Top Democrat officials in New Mexico can agree with Texas Republicans on some things, and recently, the opposition to high-level nuclear waste storage in the two states has united members of both parties. Leaders in New Mexico are in agreement with Texas that the interim storage of high-level nuclear waste is illegal and a federal government overreach.
Congressman August Pfluger spoke with Odessa’s CBS 7 News about the recent Nuclear Regulatory Commission's decision to license a high-level nuclear waste dump site in Andrews, Texas. The site, owned by Waste Control Specialists and Orano, is operated by Interim Storage Partners.
The federal government issued their license to Interim Storage Partners despite local residents’ concern and majority disapproval of the project. Once a favored issue in Texas, now has become opposed by many. One small leak could contaminate the Permian Basin oil industry. SNF stays radioactive for hundreds of millions of years.
Though Texas politicians are using this drama as a way to attack federal elected officials, the history of the issue is a bipartisan mess that can be blamed on members of both parties. Regardless, the fight between Texans and the federal agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is being watched by those in the energy sector across America.
After both the Texas House and Texas Senate passed HB 7 in early September, Governor Greg Abbott signed the bill into law. The law bans high-level nuclear waste from the state, with the exception of hospitals and research centers in Texas that produce the waste.
Thursday, September 9, 2021, Governor Greg Abbott signed House Bill 7 into law. This law bans high-level nuclear waste from entering Texas. It also prohibits the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, or the TCEQ) from issuing state permits for constructing facilities in Texas for HLW storage.
The majority of spent nuclear fuel is currently located near their reactor sites on the East Coast. Ironically, California officials are leading the fight to dump this waste in the Permian Basin because there is one decommissioned nuclear reactor site in particular they are focused on, San Onofre. Those outside of Texas and New Mexico see these two states as their dumping grounds.
Numerous officials, residents, and experts have sounded off in opposition to the high-level waste, the latest significant development seeing the Andrews County Commissioners Court unanimously pass a resolution in opposition to high-level nuclear waste – with commissioners revealing that their constituents overwhelmingly stood in opposition as well.
The concerns with interim storage of spent nuclear fuel in Southeastern New Mexico consist of environmental and social justice impacts. Both Baca and Grisham say that an interim storage site would become a de facto permanent resting place for America’s nuclear waste. There are currently no plans in sight for a permanent deep geological repository in the United States, despite the federal government’s promise to create one over 40 years ago.
A packed Special Meeting held by the Andrews County Commissioners’ Court on July 15, 2021 resulted in a vote to draft up a resolution against the interim storage of high-level nuclear waste in Andrews County. Dozens of residents spoke at the meeting, with a large showing of Waste Control Specialists employees and local residents in opposition.
“Stubbornly continuing your [ISP & Holtec] current projects will impose significant damage to the future of nuclear energy in the United States. Since both of you have major business interests in this industry, you will be damaging existing and future profit centers within your enterprises for the sake of individual projects with uncertain profit potential.”
“Because of the many risks associated with these projects, the lack of a permanent storage facility, and the importance of the Permian Basin to the economy and energy security of the country, I respectfully urge you to join me in opposing the siting of an interim storage facility in Texas or in New Mexico.”
In the statement that NRC published, Holtec has “exclusive mineral rights” to the site area, but the mineral estate is leased to XTO Energy through the State of New Mexico. Holtec seeks to use the surface but that is in conflict with the oil and gas production needs and rights of XTO Energy.
In an opposition letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham expressed major concerns with the proposed nuclear waste site in Lea County. The NRC recommended the site even though their preliminary research did not take into account several key issues. The geological makeup of the area is not suitable for spent nuclear fuel to be stored.
Southeastern New Mexico is a leading force of the state’s agricultural production. Lea and Eddy Counties, where the proposed Holtec CISF site is located, produces $300 million of New Mexico’s agricultural industry every year. In an opposition letter sent to the U.S. Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Committee, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham makes clear that this proposed site for nuclear waste is a terrible idea for the region.
Top Democrat officials in New Mexico can agree with Texas Republicans on some things, and recently, the opposition to high-level nuclear waste storage in the two states has united members of both parties. Leaders in New Mexico are in agreement with Texas that the interim storage of high-level nuclear waste is illegal and a federal government overreach.
Read MoreThe federal government issued their license to Interim Storage Partners despite local residents’ concern and majority disapproval of the project. Once a favored issue in Texas, now has become opposed by many. One small leak could contaminate the Permian Basin oil industry. SNF stays radioactive for hundreds of millions of years.
Read MoreThough Texas politicians are using this drama as a way to attack federal elected officials, the history of the issue is a bipartisan mess that can be blamed on members of both parties. Regardless, the fight between Texans and the federal agency, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, is being watched by those in the energy sector across America.
