Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Uranium One. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Uranium One. Sort by date Show all posts

Sunday, September 9, 2018

Energy Fuels Petitions President to Investigate Implications of Foreign Uranium Imports

Article published originally in Free Range Report Sept. 7, 2018
Republished with permission  
Today, the U.S. generates 20 percent of our electricity – and 60 percent of our clean, non-emitting electricity – from nuclear energy. U.S. producers supplied less than 5 percent of the fuel for these reactors in 2017, while unfriendly nations like Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan have supplied about 33 percent of our reactor requirements.
 Interview by Marjorie Haun
A uranium mill in southeastern Utah has taken the lead in activating locals to reach out to the Trump Administration regarding the current imbalance in uranium trade practices and how they are harming rural economies and threatening our national security. With its headquarters in Lakewood, Colorado, Energy Fuels has a mill near Blanding, Utah which employs 150 workers, about 50 of whom are Native American, and which produces over 20 percent of America’s domestic uranium. Energy Fuels submitted a petition to the Commerce Department in January of this year, calling for an investigation into the national security and economic impacts of disproportionate uranium imports from other nations, including geopolitical rivals Russia and China. Commerce responded and initiated an investigation in July. The period for public commentary is ongoing and been extended to September 25. You can go HERE to submit comments if you like, and find additional information about the investigation titled, Section 232 National Security Investigation of Imports of Uranium. Published 7/25/18 (83 FR 35205).”
Uranium has been unfairly demonized in the media and popular culture for years. And because this “atomic” element is not well understood, fear-mongering campaigns by radical special interest groups have succeeded in perpetuating myths and impeding its domestic development. With modern applications primarily in energy production and medicine, today’s uranium is not the uranium of the 1940’s or even the 1990’s, and its uses are many with world demand growing. Free Range Report reached out Energy Fuels and their marketing director, Curtis Moore, gave us a real world perspective on the domestic uranium industry of today.
Free Range Report: Share with us a little about Energy Fuels, its history, and what projects you have in the works.
Logan Shumway: Energy Fuels is the largest US-based uranium and vanadium mining company, supplying U3O8 to major nuclear utilities. Uranium is used as the fuel for nuclear energy. Vanadium is used a hardening agent in high strength steel and other alloys. Vanadium is also used in large-scale batteries used with renewable energy systems. 

Headquartered in Lakewood, Colorado (near Denver), Energy Fuels holds three of America’s key uranium production centers, the White Mesa Mill in Utah, the Nichols Ranch Processing Facility in Wyoming, and the Alta Mesa Project in Texas. The White Mesa Mill is the only conventional uranium mill operating in the U.S. today and has a licensed capacity of over 8 million pounds of U3O8 per year (we expect to produce about 300,000 lbs. of U3O8 at that facility this year, along with about 500,000 lbs. of V2O5). 

The Nichols Ranch Processing Facility is an ISR production center with a licensed capacity of 2 million pounds of U3O8 per year (we expect to produce about 140,000 lbs. of U3O8at that facility this year). Alta Mesa is an ISR production center currently on care and maintenance. Energy Fuels also has the largest NI 43-101 compliant uranium resource portfolio in the U.S. among producers, and uranium mining projects located in a number of Western U.S. states, including one producing ISR project, mines on standby, and mineral properties in various stages of permitting and development.
FRR: What inspired you to reach out to the public with the petition to encourage President Trump to support Uranium?
Logan Shumway:The U.S. uranium mining industry is in crisis today, due to persistent low prices. In fact, during the 1st half of 2018, our industry produced uranium at the lowest levels since the late-1940’s! The problem is that this is exposing serious national security and energy security issues. This is the reason we petitioned the U.S. Department of Commerce and the President. 

Today, the U.S. generates 20 percent of our electricity – and 60 percent of our clean, non-emitting electricity – from nuclear energy. U.S. producers supplied less than 5 percent of the fuel for these reactors in 2017, while unfriendly nations like Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan have supplied about 33 percent of our reactor requirements. Numbers from China are kept confidential; however, they have announced that they intend to target the U.S. nuclear market. In addition, U.S. defense is inextricably tied to uranium, including fueling aircraft carriers, submarines, and other vessels in the U.S. Navy, and uranium is a critical component in our nuclear deterrent including tritium production. 

