Trash to Treasure: Examining Legislation to Support Domestic Critical Mineral Recovery and Recycling
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment U.S. House of Representatives
Follow its sittingsPaul Tonko
While the drafts under consideration today warrant discussions, I believe Congress can play a constructive role in moving us even further toward a shared goal of secure domestic critical mineral supply chains. Our environmental and safety regulations need not only be seen as a barrier to achieving our goals. States are already proving that smart regulations can push all stakeholders, from manufacturers to recyclers to individual consumers, to being part of the solution. And I would again suggest that responsible end-of-life management of batteries through a national product stewardship program like extended producer responsibility can be an important step, because once we have gone through the trouble of importing critical materials, sensible collection, reuse, and recycling requirements can ensure that those materials are recovered. That is how we can build for long-term sustainable management of our critical mineral supply chains.
And this type of more comprehensive approach to responsible end-of-life management of batteries is not only possible, but preferable. It would guarantee valuable minerals are kept out of landfills while also mitigating fire risks and enabling the repurposing of batteries when possible. I have been encouraged by the work happening at EPA under both the Biden and Trump administrations to examine this challenge. I do hope we can learn from that effort and determine what additional action from Congress may be necessary. Finally, while I have mostly focused on batteries this morning, I'm also encouraged by the Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Technology Assessment Initiative.
If we can find opportunities for mineral recovery and legacy environmental remediation to work hand in hand, it could be a true win-win situation. We must be careful not to create loopholes in the law to exacerbate environmental harms at these sites, but exploring how EPA can support emerging remediation technologies has potential. And that work could be further expanded to support other valuable environmentally beneficial products, such as the mineralization of carbon dioxide. Again, I want to thank the chair for today's discussion. There are some good opportunities to strengthen our domestic critical mineral supply if we're able to unlock that potential while maintaining appropriate environmental safeguards.
With that, Mr. Chair, I thank you and yield back.
Speaker 4
Gentleman yields. I now recognize the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Guthrie, for five minutes for an opening statement.
Brett Guthrie
Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Palmer, and thank you for holding this hearing, and I really appreciate all of our witnesses being here today. This Congress, our Environment Subcommittee has explored creative solutions to identify sources of critical materials and critical minerals here at home so that we are less dependent on foreign adversaries like China. And I will say, I've become far more acquainted in the last couple years with this issue, but our chairman of this committee has been focused on this for years and was absolutely correct that we have to deal with this and should have dealt with it sooner. But here we are.
So, for example, in June of '25, the subcommittee held a hearing on the management of coal combustion residuals and evaluated the potential recovery of critical minerals from coal ash.
Speaker 8
In July of last year, the subcommittee met to assess state of our domestic recycling industry and opportunities to recover critical minerals from end-of-life electronics. This past April, we identified opportunities to modernize some of our major environmental laws to eliminate unnecessary barriers to stronger supply chains. Securing access to critical minerals is a daunting task, with geopolitical tensions, trade policy complexities, and economic rivalries complicating efforts to shore up our supply chain. This is why it's essential for all of our federal agencies to work together and harmonize their efforts to make sure we're all rowing in the same direction. The Environmental Protection Agency has unique expertise regarding recovery of valuable materials from waste streams and complexities of our domestic recycling infrastructure.
Today we will consider seven pieces of legislation to further the recovery of critical minerals from waste streams that are already located with our country within our country and support the development of domestic material recycling, recovery, and refining industries. I hope this endeavor can be part of our committee's strong tradition of bipartisanship. One of today's bills introduced, HR 3717, the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act of 2025, already enjoys bipartisan support. And we will continue to work with our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to hopefully reach bipartisan agreement on the three discussion drafts as well. So thank you for being here.
I thank all of my colleagues on this committee for willingness to be open and work together for this absolutely critical part of our national security. This is one of those issues I always say that if people fully understood the issue before us, I think the country would it's one of these people ask me sometimes what do you lose sleep over? And it's not having adequate critical minerals in our area and in within our country and within our our dependency on China is something we absolutely have to solve, and in a bipartisan way we will solve. So thank you and I yield back.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. The chair now recognizes the ranking member of the full committee, the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Pallone, for five minutes for an opening statement.
Frank Pallone
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Critical minerals are the building blocks of many modern technologies, from our cell phones to clean energy technologies like electric vehicles and solar panels, and as the world continues to shift towards clean energy to reduce costs, the demand for these minerals will continue to increase, and that's why it's vital that we work to bolster our domestic critical mineral supply chain. And as we do that, we must also focus on critical mineral recycling and recovery that increases resource efficiency, reduces the need to mine new materials or new minerals, and reduces waste. And this represents a true win-win for our environment and for our economy. For too long, we've allowed valuable critical minerals to go to landfills, never to be recovered, and that has to change if we want to remain globally competitive.
Domestic recycling of still viable critical minerals also helps mitigate supply chain vulnerabilities. This is so important considering the US is dangerously dependent on foreign adversaries, namely China, for critical mineral refining, processing, and even recycling, leaving our nation exposed to geopolitical supply chain risks. And we know it's possible to shore up our critical material supply chains without compromising environmental and public health protections. Democrats support the responsible and sustainable build-out of our domestic critical material supply chains. It's important for our economy and national security and necessary for the transition to cleaner and cheaper energy, particularly at a time when the Trump administration and congressional Republicans have gone to war against clean energy.
It's time Republicans join us in supporting clean energy rather than continually targeting it.
Speaker 6
And Democrats secured important down payments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law included 7.9 billion for battery materials processing, manufacturing, and recycling. It also directed the EPA to develop battery collection best practices, voluntary battery labeling guidelines, and an extended producer responsibility framework for batteries to help grow our circular economy for critical minerals. The Inflation Reduction Act included tax credits for electric vehicles, critical mineral minerals for batteries, and battery manufacturing to expand our nation's capacity and boost supply chain resiliency. And while none of my Republican colleagues supported these historic laws, I am encouraged by today's conversation to advance critical mineral recycling and recovery.
The slate of bills span the breadth of critical minerals recovery, ranging from bipartisan ideas we can continue to work on together to some highly partisan ideas that Republicans pushed under a previous Congress. To that end, the wholesale industry deregulation in H.R. 3059 and the codification of troubling Trump executive orders in H.R. 4370 are bills I simply cannot support. On the other hand, H.R. 3713, the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act, which creates a dedicated EPA program for cleaning up abandoned toxic mine sites, is a welcome bipartisan effort. We'll also consider three discussion drafts on battery recycling for critical minerals, a strategy for recovering critical minerals from discarded materials, and authorizing a program for reclaiming mining waste in search of critical minerals. And these discussion drafts are not perfect, but I believe they are heading in a promising direction, and I look forward to continuing conversations with the Republican majority to improve these discussion drafts so that we can secure bipartisan agreements.
While critical mineral recycling and recovery is essential to bolstering our domestic supply chains, it's important that we do it responsibly and in a way that mitigates risks and protects the environment, public health, and worker safety. And we have to recognize and build off of the tremendous progress already underway at the state and local level. So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. We have concluded with member opening statements. I would like to remind members that pursuant to the committee rules, all members' opening statements will be made part of the record. We want to thank our witnesses for being here today and taking time to testify before the subcommittee. The witnesses will have the opportunity to give an opening statement followed by a round of questions from members.
Our witness witnesses for today are David Klanecky, President and CEO, Cirba Solutions; Grayson Buckingham, Co-Founder, President and CEO, DISA Technologies; Dr. Jessica Dunn, Scientist, Clean Transportation, Union of Concerned Scientists; and Aaron H. Goldberg, Principal, Beveridge & Diamond PC. We appreciate you all being here today. I now recognize Mr. Klanecky for five minutes to give an opening statement.
David Klanecky
Chairman Palmer, Vice Chair Crenshaw, Ranking Member Tonko, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. My name is David Klanecky, President and CEO of Cirba Solutions, North America's premier battery recycling and materials management company. We were the first company in North America to process lithium-ion batteries at commercial scale, and today we recover over 90% of the critical minerals in these batteries that we process. I'm here today because the committee has an extraordinary opportunity to take decisive action that will strengthen America's national security, reduce our dangerous dependence on China for critical minerals, and position the United States to lead the global energy economy. Let me offer a vivid perspective.
Access to critical minerals is essential for our nation. The largest critical mineral mines operating today in America are not on the in the ground.
They're actually operating on our roads, in data centers, in energy storage systems, and in our homes right now. All these batteries contain critical minerals that are recoverable. There's a remarkable opportunity for the United States to take control of our own destiny, but instead we're allowing these materials to be sent to China. Battery manufacturers are sourcing critical minerals from different parts of the world like Chile, Australia, and Argentina to build those batteries in the United States, only to have these materials shipped back to China when those batteries reach end of life or become manufacturing scrap. Those critical minerals then become controlled by China, and in essence we're subsidizing China's critical mineral supply chain.
China controls an estimated 70 to 90 percent of the global critical mineral processing in the world, including materials that power our defense applications, energy for the grid, and much more. It's just not an economic vulnerability, it's a national security crisis. Battery recycling and critical mineral recovery offer one of the most fastest and cost-effective ways to reduce that path of dependency. At Cirba Solutions, we recover lithium, nickel, cobalt, and manganese from end-of-life batteries and gigafactory scrap and make sure that we return them directly to the production of a new battery, enabling a closed-loop battery supply chain which we all need. One of the most pressing obstacles facing our industry today is the export of end-of-life batteries and gigafactory scrap out of the United States to overseas processors, primarily in China.
Large volumes of lithium-ion batteries and gigafactory scrap are being shipped abroad rather than processed here at home, and our own regulatory framework is allowing that to happen. The path of least resistance for these materials is to ship those materials abroad. It's more economical to countries with far less stringent regulations and state-subsidized capacity like China. China has deliberately structured its industrial policy to attract exactly that material flow, and there are United States companies today actively shipping these critical minerals, end-of-life batteries, and gigafactory scrap to China. Meanwhile, domestic processors are operating under rigorous, sorry, environmental standards like RCRA Part B, as well as stringent CAPEX and OPEX disadvantages which result in increased cost to process these batteries.
