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.
In 1980, Congress passed the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA; 30 U.S.C. §§1401 et seq.) as an interim measure to allow the United States to proceed with seabed mining activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) until an international regime was in place (i.e., the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea [UNCLOS]). DSHMRA established a framework for authorizing U.S. citizens (e.g., individuals, corporations) to explore for and recover minerals from the seabed in ABNJ. In general, exploration means the at-sea observation and evaluation of seabed mineral resources and the taking of the resource, evaluation, and taking of seabed minerals as needed to design and test mining equipment, and commercial recovery (or exploitation) means the actual at-sea mining and processing of seabed minerals for the primary purpose of commercial use (30 U.S.C. §1403).
On April 24, 2025, as part of a broader national effort to secure reliable supplies of critical minerals, President Trump issued Executive Order (E.O.) 14285, "Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources," which directed certain federal agencies to advance seabed mining activities. This In Focus discusses the actions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), to advance seabed mining activities as part of a broader national effort to secure reliable supplies of critical minerals. This In Focus discusses the actions of NOAA and U.S. companies related to seabed mining in ABNJ as well as congressional interest in the topic. The regulation of mineral-related activities occurring on the U.S. outer continental shelf by the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and its regulation of mineral-related activities is beyond the scope of this In Focus.
UNCLOS was adopted in 1982, establishing a comprehensive international legal framework to govern activities related to the global ocean, including seabed mining. In 1994, the Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (commonly known as the 1994 Agreement) substantially modified the seabed mining provisions of UNCLOS to address concernsconcerns held by many industrialized nations. After the adoption of the 1994 Agreement, UNCLOS received the necessary number of signatories for the agreementUNCLOS to enter into force. The United States is not a party to UNCLOS or the 1994 Agreement.
UNCLOS also established the International Seabed Authority (ISA), an autonomous organization that regulates parties to UNCLOS conducting mineral-related activities in ABNJ. The ISA came into existence with the adoption of the 1994 Agreement and became fully operational in 1996. The United States participates as an observer state in the ISA but, as a non-partynonparty, has no vote in ISA business and cannot apply for or obtain a contract for seabed mining exploration or exploitation through the ISA. To date, the ISA has issued 31 exploration contracts. China holds five exploration contracts, the most of any UNCLOS party. The Metals Company (TMC), a Canadian company, has two ISA exploration contracts through sponsorships with Nauru and Tonga (both UNCLOS parties). TMC's two contracts are located in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), a 1.7-million-square-mile area of the seafloor in the Pacific Ocean. The CCZ is estimated to contain more cobalt, manganese, and nickel—identified by the U.S. Geological Survey as critical minerals—than all known land deposits combined.
The ISA has not issued any contracts for exploitation. The ISA is working toward finalizing exploitation regulations The ISA is working toward finalizing exploitation regulations and has not issued any exploitation contracts (DSHMRA uses the term commercial recovery permits).
DSHMRA authorized the NOAA administrator to issue exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits to U.S. citizens for seabed mining activities in ABNJ (30 U.S.C. §1412). In 1984, NOAA issued exploration licenses for four sites located beyond U.S. jurisdiction in the CCZ. NOAA issued exploration licenses to four U.S. mining consortia, three of which were multinational private sector consortia with participating American companies. Under DSHMRA, exploration licenses are initially issued for 10 years (30 U.S.C. §1417(a)). NOAA has issuedNOAA issued the following:
NOAA issued these four exploration licenses 10 years before UNCLOS entered into force and 12 years before the ISA became operational. NOAA has not issued any exploration licenses since 1984, although the. The agency has approved extension requests following the initial 10-year periods of the licenses. A license can be extended byfor five-year periods (30 U.S.C. §1417(a)). NOAA has not issued any commercial recovery permits.
Two of the four exploration licenses issued by NOAA have been surrenderedrelinquished (64 Federal Register 3563). In 1997, Ocean Mining Associates relinquished USA-3. In 1999, Ocean Management Inc., the holder of USA-2, dissolved. Thus, NOAA considered USA-2 relinquished (64 Federal Register 3563).
