Rebuilding the critical-minerals supply chain.

No. It spans the full chain — mining, processing, refining, recycling, and advanced-material production — because the bottleneck is often in processing and refining, not extraction.

Modern industry, from batteries to defense systems, depends on minerals the United States largely imports. That reliance links everyday manufacturing and national security to supply that sits mostly overseas.

Often in processing and refining rather than extraction. A mineral can be mined domestically and still leave the country to be refined, so capacity has to be rebuilt across the whole chain.

Recovering minerals from used products and scrap is a domestic source that reduces reliance on new imports. It is developed as part of the same chain as mining, processing, and refining.

The higher-value inputs — refined compounds, alloys, and battery-grade materials — that industry ultimately uses. Building capacity here keeps more of the value chain, not just raw ore, in domestic and allied hands.

No. Where a mineral cannot be secured at home, capacity extends to trusted allied sources, so the chain is resilient even when it is not wholly domestic.

Miners, processors, refiners, recyclers, and materials firms, alongside the states, regions, and sponsors that hold the resource or the site — coordinated across the chain rather than at a single point.

With a mining, processing, refining, or advanced-material opportunity brought forward for review, then developed as a project that strengthens a specific link in the supply chain.

Permitting, environmental review, and the sequencing from extraction through processing to end use. Mineral chains are built in stages, and development is paced to how those stages depend on one another.

Coordinated development across the chain over the project’s life, framed institutionally rather than as a fee, with scope defined together as the opportunity advances.