These are hurdles that foreign competitors are not burdened with. Every battery that leaves America is a compounding loss, not only just in the mineral value, but the jobs, the processing infrastructure, and the manufacturing feedstock that could supply US's local battery production. Enhanced material tracking, targeted incentives for domestic recycling, and a level regulatory playing field for domestic recyclers can reverse this dynamic, keeping critical minerals, jobs, and processing capacity here in the United States. The second barrier is how the federal government classifies black mass. Black mass is a concentrated intermediate material produced when lithium-ion batteries are shredded and processed at their end of life.
It's rich in lithium, cobalt, nickel, and manganese, and to every buyer and seller in the marketplace, black mass is a very valuable product, actively purchased, traded, and sought by refiners and manufacturers worldwide. Yet under current US regulations, it's classified as a solid waste. This creates a cascade of real-world consequences such as imposing compliance costs that make US recyclers less competitive. When policy treats a product like a waste, it creates waste-like economics instead of product economics that attract investment. We cannot afford to let this dynamic occur when we are trying to compete with China who controls 80 percent of the black mass shredding capacity in the world.
The BRACE Act must exclude black mass from the definition of solid waste and direct the EPA to implement universal waste standards specifically tailored for lithium-ion batteries that reflect the value of the critical minerals they contain. The practical benefits are significant. Easier domestic and transboundary movement, more competitive pricing, and a lower cost mean all more capital available for infrastructure and domestic processing capacity. And this translates into a much stronger competitive position against China. It also sends a clear and necessary market signal that battery recycling intermediates such as black mass are a strategic product that we value.
Let me be clear, we're not asking for anything to be exempt from environmental regulations or laws that are there, we're simply wanting the regulation to reflect the nature and the value of the products that we create and tailored enforcement across the industry. The volume of lithium-ion batteries reaching end of life and gigafactory scrap being created will grow dramatically over the next decade. The countries and companies that build a robust recycling infrastructure today will now control the critical mineral supply chains of tomorrow. The ones that wait will find themselves dependent on whoever did invest, and China has been and is investing aggressively at scale on recycling. A diversified domestic supply chain, one that draws recycled materials alongside a responsibly sourced primary material through mining, is the only long-term resilient path for international competitiveness.
Surplus Solutions proves every day that domestic battery recycling and critical mineral recovery at scale can be done and done commercially profitable. The critical minerals we need for our national security and economic competitiveness and for our energy future are already here. As I mentioned, they're out on the streets and in our pockets. Battery recycling is how we claim them for America. Thank you very much, I welcome your questions.
Grayson Buckingham
Chairman Palmer, Ranking Member Tonko, Chairman Guthrie, Ranking Member Pallone, and distinguished members of this subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Grayson Buckingham, I am the co-founder, president, and CEO of DISA Technologies, a veteran-led critical minerals and remediation company headquartered in Casper, Wyoming. DISA started with two Wyoming entrepreneurs and a conviction nearly everyone else had written off. My business partner John Lee and I met at the University of Wyoming, two Westerners raised with a deep appreciation for this land and the resources it holds, and a belief that we owe it to both to take care of them.
In 2018, we founded DISA on a simple conviction: that America can meet its own energy and mineral needs and does not have to choose between cleaning up its land and putting it back to work. For the first two years, neither of us drew a salary. I served in the US Army National Guard throughout, with deployments to Kuwait and Iraq, and we took on a variety of jobs just to keep the business afloat. We kept going because we believed in the mission. Every ton of critical minerals and nuclear fuel we do not produce at home is a ton we buy from foreign sources, including Russia and China, and changing that is national security.
Today, that conviction has earned DISA the backing of some of the most respected names in energy and industry, including Constellation, the largest US nuclear power producer, BHP, the world's largest mining company, as well as Valor Equity Partners, Galvanize, Evoque Innovations, Veriden, and Halliburton Labs. We have raised more than $80 million in private capital, employ over 75 people, and hold the first and only US Nuclear Regulatory Commission license ever issued to remediate and recycle abandoned uranium mine waste.
And for the past 40 to 75 years, these waste rock piles have sat exposed on the surface, posing a hazard to public health and the environment. On the Navajo Nation alone, there are 523 abandoned uranium mines. An estimated 85% of homes on the Navajo Nation have been contaminated with uranium, and generations of families have faced elevated risk for cancer and kidney disease. For decades, the only options were to do nothing, cap the material in place, or haul millions of tons of radioactive material away to disposal cells, each slow, costly, and leaving both the hazard and the resource behind. We are joined here today by the Navajo Nation EPA Executive Director Stephen Etsitty and the Navajo Nation Washington Office Deputy Director Duane Crank, partners we have been privileged to work with for the last several years.
Working with the Navajo Nation and other partners, DISA built a different option. Our technology, high-pressure slurry ablation, is a mechanical process that uses water and particle-on-particle collisions to strip uranium, radium, and vanadium off the sand. In EPA's own study on the Navajo Nation, it cut contamination by more than 90%, eliminated leachability, and shrank the waste needing disposal by up to 83% at 60 to 70% less cost than hauling and disposing the material. EPA and Idaho National Laboratory validated the technology, and the NRC licensed it just last year after a four-year-long process and a finding of no significant environmental impact. Our crews are trained radiation workers held to the same rigor used at Superfund sites.
Protecting the people, land, and water is the foundation of what we do. That same waste also holds the potential to recover hundreds of millions of pounds of domestic uranium, so we can clean up a legacy hazard and, in the same step, recover a critical mineral our country desperately needs for national security and energy production. While the technology is ready, the regulatory framework has not kept pace. Federal law is built to treat and dispose; it does not reward recovering minerals while cleaning up. The bills before you begin to fix that, and we especially support the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act, the CHARM Act, and the MRT Act.
And we needn't start from scratch. EPA's Superfund Optimization Program already makes cleanups more effective and cheaper, and it should examine and prioritize proven recovery technologies like DISA's. Four principles matter most. One, recognize and, where appropriate, credit the value of recovered minerals in cleanup decisions. Two, give a technology proven at one site a streamlined path to the next.
Three, put one lead federal agency in charge of coordinating permitting. And four, distinguish legitimate remediation, recovery, and recycling from new mining so a cleanup is not treated like a new mine. We are not asking you to choose between cleanup and recovery. With the right framework, America can do both: protect public health, restore the land, and strengthen our mineral supply, all while saving taxpayers' money. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
Jessica Dunn
Chair Palmer, Ranking Member Tonko, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss how we can increase safe, domestic critical mineral recovery. My name is Jessica Dunn and I'm a scientist at UCS. I use environmental engineering methods to assess the circularity of critical minerals and conduct research on electric vehicle battery recycling policy. My peer-reviewed research, along with the work of scientists at universities and national labs, have demonstrated that recycled materials could meet up to 50% of future demand for lithium, cobalt, and nickel for electric vehicles in the US by 2050. For that reason, I appreciate the subcommittee's focus on this topic and agree that it is important to assess how federal policy can help us recover the maximum amount of minerals from waste and support our domestic economy.
At the same time, it is important to ensure compliance with foundational environmental laws that are necessary to protect people and the resources we rely on. I urge this committee to consider approaches that build a robust recycling system while upholding critical environmental protections. My work is informed by years of in-depth discussion with industry, lawyers, and other researchers. These conversations have made clear there are key areas where policy can improve the system without lowering necessary health and safety standards. The CHARM Act takes a first step at this by coordinating recovery plans across the agencies, but much more can be done.
The first issue is addressing increasing battery collection and ensuring they can reach recycling facilities safely. The dispersed nature of battery retirements across the nation leads to many instances where the cost of collection and recycling exceeds the revenue from recovery. This lowers battery collection and squeezes the recycling market. In Colorado, this issue was addressed by a recently enacted law requiring the recycling and recovery of critical minerals from batteries in hybrids and electric vehicles. The Colorado legislation allows the collection and recycling market to continue operating, but holds the producer responsible for batteries that would typically fall through the cracks.
The bill was supported by automakers and other affected stakeholders because they know they can create an efficient and lower-cost battery collection network that will increase feedstock to recyclers and increase the critical mineral supply for future manufacturing needs. Additionally, we need to make sure minerals are actually recovered from these batteries when they reach a recycling facility. Currently, minerals are covered at rates below the technologically available level due to low and fluctuating mineral market prices and outdated technology. By setting minimum recovery rates, as done in the European Union and Colorado, more minerals will be recovered and added to US production. This can also be achieved by setting minimum thresholds for recycled content in new products.
Lastly, there is a lack of ability to determine the battery's health when it reaches retirement and is removed from a product. This is especially true for electric and hybrid vehicles. This prevents third parties from truly knowing if the battery is damaged or can be sent for repurposing. Requiring the sharing of this information would make shipping safer and the battery end-of-life more profitable and efficient. Unfortunately, the deregulation approaches in the BRACE Act would make matters worse by introducing dangerous changes to the management of retired batteries.
This draft legislation would undermine current laws covering transportation and storage. For example, excluding black mass from being considered solid waste removes the environmental oversight necessary to control heavy metals and other contaminants. Exempting recyclers from the requirement to be fully permitted under RCRA to allow them to store batteries for longer will remove important guardrails and mitigate risk.
These guardrails include fire and spill controls, storage and disposal standards, air emission standards, and public notice requirements. Enacting policies to increase critical mineral recovery while also upholding key environmental regulations is of national importance. These recovered minerals are a domestic replacement for those that are newly mined and result in significantly less environmental impact. There are valuable steps Congress could take to achieve these goals without the dangerous backsliding in the BRACE Act that creates health and safety risks. Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I'd be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Aaron Goldberg
Chairman Palmer, Ranking Member Tonko, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to speak today. My name is Aaron Goldberg. I'm an environmental attorney with Beveridge & Diamond and I've been working on hazardous waste issues under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act since 1980. I'm here today in my personal capacity to highlight the need for legislation to promote recovery of critical minerals from the lithium-ion batteries used in consumer electronics, electric vehicles, and energy storage systems.
