State Health Department Panel Hears Objections to Proposed Mill
by Beverly Corbell
Jun 10, 2010 | 1862 views | 9 9 comments | 19 19 recommendations | email to a friend | print
SPEAKING OUT — Telluride resident Michael Saftler was among several
people who spoke in opposition to a state permit for a uranium mill
in the Paradox Valley at a meeting Tuesday night in Montrose hosted
by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. (Photo by
Beverly Corbell)
SPEAKING OUT — Telluride resident Michael Saftler was among several people who spoke in opposition to a state permit for a uranium mill in the Paradox Valley at a meeting Tuesday night in Montrose hosted by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. (Photo by Beverly Corbell)
slideshow
MONTROSE – A panel from the state health department didn’t hear from many people in favor of a new uranium mill in Paradox Valley, but they heard plenty of people talk against it.

Warren Smith, head of the radiation control program for the Colorado Department of Health and the Environment, acted as moderator for a public hearing Tuesday night at the Montrose Pavilion regarding Energy Fuel’s request for a state permit to build the mill in Paradox Valley.

People in the audience were given three minutes to offer input to a three-man panel comprised of Steve Tarlton and Edgar Ethington from the Denver office of CDPHE, and Phil Egidi from the Grand Junction office.

Smith said another public input meeting was held Wednesday in Telluride and a meeting will be held in Naturita on July 13. He said the CDPHE must make a decision on whether to grant the mill a state permit by Jan. 17, 2011.

After hearing all the public input, the CDPHE will publish its decision along with explanations about the decision, Smith said.

“We can either deny, accept or accept with conditions,” he said.

About a dozen people got up to speak at the meeting, held at the Montrose Pavilion attended by about 60 people. It was a far cry from previous public meetings on the mill hosted by Montrose County last year that sometimes drew hundreds of people, many carrying signs either for or against the mill.

But at Tuesday night’s meeting, only one person, Dan Gallagher of Grand Junction, spoke in support of the mill.

“It would be wonderful,” he said. “Contractors are hurting in this downturn, and once it gets better it would be nice to have work. I think it could help western Colorado and all the counties involved.”

But others said they didn’t trust Energy Fuels to be prepared in case of a disaster, and several brought up the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico as an example.

“Just like BP in the Gulf, Energy Fuels says nothing will happen,” said Marvin Ballantyne of Montrose.

Hilary White of Telluride, speaking for Sheep Mountain Alliance, criticized the CDPHE for not holding more public meetings and for the lack of independent analysis on the possible detrimental effects to air and water quality.

Energy Fuels doesn’t have the money to open the mill, and should have to prove to the state it’s not a “speculative company,” White said.

“The only mining work they’ve been doing is mining for investors,” she said.

The dust storms that have hit Montrose in recent years were mentioned by several people, including Montrose resident Virginia Sowell, who voiced fears future dust from the mill could be radioactive.

“We’ve had so much dust the last four years, and the mill is right in the path,” she said.

Others at the meeting accused CDPHE of being cozy with Energy Fuels, and some criticized the county’s final report on the mill as containing no downside and not enough information. The county approved a special use permit for the mill last October.

Telluride resident Michael Saftler said that building the mill is “an ill conceived model,” especially since the price of uranium has dropped drastically the mill was first proposed two years ago.

Saftler also urged the panel to consider a report commissioned by the Ute Mountain Tribe, due out this fall that will give an analysis of the effects of the White Mesa mill in Utah on the environment.

“You should not consider it (the permit) without considering this report,” he said. “To not do so would be negligent.”

Janet Johnson of Grand Junction also complained that the CDPHE was not holding enough public meetings, suggesting that it should have more back-and-forth dialogue about the dangers of uranium mills.

“We need to look at the history of all uranium mills in the state,” she said. “They were all violators, and they all defaulted.”

Johnson said the state should pay for an outside company to do an analysis of uranium’s effects over the entire area.

“We are not an isolated entity, and people in that area have to live with the cumulative effects,” she said, citing a bill signed into law earlier in the day by Gov. Bill Ritter to force uranium mills to clean up existing contamination before launching new projects.

