Share your ideas for improving Minnesota's environmental review program
Consultation has concluded
The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) is gathering ideas for improving the state’s environmental review program, and we’d like to know what’s important to you. This is part of a wider effort to identify and prioritize program changes in a strategic, transparent, and efficient manner. Find more information on our continuous improvement webpage.
The ideas you share here will be considered by third-party consultants. Consultants will also conduct background research which includes analyzing past evaluations of the environmental review program. Consultants will prepare a report with program recommendations to the board this summer.
What is environmental review?
Public and private projectsContinue reading
The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) is gathering ideas for improving the state’s environmental review program, and we’d like to know what’s important to you. This is part of a wider effort to identify and prioritize program changes in a strategic, transparent, and efficient manner. Find more information on our continuous improvement webpage.
The ideas you share here will be considered by third-party consultants. Consultants will also conduct background research which includes analyzing past evaluations of the environmental review program. Consultants will prepare a report with program recommendations to the board this summer.
What is environmental review?
Public and private projects in Minnesota can have impacts on our air, land, and water resources. Since 1973, Minnesota has required that certain projects go through an environmental review process before getting governmental permits or approvals. The process provides an opportunity for public comment and produces a document that identifies potential environmental effects of a proposed project, as well as ways to reduce any negative environmental effects.
Environmental review is an information-gathering process that helps decision makers protect Minnesota’s environment. The review does not approve or deny a project.
What is the Environmental Quality Board's role in environmental review?
The state of Minnesota's environmental review program provides information about the potential environmental effects of certain proposed projects. The board oversees the program, including:
- Monitoring the effectiveness of the program
- Making program improvements
- Directing staff to implement rule-related administrative tasks
What improvements are we considering?
Help us improve environmental review now and into the future. Improvements that are in scope may include updates to forms, guidance, practices, standards, rules, statutes, data gathering practices, and more. Anything related solely to permitting or programs outside of the environmental review program are outside of the scope of this effort.
How will EQB use this information?
The EQB hosts this engagement platform, but third-party consultants will transparently evaluate your feedback. The consultants will also review background documents, including past environmental review program evaluations. For instance, in 2007, a report was requested by the board to evaluate the ideas that resulted from previous reports, studies and efforts related to improvement of the environmental review program. A 2011 evaluation report drafted by the Office of the Legislative Auditor examined the environmental review process as well. Your feedback, alongside previously cited recommendations, will be analyzed together by the consultants in a final report to EQB.
-
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
How can we ensure that Minnesota's environmental review program meets your needs now and into the future?
9 months agoCLOSED: This ideas has concluded.Post any idea you have related to Minnesota's Environmental Review Program in the public forum, below. You may post more than once and respond to others' ideas as well. Not sure how to get started? Consider answering one of the following prompts:
- If you had a magic wand, what one thing would you do to improve the environmental review program?
- What is the environmental review program doing well or not well?
- What are the characteristics of an effective environmental review program?
dab10 months agoRequire the MNPUC to strictly follow the MN ERP in their approval process whenever their decision could impact state waters or wetlands.
0 comment2JamesS10 months agoIdea: Include Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions in All Environmental Review
Short description: I appreciate your recent improvements on the Environment Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to include calculation of greenhouse gas emissions for projects undergoing environmental review. However, the current agency guidance on the revised EAW only requires calculation of direct and indirect emissions, rather than full lifecycle accounting. Calculating lifecycle emissions is especially important for making sound decisions about fossil fuel infrastructure, because these types of projects will often enable the transportation/release of massive amounts of carbon. I ask that you update the agency guidance and/or the EAW to include a full lifecycle accounting of greenhouse gas emissions related to a project, in addition to the currently required calculation of direct and indirect emissions.
0 comment1MN Environmental Partnership10 months agoExamine all long-term climate impacts of a project
The Minnesota Environmental Partnership appreciates the EQB’s work to improve the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and account for potential projects’ climate impacts. We suggest that this aspect of the review be strengthened to account not only for direct and indirect emissions, but for the project’s lifecycle emissions. Oil pipelines, for example, exacerbate the climate crisis not only by consuming energy for their operation but also by enabling - and indeed encouraging - the consumption of highly carbon-dense fuel. In order to effectively live up to our climate action obligations, Minnesota must not take a neutral stance on fossil fuel transportation merely because the direct emissions will be generated downstream. While the EAW may not be able to directly address the demand for oil and other carbon-intensive fuels, it should not disregard the effects of carbon-enabling activities like oil transport. We respectfully request that the EQB add a full lifecycle accounting of greenhouse gas emissions to its review process.
