Beneath the Waves: The Science and Technology of Deep-Sea Mining

The subcommittee on the environment will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the subcommittee at any time. Welcome to today today's hearing, beneath the waves, the science and technology of deep sea mining. I recognize myself now for five minutes for an opening statement. Good morning and thank you to our witnesses for joining us today. We're here to discuss a crucial topic with far-reaching implications for both commerce and the national security of the United States, the scientific and technological advancements of deep-sea exploration and mining. For years, NOAA has worked with other federal agencies and now the commercial sector to achieve the ambitious growth goals of mapping and surveying the U S exclusive economic zone. The U S EEZ is the largest in the world, spanning over thirteen thousand miles of coastline and containing three point four million greater than the combined land area of all fifty states. Last March we held a hearing that illustrated NOAA cannot meet these mapping goals alone and that public-private partnerships are the key to accomplishing this mission. This work is essential for locating vital resources which have become increasingly difficult to secure especially when so many of these critical minerals are under the control of hostile nations. Last year, last April, President Trump signed executive order one four two eight five titled " Unleashing America's Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources", establishing policies to advance US leadership in seabed mineral exploration and responsible commercial recovery. Additionally, NOAA announced a final rule in January to streamline regulations for the exploration and extraction of deep-sea minerals. This will make it faster for companies to apply for consolidated permits and reduce bureaucratic red tape that hold the industry back for decades, all while ensuring appropriate environmental protections. This is an important step forward toward ensuring the United States maintains a leadership role in the expansion of deep-sea mining. Critical minerals including cobalt, nickel, copper, and manganese are vital to industries across our country. Energy generation, cell phones, defense systems, and satellites, in essence the technological basis of modern life, depend on the availability of these essential elements. Responsible development of these minerals requires thoughtful risk assessment and management of potential environmental impacts. The oceans are vital to many, many industries, and we have a responsibility to extract these resources in a way that benefits the United States, but without causing undue damage to ocean ecosystems. Today's hearing will highlight the full technological cycle of current mining activities. We will hear from witnesses about exploration, the mapping and research side, as well as extraction, the production side. This will help prepare us for the future of deep-sea mining and the role Congress will play in it. Ensuring our operations are protected is key to this continued success, as adversaries like China and Russia will undoubtedly seek to undermine the United States. Numerous ports across the United States, such as the port of Tampa Bay, will hold, will be hubs for critical mine minerals processing. Coordination across federal agencies will be essential to protecting assets and ensuring American dominance. We already know that China has ramped up mining activities in the Pacific and has repeatedly demonstrated it does not follow the same rules as other countries, as we have similarly seen with their fishing fleet off the coast of South America. At the same time, a robust private sector that contributes a range of technologies and techniques, is required to advance ocean science, not just deep-sea mining. In my home state of Florida, we know that the health of our economy is directly connected to the strength of our waterways and ports. The innovations we are discussing here today support a thriving blue economy which benefits all Americans. I look forward to working with the members of the committee to establish a well-rounded approach to this growing market. I again want to thank our witnesses for being here, and I look forward to your testimonies. At this time I um ask unanimous consent that Representative Moylan be permitted to participate in today's hearing. Without objection? So ordered. I now recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee for his opening statement.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh and especially thank you, Chairman Franklin, for convening today's hearing to discuss uh the state of science and technology surrounding deep-sea mining. And thank you to our witnesses for appearing before us today. For Rhode Island, uh my home state, the ocean is our history, our economy, uh and our identity. It feeds our communities, reports are fishermen, drives tourism, and anchors a growing blue economy. But it also reminds us of something deeper, that the ocean is not a collection of isolated parts. It's a single interconnected system, an intricate web of animals, currents, chemistry, and human activity. And when change happens in one corner of the system, it does not just stay there, it ripples outward, often in ways that we don't fully understand. And that is precisely the challenge before us today. The ocean co- covers more than seventy percent of our planet, yet we still know remarkably little about what lies beneath its surface. In fact, as one of our distinguished oceanographers on the panel today has said, uh, Doctor Robert Ballard, we have better maps of Mars than we do of our own sea floor. The United States is only mapped fifty-three percent of its waters, and sixty-four percent of the global ocean remains unmapped. Uh, that's not a small knowledge gap. It is a vast unknown. So, when we talk about deep-sea mining, about extracting minerals from some of our least understood environments on Earth, we must ask ourselves a basic question. Do we truly understand the potential impacts enough to proceed responsibly? Right now, I believe the answer is no. We cannot credibly claim that the US has sufficient scientific data to begin commercial scale deep sea mining when, we don't know the full extent of deep sea biodiversity, uh we don't fully understand how disturbances to the ocean floor and water column might affect fisheries, carbon cycling, all the food chains that end at our dinner tables, and we do not yet have comprehensive long-term monitoring systems in place uh to detect and respond to those changes. So, if we're serious about managing and protecting our oceans, we must start with knowledge. We must invest in understanding what is happening beneath the waves, what ecosystems exist in the deep sea, how they function, and how they are connected to the broader ocean system. That's why uh fully uh funding federal science agencies is so very important. Facilities like NOAA's new Marine Operations Center under construction in my district, uh and assets such as uh the Okanose Explorer research vessel critical to expanding our ability to explore and monitor the deep ocean. It's also why, uh, alongside Chairman Franklin, uh, we introduced the NOAA Global Ocean Monitoring and Observing Research Act, the NOAA GOMO Act, it's a good name. This legislation would create a coordinated research program to advance and strengthen the American ocean observing capabilities because without sustained independent and science driven data, we're making decisions in the dark. And let me be very clear, this is not just about environmental protection, though that alone would be enough reason to act. This is also about our economy. Our fisheries depend on a healthy ocean, our coastal communities depend on stable and predictable marine environments and our industries, from shipping to offshore energy depend on science-based mapping. We need data to understand, predict, innovate, and responsibly manage our oceans, and right now we don't have enough of it. So, as we consider the future of deep-sea mining, let us ground ourselves in what we do not yet know. Let us acknowledge that there are more questions than there are answers, and let us commit to closing these gaps before moving forward in ways that could cause irreversible harm. If we are to restore American leadership in deep-sea science and build a a brighter blue economy we must begin with a simple principle. We cannot manage what we do not understand. And right now there is still much left to learn. Uh, before I close, I ask for unanimous consent to permit Representative Ed Case of Hawaii to attend this hearing and ask questions of the witnesses. Thank you. Uh, I yield back.

Without objection, so ordered. I now recognize uh, thank you, Ranking Member. I'm I now recognize the Chairman of the full committee, Doctor Babin, for his opening statement.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I appreciate it, and I also want to sp- uh, I got shake hands with Doctor Ballard, but I did not didn't have time to get uh get in here to meet meet you all. And uh just wanna say thank you for being here. We're looking forward to your testimony in this very, very important uh issue. Um, and Mister Franklin, I wanna thank you for having this uh this hearing. Well, really appreciate that. This discussion will examine the current state of science and technology in deep sea mining. Our way of life depends on a reliable source. and supply of energy resources which in turn is driven by the accessibility and availability of rare earth elements. United States Geological Survey defines rare earth elements as a group of seventeen metals with unique physical and chemical properties. These elements are key to making glass, lights, magnets, batteries, cell phones, cars, and catalytic converters. Ironically, they are called rare. not because of their lack of abundance but because of the locations on earth where they are sourced and the difficulty involved in processing them into usable forms. Currently, the United States follows the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act, which governs how US companies conduct resource assessment and operations in international waters and thanks to renewed efforts from the Trump administration, uh exploration licenses and production permits are being streamlined greater efficiency. As with many other issues this committee presides over, China remains our biggest competitor in the production and processing of rare earth elements and is far more advanced in the processing of critical minerals, due to heavy investment in this capability decades ago. According to the Michigan Journal of Economics, China produces almost seventy percent of the global sup- supply of rare earth elements and processes nearly ninety percent of critical minerals. Given the importance of these minerals to consumer and military technology, the United States must establish greater control over the supply chain to counteract the influence of our adversaries, especially in times of conflict. Deep-sea mining offers a path toward critical supply chain independence due to the sheer volume of minerals spread across the ocean floor. If we can responsibly and economically extract and refine them, Improving the United States' uh refining techniques is essential to bolster domestic manufacturing that relies on a secure supply of these materials, as well as the national security systems that depend on them. U. S. based breakthroughs in underwater remotely operated vehicles and autonomous underwater vehicles have allowed scientists to map and characterize the sea floor down to a one meter resolution. creating highly accurate map map data to help determine the best places to explore and harvest these minerals. Advancements in collection and lift technologies can minimize disturbance to the ocean ecosystem, while remaining cost-effective for commercial deep-sea mining, ultimately giving the United States its competitive edge. However, because of the vast scale of the oce- deep ocean, it remains one of the least understood environments on Earth and requires further study and resources. NOAA has historically conducted and continues to conduct research on deep ocean ecosystems to establish an environmental baseline that can inform future protection standards for resource development activities. This research will ultimately help the commercial industry conduct environmental impact assessments and develop risk mitigation strategies to responsibly produce these indispensable materials. It will also position the US-based mining industry as a global leader in responsible resource development and management. The United States must continue to prioritize research in the areas that have the greatest potential for resource development if we are to out-compete countries like China in the global critical min- uh minerals race. I want to thank the subcommittee chairman, and I also want to thank you again. expert witnesses and we are looking very much forward to hearing what you all have to say. Thank you very much and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Chairman Babin, and I'll recognize the ranking member of the full committee for her statement.