The governments of Russia, China, and the others heavily-subsidize state-owned entities that produce uranium and nuclear fuel. Free market producers, like we have in the U.S. and in allies like Canada and Australia, simply cannot compete against these foreign government sponsored enterprises. These unfriendly nations are literally on the verge of dominating the global nuclear industry, which has serious implications for U.S. national security and energy security. We must maintain a viable uranium mining and nuclear fuel industry for the sake of national defense and energy security.
In our Petition, we asked for a trade quota that reserves 25 percent of the U.S. uranium market for U.S. uranium producers. That means U.S. uranium production would have to increase from about 1.5 million pounds per year to about 10-12 million pounds per year. This is very achievable, and you wouldn’t see large-scale uranium mining popping up all over the nation. Some news reports have indicated that we asked for a tariff – this is not true.
FRR: Have you or the company ever been activated in political outreach prior to this?
Logan Shumway: Not at this scale. We’ve always been very engaged at the local level and with our local, state and federal regulators. But, it’s only recently that we’ve become embroiled in issues of national significance. And, while it’s tough for a little company like us to deal with it all, we’re glad our industry is getting some of this attention. People need to know the truth about our industry, where their energy comes from, and how it all ties to national security.
FRR: How has the uranium industry changed since the 1950’s?
Logan Shumway: It has changed in numerous ways – too many to count – mainly in protecting human health, worker safety, and the environment. Also, in the 1950’s, uranium mining was government controlled, as the U.S. government was the only buyer of uranium. During the Cold War, the government needed uranium for weapons, and later for the development of commercial reactors, and human health and the environment sometimes took a backseat to national security imperatives. Compared to today, uranium mining in the 1950’s was essentially unregulated. Today, we have much better understandings of how to mine uranium efficiently and responsibly. In fact, we lead the world on these issues.
FRR: Are horror stories coming from environmental groups and the Outdoor Industry Association something the public needs to worry about?
Logan Shumway: No, almost everything they point to occurred during the unregulated, Cold War era. They truly do not understand – nor do they want to understand – about how the modern uranium mining industry operates and is regulated. It is also somewhat dismaying to us that these groups, who claim to be fighting air pollution and climate change, are so anti-nuclear.  Nuclear energy is – by far – the best way we have to address these issues. As I said, nuclear provides 60 percent of the clean, non-emitting energy in the U.S. However, most of the mainstream environmental groups are anti-nuclear. It makes one wonder what their true agenda is.
FRR: What applications are there for uranium other than weapons and energy production? What innovations are in the future for uranium?
Logan Shumway: Almost all uranium is used for energy production, not weapons, and small amounts are used in medical applications.
FRR: How many jobs could your company bring into southeastern Utah?
Logan Shumway: At full capacity, the White Mesa Mill employs about 150 people with good-paying jobs for the area, many with benefits. We are also a major employer of Native Americans – today about one-third of our workforce is Native American and at full capacity about half would likely be Native American. In addition, we would hire miners and support personnel at our mines. We do not know how many people this will total at this time; however it would likely be in the hundreds.
FRR: What do you foresee for the future of uranium domestically and internationally?
Logan Shumway: A lot depends on how the Administration reacts to our Petition. As I said, the U.S. produces 20 percent of our electricity from nuclear. This comes from 99 nuclear reactors. This number is likely to drop somewhat as a few older units close in the coming years. However, the U.S. will be a major producer of nuclear energy – and consumer of uranium – for many decades to come. So, the demand for uranium in the U.S. exists. 
As for the future of uranium mining, if the Administration provides our industry with the support we’ve requested (the quota), within about 3-5 years the domestic uranium mining industry would grow to a critical mass of viability in terms of operating facilities, technical expertise, and personnel. It wouldn’t be huge, but it would certainly be healthier than it is today. You would likely see the White Mesa Mill increase its level of activity and employment, and a few mines in southeast Utah would re-open. You would also see increased production at mines and processing facilities in other states, mainly Wyoming and Texas. 

If the Administration does not act to support the industry, you would likely see all uranium production in the U.S. shut down and (in time) be reclaimed, expect perhaps the White Mesa Mill. The White Mesa Mill has other businesses that can keep it afloat, including vanadium production, alternate feed material processing (recycling certain materials for the recovery of uranium), and land cleanup work. On this last note, there are a number of government-sponsored, Cold War era uranium sites scattered around the Four Corners Region, including over 500 on the Navajo Nation. There are efforts underway today to cleanup those sites properly. The White Mesa Mill is actually a perfect location to recycle material from those cleanups that contains recoverable quantities of natural uranium – it would basically be low-grade ore. That business could keep White Mesa operating for a number of years as well. However, it would be scrapping business together, like it is today.
FRR: What would you like to say to people who may still be skeptical?
Logan Shumway: Don’t believe what you read in mainstream media outlets about uranium mining! There are activists who spread a lot of misinformation about what we do, and journalists simply don’t have the time or inclination to research verify the activists’ claims. Second, our industry carries a lot of Cold War baggage. However, almost all of the problems with our industry occurred during the 1940’s to 1960’s – or before. Think about the cars we were driving back then; or the computers we were using.  It’s night-and-day. There are people that think uranium miners haven’t changed since those days; nothing could be further from the truth.  
In addition, see the discussion below about “natural uranium.”  Some people think our industry is nefarious and shrouded-in-mystery – probably a relic of the Cold War era. But, really what we do is quite benign. Of course, you have to handle uranium properly and safely, and you have to be very conscious of the health and environmental impacts of our operations. But, the hazards of uranium mining and processing are not all that different from other mineral processing or industrial activities.  As an extreme example, we sometimes have to laugh, when people decry the dangers of uranium ore trucks traveling down the road. But, those same people don’t bat-an-eye about trucks carrying gasoline, diesel, acid, chlorine, and other nasty chemicals on our roads; substances are orders-of-magnitude more dangerous than humble uranium ore. But, that’s the world we live in today.
FRR: What are some cool facts about uranium the public would be surprised to learn?
Logan Shumway: Uranium is an extremely common element, more common than tin, about 40 times more common than silver, and 500 times more common than gold. It is found in most rocks and sediments, in seawater, in aquifers, and in hot springs. If the price of uranium were high enough, we could produce it from the ocean. I used a term above, ‘natural uranium.’  This is an important concept, because I think there are people who think a nuclear power plant, or even a uranium mill, could blow up like a nuclear bomb – yes, I’ve heard people say these things at public hearings! 

“Natural uranium” is uranium as it occurs in nature – it is the element that we mine and process. Uranium is comprised primarily of two isotopes – U-235 and U-238. In nature, uranium is about 99.3 percent U-238 and 0.7 percent U-235. “Natural uranium” is stable, it is only mildly radioactive, and it cannot explode! Everything our company does involves “natural uranium,” from mining to processing to alternate feed materials. We produce natural uranium concentrate, also known as U3O8 or “Yellowcake”.

 I’ve often heard it said that the main health hazard from “natural uranium” is not its radioactivity, but its toxicity. Like you shouldn’t ingest lead, you shouldn’t ingest uranium. Uranium becomes “unnatural” when it is enriched – which is a process far down the nuclear fuel cycle, long after we’ve sold the product. We have nothing to do with enrichment.  Enrichment is basically the process of increasing the percentage of U-235 from 0.7 percent to about 3-5 percent for use in a nuclear reactor. At those levels of U-235, the material can sustain a low-level nuclear reaction and create heat. This heat is used to power a steam turbine and generate electricity in a nuclear reactor. If you want to make a nuclear weapon, you have to increase the level of U-235 to over 90 percent! 
Energy Fuels Reclamation Efforts:  Before and After 

One of several mine sites previously operated by Energy Fuels.  Upon completion, the company reclaims the areas where their operations have been.  They are good neighbors and attentive to the environment.
Site of Kanab North Mine 1990