0 comment1UPPERSIOUX10 months agoMN Drainage Concerns
The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, Minn. Stat. § 116D.04, subd. 2a(a), requires an environmental impact statement for any project that has the “potential for significant environmental effects.” Drainage projects have dramatically altered Minnesota's landscapes and significantly affected our water quality. For example, increased flow to the Minnesota River from drainage tiles has caused high sediment levels, unstable stream banks, ravines, and collapsing bluffs. These conditions create an environment in which macrophytes (plant life) or mussels (clams, etc.) are unable to survive due to lack of oxygen, sunlight, and hard surfaces to which they can attach. Further, nutrients and pesticides make their way to our rivers and streams, leading to algae blooms, fish kills, and drinking water contamination. Yet under the current EQB rules, it is not clear that environmental review is required for many drainage projects. Although the Minnesota Rules provide for mandatory environmental review of some drainage projects, in many cases environmental review is discretionary. See Minn. R. 4410.4300, subps. 20, 24(B), 26, 27(A). In practice, environmental review is often not required even where the project have the potential for significant environmental effects. Environmental review is essential to understand the downstream impacts of drainage project, especially their cumulative impacts to the Minnesota River and other at-risk or already-impaired watersheds. It is only once those impacts are understood that mitigation measures can be developed to reduce or prevent downstream and cumulative impacts. EQB should provide for clarity for all interested parties, including downstream landowners and public citizens, by promulgating a mandatory environmental review category for drainage projects.
0 comment1UPPERSIOUX10 months agoTribes should be consulted during projects that impact Tribal Land
Coordination Policies for Collaborative Work between Tribal Staff and State Agency Staff Federally recognized Indian tribes are sovereign nations. Within the boundaries of Minnesota, tribes retain hunting, fishing, and other usufructuary rights that extend throughout the state. To protect usufructuary rights, or property rights, tribes have a legal interest in the natural resources and co-management responsibilities that are shared with the state. At the earliest opportunity, to demonstrate respect for the unique legal relationship with tribes, state agencies are required to conduct meaningful consultation on matters of common interest to purposely achieve mutually beneficial solutions. At a minimum, a EQB should: 1. As early in the process as possible, provide tribal staff all relevant information. 2. Provide the tribe with technical assistance and/or data, if requested. 3. Ensure the tribe has sufficient time to consider the information provided. 4. Collaboratively set meeting or conference call dates and times. 5. Address tribal concerns in a timely manner, and keep the tribes informed of project or process developments or changes. 6. Consider alternatives. Act in good faith and be open to looking at things from the tribe's perspective. 7. Document the coordination process by sending minutes or a summary after phone calls or meetings. 8. Accept the tribe's recommendations unless compelling reasons require otherwise. After the first coordination meeting on a topic, the EQB should provide written updates demonstrating that tribal recommendations have been considered, and how they were resolved. Rationale for not accepting a recommendation must be provided, as well as indicating where Tribal suggestions will be included. If no tribal recommendations are going to be included from the first meeting, tribes may reasonably conclude that meaningful consultation thresholds have not been met, and further coordination meetings or teleconferences on that topic would not be productive for tribal staff with limited resources. In this situation, tribal leaders may choose to engage with agency leaders to determine alternative outcomes. However, if an approach to an issue substantially changes from the first meetings where no suggestions were incorporated from Tribes, the meetings can begin again if the Tribes express an interest. There are training programs available to help EQB learn how to properly work with Tribal governments. Generally, meaningful consultation requires direct engagement with appropriate Tribal officials and staff. A simple letter or notice does not constitute meaningful consultation. I strongly encourage EQB to develop its relationship with Tribes throughout this revision process and to implement any Tribal recommendations that will promote coordination in environmental review. This may include the development of internal EQB procedures for Tribal coordination and guidance for other agencies conducting environmental review.
0 comment2
Who's Listening
-
-
Email Karen.Gaides@state.mn.us