This bill instructs that actions the Secretary of Defense takes under Presidential Determination 2022–11 — i.e., Department of Defense steps to support domestic critical‑minerals production under section 303 of the Defense Production Act — be treated as “covered projects” under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST‑41) and be listed on the Permitting Dashboard. The treatment applies broadly to activities such as feasibility studies, by‑product and co‑product production at existing facilities, and modernization of mining and processing, and it does so “without regard to the requirements” of FAST‑41’s covered‑project definition.
The practical effect is procedural: projects supported by the DOD under that Presidential Determination become subject to FAST‑41’s coordination tools (and public tracking on the Dashboard) unless the project sponsor requests exclusion. For firms, regulators, and supply‑chain buyers, the bill promises clearer federal coordination and visibility for a narrow class of critical‑minerals efforts — but it also routes national‑security–motivated activities into a transparency and milestone regime that raises implementation and confidentiality questions.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires that specified Department of Defense actions taken under Presidential Determination 2022–11 be treated as covered projects under FAST‑41 and be included in the Permitting Dashboard. It waives the usual FAST‑41 eligibility requirements for those actions, and allows a project sponsor to opt out of covered‑project treatment.
Who It Affects
Directly affected are DoD‑supported critical‑minerals activities (feasibility studies, by‑product production, modernization, and other DPA §303(a)(1) actions), project sponsors (mining and processing companies), federal permitting agencies that implement FAST‑41 processes, and users of the Permitting Dashboard.
Why It Matters
By folding certain DPA‑backed mineral actions into FAST‑41, the bill attempts to accelerate and centralize interagency permitting coordination while making project status visible to the public and stakeholders. That can speed some approvals but also brings DoD‑driven activities under a transparency and milestone regime not originally designed around defense confidentiality or agency resourcing.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill works by identifying a narrow set of Department of Defense activities — those carried out under Presidential Determination 2022–11, which implements section 303 of the Defense Production Act — and declaring them to be FAST‑41 covered projects. FAST‑41 defines a covered project using size, significance, and other criteria; this bill bypasses those thresholds by saying the listed DoD actions count as covered projects “without regard to the requirements” of the covered‑project definition.
That means even early or small‑scale DOD‑supported activities like feasibility work or by‑product production can be pulled into FAST‑41’s processes.
Once treated as covered projects, these actions must be included on the Permitting Dashboard maintained under FAST‑41. Inclusion on the Dashboard typically triggers a set of procedural tools: interagency coordination, assignment of lead agencies, milestone tracking, and access to FAST‑41 dispute‑resolution mechanisms.
The bill does not amend how those FAST‑41 tools operate; it only changes which activities fall under them. Practically, that can accelerate coordination across agencies for DoD‑backed projects but also subjects them to public visibility and a milestone schedule that requires agency attention and reporting.The bill’s scope is circumscribed in one important way: it applies only to actions the Secretary of Defense takes pursuant to PD 2022–11, and it lists the kinds of activities covered (feasibility studies, by‑product/co‑product production at existing sites, modernization of mining and processing, and other §303(a)(1) activities).
A final operational detail: a project sponsor can request that its action not be treated as a covered project, so the change is not mandatory if the sponsor prefers to avoid FAST‑41 treatment. The text does not provide funding, confidentiality carve‑outs, or additional procedural instructions for reconciling defense classification or sensitive supply‑chain information with Dashboard transparency.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill treats actions taken by the Secretary of Defense under Presidential Determination 2022–11 (87 Fed. Reg. 19775) as FAST‑41 ‘covered projects’ regardless of FAST‑41’s eligibility thresholds.
Covered activities enumerated include feasibility studies, by‑product and co‑product production at existing facilities, modernization of mining/processing, and any other activity authorized under DPA §303(a)(1).
Such actions must be listed on the FAST‑41 Permitting Dashboard (section 41003(b) of FAST‑41) to track milestones and interagency coordination.
The statute explicitly waives the ‘requirements of that section’ of FAST‑41 when treating these DoD actions as covered projects, effectively lowering the barrier for inclusion.