USA-1 and USA-4 remain the only active exploration licenses issued by NOAA pursuant to DSHMRA. Lockheed Martin holds both licenses. It became the sole holder of the licenses by different means. In 1993, Kennecott Consortium relinquished USA-4 to NOAA (58 Federal Register 33933). Ocean Minerals Company, the consortium including Lockheed Martin, applied for USA-4 (58 Federal Register 34782), and NOAA issued the license in 1994 (59 Federal Register 66942). In 1995, Cyprus Minerals withdrew from Ocean Minerals Company, leaving Lockheed Martin as the sole company overseeing USA-1 and USA-4.
USA-1 and USA-4 are expected to remain in effect through June 2, 2027 (87 Federal Register 52743). However, in 2021, the ISA designated an area of the CCZ that partially overlaps with USA-1 as an Area of Particular Environmental Interest, thereby precluding seabed mining activities from taking place in the area. This designation appears to demonstrate that NOAA-issued seabed mining exploration licenses do not. The designation precludes UNCLOS parties from seabed mining activities in the area. This action appears to question whether NOAA-issued exploration licenses have international recognition. Because the United States is not a party to UNCLOS, this would likely be true for any future NOAA-issued commercial recovery permitsany future NOAA-issued exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits that may (or may not) overlap with ISA designations may have similar uncertainty. According to a 2017 NOAA notice, "any rights a U.S. company may have domestically are not secured internationally."
Actions taken by Lockheed Martin suggest it may be divesting from seabed mining. In 2023, a Norwegian company, Loke Marine Minerals, acquired two ISA-issued exploration contracts from UK Seabed Resources, a subsidiary of the United Kingdom–based arm of Lockheed Martin. Loke has since filed for bankruptcy, in part due to difficulties raising new capital. Some suggest that the "industry is economically not viable."
To extend USA-1 and USA-4 beyond June 2, 2027, Lockheed Martin would need to submit an extension request to NOAA at least six months prior to the expiration dateLockheed Martin may submit an extension request to NOAA at least six months prior to June 2, 2027, to retain USA-1 and USA-4. If the licenses are not extended, U.S. entities can request aNOAA transfer of USA-1 and/or USA-4. In such cases, NOAA is to process the request, pursuant to Title 15, Section 970.516, of the Code of Federal Regulations15 C.F.R. §970.516. According to NOAA, the agency may choose not to actively solicit offers for the transfer of these licenses (personal correspondence with NOAA, February 2024).
E.O. 14285 directed NOAA, in consultation with the Departments of State and the Interior, to expedite the process for reviewing and issuing exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA, among other actions. NOAA reportedly has received "over 10 applications" since the E.O.
On April 29, 2025, TMC's U.S. subsidiary (TMC USA) submitted applications to NOAA for two exploration licenses and one commercial recovery permit under DSHMRA. In June 2025, TMC USA amended its exploration applications. NOAA determined that these applications arewere "fully compliant" with DSHMRA requirements. TMC USA's two exploration license applications (A and BB) overlap with portions of TMC's Nauru and Tonga ISA exploration contract areas in the CCZ. As part of NOAA's applicant review process, the agency will receive and consider oral comments via virtual public hearings on January 26 and 27, 2026, and written comments through February 23, 2026.
To date, NOAATo date, NOAA has not made a determination on TMC USA's commercial recovery permit application. The information relevant to the application willis to be made public when NOAA publishes its notice in the Federal Register (15 C.F.R. §971.971.212).
