Rule2026-01044
Deep Seabed Mining: Revisions to Regulations for Exploration License and Commercial Recovery Permit Applications
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 21, 2026
Effective
January 21, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
The Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA or the Act) charges NOAA with the responsibility for issuing licenses for exploration and permits for commercial recovery of hard mineral resources, as defined in the Act, from the deep seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction and promulgating regulations necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act. Some provisions of the regulations require updating to reflect significant technological and information changes since promulgation of the initial regulations in the 1980s. NOAA has included a consolidated license and permit application process in a section of the regulations reserved for this purpose and has made other clarifying and conforming changes.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2642-2677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-01044]
[[Page 2641]]
Vol. 91
Wednesday,
No. 13
January 21, 2026
Part III
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
15 CFR Parts 970 and 971
Deep Seabed Mining: Revisions to Regulations for Exploration License
and Commercial Recovery Permit Applications; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 13 / Wednesday, January 21, 2026 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 2642]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Parts 970 and 971
[Docket No. 260113-0029]
RIN 0648-BN96
Deep Seabed Mining: Revisions to Regulations for Exploration
License and Commercial Recovery Permit Applications
AGENCY: Office for Coastal Management, National Ocean Service, National
Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA or the Act)
charges NOAA with the responsibility for issuing licenses for
exploration and permits for commercial recovery of hard mineral
resources, as defined in the Act, from the deep seabed in areas beyond
national jurisdiction and promulgating regulations necessary to carry
out the provisions of the Act. Some provisions of the regulations
require updating to reflect significant technological and information
changes since promulgation of the initial regulations in the 1980s.
NOAA has included a consolidated license and permit application process
in a section of the regulations reserved for this purpose and has made
other clarifying and conforming changes.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective January 21, 2026.
ADDRESSES: The public docket for this rulemaking is available using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kerry Kehoe, Federal Consistency
Specialist, (240) 560-8518, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9bf0fee9e9e2b5f0fef3f4fedbf5f4fafab5fcf4ed"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="49222c3b3b3067222c21262c0927262828672e263f">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
DSHMRA (30 U.S.C. 1401-1473) charges the NOAA Administrator with
the responsibility for issuing to U.S. citizens licenses for
exploration and permits for commercial recovery of hard mineral
resources from the deep seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
U.S. citizens must obtain licenses and permits from NOAA before
undertaking deep seabed mining exploration or commercial recovery
activities.\1\ The Act and the DSHMRA regulations define ``hard mineral
resources'' as any deposit or accretion on, or just below, the surface
of the deep seabed of nodules which include one or more minerals, at
least one of which contains manganese, nickel, cobalt, or copper.
Therefore, for purposes of the Act, the regulations, and this final
rule, ``hard mineral resources'' refers to polymetallic nodules and the
regulations and this final rule refer to both ``hard mineral
resources'' and ``nodules.'' A broader interpretation of the phrase
``hard mineral resources'' could suggest that DSHMRA covers sulphides
and crusts, which it does not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Mining activities within the U.S. outer continental shelf
are governed by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C.
1331-1356c), which is administered by the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management and Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement within
the Department of the Interior. The term ``U.S. outer continental
shelf'' includes the extended continental shelf in areas adjacent to
the U.S. States and is limited to the exclusive economic zone in
areas adjacent to any territory of the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOAA, under U.S. law, regulates deep seabed mining in areas beyond
national jurisdiction for US citizens and companies. The International
Seabed Authority (ISA) regulates deep seabed mining in areas beyond
national jurisdiction for countries that are parties to the Law of the
Sea Convention (LOSC). The United States is not a party to the LOSC.
Under U.S. law, NOAA may issue licenses and permits to U.S. citizens in
areas beyond national jurisdiction under DSHMRA, provided all statutory
and regulatory requirements are met.
On April 24, 2025, the President signed Executive Order (E.O.)
14285, ``Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and
Resources,'' (90 FR 17735) establishing policies to advance U.S.
leadership in seabed mineral exploration and responsible commercial
recovery.
DSHMRA, signed into law in 1980, required the NOAA Administrator,
no later than 270 days after June 28, 1980, to issue proposed
regulations that were necessary and appropriate to implement the Act.
NOAA published its final DSHMRA exploration license regulations (15 CFR
part 970) in 1981, and its final commercial recovery permit regulations
(15 CFR part 971) in 1989. As required by the Act, the regulations
state that priority of right is established through the licensing
process. The regulations further provide that a permittee must be the
holder of a valid exploration license to apply for and receive a
commercial recovery permit (Sec. 971.200). At that time, the
sequential nature of the licensing and permitting processes was
dictated by the developmental state of deep seabed mining technology
and the information required to prepare an application for commercial
recovery. But NOAA acknowledged even then, when it reserved Sec.
971.214, that once the industry matured and gained experience from
activities undertaken during site-specific exploration, circumstances
may evolve that might allow later entrants to capitalize on work
completed by previous explorers or significant technological advances
and lessen the need for further exploration. See 51 FR 26794, 26796
(July 25, 1986). In such cases, there may be a need for 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. In the 1980s, consolidation of
the two procedures may have been premature. NOAA, however, understood
the potential and included a reserved section (Sec. 971.214) precisely
for such later development. See id.
NOAA is now issuing this final rule revising the regulations under
30 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A) and 30 U.S.C. 1426. Under 30 U.S.C.
1413(a)(2)(A), exploration license and commercial recovery permit
applications ``shall be made in such form and manner as the
Administrator shall prescribe in general and uniform regulations.'' The
same provision authorizes the Administrator to require by regulation,
as being necessary and appropriate for carrying out DSHMRA, ``such
relevant financial, technical, and environmental information'' that
applicants must provide. Under 30 U.S.C. 1426, NOAA is authorized to
``issue regulations to carry out [the Act] . . . only after public
notice and opportunity for comment'' in accordance with the procedures
outlined in that section.
As the agency anticipated, over the past decades there has been a
vast improvement in the technological capability for deep seabed
mining, and the industry has obtained a substantial amount of
information from deep seabed exploration activities and demonstrated a
readiness for commercial recovery.
For example, the development of autonomous underwater vehicles
(AUVs), deep-sea sensors, machine learning, artificial intelligence,
and other technology has substantially improved the ability to more
efficiently map and explore the sea floor.
At the same time, knowledge of the sea floor has also increased.
Unlike when the regulations were first promulgated, today NOAA and many
other entities operating under regimes
[[Page 2643]]
other than DSHMRA have undertaken detailed mapping of areas of the
seabed both within countries' national jurisdiction and in areas beyond
national jurisdiction. For example, all deep-sea mineral-related data
that is collected during NOAA-funded expeditions is made publicly
available and accessible according to FAIR data practices. This data
can be found at the NOAA National Centers of Environmental Information
(NCEI) at <a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/bathymetry/?layers=multibeam">https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/bathymetry/?layers=multibeam</a>
and <a href="https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/seafloor-mapping">https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/products/seafloor-mapping</a>. In addition,
industry has conducted scientific testing on hard mineral resources,
developed and tested new deep-sea mining-relevant technology, and
gained scientific and technical expertise and experience in deep seabed
mining exploration. And many of these organizations contribute their
data to the international seabed mapping effort Seabed 2030, and that
data can be found at <a href="https://www.gebco.net/data-products">https://www.gebco.net/data-products</a>. This
knowledge, experience, and expertise may now be leveraged by U.S.
citizens operating under DSHMRA who are interested in pursuing
commercial recovery of hard mineral resources of the deep seabed in
areas beyond national jurisdiction.
The need for regulatory changes were foreseen by NOAA in the 1980s
when it published its proposed and final rules for the DSHMRA
commercial recovery permits by reserving a section for a consolidated
license and permit application process in which applicants could meet
necessary exploration license requirements to establish priority of
right and permit requirements simultaneously. See 15 CFR 971.214; 51 FR
at 26796. For the reasons set forth above and throughout this preamble,
NOAA has concluded that establishing this consolidated application
process and specifying the financial, technical, and environmental
information that shall be submitted as part of a consolidated
application is necessary and appropriate for carrying out the
provisions of DSHMRA. See 30 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A). This approach is
consistent with DSHMRA, which does not require a sequential process to
first hold a license before applying for a permit, and is in keeping
with the Act's finding that ``the present and future national interest
of the United States requires the availability of hard mineral
resources which is independent of the export policies of foreign
nations,'' 30 U.S.C. 1401(a)(3). The consolidated application process
is an alternative application method and does not supplant existing
regulations allowing for the sequential application of licenses and
permits. Therefore, an applicant could still opt to apply for only a
license initially.
NOAA has also made technical, clarifying, and conforming changes to
other obsolete sections of the license and permit regulations. These
changes do not alter the substantive standards to which applications
are held.
Finally, this final rule is effective on the date of publication
because it relieves a restriction under the Administrative Procedure
Act (APA). The APA generally requires that substantive rules
incorporate a minimum 30-day delay of effective date following
publication. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). Delayed effective dates give the public
reasonable time to prepare to comply with a rule. But the APA provides
an exception to the 30-day delayed effective date for rules which grant
or recognize an exemption or relieve a restriction. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
This final rule relieves a restriction on the regulated community
(applicants for exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits
under DSHMRA) in the form of sequential license and permit
applications--a requirement that is not present in DSHMRA but that was
established by NOAA's regulations. NOAA received no public comments,
from existing applicants or otherwise, expressing a need for additional
time to comply with this rule. Because the final rule relieves a
restriction, it is exempt from the 30-day delay in effective date and
is effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
NOAA has created a new DSHMRA website where NOAA will post
application information as it becomes publicly available.
II. Changes From Proposed to Final Rule
Following publication of the proposed rule, in consideration of
public comments, interagency comments, and further review, NOAA has
made changes to the regulatory text that were in the proposed rule,
which are described in detail in section IV of this final rule. These
changes include: in Sec. Sec. 970.200, 971.200, and 971.214, adding a
clarifying sentence regarding computation of time for purposes of the
Administrator's required response time; in Sec. Sec. 970.208, 971.208,
and 971.214, revising how the fee payment is to be described in the
application, in light of electronic submission of applications;
revising Sec. 971.214(a) to better clarify the applicability of other
sections of parts 970 and 971 to the consolidated application process;
making clarifying edits to the provisions of Sec. 971.214(b) regarding
environmental impact statements; adding minor clarifications to Sec.
971.214(c); correcting an internal reference in Sec. 971.214(d) and
making minor clarifying and formatting edits, typographical corrections
to the subsections within Sec. 971.214(d); in Sec. 971.214(d)(1), and
in corresponding language in Sec. 971.214(e)(1), clarifying language
regarding demonstrating that an applicant can pursue commercial
recovery activities in an expeditious and diligent manner; in Sec.
971.214(d)(2), adding text directing submission of an estimated
schedule of expenditures, as required in DSHMRA, and clarifying that an
applicant may submit other types of economic analysis; revising Sec.
971.214(d)(3) to clarify the information regarding technological
capability that must be submitted; in Sec. 971.214(d)(4), correcting
internal citations and clarifying that applicants may provide an
explanation as to why designing and testing system components or mining
systems is not necessary; in Sec. 971.214(d)(5), clarifying that
environmental safeguards and monitoring systems may evolve over time
and that the resource assessment may be preliminary at the time of the
consolidated application; in Sec. 971.214(d)(6), clarifying that a
monitoring plan may be preliminary at the time of application and
making conforming edits to refer consistently to any environmental
impact statements that may be prepared on the proposed activities in a
consolidated license and permit application; in Sec. 971.214(d)(9),
clarifying that ``affiliate'' has the same definition as in Sec.
970.101(d); in Sec. 971.214(e), adding internal citations that were
inadvertently omitted from the proposed rule and clarifying the
statutory requirements for approval of the size and location of an
exploration and commercial recovery area; and in 971.214(g), clarifying
the procedure for processing of an amended application. In section IV
of this preamble, NOAA explains why these changes constitute minor
technical, clarifying, and/or conforming edits that are consistent with
the purpose, scope, and NOAA's intent of the proposed rule and do not
alter substantive rights or obligations.
In addition to the changes described in detail in section IV of the
final rule, NOAA has made some clarifying or conforming edits to
sections throughout parts 970 and 971 to reference the consolidated
application process established in Sec. 971.214, where applicable and
necessary. These edits, which were inadvertently omitted from the
proposed rule, do not result in any
[[Page 2644]]
substantive changes and constitute technical conforming amendments.
These conforming amendments made to reference the consolidated
application process are in the following regulatory sections: Section
970.303, Procedures for new entrants; Section 970.500, General; Section
970.513, Revision of a license; Section 971.101, Definitions; Section
971.400, General; Section 971.407, Safety at sea; Section 971.412,
Changes in permits and permit terms, conditions, and restrictions;
Section 971.413, Revision of permit; Section 971.503, Diligent
commercial recovery; Section 971.701, Criteria for safety of life and
property at sea; and Section 971.900, Public disclosure of documents
received by NOAA.
III. Response to General Comments on the Proposed Rule, and Comments on
the Regulatory Impact Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis, and Implementation of
Executive Order 14294
On July 7, 2025, NOAA published the proposed rule, (90 FR 29806),
and comments were due by September 5, 2025. NOAA held two virtual
public hearings on September 3 and 4, 2025, to receive oral comments.
Public comments and transcripts of the virtual public hearings,
including the oral comments, are available on the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108</a>.
In this section, NOAA summarizes the general comments that do not
relate to a specific regulatory section and provides responses. NOAA
also summarizes and responds to comments on the Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA)/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA),
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) analysis, and the virtual public
hearings. NOAA has included comments that relate to specific regulatory
sections and responses to those comments after each applicable
regulatory section in section IV.
NOAA received a total of 24,441 written and oral comments in
response to the Proposed Rule; of these, 24,384 are general comments,
in opposition and support, that are addressed in this section. There
were 1,736 individual written submissions, with 22,660 attached
duplicate or similar comments to several commenters: one commenter
attached an Excel spreadsheet with 17,581 entries, and another
commenter attached to its comment an additional comment signed by 3,537
of its U.S.-based supporters. Of the 1,736 individual written
submissions, 1,477 opposed deep seabed mining and/or NOAA's rulemaking
and 203 supported deep seabed mining and NOAA's rulemaking. Of the
total number of written and oral comments, 24,156 were the same or
similar comments in opposition to deep seabed mining or general
opposition to the proposed changes to the DSHMRA regulations. Of the
total written and oral comments received, 228 were the same or similar
comments in support of deep seabed mining or general support for NOAA's
proposed changes to the DSHMRA regulations.
Some of the comments pertaining to specific issues or sections of
the regulations are addressed in section IV. Comments can be viewed at
the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal for the Proposed Rule, <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108</a>. Comments containing
profane or abusive language or foreign language comments without an
English language translation were not posted.
NOAA considered the written and oral comments and appreciates the
information provided. The comment summaries present the significant
issues raised in public comments and are illustrative of the comments
and arguments opposing and supporting deep seabed mining and/or NOAA's
rulemaking.
1. General Objections to Deep Seabed Mining or NOAA's Rulemaking
Comment 1. General opposition to deep seabed mining was expressed
for a variety of stated reasons, including, but not limited to the
following assertions: effects on the environment; effects on seabed
habitat and to marine species including undiscovered species especially
in the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone; harm to cultural resources and
Pacific Islander livelihoods and beliefs; inadequate scientific
research and information; inadequate resource protection measures and
regulations; uncertainties regarding environmental impacts and a
nascent industry; significant technical challenges to deep seabed
mining; opposition to deep seabed mining from many U.S. states,
countries, and global companies; that deep seabed mining is contrary to
international agreements and efforts; the need for moratoria; that deep
seabed minerals are not needed to meet U.S. demand for critical
minerals and domestic sources and recycling of such minerals should be
used instead; the U.S. needs to focus on building domestic refineries;
using renewable and alternative resources rather than deep-sea
minerals; and jeopardizing vital carbon sinks. Commenters argued that
deep-sea minerals are not necessary to address national security issues
and that the real problem is foreign dominance in processing critical
minerals, not in extracting critical minerals. General opposition was
also expressed on the asserted grounds that the regulations
inadequately address biodiversity loss, sediment dispersion, sediment
plume, and combined mining effects. Commenters also expressed that
urgent improvements are needed to strengthen impact assessments, start
ongoing monitoring, enhance public consultations, prioritize
precaution, and explore sustainable alternatives to mining. Commenters
also expressed opposition to deep seabed mining in terms of
environmental stewardship, national sovereignty, economic
responsibility, constitutional government oversight, and that
stewardship over God's creation is a biblical and moral responsibility
and deep seabed mining poses a serious and irreversible threat to some
of the planet's most mysterious and fragile ecosystems. One commenter
argued that a single agency should not be responsible for both
exploration licenses and commercial recovery.
Commenters stated that deep-sea ecosystems are important for
protecting biodiversity and that the deep sea is the largest biome on
Earth, with a unique set of characteristics that make it distinct from
all other marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Commenters argued that
baseline information regarding the deep sea is limited and that seabed
mining could have lasting damage where the deep ocean remains one of
Earth's least explored environments, with vast regions never sampled
biologically. Commenters stated that deep-sea species are vulnerable to
impacts, being often highly specialized, slow-growing, and long-lived.
Commenters argued that impacts of deep-sea mining include the direct
physical destruction of benthic habitat; diminishment of deep-sea
oxygen production; release of methane and sequestered carbon;
generation of sediment plumes and the subsequent burial of benthic
habitats; toxic releases and geochemical alteration from deep-sea
mining operations; and noise, light, and vibration impacts from deep-
sea mining. Commenters stated that there could be ocean-wide and
cascading effects and that the knowledge gaps and uncertainty demand
caution.
Response. NOAA's proposed rule, and this final rule, are for the
purpose of updating the DSHMRA regulations to reflect significant
technological and information changes since the initial regulations
were promulgated in the 1980s and to include a consolidated
[[Page 2645]]
license and permit application process in a section of the regulations
that was reserved for this purpose. NOAA's rulemaking did not pose the
policy question of whether NOAA should authorize deep seabed mining
under DSHMRA. The statute itself and implementing regulations not being
revised in this rulemaking authorize deep seabed mining in areas beyond
national jurisdiction and contain standards that address the issues
raised in this comment. No changes to those standards are made via this
rulemaking, which is procedural in nature. In addition, DSHMRA
designates NOAA as the agency with the authority to issue exploration
licenses and commercial recovery permits.
