To: House Committee on Natural Resources regarding Bill H.R. 2262 Date: September 26, 2007 and October 1, 2007 Subject: Urgency of mining law reform Introduction: One of the most compelling reasons to enact significant mining law reform NOW is the rush to mine uranium on public land, including Native American land and their historical sacred sites. Nuclear power is now being touted as a relatively cheap, reliable and emissions-free solution to the world's insatiable demand for energy. Even some leading environmentalists have endorsed nuclear power as an antidote to global warming. More than 50 nuclear plants are planned or under construction in a dozen countries, according to the experts. The truth is nuclear power uses fossil fuel energy at every step: mining, milling, enriching, and conversion to solid—then carting the waste to a disposal facility. Further the problems with the radioactive waste still have not been solved. The price of uranium is going up so the speculators who hope to make a quick fortune on its rise are coming out of the millworks—especially those from across our northern border. Our Canadian neighbors are in a frenzy to stake claims on free public land, accompanied by its free water, offered by their unsuspecting and uninformed taxpayers south of their border. The situation is so blatant on Native American lands in U. S. that on April 10, 2007, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) told Canada that it must rein in Canadian corporations operating on Native American land in the United States. According to the meticulous records of the Environmental Working Group, Our research shows that in 12 Western states, the total number of active mining claims has increased from 207,540 in January 2003 to 376,493 in July 2007, a rise of more than 80 percent. Over an eight-month period, from last September to this May, the BLM recorded more than 50,000 new mining claims. Current claims cover an estimated 9.3 million acres. Many of the new claims are for uranium. The BLM reports that the estimated number of uranium claims staked in Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming combined increased from less than 4,300 in fiscal year 2004 to more than 32,000 in fiscal year 2006. Source of Information: I. What are the problems? I-1. Unreclaimed mine sites: Currently, there are uranium mining sites on Native American lands that have not been properly cleaned up and reclaimed from the uranium boom of the 1950’s to 1985. I-2. Health concerns: Environmental Protection Agency has released extensive testing on the carcinogenic nature of radioactive materials. I-3. Technologically enhanced radioactive material: The pervasive nature of uranium mining entering the air, water and soil of the environment as “technologically enhanced” radioactive material must be taken into consideration, particularly for health concerns. I-4. Disposal of Toxic Waste: Disposal regulations did not prevent the radioactive contamination of water and soil in Concord, MA or in Paducah, KY. Can we expect the people of Nevada and Utah to continue to storing the chemical and radioactive waste of the rest of the states? I-5. Cultural impacts: There are irreversible cultural impacts from living in a toxic zone. First, the relationship to the land and the wild food source are destroyed. Further, the reservation lands are flooded with hundreds of people with no knowledge of or respect for Native American culture. II. What are some solutions? II-1. Permitting limitations: Corporations and their subsidiaries that have not completed clean-up and reclamation mandated by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) of any State should not be allowed to file for mining claims and/or mining permits or permitted for new operations. A thorough list should be compiled by EPA and State DEQ’s. II-2. Health assessments: Priority should be given to health concerns of communities who live in areas with uranium. II-3. Waste disposal assessments: Overall consideration of the ramifications of radioactive waste disposal on human and animal survival, including the necessities of clean water to drink, pure air to breath and uncontaminated soil to grow food crops, should be given priority consideration. II-4. Sovereign Authority: Native Americans should be given total rights and authority over minerals in their lands. III. Conclusions Uranium is extremely toxic. The fact is that land, water and people are still suffering the effects of mining of uranium from the boom of the 1950’s through the 1980’s. When it comes to uranium mining, public land has a unique connotation: Most of the uranium is on wasteland, and those wastelands were the land forced on Native Americans, which are managed by the Department of Interior. This unique situation must be given special consideration in mining law reform to guard against a repeat of the past devastation on Native American lands. Further, companies who have not complied with reclamation mandates on public and Native American lands should not be allowed to file permits for new operations on public or Native American lands. A common misconception is the view that electricity generation is the whole energy supply. Electricity comprised about 16% of the total world energy consumption in 2005. Less than 16% of the world electricity is generated by nuclear power stations, so the total share of nuclear power is about 2.5% of the world energy generation, slightly less than that of hydropower. Even if the world electricity generation would be all nuclear, it would provide only 16% of the world energy demand. Ten Reasons Why We Don't Need
|
Category |
Claims approved |
Claims denied |
Claims pending |
Total payments |
Uranium Miner |
4,560 |
2,661 |
208 |
$455 million |
Uranium Miller |
1,000 |
239 |
33 |
$100 million |
Uranium Ore Transporter |
217 |
70 |
7 |
$22 million |
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
5,777 |
2,970 |
248 |
$577 million |
Download GAO Report Radiation Exposure Compensation Act: Program Status, September 7, 2007
I.2.2.1) Navajo Land, Arizona: The Indian Health Service data shows that cancer death rate on the reservation from the early 1970s to the late 1990s. Researchers admit that exposure to mining byproducts in the soil, air and water almost certainly contributed to the increase in Navajo cancer mortality.
