South Dakota Uranium Permit Hearing Gives Early Test to New Language Translation Law
Why It Matters
A South Dakota law requiring government agencies to provide interpretation services during administrative contested-case proceedings has gotten an early tryout — months before its July 1 effective date — as a politically charged uranium exploration hearing drew Lakota-speaking opponents and exposed longstanding gaps in due-process access for non-English speakers.
What Happened
The South Dakota Board of Minerals and Environment convened a multi-day hearing beginning May 18 in Hot Springs to consider a permit application to explore underground for uranium in the southern Black Hills near Edgemont. The application has been pending since 2024, and dozens of residents have registered as formal project opponents, triggering a contested-case process.
Opponents have raised concerns about potential water contamination from underground drilling and the proximity of the proposed site to Craven Canyon, a location with ancient Native American petroglyphs that is used for prayer and ceremony by tribal members.
Several of those opponents are Lakota first-language speakers. One participant, Elizabeth Lone Eagle, submitted a request for Lakota interpretation last August, identifying five interested parties in the case who speak Lakota as their primary language.
Although the law mandating interpretation services — known as Helen’s Law — had not yet taken effect, the Board of Minerals and Environment voted during a March meeting to provide translation consistent with the new statute, overturning a prior denial by the hearing chairman. Board Chairman Glenn Blumhardt acknowledged the law was not yet operative but the board chose to follow its framework.
The Law and Its Sponsor
Helen’s Law was adopted in March 2026 and takes effect July 1. It requires the presiding office or board in an administrative contested case to hire an interpreter when a witness or party needs one. Services during a proceeding are covered at state expense; parties can pay separately for document translation and may recover those costs if they prevail in the case.
Rep. Erik Muckey, a Democrat from Sioux Falls who sponsored the legislation, named the bill for Helen Red Feather, one of the Lakota speakers who requested services in this case. Muckey said the law’s intent extends well beyond this single proceeding.
“This isn’t just about this particular case,” Muckey said in public remarks. “The concern was, are we leaving people out of the law? And the answer to that was yes.”
Muckey noted the law covers people who are hard of hearing or blind, and speakers of languages other than Lakota. “We can’t turn people away from due process of law,” he said.
By the Numbers
- The hearing was scheduled for five days, beginning May 18 in Hot Springs
- Dozens of residents signed on as formal opponents, triggering contested-case status
- Elizabeth Lone Eagle identified five Lakota first-language speakers as interested parties when she submitted her translation request last August
- The state offered interpreters $61.88 per hour, with that rate split between two hired interpreters
- Helen’s Law takes effect July 1, 2026, approximately six weeks after the hearing began
Interpreter Speaks to the Need
Alex White Plume, an Oglala Sioux tribal member who was among the interpreters hired for the hearing, said he found the offered pay rate insulting but accepted the work because of the need. “I did it because there was a need and it was important,” he said in public remarks during the proceedings.
White Plume, who grew up speaking Lakota and describes English as his second language, said accurate interpretation of legal proceedings is critical for community members whose primary language is Lakota. The language has seen a decline in speakers partly as a consequence of policies requiring Native American students to speak English at boarding schools during the 19th and much of the 20th century.
On the hearing’s first day, state officials opened proceedings without a Lakota interpreter present, despite having agreed to provide one. A state Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources staff member cited scheduling conflicts with potential interpreters as the cause of the delay.
What’s Next
The board must still reach a decision on the uranium exploration permit application, which has been in process since 2024. The hearing’s outcome will likely set a precedent for how future contested cases handle both resource development near culturally significant sites and the application of language access requirements. Helen’s Law will become binding statewide on July 1, formally requiring all applicable administrative bodies to arrange interpretation services going forward.
South Dakota is also weighing other large-scale energy decisions in the region — including a proposed $174 million battery energy storage facility that has drawn its own permitting scrutiny.