Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuclear Lab Eis topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Fe County approves letter urging caution on LANL EIS, opposes pit-production expansion
Summary
Santa Fe County commissioners voted April 8 to send a letter to the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) commenting on Los Alamos National Laboratory's draft sitewide environmental impact statement, adding edits to flag hexavalent chromium, human impacts and explicitly oppose any expansion of plutonium pit production.
Santa Fe County commissioners voted April 8 to send a letter from the board to the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) commenting on the draft sitewide environmental impact statement for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).
The board approved an amended letter that asks NNSA to be explicit about hexavalent chromium, to address socioeconomic and housing impacts and to include a short human-impact statement. "We firmly oppose any expansion of Los Alamos National Labs that continues to produce plutonium pits," Commissioner Adam F. Johnson said as part of the language the board adopted.
The letter began as a staff draft focused on environmental concerns; commissioners debated adding language about economic development and technology commercialization after Commissioner Justin Green and others said the lab's economic role cannot be ignored. Green also asked the letter explicitly to use the phrase "hexavalent chromium" wherever chromium is discussed because of differences in toxicity. Commissioner Hank Hughes said he had added wording earlier to make clear the commission opposes pit production.
In debate, commissioners sought to balance two aims: pressing the NNSA on water and air contamination and other environmental harms, while also flagging the lab's economic footprint and unfulfilled commitments on regional investment. Johnson and Green proposed language citing the federal Bayh-Dole Act and urging LANL to support regional technology commercialization and local incubators; the board added a separate paragraph urging NNSA to account for the region's human and intergenerational harms from laboratory operations.
The public comment period included criticism of the EIS process itself. Greg Mello of the Los Alamos Study Group told commissioners the document did not include a genuine "no-action" alternative and warned the NNSA had structured alternatives so it could pick elements of each. "The NNSA hasn't made it easy because they did not provide a genuine no-action alternative," Mello said during public comment.
The motion to approve the letter as amended passed without recorded dissent. County staff said they would update the letter and transmit it to NNSA that day.
Why it matters: LANL is the region's largest federal employer and a frequent subject of environmental and public-health concern in Northern New Mexico. A county letter to NNSA becomes part of the administrative record in those federal reviews; the commission added both environmental and socioeconomic language to try to ensure county interests are considered in the final decision.
What happens next: County staff will incorporate the agreed edits and submit the letter to NNSA; commissioners asked that the final version be circulated to board members before transmission.