The views I express today are my own. To start, it's important to note that virtually all the relevant RCRA regulations were issued in the 1980s and 1990s before lithium-ion batteries were widely used. The rules contain numerous provisions designed to facilitate recycling of other types of batteries, such as lead-acid and nickel-cadmium. However, the rules are essentially silent on lithium-ion batteries. As a result, they create obstacles that were never intended and that frustrate national goals.
The fundamental problem is that the RCRA rules generally classify lithium-ion batteries and related materials as wastes rather than the valuable resources that they are. That in turn results in a cascade of other problems. I'll highlight three examples. First, the rules compel battery recyclers to store the batteries off-site prior to processing. That serves no environmental purpose, it merely adds costs, complicates logistics, and increases transport and handling risks.
Second, the rules classify critical mineral-rich black mass from shredding lithium-ion batteries as solid waste, even though lower value shredded circuit boards are generally viewed as non-waste. That makes domestic recovery harder and it puts the US at a disadvantage to countries like China, which generally views black mass as a valuable commodity. Third, the rules restrict land disposal of non-hazardous residues from recycling lithium-ion batteries, even though similar residues from recycling other batteries are not subject to the same type of restrictions. That imposes extra burdens without a corresponding environmental benefit. EPA has announced its intent to revise some of the RCRA rules for lithium batteries, but the focus appears to be more on more stringent standards to address fire risks, not any of the issues that I've mentioned.
Fire risks are real, but they are already addressed through fire codes, DOT transportation rules, and other targeted requirements. Moreover, EPA's authority to add new RCRA standards to address these risks is uncertain under the 1996 Rechargeable Battery Management Act.
And even if EPA does act, a rulemaking would likely take years and would have to be followed by state adoption that could take several more years and might never be complete. For these for these reasons, congressional action is important. I appreciate the subcommittee's work on the on the draft BRACE Act. The bill is a useful start, but it needs important revisions. First, it addresses only the rule that pushes recyclers to store batteries offsite, and it does so in a way that paradoxically could leave onsite storage less regulated than offsite storage.
Second, it does not address other barriers that I've discussed, including the regulation of black mass and non-hazardous recycling residues. Third, it would give EPA broad authority to issue new standards without requiring the agency to account for existing safety standards or the national goals for recovery of critical minerals. There are simple common-sense solutions. For example, recyclers could be allowed to store batteries onsite as long as they comply with the same requirements that they are currently subject to at their separate facilities. Black mass, like other partially reclaimed materials that are commodity-like, could be reclassified as non-waste.
And non-hazardous residues from recycling lithium-ion batteries, like those from other types of batteries, could be deemed to be sufficiently treated to allow land disposal. I urge Congress to enact these and related changes nationwide to help support the domestic supply chain for critical minerals while continuing to protect human health and the environment. Thank you for considering my testimony. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Speaker 11
Thank you all for your testimony. We will now move to the question and answer portion of the hearing, and the chair now recognizes gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Latta, for five minutes for his questions.
Robert Latta
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for today's hearing, and thanks to our witnesses for appearing today. Mr. Buckingham, you noted in your written testimony there's a lack of incentives for recovery of valuable materials during the remediation of contaminated sites. And I've been to several contaminated sites, and usually what you see is they come in, they move all the dirt out, it's, you know, taken to some other hazardous waste area, and it might be put into a pit or some kind of a lined area and forgotten for forgotten forever then on that end. But how should the EPA address and incentivize some kind of a process that we can go in and make sure that we're recovering these really critical minerals that's in that soil?
Grayson Buckingham
Thank you, Representative, for the question. The US EPA for the purposes of uranium estimates there's about 15,000 sites associated with abandoned uranium mine waste. Those sites have largely just been sitting on the surface for decades and without any meaningful incentives to remediate those sites because it's too costly. You know, on average, the US EPA estimates there's about 3 billion tons of overburden material that's been sitting on the surface in so when the EPA approaches these different types of cleanups, specifically on the Navajo Nation, they have to formulate what's called an engineering evaluation cost analysis report. And they list out the various options and how to address the cleanup of of that particular site.
And almost always option one, which sounds silly, is do nothing because it's too expensive. You know, the the predominant option historically has been to bury the material onsite, which takes no benefit of the resource and keeps those contaminants at that site.
You know, over time do erode and that material can still leach into the water and pose an environmental hazard. And so, you know, a technology like ours where we can come in, we can treat that material, we effectively recover over 90% of the uranium and vanadium into just 20% of the original mass. So we upgrade it to where, you know, in some cases it's economic to take that material and recycle it and put it to productive use, convert it to U3O8 and enter the nuclear fuel cycle. But when the US EPA did the treatability study, based on the current regulatory framework, you know, they just looked at us compared to hauling off-site, which we were still 60 to 70% more economic and then capping that material in place, but there was no consideration given to the value of those minerals. And so the economics are a major driver in determining which options to pursue.
And so if the US EPA had that framework where they were able to value the minerals that could be recovered, that would drastically change the economics in how they approach cleanup decisions.
Robert Latta
Let me follow up with that. Because again, one of the great things about serving on this committee, you know, we're looking out over this dais to a lot of so many innovators and entrepreneurs that come in here with so many great ideas. And one of what you brought up again is on the regulatory side. And so if it's just in the regulation, are you, you know, I think you touched on this, it's on the economics issue, but what are they talking to the folks out there that are coming up with the new process, the new ideas, say, hey, we can do this, or is it just always kind of like, no, it's much easier just say that we're going to bury it?
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, and it's been a long journey of perseverance on our end, you know, especially overcoming the valley of death, as what they call, you know, a lot of technologies when you're trying to commercialize that. And, you know, we're extremely grateful and I think, you know, the MRT Act strongly helps advance this, for example. But we did our treatability study on the Navajo Nation in 2022. You know, they looked at how effective, economic, and could we use the technology in a wide variety of sites. And we answered yes to all of those questions.
But you know, with the current regulatory framework, it just kind of gets put on a shelf. And you know, fortunately, because there wasn't a funding mechanism to take it to the next step. And you know, fortunately with the leadership of the Navajo Nation, you know, they said we want to see this verified at commercial scale. You did a great job on the pilot scale, but we want to see this commercially validated. But there were appropriate mechanisms, you know, within the EPA regulatory framework to do that.
So the Navajo Nation, using its own funds, is funding a phase two verification study where we'll be doing the first deployment of our technology for a cleanup this year on the Navajo Nation. And so, you know, but it does come down to economics, to your point, Representative, and given the current regulatory framework that does not incentivize the value of recovered minerals, it's extremely difficult for new innovative technologies to even come on board to validate, to reiterate the technology and prove that at commercial scale. And so, you know, with those incentives aligned, I do believe that it will encourage a much more significant amount of innovation to take place in this space. And I love the title of this hearing, from trash to treasure. I mean, that's been our slogan, you know, converting liabilities into assets since we founded the company.
And I do believe there's massive opportunities that are sitting in these waste piles.
Speaker 16
Well, thank you very much and my time has expired, Mr. Chairman, and I'll submit my other questions to the witnesses in writing. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Paul Tonko
Gentleman yields. Chair now recognizes the ranking member, Mr. Tonko from New York, for five minutes for his questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I reiterate that I am open to examining potential barriers that are hindering the responsible recovery of critical minerals. But I also believe we would benefit from an overarching end-of-life management program to require the collection, assessing, and recycling of large-formal batteries. So Dr. Dunn, what do you think we can take as a next step to really improve the circularity of our critical mineral supply chains and are there state-level policies that Congress can learn from?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you, Mr. Tonko. That is a great question. Yes, there are.
Extended producer responsibility, as I mentioned before, is a program that really requires the recycling of these products by the producer. So ensuring that they make it to the recycling facility no matter the cost. In addition, the ensuring that the minerals are actually recovered once they get to that facility is essential for building up our domestic feedstock of critical minerals. There are also additional measures that can be taken such as recycled content standards, so requiring the the production of batteries using recovered materials and therefore kind of building up that end-of-life market. In addition, there is labeling standards which really help increase the efficiency of the end-of-life market, so by telling the recyclers actually what is in that battery and those minerals and that worth.
These are all policies that were enacted in Colorado this year and they are also policies that are in the European Union since 2023.
Paul Tonko
Thank you. And why is this trend toward state-level extended producer responsibility as a program so promising?
Jessica Dunn
This is extremely promising because it is a answering a question that a lot of people have of what are we going to do with these big batteries and how can we get the the minerals out of them. It's something that is supported by industry within the market, not only environmental orgs, so the dismantlers, the folks that are taking the the batteries out of the cars and realize that they need help, along with the automakers who recognize that it is in their best interest to recycle the batteries because this will create a more resilient, low-impact and domestic supply. Thank you.
Speaker 15
Okay. Mr. Klenosky, how might a national product stewardship program that requires producers to be responsible for end-of-life management and ensures the safe recycling, repurposing, or disposal of large-format batteries be beneficial to our shared goals of promoting critical mineral recovery?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you Representative Tonko, appreciate the question. Yeah, that's that's the overarching goal, right, is is we have these programs so we keep the critical minerals in the United States and the extended producer responsibility programs enable that. They enable the collection of batteries, they they enable that there's a certain supply chain that's set up to ensure that those batteries when they reach end-of-life do do get recovered. And I think that helps recyclers, it helps the industry. It also creates a framework where we know where these batteries are going to end up.
