TRANSPORT & STORAGE OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HM 21 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HM 21.
You're tracking HM 21
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HM 21 — TRANSPORT & STORAGE OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE
Last action — action postponed indefinitely
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed House
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
207 added · 183 removedPlain-language change summary
In the recent amendments to House Memorial 21, the text has been streamlined by removing certain lines that repeated information about the dangers of nuclear waste. Specifically, it cut out a reference to spent nuclear fuel being "useful in a commercial reactor." This change matters because it simplifies the message and focuses on the ongoing issues surrounding nuclear waste management without diluting the urgency of the concerns.
HOUSE MEMORIAL 21 54THTH LEGISLATURE-LEGISLATURE - STATE OF NEW MEXICO - SECOND SESSION,SESSION , 2020 INTRODUCED BY Matthew McQueen 6This 8document 10incorporates Aamendments MEMORIALthat INhave OPPOSITIONbeen TOadopted THEduring TRANSPORTATIONthe OFcurrent HIGH-LEVELlegislative RADIOACTIVEsession. WASTE TO, AND STORAGE IN, NEW MEXICO.
14The WHEREAS,document theis problema oftool what to doshow withthe nuclearamendments wastein context and is ongoingnot andto largelybe unanswered;used for the purpose of amendments.
andA WHEREAS,MEMORIAL findingIN repositoriesOPPOSITION forTO spentTHE nuclearTRANSPORTATION fuelOF isHIGH-LEVEL aRADIOACTIVE eh tWASTE 17TO, concern,AND asSTORAGE manyIN, typesNEW ofMEXICO. radioactive waste remain dangerously w l n d 18 radioactive for thousands of years after they are no longer = = 19 a l useful in a commercial reactor;
andg io at hr g e ri 20k WHEREAS, the Eddy-Leaproblem energy alliance, an alliance of thewhat ato tdo mwith mnuclear 21waste citiesis ofh Carlsbad and Hobbs and Eddy and Lea counties, was d r ei 22 formed to focus on the creation of an "interim" storage c e s kongoing 23and facilitylargely forunanswered; spent nuclear fuel;
and eh a, nt, be 24u g WHEREAS, Holtecfinding internationalrepositories hasfor appliedspent to the United u [ States nuclear regulatoryfuel commissionis for a licensee tob constructl .216434.7e ande operateh aconcern, consolidatedas interimmany storagetypes facilityof onradioactive landwaste locatedremain betweendangerously Hobbsn andd Carlsbad,d alongi United= States= highwayo 62/180,h andradioactive tofor transportthousands upof toyears oneafter hundredthey thousandare metricno tonslonger ofl high-level] radioactiveb waste,,d ori spenta fuel,º frome ninety-sixuseful commercial nuclear reactors in thea Unitedcommercial States;reactor;
and r i = r t e w d m a n o WHEREAS, the Eddy-Lea energy alliance, an alliance of the d m :
b e d s º o t n = .216434.7AIC February 4, 2020 (8:49am) s k m e e a n e d r e l u [ A d cities of Carlsbad and Hobbs and Eddy and Lea counties, was formed to focus on the creation of an "interim" storage facility for spent nuclear fuel;
and WHEREAS, Holtec international has applied to the United States nuclear regulatory commission for a license to construct and operate a consolidated interim storage facility on land located between Hobbs and Carlsbad, along United States highway 62/180, and to transport up to one hundred thousand metric tons of high-level radioactive waste, or spent fuel, from ninety-six commercial nuclear reactors in the United States;
and h WHEREAS, New Mexico is already the storage site of the u » r nation's nuclear-weapons-defense-related transuranic waste at t h g e l i the waste isolation pilot plant near Carlsbad;
and h r i s WHEREAS, the transport to New Mexico of high-level h , e h radioactive waste HENRCº by railrail»HENRC from the eastern United States,t whereu g e b l e 17e , gh States, where ninety percent of the nuclear reactors are located,n createsd and ei e= n= do 18h located, creates an unacceptable risk for New Mexicans and residentsl in] moreb than,d =i =a lº ]r 19residents in more than forty other states;
and ae l r i= 20 WHEREAS, the proposed "interim" storage facility t e aw td anticipatesm a "temporary"n storageo periodWHEREAS, ofthe fiftyproposed years, but m m 21 e d r e 22 since no permanent repository exists, such "interim" storage cfacility ed rm c: 23 could become permanent;
andb r e at º o t n b= 24.216434.7AIC WHEREAS,February Holtec4, international's2020 plan(8:49am) tos buildk proposedm e - 2 - e a n e d r e l u [ interimA storaged ofanticipates high-levela radioactive"temporary" wastestorage inperiod Newof Mexicofifty .216434.7years, -but 2since -no haspermanent beenrepository metexists, withsuch stringent"interim" oppositionstorage fromcould manybecome sectors;permanent;
and WHEREAS, Holtec international's plan to build proposed interim storage of high-level radioactive waste in New Mexico has been met with stringent opposition from many sectors;
