A nuclear technology company looking to store spent nuclear fuel rods in the Permian Basin, along the Texas-New Mexico state line, appealed in U.S. Supreme Court a decision last year to vacate its license to do so, hoping to bring the waste from privately-owned reactors around the country.
A fight to prevent high-level radioactive waste at a site near Andrews may be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Following a ruling in favor of Texas over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, high-level nuclear waste won't be stored in Andrews. West Texans can have peace of mind.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated Holtec International’s license to build and operate a consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) for spent nuclear fuel near the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southeastern New Mexico.
Following a ruling in favor of Texas over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, high-level nuclear waste won't be stored in Andrews. West Texans can have peace of mind.
A nuclear technology company looking to store spent nuclear fuel rods in the Permian Basin, along the Texas-New Mexico state line, appealed in U.S. Supreme Court a decision last year to vacate its license to do so, hoping to bring the waste from privately-owned reactors around the country.
A fight to prevent high-level radioactive waste at a site near Andrews may be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Following a ruling in favor of Texas over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, high-level nuclear waste won't be stored in Andrews. West Texans can have peace of mind.
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals has vacated Holtec International’s license to build and operate a consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) for spent nuclear fuel near the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in southeastern New Mexico.
Following a ruling in favor of Texas over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, high-level nuclear waste won't be stored in Andrews. West Texans can have peace of mind.
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.
“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.
“For the first phase of the project, Holtec has requested initial authorization to store up to 8,680 metric tons of uranium (MTUs) in up to 500 HI-STORM UMAX system dry in-ground canisters (Figure 3) for a license period of 40 years. Holtec eventually wants to apply for amendments for up to 20 phases, which would cover an area spanning 330 acres.”
Read MoreAs soon as July of 2021, high-level nuclear waste could be headed to Andrews, Texas. Andrews County Commissioner Kerry Pack reached out to constituents via social media this past week in order to hear from more voices. Low-level nuclear waste is already stored in Andrews County, but high-level nuclear waste is an entirely different beast.
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 MoreThe process of siting a permanent repository is as slow as plutonium decay. The United States Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) just put out six overarching recommendations for the Department of Energy’s nuclear waste management program.
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 MoreCraddick earlier in the session sent a letter to the Environmental Regulation Committee that stated the bill “muddies the waters between a tax cut for a specific vendor and the issue of high-level radioactive waste storage in Texas.” Taylor spoke in opposition of the bill before it was voted out of committee, 6-2.
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“Flawed packing of radioactive waste caused sparks to fly from a container at Los Alamos National Laboratory, prompting evacuation of the work area and later the underground disposal site near Carlsbad where two similarly packed canisters were stored.”
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"A swarm of earthquakes that appears fairly suddenly adds to the uncertainty of predicting the safety of a proposed nuclear waste storage in an oil and gas field, especially a giant field like the prolific Delaware basin in New Mexico."
Read More“Locating a permanent repository for nuclear waste is “not a crisis” and the government should be deliberate about community engagement throughout the process, a former Department of Energy nuclear leaders said during a discussion last week.”
Read More“An evacuation occurred Feb. 26 at the waste generator site around the gloveboxes at Los Alamos Technical Area-55 Plutonium Facility after sparks flew in a 55-gallon drum that was being packed for shipment to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), according to a Los Alamos-NNSA “five-day report” dated March 12. Personnel observed sparking after a “metal waste item” was placed into the drum and contacted two high-efficiency particulate air (HIPA) filters.”
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 MoreIn a meeting on environmental regulation yesterday, Waste Control Specialists said they would not be moving high-level nuclear waste into the Permian Basin without the state’s approval.
Read MoreThe head of the top U.S. nuclear power group said that reprocessing of nuclear waste, a technique that has not been practiced in the United States for decades because of proliferation and cost concerns, could help address a growing problem building up at nuclear plants across the country.
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 More