A project sponsor may request that its action not be treated as a covered project, creating a voluntary opt‑out that preserves sponsor control over FAST‑41 enrollment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s short name: the “Critical Minerals Supply Chain Resiliency Act.” This is a drafting formality, but it signals the bill’s focus on policy linking critical‑minerals supply‑chain resilience to federal permitting processes.
General treatment as covered projects and Dashboard inclusion
Directs that an action described in subsection (b) shall be treated as a FAST‑41 covered project and included in the Permitting Dashboard. Critically, it ties those actions to the statutory mechanics of FAST‑41 (coordination, milestones, dispute resolution) by designation, rather than by changing FAST‑41’s substantive rules, so agencies will need to apply existing FAST‑41 processes to these newly designated items.
Scope: which DoD actions qualify
Defines the covered actions as those the Secretary of Defense takes under Presidential Determination 2022–11 to support domestic production of strategic and critical materials. It lists four example categories — feasibility studies, by‑product/co‑product production at existing sites, modernization of mining/processing, and any other §303(a)(1) activity — which means the bill reaches both early‑stage (studies) and later‑stage (modernization, production) activities.
Project sponsor opt‑out
Creates an exception: a DoD‑supported action shall not be treated as a covered project or included on the Dashboard if the project sponsor requests exclusion. That preserves sponsor choice and may be used to avoid public exposure or procedural obligations, but it also creates an administrative step for sponsors who want to remain off FAST‑41.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Defense across all five countries.
Explore Defense 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
- Domestic mining and processing firms that receive DoD support — they gain formal interagency coordination, milestone timelines, and public visibility that can compress permitting uncertainty and signal progress to lenders and buyers.
- Department of Defense and defense supply‑chain managers — they get clearer federal tracking of actions meant to shore up critical‑minerals capacity, which helps oversight and alignment with national‑security priorities.
- Downstream manufacturers and defense contractors relying on strategic materials — increased visibility and coordination can reduce supply‑chain risk by surfacing bottlenecks earlier and promoting faster resolution across agencies.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal permitting agencies (EPA, DOI, Corps, etc.) — adding DoD‑designated actions to FAST‑41 expands the docket of projects requiring coordination, milestone monitoring, and possible dispute‑resolution, creating unbudgeted workload and staffing pressure.
- Project sponsors who remain on the Dashboard — they face greater public scrutiny, reporting obligations, and the potential for stakeholder or litigation attention that can complicate development even as coordination increases.
- State, local, and Tribal permitting authorities — faster federal coordination can constrain their timelines and negotiation space and may impose additional procedural interactions without matched federal resources.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is whether to accelerate critical‑minerals capacity by subjecting DoD‑backed activities to FAST‑41’s coordination and transparency tools — potentially speeding approvals and surfacing problems — versus preserving the flexibility, confidentiality, and resource profile DoD and project sponsors may need for urgent or sensitive supply‑chain actions.
The bill creates several operational and policy tensions without resolving them. First, the phrase “without regard to the requirements of that section” effectively lowers or removes FAST‑41’s eligibility gates, which could draw many small or early‑stage DoD‑backed activities into a statutory framework designed for larger infrastructure projects.
FAST‑41 processes (lead‑agency designation, milestone tracking, and dispute resolution) assume agency capacity and predictable workflows; expanding the covered‑project universe without funding or staffing commitments risks backlogs or superficial compliance.
Second, the bill juxtaposes two competing objectives: DoD’s use of the Defense Production Act often rests on urgency and controlled information about supply vulnerabilities, while FAST‑41’s Dashboard is public and emphasizes transparency. The statute provides an opt‑out for sponsors, but it leaves unanswered how classified or commercially sensitive information will be handled when an action is listed on a public Dashboard.
Finally, treating feasibility studies and by‑product production like construction projects may force agencies to apply milestone‑driven oversight to activities that are exploratory, iterative, or otherwise ill‑suited to rigid scheduling.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.