Marine Minerals: i oring Our New Ske SS SS me: “aa PN St i Ocean Frontier _ ip) Ww & pe p) QO " Ww = m 5 fs se Ww 2) le 4% MS = “ te ( (e) a?) “ 7) Se lu ; [O} ie rs © ep Office of Technology Assessment Congressional Board of the 100th Congress MORRIS K. UDALL, Arizona, Chairman TED STEVENS, Alaska, Vice Chairman Senate House ORRIN G. HATCH GEORGE E. BROWN, JR. Utah California CHARLES E. GRASSLEY JOHN D. DINGELL Iowa Michigan EDWARD M. KENNEDY CLARENCE E. MILLER Massachusetts Ohio ERNEST F. HOLLINGS DON SUNDQUIST South Carolina Tennessee CLAIBORNE PELL AMO HOUGHTON Rhode Island New York JOHN H. GIBBONS (Nonvoting) Advisory Council WILLIAM J. PERRY, Chairman CLAIRE T. DEDRICK RACHEL McCULLOCH H&Q Technology Partners California Land Commission University of Wisconsin DAVID S. POTTER, Vice Chairman S. DAVID FREEMAN CHASE N. PETERSON General Motors Corp. (Ret.) - Lower Colorado River Authority University of Utah EARL BEISTLINE MICHEL T. HALBOUTY JOSEPH E. ROSS Consultant Michel T. Halbouty Energy Co. Congressional Research Service CHARLES A. BOWSHER CARL N. HODGES General Accounting Office University of Arizona Director JOHN H. GIBBONS The Technology Assessment Board approves the release of this report. The views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of the Board, OTA Advisory Council, or individual members thereof. over: The stylized map of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone was adapted from the base map used in the National Atlas: Health and tal Waters, published by the Ocean Assessment Division, Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, National Oceanic and \dministration. sHO i W [ uM vA Wu ll M pob0 | il Wh 5 Oh o 03 Marine “Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ‘S } exc CONG Bose Rare OF THE UNITED STATES TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier, OTA-O-342 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, July 1987). Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 87-619837 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (order form on p. 349) Foreword Throughout history, man has been fascinated by the mysteries that lay hidden below the ocean surface. Jules Verne, the 19th century novelist, author of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, captured the imagination and curiosity of the public with his fictional—but nonetheless farsighted—accounts of undersea exploration and adventure. Since his classic portrayal of life beneath the ocean, technology has enabled us to bridge the gap between Jules Verne’s fiction and the realities that are found in ocean space. Although the techno- logical triumphs in ocean exploration are phenomenal, the extent of our current knowl- edge about the resources that lie in the seabed is very limited. In 1983, the United States asserted control over the ocean resources within a 200- nautical mile band off its coast, as did a large number of other maritime countries. Within this so-called Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is a vast area of seabed that might contain significant amounts of minerals. It is truly the Nation’s ‘‘New Frontier.”’ This report on exploring the EEZ for its mineral potential is in response to a joint request from the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. It examines the current knowledge about the hard mineral resources within the EEZ, explores the economic and security potential of seabed resources, assesses the technologies available to both explore for and mine those resources, identifies issues that face the Congress and the executive branch, and finally presents options to the Congress for dealing with these issues. Substantial assistance was received from many organizations and individuals in the course of this study. We would like to express special thanks to the OTA advisory panel; the numerous participants in our workshops; the project’s contractors and consultants for contributing their special expertise; the staffs of the executive agencies that gave selflessly of their knowledge and counsel; the many reviewers who kept us intellectually honest and factually accurate; and our sister congressional agency, the Congressional Research Service, for making available its expertise in seabed minerals. OTA, however, remains solely re- sponsible for the contents of this Report. i M, Fibone JOHN H. GIBBONS Director ii OTA Ocean Frontier Advisory Panel John V. Byrne, Chair President, Oregon State University Robert Bailey John La Brecque Department of Land Conservation and Senior Research Scientist Development Lamont-Doherty Geophysical Observatory State of Oregon Done Mote James Broadus Office of Marine Affairs Director, Ocean Policy Center State of North Carolina Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute J. Robert Moore Frank Busby Department of Marine Studies Busby Associates, Inc. University of Texas Clifton Curtis W. Jason Morgan President Department of Geological and Geophysical Oceanic Society Sciences Re harhi@ecenwald Princeton University General Counsel Jack E. Thompson Ocean Mining Associates President, Newmont Mining Company Robert R. Hessler Scripps Institution of Oceanography Alex Krem Vice President Bank of America NOTE: OTA appreciates and is grateful for the valuable assistance and thoughtful critiques provided by the advisory panel members. The panel does not, however, necessarily approve, disapprove, or endorse this report. OTA assumes full responsibility for the report and the accuracy of its contents. OTA Ocean Frontier Project Staff John Andelin, Assistant Director, OTA Science, Information, and Natural Resources Division Robert W. Niblock, Oceans and Environment Program Manager James W. Curlin, Project Director Project Staff Rosina M. Bierbaum, Analyst James E. Mielke, Specialist in Marine and Earth Sciences! William E. Westermeyer, Analyst Jonathan Chudnoff, Research Assistant Elizabeth Cheng, Stanford Summer Fellow Consultant Francois Lampietti Contractors W. William Harvey, Arlington Technical Services Edward E. Horton, Deep Oil Technology, Inc. Lynn M. Powers Richard C. Vetter Administrative Staff Kathleen A. Beil, Administrative Assistant Jim Brewer, Jr., P.C. Specialist Brenda B. Miller, Secretary ‘Congressional Research Service, Science Policy Division, Library of Congress. Acknowledgments We are grateful to the many individuals who shared their special knowledge, expertise, and informa- tion about marine minerals, oceanography, and mining systems with the OTA staff in the course of this study. Others provided critical evaluation and review during the compilation of the report. These individ- uals are listed in Appendix F in this report. Special thanks also go to the government organizations and academic institutions with whom these experts are affiliated. These include: U.S. Geological Survey: Office of Energy and Marine Geology Strategic and Critical Materials Program Western Regional Office, Menlo Park, CA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Ocean Assessment Division Charting and Geodetic Services _ Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory U.S. Bureau of Mines: Division of Minerals Policy and Analysis Division of Minerals Availability Bureau of Mines Research Centers— Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN Salt Lake City, UT Spokane, WA Reno, NV Avondale, MD Minerals Management Service: Office of Strategic and International Minerals We are particularly indebted to the Marine Policy Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, and the LaSells Stewart Center and Hatfield Marine Science Center of Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, who graciously hosted OTA workshops at their facilities. vi Contents Chapter Page lo Swrcmonenay, Issues, grovel ONAN \s do oddavorsobasisoovoacooagqnooadoo¥obooac 3 ZMINESOUTCEWASSessIneEnts andy Expectatlonsyannn ewe arlene ieee eae 39 Je ViineralsiSupplyayDcmand sandy rutureirendsan ance eae ae eee 81 4. Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ..................- 115 Ds) Minin'slandvAt- Seal Processingiilicchnologies an ens saaely eee ciee eal: 167 OwEn ronmental Considerationsianna sea ase ae ae ec PANS) 7. Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ......... 249 Appendix Page eaotatelanagement of Seabeduiineral sian cena eve ate aes ae 282 B. The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories ................ 292 CeyMineraliitawsvotithetWinited|iStatesw mere se area) ele ap al al eae ee 300 DAOceanwMininewcaws) ot Other Countriess yearns eee eee eerie 307 E. Tables of Contents for OTA Contractor Reports.................0.00-000s 319 F. OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors...................... 322 Ga Aexoraynoas Arovol AN loANEIOINS | doce adoblaahendoceocoledeuesiogbdcrcoosos ecu du 330 ie ConversiongableyandsGlossanyanvee 4 ee nee eee eee ea eee en 332 Iho Le>;al Seater nb seltahet al tet Wed nen oem Maa Pele ES CS Nea Ade ah ee ear EFA hs AR 339 vii ©) Monae a) 3, Uh : ; ; q sulle Sahih) Ga Dr ae ne T's a" i an hay bei CL a ries res Lana Magy oginat! wid eeye NA ld ENF ame ‘yy Se am RK, Ahan 0% ankle | eg nn Boi ; eh , yt: at is " " | a ee i . ae nl ou Ry i 3 i ay ; f ey, au a ! i > 7 we i mM hy he it , a i uy i - Siti ou #i , é j : ‘ rk) p ete | ii hoe ae Ceiba neh ‘ i / 7) a ¥ ni ial Unie iva bi ey A ihe } Fa ( ; , ‘? a) ; 4 J yy) n a 4s a ’ i e CONTENTS Exclusive Economic Zone: The Nation’s New Frontier................-..-+. Mineral Resources of the HEZ in" Perspectives) qui ov ini. ne ciel )auee se) alare Mineral Occurrences injthesWUiS BBA. So ee is ere ei cre ron iatacaiulateraensiele Minerals Supply, Demand; and Puture Trends)... 2. ojo tain ee cee Outlook for Development of Selected Offshore Minerals.................-..- MLTLECNoD Ip bosteR MUN NAR Pei Naead Guu Guero HEN MECC HG cr Nia My Gna ni ies | Lua bE Ghromite)s). os. Sees CE ge oe se ec aoa Phosphorite: so. eh he ane es i eet renee eevee cole Gold Se aie Sand and’Gravel : 5.6 co ee Deep-Sea’ Minerals... ie Wechnologies for Pxploring the Seabed’... 5...) Technologies for Mining and Processing Marine Minerals.................-. Environmental Considerations... 0.60 Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data................+--+e sees eee Summary and Findings. 03.0.5 6.0..0 5) Issues and ©ptions 620). 6. ee Focusing the National Exploration Effort .................2......-. 5.3. Providing for Future Seabed Miming 6... ee Improving the Use of the Nation’s EEZ Data and Information............. Providing for the Use of Classified Data... - Assisting the States in Preparing for Future Seabed Mining ............... Boxes Box 1-A. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea................ 1-B. A Source of Confusion: Geologic Continental Shelf; Jurisdictional Continental Shelf; Exclusive Kconomic Zone... 6.6... 1-C. Prelease Prospecting for Marine Mining Minerals in the EEZ: Minerals Management Service Proposed Rules...) 2. Figures Figure No. 1-1. The Ocean Zones, Including the Exclusive Economic Zone.............. 1-22 WS. Mineralimmports . ooo oe ee Ss 1-3. Potential Hard Mineral Resource in the EEZ of the Continental United States, ‘Alaska; and Hiawalt) junk eos GeO es OO SE . Chapter 1 Summary, Issues, and Options EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE: THE NATION’S NEW FRONTIER Ever since the research vessel H.M.S. Challenger hoisted manganese nodules from the deep ocean during its epic voyage in 1873, there has been per- sistent curiosity about seabed minerals. It was not until after World War II, however, that the black, potato-sized nodules like those recovered by the Challenger became more than a scientific oddity. The post-war economic boom fueled an increase in metals prices, and as a result commercial interest focused on the cobalt-, manganese-, nickel-, and copper-rich nodules that litter the seafloor of the Pacific Ocean and elsewhere. World War II also left a legacy of unprecedented technological capa- bility for ocean exploration. Oceanographers took advantage of ocean sensors and shipboard equip- ment developed for the military to expand scien- tific ocean research and commercial exploration. Over the last 30 years, much has been learned about the secrets of the oceans. Several spectacu- lar discoveries have been made. For instance, only two decades ago, most scientists rejected the ideas of continental drift and plate tectonics. Now, largely due to research carried out on the oceanfloor, scien- tists know that the surface of the Earth is constructed of ‘‘plates’’ which are in exceedingly slow but con- stant motion relative to each other. Plates pull apart along “‘spreading centers’’ where new crustal ma- terial is added to the plates; plates collide along ““subduction zones’’ where old crust is thrust down- ward. While these plates move at rates of only a few inches per year, crustal material moves as if on a conveyor belt from spreading center to sub- duction zone. More recently, scientists have dis- covered that the seafloor spreading centers are zones where mineral deposits of potential use to human- ity are being created. These sites of active mineral formation are often habitats for unique biological communities. Scientists are excited by the new discoveries that have enabled them to better understand the Earth’s structure and the processes of mineral formation, among other things. Other experts are more in- terested in the implications of this new knowledge for potential financial gain. Nonetheless, despite the several decades of scientific research since World War II and some limited commercially oriented ex- ploration, only the sketchiest picture has been formed about the type, quality, and distribution of seabed minerals that someday may be exploita- ble. A large part of the ocean remains unexplored, and this is almost as true of the coastal waters un- der the jurisdiction of sovereign states as it is of the deep ocean. During the past three decades, many coastal na- tions have established Exclusive Economic Zones (so-called EEZs)—areas extending 200 nautical miles! seaward from coastal state baselines where- in nations enjoy sovereign rights over all resources, living and non-living (see figure 1-1). The EEZ con- cept has given new impetus to acquiring knowledge about the oceans and the inventory of mineral deposits within coastal nation jurisdiction. More than 70 coastal countries have now established Ex- clusive Economic Zones. When the United States established its own EEZ by Presidential proclama- tion in March 1983, it became the 59th nation to do so. Covering more than 2.3 million square nau- tical miles (nearly 2 billion acres, equivalent to more than two-thirds of the land area of the entire Unit- ed States), the U.S. EEZ is the largest under any nation’s jurisdiction.’ Its international legal stand- ing is based on customary international law, which has been codified in the Law of the Sea Convention? (see box 1-A). Although the United States has thus 1A nautical mile is 6,076 feet. All uses of the term ‘‘mile”’ in this assessment refer to a nautical mile. 2L,. Alexander, ‘‘Regional Exclusive Economic Zone Management,”’ in Exclusive Economic Zone Papers, Oceans 1984 (Washington, DC: Marine Technology Society, 1984), p. 7. Others have estimated the U.S. EEZ to be much larger—3.9 billion acres—but the larger esti- mate includes portions of the former Pacific Trust Territories that are no longer considered U.S. possessions (See W.P. Pendley, ‘‘America’s Exclusive Economic Zone: The Whys and Wherefores,’’ Exclusive Economic Zone Papers, Oceans 1984 [Washington, DC: Marine Tech- nology Society, 1984], p. 43.) 3Law of the Sea Convention Article 55 et seq. 4 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 1-1.—The Ocean Zones, Including the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) [esa eae oe niles ——$—— | Exclusive economic zone The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extends 200 nautical miles from the coast. Within the EEZ, the coastal States have jurisdiction over the resources in the 3-mile territorial sea*, and the Federal Government has jurisdiction over the resources in the remaining 197 miles. “Except for Florida and Texas where State jurisdiction extends seaward 3 marine leagues (approximately 9 miles). SOURCE: B. McGregor and M. Lockwood, Mapping and Research in the Exclusive Economic Zone (Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1985), p. 3. far declined to sign the agreement, the legal status of the U.S. EEZ is not in question. Like the EEZs of most other countries, the U.S. EEZ remains largely unexplored. It is the Nation’s ocean frontier. This assessment addresses the exploration and development of the U.S. territorial sea, continen- tal shelf, and new EEZ, focusing on the mineral resource potential of these areas except for petro- leum and sulfur. The known mineral deposits within U.S. waters are described; the capabilities to explore for and develop ocean mineral resources are evaluated; the economics of resource exploita- tion are estimated; the environmental implications related to seabed mining are studied; the contri- bution that seabed minerals may make to the Na- tion’s resource base are examined; and the impor- tance of seabed minerals relative to worldwide demand and to land-based sources of supply is assessed. Unlike the sovereign control that governments have traditionally exercised over their territorial possessions, control over the ocean and the utili- zation of its resources has been accommodated through intricate rules of international maritime law that have evolved since the 1600s. The Exclusive Economic Zone is an outgrowth of the Law of the Sea Convention—the most recent international ef- fort to develop a more comprehensive law of the sea. Within its EEZ, the United States claims ‘‘sover- eign rights for the purpose of exploring, exploit- ing, conserving and managing natural resources, both living and non-living, of the seabed and sub- soil and the superjacent waters.’’* Each of the U.S. coastal States retains jurisdiction over similar re- sources within the U.S. territorial sea, a 3-nautical- mile band seaward of the coast, that was awarded to the States by Congress in the Submerged Lands Act of 1953.5 The interests of the coastal States in the 3-mile territorial sea and the responsibilities of the Federal Government in the administration of . ‘Executive Proclamation No. 5030 (1983). ‘Public Law 83-31; 67 Stat. 29 (1953); 43 U.S.C. 1301-1315. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options e 5 Box 1-A.—The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea Comprising 320 articles and nine additional annexes, the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) is one of the most complex and comprehensive international agreements ever negotiated. Begun in 1973, the negotiations aimed to formulate international law covering a broad range of uses of the ocean and seabed. Eleven sessions were held between 1973 and the concluding session in 1982. Among the many law of the sea issues for which new rules have been devised or customary international law codified are: . Innocent passage in the territorial sea, . transit of passages and innocent passage in international straits, . extension of coastal state jurisdiction on the continental shelf, . conservation and management of the living resources of the high seas, . the regime of islands, . enclosed or semi-enclosed seas, . land-locked states, . protection and preservation of the marine environment, . environment of ice-covered areas, 10. marine scientific research, 11. settlement of disputes, 12. exploitation of mineral resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and 13. exclusive economic zone. OMOnID Of ON The entire set of issues was negotiated as a package, an approach that called for trade-offs and com- promise among the 150 or so countries participating in the Convention. As of early 1987, 32 countries had ratified the LOSC. The treaty will take effect one year after 60 countries have ratified it. Some believe that this number will be reached in 1989 and that the treaty therefore will be in force by 1990. However, the United States has not signed the Convention and currently has no plans to accede to it. The principal objections of the United States to the Convention are the provisions pertaining to exploita- tion of mineral resources in the international seabed area, which are codified in Part XI. The United States objected to these provisions because, in its view, they would deter future development of deep seabed mineral resources, the decisionmaking process would not give the United States a role that fairly reflected its interests, assured access to qualified seabed miners was not stipulated, and the mandatory transfer of private technology was required.* Most of the remainder of the Convention is acceptable to the United States, and all but a few provisions are considered to be customary international law. Subsequent to the signing of LOSC, the Preparatory Commission was established to draft detailed regu- lations for the regime governing the exploitation of deep-sea mineral resources. The United States is eligible to attend the Preparatory Commission as an observer even though it has not signed the Convention. To date, it has not sent any official observers. An alternative regime, known as the reciprocating states agreement, has been established by the United States and several other countries interested in seabed mining (some of whom are also signatories to LOSC). The principal purpose of the agreement is to ensure that disputes among signatories over possible overlapping claims can be amicably resolved. *Statement by the President, press release July 9, 1982. See also Law of the Sea, hearings before the Subcommittee on Oceanography and the Commit- tee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representatives, U.S. Congress, Committee Print 97-29, p. 173. the EEZ make the management of offshore resources a joint Federal-State problem.® As of July 1987, Congress had yet to enact im- plementing and conforming legislation to codify the 6R. Bailey, ‘Marine Minerals in the Exclusive Economic Zone: Implications for Coastal States and Territories,’ White Paper, Western Legislative Conference, Pacific States/Territories Ocean Resource Group, Feb. 28, 1987, p. 32. provisions of Executive Proclamation No. 5030, is- sued in 1983, which established the U.S. Exclu- sive Economic Zone except for reference in a few specific laws. The legislative task of implementing the EEZ Proclamation is not trivial. Reference to national ocean boundaries is contained in’ numer- ous statutes, and the impact on each must be con- sidered carefully when amending laws to implement the new EEZ. 6 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier —_— . . . the most important aspect of the Reagan Proclamation is its ceremonial declaration that the resources within the EEZ, . . . are declared to be held in trust by the U.S. Government for the Amer- ican people. Extension of U.S. control over the resources within the 200-mile EEZ in 1983 actually added— for practical purposes—little additional area to that already under the control of the United States. The U.S. and other coastal countries already had as- serted control over fish within a 200-mile zone (un- der the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Man- agement Act of 1976’ and over other resources located on the continental shelves. This extended control over resources can be traced to the Tru- man Proclamation of 1945, in which President Harry Truman declared that the United States as- serted exclusive control and jurisdiction over the natural resources of the seabed and the subsoil of the continental shelf. Many believe this proclama- tion was responsible for a flurry of new maritime claims. Following the proclamation, for instance, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador claimed sovereignty and jurisdiction out to 200 miles® and considered the 200-mile zone to be wholly under their national con- trol for all ocean uses except innocent passage of ships. Various other claims, but none quite so ex- tensive, were asserted by other countries in the wake of the Truman Proclamation. The United States implemented the Truman Proclamation by passage of the Outer Continen- tal Shelf Lands Act in 1953. This act authorizes leasing of minerals in the continental shelf beyond ’Pubic Law 94-265 as amended. The Fishery Conservation and Management Zone extends seaward from the 3-mile State-controlled Territorial Sea and is contiguous with the EEZ. The seaward bound- aries of Texas, Puerto Rico, and the gulf coast of Florida extend 9 nautical miles; all other States have a 3-mile seaward boundary. ®Executive Proclamation No. 2667; 59 Stat. 884 (1945). °L. Alexander, ‘‘The Ocean Enclosure Movement: Inventory and Prospect,’’ San Diego Law Review, vol. 20, No. 3, 1983, p. 564. the State-controlled territorial sea.'° The unilateral action of the United States in extending jurisdic- tion over the petroleum-rich continental shelf led to an international agreement in 1958 (see box 1- B). As a result, all coastal nations acquired the rights to explore and exploit natural resources within the continental shelves adjacent to their coasts.'? The area of the U.S. continental shelf is esti- mated to be approximately 1.6 million square nau- tical miles. Thus, a substantial proportion of the area of the recently proclaimed EEZ has been un- der the jurisdiction of the United States since 1945; mineral leasing on the Outer Continental Shelf has been authorized since 1953; and fisheries have been managed within the 200-mile Fishery Conservation and Management Zone since 1976. Hence, only mineral deposits in areas within 200 miles of the coast but beyond the continental shelf edge—the least accessible part of the EEZ—have been added to the resource base of the United States with the establishment of the new EEZ. President Ronald Reagan’s establishment of an Exclusive Economic Zone in 1983 kindled interest in the exploration of the “‘newly acquired”’ offshore province. Some likened the creation of the EEZ to the Louisiana Purchase. Others called for an EEZ exploratory venture akin to Lewis and Clark’s ex- ploration of the Northwest or John Wesley Powell’s geological reconnaissance of the western territories in the 1800s. Perhaps the most important aspect of the Reagan Proclamation is its ceremonial decla- ration that the resources within the EEZ, whether on the seafloor or in the water column, whether liv- ing or non-living, whether hydrocarbons or hard minerals, are declared to be held in trust by the U.S. Government for the American people. 10Public Law 83-212, 67 Stat. 462 (1953), 43 U.S.C. 1331-1356; as amended Public Law 95-372, 92 Stat. 629 (1978), 43 U.S.C. 1801-1806. 11958 Convention on the Continental Shelf (UNCLOS I), 15 UST 471; TIAS 5578. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ° 7 Box 1-B—A Source of Confusion: Geologic Continental Shelf; Jurisdictional Continental Shelf; Exclusive Economic Zone International and domestic law has established sev- eral ocean zones to accommodate the exploration and development of ocean resources. For instance, “Outer Continental Shelf’ is used in the Outer Con- tinental Shelf Lands Act to define the Federal off- shore area in which mineral leasing is authorized. The legal entity ‘““Outer Continental Shelf’’ is easily confused with the “‘continental shelf,’’ which is a geologic subsea landform with scientific definition. Establishment of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) contributed more to the confusion. The EEZ over- lays both the jursidictional Outer Continental Shelf and the geological continental shelf (figure 1-1). These overlapping zones seldom coincide exactly, and in some instances the geologic continental shelf may extend well beyond the 200-mile EEZ, while in other cases where the shelf is narrow it may extend only a few miles seaward, well short of the line of demarcation for the EEZ. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 defines Outer Continental Shelf as ‘‘all submerged lands lying seaward and outside of the area of lands beneath navigable waters. . . [three-mile State- controlled territorial sea] . . ., and of which the sub- soil and seabed appertain to the United States...” A more precise definition of the continental shelf emerged from the international Convention on the Continental Shelf in 1958, which described it as ex- tending from shore to a depth of 200 meters or be- yond that limit to where the depth of the superjacent water admits of exploitation of the natural resources. The 1958 international definition of continental shelf, therefore, is somewhat open-ended regarding the seaward extension of the shelf and bases the de- termination of the final outer boundary on techno- logical capability to explore and exploit. The World Court has limited the extent of the continental shelf, at least in cases of boundary disputes, based on the notions of proximity and natural prolongation. Be- cause the land is the legal source of a state’s marine jurisdiction, it must be established that the sub- merged lands are in fact physical extensions of the state’s territory. * The United Nations Law of the Sea Conference, which concluded in 1982, established yet another in- ternational definition for the continental shelf. Arti- cle 76 of the Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) de- fines it as the ‘“sea-bed and subsoil of the submarine *North Sea Continental Shelf, 1969, I.C.J. 3. areas that extend beyond its territorial sea through- out the natural prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin. . .’” Where the ‘‘continental margin’’ extends beyond the bound- ary of the 200-mile EEZ, LOSC requires that signa- tory nations establish a finite outer limit based on formulae for determining where the foot of the con- tinental slope meets the abyssal depths of the ocean. However, regardless of where such an outer point may lie as determined by formulae, the continental shelf can neither extend more than 350 nautical miles from the coast, nor exceed 100 nautical miles beyond the 8,200 foot isobath (point of equal water depth). Since the United States is not signatory to the re- cent LOSC, the limitations imposed by Article 76 do not apply. Some legal analysts believe that the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf with its open-ended, technology-determined definition of the outer boundary of the shelf would apply unless Con- gress redefines its boundaries in subsequent EEZ im- plementing legislation. Under the more liberal 1958 interpretation, the Outer Continental Shelf could per- haps extend several hundred miles beyond the EEZ. According to this legal reasoning, with disagreement among legal analysts on the overlapping effects of the EEZ, the Outer Continental Shelf, the continental shelf within the meaning of the 1958 Convention on the Contintental Shelf, and international ocean space beyond, there is the possibility that a legal ‘“‘no-man’s land’’ exists offshore where no domestic law governs. The geological definition of the continental shelf is only slightly more precise than the several legal definitions. The Dolphin Dictionary of Geological Terms defines it as the “‘gently sloping, shallowly submerged marginal zone of the continents extend- ing from the shore to an abrupt increase in bottom inclination; greatest average depth less than 600 feet, slope generally less than 1 to 1,000, local relief less than 60 feet, width ranging from very narrow to more than 200 miles.”’ For scientific purposes, the defini- tion is adequate since geologists can generally agree on where the continental shelf begins and ends. The industry seeking to explore and develop resources of the seabed and government administrators charged with managing the outer continental shelf have more difficulty in deciding the jurisdictional limits of the Outer Continental Shelf. 8 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE EEZ IN PERSPECTIVE The economic potential for seabed min- ing at this time is not favorable when compared to alternative sources of sup- ply for most mineral commodities. Knowledge about marine geology has steadily accumulated in recent years. Such knowledge has enabled scientists to revise their theories about the formation of some types of mineral deposits and to better predict where new deposits might be found. For instance, many continental features and mineral deposits were formed on or beneath the seabed. By studying the formation of mineral de- posits on the oceanfloor, earth scientists are better able to understand geology on land. In the case of the formation of polymetallic sulfide deposits at seafloor spreading centers, mineral deposition can be observed as it occurs. At the same time, knowledge of mineral depos- its on land—gained through years of geological ob- servation and research—provides clues about the nature and possible location of offshore minerals. For example, beach sand deposits containing heavy minerals (e.g., chromite or titanium) or phos- phorites that were formed under the ocean before ancient seas receded may help identify the likely location and composition of similar deposits located in nearshore areas. Polymetallic sulfide deposits, now on shore but formed under the sea, have yielded large commercial quantities of copper, zinc, and lead ores. Knowledge about these onshore de- posits may lead to better understanding of the evo- lution of polymetallic sulfide ores formed under the ocean. Aside from the scientific knowledge that com- parative studies of undersea and onshore mineral occurrences can provide, the potential for discov- ering sizable deposits of minerals on land or in the ocean as a result of seabed exploration could be im- portant in the future. The economic potential of seabed mining at this time is not favorable when compared to alternative sources of supply for most mineral commodities. However, onshore mineral deposits are finite, and, given sufficient economic incentives, even the higher cost seabed mineral de- posits may become commercially viable—and per- haps attractive later. Investment in seabed exploration and ocean min- ing technology should be considered a long-term venture. Its value cannot be gauged against either current economic conditions or present mineral de- mand. In the past, even short-term demand pro- jections for mineral and energy resources have widely missed their marks. There is little reason to believe that supply and demand relationships will be any more predictable in the future. Today’s overcapacity in many sectors of the minerals indus- try may give way to increased demand as popula- tions expand and global economic growth resumes. On the other hand, changes in technology can also result in reduced demand for conventional mineral commodities through substitution, recycling, intro- duction of new materials, and miniaturization. Growth in minerals demand has been linked to world economic growth, and it is likely that the course of minerals consumption will continue to be affected by economic trends in the future. Until more is understood about the location, ex- tent, and characteristics of offshore minerals within U.S. jurisdiction, including their associated marine environment, the economic future of seabed min- erals is mere conjecture. Their market position will be first determined by comparing their production costs with those of their closest domestic and for- eign onshore competitors and next with compet- ing foreign offshore producers. Minerals markets, as with most commodities, favor the least cost pro- ducers first, thus recognizing an economic peck- ing order among potential mineral sources. The de- terminants of minerals costs are dynamic and can change dramatically with the development of cost- saving technologies, discovery of exceptionally rich ore bodies, or erratic jumps in market prices as a result of increased demand or of supply disruptions. However, if environmental impacts could result from the mining or processing of seabed minerals, Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 9 Even though the occurrence of some minerals within the EEZ might have a dim economic future . . ., an under- standing of their location, extent, and availability could provide an important cushion under emergency conditions. then the cost of mitigating or avoiding damage to the marine environment must also be considered in determining economic feasibility of development. The strategic importance of several minerals in the seabed—e.g., cobalt, chromium, manganese, and the platinum group metals—could make fu- ture economic considerations secondary to national security. Between 82 and 100 percent of these crit- ical metals are imported (figure 1-2) from countries with unstable political conditions or where other supply disruptions could occur for geopolitical rea- sons, e.g., the Republic of South Africa, the So- viet Union, Zimbabwe, Zaire, Zambia, China, Turkey, and Yugoslavia. Even though the occur- rence of some minerals within the EEZ might have a dim economic future during normal periods, an understanding of their location, extent, and avail- ability could provide an important cushion under emergency conditions. For shorter, less significant disruptions, the National Defense Stockpile could supplant the loss of some of the imported critical minerals on which the United States is dependent. While the immediate challenge to the United States is to gain a better understanding of the phys- iography and geology of the seafloor and its envi- Figure 1-2.—U.S. Mineral Imports (Million dollars) 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Value of apparent consumption and import reliance (Percent) 20 40 60 80 100 80] Manganese Yttrium Platinum Cobalt Zinc Silver Thorium Barium 358 L___j_—s Titanium 725 L_____] Phosphorus Net import reliance as a percent of apparent consumption The United States is reliant on imports of a number of critical minerals that are known to occur on the seafloor within the 200-mile U.S. EEZ. SOURCE: J.M. Broadus and P. Hoagland, ‘Marine Minerals and World Resources,” paper presented at the Marine Policy Center, Alumni Symposium, Woods Hole Oceano- graphic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, Apr. 5-7, 1987 (modified). 10 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier At the current stage of preliminary re- source assessment in the EEZ, little cre- dence should be given to estimates of the economic value or tonnages of seabed minerals .... ronment and to inventory minerals occurrences within U.S. jurisdiction, the potential value of de- veloping and marketing technology for seabed min- ing and shipboard processing systems should not be ignored. It is possible—perhaps likely—that the major commercial seabed mining ventures may not be in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, but rather in other countries’ waters (small mining operations have already taken place). In this instance, U.S. innovation and engineering know-how applied to developing seabed mining technology could place the United States in a pivotal competitive position to exploit a world market (probably modest in size) for seabed mining equipment. Technological inno- vation in seabed mining systems could also assist the U.S. industry in maintaining a national capa- bility to deploy such technology in U.S. waters or elsewhere in the world when economic opportuni- ties arise or if emergencies occur. MINERAL OCCURRENCES IN THE U.S. EEZ Only a miniscule portion of the U.S. EEZ has been explored for minerals. However, several types of mineral deposits are known to occur in various regions of the U.S. EEZ (figure 1-3). These include: e Placers—accumulations of sand and/or gravel containing gold, platinum, chromite, titanium, and/or other associated minerals. ® Polymetallic Sulfides—metal sulfides formed on the seabed from minerals dissolved in su- perheated water near subsea volcanic areas. They commonly contain copper, lead, zinc, and other minerals. ° Ferromanganese Crusts—cobalt-rich manga- nese crusts formed as pavements on the sea- floor on the flanks of seamounts, ridges, and plateaus in the Pacific region. They may also contain lesser amounts of other metals such as copper, nickel, etc. e Ferromanganese Nodules—similar in compo- sition to ferromanganese crusts, but in the form of small potato-like nodules scattered ran- domly on the surface of the seafloor. Those found within the EEZ in the Atlantic Ocean tend to be lower in cobalt content than deep ocean manganese nodules in the Pacific Ocean. ¢ Phosphorite Beds—seaward extensions of on- shore phosphate rock deposits that were laid down in ancient marine environments. Since so little is known about the volume in place and the mineral content (assay) of most seabed de- posits, most deposits are properly termed ‘‘occur- rences’’ rather than resources. Not much more can be said about a mineral occurrence other than that a mineral has been identified, perhaps in as little as one surficial grab sample. A few EEZ mineral deposits have been investigated enough to be termed ‘‘resources,’’ deposits that occur in a form and an amount that economic extraction is poten- tially feasible. At the current stage of preliminary resource assessment in the EEZ, little credence should be given to estimates of the economic value or ton- nages of seabed minerals that have been inferred by some observers. Current information should be interpreted cautiously to avoid implying a greater degree of certainty than is justified by the sampling density, sampling design, and analytical techniques used. Misinterpretation of the results (1.e., by in- ferring that the results of a small number of surfi- cial samples are representative of an extensive, three-dimensional deposit) of preliminary assess- ments can lead to false expectations. Close-grid, three-dimensional sampling is needed to adequately delineate and quantify mineral de- posits in the seafloor. Sand and gravel, phosphorite beds, and placers vary in depth below the seabed Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 11 -sy ABojouyoa| jo ad1jO neeyeld axelg ‘ ‘uo}Je1jS|U|Wpy 91eydsowyy pue 9]Uee00 |EUO|eEN juewssessy oujey pue AydesBoueredg Jo 89110 ebpiy epi0y eonjep uenr *KEAINS jeo|Hoj0ey °s'p ‘sweIjlIM ‘t's pue {UeWSses 9}!W01UD, winjuey winuneld plop © sa0uesinD90 umouy $99U91INDOO Ajax! $1908 Id SOPIJINS O1|/e}@WA|Od seyoyudsoud sjsnio }Jeqoo esseuebuewole-+ sojnpou sseueHuewo1u9e4 jeaei6 pue pues UO|SIAIG SJUBWSSessy UBEDO ‘yOURg JUBWSSessY 2/69}e11S :SSOHNOS Ba Hd wf 12 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier To be competitive, marine minerals probably must either prove to exist in large, high-quality deposits, and/or to be cheaper to mine and process than their onshore counterparts. and must be sampled by taking cores through many feet of sediment and sometimes down to bedrock. Sampling polymetallic sulfides is considerably more difficult than the other EEZ minerals. The thick- ness of polymetallic sulfide deposits is expected to be much greater, sometimes extending into the basement rocks of the seabed. Polymetallic sulfides are generally found in deeper water, and prohibi- tively expensive hard-rock coring techniques are required to adequately sample them. Resource assess- ments of cobalt-manganese crust deposits and man- ganese nodules are on somewhat firmer footing than placers or polymetallic sulfides. Nodule and crust distribution can be observed and visually mapped, while grab samples and shallow coring devices can assess the thickness of these deposits and obtain samples for chemical analysis. More is known about sand and gravel than other hard mineral resources in the U.S. EEZ as a re- sult of extensive sampling by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Although onshore sand and gravel resources in most areas of the United States are am- ple to meet mainland needs for the near future, off- shore deposits of high-quality sand may be locally important in the future, especially in New York and Massachusetts. Geologists have identified several offshore areas that have potential for hosting heavy mineral placer deposits, although data are still too sparse for compiling resource assessments. Occur- rences of shallow-water mineral placer deposits have been identified in both State waters and the Fed- eral EEZ. One of the most promising areas for titanium sands and associated minerals in the U.S. EEZ is located between New Jersey and Florida. On the west coast, the best prospects for chromite placers, nS Only a miniscule portion of the U.S. EEZ has been explored for minerals. other associated minerals, and perhaps precious me- tals are offshore southern Oregon. In Alaska, gold is being investigated off the Seward Peninsula near Nome where some test mining has occurred, and platinum has been recovered onshore near Good- news Bay on the Bering Sea, providing some evi- dence that precious metal placers may also lie off- shore; in the Gulf of Alaska, lower Cook Inlet may be a promising area to prospect for gold. Phosphorite beds located onshore in North Caro- lina and South Carolina extend seaward in the con- tinental shelf. Extensive phosphorite deposits are found near the surface of the seabed in the Blake Plateau of the southeastern Atlantic coast, as well as off southern California. Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts on the seabed adjacent to the Pacific Islands have piqued the in- terest of an international mining consortium. Data on the manganese crusts are insufficient to deter- mine the resource potential, to identify a potential mining site, or to design a mining system. Ferro- manganese nodules are located in the Blake Pla- teau and have been recovered in experimental quantities while testing deep seabed mining systems that were intended for use in the Pacific Ocean. The Blake Plateau nodules are in shallower water than those in the Pacific and thus may be more eas- ily mined, but they have lower mineral content. Polymetallic sulfide deposits located in the vol- canically active Gorda Ridge in the U.S. EEZ and also located in the Juan de Fuca Ridge, that strad- dles the U.S.-Canadian EEZs off the Northwestern United States, have attracted considerable scien- tific curiosity. Although these deposits are known to contain large quantities of copper, lead, zinc, and other metals, uncertainties about the quality, composition, and extent of the deposits makes their resource potential difficult to determine. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ° 13 MINERALS SUPPLY, DEMAND, AND FUTURE TRENDS Commodities, materials, and mineral concen- trates—the stuff made from minerals—are traded in international markets. There is nothing special or unique about marine minerals that makes them different from those obtained domestically onshore or from foreign sources. They must, nevertheless, compete for price, quality, and supply reliability with other foreign and domestic mineral suppliers. To be competitive, marine minerals probably must either prove to exist in large, high-quality depos- its, and/or to be cheaper to mine and process than their onshore counterparts. Major questions remain as to where marine minerals may fit in the future economic pecking order of producers. The commercial potential of marine minerals from the U.S. EEZ is uncertain because develop- ment, when it occurs (or if it occurs in the case of some minerals), is likely to be in the distant future. It is difficult to foresee the future of marine minerals for several reasons: e Little is known about the extent and grade of the mineral occurrences that have been iden- tified in the EEZ. e Little actual experience and few pilot opera- tions are available to evaluate seabed mining costs and operational uncertainties. e Erratic performance of the domestic and global economies adds uncertainty to forecasts of minerals demand. © Changing technologies can cause unforeseen shifts between demand and supply of minerals and materials. e Past experience indicates that methods for pro- jJecting or forecasting minerals demand are not dependable. Materials are constantly competing with one another for applications in goods and industrial processes. Total consumption of a mineral com- modity is determined by the amount (volume or number) of goods consumed and by the amount of a commodity used in manufacturing each unit. The former is linked to the vitality of the economy and customer preference, while the latter is related to technological trends which also may be related to economic factors. Substitution of new or differ- ent materials, conservation through more efficient manufacturing, and recycling of used materials can reduce the demand for virgin materials. Major changes in domestic and world economies, coupled with technological advancements and changes in consumer attitudes, have significantly altered consumption trends beginning in the late 1970s and continuing through the present. For most of the commodities derived from marine minerals, the amount used relative to the goods produced has decreased for chromium, cobalt, manganese, tin, zinc, lead, and nickel from 1972 to 1982. Only platinum and titanium increased in use intensity. Consumption of goods and consequently the de- mand for mineral commodities used to produce the goods—with the exception of platinum and titani- um—also decreased (but less abruptly than use in- tensity) during the same period. Mining capacity increased—particularly in the mineral-rich Third World—in the early 1970s when mineral prices were high, consumption strong, and the economic outlook bright. In the 1980s, demand softened, prices dropped, and the world economy slowed, causing significant excess world mining ca- pacity for most of the minerals that occur in the U.S. EEZ. It is unknown whether technological trends toward miniaturization, substitution, and lower intensity of use of the commodities derived from marine minerals will continue in the future, or whether domestic and world economic growth will rebound to new heights or merely continue sluggishly on the current course. These uncertain- ties will affect the utilization of existing capacity and determine the need for new mineral develop- ment in the future, including minerals from the seabed. As a result of excess world capacity, the U.S. minerals and mining industry has met with sub- stantial foreign competition. Metals prices remain low, and, until recently, production costs in the United States and Canada have been well above the world average for copper, zinc, lead, and other metals used in large industrial quantities. Compe- tition from low-cost foreign producers, with advan- tages of lower capital and operating costs and higher grade ores, have resulted in a depressed domestic 14 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier mining industry, a trend that accelerated in the early 1980s. Foreign producers, including state-owned or state-controlled companies, are likely to continue to be the measure of competition that must be met by both domestic onshore and offshore producers. Only when seabed mine production is the least cost source with respect to both domestic and foreign onshore producers and even foreign offshore pro- ducers will it become commercially viable. Manganese, chromium, and nickel are alloying elements that are used to impart specific proper- ties to steel and other metals. Their demand is closely tied to the production of steel; they are usu- ally added to molten metal as a ferroalloy or as an intermediate product of iron enriched with the al- loying element. There are no domestic reserves (proven economic resources) of manganese or chro- mium; therefore, the United States must import substantially all of these alloying metals. A decade ago, concentrated ores were imported for conversion to ferromanganese and ferrochro- mium by U.S. ferroalloy firms to supply a then- robust domestic steel industry. Since 1981, the United States has imported more finished ferro- chromium than it has chromite ore, and a similar pattern has developed with ferromanganese. For- eign producers now supply U.S. markets with about 90 percent of the ferrochromium consumed for the domestic manufacture of chromium steel. Chro- mite-producing countries are now converting ore to finished ferroalloy and gaining the value added through the manufacturing process before export- ing to consumers. There is currently no existing domestic capacity to produce ferromanganese. U.S. steel production has also declined in favor of cheaper imports. With decreases in both U.S. ferroalloy production and iron and steel produc- tion, demand for chromium and manganese ores (manganese is also used to desulfurize steel) for do- mestic ferroalloys is likely to continue to diminish. The United States is fast approaching total depen- dence on foreign processing capacity of ferroalloys. Even if EEZ chromite heavy sands off southern Oregon were to prove economically recoverable, there are no ferroalloy furnaces in the Pacific North- west to process the chromite produced. Any offshore chromite recovered probably would be used for the production of sodium dichromate, the major chem- ical derivative of chromium. Titanium metal is used extensively in aerospace applications, and its use in industrial applications is expected to expand in the future. Heavy mineral sands in the EEZ off the Southeastern Atlantic States contain substantial concentrations of ilmenite, a titanium-bearing mineral. Although ilmenite can be converted to titanium metal through an inter- mediate process (alteration to synthetic rutile), the added expense might make it uneconomical. The most probable use for ilmenite recovered from the Atlantic EEZ would be as titanium pigments, since two major plants currently operate in northern Florida using locally mined onshore minerals; over 30 percent of world’s titanium pigment production is in the United States. About 90 percent of the phosphate rock mined in the United States goes for the production of agri- cultural fertilizers. Most of the remainder is used to manufacture detergents and cleaners. Phosphate is abundant throughout the world, but only a small proportion is of commercial importance. Offshore phosphorites are similar to those that are mined in the coastal plain onshore. The United States his- torically has been the leading producer of phosphate rock, but its preeminence is now challenged by cheaper foreign producers. Precious metals—gold, platinum-group—are in a class of their own. By definition, they are less abundant and more difficult to find and recover than other minerals, hence their enhanced value. Both are used to some extent in manufacturing, the platinum-group metals are used most widely. De- mand for the platinum-group is expected to increase in the future as Europe, Australia, and Japan adopt automobile emission controls that use platinum as a catalyst. Gold remains a standard of wealth, and is used for jewelry. Both platinum and gold are sub- ject to the whims of speculators who respond to an- ticipated economic changes, market trends, world political conditions, and other factors; therefore, prices can change abruptly and unpredictably. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 15 OUTLOOK FOR DEVELOPMENT OF SELECTED OFFSHORE MINERALS OTA has assessed the potential for near-term de- velopment of selected minerals found within U.S. coastal waters. Costs of offshore mining will deter- mine its competitive position with regard to onshore sources of the same minerals in the United States and abroad. For most offshore minerals, the near- term prospects for development do not appear promising. Although only minor new developments in technology will be required to mine offshore placer deposits or phosphorite, costs for offshore mining equipment are likely to be higher than cap- ital costs for onshore operations. Some of the fac- tors that will increase costs include the need for sea- worthy mining vessels and possible requirements for motion compensating devices and navigational and positioning equipment. In addition to greater capital costs, operating costs for offshore mining typically will be higher than for onshore operations. Occasional adverse weather conditions will undoubtedly reduce the number of days per year during which mining is feasible. For most offshore settings, mining rates of 300 days per year are considered optimistic. The necessity of transporting to shore (possibly great distances) either raw or beneficiated ore for final processing is another factor that may increase oper- ating costs relative to costs for onshore operations. On the other hand, siting offshore mining equip- ment is easier and less expensive than for onshore facilities. Sufficient data are not available with which to make detailed cost estimates of typical future off- shore mining operations. However, first approxi- mations of profitability can provide insights into the competitiveness of offshore relative to onshore mining. OTA has developed mining scenarios for four types of hypothetical marine mineral deposits in areas where concentrations of potentially valu- able minerals are known to occur. The deposits evaluated include titanium-rich sands off the Geor- gia coast, chromite-rich sands off the Oregon coast, phosphorite off the North Carolina and Georgia coasts, and gold off the Alaska coast near Nome. Titanium OTA’s analysis of offshore titanium sand min- ing indicates that it is not very promising in the near term. Nevertheless, there has been some com- mercial interest shown in these deposits. The re- covery of ilmenite alone from an offshore placer does not appear economically feasible and will not be feasible unless primary concentrate can be de- livered to an onshore processing plant at costs com- parable to those incurred in producing the equiva- lent titanium minerals from an onshore placer deposit. To be competitive, the offshore deposit would have to contain considerable amounts of higher valued heavy minerals like rutile (valued at $350 to $500 per ton) or other more valuable minerals, e.g., zircon, monazite, or precious me- tals. Such deposits have not yet been identified. Chromite Mining and processing chromite-rich sands show results similar to those obtained for titanium. For chromite, revenues of about $125 per ton would be required to realize a 3-year payback on invest- ment. The average price of low-grade, nonrefrac- tory chromite concentrate imported into the United States during the first half of 1986 was $40 per ton, exclusive of import duties, freight, insurance, and other charges. Production of chromite alone, there- fore, would not meet revenue requirements. The presence of higher valued minerals, such as gold, could improve the profitability of mining offshore chromite sands if revenues from the sale of coprod- ucts exceeded the costs of their separation. With excess capacity in the world’s ferroalloy in- dustry, it is unlikely that a viable U.S. ferrochro- mium installation could survive foreign competi- tion. It is possible that the Oregon chromite sands might be used for the manufacture of sodium di- chromate, the major industrial chromium chemi- cal. A west coast ‘‘green field’’ plant probably would have to be built for this purpose to offset the transportation costs of shipping to existing east coast chemical plants. 16 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Phosphorite The economic outlook for offshore phosphorite mining is not especially promising either. In the past, the United States led world phosphate rock production with onshore mining in northern Florida and North Carolina; now the United States is be- ing challenged by Morocco, which has immense high-grade reserves judged to be capable of satis- fying world demand far into the future. The pros- pect that mining of U.S. offshore phosphorites could successfully compete with low-cost Moroc- can phosphate rock or other possible low-cost for- eign producers is considered remote. However, do- mestic onshore producers have met considerable opposition because of potential environmental dis- turbance and land use conflicts. The offshore ma- rine deposits of North Carolina and other South- eastern States might become more competitive with domestic onshore production in the future if envi- ronmental and land use problems become insur- mountable. Gold Offshore gold placer mining near Nome, Alaska, appears more promising. In fact, Inspiration Mines has already undertaken pilot mining and is plan- ning to begin full-scale gold mining with a con- verted tin dredge from southeast Asia. Some of the data OTA used in estimating capital and operat- ing costs for this project were provided by Inspira- tion Mines; thus, some of the assumptions used in the gold offshore mining scenario are considered more reliable. Assuming the price of gold to be $400 per ounce (a conservative assumption in July 1987, but the price of gold is subject to wide swings), the pro- jected pre-tax cash flow on the estimated produc- tion of 48,000 ounces of gold per year would be approximately $19 million. This figure indicates that the offshore gold mining project at Nome shows good promise of profitability if the operators are able to maintain production. Note, however, that offshore mining will be possible only about 5 months per year, because ice on Norton Sound prohibits operations during the winter months. The dura- tion of yearly ice cover (as well as the fluctuating price of gold) will have a significant effect on the profitability of this operation. With the exceptions of sand and gravel and precious metals, the commercial prospects for developing marine min- erals within the EEZ appear to be re- mote for the foreseeable future. Sand and Gravel The least valuable marine minerals by volume are sand and gravel. However, these resources may have the most immediate competitive position in relation to onshore supplies. Although onshore sand and gravel resources are immense, coarse sand is sometimes hard to find and land use restrictions increasingly prohibit access to suitable resources. Some limited offshore mining of sand and gravel is taking place. Sand and gravel is a high-volume, low-value commodity where short-haul transpor- tation is important. Around high-growth, high- density areas in the Northeast and on the west coast, marine sand and gravel might soon prove profita- ble to mine. Deep-Sea Minerals OTA did not estimate the potential for near-term exploitation of ferromanganese nodules, cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, or polymetallic sulfides. Re- covery of ferromanganese nodules (which include copper, nickel, and manganese) from the deep seafloor beyond the U.S. EEZ has been studied by the industry, the National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration (NOAA), and the Minerals Management Service (MMS). Prototype technology has been designed and tested, but plans to mine nodule resources in the central Pacific Ocean have been on hold pending favorable economic con- ditions. Even less is known about the economic poten- tial for recovery of cobalt-rich crusts (within the Ha- waiian EEZ) or polymetallic sulfide deposits (within the U.S. EEZ off Oregon and northern California) than about the potential for recovery of nodule or placer deposits. Technology has not yet been de- veloped for mining these deposits nor does suffi- cient information about the nature of the deposits Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 17 eee The job of exploring the U.S. EEZ is immense, difficult, and expensive... [it] is not an activity that is likely to be undertaken by the private sector in re- sponse to market forces. exist to permit meaningful estimates of future eco- nomic potential to be made. More data about the physical characteristics of cobalt crusts and poly- metallic sulfides are needed before mining concepts can be refined and mining costs estimated. An in- ternational consortium is studying the potential for mining cobalt-rich crusts in the Johnston Island EEZ, but near-term incentives for mining crusts and sulfides do not exist. It is risky to attempt to rank the future potential for development of marine minerals in the EEZ be- cause of shortfalls in resource data. Nevertheless, an assessment based on what is known of the na- ture and extent of the mineral occurrences, cou- pled with insights into mineral commodity markets and trends, suggests the following rank ‘‘guesti- mate’’ for the probable order of development: 1. sand and gravel 2. precious metal placers, 3. titantum and chromite placers and phos- phorite, 4. ferromanganese nodules, . cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, and 6. polymetallic sulfides. on TECHNOLOGIES FOR EXPLORING THE SEABED The job of exploring the U.S. EEZ is immense, difficult, and expensive. The job is not an activity that is likely to be undertaken by the private sector in response to market forces. In its initial reconnais- sance stages, it is largely a government responsi- bility. As knowledge narrows the targets of oppor- tunity to those of economic potential, commercial interest may then motivate entrepreneurs to explore in more detail. But without the first efforts by the Federal Government, both the scientific commu- nity and industry will be unable or unwilling to launch an effective, broad-scale exploration program. Technological capabilities for exploring the sea- bed in detail are currently available and in use. These range from reconnaissance technologies that provide relatively coarse, general information about very large areas to site-specific technologies that provide information about increasingly smaller areas of the seafloor. A common strategy is to use these technologies in the manner of a zoom lens, that is, by focusing on progressively smaller areas with increasing detail. Among the reconnaissance technologies available are echo-sounding instruments capable of accu- rately determining the depth of the seafloor and producing computer-drawn bathymetric charts showing the form and topography of the bottom. Side-looking sonar devices produce photo-like im- ages that can reveal interesting features and pat- terns on the seafloor. These technologies can be combined in one piece of equipment or used simul- taneously to survey broad swaths of the seafloor while a vessel is underway, thus providing near- perfect registry between the sonar and bathymet- ric data. Broad-scale coverage of side-looking so- nar imagery for most of the U.S. EEZ soon will be available from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). However, high-resolution, multi-beam bathymetric data collected by NOAA will take much longer to acquire. Moreover, the future of NOAA’s bathymetric charting program is uncer- tain, since the Navy considers the data to be of suffi- cient quality to classify for national security reasons. Seismic technologies, which are used extensively by the offshore petroleum industry, can detect struc- tural and stratigraphic features below the seabed which can aid geological interpretation. New three- dimensional seismic techniques, although very ex- pensive, can enhance the usefulness of seismic in- formation. Gravimeters can detect differences in the density of rocks, leading to estimates of crustal rock types and thicknesses. Magnetometers provide 18 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier —— eee The military value of some EEZ data might require restrictions on access and use of certain information for national security reasons. —— ee ——— eel information about the magnetic field and may be used offshore to map sediments and rocks contain- ing magnetite and other iron-rich minerals. Both of these technologies are also used for oil and gas exploration. Data can be collected rapidly by mov- ing vessels and stored in retrievable form. Other technologies may also be used to explore the EEZ. Some, like many electrical techniques, are proven technologies for land-based exploration which have been adapted for ocean use, but have not been widely tested in the marine environment. Induced polarization, for example, has potential for locating titanium placer deposits and for perform- ing rapid, real-time, shipboard analyses of core samples. Nuclear techniques may also prove use- ful for identifying such minerals as phosphorite, monazite, and zircon that emit radiation. When the focus of attention narrows to prospec- tive targets of interest on the seafloor, direct visual observation is often useful. Manned submersibles and/or remotely operated undersea vehicles (ROVs), similar to those used for locating the Titanic in 1986, may come into play. Remotely operated cameras capable of observing, transmitting, and recording photographic images have proved valu- able exploration tools. Direct sampling of seabed minerals for assess- ment presents special problems. In some cases, it is possible (as has been done with the research sub- mersible Alvin to recover limited samples of seabed minerals using manned submersibles or ROVs). A number of devices have been developed to re- trieve a sample of unconsolidated sediment, but few are capable of extracting undisturbed samples that reflect the mineral concentrations contained in the Photo credit: Emory Kristof and Alvin M. Chandler, National Geographic The manned submersible Alvin provided researchers with their first face-to-face encounter with the formation of metallic sulfide minerals on the oceanfloor in the late 1970s. seabed deposit. Many of the sediment coring de- vices were designed for scientific use, and few are capable of economically and efficiently recovering the large number of samples that are needed to ac- curately determine the commercial feasibility of a marine mineral deposit and to delineate a mine site. Quantitative sampling of hard-rock deposits, e.g., ferromanganese crusts and polymetallic sul- fides, is economically infeasible with existing tech- nology. While large drill ships (e.g., the Joides Resolution) used in the Ocean Drilling Project or those used by the offshore petroleum industry, are capable of drilling and extracting cores from hard basaltic rock, their cost is prohibitive for extensive, high-density sampling of the kind needed to assess a mineral deposit. It may prove easier to develop a practical sampling device for thin ferromanganese crusts than for the thicker, less regular, polymetallic sulfides. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options © 19 TECHNOLOGIES FOR MINING AND PROCESSING MARINE MINERALS Existing or modified dredge mining sys- tems could place many potential placer deposits in the range of technical ex- ploitability. From table-flat, heavy mineral sand placers de- posited in shallow water to mounds and chimneys of rock-like polymetallic sulfides at depths of over a mile, marine minerals present a variety of chal- lenges to the design, development, and operation of marine mining systems. Development and cap- ital costs for vessels and marine systems can be high. Profitability of offshore mining ventures will hinge on whether safe and efficient mining systems can be built and operated at reasonable costs. With the exception of conversions of onshore dredge min- ing equipment for shallow, protected water offshore and work done on deep seabed manganese nodule mining systems, there has been little development effort thus far. Dredge mining technology is used extensively for harbor and channel dredging in coastal waters and for onshore mining of phosphate rock and heavy mineral sands. It has also been used for mining tin in coastal waters in Asia and is currently being used in pilot mining of gold in State waters near Nome, Alaska. In deeper waters subject to winds, waves, swells, and currents, specially designed mining dredges must be developed. High endurance dredges for deep waters must be self-powered, seaworthy plat- DREDGES WHICH OPERATE HYDRAULICALLY DUSTPAN DREDGE SELF-PROPELLED HOPPER DREDGE CUTTERHEAD OREOGE forms with motion compensating systems and may be equipped with onboard mineral processing plants and storage capacity. Conceptual designs of such equipment are being readied. The design of even the most sophisticated dredge probably can be achieved without major new technological break- throughs. Cost will be the most important limit- ing factor. The maximum practical operating depth for most dredging systems is about 300 feet from the sur- face of the water to the bottom of the excavation on the seafloor. Airlift systems can be used on suc- tion dredges to lift unconsolidated material from much greater depths. Existing or modified dredge mining systems could place many potential placer deposits in the range of technical exploitability. Solution or borehole mining has been tested in north Florida land-based phosphate rock deposits as a means to reduce surface disturbance and envi- ronmental impacts. The technique involves sink- ing a shaft into the phosphorite deposit, jetting water into the borehole, and pumping the result- ing slurry to the surface. Although the technique has not yet been tested under marine conditions, some mining engineers speculate that it could have potential for offshore phosphorite mining. Several preliminary mining systems have been sketched out for recovering ferromanganese crusts as well as for mining polymetallic sulfide deposits, but little if any development work has proceeded in either area. Collection and airlift recovery sys- tems developed for deep seabed manganese nod- ules may be adaptable to mining both crusts and polymetallic sulfides. Too little is known about the DREDGES WHICH OPERATE MECHANICALLY el? | mie OIPPER DREOGE CLAMSHELL OREDGE BUCKE T-LADDER ORE OGE Dredge Technologies Dredge technologies are well developed and proven through years of experience. Adaptation of inshore dredge mining systems for offshore use could make the technical exploitability of some heavy mineral placer deposits possible if seabed mining is found to be economically competitive. Source: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987 20 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier nature and extent of the deposits to allow the de- velopment of prototype mining systems at this time. Mineral processing technology has evolved through centuries of experience with onshore minerals, although such techniques have not been widely applied at sea. No major technological breakthroughs are considered to be needed to adapt onshore processing technologies to shipboard use, but considerable uncertainty remains about the costs and efficiency of operating a minerals proc- essing plant at sea. Shore-based v. at-sea minerals processing will be a trade-off that a seabed mining enterprise must consider. If shipboard processing is installed, it may be cheaper to transport smaller amounts of high- grade processed ore (beneficiated) than to haul large volumes of unprocessed ore containing as much as 85 to over 90 percent waste material to an onshore processing plant. Economic conditions that would influence such a decision could vary for each case. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Little direct experience exists with com- mercial offshore mining with which to estimate the potential for environmental harm. Little direct experience exists with commercial offshore mining with which to estimate the poten- tial for environmental harm. Even channel and har- bor dredging operations or recovery of sand for beach nourishment, which have been studied in some detail, are sporadic operations and do not re- flect the impacts that could result from long-term placer dredge mining operations that would move considerably more material from a larger area of the seafloor. Less is known about impacts to deep water environments than shallow water envi- ronments. Physical disturbance from dredge mining oper- ations will consist of removing a layer of the seafloor, conveying it to the surface, and reinject- ing the unwanted material onto the seabed. The mining operation will generate a transient “‘plume”’ of sediment that will affect the surface, the water column, and adjacent areas of the oceanfloor for an uncertain period of time. Experience with sand and gravel mining in Eur- ope and with the dredging operations of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suggests that as long as sensitive areas (e.g., fish spawning and nursery grounds) are avoided, surface and mid-water ef- fects from either shallow or deep water mining should be minimal and transient. Benthic commu- nities assuredly will be destroyed if mined, and some nearby areas may be adversely affected by sediment returning to the seafloor. However, min- ing equipment can be designed to minimize such damage, and, except where rare animals occur, en- tire benthic populations are eliminated, or the sub- strate is permanently altered, the seafloor should recolonize. Recolonization is expected to take place quickly in high-energy, shallow water communi- ties, but very slowly in deep-sea areas. If any at- sea processing of the mined material occurs —with subsequent discharge of chemicals—negative im- pacts would possibly be more severe. It is not scientifically or economically feasible to research ecological baseline information on all of the marine environments that may be affected by seabed mining. Furthermore, the consequences of the range of possible mining scenarios are unknown. Anticipating and avoiding high-risk, sensitive areas and mitigating damage through improved equip- ment design and operating procedures can reduce the impacts from offshore mining. Environmental monitoring during the mining process will provide an additional margin of safety and add to the knowl- edge of what effects seabed mining might have on the marine environment as well. Concurrent ob- servations in undisturbed control areas similar to those being mined could also provide an under- standing of the processes at work. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options @ 21 Anticipating and avoiding high-risk, sensitive areas and mitigating damage through improved equipment design and operating procedures can reduce the impacts from offshore mining. What effects might extensive mining in shallow waters have on the coastline? The removal of large quantities of sand and gravel or placers in near- shore areas might alter the coastline and aggravate coastal erosion by altering waves and tides. Experi- ence with sand removal off Grand Isle, Louisiana, for beach replenishment suggests that the mining of even small areas to substantial depths may cause serious damage to the shoreline. This potential problem requires considerably more investigation. More, too, should be learned about the struc- ture and energetics of deep-sea communities. How- ever, to do so requires expensive submersibles and elaborate sampling equipment because of the dif- ficulty of operating at great depths. A considerable amount of environmental data already has been collected by a number of Federal agencies as part of their missions. Much of the in- formation remains in the files of each agency, and only a small part finds its way into the public liter- ature. Some of this environmental information could be useful in planning offshore mining oper- ations. The public investment in such environ- mental information represents hundreds of millions Photo credit: Barbara Hecker, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory Little is known about the energetics and structure of marine communities in deep-ocean space or the environmental effects that seabed mining might have on these ecosystems. of dollars. An additional modest investment to com- pile a compendium and archive the information for use by the States, the private and public sector, and the scientific community would enhance its value. COLLECTING AND MANAGING OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA Several Federal agencies share responsibility for exploring various aspects of the U.S. EEZ. In addi- tion, coastal States, oceanographic institutions, aca- demic institutions, and private industry also con- tribute information and data about the Nation’s offshore areas. All of these institutions, except the private firms, are funded primarily with public funds. The overall investment in collecting oceano- graphic data related to exploring the EEZ is not trivial, nor are the problems of coordinating explo- ration efforts and archiving the results. At a time when the Federal Government is strug- gling to reduce the Federal budget deficit, it is im- portant to ensure that Federal agencies coordinate their complementary and overlapping functions and promote a spirit of cooperation among investiga- tors that will encourage efficiency and responsibil- ity. With regard to EEZ exploratory programs, there have been notable and unprecedented achieve- ments in cooperation and communication between the Department of the Interior (DOI) and NOAA during the last few years. USGS and NOAA have 22 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier agreed to a division of effort in EEZ exploration and have taken steps to create a joint office to take the lead in integrating information from govern- ment and private sources. However, the Minerals Management Service, with responsibility for man- aging the Outer Continental Shelf mineral resources, and the Bureau of Mines, with responsibility for mining and minerals research and investigations, are not formally linked to the USGS-NOAA co- operative agreement. About a dozen Federal agencies administer pro- grams related to the exploration and investigation of the EEZ. The oceanographic and resource data produced by the numerous Federal programs and augmented by similar data collected by States, in- dustry, and academic institutions make up an im- pressive body of information. The data sets are of highly variable quality and were collected in differ- ent places over different time periods. Some of these data are available to other researchers and the pub- lic through formal and informal exchanges among the institutions; other data, however, are less accessible. As exploration of the EEZ increases in intensity, data management problems will worsen. Modern instruments, such as multi-beam_ echo-sounders, satellites, and multi-channel seismic reflection re- corders, produce streams of digital data at high rates of speed. To succeed, a national exploration effort in the EEZ must effectively deal with the problems of compiling, archiving, manipulating, and dissem- inating a range of digital data and graphic infor- mation. Historically, Federal agencies have spent proportionately more on collecting the data than on archiving and managing databases compared to their counterparts in the private sector. Indus- try managers consider data collected in the course of investigations to be capital assets with future value; in general, the Federal agencies seem to con- sider data more as an inventory of limited long- term value and hence have spent less on data man- agement. There is no governmentwide policy for archiv- ing and disseminating oceanographic data to sec- ondary users. The National Science Foundation’s Ocean Sciences Division has taken steps to ensure that data collected in the course of research it funds are submitted to NOAA’s National Environmental Modern multi-beam echo-sounding systems and computer mapping technologies can produce accurate topographic maps of the deep seabed. Mapping is the first step toward a systematic program for exploring the EEZ. SOURCE: Naval Research Laboratory. Satellite, Data, and Information System. There are two national data centers that act as libraries for oceanographic and geophysical data: 1) National Oceanographic Data Center, and 2) National Geo- physical Data Center. Both are managed by NOAA. Data at the centers are acquired from Federal agen- cles under interagency agreements; some agencies are more responsive and reliable in forwarding data to the centers than are others. Funds for the centers have never been adequate to provide effective oceanographic data services to secondary users in industry, academia, or State governments. As a result of chronically inadequate funding, the centers are neither able to acquire ex- isting data sets that have intrinsic historical base- line value nor to preserve and store but a relatively small proportion of the new data that are currently being produced. Oceanographic data discarded for lack of storage facilities is a government asset lost forever. Detailed charts of the seafloor, such as those produced by multi-beam echo-sounding instruments (e.g., Sea Beam), are considered to be invaluable tools for geologists and geophysicists exploring the Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ° 23 EEZ. Unfortunately, they are also considered to be invaluable tools for navigating and positioning potential hostile submarines within the EEZ. As a consequence, the U.S. Navy has taken steps to clas- sify and restrict the public dissemination of high- resolution bathymetric charts produced by NOAA’s National Ocean Services in the EEZ. NOAA’s plans for exploring the EEZ include broad-scale, atlas-like coverage of the EEZ with high-resolution bathymetry. The plan is applauded by the academic community, but the Navy, con- cerned about the national security implications of public release of such data, opposes NOAA’s plan unless security can be assured. Negotiations be- tween NOAA and the Navy continue in an attempt to resolve the classification issue. Suggestions by the Navy that bathymetric data may be skewed or altered in a random fashion to reduce its strategic usefulness have been met by protests from the re- search community that claim its usefulness for re- search also would be reduced. There is little doubt that the Navy’s strategic con- cern over the value of high-resolution bathymetry to potentially hostile forces is well founded. How- ever, critics of the Navy’s position cite mitigating factors that they consider to undermine the Navy’s security argument, such as the availability of multi- beam technology in foreign vessels; the U.S. pol- icy of open access for research in the EEZ, which would allow foreign vessels to gather similar data; and the stringent criteria for classification estab- lished by the Navy that could include existing bathymetric charts that have been in the public do- main for some time. The importance of high-resolution bathymetry to efficient exploration of the EEZ is apparent. Both the Navy and the scientific community have failed to effectively communicate their concerns to each other. To ensure that the scientific community has access to precise bathymetry to facilitate the explo- ration of the EEZ and at the same time to protect the national security, a flexible policy must be agreed to and supported by all parties. Undoubt- edly, there will be appreciable financial costs con- nected to such a policy, but it should be consid- ered a cost of doing the government’s business in the modern, high-technology research envi- ronment. Before the marine mining industry will invest substantially in commercial prospecting in the EEZ, it must have assurances that the Federal Govern- ment will encourage development and grant access to the private sector to explore and develop seabed minerals. While the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease non-energy minerals as well as oil and gas in the Outer Continental Shelf, little guidance is provided by the legislation for structuring a hard mineral leasing program. There also is disagreement as to whether the Secretary’s mineral leasing authority can be extended to areas beyond the limits of the continental shelf in the EEZ. Furthermore, the bid- ding requirements for hard mineral leases, which require advance payment of money before a mine site is delineated, may not be workable for EEZ hard minerals. New marine mining legislation is needed to ensure the seabed mining industry that it will have a suitable Federal leasing program in place when it is needed. SUMMARY AND FINDINGS With a few possible exceptions (e.g., sand and gravel and precious metals), the commercial pros- pects for developing marine minerals within the Ex- clusive Economic Zone appear to be remote for the foreseeable future. There is currently no operational domestic seabed mining industry per se, although some international mining consortia have a con- tinuing interest in deep seabed manganese nodules and perhaps cobalt-manganese crusts in the EEZ. One land-based mining company is currently oper- ating a gold mining dredge in Alaskan State waters, and sand is being mined at the entrance to New York Harbor. Commercial interest in some near- shore placer deposits and Blake Plateau manganese nodules has occurred sporadically. Because of the economic uncertainties and financial risks of EEZ mining, it is doubtful that the private sector will undertake substantial exploration in the EEZ until 24 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier yy}; j f} Advances in mapping technology have provided oceanographers with valuable detailed information about the depths and topography of the seafloor. However, the accuracy and precision of multi-beam and echo-sounding also makes the maps valuable for military navigation and positioning. (Old technology on this page; new technology opposite). Source: National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA more is known about marine minerals. Preliminary reconnaissance and exploration by the Federal agencies to determine mining opportunities, as well as assurances from Congress that the Federal Gov- ernment will provide an appropriate administra- tive framework and economic climate to conduct business offshore, probably will be needed to in- terest the private sector in further prospecting and possible development. The possible strategic importance of some EEZ minerals is additional justification for the United States to maintain momentum in exploring its off- shore public domain. We know too little about the mineral resource potential of the EEZ to judge its long-term commercial viability or its strategic value in supplying critical minerals in times of emer- gency. A time may come, however, when it is judged that it is vital to the Nation that the Fed- eral Government indirectly or directly support the offshore mining industry to maintain a competi- tive, strategic position in seabed mining relative to European countries, Japan, and other industrial nations. The vastness of the U.S. EEZ requires that ex- ploration proceed according to well-thought-out plans and priorities. Federal agencies will have to coordinate efforts, share equipment, and collaborate in a collegial atmosphere. Academicians, State per- sonnel, and scientists and engineers from private industry also will be major participants in the Fed- eral EEZ exploration program. To achieve this extraordinary level of collaboration inside and out- side the Federal Government, a broad-based co- ordinating mechanism is likely to be needed to tie the various public, academic, and private sector EEZ activities together. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 25 Source: National Geophysical Data Center, NOAA 2] le; ISSUES AND OPTIONS Although EEZ exploration costs could be large in the aggregate, there are several possible low-cost actions that Congress might take along the way to bolster the national effort by focusing the govern- ment exploration effort and improving Federal agency performance through better communica- tion, coordination, and planning. The major needs of the fledgling U.S. ocean mining industry might be best met through appropriate legislation aimed at providing a suitable Federal administrative man- agement framework. Focusing the National Exploration Effort Responsibility for various aspects of EEZ min- erals exploration is shared by several Federal agen- cies: U.S. Geological Survey, National Oceanic and 72-672 0 - 87 -- 2 Atmospheric Administration, Minerals Manage- ment Service, U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Navy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Aeronau- tics and Space Administration, Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, Na- tional Science Foundation, and several other con- tributing agencies. Moreover, the major academic oceanographic institutions—Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Woods Hole Oceanographic Insti- tution, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory— play a key role in the pursuit of scientific knowl- edge about the seafloor and the ocean environment, as do a large number of marine scientists at many universities and colleges throughout the country. State agency efforts, though modest in compar- ison to the Federal programs, are focused on the 3-mile territorial sea under the coastal State’s con- 26 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier un . it is important to ensure that Fed- eral agencies coordinate their comple- mentary and overlapping functions. ... trol and provide an important adjunct to the Fed- eral exploration efforts. The offshore mining in- dustry’s stake in the outcome of the Federal EEZ exploration program also necessitates that the in- dustry be a major contributor to national EEZ planning. With the large number of actors involved in col- lecting EEZ information, it is important that their efforts be focused and coordinated through a na- tional exploration plan—yet no such planning proc- ess currently exists. In an effort to coordinate EEZ activities in NOAA and USGS, these two agencies recently established a joint EEZ office (Joint Of- fice for Mapping and Research) to foster commu- nication between them and to establish an EEZ point of contact for the public. The joint EEZ of- fice is a positive step towards coordination, but its activities apply principally to the sponsoring agen- cies and there is no separate funding for this office. MMS also has made efforts to improve commu- nications and information transfer with the coastal States regarding anticipated offshore mineral leas- ing in the EEZ. State-Federal working groups have been organized for cobalt crusts off Hawaii; poly- metallic sulfides and placers off Washington, Ore- gon, and California; phosphorites off North Caro- lina; heavy mineral sands off Georgia; and placers in the Gulf of Mexico. Such efforts to coordinate Federal EEZ activities are good as far as they go, but they fall short of providing the comprehensive focus needed to integrate the full range of govern- ment activities with those of the States, academic institutions, and the seabed mining industry. Faced with a similar planning and coordination problem in Arctic research, Congress enacted the Arctic Research and Policy Act (Public Law 98- 373) in 1984. The Act established an Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee composed of the 10 key agencies involved in Arctic research. A parallel organization, the Arctic Research Commis- sion, was concurrently established to represent the academic community, State and private interests, and residents of the Arctic and to advise the Fed- eral Government. The Federal Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee and the Arctic Re- search Commission are charged with developing 5-year Arctic research plan which includes goals and priorities. Budget requests for funding of Arctic re- search for each Federal agency under the plan are to be considered by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as a single ‘‘integrated, coherent, and multi-agency request’’ (Sec. 110). The Arctic Research and Policy Act does not authorize addi- tional funding for Arctic research. Each Federal agency designates a portion of its proposed bud- get for “‘Arctic research’’ for the purpose of OMB review. Congress opted for a similar solution to coordi- nate multi-agency research activities in acid pre- cipitation. Title VII of the Energy Security Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-294) established an Acid Pre- cipitation Task Force, consisting of 12 Federal agencies, 4 National Laboratories, and 4 presiden- tial appointees from the public. The ‘Task Force was assigned responsibility for developing and manag- ing a 10-year research plan. Funds ($5 million) were authorized by the Act to underwrite the cost of de- veloping the plan and to support the Task Force. Research funds requested by the Federal agencies (comprising each agency’s acid precipitation re- search budgets) are combined annually into a Na- tional Acid Precipitation Assessment Program bud- get that is submitted to OMB as a unit. Both the Arctic Research and Policy Act and Ti- tle VII of the Energy Security Act may be consid- ered prototypes for focusing, planning, budgeting, and coordinating Federal exploration and research activities in the EEZ. Neither Act has proved to be expensive, nor has either unduly encroached on the autonomy, jurisdiction, or missions of the in- dividual agencies. Neither Act authorizes or ear- marks special funds for its intended purposes (ex- cept to offset the cost of plans and administration), but collective budgets are presented to OMB along with plans and programs to justify the expenditure of the requested funds. Both approaches build in participation from the general public and the pri- vate sector in developing research plans. Another approach to interagency planning and coordination is used for marine pollution. The Na- Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options °® 27 tional Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-273) designates NOAA as the lead agency for compiling a 5-year plan for Federal ocean pol- lution research and development (R&D), a plan that is revised every 3 years. The National Marine Pollution Program links the R&D activities of 11 Federal agencies, establishes priorities, and reviews the budgets of the agencies with regard to the goals of the program and screens them for unnecessary duplication. Public participation in Federal plan- ning is fostered through workshops at which ma- rine pollution R&D progress is reviewed and fu- ture trends and priorities discussed. Each agency submits its own budget request to OMB, but ap- propriations are authorized to cover NOAA’s ex- penses for preparing the plan and monitoring progress. In 1986, the Act was amended to pro- vide for an interagency board that will review in- dividual agency budget requests in the context of the current 5-year plan. Congressional Options Option 1: Establish an interagency planning and coordinating committee within the executive branch and a public advisory commission similar to those created in the Arctic Research and Policy Act, with Federal agency budgets submitted sepa- rately to OMB. Congressional Action: Enact authorizing leg- islation. Option 2: Establish an interagency planning and coordinating task force composed of Federal agency representatives and pub- lic members similar to the task force es- tablished for acid precipitation R&D by the National Energy Security Act, with a budget request combining all agency budgets in a single EEZ document. Congressional Action: Enact authorizing leg- islation. Option 3: Mandate interagency planning and coordination and assign lead-agency re- sponsibility to a single agency as Con- gress did in the National Ocean Pollution Research and Development and Monitor- ing Act of 1978. Congressional Action: Enact authorizing leg- islation. Option 4: Allow ad hoc cooperation and co- ordination to continue at the discretion of Federal agency administrators. Congressional Action: No action required. Advantages and Disadvantages Congress has attempted in various ways to im- prove the planning and coordination of government functions among Federal agencies with related mis- sions. Informal agency coordination has largely failed in the past, although the track record of in- teragency coordination groups has had mixed re- sults. To be effective, interagency coordinating mechanisms must have means to coordinate both the programs and budgets of the agencies. The suc- cess of ad hoc agency coordination depends primar- ily on comity and cooperation among government managers. Therefore, personnel changes, which happen frequently at high levels of the Federal Goy- ernment, can alter an otherwise amiable relation- ship among the agencies and destroy what may have been an effective coordination effort. Efforts by Congress to improve agency account- ability, planning, coordination, and budgeting through legislation have also met with mixed re- sults. Some laws require elaborate plans that must be updated periodically and transmitted concur- rently to Congress and the President. Other stat- utes require that annual reports be similarly com- piled and transmitted. Such information can be useful to Congress in carrying out its oversight responsibility for agency performance and may be useful to the President in his capacity as “‘chief ex- ecutive officer’ of the Federal Government. The extent to which congressional committees and the President effectively use these agency plans, programs, and reports required by law varies con- siderably. In some cases, agency plans and pro- grams receive little or no attention from Congress; in other cases, such as the MMS 5-year leasing pro- gram required under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the planning document often becomes the focus of public debate. Although Federal agencies often have closely related functions, their budgets are generally for- 28 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier mulated with little or no mutual consultation. Fur- thermore, budget examiners at OMB who are re- sponsible for the review of individual agencies seldom collaborate with other OMB examiners who are responsible for other agencies with similar pro- grams (e.g., NOAA’s budget is reviewed by a dif- ferent OMB budget examiner than is DOI). A sim- ilar situation exists within Congress among the appropriations subcommittees that are responsible for individual agency appropriations. To remedy this problem, Congress has in several cases man- dated that “‘cross-cutting’’ budget analyses be pre- pared for related multiple-agency activities so that the entire range of funds directed toward a specific effort can be easily seen. Cross-cutting budget anal- yses are required in the Arctic Research and Pol- icy Act, Title VII of the Energy Security Act, and the National Ocean Pollution Research and Devel- opment and Monitoring Act of 1978. OMB exercises nearly omnipotent control over the funding levels recommended in the President’s budget that is submitted to Congress each year. Program budgets that are presented to Congress are arrived at through a byzantine negotiation proc- ess that involves OMB, Cabinet departments, agen- cies within the departments, programs within agen- cies, and finally, if appealed, the President. The budget process is internal, and neither the public nor Congress is privy to the negotiations. Congress has attempted to open the executive branch budget process to more public scrutiny by directing the agencies by statute to submit recom- mended program budgets directly to Congress as part of the interagency planning and coordination process without prior review by OMB; the National Ocean Pollution Research and Development and Monitoring Act uses this mechanism. Although the approach appears reasonable in theory, it seldom— if ever—works in reality. OMB continues to main- tain its authority over all budget recommendations transmitted to Congress from within the executive branch. Unified budget submissions to OMB accompa- nied by cross-cutting budget analyses and program plans that justify the funding levels, such as pro- vided in both the Arctic Research and Policy Act and Title VII of the Energy Security Act, seem to work reasonably well for developing rational inter- agency budgets within the normal budget process. As currently implemented under the Energy Secu- rity Act, unified budget submissions from several agencies in a single document covering acid pre- cipitation have the advantage of earmarking funds specifically for research in each agency as if it were a line item in the budget; on the other hand, the Arctic Research and Policy Act merely requires that Arctic R&D be “‘designated’’ in the normal agency budget submissions to OMB. The budget proce- dures under the Energy Security Act focus more directly on the multi-agency budget related to acid precipitation rather than on the single budget of each agency. The National Ocean Pollution Re- search and Development and Monitoring Act pro- vides little advantage over the normal agency bud- geting process. Providing for Future Seabed Mining The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease minerals in the Outer Continental Shelf.!? Although the main thrust of OCSLA is directed toward oil and gas, provisions are also included for leasing sul- fur (Sec. 8[i] and [j]), and other minerals (Sec. 8[k]). Sulfur has been mined in the Gulf of Mex- ico since 1960 using borehole solution mining tech- niques. Because of the similarities between sulfur mining and oil and gas extraction, DOI applies to sulfur the same general regulations that govern pe- troleum operations.'? When OCSLA was enacted in 1953, little was known about hard minerals in the continental shelf. Scientists were aware of their existence, but technology was then not generally available for either exploring or mining the seabed for hard mineral deposits. DOI claims jurisdiction under OCSLA to all off- shore areas seaward of the territorial sea over which the United States asserts jurisdiction and control. Since the United States is not a party to the Law of the Sea Convention, the only applicable treaty recognized by DOI as affecting offshore jurisdic- tion is the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf.!* The 1958 Convention authorizes coastal '2Public Law 83-212; 67 Stat. 462, Aug. 7, 1953; 43 U.S.C. 1331- 1356; as amended by Public Law 93-627; 88 Stat. 2126, Jan. 3, 1975; and 95-372; 92 Stat. 629, Sept. 18, 1978. 1330 Code of Federal Regulations, ch. I, Part 250. ‘Convention on the Continental Shelf, in force June 10, 1964, 15 UST 471, TIAS No. 5578, 499 U.N.T-.S. 311. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 29 Before the marine mining industry will invest substantially in commercial pros- pecting in the EEZ, it must have assur- ances that the Federal Government will encourage development and grant access to the private sector to explore and de- velop seabed minerals. State control over the seabed to a depth of 200 meters or beyond ‘‘where the depth of the super- jacent water admits of the exploitation of the nat- ural resources.’’ DOI concludes that the concept of ‘‘exploitability’’ in the 1958 Convention further supports the department’s opinion that the legal continental shelf includes the breadth of the 200- mile Exclusive Economic Zone, regardless of the physical attributes of the submarine area. DOI’s Minerals Management Service most re- cently attempted to lease hard minerals in March 1983, when plans were announced to prepare an environmental impact statement for a proposed lease sale of polymetallic sulfide minerals associ- ated with the Gorda Ridge geological complex.'® Authority for the proposed lease sale was based on Section 8(k) of OCSLA.'° The site of the mineral deposits of the Gorda Ridge is a tectonic spread- ing center and, therefore, is not part of the geo- logical continental shelf. DOI based its authority to lease the area on the definition of the ‘‘legal”’ continental shelf implied in Section 2(a) of OCSLA."” The Gorda Ridge lease sale is yet to be held, but, in March 1987, MMS published proposed rules for prelease prospecting for non-energy marine min- erals.!® The prelease prospecting rules are the first of a three-tier regulatory program proposed by MMS; future rules would cover leasing and post- leasing operations. 15«Scoping Notice to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement,” Federal Register, vol. 48, Mar. 28, 1983, p. 12840. '6Sec. 8(k): ‘“The Secretary is authorized to grant to the qualified persons offering the highest bonuses on a basis of competitive bid- ding leases of any mineral other than oil, gas, and sulfur in any area of the Outer Continental Shelf not then under lease for such mineral upon such royalty, rental, and other terms and conditions as the Sec- retary may prescribe at the time of offering the area for lease.”’ 17Frank K. Richardson, ‘‘Opinion of the Solicitor,’ U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior, May 30, 1985. 18Federal Register, vol. 52, Mar. 26, 1987, p. 9753. Environmental groups and industry represent- atives have questioned DOI’s leasing authority un- der OCSLA, claiming that DOI is misinterpreting the 1958 Convention by delineating the breadth of the continental shelf to include the 200-mile EEZ by using the ‘‘exploitability’’ definition in OCSLA. These groups have asserted that no U.S. agency has statutory authority to grant leases or licenses to recover hard minerals from the seafloor beyond the Outer Continental Shelf, except for NOAA which has authority to license commercial man- ganese nodule mining only. There is no disagree- ment that DOI has authority to lease hard minerals in the Outer Continental Shelf. The controversy extends only to how far that authority extends sea- ward beyond the geological continental shelf. Notwithstanding the legal question of whether DOT has legislative authority to lease in the 200- mile EEZ beyond the geographical limits of the con- tinental shelf, questions remain about the adequacy of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act for ad- ministering an EEZ hard minerals leasing program. Several shortcomings limit OCSLA’s suitability for managing hard minerals in either the Outer Continental Shelf or the EEZ: e DOL is given little congressional guidance for planning, environmental guidelines, inter- governmental coordination, and other admin- istrative details needed for structuring a hard mineral leasing regime under Section 8(k) of OCSLA. e Section 8(k) of the Act is discretionary with the Secretary of the Interior; thus, there are no assurances to the industry that a stable, pre- dictable leasing program will be continued by subsequent administrations. e Bonus bid competitive leasing requirements (money paid to the government before explo- ration or development begins) set forth in Sec- tion 7(k) of OCSLA are not well suited for stimulating exploration and development of seabed hard minerals by the private sector. © The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act does not apply to the territories; therefore, the Minerals Management Service may not have authority to lease in a large area of the EEZ adjacent to the U.S. Territories.’® 19The narrow definition of the term ‘‘State’’ as used in the Sub- (continued on next page) 30 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier An ad hoc working group consisting of represent- atives of the marine minerals industry, environ- mental groups, coastal States, and academicians was formed in 1986 to develop a conceptual frame- work for managing marine minerals in the EEZ. After several meetings, the members reached a con- sensus that the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act was unsuitable for administering a seabed hard minerals exploration and development program, and that new ‘“‘stand-alone’’ legislation is needed to replace the oil- and gas-oriented OCSLA.”° The working group recommended that the authorizing legislation should: 1. use the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Re- sources Act (Public Law 96-283) mining pro- visions and its regime for public participation and multiple-use conflict resolution as a model for new EEZ seabed mining legislation; 2. provide for a comprehensive and systematic research plan including bathymetric charting, mineral reconnaissance, and environmental baseline studies; 3. require wide public dissemination of data but protect confidential information; 4. provide incentives for private industry to col- lect and contribute to the resource informa- tion base; 5. apply legislation to all areas within the U.S. EEZ and the territories consistent with U.S. authority and obligations; and 6. provide for effective Federal/State/local con- sultation. Legislation was introduced in both the 99th and 100th Congresses to establish a regime for explor- ing and developing hard minerals in the EEZ.?! H.R. 1260, The National Seabed Hard Minerals merged Lands Act and incorporated into the Outer Continental Shelf Land Act (Sec. 6[e]) limits the applicability of OCSLA to the waters off ‘‘any State of the Union.’’ This definition contrasts with other laws that specify Congress’ intent to extend their effect to the territo- ries as well. 20Clifton Curtis, President, Oceanic Society, Memorandum, Apr. 1, 1986, to Ann Dore McLaughlin, Under Secretary of the Interior. 21H.R. 1260, National Seabed Hard Minerals Act, 100th Cong., ist sess., Feb. 25, 1987; H.R. 5464, 99th Cong., Sponsor: Lowry et al. Another bill would impose a temporary moratorium on seabed mining in the Gorda Ridge, H.R. 787, Ocean Mineral Resources Development Act, 100th Cong., 1st sess., Jan. 28, 1987, Sponsor: Bosco. Act of 1987, includes many of the suggestions by the ad hoc working group. According to DOI, MMS’s proposed rules for prelease prospecting of marine minerals is a first step toward providing access for private industry to obtain geologic and geophysical information about the EEZ (box 1-C). With the likelihood that development of EEZ minerals will not take place any time soon, the promulgation of acceptable pre- lease prospecting rules under OCSLA may be suffi- cient to allow preliminary prospecting by the in- dustry while Congress formulates and enacts EEZ seabed mining legislation that overcomes the defi- ciencies of OCSLA. Congressional Options Option 1: Enact ‘‘stand-alone’’ legislation for exploring and developing minerals in the U.S. EEZ patterned after the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act. Congressional Action: Enact new legislation. Option 2: Amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act by adding a new title to ap- ply exclusively to marine hard minerals in the EEZ. Congressional Action: Amend the Outer Con- tinental Shelf Lands Act. Option 3: Amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to extend its application to U.S. territories and possessions. Section 8(k) could either be amended to provide guidelines for marine hard mineral leas- ing or be allowed to remain in its present form. The Outer Continental Shelf also might be redefined so as to be identical to the Exclusive Economic Zone. Congressional Action: Amend the Outer Con- tinental Shelf Lands Act. Option 4: Permit the Minerals Management Service to continue to develop a regula- tory system based on its authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, but amend Section 8(k) to provide more specific guidance for administration, planning, and coordination. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ° 31 Box 1-C.—Prelease Prospecting for Marine Mining Minerals in the EEZ: Minerals Management Service Proposed Rules The Minerals Management Service (MMS) published in the Federal Register, Mar. 26, 1987, pp. 9758- 9766, proposed rules for marine minerals prospecting in the EEZ. Prospecting for all minerals except oil, gas, and sulfur would be covered by the proposed rules. Covered activities include operations such as those normally carried out by mineral explorations and university researchers. The Department of the Interior be- lieves that promulgation of prospecting regulations is an important step in ensuring the industry access to the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone for the purpose of mineral exploration. The effect of the proposed regula- tions is far reaching, and would cover ‘‘operations such as those normally carried out by mineral explora- tionists and university researchers.’’ The following provisions are proposed by MMS: e Term of Permit— Two years, with extension for good cause. e Prospecting Plan—An application for a permit must be accompanied by a description of the proposed geological and geophysical activities, including anticipated environmental impacts and appropriate mit- igation measures. Drill holes deeper than 300 feet require additional information. e Reporting—Quarterly reports required with final report to include charts, summary of mineral occur- rences, and identification of environmental hazards. e Environmental—A list of exploration technologies considered environmentally safe are included. The use of explosives, trenching, dredging, and excessive drilling requires special approval. e States—Governors of adjacent States are notified upon application by prospectors, and the States may comment on the application. If an environmental impact statement is required, States may review and comment on the activities. e Information—Proprietary information is to be withheld for 20 years, unless early release is agreed to by the permittee. Governors of adjacent States may have access to proprietary information under specified procedures and restrictions. No special property rights or preferences to a mineral lease are given to a permittee as a consequence of being granted a prospecting permit. The Minerals Management Service has announced intentions to promul- gate leasing and postleasing rules to follow the prospecting regulations. Congressional Action: Amend the Outer Con- interests that fear opening the Outer Continental tinental Shelf Lands Act. Shelf Lands Act up to amendment of Section 8(k) or adding a new EEZ seabed mining title might Option 5: Allow the Minerals Management make the Act vulnerable to amendments affecting Service to continue to develop a regula- the offshore oil and gas resource leasing program. tory system for preleasing, leasing, and postlease management of Outer Conti- nental Shelf hard minerals under the ex- isting provisions of Section 8(k). Should Congress decide not to enact separate EEZ seabed mining legislation through a stand- alone law, or a separate title in the Outer Continen- tal Shelf Lands Act, or amendments to Section 8(k) Congressional Action: No action required. of OCSLA, the Minerals Management Service could continue to promulgate seabed mining leg- islation under the current authority of Section 8(k) Advant d Disadvant Mimteroy (cuegn iri tes of OCSLA. However, leasing authority under Sec- Whether new EEZ mining legislation is incor- tion 8(k) pertains only to the continental shelf ad- porated as a separate title to the Outer Continen- jacent to ‘‘States of the Union,”’ and, therefore, tal Shelf Lands Act or is enacted as a ‘‘stand-alone’”’ the Minerals Management Service probably lacks law would make little difference so far as the effect authority to lease seabed minerals in the EEZ off of the statute is concerned. However, stand-alone Johnston Island and adjacent to the other Pacific legislation might relieve the concerns of oil and gas trust territories and possessions. 32 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier _———— U.S. innovation and engineering know- how applied to developing seabed min- ing technology could place the United States in a pivotal competitive position to exploit a world market . . . for seabed mining equipment. Se ooo Congress also has the option of merely broaden- ing the geographical coverage of the Outer Con- tinental Shelf Lands Act to include the U.S. terri- tories and possessions. Such action, if it applied to the Act in general, would also open these areas to potential oil and gas leasing in the future, although the EEZs of most of the territories and possessions are not known to have oil and gas potential. If Con- gress chose to redefine the Outer Continental Shelf and make it identical to the EEZ, the status of the oil and gas leasing program might be clarified in some areas of legal uncertainty beyond the con- tinental shelf but within the 200-nautical mile zone. Improving the Use of the Nation’s EEZ Data and Information Oceanographic data collected in the course of ex- ploring the EEZ are a national asset. Because of the immense size of the U.S. EEZ, exploration activities are likely to continue for decades. Infor- mation and data may take many forms, may dif- fer in quality, may come from many geographical areas, and may be collected by many agencies and entities. It is important that such data be evaluated, archived, processed, and made available to a wide range of potential users in the future. As the pace of EEZ exploration increases, the ex- isting Federal oceanographic data systems—which are currently taxed near their capacity based on available funding and resources—probably will be unable to adequately manage the load. Even today, in some cases, data must be discarded for lack of storage and handling facilities, and user services are limited. In other cases, Federal agencies some- times do not submit data acquired at public expense to the National Oceanographic Data Center or the National Geophysical Data Center in a timely and systematic manner. Limitations on the national data centers are pri- marily institutional, budgetary, and service-con- nected. Funding for data archiving and dissemina- tion generally has been considered a lower priority by the Federal agencies than data collection. The historical usefulness of oceanographic, environ- mental, and resource information is often over- looked by Federal managers with mission-oriented responsibilities. Consistent policies for transmittal of EEZ-related information to the national data centers are lack- ing in many Federal agencies. However, invento- ries of data collected by the academic community under the auspices of the National Science Foun- dation’s Division of Ocean Sciences are required to be transmitted to the national data centers in a timely manner as a condition of its research grants. The Ocean Science Division’s ocean data policy is an excellent example that other Federal agencies might emulate. But even with more effective policies to ensure transmittal of EEZ information to the national data centers, little improvement in efficiency can be ex- pected unless resources—both equipment and per- sonnel—are upgraded and expanded commensur- ate with the expected increase in the workload. The mere ‘‘storage’’ of data does not fulfill the national need; such information must be retrievable and made available to a wide range of potential users, including Federal agencies, State agencies, acade- mia, industry, and the general public. Improved data services will require additional funds to raise the level of capability and perform- ance of the existing national data centers. Eventu- ally, regional data centers may be required to ade- quately service the public needs; but for the time being the major Federal effort aimed at improving data services probably should be directed at upgrad- ing the performance of the existing centers. Congressional Options Option 1: Direct each Federal agency to estab- lish an EEZ data policy that will ensure the timely and systematic transmittal of oceanographic data to either the National Oceanographic Data Center or the Na- tional Geophysical Data Center, which- ever is appropriate. Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ¢ 33 Congressional Action: a. Amend authorizing legislation for each ap- propriate program and/or Federal agency. b. Direct action through the annual appropri- ations process. c. Enact general legislation that would apply to all Federal agencies collecting EEZ data and information. Option 2: Provide additional funds and direc- tives to the National Oceanographic Data Center and the National Geophysical Data Center to upgrade EEZ data services accord- ing to a plan, to be developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for meeting the future needs of archiving and dis- seminating EEZ data and information. Congressional Action: Issue directive through the annual appropriations process. Option 3: Continue at the current level of funding and continue to permit the Federal agencies to transmit EEZ-related information to the National Oceanograhic Data Center and the National Geophysical Data Center at each agency’s discretion. Congressional Action: No action required. Advantages and Disadvantages Incentives for the agencies and the academic community to place more emphasis on data serv- ices could take several forms. Since improvements in data services are tied to adequate funding, the most expedient approach for Congress would be to direct appropriate agency actions through the annual appropriations process. This option, how- ever, would only be effective for one budget cycle and would have to be repeated annually if an ef- fective long-term data services program were to continue. Amendments to individual agency authorizing legislation, or alternative ‘‘umbrella’’ legislation applicable to all agencies collecting EEZ data and information, would establish continuing programs to improve data services. Long-term plans for meet- ing the expanding EEZ data needs of the future should provide guidelines for improving overall government data services. Providing for the Use of Classified Data National security may require that public dis- semination and use of certain EEZ-related data con- tinue to be restricted. This restriction may result in some hardship and perhaps additional expense to the scientific community as well as the marine minerals industry, but it need not totally lock up that information. There are responsible ways in which classified data can be made available to those needing to use such data for further EEZ explo- ration. Federal personnel, contractors, and academicians in many technical and engineering fields have ac- cess to and routinely use classified information on a daily basis. While maintaining security installa- tions is sometimes unwieldy and expensive, it may be possible to achieve a compromise between the national need for security and the national need for timely and efficient exploration of the EEZ by estab- lishing secure data centers to manage classified EEZ data. Other aspects of EEZ data classification may prove to be more troublesome. The ocean science community may be restricted from publishing some EEZ data or information that would, if unclassi- fied, be freely available in the scientific literature. There are also inconsistencies in U.S. policy regard- ing scientific access of foreign investigators to the U.S. EEZ and the Navy’s access to foreign EEZs to gather hydrographic information that seem at odds with current EEZ data classification policies. Diplomatic questions may arise from these in- consistencies that could result in access restriction for U.S. scientists working in the EEZs of other countries. Congressional Options Option 1: Establish regional classified data centers at major oceanographic institu- tions or at colleges and universities, with access assured for certified scientists and with guidelines established for the use and publication of data sets and bathy- metric information. Congressional Action: Direct the Department of Defense in collaboration with the Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis- 34 © Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier tration to establish regional classified centers under contract with academic institutions for the operation and administration of the centers, or consider Federal operation of such centers. Option 2: Review the current EEZ data clas- sification policies and assess their possi- ble effects on academic research and their possible international impacts on access to other countries’ EEZs by U.S. sci- entists. Congressional Action: Hold oversight hear- ing on Navy’s classification policies and pro- cedures. Option 3: Continue to allow the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- tion and the Navy to seek a solution to the EEZ data classification problem. Congressional Action: No legislative action re- quired. Advantages and Disadvantages The cost of establishing and operating regional classified data centers either at academic institu- tions or at Federal centers is likely to be significant. There also may be policies at some of the academic institutions that prohibit the location of classified data centers at their facilities. Congress may choose to learn more about the details of the need for classification of EEZ data and the impact that classification restrictions might have on scientific activities and commercial explo- ration before it takes further action. Classified hear- ings may be needed to fully evaluate the security implications of EEZ data. Without either legislative or oversight activities by Congress, the uncertainties regarding the future availability of classified data may continue for some time until mutual agreement is reached between the Navy and the National Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Administration. Assisting the States in Preparing for Future Seabed Mining The first major U.S. efforts to commercially ex- ploit marine minerals are likely to occur in State waters. Most coastal States do not currently have statutes suitable for administering a marine min- erals exploration and development program. Many States do not separate onshore from offshore de- velopment, providing only a single administrative process for all mineral resources. Four of the States —California, Oregon, Texas, and Washington— separate the leasing of oil and gas from other min- erals, but most do not. Oregon has completed surveys of its coastal waters, and Florida, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Virginia are among the States where offshore surveys are con- tinuing. These survey programs are often cooper- ative efforts between the States, the U.S. Geologi- cal Survey, and the Minerals Management Service. State-Federal task forces formed through the ini- tiatives of the Department of the Interior are as- sisting the coastal States in coordinating their ef- forts with marine minerals exploration currently taking place in the EEZ. State-Federal task forces have been formed in Hawaii (cobalt-manganese crusts), Oregon and California (polymetallic sul- fides in the Gorda Ridge), North Carolina (phos- phorites), Georgia (heavy mineral sands), and the Gulf States (sand, gravel, and heavy minerals off Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas). The Federal Government could provide valuable technical assistance to the States in preparing for possible exploration and development of marine minerals in nearshore State waters. The Federal- State task forces are currently coordinating the States’ and DOI’s activities in the EEZ, but fur- ther assistance may be needed in formulating State legislation for leasing, permitting, or licensing ma- rine minerals activities in the States’ territorial seas. Such legislative initiatives must originate with the individual States, but the Federal Government could provide assistance through existing programs Ch. 1—Summary, Issues, and Options ° 35 such as those authorized by the Coastal Zone Man- Option 3: Provide technical assistance and agement Act. Private organizations, such as the funds to the coastal States to aid in for- Coastal States Organization or the National Gover- mulating marine minerals legislation nors Association, could also serve as a catalyst and through seabed minng legislation enacted guide to States for developing legislative concepts as a ‘‘stand-alone’’ statute, amendments or model seabed mining legislation. to Section 8(k) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, or through a new title Congressional Options in the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Option 1: Direct the National Oceanic and et Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Congressional Action: Enact stand-alone leg- Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage- islation or amend the Outer Continental ment to provide technical assistance and Shelf Lands Act. financial support to coastal States’ coastal zone management programs to formulate State marine minerals management legis- lation through the Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act, Section 309 grants program. Option 4: Rely on the individual initiative of the coastal States to undertake a legisla- tive effort to formulate marine minerals legislation. : : Seite Cc ional Action: N | ired. Congressional Action: Issue directive through Se haere ction Neracdon teguized the annual appropriations process. dvartarcetandelicatyantaees Option 2: Direct the Minerals Management Service to provide technical assistance to the States to aid in formulating marine minerals legislation that could provide an interface between marine minerals activ- ities in the EEZ adjacent to the States’ territorial seas. Directives to agencies through the annual ap- propriations process are often followed to the minimal extent possible and only apply to the expenditure of funds during the specific fiscal year. Authorizing legislation is probably needed to ensure a continuing, long-term effort. Congressional Action: Issue directive through the annual appropriations process. ide! Pod REL) We TE Pala eee BI a firhey ae ee we ee. Ben) 8 4) hey Aen ord REA abn A A dy it “a a gt ad ng { thu F Ae 0) t LE ns f 2 hee. 2 i fe 4 ; Hat YRS ba Rs 3 AS “) ~ t i" \ i Reeicy eee eee fs ed > eae ae 1h i fi my ‘ Cay r oe , 4 ¥ ‘ ae ; cages ; wa eta bir de Ohi LWaely TES oe ie nee at p } ad ye ehiy hy ere th hy “4 s fi = my im ug : Chapter 2 Resource Assessments and Expectations CONTENTS Page World Outlook for Seabed Minerals....... 39 General Geologic Framework............. 41 AtlantichNe clone ais: see ee Parnes se: 43 SandeandsGravelecmccturet uterine 45 PlacermDEpositsiy 5 te ee resi ears 48 Bhosphoritey Depositspe serie soe eae D2 Manganese Nodules and Pavements ..... 53 Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands... 54 Sandeancd Gravel seem: a see ie 54 BlacerpDepositsts sociariaess ie ieee ieee 55 GultiiotiViexicovRerion mistress 55 Sanduand! Gravels moses eee tee 55 PlacersDepositsccyc eee oes oe 56 Phosphonte Deposits: ve. cee ae 56 BaciitowResion's . Vacs fee oe 56 SandvandsGravele piss nee ewe Di Precious Metalsieis cy isa ee 58 Black Sand—Chromite Deposits ........ 58 @ither Heavy; Minerals) 955. je: 60 Phosphorte Deposits: 62.2 4.55: 5)... 61 Polymetallic Sulfide Deposits ........... 61 Alaskane rio We cart Vote sie eG 65 Saudrand (Gravel. 3) 48.3 67 Precious) Metals s.05 As 67 @theu: Heavy Munenalse sos 69 Hawaii Region and U.S. Trust AN ELTILONIES eiesen tthe ee ne a ee 69 Cobalt-Ferromanganese Crusts ......... 70 ManganesesINodulesi.) 47.6 on 75 Box Box Page 2-A. Mineral Resources and Reserves ..... 40 Figures Figure No. Page 2-1. Idealized Physiography of a Continental Margin and Some Common Margin Types ............ 42 2-2. Sedimentary Basins in the EEZ...... 44 2-3. Sand and Gravel Deposits Along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific Coasts.... 46 2-4. Plan and Section Views of Shoals Off Ocean City, Maryland)..3. 7.5.75... 47 2-5. Atlantic EEZ Heavy Minerals ....... 51 2-6. Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific EBEZS. (22S cineienes cane alee tage teat ate 54 2-7. Formation of Marine Polymetallic Sulfide Depositsays ctag ae ees: 62 Figure No. 2-8. Locations of Mineral Deposits Table No. 2-1. 2-2. 2-6. 2-7. 2-8. Relative to Physiographic Features ... 66 . Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Alaskan EEZ . Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Hawatian) BEZo. eee 70 . Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts on the Flanks of Seamounts and Voleanic Islands 25.4. 2e eee 71 . EEZs of U.S. Insular and Trust Territories in the Pacific............ 73 . Potential Hard Mineral Resources of U.S. Insular Territories South of Hawatl) 003. 75 . Potential Hard Mineral Resources of U.S. Insular Territories West of Tables Association of Potential Mineral Resources With Types of Plate Boundaries Areas Surveyed and Estimated Offshore Sand Resources of the United States’. 48 . Criteria Used in the Assessment of Placer Minerals ......... “Ses SS 50 . Estimates of Sand and Gravel Resources Within the U.S. Exclusive Keonomic Zone «22s. ss eee 56 . Estimates of Typical Grades of Contained Metals for Seafloor Massive Sulfide Deposits, Compared With Typical Ore From Ophiolite Massive Sulfide Deposits and Deep-Sea Manganese) Nodules. <3. 303s 63 Average Chemical Composition for Various Elements of Crusts From <8,200 Feet Water Depth From the EEZ of the United States and Other Pacific Nations })).) 050s. 8 ee 72 Resource Potential of Cobalt, Nickel, Manganese, and Platinum in Crusts of U.S. Trust and Affiliated Territories .. 74 Estimated Resource Potential of Crusts Within the EEZ of Hawaii and U.S. Trust and Affiliated Territories ....... 75 Chapter 2 Resource Assessments and Expectations WORLD OUTLOOK FOR SEABED MINERALS Ever since the recovery of rock-like nodules from the deep ocean by the research vessel H.M.S. Challenger during its epic voyage in 1873, there has been persistent curiosity about seabed minerals. It was not until after World War II that the black, potato-sized nodules like those found by the Challenger became more than a scientific oddity. As metals prices climbed in response to increased demand during the post-war economic boom, com- mercial attention turned to the cobalt-, manganese-, nickel-, and copper-rich nodules that litter the seafloor of the Pacific Ocean and elsewhere. Also, as the Nation’s interest in science peaked in the 1960s, oceanographers, profiting from technological achievements in ocean sensors and shipboard equip- ment developed for the military, expanded ocean research and exploration. The secrets of the seabed began to be unlocked. Even before the Challenger discovery of man- ganese nodules, beach sands at the surf’s edge were mined for gold and precious metals at some loca- tions in the world (box 2-A). There are reports that lead and zinc were mined from nearshore subsea areas in ancient Greece at Laurium and that tin and copper were mined in Cornwall.! Coal and am- ber were mined in or under the sea in Europe as early as 1860. Since then, sand, gravel, shells, lime, precious coral, and marine placer minerals (e.g. titanium sands, tin sands, zirconium, monazite, staurolite, gold, platinum, gemstones, and magne- tite) have been recovered commercially. Barite has been recovered by subsea quarrying. Ironically, deep-sea manganese nodules, the seabed resource that has drawn the most present-day commercial interest and considerable private research and de- velopment investment, have not yet been recovered commercially. Rich metalliferous muds in the Red Sea have been mined experimentally and are con- sidered to be ripe for commercial development should favorable economic conditions develop. ‘M.J. Cruickshank and W. Siapno, ‘‘Marine Minerals—An Up- date and Introduction,’’ Marine Technology Society Journal, vol. 19, 1985, pp. 3-5. Recent discoveries of massive polymetallic sul- fides formed at seafloor spreading zones where su- perheated, mineral-rich saltwater escapes from the Earth’s crust have attracted scientific interest and some speculation about their future commercial po- tential. These deposits contain copper, zinc, iron, lead, and trace amounts of numerous minerals. Similar deposits of ancient origin occur in Cyprus, Turkey, and Canada, suggesting that more knowl- edge about seabed mineralization processes could contribute to a better understanding of massive sul- fide deposits onshore. Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, found on the slopes of seamounts, have also begun to receive attention. Beach placers and similar onshore deposits are important sources of several mineral commodities elsewhere in the world. Marine placer deposits of similar composition often lay immediately offshore. Among the most valuable marine placers, based on the value of material recovered thus far, are the cas- siterite (source of tin) deposits off Burma, Thai- land, Malaysia, and Indonesia. The so-called “‘light heavy minerals’’—titanium minerals, monazite, and zircon—are found extensively along the coasts of Brazil, Mauritania, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Mozambique, Madagascar, India, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, China, and the southwestern and eastern coasts of Australia. Although Australia has extensively mined ‘‘black’’ titaneous beach sands along its coasts, off- shore mining of these sands has not proven eco- nomical.? Titaniferous magnetite, an iron-rich titanium mineral, has been mined off the south- ern coast of Japan’s Kyushu Island.’ Similar mag- netite deposits exist off New Zealand and the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Chromite placers are extensive on beaches and in the near offshore of Indonesia, the Philippines, and New Caledonia. Chromite- 7. Morley, Black Sands: A History of the Mineral Sand Mining Industry in Eastern Australia (St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press, 1981), p. 278. 3]. Mero, The Mineral Resources of the Sea (New York, NY: El- sevier Publishing Co., 1965), p. 16. 39 40 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Box 2-A.—Mineral Resources and Reserves A general classification for describing the status of mineral occurrences was developed by the U.S. Geo- logical Survey and the U.S. Bureau of Mines in 1976. The so-called ‘“McKelvey Box’’ named after the then- director of the USGS, Vincent McKelvey, further simplified the understanding of the economic relationships of the mineral-resource classification system: Cumulative production Demonstrated ECONOMIC Reserves nd {0} °?) oO a MARGIN- $ ALLY Marginal reserves 9 ECONOMIC fc — |— — IDENTIFIED RESOURCES UNDISCOVERED RESOURCES Inferred Indicated Inferred marginal reserves Demonstrated 5 ee é ECONOMIC} subeconomic resources pee anrcee Probability range (or) Hypothetical Speculative The system is based on the judgmental determination of present or anticipated future value of the minerals in place according to the opinions of experts. Below are the economic definitions on which the resource- classification system 1s based: e Resource: Naturally occurring mineral of a form and amount that economic extraction of a commodity is potentially feasible. ® Identified Resource: Resources whose location and characteristics are known or reliably estimated. e Demonstrated Resource: Resources whose location and characteristics have been measured directly with some certainty (measured) or estimated with less certainty (indicated). © Inferred Resource: Resources estimated from assumptions and evidence that minerals may occur be- yond where resources have been measured or located. © Reserve Base: Part of an identified resource that meets the economic, chemical and physical require- ments that would allow it to be mined, including that which is estimated from geological knowledge (inferred reserve base). © Reserves: Part of the reserve base that could be economically extracted at the time of determination. © Marginal Reserves: Part of the reserve base that at the time of determination borders on being eco- nomically producible. ® Undiscovered Resources: Resources whose existence is only postulated. bearing beach sands were mined along the south- ern coast of Oregon during World War II with gov- ernment support. Gold has been mined from many beach placers along the west coast of the United States and else- where in the world. Marine placers of potentially minable gold are located in several nearshore Alaskan areas in the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska, and adjacent to southeastern Alaska. A commer- cial gold dredge mining operation was begun by Inspiration Resources near Nome in 1986, but a number of nearshore gold operations in the Nome area have been attempted and abandoned in the Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 41 past. Diamonds have been recovered from near- shore areas in Namibia, Republic of South Africa, and Brazil. The recovery of sand and gravel from offshore far exceeds the extent of mining of other marine minerals.* In the United States, offshore sand and *J.M. Broadus, ‘‘Seabed Materials,’’ Science, vol. 235, Feb. 20, 1987, pp. 853-860. Also see M. Baram, D. Rice, and W. Lee, Ma- rine Mining of the Continental Shelf (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1978), p. 301. gravel recovery is primarily limited to State waters, mostly in New Jersey, New York, Florida, Mis- sissippi, and California. Japan and the European countries have depended more on marine sand and gravel than has the United States because of limited land resources. Special uses can be made of ma- rine sand and gravel deposits in the Alaskan and Canadian Beaufort Sea—the offshore oil and gas industry uses such material for gravel islands and gravel pads for drilling. GENERAL GEOLOGIC FRAMEWORK The potential for the formation of economic mineral deposits within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the United States is determined by the geologic history, geomorphology, and environ- ment of its continental margins and insular areas. Continental margins are a relatively small portion of the Earth’s total surface area, yet they are of great geological importance and of tremendous linear ex- tent. In broad relief, the Earth’s surface consists of two great topographic surfaces: one essentially at sea level—the continental masses of the world, including the submerged shelf areas—and the other at nearly 16,000 feet below sea level—representing the deep ocean basins. The boundaries between these two surfaces are the continental margins. Continental margins can be divided into separate provinces: the continental shelf, continental slope, and continental rise (see figure 2-1). Continental margins represent active zones where geologic conditions change. These changes are driven by tectonic activity within the Earth’s crust and by chemical and physical activity on the surface of the Earth. Tectonic processes such as vol- canism and faulting dynamically alter the seafloor, geochemical processes occur as seawater interacts with the rocks and sediments on the seafloor, and sedimentary processes control the material depos- ited on or eroded from the seafloor. All of these processes contribute to the formation of offshore mineral deposits. Advanced marine research technologies devel- oped since World War II and the refinement and acceptance of the plate-tectonics theory have cre- ated a greater understanding of the dynamics of continental margins and mineral formation. Ac- cording to the plate-tectonics model, the Earth’s outer shell is made up of gigantic plates of continen- tal lithosphere (crust and upper mantle) and/or oceanic lithosphere. These plates are in slow but constant motion relative to each other. Plates col- lide, override, slide past each other along transform faults, or pull apart along rift zones where new ma- terial from the Earth’s mantle upwells and is added to the crust above. Seafloor spreading centers are divergent plate boundaries where new oceanic crust is forming. As plates move apart, the leading edge moves against another plate forming either a convergent plate boundary or slipping along it in a transform plate boundary. Depending on whether the leading edge is oceanic or continental lithosphere, this process may result in the building of a mountain range (e.g., the Cascade Mountains) or an oceanic island arc (e.g., the Aleutian Islands) or, if the plates are slipping past one another, a transform fault zone (e.g., the San Andreas fault zone). Four types of continental margins border the United States: active collision, trailing edge, ex- tensional transform, and continental sea. Where collisions occur between oceanic plates and plates containing continental land masses, the thinner oceanic plate will be overridden by the thicker, less dense continental plate. The zone along which one plate overrides another is called a subduction zone and frequently is manifested by an oceanic trench. Coastal volcanic mountain ranges, volcanic is- land arcs, and frequent earthquake activity are re- lated to subduction zones. This type of active con- tinental margin borders most of the Pacific Ocean and the U.S. EEZ adjacent to the Aleutian chain 42 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-1.—Idealized Physiography of a Continental Margin and Some Common Margin Types ye Continental slope South Pacific: (volcanic arcs, trenches, and carbonate reefs) SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; R.W. Rowland, M.R. Goud, and B.A. McGregor, “The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone—A Summary of its Geology, Exploration, and Resource Potential,” U.S. Geologi- cal Survey Circular 912, 1983. and the west coast (figure 2-1). These regions have relatively narrow continental shelves and their on- shore geology is dominated by igneous intrusives and volcanic rocks. ‘These rocks supply the thin ve- neer of sediment overlying the continental crust of the shelf. Further offshore, the Pacific coast EEZ extends beyond the shelf, slope, and rise to the depths underlain by oceanic crust. In the Pacific northwest, these depths encompass a region of seafloor spreading where new oceanic crust is form- ing. This region includes the Gorda Ridge and pos- sibly part of the Juan de Fuca Ridge, which are located within the U.S. EEZ off California, Ore- gon, and Washington. The trailing edge of a continent has a passive margin because it lacks significant volcanic and seis- mic activity. Passive margins are located within crustal plates at the transition between oceanic and continental crust. These margins formed at diver- gent plate boundaries in the past. Over millions of years, subsidence in these margin areas has allowed thick deposits of sediment to accumulate. The At- lantic coast of the United States is an example of a trailing edge passive margin. This type of coast is typified by broad continental shelves that extend into deep water without a bordering trench. Coastal plains are wide and low-lying with major drainage systems. The greatest potential for the formation of recoverable ore deposits on passive margins re- sults from sedimentary processes rather than recent magmatic or hydrothermal activity. The Gulf of Mexico represents another type of coast that develops along the shores of a continen- tal sea. These passive margins also typically have a wide continental shelf and thick sedimentary de- posits. Deltas commonly develop off major rivers because the sea is relatively shallow, is smaller than the major oceans, and has lower wave energy than the open oceans. Plate edges are not the only regions of volcanic activity. Mid-plate volcanoes form in regions over- lying ‘‘hot spots’’ or areas of high thermal activ- ity. As plates move relative to mantle ‘‘hot spots,”’ chains of volcanic islands and seamounts are formed Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 43 Table 2-1.—Association of Potential Mineral Resources With Types of Plate Boundaries Type of plate boundary/Potential mineral resources Divergent: e Oceanic ridges —Metalliferous sediments (copper, iron, manganese, lead, zinc, barium, cobalt, silver, gold; e.g., Atlantis II Deep of Red Sea) —Stratiform manganese and iron ixodes and hydroxides and iron silicates (e.g., sites on Mid- Atlantic Ridge and Galapagos Spreading Center) —Polymetallic massive sulfides (copper, iron, zinc, silver, gold, e.g., sites on East-Pacific Rise and Galapagos Spreading Center) —Polymetallic stockwork sulfides (copper, iron, zinc, silver, gold; e.g., sites on Mid-Atlantic Ridge, Carlsberg Ridge, Costa Rica Rift) —Other polymetallic sulfides in disseminated or segregated form (copper, nickel, platinum group metals) —Asbestos —Chromite Convergent: e Offshore —Upthrust sections of oceanic crust containing types of mineral resources formed at divergent plate boundaries (see above) —Tin, uranium, porphyry copper and possible gold mineralization in granitic rocks Convergent: e Onshore —Porphyry deposits (copper, iron, molybdenum, tin, zinc, silver, gold; e.g., deposits at sites in Andes mountains) —Polymetallic massive sulfides (copper, iron, lead, zinc, silver, gold, barium; e.g., Kuroko deposits of Japan) Transform: e Offshore —Mineral resources similar to those formed at divergent plate boundaries (oceanic ridges) may occur at offshore transform plate boundaries; e.g., sites on Mid-Atlantic Ridge and Carlsberg Ridge) SOURCE: Peter A. Rona, “Potential Mineral and Energy Resources at Submerged Plate Boundaries,’ MTS Journal, vol. 19, No. 4, 1985, pp. 18-25, such as the Hawaiian Islands. These sites may also have significant potential for future recovery of mineral deposits. The theory of plate tectonics has led to the rec- ognition that many economically important types of mineral deposits are associated with either pres- ent or former plate boundaries. Each type of plate boundary—divergent, convergent, or transform— is not only characterized by a distinct kind of in- teraction, but each is also associated with distinct types of mineral resources (table 2-1). Knowledge of the origin and evolution of a margin can serve as a general guide to evaluating the potential for locating certain types of mineral deposits. ATLANTIC REGION When the Atlantic Ocean began to form between Africa and North America around 200 million years ago, it was a narrow, shallow sea with much evap- oration. The continental basement rock which formed the edge of the rift zone was block-faulted and the down-dropped blocks were covered with layers of salt and, as the ocean basin widened, with thick deposits of sediment. A number of sedimen- tary basins were formed in the Atlantic region along the U.S. east coast (figure 2-2). Very deep sedi- ments are reported to have accumulated in the Bal- timore Canyon Trough. In addition, a great wedge of sediment is found on the continental slope and rise. In places, due to the weight of the overlying sediment and density differential, salt has flowed upward to form diapirs or salt domes and is avail- able as a mineral resource. In addition, sulfur is commonly associated with salt domes in the cap rock on the top and flanks of the domes. Both salt and sulfur are mined from salt domes (often by so- 44 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-2.—Sedimentary Basins in the EEZ G 500 0 —__Wg) ——- =—— 200 nautical mile limit &D Areas of potential leasing Oregon- B Juan De Fuca- Gorda oe NN Ay ‘ Northern California Monterey % Deep Sea Fan Southern California Borderland Western Eastern Gulf Gulf 0 500 1000 1500 2000 km 500 1000 miles Georges Bank ¢ Baltimore Canyon Trough Southeast Atlantic Sedimentary Basins \ Puerto Rico- Blake Virgin Islands 1000 miles Several basins formed in the EEZ in which great amounts of sediment have accumulated. While of primary interest for their potential to contain hydrocarbons, salt and sulfur are also potentially recoverable from sedimentary basins in the Atlantic and Gulf regions. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Intbrior, “Symposium Proceedings—A National Pro- gram for the Assessment and Development of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 45 lution mining) and, thus, represent potentially re- coverable mineral commodities from offshore de- posits, although at present they would not be likely prospects in the Atlantic region. While they have potential for oil and gas forma- tion and entrapment, the bulk of these sedimen- tary rocks are not likely to be good prospects for hard minerals recovery because of their depth of burial. Exceptions could occur in very favorable cir- cumstances where a sufficiently high-grade deposit might be found near the surface in less than 300 feet of water or where it could be dissolved and ex- tracted through a borehole. Better prospects, par- ticularly for locating potentially economic and mineable placer deposits, would be in the overly- ing Pleistocene and surficial sand and gravel. The igneous and metamorphic basement rocks of the continental shelf, although possible sites of mineral deposits, would be extremely unlikely pros- pects for economic recovery because of their depth of burial. The oceanic crust that formed under what is now the slope and rise also probably contains ac- cumulations of potential ore minerals, but these too would not be accessible. The best possibility for lo- cating metallic minerals deposits in bedrock in the Atlantic EEZ probably would be in the continen- tal shelf off the coast of Maine where the sediments are thinner or absent and the regional geology is favorable. There are metallic mineral deposits in the region and base-metal sulfide deposits are mined in Canada’s New Brunswick. One other area that may be of interest is the Blake Plateau located about 60 miles off the coasts of Florida and Georgia. It extends about 500 miles from north to south and is approximately 200 miles wide at its widest part, covering an area of about 100,000 square miles. The Blake Plateau is thought to be a mass of continental crust that was an ex- tension of North America left behind during rift- ing. There is some expectation that microcontinents such as the Blake Plateau might be more mineral- ized than parent continents or the general ocean- floor, and, because they have received little sedi- ment, their bedrock mineral deposits should be more accessible.® °K.O. Emery and B. J. Skinner, ‘‘Mineral Deposits of the Deep- Ocean Floor,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 1 (1977), No. 1/2, pp. 1-71. Sand and Gravel Sand and gravel are high-volume but relatively low-cost commodities, which are largely used as ag- gregate in the construction industry. Beach nourish- ment and erosion control is another common use of sand. Along the Atlantic coast most sand and gravel is mined from sources onshore except for a minor amount in the New York City area. For an offshore deposit to be economic, extraction and transportation costs must be kept to a minimum. Hence, although the EEZ extends 200 nautical miles seaward, the maximum practical limit for sand and gravel resource assessments would be the outer edge of the continental shelf. However, the economics of current dredging technology neces- sitate relatively shallow water, generally not greater than 130 feet, and general proximity to areas of high consumption. While these factors would further limit prospective areas to the inner continental shelf regions, they could potentially include almost the entire nearshore region from Miami to Boston. Sand and gravel are terms used for different size classifications of unconsolidated sedimentary ma- terial composed of numerous rock types. The ma- jor constituent of sand is quartz, although other minerals and rock fragments are present. Gravel, because of its larger size, usually consists of multi- ple-grained rock fragments. Sand is generally de- fined as material that passes through a No. 4 mesh (0.187-inch) U.S. Standard sieve and is retained on a No. 200 mesh (0.0029-inch) U.S. Standard sieve. Gravel is material in the range of 0.187 to 3 inches in diameter. Because most uses for sand and gravel specify grain size, shape, type and uniformity of material, maximum clay content, and other characteristics, the attractiveness of a deposit can depend on how closely it matches particular needs in order to min- imize additional processing. Thus the sorting and uniformity of an offshore deposit also will be de- terminants in its potential utilization. The Atlantic continental shelf varies in width from over 125 miles in the north to less than 2 miles off southern Florida. The depth of water at the outer edge of the shelf varies from 65 feet off the Florida Keys to more than 525 feet on Georges Bank and the Scotian Shelf. A combination of glacial, out- wash, subaerial, and marine processes have deter- 46 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-3.—Sand and Gravel Deposits Along the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific Coasts Central } California Seamounts Southern California Borderland Guaymas Basin East Pacific Rise ——»," \ Ny Explanation Known Likely occurrence occurrence @ 1 Sand and gravel Blake Plateau o 1000 Miles = ee eee Significant sand and gravel deposits lie on the continental shelf near urban coastal areas. As local onshore supplies of con- struction aggregate become exhausted, offshore deposits become more attractive. Sand is also needed for beach replenish- ment and erosion control. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; S. Jeffress Williams, ‘“‘Sand and Gravel—An Enormous Offshore Resource Within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone," manuscript prepared for U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin on commodity geology research, edited by John DeYoung, Jr. mined the general characteristics and distribution of the sand and gravel resources on the shelf. The northern part of the Atlantic shelf as far south as Long Island was covered by glaciers dur- ing the Pleistocene Ice Age. At least four major epi- sodes of glaciation occurred. Glacial deposition and erosion have directly affected the location of sand and gravel deposits in this region. Glacial till and glaciofluvial outwash sand and gravel deposits cover much of the shelf ranging in thickness from over 300 feet to places where bedrock is exposed at the surface. The subsequent raising of sea level has al- lowed marine processes to rework and redistribute sediment on the shelf. Major concentrations of gravel in this region are located on hummocks and ridges in the vicinity of Jeffrey's Bank in the Gulf of Maine and off Massachusetts on Stellwagen Bank and in western Massachusetts Bay. Concentrations of sand are found off Portland, Maine, in the northwestern Gulf of Maine and in Cape Cod Bay northward along the coast through western Massachusetts Bay to Cape Ann (figure 2- 3). Large accumulations of sand also occur along the south coast of Long Island and in scattered areas of Long Island Sound. Large sand ridges on Georges Bank and Nantucket Shoals are also an impressive Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 47 Figure 2-4.—Plan and Section Views of Shoals Off Ocean City, Maryland te ny, CITY MARYLAND) MODERN SHELF |-HOLOCEN ra Ea COASTAL (From Field and Ova 6) Several drowned barrier beach shoals off the Delmarva Peninsula are potential sources of sand and possibly heavy mineral placers. SOURCE: S. Jeffress Williams, U.S. Geological Survey. potential resource of medium to coarse sand. These ridges range in height from 40 to 65 feet and in width from 1 to 2 miles, with lengths up to 12 miles. The ridge tops are often at water depths of less than 30 feet, and a single ridge could contain on the or- der of 650 million cubic yards of sand. South of Long Island through the mid-Atlantic region, the shelf area was not directly affected by glacial scouring and deposition, but the indirect ef- fects are extensive. During the low stands of sea level, the shelf became an extension of the coastal plain through which the major rivers cut valleys and transported sediment. The alternating periods of glacial advance and marine transgression re- worked the sediments on the shelf, yet a number of inherited features remain, including filled chan- nels, relict beach ridges, and inner shelf shoals. Fea- tures such as these are particularly common off New Jersey and the Delmarva Peninsula and are poten- tial sources of sand and possibly gravel (figure 2- 4). Seismic profiles and cores indicate that the majority of these shoals consist of medium to coarse sand similar to onshore beaches. Geologic evidence suggests that most of the shoals probably formed in the nearshore zone by coastal hydraulic proc- esses reworking existing sand bodies, such as relict deltas and ebb-tide shoals.° Some of the shoals may also represent old barrier islands and spits that were drowned and left offshore by the current marine transgression. Typical shoals in this region are on the order of 30 to 40 feet high, are hundreds of feet wide, and extend for tens of miles. South of Long Island, gravel is much less common and found only where ancestral river channels and deltas are ex- posed on the surface and reworked by moving processes. The southern Atlantic shelf from North Caro- lina to the tip of Florida was even further removed from the effects of glaciation and also from large volumes of fluvial sediment. The shelf is more thinly covered with surficial sand, and outcrops of bed- rock are common. Furthermore, unlike the mid- dle Atlantic region, the southern shelf is not cut by river channels and submarine canyons. Sand re- sources in this region are described as discontinuous sheets or sandy shoals with the carbonate content (consisting of shell and coral fragments, limestone grains, and oolites) increasing to the south. Although there is more information on the At- lantic EEZ than on other portions of the U.S. EEZ, estimates of sand and gravel resources on the At- lantic continental shelf are limited by a paucity of data. Resource estimates have been made using assumptions of uniform distribution and average thickness of sediment but these are rough approx- imations at best since the assumptions are known to be overly simplistic. A number of specific areas have been cored and studied in sufficient detail by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to make local resource estimates.” Resource assessments of spe- cific sand deposits on the Atlantic shelf in water S.J. Williams, ‘‘Sand and Gravel Deposits Within the U.S. Ex- clusive Economic Zone: Resource Assessment and Uses,’’ Proceed- ings of the 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 5-8, 1986, pp. 377-386. 7D.B. Duane and W.L. Stubblefield, ‘‘Sand and Gravel Resources, U.S. Continental Shelf,’’ Geology of North America: Atlantic Re- gion, U.S., Ch. XI-C, Geological Society of America, Decade of North American Geology (in press). 48 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 2-2.—Areas Surveyed and Estimated Offshore Sand Resources of the United States Geographic area Seismic miles Area surveyed Sand volume New England: Mame ss ns ctapare Siscagenenaces toc ueiles daessaeiar cvausteteetatierers Massachusetts (Boston).................048- Rhoderlslande es eccrine cieec Connecticut (Long Island Sound)............ A reaitotalsicircrtenrtn tens arenas rane ters 1,900 Southshore Long Island: Gardiners-Napeague Bays................... Montauk to Moriches Inlet ................. Moriches to Fire Island Inlet................ Fire Island to East Rockaway Inlet .......... Rockaway ssicscry stervacrets scnuevemeiceesetdver tienettse Detcaly INGEWOEILY aauane osoUD ood et ome oncbaoe one 955 New Jersey: Sandy: HOOK gars ces csctateecen scepecersdouseen-Weaevavenennie vodsrede 255 Manasquany-crumciocnrrsrersuterstentioiscccicr sundries canteen 86 Balne gate ira nttertac aerators epeterehetecteaineys 200 Bittle Q Qui Cetera ens romalns otetdc 389 Gapel May. tai 2 Sites Serene ace ee ae PORE sion 760 Areaitotals ais taicicrcscicyne intone cia reteusle eer satus 1,660 Virginia: Nortolke:., siteccpotaesaisises- orton aia ninenc de eopenc eaves eres 260 Del marvaiiesecscitcotsraet sve egev oan ayeesieuemeg mene there cyaterseaelens 435 NorthiiGarolima tyr csr cysteyecsoiteeus catyer sake ose uence 734 Florida: Northern: Fernandina—Cape Canaveral ............. 1,328 Southern: Cape! Canaverialllic.cchls.sjsyorsse chewed cceuspeneievercuene 356 Cape Canaveral—Palm Beach ............ 611 Palm Beach—Miami.............-......-- 176 INGEMDOICICE Sa Go oine no none oma ees bold pete 2,471 California: Newpont—PtiDumeiermcemryacrteraeieenerrsitrar 360 Pt. Dume—Santa Barbara .................. 145 ‘Areattotals ease aie ccn cleterstereto reise eneamneress 505 Lake WT UI Br occtoraeckn Pe ciceicneeriae in cicihaleccad ceeen baceercma lene tigated Unknown Great Lakes: [Siler atrbioeio eto ca oe rid chen ooaenaa tie Rao tees cto Unknown Granditotalsteeeimeccomemecnce cncaecinmenes 8,920 Cores (mile?) (10° cubic yards) 10 123 175 57 25 141 50 130 280 260 531 100 162 160 1,912 350 2,404 125 1,359 50 1,031 122 785 6,868 10 50 1,000 11 25 60 32 75 448 38 120 180 107 340 1,880 198 610 3,568 57 180 20 78 310 225 112 950 218 197 1,650 295 91 350 2,000 72 450 92 31 141 581 391 2,591 2,673 69 140 491 34 90 90 103 230 599 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown 1,341 7,266 15,011 SOURCES: Published and unpublished reports of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering Research Center; David B. Duane, “Sedimentation and Ocean Engineering: Placer Mineral Resources,” Marine Sediment Transport and Environmental Management, D.J. Stanley and D.J.P. Swift (eds.) (New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1976), p. 550. depth of 130 feet or less are included in table 2-2. A total of over 15 billion cubic yards of commer- cial quality sand are identified in the table, and it is fair to say that the potential for additional amounts is large. Since the current annual U.S. consumption of sand and gravel is about 1,050 mil- lion cubic yards, these resources would clearly be ample to meet the needs of the east coast for the foreseeable future. Placer Deposits Offshore placer deposits are concentrations of heavy detrital minerals that are resistant to the chemical and physical processes of weathering. Placer deposits are usually associated with sand and gravel as they are concentrated by the same flu- vial and marine processes that form gravel bars, sand banks, and other surficial features. However, Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 49 because they have different hydraulic behavior than less dense materials they can become concentrated into mineable deposits. In addition to hydraulic behavior, a number of other factors influence the distribution and char- acter of placer deposits on the continental shelf and coastal areas. These factors include sources of the minerals, mechanisms for their erosion and trans- port, and processes of concentration and preserva- tion of the deposits. While placer minerals can be derived from pre- viously formed, consolidated, or unconsolidated sedimentary deposits, their primary source is from igneous and metamorphic rocks. Of these rocks, those that had originally been enriched in heavy minerals and were present in sufficiently large volumes would provide a richer source of material for forming valuable placer deposits. For example, chromite and platinum-group metals occur in ultra- mafic rocks such as dunite and peridotite, and the proximity of such rocks to the coast would enhance the possibility of finding chromite or platinum placers. While small podiform peridotite deposits are found from northern Vermont to Georgia, ultramafic rocks are not overly common in the At- lantic coastal region. Consequently, the prospects for locating chromite or platinum placers in surfi- cial sediments of the Atlantic shelf would be low. Other rock types, such as high-grade metamorphic rocks, would be a likely source of titanium minerals such as rutile, and high-grade metamorphic rocks are found throughout the Appalachians. Placer de- posits are generally formed from minerals dispersed in rock units, when great amounts of rock have been reduced by weathering over very long periods of time. Time is a factor in the formation of placer de- posits in several respects. In addition to their chemistry, the resistance of minerals to weather- ing is time and climate dependent. In a geomor- phologically mature environment where a broad shelf is adjacent to a wide coastal plain of low re- lief, such as the middle and southern Atlantic mar- gin, the most resistant heavy minerals will be found to dominate placer deposit composition. These would include the chemically stable placer minerals such as the precious metals, rutile, zircon, mona- zite, and tourmaline. Less resistant heavy minerals, such as amphiboles, garnets, and pyroxenes, which are more abundant in igneous rock, dominate heavy mineral assemblages in more immature tec- tonically active areas such as the Pacific coast. These minerals are currently of less economic in- terest. Placer deposits are frequently classified into three groups based on their physical and hydraulic char- acteristics. The first group is the heaviest minerals such as gold, platinum, and cassiterite (tin oxide). Because of their high specific gravities, which range from 6.8 to 21, these minerals are deposited fairly near their source rock and tend to concentrate in stream channels. For gold and platinum, the me- dian distance of transport is probably on the order of 10 miles.* Heavy minerals with a lighter specific gravity, in the range of 4.2 to 5.3, form the sec- ond group and tend to concentrate in beach depos- its; but they also can be found at considerable dis- tances from shore in areas where sediments have been worked and reworked through several ero- sional and depositional cycles. Minerals of eco- nomic importance in this group include chromite, rutile, ilmenite, monazite, and zircon.? The third group is the gemstones of which diamonds are the major example. These are very resistant to weather- ing, but are of relatively low specific gravity in the range of 2.5 to 4.1. As a first step in assessing placer minerals re- sources potential in the Canadian offshore, a set of criteria was developed and the criteria were listed according to their relative importance.!? A rank- ing scheme was then adopted to assess the impli- cations of each criterion with regard to the likeli- hood of a placer occurring offshore (table 2-3). This approach can be applied to the U.S. EEZ. ®K.O. Emery and L.C. Noakes, ‘‘Economic Placer Deposits on the Continental Shelf,’’ United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, Technical Bulletin, vol. 1, 1968, pp. 95-111. °Rutile and ilmenite are major titanium minerals (along with leu- coxene), and monazite is a source of yttrium and rare earth elements which have many catalytic applications in addition to uses in metal- lurgy, ceramics, electronics, nuclear engineering, and other areas. Zir- con is used for facings on foundry molds, in ceramics and other refrac- tory applications, and in several chemical products. Zircon is also processed for zirconium and halfnium metal, which are used in nu- clear components and other specialized applications in jet engines, reentry vehicles, cutting tools, chemical processing equipment, and superconducting magnets. 10P_B. Hale and P. McLaren, ‘‘A Preliminary Assessment of Un- consolidated Mineral Resources in the Canadian Offshore,’’ CIM Bulletin, September 1984, p. 11. 50 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 2-3.—Criteria Used in the Assessment of Placer Minerals Information required Criterion Implication? Types and sources 1. Presence in marine sediments of +++ Direct evidence Onsite bottom samples interest 2. Mineral presence in onland unconsolidated deposits close to the shoreline 3. Presence of drowned river tick channels and strandlines offshore of coastal host rocks 4. Occurrence in source rock close to ++ deposit +++ Alluvial sediments in seaward flowing watershed in glacial With seaward flowing watershed Historical placer mining records, geological reports High-resolution seismic surveys, detailed hydrographic surveys CANMINDEX geological reports, shore F No watershed but previously mining records, topographic glaciated with offshore ice maps, surficial geology maps 5. Presence of unconsolidated + movement Offshore surficial geology maps, sediments seaward of onland host seismic records rocks 6. Evidence of preglacial regoliths ap Liberation of resistant heavy Reports of residual deposits and and mature weathering of bedrock minerals from bedrock for earlier formed regoliths subsequent transportation and 7. Sea-level fluctuations: concentration (i) Transgression + For preservation of relict fluvial Geological reports, air photos, tide placers now submerged records (ii) Stable sea level SP For formation of a contemporary Geological reports, air photos, tide beach placer records (iii) Regression aF For formation of a contemporary Geological reports, air photos, tide river mouth placer records 8. High-energy marine AF For formation of a contemporary Regional wave climates placer = For preservation of a relict placer 9. Previously glaciated = Glacial ice tends to scour out, Geological reports, surficial disseminate or bury the heavy geology maps minerals SF In some circumstances glaciation liberates heavy minerals and transports them to considerable distance to the offshore 10. Ice cover = Generally the longer the ice-free Ice cover maps period the greater potential to generate a marine placer 11. Circulation patterns ar Current maps 12. Climate P Important to the maturity of the Paleoclimatic maps mineral assemblage 4A relative ranking scheme was adopted to assess the implications of each factor with regards to the likelihood of a placer occurring in the offshore. Favorable indications are as follows: + ++ extremely favorable, + ++ very favorable and, + favorable. Factors likely to detract from the possibility of an offshore placer utilize a similar approach with a negative sign. SOURCE: Modified from Peter B. Hale and Patrick McLaren, ‘A Preliminary Assessment of Unconsolidated Mineral Resources in the Canadian Offshore," C/M Bulletin, September 1984, p. 7. Recent studies of heavy minerals in Atlantic con- tinental shelf sediments have found mineral assem- blages in the north Atlantic region dominated by less chemically stable minerals. The relatively im- mature mineral assemblages result from the direct glaciation that the northern shelf recently received. In general, glacial debris is less well sorted and often contains fresher mineral assemblages than sedi- ment, which has been exposed to fluvial transport and weathering processes over a long period of time. While data for the north Atlantic region are too limited to be conclusive in terms of potential resources, greater concentrations of heavy minerals are found south of Long Island (figure 2-5). Total heavy mineral concentrations in the middle Atlantic region reach 5 percent or more in some areas, and the mineral assemblages show a greater degree of weathering. In comparison to the northern regions, Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 51 Figure 2-5.—Atlantic EEZ Heavy Minerals 82° 78° 74° 36° | . ; ABZ c a r Percent heavy-mineral | content of surface sediments B+ i >4.00% | 28° l x ] 1.00-4.00% | % aN fy <1.00% \ | Hey: ic | aa ee Ny ra fo as 82° 78° 74° 70° 66 Several areas of the Atlantic EEZ contain high concentrations of heavy minerals in the surficial sediments. Further research is needed to determine the extent of these deposits and possible economic potential. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; A.E. Grosz, J.C. Hathaway, and E.C. Escowitz, ‘Placer Deposits of Heavy Minerals in Atlantic Con- tinental Shelf Sediments,” Proceedings of the 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 5198, May 1986. sediments of the southern Atlantic region contain lower concentrations of heavy minerals, but the as- semblage becomes progressively more mature to the south and, hence, more concentrated in heavy minerals of more economic interest such as tita- nium.'! This situation suggests that the mineral composition of the southern Atlantic shelf region holds the best prospects for economically attractive deposits. Precious Metals Although, in general, the north Atlantic region may have relatively poor prospects for economic placer deposits compared to the southern region, NA.E. Grosz, J.C. Hathaway, and E.C. Escowitz, ‘‘Placer Deposits of Heavy Minerals in Atlantic Continental Shelf Sediments,’’ Proceed- ings of the 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 5-8, 1986, pp. 387-394. it might possibly be the most favorable area along the Atlantic EEZ for gold placers. Gold occurrences have been found in a variety of rocks along the Ap- palachians and in the maritime provinces of Can- ada, and both lode and placer gold deposits have been worked in areas that drain toward the coast. Because of its high specific gravity, placer gold is expected to be near its point of origin, which would be nearer to the coast in the New England area than in southern areas where broad coastal plains are developed. Further, glacial scouring and movement could have brought gold-bearing sediment offshore where it could be reworked and the gold concen- trated by marine processes. While the prospects for gold placers are poor in the Atlantic EEZ, gold placers have been found on the coastal plain in the mid- and south Atlantic regions. To reach the EEZ in those regions, gold would have been transported by fluvial processes a considerable distance from its source and, if found, probably would be very fine-grained. Heavy Minerals—Titanium Sands The major area of interest for economic placer deposits, particularly titanium minerals, would be the middle and south Atlantic EEZ. Again the cri- teria in table 2-3 are useful. Concentrations of the commercially sought heavy minerals have been found in the sediments offshore (criterion 1) and titanium minerals mined onshore (criterion 2). In addition, several other criteria are also evident. These indicators would suggest a good potential for placer deposits offshore. An interesting aspect of this, however, is a reconnaissance study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) that found significant concentrations of heavy minerals in surface grab- samples offshore of Virginia, where no economic deposits are found onshore.'? However, rich rutile and ilmenite placer deposits have been mined in the drainage basin of the James River, a tributary of Chesapeake Bay. These deposits had their source in anorthosite and gneisses of the Virginia Blue Ridge.'* An earlier study, which had found high 12A_E. Grosz and E.C. Escowitz, ‘‘Economic Heavy Minerals of the U.S. Atlantic Continental Shelf,’’ W.F. Tanner (ed.), Proceed- ings of the Sixth Symposium on Coastal Sedimentology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, 1983, pp. 231-242. 13]. P. Minard, E.R. Force, and G.W. Hayes, ‘‘Alluvial Ilmenite Placer Deposits, Central Virginia,’’? U.S. Geological Survey Profes- sional Paper 959-H, 1976. 52 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier concentrations of heavy minerals parallel to the present shoreline off the Virginia coast in water depths between 30 and 60 feet, hypothesized sources from the Chesapeake Bay and the Delaware River.'* The deposit was thought to be a possible ancient strandline where the heavy minerals were concen- trated by hydraulic fractionation. Bottom topography may be an important clue to surface concentrations of heavy minerals. One investigation off Smith Island near the mouth of Chesapeake Bay found high concentrations of heavy minerals on the surface of a layer of fine sand that was distributed along the flanks of topographic ridges.!° However, coring data are needed to pro- vide information on the vertical distribution of placer minerals and on whether or not similar bur- ied topography is preserved and contains similar heavy mineral concentrations. Overall, the south Atlantic EEZ would be a favorable prospective region for titanium placers, based on maturity of heavy mineral assemblages, although sediment cover is thinner and more patchy than farther north. However, individual features such as submerged sand ridges could contain con- centrated deposits. As with sand and gravel, regional resource esti- mates are probably not very useful since they are based on gross generalizations. This caveat notwith- standing, recent studies indicate that the average heavy mineral content of sediments on the Atlan- tic shelf is on the order of 2 percent, and that the total volume of sand and gravel may be larger than earlier estimates.'® !7? These studies suggest that whatever the total offshore resource base is esti- mated to be, the southern Atlantic EEZ may hold considerable promise for titanium placer deposits of future interest, particularly in areas of paleo- stream channels where there are major gaps in the ‘4B.K. Goodwin and J.B. Thomas, ‘‘Inner Shelf Sediments Off of Chesapeake Bay III, Heavy Minerals,’’ Special Scientific Report No. 68, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, 1973, p. 34. SC._R. Berquist and C.H. Hobbs, ‘‘Assessment of Economic Heavy Minerals of the Virginia Inner Continental Shelf,’’ Virginia Division of Mineral Resources Open-File Report 86-1, 1986, p. 17. *8U.S. Department of the Interior, Program Feasibility Document: OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, prepared for the Assistant Secretaries of Energy and Minerals and Land and Water Resources by the OCS Mining Policy Phase II Task Force, August 1979, Executive Sum- mary, p. 40. ‘Grosz, Hathaway, and Esowitz, ‘‘Placer Deposits of Heavy Minerals in Atlantic Continental Shelf Sediments,’’ p. 387. Trail Ridge formation (a major onshore titanium sand deposit). In any event, only high-grade, acces- sible deposits would be potentially attractive, and the total heavy mineral assemblage would deter- mine the economics of the deposit. Phosphorite Deposits Sedimentary deposits consisting primarily of phosphate minerals are called phosphorites. The principal component of marine phosphorites is car- bonate fluorapatite. Marine phosphorites occur as muds, sands, nodules, plates, and crusts, gener- ally in water depths of less than 3,300 feet. Phos- phatic minerals are also found as cement bonding other detrital minerals. Marine phosphorite deposits are related to areas of upwelling and high biopro- ductivity on the continental shelves and upper slopes, particularly in lower latitudes. Bedded phosphorite deposits of considerable areal extent are of major economic importance in the Southeastern United States. The bedded deposits in the Southeastern United States are related to multiple depositional sequences in response to transgressive and regressive sea level changes.'® Major phosphate formation in this region began about 20 million years ago during the Miocene. Low-grade phosphate deposits are found in young- er surficial sediments on the continental shelf, but these are largely reworked from underlying units. While these surface sediments are probably not of economic interest, they may be important tracers for Miocene deposits in the shallow subsurface. On the Atlantic shelf, the northernmost area of interest for phosphate deposits is the Onslow Bay area off North Carolina. (Concentrations of up to 19 percent phosphate have been reported in relict sediments on Georges Bank, but these are unlikely to be of economic interest.) In the Onslow Bay area, the Pungo River Formation outcrops in an north- east-southwest belt about 95 miles long by 15 to 30 miles wide and extends into the subsurface to the east and southeast. The Pungo River Forma- tion is a major sedimentary phosphorite unit un- der the north-central coastal plain of North Caro- 18S_R. Riggs, D.W. Lewis, A.K. Scarborough, et al., ‘“Cyclic Depo- sition of Neogene Phosphorites in the Aurora Area, North Carolina, and Their Possible Relationship to Global Sea-Level Fluctuations,” Southeastern Geology, vol. 23, No. 4, 1982, pp. 189-204. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 53 lina. Five beds containing high phosphate values have been cored in two areas of Onslow Bay. The northern area harboring three phosphate beds con- tains an estimated resource of 860 million short tons of phosphate concentrate with average phosphorus pentoxide (P2Os) values of 29.7 to 31 percent. The P.O; content of the total sediment in these beds ranges from 3 to 6 percent. The Frying Pan area to the south contains two richer beds estimated to contain 4.13 billion tons of phosphate concentrate with an average content of 29.2 percent P2Os.'® The P.O; content of the total sediment in these beds ranges from 3 to 21 percent. Of the two areas, the Frying Pan district is given a better potential for economic development. The deposits are in shal- low water relatively close to shore. Further to the south, from North Carolina to Georgia, phosphates occur on the shelf in relict sands. Phosphate grain concentrations of 14 to 40 percent have been reported in water depths of 100 to 130 feet. On the Georgia shelf off, the mouth of the Savanna River, a deposit of phosphate sands over 23 feet thick has been drilled. Other deposits near Tyber Island, off the coast of Georgia, include a 90-foot-thick bed of phosphate in sandy clay aver- aging 32 percent phosphate overlying a 250-foot thick bed of phosphatic limestone averaging 23 per- cent phosphate. Concerns over saltwater intrusion into an underlying aquifer may constrain poten- tial development in this area. Further offshore, the Blake Plateau is an area of large surficial deposits of manganese oxides and phosphorites (figure 2-6). The Plateau is swept by the Gulf Stream and water depth ranges from 2,000 feet on the northern end to nearly 4,000 feet on the southeastern end. Phosphorite occurs in the shal- lower western and northern portions as sands, pellets, and concretions. The northern portion of the Blake Plateau is estimated to contain 2.2 bil- lion tons of phosphorite.?° Off the Florida coast near Jacksonville, deep and extensive sequences of phosphate-rich sediments ex- 19S.R. Riggs, S.W.P. Snyder, A.C. Hine, et al., ‘“Geologic Frame- work of Phosphate Resources in Onslow Bay, North Carolina Con- tinental Shelf,’’ Economic Geology, vol. 80, 1985, pp. 716-738. 20F T. Manheim, ‘‘Potential Hard Mineral and Associated Re- sources on the Atlantic and Gulf Continental Margins,’’ Program Fea- sibility Document—OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. 12, U.S. De- partment of Interior, 1979, p. 42. tend eastward onto the shelf. One bed, 20 feet thick beneath 260 feet of overburden, containing 70 to 80 percent phosphate grains, was slurry test-mined in this area. A core hole 30 miles east of Jackson- ville contained a 115-foot section of cyclic phos- phate-rich beds with the thickest unit up to 16 feet thick. The phosphate facies ran between 30 and 70 percent phosphate grains. Deep drill data in the Osceola Basin have shown two phosphate zones extending eastward onto the continental shelf. The lower grade upper zone is 1,000 feet thick with 140 feet of overburden and phosphate grain concentratrations of 10 to 50 per- cent of the total sediment. The higher grade deeper zone is 82 feet thick with 250 feet of overburden and phosphate grain concentrations ranging from 25 to 75 percent of total sediment. The Miami and Pourtales Terraces off the south- east coast of Florida are also known to have phos- phate occurrences. On the Pourtales Terrace, phosphorite occurs as conglomerates, phosphatic limestone, and phosphatized marine mammal bones. This deposit is thought to be related to the phos- phatic Bone Valley Formation onshore. Manganese Nodules and Pavements Ferromanganese nodules are concretions of iron and manganese oxides containing nickel, copper, cobalt, and other metals that are found in deep ocean basins and in some shallower areas such as the Blake Plateau off the Southeastern United States. On the Blake Plateau, nodule concretions are found at depths of 2,000 to 3,300 feet; and their centers commonly are phosphoritic. Ferroman- ganese crusts and pavements are more common at shallower depths of around 1,600 feet. The fer- romanganese concretions of the Blake Plateau are well below the metal values found in the prime nod- ule sites in the Pacific Ocean, but the Blake Pla- teau offers the advantages of much shallower depths and proximity to the U.S. continent. Potential fer- romanganese nodule resources on the Blake Pla- teau are estimated to be on the order of 250 billion tons averaging 0.1 percent copper, 0.4 percent nickel, 0.3 percent cobalt, and 15 percent man- ganese.”! 2Tbid., p. 15. 54 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-6.—Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific EEZs California Seamounts Southern California . Borderland Guaymas SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Symposium Proceedings—A National Program for the Assessment and Develop- ment of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. PUERTO RICO AND THE U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are part of an island arc complex with narrow insular shelves. The geologic environment of this type of active plate boundary suggests that sand and gravel deposits would not be extensive and that placer mineral as- semblages would be relatively immature. Sand and Gravel Modern and relict nearshore delta deposits are the main source of offshore sediment for both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Further offshore the clastic sediments contain increasing 0 [ies se hes Explanation Known occurrence Likely occurrence Sand and gravel q@) 1 @ Placers Phosphorites Mn-nodules Co-crusts Massive sulfides Blake Plateau amounts of carbonate material. In general, the is- lands lack large offshore sand deposits because wave action and coastal currents tend to rework and transport the sand across the narrow shelves into deep water. Submarine canyons also play a role in providing a conduit through which sand migrates off the shelf. The outer edge of the shelves is at a water depth of around 330 feet. Three major sand bodies are located on the shelf of Puerto Rico in water depths of less than 65 feet. As one might expect in an area of westward movy- ing wirids and water currents, all three deposits are at the western ends of islands. Inferred resources | Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 55 have been calculated for two of these areas, the Cabo Rojo area off the west end of the south coast of Puerto Rico and the Escollo de Arenas area north of the west end of Vieques Island (near the east coast of Puerto Rico). The total volume of sand in these deposits is estimated at 220 million cubic yards, which could supply Puerto Rico’s construc- tion needs for over 20 years.”? In the U.S. Virgin Islands, several sand bodies contain an estimated total of 60 million cubic yards. Some of the more promising are located off the southwest coast of St. Thomas, near Buck Island, and on the southern shelf of St. Croix. 22R .W. Rodriguez, ‘‘Submerged Sand Resources of Puerto Rico in USGS Highlights in Marine Research,’’ USGS Circular 938, 1984, pp. 57-63. Placer Deposits Heavy mineral studies along the north coast of Puerto Rico found a strong seaward sorting with relatively heavy minerals such as monazite and magnetite enriched on the inner shelf relative to pyroxenes and amphiboles. The high degree of nearshore sorting may indicate a likelihood of the occurrence of placers, particularly in the inner shelf zone.?> Gold has been mined in the drainage ba- sin of the Rio de La Plata which discharges to the north coast of Puerto Rico, although no gold placers as yet have been found on the coast. 23CQ.H. Pilkey and R. Lincoln, ‘‘Insular Shelf Heavy Mineral Par- titioning Northern Puerto Rico,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 4, No. 4, 1984, pp. 403-414. GULF OF MEXICO REGION The Gulf of Mexico is a small ocean basin whose continental margins are structurally complex and, in some cases, rather unique. The major structural feature of the U.S. EEZ in the northern Gulf of Mexico is the vast amount of sediment that accu- mulated while the region was subsiding. The struc- tural complexity of the northern Gulf margin was enhanced by the mobility of underlying salt beds that were deposited when the region was a shallow sea. In general, the sedimentary beds dip and thicken southward and are greatly disrupted by di- apiric structures and by flexures and faults of re- gional extent. Sulfur and salt are both recovered from bedded evaporite deposits and salt domes in the Gulf re- gion. Sulfur is generally extracted by the Frasch hot water process, which is easily adaptable to oper- ation from an offshore platform. Sulfur has been recovered from offshore Louisiana and could be more widely recovered from offshore deposits if the market were favorable. Sand and Gravel The sand and gravel resources of the Gulf of Mexico are even more poorly characterized than the Atlantic EEZ. Most of the shallow sedimentary and geomorphological features of the Gulf were similarly developed as a result of the sea-level fluc- tuations during the Quaternary. The Mississippi River dominates the sediment discharge into the northern Gulf of Mexico. Over time, the Missis- sippi River has shifted its discharge point, leaving ancestral channels and a complex delta system. As channels shift, abandoned deltas and associated bar- rier islands are reworked and eroded, forming blanket-type sand deposits and linear shoals.?* A number of these shoals having a relief of 15 to 30 feet are found off Louisiana. Relict channels and beaches are also good prospects for sand deposits. Relict channels and deltas have been identified off Galveston, containing over 78 million cubic yards of fine grained sand which may have uses for beach replenishment or glass sand. Sand and gravel re- source estimates for the U.S. EEZ are given in ta- ble 2-4. Based on an average thickness of 16 feet, these are projected to be around 350 billion cubic yards of sand for the Gulf EEZ. No gravel resources are identified on the Gulf shelf although offshore shell deposits are common and have been mined as a source of lime. Until more surveys aimed at evaluating specific sand and gravel deposits are con- ducted, resource estimates are little more than an educated guess. In any event, the resource base is large, although meeting coarser size specifications may be a limiting factor in some areas. **Williams, ‘‘Sand and Gravel Deposits Within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,”’ p. 381. 56 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 2-4.—Estimates of Sand and Gravel Resources Within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone Volumes Province (cubic meters) Atlantic: Maine—Long Island.................. 340 billion New Jersey—South Carolina.......... 190 billion South Carolina—Florida .............. 220 billion GulffofaMexicomenmemreimicireerscie rerio 269 billion Caribbean: MirginilslandSisnrseeicceeiecimocice cere > 46 million PuertouRiCOme mat nore ceeectee cn craton 170 million Pacific: SoutherniGalitorniaternmarceierita res. 30 billion Northern California—Washington ... insufficient data Alaskaiissiietretitsccscerpese os res aeeater ons > 160 billion FAWALIE cictienosroeserscuarseousiatel creneb tune teece sta 19 billion SOURCE: Modified after S.J. Williams, “Sand and Gravel Deposits Within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone: Resource Assessment and Uses,” 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, 1986, pp. 377-386. Placer Deposits Although reconnaissance surveys have not been conducted over much of the region, concentrations of heavy minerals have been found in a number of locations in the Gulf of Mexico. Several offshore sand bars or shoals are found off Dog Island, Saint George Island, and Cape San Blas in northwestern Florida that may contain concentrations of heavy minerals.?° Some of these shoals are believed to be drowned barrier islands. One recent survey of the shelf off northwest Florida found heavy mineral concentrations asso- ciated with shoal areas offshore of Saint George and Santa Rosa Islands.?° The heavy minerals of eco- 25W.F. Tanner, A. Mullins, and J.D. Bates, ‘‘Possible Masked Heavy Mineral Deposit: Florida Panhandle,’’ Economic Geology, vol. 56, 1961, pp. 1079-1087. 267.D. Arthur, S. Melkote, J. Applegate, et al., ‘‘Heavy Mineral Reconnaissance Off the Coast of the Apalachicola River Delta, North- west Florida,’’ Florida Bureau of Geology in Cooperation with U.S. Minerals Management Service, Contract No. 14-12-001-30115, Aug. 16, 1985 (unpublished). nomic interest totaled about 39 percent of the heavy mineral fraction averaged over the study area. However, the percentages of heavy minerals and the composition of the heavy mineral sites reported are lower and of less economic interest, respectively, than those on the Atlantic shelf. Sediments derived from the Mississippi River off Louisiana contain heavy mineral fractions in which ilmenite and zir- con are concentrated. In the western part of the Gulf, less economically interesting heavy minerals of the amphibole and pyroxene groups are domi- nant.?” An aggregate heavy-mineral sand resource esti- mate was not attempted for the gulf coast as part of the Department of the Interior’s Program Fea- sibility Study for Outer Continental Shelf hard minerals leasing done in 1979. Too little data are available and aggregate numbers are not very meaningful in terms of potentially recoverable re- sources. Phosphorite Deposits Recent seismic studies indicate that the phos- phate-bearing Bone Valley Formation extends at a relatively shallow depth at least 25 miles into the Gulf of Mexico and the west Florida continental shelf. An extensive Miocene sequence also extends across the shelf, and Miocene phosphorite has been dredged from outcrops on the mid-slope. This sit- uation would suggest that the west Florida shelf may have considerable potential for future phosphate ex- ploration.?® Core data would be needed to assess this region more fully. 27R.G. Beauchamp and M.J. Cruickshank, ‘‘Placer Minerals on the U.S. Continental Shelves—Opportunity for Development,”’ Proceedings OCEANS ’83, vol. II, 1983, pp. 698-702. 28W.C. Burnett, ‘‘Phosphorites in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone,’’ Proceedings, the Exclusive Economic Zone Symposium Ex- ploring the New Ocean Frontier, held at Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, October 1985 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, May 1986), pp. 135-140. PACIFIC REGION The continental margin along the Pacific coast and Alaska has several subregions. Southern Cali- fornia, from Mexico northward to Point Concep- tion, is termed a ‘‘borderland,’’ a geomorphic ex- tensional complex of basins, islands, banks, ridges, and submarine canyons. Tectonically, this region is undergoing lateral or transform movement along the San Andreas fault system. The offshore base- Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 57 ment (deep) rocks include metasediments, schist, andesites, and dacites. Thick sequences of Tertiary sediments were deposited in deep marine basins throughout the region. The shelf is fairly narrow (3 to 12 miles) and is transected by several subma- rine canyons extending to the edge of the shelf. From Point Conception north along the moun- tainous coast to Monterey Bay, the shelf is quite narrow in places, but north of San Francisco to Cape Mendocino it widens again to 6 to 25 miles. The coast in this area is generally rugged with a few lowland areas along river valleys. Wave energy is high along the entire coast and uplifted wave- cut terraces indicating former higher stands of sea level are common. Northward along the coast of Oregon, the con- tinental shelf is as narrow as 6 miles and averages less than 18 miles in width. Off Washington, the shelf gradually widens to over 30 miles and is un- derlain by a varied terrain of sedimentary rocks, mafic and ultramafic intrusives, and granite rocks. The Washington coast also has been influenced by glaciation, and glacial till and alluvium extend out onto the shelf. The Columbia River is a major source of sediment in the southern Washington and northern Oregon region. Beyond the shelf, but within the U.S. EEZ, the seafloor spreading centers of the Gorda and Juan de Fuca ridges and related subduction zones at the base of the continental slope contribute to the tectonic activity of the region. Sand and Gravel The narrow continental shelf and high wave energy along the Pacific coast limit the prospects for recovering a great abundance of sand and gravel from surficial deposits. In southern California, de- posits of sand and gravel at water depths shallow enough to be economic are present on the San Pedro, San Diego, and Santa Monica shelves. Most coarse material suitable for construction aggregate is found in relict blanket, deltaic, and channel de- posits off the mouth of major rivers. One deposit of coarse sand and gravel within 10 miles of San Diego Bay in less than 65 feet of water has been surveyed and estimated to contain 26 million cu- bic yards of aggregate. Total resource estimates for the southern California region indicate about 40 billion cubic yards of sand and gravel.?® However, 29Williams, ‘‘Sand and Gravel Deposits Within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone,”’ p. 382. UAH (0) = 3} => S} excessive amounts of overlying fine sand or mud, high wave energy, and unfavorable water depth may all reduce the economically recoverable ma- terial by as much as an order of magnitude. Indi- vidual deposits would need to be studied for their size, quality, and accessibility. Sand and gravel resource estimates for northern California are based primarily on surface informa- tion with little or no data on depth and variability of the deposits. As is typical elsewhere, the sand and gravel deposits are both relict and recent. Much of the relict material appears to be too coarse to have been deposited by transport mechanisms oper- ative at the present depth of the outer continental shelf.°° These relict sands are thought to be near- shore bars and beach deposits formed during lower stands of sea level in the Pleistocene. Recent coarse material is nearer the coast and generally depos- ited parallel to the coastline by longshore currents. Sand and gravel estimates for the northern Cali- fornia shelf, assuming an average thickness of about 1 yard, are 84 million cubic yards of gravel, 542 million cubic yards of coarse sand, and 2.6 billion cubic yards of medium sand.*! Most of this mate- rial would lie in State waters. Off the coast of Oregon and Washington, sea level fluctuations and glaciation controlled the loca- tion of coarse sand and gravel deposits. Most of the gravel lies to the north off Washington, where it was deposited in broad outwash fans by glacial meltwater streams when the sea level was about 650 feet lower than present. Promising gravel resource areas convenient to both Portland and Seattle are off Gray’s Harbor, Washington, and the southern Olympic Mountains. Smaller gravel deposits off Oregon lie in swales between submarine banks in relict reworked beach deposits. Little data on the thickness of individual deposits are available, but general information on the thickness of outwash and beach sediments in the area suggest that estimates of 3 to 15 feet average thickness are reasonable.*? 30S _G. Martindale and H.D. Hess, ‘‘Resource Assessment: Sand, Gravel, and Shell Deposits on the Continental Shelf of Northern and Central California,’’ Program Feasibility Document—OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. 9, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1979, p. 5. 3Tbid., p. 7. 32G_W. Moore and M.D. Luken, ‘‘Offshore Sand and Gravel Re- sources of the Pacific Northwest,’’ Program Feasibility Document— OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. 7, U.S. Department of the In- terior, 1979, p. 8. 58 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Precious Metals Placer deposits containing precious metals have been found throughout the Pacific coastal region both offshore and along modern day beaches (fig- ure 2-6). In the south, streams in the southern Cali- fornia borderland drain a coastal region of sand- stone and mudstone marine sediments and granitic intrusives. These source rocks do not offer much hope of economically significant precious metal con- centrations offshore, and fluvial placers have not been important in this area. North of Point Con- ception, gold placers have been worked and addi- tional deposits might be found offshore. The most promising region along the Pacific coast of the coterminous States is likely to be off northern California and southern Oregon where sediments from the Klamath Mountains are depos- ited. The Klamath Mountains are excellent source rocks containing, among other units, podiform ultramafic intrusives, which are thought to be the source of the platinum placers found in the region. Gold-bearing diorite intrusives are also present and provide economically interesting source rocks. Plati- num and gold placers have both been mined from beaches in the region. In some areas, small flecks of gold appear in offshore surface sediments. Several small gold and platinum beach placers have been mined on the coast of Washington from deposits which may have been supplied by glacially transported material from the north. The Olym- pic Mountains are not particularly noted for their ore mineralization, but gold and chromite-bearing rocks are found in the Cascades. Two questions remain: do offshore deposits ex- ist? and, if so, are they economic? For heavier minerals such as gold or platinum, only very fine- grained material is likely to be found offshore. Gold is not uncommon on Pacific beaches from north- ern California to Washington, but is often too fine- grained and too dispersed to be economically re- covered at present. However, some experts also ar- gue that in areas undergoing both uplift and cyclic glaciation and erosion, such as the shelf off south- ern Oregon, there may be several cycles of retrain- ment and progressive transport which could allow even the coarser grains of the precious metals to be transported some distance seaward on the shelf.*% °8K.C. Bowman, ‘‘Evaluation of Heavy Mineral Concentrations on the Southern Oregon Continental Shelf,’’ Proceedings, Eighth An- Black Sand—Chromite Deposits Chromite-rich black sands are found in relict beach deposits in uplifted marine terraces and in modern beach deposits along the coast of southern Oregon. The terrace deposits were actively mined for their chromium content during World War II. Remaining onshore deposits are not of current eco- nomic interest. However, there are indications that offshore deposits may be of future economic inter- est. Geologic factors in the development of placer deposits in relatively high-energy coastal regimes offer clues to chromite resource expectations in the EEZ. Geologic Considerations The ultimate source of chromite in the black sands found along the Oregon coast of Coos and Curry counties is the more or less serpentinized ultramafic rock in the Klamath Mountains. How- ever much of the chromite in the beach deposits appears to have been reworked from Tertiary sedimentary rocks.*4 Chromite eroded out of the peridotites and serpentines of the Klamath Moun- tains was deposited in Tertiary sediments. Changes in sea level eroded these deposits and the chromite was released again and concentrated into deposits by wind, wave, and current action. These depos- its have been uplifted and preserved in the present terraces and beach deposits. This reworking through deposition, erosion, and redeposition is an important consideration in the formation of offshore placer deposits. Not only does reworking allow for the accumulation of more min- erals of economic value over time, but it also al- lows the less resistant (and generally less valuable) heavy minerals such as pyroxenes and amphiboles to break down and thus not dilute or lower the grade of the deposit. The river systems in the region were largely re- sponsible for eroding and transporting the heavy minerals from the Klamath Mountains. Once in the marine environment, reworking of minerals was enhanced during periods of continental glaciation when. the sea level fluctuated and the shoreline nual Conference, Marine Technology Society, 1972, pp. 237-253. *4A.B. Griggs, ‘‘Chromite-Bearing Sands of the Southern Part of the Coast of Oregon,’’ U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, 945-E, pp. 113-150. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 59 retreated and advanced across the shelf at least four times. During these glacial periods, high rainfall, probable alpine glaciation in the higher Klamath peaks, and increased stream gradients from lowered base levels all contributed to accelerated erosion of the source area. Concentrations of heavy opaque minerals along the outer edge of the continental shelf off southern Oregon demonstrate the trans- port capacity of the pluvial-glacial streams during low stands of the sea.*®° High discharge and low stands of sea also allow for the formation of chan- nel deposits on the shelf. During high interglacial stands of the sea, estuarine entrapment of sediments is a larger factor in the distribution of heavy min- erals in the coastal environment. Each transgres- sion and regression of the sea has the opportunity to rework relict or previously formed deposits. Pres- ervation of these deposits is related to changes in the energy intensity of their environment. While most geologists agree that uplifted beach terrace deposits and submerged offshore deposits are secondary sources of resistant heavy minerals in the formation of placer deposits, questions re- main about which secondary source is more impor- tant. Differing views on the progressive enrichment of placer deposits have implications for locating con- centrations of heavy minerals of economic value. One view is that each sea-level transgression re- works and concentrates on the shelf the heavy min- erals laid down earlier, and any deposits produced during the more recent transgression are likely to be richer or more extensive than the raised terrace deposits that served as secondary sources since their emergence. This concentration effect would espe- cially include those deposits now offshore which could be enriched by a winnowing process that re- moves the finer, lighter material, thereby concen- trating the heavy minerals.*° The other view is that offshore deposits are likely to be reworked as the sea level rises and heavy mineral concentrations in former beaches tend to move shoreward with the transgressing shore zone so that then the modern beaches would be richest in potentially economic heavy minerals. In this view, offshore deposits would be important secondary sources to the mod- 3Ibid., p. 241. 36Bowman, Evaluation of Heavy Mineral Concentrations on the Southern Oregon Continental Shelf, p. 243. ern beaches, and raised terraces would be the next richest in heavy minerals.*’ Prospects for Future Development The black sand deposits that were mined for chromite in the past offer a clue as to the nature of the deposits that might be found offshore. Dur- ing World War II, approximately 450,000 tons of crude sand averaging about 10 percent chromite or 5 percent chromic oxide (Cr2O3) were produced. This yielded about 52,000 tons of concentrate at 37 to 39 percent Cr2O3. The chromium to iron ra- tio of the concentrate was 1.6:1. A number of in- vestigators have examined other onshore deposits. The upraised terraces near Bandon, Oregon, have been assessed for their chromite content with the aid of a drilling program. Over 2.1 million tons of sand averaging 3 to 7 percent Cr2Os is estimated for this 15-mile area.*® Deposit thicknesses range from 1 to 20 feet, and associated minerals include magnetite, ilmenite, garnet, and zircon. In a minerals availability appraisal of chromium, the U.S. Bureau of Mines assessed the southwest Oregon beach sands as having demonstrated re- sources (reserve base) of 11,935,000 short tons of mineralized material with a contained Cr2O3 con- tent of 666,000 tons.*? In the broader category of identified resources, the Oregon beach sands con- tain 50,454,000 tons of mineralized material with a Cr2O; content of 2,815,000 tons. None of the beach sand material is ranked as reserves because it is not economically recoverable at current prices. If recovered, the demonstrated resources would amount to a little over one year’s current domes- tic chromium consumption. Another indication of the nature of potential Ore- gon offshore deposits comes from studies of coastal terrace placers, modern beach deposits, and off- shore current patterns. In general, longshore cur- rents tend to concentrate heavy minerals along the southern side of headlands. This concentration 1s 37Emery and Noakes, ‘‘Economic Placer Deposits on the Continental Shelf’? p. 107. 38Bowman, ‘‘Evaluation of Heavy Mineral Concentrations on the Southern Oregon Continental Shelf,’’ pp. 242-243. 39].F. Lemons, Jr., E.H. Boyle, Jr., and C.C. Kilgore, ‘‘Chro- mium Availability—Domestic, A Minerals Availability System Ap- praisal,’’ U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular, IC 8895, 1982, p- 4. 60 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier thought to be the result of differential seasonal long- shore transport and shoreline orientation with re- gard to storm swell approach and zones of deceler- ating longshore currents. In addition, platform gradient also influences the distribution of placer sands, with steeper gradients increasing placer thickness. Similarly, the formation of offshore placer deposits would be determined by paleo- shoreline position and geometry, platform gradient, and paleo-current orientation. *° Bathymetric data indicate several wave-cut benches left from former still stands of sea level. Concentrations of heavy minerals that may be re- lated to submerged beach deposits have been found in water depths ranging from 60 to 490 feet. Sur- face samples of these deposits have black sand con- centrations of 10 to 30 percent or more, and some are associated with magnetic anomalies indicating a likelihood of black sand placers within sediment thicknesses ranging from 3 to 115 feet. In addition, gold is found in surface sediments in some of these areas. These submerged features would be likely prospects for high concentrations of chromite and possibly for associated gold or platinum. Several Oregon offshore areas containing con- centrations of chromite-bearing black sands in the surface sediment have been mapped. These areas range from less than 1 square mile to over 80 square miles in areal extent, and they are found from Cape Ferrelo north to the Coquille River, with the largest area nearly 25 miles long, centered along the coast off the Rogue River. If metal tenor (content) in- creases with depth, as some investigators expect, there may be considerable potential for economi- cally interesting deposits offshore. Also depending on the value of any associated heavy minerals, chro- mite might be recovered either as the primary prod- uct or as the byproduct of other minerals extraction. Other Heavy Minerals North of Point Conception in California, a few small ultramafic bodies are found within coastal drainage basins. Heavy mineral fractions in beach and stream sediments are relatively high in titanium *0C.D. Peterson, G.W. Gleeson, and N. Wetzel, ‘‘Stratigraphic Development, Mineral Sources, and Preservation of Marine Placers from Pleistocene Terraces in Southern Oregon, USA,”’ Sedimentary Geology, in press. minerals associated with monazite and zircon, and small quantities of chromite have been found. Titanium minerals have been mined from beach sands in this area in the past. The Klamath Mountains of southwestern Ore- gon and northwestern California contain a com- plex of sedimentary, metasedimentary, metavol- canic, granitoid, and serpentinized ultramafic rocks that are the source of most, if not all, of the heavy minerals and free metals found on the continental shelf in that region. In addition to metallic gold, platinum metals, and chromite discussed previ- ously, these minerals include ilmenite, magnetite, garnet, and zircon. Abrasion during erosion and transport of these minerals is minimal, and they are generally resistant to chemical weathering. Another area of interest for heavy mineral placer deposits is off the mouth of the Columbia River. The Columbia River drains a large and geologi- cally diverse region and its sediments dominate the coastal areas of northern Oregon and southern Washington. A large concentration of titantum-rich black sand has been reported on the shelf south of the Columbia River.*! Sand from this deposit has been found to average about 5 percent ilmenite and 10 to 15 percent magnetite. Several other smaller areas on the Oregon shelf containing high heavy mineral concentrations lie seaward of or adjacent to river systems. Estimates of heavy mineral con- tent on the Oregon shelf suggest a potential of sev- eral million tons each of ilmenite, rutile, and zir- con.*? Chromite, ilmenite, and magnetite are also found in heavy mineral placers on the Washington coast. Five areas on the Washington shelf contain ano- malously high concentrations of heavy minerals. Three areas south of the Hoh River and off Gray’s Harbor are at depths of 60 to 170 feet and prob- ably represent beach deposits formed during low stands of the sea. Two more areas are near the mouth of the Columbia River. “RL. Phillips, ‘‘Heavy Minerals and Bedrock Minerals on the Continental Shelf off Washington, Oregon, and California,’’ Program Feasibility Document—OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. B, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1979, pp. 14-17. *2Beauchaimp and Cruickshank, ‘‘Placer Minerals on the U.S. Con- tinental Shelves—Opportunity for Development,”’ p. 700. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 61 Phosphorite Deposits The southern portion of the California border- land is well known for marine phosphorite depos- its. The deposits are located on the tops of the nu- merous banks in areas relatively free of sediment. The phosphorites are Miocene in age and are gen- erally found in water depths between 100 and 1,300 feet. The deposits consist of sand, pebbles, biologi- cal remains, and phosphorite nodules. Relatively rich surficial nodule deposits averaging 27 percent P,Os are found on the Coronado, Thirty Mile and Forty Mile banks, and west of San Diego. Estimates based on available data on grade and extent of the major deposits known in the region indicate a re- source base of approximately 72 million tons of phosphate nodules and 57 million tons of phosphatic sands.*? However, because assumptions were nec- essary to derive these tonnages, these estimates should be regarded as being within only an order of magnitude of the actual resource potential of the area. Further sampling and related investigations are necessary to define the resource base more ac- curately. Phosphorite deposits are also found further north off central California at water depths of 3,300 to 4,600 feet. These deposits, located off Pescadero Point, on Sur Knoll and Twin Knolls, range in P.O; content from 11.5 to 31 percent, with an aver- age content of 24 percent.** However, their patchy distribution and occurrence at relatively great water depths make them economically less attractive than the deposits off the southern California shore. Polymetallic Sulfide Deposits ““Polymetallic sulfide’’ is a popular term used to describe the suites of intimately associated sulfide minerals that have been found in geologically ac- tive areas of the oceanfloor. The relatively recent discovery of the seabed sulfide deposits was not an accident. The discovery confirmed years of research and suggestions regarding geological and geochem- ical processes at the ocean ridges. Research related 3H.D. Hess, ‘‘Preliminary Resource Assessment—Phosphorites of the Southern California Borderland,’’ Program Feasibility Docu- ment—OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. 11, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1978, p. 21. *“#H.T. Mullins and R.F. Rasch, ‘‘Sea-Floor Phosphorites along the Central California Continental Margin,’’ Economic Geology, vol. 80, 1985, pp. 696-715. to: 1) separation of oceanic plates, 2) magma up- welling at the ocean ridges, 3) chemical evolution of seawater, and 4) land-based ore deposits that were once submarine, has contributed to and cul- minated in hypotheses of seawater circulation and mineral deposition at ocean spreading centers that closely fit recent observations. Much of the current interest in the marine polymetallic sulfides stems from the dynamic nature of the processes of for- mation and their role in hypotheses of the evolu- tion of the Earth’s crust. An understanding of the conditions resulting in the formation of these ma- rine sulfides allows geologists to better predict the occurrence of other marine deposits and to better understand the processes that formed similar ter- restrial deposits. Geologic Considerations The Gorda Ridge and possibly part of the Juan de Fuca Ridge (pending unsettled boundary claims) are within the EEZ of the United States. They are part of the seafloor spreading ridge system that ex- tends over 40,000 miles through the world’s oceans. These spreading centers are areas where molten rock (less dense than the solid, cold ocean crust) rises to the seafloor from depth, as the plates move apart. Plates move apart from one another at differ- ent rates, ranging from 1 to 6 inches per year. Limited evidence suggests that the relative rate of spreading has an influence on the type, distribu- tion, and nature of the hydrothermal deposits formed, and that significant differences can be ex- pected between slow-spreading centers and inter- mediate- to fast-spreading centers.*° The mineralization process involves the interac- tion of ocean water with hot oceanic crust. Simply stated, ocean water percolates downward through fractures in the solid ocean crust. Heated at depth, the water interacts with the rock, leaching metals. Key to the creation of an ore deposit, the metals become more concentrated in the percolating water than they are in the surrounding rocks. The hot (300 to 400° centigrade) metal-laden brine moves upward and mixes with the cold ocean water, caus- ing the metals to precipitate, forming sulfide min- *SP_A. Rona, ‘Hydrothermal Mineralization at Slow-Spreading Centers: Red Sea, Atlantic Ocean, and Indian Ocean,’’ Marine Min- ing, vol. 5, No. 2, 1985, pp. 117-145. 62 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-7.—Formation of Marine Polymetallic Sulfide Deposits Sesich > eae \ Magma $ o heat source_.-~; & \ - N \ iG < “3 \ —~ 7 7 Pacific plate The Juan de Fuca and Gorda Ridges are active spreading centers off the coasts of Washington, Oregon, and California. Polymetallic sulfides are formed at spreading centers, where seawater heated by magma circulates through the rocks of the seafloor dissolving many minerals and depositing massive sulfide bodies containing zinc, copper, iron, lead, cadmium, and silver. Such sulfide deposits have been found on the Juan de Fuca Ridge within the EEZ of Canada and on the Gorda Ridge within the U.S. EEZ. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; M.A. Champ, W.P Dillon, and D.G. Howell, ‘‘Non-Living EEZ Resources: Minerals, Oil, and Gas,” Oceanus, volume 27, number 4, winter 1984/85. erals along cracks, crusts on the oceanfloor, or chimneys or stacks (figure 2-7). High temperatures suggest little or no mixing with cold seawater be- fore the solutions exit through the vents. The degree to which the ore solution is diluted in the subsurface depends on the porosity or frac- turing of the near surface rock and also determines the final exit temperature and composition of the hydrothermal fluids. The fluid ranges from man- ganese-rich in extreme dilution to iron-dominated at intermediate dilution levels to sulfide deposition when little dilution occurs. In support of these ob- servations, investigators have found sulfide depo- sition at the vents with manganese oxide deposits farther away from the seawater-hydrothermal fluid interface.*® Iron oxides are often found in associa- tion with, but at a distance from, the active vent and sulfide mineralization. An important control on the location of hydro- thermal mineralization, either beneath or on the seafloor at a spreading center, is whether the sub- seafloor hydrothermal convection system is leaky or tight. In leaky high-intensity hydrothermal sys- tems, seawater penetrates downward through frac- tures in the crust and mixes with upwelling primary hydrothermal solutions, causing precipitation of dis- seminated, stockwork, and possibly massive copper- iron-zinc sulfides beneath the seafloor. Dilute, low- temperature solutions depleted in metals discharge through vents to precipitate stratiform iron and manganese oxides, hydroxide, and silicate depos- its on the seafloor and suspended particulate mat- ter enriched in iron and manganese in the water column.*’ In tight, high-intensity hydrothermal sys- tems, primary hydrothermal solutions undergo neg- ligible mixing with normal seawater beneath the seafloor and discharge through vents to precipitate massive copper-iron-zinc sulfide deposits on the seafloor and suspended particulate matter enriched in various metals in the water column. ‘eEast Pacific Rise Study Group, ‘‘Crustal Processes of the Mid- Ocean Ridge,’’ Science, vol. 213, July 3, 1981, pp. 31-40. “Rona, ‘‘Hydrothermal Mineralization at Slow-Spreading Centers: Red Sea, Atlantic Ocean, and Indian Ocean,” p. 123. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 63 Table 2-5.—Estimates of Typical Grades of Contained Metals for Seafloor Massive Sulfide Deposits, Compared With Typical Ore From Ophiolite Massive Sulfide Deposits and Deep-Sea Manganese Nodules Sulfides, lat 21° N. & Sulfides Sulfide ore, Deep-sea Juan de Fuca Ridge Galapagos rift Cyprus manganese nodules Typical grade, Typical grade, Typical grade, Typical grade, Element in percent in percent in percent in percent ZINC i antereiesee 30 0.2 0.2 0.13 Copper ..... 0.5 5.0 2.5 0.99 Nickel ...... — = — 1.22 Cobalt...... _— 0.02 — 0.23 Molybdenum = 0.017 — 0.018 Silver. ....:. 0.02 = _— _ Leadiiieissiecete 0.30 — — — Manganese. . _ — _ 28.8 Germanium. . 0.01 _— — _— SOURCE: Adapted from V. E. McKelvey, ‘‘Subsea Mineral Resources,” U.S. Geological Survey, Bulletin, 1689-A, 1986, p. 82. Prospects for Future Development At the present time, too little is known about ma- rine polymetallic sulfide deposits to project their economic significance. Analysis of grab samples of sulfides collected from several other spreading zones indicate variable metal values, particularly from one zone to another. In general, all of the deposits sam- pled, except those on the Galapagos rift, have zinc as their main metal in the form of sphalerite and wurtzite. The Galapagos deposits differ in that they contain less than 1 percent zinc but have copper contents of 5 to 10 percent, mainly in the form of chalcopyrite. Weight percentage ranges of some metals found in the sulfide deposits are given in ta- ble 2-5. Some of the higher analyses are from in- dividual grab samples composed almost entirely of one or two metal sulfide minerals and analyze much higher in those metal values (e.g., a Juan de Fuca Ridge sample which is 50 percent zinc is primar- ily zinc sulfide). While this is impressive, it says nothing about the extent of the deposit or its uni- formity. In any event, it is certain that any future mining of hydrothermal deposits would recover a number of metal coproducts. Highly speculative figures assigning tonnages and dollar values to ocean polymetallic sulfide oc- currences have begun to appear. Observers should be extremely cautious in evaluating data related to these deposits. The deposits have only been exam- ined from a scientific perspective related primar- ily to the process of hydrothermal circulation and its chemical and biological influence on the ocean. No detailed economic evaluations of these depos- its or of potential recovery techniques have been made. Thus, estimates of the extent and volume of the deposits are based on geologic hypotheses and limited observational information. Even estimates of the frequency of occurrence of submarine sul- fide deposits would be difficult to make at present. Less than 1 percent of the oceanic ridge system has been explored in any detail. A further note of caution is also in order. In describing the potential for polymetallic sulfide de- posits, several investigators have drawn parallels or made comparisons to the costs of recovery and environmental impacts of ferromanganese nodule mining. There is also a parallel with regard to eco- nomic speculation. Early speculative estimates of the tonnages of ferromanganese nodules in the Pa- cific Ocean were given by John Mero in 1965 as 1.5 trillion tons.*® Even though this estimate was subsequently expressed with caveats as to what might be potentially mineable (10 to 500 billion tons),** the estimate of 1.5 trillion tons was widely quoted and popularized, thus engendering a com- mon belief at the time that the deep seabed nod- ules were a virtually limitless untapped resource—a wealth that could be developed to preferential ben- efit of less developed nations. The unlimited abun- 48Mero, The Mineral Resources of the Sea, p. 175. 49]_L. Mero, ‘‘Potential Economic Value of Ocean-Floor Manganese Nodule Deposits,’’ Ferromanganese Deposits on the Ocean Floor, D.R. Horn (ed.), National Science Foundation, International Dec- ade of Ocean Exploration, Washington, DC, 1972, p. 202. 64 © Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: National Science Foundation Black ‘‘smoker’ at a seafloor spreading center. Mineral- laden hot water shoots upward in geyser-like plumes from vents on the seafloor. These mineral-laden plumes, first discovered in 1978, are called smokers. Most plumes are black with rich mineral content. Chimneys develop around the vents as the minerals precipitate in the cold ocean water forming sulfide deposits containing zinc, copper, iron, lead, cadmium, and silver. dance of seabed nodules was a basic premise on which the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was founded. Economic change and subsequent research indicate both a more limited mineable resource base and much lower projected rates of return from nodule mining. However, as often happens, positions that become established on the basis of one set of assumptions are difficult to amend when the assumptions change. Creating expectations on the basis of highly speculative estimates of recoverable tonnages and values for hypothetical metal deposits serves little e Photo credit: U.S. Geological Survey Hand sample of sulfide minerals recovered from Juan de Fuca Ridge. purpose. Avoiding the present temptation to ex- trapolate into enormous dollar values could avoid what may, upon further research, prove to be less than a spectacular economic resource in terms of recovery. This is not to say that the resource may not be found, but simply that it is premature to de- fine its extent and estimate its economic value. What then can be said about expectations for the U.S. EEZ? The Gorda Ridge is a relatively slow spreading active ridge crest. Until recently, most sulfide deposits were found on the intermediate- to fast-spreading centers (greater than 2 inches per year). This trend led some investigators to consider the potential for sulfide mineralization at slow- spreading centers to be lower than at faster spread- ing centers. On the other hand, the convective heat transfer by hydrothermal circulation is on the same order of magnitude for both types of ridges. This Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 65 suggests that, if crustal material remains close to hydrothermal heat sources for a longer period of time, it might become even more greatly enriched through hydrothermal mineralization.°° In any event, a complete series of hydrothermal phases can be expected at slow-spreading centers, ranging from high-temperature sulfides to low-temperature ox- ides. The hydrothermal mineral phases include massive, disseminated and stockwork sulfide depos- its and stratiform oxides, hydroxides, and silicates. To account further for their differences, the deeper seated heat sources at slow-spreading centers can be inferred to favor development of leaky hydrothermal systems leading to precipitation of the sulfides beneath the seafloor. This inferrence, however, cannot be verified until the deposits are drilled extensively. Another view regarding the differences in poten- tial for mineralization between fast- versus slow- spreading ridge systems suggests that the extent of hydrothermal activity and polymetallic sulfide depo- sition along oceanic ridge systems is more a func- tion of that particular segment’s episodic magmatic phase than the spreading rate of the ridge as a whole.*! According to this view, at any given time a ridge segment with a medium or slow average spreading rate may show active hydrothermal vent- ing as extensive as that found along segments with fast spreading rates. Thus, massive polymetallic sul- fide deposits may be present along slow-spreading ridge segments, but they probably would be sepa- rated by greater time and distance intervals. Another factor, particularly on the Gorda Ridge, is the amount of sediment cover. The 90-mile-long, 5°Rona, ‘‘Hydrothermal Mineralization at Slow-Spreading Centers: Red Sea, Atlantic Ocean and Indian Ocean,”’ p. 140. 514. Malahoff, ‘‘Polymetallic Sulfides—A Renewable Marine Re- source,’’ Marine Mining: A New Beginning, Conference Proceed- ings, July 18-21, 1982, Hilo, HI, State of Hawaii, sponsored by De- partment of Planning and Economic Development, 1985, pp. 31-60. sediment-filled Escanaba Trough at the southern part of the Gorda Ridge is similar to the Guaymas Basin in the Gulf of California, where hydrother- mal sulfide mineralization has been found. The amount of sediment entering an active spreading center is critical to the formation and preservation of the sulfide deposits. Too much material deliv- ered during mineralization will dilute the sulfide and reduce the economic value of the deposit. On the other hand, an insufficient sediment flux can result in eventual oxidation and degradation of the unprotected deposit. Sulfide deposits and active hydrothermal dis- charge zones have been found on the southern Juan de Fuca Ridge beyond the 200-nautical-mile limit of the EEZ. The Juan de Fuca Ridge is a medium- rate spreading axis separating at the rate of 3 inches per year. Zinc and silver-rich sulfides have been dredged from two vent sites that lie less than a mile apart. Photographic information combined with ge- ologic inference suggests a crude first-order esti- mate of 500,000 tons of zinc and silver sulfides in a 4-mile-long segment of the axial valley.°? Although marine polymetallic sulfide deposits may someday prove to be a potential resource in their own right, the current value of oceanfloor sul- fides lies in the scientific understanding of their for- mation processes as well as their assistance in the possible discovery of analogous deposits on land (figure 2-8). Cyprus; Kidd Creek, Canada; and the Kuroko District in Japan are all mining sites for polymetallic sulfides, and all of these areas show the presence of underlying oceanic crust. The key to the past by studying the present is unraveling the mechanisms by which this very important class of minerals and ores were formed. °2R.A. Koski, W.R. Normark, and J.L. Morton, ‘‘Massive Sul- fide Deposits on the Southern Juan de Fuca Ridge: Results of Inves- tigations in the USGS Study Area, 1980-83,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 4, No. 2, 1985, pp. 147-164. ALASKA REGION In southeastern Alaska, the coast is mountainous and heavily glaciated. Glacial sediments cover much of the shelf, which averages about 30 miles in width. The Gulf of Alaska has a wide shelf that was mostly covered by glaciers during the Pleisto- cene. The eastern coast of the Gulf is less moun- tainous and lower than the steep western coast. The source rocks in the region include a wide range of 66 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-8.—Locations of Mineral Deposits Relative to Physiographic Features (vertical scale exaggerated) Sea level Seamounts sulfides Depth in feet SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; Bonnie A. McGregor and Millington Lockwood, ‘Mapping and Research in the Exclusive Economic Zone,” Department Polymetallic Copper/gold ma Placers | Base metals Petroleum Salt domes of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey and Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. sedimentary, metamorphic, volcanic, and intrusive bodies. The Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands con- sist of intrusive and volcanic rocks related to the subduction zone along the Pacific side. The shelf narrows westward from a width of nearly 125 miles to places where it is nearly nonexistent between the Aleutian Islands. The Aleutians are primarily an- desitic volcanics while granitic intrusives are found on the peninsula. The Bering Sea shelf is very broad and gener- ally featureless except for a few islands, banks, and depressions. A variety of sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks are found in the region. In the south, of particular mineralogical interest, are the Kuskokwim Mountains containing Precambrian schist and gneiss, younger intrusive rocks, and dunite. The Yukon River is the dominant drain- age system entering the Bering shelf, although sey- eral major rivers contribute sediments including streams on the Asian side. The region also has been Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 67 significantly affected by glaciation and major sea level changes. Glacial sediment was derived from Siberia as well as Alaska. Barrier islands are found along the northern side of the Seward Peninsula. The major physiographic feature of the north coast of Alaska is the gently sloping arctic coastal plain, which extends seaward to form a broad shelf under the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. This area was not glaciated during the Pleistocene, and only one major river, the Colville, drains most of the region into the Beaufort Sea. The drainage area includes the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks of the Brooks Range and their associated local granitic intrusives and metamorphosed rocks. Sand and Gravel Approximately 74 percent of the continental shelf area of the United States is off the coast of Alaska. Consequently, Alaskan offshore sand and gravel resources are very large. However, since these ma- terials are not generally located near centers of con- sumption, mining may not always be economically viable. While glaciation has deposited large amounts of sand and gravel on Alaska’s continental shelf, the recovery of economic amounts for construction ag- gregate is complicated by two factors: 1. much of the glacial debris is not well sorted, and 2. it is often buried under finer silt and mud washed out after deglaciation. Optimal areas for commercial sand and gravel de- posits would include outwash plains or submerged moraines that have not been covered with recent sediment, or where waves and currents have win- nowed out finer material. In general, much of the shelf of southeastern Alaska has a medium or coarse sand cover and is not presently receiving depositional cover of fine material. The Gulf of Alaska is currently receiv- ing glacial outwash of fine sediment in the eastern part and, in addition, contains extensive relict de- posits of sand and gravel. Economic deposits of sand have been identified parallel to the shoreline west of Yakutat and west of Kayak Island. An exten- sive area of sand has been mapped in the lower Cook Inlet, and gravel deposits are also present there (figure 2-9). Large quantities of sand and gravel are also found on the shelf of Kodiak Island. The Aleutian Islands are an unfavorable area for extensive sand and gravel deposits. Relict glacial sediments should be present on the narrow shelf, but the area is currently receiving little sediment. Large amounts of fine sand lie in the southern Bering Sea and off the Yukon River, but the north- ern areas may offer the greatest resource potential for construction aggregate. Extensive well-sorted sands and gravels are found at Cape Prince of Wales and northwest of the Seward Peninsula. However, distances to Alaskan market areas are considerable. Sand, silt, and mud are common on the shelf in the Chukchi Sea and Beaufort Sea. Small, thin patches of gravel are also present, but available data are sparse. The best prospect of gravel in the Beaufort Sea is a thick layer of Pleisto- cene gravel buried beneath 10 to 30 feet of over- burden east of the Colville River. Overall sand and gravel resource estimates of greater than 200 billion cubic yards are projected for Alaska (table 2-4). In many areas, environ- mental concerns in addition to economic consider- ations would significantly influence development. Precious Metals Source rocks for sediments in southeastern Alaska are varied. Gold is found in the region and has been mined from placer deposits. Platinum has been mined from lode deposits on Prince of Wales Island. Although few beach or marine placer de- posits are found in the area, the potential exists since favorable source rocks are present. However, glaciation has redistributed much of the sediment, and the shelf is receiving relatively little modern sediment. Some gold has been recovered from beach placers in the eastern Gulf of Alaska; but, in general, the prospects for locating economic placers offshore would not be great because of the large amount of glacially derived fine-grained material entering the area. In the western Gulf, the glaciation has re- moved much of the sediment from the coastal area and deposited it offshore where subsequent rework- ing may have formed economically interesting 68 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-9.—Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Alaskan EEZ 1000 Miles ee elie ee Be ee Goid and gravel have been mined from Alaskan waters and the potential exists for locating other offshore placer deposits. Explanation Known occurrence Sand and gravel @ Placers Q) Massive sulfides © Likely occurrence SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Interior, ‘Symposium Proceedings—A National Program for the Assessment and Develop- ment of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. placer deposits.°? Gold is found in the region and has been mined from beaches on Kodiak Island and Cook Inlet. Placer deposits may have formed on the outer shelf but recovery may be difficult. Lower Cook Inlet might be the best area of the Gulf to prospect. °3H_E. Clifton and G. Luepke, Heavy-Mineral Placer Deposits of the Continental Margin of Alaska and the Pacific Coast States, in Ge- ology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margin of Western North America and Adjacent Ocean Basisn-Beaufort Sea to Baja, Cali- fornia, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir, ed., D.W. Scholl, (in press). The shelf along the Aleutian Islands is a rela- tively unfavorable prospective locale for finding eco- nomic placer deposits. Sediment supply is limited, and ore mineralization in the volcanic source rocks is rare. Lode and placer gold deposits have been found on the Alaska Peninsula, and gold placers may be found off the south shore near former min- ing areas. Platinum has been mined from alluvial placers near Goodnews Bay on the Bering Sea. Anoma- lous concentrations of platinum are also found on Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 69 the coast south of the Salmon River and in sedi- ments in Chagvan Bay.°** The possibility exists that platinum placers may be found on the shelf if gla- cially transported material has been concentrated by marine processes. Source rocks are thought to be dunites in the coastal Kuskokwim Mountains, but lode deposits have not been found. Gold placers are also found along the coast of the Bering Sea and are especially important to the north near Nome. Lode gold and alluvial placers are common along the southern side of the Seward Peninsula, and tin placers have also been worked in the area. Gold has been found offshore in gravel on sub- merged beach ridges and dispersed in marine sands and muds. Economic deposits may be found in the submerged beach ridges or in buried channels off- shore. The region around Nome has yielded about 5 million ounces of gold, mainly from beach de- posits, and it is suggested that even larger amounts may lie offshore.°° How much of this, if any, may be discovered in economically accessible deposits is uncertain, but the prospects are probably pretty good in the Nome area. 54R.M. Owen, ‘‘Geochemistry of Platinum-Enriched Sediments: Applications to Mineral Exploration,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 1, No. 4, 1978, pp. 259-282. °°>Beauchamp and Cruickshank, ‘‘Placer Minerals on the U.S. Con- tinental Shelves—Opportunity for Development,”’ p. 700. Other Heavy Minerals The eastern Gulf of Alaska is strongly influenced by the modern glaciers in the area. Fresh, glacially derived sediments, including large amounts of fine- grained material, are entering the area and being sorted by marine processes. Heavy mineral suites are likely to be fairly immature and burial is rapid. In general, the prospects for locating economically interesting heavy mineral placers offshore in this area would not be great. About 2,000 tons of tin have been produced from placers on the western part of the Seward Penin- sula. Tin in association with gold and other heavy minerals may occur in a prominent shoal which ex- tends over 22 miles north-northeast from Cape Prince of Wales along the northwest portion of the Seward Peninsula. While seafloor deposits off the Seward Peninsula might be expected to contain gold, cassiterite, and possibly tungsten minerals, data are lacking to evaluate the resource potential. In general, the Chukchi and Beaufort seas may not contain many economic placers. Source rocks are distant, and ice gouging tends to keep bottom sediments mixed. HAWAII REGION AND U.S. TRUST TERRITORIES Hawaii is a tectonically active, mid-ocean vol- canic chain with typically narrow and limited shelf areas. Sand and gravel resources are in short sup- ply. The narrow shelf areas in general do not pro- mote large accumulations of sand and gravel off- shore. One area of interest is the Penguin Bank, which is a drowned shore terrace about 30 miles southeast of Honolulu (figure 2-10). The bank’s re- source potential is conservatively estimated at over 350 million cubic yards of calcareous sands in about 180 to 2,000 feet of water.°® This resource could supply Hawaii’s long-term needs for beach resto- ration and, to a lesser extent for construction. How- ever, high winds and strong currents are common 5°/W.B. Murdaugh, ‘‘Preliminary Feasibility Assessment: Offshore Sand Mining, Penguin Bank, Hawaii,’’ Program Feasibility Document—OCS Hard Minerals Leasing, app. 19, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1979, p. 14. on the Penguin Bank. Total sand and gravel re- source estimates for Hawaii may be as high as 25 billion cubic yards (table 2-4). No metalliferous deposits are mined onshore in Hawaii. Thus the prospects are somewhat poor for locating economically attractive placer deposits on the Hawaiian outer continental shelf. Minor phos- phorite deposits have been found in the Hawaii area, although phosphorite is found on seamounts elsewhere in the Pacific. The geology of the U.S. Trust Territories is gen- erally similar to Hawaii with the islands being of volcanic origin, often supporting reefs or limestone deposits. Clastic debris of the same material is present and concentrated locally, but very little in- formation is available as to the nature and extent of any sand or gravel deposits. Other areas are rela- 70 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-10.—Potential Hard Mineral Resources of the Hawaiian EEZ Cretaceous seamounts Horizon Guyot 1000 Miles (a Pe [ieee SY esa SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Symposium Proceedings—A National Program for the Assessment and Develop- Explanation Known Likely occurrence occurrence Sand and gravel ©) Mn-nodules ® Co-crusts © Massive sulfides © South Musician Seamounts State of Hawaii Loihi Submarine Volcano Prime manganese nodule province (not U.S. territory) Cretaceous seamounts Palmyra Reef Kingman Atoll ment of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. tively free of sediment or are covered with fine sedi- ment consisting of red clay and/or calcareous ooze. The extent to which the United States has juris- diction over the EEZs of the various Trust Terri- tories (figure 2-11) is examined in appendix B. Cobalt-Ferromanganese Crusts Recently, high concentrations of cobalt have been found in ferromanganese crusts, nodules, and slabs on the sides of several seamounts, ridges, and other raised areas of ocean floor in the EEZ of the cen- tral Pacific region. The current interest in cobalt- enriched crusts follows an earlier period of consid- erable activity during the 1960s and 1970s to de- termine the feasibility of mining manganese nod- ules from the deep ocean floor. While commercial prospects for deep seabed nodule mining have receded because of unfavorable economics com- pounded by political uncertainties resulting from the Law of the Sea Convention, commercial inter- est in cobalt-ferromanganese crusts is emerging. A number of factors are contributing to this shift of interest, including seamount crusts that: 1. appear to be richer in metal content and more widely distributed than previously recognized, 2. are at half the depth or less than their abyssal counterparts, Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 71 Figure 2-11.—Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts on the Flanks of Seamounts and Volcanic Islands Cobalt-enriched TM meee lron-manganese crusts enriched in cobalt occur on the flanks of volcanic islands and seamounts in geochemically favorable areas of the Pacific. Samples have been recovered for scientific purposes, but equipment for potential commercial evaluation and recovery has not been developed. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; Bonnie A. McGregor and Terry W. Offield, “The Exclusive Economic Zone: An Exciting New Frontier,” U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey. 3. can be found within the U.S. EEZ which could provide a more stable investment cli- mate, and 4. may provide alternative sources of strategic metals. Geologic Considerations Ferromanganese crusts range from thin coatings to thick pavements (up to 4 inches) on rock sur- faces that have remained free of sediment for mil- lions of years. The deposits are believed to form by precipitation of hydrated metal oxides from near- bottom seawater. The crusts form on submarine volcanic and phosphorite rock surfaces or as nod- ules around nucleii of rock or crust fragments. They differ from deep ocean nodules, which form on the sediment surface and derive much of their metals from the interstitial water of the underlying sedi- ment. Several factors appear to influence the com- position, distribution, thickness, and growth rate of the crusts. These factors include metal concen- tration in the seawater, age and type of the sub- strate, bottom currents, depth of formation, lati- tude, presence of coral atolls, development of an oxygen-minimum zone, proximity to continents, and geologic setting. The cobalt content varies with depth, with max- imum concentrations occurring between 3,300 and 8,200 feet in the Pacific Ocean. Cobalt concentra- tions greater than 1 percent are generally restricted to these depths. Platinum (up to 1.3 parts per mil- Pillow basalt on the crest of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Lava that flows out onto the seafloor from submarine volcanoes and spreading centers commonly forms pillow-like features. Ferromanganese crusts form on features such as these, which makes the microrelief of any future potential mine site an important constraint in developing a crust mining system. lion) and nickel (to 1 percent) are also found asso- ciated with cobalt in significant concentrations in many ferromanganese crust areas. Other metals found in lesser but significant amounts include lead, cerium, molybdenum, titanium, rhodium, zinc, and vanadium (table 2-6). At least two periods of crust formation occur in some crusts. Radiometric dating and other analy- ses indicate that crusts have been forming for the last 20 million years, with one major interruption in ferromanganese oxide accretion during the late Miocene, from 8 to 9 million years ago, as detected in some samples. During this period of interrup- tion, phosphorite was deposited, separating the older and younger crust materials. In some areas, there is evidence of even older periods of crust for- mation. Crust thickness is related to age; conse- quently, within limits, the age of the seafloor is an important consideration in assessing the resource potential of an area. However, crust thickness does not ensure high cobalt and nickel concentrations. The U.S. Geological Survey found thick crusts with moderate cobalt, manganese, and nickel con- centrations on Necker Ridge, which links the Mid- 72 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 2-6.—Average Chemical Composition for Various Elements of Crusts From <8,200 Feet Water Depth From the EEZ of the United States and Other Pacific Nations (all data are in weight percent) Areas n Mn Fe Co Ni Cu Pb Ti SiO2 P20s Fe/Mn Hawaii and Midway (on axis)........ 2-38 24 16.0 0.91 045 #005 — si 79 — 0.73 Hawaii and Midway (off axis)........ 4-15 21 18/0) (0:60) (0:37) OM0) SONS 1:3 16.0 1.0 0.88 Johnston lSlandiasaceer ceteris 12-40 22 1720) O87 Ole OF4 Sie OSI iti ON iZa ules VA) 0.81 Palmyra Atoll-Kingman Reef ........ 7-8 27 16.0 1.1 0.51 OHO} OLA? Tel ye) 1148) 0.61 Howland-Baker Islands ............. 3 29 18:0) 0:99 O6Sie O08 NON Avil ee A» 4-7 0.64 MarshallilsiandSipemisemmcircrir-racrr 5-13 26 Teo), COHeYS hel) OR 2 Oe) ak 5.6 0.90 0.56 Average central Pacific crusts....... 34-117 23 VAOVO Oxy CMe) Oks) 12 94 1.3 0.75 Northern Marianna Islands (andiGuam) ere iteretacterteictenerce: 6-7 12 16:0) O!092 TONS 0:05) 0:07, = _ — 1.41 Western U.S. borderland............ 2-5 19 GLO} OFSO Me O:SO O04 Tie Ol5iy 0:3i1 17.0 — 0.95 Gulf of Alaska Seamounts .......... 3-6 26 SOMO 7an Ol 40 ON SinOdi7a nO! or — 087 0.72 Lau Basin (hydrothermal) ........... 2 46 0.60 0.007 0.005 0.02 0.006 0.005 — 0.05 0.01 Tonga Ridge and Lau Basin (h¥drogenous)) 0. nee eee eset 6-9 16 200M OFS O22 O!05) 086) 1:0 — 1.0 1.26 SouthiChinarSearceeeneeeercioscrine 14 13 13105 O53) 10!3459710'04)5) 0'08 — 14.0 — 1.07 Bonin Island area (Japan)........... LEO), (21 13.0 0.41 OSS O'06s FON 25 O67, 49 0.82 0.70 FrenchiPolynesiatemrcririricnr acre 2-9 23 120 Ve OGON RON HO:2655 120 6/5 0:3 45a 0:56 Average for Pacific hydrogenous crusts (all data from figures 2-8) ... 55-319 22 15.0063) 9 0'44 5 0!08) 2 0:16) FNO!S8 aio cl 0.81 n = Number of analyses for various elements. — = No data. SOURCE: J.R. Hein, L.A. Morgenson, D.A. Clague, and R.A. Koski, ‘‘Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts From the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States and Nodules From the Oceanic Pacific,” D. Scholl, A. Grantz, and J. Vedder (eds.), Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margins of Western North American and Adjacent Ocean Basins: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir, in press. Pacific Mountains and the Hawaiian Archipelago.*” Further, high cobalt values of 2.5 percent were found in the top inch or so of crusts from the S.P. Lee Seamount at 8° N. latitude. These deposits oc- cur at depths coincident with a water mass that con- tains minimum concentrations of oxygen, leading most investigators to attribute part of this cobalt enrichment to low oxygen content in the seawater environment. However, high cobalt values (greater than 1 percent) have also been found in the Mar- shall Islands, the western part of the Hawaiian Ridge province, and in French Polynesia, all of which are outside the well-developed regional equatorial oxygen-minimum zone but which ap- pear to be associated with locally developed oxygen- minimum zones. Oxygen-minimum zones are also associated with low iron/manganese ratios. Figure 2-12 illustrates the zone of cobalt enrichment in fer- romanganese crusts on seamounts and volcanic is- lands. In general, while progress is being made to understand more fully the physical and geochemi- cal mechanisms of cobalt-manganese crust forma- °7J.R. Heine, et al., ‘‘Geological and Geochemical Data for Sea- mounts and Associated Ferromanganese Crusts In and Near the Ha- waiian, Johnston Island, and Palmyra Island Exclusive Economic Zones,’’ U.S. Geological Survey, Open File Report 85-292, 1985, p. 129. tion, the cobalt enrichment process is still uncer- tain. Investigations to gain insight in this area will be of considerable benefit in identifying future re- sources. Surface texture, slope, and sediment cover also may influence crust growth rates. For example, sediment-free, current-swept regions appear to be favorable sites for crust formation. Nodules are also found associated with cobalt- rich manganese crusts in some areas. These nod- ules are similar in composition to the crusts and, consequently, differ from their deep ocean coun- terparts. Another difference between crust- associated nodules and deep ocean nodules is the greater predominance of nucleus material in the crust-associated nodules. The cobalt-rich nodules generally occur as extensive fields on the tops of seamounts or within small valleys and depressions. While of much lesser extent overall than crust occurrences, these nodules may prove more easily recoverable and, hence, possibly of nearer term eco- nomic interest. Prospects for Future Development The gedlogic considerations mentioned previ- ously are important determinants in assessing the Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 73 Figure 2-12.—EEZs of U.S. Insular and Trust Territories in the Pacific Alaska \ io Midway Island Northern Marina Islands Johnston Island Marshall Islands Howland and Baker Islands In addition to the waters off the fifty states, the Exclusive Economic Zone includes the waters contiguous to the insular territories Hawaii Palmyra Atoll Manganese Nodule Kingman Reef Province Jarvis Island American aman 612 1225 Miles and possessions of the United States. The United States has the authority to manage these economic zones to the extent consistent with the legal relationships between the United States and these islands. SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; J.R. Hein, L.A. Morgenson, D.A. Clague, and R.A. Koski, “Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts From the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States and Nodules From the Oceanic Pacific,” in D. Scholl, A. Grantz, and J.Vedder, eds., “Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margin of Western North America and Adjacent Ocean Basins,” American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 43, in press. resource potential of cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts. Using three primary assumptions based on these factors, the East West Center in Hawaii produced a cobalt-rich ferromanganese crust re- source assessment for the Minerals Management Service.°® The first assumption was that commer- 58A_L. Clark, P. Humphrey, C.J. Johnson, et al., Cobalt-Rich Manganese Crust Potential, OCS Study, MMS 85-0006, U.S. De- partment of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, 1985, 35 pp. cial concentrations of cobalt-rich crusts would be confined to the slopes and plateau areas of sea- mounts in water depths between 2,600 and 7,900 feet. The second assumption was that commercial concentrations would be most common in areas older than 25 million years, where both generations of crust would be found, and less common in areas younger than 10 million years, where only thin- ner younger crust generation occurs. The third primary assumption was that commercial concen- 74 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 2-7.—Resource Potential of Cobalt, Nickel, Manganese, and Platinum in Crusts of U.S. Trust and Affiliated Territories Resource potential Nickel Platinum Territory Cobalt (tx 10°) Manganese (oz x 10°) Belau/Palau........ OSS x0%3i1 15.5 0.68 Guam 2 eee ae O55 0:31 15:5 0.68 Howland-Baker ..... 0.19 0.11 5.5 0.48 CEMIS Gucopcotdeas 0.06 0.03 1.6 0.15 Jehnston Island .... 1.38 0.69 41.6 3.50 Kingman—Palmyra . 3.38 1.52 76.1 5.70 Marshall Islands... . 10.55 5.49 281.3 21.50 Micronesia......... 17.76 9.96 496.0 34.70 Northern Mariana IslandSianceecierce 3.60 1.97 100.2 7.70 SamoOaneeeeaeeee: 0.03 0.01 0.8 0.04 Wake iia cary anbaeun att 0.98 0.51 26.8 2.00 NOTE: The above are estimates of in-place resources and as such do not indicate either potential recoverability or mineable quantities. SOURCE: Allen L. Clark, Peter Humphrey, Charles J. Johnson, and Dorothy K. Pak, Cobalt-Rich Manganese Crust Potential, OCS Study MMS 85-0006, 1985, p. 20. trations would be most common in areas of low sediment cover that have been within the geographi- cally favorable equatorial zone for the majority of their geologic history. The East-West Center’s procedure was to use detailed bathymetric maps to determine permissive areas for each EEZ of the U.S. Trust and Affiliated Territories in the Pacific. The permissive areas in- cluded all the seafloor between the depths of 2,600 and 7,900 feet, making corrections for areas of sig- nificant slopes. Then, based on published data, the metal content and thickness of crust occurrences for each area were averaged. Crust thicknesses were also assigned on the basis of ages of the seamounts, guyots, and island areas. Seamounts older than 40 million years were assigned a thickness of 1 inch. Seamounts younger than 10 million years were as- signed a thickness of one-half inch, and seamounts younger than 2 to 5 million years were not included in the resource calculations. ‘These data are sum- marized in table 2-7. According to table 2-7, the five territories of high- est resource potential would be the Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Kingman- Palmyra Islands, and Johnston Island. Further ge- ologic inference suggests that the resource poten- tial of the Federated States of Micronesia and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands could be reduced because of uncertainties in age and degree of sediment cover. Thus, according to their more qualitative assessment, the largest re- source potential for cobalt crusts would likely be in the Marshall Islands, followed by the Kingman- Palmyra, Johnston, and Wake Islands (figure 2- 13). The territories of lesser resource potential would include, in decreasing order, the Federated States of Micronesia, Commonwealth of the North- ern Mariana Islands (figure 2-14), Belau-Palau, Guam, Howland-Baker, Jarvis, and Samoa.°? Another assessment of crust resource potential using grade and permissive area calculations with geologic and oceanographic criteria factored in 1s given in table 2-8.°° This assessment is also a qual- itative ranking without attempting to quantify ton- nages. In this regard, other factors that would have to be considered to assess the economic potential of any particular area include: nearness to port fa- cilities and processing plants, and the cost of trans- portation. In addition, factors highly critical to the economics of a potential crust mining operation would be the degree to which the crust can be sep- arated from its substrate and the percentage of the STbid., p. 21. 60J.R. Hein, L.A. Morgenson, D.A. Glague, and R.A. Koski, ““Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts From the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States and Nodules From the Oceanic Pacific,’’ D. Scholl, A. Grantz, and J. Vedder (eds.), Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margins of Western North America and Adjacent Ocean Basins, American Association of Petroleum Geolo- gists, Memoir (in press), 1986. Table 2-8.