DSHMRA and NOAA's regulations contain substantial requirements for
applicants and NOAA to address protection of the environment,
conservation of natural resources, and monitoring requirements. See 30
U.S.C. 1419, 1420, and 1424. These requirements include producing an
environmental impact statement (EIS) pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the issuance of an exploration
license and a commercial recovery permit (or both). 30 U.S.C. 1419(d).
As part of a license or permit NOAA also includes terms, conditions,
and restrictions (TCRs) that include environmental considerations. 30
U.S.C. 1419(b). NOAA can also, after the issuance or transfer of a
license or permit, modify any TCR if required to protect the quality of
the environment. 30 U.S.C. 1415(c)(1)(B). See also numerous sections of
the DSHMRA regulations regarding environmental, conservation, and
monitoring requirements, 15 CFR 970.204, 970.506, 970.518, 970.519,
970.522, 970.700, 970.701, 970.702, and 971.204, 971.406, 971.419,
971.420, 971.424, and 971.600-606.
Moreover, the President can determine by Executive Order that an
immediate suspension of a license or permit, or immediate suspension or
modification of particular activities under such a license or permit,
is necessary for the reasons set forth in 30 U.S.C. 1416(a)(2)(B), or
the Administrator determines that an immediate suspension of such a
license or permit, or immediate suspension or modification of
particular activities under such a license or permit, ``is necessary to
prevent a significant adverse effect on the environment or to preserve
the safety of life and property at sea, and the Administrator issues an
emergency order requiring such immediate suspension.'' 30 U.S.C.
1416(c). See also 15 CFR 970.511 and 971.417. No changes to those
standards are made via this rulemaking, which is procedural in nature.
One commenter attached to its comments numerous scientific papers,
pamphlets, articles, web pages, testimony, etc., about deep seabed
mining, asserted impacts and use conflicts related to deep seabed
mining, DSHMRA, the ISA, and NEPA. NOAA has considered these
attachments as supplemental information.
Comment 2. Commenters expressed general opposition to NOAA's
rulemaking to establish a consolidated license and permit application
process and argued that NOAA should withdraw the consolidated
application process from its final regulations and refrain from issuing
any commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA. Commenters argued that
the proposed regulations violate DSHMRA, stating that Congress
structured DSHMRA to create two distinct legal instruments--an
exploration license and a commercial recovery permit--each with its own
application, plan, review, and decision. Commenters argued that
Congress intended for a sequenced process in which exploration was a
prerequisite for commercial recovery. In support, a commenter quoted
Section 1412(b)(3) of the Act, which provides: ``A valid existing
license shall entitle the holder, if otherwise eligible under the
provisions of this chapter and regulations issued under this chapter,
to a permit for commercial recovery.'' The commenter also pointed to
Section 1413, which the commenter stated distinguishes the content and
review of an ``exploration plan'' for a license from the ``recovery
plan'' for a permit, and which establishes priority of right based on
the filing date of license applications in substantial compliance with
statutory requirements. The commenter also argued that the Act
contemplates EISs linked to each separate license or permit decision.
Finally, the commenter argued that the consolidated application process
would compress what Congress designed as two distinct notice and
comment opportunities into one.
Response. Section 1412(b)(3) of DSHMRA does not preclude a single
consolidated application, as described in the proposed rule and this
final rule. Rather, Section 1412 is simply a protective measure for the
applicant: it assures the applicant that, if it was willing to spend
the time and expense in obtaining an exploration license and completing
exploration work, and if the applicant was otherwise eligible for a
commercial recovery permit under DSHMRA and the implementing
regulations, NOAA could not arbitrarily deny a license-holder a permit
for commercial recovery. As exploration work by definition will not
generate income, and the first opportunity for income-generation will
occur only at commercial recovery, this provision helps to encourage
investment in deep-sea mining by responsible private companies, in
keeping with one of the stated purposes of DSHMRA. See 30 U.S.C.
1401(b)(5).
The opportunity to submit a consolidated application is not at odds
with Section 1412(b)(3). First, this final rule only modifies the
application process. If the applicant is otherwise eligible, NOAA will
issue both a license and a permit to the applicant. Second, the final
rule establishes an alternative consolidated method to submit a license
and permit application; the final rule does not supplant existing
regulations allowing for the sequential application of licenses and
permits. Therefore, an applicant can still opt to apply for only a
license initially. Such an applicant would therefore still rely upon
the protections of Section 1412(b)(3) when making investment decisions
and when choosing whether to apply for a commercial recovery permit.
Likewise, Section 1413 does not prohibit a consolidated license and
permit application. Section 1413 describes the requirements for an
exploration plan and a commercial recovery plan. 30 U.S.C.
1413(a)(2)(B), (C). It also states that ``priority of right for the
issuance of licenses to applicants shall be established on the basis of
the chronological order in which [substantially compliant] license
applications . . . are filed.'' The final rule requires a consolidated
application to seek both a license and a permit and to contain both an
exploration plan and a commercial recovery plan, and the regulations
are consistent with the requirements for the exploration plan and
commercial recovery plan in 30 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A) and (B). Contrary
to the comment, the Act does not require that these plans be delivered
sequentially-just that the applicant must have the plans for each
category of activities, depending on if the applicant is seeking a
license, a permit, or both. As to the establishment of priority of
right, the final rule is consistent with 30 U.S.C. 1413(b). The Act
specifically keys priority of right to the application for a license,
but it does not require a license to be obtained prior to the
application for a permit.
The commenter also argues that it is impermissible to collapse two
applications into a single public hearing or single opportunity for
public comment. NOAA respectfully disagrees.
[[Page 2646]]
DSHMRA clarifies that ``[a]ll time periods for the review of an
application for issuance or transfer of a license or permit . . .
shall, to the maximum extent practicable, run concurrently.'' 30 U.S.C.
1413(f). Thus, the statute actually encourages holding concurrent
public review opportunities where practicable. Further, throughout the
application process NOAA will continue to ensure ample opportunity for
public comment, in keeping with both statutory and regulatory
requirements. NOAA retains discretion to hold multiple public hearings,
for example, if it deems there is sufficient public interest. Nothing
in the proposed rule impermissibly infringes on the public's right to
comment on the applications.
Finally, the commenter argues NOAA should refrain from issuing any
commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA. However, this suggestion is
beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Further, as to license-holders, as
noted above, the statute explicitly states that a ``valid existing
license shall entitle the holder, if otherwise eligible . . . , to a
permit for commercial recovery.'' 30 U.S.C. 1413(b)(3). So under the
statute, NOAA does not have discretion to refuse to issue commercial
recovery permits to otherwise eligible applicants. As to applicants
seeking to use the consolidated process, NOAA is not precluded from
issuing commercial recovery permits subject to satisfaction of all
statutory and regulatory requirements, including requirements of the
consolidated application process as applicable.
Comment 3. Commenters asserted that proceeding according to the
proposed regulations would violate NEPA since NOAA's proposed rule
attempts to collapse what Congress designed as two distinct phases--
exploration and commercial recovery--into a single, consolidated
licensing process. Commenters argued that a primary purpose of
exploration is to generate baseline data to better evaluate reasonably
foreseeable impacts of commercial recovery, the environmental baseline
for these actions remains incomplete, there is still a significant
amount of the seafloor left to be mapped at high resolution, impacts of
commercial recovery cannot meaningfully be analyzed in the absence of
exploration, and authorizing exploration and commercial recovery
simultaneously would undermine NEPA obligations. A commenter argued
that NOAA's existing DSHMRA regulations contemplate using information
gathered under an exploration license to ensure that commercial
recovery operations cannot reasonably be expected to result in a
significant adverse effect on the quality of the environment. A
commenter also argued that consolidation would foreclose the
development and consideration of NEPA alternatives for commercial
recovery as informed by the baseline data from exploration. Commenters
argued that NOAA must ensure reasonable timeframes for review and input
by all relevant agencies implementing statutes related to the coastal
and marine environment, including the Endangered Species Act (ESA),
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (MSA), Coastal Zone Management Act
(CZMA), and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Finally, a
commenter argued that under NEPA, NOAA would be required to issue a
supplemental EIS after exploration and before commercial recovery even
if both proposed actions were initially evaluated in a single EIS.
Response. The final rule ensures that NOAA will comply with its
NEPA responsibilities for a thorough environmental review including the
development of an environmental baseline and a reasonable range of
alternatives to meaningfully analyze the impacts of exploration and
commercial recovery. As explained in the preamble to the proposed and
final rule, over the past decades NOAA and the industry have obtained a
substantial amount of information from deep seabed exploration
activities, including detailed mapping of areas of the seabed,
scientific testing on polymetallic nodules, and expertise and
experience in deep seabed mining exploration. NOAA, for example,
conducted the Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES), drafted
the Deep Seabed Mining Technical Guidance Document, and prepared a Deep
Seabed Mining Programmatic EIS. These studies, along with more recent
developments, establish a foundation for considering potential
environmental impacts of exploration and commercial recovery, and will
ensure that an EIS for a consolidated license and permit application is
informed by a robust environmental baseline. NOAA is also required to
hold consultations to assure compliance with, as applicable, the ESA,
the MMPA, the CZMA, and the MSA, among other statutes. See 15 CFR
970.502 and 971.402. These consultations will also enhance
environmental baseline information in furtherance of NEPA compliance.
Indeed, NOAA's final rule requires consolidated applications to
demonstrate that the applicant can proceed to commercial recovery in an
expeditious and diligent manner, including by describing any
exploration activities undertaken prior to application submission, and
to include any relevant environmental baseline information obtained
during past exploration activities. Therefore, NOAA expects to have the
necessary information from prior studies (e.g., the DOMES study, Deep
Seabed Mining Technical Guidance, Deep Seabed Mining Programmatic EIS),
recent developments, and applicant exploration activities to develop
and consider a reasonable range of alternatives for commercial recovery
in the EIS. Moreover, as stated in the proposed rule, there may be
situations in which two EISs are appropriate, and NOAA will base any
determination that a second or supplemental EIS is needed on the record
for any specific application and circumstance.
In addition, NOAA is updating its DSHMRA technical guidance in a
process that is separate from this rulemaking. Updating the technical
guidance is critical for having data acquisition standards for
monitoring potential impacts. NOAA expects to release a draft of the
revised technical guidance for public review later this year.
The commenter also asserts that Section 1415(b), which requires
that an environmental impact statement be prepared before either a
license or permit is issued, requires a sequential process and that a
``consolidated process that attempts to resolve both exploration and
commercial recovery with a single, front-end EIS would frustrate
[DSHMRA's] framework.'' But again, nothing in Section 1415(b) requires
a sequential process. And while it is true that NOAA's previously-
issued DSHMRA regulations provide for a sequential process, NOAA has
explained in the proposed rule and final rule preambles why a
consolidated application option is now appropriate for some applicants
given the more mature state of the industry. As noted above, the
consolidated application process is an alternative application method
and does not supplant existing regulations allowing for the sequential
application of licenses and permits. Therefore, an applicant could
still opt to apply for only a license initially.
Moreover, the Administrator sets enforceable terms, conditions, and
restrictions for, among other things, the protection of the environment
on each license and/or permit issued under the Act and its implementing
regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1419(b). Other
[[Page 2647]]
environmental safeguards include the applicant's required environmental
monitoring plan, TCRs that the Administrator imposes related to the
environmental monitoring plan and protection of the environment, and
enforcement and license suspension actions that the Administrator can
take if there are significant adverse environmental effects. The Act
and the DSHMRA regulations describe NOAA's enforcement authority under
this regulatory framework and contain several provisions for monitoring
compliance with legal requirements and pursuing appropriate enforcement
action when necessary. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 1424, 1461-1468; 15 CFR
part 971, subpart J.
Comment 4. Commenters stated that NOAA cannot finalize the proposed
regulations without first complying with NEPA and ESA and that the act
of promulgating these regulations is itself a ``major federal action''
under NEPA requiring an EIS and an ``agency action'' under ESA Sec. 7,
each of which requires advance environmental review. A commenter argued
that an EIS is required for this rulemaking because it constitutes a
regulatory change with significant consequences for how and when
environmental review occurs, and it will make environmental impacts of
deep seabed mining more likely. A commenter argued that the term
``extraordinary circumstances'' appears under the G7 categorical
exclusion but remains undefined, creating uncertainty about when a full
EA or EIS is required. Commenters argued that NOAA should codify
specific triggers--such as impacts on hydrothermal-vent fields, areas
designated as critical habitat for listed species, or regions of high
seafloor biodiversity--for case-by-case NEPA analysis. Finally, a
commenter also argued that issuing these regulations ``may affect''
numerous ESA-listed species, and NOAA cannot defer consultation to a
later stage.
Response. This rulemaking includes only technical and/or procedural
changes to the regulatory text and does not change the substantive
standards to which applications will be held. NOAA has determined that
the rulemaking falls within a category of actions that NOAA has
determined normally does not significantly affect the quality of the
human environment and therefore may be categorically excluded from the
need to prepare a further NEPA analysis. NOAA has also not identified
any extraordinary circumstances under NOAA's Companion Manual, Policy
and Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act and Related Authorities (effective June 30, 2025) that would
preclude this categorical exclusion. The Companion Manual provides
examples of extraordinary circumstances under which NOAA has determined
further NEPA analysis may be required. Moreover, the use of the NEPA G7
categorical exclusion is only for purposes of this rulemaking, not for
DSHMRA applications for exploration or commercial recovery, which
require the preparation of an EIS. As required by DSHMRA, NOAA would
prepare an EIS before issuing any license or permit.
With respect to ESA Sec. 7, NOAA has determined that the
administrative action of a rulemaking that includes only technical and/
or procedural changes will have no effect on ESA-listed species. Before
the issuance of any license or permit, NOAA is required to hold
consultations to assure compliance with, as applicable, the ESA, the
MMPA, and the MSA, among other statutes. See 15 CFR 970.502 and
971.402.
Comment 5. A commenter opposed the proposed consolidation of
exploration and commercial recovery licensing under DSHMRA on grounds
rooted in indigenous values. The commenter supported efforts to
modernize outdated 1980s-era regulations and improve administrative
efficiency but opposed the push to fast-track licensing and permitting
for deep-sea mining activities for a number of reasons related to
religious, spiritual, and/or cultural beliefs and ecological wisdom.
The commenter stated that NOAA should uphold its trust responsibilities
to indigenous peoples and should reject the proposed consolidation of
exploration and commercial recovery licenses; maintain a two-step
licensing process to ensure accountability; include Native Hawaiian and
Pacific Islander cultural practitioners in any future regulatory review
process, consistent with executive orders on indigenous consultation;
and support only those regulatory updates that improve clarity and
fairness without sacrificing oversight or enabling hasty extraction.
Response. NOAA appreciates and respects the commenter's statements
regarding Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander cultural beliefs and
concerns. As noted in NOAA's response to Comment 1, and as described in
this rule's background section, DSHMRA establishes a process for NOAA
to issue to U.S. citizens licenses and permits for deep seabed mining
of hard mineral resources as defined in the Act. Moreover, as stated in
E.O. 14285, there is a critical need for the U.S. to obtain critical
minerals from the deep seabed.
The consolidated license and permit process will not erode any
environmental, scientific, or cultural considerations. As stated in
NOAA's explanation of Sec. 971.214 and in the response to Comment 1,
the Act and regulations contain substantial provisions for the
protection of the environment and conservation of resources.
Consistent with E.O. 13175, NOAA engages in government-to-
government consultation with federally-recognized tribes in the
development of federal policies that have tribal implications. NOAA has
not identified tribal implications associated with this rule, which is
a procedural update to the DSHMRA regulations to establish a
consolidated application process in a section previously reserved for
that purpose. However, NOAA will fulfill any applicable tribal
consultation obligations in future regulatory actions that may have
tribal implications under E.O. 13175 for federally recognized tribes.
Comment 6. Commenters argued that this rulemaking did not follow
procedures required in DSHMRA, 30 U.S.C. 1468, because NOAA did not
undergo formal rulemaking and did not make a determination that the
proposed rule was necessary and appropriate to provide for the
conservation of natural resources, protection of the environment, and
the safety of life and property at sea. A commenter argued that NOAA
should rescind its existing seabed mining regulations and prior
determinations, which are likewise invalid because they rest on
informal rulemaking procedures inconsistent with DSHMRA and the APA.
Response. In proposing and then finalizing this rulemaking, NOAA
has followed all applicable procedures required under DSHMRA and the
APA. NOAA published a Federal Register notice of the proposed rule,
afforded a 60-day comment period for members of the public to provide
written comments, held two virtual public hearings to accept oral
comments, has considered comments received, prepared a response to
comments, and is now issuing a Federal Register notice of the final
rule.
The applicable sections of DSHMRA that authorize NOAA to undertake
this rulemaking are 30 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A) (License and permit
applications, review, and certification) and 30 U.S.C. 1426(a) (Public
notice and hearings; Required procedures). Section 1413(a)(2)(A)
provides in relevant part that exploration license and commercial
recovery permit applications ``shall be made in such form and manner as
the Administrator shall prescribe in general
[[Page 2648]]
and uniform regulations and shall contain such relevant financial,
technical, and environmental information as the Administrator may by
regulations require as being necessary and appropriate for carrying out
the provisions of [DSHMRA].'' Section 1426(a) provides that the NOAA
Administrator ``may issue regulations to carry out this chapter . . .
only after public notice and opportunity for comment and hearings in
accordance with the following: (1) The Administrator shall publish in
the Federal Register notice of . . . all regulations implementing this
chapter . . . . Interested person shall be permitted to examine the
materials relevant to any of these actions, and shall have at least 60
days after publication of such notice to submit written comments to the
Administrator. (2) The Administrator shall hold a public hearing in an
appropriate location and may employ such additional methods as the
Administrator deems appropriate to inform interested persons about each
action specified in paragraph (1) and to invite their comments
thereon.'' NOAA has implemented each of these steps, as noted above.
This rulemaking process also follows the procedures required by the
applicable section of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553 (Rule making). NOAA issued
a general notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register with
the information required in 5 U.S.C. 553(b); NOAA offered an
opportunity for public comment consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(c); and
NOAA has explained why this rule, which ``relieves a restriction,'' is
effective immediately, consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
The section of DSHMRA cited by the commenter, 30 U.S.C. 1468(c),
which requires rulemaking on the record after an opportunity for an
agency hearing, is not applicable to this rule. Section 1468(c) applies
to amending regulations under DSHMRA ``as the Administrator determines
necessary and appropriate in order to provide for the conservation of
natural resources within the meaning of Section 1420 of this title,
protection of the environment, and safety of life and property at
sea.'' This rulemaking does not constitute a regulatory amendment
within the scope of 30 U.S.C. 1468(c). Rather, this rulemaking
implements procedural changes to the DSHMRA application process as
authorized by 30 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A) and 30 U.S.C. 1426(a).
