Russian company set to take over uranium mine in Wyoming.

[powderman]

State-‘Controlled’ Russian Company Set to Take Over Wyoming Uranium Mines

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the license transfer of two Wyoming mines to a Russian company, despite concerns over national security raised by local and national government officials including senior House Republicans.
From the Telegram:
Two uranium mines in Wyoming are on their way to control by a Russian company now that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved transferring the mines’ licenses.
The NRC last week approved the license transfer to a Russian company known as ARMZ which expects to obtain a controlling interest in Canadian-owned Uranium One by year’s end. Uranium One holds the licenses for a proposed uranium mine and an existing uranium mine in northeast Wyoming.

The approval comes despite concerns from local and national lawmakers. Bother groups worry that Wyoming’s uranium could in theory go overseas and serve against U.S. interests.
“The administration must maintain rigorous oversight of this project and ensure this transaction does not undercut America’s national or energy security,” Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said through a spokeswoman Tuesday.
In October, four U.S. House members sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner to block the sale of the two Wyoming mines, citing national security concerns. According to the Wyoming Business Journal, “the sale would give the Russians control of up to 20 percent of the U.S. national uranium extraction capability along with a controlling interest in one of the nation’s largest uranium mining sites.”
The Republican representatives who sent the letter inclue: Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida (the ranking minority member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee); Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama (the ranking minority member of the House Financial Services Committee); Rep. Peter T. King of New York (the ranking minority member of the House Homeland Security Committee), and Rep. Howard P. “Buck” McKeon of California (the ranking minority member of the House Armed Services Committee).
Both Republicans Sen. Mike Enzi and Rep. Cynthia Lummis, from Wyoming, expressed concerns and promised to keep an eye on the deal, the Associated Press reports. In response, the NRC said the Russian company would have to apply for a special license to export uranium.
Still, exporting is possible, and considering the ownership make up of Uranium One and ARMZ, any national secuirity concerns are not unfounded. According to World Nuclear News, Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom received “356 million common shares in Uranium One” in a recent deal. And the Gillette News Record reports ARMZ is “controlled by” Rosatom.
Why should that cause concern? According to the Record, Rosatom “has provided Iran with uranium in the past.”
“The NRC paperwork states that the transfer means the Russian president and the government of the Russian Federation have the power to direct corporate policy and therefore direct activities under the NRC license and license applications for the Wyoming facilities,” the Record says.
These ties make a recent warning from Russian President Vladamir Putin even more ominous. Speaking with Larry King on Wednesday, the Russian leader advised the U.S. “don’t interfere either [with] the sovereign choice of the Russian people”:

[Junior1942]

This all started under the Bush administration.  Doesn't make much difference as most of Wyoming will belong to either Russia or China after the USA right wing sells off all public land to the highest bidder.

[Pat/Rick]

I wonder if russia would let the US mine sensitive materials in their country?? Nah, they've got more sense than that. 

[powderman]

I wonder if russia would let the US mine sensitive materials in their country?? Nah, they've got more sense than that. 

Well, you know that aint gonna happen. POWDERMAN. 

[FourBee]

My brother sold his ranch land to a Coal Mining company , which adjoins mine , years back.  They leased a few of my acres to errect some buildings.  (Duh).     A lot of changes have taken place since then, and I recently met with the new Leasee, a  Czechoslovakian for the state of Czechoslovakia.  I don't like it.

[Pat/Rick]

FourBee, can you cancel the lease? After all it was for the origional leasee wasn't it? Maybe a talk with a lawyer might do some good? I don't mean to pry on this so let me know if I'm overstepping.

 Also i find it interesting that the US hasn't renegged on the russian deal after they threatened to restart tha arms race. Has the US forgotten that russia destroyed our military equipment while it was on the docks in georgia?? Is our gooberment selling the farm to buy a weeks worth of groceries?  I sure wouldn't accuse our elected of having any common sense. A few years back ( when russia broke up)my son came home from school  telling me the cold war was over. I ask him, who told you that? He answered, his teachers. I told him to tell his teacher to check their headgear and stop lying. (Vee are not a threat too you anymore, kommerade amerikans!    )

[FourBee]

 

Pat/Rick ~ FourBee, can you cancel the lease? After all it was for the origional leasee wasn't it? Maybe a talk with a lawyer might do some good?

 

Been there and done that Pat/Rick.  We had some pretty hot meetings in which I finally called my son in to represent me  cause just looking at them got me riled up.  He came out with a pocket full of money, but I still don't like them being there.