Read MoreAfter both the Texas House and Texas Senate passed HB 7 in early September, Governor Greg Abbott signed the bill into law. The law bans high-level nuclear waste from the state, with the exception of hospitals and research centers in Texas that produce the waste.
Read MoreThe majority of spent nuclear fuel is currently located near their reactor sites on the East Coast. Ironically, California officials are leading the fight to dump this waste in the Permian Basin because there is one decommissioned nuclear reactor site in particular they are focused on, San Onofre. Those outside of Texas and New Mexico see these two states as their dumping grounds.
Read MoreNumerous officials, residents, and experts have sounded off in opposition to the high-level waste, the latest significant development seeing the Andrews County Commissioners Court unanimously pass a resolution in opposition to high-level nuclear waste – with commissioners revealing that their constituents overwhelmingly stood in opposition as well.
Read MoreThe concerns with interim storage of spent nuclear fuel in Southeastern New Mexico consist of environmental and social justice impacts. Both Baca and Grisham say that an interim storage site would become a de facto permanent resting place for America’s nuclear waste. There are currently no plans in sight for a permanent deep geological repository in the United States, despite the federal government’s promise to create one over 40 years ago.
Read MoreA packed Special Meeting held by the Andrews County Commissioners’ Court on July 15, 2021 resulted in a vote to draft up a resolution against the interim storage of high-level nuclear waste in Andrews County. Dozens of residents spoke at the meeting, with a large showing of Waste Control Specialists employees and local residents in opposition.
Read More“High-level, you will die within three days,” she said. “I don’t want to take that risk for my children. I’m sure you have a lot of geologists speaking with you … but they’re looking at charts, graphs, they’re not looking at my 7-year-old son and my 87-year-old grandfather.
Read More“A better solution, according to Kamps and Burnam, is to pass legislation at the federal level relating to hardened onsite storage, a concept first described by Dr. Gordon Thompson of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies in 2003.”
Once a permit is issued to WCS to store high-level waste, it will be “very difficult” to stop the process, Taylor said. He criticized the federal government for looking for temporary solutions rather than developing a permanent repository, and called the casks WCS is seeking to store with high-level waste inside “Chernobyl in a can” and “the most toxic material mankind has ever created.”
Read More“This legislation would have not added the protections needed to prevent a high level radioactive waste ban in Texas,” Craddick wrote in a statement saying he “killed” Landgraf’s bill. “Walking back on a promise to the Permian Basin is not an option.”
Read More“If HB 2692 passes the Legislature, Waste Control Specialists will get a huge tax cut, reduce its costs by reducing safety standards and – if a provision in the bill to ban highly toxic nuclear waste is struck down in court and a federal license to store the waste is granted – a new revenue stream. That highly toxic waste will be shipped from around the country on Texas highways to Waste Control’s facility.”
Read More“The plan faces stiff opposition from Gov. Greg Abbott, some oil companies that operate in the region and environmentalists over concerns about the risk of groundwater contamination and transportation accidents. Abbott wrote to federal regulators last year asking them to deny the license application, stating that the proposal presents a “greater radiological risk than Texas is prepared to allow.”
Read More“The federal government has said in law that this spent fuel, this irradiated fuel from nuclear power plants, is highly toxic and highly dangerous, and its permanent disposal requires it to be disposed deep underground in stable geologic formations, so that’s the law,” he said. “This facility is none of that.”
Read More“The state cited the potential for surface and groundwater contamination, disruption of oil and gas development in one of the nation's most productive basins and added strain on emergency response resources.
The state also raised concerns about a similar project planned just across the state line in West Texas.”
Read MoreState Rep. Tom Craddick sent a letter to House Committee on Environmental Regulation members that states he has “grave concerns” about Brooks Landgraf’s radioactive waste bill – House Bill 2692.
Read MoreMany countries including the US plan to store nuclear waste in underground repositories. But scientists might not have a complete picture of the safety of the storage materials involved in these plans, according to a new study. The report demonstrates that interactions between the different materials used for these storage systems could accelerate their corrosion when they are exposed to water, increasing the chance of the radioactive waste leaking into the environment
Read MoreYet existing and planned nuclear waste sites operate on much shorter timeframes: often 10,000 or 100,000 years. These are still such unimaginably vast lengths of time that regulatory authorities decide on them, in part, based on how long ice ages are expected to last.
Read MoreA hazardous waste disposal company in Andrews County wants to handle more dangerous levels of nuclear waste. Federal agencies are pondering new rules that could allow more of it to come to Texas.
Read More