Kanab North Mine 2015 ~~ After Reclamation

~~~~~~~

If you would like to support safe, regulated, environmentally-responsible domestic uranium production, please comment HERE or email uranium232@bis.doc.gov


~~~~~~~

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Oh, What a Tangled Web We Weave; When First We Practice to Deceive

Sir Walter Scott would be dumbfounded by the entanglements 

created by this Web of  Radical Environmental Groups


Opinion Piece by Janet Wilcox                        
Published in Free Range Report 3/7/17

Welcome to the World-Wide Web of Environmental Multi-Level Marketing which has recently reached an all-time nationwide frenzy. Benefits of joining up are staggering and multiple web sites and propaganda are always just a click away.

While promoting “progressive” protectionists policies, global environmentalists have determined to discredit state’s rights and attack elected officials and rural families who choose to live in the West. Not only have they launched attacks against Utah Congressmen using half-truths, and fear mongering, but Nevada, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Idaho, and even W. Virginia, and Hawaii have been their targets.  Their “Monumental” maneuverings to sell out America have been going on for some time. It doesn’t take a degree in geography to see that Obama's 553 Million acres of “Monumental” manipulation, has put our country at risk, and under subjugation to those who can afford to pay off our $20 trillion-dollar debt. That is one of the reasons freedom loving people didn't elect another "One World Order" queen with ties to Russia’s Uranium One company.   A quick review of the Clinton scandal involving Russian mining engineer, Frank Giustra follows:






New York Times Article:The path to Russian acquisition of American uranium deposits began in 2005 in Kazakhstan, where the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra orchestrated his first big uranium deal, with Mr. Clinton at his side. . . .In three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s, Giustra, used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. In other words, by making money in energy related, businesses, he could afford to donate millions to support environmental causes via the Clintons. Was this hypocrisy or ulterior motives, or both?
Next Giustra came to SE Utah.Soon, Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States. In April 2007, it announced the purchase of a uranium mill in Utah and more than 38,000 acres of uranium exploration properties in four Western states, followed quickly by the acquisition of the Energy Metals Corporation and its uranium holdings in Wyoming, Texas and Utah. That deal made clear that Uranium One was intent on becoming “a powerhouse in the United States uranium sector with the potential to become the domestic supplier of choice for U.S. utilities, the company declared.”
Then he advanced the cause of environmental multi-marketing. Mr. Giustra held a fund-raiser for the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative, a project aimed at fostering progressive environmental and labor practices in the natural resources industry, to which he had pledged $100 million.”  Therein lies the rub. Why would locking up land in the United States be beneficial to Russia?
At some point, investors will want benefits. This connects “Monumental Money” donations to the push to restrict American extraction, thus,  forcing below-the-surface fossil fuels to hibernate for “future generations” or as collateral for foreign investors?  Since the Conservation Lands Foundation cares more about land than people, more about ideology than freedoms, and because they are funded by "monumentally" wealthy people who want to control energy markets for their own financial gain, they are only too happy to use such money in the name of “protection.” Foundations the likes of William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Wyss Foundation, Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, and the Wilburforce Foundation love to prey on rural America, the working man, and those living outside the "inner circle of wealth."

David Bonderman’s life, further illustrates this dichotomy. About 17 years ago, Jim Stiles, the environmental writer/historian/publisher of Canyon Zephyr, discovered that some of the “world’s wealthiest bankers, financiers, and industrialists were throwing huge amounts of money into mainstream environmental organizations. The contributions trickled all the way down to SUWA and Friends of Cedar Mesa; in exchange, many of these mega-wealthy benefactors acquired positions of influence, often as members of the groups’ boards of directors.”

Bonderman is a venture capitalist and the founding partner and powerbroker at TPG Capital. This is a “private equity firm with more than $65 billion in assets; TPG has invested across the country and around the world. To get an idea of just how vast the TPG empire is, click here and here to see their portfolios.”

