INSTITUTION PROFILE / FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
A science agency with no regulatory power, behind the numbers on minerals and the work on the U.S. critical minerals list
USGS is the science agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior. It runs no mines or plants, and it does not regulate. For functional materials, its role is to publish the annual Mineral Commodity Summaries and to do the analytical work behind the critical minerals list that U.S. law requires. The list itself is designated by the Secretary of the Interior, and USGS works in the Secretary’s name. This profile looks at one question only: how much influence USGS really has over functional materials.
What this article covers
- USGS in 30 seconds
- What kind of body it is: the four types of influence
- What it does for functional materials
- How far its influence reaches (powers and geography)
- Organisations connected to USGS’s work
- Outlook
- Glossary, references and claim-to-source audit
1. USGS in 30 seconds
FULL NAMEU.S. Geological SurveyThe science agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior
COUNTRYUnited StatesA federal agency. The National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) is based in Reston, Virginia
TYPE OF BODYFederal science agencyNot a regulator and not a permitting authority; those roles sit with other federal agencies
ESTABLISHED1879By an act of Congress
STAFF6,776Employees expected on board before a shutdown, per the September 2025 contingency plan
BUDGETUSD 891.6 million (FY2026 request)For the surveys, investigations and research account. The 2024 actual was USD 1,455.4 million. We could not find the enacted figure
ROLE IN FUNCTIONAL MATERIALSMineral statistics and the critical minerals listProduction, consumption and trade figures, plus the analytical work behind the list
WHO IT REACHESU.S. government decisions; a global referenceIts statistics include world production. It has no binding legal force
The one thing to grasp first
USGS is the body that produces numbers and assessments, not the one that sets rules or prices. The critical minerals list is made under Section 7002 of the Energy Act of 2020 (Public Law 116-260). The Federal Register notice says the list was presented by “the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey” Sourced. The final 2025 list (published 7 November 2025) has 60 minerals. In addition to what USGS’s method recommended, input from other agencies and from public comments led to arsenic, boron, metallurgical coal, phosphate, tellurium and uranium being included Sourced. In practice, then, the final decision rests with the Secretary of the Interior, and USGS’s method alone does not settle it.
2. What kind of body it is: the four types of influence
Unlike the companies in this series, the institutions that appear in functional-materials coverage do not make materials themselves. What separates them is the route by which they influence the industry, and that gives four types.
3. What it does for functional materials
USGS’s work touching functional materials falls into three strands Sourced.
| Strand | Basis and timing | Content | Who does it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mineral statistics Mineral Commodity Summaries (MCS) | Published annually. The 2026 edition was first posted on 6 February 2026 and revised on 27 May 2026 (version 1.3, 222 pages) | Two-page summaries of more than 90 minerals and materials: domestic industry structure, tariffs, five-year salient statistics, and world production, reserves and resources. For example, the U.S. net import reliance for rare earth compounds and metals was 67% in 2025 (an estimate), against 53% in 2024 and above 95% in 2021 and 2022. China (including Hong Kong) supplied 71% of imports in 2021-2024 | The National Minerals Information Center (NMIC) |
| The critical minerals list | Energy Act of 2020, Section 7002. The final 2025 list was published on 7 November 2025 (90 FR 50494). The draft came out on 26 August 2025 with 54 minerals, and 163 public comments followed | The list ranks minerals by the effect a supply disruption would have on the U.S. economy and security. The 2025 list has 60 minerals (the 2022 list had 50). The method is a model of more than 1,200 disruption scenarios for 84 mineral commodities and their effects on 402 industries | Designated by the Secretary of the Interior; USGS prepares the method, analysis and notices |
| Resource surveys and mapping | The Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) and related work, per the Interior Department’s FY2026 budget justification | Nationwide airborne geophysics, geologic maps and geochemical data, plus national assessments of critical minerals (graphite and lithium, and deposit types hosting nickel, cobalt and platinum-group elements) and work on recovery from mine waste. The Mineral Resources Program had USD 68.73 million in 2024 (actual); the FY2026 request is USD 69.90 million | The Mineral Resources Program, with state geological surveys |
A materials engineer’s view: the list is a guide to what matters in the U.S., not a design rule
The MCS also gives a short note on what each element is used for. For example, gallium is listed for integrated circuits and optical devices; germanium for fiber optics, night-vision devices and semiconductors; indium for flat-panel displays and touchscreens; and dysprosium, among others, for permanent magnets Sourced. The U.S. list includes indium, but Annex II of the EU Critical Raw Materials Act does not. So lists differ by country and region, and the same material can count as “critical” for different reasons and to a different extent. When our explainers on transparent conductive films and magnets discuss the supply of particular elements, it matters which country’s list one has in mind. Being on a list does not decide whether any particular material or product is better or worse.
