[House Report 117-634]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
117th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 117-634
======================================================================
BOUNDARY WATERS WILDERNESS PROTECTION AND POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT
_______
December 14, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Grijalva, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2794]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 2794) to provide for the protection of the
Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and interconnected
Federal lands and waters, including Voyageurs National Park,
within the Rainy River Watershed in the State of Minnesota, and
for other purposes, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the
bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Boundary Waters Wilderness Protection
and Pollution Prevention Act''.
SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL OF CERTAIN FEDERAL LANDS AND WATERS IN THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA.
(a) Definition of Map.--In this Act, the term ``Map'' means the map
prepared by the Forest Service entitled ``Superior National Forest
Mineral Withdrawal Application Map'' and dated December 5, 2016.
(b) Withdrawal.--Except as provided in subsection (d) and subject to
valid existing rights, the approximately 234,328 acres of Federal land
and waters in the Rainy River Watershed of the Superior National Forest
in the State of Minnesota, as located on the Map and described in the
Federal Register Notice of Application for Withdrawal, dated January
19, 2017 (82 Fed. Reg. 6639), are hereby withdrawn from--
(1) all forms of entry, appropriation, and disposal under the
public land laws;
(2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, and
geothermal leasing laws.
(c) Acquired Land.--Any land or interest in land within the area
depicted on the Map that is acquired by the United States after the
date of enactment of this Act shall, on acquisition, be immediately
withdrawn in accordance with this section.
(d) Removal of Sand, Gravel, Granite, Iron Ore, and Taconite.--The
Chief of the Forest Service is authorized to permit the removal of
sand, gravel, granite, iron ore, and taconite from national forest
system lands within the area depicted on the Map if the Chief
determines that the removal is not detrimental to the water quality,
air quality, and health of the forest habitat within the Rainy River
Watershed.
(e) Availability of Map.--The Map shall be kept on file and made
available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 2794 is to provide for the protection
of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and interconnected
federal lands and waters, including Voyageurs National Park,
within the Rainy River Watershed in the State of Minnesota.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Originally designated under the Wilderness Act of 1964, the
Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) is a 1,090,000-
acre federal wilderness area inside Superior National Forest in
northern Minnesota. It is the nation's most visited wilderness
area, welcoming approximately 150,000 visitors annually.\1\
Along with nearby Voyageurs National Park, the Boundary Waters
is a lynchpin of the regional economy, supporting 22,000 jobs
and $1.4 billion in annual visitor spending.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\U.S. Department of the Interior Press Release, Obama
Administration Takes Steps to Protect Watershed of the Boundary Waters
Canoe Area Wilderness, December 15, 2016. https://www.doi.gov/
pressreleases/obama-administration-takes-steps-protect-watershed-
boundary-waters-canoe-area.
\2\Dissenting Views, H.R. 3905 Bill Report. https://
www.congress.gov/115/crpt/hrpt422/CRPT-115hrpt422.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BWCAW is nationally significant because of its pristine
water resources, remote location, and expansive solitude. The
BWCAW contains nearly 1,200 lakes ranging in size from 10 acres
to 10,000 acres, more than 1,200 miles of canoe routes, and
2,100 campsites.\3\ There are also 1,500 cultural resource
sites including historic Ojibwe villages and Native American
pictograph panels.\4\ The BWCAW is a prime location for hunting
and fishing and contains valuable biodiverse ecosystems that
provide a protected home for wildlife such as loons, black
bear, moose, foxes, and deer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Ibid.
\4\``Section 2, Findings'' of H.R. 5598 Boundary Waters Wilderness
Protection and Pollution Prevention Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BWCAW watershed is also internationally significant. In
1909, the United States signed a treaty with Canada, known as
the Boundary Waters Treaty, requiring that neither country
pollute waters that flow across the international boundary.
Within the Rainy River Watershed, the Kawishiwi River flows
north directly into the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness
and then into Canada and the shared waters of Voyagers National
Park. The commitment to protect this international watershed is
why the Canadian government has formally expressed concern over
the risk to water quality from proposed increases in mining
activity, through the International Joint Commission (IJC) in
2015\5\ and Global Affairs Canada in 2019.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Letter from IJC Secretaries Camille Mageau and Dr. Charles A.
Lawson to Christopher Wilkie, Director of U.S. Transboundary Affairs
Division, Foreign Affaris and International Trade Canada and Susan
Saarnio, Director Office of Canadian Affairs, U.S. Department of State.
