[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6304190,"mediaKeyId","2468136-bfba51536e0c6297e8a5c73764b5e532","parentId",2468136,"title","Bill would let Umatilla County voters decide on small modular reactor demonstration; tribes and environmental groups oppose","audioSeconds",1388,"startMs",4281000,"endMs",5669000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2468136-bfba51536e0c6297e8a5c73764b5e532&start=4281&end=5669","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2468136-bfba51536e0c6297e8a5c73764b5e532/thumbnail_4281000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6304190/Oregon/Bill-would-let-Umatilla-County-voters-decide-on-small-modular-reactor-demonstration-tribes-and-environmental-groups-oppose","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304190-57cc72e81246c88e836be6db16cc6ee9/orig.mp4?Expires=1773126873&Signature=Um4wcyjVCZOejaiR-Nn~~OWCikXHRQN6iXcTIT-kDoO0Q5N8WaBzpn66WdAo7bwOtkiGrvTVWxgo6gseEJx2G-XJHzaCHS0WTye47AUlrnDxgXHX8gBjHw5qrkgm~DSU7bYMdjk1UO5CAF2rwZ46yt~~nuFoE5ahQL0LplrVQXoZEp6GMa2FcpikbHSOfTSR8N20eA~Gu2dXsAX2mcSiMFKghPwFhXM4eiTP7YIDb~rqPsuZvW-GfjHLVHCCt1JF7S0C6l24Snck6ANH5W6~~DzFOtocjQ6COzp7FFGoOC7Sb3yWMBuECEpMQSnu5kz5xKUIZaqwewGkSgjYbxj~YA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oregon State Legislature","date","2025-02-27T00:00:00Z","article","House Bill 2,410 drew an extended informational hearing Feb. 27 in the House Climate, Energy and Environment Committee after the Oregon Department of Energy briefed lawmakers on the state's nuclear history and regulatory context.

The measure would allow the Energy Facility Siting Council (EFSC) to issue a site certificate for a small modular reactor (SMR) demonstration project within Umatilla County if EFSC finds specified criteria are met, require ODOE and partners to prepare a report on SMR demonstration projects, establish the Umatilla County SMR Demonstration Project Report Fund and refer the measure to the voters of Umatilla County for approval; if approved by a majority of registered Umatilla County voters the act would take effect.

Max Woods, assistant director for nuclear safety and energy security at the Oregon Department of Energy, told the committee that Oregon’s current regulatory posture traces to Measure 7 (1980), which requires a federally approved permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel before new plants can be approved and, if that condition is met, that a statewide vote be held. He also briefed members on regional context: Oregon receives about 3% of its electricity from a single out‑of‑state plant (Columbia Generating Station), and federal and state regulators — including the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and EFSC — would play central roles in licensing and oversight.

Supporters included Umatilla County officials and elected representatives who said SMR demonstration projects could help address local energy needs, economic development and resilience. Commissioner Dan Dorn testified that Umatilla County has been studying SMRs for more than two years and argued that long lead times for transmission and renewables make alternative clean baseload options worth examining. Maureen McGee, government affairs attorney for Umatilla County, summarized the bill’s intent and mechanics: \"The bill does 3 things. First, it creates a narrow exemption from the provisions of measure 7 to allow for a small modular reactor demonstration project to be sited in Umatilla County... Second, it honors community consent by referring the measure to the people of Umatilla County for their approval or rejection. And third, if the bill is approved by the people of the County, it sets in motion a process for the appropriate state regulatory agencies to prepare a regulatory report to the legislature.\"

Opposition came from environmental organizations, public‑health groups and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR). Kelly Campbell of Columbia Riverkeeper said the organization opposes using legislative time to advance what it called a biased approach to nuclear development and urged that attention remain on cleanup at Hanford. CTUIR representatives, including tribal board member Lisa Gonuelos and community member Kathy Sampson Kruse, said the bill as written does not require meaningful tribal consultation and raised concerns about siting a demonstration project on or near ceded treaty lands and the prospect that temporary on‑site storage would become effectively permanent absent a federal repository.

Independent consultants and analysts urged caution on costs and timelines. Energy consultant David Schlissel told the committee that SMR projects have not reached commercial scale in the United States and warned that experience with nuclear construction shows \"it takes longer to build, much longer to build, and costs much more than is originally estimated by proponents.\" Sierra Club Oregon opposed the bill on the grounds that renewables, grid improvements and storage are faster and lower‑risk options.

League of Oregon Cities representatives and some local leaders said they support a narrowly tailored demonstration and stressed the bill’s requirement that local voters approve any project. The bill’s proponents and county officials said they will continue to refine language, including technical fixes and tribal consultation provisions.

