An ROV operates over a field of polymetallic nodules on the deep-ocean floor.
Byline: Penny Langford
The United States is turning a dormant deep-sea mining framework into a test of how quickly critical-mineral projects can move from application to commercial recovery.
An executive order signed by President Donald Trump directed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Department of the Interior to expedite seabed mining licenses and permits. Since then, companies have moved to secure exploration rights in international waters and potential leases within the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf.
The result is an emerging seabed-mining race focused on polymetallic nodules containing nickel, copper, cobalt and manganese, with additional interest in rare earth elements and downstream processing. Bloomberg has described the activity as a new “seabed gold rush,” but the commercial outcome will depend on a more difficult question: whether U.S. agencies can accelerate permitting without weakening environmental review, international legitimacy or technical scrutiny.
The permitting framework splits in two
The U.S. approach depends on where mining would occur.
For areas beyond national jurisdiction, NOAA administers the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA). The law allows U.S. citizens and companies to seek exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits for polymetallic nodules.
For seabed resources within U.S. jurisdiction, the Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management is responsible for the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act process. The two tracks cover different areas, but the policy objective is similar: build a domestic platform for seabed mapping, mineral extraction, processing and technology development.
Executive Order 14285 called for faster reviews, priority seabed mapping and stronger coordination between Commerce, Interior, Energy, Defense and State departments. It also identified polymetallic nodules, cobalt-rich crusts, polymetallic sulfides and other seabed materials as potential sources of strategic minerals.
The order was significant because the United States remains outside the International Seabed Authority, the body established under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea to regulate mineral activity in the international seabed “Area.” The U.S. has not ratified the convention and participates in the ISA as an observer rather than a voting member.
That legal position gives Washington room to rely on domestic law. It also creates a source of diplomatic and legal tension with countries that regard ISA oversight as the only legitimate framework for commercial activity in the international seabed.
NOAA’s rule reduces duplication, not scrutiny
NOAA finalized a revised DSHMRA rule on Jan. 21, 2026. The rule allows qualified applicants to submit a single consolidated application for an exploration license and commercial recovery permit rather than following two sequential processes.
The change is designed to reduce duplicated paperwork, public proceedings and agency review. NOAA said the consolidated pathway could save approximately 100 days compared with separate applications. The new process also requires electronic submissions and sets a $350,000 initial fee for a consolidated application.
The rule does not remove the central environmental requirement. NOAA must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement before issuing a license or permit. The agency may prepare one EIS covering exploration and commercial recovery, although it retains discretion to require additional or supplemental analysis.
This distinction matters. A faster application process does not mean a company can move directly to commercial mining. Applicants still need to demonstrate financial capacity, technical capability, a credible exploration plan, a commercial recovery plan, environmental safeguards, monitoring systems and compliance with relevant marine laws.
NOAA’s final rule says qualified applicants must show that they possess or can access the scientific, technical and financial resources to pursue commercial recovery “in an expeditious and diligent manner.”
Operators monitor seabed mapping, vessel systems and subsea equipment from a deep-sea mining control room.
The Metals Company is the leading test case
The Metals Company USA is the most advanced applicant in the new U.S. process.
The company is seeking rights connected to polymetallic nodule deposits in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, a large Pacific seabed region between Hawaii and Mexico. Its proposed operations would target the same suite of metals that makes nodules strategically attractive: nickel, copper, cobalt and manganese.
NOAA’s official deep seabed mining page lists The Metals Company USA’s applications, including a consolidated exploration license and commercial recovery permit application. NOAA also lists earlier Application B materials and a formal Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS.
The Application B process is therefore an important indicator of how the revised framework works in practice. NOAA certified the application as procedurally complete before initiating the EIS process. That sequence suggests the agency is treating environmental review as a project-level decision point rather than as a barrier that can be bypassed through regulatory streamlining.
The company’s position is also connected to the international regime. TMC has existing exploration contracts sponsored by Nauru under the ISA system, while its U.S. subsidiary is seeking authorization under DSHMRA. That combination illustrates the overlapping legal and commercial systems now developing around the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.
Other applicants are entering the field. NOAA lists exploration applications from American Deep Sea Minerals, American Metal Resources and SeaX, while Lockheed Martin retains two older exploration licenses issued in the 1980s. NOAA has not issued a commercial recovery permit under DSHMRA.
Seabed mining race: key public data points
| Metric | Current position | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| NOAA DSHMRA exploration licenses already issued | 2 | Both are held by Lockheed Martin |
| NOAA commercial recovery permits issued | 0 | The U.S. has no operating commercial seabed mine under DSHMRA |
| Consolidated application fee | $350,000 | Higher than the combined historical license and permit fees |
| Target certification period | 100 days after full compliance | A procedural target, not a guarantee of permit issuance |
| Exploration license term | 10 years | Provides a long development and data-collection window |
| Commercial recovery permit term | 20 years | Intended to support long-term operations if approved |
| Businesses identified by NOAA as potentially affected by the rule | 7 | Indicates a small but expanding applicant pool |
| Written and oral comments on the proposed rule | 24,441 | Shows the scale of public and environmental interest |
Sources: NOAA and the Federal Register.