January 22, 2015.
\6\Letter from Eric Walsh, Director General, North American
Strategy Bureau, Global Affairs Canada to Derek Strohl, Natural
Resources Specialist and Project Lead, Bureau of Land Management.
January 30, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the BWCAW is specifically protected for its
conservation, recreation, and historical values, Superior
National Forest also has a long history of industrial activity.
In 1966, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued two mineral
leases covering 5,000 acres of the Superior National Forest
just outside the BWCAW.\7\ These leases were valid for twenty
years, at which point the federal government reserved the right
to review the leases to determine whether they should be
extended. In a 1966 press release, the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI) explicitly stated that the leases ``grant mining
rights to the company for 20 years; renewable for 30 years at
10-year intervals if the property is brought into production
within the initial 20-year term.''\8\ Neither lease has ever
supported active mining, yet they received waivers from the
production requirement and were renewed in 1989 and 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\Under 16 U.S.C. 508b, national forests in Minnesota are not
subject to the Mining Law of 1872.
\8\U.S. Department of the Interior Press Release, ``Government
Grants Leases for Nickel and Copper Mining,'' June 14, 1966.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2012, Twin Metals Minnesota--a wholly owned subsidiary
of Chilean mining company Antofagasta--requested an extension
of the two leases in order to build a sulfide-ore copper mine.
Although mining operations are common in northern Minnesota and
the Superior National Forest, the type of mining practiced in
the area has been taconite (iron ore) mining, which does not
lead to acid mine drainage. Copper sulfide mining, on the other
hand, has never been attempted in this water-rich ecosystem.
Sulfide ore mining is notorious for polluting rivers, lakes and
groundwater with severe and long-lasting acid mine drainage,\9\
and any pollution produced at the Twin Metals mine would flow
directly into the Boundary Waters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\B. Gestring, ``U.S. Copper Porphyry Mines: The Track Record of
water quality impacts resulting from pipeline spills, tailings failures
and water collection and treatment failures,'' Earthworks, July 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2016, after a public input process, the U.S. Forest
Service--which needs to provide consent before BLM can
authorize mining operations on the leases--concluded that
building a sulfide-ore copper mine in the watershed near the
BWCAW could result in ``extreme'' and ``serious and
irreplaceable harm'' to the wilderness area.\10\ The Forest
Service withheld its consent for renewal, and the leases
expired. In denying the lease renewal, the Obama administration
cited ``broad concerns from thousands of public comments and
input about potential impacts of mining on the wilderness
area's watershed, fish and wildlife, and the nearly $45 million
recreation economy,'' and ``the potential risk of environmental
contamination of the surrounding watershed,'' including within
the BWCAW. The Obama administration also determined that the
Boundary Waters would be particularly sensitive to any acid
mine drainage from the proposed sulfide-ore copper mine.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Letter from Thomas Tidwell, Chief of the U.S. Forest Service to
Neil Kornze, Director of the Bureau of Land Management. December 14,
2016, available at https://www.savetheboundarywaters.org/sites/default/
files/attachments/twin_metals_proposed_lease_
renewal_with_bibliography.pdf.
\11\U.S. Department of the Interior Press Release, Obama
Administration Takes Steps to Protect Watershed of the Boundary Waters
Canoe Area Wilderness, December 15, 2016. https://www.doi.gov/
pressreleases/obama-administration-takes-steps-protect-watershed-
boundary-waters-canoe-area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the refusal to renew the mineral leases, the
Forest Service initiated a public process to withdraw 235,000
acres of Superior National Forest within the Rainy River
Watershed from potential mineral activity for a period of
twenty years in order to provide further protections for the
BWCAW.
Nonetheless, reinstating the Twin Metals-owned leases in
Minnesota and stopping the mineral withdrawal was a top
priority for the Trump administration. In 2017, BLM reinstated
the expired leases and Twin Metals' lease renewal application,
and in September 2018, the Forest Service abruptly cancelled
its withdrawal application and the associated Environmental
Assessment (EA) before it was completed. BLM renewed the two
Twin Metals leases in May 2019.
In January 2022, the Department of the Interior's Office of
the Solicitor issued a new legal opinion regarding the 2019
renewal of these two leases. The opinion found that the Trump
administration improperly renewed the leases by failing to
follow Department regulations, did not incorporate the Forest
Service's opposition to the renewal, and conducted an
inadequate environmental analysis under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Given these findings, the
Department of the Interior cancelled the two leases. The Forest
Service has also resubmitted a 20-year withdrawal application
to the Bureau of Land Management, and at the time of H.R.
