Seabed Mining in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Issues for Congress
Changes from April 25, 2025 to July 15, 2025
This page shows textual changes in the document between the two versions indicated in the dates above. Textual matter removed in the later version is indicated with red strikethrough and textual matter added in the later version is indicated with blue.
Seabed Mining in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Issues for Congress
Contents
- Introduction
- Background on Seabed Mining
- Proposed Seabed Mining Operations
Regulations for Deep-Seabed Mining in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction- United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1994 Agreement
- International Seabed Authority
- The London Convention
- Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act and Other Applicable U.S. Laws
- Potential Marine Environmental Impacts of Seabed Mining
- Issues for Congress
- U.S. Importation of Land-Based Minerals and Seabed Mining Exploration Efforts by Selected Foreign Governments
U.S. Ratification ofExploration Licenses Issued Under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act- Pending Applications to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea- Deep-Seabed Mining Activities in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction
- International Seabed Authority Decisionmaking
- U.S. Federal Research to Study Seabed Mining Impacts and Associated Mining Technologies
- Potential Marine Environmental Impacts of Seabed Mining
- Biodiversity Loss and Habitat Disturbance
- Resuspended Sediment and Buried Carbon
- Noise Pollution
- Concerns Associated with Ship Activity
- Processing of Seabed Mineral Resources in the United States
- Issues for Congress
Figures
- Figure 1. Illustration of High Seas and Exclusive Economic Zone Boundaries
- Figure 2. Proposed Machinery and Technology for Collecting Seabed Minerals
Figure 3. Clarion-Clipperton
Clarion-Clipperton FractureZone (CCZ) - Figure
3. Proposed Machinery and Technology for Collecting Seabed Minerals4. Locations of China's Five Exploration Contracts
Tables
- Table 1. Types of
CommonSeabed Mineral Depositsand Proposed Mining Methodsin Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction
Summary
On April 24, 2025, as part of a broader national effort to secure reliable supplies for critical minerals, the Trump Administration issued Executive Order (E.O.) 14285, "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources," making it a policy of the United States to advance U.S. leadership in seabed mineral development. Some scientists estimate that certain mineral deposits, including those containing critical minerals, are more abundant on the seafloor than on land. This estimateSuch estimates, coupled with the demand for critical minerals for rapid deployment of energy transition technologies, hasnational security purposes, have increased interest in the recovery of minerals from areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). Minerals may be extracted through seabed mining, a process that involves recovering minerals from the seafloor. Although some entities hold contracts to explore the seafloor for potential commercial recovery, deep-seabed mining (i.e., mining activities taking place at water depths greater than 200 meters) in ABNJ has yet to occur. On April 24, 2025, as part of a broader national effort to secure reliable supplies for critical minerals, the Trump Administration issued an executive order titled "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources." The potential of seabed mining in ABNJ raises several issues for Congress given the United States' demand for critical minerals and concerns about potential environmental impacts.
International and U.S. Context for Seabed Mining in ABNJ
The International Seabed Authority (ISA), established under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), is an autonomous organization that regulates parties to UNCLOS conducting mineral-related activities in ABNJ. The ISA can issue contracts for exploration and exploitation ofhas issued 31 exploration contracts for seabed mineral resources to parties to UNCLOS. The ISA has yet to adopt a regulatory regime for extraction of seabed minerals and therefore has not issued exploitation contracts. In 2021, the Republic of Nauru, a small island country northeast of AustraliaPacific Island country, notified the ISA of its sponsorship of Nauru Ocean Resources (a subsidiary of The Metals Company [TMC], a Canadian firm) and its intention to recover minerals from an ABNJ in the Pacific Ocean. Nauru's action triggered a provision within UNCLOS that required the ISA to establish by summer 2023 a mining code that would allow for deep-seabed mining. At the close of the ISA's March 2025 session, the ISAit had not finalized its mining code.
The United States has not ratified UNCLOS and therefore cannot sponsor companies seeking ISA contracts. However, the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA; P.L. 96-283), signed into lawenacted in 1980 prior to the establishment of the ISA, authorized the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to regulate deep-seabed mining activities (exploration and commercial recovery) of U.S. citizens in ABNJ. To date, NOAA hasNOAA has used this authority and issued licenses to U.S.-based companies to explore the seafloor in ABNJ; it has not received applications for commercial recovery permits. Following the issuance of E.O. 14285, which directed NOAA to "expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits" in ABNJ, TMC USA LLC (a subsidiary of TMC) applied for two exploration licenses and one commercial recovery permit under DSHMRA.
Issues for Congress
Sourcing minerals from the deep sea may limitcould reduce U.S. dependency on importing land-based minerals and reduce potential supply disruptions. Unless the United States either ratifies, including critical mineral supplies controlled by the People's Republic of China. The U.S. Senate could ratify UNCLOS, which would allow itU.S. companies to seek ISA contracts, or the United States could unilaterally authorizes deep-seabed mining under DSHMRA, U.S. companies may not have a clear U.S. avenue to pursue seabed mining activities in ABNJ. The Trump Administration has taken steps to pursue seabed mineral resources, including in ABNJ. The "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources" executive order directs NOAA to "expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits" in ABNJ under DSHMRAauthorize deep-seabed mining in ABNJ under DSHMRA. H.R. 3803 and H.R. 4018 in the 119th Congress would codify and/or adapt E.O. 14285, which would include (1) directing NOAA to expedite the review and issuance of seabed mining applications and (2) requiring certain federal entities to provide a report about U.S. seabed mineral processing capacity and directing other federal entities to support domestic processing capabilities for such resources. Congress may consider any potential geopolitical consequences of NOAA issuing commercial recovery permits outside of the ISA framework, particularly because, at present, parties to UNCLOS may not be able to proceed with exploitation activities in the absence of an ISA regulatory regime.
Some Members of Congress have expressed concerns about deep-sea habitat disturbance and biodiversity loss associated with seabed mining activities. In the 119th Congress, H.R. 664 would authorize NOAA to "conduct a comprehensive study of the environmental impacts of mining activities on the deep seabed" and would prohibit NOAA from issuing exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits. Another bill in the 119th Congress, H.R. 663, would instruct the President to direct U.S. representatives of relevant international organizations to call for a moratorium on deep-seabed mining until "regulations have been promulgated by the [ISA]" that effectively protect the marine environment from harmful effectsthe ISA framework.
The April 24, 2025, executive order also made it the policy of the United States to "support allies and partners interested in developing seabed minerals responsibly in areas within their national jurisdictions," among other U.S. policies. In the 118th Congress, some Members of Congress considered legislation related to sourcing seabed minerals from allied countries and developing infrastructure to process and refine those minerals domestically. In the 119th Congress, S. 429 would attempt to diversify U.S. critical mineral supply chains through partnerships with countries that hold certain trade agreements with the United States.