Thank you, Chairman Franklin and ranking member uh for convening this uh hearing and this important discussion as well as the witnesses who are here today. We live on a blue planet, but we've barely scratched the surface of understanding our oceans. As of last summer, only about twenty-seven percent of the global sea floor had been mapped, according to NOAA, and as little as one percent of the sea floor has been explored. We can't pretend to understand what we've barely even begun to, uh, explore. Furthering our knowledge of the deep ocean is important for national security, natural resource management, and economic health. And with the nation's expansive ocean jurisdiction, we have the responsibility to be a leader in ocean exploration. While US researchers provide highly impactful, peer-reviewed ocean science research with significant influence, unfortunately, the US has already lost the lead in published ocean research output. Just this week, Reuters reported that the Chinese government supports more than forty research vessels that are part of a broader ocean mapping and monitoring operation, conducting climate and maritime research. In comparison, NOAA has fifteen research vessels, with only one being able to conduct deep-sea research. This imbalance has concerning implications for US national security. The civilian ocean and climate research that the Chinese government is heavily investing in according to Reuters and other naval experts is invaluable for sub-sea military operations and capabilities uh if we fail to invest, in marine and climate research, we were ceding both scientific leadership and strategi- strategic advantage on multiple fronts. I think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle can agree that strengthening American research and technological capabilities in ocean exploration is necessary. The specific topic at hand in this hearing is deep-sea mining. And the fact is that right now, we simply do not have the scientific baseline necessary. to support commercial deep-sea mining. Most ex- exploration contracts to date have focused on the Clarion-Clipperton zone, widely considered to be the best studied deep-sea mining region in the world. Yet, scientists still lack the data needed to address the scientific uncertainties surrounding deep-sea activities even in this relatively well-studied zone. The situation is even more concerning in US waters. In areas under consideration for potential leasing, such as offshore American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, and multiple areas in the Alaskan outer continental shelf. There's almost no baseline environmental data available. In some cases, only a handful of deep-sea dives have ever been conducted and none within the proposed lease areas. Reviews of publicly available data show major gaps across nearly every category, biological, chemical, physical, ecological, and even basic seafloor mapping. This illustrates the great deal of scientific uncertainty that remains. We can't act responsibly without addressing the unresolved scientific questions surrounding deep-sea mining activity, including potential impacts beyond extraction sites. From the limited research published on this topic, most studies conducted in prospective mining regions have been funded directly by mining companies. Now, While mining industry investment in this research is valuable, federal funding is necessary to support independent studies without apparent uh conflicts of interest. This is why I have serious reservations about proposals from this administration to move forward with commercial scale deep-sea mining. If we're committed to the responsible development of deep-sea deep-sea resources, then we first must commit to the science. That means investing in independent research to establish robust environmental baselines, understand ecosystem dynamics, uh, and develop the tools necessary to monitor and manage impacts effectively. I'd like to ask unanimous consent to put the Reuters news article about the Chinese effort, uh, in - in research into the record, Mister Chairman.

Without objection. Without objection.

Yeah. And I look forward to our continuing, uh, discussion to gain a clearer understanding. of what Congress could do to reinstate American leadership in ocean exploration. And with that, I yield back.

Thank you, ranking member Lofgren. Now let me introduce our witnesses. Our first witness today is Mister Gerard Baron. He is the co- co-founder, chairman and CEO of The Metals Company. Mister Baron launched his first venture while still in university in Australia, and has since built multiple global companies across battery manufacturing, media, technology, and future focused resource development. Our next witness is Mister Brian Connon. He is the Vice President of Ocean Mapping at Sail Drone, Inc. As a retired US Navy Captain, Brian transitioned to the private sector following nearly three decades of distinguished military service. He previously served as a Director of the Hydrographic Service Research Center at the University of Southern Mississippi before joining Sail Drone in twenty twenty. Our third witness is Doctor Robert Ballard, who is an Explorer-at-Large for the National Geographic Society. CEO of the Ocean Exploration Trust and CEO of Odyssey Enterprises. He has a PHD in marine geology and geophysics, was a tenured senior scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution for twenty-eight years in both the Department of Marine Geology and Geophysics, and later founder of the Deep Submergence Laboratory in the Department of Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering. And as a personal note, I first met Doctor Ballard over forty years ago, when I was a midshipman at the Naval Academy. I was an oceanographer major and he addressed us then, so it's been exciting to watch discoveries that he's had a hand in over the following decades. And our final witness today is Doctor Astrid Leitner. She is an Assistant Professor, Ecologi- Ecological Oceanographer and Deep Sea Ecologist at Oregon State University and the College of Earth, Ocean and Atmospheric Sciences. Doctor Leitner is an expert in the biological communities of the deep sea floor and water column especially in areas of interest for deep sea mining where she has

Chairman Franklin, Ranking Member Amo, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. Uh, we stand at the dawn of a of a new American industry that has been more than half a century in the making. And this industry started with American innovation in science and technology and regulation, but it was overtaken by the promise of an international standard for a new industry in the high seas, and the international regime enabled decades of deep sea science, but failed to deliver commercial regulations. In April last year, the executive order designed to unleash offshore minerals created the perfect conditions decades of science and technology development, can now be put to work under the only fully developed regulatory framework for deep sea mining in the high seas, American. Today, I'd like to highlight the stakes for the United States and comment on the state of the science and technology. The stakes are high. Deep seabed nodules can carry, can cure American dependency in several critical minerals in one go. All four metals contained in this nodule are on the US And dependence on imports is severe. One hundred percent for primary nickel, manganese and cobalt, and forty-six dependent for the import of copper. Sectors that need these metals are strategic, defense, AI, energy and the marine industrial base. And no other American prospect can do what the CCZ nodules can. They can deliver four metals that would take three separate mines on land. and the contents of "each metal is high in scale" dwarfs everything. At current level of US consumption, just one billion tons of nodules contains three hundred years of manganese, two hundred years of cobalt, and a hundred years of nickel, and half a decade of copper. And my company, the metals company alone, has defined almost double that. Nodules have the potential to turn America into a global mineral powerhouse. And do we have the science and technology to turn this potential into reality? And the answer is yes. First, we know now enough to understand and manage environmental risks. The foundation was laid by the Amai- American pioneers. In the nineteen seventies, several US-based consortia conducted successful pilots. They demonstrated deep-sea mining technology and helped identify environmental risks. And then in nineteen eighty Congress passed the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act to regulate deep seabed mining activities of US citizens and authorized NOAA to put in place implementing regulations. NOAA sprang into action. They put in place regulations for the exploration, conducted environmental research, produced a programmatic environmental impact statement for the CCZ, published technical guidelines for the industry and developed multiple site-specific impact statements. Pending further investigation, environmental impacts were deemed manageable. And then in nineteen eighty-nine, NOAA put in place the regulations for commercial recovery, completing the American standard for the new industry. By nineteen ninety-four, it was overshadowed by the promise of an international standard, to be agreed and managed by the international community. And the United States did not join, but chose to observe. It worked for exploration. Over three hundred offshore research cruises and over nine thousand days were spent on the water and the high seas, and almost twenty two, sorry, two hundred thousand articles have been published on poly-metallic nodules. And my company, the metals company, invested over seven hundred million dollars. completed twenty-two environmental cruises, and generated the world's largest sea floor to surface environmental data site, a data set, more than one petabyte in size. There is always more to know, but we know enough to manage risks. Second, modern offshore technology is measurably better. The systems tested in the nineteen seventies disturbed the sea floor deeply. They left tracks eighty centimeters deep and mobilized a lot of mud. And that mud lifted to the surface and was discharged overboard, raising concerns about impacts on fisheries. And the system was tested in two thousand and twenty-two was different. Our system leaves behind almost invisible ripples on the seafloor, reduces mud mobilization by an order of magnitude, and re-deposition is tightly controlled. Any mud that gets lifted to the surface is discharged. at depth to minimize risk to fisheries. And we saw recovery when we went back twelve months later. Microbes that make up sixty percent of the seafloor life showed no measurable impacts. Indicator species had begun to return and impacts to other organisms were limited to tens of meters with no measurable effects beyond a hundred meters. Better science leads to better technology and better environmental impacts. And third, the onshore technology is also better. We can process these nodules with near zero solid waste. We are integrating advanced American software and artificial intelligence to design cleaner more efficient processing facilities. So to conclude, deep-sea bed nodules represent a transformational opportunity in critical minerals, with a strong scientific foundation, improved technologies, and a clear regulatory pathway, the United States' is positioned to lead the responsible development of this emerging industry under an American standard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Baron. And I'll recognize Mr. Conan for five minutes to present his testimony.

