LAURA: Senator Jeff Steinborn,   thanks for joining me today.

SEN. STEINBORN: Good morning.

Great to be with you.

Thank you.

LAURA: Thanks.

So, today I want to   talk specifically about Holtec International and  its plans for southeastern New Mexico.

Kind of,   just in a nutshell, what is their plan?

SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah, so this company,   Holtec International has got an application  with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,   which regulates spent nuclear fuel,  high-level nuclear waste in the country.

They have an application to create what's  called a consolidated interim storage facility   in the state of New Mexico and to be  licensed to ship, basically, the entire,   up to and beyond, the entire nation's  current supply of spent nuclear fuel.

And, it would be a 40-year license with an  opportunity to extend for another 40 years.

And it's got a lot of terrifying facets  to it, which I will certainly go into,   but it's very different from what we're used to  in the state.

And, I think a lot of people confuse   this with the W.I.P.P.

facility in southeastern  New Mexico.

W.I.P.P.

is low-level waste.

It's   basically defense facility waste, like gloves and,  you know, clothing and things like that, used in,   you know, plutonium production and testing and…  but a lower level of radioactivity and kind of   danger, I guess exposure to people.

And it is a  federal facility, buried almost a mile underground   in a salt cavern, basically.

What this is, what  this proposal is, is a private company that   wants to store this material in canisters, also  licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,   basically, partially on the surface and  partially buried.

And, the fact that it   would be owned by a private company and not the  federal government just carries lots of additional   risk to the state.

So, I'll stop right there.

LAURA: One of the things that I've been thinking   about a lot lately is, you mentioned this is  waste that's coming from nuclear power plants,   so there are nuclear power plants in  different communities throughout the country,   where private companies have operated nuclear  power facilities, selling electricity, fueling   entire economies.

And now, there's this waste  product and they want to send that to New Mexico.

This seems like a, seems like a bad deal for us.

Can you talk about the, sort of, privatization   of this waste and what hold… like where  does Holtec fit into this?

How did they   get that waste and why did they send it here?

SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah, so Holtec is a company   that really, up until now, has not been, they've  been a supplier of the nuclear, of the nuclear   power generation industry.

And, they've kind of  recently got into the waste side of it and even   bought a decommissioned power plant.

And now,  actually has title to some spent nuclear fuels,   some canisters, have spent  fuel.

So, yeah, it's, you know,   private nuclear power companies, as you said,  generate this nuclear waste as a byproduct of   creating nuclear power, basically.

It's these  rods that are used to generate, generate energy   and power and heat and then they're put, once they  lose enough to generate power, they're then put   into these cooling ponds.

And then, they're put  into what these, what's called dry cast storage,   yeah.

And they are now full of this stuff and  the federal government has had a legal mandate   since the 80s to find a permanent repository.

And that's where Yucca Mountain came in.

That   was going to be the permanent repository and under  federal law, federal government is responsible for   finding a permanent repository.

Well, that did  not work out because Yucca Mountain has been   terminated as a project, at least it  did under President Obama, Congress.

There are some in Congress trying to restart that  project, but, so, meanwhile these power companies,   they're left holding this material.

Granted, they  generated, generated it and those communities did   and in all fairness New Mexico uses a little  bit of nuclear power too from the Palo Verde   nuclear plant in Arizona, but I mean,  we're less than one half of one percent   of the nation's population.

That keep things in  perspective and, and we are going to be weaning   ourselves off nuclear power also, which is  part of our utilities plan.

So, yeah, they   want to get rid of this stuff.

The communities  that have this waste nearby want to get rid of it   and so this idea of a, since the permanent storage  has not worked out, this idea of interim storage   has kind of come up and it's a convenient solution  for the industry, to get rid of their waste,   so that they can produce more of it.

And,  for the communities, frankly, they have this   waste they don't want it.

And so, it's a,  really creates very interesting dynamics of   haves and have-nots in the country.

And this is  where New Mexico is really embroiled in a national   debate and this is a national policy issue.

LAURA: So, you mentioned it's an interim   storage facility and the NRC is working on a  40-year license.

What happens at the end of   the 40 years?

