[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 77 (Friday, April 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28759-28761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08391]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on Critical Materials 
Market Dynamics

AGENCY: Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or the Department)'s Office of 
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains seeks public comment on market 
dynamics for critical materials, including non-competitive practices 
and

[[Page 28760]]

price volatility, to identify potential ways DOE can help address these 
concerns.

DATES: Responses to the RFI are requested by May 20, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments electronically to 
[email protected] and include ``Critical Materials Market 
Dynamics RFI'' in the subject line of the email.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Further questions may be addressed to 
Charles Yang, [email protected] or (202) 586-6116.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    This is an RFI issued by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) 
Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC). This RFI seeks 
public input on market dynamics and price volatility in critical 
materials processing, refining, and recycling. This RFI will inform 
DOE's development of critical materials strategies and measures to more 
effectively mitigate market volatility as critical materials 
processing, refining, and recycling are scaled up in the United States 
and allied countries.
    MESC seeks input from all types of critical material market 
participants:
     Companies that process, refine, or recycle critical 
materials;
     Groups that supply feedstock for such processors or 
recyclers (e.g., miners, scrap collectors);
     Offtakers of critical materials (e.g., automobile 
manufacturers, battery manufacturers, other clean energy manufacturers, 
utilities, heavy industries);
     Investors in critical material projects (e.g., project 
finance investors, banks, commodity traders, brokers, private equity);
     Not-for-profit organizations (e.g., entities capable of 
operating demand-side support mechanisms to scale up critical material 
processing, refining, and recycling);
     State, local, and tribal government entities; and
     Other interested entities (e.g., trade associations, 
market-clearing organizations).

II. Purpose

    On July 31, 2023, DOE released its Critical Material Assessment,\1\ 
which identified critical materials in the near and medium term that 
will face supply-demand imbalances. This assessment also informed the 
DOE's Critical Material List.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/doe-critical-material-assessment_07312023.pdf.
    \2\ The following materials are on the DOE critical material 
list: aluminum, cobalt, copper, dysprosium, electrical steel, 
fluorine, gallium, iridium, lithium, magnesium, natural graphite, 
neodymium, nickel, platinum, praseodymium, silicon, silicon carbide 
and terbium. https://www.energy.gov/cmm/what-are-critical-materials-and-critical-minerals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MESC is committed to securing the energy supply chains needed to 
support a clean and stable energy transition, which will be fueled by 
critical materials. This RFI will help inform the development of the 
U.S. Department of Energy's and its Office of Manufacturing Energy 
Supply Chain's strategy towards securing critical materials for the 
energy sector industrial base.
    The purpose of this RFI is to solicit feedback on market dynamics 
in the critical material supply chain and how the Federal Government 
can play a role in supporting market stability and price transparency. 
DOE is specifically interested in information on:
     Market dynamics for critical material producers and 
implications of those market dynamics for securing a secure and 
resilient critical material supply chain; and
     What kind of Federal Government support or coordination 
would be essential to scaling up domestic critical material processing, 
refining, and recycling, particularly to mitigate market volatility.
    You may answer as few or as many of the questions below as you 
would like. Please use the question number in your response to help 
reviewers. Please also provide detailed responses.

III. Questions

    1. For a given critical material, are there particular market 
dynamics DOE should be aware of?
    a. Are there specific critical materials that have experienced 
significant market volatility and price instability?
    b. For a given critical material, are there differences in cost of 
production domestically versus cost of production in other countries? 
How are those differences in cost of production reflected in prices?
    c. What, if any, impact has market volatility and price instability 
had on various market participants?
    d. For those critical materials that have experienced significant 
market volatility and price instability, what are the underlying 
causes?
    e. Are there particular critical materials where processing, 
refining, or recycling projects struggle to attract investment 
specifically because of demand-side uncertainty and/or lack of firm 
offtake (vs., e.g., concerns about competitiveness on price or lengthy 
qualification processes)?
    f. How do these market dynamics implicate the ability of domestic 
critical material producers to sign offtake agreements with end users? 
How does this impact DOE investments in the critical material industry 
and the path to securing a resilient supply chain?
    2. What measures can DOE take to promote market stability within a 
given critical material market?
    a. How can DOE facilitate market adoption and maturity as a 
stakeholder (e.g., facilitating market information sharing, encouraging 
price transparency, supporting consortiums)?
    b. How can DOE support critical material projects beyond capital 
grants and loans? Are there particular programs or policy mechanisms 
DOE should leverage with existing statutory authority to support 
critical material projects and successful project offtake? Are there 
particular aspects of the supply chain that DOE should focus on?
    c. In operations without co-located vertical integration across 
extraction (or production) and processing, what specific federal 
support would be most useful to provide operational stability?
    3. What indicators of market volatility demonstrate the need for 
support? What are effective measures or guiding principles DOE or the 
Federal Government could take to support critical materials?
    a. What are important considerations in exploring reverse auctions, 
advanced market commitments, contracts for difference, direct 
procurement, pooled offtake vehicles, or other support measures?
    b. What are implementation approaches for DOE to facilitate demand-
side support for critical materials through existing grant and loan 
authorities and/or public-private partnerships?
    4. What are the benefits and drawbacks of physical offtake of 
critical material products for stockpiling compared to other measures 
that do not involve physical offtake? What existing mechanisms could be 
used and what concerns should be considered in terms of implementation?
    5. How would setting up alternative market exchanges or indices 
with international partners for critical materials enable price 
transparency, market stability, and/or reduce emissions from critical 
material production?
    a. What premium would firms be willing to pay for validated 
attributes such as ESG standards and supply chains sourced from 
domestic/allied