Chairman Franklin, Ranking Member Amo, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Brian Connon. I'm a retired naval oceanographer, former president of the Hydrographic Society of America, and now the Vice President of Ocean Mapping at SailDrone. I represent nearly three hundred employees dedicated to a single mission, delivering a persistent presence at sea through uncrewed technology. Sail Drone is a proud American company based in Alameda, California, and since twenty fourteen, our autonomous vehicles have sailed over two million nautical miles and spent sixty thousand days at sea. We aren't just a tech company, we are the world leader in providing long endurance, autonomous survey solutions that provide the data and intelligence necessary for strategic maritime superiority. We often forget that Earth is a maritime planet, and the United States is a maritime dependent nation. Our EEZ is our largest and most mineral-rich frontier. Yet despite its importance to our economy and national security, it remains largely a mystery. As of today, twenty-seven percent of the world's oceans and only fifty-four percent of the US EEZ has been mapped. That leaves nearly one point eight million square nautical miles of sovereign American territory unexplored. Why? Because the ocean is a harsh, dangerous, and logistically complex environment. Traditional mapping has relied on crude ships, assets that require significant time, people, and money to operate and maintain. History has shown us that these ships cannot be scaled efficiently enough, nor utilized at high enough rates to meet our national goals. In fact, the twenty twenty-four implementation plan for the National Ocean Mapping Exploration and Characterization strategy admits that we are unlikely to meet our mapping goals by twenty-thirty for deep water if we continue at our current pace. Furthermore, a twenty twenty-four GAO report highlighted that workforce and recruitment challenges have slashed NOAA's available days at sea to nearly half of what is actually required. Commercial innovation is fundamentally altering the equation for ex- ocean exploration. Instead of dedicating our crude vessels to the routine, due diligence phase of ocean mapping, we can now assign this task to autonomous robotic systems. Systems such as the Sail Drone Surveyor, a sixty-five foot uncrewed surface vehicle, or USV, built at Austal USA in Mobile. It's designed specifically for deep ocean mapping. It uses the same high-resolution multi-beam sonar as traditional ships, but operates at a significantly lower cost, at higher utilization rates, and without the need for crew. Sail Drone operates under a mission as a service model. which shifts the burden of operation and risk from government to the private sector. This type of public-private partnership provides great opportunity and value to the government and agencies like NOAA. We have already seen what this technology can do. In twenty twenty-three, a surveyor USV mapped nearly five thousand square nautical miles of unknown seafloor around the Aleutian Islands and discovered a previously unknown seamount off the coast of California. In twenty twenty-five, sailed around complete a mapping of the portions of the Cayman Islands EEZ, over twenty-six thousand square nautical miles. The Cayman Islands are now one of the few countries in the world with a completely mapped EEZ. Today, as we're talking, two surveyor USVs are working with NOAA and the US Navy in the Mariana Islands to survey previously unmapped portions of the US EEZ that include likely areas suitable for marine mineral exploitation. These USVs serve as the scouts, identifying high potential sites and allowing crude survey platforms to focus on detailed investigation and interpretation. To accelerate this transition from innovation to adoption, I have three recommendations for the subcommittee. First, codify the autonomous uncrewed technology operations, or auto program. This program is NOAA's pathway for using as a service commercial technology like sale drone. It has seen bipartisan support and growth, but it lacks explicit legal authorization. Codifying it ensures these cost efficiencies are locked in for the long term. Second, we must move away from a ship-centric model. We cannot bridge the current mapping gap by relying solely on vessels that are increasingly difficult to staff and expensive to operate and maintain. We need a balanced investment that prioritizes scalable uncrewed systems for mapping and focuses crude vessels on exploration and characterization. Finally, we urge the prompt release of the seabed mapping plan, required by executive order one four two eight five, unleashing America's offshore critical minerals and resources. It has been nearly a year since that order was issued. Releasing this plan will allow the private sector to align its investments with our national imperative to secure critical undersea resources. We are at a technological tipping point. For the cost of building just one new ship, a concerted effort between government and industry could map our entire unknown frontier in just thirty-six months. Achieving in three years what would otherwise take decades. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, Mister Conlon, I recognize Doctor Ballard for five minutes for his testimony.

Dear Chairman Franklin and ranking member AMO and members of the subcommittee, and for providing me with the opportunity to testify before you today. As you know, I'm I'm Doctor Robert Ballard. I'm the founder and CEO of the Ocean Exploration Trust. I participated in my first oceanographic cruise of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography sixty-seven years ago, when I was seventeen. And since that time, I've participated and in most cases been the chief scientist of more than one hundred and sixty expeditions in oceans around the world. In the late nineteen seventies, our expedition led to the discovery of hydrothermal vents and their unique ecosystem and later t- uh high-temperature black smokers along the mid-ocean ridge. These discoveries explain for the first time the origin a polymetallic sulfite deposits containing mineral accumulations rich in gold, silver, zinc, and copper, as well as rare rare earth elements. And where the minerals were um that are now making up manganese nodules and encrusting volcanic uh rock surfaces came from. Which are now of increased interest by the scientific, economic, and political community, which is the focus actually of this hearing. What is critical for all of you to know is that these ore bodies were first identified through exploration. Often in the course of broad scientific investigations, they reflect a consistent principle in ocean science. Exploration empowers discovery and leads to the foundation of informed decision making. Equally important, and this is what I find most important, we did not know they were there. We bumped into them. We were looking for A and found B. We have identified them by looking s- for something else. That's the nature of exploratory work. Fortunately, I wou- an- I and other explorers were able to convince President uh Bill Clinton, and then followed by President George W. Bush, to create NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and to support the use of dedicated ships of exploration to explore what I like to call the new America. As you just heard before, we have better maps of Mars and Venus than the fifty-two percent of our own country that lies beneath the sea, within our exclusive economic zone. Let that settle in. Today's NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration, con- together with the Ocean Exploration Cooperative Institute, is leading efforts to systematically map But then you have a map you must then explore. We've mapped significantly within the USCEC. We've seen a small fraction of it. In fact, we've s- the, we've seen point zero zero one percent of the deep ocean of the world. This point zero zero one percent has actually been seen with the human eye. This unexplored area within the USCEC is equal to five and a half Louisiana purchases. Today Ocean Explorations Cooperative Institute is helping to map and explore this region guiding by a similar mandate that was given by President Thomas Jefferson to Captain Meriwether Lewis and his Corps of Exploration that stated, "The object of your mission is to explore for the purpose of commerce." My intent today is not to advocate what you do with this information in p- any particular way, but I want to emphasize the importance of science and technology to improve what we know, but equally important, what we do not know. At the present scale of what we d- are doing right now, a substantial amount of the America's EEC, these five and a half Louisiana purchases, have yet to be seen. We are exploring a small fraction of that seafloor so far. At the current pace and with the technology available, we do not yet have the data at the scale and resolution needed to reduce our uncertainty of the un- understanding of the environment and the resources they may contain. That includes not only these, where these resources are located, but what else is there? There are biological community communities and the broad systems that that exist there. It is critical for you to understand Noah's ocean exploration program is making new discoveries. We go We make these new discoveries because we have the luxury of going where no human has ever gone before. You can't help but make discoveries. As you see in the present figure, on one of of those recent NOAA-sponsored expeditions that I was on, we identified a new deposits of rare earth elements, not the ones that we know about, but a new a new uh sl- on the slopes of the oldest sea mounts i- in in American waters, in places we have never looked. before. Fortunately, you're in there mapping, making the maps for those right now, and we will be following into that area. But look at this image. Our initial observations suggested relatively vi- limited visual marine life on portions of these slopes, because the nodules are moving. They're flowing down the slopes of these volcanoes that are heavily encrusted. These deposits were uh observed to have very little life itself. I'm sure there is life there. But we have yet to sample it to prove the prove the case. The next step is to determine the size of these deposits and their compositions as a function of depth these are much shallower deposits than the one the mining companies are looking at right now. These are in less than four thousand meters of water, not six thousand meters of water. So it's very important to be able to go in there and we will be in there in June, thanks to NOAA's ocean exploration program. We will be broadcasting our expeditions live for the world to see. Again, we are looking looking to find something that only exploration can do. To accelerate progress, continued investment in NOAA's ocean exploration infrastructure and technology is critical. These include advancing multi-vehicle operations, where mapping, imaging and sampling systems can work together. As as we improve the efficiency of the systems we already have. These approaches are significant to improve the rate and quality of data collected for you to h- make informed decision making. Once again, I wanna thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak about the importance of what we're doing and that exploration precedes discovery and what follows discovery. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Doctor Ballard. Now, Doctor Leitner, recognize you for your testimony.