However, the government has never conducted a comprehensive study of the health effects of uranium mining on the reservation. But individual scientists working on their own have documented that cancer rates are higher near old mines and mills. Not only uranium, but other toxic by-products of mining common in the Southwest, such as arsenic and heavy metals, have been found in one out of five drinking-water sources sampled.
See Navajo Uranium Radiation Victims
I.2.2.2) Acoma and Laguna Pueblos, New Mexico:
Testimony given my Manuel Pino, Acoma Pueblo, New Mexico to the Swedish Parliament in 2006
Acoma Pueblo’s neighbor to the east is Laguna Pueblo, and about 15 miles from where their borders meet is the Jackpile mine, North America’s largest open pit uranium mine from 1952 until 1982.
“Living in close proximity to that mine, we disproportionately suffered from the environmental impacts, such as water contamination, air quality impacts, and environmental degradation to the soil and to domestic and wild animals,” Pino said.
“The contaminants from the Jackpile mine spread throughout the landscape. It came on the wind to our grazing areas, through the jet stream and the wind and air patterns, which affected our air quality. Then the monsoons would fill the arroyos and carry the contaminants to major tributaries that seeped into the underground water table.”
Documented cancer clusters among the Navajo, Acoma and Laguna tribes eventually led to the Uranium Workers Act of 2000, designed to compensate miners for exposure to radioactive contaminants. It is actually an amendment to 1990’s Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, which held standards of exposure to such heights that former workers and their families were not eligible for compensation. Pino has worked for years helping Native miners file claims under the UWA.
Information Source:
Manuel Pino
9000 E. Chaparral Rd.
Scottsdale, Arizona 85256-2626
United States
Phone: 480-423-6221
I .2.2.3) Acoma Pueblo, New Mexico: In addition to impact of Jackpile mine on the east side of the Pueblo, on the west side, there is an impact of “down-winder” syndrome from the inhalation of radioactive particulate from mining waste. High desert winds of up to 70 mph bring dust from the tailings ponds of the Homestake mine, which inundate the Pueblo regularly. Although there is not an actual mine site on their land, the Acoma people have lost a generation of their people to cancer. A new diagnosis of cancer or a death by cancer occurs on a weekly basis even today. The Homestake and Mt. Taylor mines are upstream from a perennial creek that flows through the Pueblo, creating a potential threat to the water supply of the Pueblo.
Information source and contact:
Laura Watchempino
Water Quality Specialist
P.O. Box 309
Acoma , NM 87304
505-552-6604
I.2.2. 3) Spokane Reservation, Washington:
“People do not know to stay out of the site because of health dangers,” Deb Abrahamson of SHAWL Society said, telling of a tribal hunter who recently shot a llama near the site.
“Although uranium mining made the United States what it is today, there was no analysis of the impact on our people,” said Deb, whose father, grandparents and uncles worked on the site.
“Our people never had a full say in establishing the mine because of internal marginalization,” she explained. “After the Homestead Act opened reservation land to homesteaders, many people were adopted into the tribe. That helped disempower and disenfranchise our people.
“Few old-timers remain. The median age of the 2,300 people is now 26,” she said.
In addition, the tribe did not have the money or education to battle it. Our grandparents, parents, uncles and aunts never knew about the danger.
“They worked in the mine and brought back yellow cake. My father, who worked double shifts, was not told he was bringing that radioactive material home,” Deb said. “The tribal health educator and teachers either lacked information or were in denial.
“We did not link deaths to the mine. Our primary care provider, Indian Health Services, was a government arm, so why would it gather data for baseline health survey on radiation?”