Stu Krebs of Montrose said, “There’s a good reason” why no new nuclear power plants have been built in decades.

“It’s an act of desperation, and it’s the same with oil drilling in the Gulf,” he said. “There are probably 10 other things we should do before building more nuclear power plants.”

Chances are good that the CDPHE panel will hear from more people who want the mill when it meets in Naturita, on the west end of the county. Uranium mining was big business in the county’s West End until a “bust” cycle began 30 years ago.

The last uranium mill in the area, in Uravan, was only recently cleaned up by the Environmental Protection Agency, following 20 years of work and a cost of $120 million, with the removal of 13 million cubic yards of contaminants and treatment of 380 million gallons of liquid.
Comments
(9)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Same problem
|
June 17, 2010
....different day.It is amazing how these libs forget that Barry Sotero (Obama) is all excited about firing up dozens of new nuke plants and only attack the hard working folks on the West End. That is his idea of clean energy.

FLASHBACK.... remember Three Mile Island? After that disaster nuke was a dirty word and the libs shut down any new nuke plants planned. That opened the door for massive oil drilling. Now the libs under Barry are crying that oil is bad and if daddy Sotero says that nuke is now a clean energy they believe him because he is sooooooo smart. BUT they want to deprive working folks in Colorado a part of the nuke money pie. Anyone catch the idiot from the Sierra Club on Democracy Now on KOTO yesterday? I swear he popped a woody when he drooled on how President Sotero is ust such a fab clean energy dude, avoiding any mention of his big nuje power plans.

Until the libs start holding their own accountable, ignore them. They are hypocrits and fools.
yeah baby
|
June 16, 2010
Just like those namby-pamby protesters who don't like seeing America's southern coast hip=deep in oil sludge even though they don't live on the Gulf. Let's help big business pollute as much as it wants. If the people who live there can take it, we all can take it.
nonothing
|
June 16, 2010
Mr. Been There, After eighty years on this planet, especially where you have lived, you ought to know that the wind blows free out here.

Now where do you suppose all that dust that has blown by your house over those eighty years has come from?

A lot more than 50 miles from Nucla or Naturita; south and west of Comb Ridge, ol' buddy.

Glad you are still healthy after all these years. Many of your friends didn't make it though, did they? Nucla and Naturita are hot spots for radiation-induced-cancer-victim reimbursements from the State of Colorado. That's your and my tax money taking care of folks the uranium corporations should be taking care of but the've hightailed it leaving you and me holding the bag.

Keep a close eye on BP over the next year; I'm sure Energy Fuels' lawyers will be.

Remember Uravan! Remember The Gulf!

Now let's get serious about renewable energy. Plants did, millions of years ago and looks like the've done pretty good.

It's the SUN! Lot more of that out here than uranium and a lot easier and safer to 'mine' as well. So if you just have to be a miner, be a solar miner.
been there
|
June 16, 2010
I lived in Nucla for sixteen years back in the late 50's and early 60's and will be 80 years old on my next birthday.

I am healthy and spry. What's the big deal with all the namby pamby protesters that live over 50 miles from the proposed mill?
maybe now
|
June 14, 2010
Energy Fuels can give up its pursuits in the West End and get in on the action in Afghanistan instead!
Go nukes!
|
June 12, 2010
Nuclear power is as safe as deep water drilling. What could possibly happen?
RFD
|
June 11, 2010
A mill won't be nearly as harmful to the enviroment as a ski resort.
And let us
|
June 10, 2010
Tellurider's tell you something else..no plastic bags or if you do ya gotta pay a quarter...for each one.

But we have another way around the polluting bunch..we will just prevent any normal way for you to make a living and their will be no money to buy groceries..

Whoah!
nonothing
|
June 10, 2010
And then there is the road, Unaweep Canyon Road. Where is the transportation plan? How will EF, the State, the Counties thru which UCR meanders, and local residents along UCR handle a yellowcake spill either on the Road or, god forbid, into the Delores River? It's not just a health issue, there is more.

State reps need to be more involved.

photos

more photos