Wisconsin Assembly approves mining bill
The Wisconsin State Assembly approved a wide-ranging bill that will ease the way for Gogebic Taconite to an iron ore mine in the Penokee Hills south of Lake Superior northern Wisconsin.
The bill passed 59-36, on Jan. 26 with all Republicans voting for it and all Democrats voting against it, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported.
“This definitely is the biggest jobs thing we’re going to do” this legislative session, Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon) said.
“These aren’t jobs that can pick up and go to China or India,” he said. “The iron ore is in our ground, in Wisconsin.”
Democrats, environmentalists and many tribal leaders oppose the legislation and have criticized it for, among other things, weakening water protections and reducing public participation in the review process.
Attention now shifts to the Senate, where the bill is likely to draw objections in a house that Republicans hold with a one-vote majority.
The bill would relax numerous environmental standards involving wetlands, ground water and rock disposal, and it would reduce the level of public participation by eliminating a process known as a contested case hearing.
Mining legislation became a top priority for Republicans last year after Gogebic Taconite demanded changes in mining laws that it said would provide certainty over the regulatory review process. The firm’s parent company has extensive coal mining holdings, and it is proposing to invest $1.5 billion to construct a large open pit iron ore mine in Ashland and Iron counties.
The company has said the mine would employ about 700 workers and operate in its first phase over about 7.2 km (4.5 miles) and reach depths of up to 300 m (1,000 ft), which would make it the largest such mine in the state’s history. Backers of the bill say it would also bolster Milwaukee’s mining equipment sector.
The Assembly bill differentiates between iron ore mining and other types of metallic mining, which is viewed as posing greater potential harm on the environment.
Opponents said an iron ore mine could still cause damage.
They also criticized the bill for weakening the Department of Natural Resources’ authority and believe that wetlands and prized streams and rivers near the mine are in jeopardy.
But proponents said the bill does not change the fact that a mine would still require state and federal environmental permits and that the DNR is prohibited from approving a mine if there would be a significant effect on water quality.
The bill would require the DNR to approve a mine permit within a year, which proponents noted was longer than timelines in Minnesota and Michigan that range from 120 to 180 days.
The Senate will next address the bill. Sen. Neal Kedzie (R-Elkhorn), chairman of a select mining committee, said he hoped to finish work on a separate wetlands bill before turning his full attention to the mining bill.