Information source contact:
Deb Abrahamson
SHAWL Society
P.O. Box 61
Wellpinit, Washington 99040
Phone: 509-747-3115
SHAWLSociety@yahoo.com
I -3: Technologically enhanced radioactive materials
The pervasive nature of uranium mining entering the air, water and soil of the environment as “technologically enhanced” material must be taken into consideration, particularly for health concerns.
EPA Report: Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (TENORM) in the Southwestern Copper Belt of Arizona- 1999
Information source and contact:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air,
Radiation Protection Division
401 M St.
SW Washington, D.C. 20460
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been working over the past several years to better understand the nature and extent of TENORM that may become concentrated at copper mining sites. This document presents the information that EPA has compiled on this issue to date. The literature on the subject indicates the presence of uranium and thorium in minerals associated with porphyry copper deposits in Arizona. Copper extraction and beneficiation operations may concentrate these radioactive materials. Samples taken by the ADEQ from several copper mines indicate that TENORM has been found to occur above background levels in surface water and in some mining process and waste streams. The data also show evidence of TENORM in surface water, groundwater and soils. The data suggest that dump leaching operations and solvent extraction-electro-winning procedures, as well as the practice of recycling raffinate at copper mines, extract and concentrate soluble radioactive materials. The results show increases of up to two orders of magnitude over background levels for samples of all radio-chemicals tested except Rn-222. Radiological data in this report represent a sampling of mine wastes at specific facilities and do not necessarily represent other copper operations. Based on the data presented herein, there is an increased likelihood that copper leach operations and their associated solvent extraction― electrowinning circuits in Arizona concentrate TENORM.
FINDINGS
In 1992, ADEQ shared with EPA data on TENORM emanating from copper mines. EPA has continued to work with ADEQ to assemble the available data. As part of its groundwater and surface water protection programs, ADEQ requires mining companies to submit APPAs containing facility-specific radiochemical characterizations. As a result, ADEQ and EPA have accumulated in excess of 3200 analyses of radionuclides at 15 mining sites in the copper industry. This report reviews the current information on the occurrence and distribution of TENORM at mines in Arizona and contains tables of all the available data as of 1997.
Tables 1 through 5 summarize the data according to media, including: groundwater, surface water, soil-sediment, process solutions, and process wastes. Instances when the average levels of radioactivity exceed the federal maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or Arizona guidelines are shown in bold. The groundwater media included about 2220 analyses from about 176 wells at nine mines. The surface water media included about 197 analyses from nine mine audits, eight washes, and six creeks at seven mine sites. As many as 25 soil samples were taken from four mines to support 110 analyses.
Levels in excess of the federal MCLs and state guidelines were found in groundwater and surface water samples, as well as soil and sediment samples at abandoned and active copper mines. TENORM exceedences were also found in groundwater at active and inactive copper mines. Uranium byproducts were recovered from heap leach dumps and in-situ operations that feed SX-EW and ion exchange circuits at several copper mines. Radioactivity was discovered in copper mineral processing waste streams. Elevated levels of radioactivity were also found to occur in the process solutions and process wastes. . . . .
Data presented within this report represent a sampling of copper mines and facilities, and may not necessarily represent all copper operations in the state. The impacts of copper mining are noteworthy because of unique conditions, such as the presence of trace uranium minerals and the mining and extraction methods that unintentionally extract radioactive materials and enhance its environmental mobility. Tables 1-5 present data on the mining sites where TENORM has been documented by ADEQ. These sites are: Cyprus Bagdad (CB), Cyprus Twin Buttes (TB), Cyprus Sierrita (CS), Phelps Dodge Copper Queen (CQ), Pinto Valley (PV), Mineral Park (MP), Phelps Dodge Morenci (MM), Phelps Dodge New Cornelia (NC), American Legion (AL), De la Fontaine (DF), Hillside (HS), Three R s (TR), Magma Florence (MF), Santa Cruz (SC), and Magma San Manual (SM). Groundwater, surface water, process solution and process waste data in Tables 1-5 are expressed in pCi/L, while soil and sediment data are expressed in pCi/g.
