National Academies Press: OpenBook

Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia (2012)

Chapter: 7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship

« Previous: 6 Potential Environmental Effects of Uranium Mining, Processing, and Reclamation
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

7

Regulation and Oversight of
Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation,
and Long-Term Stewardship

Key Points

• The activities involved in uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship are subject to a variety of federal and state laws that are the responsibility of numerous federal and state agencies.

• Because the Commonwealth of Virginia enacted a moratorium on uranium mining in 1982, the state has essentially no experience regulating uranium mining and there is no existing regulatory infrastructure specifically for uranium mining. The state does have programs that regulate hard-rock mining and coal mining.

• There is no federal law that specifically applies to uranium mining on non-federally owned lands; state laws and regulations have jurisdiction over these mining activities. Federal and state worker protection laws, and federal and state environmental laws variously apply to occupational safety and health, and air, water, and land pollution resulting from mining activities.

• At present, there are gaps in legal and regulatory coverage for activities involved in uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship. Some of these gaps have resulted from the moratorium on uranium mining that Virginia has in place;

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

others are gaps in current laws or regulations, or in the way that they are applied. Although there are several options for addressing these gaps, the committee notes that Canada and the state of Colorado have enacted laws and promulgated regulations based on best practices that require modern mining and processing methods, and empower regulatory agencies with strong information-gathering, enforcement, and inspection authorities. In addition, best practice would be for state agencies, with public stakeholder involvement, to encourage the owner/operator of a facility to go beyond the regulations to adopt international industry standards if they are more rigorous than the existing regulations.

• The U.S. federal government has only limited recent experience regulating conventional1 uranium processing and reclamation of uranium mining and processing facilities. Because almost all uranium mining and processing to date has taken place in parts of the United States that have a negative water balance (i.e., dry climates with low rainfall), federal agencies have limited experience applying laws and regulations in positive water balance (i.e., wet climates with medium to high rainfall) situations. The U.S. federal government has considerable experience attempting to remediate contamination due to past, inappropriate practices at closed or abandoned sites.

• Under the current regulatory structure, opportunities for meaningful public involvement are fragmented and limited.

This chapter discusses the laws, regulations, and policies—and the relevant federal agencies—that are applicable to uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship. Because of Virginia’s moratorium on uranium mining, Virginia state agencies have not been permitted to develop a modern state-specific regulatory environment. However, to the extent possible, the Virginia agencies that might be involved in regulating mining, processing, and reclamation if the moratorium were to be lifted are identified. For purposes of comparison, brief information on the regulatory environment in Canada and Colorado are included (Boxes 7.1, 7.2). These two examples are noted here because they are situations where there has been ongoing and recent development

_________________

1Conventional mining and processing includes surface or open-pit mining, or some combination of the two, and their associated processing plants, but excludes ISL/ISR uranium recovery.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

of laws and regulations applicable to uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship. While the committee considers that neither constitutes an ideal model regulatory environment, both illustrate the ongoing evolution of a regulatory environment that either recognizes or drives the continuing development of best practices in the industry.

The committee’s statement of task (Box 1.1) requires that it “review the state and federal regulatory framework for uranium mining, milling, processing, and reclamation” and review “best practices approaches.” The committee has interpreted this charge to be forward looking—to describe what is presently in place and to look to the future in its description of best practices for future regulation of any uranium mining, processing, and reclamation that may occur in the Commonwealth of Virginia. While acknowledging that U.S. federal and state agencies have had extensive experience in attempting to remediate sites that were contaminated by past poor practices, the report does not delve into these past practices nor does it focus on the applicable regulations and programs that address the remediation of such sites.

For a number of reasons, the laws, regulations, and policies governing uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship activities in the United States are neither well integrated nor transparent. Because of the way in which these laws, regulations, and policies were developed, gaps in coverage exist. First, the relevant laws and regulations were enacted or promulgated over the past 70 years, and were most commonly created after a crisis (e.g., uranium mill tailings contamination at early processing sites) or to address a particular situation, or contaminant, that is not unique to activities involving uranium mining, processing, reclamation, or long-term stewardship. Second, the missions of the agencies involved, and the laws they administer, vary considerably. The regulatory reach of the USNRC has traditionally been focused on radiological issues such as the use of the atom for energy generation and limitations on radiation doses to the public. In contrast, the USEPA’s mission is the prevention of pollution, and the protection of public health and the environment through laws and regulations that are media-specific. Uncontrolled radiation releases are one source of environmental contamination requiring control. Worker safety and protection laws, such as the Mine Safety and Health Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, concentrate on employee health and the elimation of workplace hazards. Third, the laws, regulations, and policies (especially for environmental protection) are media- or activity-specific, and as a result are spread across agencies and consequently are not integrated and can be incomplete. For example, the standards applicable to uranium in air are covered by a different law and different regulations than standards applicable to uranium in water; and in the area of worker protection, three agencies share the responsibility to protect occupational health. In each of these situations, the rules for information sharing, public participation, and enforcement—it they exist at all—are different. Fourth, regulations promulgated for these activities have frequently been challenged in court, and the subsequent litigation

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

BOX 7.1
Regulatory Environment for
Uranium-Related Activities in Canada

Almost all uranium mining, processing, and reclamation activities (as well as other activities involving radionuclides) in Canada are under the jurisdiction of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). Canada’s Nuclear Safety and Control Act states,

“Any work or undertaking constructed for the development, production or use of nuclear energy, or for the mining, production, refinement, conversion, enrichment, processing, possession or use of a nuclear substance … is declared to be a work or undertaking for the general advantage of Canada.” (Section 71)

The CNSC is an independent, quasi-judicial executive agency. The Canadian Nuclear Safety and Control Act, which replaced a series of older Canadian laws dating back to the 1940s, established the CNSC in 2000. There are also other federal laws that apply to uranium mining, processing, and reclamation, including the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. As a result, CNSC employs a joint regulatory strategy—involving both Health Canada and Environment Canada—in decision making.

Provincial laws also apply to uranium mining, processing, and reclamation. For example, provincial laws applicable to water use would apply to any mine that seeks to withdraw groundwater. In addition, provinces have the authority to regulate and monitor exploration activities.

Environmental Assessment

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act requires that any project requiring a CNSC license must undergo an environmental assessment. The CNSC must review, and make a decision regarding, the environmental assessment (EA) before any project license is issued. The EA process is flexible, and the requirements depend upon the nature of the project. It is the responsibility of the CNSC to determine the extent and nature of, and establish guidelines for, the EA. If a project is likely to have significant adverse environmental effects, a comprehensive study is likely to be required. If a project is deemed to have few or minor environmental

and court decisions have affected the way that regulations have been written and interpreted. Fifth, the nature of cooperation and coordination between the state and federal governments varies by law and agency. The programs of states that have signed agreements with the USNRC (i.e., Agreement States) are provided technical assistance and are subject to review for their continued adequacy.2

_________________

2See http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal.html; accessed November 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

impacts, a relatively simple environmental screening process is undertaken. However, a screening-level assessment can be used for complex issues and can also lead to more extensive regulatory review.

It is the responsibility of the applicant to carry out the technical studies required by the assessment process. The applicant must consult with the public and Aboriginal peoples about the project and its technical studies. The CNSC prepares the EA report, and has the discretion to hold a public hearing to make its final decision about whether the project can proceed.

For comprehensive environmental assessment studies, a public consultation is mandatory. The CNSC must report to the federal minister of the environment regarding the public input. A project can be referred by the CNSC or the environment minister to a review panel for further discussion in the event that public concerns are substantial, or potentially significant environmental consequences are possible. If a panel is established, a public hearing is required. The federal government provides funding to facilitate public participation in the panel proceedings. The CNSC makes the final decision as to whether a project will proceed.

After Approval and Licensing—
Protecting Workers, Citizens, and the Environment

Under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, Environment Canada has classified as toxic all uranium and uranium compounds that are contained in effluents from uranium mines and mills. However, the federal government has chosen to manage uranium and uranium compound risks under its Nuclear Safety and Control Act. A set of regulations has been promulgated under this act that cover uranium mines and mills.

In addition, in describing the information required for licensing, these regulations place monitoring obligations on licensees, authorize inspections, and impose penalties for noncompliance. Additional regulations have been promulgated to protect workers and the public from radiation and other hazards. Every licensee is required to implement a radiation protection program, and the annual limit on public radiation exposure is 1 milliseivert. Lower doses than this regulatory standard are commonplace because licensees are required to ensure that the radiation dose is “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA). The CNSC has also established regulations regarding to the safe and secure transportation of radioactive materials such as yellowcake.

