Riverview LLP of Morris will not be required to go through the rigorous Environmental Impact Statement process for the expansion of its West River Dairy, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) ruled last week.
Riverview proposes to increase its West River Dairy operation from 7,855 dairy cows and 10,997 animal units by adding 11,000 dairy cows and 15,400 animal units. When complete, the facility in Section 1 of Synnes Township in Stevens County, will be the single largest dairy operation in the state with 18,855 head and 26,397 animal units.
“The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has approved the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order for a Negative Declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the West River Dairy Expansion.
“The negative declaration document concludes that this project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects,” the MPCA ruled. “The decision completes the state environmental review process under Environmental Quality Board rules.”
With the MPCA ruling, the final decision on permits lies with the Stevens County Board of Commissioners.
Riverview was also required to seek a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit from the MPCA and feedlot expansion permit. Riverview submitted its request for the NPDES feedlot permit to the MPCA Dec. 12, 2025. It has been approved.
“The state of Minnesota, on behalf of its citizens through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), authorizes (Riverview)… to construct and operate an animal feedlot or manure storage area in accordance with the requirements of this permit.
“The goal of this permit is to protect water quality in accordance with Minnesota statutes and rules,” the MPCA states in the draft permit document.
Also, it needs Minnesota Department of Natural Resources approval for its expanded water use; that permit is pending.
Those asking that the MPCA require an EIS for the project pointed out its extraordinary size with potential negative impacts on local aquifers, air quality, the Pomme de Terre Watershed, the Minnesota River Basin, area roads, and small dairy operations.
Riverview has already completed an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) for its project.
An EAW is an information-gathering document used to inform decision-makers, including those issuing land-use and environmental permits required for the project. The environmental review process provides an opportunity for public input during the public comment period, the MPCA says. It is also required by the MPCA before deciding whether an EIS is needed.
An EIS is a more comprehensive, in-depth look at a project’s impact on the area, and even region, where it is proposed.
To move ahead with its expansion, Riverview will need an amended conditional use permit (CUP) approved by the Stevens County Planning Commission. As part of the CUP amendment review process, the planning commission will hold a public hearing to gather citizen input.
The planning commission can deny the permit, recommend its approval, or send it on without a recommendation to the Stevens County Board of Commissioners.
If it comes before the county board, no public hearing is required; however, the public may provide brief input to commissioners during the citizens’ comment period at the start of the meeting.
Study of Riverview plan, permits, and need for an EIS
During the public comment period regarding the requirement for an EIS, the MPCA received 1,314 comments from community members, and during the feedlot permit comment period, it received 60 comments. It received two comments from the DNR.
The MPCA said its decision on the need for an EIS was based on information gathered during the EAW process and the comments received. However, its decision was made within the boundaries of state law, and on whether West River Dairy’s proposed expansion complied with those rules and laws.
“In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the MPCA must compare the impacts that may be reasonably expected to occur from the project with the criteria set forth in…” state statute, it said.
The MPCA is required to order an EIS for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects, but it said it considers the measures Riverview included in its proposal to prevent or mitigate those impacts.
The first criterion that the MPCA must consider when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects is the “type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.”
A summary of the types of potential impacts from the expansion of the West River Dairy reviewed by the MPCA in its decision-making process, includes:
a. Surface water quality
b. Groundwater quality
c. Air quality (hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, odor)
d. Greenhouse gas emissions
Also, based on public comments, additional issues considered include:
e. Groundwater appropriations
f. Traffic
Through its study of each of the concerns, the MPCA made the following conclusion:
Surface Water Quality
Riverview’s EAW outlines construction and operational plans it will use to comply with the water quality discharge standards and its feedlot permit, the MPCA said.
“This includes the requirement to design, construct, operate, and maintain the facility to contain all contaminated runoff and the direct precipitation up to the volume from a 25-year 24-hour storm event.
“Riverview’s expansion design provides 14 months of manure and process wastewater storage versus nine months required by state law and prohibits all its animals from entering waters of the state,” the MPCA said in its ruling.
Its plans and permits include “measures and requirements to prevent impacts to surface water and groundwater from land application of manure that are applicable to all manure generated by the facility,” it said.
However, it adds that manure application rates may be limited when soil phosphorus test results exceed levels listed in state law and its permit.
Riverview must comply with all setbacks “to waters, open tile intakes, sinkholes, mines, quarries, and wells to minimize impacts from surface runoff at the manure application sites,” the MPCA said.
There are also strict rules in place for anyone to whom Riverview transfers its manure.
The MPCA said that it “does not reasonably expect significant adverse impacts to water quality, however, if they were to occur,” Riverview must modify its operations to address those impacts.
As further protection against possible pollution caused by run-off from its site, the MPCA says Riverview has designed its expansion to “capture and reuse most or all of stormwater runoff.”
Based on Riverview’s proposed plan, “MPCA finds that information presented in the EAW and other information in the environmental review record are adequate to assess potential impacts to surface water quality that are reasonably expected to occur from the project.”
Further, “the MPCA finds the project, as proposed, does not have the potential for significant environmental effects based on the type, extent and reversibility of impacts related to surface water quality, which are reasonably expected to occur.”
Groundwater Quality
The risk of groundwater contamination is low due to the engineered concrete structures and clay-lined design of the project, the MPCA said.
Air Quality
Based on studies Riverview has completed, using the American Meteorological Society Regulatory Model (AERMOD) developed by the American Meteorological Society and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the MPCA said its emissions will comply with current law.
To reduce odor issues, Riverview says it will place covers on its manure storage areas and inject the manure during application.
“The MPCA finds that information presented in the EAW and other information in the environmental review record are adequate to assess potential impacts to air quality related to hydrogen sulfide emissions that are reasonably expected to occur from the project,” it said in its ruling.
It also found Riverview had adequately addressed the emissions issues and potential odor problems.
Groundwater use
Some of the comments received by the MPCA raised concerns about aquifer depletion due to West River Dairy’s increased groundwater use.
Riverview’s water appropriation for its dairy expansion was based on the results from “a seven-day aquifer pump test that identified sufficient water in the water-table aquifer and confirmed that the aquifer is hydraulically connected to the Pomme de Terre River,” the MPCA stated.
It adds that, “as recommended in the Aquifer Test Report, pumping conditions were imposed by the DNR to protect the river in the event of drought or low surface-water flows.”
“The MPCA finds that the project, as it is proposed, does not have the potential for significant environmental effects based on the type, extent, and reversibility of impacts related to groundwater appropriation that are reasonably expected to occur from the project,” it states in its findings.
Traffic concerns
Area residents also expressed concern about road damage caused by increased traffic to the larger dairy operation.
The MPCA noted in its findings that the road currently has an average daily traffic of 520 vehicles, and the dairy expects to add only 45 more vehicles to that total, without requiring any improvements to the road.
Cumulative potential effects
In addition to the above criteria, the MPCA considered the cumulative impact of all the areas of concern and whether, together, they would require an EIS to be completed.
“Based on information on the project obtained from the feedlot permit application processes, information on water quality, information on manure application and groundwater appropriation presented in the EAW, and consideration of potential effects due to related or anticipated future projects, the MPCA does not expect significant cumulative effects from the Project,” it stated in its ruling.
Stevens County Conditional Use Permit
Riverview is required to obtain all required building and conditional use permits required by local units of government to ensure compliance with local ordinances.
The conditional use permit will address local zoning, environmental, regulatory, and other requirements that are needed to avoid adverse effects on adjacent land uses.
MPCA conclusions of law
“Based on a comparison of the impacts that are reasonably expected to occur from the project with the criteria established in state law, the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects,” it said.
