Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lanl Sweis And Water Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Buckman board approves strengthened comments on LANL site-wide EIS after public warning on water risks
Summary
The Buckman Direct Diversion Board approved a revised comment letter on the Los Alamos National Laboratory site-wide environmental impact statement, after a public speaker and board members urged stronger language about legacy contamination, water use and wildfire-driven remobilization.
The Buckman Direct Diversion Board approved a revised set of public comments on the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) site-wide environmental impact statement (SWEIS) at its April 3 meeting, after public testimony urged the board to press the Department of Energy for stronger protections of regional water supplies.
The board’s action follows public comment by Joni Aaron of Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, who said LANL’s proposed alternatives under the SWEIS understate long-term contamination risks and water use impacts. Aaron urged the board to ask for a true "no action" alternative and for more attention to the potential for legacy contaminants to reach the Rio Grande. "We are also asking for a reduced operations alternative," Aaron said, describing concerns about buried waste, increasing water demand and the possibility of contaminants moving toward regional aquifers.
The board’s comment letter now focuses on items the board identified in its 2025 water-quality work plan: hexavalent chromium and PFAS contamination, wildfire-driven remobilization of legacy contaminants, and water-rights implications. Jay Lazarus of Glorietta Geoscience summarized the board staff draft, saying the comments were narrowed "to those items that are specific to the board's interests," including early-warning gauging, contaminant inventories and water-use estimates.
Board members pressed staff and the draft letter on several points. Commissioner Hughes asked that the final letter avoid endorsing LANL’s "expanded operations" alternative wholesale; Hughes proposed removing language that the board "supports the expanded operations alternative" and instead stressing the board’s interest in wildfire risk reduction and feral cattle management irrespective of which SWEIS alternative the lab chooses. Member Ives and others asked the board to ask LANL to upgrade gauging and early-warning systems for flows down Los Alamos and Pueblo Canyons so possible contaminant pulses can be detected more quickly.
Staff said the proposed comments were intentionally focused on items directly affecting Buckman water supply and that mechanical edits could be made before the April 10 SWEIS comment deadline. The board voted to approve the revised letter with the discussed edits and directed staff to circulate the final draft for signatures.
The board’s final action does not change federal review processes but adds the Buckman board’s voice to the SWEIS record; the board’s concerns emphasize protecting East Side water supplies and springs in the Rio Grande corridor. The board indicated it will coordinate the letter with the MOU negotiations and its monitoring requests to LANL.
Board action and next steps: the board approved sending the revised comments with edits to emphasize wildfire remobilization risk, early-warning gauging upgrades and water-rights concerns; staff will circulate the final letter for board signatures ahead of the April 10 deadline.
Ending: The board’s comment letter and the public testimony make explicit the Buckman board’s interest in how LANL’s long-term plans could affect regional water quantity and quality; staff said they will return with the final letter and any follow-up coordination with LANL and other agencies.