Similarly, the programs of states with delegated authority from the USEPA are assessed under a state review framework that allows the USEPA to evaluate these programs consistently.3 In contrast, some state activities, such as the regulation of uranium mining on nonfederal lands, have no direct federal counterpart and therefore receive no comparable federal guidance and scrutiny. In addition, the

_________________

3See http://www.epa.gov/compliance/state/srf; accessed November 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

BOX 7.2
Regulatory Process for Uranium Mining,
Processing, and Reclamation in Colorado

Colorado has a long history of metal mining, including uranium mining. Uranium mining in Colorado first began after the discovery of radium around the turn of the 20th century, and it continued until the discovery of a rich vein of uranium ore in the Congo in the 1920s. The uranium produced by this mine supplanted uranium from other sources, including from Colorado, and it was not until the 1930s and 1940s that uranium mining recommenced in earnest in the state.

Uranium mining in Colorado accelerated in the 1940s with the expansion of the atomic weapons project as part of the war effort (Figure 7.1). The Manhattan Engineer District established an office in Grand Junction, Colorado, for uranium mining, extraction, and recovery; much of this early uranium processing occurred at abandoned metal mines. Considerable uranium ores coexist with vanadium in an area of Colorado known as the Uravan Mineral Belt, and mines in this area usually produce both uranium and vanadium. Today, the Uravan Belt contains over 1,200 historic mines that produced 63 million tons of uranium and 330 million pounds of vanadium from the late 1940s to the late 1970s (CO DRMS, 2011).

Mining techniques used in the middle 20th century were very crude by today’s standards, and little attention was paid to waste disposal and reclamation. Mine

image

FIGURE 7.1 Uranium mining by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in Colorado, 1958. Uranium mining expanded dramatically in the United States after World War II, from 38,000 tons in 1948 to 5.2 million tons in 1958—nearly all of it for nuclear weapons production. SOURCE: USDOE Office of Environmental Management.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

sites were abandoned once ore veins were exhausted; tailings piles were left unprotected, and raffinate—wastewater from the processing facilities—was discarded as surface water.a These activities resulted in environmental pollution and potential population health risks. In addition, health and safety standards to protect workers were either nonexistent or not enforced. Miners were exposed to very high levels of radon, and lung cancer rates among uranium miners were much higher than rates of lung cancer in the general population. This was particularly the case with disadvantaged and Native American populations, for example, members of the Navajo nation.

The mining and processing activities, especially those around Grand Junction, Colorado, created a legacy of pollution because of the use of uranium mill tailings as fill and for other purposes (Figure 7.2). Although uranium processing facilities were regulated by the Atomic Energy Commission following passage of the Atomic Energy Act in 1946, uranium mill tailings were not yet regulated under any federal or state laws. While the Grand Junction mines and processing facilities were active, tailings were used as fill for a number of purposes, including roadbeds, cement mixing, and home construction. As a result, radioactive pollution was a common problem, and over 4,000 residential and commercial properties

image

FIGURE 7.2 Excavation of uranium mill tailings from a residential septic system, Grand Junction, Colorado, 1993. SOURCE: USDOE Office of Environmental Management.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

were contaminated and eventually needed remediation.b The problems in Grand Junctionc led to the passage of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) in 1978. Among other things,d UMTRCA expanded the definition of “byproduct material” to include uranium mill tailings, and required the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) to regulate these tailings, clean up the tailings at inactive and/or abandoned mines, and set standards for active processing facilities.

As of June 2011, Colorado has 34 licensed uranium mines; none of these mines is presently producing ore. One mill (Piñon Ridge) has recently been licensed in Colorado but is not yet processing ore. Several former mines and mills, including the Lincoln Park Mill and the Uravan Uranium Mine, were sued by the State of Colorado for natural resources damages and are now—or have been—listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) established by the USEPA under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund). Cleanup activities at these sites have been ongoing and expensive. The 680-acre Uravan site was first listed in 1986. The site has since been cleaned up, and the tailing cells have been closed and capped, but the site remains under a radioactive materials license and is still on the NPL.e Postclosure efforts to delist the site from the NPL are ongoing; once delisted, the site will be transferred to the U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE). The Lincoln Park Mill site sits on 2,600 acres of land and is owned by the Cotter Corporation. It is located about 1.5 miles from the Cotter Uranium Mill, which holds a uranium recovery license. The site was first listed on the NPL in 1984, and cleanup is still under way.f Both Uravan and Cotter Corporation will require Records of Decision for the CERCLA delisting process.

Colorado’s Permitting and Licensing Processes

Because Colorado is an Agreement State, the USNRC is not directly involved in licensing activities. The terms of its agreement with Colorado give the USNRC certain oversight and review functions. However, the state regulates—and has licensing authority for—uranium recovery operations such as in situ leaching/in situ recovery (ISL/ISR) and traditional uranium processing. The state requires a radioactive materials license for ISL/ISR mines, and its mine permitting process is under the jurisdiction of the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) of the Department of Natural Resources. ISL/ISR activities are regulated both by DRMS and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE).

Colorado’s permitting and licensing procedures have evolved in parallel with technological advances in the mining industry and the recognition of the legacy of environmental problems from previous mines. Permitting of a uranium mine in Colorado requires numerous permits from the county, DRMS, and the Bureau of Land Management (on federal land), an environmental assessment,g an environmental protection plan, a stakeholder process, and bonding requirements. The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act of 1976 requires companies that are planning to conduct uranium mining operations to file for a reclamation permit with the

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

state’s Mined Land Reclamation Board. The board carries out the mandates of the Mined Land Reclamation Act and works with the DRMS to implement reclamation laws and regulations. Recent amendments to the law established new rules to protect Colorado’s groundwater during in situ uranium mining and revised existing rules on information disclosure during prospecting activities.h

Companies applying for a license to process uranium in Colorado undergo an application procedure that lasts at least 14 months.a First, the company must submit a radioactive materials license application and an environmental impact assessment (EIA) to the CDPHE Radiation Management Unit. Once the application is determined to be complete, the company must hold two public meetings to allow public comment on the application and the EIA. The relevant county may comment formally about perceived impacts to the community and environment, and local government may also have land-use or other regulations applicable to the project. County commissioners may request up to $50,000 from the applicant to review the EIA, and the commissioners’ comments on the EIA must be submitted to the CDPHE within 90 days of the first public meeting.i The CDPHE then determines whether the license is rejected, issued as requested, or issued with certain conditions. Additional hearings are held if the applicant challenges the license conditions. In addition to obtaining the Radioactive Materials License, the applicant is also required to obtain permits for (1) discharge to surface water or for surface runoff from disturbed areas and (2) emissions from the site and to control dust from construction activities.

Piñon Ridge Facility License

In January 2011, the CDPHE approved a license application by Energy Fuels Resources Corporation to begin constructing a uranium mill in Piñon Ridge, in the Paradox Valley of southwestern Colorado. The proposed mill would be the first uranium/vanadium mill built in the United States since the 1980s. During the review process, CDPHE considered various technical documents and hundreds of stakeholder comments, as well as consulting with other regulatory agencies.j It produced an analysis of the applicant’s EIA that reviewed geological, hydrological, chemical, and radiological parameters; various potential social, economic, and transportation impacts; and the proposed offsets or mitigation to the impacts identified. The CDPHE analysis confirmed that the applicant met requirements to assess the impacts to waterways, groundwater, and public health, and adequately considered the long-term impacts of the licensed activities and potential alternatives to those activities.

In August 2011, the company requested permission from the CDPHE to defer its remaining financial assurance payments until March 2012. The CDPHE approved this request, and amended the company’s radioactive materials license to reflect a financial warranty of $11 million—to be paid prior to, and during, facility construction—for the decommissioning of the mill after it is closed.k The facility is designed to remain in operation for 40 years. CDPHE has continued to review and update the long-term care requirements to reflect changed cost estimates—which are based on a worst-case scenario—to ensure that the costs to implement the

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

preapproved decommissioning and reclamation plan are not paid from taxpayer funds.k

_________________

aPresentation by P. Egidi, Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment, to the committee in Boulder, CO, March 23, 2011.

bSee http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/umtra/rpumtramgtplan.pdf.

cSee, e.g., http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/sec/gjoo/gjooer-175.pdf; accessed September 2011.

dUMTRCA also authorized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to set generally applicable environmental standards at uranium (and thorium) mill tailings sites and vicinity properties, which it did in 40 CFR Part 192. These standards apply at all such facilities that are licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (or an Agreement State). The USNRC’s authority over remediation of tailings and residual radioactive material at inactive sites extended only to sites that were active (licensed) at the time UMTRCA was enacted or thereafter. The 24 inactive mill tailings sites designated in Title I of UMTRCA were the sole responsibility of the U.S. Department of Energy and so remain.

ehttp://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/rpuravan.htm.

fSee http://epa.gov/aml/amlsite/npl.htm; accessed October 2011.

gSee http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/co/feld_offces/grand_junction_feld/PDF.Par.16552. File.dat/WhirlwinMineEAfnal.pdf.

hSee http://mining.state.co.us/UraniumMininginColorado.pdf.

iSee http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/rad/rml/recoveryregs.pdf; accessed October 2011.

jSee http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/rad/rml/energyfuels/index.htm; accessed October 2011.

kSee http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/release/2011/082311.pdf; accessed December 2011.