On January 21, 2026, NOAA issued a final rule that revised its seabed mining regulations to include a "consolidated license and permit application process in which applicants could meet both exploration license requirements, to establish priority of right, and permit requirements simultaneously" (91 Federal Register 2642). The final rule is reflected in 15 C.F.R. §971.214. On January 22, 2026, TMC USA submitted a consolidated application to NOAA. Reportedly, another U.S. company, Deep Sea Rare Minerals (DSRM), plans to submit a consolidated application to NOAA in 2026. DSRM announced in November 2025 that it had submitted an exploration application to NOAA; reportedly, NOAA determined the application to be in substantial compliance with DSHMRA requirements212).
Some speculate that TMC USA's applications to NOAA may be part of "a tactic to put pressure on the ISA" to adopt its exploitation regulations. Exploitation regulations would allow pursuit of ISA exploitation contracts.
Congress may continue to consider seabed mining issues in the context of E.O. 14285 and TMC USA's applications to NOAAU.S. industry interest in acquiring NOAA exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits for seabed mining in ABNJ. Some bills introduced in the 119th Congress would codify and/or adapt E.O. 14285 (S. 2860, H.R. 3803, H.R. 4018). These bills echo the challenges presented in the E.O., including that "the United States faces unprecedented economic and national security challenges in securing reliable supplies of critical minerals independent of foreign adversary control." TMC also contends that its subsidiary's applications would contribute to "America's mineral independence." S. 2860, H.R. 3803, and H.R. 4018Some Members of Congress have questioned how seabed mining could address these concerns given no commercial-scale processing facilities for seabed minerals exist. Some experts contend that "much more needs to be done before the seabed can help secure America's supply chains."
The three bills also would direct federal agencies to expedite the authorization of U.S. seabed mining activities in ABNJ under DSHMRA. According to the ISA, however, authorization of seabed mining activities outside the internationalUNCLOS framework (e.g., via DSHMRA) "may incur legal, diplomatic, economic, security, financial and reputational risks." Congress may weigh in on whether NOAA seabed miningthe extent to which the issuance of NOAA licenses and permits might present geopolitical conflicts. TMC USA stated that it does "not anticipate any use conflicts or interference with other users' freedom of the high seas." If approved, the NOAA-licenseddisagreements. Views on the potential for such disagreements vary. For example, the TMC USA application areas would overlap with portions of areas the ISA already contracted to TMC through its Tonga and Nauru sponsorships. TMC USA stated that it does "not anticipate any use conflicts." In contrast, following E.O. 14285, the Secretary-General of the ISA stated that "any unilateral action … sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilize the entire system of global ocean governance."
U.S. accession to UNCLOS may reduce the potential for geopolitical disagreements, at the cost of replacing U.S. government decisionmaking with that of an international bodyTonga and Nauru sponsorships.
Some Members have called for the Senate to take up UNCLOS, contending that as a party to UNCLOS, the United States would be able to participate in setting and voting on ISA policies (S.Res. 331). Weighing the advantages and disadvantages of giving U.S. entities access to ISA contracts through U.S. accession to UNCLOS as a means to diversify its critical mineral supply chain is an ongoing issue for Congress. U.S. access to critical minerals located in ABNJ through U.S. accession to UNCLOS may reduce the potential for geopolitical conflicts. For example, following E.O. 14285 and TMC USA's applications to NOAA, the Secretary-General of the ISA stated that "any unilateral action … sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilize the entire system of global ocean governance."
Legislation has also been introduced (H.R. 664) to prohibit NOAA from issuing licenses and permits for seabed mining activities in ABNJ until more information is known about its potential impacts. This bill would also direct NOAA—along with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine—to study the environmental impacts of mining activities.chains is an ongoing issue for Congress. S.Res. 331 calls for the Senate to take up UNCLOS, contending that as a party to UNCLOS, the United States would be able to participate in setting and voting on ISA policies.
Other Members have introduced legislation (H.R. 664) to prohibit NOAA from authorizing seabed mining activities in ABNJ until more is known about its environmental impacts. In another instance, H.R. 663 would instruct the President to call for an international seabed mining moratorium until the ISA adopts a regulatory framework. As of December 2025February 2026, 40 countries have announced their opposition to deep-seabed mining.