Where does it go when  it's not in interim storage here?

SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah, well that's the rub and  that's definitely one of the big problems, is   there is no permanent facility and scientifically  everybody acknowledges that there needs to be a   permanent repository.

That this stuff will be  radioactive for a very long time needs to be   put someplace safe for a very long time.

And, the  federal government actually defines repository,   their legal responsibility means a deep geological  repository.

So, that is the structural bar that   the federal government has legally set up, that we  have to achieve as a country.

The problem is, they   don't have one and so what everybody has a lot of  our congressional leaders, our governor has said,   is that we will become the permanent de facto  site, because there is no permanent facility.

And, it's certainly not designed to be the forever  site.

I mean, it's an interim facility.

It's   obviously not a deep geological solution and, and  beyond that, these dry casks are not there's not   a dry cask in existence that the technology hasn't  even been around longer than a couple decades.

So,   what… so, the concern here… one of my many  concerns is that we're technologically being   asked to be a guinea pig for… What happens when  we start to get a few decades out and we have   all these canisters sitting in the desert in  southeastern New Mexico.

What if they start   to fail on a massive scale, but yeah, it's…  and then what happens if the country goes,   if that company goes bankrupt, they're required  to put up a bond with this, but who would then   be required to take over this waste and where  would it go?

It could be an absolute disaster.

So, yeah, it's all of these are question marks  without answers.

They're not really question   marks, they're questions without answers, because  there's no permanent solution.

So, New Mexico,   this is basically a private sector solution being  hoisted upon New Mexico right now in lieu of a   real federal solution, which is what's needed.

LAURA: So, you and Representative Matthew McQueen   introduced House Bill 137, which  did not pass this session.

Can you   tell me a little bit about what that bill  would have done and what happened with it?

SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah, and the bill never got  defeated, it just never got brought up for a final   vote on the House Floor.

And, you know, that bill  made it to the House Floor with plenty of time   left, but of course, you know, the other side of  the aisle likes to slow the agenda down.

And, in   the House and so they started running out of time  and so the bill never got a vote.

Yeah, it's… what   the bill would have done is it would have borrowed  New Mexico, bars companies from storing high-level   nuclear waste in the state of New Mexico until  a federal permanent repository was in operation.

And initially the bill started off as just  a complete ban on storing the materials here   and then we amended it to say that it couldn't  happen until there was a federal repository.

And, so, but the bill also did some  other things as well.

It strengthens   the state's radioactive consultation task force  which is something we created in law around the   time when W.I.P.P.

came into existence.

We created  it for the state government to have kind of an   executive branch interagency level working group  to look at radioactive waste, or no, sorry,   radioactive issues.

And, and then, you  know, specifically be the interface with the   federal facility.

So, this bill would have also  strengthened that to include private facilities   and add more members to it.

So, it's one  of my obviously big disappointments that   we did not get this done this last session.

LAURA: So, and I think I read that Texas passed   a similar bill and I know other states, you know,  you mentioned Yucca Mountain, Nevada successfully   pushed back against the permanent repository.

I've  seen other states… Why is it that New Mexico seems   to keep having this issue and who in the state  is like for it.

It seems like so many people   are against it.

Who is the, who's for it here?

SEN. STEINBORN: Well, there are some political   leaders in southeastern New Mexico.

New Mexico is  a little unique, because we do have the country's   only national, low-level, nuclear waste storage  facility, W.I.P.P.

There are a lot of concerns   when that facility came into being.

Now they have  a uranium enrichment facility there called URENCO   and so, they've developed a comfort level.

Some  political leaders in southeastern New Mexico with   kind of this economic sector and so they saw  an opportunity, actually, and they're the ones   who put this in motion.

Some of the political  leaderships in southeastern New Mexico, they   recruited Holtec into submitting this proposal.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, so there's some   of the big leaders for it, ironically, right  across the border in Texas.

The oil industry   is super against it, because, obviously, we see  the economics of oil and gas and how hot the   Permian Basin is, and they recognize the risk  of having an accident in the middle of that,   of that economic activity.

