Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On US Public Land: to be destroyed by a Canadian uranium mining company, probably to fuel South Korean Nuclear Reactors. The Swedish Lundin family seems also involved. The US government doesn’t get royalties under the 1872 mining law. This is the same company trying to mine near the Grand Canyon.
BLM Att L Daneros uranium mine site
https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/75288/83021/Att_L_-_Biological_Survey_Information.pdf
Energy Fuels is a Canadian Mining Company. Its largest purchaser of uranium has been South Korea: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/07/27/attempt-by-canadian-miner-to-expand-uranium-mine-on-us-public-land-near-natural-bridges-national-monument-comment-deadline-monday-1st-august/
Comment here: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do?methodName=dispatchToPatternPage&currentPageId=71596 or here: http://grandcanyontrust.nonprofitsoapbox.com/daneros

The 2009 MPO provided for a total of 4.5 acres of surface disturbance,… The additional disturbance proposed by this MPOM is 41.8 acres, which would bring the total disturbance to 46.3 acres.” (US BLM-EA-May 2016)

This Daneros proposal for uranium mining expansion is for a low grade ore. Approximately 99.76% IS WASTE-WASTE ROCK. The ore has an average grade of 0.28% U3O8 and approximately 0.24% uranium: http://www.wise-uranium.org/upusaut.html Compare to Cigar Lake uranium mine in Saskatchewan, Canada, which is 16.7% U3O8, according to Cameco. And the uranium is probably going to S. Korea. It appears that the US should have let North Korea take the South! The White Mesa Mill, where it will be processed, was originally built by Swiss nuclear utilities, who may (or may not) still get royalties. The US doesn’t get any royalties from these uranium mines on public land, however, under the 1872 mining law: https://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/general_mining_law_of_1872

The Bureau of Land Management’s Environmental Assessment says that “the BLM may disapprove the proposed plan modification if it is determined that the proposed operations would result in unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands.” (p.30) https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/73737/82821/Daneros_EA_06.09.2016.pdf

Proposed Site of Future 7 ft Diameter Ventilation Hole.
Biological Survey Daneros Mine Vent Duct  location before BLM
https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/75288/83021/Att_L_-_Biological_Survey_Information.pdf
Proposed 7 Ft Ventilation Ducts
7-foot diameter mine ventilation boreholes BLM vent fan
7-foot diameter mine ventilation boreholes.
https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/73737/82828/Appendix_B_figures_06.09.2016.pdf

The proposed modifications include expanding facilities at two [uranium] mine portals, adding ventilation holes and expanding the [uranium] mine surface area from 4.5 acres to 46 acres.  Under the modified plan, total production of uranium ore is expected to increase from 100,000 tons over seven years to 500,000 tons over 20 years“. (BLM.gov)

The BLM EA says: “the BLM may disapprove the proposed plan modification if it is determined that the proposed operations would result in unnecessary or undue degradation of public lands“. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/73737/82821/Daneros_EA_06.09.2016.pdf

However, elsewhere, the BLM appears to have a weird definition of “Unnecessary or undue degradation“, which differs from what the EA seems to say above: “Unnecessary or undue degradation means conditions, activities, or practices that: … (2) Are not “reasonably incident” to prospecting, mining, or processing operations as defined in §3715. 0–5 of this chapter;…http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/planning/nepa/webguide/cfr/43_cfr_3809.html This seems to pre-suppose that there must be mining!

United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
Environmental Assessment Daneros Mine Plan Modification“, May 2016:
4.2.3 Human Health and Safety Concerns
Uranium mining can create risks for mine workers and the public (mainly recreational visitors such as, campers, hikers, bicyclers, ATV riders, horse riders, etc.) due to potential exposure to elevated levels of radiation, contact with ore and development rock, storage and use of hazardous materials, and transportation of mine personnel and materials to and from the mine site. These risks are assessed below along with the potential for indirect health and safety impacts from milling the Daneros ore at the White Mesa Mill.
4.2.3.1 Radiation
“Radiation exposure, primarily from radon-222 gas, and its daughter products, is a human health and safety concern at uranium mines. Studies have documented the increased risk of cancer and related mortality rates among uranium mine workers… The MSHA regulations and protection measures focus on properly ventilating underground mine workings because potentially harmful levels of radon are most likely to be found in those confined spaces. The radon released from the mine’s ventilation system could also represent a health concern to the public,…
” The BLM misleadly states that “in the case of the Daneros Mine, there are no nearby residents that could be affected. This is verified though monitoring, dose modeling and annual reporting“. Just because no one is “nearby” doesn’t mean that people won’t be affected. At least one national park is less than 10 miles away. There are also plants and animals, which almost everyone forgets.