—Estimated Resource Potential of Crusts Within the EEZ of Hawaii and U.S. Trust and Affiliated Territories Relative Pacific area banking Potential MarshallistandSiinyser cedars 1 High Micronesiaymermccicren erent 2 High Jonnstonnslangkivmtrarteeic its 3 High Kingman-Palmyra............. 4 High Hawaii-Midway............... 5 Medium Wake isis artery sii iba ech tenia 6 Medium Howland-Baker............... 7 Medium Northern Mariana Islands...... 8 Low JAIVIS Ke isee o cncloleneterenshaleenereieustets 9 Low PELUNCE Uiiorcinninioiaid cimoiibicatorciatas 10 Low Belau/Palauly-eecmermerrneienieicr 11 Low ICVETNMMado oer obareUtoD Coot S 12 Low SOURCE: Modified from J.R. Hein, F.T. Manheim, and W.C. Schwab, Cobalt-Rich Ferramanganese Crusts From the Central Pacific, OTC 5234, Offshore Technology Conference, May 1986, pp. 119-126. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ° 75 Figure 2-13.—Potential Hard Mineral Resources of U.S. Insular Territories South of Hawaii Many seamounts Wake Island Seamounts Seamounts Explanation Known Likely occurrence occurrence Mn-nodules ® Co-crusts ® Massive sulfides © ) Hawaii Loihi Submarine Volcano Cretaceous seamounts Johnston Island Seamounts Palmyra Atoll Kingman Reef Howland and Baker Islands Prime manganese nodule province (not U.S. territory) Seamounts Jarvis Island Submarine volcanism American Samoa la— Seamounts 0 1000 Miles (a ee ee SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Symposium Proceedings—A National Program for the Assessment and Develop- ment of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. area that could not be mined because of roughness of small-scale topography. When asked to place the stage of knowledge of the economic potential of co- balt crusts on the time-scale experienced in the in- vestigations of manganese nodules, one leading researcher chose 1963.° ®1J.M. Broadus, Seabed Mining, report to the Office of Technol- ogy Assessment, U.S. Congress, Feb. 14, 1984, p. 24. Manganese Nodules Ferromanganese nodules are found at most water depths from the continental shelf to the abyssal plain. Since the formation of nodules is limited to areas of low sedimentation, they are most common on the abyssal plain. Nodules on the abyssal plain are enriched in copper and nickel and, until re- cently, have been regarded as candidates for com- mercial recovery. Nodules found on topographic highs in the Pacific are enriched in cobalt and were mentioned in the previous section. 76 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 2-14.—Potential Hard Mineral Resources of U.S. Insular Territories West of Hawaii Wake Island Northern Mariana Islands Marianas Trough seafloor spreading Active Many volcanism seamounts Guam Explanation Known Likely occurrence occurrence Mn-nodules Co-crusts Massive sulfides 1000 Miles SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; U.S. Department of the Interior, “Symposium Proceedings—A National Program for the Assessment and Develop- ment of the Mineral Resources of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone,” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 929, 1983. The prime area considered for commercial re- covery of nodules in the Pacific lies in international waters between the Clarion and Clipperton frac- ture zones in the mid-Pacific ocean. However, sev- eral other smaller areas may contain suitable mine sites, for example, southwest of Hawaii. A mine site should have an average grade of about 2.25 per- cent copper plus nickel with 20 pounds of nodules per square yard to be commercially interesting. Be- cause of uncertainties brought about by the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention in regard to mining in international waters, and because of the low price of copper on the world market, the re- covery of nodules from the Clarion-Clipperton re- gion is not attractive at this time. Ch. 2—Resource Assessments and Expectations ¢ 77 ee Photo credit: Don Foot, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Salt Lake City Cobalt-enriched ferromanganese crust material over 2 inches thick dredged from flank of a seamount in the Pacific Ocean. While samples of crust material have been recovered for scientific purposes, commercial recovery would depend on the development of practical and efficient methods of separating the crust from the basaltic substrate and conveying it to the surface. 78 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Manganese nodules on the seafloor. Ferromanganese nodules have been studied extensively as a potential source of copper, nickel, cobalt, and manganese. Prototype mining systems have successfully recovered several tons of nodules from sites such as this, but full- scale mining systems have not been built and tested. Current market conditions do not encourage further commercial development. Chapter 3 Minerals Supply, Demand, and Future Trends CONTENTS Page Introductione ws... ikea tse ois hee shes 81 Trends in Minerals Consumption ......... 81 CommodityaPrices! Hower tctneisie ess 83 State of the Mining Industry ............. 85 Perroalloys gn cw ee eee tens eames ee 86 National Defense Stockpile ............... 87 Substitution, Conservation, and Recycling . 88 Major Seabed Mineral Commodities ...... 89 @abalt eo i oe bite te ke 89 Ghromim oes se ee 90 Manganese) oo. ee 94 Nickel snes ee ee ee 95 GGOPPEh tion eo es ee OT. ZAC er ee 99 Golde oe ee es 100 Platinum-Group Metals. ............... 102 Titanium (IImenite and Rutile) ......... 104 Phosphate Rock (Phosphorite) .......... 107 Sand and Gravel <5. 2 111 Gamet 3 a 112 Monazite.. 03. 112 ZiTCON 2.6 112 Box Box Page 3-A. Government Sources of Information and Units of Measure Used in This Report) 82 Figures Figure No. Page 3-1. Actual and Projected Consumption of Selected Minerals in the Market- Economy Countries :... 5.0.25... . 3 82 3-2. Price Trends for Selected Seabed Mineral Commodities ..:....2......: 84 3-3. Cobalt Prices, 1920-85... 85 3-4. U.S. Ferrochromium and Chromite Ore lmpoxts: 3.5 ee 87 3-5. Percentage of Manganese Imported Into the United States as Ferromanganese, 1973-86 2... 94 Figure No. Page 3-6. World Titanium Pigment Manufacturing Capacity ............. 105 3-7. Major World Exporters of Phosphate Rock Since 1975, With Projections to AS he Me ree Meerere RAIA earn 108 Tables Table No. Page 3-1. Major U.S. Strategic Materials Contained in the National Defense Stockpile ..... 0.0.0... eee 88 3-2. Forecast of U.S. and World Cobalt Demand in 2000.22... 2 ee 90 3-3. 1986 National Defense Chromium Stockpile Goals and Inventories...... 91 3-4. Forecasts for U.S. Chromium Demand im 2000.02). 2.5 93 3-5. Status of Manganese in the National Defense Stockpile—1986..._... 3. 95 3-6. Forecast for U.S. and World Manganese Demand in 2000 ........ 96 3-7. Forecast of U.S. and World Nickel Demand in 2000....°. a 97 3-8. U.S. and World Copper Demand im 2000... 3... 99 3-9. Forecast of U.S. and World Zinc Demand in 2000... 0... 100 3-10. Platinum-Group Metals in the National Defense Stockpile .......... 102 3-11. Forecast of Demand for Platinum- Group Metals in 2000....--. 7... 103 3-12. U.S. Titanium Reserves and Reserve (BASE. 105 3-13. Forecast for U.S. Titanium Demand m 2000... 106 3-14. World and U.S. Phosphate Rock Production. 0 a 108 3-15. World Phosphate Rock Reserves and Reserve Base...) oo ae 109 3-16. Forecasts of U.S. and World Phosphate Rock Demand in 2000 ....110 Chapter 3 Minerals Supply, Demand, and Future Trends INTRODUCTION Commodities, materials, and mineral concen- trates—the stuff made from minerals—are actively traded in international markets. An analysis of do- mestic demand, supply, and prices of minerals and their products must also consider future global sup- ply and demand, and international competition. This is important to all mining and minerals ven- tures, but particularly so for seabed minerals, which must not only compete with domestically produced land-based minerals, but which must also match the prices of foreign onshore and offshore pro- ducers.! The commercial potential of most seabed min- erals from the EEZ is uncertain. Several factors make analysis of their potential difficult, if not im- possible: e First, very little is known about the extent and grade of the mineral occurrences that have been identified thus far in the EEZ. e Second, without actual experience or pilot operations, the mining costs and the unfore- seen operational problems that affect costs can- not be assessed accurately. e Third, unpredictable performance of domes- tic and global economies adds uncertainty to forecasts of minerals demand. ¢ Fourth, changing technologies can cause un- foreseen shifts in demand for minerals and ma- terials. e Fifth, past experience indicates that methods for projecting or forecasting minerals demand 1J. Broadus, ‘“‘Seabed Materials,’’ Science, vol. 235, Feb. 20, 1987, p. 835. fall short of perfection and are sometimes in- correct or misleading. Mineral commodities demand is a function of de- mand for construction, capital equipment, trans- portation, agricultural products, and durable con- sumer goods. These markets are tied directly or indirectly to general economic trends and are nota- bly unstable. With economic growth as the ‘‘com- mon denominator’’ for determining materials con- sumption and hence minerals demand, and with recognition of the shortcomings in predicting global economic changes, any hope for reasonably ac- curate forecasts evaporates. It is probably unwise to even attempt to specu- late on the future commercial viability of seabed mining, but few can resist the temptation to do so. The case of deep seabed manganese nodule min- ing offers a graphic example of how external in- ternational and domestic political events and eco- nomic factors can affect the business climate and economic feasibility of offshore mining ventures. After considerable investment in resource assess- ments, development and testing of prototype min- ing systems, and detailed economic and financial analyses, the downturn of the minerals markets from the late 1970s through the 1980s continues to keep the mining of seabed manganese nodules out of economic reach, although many of the in- ternational legal uncertainties once facing the in- dustry have been eliminated through reciprocal agreements among the ocean mining nations. As a consequence, several deep seabed mining ven- tures have either shrunk their operations or aban- doned their efforts altogether. TRENDS IN MINERALS CONSUMPTION Minerals consumption for a product is deter- mined by the number of units manufactured and the quantity of metal or material used in each unit. Total demand is influenced by the mix of goods consumed in the economy (product composition), because each consumes different materials as well as different amounts of those materials. Finally, minerals demand is closely related to macroeconomic 81 82 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier activity, consumer preference, changing technol- ogies, prices, and other unpredictable factors (see box 3-A). Long-term demand is difficult to forecast. Sim- ple projections of consumption trends may be mis- leading (figure 3-1).? From the late 1970s through 2]. Tilton, ‘‘Changing Trends in Metal Demand and the Decline of Mining and Mineral Processing in North America,’’ paper pre- sented at Colorado School of Mines Conference on Public Policy and the Competitiveness of U.S. and Canadian Metals Production, Golden, CO, Jan. 27-30, 1987. Box 3-A.—Government Sources of Information and Units of Measure Used in This Report The U.S. Bureau of Mines compiles statistics related to production, demand, and availability of minerals and mineral commodities. The U.S. Geological Survey compiles information and data about domestic and world mineral resources. Both are agencies of the U.S. Department of the In- terior which has responsibility for managing the resources of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and the onshore public lands. The Minerals Man- agement Service (MMS) administers the OCS program, and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages the onshore lands within the De- partment of the Interior. Information about mining and manufacturing is also available from the International Trade Administration (ITA) and the Bureau of Eco- nomics housed in the Department of Commerce. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- istration (NOAA), another Commerce agency, is responsible for information and services related to the ocean environment and marine science; it is also a source of information related to the re- sources of the EEZ. Although commodity statistics are often re- ported in several different units of weight depend- ing on which commodity is being discussed, all tonnage has been converted to short tons (2,000 pounds) in this report unless otherwise specified all uses of the term ‘‘ton’’ means ‘‘short ton.”’ Weights are reported in elemental form, although some minerals are more commonly used as other compounds, e.g., titanium as titanium dioxide (TiOz) for pigments. Figure 3-1.—Actual and Projected Consumption of Selected Minerals in the Market-Economy Countries Million tons Million tons Million tons (1950-85) 12 Copper f 10 Projected 4 8 b 6 4 2 0 50 Year Projected Stowasser, ‘‘Phosphate Rock,’’ Mineral Facts and Problems— 1985 Edition, p. 591. °®Stowasser and Fantel, ‘‘The Outlook for the United States Phos- phate Rock Industry,’’ pp. 85-116. 2000 is forecast to be 2 percent, with a low of 1.5 and a high of 3 percent.°’” Exports of phosphate rock are projected to decline at an annual rate of about 1 percent through 2000. In summary, the annual growth rate is expected to approach 0.8 percent from 1983 through 2000. Future export levels of phosphate rock and phos- phate fertilizer will be largely determined by the availability of resources from Florida and North Carolina, competition from foreign producers, and an increase in international trade of phosphoric acid rather than phosphate rock. U.S. phosphate rock supply is likely to be sufficient to meet demand through 1995, but demand could exceed domestic supply by 2000 if U.S. producers reduce domestic capacity as a result of foreign competition. In addition to the domestic industry’s problems with foreign competition and diminishing ore qual- ity and quantity, problems associated with the envi- ronment affect phosphate rock mining and benefic- iation. Environmental concerns include disposing of waste clay (slimes) produced from the benefici- ation of phosphate ores, disposing of phosphogyp- sum from acid plants, developing acceptable recla- mation procedures for disturbed wetlands, and operating with reduced water consumption. Industry analysts think the phosphate industry’s problems will grow with time. It is likely that the price will not increase enough to justify mining higher-cost deposits, and that the public will con- tinue to oppose phosphate mining and manufac- turing phosphatic chemicals. In that event, the re- maining low-cost, high-quality deposits will continue to satisfy demand until they are exhausted or until the markets for phosphate rock or fertilizer become unprofitable. If domestic phosphate rock °7Stowasser, ‘‘Phosphate Rock,’’ Mineral Facts and Problems— 1985 Edition, p. 590. Table 3-16.—Forecasts of U.S. and World Phosphate Rock Demand in 2000 2000 Annual growth Actual Low Probable High 1983-2000 (million tons) (percent) United! Statesitqcc.- cece fe 449 50 50 60 1.8 Resteofsworldijereracuclelsvarpevar-iere 110 220 220 230 4.2 Worlditotallitccmimcerarnsctaerer. 270 270 290 3.6 4U.S. data for 1986, from W. Stowasser, ‘Phosphate Rock,”’ Mineral Commodity Summaries— 1987 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1987), p. 116. SOURCE: Adapted from W. Stowasser, ‘‘Phosphate Rock," Mineral Facts and Problems—1985 Edition (Washington, DC; U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 592. Ch. 3—Minerals Supply, Demand, and Future Trends © 111 production costs continue to rise and investment in new mines is not justified, the shortfall between domestic supply and domestic demand will have to come from imports of lower-cost phosphate rock.°° Sand and Gravel Properties and Uses Sand and gravel is a nationally used commodity which is an important element in many U.S. in- dustries and is used in enormous quantities. Sand and gravel can be used for industrial purposes such as in foundary operations, in glass manufacturing, as abrasives, and in infiltration beds of water treat- ment facilities. Most sand and gravel, however, is used in con- struction. Much of the aggregate is used in con- crete for residential housing, commercial buildings, bridges and dams, and in concrete or bituminous mixes for highway construction. A large percent- age of sand and gravel is also used without binders as road bases, as road coverings, and in railroad ballast. National Importance Generally, there is an abundance of sand and gravel in the United States. Even though these ma- terials are widely distributed, they are not univer- sally available for consumptive use. Some areas are devoid of sand and gravel or may be covered with sufficient material to make surface mining imprac- tical. In some areas, many sand and gravel sources do not meet toughness, strength, durability, or other physical property ~equirements for certain uses. Similarly, many sources may contain mineral constituents that react adversely when used as con- crete aggregate. Furthermore, even though an area may be endowed with an abundance of sand and gravel suitable for the intended purpose, existing land uses, zoning, or regulations may preclude commercial exploitation of the aggregate. Domestic Resources and Reserves Sand and gravel resources are so extensive that resource estimates of total reserves are probably not %®*Jbid., p. 593. obtainable. Minable resources occur both onshore and in coastal waters. Large offshore deposits have been located in the Atlantic continental shelf and offshore Alaska.°? The availability of construction sand and gravel is controlled largely by land use and/or environmental constraints. Local shortages of sand and gravel are becoming common, espe- cially near large metropolitan areas, and therefore onshore resources may not meet future demand. Crushed stone is being used often as a substitute, despite its higher price. Domestic Production In 1986, about 837 million tons of construction sand and gravel were produced in the United States, industrial sand and gravel production ap- proached 28.5 million tons!°° and about 2.5 mil- lion tons of construction and industrial sand and gravel were exported.'°! The domestic industry is made up of many producers ranging widely in size. Most produce materials for the local market. The western region led production and consumption of sand and gravel, followed by the east north-central, mountain, and southern regions. Future Demand and Technological Trends Demand forecasts for U.S. construction sand and gravel for 2000 range between a low of 650 mil- lion tons and a high of 1.2 billion tons, with the demand probably about 1 billion tons. Average an- nual growth in demand is expected to be about 2.9 percent annually through 2000.1? Apparent con- sumption in 1986 was about 836 million tons. Offshore resources may find future markets in certain urban areas where demand might outpace onshore supply because of scarcity or limited pro- duction due to land use or environmental con- 99]. Williams, ‘‘Sand and Gravel Deposits Within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone: Resource Assessment and Uses,’’ OTC 5197, Proceedings of the 18th Annual Offshore Technology Confer- ence, Houston, Texas, May 5-8, 1986, p. 377. 100V. Tepordei, ‘‘Sand and Gravel,’’ Mineral Commodity Sum- maries—1987 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1985), pp. 136-137. 101V. Tepordei and L. Davis, ‘‘Sand and Gravel,’’ Minerals Year- book—1984 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1985), p. 775. 102V7_ Tepordei, ‘‘Sand and Gravel,’’ Mineral Facts and Problems— 1985 Edition, Bulletin 675 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 695. 112 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier straints. Such areas include New York, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Juan, and Honolulu. Garnet Garnet is an iron-aluminum silicate used for high-quality abrasives and as filter media. Its size and shape in its natural form is important in de- termining its industrial use. The United States is the dominant world producer and user of garnet, accounting for about 75 percent of the world’s out- put and 70 percent of its consumption. In 1986, the U.S. produced about 35,000 tons of garnet and consumed about 28,000 tons.!°? Domestic demand is expected to rise only modestly to about 38,000 tons per year by 2000.1°* World resources are very large and distributed widely among nations. Monazite Monazite is a rare-earth and thorium mineral found in association with heavy mineral sands. It is recovered mainly as a byproduct of processing titanium and zirconium minerals, principally in Australia and India. Domestic production of monazite is small relative to demand. As a result, the United States imports monazite concentrates and intermediates, primarily for their rare-earth content. The rare earths are used domestically in a wide variety of end uses including: petroleum fluid crack- ing catalysts, metallurgical applications in high- strength low-alloy steels, phosphors used in color television and color computer displays, high- strength permanent magnets, laser crystals for high- energy applications such as fusion research and spe- cial underwater-to-surface communications, elec- tronic components, high-tech ceramics, fiber-optics, and superconductors. It is estimated that about 15,400 tons of equivalent rare-earth oxides were consumed domestically in 1986.'° 3G. Austin, ‘‘Garnet, Industrial,’? Mineral Commodity Sum- maries—1987 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 56. 1047. Smoak, ‘‘Garnet,’’ Mineral Facts and Problems—1985 Edi- tion, Bulletin 675 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 297. 105]. Hedrick, ‘“‘Rare-Earth Metals,’’ Mineral Commodity Sum- maries—1987 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 126. Substitutes for the rare earths are available for many applications, but are usually much less ef- fective. The United States imported 3,262 tons of monazite concentrates in 1986, representing about 12 percent of the total estimated domestic consump- tion of equivalent rare-earth oxides. World resources of the rare-earth elements are large, and critical shortages of most of the elements are not likely to occur. Because domestic demand for thorium is small, only a small amount of the thorium available in monazite is recovered. It is used in aerospace alloys, lamp mantles, welding electrodes, high-temperature refractory applica- tions, and nuclear fuel. Zircon Zircon is recovered as a byproduct from the ex- traction of titanium minerals from titaneous sands. Zirconium metal is used as fuel cladding and struc- tural material in nuclear reactors and for chemical processing equipment because of its resistance to corrosion. Ferrozirconium; zircon and zirconium oxide, is used in abrasives, refractories, and cer- amics. Zircon is produced in the United States with about 40 to 50 percent of consumption imported from Australia, South Africa, and France. Domestic consumption of contained zirconium was about 50,000 tons in 1983.!°® The United States is estimated to have about 14 million tons of zir- con, primarily associated with titaneous sand de- posits. It is expected that domestic contained zir- conium demand may reach about 116,000 tons by 2000, an annual growth of nearly 6 percent. Sub- stitutes for zirconium are available, but at a sacri- fice in effectiveness. Domestic reserves are gauged to be adequate for some time in the future although the United States imports much of that consumed from cheaper sources. 106W. Adams, ‘‘Zirconium and Hafnium,’’ Mineral Facts and Prob- Jems—1985 Edition, Bulletin 675 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 941. . Chapter 4 Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone CONTENTS AmitrOdWMeton ji 55 8 ee ia cctne eee eto he satiaie o cited ster shalene tate te feos etn nae Pee oe nee ae Reconnaissance echnolopiesisirrccrs so ster esa scastte. ita = fees ope) te ete eet ie ene SidesLookineSomars' 5.122 whe shay) cia act Sachs aie ace ot ental eee ip ar ee a orn Bathy metrics Systems) saci aeeine aie = o.5 5 sche cca oeeek marie crakone tees tuols ap Nae er Reflection and (Retraction Seismology. 200). Wy icn a tee cies eee ene Ae eee Miasnetie: Methods: 60.2% Rost iii eis isrt ers: ocen sume tsyeen Mek cr vu is Sine re mee Ria Gravity: Methods (2 occ nin eee cette te oe ont dae Baers Oy hae Sitesspeciiic Pechnologies. (ck ho ce a es oe Hlectricaly Techniques). eh ae Se ae oe Greenline ae Geochemical: Pechniques: (0.0 ee Manned Submersibles and Remotely Operated Vehicles .................... @ptical Imaging oe ee. Direct Sampling by Coring, Drilling, and Dredging .......:....:..:....5..3 Navigation Concerts... 22. ee Figures Figure No. Page 4-1. USGS Research Vessel S.P. Lee and EEZ Exploration Technologies....... 4-2. GLORIA Long-Range Side-Looking Sonar -.:.....°. 3.202... 4-3) SeaVMiIARG Cl, Images. ..5 4-4 Multi-Beam Bathymetry Products:... 22.0... is. 4-9, Nea beam Beam Patterns... 4-6. Operating Costs for Some Bathymetry and Side-Looking Sonar Systems ... 4-7. Comparing SeaMARC and Sea Beam Swath Widths .................... 4-8. Frequency Spectra of Various Acoustic Imaging Methods ................ 4-9. Seismic Reflection and Retraction Principles’... 6 4-10: Seismie Record With Interpretation. 2,-0.6. Ss. 4-11. Conceptual Design of the Towed-Cable-Array Induced Polarization System . 142 4-12. A Tethered, Free-Swimming Remotely Operated Vehicle System.......... 4-13. Schematic of the Argo-Jason Deep-Sea Photographic System.............. 4-14. Prototype Crust Sampler ...... 4-15. Conceptual Design for Deep Ocean Rock Coring Drill................... Tables Table No. Page 4-1. Closing Range to. a Mineral: Deposit ...). 5 ee 4-7. Side-Wooking: Sonars: see ok ae ee Oe ge ee 4-3 swath; Mapping Systemse cos 2 4-4) Bathyametiy SYSteMs io... Bek iso. aichig tte ome meus Cees Coes Se 4-5. U.S. Non-Government Submersibles (Manned) .............-2.0-:+++e00+s 4-6; Federally Owned and Operated ‘Submersibles!..o 300d. 00s sce ee 4-72.15. Government Supported ROV S082. fo ease sine gen here tees 4-6, Worldwide: Towed. Vebicles. 23) sis Go ee SU ee tN Se 4-9. Vibracore) Sampling Costs"iioh4 si @niaitan ac ota sas Go Rete tee as Macnee Chapter 4 Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone INTRODUCTION The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) is the largest piece of ‘‘real estate’’ to come under the jurisdiction of the United States since acquisitions of the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and the purchase of Alaska in 1867. The EEZ remains largely un- explored, both in the Lewis and Clark sense of gain- ing general knowledge of a vast new territory and in the more detailed sense of assessing the location, quantity, grade, or recoverability of resources. This chapter identifies and describes technologies for ex- ploring this vast area, assesses current capabilities and limitations of these technologies, and identi- fies future technology needs. The goal of mineral exploration is to locate, iden- tify, and quantify mineral deposits, either for sci- entific purposes (e.g., better understanding their origin) or for potential commercial exploitation. Detailed sampling of promising sites is necessary to prove the commercial value of deposits. Obvi- ously, it would be impractical and costly to sam- ple the entire EEZ in the detail required to assess the commercial viability of a mineral deposit. For- tunately, this is not necessary as techniques other than direct sampling can provide many indirect clues that help researchers or mining prospectors narrow the search area to the most promising sites. Clues to the location of potential offshore mineral accumulations can be found even before going to sea to search for them. The initial requirements of an exploration program for the EEZ are a thorough understanding of its geological framework and of the geology of adjacent coastal areas. In some in- stances, knowledge of onshore geology may lead directly to discoveries in adjacent offshore areas. For example, a great deal is currently known about the factors responsible for the formation of offshore heavy mineral deposits and gold placers. These fac- tors include onshore sources of the minerals, trans- port paths, processes of concentration, and pres- ervation of the resulting deposit.! In contrast, relatively little is known about the genesis of co- balt crusts or massive sulfides. Although a thorough understanding of known geology and current geo- logical theory may not lead directly to a commer- cial discovery, some knowledge is indispensable for devising an appropriate offshore exploration strategy. Rona and others have used the concept of ‘‘clos- ing range to a mineral deposit’’ to describe an ex- ploration strategy for hydrothermal mineral depos- its.? With some minor modifications this strategy may be applicable for exploration of many types of offshore mineral accumulations. It is analogous to the use of a zoom lens on a camera which first shows a large area with little detail but then is ad- justed for a closeup view to reveal greater detail in a much smaller area. The strategy of closing range begins with regional reconnaissance. Reconnais- sance technologies are used to gather information about the ‘‘big picture.’’ While none of these tech- niques can provide direct confirmation of the ex- istence, size, or nature of specific mineral depos- its, they can be powerful tools for deducing likely places to focus more attention. As knowledge is ac- quired, exploration proceeds toward increasingly more focused efforts (see table 4-1), and the explo- ration technologies used have increasingly specific applications. Technologies that provide detailed in- formation can be used more efficiently once recon- naissance techniques have identified the promising 'H.E. Clifton and G. Luepke, ‘‘Heavy Mineral Placer Deposits of the Continental Margin of Alaska and the Pacific Coast States,”’ Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margin of West- ern North America and Adjacent Ocean Basins—Beaufort Sea to Baja California, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 43, in press, 1986, p. 2 (draft). ?P.A. Rona, ‘‘Exploration for Hydrothermal Mineral Deposits at Seafloor Spreading Centers,’’ Marine Mining, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1983, pp. 20-26. 115 116 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 4-1.—Closing Range to a Mineral Deposit Approximate range to deposit 10 kilometers ... Method . Long-range side-looking sonar Regional sediment and water sampling 1 kilometer ...... Gravity techniques Magnetic techniques Bathymetry Midrange side-looking sonar Seismic techniques 7100 meters....... Electrical techniques Nuclear techniques Short-range side-looking sonar 1Owumete;nsmmeeeriet Near-bottom water sampling Bottom images Ojmetenaa-- eae Coring, drilling, dredging Submersible applications SOURCE: Adapted from P.A. Rona, “Exploration for Hydrothermal Mineral Deposits at Seafloor Spreading Centers," Marine Mining, vol. 4, No. 1, 1983, pp. 20-26. areas. Systematic exploration does not necessarily mean comprehensive exploration of each acre of the EEZ. Accurate information about seafloor topography is a prerequisite for detailed exploration. Side- looking sonar imaging and bathymetric mapping provide indispensable reconnaissance information. Side-looking sonar provides an image of the seafloor similar to that provided by aerial radar imagery. Its use has already resulted in significant new dis- coveries of subsea geological features within the U.S. EEZ. By examining side-looking sonar im- ages, scientists can decide where to focus more detailed efforts and plan a more detailed explora- tion strategy. Long-range side-looking sonar (e.g., GLORIA or SeaMARC II, described below) may show pat- terns indicating large seabed structures. At some- what closer range, a number of other reconnais- sance technologies (figure 4-1) may provide more detailed textural and structural data about the seabed that can be used to narrow further the fo- cus of a search to a specific mineral target. Photo credit: U.S. Geological Survey USGS S.P. Lee Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone @ 117 Figure 4-1.—USGS Research Vessel S.P. Lee and EEZ Exploration Technologies Gravity anomalities, rock density differences c os =< oo Ore : Oo 2o ER) 2) information meter Gravi Some of the many technologies used to gather information about the seafloor and the mineral deposits found on or in the seabed are depicted here. SOURCE: U.S. Geological Survey. 118 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier e Bathymetric profiling yields detailed informa- tion about water depth, and hence, of seabed morphology. e Midrange side-looking sonars provide acous- tic images similar to long-range sonars, but of higher resolution. ® Seismic reflection and refraction techniques ac- quire information about the subsurface struc- ture of the seabed. e Magnetic profiling is used to detect and char- acterize the magnetic field. Magnetic traverses may be used offshore to map sediments and rocks containing magnetite and other iron-rich minerals. e Gravity surveys are used to detect differences in the density of rocks, leading to estimates of crustal rock types and thicknesses. @ Electrical techniques are used to study resis- tivity, conductivity, electrochemical activity, and other electrical properties of rocks. e Nuclear techniques furnish information about the radioactive properties of some rocks. Many of these reconnaissance technologies are also useful for more detailed studies of the seabed. Most are towed through the water at speeds of from 1 to 10 knots. Hence, much information may be gathered in relatively short periods of time. It is often possible to use more than one sensor at a time, thereby increasing exploration efficiency. Data sets can be integrated, such that the combined data are much more useful than information from any one sensor alone. Generally, the major cost of offshore reconnaissance is not the sensor itself, but the use of the ship on which it is mounted. At still closer ranges, several other remote sens- ing techniques and technologies become useful. Short-range, higher frequency side-looking sonars provide very high resolution of seafloor features at a range of 100 meters (328 feet)? and less. At less than about 50 meters in clear water, visual imag- ing is often used. Photographs or videotapes may be taken with cameras mounted on towed or low- 3Many geophysical and geological measurements are commonly ex- pressed in metric units. This convention will be retained in this chapter. For selected measures, units in both metric and English systems will be given. ered platforms or on either unmanned or manned submersibles. Instruments for sampling the chem- ical properties and temperature of near-bottom water also may be carried aboard these platforms. Indirect methods of detection give way to direct methods at the seabed. Only direct samples can pro- vide information about the constituents of a deposit, their relative abundance, concentration, grain size, etc. Grab sampling, dredging, coring, and drilling techniques have been developed to sample seabed deposits, although technology for sampling consoli- dated deposits lags behind that for sampling un- consolidated sediments. If initial sampling of a deposit is promising, a more detailed sampling pro- gram may be carried out. In order to prove the commercial value of a mineral occurrence, it may be necessary to take thousands of samples. While some technology has been specifically de- signed for minerals exploration, much technology useful for this purpose has been borrowed from technology originally designed for other purposes. Some of the most sophisticated methods available for exploration were developed initially for military purposes. For instance, development of multi-beam bathymetric systems by the U.S. Navy has proven useful for civilian charting, oceanographic research, and marine minerals exploration. Much technol- ogy developed for military purposes is not imme- diately available for civilian uses. Some technol- ogies developed by the scientific community for oceanographic research are also useful for minerals exploration. Advances in technology usually generate inter- est in finding applications to practical problems. It is often costly to adapt technology for marine use. When the military defines a need, the cost of de- velopment of new technology is commonly less con- strained than may be the case for the civilian sec- tor. Conversely, although certain exploration techniques (e.g., for sampling polymetallic sulfides) are not yet very advanced, it does not necessarily follow that the technical problems in research and development are overwhelming. Identification of the need for new technology may be recent, and/or the urgency to develop the technology, which might be high for military use, may be relatively low for civilian use. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 119 RECONNAISSANCE TECHNOLOGIES Side-Looking Sonars Side-looking sonars are used for obtaining acous- tic images of the ocean bottom. Most side-looking sonars use ship-towed transducers which transmit sound through the water column to the seafloor. The sound is reflected from the seabed and returned to the transducer. Modern side-looking sonars measure both echo-time and backscatter intensity. As the ship moves forward, successive sound pulses are transmitted, received, and digitally recorded. Side-looking sonars were originally designed for analog operation (i.e., for producing a physical trace of the returned echo), but most now use dig- ital methods to facilitate image processing. The data are usually processed to correct for variations in the ship’s speed, slant-range distance to the seafloor, and attenuation of sound in the water. The final product is a sonograph, or acoustic image, of the ocean floor. It is also possible to extract informa- tion about the texture of some seabed deposits from the sonar signal. Side-looking sonars useful for EEZ exploration are of three types: 1. long-range (capable of mapping swaths 10 to 60 kilometers wide), 2. mid range (1 to 10 kilometers swaths), and 3. short range (<1 kilometer swaths).* Table 4-2 displays characteristics of several side- looking sonars. Long-Range Side-Looking Sonar One of the few technologies used to date to in- vestigate large portions of the U.S. EEZ is a long- range side-looking sonar known as GLORIA (Geo- logical LOng Range Inclined Asdic) (figure 4-2). GLORIA was designed by the Institute of Oceano- graphic Sciences (IOS) in the United Kingdom and is being used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for obtaining acoustic images of the U.S. EEZ beyond the continental shelf.» When proc- *P.R. Vogt and B.E. Tucholke (eds.) ‘“‘Imaging the Ocean Floor— History and State of the Art,’’ in The Geology of North America, Volume M, The Western North Atlantic Region (Boulder, CO: Geo- logical Society of America, 1986), p. 33. SEEZ Scan 1984 Scientific Staff, Atlas of the Exclusive Economic Zone, Western Conterminous United States, U.S. Geological Sur- vey Miscellaneous Investigations Series I-1792, Scale 1:500,000, 1986. essed, GLORIA images are similar to slant-range radar images. GLORIA’s main contribution is that it gives geologists a valuable first look at expanses of the seafloor and enables them to gain insight about seabed structure and geology. For instance, the orientation and extent of large linear features such as ridges, bedforms, channels, and fracture zones can be determined.® Horizontal separations as little as 45 meters (148 feet) and vertical distances on the order of a few meters can be resolved. USGS is using GLORIA to survey the EEZ rela- tively inexpensively and quickly. GLORIA can sur- vey swaths of seabed as wide as 60 kilometers (al- though, in practice, a 45-kilometer swath width is used to improve resolution). When towed 50 meters beneath the sea surface at 8 to 10 knots and set to illuminate a 60-kilometer swath, GLORIA is ca- pable of surveying as much as 27,000 square kilom- eters (about 8,300 square nautical miles) of the seafloor per day. It is less efficient in shallow water, since swath width is a function of water depth be- low the sonar, increasing as depth increases. GLORIA can survey to the outer edge of the EEZ in very deep water. Processing and enhancement of digital GLORIA data are accomplished using the Mini-Image Proc- essing System (MIPS) developed by USGS.” MIPS is able to geometrically and radiometrically correct the original data, as well as enhance, display, and combine the data with other data types. In addi- tion, the system can produce derivative products, all on a relatively inexpensive minicomputer sys- tem.® It is also possible now to vary the scale and projection of the data without having to do much manual manipulation. ®R.W. Rowland, M.R. Goud, and B.A. McGregor, ‘The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone—A Summary of Its Geology, Exploration, and Resource Potential,’’ U.S. Geological Survey, Geological Cir- cular 912, 1983, p. 16. 7P.S. Chavez, ‘‘Processing Techniques for Digital Sonar Images From GLORIA,”’’ Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sens- ing, vol. 52, No. 8, 1986, pp. 1133-1145. 8G.W. Hill, ‘‘U.S. Geological Survey Plans for Mapping the Ex- clusive Economic Zone Using ‘GLORIA’,”’ Proceedings: The Ex- clusive Economic Zone Symposium: Exploring the New Ocean Fron- tier, M. Lockwood and G. Hill (eds.), conference sponsored by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Interior, Smithsonian Institution, and Marine Technology So- ciety, held at Smithsonian Institution, Oct. 2-3, 1985, p. 76. Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 120 ¢ Marine Minerals ‘uoNe}SIUIWpY DUeYydsoW)y pu d1URaDO |EUONEN :JOHNOS ajge|lene JOU—WN * g jnoge ue) ssaj aie sajbue Bulzes6 j1 soijsiuayoeseYyo Uo!jDa|Jas Ul SaBUeYS ay) JO asneoaq sayeiolajap aoueseadde sj! pue ‘sajbue mojjeys ye UO!}9eJJa1 Aq payojsip Sewodeq abel! ay) asnedeq seseajoap aBued [njasn wnwixew ay} ‘sayem Mojleus Uj ‘Aep Jad Sinoy jo JaquNU AAI}9aj}a a4} aonpai ‘o}e ‘saunjley JUaWdInba ‘sauljssolo ‘sAejap JayjeaM ‘aWI} }ISUBJ} ‘a91}9e1d U| “Aep sad sinoy pz abued WinwWixewW pue peeds wnuwixew je suojjesado awnsse ayes abesan00 eae 10) UaAiB Saunbl} aUL5 “UWS padojarap-Yyouss4 94} 10) ajqe|!eae S! }SOD ON ‘wa}shs BulBew! ay} ysn{ uey} saijiiqedeo asow Auew Bulyesodioou! Wayshs Hulajoaa Ajjue}Suod e uaaq sey }} asneoaq mol daag Jo} uaniB s! ayeWIySa }SOD ON “EUOS XO9Z-SOS Ue YIM paddinbe si ayebuj e 4}! papaeu juawidinba e4}x@ AjUO ay) S! Japio9e o1YydesB Y¥ “GYWHIWMS 10) pajewijsa S! S09 ONG swa}shs aBuel-Buo] 10j UOI||IW EF O} UOI||IW 1g Wos} pue ‘swWa}SAs Mo} daap ‘aBues-}JOYS 10} 000'006$ ©} 000'009$ ‘sWaisAs MOj|EYS 10} 000'0S1$ 9} 000 0S$ WO} aBuel s}soo ‘jeiauab ul ‘pasn aq Ajay!) pjnom ueY) SWajsAs diseq as0W 10} ase Aay} asneoaq payewijsaiapun aq 0} pua} Aigeqoud sjsop ‘(000'08$) Swa}shs 1ayem-daap 10} papnjoul s! (diys ay} 0} aAlje/ad) Huluoljisod ysij jng ‘papnjou! you si waysAs Buluolisod diys ay] “swaj}sAs uayem-daap 10} (900'0SZ$) le!}UeISGNS aJe S}SOO ajqed puke YOUIM ‘9/Ged Pue YoU!M pue ‘Bulpsooai je}161p 10 Boyeue ‘(apisdo} pue easqns) sojuoijoaja ,,Ysij,, BuIpn|ou! ‘swWajsAs 3}a|dWod 104 ae S}SODp 09$-01$ MOS-Or$ xXewW ODE'Z 70 082 OL 8 eID 60 Xcel Ovxc0 70 00S 09$-01$ MOS-Or$ xXeW ODE? v0 OLS OL cS eIp 60 Xv b OVX O'L v0 OOL i 09$-01$ MOS-Or$ xXeW ODE’? G0 OZ OL Ae) eIp 60° XGiL OvxG tL G0 Siem ate ula|y 09$-01$ Merg xXew 009 SO 029 GL SS BID LL XL osxdl con) GO aoa 09¢ SWS 09$-01$ w96s = =xeW 009 gO 029 Gl gS BID LL XL OSxZél GO GOL’ 096 SWS D893 = wose$ xeW OOS! SO 26 é SLL yxy Xe OSXGL G0 OSL °° 19 OYVWE98S O0r$-0S1L$ ywoogs xewW 000'9 S‘0 vol é 0002 BID OLXEY 0S x0? 90 OOL gZ0v OGA a — xew 00l'9 G20 OeL é 008'r eID OLXG ogsxsgo sZ0 O6L/OZL PES NENAS — = 000°2 L OLL Z (4a}yeM Ul) 000'% VN 09x SZ" L OuES mo | daeq Wes xeW 000'9 S 00S A 00v'9 ECXBLXBE osxlt € OSL Caner YOWVAS Ov$-02$ woo6s xXeW 000'9 G OOL'L G o0e'l VLXOLXE osxZt Gc OSC mes | OUVWESS OL$-S$ Wels dA} 002 OL 000°€ 8 008'€ BIDE LXGS Ov x02 OL ZL/LL’ °° IL OUWWE98S 7$-e$ wets dA} 0S OOL 000'0z OL 000'r ~=eBIp 99° x GL'Z OexG?e Gee 839/39 eee Il VIdO1S = td Wwny ool< 000°99 0¢ — pajunoW jing YNxXGe< Ze Ge" (XxO9z-SDS) dew ujyems ,Wy/JSOD puesnouj}=y s19]9W s19}]9W Aep/,wy s}ouy spunod SJ9}aW seaibap Wy ZY9YO|!y Wwa}skS SUOI||IW =" ujdep abHuei xew je 59}e1 paeds yBiam suoisuewiq yujpimueeq e6buei Aouanbal4 p}SOO MO| uoljnjosay abe1aA0d MOL Xe ysi4 xe juawdinby PUY seuog Bulyoo7-apis—‘z-b a1qeL Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 121 Figure 4-2.—GLORIA Long-Range Side-Looking Sonar a) GLORIA ready for deployment 125 °30’W c) GLORIA image of Taney Seamounts SOURCE: U.S. Geological Survey. 72-672 0 - 87 -- 5 122 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier USGS used GLORIA in 1984 to survey the EEZ adjacent to California, Oregon, and Washington. This entire area (250,000 square nautical miles) was surveyed in 96 survey days (averaging about 2,600 square nautical miles per day). In 1985, USGS used GLORIA to complete the survey of the Gulf of Mexico started in 1982 and to survey offshore areas adjacent to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. In 1986, GLORIA surveys were conducted in parts of the Bering Sea and in Hawaiian waters. The ben- efits of using GLORIA data to reconnoiter the EEZ have become apparent in that, among other things, several dozen previously unknown volcanoes (po- tential sites for hard mineral deposits) were discov- ered.? These and other features appear in USGS’s recently published west coast GLORIA atlas, a col- lection of 36, 2- by 2-degree sheets at a scale of 1:500,000.!° Digital GLORIA data will be even more useful in the future, as additional bathymet- ric, magnetic, gravity, and other types of data are collected and integrated in the database. USGS has now acquired its own GLORIA (it previously leased one owned by IOS). Known as GLORIA Mark III, this newest system is an im- proved version of earlier models, incorporating titanium transducers and a digitized beam-steering unit to correct for yaw.'! During the next several years, GLORIA Mark III is scheduled to survey Alaskan, Hawaiian, and Atlantic EEZs. The USGS plan is to survey the entire U.S. EEZ by 1991, with the exception of the U.S. Trust Territories, the ice- covered areas of the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas, and continental shelf areas (i.e., areas shallower than 200 meters (656 feet)). The potential market for GLORIA surveys has recently attracted a private sector entrepreneur, Marconi Underwater Systems of the United King- dom. Marconi is convinced that other coastal states will wish to explore their EEZs and will look to com- mercial contractors for assistance. Eventually, USGS also may be in a position to use its GLORIA for mapping the EEZs of other countries. Once the U.S. EEZ is surveyed, GLORIA would be avail- able for use to explore EEZs of countries that have cooperative science programs with the United States. Wolbidene \OREZ Scan 1984 Scientific Staff, Atlas. 41D). Swinbanks, ‘‘New GLORIA in Record Time,’’ Nature, vol. 320, Apr. 17, 1986, p. 568. USGS is coordinating its GLORIA program with the detailed EEZ survey program of the Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). NOAA is using Sea Beam and Bathy- metric Swath Survey System (BS?) technology (dis- cussed below) to produce detailed bathymetric charts. NOAA uses GLORIA information pro- vided by USGS for determining survey priorities. USGS geologists use NOAA’s bathymetry in con- junction with GLORIA data to assist in interpret- ing the geologic features of the seafloor. The most accurate geological interpretations will result from use of many different types of data simultaneously: side-looking sonar, bathymetry, gravity, magnetic, seismic, electrical, etc. Midrange Side-Looking Sonar Like GLORIA, midrange systems record the acoustic reflection from the seafloor; however, they are capable of much higher resolution. In addition, whereas GLORIA is used to obtain a general pic- ture of the seafloor, midrange and shortrange side- looking sonars are usually used for more detailed surveys. A seabed miner interested in looking for a specific resource would select and tune the side- looking sonar suitable for the job. For example, manganese nodule fields between the Clarion and Clipperton fracture zones in the Pacific Ocean were mapped in 1978 using an imaging system specially designed and built for that purpose. The Sea Mapping And Remote Characteriza- tion systems—SeaMARC I and II—developed by International Submarine Technology, Ltd. (IST), and, respectively, Lamont-Doherty Geological Ob- servatory and the Hawaii Institute of Geophysics (HIG), are two of several such systems available. SeaMARC I recently has been used to survey the Gorda and Juan de Fuca ridges.'? It can resolve tectonic and volcanic features with as little as 3 meters of relief.1° Higher resolution is obtained be- cause midrange systems use wider bandwidths and generally operate at higher frequencies (10 to 80 '2].G. Kosalos and D. Chayes, ‘‘A Portable System for Ocean Bot- tom Imaging and Charting,’’ Proceedings, Oceans 83, sponsored by Marine*Technology and IEEE Ocean Engineering Society, Aug. 29- Sept. 1, 1983, pp. 649-656. 'SE.S. Kappel and W.B.F. Ryan, ‘‘Volcanic Episodicity and a Non- Steady State‘Rift Valley Along Northeast Pacific Spreading Centers: Evidence from Sea Marc I,’’ Journal of Geophysical Research, 1986, in press. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 123 kilohertz) than long-range systems and because they are towed closer to the bottom.'* However, higher resolution is obtained at the expense of swath width. SeaMARC I data is relatively expensive to ac- quire, given the smaller area that can be surveyed in a given time; however, SeaMARC I coverage in specific areas is a logical follow-on to GLORIA regional coverage, as the information it provides is of much higher resolution. For example, little is known about the small-scale topography of sea- mounts and ridges where cobalt crusts are found. SeaMARC I surveys (or surveys by a similar deep- towed system) will be needed to determine this small-scale topography before appropriate mining equipment can be designed.'° Interferometric Systems By measuring the angle of arrival of sound echoes from the seafloor in addition to measuring echo am- plitude and acoustic travel time, interferometric sys- tems are able to generate multi-beam-like bathy- metric contours as well as side-scanning sonar imagery (table 4-3).'° SeaMARC II developed jointly by IST and HIG, newer versions of Sea- Rowland, Goud, McGregor, ‘‘The U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone—Summary,”’ p. 18. 15J.R. Hein, L.A. Morgenson, D.A. Clague, et al., ‘““Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts From the Exclusive Economic Zone of the United States and Nodules From the Oceanic Pacific,’’ Geology and Resource Potential of the Continental Margin of Western North Amer- ica and Adjacent Ocean Basins—Beaufort Sea to Baja California, D. Scholl, A. Grantz, and J. Vedder (eds.), American Association of Pe- troleum Geologists, Memoir 43, in press, 1986. 16] G. Blackinton, D.M. Hussong, and J.G. Kosalos, ‘‘First Re- sults From a Combination Side-Scan Sonar and Seafloor Mapping System (SeaMARC II),’’ Proceedings, Offshore Technology Confer- ence, Houston, TX, May 2-5, 1983, OTC 4478, pp. 307-314. Table 4-3.—Swath Mapping Systems Image only Image and bathymetry Bathymetry only Side looking Interferometric Sector scan Swath Map SeaMARC II Hydrosearch GLORIA SeaMARC/S SNAP SeaMARC | SeaMARC TAMU Multibeam SeaMARC II Bathyscan Sea Beam SeaMARC CL TOPO-SSS BSSS/Hydrochart Deep Tow SASS SAR BOTASS EDO 4075 Krupp-Atlas EG&G SMS960 Honeywell-Elac EG&G 260 Simrad Klein Benetech SOURCE: International Submarine Technology, Ltd. MARC I, and several other systems have this dual function capability. SeaMARC II is a midrange to long-range side- looking sonar towed 100 meters below the surface (above SeaMARC I, below GLORIA). It is capa- ble of surveying over 3,000 square kilometers (875 square nautical miles) per day when towed at 8 knots, mapping a swath 10 kilometers wide (20 kilometers or more when used for imaging only) in water depths greater than 1 kilometer. Some re- cent SeaaMARC II bathymetry products have pro- duced greater spatial resolution than Sea Beam or SASS bathymetry technologies (discussed below). Currently, SeaMARC II does not meet Interna- tional Hydrographic Bureau accuracy standards for absolute depth, which call for sounding errors of no more than 1 percent in waters deeper than 100 meters. Although there are physical limits to im- provements in SeaMARC accuracy, the substan- tial advantage in rate of coverage may outweigh needs for 1 percent accuracy, particularly in deep water.!”7 SeaMARC II’s swath width is roughly four times Sea Beam’s in deep water, so at similar ship speeds the survey rate will be about four times greater. Two other SeaMARC systems, both of which will have the capability to gather bathymetry data and backscatter imagery, are now being developed at IST: Sa@MARC TAMU and SeaMARC CL. SeaMARC TAMU is a joint project of the Naval Ocean Research and Development Activity, Texas A&M University, and John Chance Associates. The unit will be able to transmit and receive sig- nals simultaneously at several frequencies, which may enable identification of texture and bottom roughness. Concurrently, developments are underway to use Sea Beam returns to measure backscattering strength; hence, technical developments are begin- ning to blur the distinction between SeaMARC and Sea Beam systems.!® Additional advances in seabed mapping systems are being made in the design of tow vehicles and telemetry systems, in signal proc- VD. E. Pryor, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. 18Vogt and Tucholke, ‘‘Imaging the Ocean Floors,’”’ p. 34. 124 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: International Submarine Technology, Ltd. Sea MARC I! towfish essing, in materials used in transducers, and in graphic recording techniques.'? Short-Range Side-Looking Sonar Short-range side-looking sonar systems are used for acquiring acoustic images of small areas. They are not used for regional reconnaissance work, but they may be used for detailed imaging of seafloor features in areas previously surveyed with GLORIA or SeaMARC I or II. Operating fre- quencies of short-range sonars are commonly be- tween 100 and 500 kilohertz, enabling very high resolution. Like midrange systems, they are towed close to the ocean bottom. Deep Tow, developed by Scripps Institution of Oceanography, has been used to study morphology of sediment bedforms and processes of crustal accretion at the Mid- Atlantic Ridge.?? SAR (Systeme Acoustique Re- morque) is a similar French system, reportedly ca- pable of distinguishing objects as small as 30 by 76 centimeters (12 by 30 inches). It is towed about 60 meters off the seafloor and produces a swath of about 1,000 meters. Both of these deep-water sys- tems have been used in the search for the Titanic.?! "%M. Klein, ‘‘High-Resolution Seabed Mapping: New Develop- ments,’’ Proceedings, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 1984, p.75. 2°Vogt and Tucholke, ‘‘Imaging the Ocean Floor,’’ p. 34. 24P_R. Ryan and A. Rabushka, “‘The Discovery of the Titanic by the U.S. and French Expedition,’’ Oceanus, vol. 28, No. 4, winter 1985/86, p. 19. SeaMARC CL is a short-range deep-towed inter- ferometric system which is under development (fig- ure 4-3). One model has been built for use in the Gulf of Mexico; another has been configured by Sea Floor Surveys International for use by the pri- vate sector and is available for hire. Shallow water, high-resolution, side-looking sonar systems devel- oped by EG&G and Klein are used for such activ- ities as harbor clearance, mine sweeping, and detailed mapping of oil and gas lease blocks. Bathymetric Systems Bathymetry is the measurement of water depths. Modern bathymetric technologies are used to de- termine water depth simultaneously at many loca- tions. Very accurate bathymetric charts showing the topography of the seafloor can be constructed if sufficient data are collected with precise naviga- tional positioning (figure 4-4). These charts are im- portant tools for geological and engineering inves- tigations of the seafloor, as well as aids to navigation and fishing. If bathymetric and side- looking so- nar data are integrated and used jointly, the prod- uct is even more valuable. Most existing charts are based on data acquired using single beam echo-sounding technology. This technology has now been surpassed by narrow, multi-beam technology that enables the collection of larger amounts of more accurate data. The older data were obtained without the aid of precise posi- tioning systems. Moreover, existing data in the off- shore regions of the EEZ generally consist of sound- ings along lines 5 to 10 miles apart with positional uncertainties of several kilometers.?* Charts in the existing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad- ministration/National Ocean Service (NOAA/ NOS) series are usually compiled from less than 10,000 data points. In contrast, similar charts using the newer multi-beam technology are compiled from about 400,000 data points, and this quantity constitutes a subset of only about 2 percent of the observed data. Hence, much more information is available for constructing very detailed charts. 221)_.E. Pryor, ‘‘Overview of NOAA’s Exclusive Economic Zone Survey Program,’’ Ocean Engineering and the Environment, Oceans 85 Conferente Record, sponsored by Marine Technology and IEEE Ocean Engineering Society, Nov. 12-14, 1985, San Diego, CA, pp. 1186-1189. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 125 Figure 4-3.—SeaMARC CL Images Three images made of a PB4Y aircraft at the bottom of Lake Washington near Seattle. Swath width, altitude, and depth of towfish varies. SOURCE: International Submarine Technology, Ltd. 126 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 4-4.—Multi-Beam Bathymetry Products —=|\e> 23°20 23°50! 45° 10' eer 45°10’ ews 4 ASG es (CN Oe ‘SS 23°20’ 23°50' a) Contour map of part of the Kane Fracture Zone, Mid- Atlantic Ridge b) Three-dimensional Mesh Surface Presentation of the same data. Charts and 3-D presentations such as these are impor- tant tools for geological and engineering investigations of the seafloor. SOURCE: R. Tyce, Sea Beam Users Group. Improvements in seafloor mapping have resulted from the development of multi-beam bathymetry systems (table 4-4), the application of heave-roll- pitch sensors to correct for ship motion, the im- proved accuracy of satellite positioning systems, and improved computer and plotter capability for proc- essing map data.** These improvements make possible: 23C. Andreasen, ‘‘National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra- tion Exclusive Economic Zone Mapping Project,’’ in Proceedings: The Exclusive Economic Zone Symposium: Exploring the New Ocean Frontier, M. Lockwood and G. Hill (eds.), conference sponsored by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Interior, Smithsonian Institution, and Marine Society, held at Smithsonian Institution, Oct. 2-3, 1985, pp. 63-67. 1. much higher resolution for detecting fine scale bottom features; 2. a significant decrease in time required for making area surveys; 3. nearly instantaneous automated contour charts, eliminating the need for conventional cartography;** and 4. the availability of data in digital format. Deep-Water Systems Swath bathymetric systems are of two types: those designed to operate in deep water and those designed primarily for shallow water. The principal deep-water multi-beam systems currently in use in the United States are Sea Beam and SASS. Sea Beam technology, installed on NOAA’s NOS ships to survey EEZ waters deeper than 600 meters, first became available from General Instrument (GI) Corp. in 1977. GI’s original multi-beam bathymet- ric sonar, the Sonar Array Sounding System (or SASS) was developed for the U.S. Navy and is not available for civilian use. Sea Beam is a spinoff from the original SASS technology. Sea Beam is a hull-mounted system, which uses 16 adjacent beams, 8 port and 8 starboard, to sur- vey a wide swath of the ocean bottom on both sides of the ship’s track (figure 4-5). Each beam covers an angular area 2.67° square. The swath angle is the sum of the individual beam width angles, or 42.67°. With the swath angle set, the swath width depends on the ocean depth. At the continental shelf edge, i.e., 200 meters, the swath width is about 150 meters at the bottom; in 5,000 meters (16,400 feet) of water, the swath width is approximately 4,000 meters. Therefore, Sea Beam’s survey rate is greater in deeper waters. By carefully spacing ship tracks, complete (or overlapping) coverage of an area can be obtained. The contour interval of bathymetric charts produced from Sea Beam can be set as fine as 2 meters. The Navy’s older SASS model uses as many as 60 beams, providing higher resolution than Sea Beam in the direction perpendicular to the ship’s track (Sea Beam resolution is better parallel to the ship‘s track). In current SASS models, the outer 10 or so beams are often unreliable and not used.”° *4H.K. Farr, ‘‘Multibeam Bathymetric Sonar: Sea Beam and Hydrochart,’’ Marine Geodosy, vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 88-89. *>Vogt and Tucholke, ‘‘Imaging the Ocean Floor,”’ p. 37. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 127 Table 4-4.—Bathymetry Systems? Swath Max System Frequency Beams Beamwidth angle depth cost System kilohertz no. degrees degrees meters $10° See EE Tueere octet ole oe ote che Cacetcrdignro'o maida ara. 12 16 2.7 42.7 11,000 1,800 Super Sea Beam (proposed)...............00005. 12 48 2 96 11,000 a Towed Sea Beam (proposed) ............-.....0. 17 32 2 64 _— — BS3/hydrochantyllitacrps cies seacrseieis selec acter 36 21/17 5 105 600/1,000 1,200 KRUPP Atlas Hydrosweep>...................2.. 19.5 59 1.8 90 10,000 2,000 Honeywell ELAC Superchart®.................... 12 45 2 90 7,000 3,000 50 61 2 120 600 3,000 MUimicharte stestcccnessmisenctvertstosuenke cute ccahsvens seems 50 40 3 120 1,000 — SIMRADIEMIO0R RA ails ote ease seas ais cae 95 32 2/2.5 40/80/104 420 500 FOBEMINGHEChOSH 5/625) ay. crete cis) chee i ctneierersierene 12 15 2 42 IECINOS 1D Seba e eae iy olinerd ree ici ereetoc in ot 15 15 2 42 600 45 60 2 90 6,000 BENTECH Benigraph? ...............2...eeee ees 1,000 200 0.5 100 30 2,000 740 200 0.75 100 50 2,000 500 200 1 100 60 2,000 Ainterferometric systems (e.g., SeaMARC II) are considered in table 4-2; however, they could be considered in the bathymetric table as well, as they have the potential of producing bathymetric data equivalent to that of multibeam systems. This system does not yet produce adequate bathymetric information, but improved versions are under development. Another system, the Bathyscan 300, has recently become commercially available. This system has demonstrated acceptable accuracy. It oper- ates at 300 kilohertz, covers swaths of 200 meters width in waters less than 70 meters deep, weighs about 550 pounds, and costs about $400,000. Dkrupp-Atlas’ Hydrosweep is installed on the Meteor II, but is not yet operational. CThe characteristics of Honeywell's ELAC are quoted from proposals. Honeywell claims no system was built other than an experimental one. The company did supply transducers to the Hollming Shipyard in Finland for three Soviet ships. Data from Hollming indicates that the systems that were built using these transducers were virtual clones of the Sea Beam system. Bentech’s Benigraph is oriented toward use in pipeline construction. The unit has very high resolution and a short range and can easily be scaled to lower frequencies and used as a mapping system. Company management has stated that this approach is their intention. SOURCE: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Figure 4-5.—Sea Beam Beam Patterns Improvements in Sea Beam, which has per- formed very well but which is now considered to be old technology, have also been proposed. One proposed modification is to develop a capability to quantify the strength of the signal returning from the bottom.” With such information, it would be possible to predict certain bottom characteristics. Nodule fields, for example, already have been TRANSMITTED quantified using acoustic backscatter information. va cz LITT) ae Another he am modification is to build a towed Sea Beam system. Such a system could be moved ss from ship to ship as required.?7 SIBD All bathymetric systems have resolution and BEAMS BEAMS mom ; range limits imposed by wave front spreading, ab- BEAM RECEIVED 8 p s BEAMS sorption, and platform noise. However, by reduc- The Sea Beam swath width at the seafloor depends on water ing Sea Beam’s current beam width, its resolution depth. In 200 meters of water the swath width is about 150 can be improved. There are limitations to using meters; in 5,000 meters of water, the swath width is approxi- hes mately 4,000 meters. the immense amounts of data that would be col- lected by a higher resolution system. Only a small SOURCE: R. Tyce, Sea Beam Users Group. } ae fraction (2 percent) of existing Sea Beam data are Hence, an upgraded SASS is now being design Se es PS : SS é gd 8 ed 26C. deMoustier, ‘‘Inference of Managese Nodule Coverage From that will be okOyKe reliable and will feature improved Sea Beam Acoustic Backscattering Data,’’ Geophysics 50, 1985, pp. beam-forming and signal-processing capabilities. 989-1001. These should improve performance of the outer 271). White, Vice President, General Instruments, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic beams in deep water. Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. 128 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier used in making bathymetric charts (except for charts of very small areas), and generating charts with a 1- meter contour interval is impractical. Sea Beam, unlike SASS, may be installed on small ships. In order to build a Sea Beam with a 1 ° beam width, an acoustic array 2.5 times longer than cur- rent models would be required. To accommodate such an array, one must either tow it or use a larger ship. The Navy has found that the current Sea Beam system is capable of producing contour charts of sufficient quality for most of its needs and is cur- rently considering deploying Sea Beam systems for several of its smaller ships. It is important to match resolution requirements with the purpose of the survey. Use of additional exploration technologies in conjunction with Sea Beam data may provide better geological interpre- tations than improving the resolution of the Sea Beam system alone. For instance, combined ba- thymetry and side-looking sonar data may reveal more features on the seafloor. Improving swath coverage is probably more im- portant than improving resolution for reconnais- sance surveys. Wider swath coverage, for exam- ple, could increase the survey rate and reduce the time and cost of reconnaissance surveys. Sea Beam’s swath angle is narrow compared to that of GLORIA or SeaMARC (figure 4-6); thus the area that can be surveyed is smaller in the same time period. It may be possible to extend Sea Beam ca- pability from the current 0.8 times water depth to as much as 4 times water depth without losing hy- drographic quality.*® The current limit is imposed by the original design; hence, a small amount of development may produce a large gain in survey coverage without giving up data quality. Another factor that affects the survey rate is the availability of the Global Positioning System (GPS) for navigation and vessel speed. Currently, NOAA uses GPS when it can; however, it is not yet fully operational. When GPS is unaccessible, NOAA survey vessels periodically must approach land to maintain navigational fixes accurate enough for charting purposes. This reduces the time available for surveying. Ship speed is also a factor, but in- 28R. Tyce, Director, Sea Beam Users Group, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. creases in speed would not result in as great im- provements in the survey rate as increases in swath width. Operating costs for some typical bathymet- ric systems are shown in figure 4-7. Shallow-Water Systems Several shallow-water bathymetric systems are available from manufacturers in the United States, Norway, West Germany, and Japan. NOAA uses Hydrochart, commonly known as the Bathymet- ric Swath Survey System (BS%), for charting in coastal waters less than 600 meters (1,970 feet) deep. One of the principle advantages BS* has over Sea Beam is the wider angular coverage available, 105° versus 42.7°, enabling a wider swath to be charted. This angular coverage converts to about 260 percent of water depth, in contrast to 80 per- cent of depth for Sea Beam. Data acquisition is more rapid for BS? because the swath width is wider and transmission time in shallow water is reduced.”° Hence, signal processing and plotting requirements for BS? are different than those for Sea Beam. GI has recently introduced Hydrochart IJ, an im- proved version of Hydrochart. The principal differ- ence is a maximum depth capability of 1,000 meters. With its 17 beams, Hydrochart II offers much greater resolution and accuracy than older single-beam sonars. Along the narrow continental shelf bordering the Pacific Coast, bathymetry in very shallow water is fairly well known. Thus, NOAA has set an inshore limit of 150 meters for its BS? surveys (except for special applications), even though BS? is designed to be used in water as shallow as 3 meters. In re- gions where there are broad expanses of relatively shallow water and where the bathymetry is less well known, as off Alaska and along the Atlantic Coast, BS? may be used in water less than 150 meters deep. Various bathymetric charting systems are cur- rently under development which may enable sys- tematic surveying of very shallow waters, limited only by the draft of the vessel. One such system, for use in waters less than 30 meters deep, is the airborne laser. Laser systems are under develop- ment. by the U.S. Navy, the Canadians, Aus- tralians, and others. NOAA’s work in this field . ey 2°Farr, ‘“‘Multibeam Bathymetric Sonar,”’ p. 91. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 129 10 Dollars per square kilometer NOTES: 1. 100 } Wi LV LZ} er. ZA SSB ESN Figure 4-6.—Operating Costs for Some Bathymetry and Side-Looking Sonar Systems PS SOMIC ALL ‘aa Semanal a NCUA AA GA8 440 LB BOEE SS Yt a i acs. Operating costs are not really system characteristics but are primarily determined by platform (ships, etc.) costs (including positioning system operation). Platform costs are highly variable. Variability is influenced more by eco- nomic conditions, ship operating costs, etc. than by survey system requirements. Depth (meters) . For shallow water imaging systems, work generally takes place in relatively protected areas not far from a port. Shallow water surveys can be performed using small (30-60 ft long) vessels at costs of from $500-$1200 per day, but operations would likely be limited to daylight hours. Considering daily transits, it would be difficult to survey more than 8 hours per day in an area or, given downtimes caused by inclement weather, to average more than 4 hours daily. . Acquisition of deep water acoustic data commonly requires use of a larger, oceangoing vessel that can operate 24 hours a day. At this time, operational costs range from $5K-$15K a day for such vessels. With a system cap- able of withstanding 10 knot towing speeds, it should be possible to survey, on the average, 100 nautical track miles a day. Production goals for the Surveyor and the Davidson are 85 linear nautical miles per day. . Several imaging systems can be operated in different modes to give higher resolution data, but this will be at a penalty to the cost of coverage. . Experience with only three bathymetric systems is adequate enough (and not classified) to estimate operating costs. These are Sea Beam, BSSS/Hydrochart II, and the Simrad EM100. . Bathymetric system operating costs are based on the assumption that 100 nautical miles of seafloor a day can be surveyed using a vessel costing $5K-$15K per day. . Costs of processing data (whether side-looking or bathymetric) are not included. SOURCE: D. Pryor, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 130 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 4-7.—Comparing SeaMARC and Sea Beam Swath Widths SeaMARC II contoured swath 350% of towfish altitude Sea Beam contoured swath 80% of water depth The SeaMARC II system can acquire both bathymetric data and sonar imagery and has a swath width more than four times that of the Sea Beam system. The Sea Beam system, however, produces more accurate bathymetry. SOURCE: International Submarine Technology, Ltd., Redmond, WA. stopped in 1982, due to limited funds. The Cana- dian system, the Larsen 500, is now being used by the Canadian Hydrographic Service. The Aus- tralian laser depth sounding system, WRELADS, has been used experimentally to map a swath 200 meters wide.*° Water must be clear (i.e., without suspended sediments) for the airborne lasers to work. Towed underwater lasers have not yet been developed. Another method currently under development for use in very shallow water is airborne electromag- netic (AEM) bathymetry. This technique has re- cently been tested at sea by the Naval Ocean Re- *°R.K. Bullard, ‘‘Land Into Sea Does Not Go,’’ Remote Sensing Applications in Marine Science and Technology, A.P. Cracknell (ed.) (Hingham, MA: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1983), p. 366. search and Development Activity (NORDA)."! NORDA reports that with additional research and development, the AEM method may be able to pro- duce accurate bathymetric charts for areas as deep as 100 meters. Passive multispectral scanners also have been applied to measuring bathymetry.*? A combination of laser, AEM, and multispectral tech- niques may be useful to overcome the weather and turbidity limits of lasers alone. Satellite altimeters and synthetic aperture radar images of surface ex- pressions can also indicate bathymetry, but much “17. J. Won and K. Smits, ‘‘Airborne Electromagnetic Bathyme- try,’’ Norda Report 94, U.S. Navy, Naval Ocean Research and De- velopment Activity, April 1985. 821). R. Lyzenga, ‘‘Passive Remote Sensing Techniques for Map- ping Water Depth and Bottom Features,’’ Applied Optics, vol. 17, No. 3, February 1978, pp. 29-33. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone © 131 less accurately.** If airborne bathymetric survey techniques for shallow water can be further refined, they would have the distinct advantage over ship- based systems of being able to cover much more territory in much less time and at reduced cost. Technology for airborne surveys in deep water has not yet been developed. Systematic Bathymetric Mapping of the EEZ NOAA has recently begun a long-range project to survey and produce maps of the entire U.S. EEZ. The NOAA ship Surveyor is equipped with Sea Beam and has been mapping the EEZ since May 1984. Initial Sea Beam surveys were made of the Outer Continental Shelf, slope, and upper rise off the coasts of California and Oregon.** A second Sea Beam was installed aboard Discoverer in 1986. The Davidson has been equipped with BS? since 1978. NOAA plans to acquire two additional swath mapping systems with 1987 and 1988 fiscal year funds. NOAA is currently able to map between 1,500 and 2,500 square nautical miles per month (with two ships, Surveyor and Davidson, working on the west coast continental slope). This is significantly below the expected coverage rate for the Sea Beam. Transit time, weather, crosslines, equipment fail- ure, and decreased efficiency in shallower water are factors that have limited production to about 50 square nautical miles per ship per day. Moreover, NOAA has not yet surveyed any areas beyond 120 miles from the coast. With the GPS available only part-time, too much time would be wasted in main- taining accurate navigation control on the outer half of the EEZ. Delays in launching satellites, the Challenger accident, and several recent failures of GPS satellites already in orbit are further eroding the near-term usefulness of GPS and, therefore, limiting the efficiency of NOAA surveys. 33W. Alpers and I. Hennings, ‘‘A Theory of the Imaging Mecha- nism of Underwater Bottom Topography by Real and Synthetic Aper- ture Radar,”’ Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 89, No. C6, Nov. 20, 1984, pp. 10,529-10,546. 34D.E. Pryor, ‘“NOAA Exclusive Economic Zone Survey Pro- gram,’’ in PACON 86, proceedings of the Pacific Congress on Ma- rine Technology, sponsored by Marine Technology Society, Hawaii Section, Honolulu, HA, Mar. 24-28, 1986, pp. OST5/9,10. The agency would like to map all 2.3 million square nautical miles of the U.S. EEZ. With cur- rent technology, funding, and manpower, this project could take more than 100 years. In order to ensure that the most important areas are sur- veyed first, NOAA consults with USGS and uses USGS’s GLORIA side-looking sonar imagery to select survey targets. USGS has provided funds to NOAA for data processing; in return, NOAA ac- cepts the survey priorities set by USGS. By mid-1986, less than 1 percent of the U.S. EEZ had been systematically surveyed with NOAA’s Sea Beam and BS? systems. To date, few of the charts or raw data have been publicly released because the U.S. Navy has determined that public dissem- ination of high-resolution bathymetric data could endanger national security. NOAA and the Navy are currently exploring ways to reduce the secu- rity risks while producing bathymetric charts use- ful for marine geologists, potential seabed miners, fishermen, and other legitimate users (see ch. 7). NOAA’s Survey Program is the only systematic effort to obtain bathymetry for the entire EEZ; how- ever, several academic institutions have mapped small portions of the EEZ. For instance, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, and Scripps Institution of Oceanography have their own Sea Beam systems. Much of the mapping these institutions have done has been outside the U.S. EEZ. Moreover, addi- tional bathymetric data (how much of it useful is unknown) are gathered by the offshore petroleum industry during seismic surveys. As much as 10 mil- lion miles of seismic profiles (or about 15 percent of the EEZ) have been shot by commercial geo- physical service companies in the last decade, and almost all of these surveys are believed to contain echo soundings in some form (probably mostly 3.5 kilohertz data).*° Some of these data are on file at the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) in Boulder, Colorado; however, most remain propri- etary. Moreover, maps made from these data might 35R B. Perry, ‘‘Mapping the Exclusive Economic Zone,’’ Ocean Engineering and the Environment, Oceans 85 Conference Record, Sponsored by Marine Technology Society and IEEE Ocean Engineer- ing Society, Nov. 12-14, 1985, San Diego, CA, p. 1193. The seismic profiles themselves generally include ocean bottom reflections when water depths are more than about 150 meters. These profiles are ac- curate, continuous bathymetric records along the line of survey. 132 e¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier also be considered classified under current Depart- ment of Defense policy. The grid lines are often only one-quarter mile apart, indicating that these maps would be very accurate (although a stand- ard 3.5 kilohertz echo sounding does not have the resolution of Sea Beam).*° NOAA is currently exploring ways to utilize data acquired by academic and private institutions to upgrade existing bathymetric maps to avoid dupli- cation. In some areas, it may be possible to accumu- late enough data from these supplemental sources to improve the density and accuracy of coverage. However, because these data usually were not gathered for the purpose of making high-quality bathymetric maps, these data may not be as ac- curate as needed. NOAA is adhering to Interna- tional Hydrographic Bureau standards because these standards are: widely accepted by national surveying agencies, result in a product with a high degree of acceptance, and are feasible to meet. NOAA could relax its standards if this meant that an acceptable job could be done more efficiently. For example, if depth accuracy of the SeaMarc II system (which has a much wider swath width than Sea Beam) could be improved from the present 3 percent of depth to 1.5 percent or better, NOAA might consider using SeaMarc II in its bathymet- ric surveys. Public data sets rarely have the density of cov- erage that would provide resolution approaching that of a multi-beam survey. Commercial survey data are not contiguous over large areas because they cover only selected areas or geologic structures. Data may be from a wide beam or deep seismic system, possibly uncorrected for velocity or un- edited for quality. Data sets would also be difficult to merge. Unless the lines are sufficiently dense, computer programs cannot grid and produce con- tours from the data at the scale and resolution of multi-beam data.?’ SASS data acquired by the U.S. Navy is classi- fied. NOAA neither knows what the bathymetry is in areas surveyed by SASS nor what areas have been surveyed. More optimistically, once the 5°C. Savit, Senior Vice President, Western Geophysical, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclu- sive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. 37Perry, ‘‘Mapping the Exclusive Economic Zone,”’ p. 1193. Global Positioning System becomes available around the clock, thereby enabling precise naviga- tional control at all times, it may be possible for NOAA to utilize multi-beam surveys conducted by others, e.g., by University National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) ships. If the three university ships currently equipped with Sea Beam could be used as ‘“‘ships of opportunity’? when otherwise unemployed or underemployed, both NOAA and the academic institutions would bene- fit. NOAA has already discussed the possibility of funding Sea Beam surveys with the Scripps Insti- tution of Oceanography. Reflection and Refraction Seismology Seismic techniques are the primary geophysical methods for acquiring information about the geo- logical structure and stratigraphy of continental margins and deep ocean areas. Seismic techniques are acoustic, much like echo sounding and sonar, but lower frequency sound sources are used (fig- ure 4-8). Sound from low-frequency sources, rather than bouncing off the bottom, penetrates the bot- tom and is reflected or refracted back to one or more surface receivers (channels) from the boundaries of sedimentary or rock layers or bodies of differ- ent density (figure 4-9). Hence, in addition to sedimentary thicknesses and stratification, struc- tural characteristics such as folds, faults, rift zones, diapirs, and other features and the characteristic seismic velocities in different strata may be deter- mined (figure 4-10). Seismic reflection techniques are used extensively to search for oil, but they are also used in mineral exploration. Reflection techniques have been and continue to be refined primarily by the oil indus- try. Seismic refraction, in contrast to seismic reflec- tion, is used less often by the oil industry than it once was; however, the technique is still used for academic research. Ninety-eight percent of all seis- mic work supports petroleum exploration; less than 2 percent is mineral oriented. The depth of wave penetration varies with the frequency and power of the sound source. Low-fre- quency sounds penetrate deeper than high-fre- quency sounds; however, the higher the frequency of the sownd source, the better the resolution pos- sible. Seismic systems used for deep penetration Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone © 133 Figure 4-8.—Frequency Spectra of Various Acoustic Imaging Methods —— Large airgun —— 3,000-10,000 J sparker —— Medium airgun Water gun — Multi-electrode sparker — Small airgun — Boomer — Deep-tow boomer —— Pinger — Long-range side-scan sonar (GLORIA) Sea Beam i—__ Sub-bottom profilers I t+— Side-scan——>, | sonars Very | Long 'Medium! Short short! | fange } range 4 range jrangel Medium-range side-scan sonar (Dolphins) Short-range side-scan sonar Very short-range side-scan sonar _ Spot sonars and acoustic cameras Medical 1 macro-sonography t | | i : Medical { micro-sonography J i<_____—_Underwater 20S 0s Ultra- ele range | 1 Hz 10 100 1 kHz 10 i sonography I 1 MHz 10 100 1 GHz 10 Frequency SOURCE: B.W. Flemming, ‘‘A Historical Introduction to Underwater Acoustics, With Special Reference to Echo Sounding, Sub-bottom Profiling, and Side Scan Sonar,” in W.G.A. Russell-Cargill (ed.), Recent Developments in Sidescan Sonar Techniques (Capetown, South Africa: ABC Press, Ltd., 1982). range in frequency from about 5 hertz to 1 kilo- hertz. The systems with sound frequencies in this range are very useful to the oil and gas industry. Most often these are expensive multi-channel sys- tems. Since most mineral deposits of potential eco- nomic interest are on or near the surface of the seabed, deep penetration systems have limited use- fulness for mineral exploration. Seismic systems most often used for offshore mineral exploration are those that operate at acoustic frequencies be- tween 1 and 14 kilohertz (typically 3.5 kilohertz). These systems, known as sub-bottom profilers, pro- vide continuous high-resolution seismic profile recordings of the uppermost 30 meters of strata.*® 38P.K. Trabant, Applied High-Resolution Geophysical Methods: Offshore Geoengineering Hazards (Boston, MA: International Hu- man Resources Development Corp., 1984), p. 81. Typically, they are single-channel systems. They can be operated at the same ship speeds as bathy- metric and sonar systems. A few towed vehicles are equipped with both side-looking sonar and sub- bottom profiling capability using the same coaxial tow cable.%° One drawback with single-channel systems is that they suffer from various kinds of multi-path and pulse reverberation problems, problems best han- dled by multi-channel systems. A 100 or 500 hertz multi-channel system is able to provide shallow penetration data while avoiding the problems of 39C. J. Ingram, ‘‘High-Resolution Side-Scan Sonar/Subbottom Profiling to 6000M Water Depth,’’ unpublished, presented at the Pa- cific Congress on Marine Technology, sponsored by Marine Tech- nology Society, Hawaii Section, Honolulu, HA, Mar. 24-28, 1986. 134 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 4-9.—Seismic Reflection and Refraction Principles Reflection Hydrophone Ocean bottom Refraction Hydrophone In the seismic reflection technique, sound waves from a source at a ship bounce directly back to the ship from sediment and rock layers. In the seismic refraction technique, the sound waves from a ‘‘shooting”’ ship travel along the sediment and rock layers before propagating back to a “‘receiving”’ ship. SOURCE: P.A. Rona, Exploration Methods for the Continental Shelf: Geology, Geophysics, Geochemistry, NOAA Technical Report ERL 238-AOML 8 (Boulder, CO: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1972), p. 15. single-channel systems. Because of cost, however, a multi-channel system is usually not used for reconnaissance work. High-resolution seismic reflection techniques are able to detect the presence of sediment layers or sand lenses as little as 1 meter thick. In addition, information about the specific type of material de- tected sometimes may be obtained by evaluating the acoustic velocity and frequency characteristics of the material. Seismic techniques may provide clues for locating thin, surficial deposits of man- ganese nodules or cobalt crusts, but side-looking sonar is a better tool to use for this purpose. Ryan reports that a 1 to 5-kilohertz sub-bottom profiler was very effective in reconnaissance of sediment- hosted sulfides of the Juan de Fuca Ridge.*° While seismic methods provide a cross-sectional view of stratigraphic and structural geologic framework, ge- ologists prefer to supplement these methods with coring, sampling, and drilling (i.e., direct meth- ods), with photography and submersible observa- *0W.B.F. Ryan, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclu- sive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 135 Figure 4-10.—Seismic Record With Interpretation Sea-surface Sea-bottom structure and stratigraphy below the seabed. SOURCE: U.S. Geological Survey. tions, and with geochemical sampling of bottom sediments and of the water column, etc., for the highest quality interpretations. Advances in reflection seismology have been made more or less continuously during the approx- imately 60 years since its invention.