Community Relations Plan

Dear Mr. St. John:

I write for Conservation Voters New Mexico to comment on the draft Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Community Relations Plan (“the draft Community Relations Plan” or “the Plan”) prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy and Salado Isolation Mining Contractors, LLC (referred to collectively as “the Permittees”).

Introduction

Conservation Voters New Mexico (“CVNM”) is a statewide non-profit non-partisan organization that values responsible stewardship of New Mexico’s water, land, and other natural resources. CVNM believes that ecological health and social equity among New Mexico’s diverse and culturally rich communities protect our state’s quality of life. CVNM is dedicated to ensuring democratic accountability and access for all New Mexicans in decision making at all levels of government. CVNM supports policies that promote long-term ecological and economic sustainability. This is CVNM’s responsibility to future generations.

CVNM’s concerns about the draft Community Relations Plan are based on CVNM’s commitment to democratic accountability and access for all New Mexicans in decision making at all levels of government. It is CVNM’s position that all New Mexicans must be able to be aware of, understand, and be able to influence governmental decisions that affect them and their environment.

Argument

I. CVNM’s concern about the draft Community Relations Plan is based on the impacts of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on New Mexicans.

CVNM is concerned about the draft Community Relations Plan for several reasons, including but not necessarily limited to the following:

- First, the transport of transuranic waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (“WIPP”) involves transport of that waste through New Mexico communities;

- Second, the existence and operation of WIPP pose risks to the New Mexico communities that surround WIPP;

- Third, WIPP is used, among other purposes, for removal of transuranic waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory (“LANL”), which is located adjacent to several communities in northern New Mexico, including Pueblo Nations;

- Fourth, decisions that are made about the final permit for WIPP are both technical and political decisions that should reflect concerns of New Mexico communities and New Mexico residents about those communities;

- Finally, because of WIPP’s importance to the residents of New Mexico, the WIPP Community Relations Plan must require that those residents be given timely and effective notice of events at WIPP and the ability to participate in decision making processes concerning WIPP.

II. The draft Community Relations Plan’s provisions for informing New Mexico residents about developments at WIPP are appropriate but incomplete.

Although the draft Community Relations Plan includes some important provisions for keeping New Mexico residents informed about developments at WIPP, some of those provisions are incomplete. In addition, the Plan fails to include other essential provisions.

A. The draft Community Relations Plan’s provisions for publication of notices in newspapers are important but incomplete.

The draft Community Relations Plan includes an appropriate provision that expands the list of newspapers in which notices of public meetings will be published. The draft Community Relations Plan adds Indian County Today and the Roswell Daily Record to the list of newspapers in which public meetings concerning WIPP will be published. Moreover, the draft Community Relations Plan specifies that the publication in the Roswell Daily Record shall occur on the date of a bi-monthly Spanish page edition. The publication of notices in these two newspapers is important because of the presence of Pueblo Nations near LANL, which is a source of waste that is shipped to WIPP, and because of Roswell’s proximity to a route to WIPP.

On the other hand, the Plan’s provisions addressing publication of notices in newspapers are deficient in three important respects. First, the Plan should mandate that the publication of notices in the named newspapers occur at pages other than the classified advertisements or legal advertisements. The classified advertisements in newspapers are generally read only by people who are looking to purchase items that are for sale there, and the legal advertisements in newspapers are generally read only by attorneys and people interested in specific legal proceedings. The Plan should follow the example set by the New Mexico Legislature in the New Mexico Solid Waste Act and the New Mexico Mining Act and require that notices be published in sections of the newspapers other than the classified or legal advertisements.

Second, the Plan should require that all notices be published in English and in Spanish. The Plan implies that the notice to be published in the Roswell Daily Record is to be published in Spanish, but the Plan should require explicitly that all of the notices published in the listed newspapers be published in both English and Spanish. Publication in both languages is the only way to ensure that people who communicate in each language will receive actual notice.

Third, the Plan should specify the information that must be presented in the notices that are published in the newspapers. During the negotiations on the renewal of the State Hazardous Waste Act Permit for WIPP, CVNM proposed that the notices concerning changes in the Permit include:

- A description of the proposed Permit change;

- The dates for a public comment period;

- Contact information for the Permittees and the New Mexico Environment Department; and

- The dates, times, and places for public meetings addressing the Permit change.