U.S. experience in uranium mining, processing, and reclamation over the past two decades has been limited, with little conventional uranium mining activity in the United States since the late 1980s. As noted in Chapter 4, in 2008 the United States accounted for less than 3 percent of worldwide uranium production. Chapter 3 also notes that there are currently five operating ISL/ISR plants in Texas, Nebraska, and Wyoming, and at least a dozen other ISL/ISR projects are being developed or are partially permitted and licensed.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported that at the end of 2010, only one uranium conventional processing facility was operating in the United States, with three other existing mills on standby (USEIA, 2011a). Because of the geological environment of uranium occurrences in Virginia, the committee has concluded that ISL/ISR techniques are not appropriate for uranium recovery in the Commonwealth (see Chapter 3). In the following sections, the committee has focused on conventional uranium mining and processing and sought to describe as clearly as possible the system of laws, regulations, and policies that apply to underground and open-pit mining and conventional uranium processing, and to ancillary activities such as reclamation and long-term stewardship.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

FEDERAL LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES

This section contains descriptions of the most significant federal laws, regulations, and policies that are applicable to uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship, and notes the particular federal agencies that are charged with their implementation. Laws, regulations, and policies applicable to public participation and involvement are discussed at the end of this chapter in a separate section. As discussed in the chapter’s introduction, these laws, regulations, and policies are neither well integrated nor transparent. As a result, this patchwork of laws, regulations, and regulatory responsibilities creates problems and challenges. These include (1) an increase in the amount of time and resources that potential licensees must expend to understand the system so that they are able to apply for permits and licenses and to meet technical requirements; (2) considerable difficulty and barriers for members of the public who wish to understand and participate in the permitting and licensing processes; (3) coordination issues among state and federal agencies and staff; and (4) obtaining the necessary technical expertise to understand both the radiological and nonradiological risks, and the requirements for their mitigation.

Uranium Mining

Under the Mining Law of 1872, as amended, mining on federally owned land is subject to federal regulation. This law requires that individuals who seek to mine on public land meet requirements regarding claim staking, maintenance, and patenting. Uranium mining authorized under the 1872 Mining Law must comply with the regulations of the federal agency managing the land; for example, the Department of Agriculture has established a series of requirements that apply in national forests. Agencies reviewing mine applications on federal lands must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and, accordingly, it is likely that any mining on federal lands would require a full environmental impact statement (EIS) before a license to mine would be approved. There is no federal law that specifically applies to uranium mining on privately owned land, except for federal regulation of worker health and safety, and therefore Virginia would be responsible for regulating uranium mining activities on all nonfederal lands within the state.4

Although the federal government does not directly regulate uranium mining activities on lands that are not owned by the federal government, its laws regarding water pollution, air pollution, employee protection, and waste management do apply. The Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a national emissions standard for

_________________

4In situ leaching/in situ recovery (ISL/ISR) is regulated by the USNRC or an Agreement State because it is treated as a joint mining and processing operation. As noted earlier, ISL/ISR is unlikely to be appropriate for uranium extraction in Virginia, and as a result, its coverage in this chapter is cursory and incomplete.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

radon-222 that is applicable to underground mines.5 Using its authority under the CAA, the USEPA promulgated 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart B, to protect the public and the environment from radon emissions to the ambient air from underground uranium mines. For underground mines of >10,000-tons per year production, it sets a limit on the emission of radon designed to ensure that no member of the public in any year receives an effective dose of more than 10 millirem (mrem) per year.

The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) does not apply directly to underground or open-pit mines or effluent from such mines, although SDWA underground injection control regulations are triggered if ISL/ISR techniques are used. However, the SDWA does require that facilities that provide drinking water limit the amount of radionuclides in the water. Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, more commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), the USEPA regulates discharges from open-pit and underground uranium mines. Its regulations, in 40 CFR Part 440, Subpart C, set discharge requirements for new uranium mines for uranium, zinc, pH, total suspended solids, radium, and chemical oxygen demand.6

The Mine Safety and Health Act establishes worker protection standards for miners (see Table 7.1). Under this act, mine operators must obtain a permit in order to operate, and among other requirements, the mine operator must obtain approval for a ventilation plan and roof control program and comply with all monitoring protocols and record-keeping procedures. These standards also include limitations on airborne contaminants (e.g., radon, silica, and diesel particulate matter) and protection against physical hazards such as noise. A hierarchy of controls approach is applied—engineering controls are strongly preferred over administrative controls, which are preferred over personal protective equipment such as respirators. The Mine Safety and Health Act requires inspections for underground mines four times per year; surface mines must be inspected two times per year. Mine inspectors have authority to order a withdrawal of workers from all or part of a mine.7

The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has promulgated regulations that set a maximum yearly radon exposure of 4 WLM for underground mining;8 this exposure limit is discussed in Chapter 5. These standards require periodic monitoring, recordkeeping, and the use of controls to limit exposure whenever possible. MSHA has a local presence in Virginia for both coal-mining and noncoal-mining activities. The Virginia District Office of the MSHA’s coal mining program is located in Wise County, with field offices in Wise and Buchanan counties. The Southeast District Office of MSHA’s noncoal mining

_________________

5National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart B. See also 40 CFR Part 68; section 112(r) of the CAA.

6See 40 CFR § 440.34(a).

7See 30 CFR Part 62; also based on the presentation by J. Weeks, Mine Safety and Health Admin istration, to the committee in Washington, D.C., November 15, 2010.

8See 30 CFR § 57.5038.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

TABLE 7.1 Health and Safety Regulations and Standards Applicable to Uranium Mines

Substance

Applicable Regulations

Exposure Standard

Silica (quartz)

 

100 µg/cm3 per 8 hours

Noise

MSHA 30 CFR § 62.120 Action Level

85 dBA over 8 hours

 

MSHA 30 CFR § 62.130 Maximum Exposure Level

90 dBA over 8 hours

 

MSHA 30 CFR § 62.130 Maximum Exposure Level

115 dBA

Diesel particulate matter

30 CFR § 57.5060

 

Radon

30 CFR §§ 57.5038 and 57.5039

4 WLM/year; 1 WL total

Gamma radiation

30 CFR § 57.5047(d)

5 rem/year

SOURCE: Compiled from cited regulations.

program is located in Birmingham, Alabama; its Virginia field office is located in Staunton, Virginia.

The USEPA9 has prepared information about technically enhanced, naturally occurring radioactive materials, or TENORM, which “are any naturally occurring radioactive materials not subject to regulation under the Atomic Energy Act whose radionuclide concentrations or potential for human exposure have been increased above levels encountered in the natural state by human activities” (NRC, 1999a, pp. 1-2). Although the USEPA does not have the statutory authority under the AEA to directly regulate TENORM, it has authority under other statutes to regulate TENORM emissions that impact air and water quality. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Congress gave the USEPA the authority to study the impacts of uranium mining wastes and develop regulations (using other statutory authorities) to eliminate hazards.10 The USEPA’s TENORM-related activities have focused on studying TENORM sources, categorizing their potential hazards, and working to coordinate with parties, such as the states and tribes, that have the authority to regulate.

Security can be a concern during mine development and construction. Because of the chemicals present during these activities (i.e., ANFO, the mixture of ammonium nitrate and fuel oil used for blasting), security is necessary to keep trespassers out and to prevent theft of explosives and hazardous chemicals. Because the uranium is diffusely distributed within the rock, theft of enough uranium ore to cause a threat to public health and safety is unlikely. During mining activities, security concerns at surface pit or underground uranium mines parallel security concerns at non-uranium mines.

_________________

9See http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/.

10See 42 USC §§ 6921 (b)(3)(a) and 6982(f).

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

Guidance for underground mine emergency plans has been compiled by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The first few moments are critical in any underground mining incident (Kowalski-Trakofler et al., 2010). Through interviews with focus groups of individuals involved in response to underground mining emergencies, the numerous lessons learned have been compiled to help guide the emergency planning process. Because of the inherently dangerous situations present in underground mines, particular attention to key issues such as communication and information gathering in the first moments of an emergency can lead to better outcomes. Leadership and trust are essential, and can be enhanced with training and drills (Kowalski-Trakofler et al., 2010). Emergency planning is one of the areas where compliance with regulations is not sufficient; mine owners have an obligation to go beyond the regulations to inculcate emergency planning into every aspect of mine operation.

Uranium Processing

There are a range of federal laws that apply to uranium processing, which includes processing and the other physical and chemical treatment processes that ultimately lead to the production of yellowcake. The key statutes that provide environmental control and worker protection over uranium recovery are

• Federal Water Pollution Control Act (or Clean Water Act) (CWA),

• Clean Air Act (1963) (CAA),

• Safe Drinking Water Act (1974) (SDWA),

• Atomic Energy Act (1954) (AEA),

• Mine Safety and Health Act (MSH Act), and

• Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA).