*! Recent tech- nological innovations have been the development of three-dimensional (3-D) seismic surveying and interactive computer software for assisting interpre- tation of the mountains of 3-D data generated. To acquire enough data for 3-D work, survey lines are set very close together, about 25 to 100 meters apart. Data for the gaps between lines then can be interpolated. The efficiency of data acquisition can be increased by towing two separate streamers “1C.H. Savit, ‘‘The Accelerating Pace of Geophysical Technology,”’ Oceans 84 Conference Record, Sponsored by Marine Technology So- ciety and IEEEE Ocean Engineering Society, Sept. 10-12, 1984, (Washington, D.C.: Marine Technology Society, 1984), pp. 87-89. Academic and industry researchers interpret seismic records to help them determine geological Sea-bottom (and technical advances will soon enable two lines of profile to be acquired from each of two separate cables). *? Interactive programs allow the viewer to look at consecutive cross-sections of a 3-D seismic profile or at any part of it in horizontal display. Thus, if desired, the computer can strip away everything but the layer under study and look at this layer at any angle. Moreover, the surveyed block can be cut along a fault line, and one side can be slid along the other until a match is made. Interpretation of data can be accomplished much faster than on pa- per. Such systems are expensive. While the cost of acquiring and processing 20 kilometers of two- dimensional seismic data may be from $500 to $2,000 per kilometer, a 3-D high-density survey *2Savit, OTA Workshop, June 10, 1986. 136 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier of a 10-by 20-kilometer area could cost on the or- der of $3 million. Resolution also continues to improve, assisted by better navigation, positioning, and control meth- ods. An innovation which promises to further im- prove resolution is the use of chirp signals rather than sound pulses. Chirp signals are oscillating sig- nals in which frequency is continuously varying. Using computer-generated chirp signals, it is pos- sible to tailor and control emitted frequencies. In contrast, pulse sources produce essentially uncon- trolled frequencies, generating both useful and un- needed frequencies at the same time. About 10 million miles of seismic profiles have been run in the U.S. EEZ. Most of these data are deep penetration profiles produced by companies searching for oil and are therefore proprietary. The Minerals Management Service within the U.S. De- partment-of the Interior (MMS) purchases about 15 percent of the data produced by industry, most of the data are held for 10 years and then turned over to the National Geophysical Data Center. NGDC archives about 4 million miles of public (mostly academic) seismic data. Much of this data is for regions outside the EEZ. NGDC also archives USGS data, most of which are from the EEZ (see chew): It is possible to acquire shallow-penetration seis- mic information (as well as magnetic and gravity data) at the same time as bathymetric data, so that surface features can be related to vertical structure and other characteristics of a deposit. NOAA ac- knowledges that simultaneous collection of differ- ent types of data could be accomplished easily aboard its survey ships. Additional costs would not be significant relative to the cost of operating the ships, but would be significant relative to currently available funds. The agency would like to collect this data simultaneously if funds were available. NOAA hopes to interest academia and the private sector, perhaps with USGS help, to form a con- sortium to coordinate and manage the gathering of seismic and other data, using ships of opportu- nity.*? The offshore seismic firms serving the oil and gas industry are opposed to any publicly funded *8C. Andreasen, NOAA EEZ project manager, interview by W. Westermeyer at NOAA, Rockville, MD, Apr. 22, 1986. data acquisition that could deprive them of busi- ness opportunities. All but very shallow penetra- tion data generally are of interest to the petroleum industry and therefore could be considered compet- itive with private sector service companies. Magnetic Methods Some marine sediments and rocks (as well as sunken ships, pipelines, oil platforms, etc.) contain iron-rich minerals with magnetic properties. Mag- netic methods can detect and characterize these magnetic materials and other features by measur- ing differences (or anomalies) in the geomagnetic field. Magnetic (and gravity) techniques are inher- ently reconnaissance tools, since the data produced must be compiled over fairly broad areas to detect trends in the composition and structure of rock. However, spatial resolution, or the ability to de- tect increasingly fine detail, varies depending on the design of the sensor, the spacing of survey lines, and the distance of the sensor from the source of anomaly. Satellite surveys are able to detect magnetic anomalies on a global or near-global scale. Satel- lite data are important for detecting global or con- tinental structural trends of limited value to re- source exploration. At such broad scale, mineral deposits would not be detected. Airplane and ship surveys record finer scale data for smaller regions than satellites, enabling specific structures to be de- tected. The closer the sensor to the structure be- ing sensed, the better the resolution, but the time required to collect the data, as well as the cost to do so, increases proportionately. Regional magnetic surveys, usually done by air- plane, can detect the regional geologic pattern, the magnetic character of different rock groups, and major structural features which would not be noted if the survey covered only a limited area.** For ex- ample, oceanic rifts, the transition between con- tinental and oceanic crusts, volcanic structures, and major faults have been examined at this scale. Re- gional magnetic surveys also have been used ex- tensively in exploring for hydrocarbons. Accurate measurement of magnetic anomalies can help ge- “4P.V. Sharma, Geophysical Methods in Geology (New York, NY: Elsevier Science Publishing Co., 1976), p. 228. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 137 ophysicists delineate geologic structures associated with petroleum and measure the thickness of sedi- ments above magnetic basement rocks.** Surveys also may be conducted to locate concen- trations of ferromagnetic minerals on or beneath the seafloor. The detection of magnetite may be particularly important in mineral prospecting be- cause it is often found in association with ilmenite and other heavy minerals. Ilmenite also contains iron, but it is much less strongly magnetized than the magnetite with which it is associated (it also may have weathered during low stands of sea level and may have lost magnetic susceptibility). The precise location of a mineral deposit or other object may require a more detailed survey than is possible by satellite or airplane. Use of ship-towed magnetometers has met with varying measures of success in identifying placer deposits. Improve- ments in sensitivity are needed. If enough data are gathered to determine the shape and amplitude of a local anomaly, the size of an iron-bearing body and its trend can be estimated, a common prac- tice on land. When magnetic information can be correlated with other types of information (e.g., bathymetric, seismic, and gravity) interpretation is enhanced. Magnetic anomalies also can be used to locate and study zones of alteration of the oceanic crust. The initial magnetization of the oceanic crust 1s ac- quired as it cools from a magma to solid rock. For the next 5 to 10 million years, hydrothermal cir- culation promotes the alteration of this igneous rock and the generation of new secondary minerals. Ini- tially, the heat of hydrothermal circulation destroys the thermal remanent magnetization. Rona sug- gests that this reduction in magnetization will pro- duce a magnetic anomaly and signal the proximity of active or inactive smokers or hydrothermal vents.*® The Deep Sea Drilling Project and Ocean Drilling Program drilling results suggest that as the secondary minerals grow, they acquire the mag- netization of the ambient magnetic field. This ag- gregate magnetization produces a signature which *©P_A. Rona, ‘‘Exploration Methods for the Continental Shelf: Ge- ology, Geophysics, Geochemistry,’? NOAA Technical Report, ERL 238-AOML 8 (Boulder, CO: NOAA, 1972), p. 22. *6Rona, ‘‘Exploration for Hydrothermal Mineral Deposits at Seafloor Spreading Centers,’’ p. 25. is detectable on a regional scale and might be used to determine the degree and rate of regional alter- ation.*” Variations in the intensity of magnetization (total field variations) are detected using a magnetome- ter. Magnetometers deployed from ships or air- planes are either towed behind or mounted at an extreme point to minimize the effect of the vessel’s magnetic field. Among the several types of mag- netometers, proton precession and flux-gate types are most often used. These magnetometers are rela- tively simple to operate, have no moving parts, and provide relatively high-resolution measurements in the field. The technology for sensing magnetic anomalies is considered mature. A new helium- pumped magnetometer with significantly improved sensitivity has been developed by Texas Instru- ments and is being adapted to oceanographic work. Most magnetic measurements are total field measurements. A modification of this technique is to use a second sensor to measure the difference in the total field between two points rather than the total field at any given point. Use of this gradiom- etry technique helps eliminate some of the exter- nal noise associated with platform motion or ex- ternal field variation (e.g., the daily variation in the magnetic field). This is possible because sen- sors (if in close enough proximity) measure the same errors in the total field, which are then elim- inated in determining the total field difference be- tween the two points. Gradiometry improves sen- sitivity to closer magnetic sources. *® The most important problem in acquiring high- quality data at sea is not technology but accurate navigation. The Global Positioning System, when available, is considered more than adequate for navigation and positioning needs. Future data, to be most useful for mineral exploration purposes, will necessarily need to be collected as densely as possible. It is also important that magnetic (and gravity) data be recorded in a manner that mini- mizes the effects of external sources, such as of the towing platform, and that whatever data are meas- 47J.L. LaBrecque, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, OTA, May 1, 1987. #8]. Brozena, Naval Research Laboratory, and J. LaBreque, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, OTA Workshop on Tech- nologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. 138 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ured be incorporated into larger data sets, so that data at different scales are simultaneously available to investigators. Gravity Methods Like magnetic methods, the aim of gravity meth- ods is to locate anomalies caused by changes in physical properties of rocks.*? The anomalies sought are variations in the Earth’s gravitational field re- sulting from differences in density of rocks in the crust—the difference between the normal or ex- pected gravity at a given point and the measured gravity. The instrument used for conducting total field gravity surveys is a gravimeter, which is a well- tested and proven instrument. Techniques for con- ducting gradiometric surveys are being developed by the Department of Defense, although these will be used for classified defense projects and will not be available for public use.°° The end product of a gravity survey is usually a contoured anomaly map, showing a plane view or cross-section. The form in which gravity, as well as magnetic, data is presented differs from that for seismic data in that the fields observed are integra- tions of contributions from all depths rather than a distinct record of information at various depths. Geophysicists use such anomaly characteristics as amplitude, shape, and gradient to deduce the loca- tion and form of the structure that produces the gravity disturbance.*! For example, low-density features such as salt domes, sedimentary infill in basins, and granite appear as gravity ‘‘lows’’ be- cause they are not as dense as basalt and ore bod- ies, which appear as gravity ‘‘highs.’’ Interpreta- tion of gravity data, however, is generally not straightforward, as there are usually many possi- ble explanations for any given anomaly. Usually, gravity data are acquired and analyzed together with seismic, magnetic, and other data, each con- tributing different information about the sub-bot- tom geological framework. Since variations in terrain affect the force of grav- ity, terrain corrections must be applied to gravity *°Sharma, Geophysical Methods in Geology, p. 88. °°J. Brozena, Naval Research Laboratory, OTA Workshop on Tech- nologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, June 10, 1986. *'Sharma, Geophysical Methods in Geology, p. 131. data to produce an accurate picture of the struc- ture and physical properties of rocks. Bathymetric data are used for this purpose; however, terrain cor- rections using existing bathymetry data are rela- tively crude. Terrain corrections using data pro- duced by swath mapping techniques provide a much improved adjustment. Like magnetic data, the acquisition of gravity data may be from satellite, aircraft, or ship. The way to measure the broadest scale of gravity is from a satellite. SEASAT, for instance, has provided very broad-scale measurements of the geoid (sur- face of constant gravitational potential) for all the world’s oceans. To date, almost all gravity cover- age of the EEZ has been acquired by ship-borne gravimeters. Gravimetry technology and interpre- tation techniques are now considered mature for ship-borne systems. However, the quality of ship- based gravity data more than 10 years old is poor. Airborne gravimetry is relatively new, and tech- nology for airborne gravity surveys (both total field and gravity gradient types) is still being refined. As airborne gravity technology is further developed, it can be expected that this much faster and more economical method of gathering data will be used. Of all the techniques useful for hard mineral reconnaissance, however, gravity techniques are probably the least useful. This is because it is very difficult to determine variations in structure for shallow features (e.g., 200 meters or less). Shallow material is all about the same density, and excess noise reduces resolution. Gravity techniques are used primarily for investigating intermediate-to- deep structures—the structure of the basement and the transition between continental and oceanic crust. Many of these structures are of interest to the oil industry. Although large faults, basins, or seamounts may be detected with air- or ship-borne gravimeters, it is unlikely that shallow placer de- posits also could be located using this technique. USGS has published gravity maps of the Atlan- tic coast, the Gulf of Mexico, central and south- ern offshore California, the Gulf of Alaska, and the Bering Sea. However, little of the EEZ has been mapped in detail, and coverage is very spotty. For example, port areas appear to be well-surveyed, but density of track lines decreases quickly with distance from port. Oil companies have done the most grav- Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 139 ity surveying, but the information they hold is pro- prietary. Little surveying has been done in very shallow waters (i.e., less than 10 meters), as the larger survey ships cannot operate in these waters. The availability of high-density gravity data (and possibly also magnetic data) for extensive areas of the EEZ may pose a security problem similar to that posed by high-resolution bathymetry. Gravita- tional variations affect inertial guidance systems and flight trajectories. The Department of Defense has concerns about proposals to undertake systematic EEZ gravity surveys, particularly if done in con- junction with the systematic collection of bathym- etry data, since characteristic subsea features might be used for positioning missile-bearing submarines for strikes on the United States. SITE-SPECIFIC TECHNOLOGIES Site-specific exploration technologies generally are those that obtain data from small areas rela- tive to information provided by reconnaissance techniques. Some of these technologies are deployed from a stationary ship or other stationary platform and are used to acquire detailed information at a specific site. Often, in fact, such techniques as cor- ing, drilling, and grab sampling are used to verify data obtained from reconnaissance methods. Other site-specific technologies are used aboard ships mov- ing at slow speeds. Electrical and nuclear techniques _ are in this category. Electrical Techniques Electrical prospecting methods have been used extensively on land to search for metals and min- erals, but their use offshore, particularly as applied to the shallow targets of interest to marine miners, is only just beginning. Recent experiments by re- searchers in the United States and Canada suggest that some electrical techniques used successfully on land may be adaptable for use in marine mineral exploration.°? Like other indirect exploration tech- niques, the results of electrical methods usually can be interpreted in various ways, so the more inde- pendent lines of evidence that can be marshaled in making an interpretation, the better. The aim of electrical techniques is to deduce in- formation about the nature of materials in the earth based on electrical properties such as conductivity, 524 _D. Chave, S.C. Coustable, and R.N. Edwards, “‘Electrical Ex- ploration Methods for the Seafloor,’’ in press, 1987. See also S. Chees- man, R.N. Edwards, and A.D. Chave, ‘‘On the Theory of Seafloor Conductivity Mapping Using Transient EM Systems,’’ Geophysics, February 1987; and J.C. Wynn, “‘Titanium Geophysics—A Marine Application of Induced Polarization,’’ unpublished draft, 1987. electrochemical activity, and the capacity of rock to store an electric charge. Electrical techniques are similar to gravity and magnetic techniques in that they are used to detect anomalies—in this case, anomalies in resistivity, conductivity, etc., which allow inferences to be made about the nature of the material being studied. The use of electrical methods in the ocean is very different from their use on land. One reason is that seawater is generally much more conductive than the underlying rock, the opposite of the situation on land where the underlying rock is more conduc- tive than the atmosphere. Hence, working at sea using a controlled-source electromagnetic method is somewhat analogous to working on land and try- ing to determine the electrical characteristics of the atmosphere. In both cases, one would be looking at the resistive medium in a conductive environ- ment. The fact that seawater is more conductive than rock appeared to preclude the use of electri- cal techniques at sea. Improvements in instrumen- tation and different approaches, however, have overcome this difficulty to a degree. A difference which benefits the use of electrical techniques at sea is that the marine environment is considerably quieter electrically than the terrestrial environment. Thus, working in a low-noise environment, it 1s possible to use much higher gain amplifiers, and it is usually not necessary to provide the noise shielding that would be needed on land. Also, coup- ling to the seafloor environment for both source and receiver electrodes is excellent. Thus, electrode resistances on the seafloor are typically less than 1 ohm, whereas on land the resistance would be on the order of 1,000 ohms. Electrical techniques that may be useful for ma- rine mineral prospecting include electromagnetic 140 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier methods, direct current (DC) resistivity, self po- tential, and induced polarization. Electromagnetic Methods Electromagnetic (EM) methods detect variations in the conductive properties of rock. A current is induced in the conducting earth using electric or magnetic dipole sources. The electric or magnetic signature of the current is detected and yields a measure of the electrical conductivity of the under- lying rock. The Horizontal Electric Dipole and the Vertical Electric Dipole method are two controlled- source EM systems that have been used in academic studies of deep structure. Both systems are under- going further development. Recent work suggests that these techniques may enable researchers to de- termine the thickness of hydrothermal sulfide de- posits, of which little is currently known. Changes in porosity with depth are also detectable.°? To date, little work has been done regarding the potential applicability of these techniques for identifying ma- rine placers. Researchers at Scripps Institution of Oceanog- raphy are currently developing the towed, fre- quency domain Horizontal Electric Dipole method for exploration of the upper 100 meters of the seabed. A previous version of this system consists of a towed silver/silver-chloride transmitting an- tenna and a series of horizontal electric field receivers placed on the seafloor at ranges of 1 to 70 kilometers from the transmitter. Since this ar- rangement is not very practical for exploratory pur- poses, the Scripps researchers are now developing a system in which the transmitter and receiver can be towed in tandem along the bottom. Since the system must be towed on the seabed, an armored, insulated cable is used. The need for contact with the ocean floor limits the speed at which the sys- tem can be towed to 1 to 2 knots and the type of topography in which it can be used; hence, this method, like other electrical techniques, would be most efficiently employed after reconnaissance methods have been used to locate areas of special interest. °3P.A. Wolfgram, R.N. Edwards, L.K. Law, and M.N. Bone, “‘Polymetallic Sulfide Exploration on the Deep Seafloor: The Mini- Moses Experiment,’’ Geophysics 51, 1986, pp. 1808-1818. The Vertical Electric Dipole method is being de- veloped by reseachers at Canada’s Pacific Geo- science Center and the University of Toronto. The Canadian system is known as MOSES, short for magnetometric offshore electrical sounding. It con- sists of a vertical electric dipole which extends from the sea surface to the seafloor and a magnetome- ter receiver which measures the azimuthal magnetic field generated by the source.°* The receiver is fixed to the seafloor and remains in place while a ship moves the transmitter to different locations. A MOSES survey was conducted in 1984 at two sites in the sediment-filled Middle Valley along the northern Juan de Fuca Ridge. Using MOSES, re- searchers estimated sediment and underlying ba- salt resistivity, thickness, and porosity. Another electromagnetic method with some promise is the Transient EM Method. Unlike con- trolled source methods in which a sinusoidal sig- nal is generated, a source transmitter is turned on or off so that the response to this “‘transient’’ can be studied. An advantage of the Transient EM method is that the effects of shallow and deep struc- ture tend to appear at discrete times, so it is possi- ble to separate their effects. Also, the effects of to- pography, which are difficult to interpret, can be removed, allowing researchers to study the under- lying structure. The Transient EM method also may be particularly useful for locating sulfides, since they have a high conductivity relative to surround- ing rock and are located in ragged areas of the seafloor. A prototype Transient EM system is cur- rently being designed for survey purposes. It will use a horizontal magnetic dipole source and receiver and will be towed along the seafloor. Direct Current Resistivity Resistivity is a measure of the amount of cur- rent that passes through a substance when a speci- fied potential difference is applied. The direct cur- rent resistivity method is one of the simplest electrical techniques available and has been used extensively on land to map boundaries between 541). C. Nobes, L.K. Law, and R.N. Edwards, ‘‘The Determina- tion of Resistivity and Porosity of the Sediment and Fractured Basalt Layers Near the Juan de Fuca Ridge,’’ Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 86, 1986, pp. 289-318. 55Cheesman, Edwards, and Chave, ‘‘On the Theory of Seafloor Conductivity Mapping.”’ Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 141 layers having different conductivities.°° Recent ma- rine DC resistivity experiments suggest that the DC resistivity method may have applications for locat- ing and delineating sulfide ore bodies. For exam- ple, during one experiment at the East Pacific Rise in 1984, substantial resistivity anomalies were de- tected around known hydrothermal fields, and sea- floor conductivities were observed that were twice that of seawater.°’ In this experiment the source and receiver electrodes were towed from a research submersible. Conversely, resistivity techniques would not be expected to detect placer deposits, ex- cept under the most unusual circumstances. This is because seawater dominates the resistivity re- sponse of marine sediments (as they are saturated near the surface), and, in this case, only the rela- tive compaction (porosity) of the sediments could be measured.*® Self Potential The self potential (or spontaneous polarization) (SP) method is used to detect electrochemical ef- fects caused by the presence of an ore body. The origin of SP fields is uncertain, but it is believed that they result from the electric currents that are produced when a conducting body connects regions of different electrochemical potential.5° On land, SP has been used primarily in the search for sul- fide mineral deposits. It is a simple technique in that it does not involve the application of external electric fields. However, its use offshore has been limited. Results of some experiments have been in- conclusive, but the offshore extension of known land sulfide deposits was successfully detected in a 1977 experiment.°? More recently, researchers at the University of Washington have proposed building a towed SP system for exploring the Juan de Fuca Ridge. SP may prove effective for detecting the presence of sulfide deposits; however, it is unlikely to be of help in assessing the size of deposits. °°M.B. Dobrin, Introduction to Geophysical Prospecting (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1976), p. 6. 577. J.G. Francis, ‘‘Resistivity Measurements of an Ocean Floor Sulfide Mineral Deposit From the Submersible Cyana,”’ Marine Geo- Physical Research 7, 1985, pp. 419-438. °8J. Wynn, U.S. Geological Survey, letter to W. Westermeyer, OTA, May 1986. 59Chave, Coustable, and Edwards, ‘‘Electrical Exploration Meth- ods for the Seafloor.’’ Tbid. Induced Polarization The induced polarization (IP) method has been used for years to locate disseminated sulfide minerals on land. Recent work by USGS to adapt the technique for use as a reconnaissance tool to search for offshore titanium placers (figure 4-11) has produced some promising preliminary results. The IP effect can be measured in several ways, but, in all cases, two electrodes are used to introduce current into the ground, setting up an electric po- tential field. Two additional electrodes are used, usually spaced some distance away, to detect the IP effect. This effect is caused by ions under the influence of the potential field moving from the sur- rounding electrolyte (groundwater onshore, sea- water in the seabed sediments) onto local mineral- grain interfaces and being adsorbed there. When the potential field is suddenly shut off, there is a finite decay time when these ions bleed back into the electrolyte, similar to a capacitor in an electric circuit. If perfected for offshore use, the reconnaissance mode of IP may enable investigators to determine if polarizable minerals are present, although not precisely what kind they are (although ilmenite and some base metal sulfides, especially pyrite and chal- copyrite, have a significant IP effect, so do certain clays and sometimes graphite). In the reconnais- sance mode, the IP streamer can be towed from a ship; as seawater is highly conductive, it is not necessary to implant the IP electrodes on the sea- floor. Consequently, it is ‘‘theoretically possible to cover more terrain with IP measurements in a week offshore than has been done onshore by geophysi- cists worldwide in the last 30 years.’’®! Best results are produced when the electrodes are towed 1 to 2 meters off the bottom (although before IP explo- ration becomes routine, a better cable depressor and more abrasion-resistant cables will have to be de- veloped). Electrodes spaced 10 meters apart enable penetration of sediments to a depth of about 7 meters. The current USGS system is designed to work in maximum water depths of 100 meters. J.C. Wynn and A.E. Grosz, ‘‘Application of the Induced Polari- zation Method to Offshore Placer Resource Exploration,’’ Proceed- ings, Offshore Technology Conference 86, May 5-8, 1986, Houston, TX, OTC 5199, pp. 395-401. 142 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 4-11.—Conceptual Design of the Towed-Cable-Array Induced Polarization System nel Transmitter electrodes Stainless steel / A, 10 kg weight _" wire Receiver electrodes Ag-Ag Cl electrodes Common-mode rejection differential pre-amp Induced polarization, used for many years onshore, is currently being adapted for use at sea to search for titanium placers. SOURCE: J.C. Wynn and A.E. Grosz, “Application of the Induced Polarization Method to Offshore Placer Resource Exploration,” Proceedings, Offshore Technology Conference 86, May 5-8, 1986, Houston, TX (OTC 5199), p. 399. When polarizable minerals are located, there is some hope that a related method, spectral induced polarization (which requires a stationary ship), may be able to discriminate between the various sources of the IP effect. It has been demonstrated that cer- tain onshore titanium minerals (e.g., ilmenite and altered ilmenite) have strong and distinctive IP sig- natures, and that these signatures can be used in the field for estimating volumes and percentages of these minerals.°* One factor complicating inter- pretation of the spectral IP signature for ilmenite could be the degree of weathering. More work is required to determine if spectral IP works as well offshore as it does onshore. If so, it may be possi- ble to survey large areas of the EEZ using recon- J.C. Wynn, A.E. Grosz, and V.M. Foscz, ‘Induced Polariza- tion Response of Titanium-Bearing Placer Deposits in the Southeastern United States,’’ Open-File Report 85-756 (Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey, 1985). naissance and spectral IP. Sampling then could be guided in a much more efficient manner.°? The applicability of IP to placers other than tita- nium-bearing sands has not been demonstrated, but USGS researchers also believe that it may be pos- sible, by recalibrating IP equipment, to identify and quantify other mineral sands. Experiments are now being designed to determine if IP methods can be used to identify gold and platinum sands.** The ap- plicability of IP techniques to marine sulfide de- posits and to manganese-cobalt crusts, too, has yet to be demonstrated. USGS researchers hope to ac- quire samples of both types of deposits to perform the necessary laboratory measurements. Wynn and Grosz, ‘‘Applications of the Induced Polarization Method,”’ p. 397. ®*A. Grosz, Eastern Mineral Resources, USGS, telephone conver- sation with W. Westermeyer, OTA, Apr. 8, 1986. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 143 Induced Polarization for Core Analysis Another interesting possibility now being in- vestigated is to use IP at sea to assay full-length vibracore samples. Many techniques can assist ge- ologists and mineral prospectors in identifying promising areas for mineral accumulations. Never- theless, to determine precisely what minerals are present and in what quantities, it is still necessary to do laborious, expensive site-specific coring. More- over, once a core is obtained, it often takes many hours to analyze its constituents, and much of this work must be done in shore-based laboratories. To explore a prospective offshore mine site thoroughly, hundreds or even thousands of core samples would be needed. Geologists need analyti- cal methods that would enable them to quickly iden- tify and characterize deposits. USGS researchers have begun to insert IP electrodes into unopened vibracores to determine the identity and propor- tion of polarizable minerals present. Such a pro- cedure can be done in about 20 minutes and can therefore save considerable time and expense. If the analysis showed interesting results, the ship could immediately proceed with more detailed cor- ing (shore-based analysis of cores precludes revisit- ing promising sites on the same voyage). Geochemical Techniques Water Sampling Measurement of geochemical properties of the water column is a useful exploration method for detecting sulfide-bearing hydrothermal discharges at active ridge crests.*° Some techniques have been developed for detecting geochemical anomalies in the water column 500 kilometers (310 miles) or more from active vent sites. Used in combination with geophysical and geological methods, these techniques help researchers ‘‘zero in’’ on hydro- thermal discharges. Other geochemical methods are used to sense water column properties in the im- mediate vicinity of active vent sites. Reconnaissance techniques include water sam- pling for particulate metals, elevated values of dis- solved manganese, and the helium-3 isotope. Iron and manganese adsorbed on weak acid-soluble par- ®°Rona, ‘‘Exploration for Hydrothermal Mineral Deposits,’’ pp. 7-37. ticulate matter have been detected 750 kilometers (465 miles) from the vent from which they were is- sued. Total dissolvable manganese is detectable sev- eral tens of kilometers from active hydrothermal sources. Methane, which is discharged as a dis- solved gas from active vent systems, can be detected on the order of several kilometers from a vent site.°° Analysis of water samples for methane has the advantage that it can be done aboard ship in less than an hour. Analysis for total dissolvable man- ganese requires about 10 hours of shipboard time. At a distance of 1 kilometer or less from an ac- tive vent, the radon-222 isotope and dissolved me- tals also may be detected. The radon isotope pro- duced by uranium series decay in basalt, reaches the seafloor through hydrothermal circulation and can be sampled close to an active vent. Helium-3 derived from degassing of the mantle beneath oceanic crust and entrained in subseafloor hydro- thermal convection systems may be detectable in the vicinity of active vents. Other near-field water column measurements which may provide evidence of the proximity of active vents include measure- ments of light scattering due to suspended partic- ulate matter, temperature, thermal conductivity, and salinity. Light scattering and temperature ob- servations proved to be very useful in identifying hydrothermal plumes along the southern Juan de Fuca Ridge.®’ Geochemical properties of the water column are measured using both deep-towed instrument pack- ages and “‘on-station’’ sampling techniques. For example, NOAA’s deep-towed instrumented sled, SLEUTH has been used to systematically survey portions of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Measurements made by SLEUTH sensors over the ridge crest were supplemented by on-station measurements up to 100 kilometers off the ridge axis.°* Similar sur- veys have been made over the Mid-Atlantic Ridge® and elsewhere. The sensitivity and precision of in- struments used to acquire geochemical information continues to improve. Perhaps as importantly, °eTbid. °’E.T. Baker, J.W. Lavelle, and G.J. Massoth, ‘‘Hydrothermal Particle Plumes Over the Southern Juan de Fuca Ridge,’’ Nature, vol. 316, July 25, 1985, p. 342. 8] bid. 6°P_A. Rona, G. Klinkhammer, T.A. Nelsen, J.H. Trefey, and H. Elderfield, ‘‘Black Smokers, Massive Sulfides, and Vent Biota at the Mid-Atlantic Ridge,’’ Nature, vol. 321, May 1, 1986, p. 33. 144 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier towed instrument packages like SLEUTH are en- abling systematic surveys of large ocean areas to be undertaken. Nuclear Methods Nuclear methods consist of physical techniques for studying the nuclear or radioactive reactions and properties of substances. Several systems have been developed to detect the radiation given off by such minerals as phosphorite, monazite, and zircon. One such device was developed by the Center for Ap- plied Isotope Studies (CAIS) at the University of Georgia. In the mid-1970s, the Center developed an underwater sled equipped with a radiation de- tector that is pulled at about 3 knots over relatively flat seabed terrain. The towed device consists of a four-channel analyzer that detects potassium-40, bismuth-214, thallium-208, and total radiation. The sled has been used to locate phosphorite off the coast of Georgia by detecting bismuth-214, one of the radioactive daughters of uranium, often a constit- uent of phosphorite. In another area offshore Geor- gia, the Center’s towed sled detected thallium-208, an indicator of certain heavy minerals. Subsequent acquisition of surficial samples (grab samples) of the area confirmed the presence of heavy mineral sands.” A similar system for detecting minerals associ- ated with radioactive elements has been developed by Harwell Laboratory in the United Kingdom. The Harwell system identifies and measures three principal elements: uranium, thorium, and potas- sium. The seabed probe resembles a snake and is towed at about 4 knots in water depths up to 400 meters (1,300 feet). The Harwell system is now commercially available and is being offered by Brit- ish Oceanics, Ltd., as part of its worldwide survey services.7! A second type of nuclear technique with prom- ise for widespread application in marine mineral exploration uses X-ray fluorescence to rapidly ana- lyze surface sediments aboard a moving ship. The method was developed by CAIS and uses X-ray fluorescence as the final step. X-ray fluorescence 7°). Noakes, Center for Applied Isotope Studies, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, July 16, 1986. 7\““Radiometric Techniques for Marine Mineral Surveys,’’ World Dredging and Marine Construction, Apr. 1, 1983, p. 208. is a routine method used in chemical analyses of solids and liquids. A specimen to be analyzed using this technique is irradiated by an intense X-ray beam which causes the elements in the specimen to emit (i.e., fluoresce) their characteristic X-ray line spectra. The elements in the specimen may be identified by the wavelengths of their spectral lines.”? The CAIS Continuous Seafloor Sediment Sam- pler was originally developed for NOAA’s use in rapid sampling of heavy metal pollutants in near- shore marine sediments. A sled is pulled along the seafloor at about three knots. The sled disturbs the surficial sediments, creating a small sediment plume. The plume is sucked into a pump system within the sled and pulled to the surface as a slurry. The slurry is further processed, after which small portions are collected on a continuous filter paper. After the water is removed, a small cookie-like wa- fer remains on the paper (hence, the system is known as the ‘‘cookie maker’’). ‘““Cookies’’ are coded for time, location, and sample number and can be made about every 30 seconds, which, at a ship speed of 3 knots, is about every 150 feet. An X-ray fluorescence unit is then used to analyze the samples. It is possible to analyze three or four ele- ments aboard ship and approximately 40 elements in a shore-based laboratory. The system has been designed to operate in water 150 feet deep but could be redesigned to operate in deeper water.” The cookie maker can increase the speed of ma- rine surveys. Not only are samples quickly obtained but preliminary analysis of the samples is available while the survey is still underway. Availability of real-time data that could be used for making ship- board decisions could significantly improve the effi- ciency of marine surveys. One current limitation is that samples are only obtainable from the top 3 or 4 centimeters of sediment. Researchers believe that some indication of underlying deposits may be obtained by sampling the surfacial sediments, but further tests are needed to determine if the tech- nique also can be used for evaluating the composi- tion of deeper sediments. ?2Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, 5th ed., (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 1982), p. 741. 73]. Noakes, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Ex- ploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, July 16, 1986. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 145 A third type of nuclear technique, neutron acti- vation analysis, has been used with some success to evaluate the components of manganese nodules from the deep seafloor.’* The technique consists of irradiating a sample with neutrons, using califor- nium-252 as a source. Gamma rays that are emitted as a result of neutron interactions then can be ana- lyzed. Ideally, the identification and quantification of elements can be inferred from the spectral in- tensities of gamma ray energies that are emitted by naturally occurring and neutron-activated radi- oisotopes.’° Although the neutron activation tech- nique can be used at sea to obtain chemical analy- ses of many substances, its use is limited by the difficulty of taking precise analytical weights at sea. The X-ray fluorescence method has proven both easier to use at sea and less expensive. Manned Submersibles and Remotely Operated Vehicles Both manned and remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) have been working in the EEZ for many years. One characteristic that all undersea vehicles 7°A Borehole Probe for In Situ Neutron Activation Analysis, Open File Report 132-85 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, June 1984), p. 8. share is the ability to provide the explorer with a direct visual or optical view of objects in real-time. Another common characteristic is that undersea ve- hicles operate at very slow speeds relative to surface- oriented techniques. Indeed, a great deal of the work for which undersea vehicles are designed is accomplished while remaining stationary to exam- ine or sample an object with the vehicle’s manipu- lators. As a consequence, neither manned nor un- manned vehicles are cost-effective if they are employed in large area exploration. Their best ap- plication is in performing very detailed exploration of small areas or in investigating specific charac- teristics of an area. All manned submersibles carry a crew of at least 1 and as many as 12, one of which is a pilot. Most of the many types of manned submersibles are battery-powered and free-swimming; others are tethered to a surface support craft from which they receive power and/or life support (tables 4-5 and 4-6). A typical untethered, battery-powered manned submersible is Alvin which carries a crew of three (one pilot; two observers); its maximum operating depth is 4,000 meters (13,000 feet). ROVs are unmanned vehicle systems operated from a remote station, generally on the sea surface. There are five main categories of ROVs: Table 4-5.—U.S. Non-Government Submersibles (Manned) Date Operating Power Crew/ Manipulators/ Vehicle built Length (ft) depth (ft) supply observers viewports Operators Arms |,/I,/ll and IV..... 1976-1978 8.5 3,000 Battery 1/1 3/Bow dome Oceaneering International, Santa Barbara, CA Auguste Piccard ....... 1978 93.5 2,000 Battery 6/3 0/1 Chicago, Inc., Barrington, IL BEAV Glennon cs ae see 1968 24.0 2,700 Battery 1/4 1/Bow dome International Underwater Contractors, City Island, NY, NY Deep Quest ........... 1967 39.9 8,000 Battery 2/2 2/2 Lockheed Missiles & Space, San Diego, CA DATE tases te eeriare wince 1982 15.0 1,000 Battery 1/1 1/19 Marfab, Torrence, CA Diaphus 2 ee trcord aia terct 1974 19.8 1,200 Battery 1/1 1/Bow dome Texas A & M University, College Station, TX din (UE CEN 508 cdoe ues 1974 = 1,500 Human 1/0 2/1 Oceaneering International, Houston, TX Johnson-Sea-Link I&II. ..1971 22.8 3,000 Battery 1/3 1/Panoramic Harbor Branch Foundation, Ft. Pierce, FL 1975 Mermaldil |p 1972 17.9 1,000 Battery 1/1 1/Bow dome International Underwater Contractors, City Island, NY NEO TRAG cosccsacens 1968 15.0 1,000 Battery 1/1 1/Bow dome Oceanworks, Long Beach, CA 1970 1972 Pioneer fois: Het SaaS: 1978 17.0 1,200 Battery 1/2 2/3 Martech International, Houston, TX HGS YI oc osoascascas 1976 20.0 6,600 Battery 1/2 2/3 International Underwater Contractors, City Island, NY SHOODElen hte ale eer 1969 14.5 1,000 Battery 1/1 1/10 Undersea Graphics, Inc., Torrance, CA WELCH teeters o corsa lefese ae 1966 17.7 1,200 Battery 1/1 1/6 University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI Waspi Sed. eke ea 1977 = 2,000 Surface 1/10 2/Bow dome Oceaneering International, Houston, TX SOURCE: Busby Associates, Inc., Arlington, VA. 146 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 4-6.—Federally Owned and Operated Submersibles Date Operating Power Crew/ Manipulators/ Speed (kts) Endurance (hrs) Vessel built Length (ft) depth supply observers viewports cruise/max cruise/max UNOLS AIVITn ten, re 1964 25 12,000 Battery 1/2 1/4 1/2 _— NOAA Pisces V ....1973 20 4,900 Battery 1/2 2/3 0.5/2 6/2 NAVY Sea Cliff ....1968 26 20,000 Battery 2/1 2/5 0.5/2.5 8/2 Wh Boucesac 1968 26 10,000 Battery 2/1 2/5 0.5/2.5 8/2 NRateeccrin 1969 136 — Nuclear 7/— — = — SOURCE: Busby Associates, Inc., Arlington, VA. 1. tethered, free-swimming vehicles (the most common); . towed vehicles; . bottom crawling vehicles; . structurally-reliant vehicles; and . autonomous or untethered vehicles. Ol B OO NO For exploring the EEZ, two types of ROVs ap- pear most appropriate: tethered, free-swimming ve- hicles and towed vehicles (table 4-7). A typical tethered, free-swimming ROV system is shown in figure 4-12. Typically, vehicles of this type carry one or more closed-circuit television cameras, lights, and, depending on their size, a variety of tools and monitoring/measuring instrumentation. Almost all of them receive electrical power from a surface sup- port vessel and can maneuver in all directions using onboard thrusters. Towed vehicles are connected by a cable to a sur- face ship. Most often these vehicles carry television cameras and still cameras. Lateral movement is Photo credit: Office of Undersea Research, NOAA The Submersible Alvin and the Atlantis IJ. Alvin is an untethered, battery-powered manned submersible capable of operating in 13,000 feet of water. Table 4-7.—U.S. Government Supported ROVs Type Depth (ft) Operator Tethered free-swimming: MinigRovelwrrer ce secre 328 U.S. Navy ADROV. gece er ance 1,000 U.S. Navy Mini Rover MK Il.......... 1,200 NOAA Plutole Mejscecreesn race eee 1,300 U.S. Navy STOOD Vx(2) Ben ele eee a 1,500 U.S. Navy ReconyiVa(4) erence 1,500 U.S. Navy CunVAlli(2) eee eee 2,500 U.S. Navy URS aie eee en a tee 3,000 U.S. Navy Super Scorpio (2) ......... 4,900 U.S. Navy Deepi Drone ees hie 5,400 U.S. Navy Cy Ml oSx6 se esodndvade 10,000 U.S. Navy Towed. Mantariuctin cmeter aston tier 2,100 NOAA, NMFS TClEDlOD Cee eee et 20,000 U.S. Navy WEA) WOM so ctonccsocubsas 20,000 Scripps ING AERUN Gioccees 2000 een 20,000 Woods Hole ANGUSE con Meee nsyspee se 20,000 Woods Hole KalZariShiipemr etree eee 2,500 Lamont-Doherty STS Sitpistett Se ea ee 20,000 U.S. Navy Untethered: EaverEasivan een ee 150 University of New Hampshire EaveiWestinmreeeceee cr 200 U.S. Navy SRURVAIL DER cs aes 12,000 University of Washington SRURVAI eee eee Reece 5,000 University of Washington URSSIAT Papier 1,500 U.S. Navy SOURCE: Busby Associates, Inc., Arlington, Virginia. generally attained by maneuvering the towing ves- sel, and depth is controlled by reeling in or reeling out cable from the surface. These vehicles are de- signed to operate within the water column and not on the bottom, but some have been designed and equipped to periodically scoop sediment samples from the bottom. Advantages and Limitations Manned submersibles, particularly in the indus- trial arena, have gradually given way to ROVs. The relatively few manned vehicles that have re- mained in service have done so because they offer a unique capability which ROVs have yet to dupli- Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 147 Figure 4-12.—A Tethered, Free-Swimming Remotely Operated Vehicle System Umbilical Power pack caw? Tether Handling system Sonar console Control console Vehicles of this type usually carry one or more closed-circuit television cameras, lights, grabbers, and instruments for monitoring and measuring. SOURCE: Busby Associates, Inc. cate. Comparisons of the relative advantages and disadvantages of manned submersibles and ROVs are difficult to make unless a particular task has been specified and the environment in which it has to operate is known. The first major advantage of a manned vehicle is that the observer has a direct, three-dimensional view of the target to be investi- gated or worked on. Second, the manipulative capability of certain types of manned vehicles is su- perior to ROVs. Third, the absence of a drag-pro- ducing cable connecting the manned submersible to its support ship permits the submersible to oper- 148 © Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ate within stronger currents and at greater depths than most ROVs can presently operate. Nonetheless, manned submersibles have several drawbacks. Most industrial applications require working around and within a structure where the possibility of entanglement/entrapment is often present and, consequently, human safety is poten- tially in jeopardy. Manned vehicles that operate in- dependently of a surface-connecting umbilical cord can operate for a duration of 6 to 8 hours before exhausting batteries. Even with more electrical power, there is a limit to how long human oc- cupants can work effectively within the confines of a small diameter sphere—6 to 8 hours is about the limit of effectiveness. Relative to ROVs, a manned submersible operation will always be more com- plex, since there is the added factor of providing for the human crew inside. The two major advantages of ROVs are that they will operate for longer durations than manned ve- hicles (limited only by the electrical producing ca- pability of the support ship) and that there is a lower safety risk for humans. Towed ROVs, for exam- ple, can and do operate for days and even weeks before they need to be retrieved and serviced. The many varieties of ROVs (at least 99 different models produced by about 40 different manufac- turers) permit greater latitude in selecting a sup- port craft than do manned submersibles (which usu- ally have dedicated support vessels). Many ROVs, because of their small size, can access areas that manned vehicles cannot. Because ROV data and television signals can be relayed continuously to the surface in real-time, the number of topside ob- servers participating in a dive is limited only by the number of individuals or specialists that can crowd around one or several television monitors. Depend- ing on the depth of deployment and the type of work conducted, an ROV may incur only a fraction of the cost of operating a manned submersible. Probably the most debated aspect of manned v. unmanned vehicles is the quality of viewing the sub- sea target. There is no question that a television camera cannot convey the information that a hu- man can see directly. Even with the high quality and resolution of present underwater color tele- vision cameras and the potential for three-dimen- sional television viewing, the image will probably never equal human observation and the compre- hension it provides. To the scientific observer, di- rect viewing is often mandatory. For the industrial user, this is not necessarily the case. Some segments of industry may be satisfied with what can be seen by television, and, while they would probably like to see more, they can see well enough with tele- vision to get the job done. The distinction between scientific and industrial needs is important because in large part, it allowed the wide-scale application of the ROV, which contributed to the slump in manned vehicle use. Costs The cost of undersea vehicles varies as widely as their designs and capabilities. One of the few generalizations that can be made regarding costs is that they increase in direct proportion to the ve- hicle’s maximum operating depth. Manned submersibles can cost from as little as $15,000 for a one-person vehicle capable of diving to 45 meters (150 feet) to as much as $5 million for an Alvin replacement. A replacement for the Johnson-Sea-Link, which is capable of diving to over 900 meters (3,000 feet), would cost from $1.5 million to $2 million. These figures do not include the support ships necessary to transport and deploy the deeper diving vehicles. Such vessels, if bought used, would range from $2 million to $3 million; if bought new, they could cost from $8 million to $10 million. ROVs also range widely in costs. There are tethered, free-swimming models currently available that cost from $12,000 to $15,000 per system, reach depths of 150 and more meters, and provide video only. At the other end are vehicles that reach depths in excess of 2,400 meters, are equipped with a wide array of tools and instrumentation, and cost from $1.5 million to $2 million per system. Intermedi- ate depth (900 meters/3,000 feet) systems equipped with manipulators, sonars and sensors range from $400,000 to $500,000. Most of the towed vehicles presently available are deep diving (20,000 feet) sys- tems requiring a dedicated support ship and exten- sive surface support equipment. Such systems start at about ‘$2 million and can, in the case of the towed hybrid systems, reach over $5 million. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 149 The foregoing prices are quoted for new vehi- cles only. However, in today’s depressed offshore service market, there are numerous opportunities for obtaining used manned and remotely operated vehicle systems for a fraction of the prices quoted above. Likewise, support ships can be purchased at similar savings. This generalization does not ap- ply to the towed or the hybrid systems, since they were built by their operators and are not commer- cial vehicles. Capabilities The environmental limits within which a vehi- cle can work are determined by such design fea- tures as operating depth, speed, diving duration, and payload. These factors are also an indication of a vehicle’s potential to carry equipment. The ac- tual working or exploration capabilities of a manned or unmanned vehicle are measured by the tools, instruments, and/or sensors that it can carry and deploy. These capabilities are, in large part, de- termined by the vehicle’s carrying capacity (pay- load), electrical supply, and overall configuration. For example, Deep Tow represents one of the most sophisticated towed vehicles in operation. Its equip- ment suite includes virtually every data-gathering capability available for EEZ exploration that can be used with this type of vehicle. On the other hand, there are towed vehicles with the same depth ca- pability and endurance as Deep Tow but which cannot begin to accommodate the vast array of in- strumentation this vehicle carries, due to their de- sign. Table 4-8 is a current worldwide listing of towed vehicles and the instrumentation they are de- signed to accommodate. Towing speed of these ve- hicles ranges from 2 to 6 knots. Tethered, free-swimming ROVs offer another example of the wide range in exploration capabil- ities available in today’s market. Vehicles with the most basic equipment in this category have at least a television camera and adequate lighting for the camera (although lighting may sometimes be op- . tional). However, there is an extensive variety of additional equipment that can be carried. The ROV Solo, for example, is capable of providing real-time observations via its television camera, photographic documentation with its still camera, short-range object detection and location by its scanning sonar, and samples with its three-function grabber (i.e., manipulator). The vehicle is also equipped for conducting bathymetric surveys. As- suming it is supported by an appropriate subsea navigation system, it can provide: © a high-resolution topographic profile map on which the space between sounding lanes is swept and recorded by side-looking sonar, © asub-bottom profile of reflective horizons be- neath the vehicle, © achart of magnetic anomalies along the tracks covered, ® television documentation of the entire track, ® selective stereographic photographs of objects or features of interest, and © the capability to stop and sample at the sur- veyor’s discretion. With adequate equipment on the vehicle and support ship and the proper computer programs, the entire mapping program, once underway, can be performed automatically with little or no human involvement. At least a dozen more competitive models exist that can be similarily equipped. In addition to ROVs of the Deep Tow and Solo class, several vehicles have been designed to con- duct a single task rather than multiple tasks. One such vehicle is the University of Georgia’s Con- tinuous Seafloor Sediment Sampler, discussed earlier in the section on nuclear methods. Untethered, manned vehicles are, for the most part, equipped with at least one television camera, still camera, side-looking sonar, and manipulator, and with pingers or transponders compatible with whatever positioning system is being used. The ab- sence of an umbilical cable has an advantage that received little attention until the Challenger space shuttle tragedy in 1986. Challenger’s debris was scattered under the Atlantic Ocean’s Gulf Stream, which flows at maximum speed on the surface but decreases to less than 0.25 knot at or near the bot- tom. Once the manned submersibles used in the search descended below the swift flowing surface waters (upwards of 3 knots), they worked and ma- neuvered without concern for the current. The ROVs used, on the other hand, were all tethered, and, even though the vehicle itself might be oper- ating within little or no discernable current, the um- bilical had to contend with the current at all times. This caused considerable difficulty at times during the search operation. 150 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 4-8.—Worldwide Towed Vehicles Depth Vehicle (ft.) Instrumentation Operator ANGUS Fry. ielreieter 20,000 Still camera w/ strobe, echo sounder, tem- Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, perature sensor Woods Hole, MA, USA BrutelVe sas ce eee 900 TV camera wi light, still camera w/ strobe, Biological Station, St. Andrews, New automatic altitude control Brunswick, NS, Canada CSAISTI CS eens 1,000 TV wi light Continental Shelf Associates, Jupiter, USA CSA/UTTS Exerc ncict 1,150 TV wi lights, still camera w/ strobe, al- Continental Shelf Associates, Jupiter, USA Deep Challenger ... Soysiemey een nace Nodule Collection Vehicleteect-tee 20,000 timeter TV wi lights, still camera w/ strobe, side- looking sonar, sub-bottom profiler, depth/altitude sensor, C/T/D sensors Slow-scan TV wi strobe illumination, echo sounder, side-looking sonar, scanning sonar, magnetometer, stereo camera sys- tem, C/T/D sensors, transponder TV w/ light, still camera w/ strobe, side- looking sonar, magnetometer sub-bottom profiler, current meter, altitude/depth sensor TV wi light, still camera w/ strobe, magnet- ic compass TV wi lights, still camera w/ strobe, side- looking sonar, C/T/D sensors Cutting and pumping devices to collect nodules for transport to surface TV on pan/tilt w/ light, still camera w/ strobe, depth and speed sensor Color TV and three still cameras w/ ap- propriate lighting Still cameras w/ strobe echo sounder, pres- sure/depth sensor, transponder Side-looking sonar (6km swath), sub-bottom profiler TV, still camera, pipe, tracker, scanning sonar, side-looking sonar, sub-bottom profiler, magnetometer TV wi/ light, still camera w/ strobe, side- looking sonar, magnetometer, seismic profiler TV wi/ light, still camera w/ strobe, scan- ning sonar, side-looking sonar, alti- tude/depth sonar, transponder TV wi light, stereocameras w/ strobes, magnetometer, side-looking, alti- tude/depth sonar TV wi light, stereocameras w/ strobe, scan- ning sonar, side-looking sonar, mag- netometer, manipulator Japan Marine Science & Technology Center, Yokosuka, Japan Marine Physical Laboratory, Scripps Institu- tion of Oceanography, La Jolla, CA, USA Lockheed Ocean Laboratory, San Diego, CA, USA Japanese and West German industrial firms. National Marine Fisheries Service, Pas- cagoula, MS, USA National Research Institution for Resources & Pollution, Japan Seametrix Ltd., Aberdeen, Scotland Preussag Meerestechnik, Hannover, West Germany IFREMER, Brest, France Huntec, Ltd. Scarsborough, Ontario, Canada Blue Deep Sarl, Valmondois, France Institute of Oceanology, Moscow, USSR Submarine Development Group One, U.S. Navy, San Diego, CA, USA U.S. Naval Oceanographic Office, Bay St. Louis, MS, USA Royal British Navy SOURCE: Busby Associates, Inc., Arlington, Virginia. Very little work using manned or ROVs has been done solely for exploration purposes. In the indus- trial arena, the work has been in support of offshore oil and/or gas operations, including pipeline and cable route mapping and inspection, bottom site surveying, structural inspection and maintenance, and a wide variety of other tasks. Scientific appli- | cation of undersea vehicles has been almost always directed at studying a particular phenomenon or aspect of an ecosystem. In only a few instances have undersea vehicles been used to verify the data col- lected by surface-oriented techniques. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone @ 151 Hard mineral exploration, however, is a task well-suited for manned vehicles and tethered, free- swimming ROVs. A wide array of manipulator- held sampling equipment for these vehicles has been developed over the past two decades. This sampling capability ranges from simple scoops to gather un- consolidated sediment to drills for taking hard-rock cores. Present undersea vehicles cannot, however, collect soft sediment cores much beyond 3 feet in length or hard-rock cores more than a few inches in length. The Continuous Seafloor Sediment Sampler is an example of a specially designed vehicle. Vehi- cles of this type might find extensive application in the EEZ by providing relatively rapid mineral assays of the bottom within areas of high interest. If supported with appropriate navigation equip- ment, a surficial mineral constituent chart could be developed fairly rapidly. Due to the vehicle’s present design, such a map could only be made over bottoms composed of unconsolidated, fine-grained sediments. A recent example of a vehicle application was the search for and subsequent examination of the RMS Titanic, which sank in the Atlantic in 1912. The vessel was thought to be somewhere within a 120- square-nautical-mile area. A visual search with an undersea vehicle could literally take years to com- plete at the 4,000-meter (13,000-foot) depths in which she lay. Instead, the area was searched using a side-looking sonar which detected a target of likely proportions after about 40 days of looking. To ver- ify that the target was the Titanic, the towed vehi- cle ANGUS was dispatched with its television and still cameras. The next step, to closely examine the vessel, was done with the manned vehicle Alvin and the tethered, free-swimming ROV Jason Junior (JJ). Alvin provided the means to ‘‘home on’’ and board the vessel, while JJ provided the means to explore the close confines of the vessel’s interior. The search for the space shuttle Challenger de- bris is another example of the division of labor be- tween undersea vehicles and over-the-side tech- niques. Since the debris was scattered over many square miles and intermixed with debris from other sources, it would have taken months, perhaps years, to search the area with undersea vehicles. Instead, as with the Titanic, side-looking sonar was used to sweep the area of interest and likely targets were plotted to be later identified by manned and un- manned vehicles. ‘The same vehicles were subse- quently used to help in the retrieval of debris. Once again, the large area was searched with the more rapid over-the-side techniques while precision work was accomplished with the slower moving under- sea vehicles. These two examples suggest that the main role of undersea vehicles in the EEZ is and will be to provide the fine details of the bottom. A typical ex- ploration scenario might begin with bottom cov- erage with a wide-swath side-looking sonar, like GLORIA, progress to one of the midrange side- looking sonars or a Sea Beam-type system, and end with deployment of a towed vehicle system or a tethered, free-swimming ROV or manned sub- mersible to collect detailed information. Needed Technical Developments Thanks to technological advances in offshore oil exploration, the tools, vehicles, and support systems available to the EEZ minerals explorer have increased dramatically in numbers and types since the 1960s. It would appear that adequate technology now ex- ists to explore selected areas within the EEZ using undersea vehicles. But, as with offshore oil, some of these assets will probably prove to be inadequate when they are used for hard mineral exploration instead of the tasks for which they were designed. Identification of these shortcomings is probably best accomplished by on-the-job evaluation. More than likely, whatever technological im- provements are made will not be so much to the vehicles themselves but to the tools and instrumen- tation aboard the vehicles that collect the data. Hence, it is important to identify precisely the data- collecting requirements for hard mineral explora- tion and mining. Potential discovery of new under- water features, processes, and conditions must also be anticipated. For example, prior to 1981, noth- ing was known of the existence of deepwater vents or of the existence of the animals that inhabit these areas. Once the vents and their associated fauna were discovered, tools and techniques for their in- vestigation were developed as necessary. Certain aspects of undersea vehicles and their equipment are perennial candidates for improve- 152 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: U.S. Geological Survey Underwater camera system, ready for deployment ment. These include, but are not limited to, broader bandwidths for television signals, greater manipula- tive dexterity and sensory perception, and more precise station-keeping and control of the vehicle itself. The advent of the microprocessor has intro- duced other candidates: artificial intelligence, pat- tern recognition, teach/learn programs, greater memory, all of which can serve to improve the ca- pability of the vehicles and their accompanying sen- sors and tools. There is no question that these aspects of vehicle technology are worthy of consid- eration and that they will undoubtedly improve our underwater exploration capability. But before ad- ditional development or improvement of undersea vehicle technology for EEZ hard minerals explo- ration begins, it may be more important to assess fully the applicability of the currently available tech- nology. Optical Imaging Optical images produced by underwater cameras and video systems are complementary to the images and bathymetry provided by side-looking sonars and bathymetry systems. Once interesting features have been identified using long-range reconnaissance techniques, still cameras and video systems can be used for closeup views. Such systems can be used to resolve seafloor features on the order of 10 centi- meter to 1 meter. The swath width of imaging sys- tems depends on such factors as the number of cam- eras used, the water characteristics, and the height of the imaging system above the seafloor. Swaths as wide as 200 meters are currently mappable. ANGUS (Acoustically Navigated Underwater Survey) is typical of many deep-sea photographic systems. Basically, ANGUS consists of three 35- millimeter cameras and strobe lights mounted on a rugged sled. The system is towed approximately 10 meters off the bottom in water depths up to 6,000 meters (19,700 feet), and is capable of taking 3,000 frames per sortie. It has been used in conjunction with dives of the submersible Alvin. A newer system, currently under development at the Deep Submergence Laboratory (DSL) at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, is Argo. On her maiden voyage in September 1985 Argo assisted in locating the Titanic. Like ANGUS, Argo is capable of operating in water depths of 6,000 meters. Argo, however, is equipped with a wide- area television imaging system integrated with side- looking sonar.’° It currently uses three low-light- level, silicon-intensified target cameras (one for- ward-looking, one down-looking, and one down- looking telephoto), extending the width of the im- aged swath to 56 meters (184 feet) when towed at an altitude of 35 meters. Argo is being designed to accommodate a sec- ond ROVs, to be known as Jason. Jason will be a tethered robot capable of being lowered from Argo to the seafloor for detailed camera (and sampling) work (figure 4-13). Its designers plan to equip Ja- son with stereo color television ‘“‘eyes.’’””? One cur- rent limitation is the lack of availability of an ade- quate transmission cable for the color television pictures. Color television transmissions exceed 6 million bits per second, and large bandwidth ca- bles capabie of carrying this amount of informa- tion have not yet been developed for marine use. Fiber-optic cables are now being designed for this 7®S.E. Harris and K. Albers, ‘‘Argo: Capabilities for Deep Ocean Exploration,’’ Oceanus, vol. 28, No. 4, 1985/86, p. 100. 7R.D. Ballard, ‘‘Argo-Jason,’’ Oceans, March 1983, p. 19. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 153 Figure 4-13.—Schematic of the Argo-Jason Deep-Sea Photographic System 7. The Argo-Jason system is currently under development at Woods Hole’s Deep Submergence Laboratory. Argo has already assisted in locating the Titanic. Jason is being designed to be launched from Argo and will handle detailed camera work. SOURCE: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. and related marine data transmission needs. How- ever, before fiber-optic cables can be employed, problems of handling tensional stress and repeated flexing of the cable must be overcome. Personnel at DSL believe that when the Argo-Jason system is fully developed, the need for manned submersi- bles will be much reduced. 72-672 0) — 87 —— 6 The current subject-to-lens range limit for opti- cal imaging is 30 to 50 meters in clear water. Sev- eral improvements are expected in the future that may enable subjects to be imaged as far as 200 meters from the lens under optimal viewing con- ditions. For instance, work is underway to increase the sensitivity of film to low light levels. A 200,000 154 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ASA equivalent speed film was used to take pic- tures of the Titanic under more than 2 miles of water. Higher film speed ratings, perhaps as high as 2 million ASA equivalent, will enable pictures to be taken with even less light. Improved lighting will also help. The optimal separation between cam- era and light in the ocean is about 40 meters, which suggests that towed light sources could provide an advantage. Use of polarization filters can also help increase viewing potential. Gated light sources, which emit short pulses of light, will be more ex- pensive to develop. Development of a technique to open the camera shutter at the precise time the gated light illuminates the subject will help reduce scattering of the reflected light.’® Direct Sampling by Coring, Drilling, and Dredging Once a prospective site is located using geophysi- cal and/or other reconnaissance methods, direct sampling by coring, drilling, or dredging (as appro- priate) is required to obtain detailed geological information. Direct sampling provides ‘‘ground truth”’ correlation with indirect exploration meth- ods of the presence (and concentration) or absence of a mineral deposit. The specific composition of a deposit cannot be determined without taking sam- ples and subjecting them to geochemical analyses. Representative sampling provides potential miners with information about the grade of deposit, which is necessary to decide whether or not to proceed with developing a mine site. Placer Deposits The state-of-the-art of sampling marine placers and other unconsolidated marine sediments is more advanced than that of sampling marine hard-rock mineral deposits such as cobalt crusts and massive sulfides. There are various methods for sampling unconsolidated sediments in shallow water, whereas technology for sampling crusts and sulfides in deep water is only now beginning to be developed. Two significant differences exist between sampling placer deposits and marine hard-rock deposits. One is the greater depth of water in which crusts and sulfides 7®R. Ballard, Deep Submergence Laboratory, Woods Hole Oceano- graphic Institution, OTA Workshop on Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, June 10, 1986. occur. The other is the relative ease of penetrating placers. Grab samplers obtain samples in the upper few centimeters of surfacial sediments. For obtaining a sample over a thicker section of sediments and preserving the sequence of sedimentary layers, vibracore, gravity, piston, and other coring devices are used. These corers are used to retrieve relatively undisturbed samples that may indicate the concen- tration of minerals by layer and the thickness of the deposit. On the other hand, to determine the average grade of ore at a particular site and for use in processing studies, large bulk samples obtained by dredging (including any waste material or over- burden), rather than undisturbed cores, may be sufficient. The characteristics of a sampling device appro- priate for a scientific sampling program are not nec- essarily appropriate for proving a mine site. In or- der to establish tonnage and grade to prove a mine site, thousands of samples may be required. It is essential that the sampling device provide consist- ently representative samples at a reasonable cost. The ability to carry out commercial-scale sampling, required to define an ore body, in water deeper than about 60 feet is still very limited. Scientific sam- pling can be done in deeper water, but as table 4-9 indicates, sampling costs rapidly escalate with water depth. The costs of sampling in deeper water prob- ably will have to be reduced significantly before commercial development in these areas can take place. Only a few areas within the U.S. Exclusive Eco- nomic Zone have been systematically sampled in three dimensions. Much of the data collected to date have been from surface samples and hence are not reliable for use in quantitative assessments.’? Ade- quate knowledge of the mineral resource potential of the EEZ will require extensive three-dimensional sampling in the most promising areas. Several factors, as suggested above, are impor- tant in evaluating the performance of a placer sam- pling system® (in general, these factors are equally 79See, for example, Clifton and Luepke, ‘‘Heavy Mineral Placer Deposits.”’ 80B. Dimock, ‘‘An Assessment of Alluvial Sampling Systems for Offshore Placer Operations,’’ Report, Ocean Mining Division, Re- source Evaluation Branch, Energy, Mines, and Resources Canada, January 1986. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone @ 155 Table 4-9.—Vibracore Sampling Costs? Shallow water Deep water WEAGICEOM ecuceceacoeoceasousoeucn 30-60 feet Type of coring equipment ........... Vibracorer Number of cores in program......... 50 Depth of penetration................ 20 feet MY PEHORVESSEI! versie loa cyarsnctdcw secs: sieveveceie Mobilization/demobilization cost...... $25,000 WESSEINCOSti i welecsiscsvenciccsueisisiaretoueree.cuevscs $50,000 (10 days at $5,000 per day; assumes 6 cores per day; 30% downtime for weather) Coring equipment and operating crew. $30,000 (10 days at $3,000 per day) Contingencysfunds 2h. ce ass. sees $25,000 UGE] GOR Son satnnens guocecdesoor $130,000 GOSTHPEI CONC ancsinmisera nc ecscos syenyere $2,600 100- to 150-foot open deck work boat, twin screw equipped with A-frame and double point mooring gear 200 to 300 feet Vibracorer (equipped for deep water operation) 20 feet 150- to 200-foot open deck work boat, twin screw, equipped with A-frame and double point mooring gear $50,000 $160,000 (20 days at $8,000 per day; assumes 3 cores per day; 30% down time for weather) $100,000 (20 days at $5,000 per day) $25,000 $335,000 $6,700 4Costs do not include core analysis and program management. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. applicable to technologies for sampling massive sul- fides and cobalt crusts). The representativeness of the sample is very important. A sample is repre- sentative if what it contains can be repeatedly ob- tained at the same site. In this regard, the size of the sample is important. For example, for minerals that occur in low concentrations (e.g., precious me- tals), a representative sample must be relatively large. A representative sample for concentrated heavy minerals may be much smaller. The depth of sediment that a sampling tool is capable of penetrat- ing also affects the representativeness of the sample. Undisturbed samples are particularly important for studying the engineering properties and deposi- tional history of a deposit. They are less important for determining the constituents of a deposit. Other relevant factors affecting sampling per- formance include: the time required to obtain a sample; the ease of deploying, operating, and retrieving the sampling device in rough seas; the support vessel requirements; and the core storage capability. Sampling tools that can sample quickly, can continue to operate under adverse conditions, and can be deployed from small ships are preferred when the cost of sampling is a significant factor. More often, the solution is a compromise among these factors. Grab and Drag Sampling.—Grab sampling is a simple and relatively inexpensive way of obtain- ing a sample of the top few inches of the seafloor. With its mechanical jaws, a grab sampler can take a bite of surficial sediment. However, a sample of surficial sediment is not likely to be representative of the deposit as a whole. Buried minerals may be different from surface minerals, or, even if the same, their abundance may be different. Moreover, the sediments retrieved in a grab sample are dis- turbed. Some of the finer particles may even es- cape as the sample is being raised, particularly if stones or debris prohibit the jaws from closing properly. Notwithstanding their shortcomings, grab sam- ples have helped geologists gain some knowledge of possible heavy mineral concentrations along the Eastern U.S. seaboard. However, grab samples provide limited information and are not appropri- ate for detailed, quantitative sampling of a mineral occurrence. Drag sampling 1s similar to grab sam- pling in that it is designed to retrieve only samples from the surface. An additional limitation of this type of sampling is that sample material is retrieved all along the drag track and, therefore, sampling is not representative of a specific site. Coring and Drilling Devices.—For more quan- titative sampling, numerous types of coring or drilling technologies have been developed. Impact corers use gravity or some type of explosive mech- anism to drive a core barrel a short distance into sediment. Percussion drilling devices penetrate sedi- ment by repeated pile driving action. Vibratory 156 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credits: U.S. Bureau of Mines, U.S. Geological Survey Chain bag dredge Dredges Used for Sampling the Seafloor corers use acoustical or mechanical vibrations to penetrate material.®! An example of an impact coring device is the box core. An advantage of this type of sampling sys- tem is that it retrieves relatively undisturbed cores. A disadvantage is that a box corer is capable of sam- pling only the top few feet of an unconsolidated de- posit. It is rarely used in sand because penetration requires additional vibratory or percussive action. 81M.S. Baram and W. Lee, Marine Mining of the Continental Shelf: Legal, Technical and Environmental Considerations (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Co., 1978), p. 70. Grab dredge Well-known percussion drilling devices include the Becker Hammer Drill and the Amdril series of drills. The Becker drill penetrates sediment using a diesel-powered hammer that strikes a drill pipe 91 times per minute. It also uses reverse circula- tion, meaning that air and/or water is pumped down the annulus between the inner and outer drill pipes, continuously flushing sample cuttings to the surface through the inner pipe.*? Among the advan- tages of the Becker drill are: its capability to re- cover all types of deposits, including gravel, sand, boulders, and clay; its ability to drill in a combined depth of water and sediments up to about 150 feet; and its capacity to recover representative samples. However, open water use of the Becker drill is slow and relatively expensive. The Becker drill is rated by some®* as one the best existing systems for offshore quantitative sam- 82Dimock, ‘‘An Assessment of Alluvial Sampling Systems,”’ p. 10. 8Tbid., p. 55. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ° 157 a Photo credit: Bonnie McGregor, U.S. Geological Survey The box core retrieves relatively undisturbed cores but only of the first few feet of sediment. pling of marine placers. It has been widely and reliably used in offshore programs around the world. Other systems may work well but the Becker drill has gained the confidence of investment bankers, who must know the extent and tenor of a deposit with a high degree of accuracy before in- vesting money in development. For developing commercial deposits, it is particularly important that the method used be one with a proven record. The Amdril, available in several different sizes, is another type of percussion drilling device. Un- like the Becker Hammer Drill, Amdrils are sub- mersible and virtually independent of the support ship’s movements. As a result, this drill can oper- ate in much deeper water than the Becker drill. Rather than using the reverse circulation method, an independent pipe supplies air to the casing to raise the drill cuttings. Although the Amdril can- not sample boulders or bedrock, it is capable of sampling gravel (unlike vibratory corers) using an airlift system. One type of Amdril has successfully sampled marine sands and gravels off Great Brit- ain.** A somewhat similar system, the Vibralift, devel- oped by the Mississippi Mineral Resources Insti- tute, has proved successful in sampling a variety of mineral deposits, including heavy minerals in dense and semi-hard material. The Vibralift is ba- sically a counterflush system. It utilizes a dual wall drill pipe driven into the sediment by means of a pneumatic vibrator. Water under pressure is in- troduced to the annular space of the dual pipe via a hose from a shipboard pump and is jetted into the inner pipe just above the cutting bit. In this way, the core rising in the inner pipe during the sample drive is broken up by the water jets and transported up the pipe through a connecting hose and finally to a shipboard sample processor. Ad- ditional lift is obtained by routing exhaust air from the vibrator into the inner pipe. Samples are col- lected in a dewatering box to minimize the loss of fine material.®° Several types of vibratory corers have been de- veloped over the years. Designs vary by length of core obtained (6 to 12 meters), by core diameter (5 to 15 centimeters), by water depth limits of oper- ation (25 to 1,000 meters), by method of penetra- tion (electric, hydraulic, and pneumatic), by port- ability, etc. Vibratory corers have been widely used for scientific and reconnaissance sampling. This method is probably the best low-cost method for coring sand and gravel deposits. Relatively un- disturbed and representative cores can be retrieved in unconsolidated sediments such as most sands, clay, and gravel. However, the effectiveness of vibratory corers decreases in dense, fine, relatively consolidated sands and in stiff clays. Some progress has been reported in sampling dense, fine-grained, heavy mineral placers with a jet bit that does not disturb the core.®® Vibratory corers will not pene- trate boulders or shale. This type of sampling de- vice is less expensive and more portable than the Becker Hammer Drill and is, therefore, probably ®4Ibid., p. 31. ®5R. Woolsey, demonstrated at Underwater Mining Institute Con- ference, Biloxi, MS, November 1986. 8eTbid. 158 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo source: P. Johnson, Office of Technology Assessment Vibracore ready for deployment from side of ship. Vibracores can retrieve relatively undisturbed samples in many types of unconsolidated sediment. more suitable for reconnaissance work than the Becker drill; however, given limitations in the type of deposit that can be sampled, vibratory corers would be less appropriate for proving certain mine sites. Vibracore systems, properly designed and oper- ated, have successfully evaluated thin (i.e., less than 12 meters), surficial, unconsolidated deposits of fine-to-coarse-grain material, such as sand and gravel, shell, heavy minerals, and phosphorite. Vibratory corers are inadequate for the more dis- seminated precious mineral placers such as gold, platinum, and diamonds, due to system limitations in sampling host gravels typically containing cob- bles and boulders. Vibratory corers are also use- less for any deposit where the thickness of overbur- den and/or zones of interest exceed the penetration limits of the system. The costs of offshore sampling vary widely, de- pending on such factors as water depth, mobiliza- tion costs, weather, navigation requirements, and vessel size and availability. One of the most im- portant factors in terms of unit costs per core is the scope of the program. Costs per hole for a small- scale program will be higher than costs per hole for a large-scale program. Table 4-9 shows typical costs of offshore vibracore programs in shallow and deep water. Costs per core are seen to vary between about $2,500 and $7,000. An alternative or supplementary strategy to tak- ing the large numbers of samples that would be needed to prove a mine site is to employ a small, easily transportable dredge in a pilot mining project. Each situation is unique, but for some cases the dredge may be less expensive and may be bet- ter at reducing uncertainty than coring or drilling. Such a program was recently completed with a pi- lot airlift dredge off the coast of west Africa. Four tons of phosphorite concentrate were recovered for an economic evaluation.®” Dredging would cause significantly more environmental disruption and may, unlike other sampling methods, require an environmental impact statement. Crusts Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts were discov- ered during the 1872-76 expedition of the HMS Challenger, but detailed studies have only recently begun. In general, existing coring and other de- vices developed to sample shallow-water placers are not appropriate for sampling crusts in deep water; therefore, new sampling technologies must be de- veloped. An important consideration in develop- ing new technology is that crusts and underlying substrate are usually consolidated and hard and therefore not as easily penetrated by either dredges or coring devices. Moreover, crusts are found at much greater depths than most unconsolidated de- posits. The most desirable crusts are believed to oc- cur between 800 and 2,500 meters water depth; thus, sampling equipment must at least be able to operate as deep as 2,500 meters. Crusts known to date rarely exceed 12 centimeters (5 inches) in thick- ness; therefore, there is no requirement for long samples. 874. Woolsey and D. Bargeron, ‘‘Exploration for Phosphorite in the Offshore Area of the Congo,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 5, No. 3, 1986, pp. 217-237. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 159 A few small samples of crust have been retrieved using standard deep-sea dredges. As these dredges are pulled along the bottom, they are able to dis- lodge chunks of the outcrop or gather already dis- lodged material; however, techniques and technol- ogy for precise, controlled sampling have yet to be developed.