Concerns associated with seabed mining include habitat disturbance and biodiversity loss. Congress may seek to improve understanding of the potential environmental impacts associated with seabed mining. In the 119th Congress, H.R. 664 would authorize NOAA to "conduct a comprehensive study of the environmental impacts of mining activities on the deep seabed." H.R. 663 would direct the President to place a moratorium on deep-seabed mining.
Introduction
Interest in mining the seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) for deposits that contain valuable minerals, such as critical minerals, has grown in recent years for a few reasons.1 First, increased resourcesinvestment and improved technologies dedicated to the exploration and mapping of the deep sea have advanced knowledge of seafloor deposits that contain minerals of interest.2 Second, the development of technologies for systems to collect seabed minerals from the deep ocean and deliver them to ships or surface-based mining platforms has made mining the seafloor more technologically possible and potentially economically feasible.3 Third, some seabed deposits could present an alternative source of some minerals used in energy transition technologies that otherwise may rely onof some minerals could present an alternative to, and reduce reliance on, terrestrial minerals sourced and/or processed in certain countries of concern, such as the People's Republic of China (PRC, or China).4 On April 24, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titledExecutive Order (E.O.) 14285, "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources," which made it thea priority of the United States to "rapidly develop ... domestic capabilities for the exploration, characterization, collection, and processing of seabed mineral resources."5
Different types of energy transition technologies rely on elements found in both terrestrial deposits and seafloor deposits (e.g., cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel).6 Some scientists estimate these minerals of interest are more abundant in seafloor deposits than in land deposits.7 For example, some batteries—including those that power electric vehicles—commonly use nickel, cobalt, and manganeseFor example, some batteries—including those that power electric vehicles—commonly use nickel, cobalt, and manganese.7 According to some scientific estimates, these minerals of interest are more abundant in seafloor deposits than in land deposits.8 Critical minerals used in the magnets of wind turbines, the motors of electric vehicles, and stationary energy storage also occur in seafloor deposits.
This report focuses on deep-seabed mining activities that could take place in ABNJ (Figure 1).9 The report outlines the history of international agreements that establish guidelines and standards for deep-seabed mining activities and provide protection to the marine environment in ABNJ. It also outlines domestic regulations for U.S. interests in pursuing seabed-mining activities in ABNJ as well as the potential geopolitical consequences of the United States operating outside the international framework for seabed mining. The report then examines. The report then discusses potential seabed mining impacts to ocean ecosystems and discusses calls for a moratorium on deep-seabed mining over environmental concerns. Finally, the. Finally, this report discusses issues for Congress, including U.S. participation in international agreements regarding deep-seabed mining, possible tradeoffs aboutbetween domestic versus- and foreign -supplied minerals, and the potential for domestic processing of seabed minerals to bolster U.S. critical mineral supply chains, research to improve knowledge of environmental baseline data for deep-sea habitats, and calls for a moratorium on deep-seabed mining. For information about seabed mining activities within U.S. waters, see CRS Report R48302, Critical Minerals on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf: The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's Role and Issues for Congress, by Caitlin Keating-Bitonti and Laura B. Comay.
Background on Seabed Mining
Seabed mining is a process of extracting sediment and mineral resources from the seafloor. In general, water depths less than 200 meters occur within nations' exclusive economic zones (EEZs), to which a coastal nation may claim sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting the natural resources of its continental shelf.10 Seabed mining activities occurring within a nation's EEZ are regulated by that nation's domestic law.11 In the United States, the seaward boundary of coastal states is generally three nautical miles offshore,12 and certain states and territories prohibit seabed mining within their waters (e.g., American Samoa, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington).13 An emerging subset of seabed mining is deep-seabed mining, or deep-sea mining, which occurs at water depths of 200 meters or greater.14 Water depths greater than 200 meters generally occur in areas beyond the EEZ. This report focuses on seabed minerals found beyond the outer continental shelf in ABNJ.
Deep-seabed mining was first explored in the 1960s, with commercial test mining for metal-rich nodules on the seabed starting in the 1970s.15 In 1994, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) was created under the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as an autonomous organization to regulate and control deep-seabed mining activities taking place in ABNJ.16 The ISA can issue exploration and exploitation (i.e., commercial recovery) contracts for three types of deep-seabed mineral deposits (Table 1).17 The technologies and machinery to extract raw seabed material vary depending on the type of mineral deposit (Table 1).18 Once the seabed material is extracted, it would be transported to land for mineral processing.
Type of Seabed Mineral Deposit Marine Deposit Type |
Deposit Description |
Minerals |
Occurrences |
Proposed Mining Method | ||
|
Polymetallic Nodules |
Precipitate as concentric thin layers around small, hard fragments (e.g., shark tooth) that have settled onto the seafloor. Over millions of years, the layers can accumulate to form potato-shaped rocks that range in size from 2 to 20 centimeters. |
Polymetallic Nodules Potato-shaped rocks composed of concentric layers that form over millions of years as minerals from the seawater and sediment pore water accrete around a hard nucleus (e.g., shark tooth, whale ear bone, rock fragment) lying on the deep seafloor. |
Abyssal plains, such as the Clarion-Clipperton |
Remotely operated collector vehicle fitted with caterpillar-like tracks that uses a water stream aimed at nodules laying on the seafloor to create a pressure drop and suction effect to lift sediment with nodules into a collector system; autonomous underwater vehicle that hovers over the seafloor and uses robotic arms with a vision system to pick individual nodules from the seafloor. |
||
|
Polymetallic Sulfides or Seafloor Massive Sulfide |
Precipitate from hydrothermal fluids at hydrothermal vent sites, typically along seafloor spreading ridges. |
Polymetallic Sulfides or Seafloor Massive Sulfide Mineral accumulations that form from hot waters emitted at seafloor spreading ridges and areas of undersea volcanic activity. |
Mid-Atlantic Ridge, Red Sea, East Pacific Rise, Galapagos Rift, and Juan de Fuca and Gorda Ridges (located off the Pacific Northwest coast of North America). |
Remotely operated mining machine that cuts and/or drills into the hard substrate of the hydrothermal vent chimney to extract internal minerals. | ||
|
Ferromanganese Crusts or Cobalt-rich Crusts |
Ferromanganese Crusts or Cobalt-rich Crusts |
Cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel, |
All ocean basins. Also occur at shallower depths within countries' exclusive economic zones. |
Remotely operated mining machine that scrapes across the surfaces of geologic features to remove surficial mineral crusts. |
Notes: REEs = rare earth elements. Critical minerals as determined by the USGS are bolded. Of the minerals listed in the table, the Department of Energy's Final 2023 Critical Materials List includes cobalt, copper, gallium, lithium, magnesium, nickel, and platinum as critical materials for energy. The three types of marine deposits in the table are of commercial interest. The list of minerals is not exhaustive and includes common minerals of commercial interest. Minerals may not all occur simultaneously in an ocean deposit, and the quality and quantity of minerals within a deposit may vary geographically across the global ocean.