They're not going to be ending up back in China, for example. So I think one of the the important things is just working with the states, every state is kind of proposing different rules, but working with the states to ensure there's some consistency in how these rules are are enforced as well as the fact that the entire supply chain needs to needs to be profitable when they do these things, right. Ms. Dunn mentioned a few things about the economics. I think that's important as well with these with these programs that they're they are set up to ensure that not one part of the supply chain actually profits from everything and the other part other parts of the supply chain aren't able to to build a business beyond that. But I think it definitely in the end of the day it reaches the overarching goal.
David Klanecky
Ms. Dunn mentioned a few things about the economics, I think that's important as well with these programs, that they are set up to ensure that not one part of the supply chain actually profits from everything and the other parts of the supply chain aren't able to build a business beyond that. But I think definitely in the end of the day, it reaches the overarching goal, which is keep the minerals here in the United States.
Well, thank you very much. I've exhausted my time, but I had another question that I'll get to the committee, but again, I thank the panel for their attendance today. Thank you.
Robert Latta
Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes the chair of the full committee, Mr. Guthrie, for his five minutes.
Brett Guthrie
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the recognition. I appreciate y'all being here and as said, this is critically important and it absolutely makes sense that we can take products that are going to be discarded and reclaim them and put them back in the stream of commerce instead of putting them in the earth to be buried for some future generations to discover, we need to use them now. So I'm going to ask Mr. Goldberg a series of questions and then Mr. Klanecky, after I get through, if you'll comment on some of the comments, I'd appreciate it. So Mr. Goldberg, in your written testimony, you note that the current RCRA regulations make domestic recovery of valuable materials from lithium-ion batteries more difficult and put US at a disadvantage to countries like China where the black mass, the results from shredding lithium-ion batteries, is treated as a valuable commodity. So my question is, how does EPA go about deciding which materials should be considered solid waste and therefore potentially hazardous waste, and which should be exempted or excluded from definition of solid waste by its regulations?
Did you get all that?
Brett Guthrie
And then could increased coordination, communication between EPA and federal agencies help deal with this? I thought if you could throw that in as well. Okay, there you go.
Aaron Goldberg
All right. EPA's definition of solid waste is very complicated. It's based largely on the nature of the material that's being processed as well as the manner in which it's going to be managed, in this case recycled. And with black mass in particular, since you were asking about that, generally if it's black mass from a used product, it would be viewed as a spent material that is partially reclaimed, this is under EPA's regulations, and therefore it would still be viewed as a waste by EPA. It would also then potentially be hazardous, depending upon the composition of the black mass.
Speaker 19
So communication between EPA, if they communicated with other agencies, would that be helpful in trying to get to the bottom line of this?
Aaron Goldberg
I think that might be helpful. You mentioned in particular China. China takes the position that black mass is not a solid waste if it meets certain standards, and that creates a, as I indicated, a disadvantage to the US because they're viewing it as a non-waste that they can take in freely, whereas in the US it would be...
Brett Guthrie
So how could a regulatory approach that treats black mass recovered from lithium-ion batteries as a valuable commodity encourage the growth of domestic battery recycling?
Aaron Goldberg
If black mass is viewed as a non-waste, then it can move without all the restrictions of the RCRA regulations. It can also then be processed without compliance with those regulations. They would still be subject to other regulatory regimes like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, but the stringent hazardous waste rules would not apply, as would be the case for other kinds of materials.
Brett Guthrie
So Mr. Klanecky, if we treated the black mass recovered from lithium-ion batteries as a valuable commodity, how does that encourage the growth, or any other comments you'd like to make on this subject?
David Klanecky
Yeah, no, appreciate, thank you, Representative, for the question. I, you know, I think when you look at black mass as a waste, I mentioned in my testimony, it, you know, waste, when you're classifying something as waste, it has waste economics as well that come along with it. And that there's certain burdens and restrictions that that carry that definition. If you classify it as a product, which it is an intermediate product, it contains valuable critical minerals, that attracts different investment. It's a it's a material that can be used further downstream in the in the entire process of the supply chain.
So there's other industries that have intermediates that aren't aren't called waste as well when you're when you're recycling plastics or other types of devices as well. They're not considered as a as a solid waste, they're considered as an intermediate product, which is what black mass is.
Grayson Buckingham
Okay, thanks. I'll switch a little bit to Mr. Buckingham. So what type of contaminated sites are good candidates for recovery of critical minerals and when EPA identifies contaminated sites for remediation, how does it coordinate with other local other other federal agencies?
We're primarily focused on abandoned uranium mine waste where, you know, you'll typically find large amounts of uranium and vanadium and radium located in those sites. But in addition, the technology can also be used for tailings recovery. Yes, thank you, Chairman Guthrie. So we've got strong partnerships with a group called Element USA as well as Regeneration that are focused on reprocessing tailings, so looking at copper, gold primarily in those applications. With respect to the abandoned uranium mine situation, it is there are a lot of agencies that we have to deal with.
Brett Guthrie
Is the process sufficient now or do we need to update the process between inter-agencies?
Grayson Buckingham
We would for Superfund sites and EPA-led, we would, you know, I think the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act does is a very strong step in in helping a lead agency with the Office of Mountains, Plains, and Deserts streamline coordination.
Thank you. Well, my time has expired and I will yield back what I don't time I don't have.
Speaker 20
Thank you for the time you don't have, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from New Jersey recognized for five minutes.
Frank Pallone
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to focus on the proposals we can work together on to ensure that we create a sustainable, reliable, and domestic supply of critical minerals, but while at the same time maintaining critical environmental standards. So along those lines, the BRACE Act tackles battery recycling and offers a critical opportunity to reclaim critical minerals from discarded lithium-ion batteries. And so, Dr. Dunn, my question, I have two questions, this is the first one, they're both for you. Would you please briefly explain how we currently recycle critical mineral resources found in batteries despite them being considered solid waste?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, thank you for the question. Currently, batteries are first taken out of the product they're already in. So if it's an EV, dismantled from that EV, shipped to a recycler. At that point, it's further broken down to from the pack to the module or cell level. And then it is shredded or crushed.
That is a very harsh process, exactly what you think, breaking that battery up into tiny pieces. At that, I mean, there's very you can do that in an inert environment, you can do it in saltwater essentially. From there, the black mass is attempted to be separated from the rest of the battery. This can be through sifting or magnets. And then at that point, that material is sometimes heated, not always.
Then it goes to a hydrometallurgy facility where the constituent materials are removed.
Frank Pallone
And of course, my view is that we don't need to exempt the so-called black mass from solid waste protections to recycle batteries because, as you say, there are already examples of recyclers managing this solid waste designation appropriately while successfully moving forward with recycling batteries. So, I think it's clear that battery recyclers are already doing this work without a, without the need for that exemption. But moving on to safety, my second question is the EPA started a rulemaking process to establish universal waste standards specifically tailored to lithium-ion batteries to address potential fire risks. And EPA made this announcement in response to a 2021 report on lithium-ion battery fires in the waste management process. Yet some suggest that an updated standard to address fire and other safety risks associated with lithium-ion batteries is not warranted.
All right, I appreciate it.
I think that we do need an updated standard. So, Dr. Dunn, the BRACE Act also directs EPA to revise its universal waste regulations to establish standards for lithium-ion batteries. Could you please explain why it's essential for EPA's rulemaking to reduce fire risk and improve other safety standards associated with the end-of-life treatment of lithium-ion batteries, if you would?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, thank you for the question. I agree that it's essential to consider fire when, fire risk when we are handling these batteries. One battery that has a thermal runaway, so it heats up and creates a fire, can, you know, when these are being shipped, there are a lot of batteries on the truck, and the fire in one will spread to the other fires, to the other batteries. And that is, that is a huge risk and something that can be mitigated and should be mitigated and is essential to address in any kind of transportation standard. Additionally, there's fire risk with black mass if there's lithium or, or battery fragments in that.
So, ensuring that fire risk is included in the transporting, handling, storing of these batteries is essential.
Frank Pallone
Well, I appreciate it. And again, I think that these batteries or lithium-ion batteries that are handled or transported or disposed of improperly can pose significant safety risks. So, that's why I think it's vital for any updated universal waste standard to adequately address these risks because battery safety is integral to whatever safe and sustainable recycling of these critical minerals that we seek. So, thank you again. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Speaker 29
The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes himself for five minutes. Mr. Buckham, I'm going to come to you. Thanks for being here today, by the way. Your testimony briefly touched on the geopolitical landscape and the favorable advantage China currently has in the global production and refining of critical minerals.
While I'm encouraged by the ongoing conversations and the efforts of the Department of Energy and the EPA and the Environmental Protection Agency, rather, to reduce our reliance on critical minerals from foreign countries, can you speak to how Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Technology Assessment Initiative, EMRTAI, so to speak, the program would allow us to identify new or non-traditional sources of critical minerals and drive technological innovation allowing us to further secure our domestic critical mineral supply chain? Can you speak to that?
Grayson Buckingham
And I think EMRTAI is a great first step in incentivizing how to recover these critical minerals, you know, and turn that trash into treasure. Idaho National Labs put out an amazing report a few months ago discussing the untapped resource we have in all these different tailings facilities. Yes, thank you, Representative. And, you know, speaking to our own personal experience, you know, the state of Wyoming had an investment through the Wyoming Energy Authority for eight and a half million dollars that brought in 55 million dollars in private capital within six months.
So it's a signal to the private sector as well, you know, these types of policies, that this is a major focus of the US government and that there is potential in recovering significant minerals. You know, when we started the company in 2018, no one was using the word critical minerals, there were not a lot of startups in our space, and just, you know, the focus that the US government has put on recovering these critical minerals, there are a significant amount of new entrants and capital flowing to this. And I believe in the American spirit and through innovation, we can win this race. We are far behind, but, you know, what this committee is doing, as well as other efforts, you know, is a very strong step and I think we're starting to see, you know, fast acceleration in this space.
Speaker 25
So you saw an opportunity that was going to be good for the country and you jumped on it.
