SRMT, MCA release joint statement on potential nuclear power project
AKWESASNE — The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribal Council and the Mohawk Council of Akwesasne released a joint statement Tuesday in response to a Request for Information from the New York Power Authority (NYPA) indicating the councils will not provide support for the development of a nuclear power plant near Mohawk Territory.
Both councils cited an absence of support from Tribal membership and community members as the reason for not supporting an advanced nuclear power project at any location near the Akwesasne Mohawk Territory in the joint statement released on Tuesday afternoon.
Historically, Akwesasne has not been adequately considered when it comes to industrial development projects, according to the councils, and this failure to engage in this consultation has resulted in long-term environmental damage, health concerns and a justified legacy of distrust.
Both councils assert their inherent sovereignty and affirm that meaningful consultation must occur before any decisions or commitments are advanced, according to release, and the protection of Akwesasne lands, waters and people is non-negotiable, adding past failures will not be repeated.
Given the close proximity of the proposed project to Akwesasne and Tribal lands, which include the Massena Mile Square and Grasse River Meadows and recognizing the potential impacts associated with nuclear development, both councils have requested a formal consultation process directly with the New York Power Authority that is separate from the public comment process.
“Direct consultation is necessary to ensure that all potential risks, benefits and broader implications of the proposed project are fully evaluated and clearly understood by Akwesasro:non,” the joint statement reads, “It is essential for our community to make an informed decision rooted in transparency, respect and meaningful engagement. We remain cautious regarding any industrial development that may pose risks to health, safety and overall well-being of our people.”
Both councils are aware that individuals have proposed the former General Motors Superfund Site, near the St. Lawrence River, now under the Revitalizing Auto Communities Environmental Response Trust, as a potential location, the release said, and both councils have received formal communication from RACER stating, “While the RACER Trust takes no position on nuclear energy generally, it is our position that a nuclear power plant should not be sited on the RACER property.”
The power authority announced in August 2025 that it would be asking communities around the state if they would be interested in siting a nuclear facility in their municipality.
In October 2025, the NYPA started a formal Request for Information process as part of a new initiative to develop 1-gigawatt of advanced nuclear energy, according to a press release issued by the state power organization.
The solicitations include a Request for Information for upstate New York communities interested in hosting an advanced nuclear project developed by the Power Authority, and another RFI seeking information from potential development partners with experience developing, constructing, operating or servicing nuclear power projects, according to the release.
In June 2025, Gov. Kathleen C. Hochul directed the NYPA to develop and construct a zero-emission advanced nuclear power plant in upstate New York to support a reliable and affordable electric grid, while providing the necessary zero-emission electricity to achieve a clean energy economy, according to a prepared statement from the governor’s office.
At the end of last year, NYPA unveiled the list of companies and communities willing to help with its goal to build a 1-gigawatt nuclear energy plant in the near future, publishing a list of 23 companies and eight upstate communities that have expressed strong interest in being a part of the project, on Tuesday, Dec. 30, according to a report in the Watertown Daily Times.
In Jefferson and St. Lawrence counties, Assemblyman Scott A. Gray, R-Watertown, has been working for months to ensure the region is involved in the nuclear project and has hosted informational meetings across the region and met with local stakeholders to get them on board with the project.
The list of companies willing to work with NYPA to build the facility includes a number of well-established names, such as Constellation Energy Generation, which owns the existing three nuclear reactors at Nine Mile Point in Oswego County; the Westinghouse Electric Company, which built much of the power infrastructure in the U.S.; and even Rolls-Royce SMR Limited, an experimental offshoot of the famous British carmaker that’s developing small modular nuclear reactors.
Other companies willing to partner with NYPA on the project include X Energy LLC, which is working on a next-generation gas-cooled nuclear reactor; South Korean car company Hyundai’s engineering offshoot; the U.S.-Japanese GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy collaboration; and Oppenheimer Energy.
The North Country is heavily represented on the list. St. Lawrence, Jefferson and Oswego counties are all on the list of willing host communities, alongside other upstate locations like Rochester, the city of Dunkirk in Chautauqua County, as well as Wayne, Schuyler and Broome counties.
Massena village trustees Kenneth J. McGowan and David Broadbent attended a nuclear symposium at Clarkson University in November 2025, after which village officials indicated their plans to submit an application to the New York Power Authority to site a nuclear facility in Massena, according to the report in the Watertown Daily Times.
The village and town of Massena had already passed resolutions in favor of siting a facility in Massena during their July meetings.
Assemblyman Gray weighs in
Reached over the phone Assemblyman Gray told the Telegram that there are multiple benefits that can be attributed to nuclear energy.
“It’s baseload energy, it’s always there, it’s a workhorse of power generation, it’s always there and always on, doesn’t matter if it’s needed or not. We are always generating it,” Gray said, “It’s a baseline, it’s reliable. We have a lot of renewable energy projects in the North Country which don’t meet our needs and are creating reliability issues on the grid as we decommission fossil fuels and we are not replacing it with baseload.”
Gray said he believes the state will continue to be under pressure as it continues to expand renewable energy projects.
“If we replace that with nuclear we would have the construction jobs that are associated with putting the facility together, which are substantial,” he said, “It’s a long construction period as well and then we will have direct job benefits of people who work at one of these facilities as well. There’s also a direct economic benefit that follows that type of production. Even if we are transmitting it downstate we still have the benefits of the direct jobs that are associated with it. It’s a win, win, win all the way around.”
According to Gray, there are several lines of effort at the state level pushing for nuclear energy, adding he would like to receive more specifics on them at an upcoming energy hearing in the assembly.
“Initially it was put under NYSERDA and then the governor announced 1-gigawatt and she placed that under NYPA, and then she just announced 4-gigawatts and she’s putting that under PSC, public service commission,” he said, “Now we are getting into a very fragmented approach and I think we need to step back, take a look, and make sure if that’s going to be effective or if we should have one oversight. Different communities are going to be asking who are they answering to. Let’s streamline it.”
Gray said starting last summer he got together with people in the nuclear industry to educate communities about nuclear energy.
“I think that’s the most transparent way to do this. The first step is you go out and explain what we are dealing with here, what is advanced nuclear technology, what is the current technology and what is the new technology,” he said, “You get people with baseline knowledge of all of that. That’s what we attempted to do. The next thing that we will take a look at is timelines, technology and what does it mean if it’s located in your community and things along that line.”
Gray said after a forum in the summer with elected officials and stakeholders public forums were held at Jefferson Community College and Clarkson University in the fall.
“By and large people are favorable to this with the caveat that they want to be educated,” he said.