Key Takeaways
On May 23, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) announced it had finalized its environmental assessment (EA) for the existing Velvet-Wood conventional underground uranium and vanadium mine in Utah pursuant to new alternative arrangements for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance[1] developed as a response to President Trump’s declaration of a national energy emergency.[2] The final approval for the project was issued only 11 days after DOI announced it would review the project’s April 2025 application under these alternative arrangements. Given the administration’s focus on domestic production of uranium and vanadium to support its goals of building out the U.S. nuclear industry,[3] it comes as no surprise that this project was the first to be approved. DOI also announced on May 30, 2025, that it will review three geothermal projects under these emergency procedures.[4] Decisions on those approvals are expected before June 13, 2025. A pending challenge by state attorneys general to Trump’s declaration of an energy emergency to expedite approvals of these projects,[5] however, suggests that any project approved through DOI’s new emergency procedures could face litigation. That, in turn, could mean that the projects will take more, not less, time to become operational.[6]
Overview of DOI’s Emergency Procedures
DOI released its directives on emergency procedures under the energy emergency EO and Secretary Doug Burgum’s Secretarial Order 3417 on April 23, 2025.[7] The directives include guidance on how to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Endangered Species Act.[8] These arrangements apply to oil, gas, uranium, coal, renewables, and critical minerals projects that require federal approval and are tied to the declared energy emergency.[9] Eligibility for the procedure is limited to projects that seek to identify, lease, site, produce, transport, refine, or generate energy as defined in section 8(a) of the EO and for which the project applicant(s) have submitted plans of operations, applications for permits to drill, or other applications. To initiate the process, project applicants must submit the necessary applications and affirm in writing their desire to use these expedited procedures.
Under the Alternative Arrangements for NEPA Compliance, the responsible official[10] must prepare a focused EA for projects not likely to have significant impacts within 14 days, addressing the project’s purpose, alternatives, mitigation, and effects. If the EA finds no significant impact, the decision can be finalized and published without a public comment period.
For projects likely to have significant environmental impacts, a streamlined environmental impact statement (EIS) process is used. The agency will publish a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement, solicit written comments (typically for about 10 days), and hold a public meeting. The EIS must be concise and completed within about 28 days, after which the final decision is published. No draft EIS is required before the final EIS and record of decision are published.[11]
The project applicant must agree to operate in accordance with its application, take measures to mitigate reasonably foreseeable, significant adverse effects on the human environment, and abide by applicable federal (Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act), state, and local environmental laws.
Approval of the Velvet-Wood Mine Under Emergency Procedures
The project applicant submitted a proposed Plan of Operations (Plan) Modification for the Velvet-Wood Mine to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on April 1, 2025, before DOI announced its emergency procedures.[12] The original Plan of Operations for the Velvet Mine was submitted and approved in 1981. The BLM authorized an amendment to the Velvet Mine Plan of Operations in 1988. Between 1988 and 2023, mine work included maintenance activities and substantial reclamation work. Under the April 2025 proposed modification, the applicant would develop new underground workings to access the rest of the ore in Velvet and to access the adjacent Wood mineralization. The Plan provides for 28 acres of surface disturbance, 25 of which are located within areas of pre-existing Velvet Mine disturbance such as roads, buildings, landing strips, electrical transmission lines, water wells, oil and gas pipelines, other surface and subsurface facilities, and areas where partial reclamation had occurred.
The applicant submitted its request for alternative arrangements for NEPA compliance on April 28, 2025. As a project that fell under the EO’s definition of energy resource and had submitted a plan of development, it was eligible for the use of these emergency procedures. BLM approved the request on May 12, 2025. BLM then prepared an EA and, under the alternative arrangements for NEPA compliance, did not seek public comment. BLM initiated informal, expedited consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on May 13, 2025, and FWS responded the same day stating that BLM had applied the appropriate conservation measures. The EA states that the BLM also followed the process for undertakings responding to an emergency declaration when there is no formal emergency procedure or applicable programmatic agreement and sent letters to the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, the State Historic Preservation Officer, and area Tribes on May 13, 2025, and sought comment by May 20, 2025. The BLM met virtually or in-person with the Hopi Tribe, Pueblo of Zuni, staff from the Navajo Nation Heritage and Historic Preservation Department, staff from the Pueblo of San Felipe, and staff from the Ute Mountain Ute Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO). In these meetings, each of the tribal representatives expressed concerns with the emergency procedures, water impacts, transportation, and uranium contamination. Both the Ute Mountain Ute THPO and the Pueblo of San Felipe expressed their concerns in letters to the BLM.[13] The decision record does not address the extent to which the BLM responded to their concerns.
On May 23, 2025, less than a month after the applicant’s request and only 11 days following the approval of that request, BLM issued its final decision approving the restart of the old Velvet Mine and development of the nearby Wood Mineralization.
