AN ACT to provide for a legislative management study relating to advanced nuclear energy; and to provide an appropriation.
HB 1025 directs the Legislative Management to conduct an interim study on advanced nuclear energy in North Dakota during the 2025-26 interim. The study is broad in scope and must examine the feasibility, siting, and deployment of advanced nuclear power plants, including greenfield and brownfield site options, grid connectivity, land use and zoning issues, economic impacts, waste storage, and the potential for small modular and micro reactors. It also requires review of any Century Code provisions that may restrict advanced nuclear development.
The bill also requires the study to include participation from an institution of higher education to help evaluate social interests and community acceptance of possible siting locations. A study committee is established with representatives from the energy industry, the Public Service Commission, the Industrial Commission, the Department of Water Resources, and bipartisan members from both chambers. The committee must report findings and any recommended legislation to the 70th Legislative Assembly.
HB 1025 appropriates $300,000 from the general fund and authorizes an additional $300,000 from grants or donations from nonstate sources for consulting services related to the study. The Legislative Council is directed to seek matching private-sector funds to help cover costs, and the appropriation is designated as one-time funding.
The bill’s impact on state law is primarily procedural: it does not authorize construction of nuclear facilities or change permitting rules directly, but it creates a formal legislative study that could lead to future statutory changes. It may affect state agencies, the Legislative Council, higher education partners, energy stakeholders, and local communities that could be considered for future nuclear siting, while also prompting review of existing North Dakota Century Code restrictions on advanced nuclear energy.
Overall sentiment appears strongly favorable. The bill passed both chambers with large bipartisan majorities, indicating broad legislative interest in exploring advanced nuclear energy as a potential future power source and economic development opportunity. The vote margins suggest the concept was generally well received across party lines and among members concerned with energy policy, grid reliability, and long-term planning.
The main points of contention appear to center on cost, the role of public funds, and the uncertainty inherent in studying a technology that is not yet proposed for deployment. Some opposition likely reflected skepticism about spending $300,000 in general funds on a study, concerns about nuclear waste storage and community acceptance, and questions about whether North Dakota should pursue advanced nuclear development at all. The bill’s inclusion of private matching funds and a broad stakeholder committee appears designed to address some of those concerns.
HB 1025 does not directly amend substantive energy, utility, or environmental statutes, but it creates a legislative management study that could inform future changes to the North Dakota Century Code. The study is tasked with identifying any existing legal restrictions on advanced nuclear energy and evaluating siting, grid, land use, waste storage, and economic issues that could shape future permitting, regulation, or incentive legislation. The appropriation provides one-time funding for consulting services and may leverage private or donated matching funds.
The bill appears to have enjoyed strong bipartisan support and a generally positive reception in both chambers, as reflected by the large vote margins in the House and Senate. The discussion implied by the bill structure suggests interest in advanced nuclear energy as a strategic planning issue tied to reliability, economic development, and future energy diversification. The broad support indicates that many lawmakers viewed the study as a prudent first step rather than a commitment to build nuclear facilities.
The likely areas of disagreement were the use of state funds for a study, the risks and public acceptance issues associated with nuclear siting, and whether North Dakota should pursue advanced nuclear energy at all. Critics may have been concerned about nuclear waste storage, environmental impacts, local land use conflicts, and the possibility that the study could pave the way for controversial future projects. Supporters, by contrast, appear to have emphasized planning, economic opportunity, grid reliability, and the value of gathering expert input before making policy decisions.