Sources: Allseas, "Hidden Gem," https://allseas.com/equipment/hidden-gem/;
Sources: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, "National Offshore Critical Minerals Inventory: Types of Relevant Marine Mineral Deposits," https://www.boem.gov/marine-minerals/offshore-critical-mineral-resources; Impossible Metals, Inc., "Robotic Collection System," https://impossiblemetals.com/technology/robotic-collection-system/critical-minerals/types-relevant-marine-mineral-deposits; Department of Energy, "Notice of Final Determination on 2023 DOE Critical Materials List," 88 Federal Register 51792, August 4, 2023; International Seabed Authority (ISA), "Minerals: Polymetallic Nodules," https://www.isa.org.jm/exploration-contracts/polymetallic-nodules; ISA, "Minerals: Polymetallic Sulphides," https://www.isa.org.jm/index.php/exploration-contracts/polymetallic-sulphides; ISA, "Minerals: Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts," https://www.isa.org.jm/index.php/exploration-contracts/cobalt-rich-ferromanganese; and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), "2022 Final List of Critical Minerals," 87 Federal Register 10381, February 24, 2022.
; The Metals Company, "Nodules," https://metals.co/nodules/; and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), "2022 Final List of Critical Minerals," 87 Federal Register 10381, February 24, 2022.
Notes: REEs = rare earth elements. Critical minerals as determined by the USGS are bolded. These three types of seabed mineral deposits are of commercial interest. The list of minerals is not exhaustive and includes common minerals of commercial interest. Minerals may not all occur simultaneously in an ocean deposit and the quality and quantity of minerals within a deposit may vary geographically across the global ocean.
Regulations for Deep-Seabed Mining in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction
Several international bodies and agreements address deep-seabed mining activities that could occur in ABNJ. Some of these regulate international exploration and exploitation of seabed minerals or provide guidance to prevent harm to the marine environment. The following sections describe the international bodies and agreements that regulate deep-seabed mining in ABNJ, as well as relevant U.S. domestic laws.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1994 Agreement
Notes: Proposed seabed mining machinery, with associated vessels, for polymetallic sulfides deposits at hydrothermal vents and ferromanganese crusts at seamounts, as well as machinery and technologies proposed to collect polymetallic nodules from the deep-sea abyssal plain. Depths depicted in meters refer to the typical depth at which these seafloor features (and potential mineral deposits) are located below the surface of the ocean. For illustrative purposes only, not to scale. For polymetallic nodules, remotely operated collector vehicles fitted with caterpillar-like tracks use a water stream aimed at nodules laying on the seafloor to create a pressure drop and a suction effect to lift sediment with nodules into a collector system.19 Some companies have proposed using sonar technology on the collector vehicles to identify the location of nodules.20 As a vehicle moved across the seafloor, a diffusor at the rear of the vehicle would emit seafloor sediment back into the environment, forming a sediment plume (i.e., resuspended sediment).21 The slurry (i.e., mix of water, sediment, and nodules) would be transported via a riser pump to a PSV.22 At the ocean surface, nodules would be separated and the sediment and water mix would be returned to the ocean at an unspecified water depth via a return pipe,23 creating a sediment plume at the discharged depth.24 One company has proposed an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) that would hover over the seafloor and use robotic arms with a vision system to pick individual nodules from the seafloor.25 Once the AUV was full, it would return to the support vessel to offload nodules and have its battery recharged. For polymetallic sulfides (or seafloor massive sulfide) deposits at hydrothermal vents, some companies have proposed remotely operated mining machines to cut and drill into the hydrothermal vent chimney to crush and extract internal minerals.26 For ferromanganese crusts (or cobalt-rich crusts) at seamounts, remotely operated mining machines have been proposed to scrape across the surfaces of the seamount (or other geologic features) to remove surficial mineral crusts.27 The mining processes for both polymetallic sulfides and ferromanganese crusts would create a slurry (i.e., mix of water and crushed material), which would be transported via a riser pump to a PSV.28 At the ocean surface, the fine crushed material would be separated from the water.29 The water and discarded material would be returned to the ocean at an unspecified water depth via a return pipe, creating a sediment plume at the discharged depth.30 In addition, some companies propose lifting large whole rock material in buckets to a PSV.31 Certain federal agencies have supported research and development of seabed mining technologies. For example, the Department of Energy's (DOE's) Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), authorized by P.L. 110-69 (commonly known as the America COMPETES Act), has supported transformational energy technology research projects. In the past, ARPA-E has funded several projects related to seabed mining, including the design and development of technologies for seabed mineral collection and monitoring systems to assess sediment disturbance associated with seabed mining.32 In the DOE's FY2026 budget request, the Administration is requesting $200 million for ARPA-E, a reduction of $260 million (-56.5%) from FY2025 levels.33 According to the request, this level of funding would provide "a fiscally responsible level for high risk, high reward research advancing reliable energy technologies and other critical and emerging technologies."34In 1982, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) established a framework governing activities on, over, and under the world's ocean. A recurring theme throughout UNCLOS is the "protection and preservation of the marine environment."19.
Necessary measures shall be taken in accordance with this Convention with respect to activities in the Area to ensure effective protection for the marine environment from harmful effects which may arise from such activities. To this end the Authority shall adopt appropriate rules, regulations and procedures for inter alia:
(a) the prevention, reduction and control of pollution and other hazards to the marine environment, including the coastline, and of interference with the ecological balance of the marine environment, particular attention being paid to the need for protection from harmful effects of such activities as drilling, dredging, excavation, disposal of waste, construction and operation or maintenance of installations, pipelines and other devices related to such activities;
(b) the protection and conservation of the natural resources of the Area and the prevention of damage to the flora and fauna of the marine environment.