Nor was formal rulemaking required for the initial regulations
promulgated by NOAA. NOAA published its DSHMRA exploration license
regulations (15 CFR part 970) in 1981 and its commercial recovery
permit regulations (15 CFR part 971) in 1989 pursuant to Section
1468(a) and (b), which required that the NOAA Administrator propose and
finalize such regulations as are required by or necessary and
appropriate to implement DSHMRA, ``in accordance with section 553 of
title 5.'' See 30 U.S.C. 1468(a) and (b) (emphasis added). Section 553
of title 5 is the section of the APA governing informal rulemaking,
which is the process that NOAA followed to issue the original DSHMRA
regulations and which it is following for this rulemaking. As such,
NOAA has complied with the requirements of DSHMRA and the APA and the
existing regulations need not be rescinded.
Comment 7. Commenters argued that the proposed rule is arbitrary
and capricious because the administrative record mostly repeats the
agency's rationale from 1986 without evidence that the statements are
true. Commenters argued that the deep seabed mining industry has not
matured and that a single business does not demonstrate a high
technology readiness level, nor is there a high market readiness level.
Commenters argued that the industry is nascent and no commercial deep-
sea mining has yet occurred. Several commenters argued that the
administrative record fails to discuss environmental impacts.
Commenters further argued that advancing the deep seabed mining
industry will result in advancement of industry's impacts to the marine
environment, but the proposed rule ignores advancements in
environmental science.
Response. When NOAA, in 1986, reserved Sec. 971.214 for potential
later development, it anticipated that as the deep seabed mining
industry matured and gained experience from exploration activities,
implementing a consolidated license and permit application process may
be appropriate. NOAA has explained the developments over the last
several decades that demonstrate that the industry has indeed matured
and gained both technological capability and information, such that
implementing a consolidated process is timely. For example, a
significant amount of mapping work has already occurred, and is
ongoing, in areas where hard mineral resources are known to be
concentrated--such as in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. Many entities
have performed substantial deep-sea mining exploration- and
development-type work over the last decade, gaining and developing
information, technology, and experience which has helped to mature the
industry and which means that many eligible entities may now be ready
to move to commercial recovery. Additionally, modern technology, such
as autonomous underwater vehicles, has increased the speed in which
areas can be explored as well as increased the quality of the data that
can be collected efficiently. Technologies that could be applied to
deep-sea resource recovery have also developed considerably since the
promulgation of the original regulations, with at least two companies
promoting prototype recovery equipment. Altogether, it is evident that
the industry has matured since the 1980s and it is now appropriate to
allow for a single consolidated application. NOAA is not relying on the
readiness level of any single business but rather the maturation of the
industry as a whole.
Comment 8. Several commenters made general comments in opposition
based on international considerations and offered specific
recommendations. Commenters argued that DSHMRA requires that U.S.
seabed mining activities conform to international obligations,
including LOSC Articles 192 and 194, and the precautionary principle.
Commenters stated that acting unilaterally on deep seabed mining
undermines the ISA process, international norms, global stability, and
the rule of law, and that it could result in harm to protected areas,
such as Areas of Particular Environmental Interest designated by the
ISA. One commenter recommended that NOAA revise its regulations to
require all exploration and/or commercial recovery permit applicants
planning activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction to provide a
plan for how the material recovered, knowledge gained, and general
outcomes of their operations will ``be carried out for the benefit of
all mankind'' and adhere to LOSC Article 140 and the policies in
Article 150 on Development of Resources of the Area. The commenter also
stated that NOAA should also notify the ISA Secretariat of applications
for activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
One commenter argued that NOAA failed to engage with Regional
Fishery Management Organizations (RFMOs) in this rulemaking process,
including the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission under the Tuna
Conventions Act.
Another commenter stated that U.S. deep-sea mining poses an
international offshore disconnection with the ISA and the LOSC and that
the U.S. has not aligned with growing international consensus on a deep
seabed mining moratorium. The commenter asserted
[[Page 2649]]
that the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement, adopted
in 2023 under the framework of the LOSC, is the first global treaty to
address the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological
diversity in the high seas and if the U.S. pursues seabed mining
without engaging this institutional architecture, it may lack necessary
levers to influence emerging conservation and resource regulation
frameworks. The commenter stated that geopolitical consequences of not
ratifying the LOSC and of acting unilaterally on deep seabed mining
would be far-reaching. The commenter argued proceeding under E.O. 14285
risks isolating the U.S. diplomatically, especially from key trading
partners and global industries moving toward higher environmental
standards.
Another commenter argued that the international legal landscape
governing the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources in
areas of the sea floor that lie beyond any nation's jurisdiction has
changed substantially since NOAA published its DSHMRA exploration
license regulations in 1981 and 1989 and it is essential that any
updates to U.S. regulations take these changes into account. The
commenter asserted that the current legal regime has eliminated the
``reciprocating states'' regime that existed on an interim basis in the
1980s, to which DSHMRA and the regulations refer, but on which
licensees and permittees today may no longer rely and reduces to a
small group the potential partner corporations on which a DSHMRA
licensee or permittee may rely due to potential conflicts with
contracts issued by the ISA. The commenter argued that licenses and
permits issued under DSHMRA that conflict with exploration and
exploitation contracts issued by the ISA could increase the likelihood
of creating ``a situation which may reasonably be expected to lead to a
breach of international peace and security involving armed conflict,''
30 U.S.C. 1415(a)(3). The commenter then asserted that an applicant
working outside the ISA regime cannot demonstrate that it possesses the
scientific, technical, and financial resources to pursue commercial
recovery activities in an expeditious and diligent manner as required
in the new Sec. 971.214(b). The commenter then, based on these
international considerations, recommended that NOAA acknowledge in its
regulations the substantial changes in the legal landscape since the
1980s, the incompatibility of DSHMRA and its associated regulations
with the international legal framework now in place in the Area, and
decline to entertain any applications for DSHMRA licenses and permits.
If, however, NOAA intends to review applications, the commenter
recommended that the agency maintain the current separation between the
application processes for exploration licenses and commercial recovery
permits. Lastly, the commenter provided suggested changes that NOAA
should make to various paragraphs of Sec. 971.214 and throughout 15
CFR part 971. Under the commenter's suggested changes, an applicant
would not be required to provide information in its application that
involves partnerships with Nations or work performed as part of those
partnerships that were done under the LOSC and the ISA regulatory
regime.
Response. Under DSHMRA, NOAA may issue licenses and permits to U.S.
citizens in areas beyond national jurisdiction, provided all domestic
statutory and regulatory requirements are met. The United States is not
a party to the LOSC. While the United States views the LOSC provisions
relating to traditional uses of the oceans as reflecting customary
international law binding on all States, the United States does not
consider Part XI of the LOSC or the 1994 agreement relating to Part XI
to reflect customary international law. In 1980, the United States
enacted DSHMRA, which states ``exploration for and commercial recovery
of hard mineral resources of the deep seabed are freedoms of the high
seas subject to a duty of reasonable regard to the interests of other
states in their exercise of those and other freedoms recognized by
general principles of international law.'' DSHMRA dictates that the
U.S. private sector's deep-sea exploration and commercial recovery
activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction must be undertaken
with strong standards and environmental impact statements, and those
activities must not unreasonably interfere with the interests of other
states in their exercise of high seas freedoms. The international
considerations raised by these comments are not implicated by the
changes made in this rulemaking, which consolidate and expedite
existing regulatory processes under DSHMRA. Accordingly, no
modifications to the regulations are necessary. Regarding notifying the
ISA, NOAA notifies the public and provides an opportunity to comment--
worldwide via the Federal Register and <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a>--on applications
that are in full compliance, and NOAA considers public comments on such
applications before NOAA makes final decisions on whether to issue
DSHMRA licenses or permits.
Regarding engaging with RFMOs for this rulemaking, these
organizations were aware of the rulemaking via the proposed rule
Federal Register notice and had the opportunity to submit comments
through the public <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a> process. As applicable, NOAA and the
State Department will work through the appropriate process established
in each RFMO to address potential impacts of specific U.S.-authorized
deep-sea mining projects on internationally-managed fisheries.
2. General Support for Deep Seabed Mining or NOAA's Rulemaking
Comment 9. Commenters voiced support for deep seabed mining and
asserted the need for critical minerals, strengthening the independence
and reliability of U.S. supply chains by advancing U.S. leadership in
seabed mineral exploration and responsible commercial recovery, the
need for reduced reliance on China and other foreign sources of
critical minerals, the need (on environmental and other grounds) to
pursue alternatives to land-based mining for critical minerals, and the
nature of updated deep seabed mining technology. Some commenters
expressed particular support for polymetallic nodule collection from
the Clarion-Clipperton Zone. Commenters also supported technological
developments for selective harvesting with reduced environmental
impacts.
Response: NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 10. Commenters supported NOAA's efforts to modernize the
DSHMRA regulations to streamline the permitting and licensing process
and endorsed NOAA's efforts to consolidate the exploration license and
commercial recovery permit into a single, unified application process.
Commenters considered that the shift from dual-track reviews to an
integrated permitting pathway is a substantial improvement that reduces
redundancy, shortens regulatory timelines, and aligns with best
practices in modern governance. Commenters also supported NOAA's move
to digital applications and stated that it eliminates outdated paper-
based requirements, saving applicants time and money while improving
transparency and efficiency. A commenter stated that these reforms are
particularly beneficial for small businesses, which often struggle with
compliance costs and process complexity, and which benefit from
regulatory certainty and efficiency. Commenters commended NOAA for
advancing a system that enhances
[[Page 2650]]
predictability, accelerates access to critical minerals, lowers the
cost of capital and unlocks innovation, and promotes fairer
participation in offshore economic opportunities and stated that the
regulatory changes directly align with national objectives around
critical mineral independence, economic competitiveness, and
responsible deregulation. Another commenter argued that NOAA should
expedite commercial/exploratory applications for two key reasons:
current terrestrial mining methods are devastating to the environment,
and the biggest threat to the maritime ecosystem is China's
unrestricted and unreported fishing.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
3. Other Comments
Comment 11. A commenter asked how NOAA's current regulatory
framework both supports responsible innovation in deep-sea mining and
ensures that environmental protections are effectively enforced.
Response. This comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. NOAA
notes that DSHMRA authorizes NOAA to issue licenses and permits, but
does not currently provide NOAA with funding for deep seabed mining
technology development and innovation. In reviewing applications for
exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits, NOAA considers
information presented regarding effectiveness of technology and
environmental effects. In addition, the Administrator sets enforceable
terms, conditions, and restrictions for, among other things, the
protection of the environment on each license and/or permit issued
under the Act and its implementing regulations. See 30 U.S.C. 1419(b).
The Act and the DSHMRA regulations describe NOAA's enforcement
authority under this regulatory framework and contain several
provisions for monitoring compliance with legal requirements and
pursuing appropriate enforcement action when necessary. See, e.g., 30
U.S.C. 1424, 1461-1468; 15 CFR part 971, subpart J.
Comment 12. One commenter noted many published articles regarding
the occurrence of various metals in polymetallic nodules. The commenter
asked whether given the slow, cold, and high-pressure environment in
which the metal deposition occurs, there is the potential for
depletion/enrichment of a lower or higher mass isotopes. The commenter
stated that the following additional elements have two or more stable
isotopes that are naturally occurring: Fe(4), Si(3), Mg(3), Ti(5),
K(2), V(2), Cu(2), Ni(5), Zn(5), and Ba(7). The commenter also
recommended that there should be consideration to updated analyses of
the heterogeneity of several NORM analytes (e.g., 238U, 235U, 234U,
232Th, 231Pa, 230Th, 226Ra, 214Bi, 214Pb, and 210Pb) in a
representative collection of polymetallic nodules. The commenter stated
there is an open question whether the concentrations of uranium,
thorium, and radium may be sufficient to specifically extract and
market.
Response. Pursuing the recommended research is beyond the scope of
this rulemaking action. It may be that DSHMRA licensees and permittees
may be able to obtain this information as they proceed with their
exploration and commercial recovery operations.
Comment 13. A commenter noted that NOAA is analyzing this proposed
rule in accordance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the NOAA
Administrative Order 216-6A, and the NOAA Companion Manual, Policy and
Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
and Related Authorities (effective January 13, 2017). The commenter
asked if, given E.O. 14154, ``Unleashing American Energy,'' which
directed the Council on Environmental Quality to propose rescinding its
NEPA regulations and to provide guidance on implementing NEPA, the
referenced NOAA manuals contain the appropriate and updated content.
Response. During the publication of the proposed rule, NOAA
finalized revisions to the agency's procedures for implementing NEPA in
the NOAA Companion Manual, Policy and Procedures for Compliance with
the National Environmental Policy Act and Related Authorities
(effective June 30, 2025). This final rule reflects the agency's
revised procedures.
Comment 14. Commenters encouraged NOAA to ensure that the process
for transferring and/or revising existing licenses and permits is
streamlined to at least the same extent as the proposed consolidated
license and permit application process. A commenter also expressed
concern over NOAA's retention of open-ended discretion across key
regulatory touchpoints, including fee adjustments, review timelines,
and EIS requirements. The commenter urged NOAA to adopt defined
timelines, appeals processes, and transparent criteria to ensure
fairness and accountability. The commenter argued that NOAA should
establish clear thresholds and procedures in the final rule for
determining when separate EIS processes would be required, ensuring
predictability and compliance with NEPA requirements. The commenter
also stated that NOAA should create a formal mechanism for applicants
to challenge or appeal agency actions.
Response. Regarding streamlining the process for the transfer or
revision of an existing license, NOAA notes that under Sec.
971.214(g), an existing applicant may submit an amended application in
compliance with the consolidated application process. NOAA has not
otherwise proposed changes regarding existing licenses as such changes
are outside the scope of this rulemaking. Regarding NOAA's discretion
at various steps in the regulatory process, the Act and the DSHMRA
regulations provide clear and sufficient standards regarding timelines
and criteria to provide applicants with a reasonable and expedited path
toward completion of NOAA's review. As NOAA gains further experience
with processing new DSHMRA license and permit applications as well as
the consolidated license and permit applications, NOAA will determine
whether to propose further refinements to regulatory procedures, which
may include further refinement to EIS processes if necessary and
appropriate. Regarding appeal procedures, the Act and regulations
contain administrative and judicial appeal procedures. See 30 U.S.C.
1416(b) and (d), and 15 CFR part 971, subpart I.
Comment 15. Some commenters requested that NOAA establish a public
dashboard showing where each application stands in the process and
making supporting information, such as environmental data, public in
real time.
Response. NOAA publishes in the Federal Register notice of all
applications for licenses and permits that are in full compliance and
the materials relevant to such actions, and will publish the draft and
final EISs with the accompanying TCRs. See 30 U.S.C. 1419(d), 1426(a).
Comment 16. A commenter argued that NOAA should provide for more
Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES) funds to allow the U.S.
to collect necessary data.
Response. The comment is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
Comment 17. A commenter requested that NOAA update Sec. 970.100 to
reference the LOSC and E.O. 14285 and to establish a clear strategy for
``securing reliable supplies of critical minerals independent of
foreign adversary control.''
Response. NOAA did not propose changes to Sec. 970.100 as this
section reiterates the Act's stated purposes and provides the
flexibility for NOAA to
[[Page 2651]]
make changes to the regulations based on changes in the industry over
time. See 30 U.S.C. 1401(b).
Comment 18. A commenter argued that the regulations, 15 CFR
971.801, should require collecting, preserving, and making available
deep seabed mining data.
Response. The regulations already require licensees and permittees
to maintain, make available, and submit specified data and records to
NOAA, and NOAA will continue to make these records available to the
public in accordance with the applicable regulations. As part of this
final rule, NOAA has updated the procedures for the public disclosure
of documents received by NOAA, to remove outdated procedures and cross-
references for handling records and instead replace the section with a
cross-reference to the current regulations which govern public
disclosure of documents received by NOAA.
Comment 19. Some commenters provided recommendations on NOAA's
environmental review of proposed exploration license or commercial
recovery permit activities. Some commenters expressed concern that
retaining the possibility of two separate EISs--one for exploration and
one for recovery--could lead to duplicative efforts, costly delays, and
regulatory uncertainty without delivering additional environmental
benefits. A commenter recommended clearer guidelines to avoid
unnecessary procedural repetition and to prioritize streamlined,
single-track environmental assessments when feasible. Another commenter
requested that NOAA establish best available technology requirements in
regulation, with independent monitoring and third-party audits.
Response. As stated in Sec. 971.214(b), NOAA may issue a single
EIS for a consolidated license and permit application, but there may be
instances when other NEPA reviews may be necessary or a supplemental
EIS is needed. At this time NOAA is not developing guidelines for when
NOAA will prepare one or two EISs, or supplemental EISs, as these are
case-specific determinations based on each application, how an
applicant amends its application over time, and whether evolving
information indicates the potential for significant impacts to the
human environment not previously evaluated.
The Act and the regulations contain sufficient monitoring and
reporting provisions for NOAA to evaluate environmental impacts. NOAA
is not determining through this rulemaking what technology a company
should use; rather, the technologies should be developed and selected
by each applicant and then NOAA, in the application review process,
will consider whether the proposed technologies and other components of
the applications meet the requirements in the Act and regulations. The
Act and regulations contain sufficient provisions for monitoring,
including potentially, observers. As for scaling up a project, the
scope of exploration and commercial recovery activities is included in
the DSHMRA applications.
Comment 20. One comment pertained to the environmental problem of
the great Pacific garbage patch, which the commenter said no one is
doing anything about. The commenter stated that if deep seabed mining
is commercially successful, resources or profits could be used to deal
with the great Pacific garbage patch.
Response: This comment is beyond the scope of the current
rulemaking.
Comment 21. One commenter stated that even with digital reforms,
NOAA estimates over 4,000 annual burden hours and nearly $478,000 in
wage costs per applicant. The commenter viewed this as excessive and a
potential deterrent to participation, particularly for small and mid-
sized enterprises, and argued that NOAA should do more to reduce these
costs through smarter form design, pre-filled templates, and
elimination of duplicative information requests.
Response. The burden hours and wage costs are an estimate and NOAA
will adjust these as necessary in future actions for this PRA
information collection. See the PRA section herein, which describes how
NOAA estimated the hours and costs for applicants and NOAA. In
addition, NOAA has developed a DSHMRA web page that serves, in part, as
a small business compliance guide for purposes of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA). With respect to
the request for pre-filled templates or other streamlining forms, NOAA
may determine, after reviewing several applications, whether to propose
additional guidance. More information on costs is also provided in
Responses to Comments 33 and 34 regarding the fee for the consolidated
application process.