Unfortunately, the draft Community Relations Plan does not include any of this specific information. The final Plan therefore should be amended to provide that this information must be included in public notices addressing any proposed change in the Permit.

B. The draft Community Relations Plan fails to recognize the need to communicate in various different languages.

The draft Plan appropriately provides for Community Forum public meetings to be held three times each year to provide information to New Mexico residents and for public meetings to provide information concerning class 2 and class 3 permit modification requests. The draft Plan also indicates that those meetings will be held at specific locations and virtually in order to increase the ability of New Mexico residents to participate in them. In addition, the Plan provides that the procedures outlined by the Plan do not replace the DOE’s obligations to interact with Pueblos and Tribes on a government to government basis pursuant to DOE O 144.1.

These provisions are appropriate, but they are incomplete because they say nothing about the need for the Permittees to communicate with New Mexico residents – including Pueblo and Tribal residents – in languages other than English. If these meetings are to provide information to New Mexico residents, provision must be made for translation for those residents who communicate in languages other than English.

C. The draft Community Relations Plan fails to provide for using radio to provide notice to New Mexico residents.

Finally, the draft Community Relations Plan fails entirely to provide for using radio announcements to provide notice to residents of New Mexico. During the negotiations on the State Hazardous Waste Act Permit for WIPP, CVNM argued that the Community Relations Plan should require that notices given to residents of New Mexico be given by means of announcements on radio stations as well as in newspaper advertisements. Specifically, CVNM urged that notices in newspapers should also be given as announcements on three radio stations: Carlsbad Radio, KANW, and KUNM, and that those announcements should include each of the four items listed on page 3 above. CVNM also urged that the Community Relations Plan provide that the radio announcements shall be made on at least two days.

A requirement that the public notices addressing developments at WIPP be announced on radio is important because many residents of New Mexico, particularly those residents who live in rural areas, receive their news through radio rather than by reading newspapers. A mandate that public notices be given by means of radio announcements therefore increases the chances that such a notice will actually reach New Mexico residents.

Conclusion

For these reasons, CVNM urges that the final Community Relations Plan be amended to include the provisions that CVNM has outlined above.

Thank you for your attention to this important issue.

Yours truly,

Douglas Meiklejohn
Water Quality & Land Restoration Advocate
Conservation Voters New Mexico

General Comments

Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) appreciates that the Permittees are revising the Community Relations Plan (Plan) in response to changes in Section 1.15 of the WIPP Renewal Permit. As a party in the negotiations on the Renewal Permit, SRIC supported those changes. Consequently, we also support those changes being incorporated in the Plan.

However, SRIC also notes that the Permit sets the minimum requirements, and we continue to encourage the Permittees to make other improvements in providing outreach and information to interested members of the public. Additionally, rather than strictly limiting the Plan to Permit-related information and activities, SRIC encourages the Permittees to recognize that members of the public need not limit comments and questions solely to issues that the Permittees believe are permit related. The Permittees seem to recognize that reality in the new last paragraph of Section 3.7.

Specific Comments

1. Throughout the Plan starting in Section 1.2, the Plan changes references to participants or members of the public to “interested parties.” SRIC does not support that language and requests that the language throughout the Plan instead be “members of the public.” That terminology is consistent with the Permit language in Section 1.15. Further, SRIC believes that some people might not consider themselves “parties” so that language might be perceived as limiting participation, whereas “members of the public” is more inclusive. Further, Section 3.2 provides for a “broad approach” to communications and the more inclusive language better describes such an approach.

2. In the second sentence of the next-to-last paragraph of renumbered Section 2.1, SRIC objects to the change of “laws” to “regulations” because it is inaccurate. For example, the New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act 74-4 NMSA, includes chemicals and metals. If there is to be a change, “regulations” would be added, so that the phrase would be “laws and regulations.”

3. SRIC does not support the deletion of the second paragraph in renumbered Section 2.2 regarding EPA certification. That EPA role is part of the “regulatory background” for WIPP, including radioactive constituents of the waste. It is useful for the public to understand that separate regulation, so that information should be maintained, as it has been in previous versions of the Plan.

4. In Section 3.7, SRIC suggests revising the new language in the first sentence of the second paragraph to make it more accurate, as follows:

In addition to the meetings required by RCRA regulations, the Permittees conduct pre-submittal meetings prior to submitting a Class 2 or 3 PMR to NMED.

