Mining Regulatory Clarity Act of 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1194, I call up the bill (H.R. 2925) to amend the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 to provide for security of tenure for use of mining claims for ancillary activities, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. 2925.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2925, the Mining Regulatory Clarity Act of 2024.
In May 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court's decision revoking an approved mine plan for the Rosemont Copper Mine project in Arizona.
This determination commonly called the Rosemont decision upended decades of regulatory precedent and specific U.S. Forest Service regulations that allow approvals of operation on or off a mining claim so long as these operations meet environmental and regulatory standards.
Essentially, this court's ruling puts the cart before the horse and fails to reflect the process of how a company actually develops a mine. I think there is some confusion about the mine approval process and what the term ``valid'' claim means.
First, when looking to develop a mine, an operator must submit something called a Mine Plan of Operations to the United States Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management. This plan must include the intended uses of the surface of the mining claim, including those for waste rock placements, mills, offices, and roads.
The Mine Plan of Operations is key in determining the economic feasibility of a mining site, which, in turn, factors into the basis of determining which mineral deposits are commercially developable and, therefore, valid.
If allowed to stand, the Rosemont decision would require the discovery and determination of a valid mineral deposit, meaning that operators must prove the existence of a commercially developable deposit on a claim before a plan of operations can be approved.
Remember, a mine cannot move forward if the Federal Government does not approve any facet of the Mine Plan of Operations. Further, mineral validity cannot be determined until after the economic viability of a site--as is laid out in the Mine Plan of Operations--is verified by the Federal Government, as well.
H.R. 2925, Mr. Speaker, would reverse this backward determination of the court, allowing American mining to resume on Federal lands. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I want to be very clear: This bill will not allow mining companies to do whatever they want on public land. That is a fact.
Mining activity will not occur if any facet of a mine plan of operations has not passed our strict Federal guidelines and our strict environmental guidelines.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar), my good friend, for his words of support for this legislation.
Again, this legislation would correct a misguided court decision revoking an approved mine for the Rosemont Copper Mine Project in Arizona.
Arizona produced the second-most amount of minerals in the United States in 2023. It also has over 30 million acres of Federal lands. If the Rosemont decision stands, over 40 percent of Arizona's lands will be taken offline in the U.S. in the battle to produce enough minerals to meet our ever-growing needs.
As a member of the Natural Resources Committee, the Democrats brought an expert forward, Madam Speaker, an anti-mining expert. In fact, she said we have to stop hard-rock mining because the reclamation process doesn't work. I invited her to our great State of Minnesota to show her a reclaimed mine where we have deer hunting, bears, eagles, bees, birds, haymaking. We have drinking water that comes from mines that are not in operation. We have recreation in our mines in Minnesota and elsewhere in this country.
This hard-rock mining expert said it is too dry in Arizona and too wet in Minnesota to mine. I asked where she would like us to mine these minerals for our national security. She said the quiet part out loud. She said nowhere. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuse to allow mining to happen in this country.
The Communist country of China was just mentioned. This administration today, Madam Speaker, is in consultation with Congo, where 15 of the 19 industrial mines use child slave labor owned by the Chinese Communist country.
The Biden administration is entering into memorandums of understanding to have critical minerals mined by child slave labor in Congo, where there are zero environmental standards and zero labor standards, to meet their green agenda, Madam Speaker. They are okay with that but will not allow mining to happen in this country that follows our environmental and labor standards.
The fact of the matter is, Madam Speaker, I live in the heart of mining country, and the best water in Minnesota is in the heart of mining country. We can drink it right out of the ground in Buhl, Minnesota.
I can tell you that this country better take part in mining domestically. Otherwise, we are going to find ourselves, Madam Speaker, in deep, deep trouble.
The Department of Energy and the Department of Defense say we need more domestic mining. We cannot rely on China and other adversarial nations. This is a simple fix.
We believe the court erred, so it is our job to re-legislate this part of mining that is so important to the United States of America. It is so important to our communities where we are blessed to have these natural resources.
For my good friends and colleagues from California, let's go back many years. California started on a gold rush. It began because of mining. Safe to say, we don't want to follow California much longer, with what is happening in that great State.
The fact of the matter is, Madam Speaker, I believe this is going to pass in a bipartisan fashion. It is a good piece of legislation. I look forward to passing it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The disastrous results of the Rosemont decision will redirect the huge amounts of capital needed to mine domestically to countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Indonesia.
When we choose this out-of-sight, out-of-mind mentality approach to mining, development flows to other nations with significantly lower environmental and labor standards. Indonesia, for example, is currently the world's largest nickel producer and its dominance is only expected to grow in the coming years.
Indonesian mining is accomplished with sweeping deforestation and pollution, many of which are financed, again, by the Chinese Communist Party. These operations consistently ignore environmental impacts on local communities and leave the land far worse off than they found it.