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, we did. You know, we're passionate about restoring lands and recovering critical minerals. We have 75 employees, we have 30 job openings right now, and every single day those employees come to work passionate about restoring our lands and recovering critical minerals for national security.
Speaker 26
All right, well thank you for that. Mr. Goldberg, I'm going to come to you. Your testimony demonstrates the importance of creating uniformity in regulating the collection and recycling of lithium-ion batteries. However, you briefly touched on a potentially problematic proposed EPA rule that seeks to address the fire risk of these batteries. Can you describe what legitimate oversight the EPA has on addressing fire risks with respect to the transportation and collection of those batteries?
Aaron Goldberg
Thank you for your question. EPA has legitimate authority over fire risks. On the other hand, there are a large number of other regulatory regimes that already address fire risks. And I question whether EPA, there's really a need for further EPA action here. There are currently fire codes that address these that are developed through the National Fire Protection Association.
There's DOT transportation rules and a number of other rules under other programs as well. I also have some concern that if EPA, that EPA rules here may not be desirable for certain reasons. For example, if you have a facility that is taking in batteries, both lithium-ion batteries and other types of batteries, are they now going to have to comply with two separate standards? Also, there's development of solid-state lithium-ion batteries that do not pose fire risks. So if we have rules that are specific to lithium-ion batteries in general, are the non, the batteries, the solid-state batteries that don't pose fire risks, are those also going to be subject to the same standard?
So I think there are a lot of issues that I think that if EPA were to do anything in this area, they need to make sure that they're taking into account the existing rules that apply to fire risks, they take into account new developments of new battery chemistries, and they also take into account the national goals of recovering of the critical minerals from lithium-ion batteries.
Speaker 26
Well, you're reading my mind. My next question was going to be, you know, how would that proposed rule mess up the entire facility and how would we work through that? I think you just outlined that. Thank you for your answer. I appreciate it.
Chair is going to now recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts for five minutes. Or is it the doctor from California? All right, I thought you were from Massachusetts, doctor. Chairman, the gentleman's recognized.
Speaker 21
You should know better. You know that. You know that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As a physician who has cared for patients across the Coachella Valley for decades, I've seen firsthand how environmental conditions affect the health and quality of life of the communities that I serve, and why economic opportunity and public health must go hand in hand. My district is home to Lithium Valley, located in the Salton Sea region that sits atop one of the largest known lithium deposits in the world. I can see many of you have heard of it already. I have said many times in this room, including at our last hearing on critical mineral supply chains, that we have an extraordinary opportunity right under our feet. The brine beneath the Salton Sea alone, the Salton Sea region, could help strengthen our national security, anchor a domestic battery supply chain, and create good-paying jobs in a region that has waited generations for economic investment and opportunities.
But I've also said that every single time, that this opportunity cannot come at the expense of the people who already live there. My district has some of the worst air quality in the whole country. Communities surrounding the Salton Sea continue to face significant public health challenges, including elevated rates of asthma and respiratory illnesses. Children in North Shore, for example, and across Imperial County, are seeing emergency room visits for asthma nosebleeds at rates that should alarm all of us. And that is why when we talk about unleashing domestic critical mineral production, I want us to be honest that energy security and environmental and public health protections are not competing goals.
In fact, I would argue they are inseparable. If we fail to protect the health of the communities hosting these projects, then we have not truly achieved energy security. We have simply shifted the cost onto the people least equipped to bear them. Dr. Dunn, would you agree that critical mineral development projects should leave host communities better off than they were before the projects arrived?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, sir, I agree. We need to consider both the public impacts to health and our environment as well as the recovery of these minerals.
Speaker 21
Do you also agree that they're not competing interests, that we can actually create a win-win solution where we have energy development, renewable critical mineral development, while at the same time protecting and advancing the public's health?
Jessica Dunn
I do. There are routes of complying with the regulation and protecting the environment and also boosting the recycling system in the US.
Speaker 22
Thank you. And how can Congress ensure that efforts to streamline development do not come at the expense of transparency, accountability, or public health protections?
Speaker 24
So no fast-tracking NEPA or in California CEQA or taking shortcuts that allow for some of the contaminations to occur?
Speaker 21
Upholding these bedrock environmental policies and regulations that we already have is critical.
No, sir, yeah.
Speaker 23
And would you agree that one of the greatest opportunities for domestic critical mineral development is demonstrating that economic growth and environmental stewardship can coexist?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, and I think the policies that we've enacted in Colorado recently with EPR and recovery rates show that we can do both hand in hand while complying with regulation.
Speaker 21
Okay. I mean, I want to make it very clear that we need our critical minerals, and we need to have a domestic supply chain of critical minerals.
I am a big proponent of making sure that the Lithium Valley gives America the boost it's need for our national security, to lower costs on technology, to create manufacturing the batteries that we need. We absolutely need it and the people in my district need the job opportunities. And we can do both. We can invest in a community, we can protect our public health, and we can create a full regional supply chain manufacturing and recycling. You mentioned recycling, Dr. Dunn, as a way to be good environmental stewards.
I agree with that. We don't have a robust battery manufacturing industry in our nation. But oftentimes in history, the batteries are discarded near poor communities. We have environmental injustices happening like that where companies will take advantage of marginal poor communities. That has happened in our nation and in my district multiple times.
Tell me how that is a priority in our public health efforts to avoid that from happening again.
Jessica Dunn
Yes, it is essential that the recycling of these batteries doesn't lead to increased public harms and that's something we've seen in environmental justice communities, specifically in California with lead acid batteries.
Thank you. I yield back my time.
Speaker 31
Gentleman yields. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Dr. Joyce, for five minutes for his questions.
John Joyce
Thank you, Chairman Palmer, and thank you for holding this important hearing, for our panel for being with us this morning to testify. The legislation under consideration today represents another step forward in this committee's ongoing efforts to improve America's domestic critical mineral supply chain. While we work to onshore and scale up domestic mining and processing of these materials, legislation like this will help in our efforts to recover the materials that would otherwise be discarded. With the equipment used for advanced manufacturing and precision agriculture, both very important in Pennsylvania's 13th Congressional District, we will continue to see more waste generated that contains valuable critical materials. We need to develop both a strategy and the capacity to recover these materials rather than sending the waste for processing to China, who continues to dominate the supply chain.
This is an economic and a national security imperative. We cannot afford to allow China to dictate the future of the global economy. These bills will improve our ability to recover our own critical materials and to help America back in control of these essential supply chains. Mr. Buckingham, how will treating certain supply waste as an opportunity for recovering value rather than simple material to be remediated and disposed of, how will that help to strengthen our critical mineral supply?
Grayson Buckingham
Thank you, Representative, for the question. I think, you know, and that's what guides us here at DISA. I think we can make a tremendous impact in strengthening our critical mineral supply chains by recovering minerals from these waste streams. And and that's what guides us. You know, looking at uranium, for example, we import 97% of our uranium.
We have an abundant, an untapped resource sitting in these legacy sites that we can put to productive use. And, you know, and Idaho National Labs put out a great report several months ago on this very topic. And, you know, when we look to bring on new mines, for example, that can take 10 to 15 years. Well, in these tailings and waste piles, it's already there. You don't you don't need to mine it.
You can quickly go and treat that material in a safe and sustainable manner and bring online, you know, tremendous amount of critical minerals.
Speaker 28
In follow-up, Mr. Buckingham, would you agree that directing EPA to develop a critical national mineral recovery strategy and coordinate federal efforts as outlined in the CHARM Act draft will help identify regulations that might need to be revised in order to allow and incentivize critical mineral recovery?
Speaker 27
Yes, Representative, I think that is imperative. Thank you. Mr. Kaneki, in your testimony you mentioned that the path of least resistance is to send waste abroad for processing rather than to attempt to navigate the regulatory framework right here in the United States. How does this reality impact domestic processors?
David Klanecky
Yeah, I mean, that's what I mentioned, some of the regulations create challenges for for local producers, domestic producers because the the domestic, or sorry, the foreign producers don't have those rules. They don't have RCRA regulations, they don't have...
Exactly. 100%.
Speaker 27
How will the BRACE Act improve your ability to receive, to store, and process lithium-ion batteries, and how will that in turn incentivize keeping the recovered critical minerals within our domestic supply chain?
David Klanecky
It'll provide clarity on what those rules and regulations are and then provide enforcement of those rules. I think that's the biggest thing is to level the playing field and ensure that the regulations that we all kind of operate under today, we have a RCRA Part B permit in our site and we operate under that permit, but everybody else doesn't, and and this will help people enforce the rules across the board.
Speaker 27
Will that clarity allow you to increase production, which you and I know is so important?
David Klanecky
Absolutely. Absolutely, that clarity allows us to get investment to be able to do that.
John Joyce
The legislation that's under consideration today represents how seriously this committee is working toward the goal of a more robust domestic critical material supply. And for both the state of our economic and our national security, as I stated earlier, I look forward to continue to work with this committee to move these bills forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield the remaining time back to the committee. Thank you.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields, chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. Peters, for five minutes for his questions.
Scott Peters
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the witnesses. We do need to shore up our critical mineral supply chains. America faces mounting pressure to modernize our grid, to compete with China in AI, biotech, and manufacturing, and barriers like our outdated permit system, uncertain tariff policies, and stagnating scientific research are holding us back. And first, we need to pass meaningful permit reform to make it easier and faster to source raw materials and recycled inputs.
I also want to mention to the Chairman, this has been a concern of Chairman Palmer's. He has proposed some Clean Air Amendment, Clean Air amendments for permitting reform. As I promised him, we've spoken to the industry. I think we have language that the industry would be satisfied with and that Democrats could support. Chairman Guthrie also urged me to do that and look forward to working on, continuing to work on that.