In 2015 “Environmentalists in Utah, led by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), supported the Red Rock Wilderness Bill, calling for the protection of 9.2 million acres of public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Grand Canyon Trust, with offices in Moab, also supported RRWA.” Bonderman was on the Board of Directors of the GCT and was a major financial supporter of the Red Rock Bill.  However, at the same time, Bonderman’s company TPG ironically “invested heavily in the energy sector including Alinta Energy, Amyris, Beta Renewables, China Renewable Energy, Maverick American Natural Gas and more.

Knowing this, why would any true environmental group tolerate Bonderman’s dichotomy and the double-faced strategies which he uses for his own benefit?
In June of 2015 David Bonderman was caught between profits and being politically correct — and he chose profits. The private-equity mogul attended Russian President Vladimir Putin’s annual St. Petersburg International Economic Forum against the wishes of the White House. Yes, Bonderman plays both sides, using his Russian connections.  So when SUWA, Outdoors, Friends of Cedar Mesa, Patagonia, or the Utah Dabakis supporters, et al, protest capitalism and corporate influence and its impacts on public land decisions, they have no further to look than their own sugar daddy “venture capitalists.”
Following the money trail of wealthy foundations is very troubling as is learning how environmental special interest groups are funded. For example, William and Flora Hewlett, Wyss, Leonardo DiCaprio, and the Wilburforce Foundation all donate to environmental issues. Their donations, which are often tax exempt go to the Conservation Lands Foundation, or to “protectionists” Non-Governmental Organizations such as SUWA, Dine’ Bikayah, Sierra Club, ad infinitum. Envision millions of dollars accumulating in those coffers, and you will see why land inside Monuments, has multiplied over the past eight years to 553 million acres! -- who cares if the donors live lavishly, as long as their money “protects” the environment!  “They want a new Porche, when the U.S. government can hardly afford a used Ford,” said Charlie Taylor (Blanding local), referring to the nation’s $20 Trillion debt.
Jim Stiles described David Bonderman’s lavish lifestyle in an earlier article, “David Bonderman continues to be one of the “most extravagant environmentalists on the planet. He owns palaces in Moab, Utah and Aspen, Colorado; he resides frequently in his Gulfstream jet. For his 60th birthday, he celebrated in style, at the Bellagio in Vegas, with the Rolling Stones for entertainment. For his 70th, he hired Paul McCartney and John Fogarty. Each party cost between $6 and $10 million. To secure the Pavlovian loyalty of his adoring guests, he gave each of them $1000 to contribute to their ‘favorite cause.”  True, those with money should be able to spend it on their preferred lifestyle, but when they espouse conservation and care of the planet, it seems they are only being “user friendly” when it fits their agenda.

Equally disconcerting was the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation climate change gala in St. Tropez, France, in 2016 which required its A-list guests to travel thousands of miles by air to attend.  Contrast that with Navajos in San Juan County who want and need good jobs, and worry whether they will have enough wood for the rest of the winter, and if they will be able to haul water to their home on muddy roads – or ranchers whose grazing rights are controlled by the whims of the BLM. Such is the disparity between the wealthy and many rural San Juan County residents, who are opposed to the Bears Ears Monument and want it rescinded. 

Non-governmental organizations also play a strong role in this environmental multi-marketing networking plan. The term NGO was first coined in 1945, when the United Nations (UN) was created.  Today NGO money (received from wealthy businessmen) flows like a river into beautifully crafted pro-monument videos playing on prime-time TV; then the river of wealth pours onto cookie-cutter environmental web sites nationwide, with almost identical repetitive messages.  The green flow then soaks into the pockets of CEOs, pollsters, “consultants” and play makers for the liberal left, and then ironically it sends streams of cash to promote tourism in the “fragile landscape” of Grand and San Juan counties.  All the while, Bonderman, Wyss, and Hewlett portfolios continue to grow.
Recently CLF’s “Bears Ears Campaign” (part II) amped up. Worried that the BE Monument might be rescinded and states would have more control, has caused the flood gates of Green money to open and paranoia and fear mongering increased exponentially.  Sensationalized headlines such as “Rob Bishop Thinks Our Public Lands are Worthless.”  Or “Bears Ears opposition is about denying Native Americans a Victory” shout at the unsuspecting and uninformed. Verging on yellow journalism, such extreme declarations are intentionally exaggerated and based upon ideological lobbying, not factual investigation. (Think of other MLM meetings you may have attended!) This scenario explains why Senator Mike Lee sees radical protectionist efforts as “a solution looking for a problem.”  
Jami Bayles, recently elected as president of Stewards of San Juan, stated, “A NGO should never -- no matter how much foreign money it accepts -- have the power to trump sovereign State rights, nor duly elected officials.  No one in the Four Corners area voted for SUWA, CLF, or Grand Old Broads for their representatives.  Globalists and extreme environmental organizations which seek to weaken this republic, do not represent Utah, nor San Juan County.”