®*® USGS has identified several needs in quantitative crust sampling and, through its Small Business Innovative Research program, has begun several feasibility studies to develop sampling tools. As an aid in selecting sampling sites and in quan- tifying the volume of crust in a given area, a de- vice that can measure crust thickness is an impor- tant need. Deepsea Ventures, Inc., has completed a conceptual study for such a device for USGS.* The goal is to develop a tool to measure crust thick- ness continuously and in real-time. Conceptually, a very-high-frequency acoustic-reflection profiler able to detect the crust surface and the interface between crust and host rock would be mounted aboard a sled and, with a video camera, towed 20 to 25 centimeters off the seafloor. A continuous sig- nal would be sent to the surface ship via the tow cable. An important design consideration is the very rough terrain in which some cobalt crusts are found. Current design criteria call for the device to oper- ate over relatively smooth areas with less than a 20° slope. Although it will not be able to operate on slopes steeper than 20°, it is assumed that, at least initially, any crust mining that does occur will be done in relatively flat areas. For quantitative sampling, two types of coring devices have been proposed and currently are being designed. Deepsea Ventures has developed concepts for a special sampling tool for taking an undisturbed sample suitable for studying the engineering prop- erties of crust and underlying rock.%° This corer would be capable of cutting a disc-shaped core 56 centimeters (22 inches) in diameter by 23 centi- meters (9 inches) thick. The corer and a video cam- era would be mounted on a tripod anchored to the 88F).S. Cronan, H. Kunzendorf, et al., ‘‘Report of the Working Group on Manganese Nodules and Crusts,’’ Marine Minerals: Ad- vances in Research and Resource Assessment, P.G. Teleki, et al. (eds.) (Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1987), NATO ASI Series, p. 24. 89W.. Siapno, Consultant, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Tech- nologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, July 16, 1986. Ibid. sea bottom while the core is being cut. This type of corer would not be useful for detailed mapping of a deposit because the tripod must be lowered, positioned, and raised for each core cut, a process that would take more than 2 hours in 1,500 meters of water. A second coring device more appropriate for reconnaissance sampling (and perhaps also for proving a mine site) has been designed and built by Analytical Services, Inc. (figure 4-14).9! The de- vice is a percussion coring sampler that is designed %1J. Toth, Analytical Services, Inc., OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washing- ton, DC, July 16, 1986. Figure 4-14.—Prototype Crust Sampler Sliding column oe Trigger Battery and assembly electronics housing Frame Coring devices such as this, designed to be quick and inex- pensive, will be needed for quantitative sampling of crusts. SOURCE: Analytical Services, Inc., Cardiff, CA. 160 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: Analytical Services, Inc., Cardiff, CA Prototype crust sampler about to be deployed from stern of ship. to collect as many as 30 short cores during each deployment. The speed at which samples can be taken and the cost per sample are important de- sign features—especially for corers that are used in proving a mine site—and this coring operation is designed to be both relatively quick and inex- pensive. Sampling is initiated by a bottom-sensing trigger that starts a firing sequence. To fire the ““gun,’’ an electric spark ignites the powder. As many as four samples may be taken at any one site, after which the system can be lifted from the seabed, moved to another spot, and lowered again. Cores are expected to be 10 to 12 centimeters long (long enough to sample crust and some substrate in most cases) and 2 centimeters (1 inch) in diameter. The system is designed to operate in water depths of 5000 meters. Eventually, a video system, scanning sonar, and thruster will be incorporated into the system, enabling the sampler to be steered. A second-generation prototype sampler has been built and was tested in 1987. Large, bulk samples are required for processing and tonnage/grade studies. ‘To meet these needs, the Bureau of Mines is developing a dredge capa- ble of cutting into crust that may be similar in prin- ciple to a commercial mining dredge of the future.%” Current dredges are not designed to cut into crust and substrate. The experimental dredge would the- oretically collect 500 pounds of in situ material in each pass. Problems were encountered in initial *R, Willard, Bureau of Mines, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washing- ton, DC, July 16, 1986. testing of the dredge in rough terrain, but the dredge may be redesigned to better cope with rough seafloor features. The continuous bucket line dredge, used in sampling manganese nodules, is also proposed to be adapted for bulk sampling of crusts. Polymetallic Sulfides Massive sulfides have a third dimension that must be considered in sampling. At the moment, very little is known about the vertical extent of sul- fide deposits, as drilling them has not been very successful. The problem lies in the absence of suit- able drills.°? Without a sediment overburden of 100 meters (328 feet) or so it is difficult to confine the drill bit at the start of drilling. The state-of-the-art of massive sulfide sampling is demonstrated by the fact that one of the largest samples collected to date was obtained by ramming a research submersible into a sulfide chimney, knocking the chimney over, and picking up the pieces with the submersible’s manipulator arm.°** Clearly, current bulk and core sampling methods leave something to be desired. Recent advances have been made in bare-rock drilling. For example, one of the main purposes of Leg 106 of the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) in December 1985 was to test and evaluate new bare- rock drilling techniques. Drilling from the ODP’s 143 meter (470 foot) drill ship JOIDES Resolution took place in the Mid-Atlantic Ridge Rift Valley some 2,200 kilometers (1,200 nautical miles) south- east of Bermuda. The scientists and engineers of Leg 106 were partly successful in drilling several holes using such innovative techniques as a hard- rock guide base to confine the drill bit during ini- tial “‘spud-in,’’ a low-light television camera for imaging the seafloor and for monitoring drilling operations, and new downhole drilling and coring motors. The first hole took 25 days to penetrate 33.3 meters (110 feet) of rock below the seafloor, while recovering about 23 percent of the core material.°° *8J.M. Edmond, F.P. Agterberg, et al., “‘Report of the Working Group on Marine Sulfides,’’ Marine Minerals: Advances in Research and Resource Assessment, P.G. Teleki, et al. (eds.) (Dordrecht, Hol- land: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1987), NATO ASI Series, p. 36. *P.-Hale, Offshore Minerals Section, Energy, Mines, and Re- sources Canada, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, DC, July 16, 1986. ‘ *R.S. Detrick, ‘‘Mid-Atlantic Bare-Rock Drilling and Hydrother- mal Vents,’’ Nature, vol. 321, May 1986, pp. 14-15. Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 161 Although improvements in drilling rates and core recovery are needed, the techniques demonstrated during Leg 106 open up new possibilities for drilling into massive sulfides. In 1989, the JOIDES Resolution is tentatively scheduled to visit the Juan de Fuca Ridge, thus pro- viding an opportunity to obtain a few cores from massive sulfide deposits. However, the JOIDES Resolution is a large, specially designed drill ship. Its size is governed, in part, by requirements for handling and storing drilling pipe. Because oper- ating the JOLDES Resolution is expensive, it is not economically advantageous for inexpensive explo- ration sampling of massive sulfides in extensive areas. An alternative and relatively less expensive ap- proach to using a large and expensive drill ship for hard-rock sampling is to use a remotely operated submersible drill which is lowered by cable from a surface vessel to the seafloor.°° In addition to lower cost, the advantages to using this type of drill are the isolation of the coring operation from sea- state-induced ship motions and reduced station- keeping requirements. Maintaining contact with a remotely operated drill while it is drilling remains difficult; if the umbilical is jerked during the drilling operation, the drill can easily jam. Several remotely operated drills have been conceived and/or built, as described below. The drill developed by the Bedford Institution of Oceanography in Canada has probably had the most experience coring sulfides, although the per- formance of the drill to date has not met its design specifications. The Bedford drill is electrically pow- ered from the surface and is designed to operate in over 3,500 meters of water. The drill can be de- ployed in winds of 25 to 30 knots and in currents up to 3 knots. It is designed to cut a core 6 meters long (extendable another 2.5 meters) with a di- ameter of 2.5 centimeters. A commercial version of this drill, made by NORDCO of St. John’s, Newfoundland, is now available and has been sold to Australia, India, and Norway.°’” °°R. Petters and M. Williamson, ‘‘Design for a Deep-Ocean Rock Core Drill,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 5, No. 3, 1986, p. 322. 97P J.C. Ryall, ‘‘Remote Drilling Technology,’’ Journal of Ma- rine Mining, in press, 1986. Nine cores drilled through basalt were obtained with the Bedford drill in 1983 on the Juan de Fuca Ridge, but the total core length retrieved was only 0.7 meter.°® Obtaining long cores has been diffi- cult. Drillers have found that competent, unfrac- tured rocks, such as metamorphic or intrusive types, yielded the longest cores, while young, glassy, highly fractured basalts were difficult to sam- ple.°° The massive sulfides themselves are easier to drill than fractured basalts. Since 1983, the performance of the Bedford drill has improved. Recently, two cores, each about 1 meter long, were retrieved in gabbro. Drilling took place at the Kane Fracture Zone. Several foot-long cores containing sulfides also were taken from the Endeavor Segment of the Juan de Fuca Ridge. Me- chanically, the drill has not been changed much, but electronics and control systems are better. The experience gained thus far suggests that it is essen- tial to do preliminary reconnaissance work before emplacing the drill. During emplacement, a video camera attached to the drill frame also has proved helpful, as it lets drillers locate a stable position for the drill. Several other remotely controlled drills have been designed and/or built. In the early 1970s, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution built a rock drill designed to recover a 1 meter long, 2 centimeter diameter rock core from water depths as much as 4,000 meters. The drill was originally designed to be deployed from the research submersible Alvin but was later reconfigured to be deployed from a surface ship. It has not been used extensively.‘ A Japanese firm, Koken Boring & Machine Co., has built a remote battery-powered drill and used it successfully in 500 meters of water. NORDCO has recently developed a sampling system, that, de- pending on its configuration, can be used to sam- ple either sediment or rock. This system was used in October 1985 to recover eight cores in 800 meters of water off Baffin Island.!°! Finally, design of a Hale, Offshore Minerals Section, Energy, Mines, and Resources Canada, OTA Workshop on Site-Specific Technologies for Explor- ing the Exclusive Economic Zone, July 1986. *°Ryall, “‘Remote Drilling Technology.”’ 100R FE. Davis, D.L. Williams, and R.P. Von Herzen, ‘“ARPA Rock Drill Report,’’ Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Tech- nical Report 75-28, June 1975. *1Ryall, “‘Remote Drilling Technology.”’ 162 ° Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 4-15.—Conceptual Design for Deep Ocean Rock Coring Drill Floats Umbilical (armored cable) Transponder An alternative and less expensive approach to using a large and expensive drill ship for hard rock sampling is to use a remotely operated submersible drill which is lowered by ca- ble from a surface vessel to the seafloor. (Not to scale). SOURCES:Williamson & Associates, Inc., and Sound Ocean Systems, Inc. rock corer was recently started by Sound Ocean Systems & Williamson and Associates (figure 4- 15).'°? This corer has not been built, but in con- cept it is similar to the Bedford drill. A major differ- ence is that it is designed to core continuously to a depth of 53 meters (175 feet) (by adding core bar- rels from a storage magazine). Alternatively, it can be configured to recover 40 1.5-meter cores in a single deployment. A workable system for obtain- ing cores longer than 1 meter would be a signifi- cant advancement. Both ODP and Bedford drillers have experienced jamming beyond the first few meters and have not been able to obtain longer cores. Very little sampling of sediment-hosted sulfides (e.g., in the Escanaba Trough off the coast of north- ern California) has been attempted yet. Today’s percussion and vibratory devices rated for deep water use probably will be suitable for shallow sam- pling of sediment hosted sulfides but not for deeper drilling. Additional problems may occur if the water temperature is above 250 °C. Hot water could cause a good core to turn to homogenized muck as a sample is retrieved. Current technology also is not capable of doing downhole sampling (e.g., using a temperature probe) if the temperature is above 250 °C. If the water temperature is above 350 °C, embrittlement of the drill string could occur. 102Petters and Williamson, ‘‘Design for Deep-Ocean Rock Core Drill.”’ NAVIGATION CONCERNS Technology for navigation and positioning 1s es- sential in all marine charting and exploration work. The accuracy required varies somewhat depend- ing on the purpose, but, for most purposes, present technology for navigating and for positioning a ship on the surface is considered adequate. Most seafloor exploration can be done quite well with local sys- tems with internal uncertainties on the order of 10 meters and uncertainties relative to global coordi- nates of a kilometer or so. Use of a navigation sys- tem that can position a ship within 1 kilometer of a target would enable a ship to return to the im- mediate vicinity of a survey area or mine site, for example. Use of a system that could reliably posi- tion one within 10 meters relative to local coordi- nates (established, for example, by transponders Ch. 4—Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone ¢ 163 placed on the seafloor) would enable one to return to within visual range to photograph or take sam- ples.3%? Gravity surveys and seismic reflection surveys do present demanding navigational requirements. For detailed gravity surveys, the velocity of the measuring instrument must be known with uncer- tainties less than 0.05 meter/second. For seismic work, the quality of the data is directly related to the positioning accuracy of the sequence of shots and the streamer hydrophones. Three-dimensional seismic surveys for exploration geophysics require positioning precision on the order of 10 centimeters over a survey area of about 100 square kilome- ters.!°* In some instances (e.g., determining rela- tive motion of oceanic plates) accuracy on the or- der of 1 centimeter is important, but exploration technologies generally do not require this high de- gree of precision. Precise positioning and tracking of remote sys- tems, such as towed ‘‘fish’’ or ROVs, is also con- sidered challenging. Positioning is usually done by acoustic rather than electromagnetic systems. Long baseline systems employ three or more fixed-bottom or structure-mounted reference points (e.g., acous- tic transponders), while short baseline systems em- ploy three or more ship-mounted transducers that receive an acoustic pulse from a subsea acoustic source. 1° Accurate marine charting requires precise navi- gational control relative to global coordinates. Al- though requirements are stringent, the state-of-the- art is sufficient for producing high-quality bathy- metric charts. The National Ocean Survey (NOS) has established a ‘‘circular error of position’’ stand- ard of 50 meters (164 feet) or better (in compliance with international standards for charting). This is about the average for survey ships operating be- yond the range at which navigation technologies can be frequently calibrated. Accuracies of 5 to 10 meters are typical with calibrated equipment.'” National Research Council, Seafloor Referenced Positioning: Needs and Opportunities (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1983), p. 6. Tbid., pp. 8-10. ‘Frank Busby, Undersea Vehicles Directory—1985 (Arlington, VA: Busby Associates, Inc., 1985), pp. 426-430. '6Perry, “‘Mapping the Exclusive Economic Zone.”’ NOS, for example, uses ARGO and Raydist sys- tems for charting work within about 120 miles of the coast, where these systems may achieve hori- zontal position accuracies of 5 to 10 meters. They are cumbersome to use, however, because they re- quire special onshore stations to be set up and must be calibrated by a more precise system, such as a line-of-sight system like Mini-Ranger.'°’? Beyond about 120 miles of the coast, these systems are un- able to reliably meet NOAA’s 50-meter standard. Far offshore, only the Global Positioning System (GPS) is capable of meeting the desired accuracy for charting. LORAN-C is a commonly used ground-based navigation system. LORAN-C coverage is avail- able within most of the U.S. EEZ, and it is accurate relative to global coordinates to within 460 meters. Users who want to return to a site whose coordi- nates have been measured with LORAN-C can ex- pect to return to within 18 to 90 meters (60 to 295 feet) of the site usmg LORAN-C navigation; 18 to 90 meters is thus the system’s repeatable ac- curacy. LORAN-C is expected to be phased out once the GPS is fully operational. However, this is not expected to occur before 2000. Once GPS is fully operational, plans call for a 15-year transi- tion period during which both LORAN-C and GPS will be available. A satellite system available for ci- vilian use is TRANSIT. This system is often used to correct for certain types errors generated by LORAN-C. GPS is a satellite navigation system intended for worldwide, continuous coverage. When fully de- ployed, the system will consist of 18 satellites and three orbiting spares. Only six R&D satellites are operating now, and, due to the interruption in the space shuttle launch schedule, deployment of the operational satellites has been delayed about 2 years. The system is now scheduled to be fully de- ployed by 1991. Some of the current R&D satel- lites may also be used in the operational system. Costs to use the GPS are expected to be less than costs to use current systems. GPS is designed for two levels of accuracy. The Precise Positioning Service, limited to the military and to users with special permits (NOS, for in- 107bid., p. 11192. 164 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier stance), is accurate to 16 meters or better. GPS ac- curacy to within 10 meters is considered routine. The less precise Standard Positioning Service is pri- marily for civilian use and is accurate to within about 100 meters. (Use of GPS, as well as LORAN- C and other systems in the differential mode—in which a ground receiver at a known location is used to check signals and measure range errors, allows higher accuracies to be achieved but takes much longer). NOS uses GPS when it can to calibrate the other systems it uses (Raydist and ARGO). GPS is currently available about 4 hours a day; however, it is impractical to go to sea for just the short period in which the ‘‘window’’ is open. Con- sequently, in the near term, NOS is focusing its survey work on the inner half of the EEZ where Raydist and ARGO can be used. Chapter 5 Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies CONTENTS Page Introduction... as0ctice Ss. ieee rlt ms 167 Dredging Unconsolidated Materials. .702.-: 169 Bucketline or Bucket Ladder Dredging. . . 169 Suction Dredging .....---++-+++++++++: 172 Grab Dredges ......-----:s ++ sttetece: 177 New Directions and Trends in Dredging Technology: .45.6- 02+ <2 2s ee 179 Mining Consolidated Materials Offshore . . . 180 Massive Polymetallic Sulfides........-.. 181 Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts....-. 182 Solution/Borehole Mining....-.....------- 183 Offshore Mining Technologies ........---- 185 At-Sea Processing....-.---+ss++sreecrees 185 Processing Unconsolidated Deposits of Chemically Inert Minerals ......-.--- 186 Processing Unconsolidated or Semi- Consolidated Deposits of Chemically Active Minerals .....--..------:--=- 190 Processing Consolidated and Complex Mineral ©res....-.. ot Offshore Mining Scenarios......-.------- 192 Offshore Titaniferous Sands Mining Scenario... et 193 Offshore Chromite Sands Mining Scenanlo =... 196 Offshore Placer Gold Mining Scenario . . .199 Offshore Phosphorite Mining Scenarios: Tybee Island, Georgia and Onslow Bay, North Carolina ......-----++--- 204 Box Box Page 5-A. Sand and Gravel Mining.......----- 199 Figures Figure No. Page 5-1. Bucket Ladder Mining Dredge ...... 170 5-2. Capital and Operating Costs for Bucket Ladder Mining Dredges...... 171 5-3. Motion Compensation of Bucket Ladder on Offshore Mining Dredge . .172 5-4. Components of a Suction Dredge ....172 5-5. Trailing Suction Hopper Dredge ..... 174 5-6. Cutter Head Suction Dredge .......- 175 5-7. Bucket Wheel Suction Dredge ....... 176 5-8. Airlift Suction Dredge Configuration .177 5-9. Grab Dredges:.....i0e202+. 5220205 178 5-10. Cutter Head Suction Dredge on Self- Elevating Walking Platform ......... 179 5-11. Conceptual Design for Suction Dredge Mounted on Semi-Submersible Platformiticc ees Sei cece eieeiacads 180 Figure No. 5-12. 5-13. . Technologies for Processing Placer . Operating Principles of Three Placer . Technologies for Processing Offshore . Offshore Titaniferous Mineral . Values of TiO2 Content of Common . Offshore Chromite Sands, Oregon . Nome, Alaska Placer Gold District ... Conceptual System for Mining Polymetallic Sulfides .........------ 182 — Schematic of Solution Mining Technology (Frasch Process) Mineral Ores) . 3o.3.220-)02- =e eee 187 Mineral Separation Techniques ...... 189 Mineral Ores. 3:02). 0 9 re 191 Province, Southeast United States.... Titanium Mineral Concentrates and Intermediates.......-..-----+-- 195 @ontinental Shelf: ...-.2.- =... es 5-21. Offshore Phosphate District, Southeastern North Carolina Continental Shelf -..:..:-. Tables Table No. Page 5-1. Offshore Mineral Mining Worldwide Commercial Operations.......------ 5-2. Currently Available Offshore Dredging Technology .......------- 5-3. Ratio of Valuable Mineral to Ore.... 5-4. Offshore Titaniferous Sands Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates... 3. ee 5-5. Offshore Chromite Sands Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates «. 502 oo 5-6. Offshore Placer Gold Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates ©. 0. 0.25 ee 5-7, Offshore Phosphorite Mining, Tybee Island, Georgia: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates........--- 5-8. Offshore Phosphorite Mining, Onslow Bay, North Carolina: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates....-..---- 5-9. Scenario Comparisons: East Coast Placer: 6.6 Ges os 5-10. Scenario Comparisons: West Coast Placer oo eos Sas 5-11. Scenario Comparisons: Nome, Alaska Gold! Placer (sssuSs Ss Oe ee 5-12. Scenario Comparisons: Onslow Bay and Tybee Island Phosphorite .....-.. Chapter 5 Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies INTRODUCTION Many factors influence whether a mineral de- posit can be economically mined. Among the most important are the extent and grade of a deposit; the depth of water in which the deposit is located; and ocean environment characteristics such as wave, wind, current, tide, and storm conditions. Offshore mineral deposits range from unconsoli- dated sedimentary material (e.g., marine placers) to consolidated material (e.g., cobalt-rich ferroman- ganese crusts and massive sulfides). They may oc- cur in a variety of forms, including beds, crusts, nodules, and pavements and at all water depths. Deposits may either lie at the surface of the seabed or be buried below overburden. Some deposits may be attached solidly to nonvaluable material (as are cobalt-rich crusts), while others (gold) may lie atop bedrock or at the surface of the seabed (manganese nodules). The amount and grade of ore can vary significantly by location. All of these variables affect the selection of a min- ing system for a given deposit. Dredging is the most widely used technology applicable to offshore min- ing. Dredging consists of the various processes by which large floating machines or dredges excavate unconsolidated material from the ocean bottom, raise it to the surface, and discharge it into a hop- per, pipeline, or barge. Waste material excavated with the ore may be returned to the water body af- ter removal of valuable minerals. Dredging tech- niques have long been applied to clearing sand and silt from rivers, harbors, and ship channels. Ap- plication of dredging to mining began over a cen- tury ago in rivers draining the southern New Zealand gold fields. Offshore, no minerals of any type have been commercially dredged in waters deeper than 300 feet, and very little dredge min- ing has occurred in water deeper than 150 feet. Off- shore dredging technology is currently used to re- cover tin, diamonds, sea shells, and sand and gravel at several locations around the world (table 5-1). Some of the problems of marine mining are com- mon to all offshore deposits. Whether one consid- ers mining placers or cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, for instance, technology must be able to cope with the effects of the ocean environment—storms, waves, currents, tides, and winds. Other problems are specific to a deposit or location (e.g., the pres- ence of ice) and hence require technology specially designed or adapted for that location. Just as many variables influence offshore mineral processing. The processing scheme must be de- signed to accommodate the composition and grade of ore mined, the mineral product(s) to be recov- ered, and the feed size of the material. Mineral processing technology has a long history onshore. Applications offshore differ in that technology must be able to cope with the effects of vessel motion and the use of seawater for processing. Technologies currently applied to processing minerals at sea are all mechanical operations and include dewatering, sizing, and gravity separation. Processing at sea is currently limited to the separation of the bulk of the waste material from the useful minerals. This may be all the processing required for such prod- ucts as sand and gravel, diamonds, and gold; how- ever, many other products, including, for example, most heavy minerals, require further shore-based processing. Chemical treatment, smelting, and refining of metals have heretofore taken place on shore, and, given the difficulty and expense of proc- essing beyond the bulk concentrate stage at sea, are likely to continue to be done on land in most cases. The degree to which processing at sea is under- taken depends on economics as well as on the ca- pabilities of technology. As with mining technol- ogy, some processing technology is relatively well developed (e.g., technology for extracting precious metals or heavy minerals from a placer) while other technology is unlikely to be refined for commer- cial use in the absence of economic incentives. 167 168 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ‘1861 ‘Juawssessy ADojouYyda| JO 891/}O -3OuHNOS eBpeip uolons ULL aBpeaip uolons ull qe gpues UO] oe lieder jeyong pO) ces SON yeyong Sek ec et ie pr seulddiiiUd pajeulual 410 aAljoeu] L Huvajyemeq aBpaip uonons = Gg-0 ENAUCUiAD) Wipe) =o ee Pac oe cere oo alge ts seweyeg (,WOOO'L) S}IUN |JeEWS 00S Ajuo Bulayemaq Syde} |IV (EYNEHIS 5) (OWizioy = So DOR BD soe ueder ‘apimMuoljeNn L Ajuo Bulayemeq afpaip seaddoy O€L S[[OU SKE S aie cele ge puejad| ‘yiAelyAoy Jappey yeyong JO uolyesuadWOD UO!}OW ewig UiIM 9g6L U! Bululw yOj|ld L SBiI/A}Ae15 Hulbpaip yeyong = Gg-Ge ploy eyse|y ‘@WwON ‘punos UOHON ayeos jjews Ala) OL SBIL/AyIAeID UOI}ONS Pjay-BAIG QS-O Gfooliiya)- os ae Peele Boy Wae}samujnoS Bujujw jueld jOj|ld G SBIN/AIAeID Ye UOI}ONS jal JayeM O6P-0S spuoweiq ~~ (elqiweN) eoujy Wia}samyjnos ZL Ajuo Buuayemaq BHulbpeaip seddoy (ele) NBS) Sie MAS} = or ORO e.2 pc 20 YN ‘29S YON L SBI [/A}IAe1 HulBpeip yayong OSI UI eee i ae ons eiseuopy| ‘yniny nejed gL SBIL/AyAe15 HulBpaip yeyong = O8gl-SE UN epee iaerereen sonar eiSauopUy| ‘UO}PNII!G Z SBIL/AyIAe15 BulBpeip yeyong OOL Ue ES puejley) ‘}e4nUd L8ANIV swiewey s}iun Hulssad0ld poujew Buu) = (}8 a4) Jesoul uolje907 Huluiw ujdap jo Jaqunn Jaye suoleiedo jelniawWwoD spimpyon Buiuiy jesoulyy B10YS}JO—"1-S 21921 Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 169 1a % ry > ’ tpg th Fs ye . .- > ark 7 Ova ie A de % rhc i ns — Photo credit: M.J. Cruickshank, U.S. Geological Survey Dredge technology for offshore mining must be designed for rough water conditions. DREDGING UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIALS The dredge is the standard technology for ex- cavating unconsolidated materials from the seafloor. Compacted material or even hard bedrock also can be removed by dredging, provided it has been bro- ken in advance by explosives or by mechanical cut- ting methods. Dredges are mounted on floating platforms that support the excavating equipment. Mining dredges may also have equipment on board to handle and/or process ore. Three principal dredging techniques are: buck- etline, suction, and grab (table 5-2). For bucket- line and suction dredging, the material is continu- ously removed from the seabed and lifted to the sea surface. Grab dredges also lift material to the sur- face, but in discrete, discontinuous quantities. Most existing mining dredges are designed to operate in relatively protected waters. Dredge min- ing offshore in open water occurs in only a few countries (Southwest Africa, United Kingdom, In- donesia, Thailand). The Bima, a mining dredge built for tin mining offshore Indonesia, is being adapted at this time for gold mining offshore Nome, Alaska. Little special equipment capable of min- ing the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) has yet been built, although some feasibility studies and tests have been conducted. Bucketline or Bucket Ladder Dredging The bucketline or bucket ladder dredge consists of a series of heavy steel buckets connected in a closed loop around a massive steel ladder (in the manner of the chain on a chain saw) (figure 5-1). The ladder is suspended from a floating platform. For mining, the ladder is lowered until the buckets scrape against the dredging face, where each bucket is filled with ore as it moves forward. The buckets 170 ® Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Type Bucketline and bucket ladder Suction Cutter head Trailing hopper Airlifts Grab: Backhoe/dipper Clamshell/ dragline Table 5-2.—Currently Available Offshore Dredging Technology Description Present max dredging depth Capacity “Continuous” line of buckets looped around digging ladder mechanically digs out the seabed and carries excavated material to floating platform. Pump creates vacuum that draws mixture of water and seabed material up the suction line. Mechanical cutters or high pressure water jets disaggregated the seabed material; suction continuously lifts to floating platform. Suction is created by injecting air in the suction line. Mechanical digging action and lifting to surface by a stiff arm. Mechanical digging action and lifting to surface on flexible cables. 164 feet 300 feet 50-300 feet 10,000 feet 100 feet 3,000 feet Largest buckets currently made are about 1.3 yd’ and lifting rates 25 buckets per minute (1,950 yd*/hour with full buckets). Restricted by the suction distance unless the pump is submerged. Many possible arrangements all based on using a dredge pump; the largest dredge pumps currently made have 48” diameter intakes and flow rates of 130 to 260 yd*/min of mixture (10 to 20% solids). Airlifts are not efficient in shallow water. There may be limitations in suction line diameter when lifting large fragments. Resiricted by the duration of the cycle and by the size of the bucket; currently largest buckets made are 27 yds. The largest dragline buckets made are about 200 to 260 yd*/hr; power requirements and cycle time increase with depth. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. The bucket ladder dredge is a proven and widely used dredge for offshore Figure 5-1.—Bucket Ladder Mining Dredge to calm, shallow water. SOURCE: M.J. Cruickshank, U.S. Geological Survey. mining; however, its use to date has been limited Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 171 traveling up the ladder lift the material to the plat- form and discharge the ore into the processing plant. The bucket ladder dredge is the most proven and widely used technology for mining offshore tin plac- ers in open water in Southeast Asia. Bucket ladder dredges are widely used to mine onshore gold, plati- num, diamonds, tin, and rutile placers in Malaysia, Thailand, Brazil, Colombia, Sierra Leone, Ghana, New Zealand, and Alaska. Bucket ladder dredge technology is still the best method to ‘‘clean’’ bed- rock, which is particularly important for the recov- ery from placer deposits of heavy, high-unit-value minerals like gold and platinum. These dredges have buckets ranging in size from 1 to 30 cubic feet. The deepest digging bucket line dredges are de- signed to dig up to 164 feet below the surface. Prices of bucket ladder dredges (including proc- essing plants) for mining onshore vary with dredge capacity (bucket size) and with dredging depth. A small bucket dredge (with 3-cubic-foot buckets) may sell for approximately $1.5 million (free on board plant). Such a dredge can mine 60,000 to 80,000 cubic yards of ore per month at depths of 30 to 40 feet below the hull. The cost of larger onshore min- ing bucket dredges (with buckets as large as 30 cu- bic feet) and capacities up to 1 million cubic yards per month may reach $10 million to $20 million, depending on digging depth and other variables. The per-cubic-yard capital and operating costs of larger dredges are lower than those of smaller dredges (figure 5-2). Offshore bucket ladder dredges cost more than onshore dredges because they must be more self-contained. They must be built to carry a powerplant, fuel, supplies, and mined ore. The hull also must be larger and heavier to withstand waves and to meet marine insurance specifications. In 1979, the capital cost of the 30-cubic-foot Bima was about $33 million. Approximately 10 bucket dredges configured for offshore use are currently mining tin in Indonesia in water depths of 100 to 165 feet at distances of 20 to 30 miles offshore. Despite their versatility, offshore uses of bucket ladder dredges are limited. Much of the EEZ around the United States is subject to waves and ocean swells that could make bucket ladder dredg- ing difficult. To ensure that the lower end of the ladder maintains constant thrust against the cut- Figure 5-2.—Capital and Operating Costs for Bucket Ladder Mining Dredges = 0lUt oOo NN o>) Capital cost (million US$) -— fos} ie) (pied d1qno sad $Sp) soo Buijeiado yoa1I1q 0 2 4 6 8 10 Yearly volume excavated and treated million cubic yards Dredges for use offshore would cost more to build and operate than the estimates illustrated here, since they would have to be self-contained and contain a power plant, fuel, supplies, and mined ore. They would also have to be capable of withstanding waves and high winds. SOURCE: Adapted from M.J. Richardson and E.E. Horton, ‘‘Technologies for Dredge Mining Minerals of the Exclusive Economic Zone,” contractor report prepared for the Office of Technology Assessment, August 1986. ting face, motion compensation systems must be installed. These systems are large hydraulic and air cylinders that act like springs to allow the end of the ladder to remain in the same place while the hull pitches and heaves in swells (figure 5-3). Other limitations of current dredges include the high wear rate of the excavating components (e.g., buckets, pins, rollers, and tumblers) and the lack of mobil- ity. Offshore bucket dredges are not self-propelled and must be towed when changing locations. For long tows across rough water, the ladder makes the vessel unseaworthy and makes towing impractical. The bucket dredge Bima was actually carried on a submersible lift barge from Indonesia to Alaska. In designing offshore dredges, especially those working in rough water, careful attention must be given to seaworthiness of the hull. Most bucket ladder dredges are now built out- side the United States, although the capability and know-how still exist in this country. Except for the motion compensation systems installed on offshore dredges, bucket ladder dredge technology has re- mained essentially static, and there have been only minor gains in dredging depth in the last 50 years. 172 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-3.—Motion Compensation of Bucket Ladder on Offshore Mining Dredge Motion compensation systems might be necessary offshore to ensure that th e lower end of the dredge ladder maintains constant thrust against the cutting face while the dredge hull pitches and heaves in swells. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. With the availability of new materials and higher strength steels, it is now possible to design bucket ladder dredges capable of digging twice as deep (330 feet) as present dredges, but the capital and oper- ating costs would be greatly increased. Suction Dredging Suction dredging systems have three principal components: a suction device, a suction line, and a movable platform or vessel (figure 5-4). The suc- tion device can be either a mechanical pump or an airlift. Pumps are most common on suction dredges; airlifts have more specialized applications. Pumps create a drop in pressure in the suction line. This pressure drop draws or sucks in a mixture of seawater and material from the vicinity of the suc- tion head and up the suction line into the pump. After the slurry passes through the pump, it is pushed by the pump along the discharge pipe un- til it reaches the delivery point. Pump technology is considered relatively ad- vanced. Dredge pumps are a specialized applica- tion. The main features required of dredge pumps are large capacity, resistance to abrasion, and effi- ciency. To accommodate the large volumes of ma- terial dredged, the largest dredging pumps have in- takes of up to 48 inches in diameter and impellers up to 12 feet in diameter. These parts require large steel castings that are both costly and complicated to make. The flow of solids (e.g., silicate sand or gravel) and water at speeds of 10 to 20 feet per sec- ond through the pump and suction line causes abra- sion and wear. Figure 5-4.—Components of a Suction Dredge Dredge pump Discharge Floating platform Suction line/ladder A Suction \ feed J Unconsolidated seafloor The main types of suction dredges currently applicable to offshore mining are hopper, cutter head, and bucket wheel dredges. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Pumps create suction by reducing the pressure in suction lines below atmospheric pressure. Only 80 percent of vacuum can be achieved using present mechanical pumping technology. This constraint means that dredge pumps cannot lift pure seawater in the suction line more than about 25 feet above the ocean level. This distance would be less for a mixture of seawater and solids and would vary with the amount of entrained solids. Greater efficiency can be achieved by placing the pump below the water line of the vessel, usually as near as possible Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 173 to the seabed. This placement is more costly, since the pump is either a long distance from the power source or the pump motors must be submerged. Such components are very heavy for large pump capacities. An alternative applicable for deep dredg- ing is to use several pumps in series and boost the flow in the suction line by means of water jets. This technique has been tested and proven but is not in widespread use because it is inefficient. The configuration of the suction head plays an important role by allowing the passage of the solids and water mixture up the suction line. In harder, more compact material, the action of the suction head may be augmented by rotary mechanical cut- ters, by bucket wheels, and/or by water jets, de- pending on the specific applications. When the ma- terial to be dredged is unhomogeneous, such as sand and gravel, the entrance of the suction line is restricted to prevent foreign objects (e.g, large boulders) from entering the suction line. The main technological constraints in suction and discharge systems are wear and reliability due to corrosion, abrasion, and metal fatigue. The platform or vessel that supports suction dredging components must be able to lift and move the suction head from one location to another. Since most dredgeable underwater mineral deposits are more broad than thick, the dredge must have the capability to sweep large areas of the seabed. This is achieved by moving the platform, generally a floating vessel; although experimental, bottom- supported suction dredges have been built and tested. The main types of suction dredges currently applicable to offshore mining in the EEZ are hop- per, cutter head, and bucket wheel dredges. Hopper Dredges Hopper dredges usually are self-propelled, sea- going suction dredges equipped with a special hold or hopper in which dredged material is stored (fig- ure 5-5). Dredging is done using one or two dredge pumps connected to trailing drag arms and suction heads. As the dredge moves forward, material is sucked from the seabed through the drag arms and emptied into the hopper. Alternatively, the dredge may be anchored and used to excavate a pit in the deposit. Hopper dredges are used mainly to clear and maintain navigational channels and harbor en- trances and to replenish sand-depleted beaches. In the United Kingdom and Japan, they are also used to mine sand and gravel offshore. Hopper dredges are configured to handle unconsolidated, free- flowing sedimentary material. The suction heads are usually passive, although some are equipped with high-pressure water jets to loosen seabed ma- terial. The trailing drag arms are usually equipped with motion compensation devices and gimbal joints. These devices allow the drag arms to be decoupled from vessel motion and enable the drag- heads to remain in constant contact with the seafloor while dredging. The dredged material is dewatered for transport after entering the hopper. Hopper dredges may dis- charge material through bottom doors, conveyor belts, or discharge pumps. Some models are emp- tied by swinging apart the two halves of an axially hinged hull. Capacities of sea-going suction hopper dredges currently range from 650 to 33,000 cubic yards. Although the theoretically maximum-sized hopper dredge has not been built, the maximum capacity of present dredges is a compromise between the higher capital investment required for greater hop- per capacity and the higher operating costs that would result from more trips with smaller hoppers. Typical operating depths for hopper dredges are Photo credit: J. Williams, U.S. Geological Survey Trailing suction hopper dredge Sugar Island with drag arms stowed and hopper space visible. 174 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-5.—Trailing Suction Hopper Dredge My <2 Draghead Hopper dredges have been used mainly to clear and maintain navigational channels and harbor entrances and to replenish sand-depleted beaches. A hopper dredge is currently being used to mine sand and gravel in the Ambrose Channel entrance to New York Harbor. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. between 35 and 100 feet, and 260 feet is consid- ered the maximum achievable depth with currently available technology. For current specifications and capacities, the capital costs of hopper dredges range from $5 million to $50 million. Except for sand and gravel mining in Japan and the North Sea, hopper dredges have not been used extensively to recover minerals. However, hopper dredges adapted for preliminary concentration (beneficiation) of heavy minerals at sea, with over- board rejection of waste solids and water, are likely candidates for mining any sizable, thin, and loosely consolidated deposits of economic heavy minerals that might be found in water less than 165 feet deep. A stationary suction dredge, similar in princi- ple to the anchored suction hopper dredge, has been designed and extensively tested for mining the metalliferous muds of the Red Sea.! Although the 'M.J. Cruickshank, ‘Technology for the Exploration and Exploi- tation of Marine Mineral Deposits,’’ Non-Living Marine Resources (New York, NY: United Nations, Oceans, Economics, and Technol- ogy Branch), in press. dredge has not been used commercially, it success- fully retrieved muds in 7,200 feet of water. Cutter Head Suction Dredges Mechanically driven cutting devices may be mounted near the intake of some suction dredges to break up compacted material such as clay, clayey sands, or gravel. The two main types are cutter heads and bucket wheels. Cutter head dredges are equipped with a special cutter (figure 5-6) mounted at the end of the suc- tion pipe. The cutter rotates slowly into the bot- tom material as the dredging platform sweeps side- ways, pulling against ‘‘swing lines’’ anchored on either side. Cutter head dredges usually advance by lifting and swinging about their spuds when in shallow water. Cutter head dredges are in widespread use on inland waterways for civil engineering and mining projects. Onshore, these dredges have been used to mine heavy minerals, (e.g., ilmenite, rutile, and zircon) from ancient beaches and sand dunes in the Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 175 Figure 5-6.—Cutter Head Suction Dredge Ladder Brection of dredging <—— Cutter head Dredges such as this have been used at inland mine sites to mine heavy minerals such as ilmenite, rutile, and zircon. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. United States (Florida), Australia (Queensland), and South Africa (Richards Bay). Ore disaggre- gated by the cutter is pumped through a flexible pipeline to a wet concentrating plant floating sev- eral hundred feet behind the dredge. This config- uration, while common on protected dredge ponds inland, may not be suitable for mining in the open water of the marine environment because of wave, current, and wind conditions. Large self-propelled cutter head suction dredges have been built that are capable of steaming in rough water with the cutter suction ladder raised. While not able to operate in heavy seas, this type of dredge can disengage from the bottom and “‘ride out”’ storms. Adaptation of a sea-going cutter head dredge to mining may require a motion compen- sated ladder and installation of onboard process- ing facilities and would require addition of a hop- per or the use of auxiliary barges. The capital costs of cutter head suction dredges vary widely with size and configuration. For sea- going, self-powered dredges the capital costs would be similar to those of hopper dredges, i.e., up to $50 million. The capacities of cutter head dredges vary with the size of the dredge pumps, which range in diameter between 6 and 48 inches. This range of diameters corresponds to mining volumes of solids between 100 and 4,000 cubic yards per hour. Like suction hopper dredges, the operating depths of available cutter head dredge designs are limited by dredge pump technology to between 35 and 260 feet, although greater mining depths could be achieved with incremental technical improve- ments. The cutter head suction dredge 1s not con- sidered suitable for cleaning bedrock to recover gold or other very dense minerals in placer deposits, due to inefficiency in recovering the heavier minerals. 176 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-7.—Bucket Wheel Suction Dredge Bucket wheel dredges have been used primarily in calm inland waters. Equipped with motion compensation devices, these dredges may have some potential for mining offshore placer deposits. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. Bucket Wheel Suction Dredges The bucket wheel dredge (figure 5-7) is a vari- ant of a cutter head dredge, differing mainly in that the cutter is replaced by a rotating wheel equipped with buckets that cut into the dredging face in a manner similar to a bucket ladder dredge. The buckets are bottomless and discharge directly into the suction line. Bucket wheel mining dredges are a relatively new development and have been used primarily in calm inland waters. Some applications include tin min- ing in Brazil, sand and gravel mining in the United States, and heavy mineral mining in South Africa. The bucket wheel dredge has not been used in the EEZ, but it may have potential for mining offshore heavy minerals in specific applications. Motion compensation, offshore hull design, and mobility would need to be considered. These dredges are less effective when cutting clay-rich materials, which may clog the buckets, and when dredging boulders, which could block the opening into the suction lines. However, bucket wheel dredges are more suitable than cutter head suction dredges for mining heavy minerals, since the bucket wheel avoids the prob- lem of loss of heavy minerals on the bottom. Air Lift Suction Dredges In airlift suction dredging, air under pressure is injected in the suction line of the dredge, substi- tuting for the mechanical action of a dredge pump (figure 5-8) and creating suction at the intake which allows the upward transport of solids. Airlifts have been used for many years in salvage operations and, during the past 25 years, for mining diamond-bear- ing gravels off the southwestern coast of Africa. The technology of airlift dredges has not reached the level of development and widespread use of the other forms of suction dredging, but the configu- rations are similar. Much research has been done on the physics of the flow of water, air, and solids mixtures in airlift suction dredging, because this method has been considered one of the most prom- ising for,dredging phosphorite or manganese nod- ules from great ocean depths. In general, applica- Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 177 Figure 5-8.—Airlift Suction Dredge Configuration \) Air lift discharge ‘ Compressor SS SSS SS ccs ) tA Water line Ny Air injection Airlift dredges may be applicable for some seabed deposits 300 feet or more below the ocean surface. Airlift dredging has been used on a pilot scale to lift manganese nodules from about 15,000 feet. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. tions of airlifts for mining offshore minerals may be considered for depths between 300 and 16,000 feet. Suction and air delivery lines can be handled with techniques readily adapted from the petroleum industry; the problem of platform motion in re- sponse to long period waves can be overcome by adapting motion compensation systems used in the petroleum industry; and seabed material can be dis- aggregated at the suction intake by high-pressure water jets or by hydraulically driven mechanical cutters. Grab Dredges Grab dredging is the mechanical action of cut- ting or scooping material from the seabed in finite quantities and lifting the filled ‘‘grab’’ container to the ocean surface. Grab dredging takes place in a cycle: lower, fill, lift, discharge, and again lower the grab bucket. Clamshell, dragline, dipper, and backhoe dredges are examples of this technology (figure 5-9). Clamshells and draglines are widely used for dredging boulders or massive rock frag- ments broken by explosives and for removing over- burden from coal and other stratified mineral de- posits. The clamshell and dragline buckets are lowered and lifted with flexible steel cables. Vari- ants of clamshell dredging have been used in Thai- land to mine tin in Phuket Harbor and in Japan to mine iron sands in Ariake Bay. In the late 1960s, Global Marine, Inc., used a clamshell dredge for pilot mining of gold-bearing material from depths of 1,000 feet near Juneau, Alaska. Variants of dragline dredges have been used since the late 19th century to recover material from the deep seafloor. With appropriate winch configurations for han- dling large amounts of cable and large buckets, grab dredging is similar to the traditional technologies used to hoist material from deep underground mines (e.g., in South Africa, where it is economi- cally feasible to hoist gold ores from 12,000 feet be- low the ground surface). Most aspects of clamshell dredging technology, including motion compensa- tion for working on a moving platform at sea, have been developed and proven by either the mining or petroleum industry and are readily available for adaptation to offshore mining. Dipper and backhoe dredges are designed for use on land (figure 5-9). They may be placed on float- ing pontoons for offshore dredging but are limited to shallow-water applications. Backhoes especially can be easily adapted to mining in protected shal- low water. Commercial off-the-shelf backhoes with a maximum reach of about 30 feet and buckets with capacities of up to 3 cubic yards are readily avail- able for gold or tin placer mining in protected envi- ronments. Backhoes mounted on walking platforms are conceivable for excavation in shallow surf zones. Backhoe mining is limited by depth of reach, small capacity, and the inability of the operator to see the cutting action of the bucket below water. Dip- per dredges are widely used to mine stratified mineral deposits (e.g., coal and bauxite) on land, but their unique action (figure 5-9) restricts offshore applications to shallow water. As dredged material using grab, dipper, and backhoe dredges is raised through the water column, the material is washed, which may not be desirable in mining. 178 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-9.—Grab Dredges Dipper dredge © “co000 ® Clamshell dredge <0 9eae Backhoe dredge SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987 (illustrations not to scale). Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 179 NEW DIRECTIONS AND TRENDS IN DREDGING TECHNOLOGY Dredge technology for offshore mining falls into two distinct categories: technology for mining near- shore in shallow, protected water; and technology for further offshore in deeper water subject to winds, currents, and ocean swell. Dredging systems for a shallow environment can be readily adapted from the various types of dredges currently used onshore. Dredges for mining in a deep-water envi- ronment must be designed with special character- istics. They must be self-powered, seaworthy plat- forms equipped with motion compensation systems, onboard processing plants, and mineral storage ca- pabilities. Design and construction of offshore dredge min- ing systems for almost any kind of unconsolidated mineral deposit or environment on the continen- tal shelf are possible without major new technologi- cal developments. However, for some environ- ments, there may be operating limitations due to seasonal wave and storm conditions. No break- throughs comparable to the change from the pis- ton to the jet engine in the aircraft industry, for instance, are needed. If deposits of sufficient size and richness are found, incremental improvements in dredging technology can be expected. Costs to design, build, and operate dredging equipment for offshore mining are the most significant constraints. Several new design concepts have been developed to help solve some of the problems of dredging at sea. The motion of platforms floating on the ocean generally make dredging difficult, but there are three ways to alleviate this movement other than those described previously. In one approach for shallow water, one firm has designed and built an eight-leg ‘‘walking and dredging self-elevating plat- form’’ (WADSEP) to support a cutter head suc- tion dredging system (figure 5-10). By raising and translating one set of legs at a time the platform — creeps slowly across the seafloor. Since the platform is firmly grounded, the problem of operating in rough, open water is reduced. The dredge ladder and cutter head sweep sideways by pulling against anchors. This self-elevating platform could equally well support a bucket ladder dredging operation. The practical limit for dredging using a WADSEP is probably about 300 feet. Although the concept and technology are sound, the WADSEP is not cur- rently cost-effective to use. Figure 5-10.—Cutter Head Suction Dredge on Self-Elevating Walking Platform ING Although the technology is proven, mining operations with a self-elevating walking platform are currently very expensive. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. A second technological approach to the problem of dredge motion in offshore environments is to use a semi-submersible platform, such as those in wide- spread use in the petroleum industry. This would enable a dredge to continue mining or to stay on- station rather than having to be demobilized dur- ing rough weather. A design for a suction dredge that incorporates a seaworthy semi-submersible hull is shown in figure 5-11. A disadvantage of the semi- submersible platform would be its sensitivity to large changes in deadweight if dredged material is stored on board. A third approach to eliminating platform motion in shallow water is to develop a submerged dredge. This project has proved to be complex and diffi- cult in systems tested to date. Although a proto- type of a submerged cutter head suction dredge was 180 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-11.—Conceptual Design for Suction Dredge Mounted on Semi-Submersible Platform Side view } } a/ Maximum dredging draft 72 ft Survival draft 54 ft Semi-submersible platforms have been developed for offshore oil drilling. The semi-submersible platform offers a stable platform from which to operate, but is very expensive. SOURCE: Dredge Technology Corp. successfully built and operated offshore for several months, it was not an economic success and its de- velopment was discontinued. Greater dredging depths can be attained by sub- merging pumping systems or by employing airlift or water jet lift systems. While submerged pump technology can be readily adapted from military submarine technology or from deep-water petro- leum technology, the development costs are high. No breakthroughs are foreseen that could vastly increase the capacities of offshore dredging systems and bring substantial cost reductions. However, ex- isting technology is largely based on steel construc- tion, and the use of new, lighter materials with higher strength-to-weight ratios has not been widely investigated. MINING CONSOLIDATED MATERIALS OFFSHORE Two principal types of consolidated deposits that are known to occur in the U.S. EEZ are massive polymetallic sulfides and cobalt-rich ferroman- ganese crusts. Alternatives for mining manganese nodules, where present in the EEZ, have much in common with dredging techniques used in shallow water, although the deep water in which nodules are found presents special problems. However, techniques for mining polymetallic sulfides and co- balt crusts are likely to be very different than the dredging techniques used to mine placers and other unconsolidated deposits. Unlike unconsolidated de- posits, these deposits must be broken up (using ei- ther some type of mechanical device or blasting) and possibly must be crushed prior to transport to the surface. Moreover, all known cobalt crust and Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 181 offshore polymetallic sulfide deposits occur in deep water, beyond the range of technologies used for conventional placer mining. Much of the technology needed to mine massive polymetallic sulfide and cobalt crust deposits is yet to be developed. EEZ hard-rock deposits and mas- sive polymetallic sulfide deposits are, therefore, probably of more scientific than commercial interest at this time. Research on the genesis, distribution, extent, composition, and other geological aspects of these deposits has been underway for only a few years, and more knowledge will likely be required before the private sector is likely to consider spend- ing large sums of money to develop needed min- ing technology. A more immediate need is to re- fine the technology for sampling these hard-rock _ deposits (see ch. 4). Before mining equipment can be designed, more technical and engineering data on the deposits will be required.’ In the deep ocean, technology must be designed to cope with elevated hydrostatic pressure, the cor- rosive saltwater environment, the barrier imposed by the seawater column, and rugged terrain. Even onshore, mining equipment requires constant re- pair and maintenance. Given deep ocean condi- tions, it will be particularly important that mining equipment be as simple as possible, reliable, and sturdy.? Massive Polymetallic Sulfides Although technology for mining massive sulfides has not been developed, the steps likely to be re- quired are straightforward. To start, any overbur- den covering the massive sulfides would have to be removed, although it is likely that initial mining targets would be selected without overburden. Then, the resource would then have to be frag- mented, collected, possibly reduced in size, trans- ported to a surface vessel, optionally beneficiated on the vessel, and finally transported to shore. ?R. Kaufman, ‘‘Conceptual Approaches for Mining Marine Poly- metallic Sulfide Deposits,’’ Marine Technology Society Journal, vol. 19, No. 4, 1985, p. 56. : 3D.K. Denton, Jr., ‘‘Review of Existing, Developing, and Required _ Technology for Exploration, Delineation, and Mining of Seabed Mas- - sive Sulfide Deposits,’’ U.S. Bureau of Mines, Minerals Availability Program, Technical Assistance Series, October 1985, p. 13. A number of conceptual approaches have been suggested to fragment and/or extract massive sul- fides. These include use of cutter head dredges; drilling and blasting; high-pressure water jets; dozers, rippers, or scrapers; high-intensity shock waves; and in situ leaching.* All proposed extrac- tion methods have some drawbacks, and none have been tested in the ocean environment. Crushing or grinding, where required, is not technically dif- ficult on land but has not yet been done in com- mercial operations on the seafloor. Transport of crushed ore to the surface would most likely be accomplished by hydraulic pumping (using either airlift or submerged centrifugal pumps). This tech- nology has been studied for mining seabed manga- nese nodule deposits, so it is perhaps the most advanced submerged part of many proposed hard- rock mining systems. No major technical innovations are expected to be needed for surface ship operations, although the cost of equipment such as dynamically positioned semi-submersible platforms will be expensive. On- board storage and transport of massive sulfide ore would have similar requirements as storage and transport of most other ores. Flotation technology for beneficiating massive sulfides has not yet been adapted for use at sea; however, the U.S. Bureau of Mines has initiated research on the subject. One conceptual approach’ for deposits on or just below the seafloor envisions the use of a bottom- mounted hydraulic dredge (figure 5-12). The dredge would be equipped with a suction cutter-ripper head capable of moving back and forth and also telescop- ing as it cuts into the sulfide deposit and simultane- ously fractures and picks up the material by suc- tion. The dredged material would be first pumped from the seabed to a crusher and screen system, then into a storage and injection hopper on the sub- merged dredge, and finally from the injection hop- per to the surface. An airlift pump and segmented steel riser would give vertical lift. The surface plat- form would be a large, dynamically positioned, semi-submersible platform. After dewatering, the pumped material would be discharged into storage holds on the platform. In concept, the ore would be beneficiated on the platform, loaded on a barge, ‘Tbid., pp. 16-17. SKaufman, ‘‘Conceptual Approaches for Mining,’’ pp. 55-56. 182 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-12.—Conceptual System for Mining Polymetallic Sulfides Bottom dredge transported, stored, and handled from semi-submersible platform. Riser and airlift pump — Platform spudded into Bottom mounted bottom hydraulic dredge - Cutter head - Dredge pumps A prototype system for mining massive sulfides will unlikely be developed until the economics improve and more is known about the deposits (not to scale). SOURCE: R. Kaufman, ‘Conceptual Approaches for Mining Marine Polymetallic Sulfide Deposits,” Marine Technology Society Journal, vol. 19, No. 4, 1985, p. 56. and finally transported to shore using a tug-barge system. While such approaches seem reasonable given the current state of knowledge, a prototype mining system may be very different. It will not be possible to develop such a system until more is known about the nature of massive sulfides and un- til there is a perceived economic incentive to mine them. Cobalt-Rich Ferromanganese Crusts Cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts on Pacific sea- mounts have been known for at least 20 years. However, knowledge that the crusts could some day be an economically exploitable resource is recent, and technology for mining the crusts is no more advanced than technology for mining massive sulfides. Despite lack of technology and detailed informa- tion about the resource, a consortium (consisting of Brown & Root of the United States, Preussag AG of West Germany, and Nippon Kokan of Ja- pan) has expressed interest in mining cobalt-rich crusts in the U.S. EEZ surrounding the State of Hawaii and Johnston Island. Most observers ex- pect that crusts, if mined at all, are likely to be mined before sulfides. With this in mind, Hawaii and the U.S. Department of the Interior have re- cently prepared an Environmental Impact State- ment (EIS) in which the resource potential and po- tential environmental impacts of crust mining in the Hawaiian and Johnston Island EEZs are assessed. In addition, a relatively detailed mining devel- opment scenario has been prepared as part of the EIS.® The scenario describes and evaluates the vari- ous subsystems required to mine crusts. A num- ber of approaches are possible for each subsystem, but the basic tasks are the same. Subsystems would be required to fragment, collect, and crush crust and probably to partially separate crust from sub- strate before conveying ore to the surface. The sur- face support vessel and subsystem for pumping ore 5U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, and State of Hawaii, Department of Planning and Economic Devel- opment, Proposed Marine Mineral Lease Sale in the Hawaiian Archipelago and Johnston Island Exclusive Economic Zones (Draft Environmental Impact Statement), app. A: ‘Mining Development Scenario Summary,’’ January 1987. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 183 to the surface probably would be similar to those already designed for mining manganese nodules. Crusts form thin coatings on the surface of vari- ous types of nonvaluable substrates. A principal problem in designing a crust mining system will be to separate crust from substrate in order to min- imize dilution of the ore. The thickness and conti- nuity of the crust (which are often highly variable), the nature of its bonding to substrate, and the effi- ciency of the cutting device used will affect how much substrate is collected. The more substrate col- lected, the lower the ore grade and the greater the costs of transportation, processing, and waste dis- posal. The principal alternatives are to separate crust from unwanted substrate on the seabed (and thus avoid lifting substrate to the surface) or to sep- arate crust and substrate on the mining vessel. Complete separation on the seabed of ore from waste material would be preferable (if at all feasi- ble), but costs to do so may be prohibitively high. It is more likely that only a small amount of the necessary separation will take place on the seabed and that most of the separation will take place on the mining vessel or onshore. The mining system assumed in the EIS mining scenario employs a controllable, bottom-crawling tracked vehicle attached to a mining ship by a hy- draulic lift system and electrical umbilical cord. However, before mining concepts can be signifi- cantly refined, more information will be required about the physical characteristics of the crusts. More data on the microtopography of crusts and substrate are an especially important requirement for the design of the key element of the mining sys- tem, a crust fragmenting device. SOLUTION/BOREHOLE MINING Solution or borehole mining has much in com- mon with drilling for oil and gas; in fact, much of the technology for this mining method is borrowed from the oil and gas industry. Both terms refer to the mining of rock material from underground de- posits by pumping water or a leaching solution down wells into contact with the deposit and remov- ing the slurry or brine thus created. Because the mining process is accomplished through a drill hole, this method is applicable for recovering some types of ore without first removing overburden. The Frasch process, used since 1960 to mine sul- fur from salt dome deposits in the Gulf of Mexico, is the only current application of solution mining offshore (figure 5-13). From an offshore drilling platform, superheated water and compressed air are pumped into the sulfur deposit. The hot water melts the sulfur, and liquid sulfur, water, and air are forced to the surface for collection.’ Borehole mining has been considered for recov- ery of both onshore and offshore phosphates. The U.S. Bureau of Mines has tested a prototype bore- hole mining tool onshore. For mining, the tool is 7D.E. Morse, ‘‘Sulfur,’’ Mineral Facts and Problems—1985 Edi- tion, Bulletin 675 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1986), p. 785. lowered into a predrilled, steel-cased borehole to the ore. A rotating water jet on the tool disintegrates the phosphate matrix while a jet pump at the lower end of the tool pumps the resulting slurry to the surface. The slurry is then transported to a benefici- ation plant by pipeline. The resulting cavity is back- filled with sand to prevent subsidence. Results of economic feasibility studies of using the borehole mining technique onshore show that, where the thickness of the overburden is greater than 150 feet, borehole mining may be more eco- nomical than conventional surface mining systems.® An elaborate platform would be required for min- ing offshore deposits, so capital costs are expected to be higher than for onshore deposits. Borehole mining of phosphate appears to be less destructive to the environment than conventional phosphate mining techniques and, if used offshore, would probably not require backfilling of cavities. Solution mining also has been mentioned as a possible technique for mining offshore massive sul- fides. Significant drawbacks include the application of chemical reagents capable of leaching these sul- 8J.A. Hrabik and D.J. Godesky, ‘‘Economic Evaluation of Bore- hole and Conventional Mining Systems in Phosphate Deposits,’’ Bu- reau of Mines Information Circular 8929, 1983. 184 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-13.—Schematic of Solution Mining Technology (Frasch Process) Sea surface a Sea floor ZAK FS sulfur, and air mixture Cap rock » 7S b Mon AND) Ld ROO Uap Sulfur-bearing formation - \ —' Salt dome Solution mining of sulfur is currently done in the Gulf of Mexico. Borehole mining, which has been suggested for mining phosphorite, is similar, using high pressure water to disintegrate ore below overburden. The resulting slurry is then pumped to the surface. SOURCES: Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 25 (Danbury, CT: Grolier, Inc., 1986), p. 868; J.W. Shelton, ‘Sulfur,’ Mineral Facts and Problems, 1980 ed. (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines), p. 884. fides, possible contamination of seawater by the chemical leach solutions required, and the prob- able necessity of fracturing impermeable deposits to allow the leach solution to percolate through the deposit. Solution/borehole technology is untested on marine hard-rock deposits.? SS *Denton, “‘Review of Existing, Developing, and Required Tech- nology.’” Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 185 OFFSHORE MINING TECHNOLOGIES Unless concentrations of mineral deposits off- shore are likely to be much higher than those on land, or unless the values of minerals increase, it is apparent that the mining industry will have less incentive to develop new technology than an indus- try like the petroleum industry. For example, the value of oil from a relatively small offshore field is likely to approach $1 billion. In comparison, a reasonable target for an offshore placer gold deposit might have a value of $100 million—an order of magnitude less. Massive sulfides and other primary mineral de- posits of the EEZ may some day present economic targets and offer incentives to development of min- ing technologies. These technologies are likely to depart significantly from dredging concepts and may be more closely related to solution mining, off- shore petroleum recovery, or conventional tech- niques of hard rock mining. Many of the technological advances made by the offshore petroleum industry would find applications in offshore mining, provided the offshore mineral deposits were rich enough to sustain the capital and operating costs of such developments. This tech- nology transfer was demonstrated during the 1970s when several groups of leading international com- panies in the mining industry sponsored develop- ment work on methods for mining manganese nod- ules from depths of about 15,000 feet. These groups have delayed their plans for dredging nodules, pri- marily because prices for copper, nickel, cobalt, and manganese continue to be low, but also because the institutional regime imposed on the exploitation of the international oceanfloor is still evolving. AT-SEA PROCESSING Mineral processing involves separating raw ma- terial (ore) from worthless constituents and trans- forming it into intermediate or final mineral prod- ucts. The number and type of steps involved in a particular process may vary considerably depend- ing on the characteristics of the ore and the end product or products to be extracted. Mineral proc- essing encompasses a wide range of techniques from relatively straightforward mechanical operations (beneficiation) to complex chemical procedures. Processing may be needed for one or more of the following tasks: 1. To control particle size: This step may be un- dertaken either to make the material more convenient to handle for subsequent process- ing or, as in the case of sized aggregate, to make a final product suitable for sale. 2. To expose or release constituents for further processing: Exposure and liberation are achieved by size reduction. For cases in which minerals must be separated by physical proc- esses, an adequate amount of freeing of the different minerals from each other is a prereq- uisite. 3. To control composition: Constituents that would make ore difficult to process chemically 712=67/.2) 0) — 18) ==) 7. or would result in an inadequate final prod- uct must be eliminated or partially eliminated (e.g., chromite must be removed from ilme- nite ore in order to meet specifications for pig- ment). Often, an important need is to elimi- nate the bulk of the waste minerals from an ore to produce a concentrate (beneficiation).!° Processing of marine minerals may take place either on land or at sea or partly on both land and sea, depending on economic and technological con- siderations. Where processing is to be done wholly or partly at sea, it is integrated closely with the min- ing operation. However, since almost no mining has taken place to date in the EEZ, offshore proc- essing experience is limited. Processing technology for minerals found on land has developed over many centuries and, in contrast to requirements for offshore processing, has been designed to oper- ate on stable, motionless foundations and, with few exceptions, to use fresh water. It is usually not desirable to do all processing of marine minerals offshore. Final recovery may be done onboard in the case of precious minerals, such 10K.G. Kelly and D.J. Spottiswood, Introduction to Mineral Proc- essing (New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1982), pp. 5-6. 186 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier as gold, platinum, and diamonds, but all other minerals would probably be taken ashore as bulk concentrates to be further processed. Trade-offs must be considered in evaluating whether to par- tially process some minerals offshore. First, the cost of transporting unbeneficiated ore to shore must be weighed against the added costs and capital ex- penses of putting a beneficiation plant offshore. Transportation to shore of a smaller amount of high grade concentrate may be more economical than transporting a larger amount of lower grade ore to shore for beneficiation and subsequent processing. (This is also a standard problem on land when eval- uating trade-offs between, for example, building a smelter or investing in transportation to an ex- isting smelter.) Second, it is generally thought to be easier and more economical to discharge tailings (waste materials) at sea than on land, but tailings discharge may result in unacceptable environmental impacts. Third, while seawater is an unlimited source of water for use in many phases of process- ing, its higher salinity could make processing more difficult and concentrates could require additional washing with fresh water. Important considerations in evaluating whether to process minerals offshore may include the cost of space aboard mining vessels and the sensitivity of some processing steps to vessel motion. Space is an important factor in the economics of a project. Since larger platforms cost more, engineers must consider the trade-offs between using a hull or plat- form large and stable enough to contain additional processing equipment, power, fuel, storage space, and personnel and transporting unbeneficiated ore to shore. Although little experience is available, ves- sel motion may make some processing steps diffi- cult or impossible without motion compensation equipment and may significantly reduce the effi- ciency of recovering some minerals. Power require- ments are also of major concern because all power must be generated onboard, thus requiring both additional space and costs. Personnel safety, the availability of docking facilities, distance to refiner- ies, and production rates may also influence proc- essing decisions.!! 'M_.J. Cruickshank, ‘‘Marine Sand and Gravel Mining and Proc- essing Technologies,’’ Marine Mining, in press. Some basic development options include limit- ing the motion of the platform (e.g., by using a semi-submersible); isolating the processing equip- ment from platform motion (e.g., by mounting it on gimbals); redesigning the processing equipment to make it more efficient at sea; or simply accept- ing lower grade concentrate by using existing and, hence, less costly equipment. In the case of mineral processing, an initial priority probably would be to test existing processing equipment at sea to ob- tain operating experience. The costs and efficiency of operating a process- ing plant at sea are highly uncertain. For exam- ple, motion compensation of specific sections of the onboard plant or of major portions of the vessel is expensive. For most minerals, further development of technology will be needed to optimize offshore mineral processing equipment and procedures. In general, one would probably attempt to perform the easy and relatively inexpensive processing steps offshore, such as size separation and rough grav- ity concentration, to reduce the bulk of material to be transported, then complete the processing on land. There are three broad categories of mineral proc- essing technology: 1. technology for unconsolidated deposits of chemically inert minerals, 2. technology for unconsolidated or semi- consolidated deposits of chemically active minerals, and 3. technology for consolidated deposits of min- erals requiring crushing and size reduction. Processing Unconsolidated Deposits of Chemically Inert Minerals Chemically inert minerals include gold; plati- num; tin oxide (cassiterite); titanium oxides (il- menite, rutile, and leucoxene); zircon; monazite; diamonds; and a few others. These occur in na- ture as mineral grains in placers (see ch. 2) and are often found mixed with clay, sand, and/or gravel particles of various sizes. Since these minerals are generally heavier than the silicate and other min- erals with which they may be mixed, the use of me- chanical gravity separation methods is important in processing (figure 5-14). However, the initial step Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 187 Figure 5-14.—Technologies for Processing Placer Mineral Ores Screening and sizing Waste (tailings) Gravity Hydrocyclones separation oe p heavy medium separation a fluorescence Riffle tables 3s sorter d Drying kiln dy Gold Uncut Concentrates — piatinum Magnetic diamonds of Tin ore separation ea Refining | Electrostatic Tailings { separation => Guest) Metallic Gold \ Platinum Other byproducts Tin Iimenite Rutile Ne To pigment manufacture Offshore screening, sizing, and gravity separation may be adopted to reduce the amount of mate- rial that must be brought to shore. Drying and magnetic and electrostatic separation steps will most likely take place ashore. Zircon Monazite etc. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. in processing ores containing mineral grains of vari- ous sizes is usually size separation. Size separation may be needed to control the size of material fed to other equipment in the process- ing stream, to reduce the volume of ore to be con- centrated to a minimum without losing the target mineral(s), and/or to produce a product of equal size particles. Separation is accomplished by use of various types of screens and classifiers. Screens —uniformly perforated (and sometimes vibrating) surfaces that allow only particles smaller than the aperture size to pass—are used for coarser materi- als.!2 The size of screen holes varies with the ma- 2Tbid. 188 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier terial, production capacity of the dredge, and other factors. For example, sand and gravel alone may constitute the valuable mineral fraction. To be sold as commercial aggregate, sand and gravel are gen- erally screened to remove the undesirable very fine and very coarse fractions. One type of size separation device in common use on dredges is the trommel. A trommel is sim- ply a rotating cylindrical screen, large enough and strong enough to withstand the shock and abrasion of thousands of tons of sand and gravel sliding and tumbling through it each hour. If the material is mined by a bucket dredge, the material may be dis- aggregated by powerful water jets while it slides downward through a rotating trommel. If the ma- terial is mined by a suction dredge, it may already be disaggregated but may need dewatering before screening. In either case gravity plays an impor- tant role, since the material must first be elevated in order to slide downward through the screens. Classifiers are used for separating particles smaller than screens can handle. Classifiers sepa- rate particles according to their settling rate in a fluid. One type in common use is the hydrocyclone. In this type of classifier, a mixture of ore and water is pumped under pressure into an enclosed circu- lar chamber, generating a centrifugal force. Sepa- ration takes place as the heavier materials fall and are discharged from the bottom while the lighter particles flow out the top. Hydrocyclones are me- chanically simple, require little space, and are in- expensive. Most offshore tin, diamond, and gold mining operations separate material by screening and/or cycloning as a first step in mineral recovery. Following size separation, gravity separation techniques are used to concentrate most of the minerals in this category. By gravity, the valuable heavier minerals are separated from the lighter, less valuable or worthless constituents of the ore. Proc- essing by gravity concentration takes advantage of the differences in density among materials. Several different technologies have been developed, includ- ing jigs, spirals, sluices, cones, and shaking tables.’’ Jigging is the action of sorting heavier particles in a pulsating water column. Using either air pres- sure or a piston, the pulsations are imparted to an 'Tbid. introduced ore-water slurry. This action causes the heavier minerals to sink to the bottom, where they are drawn off. Lighter particles are entrained in the cross-flow and discharged as waste. Secondary or tertiary jigs may be used for further concentra- tion. Several different types of jig have been de- veloped, including the circular jig, which has been used extensively on offshore tin dredges in South- east Asia. Jigs also have been used successfully off- shore to process alluvial gold and diamonds. For example, they have proved effective in eliminat- ing 85 to 90 percent of the waste material from tin ore (cassiterite) in Indonesia and from gold ore in tests near Nome, Alaska. Some jigs may be sensitive to the rolling and pitching motion of a mining dredge at sea, depend- ing in part on the severity of the motion and in part on their location aboard the dredge (usually high above the deck to use gravity to advantage). This has not been a major problem on Indonesian off- shore bucket dredges, although sea conditions there are not as rough as in other parts of the world. De- sign of dredges for less rolling motion and for re- duced sensitivity to wind forces (e.g., by placing the processing plant and machinery below the waterline) would alleviate this problem. Lower pro- file dredges could be designed without much diffi- culty, provided economic incentives existed to do sO. A simple gravity device for concentrating some placer minerals onshore is a riffle box for sluicing material. Although neither well understood nor very efficient, sluicing is the one of the oldest types of processing technology for concentrating alluvial gold or tin. In addition to their simplicity, sluices are rugged, passive, and inexpensive. Although sluices have not been used offshore, they might be utilized to beneficiate ore of low-value heavy minerals such as ilmenite or chromite. Many other types of gravity separation devices are used onshore to separate inert heavy minerals from mixtures of ore and water. The most com- mon are spirals (e.g., Humphrey’s spirals) and cy- clones. Spirals (figure 5-15) are used extensively to concentrate ilmenite, rutile, zircon, monazite, chromite, and magnetite from silicate sands of dunes and ancient shorelines. The effectiveness of spirals mounted on platforms subject to wave mo- tions is not well known, but spirals have been used Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies © 189 Figure 5-15.