I didn't want to let that go by since we're here talking about critical minerals. Second, we need to be more thoughtful with our tariff policy. We can shore up domestic supply chains, but the US doesn't have access to all the minerals we need, and in those cases we should be smart about working with our global allies rather than imposing broad, sweeping tariffs that ultimately raise prices for consumers and create bad blood. Third, we should be fostering innovation where permitting reform and friend-shoring still leaves gaps in our supply chain. We need to turn to novel solutions to fill the void.
And recent innovations should change how we view critical mineral supply chains, and as we've heard this morning, there are companies that can pull critical minerals from the tailing piles and ponds left behind at former industrial and mine sites and turn wasted, sometimes hazardous materials into valuable products. We should be proactive and we should incentivize the development of innovations like these. Meanwhile, we're still debating funding cuts that would be harder to make it harder to develop the solutions we we have been discussing.
This week we will consider the Energy and Water Appropriations bill for the 2027 fiscal year. The bill proposes a 40% cut to the Department of Energy's Office of Critical Minerals and Energy Innovation program. That goes beyond all the cuts we've seen at the National Science Foundation. This basic scientific research is fundamental to developing innovative solutions to problems like the supply chain issues we currently face. Mr. Buckingham, your company is the first of its kind to get a license to remove and recover uranium and other critical minerals from mining waste.
Can you talk about how investments in technological innovations like yours can help us get the edge in our fight for critical minerals access?
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, thank you for the question, Representative. And, you know, it was, you know, quite the journey with the NRC because we were being regulated under the 1954 Atomic Energy Act and they didn't foresee a technology coming like ours. And so, you know, that took a lot of education. Senator Lummis and Senator Kelly were, were paramount in helping the advocacy for, um, you know, the Commission addressing this issue, which ultimately resulted in a unanimous vote from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Um, and so, you know, once we received that license, uh, officially in September of last year, um, we were excited to get to work.
Um, but you know, when you look at all these abandoned uranium mine sites, 75% are on federal and public land. And so, you know, the, the regulatory framework hasn't caught up with innovations like ours. And so, you know, for example, we're, uh, we've submitted license applications to remediate a site in Western Colorado. Well, we had to go do our pre-mobilization notification with the NRC, which is a 90-day process. Then we have to do a plan of operations with the BLM, uh, since because we're recovering the critical minerals, it triggers 1872 mining laws, so we're effectively being treated as a new mine.
And then we also have to work with the state, uh, DRMS in, in Colorado for, uh, a mine reclamation permit. And so there's a lot of redundancy. And in our NRC, uh, you know, the environmental assessment that was conducted, there was a finding of no significant impact. In fact, the NRC said we only make the environment better. But we're still having to, you know, um, and the staff have been amazing to work with in these different agencies, but the, the framework doesn't allow that.
But even after getting our NRC license, you know, that was a huge, you know, we saw a lot of private investment that we were able to attract, um, because, you know, we were showing the ability that we are able to economically and sustainably recover these critical minerals.
Speaker 35
In the bills we're sort of talking about today, are there particular, um, provisions that you especially care about, uh, us passing?
Grayson Buckingham
For us, the CHARM Act, the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act, and MRT-I, Representative, are, are the bills that we strongly support and that we believe, you know, for our particular purposes, will help, uh, unlock additional innovation and private sector investment in this space.
Scott Peters
Is there anything you want to tell us is undone by, if we pass these bills?
Grayson Buckingham
I, I think they are all very strong steps. I think hearings like this are, are a great discussion to, you know, there's, there's much more to be done, but I, we believe they're very strong steps in the right direction.
Speaker 37
Okay, I think we all want to develop policies that will encourage that kind of thing and I hope we, I hope we can. It seems like a very constructive step forward. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Iowa, Dr. Miller-Meeks, for five minutes for her questions.
Mariannette Miller-Meeks
Thank you so much, Chair Palmer and Ranking Member Tonko, for holding this important legislative hearing. Today's hearing is about something deceptively simple. We have the material, we have the technology, we have the need, and yet we are still shipping critical minerals overseas to be processed and sold back to us. The United States built a recycling system around one question: how do we safely dispose of this? That was the right question for its time; it's the wrong question for this moment.
The materials flowing through our waste streams today are the same materials our defense sector, our grid, and our manufacturing base depend on. This is a question of energy security and industrial competitiveness. The market is already trying to solve this problem. Commercial actors are, uh, structuring contracts to recover and reuse these materials domestically. I passed a bill that allows the Ames Lab to be able to do that with hard drives from the DOD.
Companies are investing in new technologies to unlock value from existing waste streams and building the processing facilities we need to keep that value here at home. But our permitting system was designed for a different era, one where speed and efficiency were not strategic imperatives. Every month of delay is a month China is pulling further ahead. Mr. Goldberg, we currently have a regulatory system designed, as I said, around the system of how do we safely dispose of this. The market is increasingly asking how do we recover value from this.
As an expert on RCRA, how much of what we're struggling with today is simply that we've never updated the underlying assumption?
Aaron Goldberg
Thank you for your question. I think that a large part of the problem here is that the rules were developed back in the 1980s and 1990s before lithium-ion batteries really existed. And as a result of that, the existing regulations, and mind you, for other types of batteries, there are many different provisions that are specific to other kinds of batteries so as to facilitate processing of those. But lithium-ion batteries didn't exist back when the rules were written and they definitely need updating.
Mariannette Miller-Meeks
Thank you. Mr. Buckingham, the United States has some of the most advanced materials processing research in the world. In Iowa, the Ames National Laboratory has done groundbreaking work on critical mineral separation and processing. But there's a persistent and frustrating gap between what we can demonstrate at the bench scale and what actually gets built at commercial scale here at home. What's sitting in that gap?
Is it capital, is it our regulatory system, or is it something more fundamental about how we translate American innovation into American industrial competitiveness?
Grayson Buckingham
Thank you, Representative. And the response is all the above. The biggest enemy for an entrepreneur and innovator is time. And if you have to go through significantly redundant permitting hurdles, that time kills you. And the capital, typically when these venture funds are backing new innovations, you've got two years of runway to get to the next milestone.
And so if you're being slowed down by different permits, it's going to be very hard to attract that capital and overcome that valley of death.
Mariannette Miller-Meeks
Would you say, given your answer to the last question from Representative Peters about the numbers of agencies that you had to go through, having them done concurrently rather than sequentially would certainly reduce that time and also reduce the amount of capital?
Streamlining would be huge. When we go clean up a site, you know, we're dealing with at least three different agencies and it's pretty much the same information for each one.
Thank you. Mr. Goldberg, aluminum is one of the only materials designated as a critical across every federal agency, and recycled aluminum already makes up roughly 85% of US production. But recovery rates for aluminum packaging remain well below their potential, representing an estimated $1 to $2 billion annual loss to the economy. Part of that is collection, which my Recycling Infrastructure and Accessibility Act aims to address, but part of it is that our material sorting technology has fallen far behind China and Europe. The material we do collect ends up being shipped overseas for processing.
How might the CHARM Act and similar efforts incentivize the sorting and processing technology upgrades we need to actually capture the value of what we're collecting?
Aaron Goldberg
Thank you again for your question. I personally don't work a lot on aluminum issues, but at the same time, I think that the CHARM Act in general provides a great framework for coordination of agencies to address the recovery of all types of critical minerals from materials that are currently viewed as waste.
Thank you very much. I have two questions I'll submit for the record and with that I yield back.
Nanette Barragán
The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms. Barragán, for five minutes for her questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Critical minerals are essential to our economy, our energy system, and many of the products Americans use every day. As we look for ways to strengthen domestic supply chains and recover more of these materials here at home, we also have a responsibility to ensure that recycling and recovery efforts are done safely and deliver real benefits to workers and communities. So I look forward to hearing from the witnesses how we can advance both of these goals. Mr. Buckingham, I want to start with you.
Some of the bills before us, particularly the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act and M-R-T-I, would support recovering critical minerals from contaminated sites and mining waste. What safeguards or accountability measures should Congress consider to ensure that these projects also deliver meaningful cleanup benefits to communities?
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, thank you, Representative, for the question. And, you know, I would add for those bills, none of none of those bills change the cleanup standards or or the safety precautions that must be taken. For us, when we approach these abandoned uranium mine sites, we have radiation safety officers, assistant radiation safety officers. There's a significant amount of sampling and containment that go into this. And we use, you know, the most rigorous standards, both at our NRC-licensed sites as well as our Superfund sites, to ensure that we're meeting those safety standards as well as those cleanup standards in those activities.
Speaker 40
Great. Mr. Klanecky, the average person buying a car, a phone, or a computer, why should they care about battery recycling?
David Klanecky
Well, they have a lot of value in the batteries that they carry. There's a lot of critical minerals in there that are important for the the production of a new battery. And if we can recover those things, in the end of the day, if you create a closed-loop supply chain for these minerals, it will lower the cost of those devices, right? If we don't have to source things from Australia or from maybe China or Africa, other places like that, it's going to lower the cost to the consumer for these devices, whether it's a vehicle, a phone, whatever it might be.
Speaker 42
So if a consumer has a phone and they do the recycling properly, prices down the line will go lower for them.
Absolutely.
And if they don't, they're going to continue to go up.
Speaker 39
They're going to continue to go up because we're going to depend on foreign sources for those materials to make those batteries.
Speaker 41
Mr. Dunn, the BRACE Act is intended to make it easier to collect, store, and recycle lithium-ion batteries. Great, thank you. As Congress considers expanding, I'm sorry, Dr. Dunn, I think I misstated that. As Congress considers expanding battery recycling, are there environmental safety or transparency measures that should accompany that growth to protect workers and nearby communities?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, thank you for the for the question. We must uphold these bedrock policies that we already have because there is a risk of to human health from the transportation and the processing. But there are other additional measures that can be taken to ensure that we actually recover the minerals, specifically recovery rates requirements for lithium, nickel, and cobalt. We can prioritize recovery within the United States to boost up those recycling facilities. And in addition, we can continue doing research on the emissions from the facilities and look at contaminants such as PFAS that could contaminate surrounding communities.
