Pushing back against the Trump administration, state regulators announced Friday that Minnesota will conduct its own, independent environmental review of the fiercely contested Twin Metals copper-nickel mining project because the state needs to ensure a “thorough, scientific and neutral review.”
Twin Metals, which wants to build an underground mine on Minnesota’s Iron Range, is expected to submit its official plan of operation next month, and the environmental impact statement, or EIS, is the all-important first stop before the yearslong permitting process begins.
“The credibility and transparency of the EIS process for the proposed Twin Metals project is critical to Minnesotans,” Natural Resources Commissioner Sarah Strommen said in a call with journalists Friday.
Strommen also said her staff expects access to materials produced as part of a U.S. Forest Service study of the impact of hard-rock mining in a watershed of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. That review was canceled after President Donald Trump took office, and the materials have never been released despite multiple requests from members of Congress.
Strommen’s decision means that the Twin Metals proposal will undergo two separate environmental reviews, a move that could create more conflict and potential delays for the mine the company wants to build just outside the Boundary Waters wilderness.
Strommen said she made the decision because the U.S. Department of the Interior wants to fold Twin Metals’ application for a critical third federal land lease for an additional 1,000 acres into the environmental review. The state does not need to be involved in a federal leasing decision, she said.
In addition, she said that new Interior Department rules for environmental reviews create a problem with timing and scope. In 2017 the department announced a set of restrictions on the duration of federal reviews. It now requires its bureaus, including the Bureau of Land Management, to limit environmental impact statements to 150 pages and to complete them within 12 months. In the past, these crucial reviews have often taken years and resulted in long, detailed reports.
Asked for comment on Minnesota’s decision, an Interior Department spokesperson issued a statement saying: “While the Bureau of Land Management will not be preparing a joint EIS with the State of Minnesota ... we will continue to work cooperatively with the state to reduce duplication and to coordinate our review of the project on matters such as data submittals, analytic approaches, and public participation.”