SME introduces concept fora National Materials and Minerals Council

In 1996, the U.S. Congress voted to cease funding the U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM). This decision has had wide-ranging, negative ripple effects on the U.S. mining industry. In the three decades without a USBM, the United States has lost its position as the global leader in mining production and has suffered a significant decline in domestic mining education and research capabilities. Additionally, the nation has become increasingly reliant on mineral imports, many of which come from adversarial countries. Roundtable discussion On May 30, 2024, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME) invited 18 industry experts to its headquarters in Englewood, CO to discuss the need for the creation of a new agency or entity that could fill the void left by the closure of the USBM and provide technical advice and coordination on minerals issues to the U.S. government that have been absent since 1996. The roundtable discussion included representatives from industry, academia, government and nongovernment organizations, including former USBM employees. Among the experts were mining engineers, metallurgists, environmental engineers, geologists, mineral economists, mine-permitting and regulatory specialists, health and safety professionals, lawyers, and government affairs and policy specialists. The discussion highlighted many of the nation’s losses in the mining and mineral development sector due to the closure of the USBM and noted the gains the nation could achieve with a new minerals agency or office that would fulfill many of the responsibilities that were once handled by the USBM. “It seemed that the time was right, and SME saw the need to propose ideas on the importance and value of the former USBM. And we wanted to create an opportunity to either refund or create a new agency to promote and support mining in the U.S.,” said SME executive director and chief executive officer David Kanagy. “The roundtable discussion was a result of conversations with the National Mining Association (NMA), American Exploration & Mining Association (AEMA) and SME leadership who were present at the discussion. SME hopes this begins a dialogue and process that is likely to take a few years.” IWG report One of the catalysts to the formation of the roundtable discussion was the publication of a report from an interagency working group (IWG) composed of the U.S. Departments of the Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Energy and State, as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the National Economic Council. The IWG report on “Recommendations to Improve Mining on Public Lands” published in September 2023 cites the need for a USBM type of agency as “an issue needed to revitalize domestic mining,” and states: “At the end of the 20th century, the U.S. lost its position as the global leader in mining, both in terms of total production and the development of cutting-edge mining technology …. The infrastructure necessary to restart the domestic mining industry has atrophied with the increased offshoring of mining … (IWG Report, pages 90-91).” Concept paper The result of the May 30 roundtable discussion was the creation of a concept paper titled “Why the U.S. Needs a National Materials and Minerals Council” that is available on SME’s website. The paper states that the proposed National Materials and Minerals Council (NMMC) should become part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP), where it would be ideally positioned to work on a wide spectrum of materials and minerals issues and coordinate with other EOP offices as well as with all cabinet-level executive offices and their respective agencies. The NMMC should be staffed with policy and mining technical experts recruited from the private sector, federal agencies and departments and academia. “The NMMC is critically needed to revitalize the mining and mineral processing research functions at which the USBM excelled,” said Debra Struhsacker, environmental permitting and government relations consultant and co-author of the NMMC concept paper. “The urgent need to increase domestic mineral production to reduce our dangerous reliance on foreign minerals will require enhanced mining and mineral recovery techniques at new mines, operating mines and some legacy mine sites. Because some of the USBM’s responsibilities are being successfully accomplished, like the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) annual Mineral Commodities Summaries, it isn’t necessary to recreate the entire organization. However, there is an immediate need for the NMMC to rebuild our mining and mineral processing research capabilities.” Need for NMMC Since 1996, the United States has not mined or processed many of the 50 minerals deemed critical by the USGS. In 2023, the United States was 100 percent reliant on foreign sources for 15 of these minerals and 50 percent or more reliant on other countries for another 34 minerals. Furthermore, the United States is dangerously dependent on China and other adversarial countries for minerals that are essential for the defense, energy, aerospace, electronics, telecommunications and transportation sectors. The United States currently imports numerous minerals from countries with inferior environmental protection and labor safety standards. All of this comes at a time of rapidly increasing demand for minerals for electric vehicles, wind turbines, transmission lines and other infrastructure. SME estimates that the United States must develop 359 new domestic mines to provide the minerals needed to meet clean energy transition objectives. This transition will require a broad spectrum of minerals including copper, cobalt, lithium and nickel. However, the concept paper notes that the United States imports 32 percent of the copper, 61 percent of the cobalt, 50 percent of the lithium and 52 percent of the nickel that it needs. Some of these minerals are imported from adversarial countries like China and Russia or from countries with lax labor or environmental regulations compared to the United States. “The absence of federal minerals research has caused the U.S. to fall behind the rest of the world during one of the most transformative times in human history. As the world looks to transition to a clean energy economy, global demand for critical minerals is set to skyrocket by 400 to 600 percent over the next several decades. For minerals such as lithium and graphite used in electric-vehicle (EV) batteries, demand will increase by even more — as much as 4,000 percent,” the paper states. Centralized policy agency Ironically, the 1996 Congressional decision to cease funding the USBM, which was driven in part by a desire from both Republicans and Democrats to streamline the federal government, had the unintended consequence of creating a complex bureaucratic maze of government agencies that now have some touch point with the mineral supply chain (Fig. 1). To streamline material and mineral production in the United States, the concept paper recommends that the United States should establish the NMMC to provide technical input and policy advice on domestic minerals and materials to Congress and Executive Branch agencies and departments. It is important to note that the statutory authority of the USBM still exists, but it is an unfunded agency. Some of its functions, such as miner health and safety research were transferred to other agencies. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has overseen the health and safety responsibilities since 1996, but other functions, including most mining and mineral processing research programs, did not continue or are no longer funded. Rather than duplicate the former USBM, the NMMC could achieve a “whole-of-government” approach to the oversight of critical materials and critical minerals in coordination with all cabinet-level executive offices and their respective departments and agencies. In short, the NMMC would serve as the clearinghouse that coordinates the efforts of the numerous federal agencies and departments that are involved with mineral issues to achieve more synergy and efficiency and to minimize overlap and duplication and eliminate the complex, inefficient and expensive bureaucracy shown in Fig. 1. Research and development The NMMC would function as an executive-level, unbiased and fact-based advisor to help Congress and Executive Branch officials develop mineral policies and programs. NMMC would also be tasked with reinvigorating a federal mineral research program focused on strengthening U.S. mineral supply chains in order to reduce the nation’s dangerous reliance on foreign minerals and to meet the skyrocketing mineral demands projected for the next several decades to support the transition to a clean energy economy. “Currently, many of the research topics that were performed by the USBM are an unfunded mandate that Congress needs to address immediately