2794's consideration at committee markup, published a Draft
Environmental Assessment.
As the significant back-and-forth between multiple
administrations shows, the BWCAW deserves permanent protection
from the threat of copper-sulfide mining, which can only be
provided by Congress. The proposed Twin Metals mine is a direct
threat to the pristine water, clean air, and healthy forest
ecosystem of the Boundary Waters. Allowing sulfide ore mining
to go forward on public land within the watershed of the BWCAW
would present unnecessary risks to this treasured special
place. H.R. 2794, the Boundary Waters Wilderness Protection and
Pollution Prevention Act, would protect the wilderness for
future generations by permanently withdrawing 234,328 acres of
federal land and waters inside Superior National Forest from
future mineral and geothermal leasing activities. Importantly,
the legislation would still allow for sand, gravel, granite,
iron ore, and taconite mining if the Chief of the Forest
Service determines that those activities would not be
detrimental to the water quality, air quality, and health of
the forest habitat of the Rainy River Watershed.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 2794 was introduced on April 22, 2021, by
Representative Betty McCollum (D-MN). The bill was referred
solely to the Committee on Natural Resources, and within the
Committee to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources
and the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public
Lands. On May 24, 2022, the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral
Resources held a hearing on the bill. On July 13, 2022, the
Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittees were discharged by unanimous consent. Chair Raul
M. Grijalva (D-AZ) offered an amendment in the nature of a
substitute. Rep. Pete Stauber (R-MN) offered an amendment
designated Stauber #1 to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute. The amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote
of 20 yeas and 21 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Stauber offered an amendment designated Stauber #2 to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment was
not agreed to by a roll call vote of 19 yeas and 23 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Stauber offered an amendment designated Stauber #3 to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment was
not agreed to by a roll call vote of 18 yeas and 23 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Stauber offered an amendment designated Stauber #4 to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment was
not agreed to by a roll call vote of 18 yeas and 22 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Stauber offered an amendment designated Stauber #12 to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment was
not agreed to by a roll call vote of 19 yeas and 22 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Stauber offered an amendment designated Stauber #9 to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The amendment was
not agreed to by a roll call vote of 17 yeas and 22 nays, as
follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
By unanimous consent, Rep. Stauber offered amendments
designated Stauber #5, Stauber #8, Stauber #10, Stauber #11,
Stauber #13, Stauber #14, Stauber #15, and Stauber #20 en bloc
to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The en bloc
amendments were not agreed to by a roll call vote of 18 yeas
and 22 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ranking Member Bruce Westerman (R-AR) offered an amendment
designated Westerman #17 to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute. The amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote
of 18 yeas and 23 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ranking Member Westerman offered an amendment designated
Westerman #18 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
The amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 17 yeas
and 23 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) offered an amendment designated
Boebert #16 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 17 yeas and
23 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-WI) offered an amendment designated
Tiffany #6 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 16 yeas and
23 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
By unanimous consent, Rep. Garret Graves (R-LA) offered
amendments designated Graves #1 (Revised) and Graves #4 en bloc
to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The en bloc
amendments were not agreed to by voice vote. By unanimous
consent, Rep. Graves offered amendments designated Graves #3
and Graves #5 en bloc to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute. The en bloc amendments were not agreed to by a roll
call vote of 17 yeas and 23 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to
by voice vote. The bill, as amended, was adopted and ordered
favorably reported to the House of Representatives by a roll
call vote of 24 yeas and 16 nays, as follows:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
HEARINGS
For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, the
following hearing was used to develop or consider this measure:
hearing by the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources
held on May 24, 2022.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
This section provides the short title of the bill, the
``Boundary Waters Wilderness Protection and Pollution
Prevention Act.''
Section 2. Withdrawal of certain federal lands and waters in the state
of Minnesota
This section states that 234,328 acres of federal land and
waters, as depicted on the ``Superior National Forest Mineral
Withdrawal Application Map'' dated December 5, 2016, are
permanently withdrawn from future mineral and geothermal
leasing. If the federal government acquires lands depicted on
the map, those lands are also withdrawn from future mineral and
geothermal leasing. The legislation protects all valid existing
rights and the Chief of the Forest Service is authorized to
permit the removal of sand, gravel, granite, iron ore, and
taconite within the areas depicted on the Map if the Chief
determines that removal is not detrimental to water quality,
air quality, or the health of the forest habitat within the
Rainy River Watershed.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT
1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act.