Chairman Franklin, Ranking Member Amo, Representative Bonamici, and members of the subcommittee. Good morning and thank you for inviting me today. My name is Doctor Astrid Leitner. I'm an oceanographer and deep-sea ecologist with over a decade of experience using and developing marine technology to research the deep ocean, including in areas of interest for deep-sea mining. The deep ocean comprises over ninety percent of the Earth's living space and is closely linked to the surface and humanity, providing us with crucial services. It regenerates nutrients, regulates climate, supports fisheries and human health and harbors spectacular biodiversity, exceeding that of tropical rainforests. Despite its size, the deep ocean is not too big for humanity to impact. Commercial scale deep sea mining would be one of the largest direct impacts humanity has ever had on the oceans, with single mining contract areas the size of States, and prospective mining regions the size of the continental US. Today, my key points are, first, more scientific research is needed to enable data form decisions and policies regarding commercial scale deep-sea mining. Second, there are specific and critical research gaps to prioritize. And lastly, with the right investments to U. S. academic and federal research and deep-sea assets, the U. S. can reclaim leadership in ocean science and technology essential to responsible seabed mining. Despite substantial industry-funded research in certain contract areas, knowledge gaps still prevent evidence-based decision-making. even in the best studied areas. These gaps include fundamental baseline data on resource distribution, food webs, resilience, and natural variability in seafloor and water column community structure across space and over time. Research shows that the abyssal ocean is not all the same. So we cannot use data from one area to represent another. Just like on land, we cannot use we cannot understand the forests of the northeast with data from the deserts of the southwest. This baseline data is crucial for environmental assessments and detecting impacts. Without it, we are going in blind with no reference point, unable to tell if the canary in the coal mine is dead or alive, and thus leaving us at risk of serious harm. Thus, it is critical that we invest in fundamental deep-sea science to fill knowledge gaps and build these reference baselines. In addition to the baseline data, priority research includes the potential impacts of deep-sea mining in order to enable informed decisions and policies. This includes impacts on the sea floor, the water column, and the services they provide. Only a handful of small scale tests currently inform our understanding. Key gaps include potential water column impacts whose scale will be larger than mining footprints. Just like air pollution from an industrial plant is carried far down wind, sediments, dissolved metals, and microplastics from initial processing will be released into ocean currents. More research is needed to better understand potential impacts, including on food safety and fisheries. Thus, at present, the best available data is insufficient to enable the responsible development of deep-sea mining as is called for in the recent executive order, fourteen two eighty-five. Substantial and sust sustained investment in fundamental and applied deep-sea research as stated in that order can fill remaining knowledge gaps and inform uh enable informed development. Historically a leader in deep-sea research, the US has been overtaken by China, Europe and others due to their sustained large-scale investments into scientific and academic institutions, national research facilities, technology development, and international collaborative projects. In comparison, the pool of U. S. deep-sea academic expertise has dwindled over the past decade, due largely to fewer federal funding opportunities, impacting U. S. leadership in deep-sea science and thus the readiness of the U. S. workforce to serve this potential new industry. Also, the USA currently has excellent but limited numbers of assets capable of sampling the seafloor um at the depths of most seabed resources. Only three federal assets are capable of complex seafloor sampling down to six thousand meters. And the fleet of global class research vessels is aging and shrinking. In summary, substantial sustained investment in federally funded deep-sea research and assets would better position the US to make science-informed decisions in this realm. Industry also has an important role to play. To date, nearly all research in prospective mining areas has been industry funded, advancing knowledge, but presenting a conflict of interest. Establishing independently administered, industry funded research programs could resolve this. Finally, establishing smaller funding opportunities for researchers to add additional value to ocean exploration work would also accelerate critically needed science. Thank you for this opportunity to contribute to this discussion and I look forward to your questions.

Thank you, Doctor Leitner, and thank you for our witnesses for their testimony. I now recognize myself for five minutes of questions. In the wake of President Trump's executive order to unleash America's offshore critical minerals and resources, this administration has worked to keep their promise of cutting government bureaucracy in red tape. NOAA's new consolidated permit application will allow us to fully utilize our commercial capabilities to carry out deep-sea mining activities. Mr. Barron, the metals company is in a unique position in which you were the first company NOAA deemed in compliance with their new consolidated permit application. While this committee does not typically work in the permitting and regulatory process, we are constantly looking towards the future of innovation. Uh, for Mr. Barron first, and then uh any witnesses after, and I would just ask that you keep your comments to to about a minute, so everyone will have a chance to respond.

Mm.

Um, how does this executive order shape the landscape of future deep-sea mining technologies and capabilities.

Well, we, since twenty eleven we've been busy spending that seven hundred million dollars I mentioned, and of course, uh, we contemplated permitting through the international body, who had the expressed purpose of putting in place a regulatory regime to allow the commercialization, but of course they never, they never got around to it, they couldn't agree. Uh, however, we continued to carry out that that very expensive environmental research and you know those results more than a petabyte or petabyte or of environmental data is available for the world now. And of course the the biggest challenge and some of which I heard my esteemed colleague mention today some of the things they talk about happen in laboratories, or happen in uh models, we're talking we need real data, we need to be running trials four thousand meters below sea level, we need to be, uh, collecting the baseline environmental data, as we have done for many, many years. We ran a collector trial in two thousand and twenty-two, where we ran more than eighty kilometers of, along the tracks. We had fifty devices in the water, measuring, monitoring, all of this tremendous, um, data that was being gathered so we could see the impacts. We, we stayed behind to look at the impact after the collector had left. We then returned a year later. So we have this tremendous availability of data and and of course, what does the data show us? It shows us that

Thanks, Mr. Barron. I need to, I really wanna hear from everyone. I don't wanna leave Dr. Leitner out on the end,

Yes, thank

but also know we've got a lot of folks who wanna ask questions, so I wanna keep us moving,

Sure.

but thank you,

Thank you.

uh, Mr. Cannon, Conan. OK, very good. Dr. Ballard, no? OK, Dr. Leitner. And if we're done, I'll come back to you, Mr. Barron.

Yeah, I Alright, thank you. Um, I would like to point out that the executive order specifically calls for the responsible development. And so this is what we need um to follow in that order, and what we need is to fill all of the scientific gaps that still remain to be able to enable this industry to act responsibly. How can we set regulations if we don't know what we're regulating? How do we set thresholds that are acceptable if we don't know what thresholds le- what threshold levels to use? So um I would like to say that the executive order specifically calls for this, and that um prioritizing scientific research is also in that. So um there are pieces of that order that that call specifically for that.

I would ask the question, would you turn your data over to her to analyze?

Well, our our data will be made available to the regulator, and then it's for the world to look at.

Well

But what we have found also um uh Bob is that there's a n- tremendous amount of bias in science as well. there's a tremendous amount of activism in science, I would say. And um, uh however, independent scientific evidence is crucial. And so if I look at our environmental research, we spent hundreds of millions of dollars, but we we gave uh work programmes to independent organisations to go and carry out that work. They were able to carry that work and we would, we got to review it of course. It wasn't our scientists going to do that work, we get to review it afterwards. And thresholds is one classic example. We engaged the Commonwealth uh laboratory in Australia, CSIRO, and NIWA, who've had tremendous success in putting those thresholds in place for the Great Barrier Reef, uh which has seen recovery by understanding what are the things you need to measure, what are the important things, because they come with different levels of importance.

That's fair,

And if

and I got, I got one more question for Doctor Leitner, just based on your testimony, uh you had mentioned that China is is out ahead of us, they're investing heavily, more heavily in science and research and and I think I would extrapolate that that you think that China should have a hall pass to do what they're doing as far as potential mining, because they've done more research from an echo from an environmental standpoint do you consider China to be a responsible actor?

I'm not privy to the information of that's coming out of Chinese research right now, I don't think anybody gets a hall pass and I think that development

But but you're praising the amount of research that they've done.

I'm saying they're assets.

basically the United States.

I'm saying they have more assets than we do currently.

OK. Alright. Uh, thank you all, appreciate uh your responses and I now yield to the ranking members for those questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, I think we we've all heard pretty clearly that uh the ocean is, you know, one largest, one of the least understood ecosystems on Earth and uh at the same time plays such an important role in biodiversity, nutrient cycling, carbon storage, supporting fisheries. So, you know, the consequences of getting this wrong could be long-lasting and, in some cases, irreversible. So, like, if there is bias, uh, as I heard Mister Baron refer to, the bias should be about not making mistakes. Uh, and I think it's essential that, uh, we have this discussion, the data and the science driving us, uh, and - and our deference to it. Um, so, Doctor Leitner, just from an ecological perspective, Could you share what's most at risk if deep sea mining proceeds without sufficient scientific understanding?

Sure, thank you for the question. Um, I think we are really worried about biodiversity loss. We're worried about possible extinctions. We're worried about, um, disrupting crucial ecosystem functions and services. We know that the deep ocean really provides crucial services like nutrient regeneration, fuels the entire ocean system. So we are worried about disrupting functions as well as ecosystems. Um, and again, we're worried about the impacts both on the sea floor and in the water column, which is very, very, um, early on in the, in the studies. Um, metal ecotoxicity is something we've just barely scratched the surface on. The met- the metals available in the nodules are highly complex, there's lots of these metals. What are the compounded effects? We don't know any of these things. And what are the other effects of the operations themselves, the noise, the light? We're having impacts over very, very large unprecedented scales, and we need more research.