So, our dynamics are a  little different here and so, unfortunately it's,   we, I see the support, kind of, fissure  along partisan lines, which is unfortunate.

But, you know, having said that, it's not… we  have, by part, we have unique support across   industries that don't typically work together,  that are opposed to the in New Mexico.

But,   yeah, I think the other problem we have here is we  have a much shorter session and, you know, with a   30-day session.

Texas has 144 day session.

They,  you know, and they had a very powerful economic   industry pushing for it, whereas in our state, you  know, we have the environmental community, which,   you know, the economic industry sometimes has  more political muscle.

But, you know, the bill's   gotten pretty far both times.

It just, it just  didn't get pulled up for a final vote and I'm   disappointed and I'm not going to make excuse why  they didn't bring it up for a vote.

But, you know,   this bill, a different variation of this bill  passed the Senate last year.

This time, it would   have absolutely passed the House if it had been  brought up for a vote.

And, I believe, would have   passed the Senate.

So, I think we're right there  in New Mexico, but it is a missed opportunity   that we didn't pass the bill.

That's for sure.

LAURA: So, in thinking about the support for   Holtec, for this industry, in that part  of the state… are we talking about, like,   entire communities and thousands of people.

Are we talking about, you know, a few people…   and I know that it.. SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah… no,   I'm really glad you asked the question, because  it, I'm going to say a few people, because it   was some of the political leadership of those  communities, specifically Hobbs and Carlsbad, who   formed a group called the Eddy, Lee county  Alliance, to work towards this.

Having said that,   then, there was another community right in that  county jail, who passed a resolution opposed to   this.

Lake Arthur.

So, there are communities  in southeastern New Mexico, who have come out   against this and absolutely, we've heard from  numerous citizens against this.

I remember,   I'm the chair of the state's radioactive and  hazardous materials interim committee, which is   a House, Senate committee, we had a hearing in  Hobbs and, you know, the people that showed up   were largely outside of government officials,  were citizens, saying we were opposed to this.

And   so, yeah, so it's a good… so it's a really  good question.

There's not unanimous support,   by any means, in that part of the state for this,  but people all over the state are absolutely   opposed to it.

The proposal is to bring in this  waste, these tasks, through rail and it would   come in through all parts of New Mexico via armed  guard and different communities around the state,   from Las Cruces that I represent, to Albuquerque  and the All Indian Pueblo Council of Governors,   have passed resolutions saying they don't want  this waste coming through their community.

Resolutions representing about 40% of the  state's population.

So, a great number of   people in the state absolutely do not want us  to be the storage ground for this material.

LAURA: Wow.

So, I wanted to talk a little bit  about the company which has been in the news in   other states, recently.

Holtec was debarred from  working at the Tennessee Valley Authority in 2010,   due to a criminal investigation.

And they  were fined two million dollars.

There's an   ongoing story in New Jersey right now, where the  state wants 26 million dollars that it had given   the company in tax breaks.

The state wants that  back and then in New England, the environmental   protection agency said recently that the company  was misleading the public in Massachusetts   about its plans to dump radioactive waste and  from a nuclear power plant into Cape Cod Bay,   specifically.

You know, what do we know about  this company and, sort of, the good faith effort   that it would be putting forth here in our state?

SEN. STEINBORN: Yeah, you know, I've been really   troubled honestly.

Hokie is the word that comes  to mind, you know.

I've been at the forefront   of having hearings on this issue, with this  committee trying to educate the citizens of state,   asking questions of the last administration.

And,  you would think, with a proposal of this profound   magnitude and risk, if they would acknowledge  it, that they would be forthright about it,   that they would want to assure us of their safety  capacity.

They would meet us and they would   be transparent about it.

Instead,  what they've done is, they've actually   hired lobbyists to try to kill my bills  to have more transparency on this project.

They obviously worked very hard to kill  this bill this last session and brought on   additional lobbyists during the session to fight  it, because, of course, this would have banned it   and they've kind of had some,  pulled some funny stuff during,   during the draft, during the process that we're  in now.

They, one time got a letter of support   from some legislators and refashioned it to call  it a resolution from a legislative committee and   sent that to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,  saying that a committee of the legislature had   to endorse it.

