PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 9, 2026
Environmental Monitoring and Remediation Technology Assessment Initiative Authorization Act of 2026 or the EMRTAI Authorization Act of 2026
This provides statutory authority for an initiative within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that recovers critical materials from contaminated sites.
A critical material means (1) any non-fuel mineral, element, substance, or material that the Department of Energy determines has a high risk of a supply chain disruption and serves an essential function in energy technologies; and (2) any critical mineral. A critical mineral means any mineral, element, substance, or material designated as critical by the U.S. Geological Survey.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Under the program, the EPA must investigate, evaluate, and support processes, methods, and systems which may be used to identify sources of critical materials at contaminated sites and recover such critical materials from those sites. In carrying out the program, the EPA may provide assistance (e.g., awards) to persons, nonprofit organizations, and state, local, and tribal government entities.
The bill prohibits the EPA from providing assistance (1) in an amount that exceeds $10 million in any fiscal year in the aggregate; or (2) to any person, nonprofit organization, or government entity, in an amount that exceeds $3 million.
The bill terminates the program after 10 years.
People & committees
Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11] · R–TX
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 Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5682)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 9616.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5682-5683)
Mr. Guthrie moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 720.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-821.
Reported by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 119-821.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 48 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment.
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: Oct 31, 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.9616 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.9616 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.9616 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.9616 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.