[slim rem 7]

this country oughta just say no..the bear didn t die ..he just learned a lot from china..
 deals like this very well may be the thing that starts the next world war..jmo

[Dixie Dude]

Jr, no one has advocated selling off public land to foreigners.  I agree with selling some to pay down the national debt, especially near large population centers, and businesses that are in competition with private companies.  Never national parks or forests.  However, the government could lease their land to oil companies for the 200 year supply of oil on government land that Eisenhower put in the naval reserves back in the '50s.  We need to stop paying potential terroists and enemies our hard earned money, and pay Americans, even if it is American oil companies who supply lots of jobs in drilling, pipeline construction, refining, etc, so our 200 million cars can run, our diesel locomotives can run, and our planes can fly.  Texas has done just fine with oil wells all over the place.  Cows graze around oil wells.  The well drilling is no different than putting lots of windmills up in the plains states.  Also, Clinton was the one who transfered a lot of technology to China, and opened these doors, not Bush.  China now has used this technology to launch men into space. 

[Junior1942]

Jr, no one has advocated selling off public land to foreigners.  I agree with selling some to pay down the national debt, especially near large population centers, and businesses that are in competition with private companies.  Never national parks or forests.  However, the government could lease their land to oil companies for the 200 year supply of oil on government land that Eisenhower put in the naval reserves back in the '50s.  We need to stop paying potential terroists and enemies our hard earned money, and pay Americans, even if it is American oil companies who supply lots of jobs in drilling, pipeline construction, refining, etc, so our 200 million cars can run, our diesel locomotives can run, and our planes can fly.  Texas has done just fine with oil wells all over the place.  Cows graze around oil wells.  The well drilling is no different than putting lots of windmills up in the plains states.  Also, Clinton was the one who transfered a lot of technology to China, and opened these doors, not Bush.  China now has used this technology to launch men into space.  

DD, there is a HECK of a difference between leasing public land for oil drilling and selling public land to the highest bidder.  I'm 100% for drilling for oil wherever oil might be found in the USA.  I'm also 100% against "no trespassing" signs on public land.  Many of your right wing brethren want to sell not just all the public land but all the highways.  As the Arabs, Chinese and Russians are the only people with the cash to buy all that land and those highways, we'd have to learn to read "No Trespassing" and "Toll Booth Ahead" in Arabic, Chinese and Russian. I say not no but H - E - Double L no!

PS: Regardless of what you may have heard, Bill Clinton did not cause ED, premature balding and halitosis.

[Dixie Dude]

Jr, if you read what was said, most of the concern was expressed by Republicans, not democrats.  Democrats run the country right now.  Also, if it is private land, the Feds have to approve sales to foreign investments I think.  If it is public land it is a lease, no public land is being sold.  The Chinese are buying lots of ranches out west right now, especially in Montana.  They have a lot of mouths to feed so I think they want to sell to themselves. 

[Junior1942]

.....  If it is public land it is a lease, no public land is being sold.  The Chinese are buying lots of ranches out west right now, especially in Montana.  .....

Pay attention to what many right wingers post here and on other gun or hunting forums.  No public land is being sold now but those right/wrong wingers want an end to public landownership.  The BLM lands and the national forests are at the top of their sell lists.  They call it "under used or excess government assets."  Listening to their spin-talk, it sounds logical, like they want to sell vacant government buildings in D.C.  They do.  But they also see land without people and buildings as non-tax-productive.  The mindset sees themselves paying taxes for someone else to hunt/camp/hike/fish for free.

Poster Range Rider, I think it was, talked the other day about the "miles and miles of public land" next to his land somewhere out west.  Guess what?  The political party he fervently supports wants to change that to "miles and miles of Chinese/Russian/Arab land." 

[Dixie Dude]

I'm sorry, but I am a RIGHT WINGER and have never seen anyone say we should sell ALL of the public land, national parks, etc.  There is a lot of public land, about the size of everything west of the Mississippi excluding Alaska.  That is a lot of land.  I think they need to homestead some of it to give some like the poor a chance to actually own land if they can live on it for 7 years and work it.  I also think the 500 yard stretch of Wakiki beach totally surrounded by development could be sold for it's real value.  It is for officers retreat from WWII, and no longer needed.  Also numerous public buildings no longer needed, abandoned military bases, and also companies like TVA, sold for it's actual value to surrounding power companies.  NOT national parks or even national forests UNLESS it is near high development and no longer a viable national forest area.  This is practical, not EVERYTHING.  Also, in maters of national priority, like uranium mines.  If they are private, this is a tough one, should anyone be able to buy land or things in America without first being an American citizen?  What about a foreign owned factory buying the property to manufacture something?