in conjunction with its appropriations to support the clean energy transition, including recovering critical minerals from legacy mine wastes, batteries and recycled e-waste, all of which require mining, metallurgical and mineral processing expertise,” the concept paper states. “Although there is some expertise in the Departments of Energy, the Interior, Defense and other federal agencies on critical minerals and some cross-agency coordination, there is no centralized federal agency like the USBM with the expertise to provide the leadership necessary to effectively conduct, direct and coordinate federally funded critical minerals R&D projects. Consequently, Congress’ recent critical minerals appropriations functionally outsource many mineral processing, recycling and other important critical minerals research topics to academia and the private sector with relatively little federal supervision and coordination. Additionally, there is no technical group that can readily help Congress fulfill its oversight obligations to ensure that expenditures of taxpayer monies on critical minerals projects are achieving their intended purposes,” the concept paper continues, The NMMC would perform in-house materials and minerals R&D to increase domestic mining and mineral processing, improve mineral recoveries and reduce environmental impacts, ensure worker health and safety, and optimize mine reclamation outcomes. It is likely that some of this research would be performed in cooperation with the nation’s mining schools to capitalize on their existing laboratories and faculty expertise and to help train the next generation of mining professionals. The NMMC would also furnish technical assistance and perform oversight on third-party critical materials and critical minerals R&D subsidized with federal grants and loans to capitalize on these investments of taxpayer dollars and to ensure timely technology transfer to the industry at large. “Research is needed to improve almost every aspect of the materials production cycle including: removing minerals from the earth; enhancing materials performance; increasing mineral recoveries; reducing energy consumption in mining and mineral processing operations; pursuing waste management technologies and resource conservation; ensuring the health and safety of the workers in the nation’s mines and mineral processing plants and minimizing and mitigating the environmental impacts of mining and mineral processing,” the paper states. Government awareness The U.S. government has recognized the need for more minerals. Since 2021, Congress has appropriated trillions of dollars to support critical minerals. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) of 2021, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 (NDAA) have appropriated funding for domestic critical mineral projects. As noted in the 2023 IWG report, in order to cultivate an environment conducive to rebuilding the U.S. mining sector, the federal government needs to promote a stream of consistent and widely available geologic data, technology and support infrastructure, as well as dedicated funding for mining science, metallurgy and mining education. Some examples of recent appropriations include (1) $858 billion in the NDAA for the development of a federal strategy to recycle and recover critical minerals from batteries used in the federal electric-vehicle fleet, (2) approximately $3 billion in the BIL to “establish a program to inventory, assess, decommission, reclaim, respond to hazardous substance releases, and remediate abandoned hardrock mine land based on conditions including need, public health and safety, potential environmental harm, and other land use priorities,” (3) approximately $5 billion earmarked for conditional loan commitments for domestic critical minerals projects authorized by Department of Energy’s (DOE) Loan Program Office and (4) $6 billion committed in the BIL to support grants for demonstration and commercial facilities associated with battery materials processing and battery manufacturing. Permitting While the USBM did not have mine permitting authority it did provide technical guidance during the permitting process. The issue of mine permitting in the United States was discussed during the May 30 roundtable where it was noted that the United States has one of the most complex and cumbersome permitting processes in the world. According to the NMA, the U.S. permitting process, which requires multiple permits and multiple agencies as well as the involvement of other stakeholders including local indigenous groups, the general public and nongovernmental organizations, has created an inefficient permitting system. The NMA reported that it takes on average seven to 10 years to secure the permits needed to commence operations in the United States, while in Canada and Australia, countries with similarly stringent environmental regulations, the average permitting period is two years. “In these countries, the timeline for the government to respond is more clearly outlined, the permitting agency leading the process is clearly identified from the outset, and the responsibility for preparing a well-structured environmental review is given to the mining company, not the government,” the NMA states in its fact sheet titled “Delays in the U.S. Mine Permitting Process Impair and Discourage Mining at Home.” The NMMC would help federal agencies evaluate the economic mineral development potential of federal lands being considered for withdrawal from mining or subject to proposed federal land management designations that would limit mineral exploration and development. The NMMC would also identify federal lands with high development potential for critical materials and minerals and make this information available to the public to stimulate private-sector exploration of these lands and to inform land use and resource management plans of federal land management agencies such as the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service. And the NMMC would assist federal regulatory agencies, such as the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, evaluate technical issues associated with permit applications for mining and mineral processing operations. Next steps The concept paper “Why the U.S. Needs a Materials and Minerals Council” was published on the SME website in September 2024 and introduced to SME leadership at the SME Midyear Meeting in Las Vegas, NV with support from the NMA and the AEMA. On Sept. 12, the Unearth Innovation Act and the National Critical Minerals Council Act were introduced to the U.S. Senate by Senators John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Thom Tillis (R-NC). The Unearth Innovation Act would establish a mining and mineral innovation program within the U.S. Department of Energy and $100 million appropriations for 10 fiscal years to drive the research, development and commercialization of advanced mining, recycling and processing technologies. The program prioritizes practices and technologies that reduce environmental and human impacts, improve outcomes for communities, and reclaim and remediate existing mine and waste sites. These strategic investments are designed to secure domestic critical mineral supply chains, reduce the environmental and human footprint of future mining operations, and diminish the need for new mining through innovative technologies. The National Critical Minerals Council Act would create a National Critical Minerals Council, chaired by the Vice President, to develop and implement a comprehensive national strategy aimed at reducing U.S. dependence on foreign adversaries for critical minerals and addressing vulnerabilities in the mineral supply chain. A chief minerals advisor, appointed by the President, would oversee the council’s operations and collaborate with experts from universities, industry, governments, civil society and tribal nations. SME hopes that Senators Hickenlooper and Tillis will reintroduce these bills in the 119th U.S. Congress.SME also hopes that the U.S. Mining Schools Act of 2023, which was unanimously passed by the U.S. Senate on July 11, will be reintroduced in the 119th Congress. The U.S. Mining Schools Act would help boost American energy and mineral security by supporting U.S. mining schools so that they can recruit and train the next generation of miners. Upon passage of this bill by the Senate, Ranking Member John Barrasso (R-WY) who introduced the act in 2023 said, “The United States cannot afford to be dependent on China, Russia and other adversaries for minerals. We need access to minerals on federal lands. We also need to reinvigorate America’s mining workforce. I applaud the Senate for passing this bipartisan legislation to provide federal assistance to mining programs at public colleges and universities. It’s high time we support and honor the men and women who devote their lives to providing the minerals that we need for our economy and national defense.”