Critical minerals are the strategic argument
The commercial case for seabed nodules rests on their mineral content and their potential role in reducing dependence on concentrated land-based supply chains.
Nickel and cobalt are associated with battery materials. Copper is essential to power infrastructure, motors and electrification. Manganese is used in steelmaking and battery chemistries. Nodules may also contain other economically relevant elements, although their commercial value depends on processing routes, recovery rates and market prices.
The critical-minerals argument is particularly powerful for policymakers because mining alone does not solve supply-chain vulnerability. Concentrates must be collected, transported, separated, refined and converted into products that meet customer specifications.
The U.S. rule addresses this by requiring consolidated applicants to describe nodule processing, waste disposal and proposed processing locations. In general, DSHMRA requires processing in the United States unless an exception is approved on national-interest grounds.
That requirement could become as important as the mining permit itself. A project that produces nodules but lacks a credible processing route would not provide a complete alternative to existing supply chains.
Skillings’ coverage of the critical minerals supply chain examines why processing capacity, logistics and geopolitical exposure increasingly matter alongside resource size.
Polymetallic nodules form on the deep-ocean floor over geological timescales.
The environmental and geopolitical risks remain material
Deep-sea mining would disturb ecosystems that are comparatively difficult to observe and restore. The main concerns include direct seabed habitat loss, sediment plumes, noise, light, waste discharge and uncertainty about impacts on slow-growing or poorly studied species.
Critics argue that baseline data remains incomplete and that a single front-loaded EIS may not capture the effects of commercial-scale operations after exploration changes the physical and biological environment.
NOAA says its regulations preserve environmental safeguards, monitoring requirements and the ability to impose terms, conditions and restrictions on licenses and permits. The agency also says a supplemental EIS may be required if new information indicates that previously evaluated impacts are incomplete.
The international question may prove equally consequential. The ISA and many of its member states maintain that mineral resources in the international seabed are part of the common heritage of humankind and cannot be unilaterally exploited outside the ISA framework.
The U.S. takes a different position. NOAA’s rule states that DSHMRA authorizes U.S. companies to seek licenses and permits in international waters, provided domestic requirements are met. That difference could expose projects to challenges from governments, environmental organizations, fishing interests and other seabed users.
Deep-sea mining licenses: base, bull and bear cases
| Scenario | Regulatory and market conditions | Likely outcome | Indicators to monitor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base case | NOAA continues consolidated reviews, but EIS work and international objections extend timelines | TMC advances through environmental review; other applicants remain at exploration stage | Draft EIS, public comments, interagency consultations and equipment trials |
| Bull case | NOAA completes review without major legal setbacks and processing partners secure financing | First U.S.-authorized commercial recovery permit becomes possible; subsea automation and processing investment accelerates | Final EIS, permit proposal, binding offtake agreements and processing approvals |
| Bear case | Litigation, environmental findings, technical failures or diplomatic pressure slow or block approvals | Applications remain exploratory and capital shifts to land-based critical-mineral projects | Court challenges, supplemental EIS requirements, equipment failures and weak nodule economics |
The base case is the most defensible in the near term. The regulatory pathway is faster, but the technology is unproven at commercial scale and no U.S. commercial recovery permit has yet been issued.
What operators, investors and policymakers should watch
Four milestones will determine whether the seabed race becomes an operating industry rather than an application boom:
- EIS quality and scope: Whether NOAA can produce a review accepted as scientifically credible and legally durable.
- Subsea equipment performance: Whether collection systems can operate reliably at depth while limiting sediment disturbance.
- Processing economics: Whether nodules can be separated into saleable products at competitive costs.
- International response: Whether U.S.-authorized activity produces diplomatic or legal resistance that affects vessels, financing, customers or project partners.
The key takeaway for mining decision-makers is that access to seabed minerals is only the first link in a much longer chain. The companies most likely to advance will need more than a license strategy. They will need autonomous or remotely operated technology, marine science, environmental monitoring, domestic processing, compliant shipping and customers willing to qualify new material.
The United States has made the permitting race faster. It has not yet demonstrated that deep-sea mining can be made commercially reliable, environmentally acceptable or internationally durable.
Shareable takeaways
LinkedIn:
The U.S. deep-sea mining race is moving from policy to permitting. NOAA’s consolidated process could shorten the path for qualified applicants, but The Metals Company USA’s EIS will test whether faster licensing can coexist with rigorous environmental review and international scrutiny.
X:
NOAA has streamlined U.S. deep-sea mining applications, but commercial recovery still depends on an EIS, subsea technology, processing capacity and legal durability. The Metals Company USA is the leading test case for the emerging seabed nodule race.