When, in fact, it was a letter of  support and they put the resolution at the top,   which was out, which is absolutely outrageous.

The  federal regulatory entity for keeping us safe… so   I had to, of course, as the Chair of the Committee  send a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission   saying, “Oh gee, I'm sorry… we never passed a  resolution to endorse this project.

That was a   misleading statement.” And, again, you know, they,  they want to walk back statements that they've   made about the liability… this to the state and  the communities… if an accident were to occur now.

They say, “Oh, no worries.

We got it, if something  happens.” So, yeah, they haven't shown themselves   in the state of New Mexico, to be like a solid,  trustworthy partner.

Instead, they're just really   trying to shove this thing down our throat.

LAURA: And so, I know these things take time.

There's a process.

Where in the process are we?

Is there still time for people to be involved?

Kind of, what's happening?

SEN. STEINBORN: So, they are   applying for a license and unfortunately  we're beyond the public comment period.

And,   the nuclear regulatory commission is trying  to get technical information from Holtec,   they've had to go back to the company two,  three times asking to get questions answered and   concerns that they have.

Holtec has not provided  that information.

So, the Nuclear Regulatory   Commission has sent letters to Holtec and this  is public… people can see their correspondence.

They go to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission  and search for this.

They can, and they can, I   think get on a list that way, where maybe they can  get notified.

But, basically, we don't know when   they're targeted to receive a possible permit,  now, because our license… because they're not,   they haven't provided the Nuclear Regulatory  Commission, what they've been asked for,   and, you know, that's where we're at.

There's  movement in Congress to certainly try to fight   it.

As you said, Texas passed the law banning it  there in the state of Texas.

Our Attorney General   in the State of Texas has filed suit against  the federal government, saying it's illegal   to do consolidated interim storage, because  it violates state’s rights, because states   really have very narrow avenues to even have a  voice in this process, which is outrageous, with…   unlike a federal facility, which we have statutory  veto power over, unless Congress overrides us.

Not so, with a private facility.

So, it's really  a weakness in federal law.

And then, finally,   several days ago Senator Heinrich introduced  the bill with Senator Cruz.

How's that for   bipartisanship on spent nuclear fuel?

Basically,  prohibiting the use of a fund that utilities have   been setting aside, paying into, to ultimately  ship this waste to a permanent repository.

I think one of Holtec’s business plans is to tap  into that fund for this interim storage.

And so,   they introduced a bill… Senator Heinrich  and Cruz, to prohibit the use of that money   for, which… so that'll be a good door to close, if  we can.

So, there you go.

It's, this thing's being   fought on multiple levels and we're certainly, you  know, the governor is steadfast against this and   I certainly intend to introduce this bill  again, even if they were to get a permit between   now and next year.

The facility will not be built  by then and, or even started, because there's a   lot of rail issues that have to be worked out.

So,  I'm going to keep fighting and the citizens of New   Mexico, what they can do is, they can educate  each other.

They can, thank you for reporting   on this.

That's so important, so people can learn  about the project.

And, there's groups around the   state that are certainly, and I apologize.

I don't  have a website handy.

I probably should have,   but there's advocacy groups that are fighting  this.

People can get involved.

They can speak   up.

They can let their legislators know, “Hey,  next time you have an opportunity to vote on this,   get this bill passed.” Take the bullseye off New  Mexico.

Look at what's happening.

Look at what's   happening in Ukraine right now and I apologize for  getting this in there, but, you know, Chernobyl,   a massive, you know, new global nuclear disaster  there.

And then, this nuclear power plant being   targeted and literally saying, you know, these  whole regions and countries would be uninhabitable   if they, these sites took a direct hit.

So,  we don't want New Mexico to be the dumping   ground for all this material, right?

LAURA: And we will put links to the   various news stories that I mentioned as well as  the NRC's website and whole text website… we'll   put all those in the comments.

Senator, thanks for  talking with me about this.

It's so complicated.

I appreciate you breaking it down for us.

SEN. STEINBORN: You are welcome and thanks   for reaching out, to do more  public education about it.

I really appreciate it.

LAURA: Thank you Senator.