HB3713 would create within the Environmental Protection Agency an Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains, headed by a Director, and define key terms such as 'covered mine site' and 'cleanup action' so cleanup work can be organized under one umbrella. The bill tasks the Office with coordinating cleanup actions, disseminating best practices and innovative technologies, and coordinating with federal agencies, States, Indian Tribes, and others to advance cleanup where there’s no liable party.
It also requires a Priority Mine List and an interagency 10-year plan for Navajo Nation abandoned uranium mine sites, with annual reporting to Congress.
At a Glance
What It Does
Establishes the Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains within EPA to coordinate cleanup actions at covered mine sites. It defines key terms and directs interagency coordination, best-practice development, and use of innovative technologies.
Who It Affects
EPA headquarters and Regional Offices; federal land management agencies; States; Indian Tribes (including tribes in Indian country and Alaska Native Corporations); potentially responsible parties and mining companies; NGOs involved in cleanup actions.
Why It Matters
Creates a centralized mechanism to prioritize and standardize cleanups, explicitly addressing Navajo Nation abandoned uranium mine sites, and strengthens government-to-government tribal consultation and opportunities for small-business cleanup contracting.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Legacy Mine Cleanup Act of 2025 would establish within the Environmental Protection Agency a new Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains. This Office would be led by a Director and would rely on a clear set of definitions—most notably what counts as a 'covered mine site' and what constitutes a 'cleanup action'—to ensure cleanup work is organized under a single, coordinated framework.
The Office’s scope includes coordinating cleanup actions at covered mine sites in accordance with existing environmental laws and prioritizing actions that reduce risk to human health and the environment, including sites within Indian country.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains is created within the EPA and led by a Director.
A 'covered mine site' means land and water where hardrock mining occurred and has been discontinued.
The Administrator must annually identify and report on a Priority Mine List of covered mine sites and the status of cleanup actions.
A 10-year interagency plan for Navajo Nation abandoned uranium mine sites must be developed with goals, target dates, and funding estimates, due by 2028.
The bill requires government-to-government tribal consultations and interagency coordination, including Alaska Native Corporations, to support cleanup actions.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions
This subsection provides the key terms that frame the bill’s scope. It defines the Administrator, the Appropriate Committees of Congress, 'cleanup action' as actions addressing contaminated media at a covered mine site under existing authorities, and 'covered mine site' as sites where hardrock mining occurred and was discontinued. It also clarifies 'Indian country,' 'Navajo Nation abandoned uranium mine site,' 'Office,' and 'Regional Office.' These definitions set the boundaries for what qualifies for Office actions and coordination.
Establishment
This subsection establishes within EPA’s solid waste program authority the Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains. It specifies the Director’s appointment by the Administrator and positions the Office as the central node for coordinating cleanup actions, best practices, and interagency work across the agency’s headquarters and regional offices.
Purposes
The purposes center on coordinating cleanup actions at covered mine sites across agencies and tribes, disseminating best practices and innovative technologies, and facilitating voluntary cleanup actions where no liable party exists. It also emphasizes interagency coordination with other federal bodies and recognition of tribal and non-governmental stakeholders in cleanup planning.
Duties
Duties include annually identifying and reporting a Priority Mine List, coordinating with Regional Offices, federal agencies, States, Indian Tribes, Alaska Native Corporations, and other stakeholders to share best practices, and supporting interagency plans and community consultations. The section also directs interagency collaboration to encourage contracting opportunities for small businesses and to coordinate with major federal agencies on uranium and other contamination cleanup actions.
Savings Provisions
This provision clarifies that nothing in the section adds new regulatory authority beyond existing law and that it does not create a default standard for cleanup actions. It preserves existing authorities while enabling the Office to coordinate activities and share best practices without mandating new regulatory standards.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Navajo Nation and other Indian Tribes benefit from government-to-government consultations, targeted cleanup coordination, and access to technical assistance for covered mine sites.
- Alaska Native Corporations and tribal entities gain inclusion in interagency consultations and cleanup planning that affect tribal lands and resources.
- States and local governments near covered mine sites benefit from coordinated actions, shared best practices, and clearer reporting of priorities.
- Small businesses and contractors gain potential contracting opportunities in EPA- and agency-supported cleanup projects.
- Communities living near covered mine sites see improved environmental health outcomes through coordinated cleanup actions and technology-enabled remediation.
Who Bears the Cost
- EPA and the Office of Mountains, Deserts, and Plains will bear initial setup and ongoing administrative costs for coordination, staffing, and program management.
- Regional Offices and other Federal agencies incur costs to participate in interagency planning, data sharing, and implementation of best practices.
- States and local governments may incur administrative costs for participation in coordination activities and site-specific actions.
- Potentially Responsible Parties may face cleanup costs and obligations if identified in future actions, though the bill relies on existing authorities.
- Mining companies and contractors may incur compliance and bidding costs where cleanup work is funded or contracted through the Office’s programs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between accelerating and coordinating cleanup actions across federal and tribal jurisdictions without expanding ongoing regulatory authority or funding beyond existing authorities. This creates a trade-off between streamlined interagency action and potential delays or friction arising from bureaucratic processes, while balancing the needs and sovereignty of tribal governments and the appetite for timely cleanup of Navajo Nation uranium mine sites.
The bill builds a centralized coordination mechanism inside EPA but relies on existing regulatory authorities and funding, which raises questions about the sufficiency of appropriations to sustain long-term coordination and cleanup efforts. By creating an Office focused on covered mine sites and tribal coordination, the bill foregrounds federal-tribal government-to-government processes, which may implicate sovereign rights and resource decisions for tribes.
The emphasis on a Priority Mine List and a 10-year interagency plan for Navajo Nation abandoned uranium mine sites introduces ambitious timelines and interagency dependencies that hinge on cooperation across agencies, funding availability, and stakeholder buy-in. Unresolved questions include how funding will scale to cover an expanding list of sites, how the Office will measure success, and how it will handle sites with multiple jurisdictions or unclear PRP status.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.