Santa Fe County commissioners plan to raise concerns about the impacts a potential Los Alamos National Laboratory expansion could have on regional resources in response to a recent environmental report from a federal agency.

Commissioners are preparing to respond to a draft site-wide environmental impact statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration that includes three visions for LANL’s future, ranging from no action to modernization to expansion, while cataloging environmental impacts for each scenario.

A draft letter from the commissioners states the board would not support LANL increasing its footprint in Northern New Mexico.

“We support the no action alternative that continues clean up of the site, but no growth of the site or the mission,” the letter says.

Commissioners are expected to approve the letter at a future meeting, potentially with changes. It notes the lab plays an outsized role in the county’s environment, especially when it comes to drinking water. “Pollution” from LANL activities enters the Rio Grande watershed, from which the county draws much of its drinking water, the proposed letter says.

The board opted not to approve the draft letter, brought forward by Commissioner Hank Hughes, at its Tuesday meeting. But commissioners unanimously agreed to reconsider it at a subsequent meeting with some potential additions.

Commissioner Justin Greene wanted to add language specific to LANL growth and the Northern New Mexico housing landscape. LANL’s budget has more than doubled and hundreds of new employees have been added since 2008, increasing its presence in the region.

Pit production

Although former Commissioner Anna Hansen, an anti-nuclear advocate, was term-limited off the board at the start of the year, the letter would have commissioners continuing to take a strong stance on the national lab’s goals related to plutonium pit production for nuclear bomb cores.

Perhaps unexpectedly, the all-Democratic board quoted President Donald Trump in the proposed letter, arguing there is no reason for LANL to pursue expansion of its pit production capacity.

“There’s no reason for us to be building brand new nuclear weapons; we already have so many,” Trump said several weeks ago when speaking to reporters from the Oval Office, a quote that appears in the proposed letter. “[You] could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over.”

As a part of a multibillion-dollar effort, the lab is working toward the production of nuclear bomb cores with a goal of making 30 per year by 2030. The pursuit for years has generated controversy throughout Northern New Mexico, with critics raising concerns about environmental impacts and potential health risks.

“Given LANL’s obligation under [the National Environmental Policy Act] to consider alternative ways to meet its operational goals, framing the issue as a binary choice between shutting the lab down outright or expanding pit production is unserious,” states the draft letter from commissioners.

Water, PFAS contamination concernsThe draft site-wide environmental impact statement notes PFAS have been detected in several wells in Pueblo Canyon and Los Alamos Canyon in amounts exceeding the New Mexico Environment Department’s tap water screening levels.

The report from NNSA states, “given the understanding that PFAS health effects are rapidly evolving in tandem with increasing regulatory attention to PFAS, the Laboratory will continue to evaluate and consult with NMED on whether additional sampling for PFAS constituents is required.”

In the proposed letter, the county raises concerns that deferring any action on PFAS contamination while awaiting further risk evaluation and consultation amounts to “kicking the can down the road” when the risks to the environment and human health are “clear enough today.”

Commissioners also fear LANL expansion or modernization possibilities pose the prospect of an increase in the risk of PFAS contamination from fire suppression activities.

Under the modernization vision for LANL’s future set out in the draft, LANL estimates its demand for water will increase by 3.4% in comparison to the no-action alternative. Under the expansion alternative, water consumption is estimated to increase up to 70.7% annually.

The lab needs to “ensure that it has sufficient water rights to accommodate this increased usage,” the draft letter from county commissioners states.

Concern about spotted owl habitatUnder the modernization alternative, 15 projects could potentially occur in undeveloped habitat for the Mexican spotted owl, a species the federal government considerers threatened, according to the draft letter from commissioners.

Most of the land disturbance would occur if a solar panel array system was fully built on the nine proposed sites in order to meet energy goals for the lab, disrupting habitat for the spotted owl.

“If the expansion is proposed, efforts should be taken to protect spotted owl habitat in other areas, such as leaving dead trees for nesting,” the letter states. “Ideally with the no action alternative, there is no need for the [solar panel] array system or the power line across the Caja del Rio.”

Power line controversy

At several public meetings held in the last six months, area residents have continually railed against a proposed power line that would cut through 14 miles of the ecologically significant Caja del Rio plateau to shore up the lab’s power supply.

The high-voltage line would include transmission towers and a 100-foot-wide swath along its path from the lab through White Rock Canyon, south across the Caja del Rio plateau, then east through the Santa Fe National Forest to a substation. Federal officials say the project is needed because the two lines that now power the lab are becoming strained and will reach their capacity by 2027.

In the draft letter, the county expressed hope the lab will go another direction amid calls to protect the Caja del Rio plateau. Commissioners previously approved a letter objecting to a “finding of no significant impact” from U.S. Forest Service officials for the proposed power line last year.

“The County asks LANL to consider alternative approaches to satisfying its power needs that have a lesser impact on the Caja del Rio,” the draft letter said.