Establishes National Critical Minerals Council

Summary#

The National Critical Minerals Council Act would amend the Energy Act of 2020 to create a National Critical Minerals Council inside the Executive Office of the President. Its stated goal is to develop and coordinate a national strategy for critical minerals and materials; that goal is not a guaranteed result. The bill has been introduced in the Senate and is not law.

  • The Council would advise three co-chairs: the Secretary of the Interior or a designee, the National Security Advisor or a designee, and the Director of the National Economic Council or a designee.
  • Within 180 days after enactment, the co-chairs must designate a Chief Minerals Advisor. The Advisor would run the Council’s day-to-day work, have authority to hire its staff, and report to the co-chairs.
  • The Council must include at least one representative from each of these agencies and offices: Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Interior, Labor, State, Treasury, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, the Development Finance Cooperation, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Export-Import Bank, the National Economic Council, the National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
  • The Council would coordinate agency policy, recommend ways to align agency budget requests with the strategy, identify conflicting or duplicate policies, track foreign investments in relevant projects, and coordinate research, funding priorities, and workforce efforts. The bill does not give it an express power to require agencies to adopt its recommendations.
  • The Council must develop a platform for private entities to view funding opportunities and maintain a public dashboard for tracking projects and housing data. It must also consult outside experts, including Indian Tribes, and report a strategy and implementation plan to Congress within one year of enactment.

What it means for you#

  • Federal agencies: Their leaders or designees would take part in the Council. The Council would coordinate their work and advise on budget alignment, but the bill does not require agencies to follow its recommendations.
  • Businesses and project developers: A central platform would let private entities view funding opportunities. The public dashboard would include project-tracking information, but the bill does not specify what information it would show.
  • Researchers, colleges, industry, investors, and Indian Tribes: The Council must consult with these groups to stay informed about practices, needs, research, and responsible sourcing. The bill does not set rules for how that consultation happens or require the Council to accept their advice.
  • The public and Congress: The public would have access to the dashboard. The Advisor must report to specified congressional committees within one year, then brief them on progress annually after the first report.
  • General public: The bill does not directly change mineral ownership, create a benefit or fee, or require a person or business to apply for approval.

Money#

No publicly available information on the bill’s cost or a funding source appears in the supplied materials.

  • The Advisor would have hiring authority, but the bill gives no staff count or staffing-cost estimate.
  • The bill requires a strategy report, later briefings, a funding-opportunity platform, and a public dashboard, but gives no cost estimate for them.
  • It does not appropriate a specific amount of money.

What is unclear#

  • The Energy Act of 2020, which the bill would amend, was not supplied, so the existing law and any overlap with current programs could not be verified.
  • The bill does not set rules for how agencies must act on the Council’s recommendations or how the Council would resolve disagreements.
  • It does not define “foreign entities of concern” or set criteria for the Advisor to identify them.
  • The bill does not explain what project or other data would appear on the public dashboard, or how often it would be updated.
  • No publicly available information in the supplied materials gives a cost estimate, staffing plan, or source of funds.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the bill is that mineral supply issues involve many federal agencies, and one Council could help coordinate their work.
  • Tracking projects, funding opportunities, and agreements with allied and partner nations could make relevant information easier for agencies and businesses to find.
  • The strategy and benchmarks could give Congress a way to assess progress toward the bill’s stated goals, including reducing reliance on foreign adversaries.

Case against#

  • The Council could add another layer of coordination without having express power to make agencies follow its recommendations.
  • The bill requires major tasks, including a public dashboard and a funding platform, but does not specify their costs, staffing needs, or data rules.
  • The Advisor’s discretion to decide which foreign entities count as “entities of concern” is not bounded by criteria in the bill.
  • The bill calls for consultation with Tribes and other groups but does not say how they would be involved or how their views would affect decisions.