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