The AEA, enacted by Congress in 1954, regulates the civilian development, use, and control of nuclear energy. The AEA gives the USNRC broad regulatory authority; it is the primary regulatory agency for all facilities that hold a USNRC license. The USNRC also administers substantial portions of UMTRCA. As its name implies, this law applies to uranium tailings and is therefore applicable to uranium processing activities.

The USNRC has established standards for the protection against radiation (10 CFR Part 20) that are applicable to processing facilities. The USNRC licensing program (10 CFR Part 40) incorporates the 10 CFR Part 20 requirements and requires that the licensed facility monitor employee exposure and levels of radiation in effluents to the outside environment, as well as demonstrate that it has the training experience and proper materials to handle uranium. USNRC’s Part 20 standards require that facilities assure that the total effective dose to individual members of the public from the facility does not exceed 0.1 rem (1 milliSievert) in a year. Before any license is granted, the USNRC must prepare

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

an EIS that examines, among other things, baseline environmental conditions, tailings disposal options, and costs and benefits. The agency must review the license every 5 years, and no license will terminate until the processing facilities are decommissioned.

The USNRC allows states to assume control of uranium processing through its Agreement State program. Under this program, a state can enter into an agreement with the USNRC if the state establishes a regulatory program based on regulations that are equivalent to, or more stringent than, the USNRC regulatory licensing program. The USNRC must review these standards every 2 years. In 2009, Virginia became an Agreement State for regulating source material, special nuclear material, and byproduct material except uranium mill tailings. The Committee understands that Virginia might seek Agreement State status for regulating uranium processing if Virginia were to lift its ban on uranium mining and processing. In the event that Virginia does not seek Agreement State status for this program, the USNRC would regulate uranium processing in the state.

Processing facilities must also comply with a series of environmental and worker safety regulations. For environmental standards, air, water, and other regulations apply. To protect against air pollution, the USNRC and the USEPA share responsibility for regulating radioactive gas emissions. The USEPA establishes the standards, while the USNRC implements and enforces them for its licensees. The USEPA has promulgated 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart W, to protect the public and the environment from the emission of radon from uranium mills and their tailings.11 This standard limits the radon emissions rate to 20 picocuries per square meter per second, and requires that new tailings impoundments meet one of the two following requirements:

1. There are a maximum of two impoundments in operation at any time (including existing impoundments), and they cannot be more than 40 acres; tailings management and disposal is by phased disposal.

2. Tailings are immediately dewatered and disposed of, with no more than 10 acres uncovered at any time. Operators must also follow applicable requirements in 40 CFR § 192.32.

EPA has formed a workgroup to review and possibly revise Subpart W. On November 10, 2011, a revised risk assessment for radon emissions from operating mill tailings was released.12 This risk assessment provides an analysis of the radiation dose to the reasonably maximally exposed individual and the population

_________________

11The USEPA has also promulgated NESHAP regulations for disposal of uranium mill tailings (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart T) and NESHAP regulations for underground uranium mines (40 CFR Part 61, Subpart B).

12See http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/docs/neshaps/subpart-w/historical-rulemakings/subpart-w-risk.pdf; accessed November 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

dose, with their associated risks, at three existing conventional mine/mill sites, five ISL/ISR facilities, as well as at two generic mine/mill sites. The maximum radon release at each of these facilities was used to calculate the radiation dose based on computer models, taking into account the distribution of population living within 80 km of the facility and the prevailing meterological conditions. The resulting doses (and risks) were then compared with regulatory limits. Chapter 5 contains a more detailed discussion of this risk assessment. This information will be useful for the USEPA’s decision making on whether the standard needs to be revised; a decision is expected in January 2012.

USEPA’s general NESHAP requirements, described in 40 CFR Part 61, apply as well; these NESHAP requirements cover monitoring and construction approval and contain definitions. USEPA’s Subpart B NESHAP requirements, found at 40 CFR Part 61,13 set a limit on the emission of radon from underground uranium mines to ensure that no member of the public in any year receives an effective dose of more than 10 mrem/year. Owners/operators of every mine must calculate the effective dose and report it to USEPA annually.

USEPA and USNRC also share responsibility for regulating water pollution. The USEPA’s authority under the CWA allows it to set industrial discharges for pollutants, and its regulations generally cover radionuclides. However, the CWA regulations exclude all source, byproduct, and special nuclear material, as those terms are defined by the AEA. As a result, contaminants falling into these categories are regulated by the USNRC under 10 CFR Parts 20 and 40. The USNRC sets an effluent limitation and requires its licensees to apply the ALARA principle to keep releases as low as reasonably achievable. For other contaminants such as chemical oxygen demand, zinc, radium and total suspended solids, the USEPA’s CWA regulations contain a “no discharge” standard: ”Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, there shall be no discharge of process wastewater to navigable waters from mills using the acid leach, alkaline leach or combined acid and alkaline leach process for the extraction of uranium or from mines and mills using in situ leach methods” (40 CFR § 440.34(b)(1)). However, this very strict standard is tempered considerably by the exception referenced in the first clause of the regulations: “In the event that the annual precipitation falling on the treatment facility and the drainage area contributing surface runoff to the treatment facility exceeds the annual evaporation, a volume of water equivalent to the difference between annual precipitation falling on the treatment facility and the drainage area contributing surface runoff to the treatment facility and annual evaporation may be discharged subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (a) of this section.” (40 CFR § 440.34(b)(2)).14 In summary, the regulations provide an exception to the zero-discharge rule, and because of Virginia’s climate

_________________

13See http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/neshaps/subpartb/index.html; accessed November 2011.

14See http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=022ea7ae4a49a6938b6ccd94c552d024&rgn=div6&view=text&node=40:30.0.1.1.16.3&idno=40.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

this exception would apply—when annual precipitation exceeds evaporation, the facility can discharge an amount of process water that is equal to this difference. Before discharge, this process water must be treated to meet the statutory standards set out in 40 CFR § 440.34.

Uranium mill tailings are covered by UMTRCA. Uranium mill tailings contain radium, which decays to produce radon, and the radium in these tailings will not fully decay for thousands of years. Typical environmental problems arising from mill tailings are radon emanations, wind-blown dust dispersal, and the leaching of contaminants—including radionuclides and heavy metals—into surface waters and groundwaters. UMTRCA gives USEPA the responsibility for issuing generally applicable standards for control of uranium mill tailings. In 1983, USEPA issued standards for both Title I (inactive) sites and Title II (active and new) sites. In November 1985, the USNRC changed its regulations in 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, to be consistent with USEPA Title II standards. Since 1985, various changes have been made to Part 40 for the Title II sites. Most recently, the USNRC amended its Part 40 regulations to improve decommissioning planning to reduce the likelihood that any facility now in operation could become a legacy site. These changes include enhanced financial assurance and monitoring requirements that are intended to detect large volumes of contamination that might not exceed a dose limit.15

Radiation protection standards for workers at USNRC-licensed facilities are developed and enforced by the USNRC, and these must be consistent with other federal regulatory programs protecting workers, including federal standards that limit worker exposure and requirements to monitor radiation levels and maintain records. MSHA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) might also have a regulatory role at USNRC-licensed processing facilities. One interagency agreement and two memoranda of understanding (MOUs) allocate responsibilities among these parties. The USNRC and OSHA have entered into a MOU that spells out their respective responsibilities, addressing the four groups of hazards. The USNRC generally covers that first three hazards and OSHA covers the fourth category:

• Radiation risk produced by radioactive materials

• Chemical risk produced by radioactive materials

• Plant conditions that affect the safety of radioactive materials and therefore present an increased risk to workers, such as a fire or explosion that might release radioactive contaminants

• Plant conditions that result in an occupational risk, but do not affect the safety of licensed radioactive materials, such as exposure to toxic (nonradioactive) compounds or other industrial hazards

_________________

15See 76 Fed. Reg. 35,512-35,575 (June 17, 2001).

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

In addition, OSHA and MSHA have entered into an interagency agreement to coordinate activities under the Mine Safety and Health Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The agreement notes that MSHA has the authority to promulgate and enforce safety and health standards for workers in mining-related operations and preparation and processing. OSHA has authority over all working conditions of employees engaged in business, except those conditions regulated by other federal agencies. The agreement spells out in detail the relationship between these two entities. Generally, MSHA has jurisdiction over all mineral extraction and processing, including the lands, facilities, equipment, and other property used in these activities. OSHA has authority over ancillary operations. The agreement notes that “there will remain areas of uncertainty regarding the application of the Mine Act,16 especially in operations near the termination of the processing cycle and the beginning of the manufacturing cycle.”17

Finally, the USNRC and MSHA have entered into a MOU to describe their approach to regulating processing activities that fall under both the Mine Safety and Health Act and the Atomic Energy Act. The agencies will each carry out their responsibilities separately, and in the interest of administrative efficiency will cooperate regarding the promulgation and enforcement of safety and health standards, use compatible inspection procedures and techniques, and exchange information regarding enforcement actions.18

Security, Accountability, and Transportation

Security at a uranium processing facility has several aims. First, a facility must establish general security, which involves keeping intruders out by the use of fencing, guards at gates, alarms, etc. Second, a facility must establish “insider” security by engaging in background checks on employees, fingerprinting, and similar measures. Third, a facility must establish material control requirements for secure handling of radioactive materials, dangerous chemicals, and any other items used in uranium processing that could create a health or safety hazard. Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the USNRC has increased its focus on security at radioactive materials facilities.

An assortment of chemicals are used during the recovery of uranium from ore. Sulfuric acid, high-purity kerosene, tertiary amines, ANFO, alcohol, and peroxide or ammonia could be employed during these processes. If the processing facility and mine are contiguous, the same physical security system (fencing, guards) could protect both the mine and processing areas. If they are located at some distance from each other, appropriate security systems for the types of

_________________

16The Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended.

17See http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=MOU&p_id=222; accessed November 2011.

18See 45 Fed. Reg 1315 (January 4, 1980).

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

materials present at the individual facilities would need to be designed. Because the end product of the processing operation is yellowcake, appropriate accountability for the uranium that is concentrated from the ore must be maintained. Security measures are also necessary to prevent theft of the yellowcake. Following theft of radioactive materials from a processing facility in Namibia, access controls, use of biometrics (retinal scanners), and closed-circuit TV systems were recommended as increased security measures.19 Security measures also include physical separation of drums, tamper-proof seals, state-of-the-art fencing and intrusion detection, and other security measures that would prevent theft. USNRC licensees must take precautions to ensure safe and secure handling of both source material and byproduct material. According to USNRC regulations, to transfer a radioactive material, a licensee must verify that the transferee has a license to possess that type, form, and quantity of source or byproduct material (10 CFR § 40.51). Each licensee that is authorized to export natural uranium in amounts exceeding 500 kg, other than in the form of ore or ore residue, must notify the USNRC at least 10 days in advance. Under the licensing provisions in 10 CFR Part 20, the licensee is required to prevent unauthorized removal or access of all licensed materials that are stored in controlled or unrestricted areas. For materials not in storage, the licensee must maintain constant surveillance. Signs must be posted and containers must be labeled, and recordkeeping is also required. If any materials are lost or stolen, reporting to the USNRC is required.

The product of the uranium processing facility (yellowcake) is not subject to the integrated source management system that the USNRC has proposed to track high-risk radioactive sources. This Web-based licensing verification system is intended to provide a comprehensive program for security and control of radioactive material, but it is not intended to include yellowcake because it is not considered to present a high risk.20

The United States has an agreement with the International Atomic Energency Agency (IAEA), implemented through 10 CFR Part 75, that covers uranium processing facilities and mines. Material accounting and control information is collected by the covered facilities through the USNRC, and the facilities are subject to inspection by IAEA personnel on an ad hoc, routine, or special inspection basis (10 CFR § 75.8).

Packaging design requirements are regulated by the USNRC, and it has responsibility for establishing requirements for the design and manufacture of packages for radioactive materials (10 CFR Part 71) The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) regulates shipments while they are in transit, and sets standards for labeling and smaller quantity packages in accordance with its hazardous

_________________

19Wikileaks: see http://rogerpociask.posterous.com/wikileaks-us-evaluation-of-uranium-mine-secur; accessed September 2011.

20See http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part020/part020-appe.html; accessed September 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

safety materials program. Before any shipment can occur, the shipper is required to review the package certificate of compliance to determine if any testing or maintenance is required. The shipper may be required to check or change package seals and other components, or perform leak testing. In addition, the shipper must take radiation measurements at specific locations on and around the package to make sure that the radiation levels are below the required limits.

The shipper must also meet USDOT’s requirements for shipment of the radioactive material (e.g., USDOT, 2006), including route selection, vehicle condition and placarding, driver training, package marking, labeling, and other shipping documentation. The department’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration publishes training materials for individuals who may be involved in transport of radioactive materials.21

Reclamation

When mining and processing activities at a site are completed, the site will undergo a decommissioning process. For mining sites on privately owned land, state laws determine how the site is reclaimed, and it is likely that site ownership will remain with the private landowner after reclamation. For mining sites on state or federal land, state or federal reclamation laws and regulations dictate how the land is reclaimed, and it is probable that the state or federal governments will retain ownership of these sites. For uranium processing facilities, reclamation activities are dictated by the site license. During this process, the facility will seek to terminate its USNRC (or Agreement State) license, and will work with USNRC, USEPA, the state, and other applicable regulatory authorities as well as the surrounding community to prepare the site so that uranium mining and processing activities can end. License termination involves safely removing a facility from service and reducing residual radioactivity to a level that permits the license to be terminated. The nature and scope of the decommissioning and reclamation process will depend upon several factors, including the amount of waste material to be left on-site, the nature of the site contamination, and the planned future uses for the site.

A key feature of site decommissioning plans involves the treatment, stabilization, and control of uranium mill tailings. UMTRCA gives the USNRC the authority to regulate tailings, which are defined in the law as byproduct material, and the USNRC (and/or an Agreement State) oversees project management and technical review for decommissioning and reclamation (Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 40). These regulations require that every license applicant include in its license application how it will dispose of and manage tailings, and Appendix A lists 13 technical criteria that licensees must address. These criteria state that

_________________

21See http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/staticfiles/PHMSA/DownloadableFiles/Hazmat/Hazmat%20 Training/HowToRadioactive.pdf; accessed September 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

the general goal in siting and design is the permanent isolation of tailings and associated contaminants without the need for ongoing maintenance. The prime option for tailings disposal is placement belowgrade, in either mines or specially excavated pits. In certain cases, placement belowgrade might not be possible. If abovegrade disposal is used, it must be demonstrated that the tailings will be isolated from natural erosion to the same extent as belowground placement. The technical criteria incorporate USEPA’s 40 CFR Part 192 (Subparts D and E) groundwater protection standards and monitoring requirements. Standards for airborne emissions must also be followed.

The regulations also require financial surety arrangements that provide sufficient funds for decontamination and decommissioning of the site (also see Box 7.3). The amount of funds must be based on USNRC-approved cost estimates, and include decommissioning, demolition, and reclamation expenses. A variety of financial surety instruments are acceptable, but self-assurance is not allowed.

BOX 7.3
World Bank Guidance on Financial Surety

The World Bank has developed a guidance document based on financial surety systems that apply in a number of countries. The World Bank estimates that closure of medium-size open-pit and underground mines costs $15M, while closure of open-pit mines operating for over 35 years, with large waste and tailings facilities, can cost upward of $50M. The guidelines outline considerations for governmental requirements, including

• Adequate financial resources must be available for reclamation and closure as well as redress for any impacts that a mining operation may cause to wildlife, soil, and water quality.

• The instrument chosen for the financial surety must be reasonably liquid and accessible to the regulators should funding be needed to initiate reclamation and remediation in case of operator default.

• The guarantor’s financial health must be screened to ensure that it will not default.

• The public should be involved and informed, because it will bear the cost of remediation if there is a default.

Finally, the World Bank states clearly that financial surety is not a substitute for an operator’s legal liability to clean up the site.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

Long-Term Stewardship

A site that contains uranium mill tailings that is licensed by the USNRC or an Agreement State cannot undergo license termination until it meets certain closure and postclosure requirements, and either a state government or the federal government—typically, the USDOE—assumes ownership of the site. These sites are administered under the provisions of a general USNRC license (see 40 CFR § 40.28). To obtain this general license, the USNRC requires that the prospective licensee develop a long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) for the site.

Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40 specifies closure and postclosure obligations, which include requirements for siting and design of the tailings pile, cover performance, and financial surety for decommissioning, reclamation, and long-term surveillance. When the USNRC has terminated the specific license or has concurred in an Agreement State’s termination of a specific license, the reclaimed tailings areas are transferred to either USDOE, another federal agency designated by the President, or the state in which the site is located, for custody and long-term care under the general license provisions of 10 CFR § 40.28. According to section 40.28, an LTSP must include (1) a legal description of the site to be transferred; (2) a description of the final site conditions, including characterization of existing groundwater conditions, that is sufficiently detailed to provide a baseline for assessing the seriousness of future changes; (3) a description of the long-term surveillance program, including proposed inspection frequency, frequency and extent of groundwater monitoring if required, appropriate constituent concentration limits for groundwater, inspection personnel qualifications, inspection procedures, and recordkeeping and quality assurance procedures; (4) the criteria for follow-up inspections in response to observations from routine inspections or extreme natural events; and (5) the criteria for instituting maintenance or emergency measures. Under 10 CFR § 40.48(b), there is no termination of the general license under which the LTSP is carried out. At present, the Office of Legacy Management has control over six such sites; this number will probably increase as ongoing site reclamations are completed. Ultimately, the Office of Legacy Management could manage as many as 27 of these sites.22

The USNRC licensing regulations of 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 12 state that

final disposition of tailings, residual radioactive material, or wastes at mining sites should be such that on-going active maintenance is not necessary to preserve isolation. At a minimum, inspections must be conducted by the government agency responsible for long-term care of the disposal site to confirm its integrity and to determine the need, if any, for maintenance and/or monitoring.

The various federal regulatory authorities applicable to uranium mining,

_________________

22See http://www.lm.doe.gov/pro_doc/references/framework.htm; accessed September 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

processing, reclamation, long-term stewardship, transportation, and security are summarized in Table 7.2.

STATE AGENCIES, LAWS, REGULATIONS, AND POLICIES

As noted above, because a mining moratorium is in place, Virginia does not have a law that specifically addresses uranium mining, and its agencies have not been authorized to establish programs to regulate uranium mining under other state laws. However, certain activities—such as air and water emissions control—are regulated by Virginia at other hard-rock mining sites. State law authorizes several state agencies to lease state lands for mineral production. Rental and/or royalty rates can be established by these agencies. Leases on certain submerged lands require that a royalty be collected (Virginia Code Ann. §§ 28.2-1208, 53.1-31). At present, there are 460 nonfuel mines (e.g., quarries, sand and gravel pits, and other surface and underground mining operations) in Virginia that cover 66,000 acres. These mines are permitted and regulated by the Division of Mineral Mining within the Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy.23

This section describes the Virginia state agencies that are active, and have authorities over, the regulatory areas that could be applicable to uranium mining. In the event that the uranium mining moratorium were to be lifted, it is likely that state agencies would play a role in regulating underground or surface uranium mining facilities.24Table 7.3 summarizes these agencies and their possible areas of responsibility.

Local ordinances might apply to proposed uranium mines and processing facilities; requirements contained in zoning codes can play a role in site preparation and facility construction can trigger the need for soil erosion and sediment control. Local governments and/or soil and water conservation districts (Code of Virginia §§ 10.1-560 et seq.) could have applicable programs.

Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy

The Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (VA DMME) is under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce and Trade. Laws governing VA DMME are contained mainly within Title 45.1 of the Code of Virginia. It is the lead agency responsible for administering state laws and regulations regarding mining and is part of the state grant program of the U.S. Department of Labor’s MSHA. Among other areas, the VA DMME has state jurisdiction over miner health and safety and over geological surveying. It has approximately 230

_________________

23See http://www.dmme.virginia.gov/DMM/divisionmeralmining.shtml; accessed September 2011.

24The Commonwealth of Virginia’s Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy has reviewed and granted one permit for uranium exploration at Coles Hill in Pittsylvania County.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

TABLE 7.2 Summary of Key Federal Authorities for Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, Long-Term Stewardship, Transportation, and Security

Activity

Federal Department or Agencies Involved

Nature of Involvement

State-Federal Relationship (if any)

Mining

Mining Act of 1872, as amended, covers mining on federal lands, along with regulations of agency owning land

Regulations regarding claim staking, maintenance, patenting, and EIS

If mining takes place on federal land, the federal agency supervising the land would be the lead agency

No federal laws specifically address mining activities on non-federally owned landsa

N/A

State is the sole regulator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

Regulations cover water discharges, air discharges; guidance on overburden (TENORM) has also been publishedb

Air and water programs can be delegated to the state, and the state can enact regulations on overburden

Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

An interagency agreement between OSHA and MSHA addresses jurisdictional questions

States can operate OSHA-approved plans (OSH Act § 18), but must operate under state law

Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)

Regulations cover miners and processors. An interagency agreement between OSHA and MSHA addresses jurisdictional questions.

MSHA has a state grant program that distributes funds to state programs responsible for miner safety and health; states can enact mining laws that are at least as stringent as, or more stringent than, MSHA

Mine Safety and Health Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Guidance for emergency planning

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

Processing

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC)

Regulates uranium recovery processes (e.g., uranium processing facilities) and activities at these facilities such as worker health and safety

Programs can be relinquished to an Agreement State

USEPA

Regulations cover water discharges, air discharges, land disposal, contamination cleanup

Programs can be delegated to state

Department of Labor, OSHA

Regulations cover some on-site workers (not miners) (workers in the processing facility, track drivers, equipment operators): jurisdictional issues explaining how occupational and worker health are divided among USNRC, OSHA, and MSHA are described in a series of interagency memoranda of understanding and agreements

States can operate OSHA-approved plans (OSH Act § 18), but must operate under state law

MSHA

Has authority to regulate processing along with the NRC: jurisdictional issues are spelled out in a series of interagency memoranda of understanding and agreements

U.S. Department of Transportation

Regulations cover transportation of chemicals, explosives, yellowcake

Reclamation

USEPA

Authorities for cleanup (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA] and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (Superfund))

RCRA program can be delegated: Superfund is not delegated to states: authorities unlikely to be used unless there is a nonpermitted release from the site

USNRC

License termination process and issuance of general license

State or federal agency can obtain a general license from the USNRC

OSHA

Workplace safety

Long-term stewardship

Federal or state government (for sites with uranium processing facility tailings)

Assume site ownership

Federal government or state government assumes ownership of processing sites with uranium mill tailings (see Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) § 202(a)(2)).

aEarlier text provides a fuller explanation of this point.

bSee http://www.epa.gov/radiation/tenorm/.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

TABLE 7.3 Commonwealth of Virginia Agencies Involved in Mining and Related Activities and Their Areas of Jurisdiction

Agency

Area of Jurisdiction/
Regulation

Statutory and Regulatory Authorities

Department of Mines, Minerals and Energy (VA DMME)

Major regulatory authority for mining operations

Major agency for mining regulation

Department of Labor and Industry (VA DLI)

Federal OSH Act, Virginia worker safety laws

Major state-level agency for worker health and safety

Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ)

Water, air, waste permitting

Delegated authorities under Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Department of Conservation and Recreation (VA DCR)

Stormwater discharge during mine construction; natural heritage program

Minor involvement, authorities assumed by VA DMME and/or VA DEQ once mining starts

Department of Health (VDH)

Safe drinking water, including private drinking water wells; source, byproduct, and special nuclear material regulations (Agreement State), excluding uranium processing

Delegated authority from USEPA to administer the federal SDWA; regulates placement and construction of private wells but does not monitor their water quality. Virginia’s Agreement State program (which does not cover uranium processing facility tailings) is administered by VDH. It is the sole regulatory agency in Virginia with radiation expertise

employees and an annual budget of approximately $20 million (Spangler, 2011). VA DMME includes a Division of Mineral Mining, which handles noncoal mining activities—primarily rock, sand, and gravel mining. The division’s workforce includes 10 inspectors and 2 supervisors.

VA DMME has indicated that if the uranium mining moratorium were to be lifted, the regulatory program for the mining operation would closely follow the model that was developed for reviewing the exploratory permit that authorized the recent drilling program conducted at the Coles Hill site (Spangler, 2011). More specifically, VA DMME indicated that it would pool expertise from its office and other state agencies (especially those with expertise in drilling, groundwater control, and air contamination protection), and it would make use of other state and national programs, for example, by applying aspects of existing regulations regarding hard-rock mining to uranium mining.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

Virginia’s hard-rock mining laws are set out in Title 45.1 of the State Code. Among other things, these laws require the issuance of a permit to mine before any activity is commenced, and a reclamation bond must be posted. According to the Virginia statutes, in applying for a permit to commence mining operations after exploration an applicant must

• review all leases and deeds to procure rights of entry;

• conduct a background assessment that reviews land use, as well as the historical and cultural value of the land;

• assess any necessary restrictions or provisions for removing tracts of land from mining;

• conduct public hearings to disseminate information and obtain input into the application; and

• establish standards for postmining land use that are consistent with the surrounding land.

In addition, the applicant must demonstrate financial surety, and the financial assurance must encompass all site activities and include postmining closure (Spangler, 2011). Once mining and other activities commence, the Commonwealth will inspect for compliance and safety, and additional inspections will take place in the event of an accident and/or worker injury. The VA DMME has the authority to issue closure orders and other orders to mine operators, but cannot assess civil penalties for health and safety violations.

In 2009, VA DMME reported that mining resulted in the removal of 56 million tons of minerals (Spangler, 2011).25 In addition to the mining itself, VA DMME’s Division of Mineral Mining also administers the reclamation regulations for mineral mining sites (Virginia Administrative Code, Title 4, Agency 25, Chapter 31). These regulations specify, for example, performance bond requirements, stabilization and revegetation procedures, and drainage and sediment control.

Department of Labor and Industry

Like VA DMME, the Department of Labor and Industry (VA DLI) comes under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce and Trade. VA DLI enforces the regulatory standards established in the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) as well as state worker protection laws.26 Between 2000 and 2010, Virginia had five fatalities in its noncoal mining industry.27 VA DLI conducts

_________________

25Currently, there is no metal mining in Virginia, although metal mining has been carried out in the past. These figures represent mining in sand, gravel, and crushed stone.

26See http://www.doli.virginia.gov/vosh_enforcement/vosh_standards.html; accessed May 2011.