Yet, “advancing strategic solutions” is the watchword of the Wilburg Foundation, and currently their “solution” involves the massive 1.3 Million acre Bears Ears National Monument, in Utah—a state which is already filled with 40+ National and State Parks and is 63% public land, which we all enjoy and love. Yet NGO minions demean locals, and decry Utah congressmen, claiming they do not value “public” land. Nothing could be further from the truth. 

Wilburgforce is one such non-government foundation and has funded Resource Legacy Fund. http://resourceslegacyfund.org/programs/bears-ears-fund/  One of three pet projects is The Bear Ears Community Engagement Fund which will provide grants for projects that will. among other things, create “opportunities for sustainable recreation use and management by local communities.”  In other words, they have elected themselves to fill the role of county/state/ federal land managers

Contrast this web of multi-level marketing to the “No Monument” grass roots effort in rural Utah.  It has functioned without benefit or obligation to wealthy NGOs and backers, using only the money they have raised through local benefits. Thus, when wealthy globalists secure more and more monuments and prevent multi-use of parts of local land and spend millions to do so, locals see it not only as immoral, but illegal and presumptous.  They decry the prospect of turning Bears Ears communities into Moab look-alikes.

Ironically, Yvon Chouinard, founder of Patagonia at least partially agrees: “When you see the guides on the Bighorn, they’re all out of central casting. Beard, bill cap, buff around the neck, dog in the bow. . .It’s so predictable. That’s what magazines like Outside are promoting. Everyone doing this ‘outdoor life style’ thing. It’s the death of the outdoors.”   
When NGOs are held hostage by their donors, the hostages often become purveyors of donor messages, (i.e. Patty Hearst and the Stockholm syndrome).  If the mantra of the donor is “cattle free in ‘23” then the recipient uses Wilburgforce or Patagonia donations to advance that position. If corporate donors, who are often board members of environmental groups, say “Forbid the use of below ground resources”, (not knowing some of their corporate friends have ulterior motives) they respond like puppets, canting and chanting the dictated slogans.  It is truly a “Monumental Multi-Level Marketing” plan top down, and all around!

 Unfortunately, by hoping to eradicate ranching, farming, and extraction opportunities in the public domain, the solution of “sustainable” tourism comes with a whole new set of problems. Pairing tourism in the name of “protection” is an environmental paradox. Locals know from the experiences of those living in the shadows of Grand Staircase Escalante, there is much to lose. NGOs are working to eliminate jobs, families, and life styles (not of the rich and famous), but of rural Americans. As the Green MLM has expanded into Utah, Colorado, Oregon and Nevada, we see the ever-creeping web of bureaucratic power under the guise of protecting mother earth.   

By expanding the globalist web of deception via National Monuments, the ideology spills onto western terrain, and seals up productive land, as well as smaller legitimate antiquity landscapes in one fell swoop. The “We Won’t Share” attitude on the part of hard core “progressives” has caused backlash and anger from those who believe “less is more” when it comes to government-layered public lands.  We support “elected” Utah Congressmen and “elected” San Juan County officials in their efforts to rescind the Bears Ears Monument and believe that pubic land should allow multiple-use

 Top of Form





Wednesday, August 29, 2018

Uranium Industry Suppressed by Foreign Marketing

U.S. Uranium Industry Controlled by Russians? 

