nuclear-news

During his presentation to the committee, Mayer pitched the project as an economic boon to the state that would not affect oil and gas activity in the area and assured committee members the facility would not threaten water resources in the area.

But legislators at the meeting weren’t completely sold on the project.

“I’m reminded of how [much] of a long-term legacy this project is creating for fellow New Mexicans,” said state Sen. Jeff Steinborn, D-Las Cruces. “We’re dealing with something that our successors’ successors’ successors will be dealing with, with not much benefit to the state and a very significant upfront cost.”

‘Invited by New Mexicans’

The proposal would see high-level nuclear waste transported from power plants across the country to a facility in New Mexico by railway. Holtec maintains the facility would be a temporary repository to store the waste while the federal government finds a permanent location for it. The Department of Energy spent some $15 billion building a permanent underground facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but the project was shuttered in 2009 by former president Barack Obama.

In late 2015, the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance, a government organization made up of city and county officials, sent out a request for proposal for nuclear waste storage solutions for a tract of land the alliance had acquired and surveyed for nuclear operations. The group considered three proposals, but settled on Holtec’s technology. During the following legislative session, state lawmakers passed two memorials in support of the project, while then-governor Susana Martinez sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry supporting the establishment of an interim storage facility in New Mexico to house the high-level waste.

“At Holtec, we say we’re in New Mexico because we were invited by New Mexicans,” Mayer said.

Some of that support seems to have evaporated. In June, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham voiced her opposition to the project in a letter sent to U.S. Secretary of Energy Rick Perry and Nuclear Regulatory Commission chair Kristine Svinicki. Lujan Grisham said the project “poses an unacceptable risk to New Mexicans,” and that establishing the facility in southeastern New Mexico “would be economic malpractice.”

State Land Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard also raised concerns with the proposal and Holtec’s statements to the NRC. “This is not the right site for high-level nuclear storage,” Garcia Richard said in a statement from June. “There is no guarantee that high-level nuclear waste can be safely transported to and through New Mexico. There is no guarantee that there won’t be a hazardous interaction between the storage site and nearby oil, gas, and mining activities.There is no guarantee that this site will truly be ‘interim’ and won’t become the permanent dumping ground for our nation’s nuclear waste.”

Meanwhile, residents across the state have begun to voice opposition to the project. Twelve communities have officially opposed the project, including the City of Las Cruces, and the county governments of Santa Fe, McKinley and Bernalillo counties.

In a separate presentation before the committee, Sierra Club legislative issues volunteer Patricia Cardona described the use of the term “consolidated storage” as a “marketing campaign.”

“Consolidated storage is just another word for permanent storage, and that’s how a lot of people see it in southeastern New Mexico,” Cardona said. “That land, should it end up hosting the high-level nuclear waste, will end up being occupied on a permanent basis for 100,000 to 1 million years. That means that land cannot be reused for any other purpose.”

Cardona said the area sited for the proposed facility is near a number of dairy and agricultural ranches.

“We really have to think about our land use, to think about being able to build other kinds of businesses that don’t end up spoiling the land and air,” she said. “For people in southeastern New Mexico, what they want is clean air, clean water, and clean soil. They want to have an economy that is healthy that doesn’t damage them.”

Legislators push back on Holtec’s proposal

Holtec anticipates the facility will generate a $3 billion capital investment in the area, and will create 100 long-term operations jobs, and 100 temporary construction jobs. Mayer said Holtec has also entered into a revenue sharing agreement with the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance.

“We’re going to share 30 percent of our gross revenue,” he said.

But the company has no formal revenue-sharing agreement with the state of New Mexico. Mayer said it would be up to the Alliance to enter into its own agreement with the state for sharing revenues derived from the project.

“We really have to think about our land use, to think about being able to build other kinds of businesses that don’t end up spoiling the land and air,” she said. “For people in southeastern New Mexico, what they want is clean air, clean water, and clean soil. They want to have an economy that is healthy that doesn’t damage them.”

Legislators push back on Holtec’s proposal

Holtec anticipates the facility will generate a $3 billion capital investment in the area, and will create 100 long-term operations jobs, and 100 temporary construction jobs. Mayer said Holtec has also entered into a revenue sharing agreement with the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance.

“We’re going to share 30 percent of our gross revenue,” he said.

But the company has no formal revenue-sharing agreement with the state of New Mexico. Mayer said it would be up to the Alliance to enter into its own agreement with the state for sharing revenues derived from the project.

Steinborn wasn’t satisfied with that answer.

“There’s no revenue share with the state of New Mexico, there’s no emergency preparedness money, and it’s almost like an afterthought. These are all huge concerns,” Steinborn said.

During a separate presentation before the committee, State Sen. Nancy Rodriguez, D-Santa Fe, questioned the wisdom of transporting thousands of tons of radioactive material across the country.

“I’ve never understood what the rationale was for transporting this nuclear waste for these many miles all the way down to New Mexico. I don’t have an answer as to why it can’t be stored close to where it was created,” Rodriguez said. “All I can think of is that there are dollar signs involved here, there’s some kind of profit that’s really leading this whole thing.” ……..

“Over the last ten years, we’ve had almost 100 incidents of safety performance issues related to storage,” he said. “I think it’s one of those issues where it’s not a matter of if, but when. We need to humble and understand that accidents do happen. We’ve seen that with our experience with WIPP.”

Searching for a nuclear utopia

Lawmakers on the committee were reserved in the comments about the proposal but not many voiced support. State Rep. Angelica Rubio, D-Las Cruces, said the proposal “has been a huge issue for New Mexico.”

“A lot of people in the southeastern part of the state are concerned about this,” she said………….. https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2019/11/20/not-much-benefit-to-the-state-legislators-scrutinize-details-of-holtecs-proposed-nuclear-storage-facility/