Comment 22. Several commenters provided comments on NOAA's RIA. One
commenter argued that the RIA shows only meager administrative cost
savings from the proposed process consolidation. The commenter argued
that this minimal amount does not justify expansion of speedy pathways
for an untested, high-risk new industry and that the amendments are not
about cost savings for the American people--they are about cost savings
and shortcuts benefiting only private commercial entities.
Another commenter pointed to the economic analysis in the RIA and
considered that the efficiency gains are expected to accelerate
America's offshore mineral development capabilities, potentially unlock
billions of dollars in untapped seabed resources, and help establish
U.S. leadership in the global critical minerals supply chain,
particularly for rare earth elements and strategic metals essential for
clean energy and defense technologies. Another commenter asserted that
the 100-day time savings is non-trivial in commercial cycles and could
substantially affect economic viability.
Commenters stated that the consolidated license process and cost
savings for small businesses will boost innovation and competitiveness.
NOAA's IRFA estimates cost savings of $5,099 for small businesses
transitioning to electronic applications and a 100-day reduction in
review time for consolidated applications, enabling faster market
entry. A commenter stated that these efficiencies will attract
additional U.S. companies to the sector, fostering a competitive and
innovative industry ecosystem. Other commenters expressed concern that
the consolidated application fee was too high and risks entrenching the
largest operators at the expense of small businesses.
Response. The RIA is an objective evaluation of the information to
which NOAA has access to evaluate the economic impacts of a rulemaking.
NOAA uses the RIA to comply with E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) and the RFA. As a result of the public comments and additional
public data available, NOAA has revised the RIA as follows.
First, NOAA has partially monetized the benefit of 100 days saved
through the consolidated license and permit application process. NOAA
has monetized the cost savings for the applicant's administrative labor
overhead that would be incurred during this waiting period and has
found an annual cost-savings benefit of $2,411,192. Second, NOAA
revised the applicant's wage burden benefit calculated using the PRA
Supporting Statement OMB Control # 0648-0145, Section 12 to find a cost
savings benefit of $43,125 for transitioning from a sequential to a
consolidated permit application. NOAA has also included the calculation
of the government's reduced wage burden using the PRA
[[Page 2652]]
Supporting Statement OMB Control # 0648-0145, Section 14, by reviewing
a single consolidated instead of a sequential exploration and
commercial recovery application, showed a benefit to NOAA of $119,803
in cost savings per year. Third, NOAA updated the Final RIA benefit
calculations including the 100-day cost savings and reduced government
wage burden. NOAA also updated the FRFA to include the 100-day cost
savings only.
For additional information, please refer to the Final RIA and FRFA,
available at the Federal eRulemaking Portal at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108">https://www.regulations.gov/docket/NOAA-NOS-2025-0108</a>, as well as the summary
pertaining to the RFA in Section V, Miscellaneous Rulemaking
Requirements, below. See also NOAA's Responses to Comments 33 and 34
below, regarding the fee for the consolidated application process.
Comment 23. One commenter stated that on September 3, 2025, the
virtual public hearing platform failed to load and would not allow
members of the commenter's coalition to join the virtual public
hearing. The commenter argued the lack of reliable access effectively
denied them the opportunity to participate in the hearing and share
their input in real time. The commenter asserted that public hearings
are a crucial part of the democratic process, especially when it comes
to federal regulations that impact communities, stakeholders, and the
environment and that it is essential that all interested members of the
public have a fair and functional opportunity to engage in the
regulatory process. The commenter requested that NOAA schedule an
additional public hearing using a more accessible and reliable
platform.
Response. On September 3, 2025, NOAA experienced technical
difficulties with the virtual public hearing platform, which was
scheduled to commence at 3:00 p.m. eastern time (ET) and run through
7:00 p.m. ET. At the outset of the hearing, many members of the public
as well as NOAA staff were unable to access the hearing. NOAA staff
immediately contacted the platform provider to troubleshoot the issue
and sent the following message to all registered hearing participants
at approximately 4:50 p.m. ET, informing them of the technical issues:
``Dear Hearing Registrant--NOAA is aware of the technical difficulties
with today's hearing. We are working to resolve this issue and we will
follow up with additional information within the next hour. We
apologize for any inconvenience.'' Soon after that, the problem was
resolved, and NOAA decided to hold the hearing from 5:45-7:30 p.m. ET.
At 5:30 p.m. ET, NOAA sent an updated message to all registered
participants with that information and a working virtual public hearing
room link. The message also reminded participants of the second hearing
on September 4 and encouraged them to register for that one, if
preferred. The September 3 hearing began at 5:45 p.m. ET and proceeded
without incident until there were no additional oral comment requests,
ending at approximately 7:15 p.m. ET. All participants who joined the
hearing and who requested to speak had the opportunity to do so. About
99 of the 268 registrants attended at least part of the hearing. On
September 4, NOAA conducted the second virtual public hearing, as
scheduled, from 3:00 p.m. ET until there were no additional oral
comment requests, at approximately 5:10 p.m. ET. All participants who
attended and requested to speak had the opportunity to do so. All
comments shared during both hearings were transcribed and posted to the
<a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a> e-Portal docket for the proposed rulemaking. Members
from the group making this comment spoke at the September 3, 2025,
virtual public hearing. No additional virtual public hearing is
necessary.
Comment 24. A commenter requested an extension to the 60-day public
comment period and stated that there was insufficient publicity on this
critical matter.
Response. NOAA declines to extend the public comment period because
there was ample publicity and opportunity for public comment in this
rulemaking process. As required by DSHMRA, 30 U.S.C. 1426, and
consistent with the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, NOAA provided notice in the
Federal Register of the proposed rule, afforded a 60-day period for
public comments, and has considered comments received. DSHMRA requires
that the Administrator shall hold a public hearing on proposed
regulations, 30 U.S.C. 1426; NOAA conducted two virtual public
hearings. NOAA also published a Federal Register notice of the virtual
public hearings (90 FR 36425, Aug. 4, 2025) in addition to the notice
regarding the proposed rule (90 FR 29806), and NOAA's DSHMRA website
(<a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/">https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/</a>) discusses the
rulemaking.
IV. Summary of Final Regulations and Response to Comments on Specific
Sections of the Regulations.
In this section, NOAA explains the changes to the DSHMRA
regulations implemented by this final rule. Some of the changes are in
response to comments on the proposed rule. NOAA has included public
comments on specific sections of the proposed rule and NOAA's responses
at the end of each applicable section. For a summary of other
conforming changes that are necessary to reference the consolidated
application process, as applicable, throughout parts 970 and 971, see
section II. Changes from Proposed to Final Rule.
Sec. 970.200(b) Place, Form and Copies
NOAA revises paragraph (b) to remove the requirement for mailing 30
hard copies, replace it with a requirement to submit electronically
only, and remove addresses that are no longer valid. NOAA also adds a
requirement that applications must be formatted according to regulatory
sections and topics, which will help ensure that an application
contains the required information and will allow NOAA to complete its
review of an application in an expeditious manner. At this final rule
stage, NOAA has also added a clarifying sentence to paragraph (b)
stating: ``For applications received electronically after the close of
business, for purposes of computing the Administrator's required
response time, the application shall be deemed to be received at 8 a.m.
ET on the next business day.'' This change is consistent with the
proposed rule language transitioning to electronic submission of
applications and with existing language in the DSHMRA regulations on
computation of time (15 CFR 971.805). This change pertains to the
Administrator's response time computation only and does not alter
substantive rights or obligations of applicants. As such, this is a
clarifying change.
Sec. 970.208(b) Fee
NOAA made corresponding changes to the required application
description of the fee payment in Sec. Sec. 970.208, 971.208, and
971.214(d)(1), in light of the new electronic submission requirements
for applications (described above). Since there will no longer be a
physical application that can be ``accompanied'' by a physical payment
(such as a check), NOAA is simply requiring the fee payment to be made
prior to or concurrent with the submission of the electronic
application and explaining that the application should contain a
description of when and in what manner the fee was paid. Other
provisions of Sec. 970.208, such as the amount of the fee, were left
unchanged. This is a clarifying change that does not alter substantive
rights.
[[Page 2653]]
Related Comments
Comment 25. A commenter supported the proposed changes to the text
at Sec. 970.200(b) to remove the requirement for applicants to mail
hard copies of exploration license applications to NOAA and to replace
it with a requirement for electronic submission of applications only.
The commenter asserted that this change would considerably increase
efficiency in the application process and reduce the resource burden on
both applicants and NOAA. The commenter requested further clarity on
what NOAA means by ``The application format shall be organized
according to the specific regulatory topics and sections'' and invited
NOAA to consider developing a template or guidelines for exploration
license applications for applicants to use in future.
Response. NOAA is specifying that applications must be formatted so
that they follow the specific regulatory topics and sections included
in the part 970 and 971 regulations, which describe the application
requirements. If applications are otherwise organized into headings of
the applicant's own design, then it is difficult for the applicant and
NOAA to determine that the application contains the required
information addressing each applicable section of the regulations. NOAA
has also developed a DSHMRA web page that serves, in part, as a small
business compliance guide for SBREFA purposes. NOAA may determine,
after reviewing several applications, whether to propose additional
guidance or regulatory changes.
Sec. 970.209 Substantial Compliance With Application Requirements
NOAA revises Sec. 970.209 by making clarifying changes regarding
substantial compliance and to reference the Sec. 971.214 consolidated
license and permit procedure. NOAA notes that this section applies to
``new entrants,'' which is defined in Sec. 970.101(m) as any applicant
with respect to any application or amendment that has not been accorded
a pre-enactment explorer priority of right. A holder of an exploration
license who then applies for an exploration license or consolidated
license and permit for a new area would be considered a ``new entrant''
with respect to the application for a new area. NOAA is not changing
how to determine priority of right; the submission date of the
exploration license application that is found to be in substantial
compliance (rather than payment of the administrative fee) determines
priority of right under the terms of Sec. 970.200(e), which also
describes how priority of right may be lost during the application
process. NOAA is also not changing the 30-day and 60-day time periods
for determining substantial and full compliance as these time periods
facilitate expedited review.
Sec. 970.210 Reasonable Time for Full Compliance
NOAA revises Sec. 970.210 to reference the new Sec. 971.214
consolidated license and permit procedure.
Related Comments
Comment 26. A commenter supported the proposed revision to the text
at Sec. 970.210 to expressly include reference to consolidated license
and permit applications filed under Sec. 971.214.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Sec. 971.200(b) Place, Form and Copies
NOAA revises paragraph (b) to remove the requirement for mailing 25
hard copies, replace it with a requirement to submit electronically,
and remove addresses that are no longer valid. NOAA also adds a
sentence that applications must be formatted according to regulatory
sections and topics. Formatting an application by the regulatory
sections and topics will help ensure that an application contains the
required information and will allow NOAA to complete its review of an
application in an expeditious manner. At this final rule stage, NOAA
has also added a clarifying sentence to paragraph (b) stating: ``For
applications received electronically after the close of business, for
purposes of computing the Administrator's required response time, the
application shall be deemed to be received at 8 a.m. ET on the next
business day.'' This change is consistent with the proposed rule
language transitioning to electronic submission of applications and
with existing language in the DSHMRA regulations on computation of time
(15 CFR 971.805). This change pertains to the Administrator's response
time computation only and does not alter substantive rights or
obligations of applicants. As such, this is a clarifying change.
Sec. 971.208(b) Fee
NOAA made corresponding changes to the description of the required
application fee payment in Sec. Sec. 970.208, 971.208, and
971.214(d)(1) in light of the new electronic submission requirements
for applications (described above). Since there will no longer be a
physical application that can be ``accompanied'' by a physical payment
(such as a check), NOAA is requiring the fee payment to be made prior
to or concurrent to the submission of the electronic application and
explaining that the application should contain a description of when
and in what manner the fee was paid. Other provisions of Sec. 971.208,
such as the amount of the fee, were left unchanged. This is a
clarifying change that does not alter substantive rights.
Related Comments
Comment 27. A commenter requested further clarity on what NOAA
intends to mean by ``The application format shall be organized
according to the specific regulatory topics and sections'' and invited
NOAA to consider developing a template or guidelines for CRP
applications for applicants to use in future.
Response. NOAA is specifying that applications must be formatted so
that they follow the specific regulatory topics and sections included
in the part 970 and 971 regulations. If applications are otherwise
organized into headings of the applicant's own design, then it is
difficult for the applicant and NOAA to determine that the application
contains the required information for each section of the regulations.
NOAA has also developed a DSHMRA web page that serves, in part, as a
small business compliance guide for SBREFA purposes, <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/">https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/</a>. NOAA may determine, after
reviewing several applications, whether to propose additional guidance
or regulatory changes.
Sec. 971.214 Consolidated License and Permit Procedures
NOAA is using this reserved section to add a process whereby U.S.
citizens who are qualified for these consolidated procedures may
concurrently apply for an exploration license and a commercial recovery
permit. A U.S. citizen is qualified to use these consolidated
procedures if it can demonstrate that the applicant possesses the
scientific, technical, and financial resources to pursue commercial
recovery activities in an expeditious and diligent manner.
Under the consolidated license and permit process, a qualified
applicant does not submit two, sequential applications (one for the
exploration license and one for the commercial recovery permit) but,
rather, submits one application for both the exploration license and
commercial recovery permit at the same time that meets the requirements
of the new Sec. 970.214. The Administrator then conducts a
consolidated review through one process, not two separate reviews, and,
[[Page 2654]]
where necessary, publishes separate proposals to issue a license and
permit; TCRs on the licenses and permits; and the licenses and
permits.\2\ The Administrator provides an opportunity for public
comment and will hold a public hearing on the consolidated license and
permit application. NOAA expects that the Administrator will likely
prepare a single EIS that would evaluate the impacts of both
exploration activities and commercial recovery activities as opposed to
separate EISs. However, there may be situations in which two EISs are
appropriate. See 30 U.S.C. 1419(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ As under the existing regulations, and pursuant to DSHMRA,
priority of right shall be based on ``the chronological order in
which license applications which are in substantial compliance with
the requirements established under subsection (a)(2) of this section
are filed with the Administrator.'' 30 U.S.C. 1413(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While paragraph (g) will require that an applicant with a pending
license application file an amended consolidated application if the
applicant seeks to use the consolidated license and permit procedure,
it would not be a new application and would not negate work completed
to date. To the contrary, NOAA would apply whatever work has been done
to date, and then continue under Sec. 971.214, supplementing already-
completed steps as necessary to account for changes and additions in
the consolidated application, including for example, substantial
changes (if any) to the exploration plan as well as new plans and
information regarding a commercial recovery permit. If any existing
applicant wishes to take advantage of the consolidated application
process, that applicant would be directed to submit an amended
application consistent with Sec. Sec. 970.213 and 971.213. And under
Sec. 970.213, priority of right established by the filing of the
original application would generally not be affected by the filing of
the amended application unless the amended application proposes new
coordinates outside of the area of the proposed exploration area of the
original application. If the amended application proposes new
coordinates, the applicant would maintain priority of right over any
proposed area in the original application that is also in the amended
application, and, if there are no conflicts with the new proposed areas
in the amended application, the applicant would obtain priority of
right over new areas as of the date of submission of the amended
application, as long as the amended application is determined to be in
substantial compliance. NOAA has added to paragraph (g) a clause at the
end of the last sentence that states, ``except that any work, actions
or decisions by NOAA, including required findings at various stages of
the application process, shall continue to apply to the extent still
applicable.''
The Administrator may issue the exploration license and commercial
recovery permit at the same time, thereby confirming the priority of
right required that would otherwise be established through the
licensing process and the ability of the permit holder to proceed to
commercial recovery. The Administrator would issue the license and
permit when the TCRs are finalized and if the requirements of 15 CFR
part 970, subpart E, part 971, subpart D, and Sec. Sec. 970.509 and
971.410 are satisfied and the applicant is otherwise eligible for a
license and permit. That priority of right continues through the
commercial recovery permit. The length of the terms for an exploration
license (10 years) and commercial recovery permit (20 years) does not
change nor does the ability to extend these terms as described in the
regulations and the Act. Once the Administrator issues the license and
permit under the consolidated process, the applicant may immediately
proceed to commercial recovery of hard mineral resources, if it wishes,
but in any event must begin to diligently pursue its commercial
recovery plan. See 30 U.S.C. 1417(b), 1418. Similarly, the applicant
must diligently pursue its exploration plan. 30 U.S.C. 1418. However,
if an applicant determined that it no longer needed to conduct further
exploration, it could decide to not extend its exploration license or
it could opt to relinquish its license early without penalty. See 30
U.S.C. 1425(a).
NOAA recognizes that there may be instances where an applicant for
a consolidated license and permit is found to qualify for a license
only. In such instances, NOAA may issue an exploration license while
withholding the granting of a permit.
The fee for the consolidated application has been set at $350,000,
which partially accounts for inflation that has occurred in the time
since the fee was set at $100,000 for a license application and
$100,000 for a permit application. Additionally, NOAA has clarified
that, given the electronic submission of the application, the fee
payment must be made prior to or concurrent with the submission of a
consolidated application and that the application should describe when
the payment was made and the method of payment.
NOAA has made some technical and clarifying changes to Sec.
971.214 based on comments on the proposed rule, and these changes are
addressed in the responses to comments below.
Related Comments
Comment 28. A commenter expressed confusion as to which provisions
of Parts 970 and 971 apply to a consolidated exploration license and
commercial recovery permit application. The commenter requested that
NOAA redesignate the existing text of paragraph (a) as paragraph (a)(2)
and insert a new paragraph (a)(1) at the outset of Sec. 971.214(a) as
follows: ``(1) Applicability and Order of Precedence. This section
governs all applications that seek both exploration and commercial
recovery under DSHMRA. Except as expressly modified herein, applicants
must comply with any provision of Parts 970 and 971 that is not in
conflict with the requirements of this section. In the event of any
conflict or inconsistency between any provision of this section and any
provision of Parts 970 or 971, the provision of this section shall
control.''
Response. To accommodate the concerns expressed in the comment,
NOAA has added some of the suggested text to paragraph (a) and changed
the title of paragraph (a). NOAA has also made some minor conforming
edits to this text to further clarify the applicability of the
referenced sections. NOAA agrees that adding some of the proposed text
provides clarification regarding the meaning of this section, and it
does not alter substantive obligations.
Comment 29. A commenter requested that NOAA replace each citation
that now reads ``Sec. 970.103(b)'' with the exact subsection housing
the relevant text. For example, any reference to the definition of
``deep seabed'' would become ``Sec. 970.103(b)(1)(i),'' and references
relating to financial assurance requirements would become ``Sec.
970.103(b)(2)(ii).''
Response. It is not clear what the commenter is referring to. In
the proposed regulatory text for Sec. 971.214, there are only two
references to Sec. 970.103(b), and one of these is a duplicate that
NOAA has removed (proposed paragraph (e)(5)). The one use of Sec.
970.103(b) is meant to cover all the restrictions in that section.
Comment 30. Commenters stated that under Sec. 971.214(d), there
are no objective thresholds for how applicants can demonstrate
scientific, technical, and financial resources and show the need for
further exploration activities is minimal or not needed. Commenters
requested that NOAA provide clear guidance on documentation
[[Page 2655]]
expectations, such as publishing illustrative thresholds.
Response. The Act and NOAA's regulations contain substantial
guidance for the information needed to support the issuance of an
exploration license and commercial recovery permit. The information
required will be the same under the consolidated license and permit
procedure. To the extent an interested party has additional questions,
under existing regulations, applicants are encouraged (and in some
cases required) to engage in pre-application consultations. The
scientific, technical, and financial resources necessary and the types
of documentation required will necessarily depend on the applicant's
chosen exploration and commercial recovery plan, and through the pre-
application consultation process NOAA can work with applicants to
clarify requirements given an interested party's specific situation. In
addition, NOAA is updating its DSHMRA technical guidance in a process
that is separate from this rulemaking. Updating the technical guidance
is critical for having data acquisition standards for monitoring
potential impacts. NOAA expects to release a draft of the revised
technical guidance for public review later this year. As NOAA gains
experience with new DSHMRA applications, NOAA may provide additional
guidance regarding thresholds for net financial resources or
technological capabilities.
NOAA is not pre-determining, even by providing non-binding
examples, what information a prospective applicant for the consolidated
license and permit might propose to NOAA to demonstrate that it is
eligible for a consolidated license and permit application and that the
applicant could proceed to commercial recovery in an expeditious and
diligent manner. As described in greater detail below, however, NOAA
has removed the reference to ``the need for further exploration
activities'' in order to clarify the required qualifications for using
the consolidated application process.
Comment 31. A commenter stated that under Sec. 971.214(e), NOAA
must certify a consolidated application or identify any deficiencies
within 100 days of submission. The commenter expressed confusion about
how this provision relates to Sec. 970.210, which allows a 60-day cure
period for ``substantial but not full compliance,'' a window that can
extend past the 100-day review deadline and leave stakeholders unsure
which clock governs. The commenter argued that the rule should state
the 100-day review clock is suspended when NOAA issues a cure notice
and resumes only once all deficiencies are fully resolved.
Response. The 60-day period for an application to meet full
compliance in Sec. 970.210 serves a different purpose than the 100-day
certification period in 30 U.S.C. 1413(g), Sec. 970.400(c), and the
new Sec. 971.214(e). The 100-day period begins after the 60-day
period. The 60-day period begins when NOAA finds an application to be
in substantial compliance, but not full compliance, and the applicant
then has 60 days to provide the information NOAA has identified that is
needed for full compliance. The 60-day period in Sec. 970.210 applies
to exploration license applications submitted as part of a consolidated
license and permit application under Sec. 971.214. The 100-day period
begins once NOAA finds an application to be in full compliance; NOAA
then has 100 days to certify the application. This has been NOAA's
long-standing interpretation of the Act and the regulations regarding
the 100-day period for certification of an application for an
exploration license. NOAA interprets the phrase ``submission of the
application which is in full compliance'' as the date of the submission
of the amended application that is in full compliance. Therefore, NOAA
interprets references to a license ``application'' in both the Act and
Part 970 to refer to a fully compliant, and not substantially
compliant, application for purposes of starting the certification 100-
day period. Similarly, NOAA interprets references to permit
applications in both the Act and Part 971 to refer to fully complete
applications, and not incomplete applications, for purposes of starting
the 100-day certification period. See 15 CFR 971.300(c).
Comment 32. A commenter argued that NOAA should formalize
notification for permits beyond areas of national jurisdiction. The
commenter stated this approach mirrors the ``due regard'' duty
articulated in LOSC Article 56(2) and the LOSC Part XI provisions
(Arts. 138-140) that underlie ISA procedures, demonstrating good-faith
adherence to customary obligations under the ``common heritage of
mankind'' principle.
Response. The Act and NOAA's regulations contain provisions for
interagency coordination, including coordination with the Department of
State, and NOAA complies with this requirement. The Act and regulations
also provide for public notification of and comment on applications
that are in full compliance. In keeping with this requirement, NOAA
notifies the public and provides an opportunity to comment--worldwide
via the Federal Register and <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a>--to applications that are
in full compliance, and NOAA considers public comments on such
applications before NOAA makes final decisions on whether to issue
DSHMRA licenses or permits. In addition, the Act and the regulations
contain provisions that are sufficient for NOAA and the public to
evaluate whether there are any potential use conflicts in a proposed
area of the ocean beyond national jurisdiction. If any potential use
conflicts exist, NOAA can develop appropriate TCRs for DSHMRA licenses
or permits to address such conflicts. In addition, informal dialogue
and consultation or formal negotiation can be used to address potential
use conflicts that may remain or may later arise.
Comment 33. Some commenters argued that the consolidated
application fee is too high. Commenters argued that the proposed
consolidated-permit process risks entrenching the largest, best-funded
operators at the expense of smaller innovators and is potentially
exclusionary and disadvantages smaller entrants to the market and
diversified competition. For startups and small marine tech firms,
commenters thought this fee may present a prohibitive barrier to market
entry. Commenters argued NOAA should adopt a sliding-scale, tiered, or
phased fee structure that reduces upfront costs for entities with lower
annual revenues or early-stage exploration achievements. A commenter
argued that NOAA has not shown that the increased fee aligns with the
actual costs incurred per application. Commenters also requested that
NOAA implement a grandfather provision whereby applications submitted
prior to the effective date of the new rule would be subject to the fee
schedule in effect at the time of submission under the existing rule
prior to the proposals.
Response. The Act, 30 U.S.C. 1414, requires that NOAA establish a
``reasonable administrative fee'' that ``shall reflect the reasonable
administrative costs incurred in reviewing and processing the
application'' for a license or permit. NOAA has set a $350,000 fee for
the consolidated license and permit application, which partially
accounts for inflation that has occurred in the time since the fee was
set at $100,000.\3\
[[Page 2656]]
While an inflation adjustment alone would result in an amount greater
than $350,000, the $350,000 amount is a reasonable initial fee for the
consolidated license and permit process, given technological
improvements that may increase the efficiency of application
processing. In addition, under Sec. Sec. 970.208, 971.208, and
971.214, regardless of the initial fee ($100,000 or $350,000), NOAA may
adjust the fee up or down for each application, depending on the
administrative costs incurred. If, after further experience processing
consolidated applications, NOAA determines that the reasonable cost of
processing these applications is higher or lower than the estimated
$350,000, NOAA may promulgate new rules further adjusting the initial
application fee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Using the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recommended
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) deflator, adjusting $200,000 ($100,000
each for an exploration license application and a commercial
recovery permit application) from 1989 to 2024 would be $438,144,
substantially more than the $350,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the estimated costs of exploration and commercial recovery
programs that an applicant must be financially responsible for carrying
out, see 30 U.S.C. 1413(c)(1), NOAA does not expect this initial fee to
pose an undue barrier to entry to smaller businesses who wish to submit
consolidated applications. See the Final RIA for more information.
After this rule becomes effective, in the instances where an
applicant has a pending exploration license application and then
submits a consolidated license and permit application, NOAA will
determine the additional fee amount, if any, that an applicant will
need to pay for the consolidated application.
NOAA also made technical changes to how the fee is described in the
application and similar edits to the corresponding sections for
Sec. Sec. 970.208 and 971.208. Instead of requiring that the fee
payment ``accompany'' the application, in light of the new electronic
submission requirement NOAA now requires an applicant to submit the fee
payment to NOAA prior to or concurrent with the submission of the
application and to include in the application a description of when the
fee was paid and the manner of payment. This is a technical, clarifying
change.
Comment 34. Some commenters argued that the consolidated
application fee is too low. One commenter stated that priority by
receipt date can encourage low-effort filings on prime areas and argued
that NOAA should require a modest, refundable reservation bond--
released once an applicant delivers a minimum dataset or completes an
initial survey--to discourage speculative claims without penalizing
serious developers. Another commenter argued that the consolidated
application fee is grossly insufficient to reflect the harm that deep-
sea mining activities cause to the oceans and for costs of restoration
and remediation activities along with the loss of ecosystems. The
commenter argued that the fee for each of the licensing and permitting
phases should be separate and use a fee schedule based on the size of
the geographic area to be mined, the present value of the ecosystem,
the value of each impacted species, and the gross cost of restoring the
area to a pre-mined state, with a minimum fee of $10,000,000 for each
of the licensing and permitting phases.
Response. As stated in the Act, the ``administrative fee imposed by
the Administrator on any applicant shall reflect the reasonable
administrative costs incurred in reviewing and processing the
application.'' 30 U.S.C. 1414. So, NOAA is not adjusting the fee
structure to establish by rulemaking a new ``reservation bond'' nor
impose separate fees for each application to account for restoration
and remediation. Such bonds or fees are outside the limited scope of
this rulemaking and the Act.
In addition, the fee structure (an initial $100,000 or $350,000,
with adjustment upwards or downwards to reflect the actual
administrative cost of an application), the findings NOAA must make
under the Act and the regulations, and the diligence requirements under
the Act and the regulations, provide sufficient authority to address
speculative claims. For example, under the DSHMRA reporting
requirements, license and permit holders are required to show diligent
progress in the execution of their exploration and commercial recovery
plans in order to maintain those licenses and permits.
Comment 35. Commenters argued that the regulations are of general
applicability to all deep seabed mining which may include all sorts of
geological formations, and it is not appropriate to single out one type
of mining by referring to polymetallic nodules, but rather to refer to
minerals, or mineral deposits. Although the DSHMRA resource definition
may be read narrowly to apply only to polymetallic nodules, the
commenters asserted that the President's Executive Order is much
broader in scope and nothing in DSHMRA would appear to limit NOAA's
authority to address this broader scope. Commenters suggested
elimination of language which would suggest that licenses and permits
cannot address the full range of minerals in application areas.
Response. The Act and the DSHMRA regulations define ``hard mineral
resources'' as ``any deposit or accretion on, or just below, the
surface of the deep seabed of nodules which include one or more
minerals, at least one of which contains manganese, nickel, cobalt, or
copper.'' 30 U.S.C. 1403(6); 15 CFR 970.101(j); 15 CFR 971.101(k).
Therefore, for purposes of the Act, the regulations, and this final
rule, the term ``hard mineral resources'' refers to polymetallic
nodules. As such, and because ``nodules'' is used elsewhere in the
DSHMRA regulations, NOAA has not made changes to the use of ``nodules''
in the regulatory text. A broader interpretation of hard mineral
resources could suggest that DSHMRA covers sulphides and crusts, which
it does not. As this definition is in the Act, NOAA cannot by
regulation change the definition.
Comment 36. A commenter argued that many sections provide redundant
information and stated that it is important to determine an overall
structure and then allocate the information to these sections.
Response. In creating the new Sec. 971.214 consolidated license
and permit process, NOAA has mirrored some corollary sections within 15
CFR parts 970 and 971 in Sec. 971.214. NOAA has taken this approach
for greater clarity and specificity as to the requirements of the
consolidated application process and to ensure that, where applicable,
there are consistent application requirements between applicants using
the consolidated application process and those opting to pursue
sequential licenses and permits.
Comment 37. A commenter stated that it is important to the
Applicant to understand what is required, early on in the document such
as the: Application Form, Statement of Financial Resources, Exploration
Plan, Commercial Recovery Plan, Environmental Impact Statement,
Economic Feasibility Analysis, Technical Feasibility Study, Legal
Feasibility Study, Monitoring Plan, Hearings (Processing Outside the
US), and Schedule of Commercial Recovery.
Response. The current regulatory structure in 15 CFR part 970 and
part 971, and now also in Sec. 971.214, contain information on the
sections needed for an application.
Comment 38. A commenter argued that in Sec. 971.214(b), the word
``separate'' creates confusion and requested that NOAA replace it with
an ``Exploration License and a Commercial Recovery Permit.''
Response. For clarity, NOAA has replaced the first instance of
``separate'' with ``an exploration license and a
[[Page 2657]]
commercial recovery permit.'' This is a clarifying change that does not
alter the meaning of this section.
Comment 39. A commenter stated that, given that public hearings
have not yet been mentioned, Sec. 971.214(b) should be reserved for a
section on hearings.
Response. Regulations regarding public hearings can be found in the
existing regulations and are also included in the new Sec. 971.214.
See also Sec. Sec. 970.212, 971.212.
Comment 40. A commenter argued that in Sec. 971.214(b) the word
``may'' is confusing as it allows the possibility that NOAA will not
prepare the EIS and requested that NOAA reserve a section especially
for this part of the process.
Response. NOAA's intent for this section is to explain that NOAA
may prepare a single EIS rather than one EIS for the exploration
license and another EIS for the commercial recovery permit. To clarify
this intent, NOAA has deleted ``also'' from the sentence and added at
the end of the sentence the clause ``rather than one environmental
impact statement for the exploration license and another environmental
impact statement for the commercial recovery permit.'' This is a
clarifying edit that does not alter the consolidated application
process.
Comment 41. A commenter stated that in the last sentence of Sec.
971.214(b), the word ``proposal'' indicates that there is a process
that needs to be explained in its own section.
Response. NOAA has added some clarifying text in response to this
comment. Under the Act, NOAA will publish ``proposals to issue or
transfer licenses and permits'' in the Federal Register. 30 U.S.C.
1426(a)(1). The language in the proposed rule for Sec. 971.214(b)
refers to proposals to issue licenses under Sec. Sec. 970.500(a) and
970.401. NOAA has added text to clarify this point; this text is
consistent with the proposed rule and does not change the process or
requirements.
Comment 42. A commenter stated that in Sec. 971.214(c), the first
sentence is confusing and should say ``the information required in each
of the following sub-sections of paragraph (d), in the order they
appear.''
Response. NOAA agrees and has referenced paragraph (d) as
suggested. This is a clarifying change. NOAA has also added a
clarifying sentence to paragraph (c) stating: ``For applications
received electronically after the close of business, for purposes of
computing the Administrator's required response time, the application
shall be deemed to be received at 8 a.m. ET on the next business day.''
This change is consistent with the proposed rule language transitioning
to electronic submission of applications and with existing language in
the DSHMRA regulations on computation of time (15 CFR 971.805). This
change pertains to the Administrator's response time computation only
and does not alter substantive rights or obligations of applicants. As
such, this is a clarifying change.
Comment 43. A commenter requested that NOAA delete the following
from Sec. 971.214(d): ``information sufficient to enable the
Administrator to make the findings set forth in 30 U.S.C. 1415(a) and
15 CFR 970.500(c), 971.214(f), and 971.400(c), including the following
items:''
Response. The specified sections of regulations that the commenter
requested be deleted are the findings that the Administrator must make
before approving or denying the issuance or transfer of a license or
permit and must remain. However, NOAA has made a clarifying edit to
Sec. 971.214(d) to correct an inadvertent typographical error in the
proposed rule: the reference in this section to Sec. 971.214(f) has
been replaced with a reference to the correct section, Sec.
971.214(e).
Comment 44. A commenter stated that Sec. 971.214(d)(1) provides
the same information as paragraph (4) describing the exploration plan.
Response. Paragraph (d)(1) is distinct from paragraph (d)(4). The
information required in paragraph (d)(1) is to allow NOAA to assess
whether the applicant is currently qualified to use the consolidated
license and permit application and seek information on any pre-
application exploration work. The information required in paragraph
(d)(4) is for any exploration activities the applicant proposes to
undertake under the license for which it is applying via the
consolidated process. However, NOAA has made clarifying changes in
response to this and other comments expressing confusion about this
language. The purpose of the clarified regulatory text in sections
971.214(d)(1) and e(1) is to establish the applicant's qualifications
to use the consolidated license and permit application instead of
requiring the applicant to first apply for, and obtain, an exploration
license before seeking a commercial recovery permit. In order to
qualify for the consolidated application, and in keeping with DSHMRA,
an applicant to a commercial recovery permit must be able to ``pursue
diligently the activities described in the recovery plan.'' 30 U.S.C.
1417(b), 1418(a). NOAA further modified the text of Sec. 971(d)(1) to
clarify that information on exploration work (if any) performed by
either the applicant or by entities affiliated with the applicant may
be relevant to determining whether the applicant can demonstrate it
possesses the scientific, technical, and financial resources to pursue
commercial recovery activities in an expeditious and diligent manner.
NOAA removed text that could imply that past exploration is required to
make such a demonstration. See also response to Comment 48.
Comment 45. A commenter requested that, in Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i),
NOAA replace ``This'' with ``Each section,'' delete ``the applicant's
access to,'' and delete ``including the following items.''
Response. NOAA has not included ``Each section'' as Sec.
971.214(d)(1)(i) refers to the information in this paragraph only and
not other sections of the regulations. However, NOAA has made a
clarifying change to replace ``This'' with ``The description of past
exploration activities . . . .'' NOAA has deleted ``the applicant's
access to.'' NOAA notes that there may be instances when an applicant
does not have access to all information resulting from previous
exploration activities. NOAA has retained ``including the following
items,'' as this text is needed to refer to Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i)(A)-
(F).
Comment 46. A commenter argued that Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i)(A)
should include the specific location and size of the deposit and area
requested for the exploration license and recovery permit.
Response. Section 971.214(d)(1) describes past exploration
activities--not the activities or location proposed under the
consolidated license and permit application. Therefore, for Sec.
971.214(d)(1)(i)(A), the survey cruises are from past exploration
activities that could be for the area proposed in the DSHMRA
application or other areas, but which are relevant to the issue of
whether the applicant will be able to proceed to commercial recovery in
an expeditious and diligent manner. NOAA is not pre-determining what
past exploration activities, if any, an applicant may use to meet the
requirements for a consolidated license and permit. Section
971.214(d)(4) contains the information requirements for the
consolidated license and permit application.
Comment 47. A commenter argued that in Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i)(F),
economic feasibility ought to be shown by an Internal Rate of Return
(IRR) analysis of the first 10 years of commercial operations using
likely, high and low scenarios. This should include estimates of
capital costs up until date of first commercial recovery and during
recovery; amount of mineral recovered, cost of extraction, refining,
and
[[Page 2658]]
transport, other costs, amount of metal recovered going to the
applicant, price of metal, and profits before taxes. The commenter also
stated that this paragraph should be divided into several parts:
Economic feasibility, Technical Feasibility, Legal Feasibility, and
Environmental Considerations.
Response. Section 971.214(d)(1), including paragraphs (d)(1)(i)(A)-
(F), pertains to past exploration activities not the activities
proposed under the consolidated license and permit application. NOAA is
not pre-determining what types of analysis an applicant may provide to
describe work that was performed to evaluate the feasibility of
commercial scale operations. NOAA does not believe that paragraph (F)
should be broken out into separate paragraphs as there is no need to
delineate each of the items in further detail.
Comment 48. A commenter argues that in Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(ii), the
clause ``and the applicant possesses the scientific, technical, and
financial resources to pursue commercial recovery activities in an
expeditious and diligent manner'' is redundant and should be deleted.
Response. NOAA disagrees that this language is redundant. The items
specified in this subparagraph inform the explanation of why the
applicant qualifies to use the consolidated license and permit
procedures and that the applicant can pursue commercial recovery
activities in an expeditious and diligent manner. However, on review,
NOAA has made a formatting change to this paragraph, and to
corresponding language in Sec. Sec. 971.214(d)(1) and 971.214(e)(1),
to clarify how an applicant may demonstrate that the applicant can
pursue commercial recovery activities in an expeditious and diligent
manner. NOAA has further clarified, with examples, the types of
information that may be used by the applicant to demonstrate that it is
qualified to use the consolidated application process. These examples
are illustrative only, however, and are not intended to require
additional information or limit the information or explanation that an
applicant may provide in response to this requirement, nor do they
necessarily reflect NOAA's views as to how much weight should be
accorded to the types of information an applicant may provide. These
are clarifying changes that do not change substantive rights or
obligations.
Comment 49. A commenter argued that Sec. 971.214(d)(2) must
mention that the plans referenced are requirements detailed below in
paragraph 4 for the exploration plan, and in paragraph 5 for the
commercial recovery plan. The commenter argued the general estimated
costs should not be included here but in paragraph (d)(1)(i)(F). The
commenter argued that instead of the financial statements and Form 10-K
referenced in this regulation, the applicant should do an IRR analysis
based on data generated by exploration and market metal prices.
Regarding the description of those entities upon which the applicant
will rely to finance the exploration, the commenter stated that small
exploration companies will often trade future production for cash
during the exploration phase and argued that it is essential that these
deals are monetized before doing the IRR analysis as the applicant may
have pre-sold future production.
Response. NOAA agrees in part with the suggested changes. NOAA has
added a clarifying reference to the requirements in paragraphs (4) and
(5) for the exploration plan and commercial recovery plan.
Paragraph (2) is the appropriate place to describe general
estimated costs and not in paragraph (d)(1)(i)(F), as (d)(1) is for
past exploration activities.
If available, a company's financial statements and Form 10-K are
useful documents for evaluating a company's financial resources. There
may be other useful documents and analyses, including an IRR, which
evaluates the expected annualized rate of return an investment is
expected to generate over its lifetime. NOAA has added a sentence to
note that applicants may also provide other economic analyses. These
technical and procedural revisions are consistent with the scope and
NOAA's intent that the applicant provide information sufficient to
demonstrate that it is capable of committing or raising sufficient
resources for the proposed exploration and commercial recovery
activities.
Comment 50. A commenter argued that Sec. 971.214(d)(3) is
redundant and should be divided between exploration and recovery and
put in subparagraphs (4) and (5). With respect to Sec. 971.214(d)(3),
the commenter also argued that: subparagraph (3)(ii) is where the
requirement for an EIS should appear; the description of environmental
monitoring equipment in paragraph 3(ii) should be moved to subparagraph
(d)(4); subparagraph (3)(iii)(A)-(D) should be incorporated in Sec.
971.214(d)(5); in subparagraph (3)(iii), the phrase ``mining process''
should be replaced with ``mineral extraction'' and the phrase ``for
persons operating its equipment'' in subparagraph (3)(iii)(D) should be
replaced with ``during the mineral recovery stage.''
Response. Section 971.214(d)(3) requires that an applicant provide
a statement of the technology, equipment, and capabilities that will be
used during exploration and commercial recovery, not the actual
exploration and commercial recovery plans of work contained in
paragraphs (4) and (5). Paragraph (3)(ii) is a description of the
environmental monitoring equipment that will be used separate from the
EIS requirements referenced elsewhere in the regulations. ``Mining
process'' is an appropriate term, and the term is used in the existing
regulations. See Sec. 971.202(b)(1). Finally, paragraph (D) refers to
the qualifications of personnel operating the equipment, not just
regarding resource recovery.
Comment 51. A commenter argued that in Sec. 971.214(d)(4), the
enforcement of TCRs needs to be defined.
Response. 15 CFR 971.214 sets forth procedures governing
consolidated exploration license and commercial recovery permit
applications. Paragraph (d) of this section identifies the information
required for the Administrator to make necessary findings under the Act
and parts 970 and 971. This information includes a description of the
applicant's proposed exploration activities sufficient for, among other
things, the development and enforcement of TCRs. NOAA disagrees that
the enforcement of TCRs needs to be defined in this section. The Act
and the DSHMRA regulations already contain various provisions
describing NOAA's enforcement authorities, which may be applied to the
enforcement of TCRs. See, e.g., 30 U.S.C. 1424, 1461-1468; 15 CFR part
971, subpart J.
Comment 52. A commenter argued that subparagraph 971.214(d)(4)(iii)
is a repetition of sub-sections of paragraph (d)(1) and should be
deleted and replaced with a reference to paragraph (d)(1).
Response. Paragraph (d)(1) refers to a description of past
exploration activities. Paragraph (4) pertains to the exploration plan,
which shall include the intended exploration schedule as further
delineated in parts of paragraph (d)(4)(iii).
Comment 53. A commenter stated that in Sec. 971.214(d)(9)(iii),
``copper, nickel, cobalt or manganese minerals or any metals refined
from these minerals'' is particular to polymetallic nodules mining. The
commenter suggested that the regulations should apply a broader
definition.
Response. These minerals are specifically mentioned in the
definition of ``hard mineral resource'' in Section 1403(6) of DSHMRA.
[[Page 2659]]
Comment 54. A commenter inquired what the process is for getting
the determination under Sec. 971.214(d)(11) that the ``President or
his designee does not determine that this restriction contravenes the
overriding national interests of the United States.''
Response. Section 971.408 mirrors the requirements of the Act,
which describes when and how the Administrator may authorize processing
outside of the United States. See 30 U.S.C. 1412(c)(5). It is
unnecessarily detailed to include in the regulations the intra-
governmental process necessary to reach the determination.
Comment 55. A commenter argued that this rulemaking will delay the
processing of existing applications for commercial recovery permits.
The commenter stated that NOAA should apply the new amended rules
retroactively and/or grandfather in existing applications so that the
commercial recovery permit decision can be expedited.
Response. Paragraph 971.214(g) establishes that applicants who have
pending applications for exploration licenses may notify the
Administrator of their intent to proceed under the consolidated
procedures. While paragraph (g) would require that the existing
applicant file an amended consolidated application, it would not be a
new application and would not negate work completed to date. NOAA has
added to paragraph (g) a clause at the end of the last sentence that
states, ``except that any work, actions or decisions by NOAA, including
required findings at various stages of the application process, shall
continue to apply to the extent still applicable.'' NOAA has added
further explanation to the preamble. This regulation will not impact
the processing of any pending applications for commercial recovery for
any applicant that already holds an existing exploration license.
Comment 56. A commenter argued that Sec. 971.214(d)(7)(ii),
regarding foreign flag vessels, disregards the April 9, 2025, E.O.
14269, ``Restoring America's Maritime Dominance.'' The commenter
requested that the regulations be revised to allow only the use of
United States-built and flagged vessels.
Response. Section 971.214(d)(7) does not change the statutory and
regulatory requirements for U.S. Flag and foreign flag vessels; rather,
paragraph (d)(7) is describing the U.S. Coast Guard and other safety
information and certifications required for all vessels used in
exploration or commercial recovery. The regulatory provisions for when
U.S. Flag vessels must be used remain unchanged and these provisions
are based on the Act's requirements that commercial recovery vessels be
U.S. Flag vessels and that at least one commercial recovery
transportation vessel be a U.S. Flag vessel. See 30 U.S.C. 1412(c)(2)
and (3). The regulations contemplate the very limited number of vessels
that could undertake deep seabed mining exploration and commercial
recovery, and revising the requirements for U.S. Flag and foreign flag
vessels are beyond the scope of this regulatory action.
Comment 57. For Sec. 971.214(b) (Who may apply; how), a commenter
supported the proposed consolidation of public hearings and other
proceedings related to the issuance or transfer of an exploration
license and a commercial recovery permit in a consolidated application
process and asserted that this approach would promote efficiency and
reduce duplication of hearings while maintaining transparency. The
commenter also supported the proposal to allow NOAA to prepare a single
EIS covering both exploration and commercial recovery activities.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 58. For Sec. 971.214(d)(1) Past exploration description
and affirmation, a commenter supported the proposed provision to allow
a consolidated exploration license and commercial recovery permit
applicant to refer to the exploration activities of ``other entities''
outside of the work of the applicant or the proposed transferor to
demonstrate that the applicant will be able to proceed to commercial
recovery with limited or no additional exploration.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 59. For Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i)(F) Past exploration
description and affirmation, a commenter requested that NOAA remove the
term ``continued'' in ``Evaluating the continued feasibility of
commercial scale operations . . . .'' The commenter asserted that the
feasibility of commercial operations should be assessed based on
current and projected conditions at the time of the consolidated
application. A second commenter requested that NOAA retain the term
``continued'' in this provision and recommended that NOAA conduct a
rigorous review of applications with respect to this criterion,
including requiring that financial projections be prepared by
independent consultants. The second commenter also argued that NOAA
should conduct a legal feasibility review for DSHMRA applicants and
their foreign partners, especially those foreign partners who are
signatories to the LOSC. A third commenter argued that NOAA should
consider whether it could approve an application if the U.S.-based
company would rely on foreign processing, and NOAA would have no
authority or NEPA review over that foreign source.
Response. Paragraph (d)(1)(i)(F) of Sec. 971.214 directs that an
applicant who is using the consolidated license and permit application
process shall provide a description of past exploration activities that
includes an evaluation of the feasibility of commercial scale
operations, and lessons learned from past exploration activities for
the continued feasibility of commercial recovery activities are
relevant to NOAA's evaluation of a consolidated license or permit
application. Moreover, Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(i)(F) mirrors the existing
language of Sec. 970.203(b)(3)(vi).
Regarding NOAA's evaluation of the feasibility of commercial
recovery activities based on an applicant's past exploration and
commercial recovery activities, NOAA understands that there is inherent
risk in deep seabed mining and that past successes and failures can
inform an applicant's decision to proceed with new deep seabed mining
proposals and NOAA's review of a DSHMRA application. NOAA acknowledges,
however, that as of the date of application commercial recovery may not
have occurred; the use of the word ``continued'' is not meant to imply
(or require) that the applicant, any affiliate of the applicant, or any
other entity has already become engaged in commercial recovery prior to
the submission of a consolidated application.
As to processing, NOAA will determine whether to authorize
proposals to use foreign sources for processing recovered hard mineral
resources pursuant to Sec. Sec. 971.209 and 971.408, which allow for
foreign processing under certain circumstances.
Applicants must adhere to the provisions of the Act and the
regulations. As such, regarding NOAA's review of the legal feasibility
not only for a DSHMRA applicant, but also for its foreign partners, to
the extent an applicant is relying on financial or other support from
domestic or foreign partners, NOAA evaluates those arrangements as part
of its DSHMRA application review.
Comment 60. For Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(ii) Past exploration
description and affirmation, a commenter supports the proposed text at
Sec. 971.214, paragraph (d)(1)(ii).
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 61. For Sec. 971.214(d)(2) Statement of financial
resources, a commenter supported the proposed text
[[Page 2660]]
at Sec. 971.214, paragraph (d)(2) which would allow applicants to
include information in their consolidated application that demonstrates
their capability to commit ``or raise'' sufficient financial resources
to cover the estimated costs of their proposed exploration and
commercial recovery programs.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 62. For Sec. 971.214(d)(3) Statement of technological
experience and capabilities, a commenter requested that NOAA make the
following change (in strikeout/underlined text) to Sec. 971.214,
paragraph (d)(3):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.004
The commenter considered that the above amendment was necessary
because an applicant may not always directly possess or own the
technological capability to carry out the proposed exploration and
commercial recovery activities; rather, the applicant may partner with
or subcontract to other entities that own or possess the technological
capability to execute the proposed activities on behalf of the
applicant.
Response. NOAA agrees with this comment and has made the change to
the text in Sec. 971.214(d)(3). Paragraph (d)(3) does not require that
an applicant have possession of the technology required at the time an
application is filed or NOAA issues its approval. Rather, an applicant
needs to show what technology is needed and demonstrate that it will
have access to such technology (which may be, for example, through
agreements, partnerships, or contracts). This is a clarifying comment
that is consistent with the initial DSHMRA regulations as well as Sec.
971.214(e)(4)(ii).
Comment 63. For Sec. 971.214(d)(3)(ii) Statement of technological
experience and capabilities, a commenter noted that there may be cases
where a consolidated license and commercial recovery permit application
may include an exploration plan that covers only exploration activities
that fall within the scope of Sec. 970.701(a)(1-10) (listing
activities have no potential for significant environmental impact and
will require no further environmental assessment). The commenter
requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(d)(3)(ii) as follows (proposed
change in strikeout/underlined text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.005
Response. In reviewing a consolidated application, NOAA needs the
full suite of information available so that it can assess in the first
instance the scope of the proposed exploration activities, potential
for significant environmental impacts, and any applicable monitoring
equipment. Relatedly, and as relevant to Sec. 971.214(d)(3)(ii), it is
critical that the applicant provide a description of the environmental
monitoring equipment so that NOAA may assess the applicant's
technological experience and capabilities.
Comment 64. For Sec. 971.214(d)(4)(iii) Exploration plan, a
commenter requested that NOAA adopt the existing text at Sec.
970.203(b)(3) for Sec. 971.214(d)(4)(iii):
``The intended exploration schedule which must be responsive to the
diligence requirements in Sec. 970.602. Taking into account that
different applicants may have different concepts and chronologies with
respect to the types of activities described, the schedule should
include an approximate projection for the exploration activities
planned. Although the details in each schedule may vary to reflect the
applicant's particular approach, it should address in some respect
approximately when each of the following types of activities is
projected to occur.''
Response. NOAA has modified the proposed text in Sec.
971.214(d)(4)(iii) but these changes have not changed the meaning of
Sec. 970.203(b)(3). The text in Sec. 971.214(d)(4)(iii) that states
the ``intended exploration schedule addressing which of the following
exploration activities the applicant intends to conduct after the
issuance of the license and when each of these proposed activities will
occur'' is a clearer statement and still provides flexibility for the
applicants regarding ``intended'' schedules. However, in order to
better mirror the language of Sec. Sec. 970.203(b)(6) and 971.201(b),
NOAA has added additional language to Sec. 971.214(d)(2) to make clear
that the applicants are still expected to provide a schedule of
expenditures and that the schedule of expenditures must be responsive
to both the exploration plan and the commercial recovery plan. This is
a technical and clarifying change in response to public comment that is
consistent with the proposed rule.
Comment 65. For Sec. 971.214(d)(4)(iii)(C) and (D)
[[Page 2661]]
Exploration plan, a commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec.
971.214(d)(4)(iii)(C) and (D) as follows (proposed text underlined):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.006
The commenter argued that the deep-sea mining industry has
significantly advanced since DSHMRA came into force, and some
technology (such as those related to onshore and at sea mining systems)
has already been designed and tested.
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment that designing and testing
these components and systems may not be needed for all applicants or
technologies that have already been sufficiently designed and tested
and has added clarifying language ``or an explanation as to why this is
not necessary'' to Sec. 971.214(d)(4)(iii)(C) and (D). This is a
technical and clarifying change in response to public comment that is
consistent with the proposed rule.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.007
Response. In reviewing a consolidated application, NOAA needs the
full suite of information available so that it can assess in the first
instance the scope of the proposed exploration activities, potential
for significant environmental impacts, and any applicable monitoring
equipment. However, NOAA has made a revision to correct an inadvertent
typographical error in this section of the proposed rule: the reference
to ``subpart G of this part'' has been replaced with ``subpart G of
part 970.''
Comment 67. For Sec. 971.214(d)(5)(iii) Commercial recovery plan,
a commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(d)(5)(iii) as
follows (underlined text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.008
[[Page 2662]]
The commenter asserted that it is standard practice for
environmental monitoring and management plans to be refined following
the completion of preliminary assessments.
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment, has made this change with a
modification to ensure consistency in referring to environmental impact
statements throughout these regulations, and notes that it is the
inherent nature of the Act, regulations, monitoring plan, and
monitoring plan TCRs that the plan may be refined and evolve over time
based on any EISs and subsequent deep-sea mining activities. See, e.g.,
30 U.S.C. 1424(3), 15 CFR 971.603(g). As such, this is a technical
change, consistent with the Act and regulations, to provide
clarification in response to public comment. NOAA made a further
technical change to the text of Sec. 971.214(d)(5)(v), clarifying that
the resource assessment is required to address the requirements of
Sec. 971.501 only to the extent practicable and that the resource
assessment may be preliminary at the time of the application. The
requirements of Sec. 971.501 were structured for applicants using a
sequential application process, but these requirements may not make
full sense in the case of some applicants using the consolidated
process. The additional language is intended to clarify that the
resource assessment may be more preliminary for some applicants using
the consolidated application process. This is a clarifying change that
does not change the substance of the regulation.
Comment 68. For Sec. 971.214(d)(6)(ii) Environmental and use
conflict analysis, a commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec.
971.214(d)(6)(ii) as follows (underlined text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.009
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment, has made this change, and
notes that it is the inherent nature of the Act, regulations,
monitoring plan, and monitoring plan TCRs that the plan may be refined
and evolve over time based on any EISs and subsequent deep-sea mining
activities. See, e.g., 16 U.S.C. 1424(3), 15 CFR 971.603(g). As such,
this is a technical change, consistent with the Act and regulations, to
provide clarification in response to public comment. NOAA has also made
conforming and clarifying edits throughout Sec. 971.214(d)(6) to
consistently refer to any EISs that may be prepared on the proposed
activities in the consolidated license and permit application.
Comment 69. For 15 CFR 971.214(d)(8)(ii)(D) Statement of Ownership,
a commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(d)(8)(ii)(D) as
follows (strikeout text):
``Sufficient information to demonstrate that the applicant is a
U.S. citizen, including:
[. . .]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.010
The commenter expressed concern as to a certification requirement,
including the mechanism by which certification would operate and who
would be responsible to certify.
Response. NOAA agrees in part with the comment and has changed
Sec. 971.214(d)(8)(ii)(D) to require ``copies'' and not
``certification'' of all essential and nonproprietary information. This
edit is consistent with Sec. 971.206(b)(2)(iv) and Sec.
970.206(b)(4), which is asking for copies of certificates of
incorporation and copies of essential and nonproprietary information
and not certification of the information. Therefore, NOAA has retained
paragraph (D) and replaced ``certification'' with ``copies.'' NOAA has
also made a revision to Sec. Sec. 971.214(d)(8)(i) and (ii) to correct
an inadvertent omission in the proposed rule, by adding ``and
commercial recovery'' after ``exploration.'' Finally, in Sec.
971.214(d)(9)(i) and (ii), NOAA has corrected an inadvertent omission
in the proposed rule by adding references to commercial recovery
permits. These are technical changes to clarify the scope of the rule,
and they are consistent with the purpose of the proposed rule and
NOAA's intent in promulgating this section.
Comment 70. For 15 CFR 971.214(e) Certification, a commenter
supported the proposed language of Sec. 971.214(e), regarding
certification of applications which are in full compliance.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment and has made a
technical and clarifying edit to Sec. 971.214(e)(1) to correct an
inadvertent omission in the proposed rule. NOAA has added ``and
971.211'' after the reference to Sec. 970.211, to reference the
corresponding provisions regarding
[[Page 2663]]
consultation in both part 970 and part 971.
Comment 71. For Sec. 971.214(e)(2) Certification, a commenter
requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(e)(2) as follows (underline
text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.011
The commenter proposed that the regulation also explicitly
reference Sec. 971.103(b) to ensure comprehensive coverage of
restrictions applicable to commercial recovery permits, not just
exploration licenses.
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment that Sec. 971.214(e)(2)
applies to both licenses and permits and has added the reference to
Sec. 971.103(b). This is a technical clarification to the text of the
proposed rule to correct an inadvertent omission. NOAA has also made a
clarifying change to Sec. 971.214(e)(3) to address an inadvertent
omission in the proposed rule; the clarification, which is consistent
with NOAA's intent for, and scope of, the proposed rule, aligns the
language of Sec. 971.214(e)(3) with the statutory language in 30
U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(D) regarding approval of the size and location of an
area selected by an applicant.
Comment 72. For Sec. 971.214(e)(5) Certification, a commenter
requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(e)(5) as follows (strikeout
text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.012
The commenter asserted that this provision was redundant of Sec.
971.214(e)(2).
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment and has removed paragraph
(e)(5).
Comment 73. For Sec. 971.214(f)(C) Denial of Certification, a
commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(f)(1)(ii)(C) as
follows (strikeout text):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.013
Response. The term ``endeavor'' is from the Act when referring to
the 100-day deadline to certify an application. See 30 U.S.C. 1413(g).
This term is then mirrored in the regulations. For Sec.
971.214(f)(1)(ii)(C), rather than endeavoring to complete a review in
100 days, 50 days is a reasonable period to endeavor to complete review
of the amended application, given NOAA's experience to date in
processing DSHMRA exploration applications.
Comment 74. For Sec. 971.214(g) Effect of this section on pending
applications, a commenter requested that NOAA revise Sec. 971.214(g)
as follows (underline text):
[[Page 2664]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21JA26.014
Response. NOAA agrees with the comment in principle and addresses
the comment above in the preamble explanation for paragraph (g). NOAA
added a clause to the end of the paragraph that states that ``except
that any work, actions or decisions by NOAA, including required
findings at various stages of the application process, shall continue
to apply to the extent still applicable.'' This change is a technical
and procedural clarification that reflects NOAA's original intent in
proposing Sec. 971.214(g) and that is consistent with the purpose and
scope of the proposed rule. It does not establish or alter substantive
rights.
Comment 75. One commenter urged NOAA to modify the DSHMRA
regulations, including proposed 15 CFR 971.214(d)(6)(iii), to alert
applicants to the need to coordinate with submarine cable companies and
regulators in the proposed consolidated license and permit area and to
require due diligence and specific identification of existing and
planned submarine cables. More generally, the commenter urged NOAA to
develop comprehensive cable protection regulations and guidance for
deep seabed mining that ensures submarine cable protection and
coordination between submarine cables and mining at the earliest stages
of mining project proposals and planning. The commenter also urged NOAA
to consult and coordinate with those agencies with licensing and policy
responsibilities for submarine cables and telecommunications sector
critical infrastructure, including the Federal Communications
Commission, the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, the Department of Homeland Security,
and the Department of State.
Response. NOAA is aware of the potential for use conflicts between
deep seabed mining and submarine cables. However, the changes proposed
by the commenter to establish comprehensive cable regulations and
guidance for deep seabed mining are outside the scope of the present
rulemaking and NOAA did not propose, or request public comment on,
these issues, including the suggested guidance and further regulations
related to submarine cables. Moreover, it is unnecessary to revise
Sec. 971.214(d)(6)(iii) as proposed by the commenter, as that
provision is broad enough as written for applicants and NOAA to address
submarine cables, including TCRs specific to submarine cables. NOAA
declines to include a requirement for applicants to conduct additional
due diligence steps regarding use conflicts and notes that under the
regulations, the Administrator may require the applicant to submit
additional data if the basis for determining appropriate TCRs is not
available. In the future, NOAA could choose to consider revising the
regulations to expressly address submarine cables via a separate
action. Under the Act and the DSHMRA regulations there are substantial
opportunities for both interagency consultation during the application
review process, including with the Federal Trade Commission, Coast
Guard, State Department, other Department of Commerce offices, and
other federal agencies including the Federal Communications Commission
if appropriate, and accepting comments from the public, including the
opportunity for private companies and trade groups to give advice on
specific TCRs to be attached to a given license or permit. See 30
U.S.C. 1426.
Comment 76. One commenter requested clarification that, under the
proposed consolidated procedures, both the timeline for review set
forth in current Sec. 971.400 and the consultations required under
Sec. 971.402 would occur concurrently with the Administrator's review
of a consolidated application. The commenter supported NOAA's 100-day
timeline to certify consolidated applications (as referenced in new
Sec. 971.214(e)) and requested clarification that this timeline
encompasses the full review, consultation, and issuance or transfer
process, thereby avoiding sequential delays.
Response. NOAA begins its interagency consultations early in the
application review process under Sec. Sec. 970.211 and 971.211, before
certification of such application under Sec. 971.214(e). However,
interagency consultations will continue, as necessary and appropriate,
throughout the application process even after certification has been
completed. Section 971.402 simply describes the need to conclude these
ongoing interagency consultations prior to the issuance or transfer of
a commercial recovery permit; Sec. 971.402 does not create a new,
separate time period during the application process. The timeline for
the development of TCRs for commercial recovery permits falls under
Sec. 971.400(b). The 100-day timeline is the period during which NOAA
will endeavor to certify the consolidated application, but the issuance
or transfer of the application would occur after the 100-day period.
Comment 77. A commenter recommended that NOAA explicitly include
the imposition and content of TCRs for new, transferred, or modified
licenses or permits under the provisions of Sec. 971.214(e).
Response. As noted in Sec. 971.214(a), all requirements set forth
in 15 CFR parts 970 and 971, except those sections that Sec.
971.214(a) states are inapplicable or those sections that are in
conflict with the requirements of Sec. 971.214, continue to apply.
Section 971.214(e) applies to the certification stage of an
[[Page 2665]]
application; TCRs are drafted and finalized after certification and
before issuance. The provisions governing TCRs for licenses or permits
that were applied for under the consolidated process would continue to
be 15 CFR part 970 subpart E and part 971 subpart D. However, one of
the changes to the proposed rule text that NOAA has made regarding
Sec. 971.214 addresses this comment by modifying Sec. Sec. 970.500(a)
and 971.400(a) to say, ``After certification of an application pursuant
to subpart C of this part or Sec. 971.214, the Administrator will
proceed with a proposal to issue or transfer a permit for the
commercial recovery activities described in the application.'' For the
consolidated license and permit application process, certification
occurs under Sec. 971.214(e) and not subpart C. By making a conforming
change to reference Sec. 971.214 in Sec. Sec. 970.500(a) and
971.400(a), the connection to the TCR process is made explicit. These
are conforming and clarifying edits that are consistent with the
proposed rule and that do not alter any substantive rights.
Comment 78. Commenters supported an efficient and scientifically
grounded approach to data submissions under Sec. 971.214(d)(1) and
suggested that NOAA allow the use of environmental, geological, and
operational data required by this section from an adjacent, similarly
situated area with the same, or substantially similar, deep-sea
characteristics, such as habitat and fauna, as the area that is the
subject of an application for a license or permit.
Response. Section 971.214(d)(1) describes past exploration
activities that could be in the area proposed in the DSHMRA application
or other areas and that are relevant to whether exploration activities
are needed for the consolidated license and permit application. NOAA is
not pre-determining what past exploration activities an applicant may
include in its applications for a consolidated license and permit and
the applicant can describe past exploration activities in the proposed
area or adjacent or other similar areas as part of its explanation for
Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(ii), to the extent the applicant can explain the
relevancy of the information.
Comment 79. A commenter requested clarification that under the
proposed Sec. 971.214(d)(1)(ii), an applicant may alternatively
satisfy the informational requirement by filing a detailed plan with
NOAA prior to the commencement of commercial recovery operations.
Response. Section 971.214(d)(1) describes past exploration
activities, and an applicant must provide in its consolidated license
and permit application the explanation required under Sec.
971.214(d)(1)(ii) so that NOAA can determine if the applicant is
eligible to use the consolidated application based on whether the
applicant can pursue commercial recovery activities in an expeditious
and diligent manner.
Comment 80. A commenter recommended that NOAA clarify that the
description of technology, equipment, methods, processing locations,
and other related operational data provided under Sec. Sec.
971.214(d)(3)(iii), (d)(5), and (d)(6), as applicable, may be based
upon either the currently available techniques, knowledge and know-how,
or the applicant's current expectations at the time of submission. The
commenter argued that this flexibility would reflect the current
capabilities of offshore mineral operations and processing operations
while still affording the NOAA sufficient information to execute
informed decisions.
Response. The current regulations and Sec. 971.214 do not limit or
pre-determine how an applicant can describe how it will address
technology, equipment, methods, processing locations, and other related
operational data.
Comment 81. A commenter argued that although DSHMRA provides for
antitrust review, it does not mandate detailed information requirements
such as those proposed in the Proposed Rule (Sec. 971.214(d)(9)). The
commenter asserted they are counterproductive and should be eliminated.
Response. The Act requires that NOAA conduct an antitrust review,
30 U.S.C. 1413(d), and eliminating the information requirements in the
new Sec. 971.214(d)(9) would require changing the antitrust provisions
in 15 CFR parts 970 and 971 for individual license or permit
applications, which NOAA considers to be beyond the scope of this
rulemaking. Moreover, the information collected pursuant to these
regulatory provisions is important for compliance with the statutory
requirement. However, NOAA has made some minor clarifying edits in
Sec. 971.214(d)(9), including clarifying that ``affiliate'' has the
same definition as in Sec. 970.101(d).
Comment 82. A commenter argued that the consolidated approach
removes a critical separation of two processes, which introduces
problems and issues that limit the ability of the agency to ensure
effective protection of the marine environment. The commenter stated
that the proposed rule language ``exploration, if any . . .'' is vague
and, as written, could imply that exploration is not necessary before
commercial recovery. The commenter argued that baseline
characterization of the seabed mineral resource, the physical and
geochemical environment, and associated biological communities, all of
which should occur during the exploration phase, is fundamental to an
accurate environmental impact statement of the activity and the design
of test mining and effective monitoring of impacts, which also occurs
during the exploration phase. The commenter requested adding a formal
requirement for a test mining phase after exploration and before
commercial recovery.
Response. The consolidated license and permit application does not
remove the need for the collection or provision of baseline data;
rather, as explained in this preamble, the consolidated license and
permit application process recognizes the advancements that have taken
place in the deep seabed mining industry and exploration activities
that industry has completed. As such, eligible applicants for the
consolidated license and permit application process will need to
explain why they can undertake commercial recovery activities in an
expeditious and diligent manner. As noted herein, NOAA is not pre-
determining what an applicant may use in its consolidated license and
permit application to meet the requirements, and the applicant can
describe past exploration activities in the proposed area or adjacent
or other similar areas as part of its explanation for Sec.
971.214(d)(1)(ii), new technologies that would allow for the quick
generation of the necessary information, and/or access to necessary
baseline data from another source, among other options. As for
requiring a formal test mining phase after exploration and before
commercial recovery, that requirement would be beyond the scope of this
rulemaking. An applicant for an exploration license describes in its
application the test mining that would be conducted as part of its
proposed exploration activities, if any. However, depending on the
information that an applicant provides in its initial license
application, an applicant intending to conduct test mining at a later
date may need to seek a revision to its license before conducting test
mining and NOAA may need to supplement its NEPA evaluation.
Comment 83. A commenter requested that NOAA require explicit
communication of uncertainty in the information provided to prepare the
EIS and in quantification of the direct impact and potential longer-
term effect of activities. Characterizing uncertainty could take the
form of providing a range of outcomes for pollutants discharged or
information on data quality and underlying assumptions used in
[[Page 2666]]
determining expected quantities of material recovered, duration and
extent of disruption to marine ecosystems, etc. The commenter argued
that characterizing uncertainty as precisely as possible is important
to reduce risk as the industry progresses. To advance the acceptance of
this industry, the commenter requested that NOAA focus on developing
best practices and operational guidance rather than streamlining the
permitting process.
Response. NOAA is not developing guidance on uncertainties in the
industry, best practices, or operational guidance. However, NOAA is
updating its DSHMRA technical guidance in a process that is separate
from this rulemaking. Updating the technical guidance is critical for
having data acquisition standards for monitoring potential impacts.
NOAA expects to release a draft of the revised technical guidance for
public review later this year. As NOAA gains experience with new DSHMRA
applications, NOAA may provide additional guidance regarding thresholds
for net financial resources or technological capabilities.
The 15 CFR part 970 and part 971 regulations include relevant
provisions regarding the evaluation of environmental impacts, as well
as best available technologies for the protection of safety, health,
and the environment (Sec. 971.604). Regarding possible uncertainties
in the industry, the regulations require that applicants using the
consolidated license and permit application process must demonstrate
that they possess the ability to proceed with commercial recovery in an
expedited and diligent manner. Regarding the possibility of
uncertainties in longer-term impacts of a proposed deep-sea mining
activity, NOAA notes that it retains discretion, in evaluating the
impacts of any particular proposal, to ``draw what it reasonably
concludes is a manageable line--one that encompasses the effects of the
project at hand, but not the effects of projects separate in time or
place.'' Seven County Infrastructure v. Eagle County, Colorado, 605
U.S. 168, 189 (2025) (citations omitted).
Sec. 971.802 Public Disclosure of Documents Received by NOAA
NOAA revises Sec. 971.802 to remove outdated procedures and cross-
references for handling records and instead replaces the section with a
cross-reference to the current regulations which govern public
disclosure of documents received by NOAA. The changes revise paragraph
(a), remove paragraphs (b) through (e), and redesignate paragraphs (f)
and (g) as paragraphs (b) and (c). The text of the redesignated
paragraphs (b) and (c) remain unchanged from the current paragraphs (f)
and (g). When an applicant requests that parts or all of an application
be kept confidential, e.g., under Sec. 971.214(c), the applicant
should understand that NOAA must provide for public review of
applications and that NOAA expects to release substantial portions of
an application for this review.
Related Comments
Comment 84. A commenter argued that the open-ended requirement to
submit proprietary technology details may chill R&D investment or spur
excessive redactions. The commenter requested that NOAA clarify the
confidential business information process under 15 CFR part 4 by
specifying how to mark sensitive material, how it will be stored and
redacted, and guaranteed review timelines.
Response. The Act requires that NOAA find that an applicant has the
technological capability to carry out the activities described in an
application. See 30 U.S.C. 1413(c)(2). This process will include NOAA's
evaluation of proprietary technological details. Regarding the
treatment of proprietary information by NOAA or other federal agencies,
the intent of the changes to Sec. 971.802 was to replace outdated
information with a single source for the Department of Commerce's
treatment of documents and proprietary information, 15 CFR part 4.
Comment 85. A commenter supported the proposed amendment to 15 CFR
971.802.
Response. NOAA appreciates the supportive comment.
Comment 86. Commenters expressed concern that the proposed changes
to public disclosure of documents do not make clear when and how
applications are made accessible to the public. A commenter stated that
it was not clear from the proposed revision to Sec. 971.802 how the
public would access the applications for exploration and commercial
recovery submitted to NOAA, in particular when and how the information
would be made available. The commenter argued that members of the
public have a legal right to review and comment on all aspects of
DSHMRA applications, and it is incumbent on applicants to demonstrate
that any information in an application warrants designation as
confidential. The commenter further argued that the application as a
whole cannot be shielded from public access as that would violate
NOAA's legal obligations to provide opportunities for public review and
comment. The commenter argued that interested persons should not have
to make a formal FOIA request to obtain relevant application materials
that have been submitted; it is NOAA's obligation pursuant to 15 CFR
970.212 and 971.212 to allow for examination of such materials in order
for the public to be able to comment within the allotted time period.
Response. The original public disclosure text in Sec. 971.802 was
outdated and no longer reflected present public disclosure requirements
for federal agencies. Regarding public review and comment of formal
DSHMRA applications that applicants have submitted to NOAA, NOAA will
provide public review and opportunities to comment on those parts of
applications that are not confidential in accordance with the
applicable provisions of DSHMRA and 15 CFR parts 4, 970, and 971. NOAA
publishes notices of DSHMRA applications and opportunities to comment
in the Federal Register after NOAA finds an application in full
compliance or fully complete.