Nanette Barragán
Great, thank you. Mr. Klanecky, industry surveys have found shortages of skilled workers across the battery supply chain, particularly technicians and manufacturing workers. DOE and the Department of Labor have worked to develop battery workforce standards and apprenticeship pathways, but much of that effort has focused on manufacturing. Are there unique workforce needs in battery recycling and materials recovery that aren't receiving enough attention, and what can Congress do to support them?
David Klanecky
Thank you, Representative, that's a great question. I think it's it's an industry problem in whole, whether it's battery production itself or battery recycling. The technicians required, just the people to build plants, right? We have to build assets to to be able to recycle and recover these critical minerals. And having electricians, pipefitters, things people like that that actually can do those trades as well is a real shortage in the United States.
We're working obviously with the federal government on different training programs for battery recycling facilities. A lot of these facilities are chemical processing plants, it was mentioned earlier, hydrometallurgical processing, so we're competing with the chemical industry in some respects for those operators and that talent. But I think having programs that are really specifically focused on the training of operators for these facilities is absolutely critical going forward. And it starts, starts in grade school. It doesn't start in college.
We need to start back in the grade school, high schools and be able to attract and and really teach people what battery recycling is and the value of their their job.
Nanette Barragán
Well, I'd love to see that lesson for grade school on this. So thank you so much for your testimony and all the witnesses. I yield back.
Nicholas Langworthy
Thank you. Gentlelady yields. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. Langworthy, for five minutes for his questions.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I mean, New York may not have the large critical mineral mines found in other parts of the country, but our manufacturers and advanced technology companies depend on these materials to make the products that power our economy and support our national security. And as demand for these materials continues to grow, it is important that we take an all-of-the-above approach to strengthening domestic supply chains through mining and recycling, recovery, processing, and refining here in the United States. You know, several of the bills before us look beyond traditional mining and focus on recovering critical minerals from existing waste streams and legacy sites. And that is particularly relevant for Western New York and the Southern Tier where a long history of manufacturing and industrial activity has left behind sites that may represent opportunities for cleanup and redevelopment and recovery of valuable materials.
And if done responsibly, these efforts could help strengthen our domestic supply chains and create new economic opportunities for communities that I represent. Mr. Klanecky, if these waste streams and legacy sites contain materials that can help strengthen domestic supply chains, what are the biggest barriers preventing that recovery today?
David Klanecky
I think a couple of things, Representative, thank you for the question. I think when you look at the the supply chain that we have, the assets that we have, again, designing them to be able to do recovery of waste streams is something that's critical. There's a lot of technology out there that's been talked about today about recovering things like uranium, same with nickel, cobalt, lithium, there's there's technologies out there to do that. I think one of the biggest hurdles is, again, the permitting process and ensuring that that is a very defined process, timelines are defined, the objectives are defined. Once that's done, having having the ability to have capital to do that.
The government has done a tremendous job over the last five years in providing some grants, loans, things like that, support for the industry. I think that needs to continue. If you step back and look at what China's done over the last 15 years, they've invested trillions, not billions, but trillions of dollars in the battery industry to build not only batteries, but also the recycling infrastructure to be able to recover those critical minerals.
Nicholas Langworthy
Yeah, and every pound of material we can recover here at home is one less pound that we have to source overseas. And I think that's that's something that we have to be laser focused on as we work to strengthen that domestic supply chain, we need to be looking at every opportunity to reduce our dependence on those foreign sources. You know, staying with you, sir, China dominates significant portions of the global critical mineral supply chain. If China were to significantly restrict exports of critical minerals or critical mineral processing capacity tomorrow, what would be the most immediate impact on the American economy?
David Klanecky
It'd be a large impact, Representative. We we import over 60% of the batteries today that we need in our country. So that's a large number of batteries that are coming from other countries, including China. So it would significantly impact the defense industry, it would impact the automotive industry, it would impact our grid industry on how we store energy, as well as the big thing now, which is data centers. 60, 6-0.
Obviously, the administration today is very focused on, you know, unleashing opportunities for companies to to develop the critical mineral supply chain. I think we have a long ways to go. Again, China has had a 15-year plus head start on on us for this, but I think you have a lot of entrepreneurs, you have a lot of companies, you have a lot of investment that's ready to be deployed to help build this infrastructure out, and we just need to continue to support that.
Nicholas Langworthy
Well, thank you very much. Many of the opportunities discussed in these bills involve areas where EPA already has expertise, including environmental cleanup and remediation and waste management. Mr. Goldberg, what role could EPA play in helping to identify and recover critical minerals from waste streams, legacy sites, and contaminated land, and how could the EPA work with other federal agencies to support these efforts?
Aaron Goldberg
Uh, thank you for your question. Um, the EPA the the RCRA regulations already uh contain uh a number of uh provisions that are designed specifically for uh recovery of materials from uh of other types of materials from a variety of waste materials. And uh the uh they have the opportunity here to do a similar kind of thing with respect to recovery of critical minerals from from waste and secondary materials.
Nicholas Langworthy
Well, well, thank you very much. I mean, these issues are more than just about critical minerals. They're about supporting manufacturers, creating jobs, and ensuring that American businesses have access to the resources that they need to compete and to grow. And I look forward to working with my colleagues, hopefully on a very bipartisan basis, to advance these bills and strengthen America's critical mineral supply chains for the long haul. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Soto, for five minutes for his questions.
Darren Soto
Thank you, Chairman. You know, looking at uh the need for rare earth minerals, they're in just about everything in in our critical to our way of life, uh whether it's cars or computers, cell phones, appliances, and other technology, and the demand is huge. When I look at my home state of Florida, um 20% of vehicles last year were either EV or hybrids, uh and solar uh was a huge uh solar panels were a huge purchase last year uh among others, uh although we we do have to address the the lapse of those tax credits, but people continue to buy these things. So the we know the demand is huge, and we can mine it, um and we can recycle it. We only have one major rare earth mine site that does the processing, Eagle Pass in California.
A lot of it comes from China and other countries, and so we're working on bipartisan efforts to increase our mining capacity, um which is why I'm supportive of the, you know, making sure we clean up abandoned mines like the Legacy Mine Cleanup Act, uh which is a good start. But as we look at recycling uh today, we're going to be looking at used batteries, at uh coal ash, landfill recycling, among other things, uh but the one that's most ready for prime time right now is is the recycling of of batteries. Uh so the BRACE Act, you know, we we started talking about it today, establishes standards for used lithium-ion batteries, uh making sure that we establish how to store this efficiently to protect public safety. Of course, um how to get there is a really key issue. In Orlando, we do mostly drop-offs with GreenTech uh in in the northern Orlando area.
And then we see in Georgia, in Covington, Ascend Elements, a major southeastern commercial-scale EV lithium battery uh recycling plant. Um we also see CHARM, uh where the EPA would develop national critical minerals recovery strategy, uh obviously very important for all these things, um but the key is how do we classify and treat used lithium-ion batteries?
Speaker 47
And I did want to hear from the panel on it, of our esteemed experts. I'll start with Mr. Klanecky. Give me some of the basics that my constituents could really kind of sort through as far as how do you think we should treat and classify lithium-ion batteries for to benefit improved recycling.
David Klanecky
Yeah, I think Mr. Goldberg, sorry, Representative, thank you for the question. I think Mr. Goldberg mentioned a few things about some of the, there are transportation regulations, there are fire codes, there are OSHA regulations on how we actually handle lithium-ion batteries. So there's a lot of infrastructure, a lot of framework in place today on how we handle those materials and those batteries. Can it be improved? Absolutely.
There's always opportunities to improve it. And, you know, we can't go a day where we don't see there's been some fire in a waste facility, right, where someone has improperly disposed of batteries. So addressing upfront, like you were asking, the collection of batteries, how they're collected, how they're transported, how they're stored, things like that, is something I think we've got to be better with the public and educating on what needs to happen. You shouldn't throw a lithium-ion battery or phone in your trash. That's not where that battery should go.
We have a collection network across the country where we allow people to actually, they can buy a pail system and we'll have the battery shipped to our facility and properly processed. So there's opportunities there for that.
David Klanecky
The BRACE Act, in my mind, it provides some very clear guidelines on how collection, how we should manage actually the transport of lithium-ion batteries. It actually also kind of helps you understand what the classification of a lithium-ion battery is versus a solid waste. So that's where we're kind of trying to ask for some of those exemptions.
Speaker 46
Thank you. Dr. Dunn, where would you like to see improvements to the BRACE Act, just top lines on this?
Jessica Dunn
Microphone. Thank you. Thank you for the question. The waste classification and permittings that already exist, we believe should stay. They are there for a reason because there is a risk to human health from these products.
And we can do both abide by these regulations and also support our recycling facilities. At the moment, a lot of the issues they're seeing is a lack of feedstock. And we will see that increase around 2030 when most of the EVs that you're mentioning start to retire. And so that uptick is essential to really boosting their profit. And as much as we can prioritize having batteries processed in the US and have those minerals recovered, the better the industry will be supported.
And we can do that without creating exemptions in bedrock environmental policy.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez, for five minutes for his questions.
Robert Menendez
Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate today's conversation centered around increasing critical mineral circularity through recycling and recovery. That goal is especially important for batteries, which power our daily lives and which rely on mineral resources that we must recover and reuse as much as possible. Extended producer responsibility, or EPR, is one policy approach to address battery disposal challenges. In 2024, New Jersey passed a first-of-its-kind EPR law for electric vehicle batteries to incentivize the recycling and sustainable management.
