Status
Active
The PolyMet/NewRange sulfide mine, proposed a mile upstream of Lake Superior, poses one of the biggest threats to freshwater in Minnesota. If built, it could cause centuries of water pollution in the Lake Superior watershed and put thousands of people living in downstream communities at risk, including the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Duluth, and Cloquet.
This sulfide mine plan was first proposed back in 2005, when it was backed by the international mining conglomerate Glencore. With so much on the line, MCEA immediately armed itself with experts to better understand the science and risks involved with sulfide mining, which is vastly different from the iron ore mining that historically defined the economy of Minnesota’s North Shore.
When exposed to air, sulfide ores release highly toxic sulfuric acid. This creates dangerous acid mine drainage that leaches heavy metals into surrounding waterways, devastating aquatic ecosystems, contaminating drinking water sources, and leaving visible rust-colored deposits. This kind of mining has never been done anywhere without causing harm.
Given the risks, strong permits are critical to protecting nearby natural resources and people. With so much on the line, MCEA’s attorneys and scientific experts served as public watchdogs as Polymet’s proposal moved through the state’s permitting process. We also used our expertise to craft evidence-based arguments that highlighted major shortcomings in the various permits that left the Lake Superior watershed and downstream communities at risk.
When the state approved the permits in 2018 without acknowledging the dangers we had identified, we knew we had to act. We filed lawsuits challenging all of the proposal’s major state permits, including the proposal’s water pollution permit, air pollution permit, and permit to mine. While each case is distinct, there was a clear throughline. Simply put, the permits violated Minnesota law and lacked the protections needed to safeguard our natural resources and people.
After years of ongoing legal challenges that climbed all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court, PolyMet–now rebranding itself as NewRange Copper Nickel– announced in 2024 that it was reexamining its proposal and considering changes to the mine plan, specifically regarding its tailings basin and waste management plans.
The announcement is a huge victory for MCEA, other environmental organizations, the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, and the thousands of Minnesotans across the state who have fiercely advocated for stronger protections against this risky mining proposal.
The sulfide-mining proposal and all MCEA’s ongoing legal challenges have been on pause since.
We know the company could, and likely will, reactivate its proposal at any time. MCEA and our allies will be ready to re-engage in the ongoing fight to protect Lake Superior and downstream communities when that time comes.
KEY EVENTS
November 2024 (PERMIT TO MINE)
DNR suspends proceedings in ongoing Permit to Mine case
A state agency issues a decision following PolyMet/NewRange's announcement that the company is researching possible changes to its mine plan, particularly regarding the design of the tailings basin.
December 2023 (AIR PERMIT)
Minnesota Court of Appeals allows PolyMet air permit to stand
The court determined the air permit issued by the MPCA could stand despite concerns that PolyMet had been deceptive about the size of its proposed mine. The court determined that MPCA’s cursory examination of evidence challenging whether PolyMet applied for the correct permit is all that Minnesota law requires.
November 2023 (PERMIT TO MINE)
Administrative Law Judge Recommends Denial of Permit to Mine Following Contested Case Hearing
In a 40-page ruling, Judge James E. LaFave finds that the mine’s proposed method of storing reactive mine waste, by lining the mine’s tailings waste facility with a type of clay known as bentonite, “is not a practical and workable reclamation technique.” Permit denial recommendation sent to DNR for final determination.
August 2023 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
MN Supreme Court reverses water permit and returns it to MPCA
A unanimous Minnesota Supreme Court reverses the PolyMet water pollution permit and remands it back to the MPCA in a landmark decision. The decision and a concurring opinion signed by a majority of the Court blasts MPCA for concealing EPA concerns about the permit. The Court also agrees with MCEA’s argument that the permit violates Minnesota rules by allowing the pollution of groundwater.
March 2023 (PERMIT TO MINE)
Contested Case Hearing Held on Permit to Mine
The sole issue examined during the hearing is the adequacy of PolyMet’s bentonite scheme to prevent, in perpetuity, contaminants (“reactive waste”) from polluting Minnesota’s waters. The Administrative Law Judge considers the facts presented and will later issue a recommendation to DNR (which DNR can either accept or reject) on whether PolyMet’s scheme satisfies the legal requirements.
January 2022 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
Minnesota Court of Appeals issues a mixed ruling
The Minnesota Court of Appeals reverses and remands the PolyMet permit because MPCA failed to properly evaluate whether groundwater discharges would impact surface waters. But in doing so, the Court declines to impose any formal legal consequences for MPCA’s suppression of EPA’s concerns about the enforceability of water quality standards in the PolyMet water permit.