Thank you for that. Um, look, as I mentioned in my uh opening statement rather, uh we have mapped only about fifty-four percent of US waters, leaving you know, a significant knowledge gap. And uh as I think we've established as well, ocean exploration is incredibly important for advancing our understanding of the environment, Uh there is also an economic imperative, and and that's something that I, you know, I won't deny. And so Doctor Ballard, we know that you are a renowned pioneer in underwater exploration and and, you know, your tenure at the University of Rhode Island is something that uh is a point of pride uh uh for us in the ocean state. And you mentioned in your testimony that uh it's explorers like you who informed the public the nodules uh even existed on the sea floor, right? And and it that may not have been an an potential discoverer, but you dis- you discovered that. Can you speak uh to the importance of investing in ocean exploration? You talked about the bipartisan uh administration support for the uh the Office of Ocean Exploration, but can you tell me uh about its importance and why we have to do more?

In the first place, we discovered manganese nodules in the eighteen hundreds on the Challenger expedition on abyss, of the first global exploration was in the eighteen hundreds. We just didn't think they were very important at the time. But it was really in nineteen seventy nine when I discovered hydrothermal black smokers that we realized uh where manganese nodules were getting their elements, as well as the subsequent deposits people are looking at. I think what really is interesting is that what I just mentioned. We just introduced to the people sitting at this table the discovery we just made of a fourth fourth setting, that's much shallower. And fortunately, NOAA is funding us. And you're out there right now, if I'm not sure, if I'm sure, with a saildrome, mapping the very seamounts that I'm gonna be on in June. And I can't wait to have both sides of the party here, uh, uh, participating in that expedition. So it's really being able to discover what we don't know that may be better candidates than the ones we do know. So I'm advocating continued exploration of the, that part of our own country we've never explored. So that's really where my hat's in the ring, is our knowledge base of most of our uh five and a half Louisiana purchase. We didn't have the advantage of uh scouts that that were uh leading Lewis and Clark on their expertise. There were no Na- there's no Native Americans out where we are. We are the first human being to be in a piece of America. And so we really want a community participation. Both sides of the table. Our expeditions are done live. And you can literally participate in the expedition from your home. We have experts. We have called the doctors on call. When we go out and we're the first on scene, we w- operate twenty-four hours a day and our watch leader has a book that has all experts wanting to be notified the moment we make a discovery. We tend to do it mostly Sunday morning at two AM. But if her name is in the book, we will call her or call you, we will wake you up in your bed, we will ask you to open up your laptop and we'll stream the discovery to you. That's how open we are. That's the kind of involvement we want all players in the game. And having them work together as Americans.

Well, thank you, but, Doctor Ballard, and you you make a strong case for the continued collaboration and partnership and uh uh I believe uh additional federal investments necessary to

uh explore our oceans. With that I yield back.

Thank you, thank you, Mem Bramah, I now recognize uh the Chairman uh Doctor Vaben for his questions.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, I appreciate it.

Sure.

And uh everyone wants to insure that deep sea exploration and mining is done responsibly. Given the C C P's, Communist Chinese Party, deep sea surveying, mapping and mining plans, well as its abysmal history of environmental protection and international resource exploitation, would the deep sea environment be better preserved by US leadership in this field, or by CCP stewardship? I'm gonna go to you, Mr. Barron, first. That should be a short answer, but maybe not.

Thank you. Well, the best way to protect the marine environment is to regulate it, and America has regulations. And so, what I would look at in the multilateral system is that they've not been able to achieve their objective, and that was agree a set of rules. And so, the evidence would point to the fact that America is a, um, you know, has a set of rules that, that, you know, everyone should be adhering to. Because of course, you know, we have this other group of countries who signed on to the treaty.

Right.

And if there are no overseers of how they uh behave during those expeditions, then you know, you don't get as good a regulatory outcome,

Yes, sir.

in my opinion.

Thank you. And I'd li- I'd like to go to you, Mr. Cannon, next.

I think the short answer is, of course we want Amer- America to be in the lead.

Amen. Yeah.

And I think as you look back in our history, that's that's what set us apart. We are explorers. And we need to - to get out and - and - and follow along with what Doctor Ballard is saying, is to explore our own territory that's - that we can't see unless we get down to look at it. Uh, it is hard, it is expensive, but we're now seeing technologies that allow us to do this, um, more efficiently and faster than we've ever been able to do it before. And that's, I think, the piece that we - we also need to look at is getting, uh, the understanding and the - and the acceptance of these new technologies and bring those to bear on the issue.

Right. And then one of the, one of the greatest modern explorers of of of our times, Doctor Ballard, what would you say to that?

Well, you have to understand that uh when people a- ask you what is it like to go to work, I work in a helicopter underwater in total darkness with a flashlight with marine snow. Try that one on. Literally the challenges that we face, our world under the sea is a world of eternal darkness. We carry our own light bulbs with us. It's extremely difficult to do what we do, but with the advance of autonomous vehicle systems now, we're now developing swarming AUVs where we get a pack of dogs out there hunting. But those AUVs are six million a click. But if you give me a pack of dogs, I can get out there and exp- rapidly accelerate. In fact, we've now taken University of New Hampshire's DRIX vehicle, which is a surface mapping vis- vehicle similar in many ways to uh to a sail drone. And it is the mother to other dogs, and it takes them out and is able to explore and increase our footprint. We need those assets. We see them being used in war. We wanna use them in peacetime, underwater drones that are able to rapidly accelerate our discovery. And they exist right now, but I don't own them. Buy me some, would you?

Well, let me, let me go on further. The Science, Space and Technology Committee uh is home to forward-looking thinkers and we're constantly searching for the next edge in science. Today's hearing highlights just how rapidly this this field is uh is developing. And Doctor Ballard, your nineteen seventy-nine discovery of black smokers uh changed the trajectory of deep-sea critical uh mineral exploration and detection, as our technology and capabilities continue to expand. expand, what do you see as the next major breakthrough in this environment, and what is something we're pursuing that remains just beyond our reach?

It's, it's where we are right now. We now, I can do my expedition from my home. I don't, we're now building in military, and I served in the Navy for thirty years and before that the US Army. We now have ships that don't have people on them. His vehicle doesn't have people on them. That is the technology of tele-operated robotics, again, where you do humans, we're land animals, we go out there and you're drowned, OK. What you wanna do is to be able to send technology that's inexpensive to operate and in large numbers, and that's right where we are. That technology exists, but we need to be implementing it across the board.

Uh, it, it is so fascinating, I just wanna say thank you very much because this, this goes really beyond uh deep sea mining. I mean we you've discovered ships that have been uh sunken from World War Two uh nineteen twelve on back to uh thousands of years ago and uh I would think this would uh enter the arena of archaeology and and uh paleontology as well so that's uh the the sky's the limit there so thank you.

Oh I'm an equal opportunity explorer you can and I but the key is getting bottom time. When I dove to twenty thousand feet in a submersible that took twel- six hours to get to the bottom and six hours to get back at night. How would you like to have a job that's a twelve hour commute a day, and you spend minutes on the bottom? We're now moving our bodies. The technology that we're developing here will infect us through the future of electronic travel. That's just like NASA's technology had impact. Our ocean exploration by moving to autonomous vehicle systems, we're now launching a whole new industry that has nothing to do with the ocean. Is you're gonna have a a broom in your house where you turn it on and you're in a Serengeti and a Jeep, and you get a phone bill.

Thank you, I yield back, Mister Chairman.

Thank you.

Fascinating.

Thank you, Chairman Babin, I now recognize the ranking member, Miss Lofgren. She's back. She was here, OK. Um, so next, OK, yeah, Miss Ross, North Carolina.

Thank you very much. Um, I love this committee, like, we're getting from Doctor Ballard. It just, um, it's so important and, um, I really hope that this administration invests in the kind of research that you do. It is important not just for deep-sea mining, as our chairman has said, but for so many other things. Um, we had the really great privilege, um, almost two years ago of going to Rhode Island and seeing what the Coast Guard has been doing in mapping, in order to pursue offshore wind, which hopefully we'll be able to do again in another administration. And the Coast Guard told us They didn't know what was going on under the sea. And to not know that after all this time, um, really speaks to the fact that we need research. I represent North Carolina, a coastal state, and I also represent the research triangle and so many amazing scientists. And we have wonderful, wonderful coastal research that's going on in North Carolina and I don't know if with them but um i've gone out to see it and it's been really terrific i really appreciate chairman franklin and ranking member amo for holding this very important meeting and thank you to all of the witnesses for sharing your testimony and insights on this topic as we've heard deep-sea mining brings significant scientific uncertainties in addition to the great possibilities and there are also environmental risks and so for those of us that represent coastal states, we're particularly attuned to those risks. We're not even close to having the sufficient data on deep-sea biodiversity, ecosystem functions, physical systems, and that means we can't possibly know the full and lasting impacts that deep-sea mining will have on the ocean's fragile and interconnected ecosystems. Um, this administration is really trying to fast-track before we have the data that we need. And the executive order is paving the way for that. And we need to make sure that we don't get it wrong and we get it right. Nobody's saying that we don't need these minerals, but we also have to protect ecosystems and our coastal communities. And in North Carolina, those coastal communities have suff- suffered from hurricanes and all sorts of other things. we don't need to give them one more thing to worry about. The EO comes at a time when the United States has fallen behind other countries in deep-sea research investment and that means that we have gaps, as you all have identified. North Carolinians and our coastal communities depend on healthy ocean ecosystems for tourism, fishing, recreation, and a huge part of our state's economy. So I will support any additional research needed to better understand the impact of deep-sea mining, on seafood safety, fisheries, and to ensure that deep-sea mining is not green-lit at the expense of our coastal communities. Um, my first question is for Doctor Leitner, and I see it may be my only question. Um, as you said, whether on land or in the deep sea, no two ecosystems are alike, and studying one in detail doesn't give us um the full understanding. It's really limited to that ecosystem. And so we need to make sure that this research is geographically diverse, and um we understand where scientific findings are comparable and where they're not comparable, because we don't wanna make a mistake by making an ass- an assumption. What would a strong research framework look like with sufficient geographic and ecological coverage? And of course money, money too.