[[Page 28761]]

countries? How could DOE or the Federal Government support greater 
demand for higher standard materials?
    b. How might environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards 
or critical material grades specific to energy applications be 
incorporated into an exchange and what are the conditions needed for 
successful implementation?
    6. What other tools outside of market exchanges could support price 
transparency, market stability, and/or reduce emissions from critical 
material production?
    a. What actions could the United States take in collaboration with 
its international partners to enhance price transparency and stability?
    b. Which country partners would be ideal collaborators?
    c. Are there established international fora that are better suited 
to have an impact on these challenges? (i.e., International Energy 
Agency, G7, OECD, etc.)

IV. Response Guidelines

    Commenters are welcome to comment on any question. RFI responses 
shall include:
    1. RFI title;
    2. Name(s), phone number(s), and email address(es) for the 
principal point(s) of contact;
    3. Institution or organization affiliation and postal address; and
    4. Clear indication of the specific question(s) to which you are 
responding.
    Responses to this RFI must be submitted electronically to 
[email protected] with the subject line ``Critical Materials 
Market Dynamics RFI'' no later than 5:00 p.m. (ET) on May 20, 2024. 
Responses must be provided as attachments to an email. It is 
recommended that attachments with file sizes exceeding 25 MB be 
compressed (i.e., zipped) to ensure message delivery. Responses must be 
provided as a Microsoft Word (*.docx) or Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) 
attachment to the email, and no more than 10 pages in length, 12-point 
font, 1-inch margins. Only electronic responses will be accepted.
    A response to this RFI will not be viewed as a binding commitment 
to develop or pursue the project or ideas discussed. MESC may engage in 
pre- and post-response conversations with interested parties.

Confidential Business Information

    Because information received in response to this RFI may be used to 
structure future programs and/or otherwise be made available to the 
public, respondents are strongly advised NOT to include any information 
in their responses that might be considered business sensitive, 
proprietary, or otherwise confidential.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that 
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public 
disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: one copy of 
the document marked ``confidential'' including all the information 
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-
confidential'' with the information believed to be confidential 
deleted. Failure to comply with these marking requirements may result 
in the disclosure of the unmarked information under the Freedom of 
Information Act or otherwise. The U.S. Government is not liable for the 
disclosure or use of unmarked information and may use or disclose such 
information for any purpose. If your response contains confidential, 
proprietary, or privileged information, you must include a cover sheet 
marked as follows identifying the specific pages containing 
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information:
    Notice of Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data:
    Pages [list applicable pages] of this response may contain 
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information that is exempt 
from public disclosure. Such information shall be used or disclosed 
only for the purposes described in this RFI. The Government may use or 
disclose any information that is not appropriately marked or otherwise 
restricted, regardless of source.
    In addition, (1) the header and footer of every page that contains 
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information must be marked as 
follows: ``Contains, Confidential, Proprietary, or Privileged 
Information Exempt from Public Disclosure'' and (2) every line and 
paragraph containing proprietary, privileged, or trade secret 
information must be clearly marked with [[double brackets]] or 
highlighting. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to: 
[email protected].

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 12, 
2024, by Giulia Siccardo, Director, Office of Manufacturing and Energy 
Supply Chains, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of 
Energy. That document with the original signature and date is 
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance 
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the 
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to 
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as 
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative 
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon 
publication in the Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on April 16, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2024-08391 Filed 4-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P