On the other hand, American mines, like this mine project in Nevada, adhere to the best standards in the world and are committed to restoring the land after minerals are extracted.
In fact, again, mines are not even permitted until the Federal Government approves a full Mine Plan of Operations, which must include a robust plan and financial assurance for reclamation after the project is complete.
Madam Speaker, this is simple. Either we do it here or we let foreign adversarial nations take over. This is a strategic national security interest.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Federal lands account for as much as 86 percent of the land area in certain Western States, and these same States account for 75 percent of our Nation's metals production.
The Mining Regulatory Clarity Act is needed to ensure that we have certainty of access to these essential mineral deposits.
If we want to encourage investment in safe, responsible, clean mining practices that provide billions in taxes that support our roads, bridges, schools, and other essential services, along with the essential materials to the American people, then we also need to support H.R. 2925.
Madam Speaker, really quick, you are hearing the other side of the aisle not necessarily debate the actual legislation. We have heard them talk about the process. When you can't debate the legislation, then you go after the process.
This is a very, very good piece of legislation, and I look forward to it passing in just the next hour or so.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Let's be clear: There are no mines operating on Federal lands that are owned by the Chinese Communist Party. Zero. Zero. Anybody that mines in the United States will follow our environmental standards and our labor standards. It doesn't matter which company it is. They are going to follow our rules.
For this administration to turn a blind eye to the atrocities and the human rights violations to meet their green agenda, it is unconscionable. We can do it here in the United States with the best labor standards, the best environmental standards, with our technology, and be proud of these minerals that we produce. We can lead the rest of the world on how to do it. Nobody does it better than the United States of America and our workers, period.
Madam Speaker, let me address some of the misinformation we have heard about this bill. This bill does not allow mining companies to continue to operate under conditions that don't follow our labor and environmental standards.
If the outlandish circumstances that my friends on the other side of the aisle have been telling you will happen if this bill is enacted could have actually happened all along, including land lock-ups and subversion of environmental and governmental oversight, then why didn't it happen?
It is because the harm they claim this bill could inflict upon our Federal lands is actually not true. It is inaccurate.
This bill would, however, allow America to become a global leader in mineral production once again.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Governor of Nevada in support of H.R. 2925. Office of the Governor, May 1, 2024. Hon. Dina Titus, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Steven Horsford, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Susie Lee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Representatives Titus, Horsford, and Lee: I write in support of the Congressman Amodei's Mining Regulatory Clarity Act of 2024 (H.R. 2925) and encourage you to vote in favor of this critical bill when it reaches the House floor. In doing so you will stand in solidarity with Senator Cortez Masto and Senator Rosen, sponsors of the Senate companion bill (S. 1281), and the State of Nevada to support a key pillar of our economy. Since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued its decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, also known as the Rosemont decision, the future of hardrock mining in Nevada and the West has been plagued by uncertainty. This matter must be favorably resolved for the Silver State and bipartisan, bicameral legislation must be signed by the President to help ensure the economic viability of our robust mining industry.
The Mining Regulatory Clarity Act (MRCA) simply reinstates the contemporary mining policy and permitting practices that were upended by the Rosemont decision. Contrary to the scare tactics of critics, the MRCA does not open the door to unrestricted use of public lands, block renewable energy, recreation, or conservation, or allow mining in National Parks, wilderness areas, and other special areas. Rather, it provides much-needed business certainty and protects the 14,700 direct high-paying jobs and an additional 20,000 indirect jobs that are supported by the mining industry in the state. In addition to providing employment with high, family supporting salaries averaging over $100,000, the industry provides $4.9 billion of our state's gross domestic product and $12.7 billion in economic output.
Schools and local governments in each of your districts also benefit from the $389 million the industry paid in state and local taxes. More than half of the mining Net Proceeds of Minerals (NPOM) tax revenue goes to the Nevada State Education Fund. The other half goes to the county where the minerals were produced. Gold and silver operators further contribute to the State Education Fund through the Gold and Silver Excise Tax, or Mining Education Tax which was established during the 81st Nevada Legislative Session; and in fiscal year 2023, contributed approximately $68 million to the State. Beginning in fiscal year 2024, revenue from the Mining Education Tax will go directly into the State Education Fund. The Rosemont decision ends hardrock mining as we know it and threatens the livelihoods and institutions that rely on it.
Nevada is counting on you to unite and join Senators Cortez Masto and Rosen and Congressman Amodei to provide certainty to one of Nevada's critical industries. I look forward to continuing to work collaboratively to ensure Nevada remains well positioned as a leader in domestic mineral production, from lithium and other critical materials to precious metals.
Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Joe Lombardo, Governor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. STAUBER. Madam Speaker, I support fair labor standards, high environmental standards, and increasing our national security. In short, I support domestic mining. I urge all of my colleagues to do the same and support H.R. 2925.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source