In 1982, the United States and some other industrialized countries did not sign the convention or announced they could not ratify it without important changes to Part XI of UNCLOS, which deals with deep-seabed resources in ABNJ.2036 UNCLOS refers to resources recovered from ABNJ as minerals, which includes all solid, liquid, or gaseous mineral resources as well as polymetallic nodules at or beneath the seabed.2137 UNCLOS also considers minerals collected from ABNJ as the common heritage of mankind, meaning seabed resources are available for everyone's use and benefit, including Small Island Developing States, Landlocked Developing Countries, and Least Developed Countries.2238 The Reagan Administration was not comfortable with some of these seabed mining provisions.23
In 1994, the UNUnited Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution opening the Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (the 1994 Agreement), which amended UNCLOS Part XI by removing many of the provisions objectionable to industrialized nations.2440 Following the adoption of the 1994 Agreement, UNCLOS entered into force. In October 1994, President Clinton submitted UNCLOS and the 1994 Agreement as a package to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification. To date, the Senate has not ratified UNCLOS or the 1994 Agreement, butwhich are to be applied and interpreted together as a single treaty.41 Some members of the executive branch have stated that some (but not all) portionsprovisions of UNCLOS reflect customary international law, except for the seabed mining provisions.42 Some stakeholders have argued that U.S. practice with regard to seabed activities has been consistent with customary international law, such as signing the 1994 Agreement and engaging with the ISA as an observer since 1998.43 of UNCLOS reflect customary international law.25 For example, Presidential Proclamation 5030 established the EEZ of the United States in accordance with UNCLOS and "assert[ed] the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the United States in its EEZ and confirm[ed] the rights and freedoms of all states, as provided under international law."26
International Seabed Authority
UNCLOS established the ISA, an autonomous organization that regulates and controls mineral-related activities in ABNJ for parties to UNCLOS.2744 According to the ISA, it has a "mandate to ensure the effective protection of the marine environment from harmful effects that may arise from deep-seabed-related activities."2845 Deep-seabed activities include exploration of the seabed and exploitation of seabed mineral resources. Parties to UNCLOS are ipso facto members of the ISA.2946 As a UNUnited Nations member nation, the United States has an observer delegate status at the ISA.30
As of April 25,June 2025, the ISA had issued 31 exploration contracts to public and private mining enterprises for seabed mineral resources.31 The ISA has never rejected an application for an exploration contract.3248 The ISA has issued 17 exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ; Figure 23).3349 The CCZ is estimated to contain more copper, cobalt, nickel, and manganese than all known land deposits combined.34 Because the United States is not a party to UNCLOS, the United States cannot sponsor companies interested in seeking ISA contracts for exploration or exploitation of seabed mineral resources through the ISA framework. Under domestic law, the United States has authorized exploration licenses to U.S.-based companies in the CCZ (see "Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act and Other Applicable U.S. Laws," below).35
|
Source: Map created by CRS using International Seabed Authority (ISA), "Maps," https://www.isa.org.jm/exploration-contracts/maps/; and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Deep Sea Mining: A Report to Congress, 1995, p. 6; and ESRI. Notes: APEI = Areas of Particular Environmental Interest, which refers to no-mining zones as designated by the ISA to protect the full range of biodiversity and habitats; DSHMRA = Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (30 U.S.C. §§1441 et seq.); and UK = United Kingdom. Most commercial interest in deep-seabed mining focuses on the CCZ. The CCZ is approximately 1.7 million square miles (up to 3.4 miles beneath the ocean's surface), spanning an area as wide as the continental United States on the Pacific seafloor. Since 2001, ISA has awarded 17 exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules in the CCZ. In addition to APEIs, the ISA also designates reserved areas to ensure developing countries have access to mineral resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction. NOAA issued two exploration licenses in the CCZ in 1984 that have been extended through June 2027 pursuant to DSHMRA. For more information about ISA exploration contracts and U.S. exploration licenses issued by the NOAA pursuant to DSHMRA in the CCZ and the duration of these contracts and U.S. licenses, see CRS Infographic IG10053, Seabed Mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, by Caitlin Keating-Bitonti, Corrie E. Clark, and Emma Kaboli. |
Because the United States is not a party to UNCLOS, the United States cannot sponsor companies interested in seeking ISA contracts for exploration or exploitation of seabed mineral resources through the ISA framework. Under domestic law, however, the United States has authorized exploration licenses to U.S.-based companies in the CCZ (see "Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act and Other Applicable U.S. Laws," below).3651 In 2014, the ISA began to draft standards and guidelines for exploitation of seabed minerals in ABNJ and initially set a self-imposed deadline of 2020 for the release of its "Mining Code," which was delayed due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic.37
In 2021, the Republic of Nauru, a small island country located northeast of Australia in the Pacific OceanPacific Island country, notified the ISA of its sponsorship of Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI; a subsidiary of The Metals Company [TMC], a Canadian firm) and its intention to mine the CCZ by early 2026.3853 The Republic of Nauru claimed its efforts to mine the seabed would support the global transition to clean energy technologies and would help reduce carbon emissions.3954
The Republic of Nauru's application triggered a legal provision within UNCLOS that compels the ISA to establish standards and guidelines for mining deep-sea resources while minimizing environmental risks.4055 According to the provision, commonly referred to as the two-year rule, the ISA must finalize its deep-seabed mining regulations within two years (i.e., by summer 2023).4156 The ISA did not meet this two-year deadline and pushed the deadline to 2025.4257 Outstanding matters to be considered within the ISA's regulations for exploitation of seabed minerals could include the following, for example:
- Threshold of environmental harm to apply when assessing applications, including knowledge of environmental baseline data
- Processes relating to the preparation and evaluation of environmental plans
- Monitoring programs
- Environmental performance guarantees
- Environmental compensation fund
- Adjacent coastal states and transboundary harm
43
58On January 1, 2025, Leticia Carvalho began her four-year term as Secretary-General of the ISA, replacing Michael Lodge, who had held the position since 2017.4459 Carvalho has been reported as saying commercial-scale deep-seabed mining should not start until environmental regulations are finalized.4560 However, ISA Council decisions provide that if an ISA exploitation application is submitted before the exploitation regulations have been adopted, the council will consider the process for reaching a decision on such an application at its next meeting.46 TMC 61 TMC had previously announced that NORI and the Republic of Nauru intend towould submit their ISA exploitation application onby June 27, 2025, but they did not submit an application to ISA by that date.62 In a March 2025 statement, TMC asserted that "the ISA has neither the Mining Code nor the willingness to engage with their commercial contractors," signaling a shift in the company's priority away from pursuing ISA seabed mining options toward those under the U.S. framework for seabed mining in ABNJ (discussed in the following section).63 June 27, 2025.47
The London Convention
The principal international agreements that address marine pollution are the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, known as the London Convention,48 and the 1996 Protocol to the London Convention, known as the London Protocol.49 The United States is a party to the London Convention and is not a party to the London Protocol. Under Article XII of the London Convention, parties pledge to take measures to protect the marine environment against pollution. Included among the list of pollution sources are "wastes or other matter directly arising from, or related to the exploration, exploitation and associated off-shore processing of sea-bed mineral resources."
Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act and Other Applicable U.S. Laws
In 1980, Congress passed the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA; P.L. 96-283) as an interim measure to allow U.S. citizens to proceed with seabed mineral exploration and recovery until an international regime was in place (i.e., UNCLOS).5064 The 96th Congress stated among the findings of DSHMRA that "the nations of the world, including the United States, will benefit if the hard mineral resources [, including nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese,] of the deep seabed beyond limits of national jurisdiction can be developed and made available for their use."5165 Further, the 96th Congress stated the purposes of DSHMRA are to "encourage the successful conclusion of a comprehensive [UNCLOS],"5266 and to "assure that such exploration and recovery activities are conducted in a manner which will encourage the conservation of such resources, protect the quality of the environment, and promote the safety of life and property at sea,"53 among others. For example, the act directed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to "expand and accelerate a program assessing the effect on the environment from exploration and commercial recovery activities," including the long- and short-term effects on deep-seabed species in ocean areas where deep-seabed mining activities likely would occur.54
DSHMRA establishes a framework for authorizing U.S. citizens to explore for and recover minerals from the seabed in ABNJ. Congress authorized NOAAthe National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to issue exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits to U.S. citizens for deep-seabed mining activities.5568 After NOAA receives an application by an entity seeking an exploration license or commercial recovery permit and before it issues the license or permit, NOAA is required to prepare and publish an environmental impact statement for its issuance of the license or permit.5669 The National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §§4321-4347) is the source of the substantive requirements for preparing an environmental impact statement.
The lack of accession by the United States to UNCLOS does not preclude NOAA from issuing exploration licenses or commercial recovery permits pursuant to DSHMRA.57 In 1984, NOAA issued exploration licenses for four sites located in the CCZ, predating the establishment of the ISA in 1994.58 NOAA has not issued any exploration licenses since 1984, although the agency has approved extension requests. To date, two exploration licenses (USA-1 and USA-4), both held by Lockheed Martin, remain active pursuant to DSHMRA and in effect through June 2, 2027 (Figure 2).59 As of April 25, 2025, NOAA has not issued commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA. Commercial recovery permits issued by NOAA may not be recognized by parties to UNCLOS, and it is possible the ISA could issue 71 However, "any rights a U.S. company may have domestically [under DSHMRA] are not secured internationally," according to a 2017 NOAA notice.72 According to the ISA, parties to UNCLOS have "a duty not to recognize any claim, acquisition, or exercise of rights over minerals recovered from the Area by any State or by any natural or juridical person, unless conducted in accordance with Part XI of UNCLOS."73 Therefore, parties to UNCLOS may not recognize exploration licenses or commercial recovery permits issued by NOAA. The ISA also could issue exploration or exploitation contracts to a company sponsored by a nation party to UNCLOS in the same area.60or make other designations (e.g., areas of particular environmental interest74) in the same area where NOAA has issued a license or permit.75 Without the United States being a party to UNCLOS, U.S. citizens issued licenses or permits by NOAA would have no legal recourse under UNCLOS mechanisms to protect their claim to explore and/or recover seabed minerals in ANBJ.
U.S. companies pursuing deep-seabed mining activities in ABNJ may be subjected to other U.S. federal laws, including the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. §§1361-1423h). In addition, Section 109(e) of DSHMRA provides that any discharge of a pollutant from a vessel or other floating craft associated with deep-seabed mining activities is subject to the provisions of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §§1251-1387).61
Potential Marine Environmental Impacts of Seabed Mining
The potential effects of seabed mining on the marine environment remain incompletely understood. This is in part because commercial-scale deep-seabed mining in ABNJ has yet to occur.
Seabed mining companies have worked with scientists to collect environmental and biological data in deep-sea areas with potential for mineral deposits.62 These companies are collecting and sharing these data with the ISA—a requirement of ISA exploration contracts—in part to understand the potential impacts of seabed mining activities.63 Although scientists have worked with seabed mining companies to establish environmental baselines, some stakeholders may perceive their scientific research as a potential conflict of interest.64 While some may call for a third party or independent scientific institution to collect deep-sea data, this type of research may be cost prohibitive for such researchers.65
Mineral deposits occur across different ocean environments and would require different machinery and technology to collect seabed material (see Figure 3 in the text box, below), which means it may be challenging to extrapolate understanding of marine environmental impacts from one area of the ocean to another. Some potential seabed mining impacts to the marine environment are described below.
Some species inhabiting the deep sea live under cold conditions without sunlight and survive on little food.66 To be successful under such conditions, deep-sea species have low metabolic rates—they move slowly, live for a long time, and take many years to reproduce.67 In general, these traits mean species may be slow to recover from disturbances, making them potentially vulnerable to deep-sea exploitation activities, such as seabed mining, and making the deep-sea environment potentially susceptible to biodiversity loss.68
Sediment dispersal by seabed mining machinery disturbing seafloor deposits has the potential to impact environments immediate and adjacent to the mined area (see Figure 3 in the text box, below).69 The distance to which sediment disperses through the water column primarily depends on the presence of ocean currents and, if near the surface of the ocean, wave energy. Suspended sediment in the water column could reduce water quality and clarity. The dispersion of seafloor sediment may threaten certain groups of benthic (i.e., living on or within the seafloor) invertebrate organisms in specific ways:
- Deposit feeders, organisms that feed on organic matter that settled onto the seafloor, may be impacted by sediment diluting or burying their food resources.70
- Suspension feeders (also known as filter feeders), organisms that filter small food particles directly from the water, may be affected by suspended sediment clogging the water column.71
An additional concern for benthic organisms is that seabed mining machinery could crush, smother, or disperse them while disturbing their habitats.72
The removal of nodules and other hard mineral resources from the seabed also may impact species living or depending on these resources.73 For example, some organisms require a hard surface, such as a mineral nodule, to attach their bodies to in order to live and grow. Some species of sponges and some microbes live on seabed nodules,74 and a species of deep-sea octopus lays its eggs on sponges attached to seabed nodules.75 Because deep-sea nodules form over millions of years,76 their removal in an area of the seafloor could equate to the permanent loss of a part of the marine habitat that some deep-sea species depend on for their survival.77
Noise and vibration associated with seabed mining operations may affect the behaviors of marine mammals and other animals living near the ocean's surface.78 Sound waves travel through the ocean approximately four times faster than they can travel through air and could increase the ambient background noise level in areas up to 500 kilometers away from the mining site, potentially impacting animals in that radius.79 Noise pollution from mining operations may mask communication and echolocation sounds of cetaceans (whales, porpoises, and dolphins), affecting their abilities to detect and avoid predators and to find food and mates.80 It also may cause temporary or permanent hearing loss in some marine mammals and may increase their stress levels.81
The processing of recovered seabed material at the ocean surface and its transport to land may have impacts near or at the ocean surface. For example, seabed material may be processed on a production support vessel (PSV) or surface-based mining platform and seafloor sediment discarded back into the ocean may cloud the near surface water column (see Figure 3 in the text box, below), potentially inhibiting photosynthesis in some plankton.82 Collected seabed material and water also may potentially overflow off the PSV or mining platform.83 In addition, ship traffic associated with seabed mining operations may pose a threat to animals living near the ocean's surface. The increased potential for a vessel strike is one concern.84 Another concern would be the discharge of ballast water and other wastes, including marine debris, from mining vessels.85
Some extractive activities, including seabed mining, could disturb the natural processes (i.e., microbes) that regulate carbon in the deep sea in addition to existing carbon buried in deep-sea sediments.86 Some scientists speculate that activities that affect carbon burial in sediments could have "far-reaching effects on carbon sequestration that in turn is connected to climate regulation,"87 and others have stated that "deep seabed mining may be directly at odds with current climate goals if such regulatory services [provided by microbial communities] are degraded."88 Other stakeholders state that the scale at which seabed mining would take place would have minimum impact on net deep-sea carbon storage.89
Proponents of seabed mining that is "properly managed with appropriate governance safeguards" argue that sourcing minerals from the deep sea has the potential to have less pollution (e.g., tailings, waste), impacts on freshwater sources, and social impacts (e.g., human fatalities, injuries, health effects) compared with traditional land-based open-pit and underground mining.90 Instances of terrestrial mining have been associated with drinking water contamination, air pollution, and alteration of landscapes, among other impacts.91 The potential primary impacts of seabed mining would be on the marine organisms and ocean carbon storage, which could have secondary effects on humans.