Thank you for the question. Um, yeah, there's a recent paper actually that presented a ten year to um multi-decade old time frame basically to assess each region and for each resource separately. And that's really important, right? No two regions are alike. The resources that you're going to exploit in those regions are not alike and the um impacts that we can expect are not alike and so each region will need specific um research. The road map there lays out basically a step-by-step guide from assessing all of the existing data, collecting all of that, everything that's publicly available, assessing that, understanding what in that region is missing, specifically, and then spending the time and the research dollars to get us there, explore those systems, but also take in-depth samples, right, to understand structure and function and all these things that we're worried about, specific to that region, and we need to place it into context. Again, if we only sample mining regions we won't understand if they're linked or not, how they're linked or not to the larger ecosystem. How can we uh understand an extinction risk if we only sample the one place and not outside of it, right? So we have to go beyond just the specific regions of interest. Um, and then again we're going to need multiple years of monitoring test mining to try to understand not only short-term impacts, but what the longer impacts are, and to do those over different scales, right?

General lady yields back. The chair now recognizes my colleague from Tennessee, Mister Vanneps.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today. Over the last several decades, American mineral production has severely declined, eroding strategic advantages against our foreign adversaries, in undermining our national security. President Trump's executive orders have halted this decline by taking decisive action to advance domestic mineral production and expand our capabilities in the deep sea. A flourishing deep sea mining industry will help establish American undersea dominance, secure critical mineral supply chains, and advance domestic industries that require critical minerals as essential inputs for finished goods. Tennessee's seventh district has seen major investment in critical mineral and battery supply chains. From mineral smelters to battery cathode manufacturers, these investments in midstream supply chains position our district to help revitalize the U. S. Industrial base, provide American jobs, and foster an emerging technology corridor in the Southeast. Mister Barron, in your remarks, you discussed the benefits of processing poly-metallic nodules onshore. To what extent is the metals company involved in domestic mineral processing, and how is the company planning to expand its processing capabilities?

Thank you for your question. And we are committed to bringing processing back to the United States of America. And for a a number of years we've been trying to solve for uh minimizing the amount of capital we spend to get started. But then of course this administration arrived and said re-industrialization was uh a high priority, bringing jobs back, securing supply lines. And so, it's no surprise that we are deeply engaged with some of those government agencies about how we can bring uh the ability to bring processing for polymetallic nodules back to the United States, because of course what that would do is is provide secure supply lines, but it would also open up for other operators who follow behind us and might want us to process their material as well. So, it is a very high priority. And we've always said if the administration would be willing to help us, um, that we would be very keen to do that, and, and I can confirm they are willing to help us, and we're having very productive discussions along those lines.

Great. As a follow-on to that, what are the barriers to expanding domestic minerals processing and what can Congress do to help in that area?

Well, the first thing is, there hasn't been a nickel smelter built in the United States in eighty years. There is nowhere I can bring these polymetallic to the United States today because we've outsized all of that. And so making funding available through the uh the the standard agencies, and then also fast-track permitting, which of course uh Secretary of the Interior has made a high priority for him, uh for his department, uh and I think that the continued support through at a local level as well, to encourage incentives for companies to to build industry jobs. And that's what's going to make a safer, more, um, more, more commercially successful America.

Thank you. I'll come back in just, in just a minute. Uh, I'm, I'm switching gears slightly here. Despite ongoing efforts to reduce reliance on adversarial inputs, upstream and midstream segments of the US battery supply chain remain heavily dependent on China. For EVs built in the US, forty-five percent of the required mineral materials used in battery components originate in China. This dependency creates an urgent national security risk. Mister Barron, you mentioned that nearly all America's metal inputs are dependent on foreign supply. Can you speak more specifically to China's involvement in deep-sea mining, and any efforts they are taking to expand their cap- capabilities in this area?

Well, I have visited uh China back in two thousand and eighteen and witnessed their deep-sea mining uh pilot processing plant where they were processing these materials, um visited their somewhat agricultural uh deep-sea mining machines, And of course that was almost a decade ago, so it is clear they are the, they are the dominant player when it comes to the international seabed authority. They have more licenses than anyone. And they continue to talk about wanting to dominate deep ocean, deep earth, deep space. And so um what people forget is that China has resource anxiety as well, because they get their resources from developing countries who may withdraw the welcome mat at any moment and so being able to, uh, develop ocean resources and ship them straight to China is something very comforting for them as it should be for us and as it can be an amazing opportunity for America, who has been, uh, forced to sit on the sideline for the last many decades to now reassert the leadership position that it once had back in the seventies via supporting, uh, corporations like ours.

Right. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Mister Chairman, I'll yield back.

Thank you, Mr. Van Epps. The chair now recognizes my colleague from Oregon, Miss Bonamici.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and ranking member, a special welcome to Doctor Leitner. Thank you for making the trip from Oregon. Appreciate that. So I represent a coastal district. Uh, I also co-chair the bipartisan oceans caucus, so I've understood for a long time that we know more about the surface of the moon than we do about the deep ocean sea floor. Uh, last year, twenty-four leading deep ocean scientists warned that we cannot establish a meaningful baseline for mining because we lack even the most basic basic physical, chemical and biological data, and even some industry funded studies show that mining would reduce biodiversity and disrupt food webs that sustain fisheries and ocean life. And the Trump administration's executive order is a rush to issue mining permits in the US and international waters, and it gambles with the fragile ecosystems that support coastal economies. And according to the Center for St- Strategic and International Studies, it risks stabilizing international law by opening the door for any country to claim and extract minerals in the high seas. So, Doctor Leitner, research published published last year i- in Nature Communications suggests that deep seabed mining could disrupt uh complex food webs that support the health of the planet. Uh, the ocean's midwater is one of the largest yet least understood ecosystems on Earth. So how could sediment plumes from mining affect midwater ecosystems including species that support commercial fish commercial fisheries and coastal economies.

Thank you for that question. Yeah, we are talking actually about two distinct impacts from one mining um operation. One is on the sea floor, but a totally separate second additional impact that's actually gonna be larger scale um is going to happen in the

Right.

midwaters from an additional plume that is released from initial onboard processing. We've now measured that that um discharge includes high levels of sediments, um, high levels of a whole suite of dissolved metals, persistent organic pollutants, um, and high levels of microplastics, right? So we are worried about each of those things in isolation and the combination. And we know again that this this spread in the ocean currents of these mid-water plumes um, will be on much larger scales. We're worried about disruptions of the food web that then ripple up,

Sure.

um, all the way to our fish species that depend and feed in this layer.

Correct. In two uh twenty twenty two there was an international assessment that called for at least a decade of research. That was twenty twenty two, so a decade hasn't passed. A decade of research before science informed seabed mining could proceed responsibly, so what specific data gaps still exist that make permitting premature?

Yes, even in the best studied regions, so in the Clarion-Clipperton zone, eighty-five percent of the data categories that we had um had no data at all, or were dominated by gaps. Major baseline gaps um include ecosystem services and functioning, biodiversity, natural variability in time especially and over space, um understanding the connectivity um between these ecosystems, and then again we need to focus on impacts as well, what are the impacts to our fisheries and our seafood safety through metal ecotoxicological work, um what are the impacts on our critical ecosystem services like nutrient regeneration and carbon sequestration, um and so we're just not there yet in terms of the data, we need more time to um fill those data gaps.

Right, and I'm working to uh reintroduce my bipartisan Blue Globe Act uh to enhance the mapping, monitoring, and data sharing with targeted research and partnerships so we understand these ecosystems instead of rushing to exploit them. Uh, Doctor Ballard, how should Congress approach deep sea exploration and mapping uh before considering any commercial extraction? And and I I'm going to give you like half a minute quickly because I still have one more question.

I had a quick question. If we these areas have already been mined. If China is already mining areas on the high seas, are they, is any major mapping going, mining going on in the world's oceans? Oh, OK, that was the question I had.

Oh, the mining is done. We need more mapping, though.

Cuz I would go no, I would go and study what they've already done, but they haven't done it yet. No, I I think we now have a very comprehensive program, the Ocean Exploration Cooperative Institute, funded through NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration,

Right.

is a ten year program funded through twenty thirty to map and characterize,

Right.

and we're busy, could we be at sea more? Yes. Our ships spend most of their time not at sea for lack of funding.

Okay, that Yeah, okay.

And

I thank you. I appreciate that. Uh, twenty thirty is not here yet. Uh, Mister Baron, you're featured in a video uh with a title, sixteen trillion dollar research on our ocean floor. So how much do you stand to benefit uh, financially, if this permit goes through?