Table 1: Groundwater Statistical Data (except Morenci) (pCi/L)
Radiochemical |
Mine Sites |
Number |
Min. |
Max. |
Avg. |
Std. Dev. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Alpha |
CB,TB,CS,CQ,PV,MP,NC |
129 |
0 |
1500 |
60.3 |
150.8 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Beta |
CB,TB,CS,CQ,PV,MP,NC |
116 |
0 |
500 |
44.4 |
72.6 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-238 |
CB,CQ,NC |
63 |
0.06 |
38.6 |
5.9 |
7.6 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-234 |
CB,CQ,NC |
63 |
1.3 |
60.4 |
12.8 |
14.8 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-235 |
CB,CQ,NC |
56 |
0 |
2.9 |
0.4 |
0.5 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total Ra |
PV |
16 |
0.8 |
122 |
10.8 |
30.5 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-226 |
CB,TB,CS,CQ,PV,NC |
117 |
0 |
130 |
3.0 |
13.4 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-228 |
CB,TB,CS,CQ,PV,NC |
111 |
0 |
122 |
4.1 |
12.7 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total-U |
IB,CB,CS,CQ,PV,NC |
119 |
0 |
209 |
12.0 |
24.9 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Rn-222 |
CB,CQ,PV |
23 |
16 |
3980 |
1216 |
1309 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
7 MINES |
813 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Levels of radioactivity in excess of federal MCLs or Arizona guidelines are shown in bold |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 2: Surface Water Statistical Data (pCi/L) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Radiochemical |
Mine Sites |
Number |
Min. |
Max. |
Avg. |
Std. Dev. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Alpha |
MP,MM,CB,TR, AL,DF,HS,NC |
54 |
0 |
1240 |
83.5 |
188.4 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Beta |
CB,MP,MM,TR,NC |
32 |
0 |
128 |
27.1 |
34 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-238 |
CB,TR,AL,HS,NC |
19 |
0.1 |
678 |
83.8 |
168.2 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-234 |
CB,TR,AL,HS,NC |
19 |
0.2 |
577 |
80 |
141.8 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-235 |
CB,TR,NC |
9 |
0.04 |
2.9 |
1.1 |
0.9 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-226 |
CB,MP,NC |
29 |
0 |
71.8 |
6.4 |
13.8 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-228 |
MP,CB,TR,AL,DF,HS,NC |
18 |
0 |
55.5 |
5.6 |
13.1 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total-U |
MP,CB,TR,NC |
12 |
0.01 |
32.9 |
6.6 |
10.9 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Rn-222 |
MP |
3 |
39 |
120 |
68.3 |
44.9 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
8 MINES |
195 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Levels of radioactivity in excess of federal MCLs or Arizona guidelines are shown in bold |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 3: Sediment and Soil Statistical Data (pCi/g) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Radiochemical |
Mine Sites |
Number |
Min. |
Max. |
Avg. |
Std. Dev. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Alpha |
AL ,DF,HS,MM |
25 |
0.5 |
395 |
63.1 |
90.0 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Beta |
AL ,DF,HS,MM |
25 |
22 |
248 |
69.4 |
52.3 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-238 |
AL,DF,HS |
20 |
0.7 |
63.3 |
7.9 |
14.2 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-234 |
AL,DF,HS |
20 |
0.9 |
60.8 |
10.0 |
16.6 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-226 |
AL,DF,HS |
20 |
0.7 |
82.6 |
10.4 |
19.7 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Totals |
4 Mines |
110 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Levels of radioactivity in excess of federal MCLs or Arizona guidelines are shown in bold |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 4: Process Solutions Statistical Data (pCi/L) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Radiochemical |
Mine Sites |
Number |
Min. |
Max. |
Avg. |
Std. Dev. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Alpha |
MP,MM,MF,SC |
43 |
1.3 |
8649 |
1841 |
1850 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Gross Beta |
MP,MM,MF |
41 |
3.0 |
3683 |
975.6 |
881.7 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-238 |
MF |
2 |
248 |
1611 |
929.5 |
963.8 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-234 |
MF |
2 |
254 |
1745 |
999.5 |
1054.3 |
||||||||||||||||||||
U-235 |
MF |
2 |
11.6 |
598 |
304.8 |
414.7 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-226 |
MF,SC |
4 |
19.5 |
193 |
86.3 |
79.1 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Ra-228 |
MF,SC |
4 |
2.0 |
19 |
7.8 |
8.0 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total-U |
MF,CS,TB |
6 |
0.8 |
4362 |
1895.9 |
1532.9 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Rn-222 |
MF,SC |
4 |
243 |
3760 |
1805.7 |
1593.5 |
||||||||||||||||||||
For entire report, see
http://www2.epa.gov/radiation/technologically-enhanced-naturally-occurring-radioactive-materials-tenorm
I.4. Disposal of Toxic Waste
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978 allows the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to regulate cleanup activities at inactive uranium tailings disposal sites. The statute provided for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project, which identified 24 inactive uranium sites (two of which have been delisted) at which the DOE monitored the contamination, ground water, and maintenance. These sites also will be part of the Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance Program, which provides for surveillance, ground water monitoring, and maintenance of sites cleaned up under the UMTRCA Program. In addition, DOE cleaned up properties in the vicinity of the sites contaminated with residual radioactive materials. DOE’s Office of Environmental Management now calls it “DOE’s oldest and most successful environmental restoration project.”
