REGIONAL— Minnesota’s mining industry is looking forward to  president-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration next month, which will usher in a reversal of policies that will allow Twin Metals to renew efforts to mine copper, nickel and other precious minerals in what opponents call environmentally sensitive land.
For years, Twin Metals has strived to locate its mine on federal land in the Superior National Forest. But it had to mothball its plans after the Biden administration — citing environmental concerns — canceled its leases and put a 20-year moratorium on underground mining in the forest, which is a watershed for the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
Trump has vowed to reverse the Superior National Forest moratorium as a priority after he’s sworn in, which he can do under his executive authority.
Earlier this year, Twin Metals also conducted exploratory drilling southwest of the federal site on state land. 
It’s not only Twin Metals that is expected to benefit from a change of administration; other mining projects in the state are likely to benefit, too.
In 2017, the last time Trump was in the White House, he signed an executive order directing agencies to identify critical minerals essential for national security and the economy. The order also encouraged reducing permitting delays for mining projects involving these minerals.
And the next Congress is expected to be far friendlier than the current one when it comes to the concerns of mining interests. For instance, legislation proposed by Rep. Pete Stauber, R-8th District, and other lawmakers that would streamline federal permitting and make it harder to halt or slow the development of new mines in court now has a better chance of becoming law.
That legislation was never considered by the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate and was always vulnerable to a Biden veto threat. But Republicans wrested control of the chamber from Democrats in November’s elections, the GOP maintained its majority in the U.S. House and Trump is expected to back legislation that helps U.S. mineral production.
“Because of the balance in the House and the Senate, we’re going to be playing a lot of defense,” predicted Ingrid Lyons, executive director of Save the Boundary Waters, one of the many environmental and conservation groups that have battled sulfide ore mining on the Iron Range.
Twin Metals spokeswoman Kathy Graul declined to be specific about her company’s plans but provided a statement that said “we are committed to advancing our project in a bipartisan manner to ensure Americans can benefit from the much-needed copper, nickel and cobalt resources that are abundant in northeast Minnesota.”
Julie Lucas, executive director of the trade organization Minnesota Mining, was more blunt. “The company is ready to go whenever they have the opportunity to go again,” she said of Twin Metals, a subsidiary of the Chilean mining company Antofagasta.
Saying there is no safe way to mine for copper, environmentalists, including a group called Save the Boundary Waters, have tried to derail the Twin Metals proposed mine for nearly 10 years and say they are ready to renew their efforts in court.
“The protections that were put in place by the Biden administration went through a formal process by which public comments were taken and a science-based determination made from that,” said Chris Knopf, the executive director of Friends of the Boundary Waters. “And so if the Trump administration were to haphazardly and quickly undo that work, we would challenge that.”
Lawsuits ‘a fact of life’
Meanwhile, NewRange Copper Nickel, a joint venture of PolyMet Mining and Teck Resources, is hoping to get their $1 billion open pit mine near Babbitt back on track. The proposed mine, which had been issued all of its major permits as of 2018, has been beset by a series of legal setbacks that ultimately stripped PolyMet—now owned entirely by Swiss-based commodities trader Glencore— of most of its key permits.
The project will again need both federal and state permits to move forward and its federal permit from the Army Corps of Engineers has been revoked because of concerns over the mine’s potential impact on downstream water quality.
But the prospect of a more mining-friendly administration could help the mine advance.
NewRange spokesman Bruce Richardson said his company will reapply for a Clean Water Act “Section 404” wetlands permit. “We have every intention to do that,” he said.
Knopf said he fears the Trump administration will reissue the permit for that project, which the Army Corps of Engineers had ruled would violate water quality standards.
Richardson also said he hoped a key state license that has been stalled will move forward. Called a “permit to mine,” it was put on hold when a state administrative law judge recommended that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources not reissue the permit originally given to PolyMet because of concerns over tailings storage. Richardson said the company is modifying its plans to address those concerns and the DNR said that is why the permit is on hold until next August.
“The scope of potential changes could have a direct impact on specific issues under consideration in the contested case hearing process,” DNR spokeswoman Gail Nosek said in an email. “DNR’s final decision-maker ordered the stay to prevent significant expenditure of time and resources in the contested case process for a project design that may become moot if the company seeks to modify its project in ways that would require a permit amendment and/or additional environmental review.”
While it’s difficult to predict how the conflict between the state’s mining interests and environmental advocates will play out, the change in the direction of political winds are certain to reignite debate and court battles.
“Lawsuits are a fact of life if you want to build a mine,” said NewRange’s Richardson.
The shift toward the GOP in the state House (which is now evenly divided between DFL and Republican lawmakers) also makes it tougher for environmental allies to win approval of legislation that would impede state permitting of mines.
While the state has a law prohibiting mining in the Boundary Waters, some legislators have sought to expand that to its headwaters, an effort that failed and now seems further out of reach. 
Lucas, the Mining Minnesota official, said she understood the concerns of those who are fiercely opposed to mining for critical minerals in Minnesota because of fears of pollution of the Boundary Waters and other waters and land.
“They are not bad people for being scared,” she said. “They are just scared.”
This story courtesy of MinnPost