Because these batteries contain valuable critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel, collecting and recycling them can help us create a strong domestic supply of critical minerals while reducing human health and environmental harms. That is why the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act directed the EPA to collaborate with the Department of Energy to develop an EPR framework for states that will address recycling goals, cost structures for mandatory recycling, reporting requirements, product design, collection models, and transportation of collected material. Dr. Dunn, it is my understanding that you have been engaged in conversations with the EPA and DOE on this effort. So let me ask you, how can EPR help boost EV battery recycling in the US and lower the risk of batteries being mishandled or landfilled?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you for the question. Yes, extended producer responsibility holds the producer responsible for ensuring those batteries are recycled and collected and those materials are recovered. And that's essential when the recycling isn't always profitable, these batteries are dispersed through the nation, and they're also dangerous if they're not stored properly. So creating this kind of program really reduces the cost to public health and increases the mineral recovery. This will boost the recycling facilities, increase their feedstock, and also ensure a domestic supply.
Robert Menendez
I appreciate that. And by ensuring that producers are responsible for managing EV batteries, EPR can help create a comprehensive and efficient system. Meanwhile, it can also increase, as you mentioned, critical feedstock for battery recyclers and ultimately bolster our domestic supply of critical minerals to meet our need for clean, affordable energy. Dr. Dunn, in your testimony, you mentioned the importance of high recovery rates in the lithium-ion battery recycling, making sure that we capture as much critical mineral content as possible. How do minimum mineral recovery rates help maximize the environmental benefits of battery recycling?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you, it's a tongue twister for me as well. Recovery rates are essential. It basically creates a minimum threshold of the lithium, nickel, manganese, cobalt that are in the batteries. That means that the recovery isn't dependent on market volatility, which we are seeing in these critical minerals because of the extreme increase in demand and uncertain supply. This isn't a new idea.
It was enacted in the European Union. They have a 90% required recovery of nickel and cobalt, 50 and then 80% for lithium. And this is also something that's being taken up by Colorado.
Robert Menendez
And sort of building off of this, can minimum mineral recovery rates paired with EPR help shield recycling companies from the volatility of global mineral prices?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, I believe so, because then the producer of the battery is paying for the recycling.
Robert Menendez
Right. And from a US perspective, this is probably the most efficient means of getting these critical minerals back into our system through recycling, as opposed to sort of trying to restart American production, exploration, etc., right? So this is actually the most efficient means that we can explore, produce?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, it's extremely efficient. I mean, we have all these minerals within our economy that some of them that we've imported, and we can recover them and add them to our domestic production.
Robert Menendez
And finally, I want to return to my point about New Jersey's leadership in battery EPR and why we should continue to build on the progress that states are already making. Can you talk about preserving state leadership on this front, the importance of it?
Jessica Dunn
Yes, many states have recognized the need for this kind of policy. It started with consumer electronic batteries because of the fires in landfills and others, and now it's moving to the bigger batteries as these EVs come offline. The states are moving first, but it is something that the whole US could benefit from.
Appreciate that. Thanks so much. I yield back.
Gary Palmer
I thank the gentleman. The chair now recognizes himself for five minutes for questions. I want to raise some points that really haven't been raised thus far in regard to China's control of practically the entire process for rare earth elements and critical minerals. They've already controlled 90% of the world's processing for heavy rare earths, which allows them to basically control the cost and availability of critical elements for not just the United States, but the entire Western Hemisphere. So they control the mining, the separation, the processing, and recycling and refining on the final stage for critical minerals and rare earth elements that, like I said, the US and the rest of the world depend.
One of the things that I want to run by you, and particularly you, Mr. Klanecky, is extracting lithium and cobalt and neodymium is a very difficult process. But China has developed the technology to do this at scale, and my guess is they're not as concerned about environmental impact as we are. So we're not going to use the technology like China uses. We're going to do this better. But does the US or any of our allies possess this ability to do this at scale currently?
David Klanecky
Yes, Representative Palmer, thank you for the question. Yes, we do possess that technology. We actually have it ready to go. The hydrometallurgical processing process is actually demonstrated in other countries as well. We haven't built one in the United States, but we've got the technology ready to be deployed.
We actually have a grant that is being positioned to use for building a hydrometallurgical processing facility in South Carolina.
Absolutely. Absolutely, 100%.
Gary Palmer
Also, we've talked a lot about batteries, but if we could recycle magnets that are used in automobile manufacturing, turbines, we could recover neodymium scrap alloys. We could recover gallium and germanium. Do we have the ability to do that, Mr. Klanecky?
David Klanecky
Yes, sorry, yeah, we do have the capability to do that. There's a number of companies out there that have started to actually look at deploying capital in the United States to be able to recover the rare earth metals from magnets.
Gary Palmer
On another topic, it's not, it's the same topic, but my concern is that China is using front companies to buy up our e-waste and particularly batteries and like dead car batteries, things like that, to an extent that I think it is, and it's been mentioned several times, I think, throughout this hearing, that it's a threat to our national security. It's a threat to our economic security, but our national security as well. Do you, and this is a question for each of you, do you think it, we're at a point where we need to ban the export of recyclable e-waste and other materials containing critical minerals and rare earth elements to non-aligned nations?
David Klanecky
Absolutely. I think that's one of the number one priorities is banning the export of these materials, whether it's a battery or gigafactory scraps. We have lots of gigafactories in the United States that are producing batteries. Ban the export of those waste materials as well because they are going outside the country today.
China will pay a lot of money for those materials and I think having a robust framework to ban the export of that would help our industry tremendously and keep those minerals here. Like I mentioned in my testimony, we pay a lot of money for those minerals to bring them here to build the battery in the United States and we just let them go to China.
Gary Palmer
Well, it would also keeping them here would create a marketplace that I think would incentivize people to remove them from areas that are potentially harmful to people. Mr. Buckingham, what are your thoughts on it?
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. I think it is essential that we keep our minerals here. We don't have a problem of geology or supply here in the United States. We have issues with processing and getting those up to the level to compete with China and a streamlined and well-defined permitting process. And I think that's what we need to be able to unleash further production here in the United States.
Dr. Dunn.
Jessica Dunn
Thank you for your question. I do believe that we can invest in our infrastructure here and incentivize the recovery and that will lead to a lot more domestic supply and really fill the gap of feedstock that is necessary.
Thank you. Mr. Goldberg.
Aaron Goldberg
Thank you again for your question. There are already certain restrictions on export of hazardous waste from the United States, but I think that for example with China that they have taken the position that the black mass is not a waste at all if it meets certain standards and so they're sort of opening the door to exports of the material. So there are definitely things more things that the US could be doing to ensure that the critical minerals stay within the country.
Speaker 54
Yeah, we already ban certain products from being exported to China, but they're going through non-aligned nations and front companies to purchase them. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Latta, for five minutes for his questions.
Robert Latta
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for being here. It's clear from everyone's comments that there's agreement about the domestic recovery and recycling of critical minerals and how important it is for our economy, jobs, national security, and our energy security. With a few exceptions, most of these bills in front of us today propose bipartisan ideas to expand critical mineral recovery and recycling. And although many are, you know, works in progress and need additional guardrails, I appreciate my colleagues' efforts to work with us to get these drafts to a better place.
And along those lines, I wanted to focus on three areas with my questions. One is costs, what what this work does to reduce costs for consumers and businesses, how to ensure we're doing that, you know, to the to the extent we can. The second is around investments and the third is competition, particularly with China. The first question is for Dr. Dunn. The advancing critical mineral recycling recovery work does help to reduce the need to mine new minerals.
It also helps us tap into important resources that would otherwise be wasted and end up in landfills. In the long run, how would increasing the amount of domestic recycled materials help bring down costs of critical minerals?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you for the question. It really speaks to affordability. When we recover a lot of the minerals within our economy, we create a secondary supply and that will help keep prices low for these minerals and also prevent price spikes due to supply and demand changes or any geopolitical risks.
Robert Latta
Yeah, I think the latter is really important because everything's here already and that that in it of itself makes such a huge difference.
Many critical minerals are key components of batteries for cost-cutting clean energy technologies such as energy storage, solar panels, and electric vehicles. As part of the one big beautiful bill, there were over $500 billion in cuts to key investments in clean energy work. These clean energy tax credits helped create strong domestic demand in the United States for critical minerals, which is essential to our critical mineral supply chain. Also to Dr. Dunn, how did these cuts hurt companies looking to invest in rebuilding American leadership in this area?
Jessica Dunn
Thank you for that question. Yeah, our reduced investment in electrification and the manufacturing in this country has really, it will result in probably less EVs on the road and therefore less end-of-life batteries going to recycling. In addition, the reduced investment in the manufacturing of these batteries in the US means that that scrap is not going to these recycling facilities. As I said before, one of the big hurdles that recyclers have to get through is the lack of feedstock at the moment because a lot of the batteries have not retired yet. They're relying on a lot of manufacturing scrap.
And by slowing the progress towards a clean economy and the manufacturing here in the US, it's hurting the recycling companies.
Speaker 51
Yeah, man, I suspect we're going to see a big dip in the number of batteries being recycled here. Mr. Buckingham, this one, last one's for you. An area where I think we can all agree is that reducing our reliance on China for critical mineral processing, refining, and recycling will reduce costs for Americans. How will these bills help increase our critical mineral independence?
Grayson Buckingham
Yes, thank you, Representative. And I think it's all about bringing down that total cost of production. And that's how we win is by being economically competitive. You know, in the case of abandoned uranium mines, being able to recycle uranium that would otherwise be discarded and have that enter the fuel cycle is directly passed on to the consumers. And then in typical mineral processing, we're competing, for example, with ball mills and rod mills, grinding technologies that have been around literally since the medieval ages.
And so by new innovations, you know, you're going to have massive savings in OPEX, CAPEX, energy savings. And that's how we win the day is through innovation. And these bills help just do that.
Gary Palmer
Gentleman yields. I'd like to thank our witnesses for being here today. And you should note that members may have additional questions for you. I remind the members that they have 10 business days to submit additional questions for the record. And I ask the witnesses to do their best to submit responses within 10 business days upon receipt of the questions.
I ask unanimous consent to insert in the record the documents included on the staff hearing documents list. Without objection, that will be the order. Without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.