SME introduces concept fora National Materials and Minerals Council

Authored by: William Gleason

To view the past issues of the UCA magazine you must be a member of SME/UCA.

China Rare Earth Group in talks to buy MP Materials shareholder Shenghe Resources, sources say

Mining Engineering’s Weekly Rundown: Episode 70

Congo creates task force for US minerals deal, cabinet minutes say

China Rare Earth Group in talks to buy MP Materials shareholder Shenghe Resources, sources say

Mining Engineering’s Weekly Rundown: Episode 70

Congo creates task force for US minerals deal, cabinet minutes say

To view the past issues of the UCA magazine you must be a member of SME/UCA.

AGI Releases 2024 'Critical Needs' Policy Resource

Meet the future of mining at MINEXCHANGE 2025

Related Articles

Critical minerals: Technical and policy considerations

Historic day in Washington DC for mining education

Critical minerals management on the federal seabed

Copper stockpiling, transformation capacity and industrial synchronization in the US

China Rare Earth Group in talks to buy MP Materials shareholder Shenghe Resources, sources say

Mining Engineering’s Weekly Rundown: Episode 70

Congo creates task force for US minerals deal, cabinet minutes say

China Rare Earth Group in talks to buy MP Materials shareholder Shenghe Resources, sources say

Mining Engineering’s Weekly Rundown: Episode 70

Congo creates task force for US minerals deal, cabinet minutes say

Use Single Sign On