27See http://www.msha.gov/stats/charts/Allstates.pdf; accessed September 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

unplanned safety and health enforcement inspections in response to accidents, employee complaints, and referrals, as well as planned inspections in special-emphasis inspection programs and randomly scheduled inspections of high-hazard industries.28 One of OSHA’s special-emphasis programs is trenching and excavation.

Department of Environmental Quality

The Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) comes under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Natural Resources. Among other things, VA DEQ is responsible for water permitting (process wastewater and stormwater run-off from industrial activities) (Paylor, 2011; 9 VAC 25-31-10 and 40 CFR Part 440), air permitting, and RCRA permits. The VA DEQ also coordinates implementation of Virginia’s environmental impact review requirement (Code of Virginia § 10.1-1188). State agencies are required to conduct an environmental impact review for the construction of state facilities whose cost is greater than or equal to $500,000. In addition, exploration for, and extraction of, minerals on state-owned lands require EISs.

VA DEQ sets water discharge limits using both water quality criteria and technology-based standards. In Virginia, water quality criteria are classified in three Tiers (I, II, and III) based on the quality of the receiving waters. Tier III is composed of “no-discharge” waters—absolutely no discharge is allowed. Tier II waters are high-quality waters where strict discharge standards are set; for example, the waters surrounding the Coles Hill site are Tier II waters. Tier I waters are less pristine. Water quality criteria are established using a mass balance and worst-case scenario assumptions (Paylor, 2011). The water quality criteria would apply to discharges of radionuclides (limits would be set at criteria for public water sources) and metals, including zinc, arsenic, copper, and selenium, as well as other potential contaminants. Under Virginia’s delegated authority under the CWA, mines and processing facilities that discharge to state waters must obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permit. The permit requires that monitoring be conducted twice a year for specific pollutants determined by the type of ore mined.

Virginia has committed to a policy of antidegradation of groundwater quality, which states

if the concentration of any constituent in groundwater is less than the limit set forth by groundwater standards, the natural quality for the constituent shall be maintained; natural quality shall also be maintained for all constituents, including temperature, not set forth in groundwater standards. If the concentration of any constituent in groundwater exceeds the limit in the standard for that constituent,

_________________

28See http://www.doli.virginia.gov/whatwedo.html; accessed May 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

no addition of that constituent to the naturally occurring concentration shall be made. Variance to this policy shall not be made unless it has been affirma-tively demonstrated that a change is justifiable to provide necessary economic or social development, that the degree of waste treatment necessary to preserve the existing quality cannot be economically or socially justified, and that the present and anticipated uses of such water will be preserved and protected. (Virginia Code § 62.1-44.4)

Current groundwater quality standards set no specific limit for uranium, but limits are set for the uranium daughters radium-226 and radium-228. Complete listing of the groundwater quality standards and groundwater criteria are provided in Tables 7.4 to 7.6).

Department of Conservation and Recreation

Like VA DEQ, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (VA DCR) comes under the jurisdiction of the Virginia Secretary of Natural Resources. VA DCR plays a minor role in regulating mining operations. It maintains jurisdiction over stormwater discharges during construction activities and oversees local soil erosion and sediment control programs, which include conducting inspections during construction. Stormwater management is transferred to VA DMME and VA DEQ when mining operations start.29 VA DCR also administers the Commonwealth’s natural heritage program.

Department of Health

The Department of Health (VDH) operates under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Health and Human Resources. VDH enforces regulations and standards under the Virginia Public Water Supply law (Code of Virginia §§ 32.1-167 et seq.) and the federal SDWA. Its responsibilities include regulating aspects of private drinking water wells related to design, construction, and placement of wells, but do not include monitoring requirements.

The Division of Radiological Health within VDH has responsibility for regulating all machine sources of radiation (e.g., x-ray machines, particle accelerators) and all radioactive sources except uranium mines or processing facilities, performing radiation monitoring around certain fixed nuclear facilities in Virginia (i.e., the North Anna and Surry nuclear generating stations and Babcock and Wilcox nuclear operations group), maintaining a radiological emergency response team, maintaining a radon program to advise citizens about this health hazard, maintaining a radiation laboratory, and updating regulations regarding radiation.

_________________

29Presentation by D. Johnson, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, to the committee in Richmond, February 7, 2011.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

TABLE 7.4 Groundwater Standards Applicable in the Commonwealth of Virginia

Constituent

Concentration

Units

Sodium

270

mg/L

Foaming agents as methylene blue active substances

0.05

mg/L

Petroleum hydrocarbons

1

mg/L

Arsenic

0.05

mg/L

Barium

1

mg/L

Cadmium

0.0004

mg/L

Chromium

0.05

mg/L

Copper

1

mg/L

Cyanide

0.005

mg/L

Lead

0.05

mg/L

Mercury

0.00005

mg/L

Phenols

0.001

mg/L

Selenium

0.01

mg/L

Silver

None

 

Zinc

0.05

mg/L

Chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides

 

 

   Aldrin/dieldrin

0.003

µg/L

   Chlordane

0.01

µg/L

   DDT

0.001

µg/L

   Endrin

0.004

µg/L

   Heptachlor

0.001

µg/L

   Heptachlor epoxide

0.001

µg/L

   Kepone

None

 

   Lindane

0.01

µg/L

   Methoxychlor

0.03

µg/L

   Mirex

None

 

   Toxaphene

None

 

Chlorophenoxy herbicides

 

 

   2,4-D

0.1

mg/L

   Silvex

0.01

mg/L

Radioactivity

 

 

   Total radium (Ra-226 + Ra-228)

5

pCi/L

   Radium-226

3

pCi/L

   Gross beta activitya

50

pCi/L

   Gross alpha activity (excluding radon and uranium)

15

pCi/L

   Tritium

20,000

pCi/L

   Strontium-90

8

pCi/L

   Manmade radioactivity, total dose equivalentb

4

mrem/yr

NOTE; mg/L = milligrams per liter; µg/L = micrograms per liter; pCi/L = picocuries per liter; mrem/yr = millirem per year.

aThe gross beta value shall be used as a screening value only. If exceeded, the water must be analyzed to determine the presence and quantity of radionuclides to determine compliance with the tritium, strontium, and manmade radioactivity standards.

bCombination of all sources should not exceed total dose equivalent of 4 mrem/yr.
SOURCE: 9 VAC 25-280-40.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

TABLE 7.5 Groundwater Standards Applicable in the Commonwealth of Virginia by Physiographic Province

Concentration

Piedmont &

Cumberland

Constituent

Coastal Plain

Blue Ridge

Valley and Ridge

Plateau

pH

6.5-9

5.5-8.5

6-9

5-8.5

Ammonia nitrogen

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

Nitrite nitrogen

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

0.025 mg/L

Nitrate nitrogen

5 mg/L

5 mg/L

5 mg/L

5 mg/L

SOURCE: 9 VAC 25-280-50.

TABLE 7.6 Groundwater Criteria

Groundwater Criteria by Physiographic Province (mg/L)

Piedmont &

Cumberland

Constituent

Coastal Plain

Blue Ridge

Valley and Ridge

Plateau

Alkalinity

30-500

10-200

30-500

30-200

Total dissolved solids

1,000

250

500

500

Chloride

50"

25

25

25

Sulfate

50

25

100

150

Total organic carbon

10

10

10

10

Color

15

15

15

15

Iron

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.01-10

Manganese

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.01-0.5

Sodium

100a

25

25

100

Fluoride

1.4b

1.4

1.4

1.4

Hardness

120

120

300

180

NOTE: Because natural groundwater quality can vary greatly from area to area for these constituents, enforceable standards were not adopted. These criteria are intended to provide guidance in preventing groundwater pollution. Groundwater criteria are not mandatory.

aIt is recognized that naturally occurring concentrations will exceed this limit in the eastern part of the Coastal Plain, especially toward the shoreline and with increased depth.

bExcept within the Cretaceous aquifer, concentration up to 5 mg/L and higher.
SOURCE: 9 VAC 25-280-70.

Regulatory Program Funding and Resources

Regulatory programs at the state level are supported by fees that are assessed on regulated industries. The fee structure is created to recover the cost of resources expended for implementing a regulatory agency’s responsibilities, including staffing, training, and equipment. Since regulations must be developed prior to collecting fees, the initial development of regulations is usually not covered by fees, and if the uranium mining moratorium were to be lifted, then

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

the Virginia legislature would need to provide an appropriation to the regulatory agencies involved so that they could develop the expertise to write, implement, and enforce the regulations.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE REGULATION OF
URANIUM MINING, PROCESSING, AND RECLAMATION

Because of concerns about the off-site effects—negative or positive—of uranium mining and processing facilities on human and environmental health and welfare, members of the public often express interest in participating in the regulation of such facilities. Requirements for public participation—the two-way exchange between regulators and the public in advance of regulatory decisions so that the public can receive information and make comments—apply to both federal and state regulatory processes.

Opportunities under the current regulatory structure for public participation in the regulatory process for uranium mining and processing facilities are offered during the promulgation of regulations of general applicability, the licensing of particular facilities, and the development and approval of postclosure plans for facility reclamation and long-term stewardship.

