If there’s a theme among energy-related bills proposed for the Legislature’s upcoming budget session, it might be giving the electorate and local communities more say in what many residents regard as a tsunami of energy development proposals.
From a growing crop of wind turbines to mining proposals, prospective nuclear manufacturing and hydrogen energy projects, residents have clashed with one another, county officials and the state. Tensions swirl around the economic, safety and cultural ramifications of a rapidly changing energy landscape.
One bill speaks directly to the sense that, although Wyoming wants to remain the nation’s premier source of raw power, residents want to have more of a say about what’s a good fit.
A public vote on nuclear waste storage?
One of the most high-profile conflicts has centered on nuclear energy and whether the state should loosen its ban on spent nuclear fuel waste storage.
House Joint Resolution 3, “Storage of spent nuclear fuel and waste-vote required,” aims to put the authority to decide directly in Wyoming voters’ hands. If passed, the general election ballot in November would include a referendum on whether to amend Wyoming’s constitution to proclaim:
- “No storage, siting or placement of high-level radioactive waste shall be authorized under state law and occur except upon an affirmative vote of the people of the state.
- “No storage, siting or placement of spent nuclear fuel shall be authorized under state law and occur except upon an affirmative vote of the people of the state.
- “That the Secretary of State shall endorse the following statement on the proposed amendment: The adoption of this amendment would require an affirmative vote of the people of the state before any high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel can be stored in Wyoming.”
All 13 sponsors behind the resolution are members and allies of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus, indicative of a political divide that has already curtailed some nuclear development. In October, Radiant Industries announced it was withdrawing its plans to build a nuclear microreactor manufacturing facility in Natrona County. Radiant’s plan would have required a change to Wyoming’s ban on high-level nuclear waste storage. Though lawmakers have tried several times to do just that, the effort has met passionate opposition, including this past summer.
At stake is whether Wyoming can reap the economic benefits of high-dollar nuclear energy proposals without sacrificing public safety. While the bill’s primary sponsor, Midwest Republican Rep. Bill Allemand, says he believes storage facilities can be operated safely, it’s unlikely that any nuclear waste deemed as “temporarily” stored here would ever be removed from the state, because there are no plans for a federal repository, he noted.
Plus, Allemand said, Radiant’s proposed site was simply too close to homes and schools in Bar Nunn, and elected officials didn’t advocate for what he considered a majority of neighbors who didn’t want to take the risk.
“Their elected officials turned a blind eye and would not listen to them,” Allemand told WyoFile. “They said they might pay a price at the next election. Well, for these people in Bar Nunn, that would have been too late.”
Proponents of bringing nuclear energy projects to Wyoming say the state risks earning a reputation as unwelcoming to the industry, which has plenty of other states courting those dollars.
If such a referendum were to pass, Allemand said, it would not stop ongoing discussions about what aspects of the nuclear energy industry might be a good fit for Wyoming. “But the Legislature, the governor, the county commission — they would no longer have that right,” he said. “It will be the people, and that’s where it should be on something of this high of importance.”
Energy on state lands
Lawmakers will also consider at least two bills that would require more public engagement and allow for more flexibility regarding energy and other industrial developments on state lands.
Senate File 40, “State lands-designation of community-valued land,” would allow the Wyoming Environmental Quality Council to designate state lands, on a case-by-case nomination basis, as “lands with significant community value.”
Senate File 42, “County zoning authority-amendments,” would specify that counties have the authority to “implement zoning regulations for specified purposes.”
“There needs to be a little bit more of a vetting process to allow for the county commissioners or the city council or communities, in general, to at least weigh in before it lands on the desk in front of the [state lands] board.”
Casper Republican Sen. Bill Landon
Both bills, according to proponents, attempt to give communities and local officials more say over state-sanctioned activities on what are known as “school sections” — state-owned lands prioritized for the financial and general benefit of Wyoming public schools. Some critics say the Wyoming State Board of Land Commissioners has pursued those priorities too narrowly, failing to provide proper notice to locals when granting leases and insisting that county zoning and land use rules cannot trump the state’s authority over school sections.
Senate File 40, according to the bill’s sponsor, Casper Republican Sen. Bill Landon, “attempts to give communities an option, or at least give a little bit better vetting process to what we do on state lands, particularly state lands that are either contiguous or close to communities.”
Two years ago, controversy erupted over the state land board’s approval of mining leases on state lands at the base of Casper Mountain, where a gravel mining company proposes to set up operations. Adjacent homeowners cried foul, saying the gravel pit threatens water wells and neighborhood safety. Both homeowners and county officials were irate that the state didn’t reach out to locals before approving the leases.
Beyond Casper Mountain, residents and local officials throughout central and eastern Wyoming have said the state has approved wind and other industrial projects without considering other land values or the cumulative impacts that threaten ranching and small communities.
“There needs to be a little bit more of a vetting process,” Landon said, “to allow for the county commissioners or the city council or communities, in general, to at least weigh in before it lands on the desk in front of the [state lands] board.”
Landon noted that SF 40 doesn’t attempt to supersede the state’s authority over school sections, but prescribes a process for more public engagement and the opportunity to recognize the value of lands, on a case-by-case basis, beyond generating revenue from industrial development.
Senate File 42 flirts with the contentious issue of whether counties can impose zoning and other land use rules that might conflict with state-sanctioned activities on school sections. The measure would give counties more of a say when it comes to supposedly temporary industrial and commercial activities that can be prolonged via state lease extensions, according to co-sponsor Casper Republican Rep. Steve Harshman.
The clash over such county-versus-state authorities has generated several lawsuits in recent years, including a recent court ruling in favor of Prism Logistics, the company that wants to mine gravel at the base of Casper Mountain.
Federal minerals
Though Wyoming officials cheered the GOP-led Big Beautiful Bill, there was some regret over a provision that slashed the federal mineral royalty rate for coal, oil and natural gas — a longtime pillar of revenue to the state. The move, related to coal royalties alone, is estimated to choke the annual flow of federal dollars to Wyoming by $50 million, according to estimates.
To help make up for those losses, House Joint Resolution 2, “Federal mineral royalties-state share,” sponsored by the Legislature’s Select Federal Natural Resource Management Committee, would ask Congress to increase Wyoming’s share of federal mineral royalties from 50% to 87.5%, according to the bill draft.
The committee is also sponsoring Senate Joint Resolution 1, “State management-federal mineral leases.” The resolution would request that Congress amend the federal Mineral Leasing Act to “authorize the state of Wyoming to administer and manage mineral leasing on federal lands located in Wyoming.”
Though the production of federal minerals has been a major source of revenue and job creation in Wyoming, state leaders have bristled at past administrations’ leasing decisions, particularly when the Biden administration imposed a ban on all future federal coal leasing in the Powder River Basin — a move that the Trump administration is reversing.
The resolution claims Wyoming could administer federal leasing in the state more efficiently and at a lower cost. It also asserts that “Authorizing Wyoming to administer and manage mineral leasing of federal minerals not only respects the principles of federalism and local control but also ensures that decisions are made by those who know the land best and are most invested in its long-term sustainability.”