Americans Need to be Concerned and Write Dept. of Commerce

Energy Fuels has embarked on a key process with the Trump Administration that, if successful, will strengthen U.S. national security and energy security, and revitalize the U.S. uranium industry.  Your help is needed.

"In January 2018, Energy Fues submitted a Petition to the U.S. Department of Commerce to have them investigate the impacts of today’s extremely high levels of uranium imports on national security. In July 2018, Commerce initiated the investigation. This is great news for the United States, for the domestic uranium industry and for those associated with that industry.

Commerce also opened a 45-day period in which they would accept public comments to consider in their investigation. Therefore, I hope you will join me in submitting a comment that encourages Commerce and the President to support a healthy domestic uranium industry. Comments can be submitted to DOC in three ways:

(i)                  Via email at uranium232@bis.doc.gov;
(ii)                Through the link https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=BIS-2018-0011 (click the “Comment Now!” box), or
(iii)               By U.S. mail to Michael Vaccaro, Acting Director, Office of Technology Evaluation, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Room 1093, Washington, DC 20230.

Comment period ends on September 10, 2018. 
Submit your comments before then.


 As members of this strategic industry, I am certain that The Dept. of Commerce and the President will listen to us.  Also, please forward this link to your friends, family, consultants, or anyone else you think would be willing to submit a supportive comment.

We need to work together to generate as many positive comments as possible encouraging Commerce and the President to do the right thing for U.S. national security and energy security."



Possible Talking Points for Letters: 


·        The U.S. uranium mining industry is at risk. Uranium is essential to our national defense, including providing fuel for the U.S. Navy and representing the backbone of our nuclear deterrent.
·        Over the past decade, this key domestic industry has shrunk to the point that U.S. national security is now threatened.
·        In 2017, U.S. uranium production fell to near historic lows due in large part to uranium and nuclear fuel imported from state-subsidized foreign entities.
·        In 2018, U.S. producers may produce less than 2% of our nation’s needs.
·        Russia and China are geopolitical rivals of the U.S. with a long record of utilizing their state-owned energy industries as tools of foreign policy.
·        State-owned enterprises in Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan are targeting the U.S. uranium industry, and now fulfill over one-third of U.S. demand.
·        Moreover, Chinese state-owned entities have announced plans to penetrate the U.S. nuclear market, threatening to further degrading U.S. energy security and national security.
·        In traditional allies like Canada and Australia, mines are shutting down and reducing production.
·        Without prompt action, uranium imports from Russia, China and other geopolitical rivals will increase significantly in the future.
·        The U.S. uranium mining industry can compete on a level-playing field with anyone. However, the anti-competitive practices of state-owned and state-subsidized entities are putting U.S. producers at an enormous disadvantage.
·        The U.S. generates 20% of our electricity – and nearly 60% of our clean, zero-carbon electricity – from nuclear energy.
·        The remedies proposed are sensible and achievable, a 75% quota on imports and a “buy American policy for U.S. Government purchases. They will have an impact on foreign entities, but very little impact on U.S. utilities and their customers.
·        The U.S. uranium industry has more than enough production capability to increase production and meet requirements, including a number of permitted and constructed mining and processing facilities currently in operation or on standby.
·        The Administration can help create thousands of jobs, including Native American jobs, with good salaries and benefits, along with increased tax revenues that support rural schools, hospitals, and other local infrastructure.

Tuesday, September 4, 2018

Letter sent to Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)


