By John Stang
A draft federal environmental impact statement (EIS) for a proposed used nuclear fuel storage site in southeastern New Mexico focuses on a 40-year licensing period, and does not sufficiently consider that the radioactive material might remain there long past that point, opponents of the project argued Tuesday.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission held a public meeting via teleconference on its draft EIS for Holtec International’s planned consolidated interim storage facility in Lea County, between the cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs. About 60 people spoke before the more-than-five-hour session ended.
The bottom line for critics Tuesday was that New Mexico could end up as one of the nation’s permanent nuclear fuel disposal sites by default, if the federal government remains unable to build a geologic repository elsewhere.
“Yucca Mountain is not in the cards right now. … We don’t want New Mexico holding the bag as a permanent repository,” said Dave McCoy of Citizen Action New Mexico.
The region is already home to the Department of Energy’s disposal facility for radioactive transuranic waste, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a point emphasized by one state official.
“New Mexicans have shouldered a disproportionate burden of the waste associated from nuclear weapons development. Holtec is asking the NRC to have New Mexico shoulder more burden with the waste from nuclear generators,” said New Mexico Environment Department Secretary James Kenney. “The location suggested is in an area where people rely on groundwater.”
In March 2017, Holtec applied for an NRC license to build and operate just-underground storage of 500 canisters containing 8,680 metric tons of spent fuel from U.S. nuclear power plants. The license would expire after four decades, but with additional NRC approvals it could be extended to 120 years and over 100,000 metric tons of the radioactive waste in 10,000 canisters.
The draft environmental impact statement from NRC staff concluded the Holtec facility would have little environmental impact on that portion of New Mexico in both the 500-canister and 10,000-canister scenarios. Agency staff preliminarily recommended approval of the license.
“It shows minimal impact will be felt by everyone in this area,” Carlsbad City Council member Edward Rodriguez said during the NRC event.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has planned to finalize the draft EIS by next March. However, last week the agency for a second time extended the public comment period on the document, to Sept. 22. The deadline had previously been pushed back from May 22 to July 22, to ensure public input during the COVID-19 pandemic. Another virtual meeting is scheduled for July 9, with live events possible later in New Mexico.
“We are assessing the impact this extension will have on the overall schedule, and will send a schedule letter to Holtec in the near future,” NRC spokesman David McIntyre said by email Monday. “That letter will be made public.”
In a June 10 letter to the NRC, Holtec President and CEO Kris Singh argued against allowing more time for comments.
“Stakeholder participation is an important part of the regulatory approval process. An extension is the NRC’s prerogative and Holtec respects their decision,” company spokesman Joe Delmar said by email Monday. “Holtec supported the NRC’s decision last May to extend the public comment period by 60 days. However, we did not support a second extension.”
Holtec expects a licensing decision in March 2021. Afterward, construction would begin once funding is identified. Construction could be completed and Holtec could begin receiving fuel as early as 2023, according to Delmar.
The draft EIS says the facility would have small impacts on land use, transportation, geology, surface and ground water, environmental justice, and public health. It said the 500-canister scenario would have little impact on the local economy, but the 10,000-canister scenario would provide a moderate boost to the economy. The first phase would have a small impact on vegetation, while the subsequent phases would have a moderate effect until the vegetation grows back.
“The draft EIS cannot adequately analyze the long-term impacts (in New Mexico) because we have no permanent repository,” said state Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D), who for years has expressed skepticism about the Holtec plan.
In the document, staff noted that up to 19 expansions of the site’s storage capacity are not included in the initial licensing. But staff said it nonetheless evaluated those anticipated expansions in describing “the affected environment and impact determinations in this draft EIS, where appropriate, when the environmental impacts of the potential future expansion can be determined so as to conduct a bounded analysis for the proposed CISF project.”
The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act gave the Department of Energy until Jan. 31, 1998, to begin disposal of the nation’s stockpile of high-level radioactive waste from defense nuclear operations and used fuel from commercial power plants. Congress amended the law in 1987 to direct that the waste be placed in permanent disposal under Yucca Mountain in Nevada, about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
The Energy Department has made little progress toward that goal. The agency in 2008 filed its license application for Yucca Mountain with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but the Obama administration defunded that proceeding two years later. The Obama DOE’s alternative, restarting “consent-based” siting for separate disposal of defense and commercial wastes, did not get far before Donald Trump was inaugurated president in January 2017.
The Trump administration tried, and failed, in three consecutive budget proposals to persuade Congress to appropriate money for the Energy Department and NRC to resume licensing for the Nevada facility. It changed tack for the upcoming fiscal 2021, instead asking for $27.5 million that would fund early work on interim storage. That approach could at least remove the used fuel from nuclear utilities, who have already won more than $7 billion in legal judgments against the federal government over the Energy Department’s failure to meet its legal mandate.
Speakers at Tuesday’s virtual meeting included elected officials from Lea and Eddy counties, along with Hobbs and Carlsbad, a couple union officials, and several state legislators. They supported the initial conclusions of the draft EIS and said the Holtec project would provide a significant economic boost with little risk to the area.
The two cities and two counties comprise the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, which provided the 1,000 acres on which the storage facility would be built. The organization has said the project would generate 215 new “highly paid” jobs and a $2.4 billion capital investment.
“We have already addressed the (EIS’) concerns, and we need to move forward as soon as possible,” said Eddy County Commissioner Ernie Carlson.
Supporters said the project has been discussed with residents of the two counties, that no accident has ever been recorded during the transportation of radioactive materials on railroads and highways, and that local officials believe the canisters that would hold the waste are solidly engineered.
Opponents include New Mexico’s state government under Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D), some legislators, and a number of environmental watchdog groups from New Mexico and across the nation. Besides the likelihood of the Holtec facility operating longer than 40 years, opponents focused comments Tuesday on concerns about railroad accidents, which they believed the EIS downplayed.
Critics also said that New Mexico’s status as a minority-majority state — its population is 37% white — raises environmental justice concerns about such a facility ending up in a region in which the majority are people of color.
“This is environmental racism in action,” argued Susan Skerman, a member of the Nuclear Issues Study Group.
Some callers said the comment period must be extended until next year, when COVID-19 vaccinations are supposed to be available, in order to have in-person public hearings. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has said it intends to hold live meetings in New Mexico, but those have not yet been scheduled.
Comments on the document can be submitted via email, to Holtec-CISFEIS@nrc.gov; at regulations.gov, Docket ID NRC-2018-0052; or by mail to Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Input submitted in writing or at the public meetings will be considered in finalizing the environmental impact statement, McIntyre said.
A similar project by Interim Storage Partners — a joint venture of Orano and Waste Control Specialists — is in the works in western Texas. Nuclear Regulatory Commission also preliminarily backed a 40-year license for 5,000 metric tons of used fuel (of a maximum planned capacity of 40,000 metric tons), in a separate draft EIS issued in May. No public feedback sessions have been scheduled yet for that document.
