outside of Gretna, wanted to know how much his land and business would be worth if contamination occurred. He asked how long would it take for contamination to reach him if an earthquake damaged the radioactive tailings (uranium mill waste) containment cell.

Engineering structures should be built to withstand those sort of extreme events if adhering to regulations, Locke said.

Sue Poe of Gretna wanted to know how far away she would need to be away from the site to stay within safe levels for radon exposure.

“What’s considered safe? That’s a very difficult question,” said study panel member and epidemiologist Bill Field, adding that would depend on the several factors like the design of the tailings facility. The Environmental Protection Agency limits radon exposure to 10 millirem a year for an individual.

Virginia Uranium views the NAS report as showing how the company can safely mine uranium in Virginia in accordance with advanced industry practices, VUI project manager Patrick Wales said in a statement.