Dear BIS Team,
I am writing in support of the petition investigating foreign sales of Uranium to the US. I have lived in San Juan County for 48 years in Blanding, Utah just 4 miles from Energy Fuels Uranium Mill. As a former writer and editor of a regional publication I have followed closely the history of both the uranium industry, and the history of mining and of this particular mill. We have published four Blue Mountain Shadows magazines about uranium mining in San Juan County. 
That business has provided jobs to hundreds of people through the years. However, the market has been at a disturbing standstill for many years, and San Juan County is once again one of the poorest in the state of Utah. During the uranium boom when jobs and tax resources skyrocketed and we were finally able to have jobs, schools, hospitals, roads and infrastructure comparable to the rest of the nation. But that ended decades ago. 
* Some counties in the US are blessed with agriculture, abundant water, factories, industry, and businesses which have made them wealthy. We were blessed with ROCKS , and many of these contain uranium, and other minerals. Wise people learn to use the resources where they live, and so it should be with this important element today. Why should we be importing uranium when much of the West is rich in this natural resource? Why should foreign countries have the power to suppressing mining and resource development? Many foreign nations have also worked to lock up public lands via National Monument designations. They provide millions of dollars to create scare tactics, media campaigns and promote extreme environmental causes which point fingers at the uranium business.
* Of even greater concern is that when the uranium industry is at risk, so is our nation. Uranium is essential to our national defense, including providing fuel for the U.S. Navy and representing the backbone of our nuclear deterrent. State-owned enterprises in Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan are targeting the U.S. uranium industry, and now fulfill over one-third of U.S. demand. These are not private industries, but are funded by state managed foreign governments. Its time that this great US business be allowed to play and compete on a level playing field. However, the anti-competitive practices of state-owned and state-subsidized entities are putting U.S. producers at an enormous disadvantage. This must be changed. It is indeed important to Make America Great Again! 

Sincerely,

Janet Wilcox

Friday, October 19, 2018

~~BEAR ESSENTIALS: Oct. 20, 2018~~



Matt Redd Monticello rancher, photo by Aaron Huey
November 2018 issue of National Geographic
~~Bears Ears: Lead story in November National Geographic: Battle for the American West
Though dozens of local people were interviewed over the course of several weeks by author Hannah Nordhaus, very little was used in the actual article from those interviews.  The editing staff at Nat’l Geo was part of that dilemma, and the real story was bigger than a single article could cover. Maps and photographs were great.  Sandy Johnson was one of several ranchers who were interviewed. (Photos were by Aaron Huey who made at least 4 or more trips to San Juan)


 

Energy Fuels White Mesa Uranium Mill--Aaron Huey photo
Kyle Kimmele, one of many SE Utah citizens who own mining leases.  Photo by Aaron Huey
“One of many comments made by businesses impacted by foreign suppliers of uranium: “The US uranium industry has suffered great harm and our national security is threatened as a result of excessive imports of foreign uranium. The United States over reliance on price insensitive uranium from countries like Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan with their state-owned and funded companies, has displaced US production and led to a severe decline in the industry. As a service provider to the US uranium industry, this has also hurt our business.”

~~Write-In Candidates for County Commissioner—Districts 2 and 3                                                          
                                                      
1)     Republican Al Clark running as Write-in against Kenneth Maryboy District 3



2) Democrat Maryleen Tahy running as write-in District 2 

 Audio of  Debate with Marsha Holland.
 “Public lands management is an area that we certainly do not agree on. I prefer local management of local resources and I rely on constitutional provisions that guarantee that even a state like Utah has an equal footing with other states. Federal agencies are creating massive problems to which they claim to be the solution. It is time for Utah to end the madness. We are not a federal administrative unit, but a sovereign and independent State; sometimes we have to act like it. 
I have never been accused of being neutral on matters of public land, fiscal responsibility, or political accountability. The State Legislature has the duty to safeguard these qualities and to safeguard the liberty of the people against federal encroachment, not the reverse for which Ms. Holland seems to advocate.
“Any legislation that I am involved in is going to emphasize less government interference with people’s lives and more accountability from government agencies. If I could figure out legislation to rein in the federal agencies and put them in their proper jurisdictional role instead of this god-like role that they think they have, I would do that.”    Recapture Incident: “A mistake that I made was believing that the federal agencies had integrity and that the department of justice believed that a person was innocent until proven guilty. And that the U.S. attorneys followed that same ideology.
~~Kelly Laws Running for County Commissioner in District 3

Why Voters Should Not Support Tax Increases 

By Phil Lyman

---------

Be sure to vote: Mail in or at polling booths


~~~~~~~


Read Past Editions of Bear Essentials at: http://beyondthebears.blogspot.com/
Documenting Bears Ears Controversy and Public Land Issues since July 2016