The state attorney general’s office says Pittsylvania County cannot impose a ban on uranium mining.

Late last month, the Board of Supervisors asked state Sen. Robert Hurt, R-Chatham, to seek an opinion from Virginia’s attorney general regarding the legality of a county ban on uranium mining. Hurt contacted the attorney general’s office on behalf of the board, said a lawyer there restated the office’s position expressed earlier.

Delegate Riley Ingram, R-62nd District, had made a similar request to the attorney general’s office last fall. An opinion from the office on Nov 14, 2008, states that a “locality may not enact (an) ordinance that preempts or nullifies state or federal law; such ordinance would be unconstitutional.” 

The Board of Supervisors requested Hurt’s assistance on the matter in a May 28 letter after local uranium-mining opponents asked the board to consider a county ban on mining.

County Administrator Dan Sleeper said the Board’s Legislative Committee will discuss the opinion at its next meeting Tuesday.

Virginia Uranium Inc. seeks to mine and mill a 119-million pound uranium ore deposit at Coles Hill, about six miles northeast of Chatham. Virginia currently has a moratorium on uranium mining. The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission’s Uranium Mining Subcommittee is overseeing a study by the National Academy of Sciences to determine whether the practice can be done safely in the commonwealth.

The attorney general’s office’s opinion also mentions the state’s “Dillon rule,” which says that municipalities and counties can exercise only those powers given to them by the state.

Board of Supervisors Chairman Coy Harville said the board wanted to “set the record straight” with the attor-ney general on the subject. Harville said the question of whether the county can ban uranium mining is settled.

“To me, it’s a dead issue,” he said. 

The issue took on added significance last year after the town of Halifax passed a chemical-trespass ordinance in 2008 and the town of Chatham mulled a similar ordinance. Chatham also sought and received a similar opinion from the attorney general’s office last year.