Page 2 of 2   <      

Va. Commission to Study Effects of Uranium Mining

"I think it's important to study to know what the options are," Gov. Timothy M. Kaine says of mining. (By Karin Cooper -- Associated Press)
  Enlarge Photo    
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

The issue divided legislators along geographic lines rather than partisan ones. Many who represent areas where uranium has been found or whose drinking water could be affected voted against it, and many from other regions, including Northern Virginia, voted for it. The Coles Hill area supplies drinking water locally and to parts of Hampton Roads and North Carolina.

Virginia Uranium paid almost $100,000 to 15 lobbyists at three firms to try to get a study approved, according to the Virginia Public Access Project. After legislators rejected the study, company officials began searching for a way around the defeat.

Hogan said he was not able to prevent the Coal and Energy Commission from approving the study. The 20-member commission, formed by the General Assembly in 1979, is composed of legislators appointed by the House and Senate and other residents appointed by the governor.

"I had no avenue to fight it," Hogan said. "What am I going to do?"

Hogan said he remains opposed to mining but that he is "cautiously optimistic" that the study will be fair.

Virginia Uranium donated almost $30,000 to 30 legislators this year, including some commission members, according to the public access project.

"This is a politically connected group,'' said Robert Lazaro of the Piedmont Environmental Council, which opposes the study. "When the 140 men and women of the General Assembly say no, people should pay attention to that."

Environmental groups and other critics say uranium should not be mined in Virginia's highly populated areas and relatively rainy climate. They say they are worried that radioactive materials could cause cancer or other illnesses and do long-term harm to animals and plants.

Uranium has never been mined on the East Coast, its mining in the United States confined instead to drier, less populated areas such as Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming and Nebraska, according to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Uranium mining is more common in Canada, Australia, Eastern Europe and Africa.

Virginia Uranium wants to mine and mill uranium on a 200-acre site to supply nuclear power plants. Coles said that can be done safely and in a way that would benefit the community through jobs, taxes and economic development.

Geologists think that smaller amounts of uranium can be found along the Piedmont from North Carolina to New York. Opponents are worried that if Virginia Uranium succeeds in lifting the state mining ban it would try to mine in other areas, but company officials say they are not interested.

The company has said it would fund the study, estimated to cost $1 million or more and take about a year.

But critics of the study -- and Kaine -- said they would have concerns about the objectivity of a company-funded study. As a result, Kilgore said he will ask all interested groups to contribute funding. No state money is expected to be spent.


<       2


More from Virginia

[The Presidential Field]

Blog: Virginia Politics

Here's a place to help you keep up with Virginia's overcaffeinated political culture.

Local Blog Directory

Find a Local Blog

Plug into the region's blogs, by location or area of interest.

FOLLOW METRO ON:
Facebook Twitter RSS
|
GET LOCAL ALERTS:
© 2008 The Washington Post Company