Ending: The committee closed the informational hearing and said the bill will be subject to amendment; if advanced it would require local voter approval in Umatilla County and further regulatory work by state agencies.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Committee On Climate, Energy, and Environment 02/27/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","House Bill 2,410 would let the Energy Facility Siting Council issue a site certificate for a small modular reactor demonstration in Umatilla County if certain criteria are met and the project is approved by a majority of Umatilla County voters.","taxTitle","Climate, Energy, and Environment, House of Representatives, Committees, Legislative, Oregon","taxId",17502,"location","Oregon","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6304195,"Oregon lawmakers hear mixed views on bill ordering state study of nuclear energy",2096,55000,2151000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2468136-bfba51536e0c6297e8a5c73764b5e532&start=55&end=2151","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2468136-bfba51536e0c6297e8a5c73764b5e532/thumbnail_55000.jpg","/articles/6304195/Oregon/Oregon-lawmakers-hear-mixed-views-on-bill-ordering-state-study-of-nuclear-energy","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6304195-760c70dfd72300a815c8920cf0c502b2/orig.mp4?Expires=1773126873&Signature=kcSKkoSKjEbGc7MAWYQRhDcMHihuLvrmExSL0YybocsED20C7LcYaNUFb~xd1qFRqracnTi1sTKcxGM-6~8LcJzDm3Po7mVWVESO2KcbjWTT7DVkjzZz7GcuGgNm6iY5jeMxIMMFQaDExCRTdUdq43Jso0HxP7Ei7FVBlbefK21PKnEC3alhnfmPmV173AEkfsdKS7zWZKLflSrnxxaG2bWLwOqvuTgLxy498kE3f0G-bvfDWR36PyArE32w603sqekhbO3DQQAD1xc5DdhI2vK3OMZeqkFh0p~BwVU4ik3MtdvZw37Tb-PfD8qLMb~jLSl7kd1h8zUx2Lj-egbMTg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House Climate, Energy and Environment Committee on Feb. 27 heard competing testimony on House Bill 2,038, a measure that would require the Oregon Department of Energy to study specific aspects of nuclear energy and submit a report by Sept. 15, 2026.

Proponents, including Representative Ed Deal (House District 17), Representative Boomer Wright and Representative Bobby Levy, urged an objective review of modern nuclear technology’s role in Oregon’s energy future. \"I firmly believe that our state stands to benefit immensely from a serious in-depth analysis of nuclear energy and all it has to offer,\" Deal said, adding that nuclear could provide \"abundant, reliable, and clean base load power.\" Representative Wright and Levy likewise emphasized potential economic and reliability benefits.

Opponents pressed that the bill’s current language is one-sided. Kelly Campbell, policy director at Columbia Riverkeeper, said, \"Columbia Riverkeeper opposes HB 2,038, which would direct the Oregon Department of Energy to study nuclear power. As several representatives have already noted, the way the bill is written currently is not an objective study.\" Physicians for Social Responsibility and physicians who testified also urged rejection or amendment, arguing the measure ignores health, safety and long-term waste challenges; Dr. Andy Harris said, \"Nuclear energy is touted as, quote, clean energy, but in fact, it is dirty, toxic, and a major health risk.\"

Committee members flagged the language that instructs ODOE to study the \"advantages\" of nuclear power and asked that amendments broaden the charge to include disadvantages, feasibility, permitting timelines and alignment with Oregon’s decarbonization goals. Representative Marsh said he would seek amendment language to \"position the study in a more objective way,\" and others including Representatives Gamblin and Anderson voiced similar requests.

The bill text read into the record notes the study topics and sets a sunset for the study requirements on Jan. 2, 2027. The committee opened and then closed public testimony on HB 2,038 within the allotted time; lawmakers directed proponents and opponents to work on amendment language and offered to open a follow-up work session to consider proposed changes.

No formal committee vote was taken on HB 2,038 at the Feb. 27 hearing.

Ending: Committee leaders said they expect draft amendments and will hold further deliberations or a work session to refine the bill before any formal committee action.","Supporters told the House Climate, Energy and Environment Committee that Oregon should study nuclear power’s feasibility and benefits; opponents said the bill is biased because it asks only for “advantages” and not disadvantages. Lawmakers signaled willingness to amend the measure to make the study more objective.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Bill would let Umatilla County voters decide on small modular reactor demonstration; tribes and environmental groups oppose

Oregon lawmakers hear mixed views on bill ordering state study of nuclear energy