The E-Waste Column no. 211

23 hours ago
3 min read

Today, we are looking at the future of deep-sea mining in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone within the Pacific Ocean.

🌱 What exploration rights have been granted?

During the 31st Annual Session of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the ISA’s council members decided to prolong the existing exploration contract of Nauru Ocean Resources Inc. (NORI) by another 5 years, based on their finding that the company “had met all the criteria for renewal”. In practice, this means that NORI continues to have “exclusive exploration rights for blocks of the seabed in the Pacific Ocean”. The contract also “provide[s] a pathway for the company to apply, via the ISA, to commercially mine those areas”. The ISA’s decision was met with criticism, as NORI is the subsidiary of the Canadian deep-sea mining firm, The Metals Company (TMC). The controversy here is rooted in the fact that TMC has a U.S. subsidiary called “TMC USA” that is currently “pursuing deep-sea mining in the same areas outside of the ISA’s legal framework” via the U.S. government.

🌱 How might companies bypass international law?

In 2025, TMC USA reached out to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). It asked the NOAA for permits “for many of the same areas in international waters covered by its [existing] ISA exploration contracts”. This means that in place of just waiting to apply for an exploitation license from the ISA, TMC USA is also looking to acquire exploration and exploitation permits from the U.S. government. While the decision of the NOAA is still pending, TMC USA’s permit applications in the U.S. have been perceived by many foreign governments and authorities as an attempt to bypass international law.

🌱 Can the U.S. government issue mining permits for the international seabed?

The U.S. is not a member country of the ISA. Yet, the Trump administration and TMC are planning to extract manganese, nickel, and rare earths from the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the Pacific Ocean. The U.S. government is therefore currently unilaterally pushing for deep-sea mining by issuing permits for the high seas. NOAA says it has the authority to issue mining permits through a U.S. federal law from 1980 called the “Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act” (DSHMRA). DSHMRA is still valid as a domestic law in the U.S. today. The legality of this specific law under international law is, however, disputed. A number of governments globally are therefore now also looking to prevent the unilateral action of the U.S. government around deep-sea mining.

🌱 What actions are being taken against unilateral U.S. mining?

In July 2025, after TMC had requested deep-sea mining licenses from the U.S. government, the ISA launched an inquiry “into whether the company was still in compliance with the obligations of its ISA contracts”. Two of TMC’s subsidiaries – namely NORI and Tonga Offshore Mining Limited (TOML) – responded to this in June 2026 by taking the ISA to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). The two subsidiaries argued that the ISA’s inquiry process was unfair. ITLOS responded to this by issuing a decision with provisional measures on 18 July 2026. The decision said that “the ISA could continue with its inquiry but that it must respect NORI’s and TOML’s rights to due process”. The question of whether TMC is in breach of its contracts with the ISA was not addressed in the decision. The ISA is therefore continuing with its inquiry into the company.

💡 In next week’s column, we will be taking a look at the role the EU plays in the future of deep-sea mining – so stay tuned.