4. How far its influence reaches (powers and geography)
| Aspect | What USGS has | What it does not have |
|---|---|---|
| Powers | The power and the practical job of collecting and publishing mineral statistics. It builds the method for the critical minerals list, analyses the data, and publishes the draft and final lists (legally, in the Secretary of the Interior’s name). It does resource surveys and mapping | Power to regulate, to grant permits or to set prices: USGS describes itself as the scientific arm of the Department of the Interior. The final designation of the list (the Secretary of the Interior). Statistics on metallurgical coal and uranium (USGS does not collect data on these two) |
| Geography | The U.S. federal government is its most direct user. The MCS carries world production and reserves, and the budget justification says state agencies, private firms, market analysts and foreign trade partners also rely on its data. The Minerals Yearbook also covers more than 180 countries and localities outside the United States | Power over other countries’ lists or rules. Permits for mines in the United States (federal land managers and others decide; USGS supplies scientific information) |
| Time horizon | The MCS is updated every year. The law requires the list to be updated at least every three years | A guarantee of when the list is next updated. We could not find the date of the next update |
| Scale | 6,776 staff (September 2025). The FY2026 request is USD 891.6 million (all fields). The budget justification says NMIC answers more than 2,000 inquiries a month | No figure is published for functional materials alone. The whole Mineral Resources Program has a FY2026 request of USD 69.9 million |
How to read the numbers
Many of the MCS figures for 2025 are estimates (“e”), and some items are withheld (“W”) to protect company data or not available (“NA”) Sourced. The 60 minerals also include phosphate and potash (fertilizer ingredients), metallurgical coal and uranium, so the number of minerals on the list is not the number of elements relevant to functional materials. A full picture of how the list is used in U.S. companies’ sourcing and in policy is something we could not find in USGS’s materials Not yet confirmed.
5. Organisations connected to USGS’s work
This section shows only “who does what” as stated in primary sources. We could not confirm, from USGS materials, a direct relationship with any company profiled in this series.
| Organisation | Role (as stated in primary sources) | Link to this series |
|---|---|---|
| Secretary of the Interior (Department of the Interior) | Designates the critical minerals list. After interagency consultation and public comment, added minerals to the final list | USGS’s parent department and the final decision-maker on the list |
| U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and others | Consulted on the list. DOE recommended adding metallurgical coal and uranium; the Department of Agriculture recommended phosphate; the Department of War (the notice’s wording) pointed to the importance of arsenic and tellurium | See our DOE profile. DOE funds research; it does not designate the list |
| State geological surveys | Partner with USGS in Earth MRI to build nationwide maps and geophysical data | Partners in resource surveys |
| DARPA and ARPA-E | Joint work on AI and machine-learning mineral resource assessment (CriticalMAAS), which ended in FY2025 | For ARPA-E, see our DOE profile |
| European Commission | The EU’s list of critical raw materials rests on a separate legal framework (Regulation (EU) 2024/1252), with different criteria and counts (17 strategic and 34 critical raw materials) | See our European Commission profile. We found no statement in USGS materials about coordination with the EU |
6. Outlook
| What can be read from the sources | Primary evidence | Type |
|---|---|---|
| We could not find when the critical minerals list will next be updated. The law requires an update at least every three years, but the notice’s abstract also reads as “not less than biannually” | Federal Register, 90 FR 50494 (the abstract and the body) | Not yet confirmed |
| The FY2026 request cuts the whole budget to about 60% of the 2024 actual (USD 891.6 million against USD 1,455.4 million; our calculation), while the Mineral Resources Program stays roughly flat. We could not find the enacted amount | The Interior Department’s FY2026 USGS budget justification (request of USD 891.6 million; Mineral Resources Program USD 69.9 million) | Not yet confirmed |
| A new MCS edition will appear in early 2027, as in past years | The 2026 edition was first posted on 6 February 2026, and the MCS is stated to be annual. We could not find a schedule for 2027 | Inference |
| With the list widened from 50 to 60 and now including fertilizer ingredients, coal and uranium, the MCS tables of net import reliance and import sources by mineral are likely to be more useful for materials decisions than whether a mineral is on the list | The 60 minerals of the final 2025 list, and Table 7 of MCS 2026 (net import reliance and import sources by mineral) | Inference |
7. Glossary
- Mineral Commodity Summaries (MCS)
- USGS’s annual overview of production, consumption, trade and reserves for more than 90 minerals and materials.
- NMIC
- The National Minerals Information Center, the USGS unit that prepares the MCS.
- Critical mineral (U.S.)
- A mineral whose supply disruption would threaten the U.S. economy or security, under the Energy Act of 2020’s definition. The Secretary of the Interior designates it on the list.
- Net import reliance
- The share of apparent consumption that relies on imports. An indicator given in each MCS chapter.
- Earth MRI
- The Earth Mapping Resources Initiative, which builds nationwide geologic maps and geophysical data to study critical mineral resources.
- Byproduct
- A mineral recovered in the course of mining or refining another one. The budget justification says more than half of the 50 minerals on the 2022 list are mainly byproducts.