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII
of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 308(a)
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect to
requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) and clause 3(d) of rule XIII
of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 402 of
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has
requested but not received a cost estimate for this bill from
the Director of Congressional Budget Office. The Committee
adopts as its own cost estimate the forthcoming cost estimate
of the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, should such
cost estimate be made available before House passage of the
bill.
The Committee has requested but not received from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office a statement as to
whether this bill contains any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goals and
objectives of this bill are to provide for the protection of
the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and interconnected
federal lands and waters, including Voyageurs National Park,
within the Rainy River Watershed in the State of Minnesota.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT
An estimate of federal mandates prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 423 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act was not made available to the
Committee in time for the filing of this report. The Chair of
the Committee shall cause such estimate to be printed in the
Congressional Record upon its receipt by the Committee, if such
estimate is not publicly available on the Congressional Budget
Office website.
EXISTING PROGRAMS
This bill does not establish or reauthorize a program of
the federal government known to be duplicative of another
program.
APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public
services or accommodations within the meaning of section
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW
Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the
U.S. Constitution.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes to existing
law.
DISSENTING VIEWS
H.R. 2794 (McCollum) would permanently withdraw 234,238
acres of the Superior National Forest in northern Minnesota
from mineral development. The Superior National Forest in
northeastern Minnesota contains 3.7 million acres of National
Forest System land, under which lies the Duluth Complex, one of
the largest undeveloped mineral reserves in the world.
Vast amounts of copper and nickel, as well as cobalt and
platinum metal groups, began to attract interest from
developers decades ago. Two mining leases were granted to
project proponents in 1966 for an initial term of 20 years,
with rights to renew for 10 years. These leases have been
renewed multiple times since. The need for these valuable
commodities has increased tremendously since the leases were
initially granted; growth in the renewable energy sector and
other advanced technologies has increased demand for many
hardrock minerals by orders of magnitude. The Duluth Complex
could be a crucial supplier of copper, nickel, and cobalt, all
of which are vital for electric vehicles and other renewable
technologies. This deposit is one of the richest in the world,
containing an estimated 7.7 billion short tons of ore in total.
In the last days of the Obama administration, the U.S.
Forest Service (USFS) filed an application with the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) to withdraw 234,328 acres in the Superior
National Forest from mineral development, immediately halting
all mining activities pending the results of an environmental
review. The Obama administration also declined to renew the two
mineral leases held by Twin Metals Minnesota, despite their
long tenure and hundreds of millions of dollars spent exploring
the prospective mine site.
After 15 months of environmental review, the Trump
administration cancelled the application for the mineral
withdrawal on September 6, 2018, and reinstated the mineral
leases on May 2, 2018. In December 2019, Twin Metals Minnesota
formally submitted a Mine Plan of Operation to BLM.
Unfortunately, on October 20, 2021, the Biden
administration restarted the process for withdrawing taconite,
copper, nickel, cobalt, platinum, and other minerals from
development in the area, triggering an automatic two-year pause
on mineral activities while the withdrawal application is
analyzed. On January 26, 2022, the Biden administration took
another step by cancelling the two mineral leases, originally
issued in 1966, held by Twin Metals Minnesota. These actions
interrupted regular regulatory review under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), including an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to thoroughly analyze Twin Metals' Mine
Plan of Operations.
In the face of rising mineral demand and supply chain
risks, not to mention the 700 direct and 1,400 indirect jobs
that would be created by the Twin Metals Minnesota project
alone, maximizing domestic production in the Duluth Complex and
elsewhere will help support responsible production of minerals
for many years to come. H.R. 2794 would take our country in the
wrong direction, furthering reliance on foreign supply chains
powered by child slave labor for everything from cell phones to
solar panels and permanently withdrawing 234,238 acres from
nonferrous mineral development. H.R. 2794 would authorize the
Chief of the Forest Service to have veto authority over
taconite projects and quarries in the withdrawal area, hinging
Minnesota's robust iron history on the attitude of the whoever
occupies the White House, rather than on sound environmental
analysis.
For these reasons, I oppose H.R. 2794.
Bruce Westerman.
[all]