UMTRCA amended the Atomic Energy Act by directing EPA to set generally applicable health and environmental standards to govern the stabilization, restoration, disposal, and control of effluents and emissions at both active and inactive uranium and thorium mill tailings sites. The standards limit air emissions and address soil and ground water contamination at both operating and closed facilities (42 USC 2022 et seq.).
Title I of the Act covers inactive uranium mill tailing sites, depository sites, and vicinity properties. Under this Act, EPA must set standards that provide protection as consistent with the requirements of RCRA as possible. The standards must include ground water protection limits. Title II of the Act covers operating uranium processing sites licensed by the NRC. EPA was directed to promulgate disposal standards in compliance with Subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, to be implemented by NRC or the Agreement States. The 1993 Amendments to UMTRCA further directed EPA to promulgate general environmental standards for the processing, possession, transfer, and disposal of uranium mill tailings. The NRC was required to implement these standards at Title II sites.
In 1983, EPA developed standards to protect the public and the environment from potential radiological and non-radiological hazards at abandoned processing sites. These standards include exposure limits for surface contamination and concentration limits for ground water contamination. DOE is responsible for bringing surface and ground water contaminant levels at the 22 sites (two sites were delisted) into compliance with EPA standards. DOE is accomplishing this through the UMTRCA Surface and Ground Water Projects.
1) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Abandoned Mine Lands Team Reference Manual: www.epa.gov/aml/tech/amlref.pdf
2) Radioactive Waste Disposal: An Environmental Perspective
www.epa.gov/radiation/docs/radwaste/402-k-94-001-umt.htm
3) Field Demonstration of Permeable Reactive Barriers To Remove Dissolved Uranium From Groundwater, Fry Canyon, Utahwww.epa.gov/radiation/docs/cleanup/402-c-00-001.pdf
Information source and contact for above three reports:
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Ariel Rios Building
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
MC 2843
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-2592
II-5. Cultural Impacts
Public attention is now being given to the cultural impacts on the indigenous peoples, not only in U.S., but throughout the world. Many Native American tribes still depend on natural resources for food. Throughout the world, indigenous peoples in particular have seen their centuries-old traditions razed by the introduction of industrial-scale business. From Alaska to Nevada, mining projects have left native tribes plagued by contaminated waterways and forests, health problems, upsurges in violence from the influx of outsiders, neglect of local traditions, and community infighting between those who want jobs at any price to the environment and those who want to preserve a way of life that has persevered for several thousand years.
United Nations adopts Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples
13 September 2007
The General Assembly today adopted a landmark declaration outlining the rights of the world’s estimated 370 million indigenous people and outlawing discrimination against them – a move that followed more than two decades of debate.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has been approved after 143 Member States voted in favor, 11 abstained and four – Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States – voted against the text.
A non-binding text, the Declaration sets out the individual and collective rights of indigenous peoples, as well as their rights to culture, identity, language, employment, health, education and other issues.
The Declaration emphasizes the rights of indigenous peoples to maintain and strengthen their own institutions, cultures and traditions and to pursue their development in keeping with their own needs and aspirations. It also prohibits discrimination against indigenous peoples and promotes their full and effective participation in all matters that concern them, and their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own visions of economic and social development.
Information source and contact:
The Secretariat of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
Secretariat of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
United Nations, 2 UN Plaza
Room DC2-1772
New York, NY, 10017
Tel: 1 917 367 5100
Attachment Four: On the Cultural Impacts of Mining