The Minnesota Environmental Review Program was created over 50 years ago to provide usable information to communities, decision makers, and project proposers for a wide variety of projects. Every four years, the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) will seek feedback from everyone —members of the public, petitioners, responsible governmental units, Tribes, environmental groups, etc.— for how to make environmental review more effective.
Ideas can be submitted now through May 1st, 2026, by noon on our EQB Engagement Platform. You might have to create a username to access the system, but your feedback can be anonymous.
More information
EQB is always open to feedback, but the ideas provided here will be specifically considered as part of the environmental review program’s continuous improvement (CI) process. We greatly appreciate those of you who engaged with us during the 2023 CI Process development. EQB keeps track of all ideas shared with us in the past, so if you submitted an idea in 2023, you do not need to re-submit it. However we do encourage you to re-submit for two reasons: 1) we updated the format and are asking for more context than you may have provided in the past, and 2) you now have the benefit of seeing the 'criteria of an effective program' and identifying how your idea might relate to those criteria.
You can check our collection of previously submitted ideas below to see if your idea has been carried forward from 2023. If you are happy with how your idea is represented on this list, then there is no need to submit more information this year.
The 2023 CI feedback has already helped influence work planning for the following:
- Health in Environmental review: determining how to best incorporate health impacts into environmental review
- Cumulative Potential Effects: Investigating how cumulative potential effects may be better defined or described
- Decision Criteria: Investigating the effectiveness of the existing decision criteria
- Guidance Updates: Modernizing existing guidance documents and creating new guidance for AUARs, working with Tribes, using the new climate calculator tool and more
- EAW Form: Updating the EAW form for inclusivity, clarity, and accessibility (no major content changes)
- Housekeeping Rule: Preparing housekeeping fixes for environmental review rules chapter 4410
- Working with Tribes: Pursuing legislative changes to accommodate Tribes in the petition process
CI Process
The board resolves to adopt and use the following continuous improvement procedural steps, at least once every four years (beginning in 2026) for the environmental review program:
- EQB staff solicit ideas for program improvements.
- EQB staff review the scope of the improvements and adjust for step 3.
- EQB staff evaluate and score improvements using a program effectiveness matrix.
- EQB staff plan for implementation of improvements.
- ERIS completes review of implementation planning.
- Board completes review and directs staff to implement selected projects.
These steps will be re-evaluated at least every four years, so the board may make any necessary adjustments.
The prioritization matrix mentioned in step 3 was designed based on the environmental review rules, past report recommendations, and public feedback. The matrix is what staff use to score improvement ideas. The scoring is considered by the board in determining the workplan priorities, but it is not the only factor used in decision-making. More information on the matrix and criteria development can be found in the final report.
Environmental Review Program Effectiveness Matrix
Does an improvement directly or fully increase a criterion as defined below? Award 2 points.
Does an improvement indirectly or partially increase a criterion as defined below? Award 1 point.
Does an improvement maintain or not address a criterion? Award 0 points.
| Criteria for information (Objective A) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Scientific integrity | Environmental protection | Measurability |
| means considering, encouraging, or making available the most up-to- date reputable, and complete science-based information for analysis of environmental and human health impacts or mitigation | means using information in government decisions to safeguard the environment and people in Minnesota | means identifying quantifiable data to understand project and/or environmental review program impacts to human health and the environment |
| Criteria for engagement (Objective B) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Inclusivity | User-friendliness | Accessibility |
| means inclusion of voices that have historically been marginalized, excluded, or disproportionally impacted by pollution and the ability for those voices to influence the conversation, etc. | means clear communication and procedures or understandable information to interact with environmental review; ease or efficiency to thoroughly and accurately complete environmental reviews | means access to decision-makers and processes so that the public can provide meaningful input into decision making and receive explanations and updates for why certain decisions are made |
| Criteria for process (Objective D and E) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Consistency | Quality assurance | Accountability |
| means uniformity of environmental review processes thereby promoting dependability and reliability in environmental review; eliminates ambiguities; promotes comparability | means EQB's ability to verify accuracy and completeness of information used in the environmental review program | means the project proposer's, RGU's, and Board's ability to better demonstrate meeting the program's obligation to the public and to the environment through reporting, data sharing, transparently explaining decisions, taking responsibility for actions, and being able to explain, justify, and take consequences for them |
Want to learn more?
EQB and agency partners worked with a third-party consulting group to research historic ideas, analyze new ideas, and facilitate conversations to build this continuous improvement process.
- The final report summarizes the CI development process
- Appendix C: Summary of past EQB evaluation recommendations
- Appendix F: Results of scoring 2023 improvements
- This memo details the extensive background research performed
- Appendix C: Summary of past EQB evaluation recommendations
- The board packet of June 2023 (packet page 13) details the methodology of the CI process build, provides full comments as submitted, and shares the matrix results per criteria.
- The 2024 Mandatory Category report lists potential updates per category. (In the 2026 CI idea solicitation, please note that any ideas for mandatory category updates will now be considered in the CI process for consistent analysis)
Any questions can be emailed to Env.Review@state.mn.us.