Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Black Mass And Brace Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Witnesses clash over treating 'black mass' as commodity versus maintaining waste safeguards
Summary
Industry witnesses urged reclassifying battery 'black mass' as a non-waste commodity to spur U.S. processing, while environmental and legal witnesses urged caution and stronger safety and collection measures such as EPR and minimum recovery rates.
WASHINGTON — A major point of contention at the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment hearing was how U.S. rules should treat "black mass," the intermediate material produced when lithium-ion batteries are shredded.
Industry witnesses said the current classification as solid waste under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) frameworks raises compliance costs, discourages domestic processing and encourages exports to countries that treat the material as a commodity. "When policy treats a product like a waste, it creates waste-like economics instead of product economics that attract investment," David Klonsky testified.
Legal expert Aaron Goldberg said RCRA-era regulations were written before lithium-ion chemistry became ubiquitous and now produce unintended obstacles — including storage rules and land-disposal restrictions — that can make domestic recovery less competitive.
Environmental scientist Dr. Jessica Dunn urged that any policy change preserve environmental and worker protections. She recommended policies that increase battery collection and set minimum recovery rates; she pointed to Colorado and the European Union as examples where producer responsibility and recovery standards have improved collection and recycling outcomes.
On safety, members and Dr. Dunn repeatedly noted battery fire risks during transportation and storage and emphasized that any rollout of expanded recycling capacity should be paired with binding fire-safety and handling standards. Several members asked whether EPA action on universal waste standards or congressional legislation (for example the BRACE Act discussion draft) should be preferred; witnesses differed on scope, with industry urging regulatory clarity to improve competitiveness and others urging retention of RCRA-based safeguards while improving collection and feedstock availability.
No legislative decisions were made at the hearing; members asked witnesses to submit technical details and suggested further committee work to reconcile competitiveness, worker safety and environmental protection.