—Operating Principles of Three Placer Mineral Separation Techniques a) Spiral separator Y PN b) Magnetic separator Fixed assembly of permanent magnets Rotating steel drum Pulp wy NaI coh ae Ne ity lonizing 7 electrode 4 Z—- Static ~ electrode Non-conductors Middlings Conductors Gravity separation using spirals may be adapted for offshore use in some circumstances. Magnetic and electro-dynamic separation will most likely be done on land. SOURCE: E.G. Kelley and D.J. Spottiswood, Introduction to Mineral Processing (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1982). successfully for sample concentration on board ship. In operation, an ore-water slurry is introduced at the top of the spiral. As the slurry spirals down- ward, the lighter minerals are thrown to the out- side by centrifugal force, while the heavy minerals concentrate along the inner part of the spiral. The heavy minerals are split from the slurry stream and saved. Spirals have lower rates of throughput than jigs. Moreover, more space would be required to process an equal volume of minerals, and spirals are unsuited for separating particles larger than about one-quarter inch. Another form of heavy mineral processing that may have applications offshore is heavy media sep- aration. This gravity separation technique uses a dense material in liquid suspension (the heavy medium) to separate heavy minerals from lighter materials. The “‘heavies’’ sink to the bottom of the heavy medium, while lighter materials, such as sili- cates, float away. The heavy liquid is then recir- culated. This technique has been used effectively offshore to recover diamonds. However, it is ex- pensive and its use may contaminate seawater. Initial “‘wet’’ concentration at sea results in a primary concentrate. Much of the technology for size classification and gravity separation of minerals appears to be adaptable for use at sea for making primary concentrates without major technological problems. For further preparation for sale, concen- trates of heavy minerals are usually dried and sep- arated on shore. For example, ilmenite and magne- tite are considered impurities in tin ore and must be eliminated. Producing heavy mineral concen- trates for final sale may also involve further gray- ity separation, drying in kilns, and/or elaborate magnetic and electrostatic separation operations. Magnetic separation is possible for those minerals with magnetic properties (figure 15-5). For exam- ple, magnetite may be separated from other heavy minerals using a low-intensity magnetic separation technique. IImenite or other less strongly magnetic minerals may be separated from nonmagnetic min- erals using a high-intensity technique. Separation at sea of strongly magnetic minerals is possible, but separation of minerals with small differences in magnetic susceptibility may have to be done on land. Magnetite has the highest magnetic suscep- tibility. In decreasing order of susceptibility are il- menite and chromite; epidote and xenotime; apa- tite, monazite, and hematite; and staurolite. 190 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Conducting minerals may be separated from nonconductors using electrostatic separation. Only a few minerals are concentrated using this method, but electrostatic separation is used very successfully to separate heavy mineral beach sands, such as ru- tile and ilmenite from zircon and monazite.'* Fig- ure 5-15 illustrates how conducting and noncon- ducting minerals and ‘‘middlings’’ are split from each other using an electro-dynamic separator. During processing, the feed particles acquire an electrical charge from an ionizing electrode. Con- ducting minerals lose their charge to the grounded rotor and are thrown from the rotor’s surface. A non-ionizing electrode is then used to attract con- ducting minerals further away from the rotor. Non- conductors do not lose their charge as rapidly and so adhere to the grounded rotor until they do lose their charge or are brushed off. Middlings may be run through the electrostatic separator again.'° Electrostatic separation is usually combined with gravity and magnetic separation methods when sep- arating minerals from each other. Many of these technologies require adjustments, depending in part on the volume and grade of ore passing through the plant and on the ratio of in- put ore to output concentrate or final product. The ratios of valuable mineral to ore mined are shown in table 5-3 for some typical heavy minerals. The amount of primary concentrate produced by jigs on a dredge mining 30,000 cubic yards of gold ore per day would be on the order of a few tons (de- pending on the other heavy minerals present); ini- tial processing of 30,000 cubic yards per day of ilmenite ore would yield a few hundred tons of pri- mary concentrate. The amount of machinery, space, and power needed for producing a final concentrate or prod- uct varies widely for different minerals. Final sep- aration and recovery of ilmenite, rutile, zircon, and “Tbid. STbid. Table 5-3.—Ratio of Valuable Mineral to Ore In ore mined In primary concentrate Diamonds....... 1:5,000,000 1:1,000 Gold, platinum... 1:2,000,000 1:1,000 iituontono oooanee 1:1,000 1:100 IImenite, etc. .... 1:100 1:10 SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. monazite require elaborate plants that occupy large spaces and consume large amounts of energy. These heavy minerals are first dried in long kilns, then passed through batteries of magnetic and elec- trostatic separators. Experience using these tech- nologies is mostly on land, and there do not ap- pear to be any economic advantages to undertaking final separation and recovery of these minerals off- shore. Conversely, technologies for final recovery of diamonds, gold, and tin occupy little space and consume little power. Some techniques (e.g., shak- ing tables) require flat, level platforms. Final re- covery of gold by amalgamation with mercury can be easily done at sea if the mercury is safely con- tained. Final separation of diamonds from concen- trates is done using X-rays. Processing Unconsolidated or Semi- Consolidated Deposits of Chemically Active Minerals Examples of unconsolidated or semi-consolidated deposits of chemically active minerals include min- erals found in such deposits as the Red Sea brines and sulfide-bearing sediments on the Outer Con- tinental Shelf. In general, the minerals of economic interest in ore deposits of this type are complex sul- fides of base metals such as copper and zinc, and minor quantities of precious metals (mainly silver). This type of mineral is generally concentrated on land using flotation technology (figure 5-16). Flotation concentration is based on the surface chemistry of mineral particles in solution. Meth- - ods vary, but all employ chemical reagents that in- teract with finely crushed sulfide particles to make them selectively hydrophobic. The solution is aer- ated, and the hydrophobic minerals adhere to the air bubbles and float to the surface (other mineral particles sink to the bottom). A froth containing the floated minerals is formed at the surface of the so- lution and is drawn off.'© Flotation concentrates are collected on filters and dried prior to further pyro- metallurgical processing (e.g., smelting) to sepa- rate individual metals. Experimental flotation of metalliferous muds at a pilot-scale plant in the Red Sea is the only ex- perience using this process offshore. Since wind, ‘eTbid. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 191 Figure 5-16.—Technologies for Processing Offshore Mineral Ores Brines and muds (complex sulfides Nodules, crusts, pavements and veins and massive sulfides salts of metals) (oxides and sulfides of metals) VU. ve Crushing 9, ¢ Poteet Grinding Classification Flotation Roasting 0 q <— Filtration Chemical separation and Drying purification \ Copper, lead, zinc, nickel etc. Consolidated deposits of nodules, crusts, and massive sulfides require crushing and grinding in addition to the screening required for brines and muds. Flotation is the primary technique for separating oxides and sulfides of metals from waste material. These processes have not yet been adapted for use offshore. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. wave, and current conditions in the Red Sea are not as severe as in the open ocean, these tests are not conclusive regarding the sensitivity of flotation methods to ship motion. Disposal of flotation re- Mineral deposits in this category include nod- agents at sea may be a problem in some cases and ules, crusts, veins, pavements, and massive depos- should be further investigated. its, as of metalliferous sulfides or oxides. Process- Processing Consolidated and Complex Mineral Ores 192 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ing of these minerals is likely to require crushing or grinding to reduce particle size, followed by chemical separation methods. In some cases (i.e., for gold veins) fine grinding may liberate minerals which then may be recovered using gravity sepa- ration alone. However, in most cases some flota- tion and/or other chemical processing is likely to be required. The Bureau of Mines has experimented with column flotation techniques for separation of cobalt-rich manganese crust from substrate. Crust separated in this manner, however, cannot simply be concentrated by inexpensive mineral process- ing techniques. Most of these processes have not been adapted for use at sea. Crushing and grind- ing circuits could be mounted on floating platforms or on the seafloor, but unless the economic incen- tive to mine this type of seafloor deposit improves, these techniques will not likely be used offshore in the near future. The same comment applies to flo- tation and other chemical processing technologies. OFFSHORE MINING SCENARIOS To illustrate the feasibility of offshore mining, OTA constructed five scenarios, each depicting a prospective mining operation in an area where ele- vated concentrations of potentially valuable min- erals are known to occur. The scenarios illustrate factors affecting the feasibility of offshore mining, including the physical and environmental condi- tions that may be encountered offshore, the capa- bilities of the available mining and processing tech- nologies, and estimated costs to mine and process offshore minerals. The scenarios selected include mining of: titanium-rich sands off the Georgia coast, chromite sands off the Oregon coast, gold off the Alaska coast near Nome, phosphorite off the Georgia coast near Tybee Island, and © phosphorite in Onslow Bay off the North Carolina coast. ‘These shallow-water mineral deposits were selected because they are judged to be potentially mineable in the near term, unlike, for example, deposits of cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts or massive sul- fides, both of which would require considerable engineering research and development. For each scenario, the ocean environments are considered to be acceptable for dredging operations, dredging technologies are judged to be available with little modification, and existing processing technologies are considered adaptable for shipboard use, although some development will be needed. The greatest uncertainties arise from lack of data on the nature of the placer deposits (except for Nome, reserves have not been proven by drilling) and from the lack of operating experience under conditions encountered in the U.S. EEZ (i.e., waves and long-period swells). OTA did not attempt detailed engineering and cost analyses. Too little information is currently available to accurately assess the profitability of off- shore mining. For example, the grade of ore may vary considerably throughout a deposit, but little information about grade variability has been com- piled yet at any site. Estimates of mining and proc- essing costs can vary considerably depending on the amount of information on which they are based. Given that estimates cannot now be based on de- tailed information, OTA has attempted simply to estimate the range within which costs are most likely to fall. Rough estimates do not satisfy the need for detailed feasibility studies based on comprehensive data; however, they do provide criteria with which to judge if recovery of large quantities of high grade, valuable minerals on the seabed is likely to be profitable or at least competitive with land-based sources of minerals. Similar scenarios for titanium, chromite, and gold placers also have been developed recently by the U.S. Bureau of Mines.'” The scenarios are not directly comparable, but, after allowing for differ- ent assumptions and uncertainty, the general con- clusions reached are roughly the same. Tables 5- 9, 5-10, and 5-11 at the end of the chapter com- pare OTA and Bureau of Mines scenarios. '7An Economic Reconnaissance of Selected Heavy Mineral Placer Deposits in ‘the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, Open File Report 4-87 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Bureau of Mines, January 1987). Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 193 Offshore Titaniferous Sands Mining Scenario Location.—Concentrations of titaniferous sands are known to occur on the seabed adjacent to the coast of Georgia (figure 5-17). These sands consti- tute a resource of titanium oxide minerals (primar- ily ilmenite, but also lesser amounts of rutile and leucoxene, (figure 5-18)) and associated light heavy minerals. However, little detailed exploration has been done in the area, so the extent and grade of the resource is not precisely known. ‘Two mineral companies that mine onshore titan- iferous sands in nearby northeastern Florida have expressed interest in the area. In fact, in 1986, the Minerals Management Service issued geological and geophysical exploration permits to Associated Minerals U.S.A., Ltd., and E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. The companies have undertaken shallow cor- ing, sub-bottom profiling, and radiometric surveys in the area. The area of interest extends from Ty- bee Island in the north to Jekyll Island in the south, a distance of about 85 nautical miles, and from State waters to about 30 nautical miles offshore. The proximity of onshore titanium mineral processing facilities in northeastern Florida is a particular rea- son this scenario site was selected over other po- tential sites on the Atlantic Ocean continental shelf. Operational and Geological Characteristics. — Within this area, a typical mine site was selected approximately 30 nautical miles offshore. Water depths at this site average 100 feet. Northeasterly winds tend to prevail from October to March. The site is in the path of occasional ‘‘northeasters’’ and hurricanes, but wind, wave, tide, and current con- ditions are otherwise moderate. Wave heights of 6 feet are common during winter months, but waves of 1 to 4 feet are more typical the rest of the year. Infrequent severe storms may produce waves in excess of 20 feet, typically from the southeast or northeast. It is assumed that operations can be con- ducted 300 days per year. The geological features of the site were identi- fied primarily by sub-bottom profiling and include buried stream channels and submerged shorelines. A similar ancient shoreline target onshore in north- eastern Florida would be 12 miles long, 1 mile wide, and 20 feet thick. Little is known about any over- burden at this time, so it is assumed that the de- posit, like similar deposits onshore at Trail Ridge, Florida, consists of unconsolidated heavy mineral sands without significant overlying sediments. The average concentration of total heavy min- erals in the ore is assumed to be between 5 and 15 percent by weight, about half of which are economic heavy minerals. This range includes the average grade of the heavy mineral concentrations detected in the few samples from the site that have been ana- lyzed to date. Mining Technology.—The most appropriate technology for mining titaniferous minerals at the selected site is considered to be a trailing suction hopper dredge. This dredge is capable of operat- ing in the open ocean at the mining site and of shuttling to and from its shore base during the nor- mal seas expected in this region. Trailing suction hopper dredges have been widely used for sand and gravel mining and for removing unconsolidated material from harbors and channels. It is assumed that the titaniferous sand is at most only mildly compacted. The unconsolidated mineral sands are sucked up the drag arms, which can adjust to ves- sel heave and pitch to maintain the suction head on the seabed. A booster pump is installed in the suction line, enabling the dredge to reach minerals at the assumed bottom of the mineralized zone, about 120 feet below sea level. If cutting force is needed to loosen the compacted sand and clay, high-pressure water jets and cutting teeth can be added to the suction head. A dredge with a hop- per capacity of 5,000 cubic yards is used. The dredge is assumed to be of U.S. registry, built and operated according to Coast Guard regulations, and more expensive than a similar dredge built abroad. All equipment is assumed to be purchased new at 1987 market prices. At-Sea Processing.—The dredge is outfitted with a wet primary concentration plant capable of producing 450,000 tons per year of heavy mineral concentrate for delivery to a dry mill on shore. The efficiency of economic heavy mineral recovery is assumed to be 70 percent for the wet plant and 87.5 percent for the dry plant. The final product con- centrate supplies the raw material for a pigment plant. It is assumed that no major technical prob- lems are encountered in designing the primary con- 194 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-17.—Offshore Titaniferous Mineral Province, Southeast United States Georgia Tybee Island x7 ( su 7, Jekyll Island Florida Jacksonville S Percent HM content of surface sediments 130 200/660 SOURCES: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; A.E. Grosz, J.C. Hathaway, and E.C. Escowitz, ‘Placer Deposits of Heavy Minerals in Atlantic Continental Shelf Sediments,” Proceedings of the 18th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 5-8, 1986. centration plant to compensate for operation on a moving vessel, and that the processing subsystems do not require significant and/or expensive devel- opment work. The onboard processing plant pro- duces the primary concentrate using conventional particle size separation and gravity separation equipment. Seawater is used in the gravity sepa- ration process. Production of 450,000 short tons per year of primary concentrate implies mining rates between 3.2 million and 9.5 million short tons of ore per year, corresponding to ore grades of 15 and 5 percent. Larger pumps consuming more power would be required to mine 5 percent ore at the same rate as 15 percent ore. Mining and At-Sea Processing Cycle.—The mining and at-sea processing cycle consists of five steps: 1. The dredge steams to the mining site, 2. it dredges material from the seabed, 3. it preconcentrates the ore and fills up the hopper, Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 195 Figure 5-18.—Values of TiO2 Content of Common Titanium Mineral Concentrates and Intermediates (1984) 20 meu Yo ile Rutile concentrate ene c/lb TiO, content mS) ieee 0 10 20 3 entrates 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 =6100 110 TiO, content, % 1 ntrate and synthetic “a TiO, s: rutile and anatase grades SOURCE: W.W. Harvey and F.C. Brown, “Offshore Titanium Heavy Mineral Placers: Processing and Related Considerations,” contractor report prepared for the Office of Technology Assessment, November 1986. 196 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 4. steams to the shore base, and 5. it discharges the preconcentrate from the hopper. Each of these cycles takes 4 days: 3 days for dredg- ing and processing and 1 day for transit and offload- ing. Seventy-five such cycles per year can be made using a trailing suction hopper dredge with a 5,000- cubic-yard hopper capacity. This allows 60 days per year for drydocking, maintenance, and down- time due to weather or other contingencies. The average distance from offshore deposits to the shore- side discharge point is estimated to be 100 miles. The requirement to stop dredging and return to port could be eliminated by loading shuttle barges instead of filling the dredge hoppers. Other alter- natives to the scenario probably would be evalu- ated by prospective miners who, for example, might process to a higher concentrate grade offshore. Capital and Operating Costs.—Total capital requirements are estimated to range from $55 mil- lion to $86 million, depending on average ore grade (ranging from 15 to 5 percent respectively). Capi- tal costs include costs of the dredge, onboard wet mill, onshore unloading installation, dry mill, and working capital (table 5-4). Capital costs for both the dredge and onboard wet mill decrease as the ore grade increases because less mining (pumping) capacity is required. Total operating costs are higher for lower grade ore because more ore must be mined by a larger dredge to produce the same amount of concentrate. Annual costs to operate the dredge, wet mill, and dry mill, and for general and Table 5-4.—Offshore Titaniferous Sands Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Ore grade 5% 10% 15% Capital costs (million $): Dredge sicc.cve ceteris stevele a coheos ionszasterete $40 $36 $32 Offshore processing............... 34 18 14 Onshore processing ............... 4 4 4 Workingicapitalirviecit-taict-ashs orereterene 8 6 5 jotalicapital!costSt -eicreiertoe $86 $64 $55 Annual operating costs (million $): Dredge and offshore processing ....$17 $14 $12 Onshore processing ..............- 2 2 2 General and administrative ......... 2 1 1 Depreciation expense.............. 16 11 10 Total operating costs ............. $37 $28 $25 SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. administrative expenses and depreciation are esti- mated to be from $25 million to $37 million, de- pending on the heavy mineral content (15 to 5 per- cent). Given these estimates for capital and operating costs, breakeven revenue requirements have been calculated to range from $170 to $250 per ton of marketable product. Given the risks inherent in developing an offshore deposit, the developers would expect higher returns than for a conventional land-based mineral sands operation and require a more rapid payback on in- vestment. For example, under the 1986 tax law, a 3-year payback would require revenues of be- tween $420 and $280 per ton of product for ore grades ranging from 5 to 15 percent. Since the cur- rent U.S. east coast price of ilmenite concentrate is $45 to $50 per short ton, it is clear that the de- posit would require appreciable concentrations of other valuable minerals (e.g., rutile, zircon, and/or monazite with values ranging from $180 to $500 per ton) to be profitable. Offshore Chromite Sands Mining Scenario Location.—Concentrations of heavy mineral sands containing primarily chromite, lesser amounts of ilmenite, rutile, and zircon, and traces of gold and other minerals occur in surface and near-sur- face deposits on the continental shelf off southern Oregon (figure 5-19). Many reconnaissance sur- veys conducted by academic researchers have been completed in the area, but no detailed mineral ex- ploration has taken place. The largest heavy mineral sand area appears to extend westward from the mouth of the Rogue River and northward toward Cape Blanco. A second area of chromite- rich black sands is located seaward of the mouth of the Sixes River. Additional small deposits oc- cur on the continental shelf and on uplifted ma- rine terraces between Coos Bay and Bandon. The Rogue River deposits are approximately 75 miles south of Coos Bay, the nearest deep-water indus- trial port, and 100 miles north of the port of Eu- reka, California. No State or Federal exploration permits have been issued in the area to the private sector. How- ever, one company, Oregon Coastal Services, has expressed interest in obtaining a permit to explore for minerals in State waters. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 197 Figure 5-19.—Offshore Chromite Sands, Oregon Continental Shelf Pacific Ocean Cape Oregon Blanco More than 20% heavy minerals in sand Wie S\\ ES Sa SOURCE: Adapted from T. Parmenter and R. Bailey, The Oregon Ocean Book (Salem, OR: Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Develop- ment, 1985), p. 21. Operational and Geological Characteristics. — The site selected for this scenario lies seaward of the Rogue River, from 2 to 4 miles offshore. Water depths in the vicinity of the mine site are between 150 and 300 feet. The main deposit is assumed to be roughly 22 miles long by 6 miles wide and strad- dles the boundary between State and Federal waters. Summer waves, generally from the northwest, are driven by strong onshore winds and range in height from 2 to 10 feet. In winter, waves are characteristically from the west or southwest and average 3 to 20 feet. The most severe storms, which occur from November through March, may occa- sionally produce wave heights in excess of 60 feet. The severity of the wave regime off the coast of Ore- gon has been compared to that of the North Sea. In addition to weather, a seasonal factor that may affect mining activity is prior use of the area by sea lions as a breeding ground and by salmon fisher- men for sport and commercial fishing. Coastal terrace deposits between Coos Bay and Bandon, north of the scenario site, are likely ana- logs of potential continental shelf placers (see ch. 2). Most samples taken from these deposits have contained from 6 percent to as much as 13 percent chromite, usually concentrated in the bottom 3 to 15 feet of the stratigraphic section, although sam- ples containing as much as 25 percent chromite have been taken in some places.'® This scenario assumes that offshore placers con- tain similar grades of chromite and that the aver- age grade is closer to 6 percent. Magnetic anomaly studies associated with surface concentrations in the scenario area suggest that the potential placer bodies lie beneath a sediment overburden that ranges from less than 3 feet to more than 100 feet thick. The ore body thickness at the mining site is assumed to be less than 25 feet. Mining Technology.—This scenario assumes that the chromite placers are largely unconsolidated deposits and that a trailing suction hopper dredge similar to the one used in the titanium sands sce- nario is applicable for mining. The dredge is equipped with twin 3,400-horsepower suction pumps, giving it a greater suction capacity than the dredge used to mine titanium sands. Dredging in rough seas at depths ranging from 150 to 300 feet will require a special design; how- ever, it is assumed this need will not present greater technical problems or costs than, for example, building dredges or pipe-laying vessels for the North Sea. The dredge is similar in its other characteris- tics to the hopper dredge described in the titanium sands scenario. At-Sea Processing.— High volumes of ore can be brought to the surface at relatively low cost, but transporting the material to shore is costly. ‘There- fore, there is an incentive to enrich the ore as much as economically and technically feasible prior to transporting it to shore. This scenario assumes pri- mary beneficiation at sea by a simple, low-cost proc- ess of screening and gravity separation. The sys- tem might incorporate devices such as cones, jigs, spirals, or a very large sluice box. As in the titanium "LaVerne D. Kulm, College of Oceanography, Oregon State University, OTA Workshop on Pacific Minerals, Newport, Oregon, Nov. 20, 1986. 198 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier sand mining scenario, the effect of vessel motion on these devices needs to be evaluated. It is assumed that 30 to 50 percent of the dredged ore will be kept on the vessel and that the tailings will be continu- ously discharged by pipe back to the seafloor. There are no at-sea processing plants of this type in operation. Additional investigation is needed to evaluate the feasibility and to determine the capi- tal and operating costs of this system, but it is as- sumed that the development engineering required will not entail major costs. Mining and At-Sea Processing Cycle.—In- creased suction capacity plus a shorter distance to dockside and less elaborate processing at sea en- able the dredge to deliver 5,000 tons of enriched ore to shore per day (rather than every third day as in the case of the titanium sands scenario). Un- der normal operating conditions, the dredge is as- sumed to take about 3 hours to fill to capacity. The vessel then steams an average distance of 75 miles for offloading at a shore facility. Transit time is esti- mated to average about 8 hours, offloading time less than 5 hours; hence, the vessel would be able to make one round trip per day. At dockside the dredge would be offloaded using either a dry scraper or its own pumps. Pumped transfer decreases off- loading time. If this method is used, the ore is pumped into a dewatering bin and from there trans- ported by conveyor belt to a stockpile. It is assumed that the mining and processing system can be de- signed so that mining and processing at sea can take place 300 days a year. This would leave 65 days for downtime due to bad weather or sea conditions, for drydocking and maintenance, and for other un- foreseen events. Under these assumptions, 1.5 mil- lion tons of chromite-rich concentrate are delivered yearly to the offloading plant onshore. Capital and Operating Costs.—Capital and operating costs (table 5-5) were estimated for min- ing, at-sea processing, transportation, and offload- ing at a shoreside facility, but not for subsequent processing on land. Capital costs amount to approx- imately $57 million for an operation that uses all new equipment developed for the project and built in the United States. These include a dredge ($40 million), shipboard primary beneficiation plant ($5 million), shoreside facility (about $5 million), and design, engineering, and management ($7 million). Annual operating costs are estimated to be approx- imately $20 million; this figure includes costs to operate the dredge and shore facility and general and administrative expenses. Based on the above figures and assumptions, the cost of delivering enriched chromite sand to a shore- based facility was calculated. In terms of dollars per ton of beneficiated ore, the range is between $12.50 and $22. The lower cost assumes the use of a sec- ondhand dredge. The higher cost includes a 20 per- cent internal rate of return which is assumed to be a realistic goal in view of the uncertainties (espe- cially operating time) that surround the project. (If the yearly operating time were reduced to 150 days, the costs of delivering concentrates would double to between $25 and $44 per ton). Table 5-5.—Offshore Chromite Sands Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Millions of dollars Capital costs: Suctionshoppermdredgemmae errant r ter tereeeeien $40.0 Shipboard primary beneficiation plant............... 5.0 Shoresidei facility Gareth nine crcclaalsed Cleve oka foekertvane 4 5.0 Engineering procurement and management (15%) .... 7.5 TOCA dans sca een egtuaysdeps req aecuor sea ersreren tie cenaletehee cates ee ee et $57.5 New equipment Used equipment (excluding profit (excluding profit and risk) and risk) Annual operating costs: L DI Kctolols\is tre or cing AGS ooMommo cone ODO ma ronn Go ob $17 $15 Shorerfacilitysecccsccsstepac a cctersehsve GAG siete cus tansvovesehetauensye 2 2 Generaliandladministratives «sy cer. perce iets eie le eer 3 2 AN NUalito tal epic ere e satel wenn tel oe len ere okeveve tate te $22 $19 SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 199 Box 5-A.—Sand and Gravel Mining Mining offshore sand and gravel is likely to be profitable at selected sites well before mining of most other offshore minerals. Sand and gravel occurs in enormous quantities on the U.S. continental shelf. How- ever, due to onshore sources of supply in many parts of the country, the low unit value of the resource, and significant costs to transport sand and gravel long distances, profitable offshore sand and gravel mining is likely to be restricted to areas near major metropolitan centers that have depleted nearby onshore sources and/or have encountered conflicting land use problems. Sand and gravel are currently being dredged in State waters in the Ambrose Channel between New York and New Jersey. This operation, begun 2 years ago, is the only offshore sand and gravel mining currently taking place in U.S. waters. The Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co., the dredge operator, mines approximately 1.5 million cubic yards per year of high-quality fine aggregate from the channel. This aggregate is sold to the concrete ready-mix industry in the New York/New Jersey area at an average delivered price of $11.50 per cubic yard. The Federal Government benefits from this operation because it enables the Ambrose Chan- nel, which is a major navigation channel into New York Harbor, to be maintained at significant savings to the government. In addition, both New York and New Jersey receive royalties of 25 cents per cubic yard of aggregate mined. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock uses one trailing suction hopper dredge in its operation. The dredge is au- thorized to mine to a depth of 53 feet below the mean low water mark. When full, the dredge proceeds to a mooring point about one-half mile offshore South Amboy, New Jersey. The aggregate is then pumped to shore via a pipeline. The company estimates that there is enough sand and gravel in the channel to operate for 10 to 15 more years (longer if the channel is widened and/or deepened). Sand and gravel mining has not yet occurred in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, but the Bureau of Mines has tentatively identified two metropolitan areas, New York and Boston, where significant potential exists for the near-term development of offshore sand and gravel deposits.* Local onshore supplies are fast becoming depleted in these areas. The Bureau estimates that, for both areas, dredge and plant capital costs would range from a low of about $21 million for a 1.3-million cubic-yard-per-year operation 10 nautical miles from an onshore plant to a high of $145 million for a 6.7-million cubic-yard-per-year operation 80 nautical miles from shore. Operating costs for a product that has been screened (i.e., sorted) are estimated to range from about $3.30 per cubic yard for the smaller nearshore operation to $4.00 for the larger, more distant operation. Estimates are based on 250 operating days per year for the dredge and 323 for the plant. Other cities where offshore sand and gravel eventually could be competitive include Los Angeles, San Juan, and Honolulu. *An Economic Reconnaissance of Selected Sand and Gravel Deposits in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, Open File Report 3-87 (Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Mines, January 1987). There are no active facilities for processing chro- mite in the Pacific Northwest. Ferrochromium plants and chromium chemicals and refractories producers are concentrated in the eastern half of the country. However, one company, Sherwood Pacific Ltd., was recently formed for the purpose of constructing and operating a chromium smelter in Coos Bay, Oregon. Coos Bay has a deep draft ship channel, rail access, land, and a work force. Initial raw material for the smelter is expected to come from onshore deposits in southern Oregon and northern California. The costs per ton of concentrate projected in this scenario allow only small margins to make and dis- tribute a finished product, currently worth about $40 per ton. Hence, it is clear that chromite alone would not be worth recovering. Unless the price of chromite were to increase or byproducts such as gold or zircon could be economically recovered, the costs projected in this scenario do not justify eco- nomic chromite mining in the near future. Offshore Placer Gold Mining Scenario Location.—Gold-bearing beach sands were dis- covered and mined at Nome, Alaska, in 1906. Min- ing gradually extended inland from the current shoreline to old shorelines now above sea level. By 200 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 1906, about 4.5 million ounces of alluvial gold had been mined from a 55-square-mile area. Early miners recognized that the Nome gold placers were formed by wave action and that additional depos- its, formed when sea levels were lower, should be found in the adjacent offshore area (figure 5-20). Two U.S. companies, ASARCO and Shell Oil Co., sampled offshore deposits near Nome in 1964 and recovered alluvial gold. By 1969, proven re- serves offshore of approximately 100 million cubic yards of ore had been established. The rights to these reserves were acquired in 1985 by Inspira- tion Resources, which then began a pilot mining and testing program. This program was followed by mining tests with a bucket ladder dredge in 1986. All operations to date have taken place within 3 miles of shore in waters under the jurisdiction of the State of Alaska, although gold resources have been identified out to about 10 miles. The future offshore gold mining operation is examined in this scenario, based on a number of assumptions. Operational and Geological Characteristics.— Nome is a small town near the Arctic Circle on Nor- ton Sound, a large shallow bay open to the west. Water depths in the bay do not exceed 100 feet. Ten miles offshore water is only 60 feet deep. Gold- bearing sediments are a maximum of 30 feet thick and consist of bedded sands, gravels, and clays alternating with occasional beds of cobbles and boulders. These sediments were sampled from the ice out to about 1% miles from the coast. Gold has been found further offshore, but reserves have not yet been fully delineated. Current mining sites are located less than 1% miles offshore in water depths averaging 30 feet and in formations 6 to 30 feet thick. Only between June and October is Norton Sound ice-free and accessible to floating vessels. During the winter, thick pack ice forms over the Sound. Waves reportedly do not exceed periods of 7 seconds, but occasional sea-swells with longer periods may come from the west or southwest. Pre- dominant winds are from the north and northeast. Currents and longshore drift are westward. Maxi- mum tides are 6 feet. Mining Technology.—The Bima, a bucket lad- der dredge built in 1979 for mining tin offshore In- donesia, was selected to mine the offshore gold placers. The Bima was brought to Nome in July 1986 for preliminary tests. It was modified in Seattle and is scheduled to begin operation in July 1987. The Bima was designed and built abroad as a sea- going mining vessel. Its hull is 361 feet long, 98 feet wide, and 21 feet deep. The entire vessel is of steel construction and weighs about 15,000 short tons, including the dredging ladder and machin- ery. Freeboard is 10 feet and draft 15 feet with the ladder retracted. The Bima is not self-propelled. It must be moved to and from the mining site by a tugboat. On site, the dredge is kept in position by five mooring lines attached to 7-ton Danforth anchors. This anchor- ing arrangement allows the dredge to swing 600 feet from side to side and to advance while digging. The anchors are positioned and moved by a special aux- iliary vessel. A 15,000-horsepower diesel-electric powerplant is used to operate the bucketline, the ore process- ing plant, the anchor winches, and the auxiliary systems. There is fuel storage on board for 2% months of operation. The Bima’s dredge ladder and bucketline were originally designed to operate in 150 feet of water. This scenario assumes that the dredge ladder has been shortened, so that the dredge is able to mine from 25 to 100 feet below the water line at the rate of 33 cubic yards per minute or approximately 2,000 cubic yards per hour. The Bima was designed to enable the mass of the ladder and bucketline to be decoupled from the motions of the hull by an automated system of hydraulic and air cylinders that act like very large springs. This feature keeps the buckets digging against the dredging face on the seabed while the hull may be heaving or pitch- ing due to the motions of passing waves. During the trials of the Bima in Norton Sound from July to October 1986, it was not necessary to activate the system. At-Sea Processing.—The Bima is equipped with a gravity processing plant to make a gold concen- trate at the mining site. The throughput capacity of the plant is 2,000 cubic yards per hour. The plant consists of two parallel inclined rotary trommels 18 feet in diameter and 60 feet long. After removal of any large’boulders, ore brought up by the dredge bucket slides down the trommels under the spray Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies °® 201 Figure 5-20.—Nome, Alaska Placer Gold District 165°30 ’ \/ Arctic Ocean | Chukotsk Peninsula Seward Peninsula X Mined gold 30’ water 0 5 miles placers depth LS Ts a ee LE) A A Anvil Peak Second beach S *.§ Snake River Fourth beach Third beach Monroeville beach Intermediate beach 36-foot beach O: 65-foot beach O2 75-foot beach Os 4 Present beach P Pliocene beach Depth, in feet Explanation Alluvium Glacial drift Beach sediments E] Marine silt and clay [43 Stratified rocks of unknown type Bedrock Generalized geologic profile of Nome beaches. SOURCE: Adapted from E.H. Cobbs, U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1374. 202 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Aerial view off Nome, Alaska, 1986 View of the control room BIMA Bucketline Dredge Photo credit: F.J. Lampietti of powerful jets of seawater. The water jets are used to break up the clay and force sand and gravel smaller than three-eighths inch to pass through the trommel. Material coarser than three-eighths inch is discharged over the stern. Material retained by the trommel is distributed in a seawater mixture to three circuits of jigs, be- ginning with six primary circular jigs 24 feet in di- ameter. The concentrates from the circular jigs are then fed to crossflow secondary and tertiary jigs. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 203 The jig concentrates are further refined on shak- ing tables before transport to shore for final gold separation and smelting into bullion. It is expected that about 22 pounds of gold concentrate will be produced by mining and processing approximately 50,000 tons of ore per day. The actual amounts of concentrate produced will depend on the quantity of heavy minerals associated with the gold at each location. Environmental Effects.—The ore processing plant on the Bima returns 99.9 percent of the proc- essed material to the seabed as tailings. Since the tailings do not undergo chemical treatment, local turbidity caused by particles that may remain in suspension is likely to be the most significant envi- ronmental impact. During pilot plant tests in 1985, Inspiration Resources found that turbidity could be minimized by discharging fine tailings through a flexible pipe near the seabed. Other potential environmental impacts could occur if diesel fuel is spilled, either as it is being transferred to the Bima or as a result of accidental piercing of the hull. Operating Conditions.—The Bima operates only between June and October (five months per year) because ice on Norton Sound prohibits oper- ations during the winter months. Thus, without breakdowns or downtime due to weather and other causes, a theoretical yearly production of about 7.5 million cubic yards of ore is possible. During tests in 1986, Bima operated only a small fraction of the time available. This was due more to the nature of the trials than to downtime related to winds and waves. Assuming a mining efficiency (bucket fill- ing) of 75 percent and an operating efficiency of 80 percent (allowing for time to move and down- time due to weather), yearly production is limited to 4.5 million cubic yards. If gold grades of 0.012 to 0.016 ounces per cubic yard of ore are assumed, the yearly gold production would be between 1.75 and 2.20 short tons (before any losses due to proc- essing and refining). The Bima will have a crew averaging 12 persons per watch, 3 watches per day. Personnel are trans- ported to and from Nome daily by helicopter. The operation also requires extensive maintenance, sup- ply, and administrative facilities onshore. These fa- cilities will be manned by an additional 46 persons during the operating season. During the winter months, the Bima will be laid up in Nome harbor, and most of the operating personnel will be on leave. Capital and Operating Costs.—Capital and operating cost estimates (table 5-6) are based on a number of assumptions and, like the other scenarios in this report, must be considered first order approximations. The estimates rely in part on published information that the Bima gold min- ing project will have a life of 16 years and will re- cover about 48,000 troy ounces of gold per year at operating costs of less than $200 per ounce. The Bima was constructed at a cost of $33 mil- lion in 1979. It is assumed that its purchase in 1986 as used equipment (sold because of the fall in the Table 5-6.—Offshore Placer Gold Mining Scenario: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Millions of dollars Capital costs: Exploration and pilot plant mining tests ..... Used dredge (BIMA)....................... Dredge transport and insurance from Indonesia to Nome .............. Shipyardimodificationsi@acn-eesen emcees Onshore facilities and infrastructure ........ AuxilianyavesselSmnicnne osc eeceoee ere otalicapitalicostSs sane eeereeee eee Annual operating costs: Fuelgandilubricantsiece scarce ei Maintenance and spares................... SENVIGCES vescuseneree OY oree set arc aenedaecatn irene Annual operating costs.................. ee ers ce) ai N A) CFS (e5) onon fA NJ Oo SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. 204 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier price of tin) is on the order of $5 million. Also as- sumed is that other capital costs, including ancil- lary facilities onshore; pilot-plant mining tests in 1985 and trials in 1986; auxiliary vessels for prospecting and for tending anchors; shipyard modificaticns and alterations to the processing plant; and the cost of shipment of the Bima from Indonesia to Nome and to and from the shipyard near Seattle will amount to another $10 million to $15 million. Total capital costs are thus assumed to be between $15 million and $20 million. Annual operating costs for fuel, maintenance, in- surance and administration, and personnel and overhead are estimated (to an accuracy of 25 per- cent) to be $7 million. At a production rate of 48,000 ounces per year, a cash operating cost on the order of $150 to $175 per ounce is implied. At a mining rate of approximately 4.5 million cubic yards per year, direct costs would amount to $1.55 per cubic yard. Assuming the price of gold to be $400 per troy ounce, the projected pre-tax cash flow on a pro- duction of 48,000 troy ounces per year would be approximately $12 million (after subtracting oper- ating costs) on an investment of $17 million. Al- though this figure does not include debt service, it nevertheless indicates that the Bima offshore gold mining project at Nome shows good promise of profitability if the operators are able to maintain production. This scenario illustrates that offshore gold mining is economically viable and technically feasible using a bucketline dredge under the con- ditions assumed. Offshore Phosphorite Mining Scenarios: Tybee Island, Georgia and Onslow Bay, North Carolina Two different phosphorite mining scenarios were considered by OTA. The first, located off Tybee Island, Georgia, was developed by Zellars- Williams, Inc., in 1979 for the U.S. Geological Sur- vey. The second was developed by OTA in the course of this study. Although the two scenarios dif- fer in location and in the assumptions concerning onboard and onshore processing of the phosphorite minerals, breakeven price estimates of the two cases are well within overlapping margins of error. Both scenarios should be considered little more than rough estimates of costs based on hypotheti- cal mining conditions and technology. In some cases—particularly with the OTA scenario— assumptions are made about the adaptability of on- shore flotation and separation techniques to at-sea conditions. Not only would additional technologi- cal development and testing be needed to adapt ex- isting technology for onboard use, but even the fea- sibility of secondary separation and flotation processing at sea would also probably need further assessment and testing. The actual costs of capitalizing and operating an offshore mining operation can vary significantly from OTA’s estimates. However, in both scenarios, the results suggest that further evaluation—par- ticularly to better define the potential resources and to consider processing technology—might be worthwhile. While further assessment of the potential for min- ing phosphorite minerals offshore may be war- ranted, the overall condition of the domestic on- shore phosphate industry cannot be ignored when evaluating the feasibility of offshore operations. The future of the U.S. phosphate mining industry seems bleak in the face of increased low-cost foreign pro- duction. Some fully depreciated mines are currently finding it difficult to meet foreign competition. New phosphate mines, either onshore or offshore, will likely find it difficult to compete with foreign oper- ations. If exceptionally rich phosphate resources are dis- covered offshore, or if offshore mining and proc- essing systems can reduce costs through increased productivity or offsetting land use and environ- mental costs, the commercial prospects for offshore development might improve. However, higher phosphate prices would also be needed to make the economic picture viable, and most commodity analysts do not think higher prices are likely. Ta- ble 5-12 compares Tybee Island and Onslow Bay scenarios. Tybee Island, Georgia Location.—Onshore and offshore phosphorite deposits are known to occur from North Carolina to Florida. The potential for offshore mining of phosphorite in EEZ waters adjacent to the north- Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ¢ 205 ern coast of Georgia was examined in some detail in a 1979 study by Zellars-Williams, Inc., for the Department of the Interior. To illustrate the tech- nical and economic feasibility of offshore phos- phorite mining, OTA has drawn heavily from Zel- lars-Williams work. The Zellars-Williams study considers a 30- square-mile area located about 12 miles offshore Tybee Island, Georgia, not far from the South Carolina border and in the same general area con- sidered in the titanium scenario (figure 5-17). Only scattered, widely spaced samples have been taken in the vicinity, and none within the scenario area itself. These samples and some seismic data sug- gest the occurrence of a shallow phosphorite deposit in the area, but much more sampling is required to fully evaluate the deposit. The mine site is at- tractive for several reasons: © water depths are uniform over the entire block, with a mean depth of 42 feet; © the area is free of shipwrecks, artificial fish- ing reefs, natural reefs, rock, and hard bottom; © the area is close to the Savannah Harbor en- trance but not within shipping lanes for traf- fic entering the harbor; and © an onshore plant site is available with an ade- quate supply of river water for process use, in- cluding washing of sea salts. Operational and Geological Characteristics. — Average windspeed during the year at the site is about 7 miles per hour with peaks each month up to 38 miles per hour. Winter surface winds are chiefly out of the west, while in summer north and east winds alternate with those from the west. Se- vere tropical storms affect the area about once every 10 years and usually occur between June and mid- October. The most severe wave conditions result from strong fall and winter winds from the north and west, but the proposed mining site is sheltered by land from these directions. Waves of 12 feet or more occur about 2.5 percent of the year while 4- foot waves occur 57 percent of the year. The max- imum spring tidal range is about 8 feet. Current speeds are low, about 3 to 4 miles per day. Heavy fog is common along the coast, and Savannah ex- periences an average of 44 foggy days a year. Phosphorite ore occurring as pebbles and sand at the mine site is part of what is known as the Savannah Deposit. The site straddles the crest of the north-south trending Beaufort Arch, which sug- gests that the top of the phosphatic matrix will be closest to sea level in this area. The ore body lies beneath 4 feet of overburden. It is assumed that the ore body is of constant thickness over a reason- ably large area and that the mine site contains 150 million short tons of phosphorite. The average grade of the ore is assumed to be 11.2 percent phos- phorous pentoxide (P2Os). Mining Technology.—An ocean-going cutter suction dredge with an onboard beneficiation plant is selected for mining. The dredge is equipped with a 125-foot cutter ladder, enabling it to dredge to a maximum depth of 100 feet below the water sur- face, more than enough to reach all of the mine site deposit. The dredge first removes the sandy over- burden in a mine cut and places it away from the cut or in a mined-out area. Phosphate matrix then is loosened by the rotating cutter, sucked through the suction pipe, and brought onboard the dredge. The dredge is designed to mine approximately 2,500 cubic yards of phosphate matrix per hour. It is estimated that approximately 450 acres of phos- phate matrix are mined each year. Mining cuts are 1 mile long and 800 feet wide. Processing Technology.—Onboard processing consists of simple mechanical disaggregation of the matrix followed by size reduction. Oversize mate- rial is screened with trommels and rejected. Under- size material (mainly clays) is removed using cyclones. The undersize material is flocculated (thickened to a consistency suitable for disposal) and pumped to the sea bottom. On shore, the sand size material is subjected to further washing and sizing. Tailings and clays are returned to the mine site for placement over the flocculated clays. Phosphate is concentrated to 66 percent bone phosphate of lime (BPL) by a con- ventional flotation sequence. The wet flotation con- centrate is then blended and calcined to 68 percent BPL (approximately 30 percent P2Os). It is assumed that, initially, 2.5 million short tons per year of phosphate rock are produced. Eventu- ally, the amount produced would increase to the optimum rate of 3.5 million tons. It is also assumed that only 4 cubic yards of ore would need to be dredged per ton of final product. 206 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Mining and At-Sea Processing Cycle.—Min- ing is assumed to take place 80 percent of the avail- able time—292 days or about 7,000 hours per year. The beneficiated ore is loaded continually on 5,500- ton capacity barges for transport to the onshore processing plant. Barge transport is deemed nec- essary for both economic and pollution control rea- sons. A tug picks up one barge at a time, taking it to a mooring point just outside the channel at the Savannah River entrance. A push boat then takes a four-barge group about 20 miles upstream to the processing facility. After the ore is discharged, the barges are reloaded with tailings sand and returned to the mooring point. The tug then returns the barge to the mining area, initially to discharge tailings and then to be taken to the dredge and left to be filled with feed. Capital and Operating Costs.—Capital and operating cost estimates for the Zellars-Williams scenario (table 5-7) have been updated to reflect changes in plant, equipment, wages, and other cost factors. The revised figures are expressed in 1986 dollars. Capital and operating costs include costs for dredging and primary concentration, transpor- tation of beneficiated ore to port, onshore process- ing to 66 percent BPL, calcining to 68 percent BPL, contingency, and working capital. The Zellars-Williams scenario and associated costs are regarded as a “‘best-case’’ situation.'? In '8More information about the Zellars-Williams and other phos- 1986 dollars, the operating costs to mine and wash the ore and to transport the primary concentrate to an onshore processing plant amount to about $4.60 per short ton. Onshore processing would cost about $10 per short ton, and a depreciation expense of almost $10 per ton must be added to this figure. Hence, a ‘‘breakeven’’ price for calcined concen- trate would be close to $25 per short ton. Calcined concentrate, however, is currently selling for only $19 to $25 per short ton, depending on grade and whether the product is sold domestically or ex- ported. Furthermore, given uncertainties such as costs for mitigating environmental impacts, the acceptability of at-sea disposal of flocculated clays, and the uncertain effectiveness of both dredging and processing technology in the offshore environment, investors would probably require a discounted cash flow return larger than the 16.5 percent return in- dicated in the Zellars-Williams study. The break- even price does not include additional requirements for profit and risk. The largest component of total capital cost and of total operating cost is for onshore processing of the primary concentrate to 66 percent BPL, and the second largest cost component is for calcining to 68 percent BPL. Savings might be possible if an existing onshore processing plant could be used for flotation and/or calcining or if flotation at sea be- phorite studies may be found in the OTA contractor report ‘‘Offshore Phosphorite Deposits: Processing and Related Considerations,’ by William Harvey. November 1986. Table 5-7.—Offshore Phosphorite Mining, Tybee Island, Georgia: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Millions of dollars Capital costs: Dredging and primary concentration ........ MEMEO) Nel catugusuosood@oudacabuaued Processing to 66 percent BPL.............. Calcining to 68 percent BPL ............... GONntiNGENCyaa.v Seisarstss oie cic eiey. Jonsittousne tape os Workingtcapitalivwprtacs cher caciiectacicmic: Operating costs: Dredging and primary concentration......... lliransportatoypontereeerenee erie el Processing to 66 percent BPL .............. Calcining to 68 percent BPL................ Contingency ct roe aici nn ore tlercislentosie.s MO tall eye Ae et ao stoinicreen rage ay tetova ann aia raya $185 (million $/year) — ($/ton product) Jian ates $9 $ 2.50 ae oes 7 2.10 Resor anh 22 6.20 ieee bea 12 3.50 en mene 2 2 0.70 Ree oes! $52 $15.00 SOURCE: Zellars-Williams, Inc., ‘Outer Continental Shelf Hard Minerals Leasing: Phosphates Offshore Georgia and South Caro- lina,’ report prepared for U.S. Geological Survey, May, 1979. Figures updated by OTA contractor, William Harvey. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 207 comes technically and economically feasible. While there is no existing facility within a reasonable dis- tance of the Savannah Deposit, phosphorite ore lo- cated off the coast of North Carolina (Onslow Bay) potentially could be processed at the existing on- shore facility near Moorhead City. The following scenario, developed by OTA, ex- amines the feasibility of mining the Onslow Bay deposits, of using onboard flotation to upgrade the ore to 66 percent BPL, and of using the existing facility at Moorhead City for calcining to 68 per- cent BPL. Onslow Bay, North Carolina Location.—A high-grade offshore phosphorite resource is described by Riggs*° and others on the continental shelf adjacent to North Carolina. The resource is located at the southern end of Onslow Bay 20 to 30 miles southeast of Cape Fear (figure 5-21). A Federal/State task force was established in 1986 to investigate the future of marine mining offshore North Carolina. The task force has hired Development Planning & Research Associates to study the feasibility of mining Onslow Bay phos- phorite; however, no private companies have ex- pressed an immediate interest in mining offshore phosphorite in this area. The Miocene Pungo Formation is a major sedi- mentary phosphorite unit underlying the north- central coastal plain of North Carolina. It is mined extensively onshore. The seaward extension of the Pungo Formation under Onslow Bay has been stud- ied using seismic profiling and vibracore sampling methods. The site selected for this scenario is where the Frying Pan Phosphate Unit of the Pungo For- mation outcrops offshore in a band 1 to 2% miles wide and about 18 miles long. Operational and Geological Characteris- tics. —The site is characterized by open ocean con- ditions consisting of wind waves from the north- east and long period swell. Winds gusting above 30 knots occur less than 15 percent of the time. Cur- rents are less than 1 knot and tidal influence is neg- ligible. Hurricanes and associated wave conditions occur on an average of 10 days per year. 70S.R. Riggs, et al., ‘“Geologic Framework of Phosphate Resources in Onslow Bay, North Carolina Continental Shelf,’ Economic Ge- ology, vol. 80 (1985), p. 735. The phosphorite formation consists of fine, muddy sands covering an area of 45 square miles. Overburden consists of loose, fine, sandy sediment varying in thickness from 0 to 8 feet. Underneath, the phosphorite sand has a thickness between 1 and 10 feet. Water depth averages about 80 feet; hence, the total mining depth is not expected to exceed 98 feet. The overburden contains an average of 6.3 percent P,O;. The phosphorite unit contains be- tween 4.8 and 22.9 percent P2Os, with an average of 12.4 percent by weight.*! Laboratory analysis of phosphate concentrates indicates the presence of no other valuable minerals. Mining Technology.—A trailing suction dredge with an onboard beneficiation plant is selected as the most appropriate technology for the water depth and geological characteristics of the deposit. It is assumed that the phosphorite unit and overburden are sufficiently unconsolidated to be mined by suc- tion dredging methods without the need for a cut- ter head. Only water jets and passive mechanical teeth are used. The dredge and plant are housed in a specially designed ship-configured hull. The vessel is not a self-unloading hopper dredge and has only a small storage capacity on board. The beneficiated ore is discharged onto barges or small ore carriers which are continuously in attendance behind the mining vessel and which shuttle back and forth to the unloading point near the shore processing plant. Dredging capacity is about 2,000 cubic yards per hour; 75 percent dredging efficiency is assumed. The suction head is kept on the seabed by a suction arm that compensates for the motion of the vessel in ocean swell. The vessel is self- propelled, dredges underway, and is equipped with precision position-keeping instrumentation. The above configuration is preferred to hopper dredging because either a very large single hopper dredge or several smaller hopper dredges would be needed to meet the mining production re- quirements. Processing Technology.—At-sea processing is assumed to consist of: © conventional mechanical disintegration and screening to eliminate oversize material, 21Tbid. 208 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 5-21.—Offshore Phosphate District, Southeastern North Carolina Continental Shelf 78 °00' 77°30! New Bern MU, On, o 4, Ve Belgrade 3 ey S Ellis Rey, Silverdale }& Maple Hill : 1 g= Morehead City North Carolina af) Map Area 34°00’ Frying pan phosphate district SOURCE: Adapted from S.R. Riggs, S.W.P. Synder, A.C. Hine, S.W. Snyder, M.D. Ellington, and P.M. Mallette, “Geologic Framework of Phosphate Resources in Onlsow Bay, North Carolina Continental Shelf,’ Economic Geology, vol. 80, 1985, p. 720. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 209 © cycloning to reduce undersize material (e.¢g., clays), and ® flotation to reject silicates. Rejected material is returned to the sea floor. The assumption that flotation can be adapted to ship- board operation requires verification by develop- ment and testing studies, the costs of which are pro- vided for under the capital cost estimates below. The use of an existing (and, therefore, already capitalized) onshore calcining plant near Moorhead City, North Carolina, some 80 miles north of the mine site, is also assumed. Assuming that P2Os5 makes up 12.4 percent (by weight) of the Frying Pan unit and 6.3 percent of the overburden (both of which are mined), the mined feed to the at-sea processing plant contains 11.2 percent P2O; by weight. A total of 6.9 mil- lion short tons of ore are mined each year at the dredging rate of 2,000 cubic yards per hour, yield- ing a shipboard concentrate of about 1.7 million tons for feed to the calcining plant onshore. This yield assumes that shipboard ore flotation upgrades the P2Os5 content to 30 percent. Mining and At-Sea Processing Cycle.—It is estimated that six barges, each with a capacity to carry 6,550 cubic yards of beneficiated ore, and two tugs will be required to conduct efficient and nearly continuous loading while the mining vessel is on station. The time required to load three barges, transit to shore, unload, and return to the mining vessel is expected to be 3 days. The mining vessel is assumed to operate 82 percent of the time, or 300 days per year. Capital and Operating Costs.—The capital and operating cost estimates (table 5-8) are based on the assumption that new equipment is provided to supply beneficiated ore to an existing shore-based calcining plant. The capital costs of this shore-based plant are not included in the following estimates that may vary by as much as a factor of 2 or more. Estimated annual operating costs are $20 per short ton. The estimated costs do not include cap- ital recovery or the profit and risk components that would be required to attract commercial investors to an untried venture. Capital recovery alone over 20 years for a $71 million loan at a 9 percent in- terest rate would add an additional $8 per short ton of product. The current market price of compara- ble phosphate rock is about $21 per short ton. Hence, the potential for mining phosphorite in Onslow Bay would not be immediately attractive to commercial investors. Table 5-8.—Offshore Phosphorite Mining, Onslow Bay, North Carolina: Capital and Operating Cost Estimates Millions of dollars Capital costs: Detailed exploration, metallurgical testing and feasibility studies ....... $ 4 Mininggandibeneticiationivesselimanseenermmierrice cetera ce cncrcn 41 Transportation to shore (tugs and barges with capacity to deliver 20,000 Cubicayardsrevenyazcidays)ecteceeiae erence orate ee ete ue era mre a eeeaara 16 Loading, unloading, and storage installations ........................ 10 VOE CLM! COBUS's c cosdossdcoguaHounoas Operating costs: Mining Processing to 66% bone phosphate of lime (2h) CithieliGscsocescoomnnnuonneeacooon Transport and handling .................... (million $/year) ($/ton product) Calcining to 68 percent BPL (31 percent phosphorous pentoxide)ronshoremeysececee cee Total operating costs $9 $ 5.00 Dea et ote 12 7.00 Perper 5 3.00 obese gMon 8 5.00 $34 $20.00 SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. 210 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 5-9.—Scenario Comparisons: East Coast Placer Bureau of Mines (January 1987) OTA Depositekindiesmaetericm eet IImenite, rutile, zircon, etc. in old shorelines IImenite, rutile, zircon, etc. in old shorelines Grades iii cicsare wicrelentioe se otocters Approx. 5% economic heavy minerals by 5 to 15% total heavy minerals (economic % weight heavy mineral not specified) SIZOpaecetstensterersicrecateis eens ekeiekerere 100 million short tons Not specified Distance to shore unloading POINntitcte rete etree 80 nautical miles 100 nautical miles Maximum dredging depth ....150 feet 120 feet Annual mining capacity— tonnage dredged.......... 2.5 to 5.0 million short tons 3.2 to 9.5 million short tons Mining system.............. Domestic built new hopper dredge with an Domestic built new hopper dredge with onboard new beneficiation plant an onboard beneficiation plant Mining system operating Gays: foie Beveitere@eysrigien ene 250 300 Shore processing plant...... New, to produce saleable heavy mineral New, to produce saleable heavy mineral products products Capital costs (million $): Dredge: fase anges secsince 25.9 to 49.7 Plantvandiothenysscccs.-- 16.3 to 24.5 MOtal payee tic rarera Seneralemecsparey: 42.2 to 74.2 55 to 86 Direct cash operating costs $U.S. per short ton dredgedPercrreirt tec ere 4.55 to 3.79 4.72 to 2.2 Comments (OTA’S) e Technically feasible but economically marginal for heavy mineral grades assumed e No estimate of accuracy of scenario e Accuracy of scenario not estimated ° Costs most sensitive to distance from ° Costs most sensitive to heavy mineral shore grade SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Ch. 5—Mining and At-Sea Processing Technologies ° 211 Table 5-10.—Scenario Comparisons: West Coast Placer Bureau of Mines (January 1987) OTA Depositukingd errr Chromite with minor titanium, zircon, and gold Grad eRe ancinoveine esieets steers >6% Cr2O3 + .0048 oz. Au per short ton SIZE P Webs oinieisesisieos eteuycistskecsusssy sts 50 million short tons Distance to shore unloading (Ol Moces cieroltcrns ero ceca 40 nautical miles Maximum dredging depth ....150 feet Annual mining capacity— tonnage dredged.......... 5,000,000 short tons Mining system.............. Domestic built new hopper dredge Mining system operating CEWE:-Gocmdiggacae cuca tacts 250 Shore processing plant ...... New, to produce saleable mineral products Capital costs (million $): Dred Gea icnvse ctor nicsmetstes: 41.4 Blantvandiotheneean.s. 4s: 44.3 MOtalyei ays cciecinccrose eee 85.7 Direct cash operating costs $U.S. per short ton red gedit ee es ale 5.42 Comments (OTA’S) e Technically feasible but economically marginal for heavy mineral grades and prices assumed e No operating experience e No estimate of accuracy Chromite with insignificant amounts of ilmenite, rutile, and gold 6% Cr2Os Not specified 75 nautical miles 300 feet 4,500,000 short tons Domestic built new hopper dredge 300 New, to produce saleable mineral products 40.0 17.0 57.0 4.00 e Technically feasible but economically marginal for heavy mineral grades and prices assumed e No operating experience e No estimate of accuracy SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Table 5-11.—Scenario Comparisons: Nome, Alaska Gold Placer Bureau of Mines (January 1987) OTA Depositukindpeers-emeer eee: Gold Placer Gold Placer ChECiccuterod some noone 0.6 gram per yard* 0.35 to 0.45 gram per yard? SIZO pet bes aaite easiest eye icy slevaersnsves 35,000,000 yard 80,000,000 yard* Distance to shore unloading POINT aia teleseversieesie shecetevee 0.5 to 5 miles 0.5 to 10 miles Maximum dredging depth ... .80 feet 90 feet Annual mining capacity— tonnage dredged.......... 1,632,000 yd° Mining system.............. Used seagoing bucket line dredge with full gravity processing Mining system operating CLAY Sirsa tcanenerecsusvs aye, device 150 Shore processing plant ...... Minimal for final cleaning of gold concentrates Capital costs (million $) Dred Qe: tics -ccrsveteve cusperstetecuts Plant and other........... MOtallese srettrcverss secre crete sits $9.1 Direct cash operating costs $U.S. per yard? mined ..... 2.00 Comments (OTA’S) e Technically feasible and appears economically profitable 4,500,000 yd° Used seagoing bucket line dredge with full gravity processing 150 Minimal for final cleaning of gold concentrates 5 10-15 15-20 1.55 e Technically feasible and appears economically profitable SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. 212 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 5-12.—Scenario Comparisons: Onslow Bay and Tybee Island Phosphorite Zellars-Williams (Tybee Island) (updated 1986) Depositikind/ rrr Pebbles and sand Grad Orteicctcascscceeseeerivetetere 11.1 percent P20s SiZC eee spheess ocr eeroeieiereerns 150 million short tons Distance to shore unloading POINty.Rrersaceres oreo meter os 30 miles Maximum dredging depth ....100 feet Anriual mining capacity— tonnage dredged.......... 2.5-3.5 million short tons Mining system.............. Ocean-going cutter suction dredge with onboard screening and cycloning Mining system operating OEW GL Serbricon vamos aemaee 292 days Shore processing plant ...... Washing and sizing, flotation, calcining Capital costs (million $) Dredge & offshore PROCESSING enone Sy We Transportation to shore.... 26 Onshore processing....... 113 Other tease mccsensiene cusses 29 MOtalls eave resceckercecsnecrse $185 Cash operating costs $U.S. pemshontatonpeercrceecerac $ 25 Comments (OTA’S) e Cash operating cost is break-even; Does not include profit and risk. e Estimate considered ‘‘best case.” e Estimate may be off by factor of two or more. OTA (Onslow Bay) Sands 11.2 percent P20s Not specified 80 miles 98 feet 6.9 million short tons Trailing suction hopper dredge; onboard screening, sizing, and flotation 300 days Calcining only $ 28 e Cash operating cost is break-even; Does not include profit and risk. e Does not include capital costs of existing onshore calcining plant. e Estimate may be off by factor of two or more SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Chapter 6 Environmental Considerations CONTENTS Page Introduction’ $25.38 iis coke BE egies, Haceas a te aan U maitre cal aes aeRleR Sch An Nar cans Nn Prarie 215 Similan Eitects:in Shallow: andeWeep: Watenic ee eye or i te eee aan oe teresa 222 Surface Hffects) 2 20ne ao Pe aby sole Uae Le Ea SSIES eee ge eRe 222 Water'Column Effects iene se So He etait het eee cre Meee ere nye erties eae 222 Benthic Impacts) sok ecg his 25 cS an ree ee ee ne eu La 223 Alteration ‘of Wave Pattermss0.) 05. Sek ee ete i eee 224 Seasomal cs Oe a OU a eee 224 Different Effects im Shallow and Deep Water... 022. 226 Surface Bifects: oa i ee i ee 226 Water Column Bifects 3. 89550 0 ee ee 226 Benthic Effects oe 226 Shallow, Water Mining Experience ......02.:.20. 52-66. 2 227 Deep Water Mining Studies. 2200.06 ee 236 DOMES: The Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study ................... 236 Follow-Up to DOMES ......5.5 000 239 Environmental Effects From Mining Cobalt Crusts...................-..... 240 Gorda Ridge Vask Horce Efforts... 6.0.2 244 Boxes Box Page 6-A. IGES—International Council for Exploration of the Sea.................. 228 6-B. U:S. Army Gorps of Enpmeers 229 6G-C. Project NOMES.. 230 6G-D. New York Sea Grant Studies... 231 G-E. EPA/COE Criteria for Dredged and’ Fill Material ....-.....:....:3. 53 2a2 6-F. Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES).................... 237 6-G. Cobalt Crust Case Study «2.0 243 6-H. Gorda Ridge Study Results.................3.... 245 Figures Figure No. Page 6-1. The Vertical Distribution of life m the Sea... 216 6-2. Impacts of Offshore Mining on the Marine Environment ................. 217 6-3. Spawning Areas for Selected Benthic Invertebrates and Demersal Fishes... . . 220 6-4. Composite of Areas of Abundance for Selected Invertebrates Superimposed With Known Areas of High Mineral: Potential"... ss a 221 6-5. The Effect of Discharge Angle and Water Current on the Shape and Depth of Redeposited Sediments )).2 5. 2 235 6-6. Silt Curtain 150. hee. 6 Oe a eee 236 Tables Table No. Page 6-1. Environmental Perturbations from Various Mining Systems ............... 234 6-2. Summary of Environmental Concerns and Potential Significant Impacts of Deep-Sea Mining ines cake tie SRT ho ate cM ieee ce vans Sante 238 Chapter 6 Environmental Considerations INTRODUCTION Mineral deposits are found in many different environments ranging from shallow water (sand, gravel, phosphorites, and placers) to deep water (co- balt crusts, polymetallic sulfides, and manganese nodules). These environments include both the most biologically productive areas of the coastal ocean as well as the almost desert-like conditions of the abyssal plains. (See figure 6-1.) Given this broad spectrum, it is hard to gener- alize about the effects of offshore mining on the ma- rine environment. However, a few generic princi- ples can be stated. As long as areas of importance for fish spawning and nursery grounds are avoided, surface and mid-water effects from either shallow or deep water offshore mining should be minimal and transient. Benthic effects (i.e., those at the seafloor) will be the most pronounced for any min- ing activity in either shallow or deep water. Ani- mals within the path of the mining equipment will be destroyed; those nearby may be smothered by the ‘‘rain of sediment’’ returning to the seafloor. Mining equipment can be designed to minimize these effects. Barring very extensive mining sites that may eliminate entire populations of benthic organisms or cause extinctions of rare animals, neg- ative impacts to the seafloor are reversible. Most scientists believe that shallow water communities would recover rapidly from disturbance but that recolonization of deep sea areas would be very slow. Because little offshore mining is going on now, the degree of environmental disturbance that any particular commercial operation might create is dif- ficult to characterize. Even areas that are dredged frequently do not have the same level of disturbance as a continuous mining operation. Nevertheless, U.S dredging experience is a useful gauge of the potential for environmental impacts. In shallow nearshore waters, a few sand, gravel, and shell min- ing operations in the United States and Europe in- ‘These conclusions are for mining alone. If any at-sea processing occurs, with subsequent chemical dumping, guidelines may be totally different. dicate possible impacts. In addition, results of re- search in the United States and abroad offer insights on the effects of offshore mining. These research efforts include: © the International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Report of the Working Group on Effects on Fisheries of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction—box 6-A, © the U.S Army Corps of Engineers Dredge Ma- terial Research Program (DMRP)—box 6-B, © the New England Offshore Mining Environ- mental Study (NOMES)—box 6-C, © Sea Grant Studies of Sand and Gravel in New York Harbor—box 6-D, and e@ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- istration’s (NOAA) Deep Ocean Mining Envi- ronmental Study (DOMES)—box 6-F. The Gorda Ridge Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and the Cobalt Crust Draft Environ- mental Impact Statement (see box 6-G) summarize related research as well. Similarities among the mining systems used for deep water (2,500-16,000 feet) and shallow water (less than 300 feet) suggest that the same general types of impacts will occur in both environments. Any mining operation will alter the shape of the seafloor during the excavation process, destroy organisms directly in the path of operations, and produce a sediment plume over the seafloor from the operation of the equipment’. When the mined material is sorted and separated at the ship, some percentage will be discarded—very little in the case of sand and gravel, a great deal for many other seabed minerals—resulting in a surface ‘‘plume’”’ that will slowly settle to the bottom (see figure 6- 2). The duration and severity of plume effects on the surface and water column depend on the grain- size of the rejected material. Sand (1.e., particle sizes 0.06 mm-1.0 mm.) settles quickly; silts (.001-.06 *These sediment plumes are the equivalent of the dust clouds produced by similar operations on land. 215 216 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier “LBL ‘W404 MON ‘SUBBDO 94} JO Sel}y AITENIW PUeY E41 WO) Palj|POW -ZOXNOS siaquinono usij-poduy siaquinono eeg NIV Id IWSSAEY we Eee pec ale Se Usij We}ue7 yieys ployenbs ployeWo}S, kf Joyyeo4 ysij 18/4 OZ LHDIMIML Sjeum weds 3dO1S Y¥addn BP s6njs S1JPJOM\ YS!1{PJOMS ulydjog seddeus uILeW S9uo! asiodiog sie||op pues [3 0S9 | ANOZ LINAS : : KAQUDUY wrecerspcst 5 |88 @YBUS ge10 spaamees “ep us BulAis ANOZ 41SHS uojyuR|dooz uoj}yuR|do}AUd 28S aU) U! E417 JO UONINGIISIG [29IHEA e4YU1—"}-9 e4nBI4 Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 217 Figure 6-2.—Impacts of Offshore Mining on the Marine Environment Ship discharge Surface plume Current => See Thermocline Lay oa em ees Se SS co fh ES SSS pycnocline Benthic waters Clamp shovel Seafloor SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. 72-672 0 - 87 -- 8 218 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier mm.) and clays (finer than .06 mm.) remain in the water column for a much longer time. It is not scientifically or economically possible to develop very detailed baseline information on the ecology of all offshore environments in the near fu- ture; the consequences of a variety of mining sce- narios cannot be precisely predicted. However, pre- sumably environmental impact statements (EIS) will be prepared to identify site-specific problems prior to the commencement of mining operations. Environmental impacts should also be monitored during an actual mining operation. Areas where offshore mining is most likely to pose an environ- mental risk can be identified now or in the near future using existing data. (e.g., see figure 6-4 showing areas of high biological productivity su- perimposed on a map, produced by the Strategic Assessment Branch of NOAA, depicting areas of high mining potential.) For shallow water environ- ments, areas considered sensitive because of unique plant or animal species, spawning or nursery areas, migration pathways, fragile coastline, etc., should be prohibited from mining activities (see figure 6- 3); this approach is being pursued in the United Kingdom and Canada and is one of the prime rec- ommendations of the International Council for Ex- ploration of the Seas (ICES) Working Group. Analogues in natural environments that simu- late disturbances on the scale of a mining effort should be investigated. For example, insight into the response of the deep-sea to a mining operation can be gained from studying deep-sea areas exposed to natural periodic perturbations such as the HEBBLE? (High Energy Benthic Boundary Layer Experiment) area. In addition, when mining does proceed in either shallow or deep water, at least two reference areas should be maintained for sampling during the oper- ation: one sufficiently removed from the impact area to serve as a control, and one adjacent to the mining area. 3D. Thistle 1981, ‘‘Natural Physical Disturbances and Communi- ties of Marine Soft Bottoms,’’ Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 6: 223-228, and B. Hecker, ‘‘Possible Benthic Fauna and Slope Instability Relation- ships,’’ Marine Slides and Other Mass Movements, S. Saxov and J. K. Nieuwenhuis (eds.), Plenum Publishing Corp., 1982. Shallow water effects are better understood than deep water effects because nearshore areas have been studied in detail for a longer time. A great deal is known about the environment and plant and animal communities in shallow water areas. But there has been no commercial mining and much less is known about ecology in deep-sea areas where manganese-cobalt crusts, manganese nodules, and polymetallic sulfides occur. However, there appears to be remarkable uniformity in the mechanisms that control deep-sea environments, so that information gleaned from one area in the deep-sea can be used to make predictions about others; shallow water environments on the other hand, differ significantly from site to site. One area of shallow water research that requires attention is coastline alteration. Sand, gravel, and placer mining in nearshore areas may aggravate shore erosion by altering waves and tides. A site- specific study would have to be done for each shal- low water mining operation to ensure wave climates are not changed. New theories about wave action suggest that, contrary to previous scientific opin- ion, water depth may be a poor indicator of subse- quent erosion. The relative importance of differ- ent kinds of seafloor alterations on coastline evolution needs to be clarified. For example, what is the effect of a one-time, very large-scale sediment removal (e.g., at Grand Isle, Louisiana, for beach replenishment over a several mile area) versus cumulative scraping of a small amount over a very long period (such as decades). The information most needed to advance under- standing of the deep-sea is even more basic. The research community needs more and better sub- mersibles to adequately study the deepsea benthos. Currently, there is a 2-year time-lag between re- search grant approval and available time on one of the two U.S.-owned deepsea submersibles avail- able to the scientific community. Deep-sea biota need to be identified and scientifcally classified. Up to 80 percent of the animals obtained from the few samples recovered have never been seen before.* It will be impossible to monitor change in animal communities without systematic survey of these populations. Research funding is needed to develop . *B. Hecker, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory, OTA Work- shop on Environmental Concerns, Washington, D.C., Oct. 29, 1986. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 219 Photo credit: S. Jeffress Williams, U.S. Geological Survey Hallsands once stood on a narrow ledge of rock protected by a cliff and high pebble ridge. The disappearance of this small fishing village was the result of dredging 650,000 tons of gravel offshore over a 4-year period. Removal of such vast quantities of offshore sediments from 1897 to 1901 altered wave patterns and caused beach erosion of 12 to 19 feet by 1904. By 1917, foundations of 29 homes were undermined by the waves and fell into the sea. the taxonomy of deepsea creatures. Improvements in navigational capabilities are needed; in order to conduct “‘before and after’’ studies, it is important to return to the exact area sampled. A compendium of available studies and the data produced on both shallow and deep water environ- ments is sorely needed. Unfortunately, a great deal of research on environmental impacts to offshore areas, performed for particular agencies and insti- tutions, has never appeared in peer-reviewed liter- ature. These studies may be quite useful in de- scribing both the unaltered and altered offshore environment and may be directly applicable to pro- posed mining scenarios. An annotated bibliogra- phy summarizing all the information that went into the compilations of MMS Task Forces (see boxes 6-G and 6-H), DMRP, DOMES —see box 6-F, NOMES—see box 6-C, and Information from the Offshore Environmental Studies Program of the Department of Interior developed in conjunction with developing EISs for Oil and Gas Planning Areas would be invaluable. The combined research budgets represented by these efforts is hundreds of millions of dollars. Such data collection could not be duplicated by the private and academic sectors in this century. New research efforts—which tend to be quite modest in comparison—would benefit from easy access to this wealth of information. An important effort to collect available biologi- cal and chemical data and screen them for quality control is underway in the Strategic Assessment Branch of NOAA. Since 1979, NOAA has been 220 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 6-3.—Spawning Areas (June-September) for Selected Benthic Invertebrates and Demersal Fishes Number of species 1 “to” ~2 3 to 4 This computer-generated map of the Bering, Chukchi, Beaufort Seas area of Alaska shows how information about various species can be combined to develop pictures of offshore areas (in this case, spawning areas) where mining activities may be detrimental. SOURCE: Strategic Assessment Branch, NOAA. List of Species Included in Computer-Generated Composite Map Invertebrates: Fishes: Small crangonid shrimps (Crangon communis, C. dalli, Pacific Cod (Gadus macrocephalus) C. septemspinosa) Walleye Pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) Northern Pink Shrimp (Pandalus borealis) Yellowfin Sole (Limanda aspera) Sidestripe Shrimp (Pandalopsis dispar) Alaska Plaice (Pleuronectes quadrituberculatus) Humpy Shrimp (Pandalus goniuris) Greenland Turbot (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) Pandalid shrimp (Pandalus tridens) Rock Sole (Lepidopsetta bilineata) Opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta) Arrowtooth Flounder (Atheresthes stomias) Korean Hair Crab (Erimacrus isenbeckii) Flathead Sole (Hippoglossoides elassodon) Red King Crab (Paralithodes camtschatica) Pacific Halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) Golden King Crab (Lithodes aequispina) Blue King Crab (Paralithodes platypus) Bairdi Tanner Crab (Chionoecetes bairdi) Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 221 Figure 6-4.—Composite of Areas of Abundance for Selected Invertebrates Superimposed With Known Areas of High Mineral Potential Known Potential Gold @ Platinum @ © Other places United States Composite of Areas of Abundance for Selected Benthic Invertebrates Number of Species Bw -:; 213: NOTES: Map constructed by combining areas of abundance (i.e., major adult areas and major adult concentrations) from maps of species indicated. Boundaries have been smoothed. Areas depict the number of individual species with relatively high abundance; they do not necessarily reflect the distribution of total biomass. Species included: Small Crangonid Shrimp (Crangon communis, C. dalli), Large crangonid shrimp (Argis dentata, Sclerocrangon boreas), Northern Pink Shrimp, Korean Hair Crab, Red King Crab, Golden King Crab, Blue King Crab, Bairdi Tanner Crab, Opilio Tanner Crab, Chalky Macoma, Greenland Cockle, Iceland Cockle. SOURCE: Strategic Assessment Branch, NOAA. compiling databases on coastal areas and the Ex- used to identify potential conflicts among the mul- clusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (see Ch. 7 for more tiple uses of resources with given offshore areas (see information on this program). These data are be- figures 6-3 and 6-4). ing used to develop a series of atlases and can be 222 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier SIMILAR EFFECTS IN SHALLOW AND DEEP WATER Surface Effects The surface plume created by the rejection or loss of some of the mined material or the disposal of unused material could cause a number of effects on the phytoplankton (minute plant life) commu- nity and on primary production.