Public Participation in Federal-Level Regulatory Decisions

Public participation in federal actions regarding uranium mining and processing is governed by various federal laws and regulations, including the Administrative Procedure Act (5 USC Chapter 5, Subchapter II), the National Environmental Policy Act (42 USC Chapter 55) (NEPA), and agency-specific laws and regulations. NEPA is often the statute that triggers the most substantial public input. As noted elsewhere in this chapter, the regulations of several agencies come into play with uranium mining and processing, and the formulation of these regulations would be required to adhere to federal public participation requirements.

For surface or open-pit mining on nonfederal lands, there is no federal requirement for an environmental impact analysis and no federal requirement for public participation. When considering a license application for an ISL/ISR process, or for a facility that will process uranium ore from an open-pit or a surface mining operation, the USNRC has public participation provisions for both the licensing process itself and the accompanying environmental review. In the prelicensing stage, members of the public are notified through various means, including the Federal Register, press releases, and local advertisements, that a license application has been received. If local interest is strong, the USNRC may hold public meetings in the vicinity of the proposed facility.30 The degree of public participation allowed in a USNRC public meeting ranges from primarily

_________________

30See http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/licensing/pub-involve.html.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

observational to open discussion, depending upon the type of meeting; with major licensing applications, the USNRC also may post an opportunity to request a hearing.

A new major facility such as a uranium processing facility is also, as noted elsewhere in this report, subject to the requirements of NEPA. Typically, an environmental assessment (EA) is prepared first. The EA is a preliminary document that summarizes the potential environmental impacts to briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis to help determine whether to prepare an EIS or a finding of no significant impact. If the EA indicates that the proposed facility could have a significant effect on the environment, a full EIS is then developed. USNRC regulations require that the USNRC conduct an EIS for all uranium processing facility licensing actions. The USNRC is thus required to hold public meetings, including open scoping meetings. These meetings are held in the vicinity of the facility; they provide information to members of the public and an opportunity for them to express their opinions, and they serve as a means to help the USNRC identify issues to be addressed in the EIS.

Public Participation in State-Level Regulatory Decisions

Public participation in state-level agency decisions is governed by the Virginia Administrative Process Act (Code of Virginia, Title 2.2, Chapter 40). In formulating regulations, this act specifies that each agency shall develop guidelines for soliciting the input of interested parties and that the agency, pursuant to its guidelines, “shall afford interested persons an opportunity to submit data, views, and arguments, either orally or in writing to the agency, to include an online public comment forum on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall, or other specially designated subordinate” (§ 2.2-4007.02). The Virginia Regulatory Town Hall31 is a Web-based means for agencies, boards, and secretariats to provide information on upcoming regulatory changes and for members of the public to submit comments electronically. The Administrative Process Act also specifies that agency guidelines are to set out any methods in addition to a “Notice of Intended Regulatory Action” for identifying and notifying interested parties, as well as a general policy for using standing or ad hoc advisory panels and for consulting with interested groups and individuals. The act does not speak directly to public participation in regulatory decisions regarding particular cases.

Regarding prospective public participation in permitting uranium mining facilities, the current practices of the Division of Mineral Mining (DMM) within VA DMME are relevant. Under state law (Code of Virginia § 45.1-184.1), an applicant to DMM for a new mineral mining permit must identify and notify adjacent landowners within 1,000 ft of the proposed facility boundary. According to DMM, no notification is required for a permit renewal or an expansion of the

_________________

31See http://townhall.virginia.gov/.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

original acreage.32 The notified property owners then have 10 days to file written objections with the DMM director and/or request a public hearing regarding the proposed operation. According to DMM, the hearing is an informal “information gathering” forum in which people attending may present comments as well as evidence. The hearings officer then makes a written recommendation regarding the permit to the DMM director. Based on this recommendation and any additional information pursuant to the hearing, the DMM director issues a final order on the permit. This final order may be appealed to civil court in the city or county where the mine is located.

FINDINGS AND KEY CONCEPTS

The committee’s analysis of the existing regulatory environment applicable to uranium mining and processing in Virginia has produced the following findings:

The activities involved in uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship are subject to a variety of federal and state laws that are the responsibility of numerous federal and state agencies.

Because the Commonwealth of Virginia enacted a moratorium on uranium mining in 1982, the state has essentially no experience regulating uranium mining and there is no existing regulatory infrastructure specifically for uranium mining. The state does have programs that regulate hard-rock mining and coal mining.

There is no federal law that specifically applies to uranium mining on non-federally owned lands; state laws and regulations have jurisdiction over these mining activities. Federal and state worker protection laws, and federal and state environmental laws, variously apply to occupational safety and health, and air, water, and land pollution resulting from mining activities.

At present, there are gaps in legal and regulatory coverage for activities involved in uranium mining, processing, reclamation, and long-term stewardship. Some of these gaps have resulted from the moratorium on uranium mining that Virginia has in place; others are gaps in current laws or regulations, or in the way that they are applied. Although there are several options for addressing these gaps, the committee notes that Canada and the state of Colorado have enacted laws and promulgated regulations based on best practices that require modern mining and processing methods, and empower regulatory agencies with strong information-gathering, enforcement, and inspection authorities. In addition, best practice would be for state agencies, with public stakeholder involvement, to encourage the owner/operator of a facility to go beyond the regulations to adopt international industry standards if they are more rigorous than the existing regulations.

_________________

32See http://www.dmme.virginia.gov/dmm/permitting&licensing.shtml

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×

The U.S. federal government has only limited recent experience regulating conventional33uranium processing and reclamation of uranium mining and processing facilities. Because almost all uranium mining and processing to date has taken place in parts of the United States that have a negative water balance (i.e., dry climates with low rainfall), federal agencies have limited experience applying laws and regulations in positive water balance (i.e., wet climates with medium to high rainfall) situations. The U.S. federal government has considerable experience attempting to remediate contamination due to past, inappropriate practices at closed or abandoned sites.

Under the current regulatory structure, opportunities for meaningful public involvement are fragmented and limited. Key points in the regulatory process for public participation include (1) the promulgation of regulations of general applicability, (2) the licensing of particular facilities, and (3) the development of postclosure plans for facility reclamation and long-term stewardship. Regarding (1), the current regulatory structure requires that members of the public who are interested in prospective uranium mining and processing in Virginia be aware of and respond to rulemaking by several different state and federal agencies. The Virginia Regulatory Town Hall could provide an online means of coordinating information and opinion exchanges about upcoming state-level regulatory changes pertinent to mining, but at present the Regulatory Town Hall does not offer transparent cross-agency coordination by topic. Regarding (2), the Division of Mineral Mining’s explicit opportunities for public participation in licensing a mining facility currently are limited to adjacent landowners. The USNRC has a more robust approach to public participation in licensing a uranium processing facility. Its regulations require the USNRC to conduct an EIS, during which prelicensing public meetings or hearings will be held in the vicinity of the proposed facility. Regarding (3), there is no evidence at present that members of the public would be included in deliberations about postclosure plans at the time those plans would be implemented.

_________________

33Conventional mining and processing includes surface or open-pit mining, or some combination of the two, and their associated processing plants, but excludes ISL/ISR uranium recovery.

Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 223
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 224
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 225
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 226
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 227
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 228
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 229
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 230
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 231
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 232
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 233
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 234
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 235
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 236
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 237
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 238
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 239
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 240
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 241
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 242
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 243
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 244
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 245
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 246
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 247
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 248
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 249
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 250
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 251
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 252
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 253
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 254
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 255
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 256
Suggested Citation:"7 Regulation and Oversight of Uranium Mining, Processing, Reclamation, and Long-Term Stewardship." National Research Council. 2012. Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13266.
×
Page 257
Next: 8 Best Practices »
Uranium Mining in Virginia: Scientific, Technical, Environmental, Human Health and Safety, and Regulatory Aspects of Uranium Mining and Processing in Virginia Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $64.00 Buy Ebook | $49.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia has been prohibited since 1982 by a state moratorium, although approval for restricted uranium exploration in the state was granted in 2007. Uranium Mining in Virginia examines the scientific, technical, environmental, human health and safety, and regulatory aspects of uranium mining, milling, and processing as they relate to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the purpose of assisting the Commonwealth to determine whether uranium mining, milling, and processing can be undertaken in a manner that safeguards the environment, natural and historic resources, agricultural lands, and the health and well-being of its citizens. According to this report, if Virginia lifts its moratorium, there are "steep hurdles to be surmounted" before mining and processing could take place within a regulatory setting that appropriately protects workers, the public, and the environment, especially given that the state has no experience regulating mining and processing of the radioactive element. The authoring committee was not asked to recommend whether uranium mining should be permitted, or to consider the potential benefits to the state were uranium mining to be pursued. It also was not asked to compare the relative risks of uranium mining to the mining of other fuels such as coal. This book will be of interest to decision makers at the state and local level, the energy industry, and concerned citizens.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!