December 2021 (AIR PERMIT)
MPCA issues PolyMet its requested Air Permit
After the Minnesota appellate courts remanded the permit decision back to MPCA, the agency issues revised findings of fact and conclusions of law to once again award PolyMet its Air Permit. MCEA appeals this decision to the Minnesota Court of Appeals the following month.
April 2021 (PERMIT TO MINE)
Minnesota Supreme Court remands Permit to Mine back to DNR
The Minnesota Supreme Court held that the DNR should have convened a contested case hearing on a key part of PolyMet’s plan to manage pollution from its tailings basin, and that DNR erred in not establishing a fixed term based on when reclamation will be complete. The Court orders DNR to hold the hearing and make a new decision based on the hearing record.
February 2021 (AIR PERMIT)
Minnesota Supreme Court Issues Mixed Opinion, Sends Case Back to Court of Appeals
On February 24, 2021, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a mixed opinion, reversing in part, and sending the matter back to the Court of Appeals to consider whether PolyMet knowingly submitted false or misleading information to the MPCA in violation of state permitting law.
September 2020 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
District Court finds MPCA engaged in “procedural irregularities”
Judge John Guthmann issues an order finding MPCA engaged in irregularities in procedure not found in the record during the comment period, when MPCA did not include EPA’s concerns about the permit in the public record. The case is returned to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
March 2020 (AIR PERMIT)
Minnesota Court of Appeals rules for MCEA, remands permit to agency for investigation
In an unanimous decision, the Minnesota Court of Appeals finds that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency had failed to fully investigate whether the air pollution permit was a “sham permit.” The Court remanded (returned) the permit to the MPCA to investigate PolyMet’s expansion plans and whether they should modify the air pollution permit. PolyMet and the MPCA both appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
January 2020 (PERMIT TO MINE)
Minnesota Court of Appeals rules for MCEA, overturns permits and orders contested case hearing to establish the facts
In a unanimous decision, the Minnesota Court of Appeals finds that the Minnesota DNR should have ordered a “contested case hearing,” an administrative trial in front of a judge, before issuing the permits. The Court overturns the permits and directs DNR to hold that trial before further permit decisions. PolyMet and DNR both appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
July 2019 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
EPA staff memorandum detailing problems with permit leaked to press by EPA employee union
After MPCA claims that EPA agreed with the permit as issued, a 29-page memorandum from EPA permitting staff was leaked to the Star Tribune by the union representing EPA employees at the Region 5 office. The memo shows that days before the permit was issued, staff raised numerous concerns about the permit that MPCA never addressed.
February 2019 (PERMIT TO MINE)
MCEA and partners request DNR reconsider permits in light of Brazilian mine disaster
After the deadly collapse of the Brumadinho, Brazil dam that similar in design to PolyMet’s proposed dam, MCEA and our partners ask DNR to reconsider their permits in light of new evidence. DNR refuses to do so.
January 2019 (PERMIT TO MINE)
MCEA appeals permit to mine and dam safety permits
MCEA argues to the Minnesota Court of Appeals that DNR’s issuance of these two key permits did not comply with Minnesota law for multiple reasons, including that the Permit to Mine does not include an appropriate ending date and depends upon an untested plan to store mine waste.
January 2019 (AIR PERMIT)
MCEA appeals air pollution permit
MCEA argues to the Minnesota Court of Appeals that the air pollution permit granted to PolyMet does not comply with Minnesota law because PolyMet misrepresented the size of the mine it intends to build in order to obtain a less stringent permit.
January 2019 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
MCEA Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, and WaterLegacy appeal PolyMet water pollution permit
MCEA argues to the Minnesota Court of Appeals that the water pollution permit granted to PolyMet does not comply with Minnesota law for several reasons, including that it allows unlawful pollution of groundwater.
December 2018 (AIR PERMIT)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency issues PolyMet air pollution permit
In his last few days as MPCA Commissioner, John Linc Stine signs the air pollution permit for PolyMet. PolyMet is issued a “synthetic minor” permit, in which PolyMet agrees to limit their operations to a certain level and less protective standards are included in the permit.
December 2018 (WATER POLLUTION PERMIT)
PolyMet Water Pollution (NPDES) permit issued by MPCA
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency issues the water pollution permit. EPA staff write a memo days before issuing the permit outlining how it fails to resolve 23 concerns raised by staff. However, EPA Region 5 does not object to the permit and the memo is added to the EPA file.
November 2018 (PERMIT TO MINE)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources issues PolyMet permit to mine and dam permits
DNR Commissioner Tom Landwehr issues three permits to PolyMet for their proposed mine - a permit to mine and two dam safety permits. This comes after years of environmental review with record numbers of public comments opposed to the proposal, and serious concerns about the pollution and safety of the mine proposal.