SRIC gives permission for these comments (and Permittees’ Responses) to be posted on the WIPP website.

SRIC looks forward to your responses to these comments and any others that are submitted.

Yours truly,

Don Hancock
Southwest Research and Information Center
PO Box 4524
Albuquerque, NM 87196-4524

Posted December 11, 2023

1. CCNS strongly objects to the removal of the pre-submittal permit modification request (PMR) meetings, also known as "draft stage" PMR meetings Sec. 3.7. The pre-submittal PMR meetings have proven to be effective, efficient and an opportunity to have a conversation about the PMRs before the formal regulatory process begins - thus clarifying the public's concerns as well as for DOE and the public understand more fully the technical matters being raised - all to the benefit of the USA's taxpayers. There is no information in the CRP to explain why the pre-submittal meetings are being eliminated. The public requires the pre-submittal meetings. Do not eliminate them.

   Response: The Community Relations Plan focuses on those public meetings that are required by the regulations. Pre-submittal meetings are not required, hence, they are not included in the CRP. As the result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the DOE sought an alternative for these meetings that did not involve face-to-face contact. To this end, virtual town hall meetings are scheduled as a means of not only reaching a larger audience, but to provide the same opportunities for presubmittal comments and questions. DOE believes that the benefits obtained from presubmittal discussions can be obtained through these virtual town hall meetings.

   The Web page that was linked in the Community Relations Plan is no longer used and will be removed. The information quickly becomes obsolete and can cause confusion since it is draft material. DOE will decide on a case-by-case basis what draft information should be distributed to the public for review and comment.

2. When CCNS received the mailing containing the CRP, we did not understand what it was because it was folded in such a way that was confusing. And the double-sided sheets did not include page numbers - thus creating even more confusion. It remains confusing even today as we prepare these comments.

   Response: We apologize for the confusion. Double sided printing is used to reduce the amount of paper and minimize the postage. Page numbers certainly would have reduced the confusion and they will be added.

3. Sec. 3.2 - The CRP ignores that DOE and each individual sovereign tribal nation has a separate government-to-government relationship. Stating that "affected tribal governments and tribal members will be provided information about WIPP Permit related actions in the same manner as that outlined in this Plan for communities, the general public and interested parties" is incorrect. As DOE knows, the government-to-government relationship requires more than what communities, the general public and interested parties receive. The CRP ignores that relationship. The CRP language must be updated to include the government-to-government relationship and explain the more involved outreach to sovereign tribal nations.

   Response: Actual government-to-government relations are addressed by the Department of Energy Headquarters staff. Tribal governments are provided information pertaining to WIPP in the same manner that all stakeholders interested in WIPP receive information.

Posted July 12, 2017

Don Hancock
Southwest Research and Information Center
Albuquerque, NM

Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) provides the following comments on the proposed Updates for the Community Relations Plan.

1. SRIC does not understand the proposed changes to Section 2.1. Without explanation, the changes should not be approved.

The proposed deletion of “the facility” and replacement with “purposes” is unnecessary and could be confusing. It is unnecessary because “facility” better describes WIPP than does “purposes” (which are undefined) in the Plan and could be confusing. SRIC does not believe any changes are necessary in the existing language. But a better alternative would be:

“…for the WIPP facility to safely dispose of defense transuranic (TRU) waste.”

The proposed additional sentence is not necessary and conveys the incorrect impression that there is no water in the formation, which is not true. There are interstitial drops of water in the formation.

2. SRIC does not understand the reason(s) to delete sentences in Section 2.2. Without explanation, the changes should not be approved. The two sentences are correct and provide information not otherwise contained in the Plan, so the effect of deleting the sentences is to provide less information to the public.

3. SRIC does not object to the other proposed changes.

SRIC also suggests that future updates provide some basis for additions and deletions to the Plan, as part of the effort to inform the public in a “transparent manner.”

Thank you for your consideration.

Posted July 12, 2017

Permittees Response to Comments from
Don Hancock
Albuquerque, New Mexico

Dear Mr. Hancock,

Thank you for providing comments to the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Community Relations Plan. The Permittees will respond to your comments in the order they were received.

Comment 1a:The proposed deletion of “the facility” and replacement with “purposes” is unnecessary and could be confusing.

Permittees response:
The reason that "the WIPP facility" was replaced with "purposes" is that "the WIPP facility" ended one sentence and the next sentence began with the same words. The author felt it was repetitive. Searching for an alternate phrase, the author chose "purposes" which can be found in Public Law 102-579 Sec.3, a. (3) Land Withdrawal and Reservation For WIPP which states, "Such lands are reserved for . . . construction, experimentation, operation, repair and maintenance, disposal, shutdown, monitoring, decommissioning, and other authorized activities associated with the purposes of WIPP as set forth in section 213 of the Department of Energy National Security and Military Applications of Nuclear Energy Authorization Act of 1980."

The Permittees agree to change the sentence to read: "In 1992, Congress withdrew 16 sections of land from the public domain to be used by the DOE for the purposes of fulfilling the WIPP mission of safely disposing of defense TRU waste."

Comment 1b: The proposed additional sentence is not necessary and conveys the incorrect impression that there is no water in the formation, which is not true. There are interstitial drops of water in the formation.

Permittees response:
The Permittees suggest an alternate change: "The formation, which has existed for more than 250 million years, also demonstrates an absence of water as a viable pathway to the accessible environment, which ensures long-term isolation of TRU mixed waste constituents."

The Permittees believe the added sentence better explains why the salt formation, in which the WIPP repository is located, will safely contain radionuclides for 10,000 years and beyond.

Comment 2: SRIC does not understand the reason(s) to delete sentences in Section 2.2. Without explanation, the changes should not be approved. The two sentences are correct and provide information not otherwise contained in the Plan, so the effect of deleting the sentences is to provide less information to the public.

Permittees Response:
The author’s intent was to provide a more concise and accurate definition of TRU mixed waste. The Permittees agree to leave the two existing sentences but propose a change to the second sentence: "The WIPP Permit is required to manage and dispose of these TRU and hazardous wastes as TRU mixed waste, which is waste that contains both radioactive and hazardous components."

Please let us know if our responses resolve your comments. We appreciate your perspective. Do we have your permission to post your comments and our responses to them?
Thank you.

Posted July 12, 2017

Don Hancock (Second Set of Comments)
Southwest Research and Information Center
Albuquerque, NM

Thanks for your responses. You certainly may post and make public our comments and your responses.

The proposed revision in response to comment 1.a. is acceptable.

The proposed revision in response to comment 1.b. is not acceptable and is more of an “advocacy” argument rather than a factual statement, especially the last phrase: “which ensures long-term isolation of TRU mixed waste constituents.”

SRIC objects to that last phrase and requests that it not be used. Ensuring long-term isolation should include an explanation of the hundreds of oil and gas wells surrounding the site, and oil and gas resources below the WIPP repository horizon.
The proposed revision to comment 2 is acceptable.

Posted July 12, 2017

Permittees Response to Second Set of Comments from
Don Hancock
Southwest Research and Information Center
Albuquerque, New Mexico

Comment 1b: The proposed revision in response to comment 1.b. is not acceptable and is more of an “advocacy” argument rather than a factual statement, especially the last phrase: “which ensures long-term isolation of TRU mixed waste constituents.”

Permittees Response:

Mr. Hancock,

Thank you for your comments. The Permittees agree to delete the proposed sentence: “The formation, which has existed for more than 250 million years, also demonstrates the absence of water."

Posted August 2, 2016

Donald Dayton
Carlsbad, New Mexico

Thank you for a copy of your Community Relations Plan. I am retired in Carlsbad after 30 years of federal employment in Environmental Management work with the U.S. Dept. of the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture at various locations around the country. My last assignment was in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

After retirement, I volunteered to serve on the "Northern New Mexico Citizens" Advisory Board to "Advise the DOE through a federally chartered formal recommendation process on environmental restoration (cleanup) and waste management activities at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and the northern New Mexico communities impacted by LANL activities, (see attached). The Board was also provided with a trip to the WIPP site, a tour underground and discussion with the WIPP environmental management. I found my two year assignment on this Committee to be very successful in providing community input from the various communities impacted by LANL activities.

I urge that you set up a similar Citizen's Advisory Board with members representing local communities surrounding and impacted by WIPP. In the long run, it can prove to be very valuable and provide a positive impact on your community relations program.

I agree to having my comments and suggestions posted on the WIPP Community Relations Plan Web Page.