Proposed Seabed Mining Operations While no commercial-scale seabed operations currently take place in areas beyond national jurisdiction, the figure below illustrates some of the machinery proposed to mine polymetallic sulfides deposits at hydrothermal vents, ferromanganese crusts at seamounts, as well as machinery and technologies proposed to collect polymetallic nodules from the deep-sea abyssal plain.
Notes: Proposed mining machinery, collection vessels, and autonomous underwater vehicles for seabed mining operations at hydrothermal vents, on the deep-sea abyssal plain, and at seamounts. Depths depicted in meters refers to the typical depth at which these seafloor features (and potential mineral deposits) are located below the surface of the ocean. Some seabed mining approaches require a production support vessel (PSV) and a transport vessel. A PSV launches the mining machinery or collector vehicle and provides power to it while operating on the seafloor. Collected seabed material is lifted via a riser pump to the PSV, where the desired seabed material would be separated from water and sediment. The water and sediment is returned to the ocean via a return pipe. A transportation vessel would ship the seabed material to land where it would be processed and refined into useable metals. For polymetallic sulfides (or seafloor massive sulfide) deposits at hydrothermal vents, remotely operated mining machines have been proposed to cut and drill into the hydrothermal vent chimney to crush and extract internal minerals. The resulting slurry (i.e., mix of water and crushed material) would be transported via a riser pump to a production support vessel (PSV). At the ocean surface, the fine crushed material would be separated from the water. The water and discarded material would be returned to the ocean at an unspecified water depth via a return pipe, creating a sediment plume at the discharged depth. For ferromanganese crusts (or cobalt-rich crusts) at seamounts, remotely operated mining machines have been proposed to scrape across the surfaces of the seamount (or other geologic features) to remove surficial mineral crusts. The resulting slurry would be transported via a riser pump to a PSV. At the ocean surface, the fine crushed material would be separated from the water. The water and discarded material would be would be returned to the ocean at an unspecified water depth via a return pipe, creating a sediment plume at the discharged depth. In addition, large whole rock material has been proposed be lifted in buckets to a PSV. For polymetallic nodules, remotely operated collector vehicles fitted with caterpillar-like tracks use a water stream aimed at nodules laying on the seafloor to create a pressure drop and suction effect to lift sediment with nodules into a collector system. Some companies have proposed using sonar technology on the collector vehicles to identify the location of nodules. As a vehicle moves across the seafloor, a diffusor at the rear of the vehicle would emit seafloor sediment back into the environment, forming a sediment plume. The slurry (i.e., mix of water, sediment, and nodules) would be transported via a riser pump to a PSV. At the ocean surface, nodules would be separated and the sediment and water mix would be returned to the ocean at an unspecified water depth via a return pipe, creating a sediment plume at the discharged depth. One company has proposed an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) that hovers over the seafloor and uses robotic arms with a vision system to pick individual nodules from the seafloor. Once the AUV is full, it would return to the support vessel to offload nodules and have its battery recharged. For each of these three seabed mineral deposits, the desired material would be transported to a processing and refining facility on land. Sources: Allseas, "Hidden Gem," https://allseas.com/equipment/hidden-gem/; Deep Sea Mining, "Mining Subsea Minerals – How It Works," https://deepseamining.ac/how_it_works; International Seabed Authority, CARMUS Inspection Report 01/2023, February 21, 2023, pp. 1-38, https://www.isa.org.jm/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ISA_inspection_report_NORI_mining_collector_system_test.pdf; Impossible Metals, Inc., "Robotic Collection System," https://impossiblemetals.com/technology/robotic-collection-system/; Wendy Laursen, "The Nodule Collectors Are Lining Up, Ready to Go," Maritime Magazine, March 2024, https://www.maritimemagazines.com/offshore-engineer/202403/the-nodule-collectors-are-lining-up-ready-to-go/; and The Metals Company, "Nodules," https://metals.co/nodules/. |
Issues for Congress
Congress may be interested in how potential deep-seabed mining in ABNJ may impact deep-sea habitats and their species as well as demand for and U.S. importation of land-based minerals, including critical minerals.92 With respect to access to seabed minerals in ABNJ, Congress may consider the potential implications of the United States not being a party to UNCLOS or the potential benefits, or consequences, of the U.S. ratification of UNCLOS.
