Earlier this week, two bills, HB 623 and 696, were heard in Senate Energy Technology and Federal Relations relating to nuclear energy in Montana. Both bills would allow the legislature to approve sites where facilities that handle radioactive materials can be located. These sites would fall under the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulation Commission and the Nuclear Regulation Commission. However, both pieces of legislation neglect to consider government-to-government relations with Tribes and, in the event of an environmental emergency, could infringe on Tribal sovereignty.
Tribal Nations are sovereign, meaning Tribes have the right to govern their citizens and territory to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Tribal citizens. Approaches vary from Nation to Nation, but some Tribes in Montana outright oppose energy developments like mining on their lands to protect the health of their environment and citizens. Energy projects often have disproportionate negative environmental impacts on Tribal lands in the United States. The Hanford Nuclear Site case is one example of how energy and defense projects can impact Tribal communities even when not directly located on reservation land, as contamination doesn't respect political boundaries and can severely impact treaty-protected resources.
HB 623 allows the legislature to authorize the siting, or the process of selecting a location, for spent nuclear fuel storage facilities within the state. To understand what spent nuclear fuel is, let's take a step to understand better what happens in the process of nuclear energy. Nuclear power plants use nuclear fuel in a chain reaction that produces electricity. This fuel does not last forever. After about four to six years, this fuel becomes hot, radioactive, and unusable. Through this process, fuel becomes known as spent fuel and needs to be stored until it is no longer radioactive and dangerous to people. The time it takes for spent fuel to no longer be radioactive varies greatly; it could be anywhere from a few seconds to sometimes millennia, but engineers and geologists predict after a few hundred years is when most fragments lose their radioactivity.
Nuclear energy has many rewards associated with its benefits to clean energy, but it also comes with many risks. Nuclear fuel or energy is not inherently bad. Some even view it as a path toward lowering our carbon footprint because it produces nearly zero greenhouse gases. In the U.S., more than 86,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel are stored at 75 sites, but America has yet to develop a long-term management plan for what to do with all this waste. There is no definitive way to dispose of spent fuel without risk, and the current storage plan costs U.S. taxpayers billions annually. Although safety measures are in place to avoid radioactive contamination, unpredictable factors can cause facilities to leak. These include the rare possibility of earthquakes, cyberattacks, and grid failure. The most considerable risk with these facilities is radioactive exposure, which can cause cancer, land contamination, and population dislocation.
Additionally, HB 696 would allow the legislature to approve sites for uranium conversion and enrichment facilities. These facilities are where raw uranium ore can be chemically transformed to have a higher level of isotopes for nuclear fuel use. Enrichment also has some hazards associated with it and poses a potential risk of radioactive chemical release linked to cancer in individuals living near plants.
Members of the Montana American Indian Caucus (MAIC) sought to amend HB 623 and 696 to incorporate consultation between Tribal Nations and the state on nuclear energy facilities. The amendments allowed Tribal electors on reservations to vote on the proposed sites located within 50 miles of their location. Both amendments passed but were stripped from the bills in their committee hearings in Senate Energy Technology and Federal Relations.
Tribal Nations are often left demanding a voice at the table when decisions deeply affect the health and safety of their communities. The state should consult Tribal Nations at every step of the way to make Montana a better place for everyone. For these reasons, we recommend asking legislators to vote NO on HB 623 and 696!
MBPC is a nonprofit organization focused on providing credible and timely research and analysis on budget, tax, and economic issues that impact low- and moderate-income Montana families.