Committee advances bill to classify nuclear as clean energy after lengthy hearing; vote 8‑5

The House Energy & Environment Committee voted 8‑5 to send a bill redefining Colorado’s statutory clean‑energy list to include nuclear power to the committee of the whole, following nearly nine hours of testimony and roughly 90 witnesses.

The measure would amend the state definition of “clean energy” to explicitly permit electricity generated by nuclear fission to be treated as a clean resource under state law. Sponsors said the change does not itself authorize construction of any plants or alter federal licensing; it allows nuclear projects to compete for state and local incentives, be considered in planning, and be treated like other carbon‑free sources in local and municipal clean‑energy programs.

Supporters argued the change is an option‑keeping step: small modular reactors (SMRs) and other advanced designs are evolving, federal incentives (notably the Inflation Reduction Act) are channeling funds to next‑generation nuclear, and rural communities facing coal plant retirements want options that can preserve jobs and tax bases. Proponents also emphasized the low greenhouse‑gas footprint of nuclear generation and pointed to foreign recycling programs and federal research into fuel reuse.

Opponents — which included environmental justice groups, county and municipal officials from disproportionately impacted communities, unions and clean‑energy advocates — raised long‑standing concerns: high construction costs and frequent cost overruns for large reactors; the absence of commercially scaled SMRs in the U.S. today; unresolved long‑term disposal of high‑level spent fuel; water‑use concerns; and environmental‑justice questions tied to uranium mining and historic contamination on tribal lands. Many witnesses said the state should continue to prioritize wind, solar, storage and emerging geothermal before expanding the statutory definition.

Committee discussion centered on safety, waste management, cost and whether defining a technology as “clean” should be handled in statute before the technology is demonstrated at scale. Legislative staff and industry witnesses testified on reactor designs, licensing by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and recycling approaches used abroad. The committee adopted two technical amendments during floor debate and then approved the motion to move the amended bill to the committee of the whole.

Bill action: Chair Valdez moved the referral and Representative Gonzales seconded. The committee announced the final roll‑call tally as 8 yes, 5 no.

Why it matters: The statutory change would not build reactors, change federal licensing, or appropriate money; it would change which technologies qualify for certain state and local clean‑energy programs, which could affect project eligibility, local tax treatment, and whether utilities include nuclear projects in resource planning. Sponsors say the bill preserves choices for rural transition communities and for large industry users of carbon‑free firm power; opponents say the bill could divert policy attention and public resources from established, lower‑cost renewable alternatives while leaving open major unresolved questions about waste and costs.

Next steps: Because the committee moved the measure to the committee of the whole, the bill will receive further House floor consideration. Additional fiscal and policy review will focus on how the state defines clean energy and which subsidies or programs would be affected.