Potential Impact of State Attorney Generals’ Challenge
In May 2025, 15 states filed a federal lawsuit in the Western District of Washington against President Donald Trump, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation, contesting the legality of EO 14156. The states allege that the EO not only is ultra vires but also that emergency permitting authorities have been used to bypass critical environmental and historic preservation safeguards and have undermined states’ statutory rights.
In addition to asserting that the president unlawfully declared an energy emergency, the lawsuit, led by the attorneys general of Washington, California, and Massachusetts, argues that the federal agency defendants’ actions have directly harmed the states’ interests. These include environmental and financial harms flowing from the declaration of an energy emergency, the Army Corps of Engineers’ implementation of the EO under its Clean Water Act section 404 authority, and the Advisory Council for Historic Preservation’s implementation of the EO under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The specific actions challenged occurred on the West Coast and in the Northeast. Examples called out by the states include the Corps issuing expedited permits for the construction of interstate oil and gas pipelines, as well as waiving requirements for environmental impact statements under NEPA.
The complaint did not name DOI as a defendant, as it had not yet issued approvals based on the alternative arrangements at the time of the filing. However, it stated that “[s]hould Interior move forward with Alternative Arrangements for such projects, Plaintiff States will seek to amend this complaint accordingly.” As of the date of this Update, the complaint has not been amended nor have additional pleadings been filed.
Conclusion
An expedited timeline under emergency procedures that provide for limited public input could lead to a vulnerable record of agency assessment of the true impact of any project. Whether projects approved under those procedures will survive challenge will depend heavily on how far a project has advanced through the environmental review process, the extent of required consultation, and the state of its administrative record. Project applicants seeking to take advantage of any expedited permitting subject to DOI or any other agencies’ emergency procedures should closely follow the state attorney generals’ lawsuit challenging that emergency, including any amendments to the complaint, and seek the advice of legal counsel.
Endnotes
[1] DOI’s emergency procedures implementing the national energy emergency are set out in the following documents: Alternative Arrangements for NEPA Compliance, Alternative Procedures for Informal Section 7 Consultation; and Emergency Procedures for Section 106 Compliance.
[2] Exec. Order No. 14156, Declaring a National Energy Emergency, 90 Fed. Reg. 8433 (Jan. 20, 2025). Executive Order 14156 (EO) was followed by Secretary Doug Burgum’s Secretarial Order 3417, Addressing the National Energy Emergency, issued on February 3, 2025.
[3] President Trump signed four Executive Orders related to nuclear energy on May 23, 2025, three of which seek to expedite approval processes for permitting new nuclear reactors. The order to reinvigorate the nuclear industrial basis specifically calls out the need to boost domestic uranium production. Our Update summarizing these orders is here.
[4] These projects include (1) a plan to drill test wells and conduct geothermal resource confirmation activities on federally leased land to determine whether the geothermal reservoir is commercially viable; (2) upgrading and expanding three existing geothermal power plants by adding new wells, advanced heat exchangers, cooling fans, and a 15 MW solar photovoltaic field; and (3) evaluating geothermal potential on leased public lands through test drilling and exploration activities.
[5] Complaint, Washington v. Trump, No. 2:25-cv-00869 (W.D. Wash. May 9, 2025).
[6] In fact, in their complaint, the attorneys general stated that once DOI exercised its alternative arrangements for these projects, they would amend their complaint. Complaint at paragraph 176.
[7] The Council on Environmental Quality authorized the use of these alternative arrangements for projects that respond to the national energy emergency on April 23, 2025.
[8] See endnote 1; see also Frequently Asked Questions about the Department of the Interior’s Emergency Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and Endangered Species Act (ESA) for Projects That Will Address the National Energy Emergency.
[9] Section 8(a) of the National Energy Emergency EO defines the term "energy" or "energy resources" as “crude oil, natural gas, lease condensates, natural gas liquids, refined petroleum products, uranium, coal, biofuels, geothermal heat, the kinetic movement of flowing water, and critical minerals, as defined by 30 U.S.C. 1606 (a)(3).”
[10] A responsible official under these alternative arrangements includes the acting assistant secretary—land and minerals management.
[11] As stated by DOI in its FAQs on the emergency procedures, the condensed timeline for approval under these emergency procedures applies to projects where DOI is the only federal agency involved. For eligible projects that require reviews, permits, consultations, or compliance under other federal, state, or local agencies, the permitting timeline is likely to exceed 28 days. See endnote 6.
[12] Vanadium is considered a critical mineral. 30 U.S.C. 1606(a)(3) & 87 FR 10381. Uranium is a mineral covered by Executive Order 14241, Immediate Measures To Increase American Mineral Production, issued on March 20, 2025. A detailed breakdown of the directives in Executive Order 14241 can be found in our prior Update.
[13] In their letter, the Ute Mountain Ute THPO expressed concern with the project and potential effects from uranium transportation and water issues. The Pueblo of San Felipe, in their letter, expressed concerns with the emergency procedures process, uranium transport, water contamination, effects to cultural resources important to the Tribe near the mine, and with transport through Bears Ears National Monument. EA at 63.
[View source.]