Well, we are a for-for-profit company and you can um buy our shares on the NASDAQ. TMC is the ticker. Um, we have found that as the, as the private sector is where you get the best research dollars, because we also bring a very commercial approach to how we carry out that research.

And, and do you have an answer to my question? How much do you stand to benefit financially if you get the permit?

Well, all of our shareholders will hopefully benefit substantially. I bet I can't give you an exact answer to that question.

Thank you. As I yield back, Mr. Chairman, rushing to mine the least understood ecosystem on Earth relies on uncertain science, speculative economics, and it risks irreversible environmental harm. That combination should lead us to invest in understanding the deep ocean, not accelerating its exploitation. And I yield back.

Thank you, Ms. Bonamici, and um we have a couple of folks who've waved on, but we'll continue with the subcommittee members now, not the chair now recognizes, my colleague from Texas, Mister Menefee.

Thank you, Mister Chairman and Mister Ranking Member, uh I represent uh Texas eighteen which encompasses a good deal of uh the Houston area, and as you all know the Texas Gulf Coast has been a global hub for deep sea research, but also restoration uh given what we all went through at the start of the last decade uh with the oil spill. Uh so we bring a unique perspective uh to this conversation uh so just let me the scene here. There are minerals sitting on the ocean floor right now that power electric vehicles, defense technology, and the clean energy grid. Countries like China are already racing to get them, and the Texas Gulf Coast is being asked to be a major part of America's solution. So your company, the metals company, wants to build a three point two billion dollar processing facility on the Texas Gulf Coast. That's twelve hundred jobs, and that's critical minerals like nickel, cobalt, manganese. process right here at home instead of overseas. That's that's a big deal and I want Texas to win. But researchers at Texas A and M are raising serious questions about what we don't yet know about the ocean floor and what happens when we start mining it. And here's my concern. If we move too fast and we get this wrong, we don't just risk the environment, we risk the industry itself. Because rules based on bad science don't hold up, and mistakes in the deep ocean are very hard to undo. So today I just wanna understand what we know, what we don't know, and what it takes to get this right. Um, Doctor Lighten, I'll start with you, uh, the Trump administration wants to fast track these deep sea permits, uh, for mining, and, and I get the appeal, but if we skip the science and we start mining anyway, what happens when something goes wrong? Can we even detect it? Can we fix it? Or are we just kinda crossing our fingers out in the deep sea?

Yeah, thank you for that. Um, currently if we don't know, we d- if we don't have a baseline to compare to, we're going in blind. We don't, we don't know if we're gonna make an impact and we don't have thresholds to say, OK, we need to stop, right? We need to have that baseline research in order to detect what's going on and understand when we are causing serious irreversible harm. We know that once we remove the nodules, the animals that depend on those, they can't come back. Those nodules are not going to regenerate and we cannot restore those environments right now. We're thinking about doing ha- res- restoration from the deep oil horizons, but we can't do that at four thousand meters with these nodules. So there is no um technology right now to do any restoration. And so we're talking about impacts that are going to be decadal and sometimes permanent for certain animals. So we really need the research to go into this with eyes wide open and to set reasonable regulations and policies, because we can't fix it.

Uh, the research is incredibly important for all those reasons. Um, and in the Texas Gulf Coast it's also very important to us because in the Houston area, for example, we're home to some fantastic research institutions, University of Houston, Rice University just up the street, you got Texas A and M. Uh, and I, because I mentioned A and M I also have to mention UT Austin. Uh, much love to our Longhorns. Uh, but you said in your testimony that the United States has fallen behind other countries in deep sea research. because they kept investing and we didn't. So what does a real federal investment look like? What programs do we need to build the next generation of scientists in this field?

Yes, um, I have suggested kind of three approaches. One would be the federal government funding large interdisciplinary coordinated projects that have sufficient spatial and temporal coverage. That looks like getting all of the deep-sea research experts together, putting them on one ship, getting the maximum amount of research done with the time that we spend at sea. Working it out at sea is very expensive, it's hard to do, um, and so we wanna maximize our our footprint there with what we can do with the resources given. But we need those um large interdisciplinary federally funded projects. Um second, I think we really need to think about um leveraging and piggybacking other existing um operations. For example, if we d go out and do ocean exploration, can we get um additional research done that's not exploratory, that's that's quantitative, when we're already paying to be out there, right? So we need some value-added smaller funding opportunities that researchers like myself and other academic institutions can take advantage of. And then lastly, we do understand the industry needs to keep um playing a role, and so can we have, can we set up um an independently administered industry funded research program where we work together with industry to get independent science done?

And Dr. Ballard, I'll I'll close with a question to you. Uh, I need you to make it plain for me. If we keep cutting funding, uh, for studying the deep ocean, what does that actually mean as far as a cost to everyday Americans? Not research, just regular people.

Well, we lose our we lose our ability to support our graduate students and the education program collapses and we're now seeing people leaving this country, really great scientists, because they can't get funding for their students. The States funds them as a researcher, but your grants fund your graduate students. And if you don't have those grants, you don't have graduate students.

Thank you.

That's the calamity of a reverse brain drain.

Thank you. Thank you, Mister Chair. I go back.

Thank you, Mister Menifee. The chair now recognizes my colleague from Guam, Mister Moylan.

Thank you, Mister Chairman. Great panel we have here. Of course, this is really important. Uh, Mariana Island. So I thank you all for your explanations. really good to understand a lot more. And especially since our commercial scale deep-sea mining has never done be been done before it's untested, so there's still unknowns as you've been clearly explaining. And the impacts of deep-sea mining could have uh uh could have on, we just don't know what impacts it could be on fisheries, on our ecosystem, the reef ecosystem, uh the Pacific islands, and the potential to devastate our economy and cultural resources. you know, the uh Guam is just a hundred and seventy thousand people. We really rely on our resources. And then we have Boem uh issued an RFP for interest in deep-sea mining offshore uh of the Mariana Islands. It - they expanded it in fact. And despite our wide-spread pushback, including unanimous uh opposition from Guam's elected officials and scientists, Boem uh basically doubled the size of the potential east area bringing the mining operation even closer Forty-six miles, actually. And our highest point on, is uh Mount Lam-Lam, you can see that far. That's how close it is to us. So, first question, Mister Baron. Uh, yesterday there was a article by Ocean Graphic Magazine published, uh, in an independent report that found your company's proposed project in the CCC to be economically unviable. The report found that economic modeling was based on a series of best case scenarios. and that TMC would not make any meaningful profit from the project. Brief response please.

Thank you. Look, every time I've seen one of those reports, they tend to be uh promoted or or prepared by activists who are against the industry moving forward. And if you look at the list of participants that we have involved in our company, firstly we have one of the world's largest pipelines in the in the deep ocean for lane gas and oil pipelines, all Cs, uh, who will be operating our production vessel. Um, we've been working with a variety of partners in Japan, including Korea Zinc and, and Pacific Metals in Japan.

Thank you, Mister Baron, I, I can understand what you're,

So lots of expertise,

what's, right, right.

who know a lot about this.

Versus, versus the, the editor of this article, you disagree with her state,

That's right.

OK. Uh, thank you for your answer. Uh, another question for you, the report also founds, founds that markets for materials extracted from deep sea mining don't exist yet. And during the Natural Resources Committee hearing, thank you for your presence there, uh, we also discussed how there's no American processing companies which would face, uh, which would force us to rely on processing in Asia.

Hmm.

Uh, any new developments on that, Mister Baer?

Only there's become more, uh, more important, I think, supply lines need to be established. For. The United States, we cannot be relying on our adversaries to get the supply of these critical minerals.

So it's uh, we need to have both in place at the same time we're working on,

Absolutely.

OK. Thank you, sir. Uh, Doctor Littner. Uh, deep sea uh biomass are not well studied and we're still discovering more and more about the sea floor every day. The phase uh often used we know more about the moon than we do about our oceans. Uh, what your research has found about deep-sea uh biomass, including what risk are to do with fisheries and higher ecosystems if there is disruption in our seafloor. Please.

Um, yes. So we've found that these ecosystems have um low biomass and very high biodiversity. Um, that means that extinction risks are very high. Um, it means that the animals are mostly small. But again, small does not mean they're not important, right? Function determines importance. And we know um from our research that these s- animals have a very important role to play in our Earth system. Um, again, in the mid-water, where we are worried about impacts to fisheries, we're very, very early. Um, and so we we need more research in the mid- in the deep mid-water.

Thank you. Again, unknowns, right? Uh, uh, Doctor Ballard, your explanations, your comments are fascinating. consider yourself living on the mariana islands what would you consider if this is being done in your ocean

well first like my my ship was is based in guam it's on it's way there right now so uh i'm working with the university of guam i'm well aware of the marianus islands will be spending quite a number of months i can't wait for you to step aboard my ship uh but will also be

I think the most important thing we'll also be doing is is broadcasting from our ship to all your schools.

That's wonderful, Do- Doctor Ballard, I'm out of time, but I'm gonna bring my flash aid, I wanna join you in.

Roger that.

Thank you.

