PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 29, 2010
Rare Earths and Critical Materials Revitalization Act of 2010 - Title I: Rare Earth Materials - (Sec. 101) Establishes in the Department of Energy (DOE) a research, development, and commercial application program to assure the long-term, secure, and sustainable supply of specified rare earth materials to satisfy the national security, economic well-being, and industrial production needs of the United States.
Directs the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) to: (1) support new or significantly improved processes and technologies (as compared to those currently in use in the rare earth materials industry); (2) encourage multidisciplinary collaborations and opportunities for students at institutions of higher education; (3) collaborate with relevant agencies of foreign countries with interests relating to rare earth materials; and (4) submit an implementation plan to Congress.
Requires the Secretary to offer to contract with the National Academy of Sciences for an assessment of the program after it has been in operation for four years.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 102) Amends the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to authorize the Secretary through FY 2015, only to the extent provided in advance in a subsequent appropriations Act, to make loan guarantee commitments for the commercial application of new or significantly improved technologies for specified categories of projects, including: (1) separation and recovery of rare earth materials from ores or other sources; (2) preparation of rare earth materials in oxide, metal, alloy, or other forms needed for national security, economic well-being, or industrial production purposes; and (3) application of rare earth materials in the production of improved magnets, batteries, refrigeration systems, optical systems, electronics, and catalysis, among other uses.
Directs the Secretary to cooperate with appropriate private sector participants to achieve a complete rare earth materials production capability in the United States within five years after enactment of this Act.
Prohibits the Secretary from awarding a loan guarantee for a project unless the project's proponent provides assurances that the loan or guarantee shall be used to support the separation, recovery, preparation, or manufacturing of rare earth materials in the United States for customers within the United States, unless insufficient domestic demand for such materials results in excess capacity.
Title II: National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research, and Development - (Sec. 201) Amends the National Materials and Minerals Policy, Research and Development Act of 1980 to: (1) instruct the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to coordinate federal materials research and development through the National Science and Technology Council (instead of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, and Technology, which is now defunct); and (2) repeal specified reporting and action requirements for the Secretaries of Defense and of the Interior, respectively.
(Sec. 202) Repeals the National Critical Materials Act of 1984.
People & committees
Rep. Dahlkemper, Kathleen A. [D-PA-3] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 325 - 98 (Roll no. 555). (text: CR 9/28/2010 H7060-7061)
House roll call 555 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 325 - 98 (Roll no. 555).(text: CR 9/28/2010 H7060-7061)
House roll call 555 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H7273)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6160.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7060-7063)
Mr. Gordon (TN) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 384.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 111-644.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science and Technology. H. Rept. 111-644.
Referred to the House Committee on Science and Technology.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.6160 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.6160 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.6160 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.6160 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.