News & Media - Protect the Basin

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.

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.

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 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.