I'll be there in June.

Thank you, sir. Thank you.

I'd like to join you as well, since uh one of one of our uh colleagues on the subcommittee has returned from another hearing I'd like to recognize my colleague from Colorado, Mister Herd.

Thank you very much, uh, Mister Chairman. China has shown its time and again that they do not wanna play by the same rules as the US. We've heard numerous reports of China expanding, mapping, and surveying efforts in the South Pacific under the guise of searching for mineral deposits or for fishing grounds. Uh, United States' presence in the region, I think this is something that is not controversial, but - but, uh, I would say our presence in the region is critical to ensure that China, uh, does not push that envelope. So, Mr. Connon and Doctor Ballard, how can the United States strengthen its soft capacity against China's expanding mapping and survey activities in the Pacific, for example, and particularly through things like partnerships with the Pacific Island, forum member states, transparency initiatives, capacity building for local maritime domain awareness without escalating tensions or undermining regional sovereignty.

Uh, thank you for the question. I'll go first. That, OK? So, I think that y- you've hit on a really good point, which is, uh, mapping the ocean is - is non-controversial, uh, data is neutral, and so we want to - it's a - a very good way to engage with other countries, especially small island developing states, to provide them something that is dual purpose for them and - and potentially multi-purpose. By helping them map their own EASIs, we strengthen our partnership with that nation, but we also provide them with that baseline data that's

Doctor Ballard, thoughts on counting on China's influence here in the States?

Yes. Uh, what's really important and and and what's really admirable about NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration working with the State Department, is for us to go into other nations' EEZs like the Cook Islands We worked off Palau, we've worked off other countries that don't have the resources or the wherewithal to explore their EEZ and so by having us be the first in the door, also opens the door to further exploit further work with those countries. So I I think you you cannot underestimate uh how much soft power we can wheel by going to countries that do not have the resources that we have to help them discover what they know some countries like Kiribati ninety-five percent of their entire nation is under the ocean.

Mm-hmm.

They have very little above the ocean and they have not the resources. So if you look at the, those countries where we're now working, excellent opportunity to, uh, really extend America's influence in the area.

And are you, do you share our concerns about the activities of the Chinese in this sphere, the, the two of you, Mister Khan and Doctor Ballard?

Absolutely. I mean, look at their asset. Look what, how much they're pouring into it. I mean, there's a they they they are you know, there are one point five billion people and we're, you know, three hundred and some million. We need every American we can in the game. Uh, but the important thing is they're just outspending us.

Understood. Thank you.

Yeah, and I and I would say, too, it is a capacity issue. Uh, if you look at the number of ships and how quickly they can put them to sea, um, and we we know the s- the state of American shipbuilding right now, it takes too long to build ships. But we now have technologies like ours that can get out and do this mapping. It's, and you can scale it quickly. We can produce a new mapping platform in months, not years.

Yep.

And we can put it to see.

We can and need to do better. Uh, agreed, gentlemen. Thank you. Uh, Mister Barron, you state in your testimony that zero waste is a key objective in developing technology for processing and refining modules. There are university programs currently studying how to make metal waste into usable products. uh, many programs in the country are advancing that work in areas not traditionally associated with mining or traditionally associated with - with processing. How extensive are your partnerships with universities to help develop these novel methodologies, and what can Congress or NOAA do to help facilitate connections between industry and nontraditional university research programs to find solutions that are innovative?

Hmm. Thank you.

Well, we're very fortunate that this resource, the way we process it doesn't generate a natural waste. The waste, it tends to be the manganese silicate which goes into the steelmaking industry and to the battery-making industry. Um, however, we we collaborate a lot with with uh universities in our research programs, and but that's tend to be is is more on the environmental side than the processing. Uh, most of course, when you compare ocean resource, this one, and also some of the others that we are not focused on, like SMSs, they will generate waste. And of course we know that uh mining waste is a terrible problem on land. We're just very fortunate that this resource doesn't have that attribute.

Great. Thank you very much uh, Mr. Barron. Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired, so I yield back.

The gentleman yields back and the chair now recognizes uh another colleague representing an island chain,

Thank you very much uh, Mister Chair, and to you and the ranking member, thank you so much for letting me uh wave on for this really critical um um issue. I I wanna I wanna put my questions in some context because I I think that we've jumped a little bit ahead in this hearing. So the context is is we're not doing commercial deep seabed mining right now. Um we have uh under the law of the sea, the International Seabed Authority, uh which is developing rules, including environmental uh um rules, as to how we will do deep-sea bed mining, uh, Mister Baron is very impatient that the ISA complete that job. By the way, um, the United States is not a member of the International Seabed Authority, cuz we're not a member of the Law of the Sea, but that's another story. However, the People's Republic of China and others, including some of the countries in this world that have been at the forefront of protecting our deep seas including France as an example who have done some of the most advanced uh research on environmental consequences are a member. And so fundamentally what's going on here is that the ISA is developing these regulations, which would open up uh the deep-sea bed to mining under uh presumably under some very s- uh specific uh controls that are applicable internationally. Our country has ignored the international seabed authority and proceeded unilaterally to come out with rules which are going to int- in- ignore that entire international effort. to do this right. Um uh, Mister Barron comments that America has a set of rules that everyone should be adhering to and I fundamentally disagree with that because basically he wants Amer- he wants everybody else to do it our way which is not environmentally protective. I do have two measures that I've introduced uh just for everybody's benefit, H R six six three and H R six six four. These apply a moratorium to America giving licenses um or permissions uh both in REEZ and in and in the deep sea until we have better evidence. It's not a prohibition, it's a moratorium. And so that's the context for my questions. Um, so, uh, Doctor Ballard, I think I wrote this down, you say that point zero zero one percent of the deep, uh, floor, uh, the deep sea floor has been even seen by man. Is that correct? OK.

That's correct.

All right. And we've got about seven places in the world, uh, where, um, there is the um focus on deep sea bed mining so the clarion clarion clipperton zone off of hawaii um is one of them is that true there point zero zero one percent

there's a lot of effort being poured into that

ok but i mean it's less than one percent

i don't really know i'm not the one qualified to answer that

is it do we in your professional estimate having been there um is it one percent two percent how much have we how much do we actually know about the deep sea bed there

i've never been to the clarion clipperton ranch so

oh ok alright Well,

That's true.

I'm extrapolating from your comment on point zero zero

Right. I'm talking about on a global basis.

one percent. OK. I think I would, I would ask you the same question of the other six uh deep sea bed zones, and I think you would similarly answer if you knew the evidence that we know nothing whatsoever about what's going on there other than for maybe a few expeditions, that haven't covered a whole bunch of territory.

That's true.

OK. Um, Mister Barron uh brags on the fact that his uh scientific investigations um have um covered and i wrote this down he did an eighty kilometer track of a test i guess a test mining operation and then he came back a year later um is is eighty kilometers um a good sample of the deep sea bed can you extrapolate uh from an eighty kilometer track uh to uh to a generalization about what is and isn't down at the deep sea bed

it's about how

no i'm not asking you i'm asking doctor um

Well obviously it's where it was done.

I know, but can we extrapolate from that to other parts of the ocean?

Only if it's Only if it's an identical setting.

OK, but you don't know that because we haven't been there,

Exactly.

right? OK. Um, Mister uh, and staying with you Doctor Ballard, uh Mister Barron on January twenty second in our house natural resources committee uh testified that um the bottom of the ocean is a quote marine desert. Do you agree with that?

Not where I have been.

OK, so everywhere you've been we don't find a desert down there.

No, it's sparsely populated by certain comparisons, but when I discovered hydrothermal vents, they were a waste of life that we knew nothing about. It was a massive amount of marine biomass there.

OK, and he also testified that the mechanisms for deep-sea bed mining um are not environmentally impactful do you do you agree with that

he hasn't shown me his data

ok um mister mister

or her i would i would rather have her look at the data than me

mister baron um i'm gonna ask you the question again that doctor bellard asked why don't you produce your data now for public review so that everybody can peer review your data you said you would give it to the regulators but you didn't say you would give it outside the regulators i don't think there's a requirement for you to limit your production of your data to the regulators. Is that true?

We will be submitting that information to the regulators.

OK, so are you gonna submit it publicly?

We'll make it available into the UNESCO database as well.

Oh, thank you. I appreciate that. When will you do that?

Uh, well, it's a petabyte of data, and of course it needs to, it's a, it's a complex process, but you, you'll find we are the largest contributor into that uh database as of this very moment.

Well, the world needs your data because you are saying your data is the basis

True.

upon which this country should provide deep to should go into deep sea bed mining. Your data is the only data that we have,

Yes.

the only data that our US government is relying upon, and that's your data. You paid for it. We have no idea whether your data is peer reviewable or is any good at all. So the better

Missions we need to wrap up.

faster you get your data up out, the better we are gonna all be for this debate. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

I'm told our data is Excellent, for for your benefit.

Thank you, Mr. Casey. You're back. Uh, thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony today. I've really, really enjoyed it, truly. And I thank the members for their questions, who all pretty much moved on to other hearings by now. The hearing uh, or this record will remain open for ten days for additional comments, and written questions from members. The hearing is adjourned.