On April 24, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order titled "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources," which, among other things, directs the Administrator of NOAA, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), to "expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits" in ABNJ under DSHMRA.93 Executive branch activities may affect issues of congressional interest related to seabed mining, such as potentially diversifying critical mineral supply chains and developing capabilities for processing seabed minerals in the United States. Congress may consider the benefits of U.S. companies pursing seabed mining activities under NOAA authorities and regulations and concerns about the environmental and geostrategic impacts of such activities. The United States is not a party to UNCLOS, so whether and how U.S. policies, as expressed in the new executive order, may conflict with the ISA framework for seabed mining or the policies of UNCLOS signatories is not clear.94
U.S. Importation of Land-Based Minerals and Seabed Mining Exploration Efforts by Selected Foreign Governments
Because critical minerals, including rare earth elements (REEs), can be found in land and ocean deposits, Congress could consider weighing the potential marine environmental impacts of seabed mining alongside the environmental impacts associated with terrestrial mining. Some may argue seabed mining could reduce U.S. dependency on importing certain land-based minerals, such as cobalt.95 For example, a 2024 study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) identified that China had a monopoly over cobalt battery materials.96 China owns or finances mines in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, some of which have been associated with unsafe working conditions and forced labor.97 Dependence on foreign sources of minerals may lead to U.S. uncertainties in supply ranging from cost instability to supply disruptions. For example, China has restricted or prohibited the export of certain critical minerals to the United States. Some of these export-controlled critical minerals (e.g., gallium, scandium, yttrium) by China occur in seabed deposits (Table 1).98 Some stakeholders also may look to seabed mining to reduce dependence on sources with weak protective labor and environmental standards and practices.99 In addition to seabed minerals as potential alternative sources for critical minerals, the Biden Administration identified recycling and recapture of minerals from waste or mine tailings as other options.100
Deep-sea resources may contribute to meeting the changing global demand for some critical minerals, such as cobalt. The ISA has issued 31 exploration contracts to public and private mining enterprises for seabed mineral resources.101 Of these ISA exploration contracts, China currently holds five exploration contracts: three contracts for polymetallic nodules (two of these three are for the CCZ [Figure 2]); one contract for polymetallic sulfides; and one contract for cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts. The Russian Federation currently holds four ISA exploration contracts: two contracts for polymetallic nodules located in the CCZ, one of which is a joint contract between six member nations of the ISA (Figure 2); one ISA exploration contract for polymetallic sulfides; and one ISA exploration contract for cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts. Some Members of Congress have expressed concern about China's dominance of the global critical mineral market place, pointing to China's five ISA exploration contracts (the most of any country) and China's control over a large portion of terrestrial mines (located in China or Chinese-owned in other countries).102 In addition to mining critical minerals, in 2022 China processed approximately 31% of the nickel, 74% of the cobalt, and 90% of REEs extracted globally.103
According to the Department of Commerce, the United States currently "lacks domestic processing and manufacturing capabilities for some critical minerals,"104 including those derived from seabed deposits. In the 118th Congress, some Members proposed that domestic processing of seabed minerals could reduce U.S. dependence on critical minerals supplied by non-allied countries. For example, H.Rept. 118-125, the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) report, which accompanied its reported version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (H.R. 2670), directed the Department of Defense (DOD) to submit a report to the committee assessing the processing of polymetallic nodules domestically.105 The committee report notes that while the United States holds no ISA contracts, "there remains opportunity to evaluate domestic processing and refining of seafloor resources from the contracts held by allied [UNCLOS] parties and domestic partners in international waters." Similarly, H.Rept. 118-529, the HASC report accompanying its reported version of the Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (H.R. 8070), authorized a DOD study to assess the feasibility of improving U.S. capabilities for refining polymetallic nodules for defense purposes.106 Some stakeholders have proposed Texas as a potential site for a smelting or refining facility for producing critical minerals from polymetallic nodules.107 In 2023, some Members of Congress had supported a potential seabed mineral processing facility in Texas and asked DOD to support TMC's application for funding to develop a Texas processing facility.108 For the United States to domestically process polymetallic nodules derived from ABNJ, the ISA would need to issue exploitation contracts. Some Members in the 118th Congress called on the ISA to adopt exploitation regulations because the domestic processing and refining of critical minerals, including polymetallic nodules from the CCZ, is in the national interest of the United States.109
Some Members of Congress have proposed securing a reliable supply of critical minerals and REEs through strategic partnerships. For example, S. 429 in the 119th Congress would authorize the President, through the U.S. Trade Representative, to negotiate and enter into trade agreements related to critical minerals with allied countries. The bill also would amend the Defense Production Act of 1950 to include such countries in the definition of a domestic source, potentially making related enterprises eligible for U.S. financial incentives.110 In addition, some countries with operating critical mineral processing facilities also have comprehensive free-trade agreements with the United States; these countries may provide opportunities for collaboration enabling the United States to bolster U.S. critical minerals supply chains, including those potentially derived from seabed mining. For example, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and South Korea have free-trade agreements with the United States,111 and each has an operating smelting facility.112 Japan and the United States have concluded several limited trade deals, including a critical minerals agreement.113 Japan has three operating smelting facilities.114 The U.S. Department of the Treasury has designated Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Japan, and South Korea, among other countries,115 as U.S. free-trade agreement partners for the purposes of meeting critical minerals sourcing requirements in the clean vehicle tax credit under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA; P.L. 117-169).116 Some companies may be interested in sourcing certain minerals derived from seabed mining in order to receive a clean vehicle tax credit under the IRA.117 Congress also may consider how U.S. tariffs could impact U.S. trade relations with countries pursuing critical minerals and its effect on seabed mining activities.118
U.S. Ratification of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
The U.S. Senate might consider the ratification of UNCLOS.119 For consecutive Congresses between the 115th and 118th Congress, some Members have introduced resolutions calling on the U.S. Senate to give its advice and consent to the ratification of UNCLOS.120 Members of Congress and other stakeholders may call for the United States to join UNCLOS for several reasons related to deep-seabed mining issues. Some stakeholder proposed reasons for the United States to join or not join UNCLOS are discussed below.
