Critical Mineral Dominance Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 4090
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Energy
- Status
- Passed House
- Latest Action
- 2026-02-05: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-11T23:26:32Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Critical Mineral Dominance Act aims to make the United States the top global producer of hardrock minerals (such as rare earth elements used in technology and defense) by turning certain Executive Order provisions into permanent law. This supports domestic mining on federal lands to boost jobs, secure supply chains for the U.S. and its allies, protect national security, and lessen reliance on countries seen as threats.
Key Provisions
- Policy Statement (Section 2): Declares U.S. goals for leading in hardrock mineral production to drive economic growth, enhance alliances, ensure security, and counter adversarial nations' influence.
- Economic Impact Analysis (Section 3): Requires the Secretary of the Interior (within 90 days of enactment) to report to Congress on the dollar cost of U.S. import reliance for minerals listed in the U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) 2025 Mineral Commodity Summaries, plus the broader economic effects of these imports/exports. Starting in 2026, this data must be added to all future USGS summaries.
- Priority Mining Projects (Section 4): Mandates (within 10 days of enactment and annually) a list of all mining projects on federal lands awaiting approval. The Secretary must then quickly identify and approve "priority" projects (those ready for immediate action). Also requires a one-time list of projects with potential to boost hardrock mineral or byproduct output (e.g., from mine waste or coal byproducts), and a report within one year on barriers to byproduct production with suggestions to remove them.
- Mining Potential on Federal Lands (Section 5): Directs the Secretary to catalog all federal lands (managed by Interior or Agriculture) suitable for hardrock mineral exploration or mining under the 1872 Mining Law—focusing on active sites, underexplored areas, or known deposits. Prioritizes lands where projects can start fastest and strengthen domestic supply chains. An annual list must go to Congress.
- Regulatory Review (Section 6): Within 90 days, the Secretary must review and flag federal rules, policies, or actions (like land withdrawals) that overly hinder mining. Includes gathering industry input on delays and starting a plan to fix or eliminate burdensome items. Within 180 days, submit a report to Congress with law change ideas and a review of state/local rules blocking mining.
- Geologic Mapping Acceleration (Section 7): Prioritizes faster, detailed mapping of U.S. geology to find new hardrock deposits. Requires a one-year report to Congress on progress toward a comprehensive national mapping effort under the 2021 Infrastructure Act.
- Definitions (Section 8): Clarifies terms like "federal land" (e.g., national forests, public lands open for mineral leasing), "hardrock mineral" (e.g., metals, gems in rocks, excluding coal, oil, or salts), "mining project" (exploration to processing), and "Secretary" (Interior head).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Codifies Executive Order elements into statutory law, making them harder to reverse without congressional action.
- Adds mandatory economic cost data to USGS annual reports, which previously focused more on supply/demand without import reliance valuations.
- Introduces expedited approval timelines (e.g., 10-20 days for lists and decisions) for mining permits on federal lands, speeding up processes under the 1872 Mining Law (which allows claims on public lands but lacks modern deadlines).
- Requires proactive regulatory rollbacks and industry consultations, potentially overriding or suspending existing environmental or land-use rules without new legislation.
- Expands focus to byproducts (e.g., minerals from waste) and underexplored federal lands, building on but not replacing laws like the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The Department of the Interior (DOI) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) face increased duties for rapid reporting, land assessments, and regulatory changes, potentially streamlining operations but straining resources short-term. USGS gains ongoing data mandates.
- Citizens: Could create mining jobs and economic growth in rural areas with federal lands, but may raise concerns over environmental effects like land disruption or water use without stronger safeguards.
- International Relations: Bolsters U.S. and allied independence from mineral imports (e.g., from China, which dominates rare earths), enhancing geopolitical leverage and supply chain security for tech, defense, and green energy sectors.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Mining Industry: Benefits from faster permits, reduced barriers, and mapping support, enabling quicker project starts.
- Federal Agencies: DOI, USDA, and USGS must implement changes, prioritizing mining over other land uses.
- Congress: Receives frequent reports, influencing oversight of mineral policy.
- State and Local Governments: Impacted by reviews of their rules; some may gain revenue from mining, others face land-use conflicts.
- Environmental and Community Groups: Potentially harmed by deregulation, as it could ease restrictions on federal land mining without new protections.
- U.S. Allies and Businesses: Gain from stronger domestic supplies for critical minerals in manufacturing and defense.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Streamlines permitting under the 1872 Mining Law (a claim-based system for public lands) but could conflict with environmental statutes like the National Environmental Policy Act if approvals bypass reviews. Introduces "undue burden" tests for regulations, potentially leading to court challenges over arbitrary changes.
- Constitutional: Involves federal land management (a congressional power under the Property Clause), emphasizing economic/national security over conservation, which might spark debates on balancing public resources.
- Political: Advances a pro-domestic production agenda amid U.S.-China tensions, but risks partisan divides on deregulation versus environmental protection; as a House-passed bill referred to Senate committees, it highlights congressional-executive alignment on resource security.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (2)
Rep. Begich, Nicholas J. [R-AK-At Large], Rep. Finstad, Brad [R-MN-1]
Recent Actions
- 2026-02-05: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 2026-02-04: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2026-02-04: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 195 (Roll no. 55). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H1994) (Roll call 55)
- 2026-02-04: Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 224 - 195 (Roll no. 55). (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H1994) (Roll call 55)
- 2026-02-04: On motion to recommit Failed by the Yeas and Nays: 209 - 212 (Roll no. 54). (Roll call 54)
- 2026-02-04: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2009-2010)
- 2026-02-04: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on H.R. 4090, the Chair put the question on motion to recommit and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Leger Fernandez demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- 2026-02-04: The previous question on the motion to recommit was ordered pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX.
- 2026-02-04: Ms. Leger Fernandez moved to recommit to the Committee on Natural Resources. (text: CR H2002)
- 2026-02-04: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- 2026-02-04: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 4090.
- 2026-02-04: Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 142 and H.R. 4090. The resolution provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 7148. Also, the resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 142 and H.R. 4090 under a closed rule and provides for one motion to recommit H.R. 4090.
- 2026-02-04: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 1032. (consideration: CR H1993-2002)
- 2026-02-03: Rule H. Res. 1032 passed House.
- 2026-02-03: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 1032 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 142 and H.R. 4090. The resolution provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 7148. Also, the resolution provides for consideration of H.J. Res. 142 and H.R. 4090 under a closed rule and provides for one motion to recommit H.R. 4090.
Bill Versions
- Critical Mineral Dominance Act — issued 2026-02-04 — PDF (12 pages)
- To codify certain provisions of certain Executive Orders relating to domestic mining and hardrock mineral resources, and for other purposes. — issued 2025-06-23 — PDF (9 pages)
- Critical Mineral Dominance Act — issued 2026-02-05 — PDF (10 pages)
- Critical Mineral Dominance Act — issued 2025-11-25 — PDF (12 pages)