Attachment:

Posted August 2, 2016

Permittees Response to Comments from
Donald Dayton
Carlsbad, New Mexico

Dear Mr. Dayton,

Thank you for your interest in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) and for providing comments to the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Community Relations Plan. The purpose of the Community Relations Plan is to offer background information about the WIPP Permit, updates on Permit actions and opportunities for public participation in the Permit process.

With regard to your interest in establishing a WIPP Citizens Advisory Board (CAB), the Permittees will certainly consider how a CAB might add value to WIPP. Through the years the WIPP Project has developed valued relations with state and local stakeholders and actively supports public participation opportunities. In addition to regulators, the New Mexico Environment Department and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, there are numerous autonomous agencies and organizations that review WIPP operations for safety and compliance.

We welcome your participation in the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit process and encourage you to sign up for the WIPP facility mailing list to receive notifications of Permit actions and public meetings. You may also call the toll-free Community Relations number at 1-866-271-9640 for more information.

Thank you for taking the time to provide comments.

Posted May 24, 2015

Lisa Chappa

I saw in yesterday's paper that you are accepting ideas on how to improve the community relations for WIPP. I would suggest that it should be a goal for the NWP to have everyone in the community have a basic understanding of what WIPP is and how it works. This will avoid any spreading of rumors and reduce any fears.

Perhaps a WIPP month would work, or you could spread it out over the year. But concentrating efforts in one month would encourage families and friends to talk about it at dinner tables and around town. get WIPP people out into the community in a united effort in one month of the year.

For students I suggest a WIPP week. Similar to Engineer's week or Math awareness month, WIPP would visit local schools and offer a hands-on curriculum for students that week. Engineer's week also has a girl day which I think is a nice component. No need to rebuild the wheel, just use their model.

You could also work with local scout groups, after school science programs, and the Boys and Girls club to offer curriculum like games which relate to nuclear power and waste which could just be incorporated into their activities. Bring in people from the National Museum of Nuclear Science to do assemblies or run an evening family science night for the community. You could even sponsor or lead a summer camp!

Some possible curriculum is here:
Exothermic Reactions:
What to do with Waste:

In this same month, also attend adult groups like Rotary, Lions, Christian Women's Club, and clubs at the college. Bring activities, show power points about how things work, and be available to answer questions. Maybe you could even host a movie at the end of the month. Perhaps this could be done in collaboration with the college or the Cave and Karst institute.

I believe that if you make educating the community a goal, you will find many opportunities to do that in a fun and positive manner. This will certainly improve the community relations and benefit the community in the process. Kids will be proud that their parents work at WIPP, young people will look for education that will allow them to find jobs there, and the community in general will be more likely to embrace WIPP, even in hard times.

Thank you for the opportunity to share my opinions, Lisa Chappa

-- "Be the change you want to see in the world." -Mahatma Gandhi

Posted May 28, 2014

Don Hancock,
Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC)
Albuquerque, New Mexico

1: Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) continues to support the Permit requirement for a Community Relations Plan and for the Plan to be developed and revised with community input. SRIC has no objections to the changes provided in the updated plan.

2. SRIC appreciates that comments and responses are posted under the "Comments" tab.

3. SRIC is concerned that the August 9, 2012 Response to SRIC's comment about public involvement was not incorporated into the Plan.

The Response was: The Permittees periodically convene meetings that are not required by the Permit in order to provide interested members of the public an opportunity to discuss and give input to the Permittees during the development of a Permit modification request prior to its formal submission to the New Mexico Environment Department. Such meetings will continue provided they add value to the permit modification process and as budget allows. Interested members of the public can find review drafts of Permit modifications and check for meeting dates on the link below: wipp.energy.gov/rcradox/ProposedMods.htm.

However, Plan section 3.7 does not have that language, nor any other discussion of the "meetings that are not required by the Permit." Nor does the Plan contain the link to drafts of Permit modifications.

SRIC supports including the additional language stated in the August 9, 2012 Response into the Plan. SRIC supports continuing the "meetings that are not required by the Permit" and the posting on the WIPP webpage of review drafts of Permit modifications.

4. SRIC continues to believe that a list of involved community groups, including SRIC, and their contact information should be included as resources to facilitate public involvement. Groups should be listed only
with their consent, which could be given in a similar way to that done with individual comments.

5. SRIC agrees that these comments and the responses should be posted on the Community Relations Plan "Comments" tab.

6. I am glad to discuss any of these comments or other comments

Posted July 19, 2012

Don Hancock,
Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC)
Albuquerque, New Mexico

1. Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) continues to support the permit requirement for a Community Relations Plan and for the Plan to be developed and revised with community input. SRIC has no objections to the changes provided in the updated plan.

2. SRIC appreciates that the addition suggested in our June 2, 2011 comments in Section 1.0 has been incorporated into the Community Relations Plan.

3. SRIC is concerned that the Plan posted (http://www.wipp.energy.gov/WIPPCommunityRelations/plan.html) does not include Sections 5.1 to 5.6 of the draft plan, including the changes that were agreed to. SRIC believes that the entire Plan must be posted.

4. SRIC continues to believe that the Plan should include the fact that public involvement is encouraged through a pre-submittal meeting on draft permit modification requests and that such requests are posted on the WIPP website link "Hazardous Waste Permit - Information on Proposed Modifications" to allow additional public involvement.

5. SRIC appreciates that the addition suggested in our June 2, 2011 comments for e-mail notification was incorporated into Section 5.3 of the Plan.

6. SRIC continues to believe that a list of involved community groups, including SRIC, and their contact information should be included as resources to facilitate public involvement. Groups should be listed only with their consent, which could be given in a similar way to that done with individual comments.

7. I am glad to discuss any of these comments or other comments.

Don Hancock,
Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC)
Albuquerque, New Mexico

Posted May 29, 2012

Crystal Fletcher
Carlsbad, New Mexico

I am looking for any information available:

My name is Crystal Fletcher and I am an intern at Intrepid Potash in the Environmental Dept. I would like to get a recycling program initiated at the plant and would like any information on the Program that WIPP has in place for recycling in Carlsbad. I am in search of an established plan that can serve as a mentor for research.

Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,
Crystal Fletcher

Posted June 2, 2011

Don Hancock,
Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC)
Albuquerque, New Mexico

1. Southwest Research and Information Center (SRIC) supports the permit requirement for a Community Relations Plan and for the Plan to be developed with community input. There are many good elements included in the draft Plan. While a concise Community Relations Plan is appropriate, SRIC believes some essential information should be added to the Draft Plan.

2. Section 1.0. SRIC suggests that two important fundamental aspects of WIPP, which are included in Permit Attachment B, should be stated in this section. "During the Disposal Phase of the facility, which is expected to last 25 years, the total amount of waste received from off-site generators and any derived waste will be limited to 175,600 m3 of TRU waste of which up to 7,080 m3 may be remote-handled (RH) TRU mixed waste. For purposes of this application, all TRU waste is managed as though it were mixed."

3. Section 5.1. Over the past several years, an important aspect of public involvement in permit modifications has been the distribution of draft permit modifications and a pre-submittal meeting. That practice should be maintained and included in the Community Relations Plan.

4. Section 5.2. The fact that the Carlsbad Field Office provides financial assistance to some tribes should be included, and the tribes currently with such agreements should be listed.

5. The Community Relations Plan web page should include an e-mail notification system to provide those who sign up with notification when the information changes.

6. The Plan should include a list of involved community groups, including SRIC, and their contact information.

7. The Plan is generally written so that a glossary may not be needed. However, SRIC suggests that the Plan include either a link to Section 1.5 of the Permit for definitions or placing those definitions as a part of the Plan.

8. I am glad to discuss any of these comments or other comments.

Don Hancock

Posted June 2, 2011

Cathrynn N. Brown
State Representative

I realize that the WIPP budget has financial constraints and that the community relations staff is overworked, but I believe that WIPP needs to reach out to state legislators. If you haven't already invited each representative and senator on a tour, please make it a point to do so. Keep after them until they "come and see." There is resistance to all things radioactive in the minds of some northern legislators, and we need to assuage their concerns.

I have spoken with the freshman class of legislators, and these individuals would like to go on a tour of the WIPP facility (and then visit LES) in the late summer or fall. Perhaps this tour could be conducted in conjunction with a meeting of the Radioactive and Hazardous Materials Committee. (I have already broached the idea with LES.)

Thank you for inviting comments from the community.

Cathrynn N. Brown
State Representative,
District 55 Carlsbad, Loving, Malaga & Otis