and WHEREAS, the governor also noted that the facility poses unacceptable risk to New Mexicans, who look to southeastern New Mexico as a driver of economic growth in the state, with agricultural industry contributions of approximately three h billion dollars ($3,000,000,000) per year to the state's u » r economy, of which three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000) t h g e l i is generated in Eddy and Lea counties, where the proposed h r i s facility would be located;
and h , e h WHEREAS, Commissioner of Public Lands Stephanie Garcia t u g e b l e 17e , gh Richard also raised concerns with the proposal, stating that e e n d 18d i = = o h New Mexico is not the right location for high-level nuclear = = l ] 19b ,d i a º r storage and that there is no guarantee that high-level nuclear ae l r i= 20t e w d m a n o waste can be safely transported to and through New Mexico or td em a: t that the site would truly be "interim";
andb m m 21 e d r e 22t WHEREAS,º existingo industrial,t agriculturaln and= ranching.216434.7AIC cFebruary e4, r2020 c(8:49am) 23s businessesk thatm generatee more- than3 thirty-eight- thousand jobs e a n be 24d andr moree thanl three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000) in annual u [ revenuesA tod the state and oil and gas production that generates .216434.7 - 3 - more than two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) in annual tax revenue to the statesite couldwould truly be negatively"interim"; affected by the proposed facility, including that high-level radioactive waste could threaten the land values and marketability of those products;
and WHEREAS, existing industrial, agricultural and ranching businesses that generate more than thirty-eight thousand jobs and more than three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000) in annual revenues to the state and oil and gas production that generates more than two billion dollars ($2,000,000,000) in annual tax revenue to the state could be negatively affected by the proposed facility, including that high-level radioactive waste could threaten the land values and marketability of those products;
and h WHEREAS, record numbers of visits to state parks, u » r historical sites and museums increased for the seventh t h g e l i consecutive year, with thirty-seven million five hundred h r i s thousand trips taken to and around the state in 2018, visitor h , e h spending having increased seven percent in 2018 and visitor t u g e b l e 17e , gh spending sustaining eight and five-tenths percent of all jobs e e n d 18d i = = o h in New Mexico;
and = = l ] 19b ,d i a º r WHEREAS, the creation of a high-level radioactive waste ae l r i= 20 storage facility in New Mexico jeopardizes the state's existing t e aw td industrial, agricultural and ranching businesses, runs counter m ma 21n eo dstorage rfacility ein 22 to the promotion of tourism and the diversification of New cMexico ejeopardizes r c 23 Mexico's economy and threatens the healthstate's andexisting safetyd ofm New: e a n b 24 Mexico residents;
ub [r NOW,e THEREFORE,t BEº ITo RESOLVEDt BYn THE= HOUSE.216434.7AIC OFFebruary .216434.74, 2020 (8:49am) s k m e - 4 - REPRESENTATIVESe OFa THEn STATEe OFd NEWr MEXICOe thatl u [ A d industrial, agricultural and ranching businesses, runs counter to the housepromotion of representativestourism opposeand the transportationdiversification of high-levelNew radioactiveMexico's wasteeconomy to,and threatens the health and storagesafety in,of New Mexico;Mexico residents;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO that the house of representatives oppose the transportation of high-level radioactive waste to, and storage in, New Mexico;
- 5 - 10» 12g 14o 16» er eh 17t ei ek nl di 18g =t =h ls ], 19e ah t l r i 20w tl eb al te me m, 21gh en d rl eh 22= c= b , a l º d i a r e r c= 23, a t e d m a n bo 24d um [: .216434.7
b r e t º o t n = .216434.7AIC February 4, 2020 (8:49am) s k m e e a n e d r e l u [ A d
View plain text versions (2)
- Amended Amendments in Context Current pdf
- Introduced introduced version pdf
Action History
-
action postponed indefinitely
-
DO PASS, as amended, committee report adopted
-
Sent to House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee
Sponsors
- Matthew McQueen · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 111 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Matthew McQueen Democrat
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (111)
111 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 111 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HM 21?
- HM 21 is sponsored by Matthew McQueen (Democrat).
- What is the current status of HM 21?
- This bill died with 2020 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track HM 21?
- Track HM 21 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HM 21
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HM 21
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →