Rep. Grijalva Slams Bill to Fast-Track Mining Permits

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Congresswoman Adelita S. Grijalva spoke on the House floor in opposition to H.R. 1501 , legislation which passed the House today that would make mining and mineral processing projects eligible for coverage under FAST-41 , an expedited federal permitting process.
The bill would also block a Biden Administration proposal that would have narrowed FAST-41 eligibility for mining projects to those involving critical minerals and their supply chains.
Earlier, Rep. Grijalva introduced an amendment that would have required meaningful, robust, and enforceable consultation with potentially impacted Tribal Nations before a mining project could qualify for expedited permitting under FAST-41.
“At a time when we should be strengthening environmental protections, respecting Tribal sovereignty, and ensuring communities have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their land and water, this bill moves us in the wrong direction,” said Rep. Grijalva.
“I offered an amendment that would have required robust, meaningful, and enforceable consultation with potentially impacted Tribal Nations before a mining project could be eligible for expedited permitting under FAST-41. Tribal Nations deserve a meaningful seat at the table when projects could affect their lands, water, cultural resources, and communities.”
Rep. Grijalva’s opposition to the legislation comes as she continues to raise concerns about proposed mining activity in Southern Arizona. She recently sent a letter to U.S. Forest Service Chief Tom Schultz raising serious concerns about the Hermosa critical minerals project – the first project in the country approved under FAST-41 – and calling for greater consideration of potential impacts on Tribal Nations, local communities, and the region’s natural resources. She also wrote an op-ed in the Patagonia Regional Times following the project’s approval.
You can view her Floor remarks here . The full copy of her remarks is below:
I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1501, the Protecting Domestic Mining Act.
At a time when we should be strengthening environmental protections, respecting Tribal sovereignty, and ensuring communities have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect their land and water, this bill moves us in the wrong direction.
I offered an amendment that would have required robust, meaningful, and enforceable consultation with potentially impacted Tribal Nations before a mining project may be eligible for expedited permitting under FAST-41.
Unfortunately, the Rules Committee refused to make my amendment in order, denying this body the opportunity to even debate and vote on a basic principle: that Tribal Nations deserve a meaningful seat at the table when mining projects threaten their lands, resources, and communities.
My amendment would have ensured that federal agencies uphold the United States’ trust and treaty obligations by engaging in intentional and substantive consultation with Tribal governments. It would have made clear that consultation is not a procedural checkbox, but a meaningful government-to-government dialogue.
It would also have ensured that no mining project could receive expedited permitting treatment unless affected Tribal Nations had been engaged from the earliest possible stages of the project’s development.
This issue has become increasingly relevant in my district with the Hermosa Project in the Patagonia Mountains, southeast of Tucson, Arizona. Its designation as the first critical minerals project under FAST-41 highlights the growing use of expedited permitting frameworks.
While FAST-41 is intended to improve efficiency, mining is among the most environmentally consequential sectors it covers. Expedited timelines must not come at the expense of meaningful public participation or environmental assessment.
We have already seen the consequences of insufficient engagement and analysis.
The Town of Patagonia formally requested a comprehensive groundwater study of the Patagonia Mountains from the Coronado National Forest in both 2020 and 2021, specifically citing concerns related to the proposed Hermosa Project.
Despite these repeated requests — and the support of then-Congressman Raúl M. Grijalva — the study was never completed.
For that exact reason, I sent a letter to the U.S. Forest Service in April to follow up on that same request.
This gap leaves significant uncertainty about potential impacts to groundwater and undermines public confidence in the adequacy of the review process.
When I met with local leaders and community members in Patagonia, they raised serious concerns about their drinking water, their health, and the long-term sustainability of their aquifers.
Those concerns are not abstract; they reflect lived experience and legitimate questions that deserve answers before — not after — decisions are made.
What these experiences make clear is that communities closest to these projects cannot be left to react once decisions are already in motion. They must be engaged from the beginning, with their voices meaningfully incorporated into decision-making.
My amendment does not slow progress — it strengthens it.
By ensuring Tribal Nations and impacted communities have a real seat at the table, we produce more informed and more mindful policy outcomes.
Respecting Tribal sovereignty and listening to affected communities is not optional; it is a fundamental obligation.
For those reasons, I oppose H.R. 1501, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
###