Hi Wormy, the approval of Energy Fuels' Pinon Ridge mill near...

Hi Wormy, the approval of Energy Fuels' Pinon Ridge mill near the town of Montrose by the State of Colorado is INDEED a huge development for uranium companies in Colorado and the United States.

Not only is it the first new mill approved in the US in close to 30 years, it also
represents the first major decision under a more streamlined regulatory regime by which so-called "Agreement States" such as Colorado have assumed regulatory authority over uranium mining and recovery activities from the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a Federal body.

Not all uranium producing states in America are "Agreement States", so there is the headache for some non-Colorado uranium plays of duplicated regulatory regimes at the State and Federal (NRC) level. The roadmap for BLR permitting will benefit hugely from this streamlined approvals process that Energy Fuels has successfully inaugurated for all other Colorado uranium plays.

The other tremendous benefit for BLR from this decision is that Energy Fuels has said that the Pinon Ridge Mill's business model includes acting as a fully permitted regional mill for the toll-processing of other conventional uranium producers' ore. If Cotter Corp's Canon City Mill remains out of action in the medium term, the proposed best practice mill in Pinon Ridge is within trucking distance to the west of BLR on Route 50. BLR also has the option of trucking ore to Denison Mines' White Mesa Mill in Utah - Denison even pays Colorado producers a bounty to truck their ore to White Mesa! Yet another ore milling option for BLR is the Ambrosia Lake mill near Grants, New Mexico.

Those who say that BLR has no ore milling option other than the shuttered Cotter Corp mill in Canon City are being disingenuous: the regional mill solutions for BLR are very real, and the Pinon Ridge approval is an absolutely outstanding development for a Colorado Plateau prospect such as BLR.

With the Pinon Ridge mill approval, Colorado has shown that the "Agreement States" framework for conventional uranium milling and mining operations is viable and the learning curve for companies and regulators has advanced hugely; Colorado was - and is - a great mining jurisdiction.

In fact, BLR's 100 million pounds in Colorado is looking very good indeed compared to the headache for the US's second largest known deposit: Virgina Uranium's 109 million pound deposit near Coles Hill in the genteel state of Virginia. While West Virginia certainly has a mining heritage, neighbouring Virginia doesn't (its economy is based on services, defence, agriculture and tourism) and it looks like major hurdles exist to getting the 109 million pound of Coles Hill uranium out of the ground. BLR therefore looks great compared to America's largest known deposit, Rio Grande Resources' 120 million pound resource at Mt. Taylor in New Mexico.

See this recent op-ed piece in The Washington Post regarding the prospects for Virginia Uranium (accessed 10/01/11). All copyright remains with its respective holders:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-opinions/2010/12/the_apparent_terror_of_virgini.html


Best regards to all BLR FPO and BLRO holders. I won't be letting go of them lightly, as uranium majors have demonstrated that they are willing to pay between $1.90 and $10.26 per pound for the in-ground resources of explorers (PDN paid $1.90 for Aurora Energy in Newfoundland and the latter $10.26 was paid by ARMZ/Uranium One for the highly characterised resources of MRU in Tanzania in East Africa).

IMO, BLR's 100 million pounds is very well characterised and jurisdictionally certain, ruling out the low end of the price range - even on a fully diluted basis (including Feb 2011 options in existing float).








Posted at 5:09 PM ET, 12/16/2010
What a dose of uranium will do to a policy debate
By Paige Winfield Cunningham

The apparent terror of Virginians living near a potential uranium mine illustrates how drastically things can change when they become personal.

Located at Coles Hill, about 60 miles southeast of Roanoke, the undeveloped uranium deposit is the only one in Virginia, but it is the largest in the United States. The land used to be owned by solely two families, but they've lately been handing a greater share of ownership to Virginia Energy Resources -- a Canadian company that invests in uranium and coal projects all over North America.

Actual mining of the deposit is still far away because Virginia has had a moratorium on uranium mining since the 1980s. Before legislators will consider whether to overturn the moratorium, they're waiting on the December 2011 completion of studies examining how mining would affect the area environmentally and socio-economically.

Most legislators, Democrats and Republicans alike, agree with doing the studies. But Coles Hill residents are objecting every step of the way.
The residents say the first study may not be trustworthy because it is being funded by Virginia Uranium Inc. -- the private company that owns the Coles Hill land. Never mind that it is being performed by probably the most reputable entity out there: the National Academy of Sciences.

As to the second study, residents say it's all a big conspiracy by legislators who have already staked their tent on the side of uranium mining. Del. Terry Kilgore (R-Scott), for instance, has been accused of pushing for the study through his chairmanship on the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission, then using his chairmanship of another body, Virginia's tobacco commission, to get it funded it.

The residents' argument has been bolstered, in part, by the eight tobacco commission members who voted against appropriating $200,000 for the study. One of those was Del. Watkins Abbitt (I-Appomattox), who said he didn't think it was a good use of the commission's funds because they're supposed to be used mainly for boosting the economies of tobacco-dependent communities and the studies wouldn't directly create jobs in the area.

Still, Abbitt and most legislators are looking forward to getting the results. Republican Del. Lee Ware (R-Powhatan), chairman of the Coal and Energy Commission's uranium subcommittee, wrote in an e-mail:

"Not 'til the technical study is completed would one be able to declare a reasonable and also definitive view one way or another on the question of whether the uranium deposit at Coles Hill could be efficiently and safely extracted. ... Similarly, not 'til the socio-economic study is completed will there be available for dispassionate deliberation the full range of views of both individuals and institutions in the area that would be affected by the proposed uranium mining operation."

The problem is, Coles Hill residents will probably never be capable of "dispassionate deliberation" on this issue. Type the word "uranium" into Google images, and horrifying photos of mangled babies appear. Can you blame residents for fearing uranium pollution in their drinking water, even if the studies do end up casting a positive light on the mining?

Fears that are perhaps irrational look foolish until a policy discussion becomes a personal discussion. Del. Abbitt put it this way: "I would not want to own my own land within a mile of it."

Paige Winfield Cunningham is an investigative reporter and managing editor at Old Dominion Watchdog. The Local Blog Network is a group of bloggers from around the D.C. region who have agreed to make regular contributions to All Opinions Are Local.

By Paige Winfield Cunningham | December 16, 2010; 5:09 PM ET