GRANTS, N.M. - Three local governments have gone on record supporting in-situ recovery, or ISR, as an environmentally responsible way to extract uranium for carbon-free nuclear power. The Grants City Council passed the first resolution Jan. 21. The village of Milan Board of Trustees followed March 23, and the Cibola County Board of Commissioners voted 3-2 on Sept. 24.
ISR technology has been used successfully in the United States for more than 50 years, including in Nebraska, Texas, and Wyoming. Grants Energy is working to bring this proven technology to New Mexico, where it can generate tens of billions of dollars in economic activity. Permits will come from state and federal regulators, who will review our Grants Precision ISR project near San Mateo over the next several years. Residents have that time to judge the project, and they deserve specific answers. Diego Lopez, editor of the Cibola Citizen, asked for them in his Sept. 30 State of Affairs column, “Atoms for Cibola.”
We plan to operate here for more than 30 years. That requires being a good neighbor, investing in local people, learning from the past, and respecting the cultures of this county, region, and the state. Lopez raised these questions, and we want to answer them.
How does ISR differ from the mining and milling behind the Homestake contamination?
ISR leaves the ore underground. Wells circulate the aquifer’s own water, with oxygen and bicarbonate (like baking soda) added, through ore more than 3,000 feet deep and pump out the uranium.
That depth is more than two Empire State Buildings stacked end to end. It requires steel well casing, and it places thousands of feet of clay and shale between the ore and the shallow aquifers that supply local drinking water.
Lopez wrote that Homestake’s legacy “belongs in every conversation about uranium’s return.” We agree. Homestake’s contamination came from mill tailings that leached into the shallow aquifers supplying families’ wells. ISR brings no ore to the surface and leaves no tailings. It entirely eliminates the things that caused Homestake’s contamination.
Through a source material license and a discharge permit, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the New Mexico Environment Department will review what we inject. The safe use of oxygen and bicarbonate in ISR is well demonstrated at projects across the U.S.
How much water will the project use, and which aquifer will it affect?
The project will draw from one aquifer, the Westwater. On Dec. 5, 2025, we applied to the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer to transfer 2,100 acre-feet a year of existing water rights from the former Mount Taylor Mine. That is about 0.001% of the water in the Westwater, less than what Intel uses at its Rio Rancho operation and about half of what a large pecan farm uses.
The Pueblo of Acoma, the Pueblo of Laguna, and the Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment have protested the transfer. The state engineer can approve it only if we prove it will not impair the water rights of others, is not contrary to the conservation of water in the state, and is not detrimental to the public welfare. Our basin-wide groundwater model demonstrates that those conditions are met. Once the state engineer’s office reviews it, we intend to share it with Acoma and Laguna directly and answer their questions.
Is there any connection to the Rio San Jose, Bluewater Lake, or the wells families depend on?
No. At the site, thick layers of shale and claystone separate the Westwater from the aquifers 100 to 800 feet deep that supply household and municipal wells. The Westwater has no hydrologic connection to the Rio San Jose or Bluewater Lake.
Baseline sampling of wells in the San Mateo area is underway, so residents will have a record of their water as it was before operations.
How will contamination be detected?
Monitoring wells will surround each well field and give early warning if fluid moves outside it. The aquifer above the production zone will be monitored as well. Federal ISR rules require that these wells be sampled continuously.
If a well shows fluid moving outward, operators will adjust pumping rates to pull it back. Injection and production wells will undergo routine testing for cracks and leaks. Surface pipelines will have double walls or secondary containment, with leak detection. Groundwater models refined over decades of our ISR work in South Australia will guide the operation and predict groundwater movement with extremely high accuracy.
In 2009, NRC staff reported that they knew of no nearby water supply well that had been degraded, shut down, or relocated because of ISR.
What happens if restoration falls short?
Regulators will not release the well field, and the obligation remains ours.
Restoration starts with a baseline. Water in a uranium ore body is naturally toxic and radioactive because the rock holds uranium, radium, and radon. We will sample it before we begin, and our permits will require us to return each well field to that baseline or to applicable regulatory standards. That water is toxic and radioactive before we start, and it will remain so after restoration.
Our main method under consideration is reverse osmosis, which removes dissolved constituents from water. We are also evaluating oxygen-scavenging technologies that may limit further dissolving of uranium. The injected oxygen and bicarbonate are consumed in the reactions, and iron, molybdenum, vanadium, and other dissolved metals are treated in the restoration program.
Lopez asked us to “explain the uncertainties.” Here is one: Uranium is often the hardest constituent to return to baseline. We are conducting recovery and restoration research on this site’s geochemistry to plan for it.
ISR also allows progressive rehabilitation of production areas. Our South Australian affiliate, Heathgate Resources, was a 2025 finalist in the environment category for its integrated progressive closure of ISR production areas.
Nationally, 49 ISR projects have been licensed. According to the information available to us, 30 have been restored or released; 11 are operating, in restoration, or under stability monitoring; two are on standby; and six more are licensed and being developed.
Who pays if something goes wrong, and will the money still be there after mining ends?
We pay, before any uranium is produced. State and federal rules require us to post a bond large enough for an independent contractor to finish decommissioning, reclamation, and groundwater restoration. Regulators hold the bond and review it every year, so the money stays no matter what happens to the company. We also support paying for a New Mexico Environment Department inspector stationed at the site.
These rules did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s, when New Mexico’s abandoned mines were left behind.
We have already paid for one cleanup. Rio Grande Resources, which formed Grants Energy, acquired the Mount Taylor Mine in 1991 and never produced a pound of uranium there. In 2019, it relinquished the mine’s permit and invested tens of millions of dollars in closure and reclamation, removing ore piles, decommissioning ponds, and dismantling infrastructure.
What consultation has taken place with Acoma, Laguna, and other tribal nations, and what concerns have they raised?
Lopez directed this question to the county, and he noted that company outreach and government-togovernment consultation are separate duties. Our duty is outreach.
For a year and a half, we have reached out to the governors of Acoma and Laguna and mapped cultural sites in the project area to keep them undisturbed. Both pueblos have protested our water transfer, and we intend to share our groundwater model with them directly.
We recognize the lasting impacts past uranium mining left on the pueblos, and earning trust takes time. We are doing everything in our power to build long-term partnerships with Acoma and Laguna, including job training, built alongside tribal leaders, for tribal youth and adults.
Who will be ready for the jobs, and will our schools have the partnerships to prepare students?
The project is expected to create more than 200 direct jobs that pay above the regional average, plus hundreds of indirect jobs. Permitting will take several years, giving us about five years to build a local workforce before production begins. Specific job classifications and hiring schedules will depend on permitting and construction.
We have done this before. In 2001, our affiliate Heathgate Resources started the Beverley ISR project in South Australia, where no ISR workforce existed. It cross-trained workers from other industries such as oil and gas, built training programs, and developed pipelines from local schools. We are bringing that model here, along with experienced mentors from Australia, so Cibola County residents fill these jobs from day one.
We are building a vocational curriculum with the Cibola Communities Economic Development Foundation, the Greater Gallup Economic Development Corp., and local school boards. In Australia, Heathgate’s Aboriginal School Mentoring Program, created with the Nature Foundation, gave Aboriginal high school students ecology field experience and career pathways and won an Excellence in Social Inclusion award in 2016.
Will local businesses gain customers and contracts, and how will public revenue benefit the community?
The plant will buy tens of millions of dollars in goods and services each year, preferably from local companies. We project more than $400 million in state and local tax revenue.
Will the company come before the people, answer their questions, and put its commitments in writing?
Yes. These answers are our own. We have taken questions at community meetings in Grants and San Mateo, most recently Aug. 26. The permits will turn these answers into conditions that state and federal agencies can enforce, and residents will have the right to comment, object, and be heard during review.
Lopez asked that Cibola County be given “something it can measure.” These figures are offered for that purpose, and residents can check them against our applications, which are public records. Anyone with another question can bring it to our office at 102 E. Santa Fe Ave. in Grants.
Daria Sayan is the director of regulatory affairs for Grants Energy, which proposes the Grants Precision ISR project near San Mateo.