Deep-Seabed Mining Activities in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction
By ratifying UNCLOS, the United States would become a member of the ISA. As a member of the ISA, the United States could sponsor U.S. companies seeking ISA contracts. Currently, U.S. companies would have to establish a subsidiary in a nation party to UNCLOS to seek ISA contracts. For example, the United Kingdom (UK) arm of Lockheed Martin established UK Seabed Resources.121 Through sponsorship of the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, UK Seabed Resources held two ISA exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules in the CCZ.122 On March 16, 2023, Loke Marine Minerals, a Norwegian company, acquired 100% of UK Seabed Resources.123 This acquisition also included the transfer of UK Seabed Resources' two ISA-issued exploration contracts to Loke Marine Minerals (Figure 2).124 However, Loke Marine Minerals filed for bankruptcy in April 2025, claiming "it was difficult to raise capital" due to uncertainty over the ability of the ISA to adopt exploitation regulations in the near future.125
Some stakeholders who oppose U.S. ratification of UNCLOS contend that the United States already has the authority to explore and recover seabed minerals in ABNJ.126 However, some U.S.-based companies may find it too risky to pursue NOAA exploration licenses for seabed mining in the absence of U.S. ratification of UNCLOS. Lack of accession by the United States to UNCLOS has not precluded NOAA from extending two DSHMRA exploration licenses to Lockheed Martin through 2027.127 However, in December 2021, the ISA established an Area of Particular Environmental Interest—a no-mining zone that seeks to protect the full range of biodiversity and habitats—that partially overlaps with one of the Lockheed Martin's DSHMRA exploration licenses (refer to USA-1 in Figure 2).128 Conflicting claims between DSHMRA exploration licenses and ISA contracts could potentially deter financiers from backing U.S.-authorized deep-seabed mining projects.129
On March 27, 2025, TMC announced that its U.S. subsidiary, The Metals Company USA LLC (TMC USA), had formally initiated a process with NOAA to apply for exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA.130 As discussed above, on April 24, 2025, President Trump directed NOAA to "expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits" in ABNJ under DSHMRA.131 Congress may consider the potential geopolitical consequences of U.S. companies pursing seabed mining licenses and permits under DSHMRA. Because TMC holds two ISA exploration contracts for polymetallic nodules in the CCZ, through sponsorships with Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga,132 some stakeholders speculate that TMC USA's actions may be part of "a tactic to put pressure on the ISA" to adopt its exploitation regulations.133 The adoption of the ISA's exploitation regulations would allow seabed mining companies to apply for exploitation contracts and potentially proceed with commercial-scale mining through the ISA framework.
International Seabed Authority Decisionmaking
During the negotiation of the 1994 Agreement, one permanent seat on the 36-member ISA Council was created for the country "having the largest economy in terms of gross domestic product" on the date UNCLOS entered into force.134 When UNCLOS entered into force on November 16, 1994, the United States had the largest economy. If the United States ratified UNCLOS, the United States would occupy the only permanent seat on the ISA Council.135 The Council establishes ISA policies, proposes rules of procedure, enters into agreements with the United Nations or other international organizations, exercises control over activities occurring on or within the seabed in ABNJ (for parties to UNCLOS), and disapproves areas for exploitation, among other powers.136 In general, the Council makes decisions by consensus for administrative, budgetary, and financial matters, including distribution fees.137
The United States could formally participate in negotiations on ISA matters if it was a member of the ISA. For example, negotiations are ongoing for ISA regulations for the exploitation of mineral resources in ABNJ.138 Some stakeholders contend that the United States should ratify UNCLOS to formally participate in the development of these regulations.139 According to the U.S. Department of State, as an observer delegate to the ISA, United States' input has been generally respected and accepted in the drafting of the ISA's exploitation regulations.140 Other matters, such as a mechanism for the equitable sharing of financial and other economic benefits derived from deep-seabed mining activities, have yet to be developed and adopted by the ISA.141
U.S. Federal Research to Study Seabed Mining Impacts and Associated Mining Technologies
Exploration of deep-sea habitats can provide baselines for understanding whether—and to what degree—these habitats and their species are vulnerable or resilient to disturbance or change. Under the Biden Administration, the United States had taken the position that "a robust understanding of the marine environment and the potential impacts of seabed mining activities on the ocean, impacted species and ecological communities, and the climate" is needed to inform the ISA's exploitation regulations.142 NOAA's 1975-1980 Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Studies Project and subsequent projects through the 1990s as directed by Congress under DSHMRA were limited to the biological effects of increased sedimentation on the seafloor.143 In more recent years, NOAA has collaborated with the BOEM and USGS to study a 1970s test site for seabed mining equipment on the Blake Plateau, offshore the Georgia coast, "to quantify the extent of the impacts, search for visual signs of ecosystem recovery, plan for additional research, and, ultimately, inform reviews, future decisions, and mitigation measures related to deep-sea mining in other areas."144 Congress may consider directing and/or appropriating more funding to NOAA, BOEM, USGS, and other relevant agencies, to conduct additional exploration campaigns or research studies designed to establish environmental baseline data to inform seabed mining activities.145
Some stakeholders have called for the implementation of environmental safeguards before ISA permits deep-sea exploitation activities.146 Other stakeholders point to the lack of environmental baseline data for deep-sea habitats as one reason to delay or ban deep-seabed mining in ABNJ.147 Several technology companies (e.g., Apple, Google, and Samsung) and automakers (e.g., BMW, Volkswagen, Volvo) have announced support for a moratorium on seabed minerals being used in electric vehicle batteries and other technologies until seabed mining activities can be performed in a way that protects the marine environment.148 More than 30 foreign governments also have called for a moratorium on deep-seabed mining. Although France holds an ISA exploration license in the CCZ (Figure 2), France is among the governments calling for a moratorium. France's State Secretary for the Sea has said that France will continue to hold its ISA contract and use it for "more research, more science, more data" to better understand the deep sea.149 Some Members of Congress signed a letter urging President Biden to "support a precautionary pause or moratorium on deep-seabed mining until and unless there is sufficient scientific information and knowledge of the deep sea."150 In the 119th Congress, some Members of Congress introduced H.R. 663 instructing the President to direct U.S. representatives to international organizations (e.g., the ISA) to call for a moratorium on deep-seabed mining.
Some Members of Congress proposed legislation in the 119th Congress that could improve understanding of seabed mining impacts. For example, H.R. 664 would authorize NOAA to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to "conduct a comprehensive study of the environmental impacts of mining activities on the deep seabed and the Outer Continental Shelf." With an improved understanding of these marine environmental impacts, Congress might consider how amending DSHMRA or other laws could ameliorate some of the potential negative effects on the ocean of U.S. licensed or permitted seabed mining activities.
Congress might consider how mining technologies for the recovery of seabed minerals has evolved since DSHMRA was enacted and amend relevant aspects of the law to better reflect the potential impacts these technologies could have on deep-sea habitats and deep-sea organisms.151 For example, Impossible Metals, Inc., a U.S. seabed mining company, is developing an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) fixed with robotic arms and computer vision system that would hover over the seafloor to pick up individual polymetallic nodules.152 Impossible Metals posits their AUV would have minimum sediment disturbance compared to other collection approaches and its computer vision could help avoid nodules with attached marine life.153
Congress may consider the level of funding to certain federal agencies that support the research and development of seabed mining technologies. Congress could determine if agencies should receive increased levels of funding to meet certain seabed mining objectives or if current funding levels are sufficient. For example, the Department of Energy's Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), authorized by P.L. 110-69 (commonly known as the America COMPETES Act), supports transformational energy technology research projects. ARPA-E has funded several projects related to seabed mining, including the design and development of technologies for seabed mineral collection and monitoring systems to assess sediment disturbance associated with seabed mining.154