8. References
- USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2026, publication record (first posted 6 February 2026; revised 27 May 2026; version 1.3; 222 pages; more than 90 minerals and materials). https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/mcs2026
- USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2026 (full PDF: foreword, U.S. Critical Minerals Update, Tables 6 and 7, description of the Minerals Yearbook). https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2026/mcs2026.pdf
- USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2026, “Rare Earths” chapter (net import reliance and import sources). https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2026/mcs2026-rare-earths.pdf
- Federal Register Final 2025 List of Critical Minerals (90 FR 50494, 7 November 2025: 60 minerals, draft of 54, 163 public comments, consultation, scale of the method). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/07/2025-19813/final-2025-list-of-critical-minerals
- U.S. Department of the Interior USGS Budget Justifications, Fiscal Year 2026 (established 1879, mission, FY2026 request, Mineral Resources Program, NMIC inquiries, Earth MRI, work with DARPA and ARPA-E). https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-11/usgs-2026-greenbook508.pdf
- U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Contingency Plan (September 2025: 6,776 employees expected on board before a shutdown). https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-09/doi-usgs-contingency-plan2025930508.pdf
- EUR-Lex Regulation (EU) 2024/1252, Annexes I and II (confirming that indium is not on the EU lists). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1252/oj/eng
9. Claim-to-source audit
| Claim in the article | Type | Source |
|---|---|---|
| USGS is the science agency of the Interior Department, established in 1879; its mission statement | Sourced | Reference 5 https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-11/usgs-2026-greenbook508.pdf |
| 6,776 staff (expected on board before a shutdown, September 2025 contingency plan) | Sourced | Reference 6 https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-09/doi-usgs-contingency-plan2025930508.pdf |
| FY2026 request of USD 891.6 million; 2024 actual of USD 1,455.4 million; Mineral Resources Program amounts (USD 68.73 million and USD 69.90 million); NMIC answers over 2,000 inquiries a month | Sourced | Reference 5 https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-11/usgs-2026-greenbook508.pdf |
| MCS 2026 publication facts (first posted 6 February 2026; revised 27 May 2026; version 1.3; 222 pages; over 90 minerals and materials) | Sourced | Reference 1 https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/mcs2026 |
| What the MCS contains; the Minerals Yearbook covering over 180 countries; the applications in Table 6; the statistics in Table 7; no data collected for metallurgical coal and uranium | Sourced | Reference 2 https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2026/mcs2026.pdf |
| Rare earth net import reliance of 67% (2025 estimate), 53% (2024) and above 95% (2021-2022); China (including Hong Kong) at 71% of imports | Sourced | Reference 3 https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2026/mcs2026-rare-earths.pdf |
| The critical minerals list: Energy Act Section 7002; published 7 November 2025; 60 minerals; the draft of 54 minerals on 26 August 2025; 163 comments; designated by the Interior Secretary; agencies consulted; minerals added | Sourced | Reference 4 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/07/2025-19813/final-2025-list-of-critical-minerals |
| The scale of the list method (84 minerals, over 1,200 scenarios, 402 industries); the update interval of at least three years; the abstract’s wording “biannually” | Sourced | Reference 4 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/07/2025-19813/final-2025-list-of-critical-minerals |
| The 2022 list had 50 minerals and the 2025 list has 60 | Sourced | Reference 4 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/11/07/2025-19813/final-2025-list-of-critical-minerals Reference 2 https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2026/mcs2026.pdf |
| Indium is absent from the EU lists; the EU has 17 strategic and 34 critical raw materials | Sourced | Reference 7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1252/oj/eng |
| Earth MRI; resource assessments; mine waste; joint work with DARPA and ARPA-E; partnership with state geological surveys | Sourced | Reference 5 https://www.doi.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025-11/usgs-2026-greenbook508.pdf |
| Whether USGS has any power to regulate, permit or set prices (none is stated in the sources) | Not yet confirmed | Not found in References 1-6. This article does not infer any |
| How the list is used in U.S. companies’ sourcing and in policy overall | Not yet confirmed | Not given in References 1-6. This article does not estimate it |
| The date of the next list update; the enacted FY2026 budget | Not yet confirmed | Not given in References 4 or 5 (the request only). This article does not infer them |
| The four-type classification | Our calculation | Our own classification |
| The ratio of the FY2026 request to the 2024 actual (about 60%) | Our calculation | Our calculation from the figures in Reference 5 |
| A direct relationship between USGS materials and companies profiled in this series | Not yet confirmed | Not found in References 1-6. This article does not infer any |
| The two inferences in Section 6 (a new MCS in early 2027; MCS tables more useful than list membership) | Inference | Our own interpretation of References 1, 2 and 4 |
Last updated: 10 October 2026 / Troy Technical
The figures in this article come from USGS’s Mineral Commodity Summaries 2026, the Federal Register and the Interior Department’s budget justification and contingency plan. Passages marked “Inference” are our own interpretation of the primary sources.