V. Miscellaneous Rulemaking Requirement
Executive Order 12372: Intergovernmental Review
NOAA has concluded that this regulatory action does not affect any
state's intergovernmental review process established under Executive
Order 12372.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism Assessment
NOAA has concluded that this regulatory action is consistent with
federalism principles, criteria, and requirements stated in Executive
Order 13132. The changes to the DSHMRA regulations will facilitate the
submission of exploration license and commercial recovery permit
applications as well as NOAA and interagency review of the
applications. DSHMRA and these regulatory changes do not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Because
DSHMRA and these regulations do not affect the principles of
federalism, no federalism assessment was prepared.
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Based on the analysis in the RIA and public comment received during
the
[[Page 2667]]
proposed rule stage, OMB has determined this final rule is a
significant but not economically significant action under Executive
Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,'' 58 FR 51735 (Oct 4,
1993).
Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
This final rule is an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This final rule is not a ``significant energy action'' for purposes
of Executive Order 13211. Therefore, NOAA has not prepared a statement
of energy effects. The DSHMRA regulations and these revisions will not
result in a ``significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution,
or use of energy.''
Executive Order 14285: Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals
and Resources.
E.O. 14285 establishes policies to advance U.S. leadership in
seabed mineral exploration and responsible commercial recovery. Section
3(a) directs the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NOAA, to
expedite the process for reviewing and issuing exploration licenses and
commercial recovery permits under DSHMRA, consistent with applicable
law, to ``ensure efficiency, predictability, and competitiveness for
American companies.'' This rulemaking responds to the directives of
E.O. 14285 by providing an option for a consolidated application
process, which will streamline and expedite the process for eligible
and qualified applicants to apply for and receive an exploration
license and commercial recovery permit.
Executive Order 14294 Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal
Regulations
Section 5 of Executive Order 14294 provides, in relevant part, that
notices of final rules published in the Federal Register, the violation
of which may constitute criminal regulatory offenses, should include a
statement identifying that the rule is a criminal regulatory offense
and the authorizing statute.
The Executive Order defines a ``criminal regulatory offense'' as
``a Federal regulation that is enforceable by a criminal penalty.''
E.O. 14294 section 3(b) (90 FR 20363).
DSHMRA establishes that a person subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States is guilty of a criminal offense ``if such person
willfully and knowingly commits any act prohibited by section 1461 of
[DSHMRA].'' 30 U.S.C. 1463(a). Acts prohibited under Section 1461
include ``violat[ing] . . . any regulation issued under [DSHMRA].'' 30
U.S.C. 1461(1). As such, for any criminal regulatory offense enforced
under the authority of DSHMRA, the Act requires that the offense be
committed ``willfully and knowingly'' to satisfy the applicable mens
rea requirement.
NOAA received no public comments on the implementation of E.O.
14294.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal agencies to prepare
an analysis of a rule's impact on small businesses whenever the agency
is required to publish a rulemaking, unless the agency certifies,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605, that the action will not have significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small businesses. The RFA
requires agencies to consider, but not necessarily minimize, the
effects of rules on small businesses. The goal of the RFA is to inform
the agency and public of expected economic effects of the action and to
ensure the agency considers alternatives that minimize the expected
economic effects on small businesses while meeting applicable goals and
objectives.
NOAA developed the FRFA discussing the impacts of the proposed rule
on small businesses. The analysis was updated to incorporate revisions
to benefit and cost estimates for the final rule with no changes to its
conclusion. The Final RIA, Section 7, Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA), contains additional information. NOAA has also
developed a DSHMRA web page that serves, in part, as a small business
compliance guide for SBREFA purposes, <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/">https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/deep-seabed-mining/</a>. NOAA received some public comments on the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis that NOAA has considered and addressed
in the FRFA. Please see the response to Comment 22. For responses to
comments on the consolidated application fee, please refer to NOAA's
responses to Comments 33 and 34.
Summary of Findings
NOAA has determined that the final rule would result in a cost
savings for the affected businesses. Based on the information from this
analysis we found that: (1) there are an estimated seven U.S.
businesses that would be affected by this final rule; (2) for these
seven businesses, we estimate that 57% (or four businesses) are
considered small based on the Small Business Administration (SBA) size
standards; and (3) although we estimate that seven businesses would be
affected by this final rule, we recognize that the number of applicants
could be even smaller since currently there are no U.S. companies
engaged in deep seabed commercial recovery of hard mineral resources
and there are specific technological, engineering, capital and support
services required to undertake seabed mining.
1. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The RFA establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and
of applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and informational
requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this
principle, agencies are required to solicit and consider flexible
regulatory proposals and to explain the rationale for their actions to
assure that such proposals are given serious consideration.''
2. Statement of Need for and Objectives for the Rule
Prior to this final rule, the DSHMRA regulations required a
sequential process. Applicants first had to obtain an exploration
license before a commercial recovery permit could be applied for. While
this sequential approach was initially appropriate due to the nascent
stage of deep seabed mining technology and the data needed for a
commercial recovery application, a consolidated review was always
envisioned for a more mature industry.
The statutory authority for NOAA to prescribe, change, revise, or
amend the affected regulations under 15 CFR parts 970 and 971 is
provided under DSHMRA (30 U.S.C. 1413, 1426). NOAA published its DSHMRA
exploration license regulations (15 CFR part 970) in 1981, and its
commercial recovery permit regulations (15 CFR part 971) in 1989.
The objective of this final rule is to provide the option for a
consolidated application that streamlines the process for qualified
applicants, in accordance with E.O. 14285, ``Unleashing America's
Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources,'' establishing policies to
advance U.S. leadership in seabed mineral exploration and responsible
commercial recovery.
3. Summary of Substantive Issues Raised by Public Comments and
Statement of Changes
As a result of the public comments and additional public data
available,
[[Page 2668]]
NOAA has updated the FRFA estimates based on the following changes: (1)
partial monetization of the applicant's benefit of 100 days saved
through the consolidated permit process and (2) included a revision to
the applicant's wage burden benefit calculated using PRA ``OMB Control
#0648-0145,'' Section 12. For more information on these updates, please
see Section 1.2.a. of the Final RIA. The changes did not impact the
number of entities affected by the rule but resulted in an increased
benefit to the small business when accounting for the 100 days cost
savings. The detailed description of the cost impact to the small
businesses is described in the Cost Impact Analysis of this FRFA.
4. Description of the Estimated Number of Small Businesses
NOAA used the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes of the current businesses that have applied or expressed interest
(prospective DSHMRA applicants). The agency identified seven businesses
likely to be affected by this rule. Research and compilation of
employee size and revenue data for all seven businesses was conducted.
Available name and address information was used to research public and
proprietary databases for business type (subsidiary or parent
business), primary line of business, employee size, and revenue. The
preferred source, deemed most authoritative, came directly from
prospective DSHMRA applicants. Employee size and revenue data for all
seven businesses was collected and analyzed. Using names and addresses,
public and proprietary databases were consulted to determine business
type (subsidiary or parent), primary line of business, employee count,
and revenue. The most authoritative information was obtained directly
from prospective DSHMRA applicants. In cases where the prospective
DSHMRA applicant did not provide this information, the secondary
preferred source came from Dun & Bradstreet, which provides a
comprehensive database of business records for over 600 million
organizations internationally. This information was matched to the
SBA's ``Table of Small Business Size Standards'' to determine if a
business is small in NAICS 212290--All Other Metal Ore Mining which
best describes deep-sea mining. This industry has an SBA size standard
of 1,250 employees. Based on the information available, four out of
seven businesses were classified as potentially impacted by this final
rule as small businesses.\4\ In addition to these directly impacted
small businesses, businesses in several other industries may be
indirectly impacted and are included in Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Out of the seven businesses analyzed one business was
determined not a small business and two businesses could not be
assessed due to a lack of employment information.
Table 1--NAICS Categories for Small Businesses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Number of small Small business Estimated small
NAICS code Description businesses by share of revenue per SBA standard ** businesses
industry * industry * (%) small business affected by
* the rule ***
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
212290................. All Other Metal Ore Mining 30 88 $40.5 M 1,250 Employees.................. 4
213114................. Support Activities for 158 90 2.3 M $41.0 M.......................... ..............
Metal Mining.
213115................. Support Activities for 175 90 2.7 M 20.5 M........................... ..............
Nonmetallic Minerals
(except Fuels) Mining.
523110................. Investment Banking and 1,861 91 2.6 M 47.0 M........................... ..............
Securities Intermediation.
541620................. Environmental Consulting 8,119 97 1.2 M 19.0 M........................... ..............
Services.
541690................. Other Scientific and 25,810 98 0.8 M 19.0 M........................... ..............
Technical Consulting
Services.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Source: U.S. Census Bureau Statistics of US Businesses.
** Source: SBA Office of Size Standards.
*** Source: NOAA records. The number of small businesses is calculated based on business information received from potential DSHMRA applicants and SBA
Size Standards by 6-digit NAICS code. In some cases, the SBA Size Standard is based on a business's total annual receipts (gross income plus cost of
goods sold). Due to a lack of data on businesses' annual receipts it was not possible to determine whether they met the standard for a small business.
5. Cost Impact Analysis
As noted in the Final RIA, there are cost efficiencies in the
transition from print to digital for submission of the application and
also efficiencies in the consolidation of the permitting process rather
than completing both the exploratory license and commercial recovery
permit processes. Monetized savings are found in the preparation of one
report rather than two and the need to attend only one adjudicatory
hearing in the event certification is denied, rather than two. The
applying business would also see a savings of 100 days through only one
review process rather than two.
For an individual small business considering the consolidated
application over the separate and sequential exploratory and recovery
permit processes, they would see a cost savings of 5,099 from
transitioning from paper to digital application,\5\ 43,125 from
submitting only one application package, 26,358 from reducing the
number of adjudicatory hearings for any denial of certification from
two to one, and 2,411,192 from time savings of 100 days to start the
recovery process. For a business electing the sequential process of
exploratory licenses and commercial recovery permit applications, the
benefits of transitioning from paper to digital application submissions
would be 5,002.\6\ Other benefits from the standardization of the
exploratory and commercial recovery applications were not quantified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ This includes the net benefits resulting from transitioning
from paper to digital for the exploration and recovery applications
(2,856-97 = 2,759 and 2,533-97 = 2,436) less the cost of digital
submission for the consolidated application (97).
\6\ This includes the net benefits resulting from transitioning
from paper to digital for the exploration and recovery applications
(2,856-97 = 2,759 and 2,533-97 = 2,436) less the cost of two digital
submissions (194).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The net benefits associated with these cost savings over the 10-
year period between 2026-2035 are presented in Table 2. The total net
benefits (USD) of the final rule is 23,523,304 undiscounted, 20,065,855
discounted at three percent, and 16,521,784 discounted at seven
percent.
[[Page 2669]]
Table 2--FRFA Estimates of Costs and Benefits to Applicant Businesses Over Ten Years
[2026 USD]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs (New costs) Benefits (Cost savings) Net benefit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 3%
Undiscounted Discount 7% Discount Undiscounted 3% Discount 7% Discount Undiscounted 3% Discount 7% Discount
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2026.............................................................. $150,872 $146,478 $141,002 $2,503,202 $2,430,294 $2,339,441 $2,352,330 $2,283,816 $2,198,440
2027.............................................................. 150,872 142,211 131,777 2,503,202 2,359,508 2,186,394 2,352,330 2,217,297 2,054,616
2028.............................................................. 150,872 138,069 123,156 2,503,202 2,290,785 2,043,359 2,352,330 2,152,716 1,920,202
2029.............................................................. 150,872 134,048 115,099 2,503,202 2,224,063 1,909,681 2,352,330 2,090,015 1,794,582
2030.............................................................. 150,872 130,143 107,570 2,503,202 2,159,284 1,784,749 2,352,330 2,029,141 1,677,179
2031.............................................................. 150,872 126,353 100,532 2,503,202 2,096,393 1,667,989 2,352,330 1,970,040 1,567,457
2032.............................................................. 150,872 122,673 93,955 2,503,202 2,035,333 1,558,869 2,352,330 1,912,660 1,464,913
2033.............................................................. 150,872 119,100 87,809 2,503,202 1,976,051 1,456,887 2,352,330 1,856,951 1,369,078
2034.............................................................. 150,872 115,631 82,064 2,503,202 1,918,496 1,361,576 2,352,330 1,802,865 1,279,512
2035.............................................................. 150,872 112,263 76,696 2,503,202 1,862,618 1,272,501 2,352,330 1,750,355 1,195,805
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................................................... 1,508,719 1,286,968 1,059,661 25,032,023 21,352,824 17,581,446 23,523,304 20,065,855 16,521,784
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized.................................................... 150,872 150,872 150,872 2,503,202 2,503,202 2,503,202 2,352,330 2,352,330 2,352,330
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Discounted and annualized amounts are calculated assuming expenditures and payments at the end of year.
This final rule would result in benefits (i.e., compliance cost
savings) to the small businesses. To assess the impact to small
businesses, benefits were calculated as a percentage of businesses'
revenues. Annual revenue figures could be found for only two of the
four applicants that were determined to be small businesses \7\ and
showed an interest in applying for a deep seabed mining license and/or
commercial recovery permit. This was primarily due to the majority of
interested businesses being newly incorporated in 2025. Using business
reports and financial records, it was found that the small business
benefits of the final rule would have greater than a one percent
positive impact on annual revenues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Due to limited data on business revenue and/or employee
totals, it could not be determined whether two potential DSHMRA
applicants were small businesses. Hence, these businesses were not
included in this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Description of Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements
This final rule will reduce the current requirements for reporting,
recordkeeping, and other paperwork requirements for affected businesses
by transitioning to electronic delivery and offering an optional
consolidated process to streamline exploration licensing and commercial
recovery permit applications. These changes and their impacts are
described in more depth in Chapters 4 and 5 of the Final RIA.
7. Overlapping, Duplicative, or Conflicting Federal Rules
The requirements of this final rule will not duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with any other Federal requirement.
8. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Impact on Small Entities
The requirements in the final rule would bring benefits (i.e.,
compliance cost savings) to small businesses. NOAA's ability under the
Act to develop alternatives to the license and permit processes are
limited, as DSHMRA states that an application for an exploration
license establishes priority of right to an area. Therefore, NOAA could
not, through regulation, remove the requirement for an exploration
license. NOAA did consider various amounts for the administrative fee
for the consolidated license and permit process. Under existing
regulations, the fee for an exploration license application is
$100,000, and the fee for a commercial recovery permit application
would be another $100,000. NOAA is proposing a $350,000 fee for the
consolidated license and permit application, which imposes a cost
burden of $150,000 when compared to the total cost of $200,000 when
permits are pursued sequentially. Additionally, as required in the Act
(30 U.S.C. 1414) and described in the regulations (15 CFR 970.208 and
971.208), an applicant must pay to the Administrator a reasonable
administrative fee, and the amount of the administrative fee shall
reflect the reasonable administrative costs incurred in reviewing and
processing the application. Therefore, this fee may be adjusted up or
down depending on the administrative costs incurred. For further
discussion of the consolidated application fee, please refer to
Comments 33 and 34, and NOAA's responses to those comments, above.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
to review and approval by the OMB under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
This rule extends and revises the requirements for the collection of
information 0648-0145, formerly titled ``Deep Seabed Mining Regulations
for Exploration Licenses'' and now renamed ``Deep Seabed Mining
Regulations.'' In accordance with Section 3507(d) of the PRA, the
information collection requirements included in this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB.
This rule permits the submissions of consolidated applications
seeking both exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits.
Anyone seeking an exploration license or commercial recovery permit
must submit certain information that allows NOAA to ensure the
applicant meets the standards of the Act. Licensees and permittees are
required to conduct monitoring and make reports, including annual
reports regarding the licensee's or permittee's conformance to the
schedule of activities and expenditures contained in the license or
permit, and they may request revisions, transfers, or extensions of
licenses or permits. Information required for the issuance, revision,
transfer, and extension of licenses and permits ensures that the
Administrator is able to make determinations on the findings set forth
in 30 U.S.C. 1413(c) and 30 U.S.C. 1415(a) and the factors set forth in
the DSHMRA regulations. These findings and factors include that
applicants have identified areas of interest for deep seabed hard
mineral exploration and production; developed plans for those
activities; have the financial resources available to conduct the
proposed activity; and have considered the effects of the activity on
the natural and human environment. This information is used
[[Page 2670]]
to determine whether licenses and permits should be issued, revised,
transferred, or extended. The licenses and permits are subject to
annual reporting requirements and may be subject to extension requests
(every five years for exploration licenses, or every twenty years for
commercial recovery permits).
NOAA estimates that the public reporting burden for applicants
taking advantage of the consolidated exploration license and commercial
recovery permit process would be 1,125 hours per applicant; with an
estimated one applicant per year using the consolidated process, the
total annual burden hours for this process would be 1,125 hours. This
estimate takes into account the one-time initial cost (in hours) per
entity to prepare and submit to NOAA the consolidated license and
permit application. NOAA estimates that the public reporting burden for
applicants submitting an exploration license application alone would be
750 hours per applicant, with seven applicants anticipated per year
resulting in total annual burden hours of 5,250. A commercial recovery
permit application alone would be 750 hours, with one anticipated
commercial recovery permit applicant per year for a total of 750
anticipated annual burden hours. This estimate takes into account the
one-time initial cost (in hours) per entity to prepare and submit to
NOAA either a license application or a permit application.
NOAA anticipates a total of seven annual exploration license
applications, one annual commercial recovery permit application, and
one annual consolidated application for both an exploration license and
a commercial recovery permit. These estimates reflect an upper bound
which may overstate the anticipated annual burden, and the burden
estimates will be updated in the next renewal cycle based on the actual
number of applications received. NOAA sought information from potential
respondents as to the time estimates of preparing applications. One
potential respondent estimated a total of 3,600 hours to prepare three
applications, resulting in an estimated 1,200 hours per application.
Another respondent estimated a total of 600 hours to prepare two
applications, resulting in an estimated 300 hours per application.
Averaging the estimated time burden between these two potential
respondents results in an estimated 750 hours per application. NOAA
used this hour estimate for the time burden of preparing a single
license or permit application. For a consolidated exploration license
and commercial recovery permit application, this is a new proposed
process, but NOAA provides an educated estimate that the time burden
would be 1.5 times that of a single application, due to efficiencies
gained in reducing duplication of effort. As such, NOAA estimates that
preparation of a consolidated application would take 1,125 hours. NOAA
will update this information in future renewals of this collection
based on the actual number of license applications, permit
applications, and consolidated applications received during the
collection approval cycle, and on further information.
NOAA estimates that there may be one objection to license or permit
terms, conditions, or restrictions received per year. NOAA anticipates
that the respondent would spend 250 hours per objection for an
estimated tota
[…truncated; see source link]Indexed from Federal Register on January 21, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.