About White Mesa Mill, includes short video: http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/white-mesa-uranium-mill

The EA’s “4.2.3.2 Radiation Exposure Data Studies” excludes recent research found below. EA found here: https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/73737/82821/Daneros_EA_06.09.2016.pdf

when radon gas migrates through the atmosphere, the solid radon progeny are deposited on the soil and water below, entering into the food chain and hence the bodies of birds, animals, fish and insects.http://www.ccnr.org/radon_chart.html

While radon itself has a fairly short half-life – though not short enough, it becomes radioactive lead with a half-life of over 22 years, and polonium 210 with a half-life of 138 days:
* 222Rn, 3.8 days, alpha decaying to…
* 218Po, 3.10 minutes, alpha decaying to…
* 214Pb, 26.8 minutes, beta decaying to…
* 214Bi, 19.9 minutes, beta decaying to…
* 214Po, 0.1643 ms, alpha decaying to…
* 210Pb, which has a much longer half-life of 22.3 years, beta decaying to…
* 210Bi, 5.013 days, beta decaying to…
* 210Po, 138.376 days, alpha decaying to…
* 206Pb, stable.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radon

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Uranium Mining
Emissions from fossil fuel combustion would contribute a minor incremental increase in greenhouse gases…“, but they misleadingly add that “impacts would be offset by the comparatively low air emissions of the nuclear power generation industry.” This excludes the possibility that energy can come from renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. It excludes the greenhouse gas pre-cursers emitted by operating nuclear reactors. It excludes energy needed for long-term cooling of waste, even after the reactors are shut-down. Sellafield in the UK has its own fossil fuel burning power station to cool waste. Is assumes that greenhouse gases are more dangerous than legal and illegal nuclear discharges – radiological and chemical poisons – discharged into the environment for the entire fuel chain. It disregards the impacts of nuclear accidents. https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/projects/nepa/54345/73737/82821/Daneros_EA_06.09.2016.pdf

Excerpts from Jones, Benjamin A. “What Are the Health Costs of Uranium Mining? A Case Study of Miners in Grants, New Mexico.” International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 20.4 (2014): 289–300. PMC. Web. 28 July 2016:
miners succumbing to lung cancer and working before 1971, died on average 21.7 years prematurely compared to an average of 20.6 years for miners working after 1971.
From Jones’ “Conclusions:
Miners have the highest exposure to radon, but are only a subset of the potential exposure population. Qualitative work and media outlets have identified other exposure populations, including Native Americans, families of miners, pregnant women, and communities adjacent to mines and mills.

Total health costs ranged from $2.2 million to $7.7 million per excess death
(Jones, Benjamin A. “What Are the Health Costs of Uranium Mining? A Case Study of Miners in Grants, New Mexico.” International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 20.4 (2014): 289–300. PMC. Web. 28 July 2016.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4164879/)

…the decay products of radon gas (radon-222) in their order of appearance. They are called the “radon progeny”… Each radioactive element on the list gives off either alpha radiation or beta radiation — and sometimes gamma radiation too — thereby transforming itself into the next element on the list. Lead-206, the last element on the list, is not radioactive. It does not decay, and therefore has no half-life./ When radon gas is allowed to build up in an enclosed space, such as a mine shaft or basement, the radioactive hazard increases enormously because of the build-up of radon progeny. Conversely, when radon gas migrates through the atmosphere, the solid radon progeny are deposited on the soil and water below, entering into the food chain and hence the bodies of birds, animals, fish and insects.http://www.ccnr.org/radon_chart.html (See chart and more at link)

We recommend anonymous comment as explained here: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/07/27/attempt-by-canadian-miner-to-expand-uranium-mine-on-us-public-land-near-natural-bridges-national-monument-comment-deadline-monday-1st-august/ But, if you do not wish to be anonymous, it may be best to comment through Grand Canyon Trust. You may also wish to donate to them, to help them with legal action.