Fate of Stauber’s mine permitting bill rests on debt limit talks

WASHINGTON — On the table at high-stake negotiations on raising the debt ceiling is legislation sponsored by Rep. Pete Stauber that aims to help the mining industry.

But it’s anybody’s guess right now whether that legislation will be included in a final deal or end up on the cutting room floor.

Stauber’s PERMIT-MN bill, the first bill he introduced in this Congress, was made a part of broader GOP energy legislation known as H.R. 1. That bill was included in the House Republican bill that would also substantially cut non-defense spending under negotiation with the White House as a condition to avoid a calamitous default on the national debt as soon as June 1.

The PERMIT-MN bill would set limits on time for environmental reviews and otherwise streamline the federal permitting process. It would also end what Stauber calls “frivolous” lawsuits by imposing a ban on legal challenges to the approval of a federal permit 120 days after the decision has been made official.

The legislation, which Stauber, R-8^th District, has called “the tip of the spear” when it comes to mining reform, would also designate a federal agency as the “lead agency” in the permitting process. It would allow that agency to adopt an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment prepared by or for a mining company “if such document fulfills the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.”

Stauber maintains the mining permitting process is in dire need of an overhaul to allow mines in Minnesota and across the nation to provide critical minerals and to lessen U.S. dependency on the import of those minerals from China and other nations.

“Permitting reform, including for mining projects, is the top priority of our House Republican majority,” Stauber said. “Permitting reform will unleash the full potential of America’s energy and mineral resources and will lower energy prices for Americans, create jobs in my district and secure our domestic supply chains.”

But Aaron Klemz, chief strategy officer of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, called Stauber’s legislation “kind of a collection of giveaways to the (mining) industry.”

“The proposal is a bad idea,” he said.

While environmental groups oppose Stauber’s legislation, it is supported by a broad National Association of Building Trades Unions, the American Exploration and Mining Association, the National Mining Association and the Uranium Producers of America, among other industry groups.

In promoting his bill, Stauber sometimes mentions the 20-years of legal battles the NewRange Copper Nickel’s NorthMet project has been embroiled in as it attempts to establish an above-ground mining operation in northern Minnesota’s Duluth Complex.

The Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy has challenged NorthMet’s permits in court. While the project would be established on state, not federal land, it – like most mining projects – was also required to apply for a federal permit, in this case a federal Clean Water Act wetlands permit.

Stauber’s legislation may not be of much help to the NorthMet project, but could aid NewRange, previously known as Polymet, if the mining company moves forward on a second Minnesota mining project in the Mesaba mineral deposit, also located in the Duluth Complex.

NewRange spokesman Brucel Richardson said PERMIT-MN, would also prevent other mining companies from ongoing litigation “for years on end.”

“It would remove the uncertainty of litigation going into perpetuity,” he said. “These environmentalists kind of made a cottage industry out of filing lawsuits.”

Stauber’s legislation could also help Twin Metals, whose proposed copper and nickel mine in the Superior National Forest has been stalled by a Biden administration-imposed moratorium, if that ban were lifted. The 20-year moratorium on more than 220,000 acres of the forest was imposed because of concerns its Rainy River Watershed, which feeds the Boundary Waters, could suffer pollution from sulfide mining.

The PERMIT-MN bill’s chances of ever becoming law are largely dependent on whether it is part of larger, “must pass” legislation, like an agreement on lifting the debt ceiling. That’s because the U.S. Senate, controlled by Democrats, is not likely to approve a stand-alone bill.

Stauber said he’s “glad that Speaker (Kevin) McCarthy is pushing for permitting reform measures to be included in the debt ceiling negotiations.”

“It’s time we get H.R. 1 across the finish line,” Stauber said.

But whether the PERMIT-MN bill, or any of the other proposals included in H.R. 1 – including measures to expand oil and gas drilling on public lands and the repeal of parts of President Biden’s climate initiative – remains to be seen.

While climate-minded Democrats support speeding permitting for renewable energy projects and a compromise could be forged on all types of permitting, time is running out for the type of back and forth that would be needed.

And earlier this month, White House adviser John Podesta, speaking at the Bipartisan Policy Center, firmly said permitting reforms do not belong in debt ceiling negotiations.

“If you want to talk about the budget, we should talk about the budget. If you want to talk about permitting, we should talk about permitting,” Podesta said.

Ongoing negotiations to lift the debt ceiling have led to few public disclosures. Reps. Garret Graves (R-La.) and Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.), who are House Speaker McCarthy’s emissaries in the talks, have said little about what progress has been made.

And Democratic negotiators — close Biden adviser Steve Ricchetti, White House budget chief Shalanda Young and congressional liaison Louisa Terrell — have also remained largely silent.