PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 14, 2021
National Strategic and Critical Minerals Production Act of 2021
This bill sets forth environmental review requirements for the mine permitting process and limits the review to 30 months.
Under the bill, projects that provide minerals vital to job creation, energy infrastructure, coastal resilience and restoration, economic competitiveness, and national security must be considered to be infrastructure projects as described in Executive Order 13807, titled Establishing Discipline and Accountability in the Environmental Review and Permitting Process for Infrastructure Projects and dated August 15, 2017. This order directed agencies to ensure that the environmental review and permitting process for infrastructure is coordinated, predictable, and transparent.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) or the Forest Service must appoint a project lead for the mine permitting process to coordinate with other agencies to ensure that the agencies minimize delays, set and adhere to timelines for completion of the permitting process, set clear permitting goals, and track progress against goals. The project lead must also determine the amount of financial assurance required for reclamation of a mineral exploration or mining site.
The bill considers the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to be satisfied if the BLM or the Forest Service determines that the agency issuing the permit will address specified factors, such as environmental impacts of the permit or alternatives to issuance of the permit.
Additionally, the bill exempts projects on National Forest System land from regulations that prohibit timber tree cutting and road construction in areas without roads.
People & committees
Rep. Amodei, Mark E. [R-NV-2] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 3, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3240 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3240 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3240 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3240 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.