° In the short term, reduction of available light in and beneath the plume may decrease photosynthesis. Nutrients originally contained in the bottom sediments but introduced to the surface waters may stimulate phytoplankton productivity. Long-term plume ef- fects from long-term continual mining operations 5A.T. Chan and G.C. Anderson, ‘‘Environmental Investigation of the Effects of Deep-Sea Mining on Marine Phytoplankton and Pri- mary Productivity in the Tropical Eastern North Pacific Ocean,’’ Ma- rine Mining, vol 3. (1981), No. 1/2, pp. 121-150. might lead to changes in productivity or changes in species composition. Water Column Effects High particulate concentrations in the water column can adversely affect the physiology of both swimming and stationary animals,° altering their growth rate and reproductive success. Such stresses may lead to a decrease in the number of species,’ a decrease in biomass (weight/unit area), and/or ®D.C. Rhoads, and D.K. Young, ‘“The Influence on Sediment Sta- bility and Community Trophic Structure,’’ Journal of Marine Re- search, No. 28 (1970), pp. 150-178. 7™R.W. Grigg and R.S. Kiwala, ‘‘Some Ecological Effects of Dis- charged Wastes on Marine Life,’’ California Fish and Game, No. 56 (1970), pp. 145-155. Sie a, me Photo credit: U.S. Geological Survey A surface plume of turbidity is produced when a dredge discharges material overboard. The extent, duration, and negative impacts of such a plume depend on the size and composition of the rejected material. Larger particles will settle out quickly and the plume will rapidly disperse. Very fine sediments may remain suspended for several days. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 223 changes in seasonal and spatial patterns of organ- isms.® Eggs and larvae in the mining area will be unable to escape. Most adult fish—the prime com- mercial species in the water column—are active swimmers and would be able to avoid the area of high particulate concentrations. Nonetheless, a large-scale, long-term mining operation will pro- duce a ‘“‘curtain’’ of turbidity (cloudiness due to particulates) in the water column which might in- terfere with normal spawning habits, alter migra- tion patterns, or cause fish to avoid the mining area altogether. Heavy metals, e.g., copper, zinc, manganese, cadmium, and iron, may be released into the water column in biologically significant forms from some , mining operations. The quantities of dissolved me- tals generally will be quite low, but current hypoth- eses suggest that small spatial and temporal differ- ences in metal concentrations regulate the kinds of plankton found? !°. Metals could, therefore, cause changes in species composition; such changes have been verified for copper both in the laboratory! and at sea.!* Trace metals may be as important as macronutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, and silicon) in controlling species composition and productivity in the marine environment, If so, then any large- scale disruptions in the natural metal balance due to mining activities could alter marine food webs. However, our understanding of the role of metals in unpolluted marine environments is currently constrained by the difficulty of measuring such min- ute quantities. 8A. Shar and H.F. Mulligan, ‘‘Simulated Seasonal Mining Impacts on Plankton,’’ Internationale Revue Gesamte Hydrobiologie, 62(4) 1977, pp. 505-510. 9$.A. Huntsman and W.G. Sunda, ‘‘The Role of Trace Metals in Regulating Phytoplankton Growth with Emphasis on Fe, Mn, and Cu,”’ The Physiological Ecology of Phytoplankton, I. Morris (ed.) (Boston: Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1981), pp. 285-328. 10F A. Cross and W.G. Sunda, ‘“The Relationship Between Chem- ical Speciation and Bioavailability of Trace Metals to Marine Organisms—A Review,’’ Proceedings of the International Sympo- sium on Utilization of Coastal Ecosystems: Planning, Pollution, and Productivity, Nov. 21-27, 1982 (Rio Grande, Brazil: 1985). “W.H. Thomas and D.L.R. Siebert, ‘‘Effect of Copper on the Dominance and the Diversity of Algae: Controlled Ecosystem Pollu- tion Experiment,’’ Bulletin of Marine Science, No. 27 (1977), pp. 23-33. RW. G. Sunda, R.T. Barber, and S.A. Huntsman, ‘‘Phytoplank- ton Growth in Nutrient-Rich Seawater: Importance of Copper- Manganese Cellular Interactions,’’ Journal of Marine Research, No. 39 (1981), pp. 567-586. Benthic Impacts Little is known about the dynamics of animal communities on the seafloor. There are, however, several possible effects of concern. Animals within the mined area will be destroyed. Large-scale removal of bottom sediments will alter the topog- raphy and therefore could affect currents and sub- strate characteristics, which in turn affect species composition.!? Benthic plumes from mining devices will cause sedimentation on the bottom-dwelling organisms and eggs in the vicinity. Surface plumes from rejection of some of the mined material will eventually settle over a much wider area and cover animals with a thin layer of sediment. Silt depos- its can smother benthic organisms and inhibit growth and development of juvenile stages.'*!° While the first new colonizing organisms in a mined area probably will be those with the highest disper- sal, the direction of succession and final composi- tion of the community is difficult to predict and is likely to be affected by grain size and suitability of the deposited sediment for colonization by benthic invertebrates. The areas affected by mining will tend to be smaller than those affected by commercial fishing (especially bottom-trawling operations), which also removes large numbers of organisms and may dis- turb large sections of the seafloor. However, ma- rine mining impacts may be more intense than those of fisheries. 13)_S. Gray, ‘‘Animal-Sediment Relationships,’’ in Oceanography and Marine Biology-An Annual Review, H. Barnes (ed.), No. 12 (1974), pp. 223-262. 144=Ww.B. Wilson, ‘‘The Effects of Sedimentation Due to Dredging Operations on Oysters in Copano Bay, Texas’’ (M.S. thesis, Texas A&M University, 1956). 19R.S. Scheltema, ‘‘Metamorphosis of the Veliger Larvae of Nas- sarius Obsoletus (Gastropoda) in Response to Bottom Sediment,’’ Bio- logical Bulletin, No. 120 (1961), pp. 92-109. 16G. Thorson, ‘‘Some Factors Influencing the Recruitment and Establishment of Marine Benthic Communities,’’ Netherlands Jour- nal of Sea Research, No. 3 (1966), pp. 267-293. Grigg and Kiwala, ‘‘Some Ecological Effects of Discharged Wastes on Marine Life.”’ 18S .B. Saila, S.D. Pratt, and T.T. Polgar, Dredge Spoil Disposal in Rhode Island Sound, University of Rhode Island Marine Techni- cal Report No. 2, 1972. 19P_S. Meadows and J.I. Campbell, ‘‘Habitat Selection by Aquatic Invertebrates,’’ Advances in Marine Biology, No. 10 (1972), pp. 271-382. 224 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier vie , : Photo credit: A. Crosby Longwell, National Marine Fisheries Service Atlantic mackerel eggs sorted out of plankton from surface waters of the New York Bight. Alteration of Wave Patterns Mining in shallow water may change the form and physiography of the seafloor. Wave patterns may be altered as a result of removing offshore bars or shoals or digging deep pits. When changes in wave patterns and wave forces affect the shoreline, coastal beaches can erode and structures can be damaged. The best example of these dangers oc- curred in the United Kingdom in the early 1900s when the town of Hallsands in Devon was severely damaged by wave action following large scale removal of offshore sandbars to build the Plymouth breakwater (see photograph). Coastal erosion is now the first consideration in the United Kingdom before mining takes place; dredging is limited to areas deeper than 60 feet. This criterion is based on studies that imply sediment transport is unlikely at depths greater than 45 feet; the additional 15 feet were added as an extra precaution.?° Current work 20R .W. Drinnan and D.G. Bliss, The U.K. Experience on the Ef- fects of Offshore Sand and Gravel Extraction on Coastal Erosion and the Fishing Industry, Nova Scotia Department of Mines and Energy, Open File Report 86-054. by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers suggests that concern with water depth alone may not be suffi- cient to avoid beach erosion?! ** and that detailed on-site modeling should be considered in pre-plan- ning analysis. For example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of the New Orleans District built a beach and dune on Grand Isle, Louisiana for ero- sion control in 1983. The project required 2.8 mil- lion cubic yards of sand obtained by digging two large borrow holes one-half mile offshore (about twice this amount was actually dredged to achieve the design section). Shortly after completion, cus- pate sand bars began to form on the leeward side of the dredged holes and the beach began to erode adjacent to the newly formed bars. During the win- ter and spring of 1985, heavy storms exacerbated the areas of beach loss adjacent to the cuspate bars (e.g., see opposite page).?* This unexpected re- sponse of beach formation and erosion as a result of altered wave patterns around the borrow areas illustrates the importance of site-specific assessment before mining large volumes of sediment from the seafloor. Seasonal During certain times of the year, e.g., when eggs and larvae are abundant, the effects of offshore min- ing may have a more negative impact on the ocean community than at other times. Juvenile stages of fish and shellfish are transported by water currents and therefore are less able to actively avoid adverse conditions. They are generally more susceptible to high concentrations of suspended sediments than swimming organisms that can avoid such conditions. For example, striped bass larvae in the Chesapeake Bay develop more slowly when particulate levels are high.** Therefore, restricting offshore mining 21Joan Pope, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, OTA Workshop on Environmental Concerns, Washington, D.C., Oct. 29, 1986. 22R J. Hallermeier, A Profile Zonation for Seasonal Sand Beaches from Wave Climate, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Reprint 81-3 (Fort Belvoir, VA: Coastal Engineering Research Center, April 1981). 23 J. Combe and C. W. Soileau, ‘‘Behavior of Man-made Beach and Dune, Grand Isle, Louisiana,’’ Coastal Sediment ’87, 1987, p. 1232. 244 H. Auld and J.R. Schubel, ‘‘Effects of Suspended Sediment on Fish Eggs and Larvae: A Laboratory Assessment,’’ Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science, No. 6 (1978), pp. 153-164. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 225 Photo credit: Jay Combe, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of the New Orleans District built abeach and dune on Grand Isle, Louisiana for beach erosion control, recreation, and hurricane wave damage protection (Aug. 14, 1984). The two offshore borrow areas from which the sand was obtained, were of sufficient width, depth, and proximity to the shore to modify wave climate. Over the next 3 years, cuspate sand bars formed in the lee of the borrow pits while erosion occurred adjacent to these bars (Aug. 9, 1985). A series of hurricanes between 1984-85 severely eroded areas immediately adjacent to and between the cuspate bars destroying total beach and dune fill over one-seventh of the project length (Oct. 28, 1985). Plans to restore and modify the project to improve its resistance to damage in future hurricanes are essentially complete. 226 ® Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier seasonally as environmental concerns warrant may protect biota during sensitive stages of devel- opment. Permanently changing the topography of the seafloor may disrupt the spawning patterns of some marine species dependent on a particular substrate type (e.g., salmon and herring).*° 25§.J. de Groot, ‘The Potential Environmental Impact of Marine Gravel Extraction in the North Sea,’’ Ocean Management, No. 5 (1979), pp. 233-249. DIFFERENT EFFECTS IN SHALLOW AND DEEP WATER While the potential environmental impacts of mining operations in shallow water are similar to those in deep water, the effects may be more obvi- ous in shallow areas and may have a more direct effect on human activities. Many of the organisms on the continental shelf and in coastal waters are linked to humans through the food chain; decreased animal productivity may have an adverse economic effect as well as an undesirable environmental ef- fect in these nearshore areas (see figure 6-2). Surface Effects Surface plumes are of more concern in nearshore shallow water areas than they are in deeper areas. In the open ocean, plankton productivity is lower and populations extend over huge geographic scales. The effects of a localized mining operation on the surface biota, therefore, will be less in the offshore situation. Visual and aesthetic effects from mining operations and waste plumes also will be less apparent far offshore. Water Column Effects High metal concentrations can reduce the rate of primary production by phytoplankton and can alter species composition and succession of phytoplankton communities”® Several factors act simultaneously to reduce the likelihood of adverse effects from metals released during mining opera- tions in shallow water. Water over the continental shelf contains higher concentrations of particulate matter (and organic chelating agents) which con- vert the dissolved (ionic) metals into insoluble forms that are unavailable to plankton?’ While no studies have yet identified metal contamination of the water column to be a serious consequence of seabed min- 26Thomas and Siebert, ‘‘Effect of Copper.”’ 27Huntsman and Sunda, ‘‘The Role of Trace Metals.’’ ing, the potential for metal persistence is greater in the deep-sea. Benthic Effects Coastal waters are subject to continual wave ac- tion and seasonal changes, and the species found here are adapted to such conditions. The fine par- ticulates stirred by mining operations may be sim- ilar to sediment resuspended by strong wave action in shallow water. In coastal areas, surface-living forms have been found to tolerate 2 inches of sedi- ment deposition, sediment-dwelling animals (infauna) 10 to 12 inches, and deeper burrowing bivalves 4 to 20 inches.?® On the other hand, animals accus- tomed to the relatively quiescent deep ocean envi- ronment may be less resilient to disruption of their habitat or blanketing by particulates. Since deep- sea animals live in an environment where natural sedimentation rates are on the order of millimeters per thousand years, they are assumed to have only very limited burrowing abilities. Thus, even a thin layer of sediment may kill these organisms.?? In general, if the resident fauna on an area of the shal- low seafloor are buried, the community will gen- erally recover more quickly than in the deep-sea. Populations of animals directly within the min- ing path will be destroyed. Dredged areas in shal- low seafloor are buried, the community will recover more quickly than in the deep-sea. 28C onsolidated Gold Fields Australia Ltd. and ARC Marine Ltd., Marine Aggregate Project, Environmental Impact Statement, vol. 1, February 1980. 29P A. Jumars and E.D. Gallagher, ‘‘Deep-Sea Community Struc- ture: Three Plays on the Benthic Proscenium,’’ The Environment of the Deep Sea, Rubey Volume II, W.G. Ernst and J.G. Morin (eds.) (Englewood ‘Cliffs, NJ: 1982); and P.A. Jumars, ‘‘Limits in Predict- ing and Detecting Benthic Community Responses to Manganese Nod- ule Mining,’’ Marine Mining, vol 3. (1981), No. 1/2, pp. 213-229. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 227 Photo credit: Paul Rodhouse, British Antarctic Survey Mussels, like many benthic marine organisms, filter their food. Sediments discharged from dredging vessels or stirred up by mining activities may clog feeding and respiratory surfaces of these animals or completely bury populations. cies.*° 3! Animal populations in fine-grained sedi- ments appear to recover more rapidly than those in coarse-grained sediments, which may require up to 3 years for recovery.** Recolonization rates in the deep sea are not known with any certainty, but they appear to be long—on the order of years—in areas not subject to periodic disturbance.**?° Deep-sea benthic communities are areas of high species diver- sity, few individuals, slow recolonization rates, and questionable resilience. Shallow water benthic com- munities may have either high or low diversity, usu- ally with large numbers of individuals, fast recoloni- zation, and resilience to physical disturbance. 3°R..T. Saucier et al., Executive Overview and Detailed Summary, Technical Report prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Of- fice, Chief of Engineers, Washington, D.C., December 1978. 311). Thistle, ‘‘Natural Physical Disturbances and Communities of Marine Soft Bottoms,’’ Marine Ecology Program Service, No. 6 (1981), pp. 223-228. 32Saucier et al., p. 75. 33F_N. Spiess et al., Environmental Effects of Deep Sea Dredging, Report to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, No- vember 1986. 34C. R. Smith, ‘‘Food for the Deep Sea: Utilization, Dispersal, and Flux of Nekton Falls at the Santa Catalina Basin Floor,’’ Deep-Sea Research, vol. 32, No. 4. 3°]_.F. Grassle, ‘‘Slow Recolonization of Deep-Sea Sediment,’’ Na- ture, No. 265 (1977), pp. 618-619. 3°J_F. Grassle, ‘Diversity and Population Dynamics of Benthic Organisms,’’ Oceanus, No. 21 (1978), pp. 42-45. SHALLOW WATER MINING EXPERIENCE Since little mining has taken place offshore of the United States*’?, any discussion of the environ- mental impacts must rely heavily on the European experience. This experience is summarized in the documents of the International Council for the Ex- ploration of the Seas (ICES—see box 6-A). Addi- tionally, the very extensive experience of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in lifting, redepositing, ae There is currently sand and gravel mining in the Ambrose Chan- nel of New York Harbor and a gold mining operation off Nome, Alaska, (see Ch. 5). and monitoring sediments from dredging opera- tions provides insights into the effects of shallow water mining. In particular, the 5-year Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP) (see box 6- B) attempted to cover all types of environmental settings offshore. The information gathered is rele- vant to the activities involved in mining sand and gravel or placer deposits. Finally, there are two regional efforts—The New England Offshore Min- ing Environmental Study (NOMES) (see box 6- C), and Sea Grant studies in New York Harbor 228 © Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Box 6-A.—ICES—International Council for Exploration of the Sea The International Council for Exploration of the Sea was set up in the mid-1970s primarily because of concerns over the environmental effects of sand and gravel mining in the North Sea. Three reports were is- sued in 1975, 1976, and 1979. Each report described the current mining operations country by country, as well as the environmental impacts avoided/encountered. The countries participating are the United King- dom, Netherlands, Denmark, Federal Republic of Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, United States, Belgium, and Finland. Based on the accumulated experience, a series of recommendations were drawn up and set out in the second Report of the ICES Working Group on Effects on Fisheries of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction: Member countries should collect and submit maps for all areas of potential dredging activity showing: a). the distribution of different types of sediment, bathymetry, etc. b). relevant fishing grounds, spawning areas, nursery areas, etc. Additionally, more research on biological, chemical and physical effects was encouraged and the need for an environmental impact statement before prospecting or licensing was highlighted. The three ICES reports conclude that the method selected for sand and gravel mining determines the direct and indirect impacts to bottom fauna and the final condition of the seafloor. There are three alternative mining methods: 1. Extraction in a restricted area, deep into the seabed, with a stationary hopper dredger; the result will be a deep hole (as much as 230 feet) in the bottom. Such pits will not naturally be backfilled with sediment. 2. Extraction over a wide area with trailing hopper dredgers; this will result in only removal of the top 8 inches. 3. Extraction over a relatively large area with stationary seaworthy dredging equipment; the sea bottom is lowered over the area by about 33-50 feet. For sand dredging off the Netherlands coast, where sand is found in thick layers, a shallow lowering of the sea bottom over a wide area is preferred'. Bottom composition and structure both before and after dredg- ing remain similar. Although there would be destruction of the bottom fauna throughout the area mined, such effects are likely to be temporary. The recovery of the flora and the fauna should occur quickly because the colonizing substrate is unchanged. If deep excavation is used in water depths greater than 50 feet, the pits will generally not backfill with sand because little transport takes place at these depths. An example of the impacts associated with deep exca- vation mining exists near the U.K. coast off Hastings, where gravel mining produced a pockmarked land- scape in a previously good trawling area; here, bottom-trawling gear can no longer be used.” From the many studies on the effects of marine aggregate dredging, it is evident that initial impacts can vary from minimal to severe and that disruptions range from short to long term. The sensitivity of the area involved determines the impact. Belgium has adopted the ICES protocol and has designated all of its continental shelf as belonging to one of four zones that control the exploitation and extraction of sand offshore: e Zone I: Navigation areas. Extraction prohibited. ® Zone 2: Fishing Grounds. In view of their importance as spawning and nursery areas, this zone is prohibited for exploitation and extraction. © Zone 3: Southern part of the Belgian continental shelf. Mining allowed when ecological monitoring is carried out. © Zone 4: Northern part of the Belgian continental shelf. Extraction allowed after preliminary monitor- ing, with continuous ecological monitoring during extraction. Canada is in the process of developing regulations for offshore mining? and is considering similar designations. ‘International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Marine Environmental Quality Committee, Report of the ICES Working Group on Effects on Fisheries of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction, (Charlottenlund, Denmark: ICES, 1979). 4§.J. de Groot, ‘“‘An Assessment of the Potential Environmental Impact of Large-Scale Sand-Dredging for the Building of Artificial Islands in the North Sea,’’ Ocean Management, No. 5 (1979), pp. 211-232. ’David Pasho, Canada Oil and Gas Lands Administration, OTA Workshop on Environmental Concerns, Washington, D.C., Oct. 29, 1986. + Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 229 Box 6-B.—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) maintains over 25,000 miles of navigable waterways that service over 155 commercial ports and more than 400 small boat harbors. About 465 million cubic yards of sediment are dredged each year in the United States; most of this dredging is the result of COE projects that have been approved by Congress. About 30 percent of the material is disposed of in marine environments. The major program addressing environmental effects of dredging and disposal conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is the Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP). This work was initiated following congressional authorization for a comprehensive nationwide research program. The 5-year DMRP Program was completed in 1978 at a cost of approximately $33 million; about 300 reports were produced as a result of this research effort. The project was designed to be applicable nationally with all regions and environmental settings represented. The overall conclusion of the study was that physical effects (such as smothering benthic communities) caused by dumping dredged material were more important than chemical or biological effects. However, these effects were deemed avoidable under guidance for the Sec- tion 404? and Section 103? programs. In general, deep ocean areas were recommended as ‘‘more environ- mentally acceptable’’ for disposal than highly productive continental shelf areas. Except in unusally sensitive environments (such as coral reefs) or at critical stages in the life cycle of animals (spawning, larval develop- ment, and migration), turbidity plumes are “‘primarily a matter of aesthetic impact rather than biological impact.’ Benthic communities appear to recover if the grain-size of the sediment remains similar to the origi- nal condition after dredging or disposal occurs. Recolonization both of dredged areas and disposal mounds appears rapid for fine-grained sediments (silt) but requires up to 3 years for coarse-grained sediments (sand). Short-term impacts from dredging and dredge disposal are brief and not of major environmental signifi- cance. Long-term monitoring studies still need to be done. In particular, chronic or sub-lethal effects of very long-term mining operations are not known. ‘Public Law 91-611. ?Public Law 92-500, The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 1972. *Public Law 95-532, The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. (see box 6-D) that examined naturally occurring populations of organisms on the seafloor in the northeastern United States where shallow water mining operations are likely to take place. Guide- lines have been established by EPA and the Corps of Engineers (see box 6-E) for testing the impacts of dumping dredged material which may, in turn, provide information about effects of concern from rejected mining material. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports sug- gest that concerns about water quality degradation from the resuspension of dredged material are, for the most part, unfounded. Generally, only mini- mal chemical and biological impacts from dredg- ing and disposal have been observed over the short- term**. Most organisms studied were relatively in- sensitive to the effects of sediment suspensions or turbidity. Release of heavy metals and their up- 38R.A. Geyer (ed.), Marine Environmental Pollution, Dumping and Mining, Elsevier Oceanography Series 27B (Amsterdam-Oxford, New York: Elsevier Science Publishing Co., 1981). take into organism tissues have been rare. The con- clusion of the Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP) is that biological conditions of most shal- low water areas—areas of high wave action— appear to be influenced to a much greater extent by natural variation in the physical and chemical environment than they are by dredging or drilling. The NOMES and Sea Grant studies corroborate the Corps of Engineer’s finding, that in shallow water, there is much natural variation in both the distribution and abundance of species on the un- altered seafloor; these latter studies conclude that it is impossible to generalize about the effects of mining on all shallow water environments given the tremendous variability from site to site. This con- clusion suggests that, if a mined area is compared with an unmined area, changes due to the dredg- ing might not be statistically detectable because either: © the mining really had a minimal impact, or © the tremendous variability between sites masked the changes that occurred at the mining site. 230 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Box 6-C.—Project NOMES The New England Offshore Mining Environmental Study (Project NOMES) was begun in 1972 in an attempt to clarify the environmental impacts associated with marine mining. Uncertainties about the extent, severity, and permanence of negative effects of offshore activities highlighted by the Santa Barbara, CA oil spill had led to a moratorium on offshore mining. NOMES was a joint study sponsored by the Common- wealth of Massachusetts and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. A 1-year study of base- line conditions at a sand and gravel deposit centered in Massachusetts Bay at 40° 21°41” N, 70° 47°10” W, was to be followed by a period of well-monitored commercial-scale mining. Two years of post-experiment monitoring were planned to document mining-induced changes in the seafloor and water column as well as alterations resulting from natural processes. The project was terminated in 1973 because a suitable disposal area had not been identified by the Com- monwealth for the 1 million cubic yards of sand and gravel to be mined during the planned 1974 test. The principal investigators were funded through a project wrap-up phase; two were funded an additional year to study baseline conditions in plankton and benthic organisms. The principal research in Stage 2 would have involved: © Modeling the distribution of suspended sediment. e Studying chemical interactions between sediments and water: e.g., release of nutrients and toxic sub- stances to the water, and the effect of suspended particles on the scattering and absorption of light. © Studying energetic relationships in organisms stressed by the presence of sediments: physica! and/or chemical effects on respiration, photosynthesis, assimilation, feeding rates, and reproductive potential in adults, juveniles, and larvae of key species (including benthic invertebrates, benthic algae, zooplankton, phytoplankton, and fish). Recommendations 1. Laboratory studies of the effects of turbidity on marine organisms should be continued. This work should be broadened to include nonphysiological responses, such as organisms’ avoidance of a turbidity plume. Results may be extremely relevant to local commercial fishermen. 2. Once a site has been agreed upon, a 2-year period should be devoted to pre-mining studies—at least the first tume. The first year should be devoted to the development of sound sampling and test procedures for coordinated use the second year. The main focus of the baseline studies should be the long-term effects of a change in substrate characteristics caused by the blanket of fine materials. 3. The mining test should be at a commercial scale and should continue for at least 1 year. A brief period of mining should not be extrapolated to long-term mining. 4. Although the period of mining must be well-monitored, the post-mining environment can be exam- ined less frequently but should continue for at least 2 years. SOURCE: J.W. Padan (ed.), New England Offshore Mining Environmental Study (Project NOMES), U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Seattle, WA: April 1977). At the OTA Workshop on Environmental Con- cerns,*° participating scientists agreed that the only way to resolve such controversy is to monitor at a site before, during, and after a mining operation. Additionally, workshop participants pointed out that commercial mining at a fixed location will dis- turb the environment for a much longer period of time than transient dredging operations; partici- pants expressed concern that in the United States “‘the experiment had not been done.”’ Oct. 29, 1986, Washington, D.C. In Europe, where sand and gravel mining has proceeded for some time, monitoring studies con- cluded that if the nature and structure of the sub- strate do not differ substantially before and after dredging, the seabottom communities will probably recover successfully from the effects.*° Recovery generally starts within months of cessation of min- ing, with full recovery within 2 to 3 years. During actual mining, increased turbidity in the water 40S.J. de Groot, ‘‘Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction in the North Atlantic and its Potential Environmental Impact, with Emphasis on the North Sea,’’ Ocean Management, No. 10 (1986), pp. 21-36. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 231 Box 6-D.—New York Sea Grant Studies Sea Grant studies of the Lower Bay of New York Harbor’ illustrate the NOMES conclusion of benthic heterogeneity over even a small region of the seafloor. Five studies had been done on the biology of the ben- thos in this confined area. For 3 summers (1957-60), more than 100 stations were sampled for macrobiota using grab samplers.? Monthly samples were taken over a period of 1 year (February 1966 to January 1967) off the southwest coast of Long Island. The Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory sampled 78 stations seasonally (1973 only) between Ambrose Channel and the mouth of the Raritan River.* The New York District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers sampled the East Bank of the Ambrose Channel before and after sand borrow dredging operations.’ Additionally, eight stations in the Lower Bay and Raritan Bay were sampled once to estimate standing stock and diversity.° A table displaying the results of all five surveys, while not formally comparing numbers of individuals or species at different stations, clearly shows the data sets have little in common. Kastens et al. conclude: ‘“The wide variation in collecting devices, sampling frequency, and sedi- ment type; the paucity of stations; and the extreme temporal and spatial patchiness of benthos make such -a comparison of little value.’’ In the Raritan Bay, muddy bottoms sampled in close proximity to sandy bottoms had markedly different biological communities.’ They shared only one species in common.® While both sediment types were low in both density and diversity, the muddy bottom was particularly so, with only 10 species being reported. How- ever, the Lower Bay has been perturbed by a diverse input of pollutants which may contribute to decreased biological activity.? The East Bank (less than 2 miles away) was described as ‘‘far from depauperate.’’!° This study identified a third unique community within the relatively small area of the Raritan Bay. Differences in biota between dredged and undredged sites in the Lower New York Bay were less than differences from one geographic site to the next." 1K. A. Kastens et al., Environmental Effects of Sand Mining in the Lower Bay of New York Harbor, Special Report 15, Reference 78-3, State Univer- sity of New York, Marine Sciences Research Center, (Stony Brook, NY: September 1978). *D, Dean, ‘‘Raritan Bay Macrobenthos Survey,’’ National Marine Fisheries Service Data Report 99, 1975. 3F. Steimle and R.B. Stone, ‘“‘Abundance and Distribution of Inshore Benthic Fauna off Southwestern Long Island, New York,’ NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-673, 1973. 4R.A. McGrath, “Benthic Macrofaunal Census of Raritan Bay—Preliminary Results, Benthos of Raritan Bay,’’ Proceedings, Third Symposium on Hudson River Ecology, paper No. 24, Mar. 22-23, 1974, Bear Mountain, New York, Hudson River Environmental Society. 5Woodward-Clyde Consultants, Rockaway Beach Erosion Control Project, Dredge Material Research Program, Offshore Borrow Area, Results of Phase I-Pre-dredging Studies, prepared for the Department of the Army, New York District, Corps of Engineers, 1975, 6._A. Walford, Review of Aquatic Resources and Hydrographic Characteristics of Raritan, Lower, and Sandy Hook Bays, report prepared for the Battelle Memorial Institute by the staff of Sandy Hook Sport Fisheries Marine Laboratory, 1971. 7McGrath, ‘‘Benthic Macrofaunal Census.’* ®Kastens et al., Environmental Effects of Sand Mining. °B.H. Brinkhuis, Biological Effects of Sand and Gravel Mining in the Lower Bay of New York Harbor: An Assessment from the Literature, State University of New York, Marine Sciences Research Center, (Stony Brook, NY: January 1980). 10K astens et al., Environmental Effects of Sand Mining UBrinkhuis, Biological Effects of Sand and Gravel Mining. column appears to cause only local and minor re- ductions in plankton productivity. The abundance and types of species found on the bottom also change.*! When the substrate type is changed due to the dredging activities (e.g., removal of gravel or a sand layer on top of bed-rock) then adverse effects may be persistent.*? The benthic commu- "S.J. de Groot, Bibliography of Literature Dealing with the Ef- fects of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction on Fisheries (The Nether- lands: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Marine Environmental Quality Committee, 1981); de Groot, ‘“The Poten- tial Environmental Impact of Marine Gravel Extraction in the North Sea.”’ *2International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Second Re- port of the ICES Working Group on Effects on Fisheries of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction, Cooperative Research Report No. 64, nities that are established in the area after remov- ing the top layers may differ significantly from the prior communities.** Of great concern to the European community is the potential detrimental effects of mining on commercial fisheries. Removal of gravel in herring (Charlottenlund, Denmark: ICES, April 1977); International Coun- cil for the Exploration of the Sea, Marine Environmental Quality Com- mittee, Report of the ICES Working Group on Effects on Fisheries of Marine Sand and Gravel Extraction, (Charlottenlund, Denmark: ICES, 1979). 43A P. Cressard and C.P. Augris, ‘‘French Shelf Sand and Gravel Regulations,’’ Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 4292, 1982. 232 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Box 6-E.—EPA/COE Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, Public Law 92-532, speci- fies that any proposed operation involving the transportation and dumping of dredged material into ocean waters must be evaluated for potential environmental impact. The responsibility rests with the Secretary of the Army and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) acting cooperatively with the District Engineer and Regional Administrator. Environmental evaluations must follow criteria published by EPA in the Federal Register, vol. 42, No. 7, January 11, 1977. Techniques such as bioassays and bioas- sessments are emphasized as tools for estimating the potential for environmental impact. It is possible that offshore sand and gravel extraction, placer mining, and phosphorite extraction will be excluded from detailed biological assessment under the exclusion of paragraph 227.13b.1 Dredged material that does not meet these conditions must receive ‘‘a full technical evaluation for potential environmental im- pact.’’ The procedures emphasize biological effects of possible contaminants. Dredged material is separated into three components for evaluation: a (1) liquid phase and a (2) suspended particulate phase are deemed to have the greatest potential for impact on the water column and are evaluated with this in mind. The (3) solid phase has the greatest potential for impact on benthic organisms, and evaluative emphasis is placed there. For each phase, three species must be used in assessing toxicity of the material.? The Register required that a technical implementation manual for the criteria applicable to dredged ma- terial be developed jointly by EPA and the Corps of Engineers (COE). This manual contains summaries and discussions of the procedures for ecological evaluation of dredged material, tests to implement them, defini- tions, sample collection and preservation procedures, evaluative procedures, calculations, interpretative guid- ance, and supporting references required for the evaluation of permit applications. ‘Dredged material that meets the criteria set forth below is approved for depositing without further testing: a. It is composed predominantly of sand, gravel, rock, or other naturally occurring bottom material with particle sizes larger than silt, and the material is found in areas of high current or wave energy, or b. The material proposed for dumping is substantially the same as the substrate at the proposed disposal sites. These include: one species of phytoplankton or zooplankton, one crustacean or mollusc, and one fish for the liquid bioassay; one species of zooplank- ton, one crustacean or mollusc, and a fish for the suspended particulate phase; and all benthic organisms—one filter-feeder, one deposit-feeder, and one burrowing species for the solid phase assays. 3EPA/COE Technical Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material, ‘‘Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged Material into Ocean Waters,’’ Implementation Manual for Section 103 of Public Law 92-532, July 1977, Second Printing, April 1978. [U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS]. spawning areas or on sandbanks where sand eels From the U.S. and European work discussed hide at night adversely affects these fisheries**. While direct negative effects of dredging on adult fish stocks has not been clearly demonstrated, these concerns remain. To protect fishing interests, ICES proposed a ‘‘Code of Practice.’’*° Elements of this code have been adopted by France and the United Kingdom. The code requires that the exact bound- aries of the mining area and the amount and thick- ness of the sediment layer to be removed be speci- fied. In addition, the expected condition of the seabed after completion of dredging operations must be described, including the amount of gravel remaining to enable herring to spawn. “Tt is still not known why herring select a specific spawning ground or what the selection criteria are for sand eel (Ammodytes) in their choice of a specific bank in which to dig. **International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. above, it appears that there are three ways to min- imize the environmental effect of mining operations in near-shore areas, namely: 1. identify and avoid environmentally sensitive areas with regard to biota, spawning areas, migration, currents, coastline erosion, etc.; 2. where mining does occur, use dredging equip- ment that minimizes destruction of the bot- tom as well as production of both surface and bottom particulate benthic plumes; and 3. effectively restore the site to its original pre- mining condition—mine and ‘‘reclaim’’ the area by smoothing seafloor gouges and replac- ing removed sediment with a similar type and grain-size. (Note: While this option may be feasible in certain cases, it is expensive and energy-intensive. Because little information Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 233 Photo credit: Southern California Coastal Research Project Authority Coastal regions are the most biologically productive areas of the ocean. Because offshore mining is most likely to occur here first, care must be taken to avoid areas important for fisheries. exists on reclamation, this option will not be considered below. Information from many existing environmental studies*®®! can be combined to characterize the *6National Ocean Service, Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, Ocean Assessments Division, Strategic Assessments Branch, Coastal and Ocean Zones, Strategic Assessment: Data Atlas. The atlases consist of maps covering a range of topics on physical and biological environments (geology, surface temperatures, and aquatic vegetation); living marine resources (species of invertebrates, fishes, birds, and mammals); economic activities (population distribution and seafood production); environmental quality (oil and grease discharge); and jurisdictions (political boundaries and environmental quality man- agement areas). The Eastern United States Atlas (125 maps) was pub- lished by the Department of Commerce in 1980; it is now out-of-print. The Gulf of Mexico Atlas (163 four-color maps) was printed by the U.S Government Printing Office in 1985. The Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas Atlas (127 maps) will be printed early in 1987. The West Coast and Gulf of Alaska Atlas is scheduled for 1988 publication. areas of prime ecological concern. Dredging and mining operations can then avoid prime fish and shellfish areas especially during times of reproduc- tion and migration. The OTA Workshop on Envi- ronmental Concerns stressed that a compendium of such information should be developed; currently, there are many sources of data®? housed in differ- ent agencies or institutions, but it is difficult to com- pare or combine them. Historically, the dredging industry has empha- sized increasing production rather than reducing sediment in the water column or minimizing dam- age to the environment. Information on particu- late levels and other effects caused by different dredge designs exists (see table 6-1). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers field studies indicate that the cutterhead dredge produces most of its turbidity near the bottom, as does the hopper dredge with- A national atlas of 20 maps on the health and use of coastal waters of the U.S. is also being produced by NOAA. The first five are: Ocean Disposal Sites, Estuarine Systems, Oil Production, Dredging Activi- ties, and NOAA’s National Status and Trends Program. Future maps are scheduled on hazardous waste sites, marine mammals, fisheries management areas, and other similar topics. 47U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Bio- logical Services Program: ‘‘Gulf Coast Ecological Inventory, User’s Guide and Information Base,’’ August 1982; ‘‘Pacific Coast Ecolog- ical Inventory, User’s Guide and Information Base,’’ October 1981; and ‘‘Atlantic Coast Ecological Inventory, User’s Guide and Infor- mation Base,’’ September 1980. #8Marine EcoSystems Analysis Program (MESA), New York Bight Atlas Monograph Series, New York Bight Project, New York Sea Grant Institute, Albany, 1975, especially Monographs 13-15 (“‘Plank- ton Systematics and Distribution’ T. Malone, ‘Benthic Fauna’’ by J.B. Pearce and D. Radosh, and ‘‘Fish Distribution’? M.D. Gross- lein and T.R.A. Zarovitz’’). #9U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Serv- ice, ‘Proposed 5-Year Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program, Mid-1987 to Mid-1992,”’ Final Environmental Impact State- ment, Volumes I and II, January 1987. There are 22 planning areas for oil and gas development within the U.S. For each area, informa- tion has been collected on biological species, geologic and chemical conditions, physical oceanography, and socio-economic conditions. About $400 million has gone into the Environmental Studies Program since 1973. Hundreds of papers and reports have been published as a result; these are listed and summarized in Environmental Studies Index, OCS Report 86-0020, U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, 1986. 50B.L. Freeman and L.A. Walford, Anglers’ Guide to the United States Atlantic Coast, Fish, Fishing Grounds and Fishing Facilities, prepared for the U.S. Department of Commerce, Seattle, WA, July 1976. ‘1Scripps Institution of Oceanography, California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations (CalCOFI), A-027. The distributions of species in the California Current Region are mapped in a 30-volume atlas series. This series is one of the few long-term monitoring studies of a large region; records are available from 1949 to the present day. 52Besides the large studies cited here, there are many regional, state, and local studies. 234 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Table 6-1.—Environmental Perturbations from Various Mining Systems Mining method Seabed Water column Mining approaches Mining Fragmentation/ systems collection Excavation Turbidity Suspended __ Dissolved plume Resedimentation Subsidence particulates substances Scraping Drag line dredge Trailing cutter suction dredge i Rock cutter section dredge s Crust-miner “ Continuous line bucket * Clams shell bucket * Bucket ladder dredge ‘ Bucket wheel dredge * Anchored suction dredge * Cutterhead suction dredge . Drilling and blasting he Shore entry Artifcial island entry Excavating Tunneling beneath seafloor Fluidizing Slurrying (sub-seafloor) | Leaching * * * * * ** oe * +e ae ee * +e we ee * * Applicable or potentially applicable. ** Relative major perturbation. SOURCE: Environmental Effects Document prepared by U.S. Department of the Interior Regulatory Task Force for Leasing of Minerals Other than Oil, Gas, and Sulphur in the Outer Continental Shelf, unpublished draft, October 1986. out overflow. The bucket dredge and the hopper dredge with overflow, however, produce suspended sediments throughout the water column. The mod- ified dustpan dredge appears to suspend more solids than a conventional cutterhead dredge.°? A typical bucket dredge operation produces a plume of particulates extending about 1,000 feet downcurrent at the surface and about 1,600 feet near the bottom.** In the immediate vicinity of the operation, the maximum concentration of sediment suspended at the surface should be less than 500 mg/l and should rapidly decrease with distance. Water column concentrations generally should be less than 100 mg/1.5° When mining stops, the tur- bidity plume will settle rapidly. The dispersion of a turbidity plume can be ef- fectively altered by the configuration of the pipe- °3For more information on dredge designs, see Ch. 4. **W.D. Barnard, Prediction and Control of Dredged Material Dis- persion Around Dredging and Open Water Pipeline Disposal Oper- ations, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicks- burg, MS, Technical Report DS-78-13, August 1978. °°Sediment suspended by a dredge is similar to the amount of dis- turbance produced by a small-scale storm. line at the point of discharge (see figure 6-5).°° Pipe- line angles that minimize water column turbidity (e.g., with a 90-degree angle) produce mud mounds that are thick but cover a minimum area. Con- versely, those that generate the greatest turbidity in the water column disperse widely and produce relatively thin mud mounds of maximum areal ex- tents! Many parameters, such as particle settling rates, discharge rate, water depth, current velocities, and the diffusion velocity, all interact to control the size and shape of the turbidity plume. As water cur- rent speed increases, the plume will grow longer. As the dredge size increases or particle settling rates decrease, the plume size will tend to increase®®. Fi- nally, with lower rates of dispersion or particle set- 5°J.R. Schubel et al., Field Investigations of the Nature, Degree, and Extent of Turbidity Generated by Open Water Pipeline Disposal Operations , U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report, Vicksburg, MS, D-78-30, July 1978. 57A general rule of thumb is that, as the height of the redeposited mound decreases by a factor of two, the areal coverage increases by a factor-of two. But as the mound height decreases, the amount of wave-induced resuspension of the surface material will also decrease. 58In addition, as the diffusion velocity increases for a given current velocity, the plume becomes longer and wider, while the solids con- centrations in the plume decrease. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 235 Figure 6-5.— The Effect of Discharge Angle and Water Current on the Shape and Depth of Redeposited Sediments Vertical discharge Horizonal discharge No current CURRENT Current , CURRENT lf mining ships discharge unwanted sediments through a vertical pipe (left portion of diagram) seafloor deposits will cover a smaller area but to a greater depth than if a horizontal discharge pipe is used (right side of diagram) which results in a large but thin “footprint” of sediments. The movement of water current (bottom of diagram) will similarly expand the area of the seafloor blanketed by sediment but decrease the depth of the deposit overall. SOURCE: Modified from W. Barnard, ‘‘Prediction and Control of Dredged Material Dispersion Around Dredging and Open Water Pipeline Disposal Operations,” U.S. Army Corps Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, Technical Report DS 78-13, August 1979. tling or an increase in water depth, the length of time required for the plume to dissipate after the disposal operation has ceased will increase. One method for physically controlling the dis- persion of turbid water is a ‘‘silt curtain.’’ (see fig- ure 6-6). A silt curtain is a turbidity barrier that extends vertically from the water surface to a speci- fied depth around the area of discharge. At present, silt curtains have limited usefulness; they are not recommended for ‘‘operations in the open ocean, in currents exceeding one knot, in areas frequently exposed to high winds and large breaking waves, or around hopper or cutterhead dredges where fre- 236 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 6-6.—Silt Curtain ,- PIPELINE SILT TURBID SOURCE: Modified from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ‘Executive Overview and Detailed Summary,” Synthesis of Research Results, DMRP Program, U.S. Army Corps Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, Technical Report DS 78-22, December 1978. quent curtain movement would be necessary.’’°? Once environmental effects are better defined, engi- neering techniques can be developed to address them. For example, Japanese industry has devel- oped a system that may reduce turbidity in the suface layers of the water column when sediment is discarded. Air bubbles entrained in the water during dredge filling and overflow exacerbate the surface turbidity plume associated with hydraulic hopper dredging. A system, called the ‘‘Anti- Turbidity Overflow System’’ employed by the Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Company, Ltd., (HI) reportedly separates air from the water prior to overflow. According to IHI data, the re- sult is a clear water column and, presumably, a smaller area of fine sediment at the dredge site caused by particles that settle rapidly. °*°Barnard, Prediction and Control of Dredged Material Dispersion, p. 87. DEEP WATER MINING STUDIES In the deep-sea, the abundance of animal life de- creases with increasing depth and distance from land. Deep-sea animals are predominantly re- stricted to the surface of the seafloor and the up- per few inches of the bottom. Species, especially smaller-sized organisms, are incompletely cata- logued at present, and little information is avail- able on their life cycles. The density of animals is low but diversity may be high. In these regions, the low total number of animals is thought to re- flect the restricted food supply, which comes from either residues raining into the deep sea from above or from in situ production.®° All estimates of the environmental impacts of deepsea mining draw heavily on information from the Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES), the only systematic long-term research program conducted in very deep water. Justifica- tion for extrapolating from these deep-sea sites to others rests on the hypothesis that, in general, the abyssal ocean is a much more homogeneous envi- ronment than shallow water environments. °°Deep-sea biomass often correlates with primary productivity above; areas beneath low productivity subtropical waters may be an order of magnitude lower in biomass per unit area than at high latitudes. DOMES: Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study DOMES was a comprehensive 5-year (1975-80) research program funded by NOAA. The goal was to develop an environmental database to satisfy the National Environmental Policy Act requirements to assess the potential environmental impacts of manganese nodule recovery operations.*! During the first phase of DOMES, the environmental con- ditions in the designated manganese nodule area of the Pacific Ocean (i.e., the DOMES area) were characterized to provide a background against which mining-produced perturbations could be later compared. These baseline studies were carried out at three sites that covered the range of environ- mental parameters expected to be encountered dur- ing mining (see box 6-F). The mining scenario presumed removal of nod- ules from the deep seabed by means of a collector (up to 65 feet wide) pulled or driven along the seabed at about 2 miles per hour. Animals on the °1U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Office of Ocean Minerals and Energy, Deep Seabed Mining, Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, vol. 1, (Washington, D.C.: Department of Commerce, September 1981). Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 237 Box 6-F.—Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study (DOMES) The objectives of the first phase of the DOMES program were: 1. to establish environmental baselines at three sites chosen as representative of the range of selected envi- ronmental parameters likely to be encountered during nodule mining, 2. to begin to develop the capability to predict potential environmental effects of nodule mining, and 3. to contribute to the information base available to industry and government for development of appro- priate environmental guidelines. Field work associated with the studies included upper water layer measurements of currents, light penetra- tion, and plant pigments and the primary productivity, abundance, and species composition of zooplankton and nekton. Temperature, salinity, suspended particulate matter, nutrients, and dissolved oxygen were meas- ured throughout the water column. Current measurements were also made in the benthic boundary layer. Abundance and distribution of benthic populations and characteristics of the sediments and pore water were determined. In addition, the seasonal and spatial variability of chemical and biological parameters at four oceanographic depth zones were studied: 1. the surface mixed layer, 2. the pycnocline, 3. the bottom of the pycnocline to 1,300 feet, and 4. 1,300 to 3,300 feet—were characterized for future comparison with measurements made during actual mining activities. The second phase of the DOMES project focused on refining predictive capabilities through analysis of data acquired during pilot-scale tests of mining systems. Two successful pilot-scale mining tests were moni- tored in 1978, one using both hydraulic and air-lift mining systems, and one using air-lift only. Each test saw hundreds of tons of manganese nodules brought from water depths of 13,000 to 16,400 feet to the surface. These tests established the engineering feasibility of deepsea mining, provided the first opportunity to observe actual effects of operations such as those envisioned for the next decade, and allowed comparisons of those effects with earlier estimates of mining perturbations. During these tests, discharge volumes, particulate con- centrations, and temperature were measured from each mining vessel; limited studies were made of the sur- face and benthic plumes; and biological impact assessments were made. The second phase of DOMES con- sisted of monitoring actual pilot-scale mining simulation tests. Its objectives were: © to observe actual environmental effects relevant to forecasting impacts, and ® to refine the database for guideline development. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, Office of Ocean Minerals and Energy Deep Seabed Mining, Final Programmatic Environmental Im- pact Statement, Vol. 1, September 1981. seafloor directly in the mining path or nearby would be disturbed by the collector and the subsequent sediment plume. In addition, when the nodules reached the mining ships, the remaining residue (consisting of bottom water, sediments, and nod- ule fragments) would be discharged over the side of the ship, resulting in a surface discharge plume that might also cause adverse impact. The Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement concluded that of 20 to 30 possible neg- ative impacts (see table 6-2) from deepsea mining, only 3 were of sufficient concern to be investigated as part of the 5-year research plan required by the 1980 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act.°? ©2Public Law 96-283. The first of the three important impacts occurs at the seabed. First, the collection equipment will probably destroy benthic biota, an impact which— as in the case of shallow water mining—appears to be both adverse and unavoidable. The degree of disturbance depends upon the kinds of equip- ment used and the intensity of mining. The affected biota include animals such as sea stars, brittle stars, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, polychaete worms, and sea anemones. NOAA did not identify any ben- thic endangered species in the area that may be af- fected by bottom disturbance. Most benthic ani- mals in the DOMES area appear to be tiny detritus feeders that live in the upper centimeter of sedi- ment and are fed by organic material that falls from upper waters. A worst-case estimate is that the ben- 1er Exploring Our New Ocean Front. 238 ¢ Marine Minerals “921 “d ‘(E861 Jequieydes ‘oq ‘uo}Bujysenm) | “JOA ‘Juewaje}S JoedW) je}UEWUOIAUZ O)JeWWeIBOs jeu) ‘BujujW peqees deeq ‘A6ieuz puke sjeieujW UBIO JO 891}JO ‘eDJaWWOD jo juUaWYedag ‘S'p WoL pajdepy ‘JOUNOS ueyew ejyeinojyeq pepuedsng=wWdS “yoleesal ainjnj jo sealy, *e1N}9e[UOD UO paseq AjjSOW SUO}}9|peld ‘syoe{qns ey} UO s}s|xe eBpajmouy OU JO 9}}}!| Al@A=UMOUXUN “snonua} S| Suo}}ejOde1}xe JO AjIPIJeA BY} JeAeMOY ‘s}s|xe eBpa;mouy BWOS=uUleWeoun “SYOOM 0} skedp ‘4eBuo| 10 siea{ Jo sua} 0} siea,,, "SAWOG Jepun pejyonpuoo sjuewesnseews/sjueW|Jedxe Uo pasegg “weyshs BujujwW ey} pue ebieyosip ay} jo sojjsye}oeeYyo SOPN|IUlp qi99H}e juajuo09 seB parjossip @UON 9|qe}99}9p ON pidey Mo| fla, ws|jOqUZ e ul uo}JeINyesuadns }28439 Ayanjonpoid sjejew aes} QUON 9jqejoe}ep ON ppidey Mo| ua, Asewlid jo uOljIgiyu] e PeAOSSIp U! eseasoU| }99452 UOl}ISOdWod seloads auON 9|qej}oe}Ep ON ppidey Mo} Kua/, uojyuUR|do}Ayd ul aBueyo e 9942 saoue}sqns panjossig aUuON 91qejoe}Ep ON ppidey Mo} Kian AjAJONpod Ayewid ul oSeaioU] $}Ual4J]NU pesealou eBseyasip aaeying Ayipiqun} paseasouy MO7 asiaape Ajje007 ppidey uyeyag $= Aj}AN}ONpoid Avewlid u| aseaio0agq eo 0} enp }yB}| paseaioaq (a)\qejoe}9puNn (pide Ajqeqoid) mo Ajqeqoid) umouyun uleyaoun Ajaxijun Ayanonpoid Avewyid uo 499}j9 eo uoljejnuinooe auljoOoUAd joao asn 0} suis|ueBi0 aUuON 9/4e}09}8p ON pidey Ajoxiun 40} UaBAXO paajossip MO] e puewep uebAxo (pides Ajqeqoid) ~MO7 ureyaoun uleyaoun = (Mo}) uleyaoun @PAle] YSIJ UO 19AjJFZ o j09}}e aUuON aiqejoojep ON ppidey Ajaxiun YSIJ }INPe UO 499}j9 o 9}e1}s -qns peseaiou! 0} anp Ajaljoe le1qos0|W payeagja pue syqep 91}01G 9/4}UEq JO UO}}ONPOIzUI BUON jelo!|jaueq A\qissog ppidey Ajax\|UM 0} anp Ajddns poo} paseaiouj— ~MO7 asiaape A\je907 ppidey Ajaxijun ayejdn jejow aoes) — i299 uol}jsodwoo sajoads 9QUON ajqejoajep oN ppidey AjayijuN ~=—-«40/pue aouepuNge u| eBueyg— @UON i084 9|qe}99}9p ON ppidey Ajayijun AyeyOW— Jayyew ayejnoijed UO} UR|dOOZ UO 49AsjW papuadsns paseasou| sajejnoied eBseyosip eens SUO!}|PU0D diqoseeue WoO) AjjeOW 3UON yoasjo fezij1]N 0} Suus}ueB10 104 9|qe}99}Eap ON pidey Ajayiun UaBAXO PaAjOSSIP 18MO07 e puewap uabAxo UuO}yUe|dOOZ e esealoul euOoN 3|qe}09}0p ON pidey Ajayi|UN Aq eyejdn sjejow aoe.) Je}aW 80es}/}UBINN soujueq BUON jeldljaueq Ajqissod ppidey AjoxUy 40} Ajddns poo} paseasou| e (mojs Ajqeqoid) ~UMOUMUN) asiaapy )UMOUxUN ujeyao Bujjayuejg— (mojs Ajqeqoid) SIOPIE} JA}|1j JO Sede} umouyun asiaApy 5UMOUYUN, AjOyI7 -Ins Auoyesidsas yo BulBBojg— (seu (mojs Ajqeqoid) JO uyel,,) 18}}eW papued .~uMOUyUn, asioApy ,jUMOUXUF) Ajax A\jddns poo} jo Buyianog— -SNS peseaioU! pue a}e1 SOYjJUag UO }9AjJF e uOl}e}UaWIPas paseasoU| ewnjd aJyjueg (pides Ajqeqoid) 9@UON ujeyaoun umouyun Ajaxiun Ajddns poo} mau 0} uojjoes}Vy punos pue }y617 (goued!s1UB\s uyeyeoun) y9bs} 10J9a/]09 1eAaU s]uaw|pas .8/Gepjoneun asiaapy UMOUxUy uleyag = JuNOWwe Uy Bune) O/YJUaq AO1}Saq yoedwoo pure inoos e 40}99]/09 aoueoljiubis aouenbasuo9 ayer Alanooey @9U9JINDN0 (soyje}) ul] SuJaoUO0D Bujujewea4) S}O9jja jeO|WAYd-09|SAUq pSUOI}|PUOD }eI}1U) [!249A0 40 Ajyiqeqoid sjoedw| jeo|Bojolq je}}U9}0q eoueqinisiq yoreduy| jeojBojoiq jo aoued|j|UBjs je1}U9}0q Buiulyy eag-deeq jo syoedu] yueoIUBIS jel}U9}0q Pue SUJBDUOD je}UGWUOIIAUA Jo ALeWLUNS—"z-9 91qGeL Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ¢ 239 thic biota in about 1 percent of the DOMES area, or 38,000 square nautical miles, may be killed due to impacts from first generation mining activities. Although recolonization is likely to occur after min- ing, the time period required is not known. No ef- fect on the water-column food chain is expected. The second important type of impact identified is due to a benthic plume or “‘rain of fines’? away from the collector which may affect seabed animals outside the actual mining tract through smother- ing and interference with feeding. Suspended sedi- ment concentrations decrease rapidly, but the plume can extend tens of kilometers from the col- lector and last several weeks after mining stops. No effect on the food chain in the water column is ex- pected due to the rapid dilution of the plume. How- ever, mining may interfere with the food supply for the bottom-feeding animals and clog the respi- ratory surfaces of filter feeders (such as clams and mussels). Such effects will involve biota in an esti- mated 0.5 percent or 19,000 square nautical miles of the DOMES area. The third impact identified as significant is due to the surface plume. Under the scenario, a 5,500- ton-per-day mining ship will discharge about 2,200 tons of solids (mainly seafloor sediment) and 3 mil- lion cubic feet of water per day. The resulting sur- face discharge plume may extend about 40 to 60 miles with a width of 12-20 miles and will continue to be detectable for three to four days following dis- charge. As the mining operation is supposedly con- tinuous (300 days per year), the plume will be vis- ible virtually all the time. Surface plumes may adversely affect the larvae of fish, such as tuna, which spawn in the open ocean. The turbidity in the water column will decrease light available for photosynthesis but will not severely affect the phytoplankton populations. The effect will be well within the realm of normal light level fluctuations and will resemble the light reduction on a cloudy day. Follow-Up to DOMES: Research by the National Marine Fisheries Serv- ice, under NOAA’s five-year plan, concluded that the surface plume was not really a problem due to rapid dilution and dissipation. This study identi- fied another potential adverse effect that previously had not been considered—that of thermal shock to plankton and fish larvae from discharge at the sur- face of cold deep water.®? However, except for mor- tality of some tuna and billfish larvae (the two com- mercially important fish) in the immediate vicinity of the cold water (4-10° C) discharge, adverse ef- fects appear to be minimal. Continued study of surface plumes suggests that discharged particulates will not accumulate on the pycnocline.** Because new measurements show much of the material discharged settled more slowly than previously thought, the plumes will cover more area. In June 1983, Expedition ECHO I collected 15 quantitative samples of the benthic fauna in the vi- cinity of DOMES site C (15° N, 125° W). These samples were collected for a study of potential im- pacts on the benthic community of a pilot-scale test mining by Ocean Mining Associates, carried out 5 years earlier. Fauna from the immediate test min- ing area were compared with fauna from an area 63W.M. Matsumoto, Potential Impact of Deep Seabed Mining on the Larvae of Tuna and Billfishes, SWFC Honolulu Laboratory, Na- tional Marine Fisheries Service/ NOAA, prepared for NOAA Divi- sion of Ocean Minerals and Energy, NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFC-44, Washington, D.C., 1984. 6¢7_W. Lavelle and E. Ozturgut, ‘‘Dispersion of Deep-Sea Min- ing Particulates and Their Effect on Light in Ocean Surface Layers,”’ Marine Mining, vol 3. (1982), No. 1/2, pp. 185-212. Photo credit: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The box core sampler is a standard tool for studying ocean bottoms. This particular sample, containing manganese nodules, is from the DOMES area. Box cores provide a relatively intact picture of the sediment and animals in the top layers of the seafloor. 240 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier far enough away to have been undisturbed. Dis- turbance to the seafloor was either not extensive enough to produce a statistically detectable differ- ence in community structure from unaltered areas, or recovery had taken place within 5 years.® Con- clusions were that the test mining was not indica- tive of an actual mining operation. Future research will include some short-term (30-day) sedimenta- tion studies to try to characterize the response time of benthic animals to plume effects.®° Recommendations for future research include: ® studying a much larger mining effort or other similar impact on the benthos, ® sampling at the same sites previously sampled to develop trends over time, and ® evaluating data to detect differences at a com- munity level, not at individual or species levels. Environmental Effects From Mining Cobalt Crusts The environmental baseline data that DOMES collected and the conclusions it drew about poten- tial impacts of nodule mining are somewhat appli- cable to mining cobalt crusts. The environmental setting described from the DOMES area has much in common with proposed crust sites. DOMES sta- tions span the central and north Pacific basins and are in areas meteorologically similar to the Hawai- ian and Johnston Island EEZs. The environment studied was typical of the tropical and subtropical Pacific in terms of water masses, major currents, and vertical thermal structure. Species recorded in the water column of the DOMES area are all char- acterized as having broad oceanic distributions. The settings differ primarily with respect to topography and bottom type. The crusts occur on the slopes of seamounts with little loose sediment, while the nodule mine sites occur on plains carpeted with thick sediments. The two areas consequently dif- fer in their potential for resuspension of sediments. Baseline benthic biological data collected in the DOMES study area are less analogous to the crust sites than are the water column pelagic data. The ®°Spiess et al., Environmental Effects of Deep Sea Dredging. °°Ed Myers, NOAA, pers. comm., OTA Workshop on Evironmen- tal Concerns, October 1986. chief depth range of interest for crust mining is 2,500 to 8,000 feet. Bottom stations sampled in the DOMES area varied in depth from 14,000 to 17,000 feet. Communities would be different be- cause of the substrate as well as the depth. The DOMES sites consist of soft sediments interspersed with hard manganese nodules; the crusts are hard rock surfaces with little sediment cover. The com- munities actually living on the manganese nodule hard surfaces may resemble the fauna on the crust pavement because the substrate composition is very similar. Plume Effects As part of the Manganese Crust EIS Project, mathematical models were constructed to simulate the behavior of surface and benthic discharges.*” This effort was based upon extensive modeling of dredged material discharge dispersion conducted for the Army Corps of Engineers’ Dredged Mate- rial Research Program.®® °° Surface Plume.—The DOMES data indicate that a mining plume will increase suspended par- ticulate matter in the water by a factor of ten. This would effectively halt photosynthesis about 65 feet closer to the surface of the water than normal. The results of field measurements made during the DOMES program were extrapolated to com- mercial-scale discharges and it was estimated that the surface plume could reduce daily primary pro- duction by 50 percent in an area 11 miles by 1 mile and by 10 percent over an area as large as 34 miles by 3 miles. The shading effect will only persist un- til the bulk of the mining particulates settle, usu- ally within a period of less than a day. Since it takes phytoplankton 2 to 3 days to adapt to a new light regime, the short-term shading effect of particu- lates is not likely to affect the light-adaptation char- ®7F.K. Noda & Associates and R.C.Y. Koh, ‘‘Fates and Trans- port Modeling of Discharges from Ocean Manganese Crust Mining,”’ prepared for the Manganese Crust EIS Project, Research Corpora- tion the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, 1985. °°B.H. Johnson, 1974, ‘Investigation of Mathematical Models for the Physical Fate Prediction of Dredged Material,’’ U.S. Army Engi- neer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, Hydraulics Lab- oratory, Technical Report D-74-1, March 1974. °°M.G. Brandsma and D.J. Divoky, 1976, ‘‘Development of Models for Prediction of Short-term Fate of Dredged Material Discharged in the Estuarine Environment,” Tetra Tech, Inc., Pasadena, CA, Con- tract Report D-76-5, May 1976. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 241 Photo credit: Barbara Hecker, Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory Brittle stars and corals, shown here at 2,000-foot water depth, are two common kinds of animals living on hard substrates in the deep sea. acteristics of the phytoplankton. No other poten- tial effects (including increased production due to nutrient enrichment or heavy metal toxicity) could be demonstrated.’° Application of the DOMES conclusions to the crust mining scenario requires some modifications. 70U.S. Department of Commerce, Deep Seabed Mining, Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Minerals Manage- ment Service, Draft Environmental Statement: Proposed Marine Mineral Lease Sale in the Hawaiian Archipelago and Johnston Is- land Exclusive Economic Zone, Honolulu, HI, (1987), p. 208. The crust mining surface plume will contain more solids in less water than the nodule mining surface plume, but the crust particles are larger and settle out faster. Thus, the area of reduced primary prod- uctivity probably would be approximately 50 per- cent smaller than that predicted for the nodule sce- nario, a very short-term localized impact.’ Bottom Plume.—A bottom plume would be generated from the movement of the mining equip- U.S. Department of the Interior, p. 208. 242 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ment on the bottom and, in an emergency, from release of materials in the lift pipe. Ten hours af- ter suspension, most material will be redeposited within 65 feet of the miner track, but only 1 per- cent of the smallest particles will be redeposited after 100 hours. From the test mining data, the research- ers calculated that about 90 percent of the resus- pended material would be redeposited within 230 feet of the miner track, and the maximum redepo- sition thickness would be a little more than half an inch thick near the centerline of the track.” The crust scenario envisions recovery of about two-thirds of the ore volume of the nodule scenario but assumes a much thinner range of overburden. Peak base-case crust miner redeposition thicknesses were about one-thousandth of an inch.”* There is a highly significant difference between the two min- ing scenarios. The “‘worst case’’ scenario for crust mining,’* would result in less than 1 percent of the maximum deposition in the nodule mining scenario. From the DOMES baseline data (average of 16 macrofaunal individuals/ft?) and an assumed nod- ule mining scenario, Jumars’”® calculated that a nod- ule miner would directly destroy 100 billion indi- viduals. In comparison, data from a case study done at Cross Seamount (see box 6-G) indicate that pas- sage of the crust miner over 11 mi’? per year would directly destroy from 100,000 to 10,000 macro- faunal organisms at 2,600 and 7,800 feet respec- tively. The DOMES and Cross Seamount data- bases differ in that infaunal organisms (those actually living within the sediments) were not sam- pled in the Cross Seamount reconnaissance. How- ever, the crusts provide little sediment for organ- isms to inhabit. Nevertheless, it appears that the number of macrofaunal organisms destroyed in the crust mining scenario is orders of magnitude less (one-millionth to one ten-millionth) than in the nod- ule scenario.’® 727 .W. Lavelle et al. ‘‘Dispersal and Resedimentation of the Ben- thic Plume from Deep-Sea Mining Operations: A Model with Calibra- tions,’’ Marine Mining, vol. 3 (1982), No. 1/2, pp. 185-212. 73U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Serv- ice, p. 197. Mining at the shallowest depth and superimposition of surface and bottom plume footprints. ?>Jumars, ‘‘Limits in Predicting and Detecting Benthic Commu- nity Responses.’’ 7°U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Serv- ice, p. 240. The severity of the impacts on populations in areas adjacent to the miner track would be deter- mined by the intensity of the disturbance, i.e., proximity to the track, and the type of feeding be- havior characteristic of the population. As in the case with shallow water mining, highly motile or- ganisms such as fish, amphipods, and shrimp would be most able to avoid localized areas of high redepo- sition and turbidity. Once conditions become toler- able, these organisms could venture into the mined area to feed on the dead and damaged organisms. The area mined may be invaded by opportunis- tic species with dispersal capabilities greater than those of the original resident species. Reestablish- ment of the original community has been postu- lated to take a very long time, perhaps decades or longer. Temperature Comparing the ambient surface water tempera- ture in the lease areas with a temperature of 4 to 10 degrees C for the bottom water released at the surface, there is reason to believe that eggs and lar- vae coming into direct contact with the cold dis- charge water could be affected adversely; such ef- fects should be limited to the area immediately beneath the ship’s outfall.’” To estimate the annual loss of tuna larvae and the impact of this loss on adult fish biomass, it was assumed that all tuna eggs and larvae coming into direct contact with the cold water discharge could die. At least 46,000 skipjack tuna and 15,000 yel- lowfin tuna could be lost annually due to thermal mortality. These values would be about four times larger if the mining ship acts as a fish aggregating device by concentrating tuna schools in the imme- diate vicinity. The loss of adult fish biomass due to death of larvae would be a very small fraction (less than 1 percent) of the total annual harvest of these spe- cies in the central and eastern North Pacific. The crust mining scenario assumes a surface plume vol- ume about 60 percent that of the nodule mining scenario, and the effects of thermal mortality of lar- val fish would be reduced proportionately. 77Matsumoto, ‘‘Potential Impact of Deep Seabed Mining.’’ Con- tact of larvae with cold water could cause the development of deformed larvae. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 243 Box 6-G.—Cobalt Crust Case Study As part of the present program to assess the environmental impacts of crust mining in the EEZs of Ha- waii and Johnston Island, a representative area, Cross Seamount, located about 100 miles south of Oahu, Hawaii (at 18° 40’N, 158° 17W), was selected for a comprehensive, biogeological reconnaissance. The study was conducted by the Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory. At depths where manganese-cobalt (Mn-Co) crusts were thickest (1,000 to 2,000 m), the biota is un- usually sparse, suggesting that larvae may be selectively avoiding crust substrates. More research will be re- quired to substantiate this hypothesis. The depauperate nature of the benthic fauna of Cross Seamount, if representative of other Hawaiian seamounts, suggests that environmental impacts of possible future mining of Mn-Co crusts in such environments would be negligible, at least in terms of benthic species populations. ! In general, the fauna of Cross Seamount is patchy, low in diversity and only a few species of commercial importance were seen. At depths of 1,300 feet to about 3,300 feet the fauna were about an order of magnitude more abundant than the fauna from 3,300 to 13,500 feet. The density of organisms in the upper depth interval _ (less than 1,000 feet) was about 8 organisms/ft?, approximately 3 times that in the second interval (1,300 to 1,650 feet). From 1,650 to 2,000 feet density declined markedly to about 1 organism/ft?. Again, from 2,000 to 2,300 feet density decreased to about one organism per 312 ft?. Most of the organisms encrusting manganese crusts are relatively small (less than two-thousandths of an inch long) and cannot be identified in bottom photographs. The observed fauna is overwhelmingly com- posed of various types of sessile, suspension feeders. Estimates of infaunal organisms are not included, and highly mobile organisms may be under-represented in the data due to avoidance of the camera. Detrimental Effects of Mining 1. Direct destruction of precious coral and deep-sea shrimp populations, squid eggs, or their respective habitats by the miner or subsequent sedimentation of discharged materials. 2. A reduction in bottom habitat of 11 mi?/year at mining sites. 3. Destruction of between 10,000 (at 7,900 feet) and 100,000 (at 2,600 feet) epibenthic macro-organisms at mine sites. 4. Effects on groundfish or pelagic fish adults or larvae from turbidity plumes generated above the bot- tom by mining or at the surface from shipboard dewatering operations. 5. A reduction in phytoplankton productivity due to shading by solid particulate matter in the surface discharge plume. 6. Death of plankton and/or pelagic fish larvae due to thermal shock. 7. An elevation in substrate available for bacterial growth in the water column due to particulates in the discharge plume. 8. Possible aggregation of pelagic fishes by the surface mining ship. 9. Minor behavioral disruptions to the endangered humpback whale, the green sea turtle, and resident marine mammals. ‘U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Proposed Mineral Lease Sale in the Hawai- jan Archipelago and Johnston Island Exclusive Economic Zones, Honolulu, HI, 1987. Threatened and Endangered Species The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA)’® prohibits ‘‘attempts’’ to harass, pursue, hunt, etc., listed species. The ESA also prohibits significant environmental modification or degradation to the habitat used by threatened and endangered species, as well as any act that significantly disrupts natu- ral behavior patterns. 7216 U.S.C. 1531 Living within the general proposed lease area of the cobalt crusts are the endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi), the endan- gered humpback whale Megaptera novaea gliae), the threatened green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), an occasional endangered hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), the threatened loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the endangered leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) and the threatened Pacific ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) sea turtles. However, in 244 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: U. S. Geological Survey Deep-sea Hydrothermal vent communities consist of exotic life forms such as these giant tube worms and crabs from the East Pacific Rise. recognition of these species’ presence, the more densely populated areas have been excluded from leasing. Gorda Ridge Task Force Efforts In 1983, a draft Environmental Impact State- ment was circulated by the Minerals Management Service in preparation for a polymetallic sulfide minerals lease offering in the Gorda Ridge area. Much of the discussions of potential environmental impacts drew from the DOMES work because there was little site-specific information to summarize. In response to concerns that there was too little in- formation to adequately characterize the effects of any prospecting or mining operation, the Gorda Ridge Task Force was set up to augment the draft EIS. The major research efforts focused on charac- terization of the mineral resources and led to the discovery of large deposits in the southern Gorda Ridge. However, a series of reports was also pre- pared by the State of Oregon under the Task Force’s oversight summarizing the state of scien- tific information relating to the biology and ecol- ogy of the Gorda Ridge Study Area. The reports included information on the benthos,’° nekton,®° 79M.A. Boudrias and G.L. Taghon, The State of Scientific Infor- mation Relating to Biological and Ecological Processes in the Region of the Gorda Ridge, Northeast Pacific Ocean: Benthos, State of Ore- gon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Portland, OR, Open File Report 0-86-6, February 1986. 80].T. Harvey and D.L. Stein, The State of Scientific Information Relating to the Biology and Ecology of the Gorda Ridge Study Area, Northeast Pacific Ocean: Nekton, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and ‘Mineral Industries, Portland, OR, Open File Report 0-86-7, February 1986. Ch. 6—Environmental Considerations ° 245 Box 6-H.—Gorda Ridge Study Results Plankton Most work on the study area is now 10-20 years old. No information exists on feeding ecology, secondary production, and reproduction. The phytoplankton community is dominated by diatoms. Many estimates of phytoplankton abundance were made in the 1960s;1 they indicate productivity in this region is low (e.g., chlo- rophylla concentration ranges from 0.1-0.8 mg/m’ throughout the year). Nekton Only one species-albacore (Thunnus alalunga) is commercially fished in the Gorda Ridge Lease area. Larvae and juvenile forms of other commercially important species (the Dover and Rex sole) occur within the area. These larvae are far west of the shelf and slope areas where the adult populations live, and their survival and input to the commercial fishery population is unknown. While occurrences of species of fish, shrimps, swimming mollusks (cephalopods), and mammals with the Gorda Ridge area are fairly well-known, _ their abundances, reproduction, growth rates, food habits, and vertical and horizontal migratory patterns are not. Benthos Little is known about the benthos of the Gorda Ridge area. Until recently, these rocky environments were avoided by benthic ecologists because of the difficulty in sampling them. Photographic surveys from the sub- mersibles Alvin (1984) and Sea Cliff (1986) as well as from a towed-camera vehicle behind the S.P. Lee (1985) provide most of the benthic information for this area. The Gorda Ridge rift valley animals appear to be primarily filter feeders and detritus feeders. Soft sediment and rocky epifaunal communities appear to differ in species composition; however, quantitative data from controlled photographic transects across the Ridge and taken close to the substrate (3-6 ft. off the bottom) are needed to permit identification of smaller organisms. Non- vent areas may represent several types of environment with some areas of high particulate organic material concentrated by topographic features juxtaposed with off-axis rocky surfaces. 1§ G. Ellis, and J.H. Garber, The State of Scientific Information Relating to the Biology and Ecology of the Gorda Ridge Study Area, Northeast Pacific Ocean: Plankton, Open-File Report 0-86-8, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (Portland, OR: February 1986). plankton,*! seabirds, *? and epifaunal and infaunal community structure.®* The information contained in these reports was collected trom a variety of sources such as peer-reviewed journals, government 81$.G. Ellis and J.H. Garber, The State of Scientific Information Relating to the Biology and Ecology of the Gorda Ridge Study Area, Northeast Pacific Ocean: Plankton, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Portland, OR, Open-File Report 0-86-8, February 1986. 82],.D. Krasnow, The State of Scientific Information Relating to the Biology and Ecology of the Gorda Ridge Study Area, Northeast Pacific Ocean: Seabirds, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Portland, OR, Open File Report 0-86-9, Feb- ruary 1986. 83A G. Carey, Jr., D.L. Stein, and G.L. Taghon, Analysis of Ben- thic Epifaunal and Infaunal Community Structure at the Gorda Ridge, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Port- land, OR, Open File Report 0-86-11, July 1986. investigators, and active researchers, as well as less traditional sources such as fishing records, etc. ‘The reports are useful compendia identifying what base- line information exists for biota at and near the pro- posed lease area and what missing information needs to be developed before the effects of a min- ing operation can be fully characterized (see box 6-H). While active vent sites such as the Gorda Ridge area often contain lush communities of unique spe- cies, the MMS has decided it will not lease such areas for mining should they be encountered. ** Thus, their discussion is not included here. 8*Thus far, none have been found on the Gorda Ridge sites. % Ts et may nae Le a al Fat me 4 Wldlite re, ; ay * et lie K kd: , y ; \ 7 ; Te 4 " f ‘ } : ‘y : ; ; : I + « yar ie f ~ 4 _ cy” i NY i uy i Chapter 7 Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data CONTENTS Page Titra ductors sie seu tater f mitoie eae elo) nteete Pou aitadescoys Sols fonds aster diay Sc telter bere Re aces os eee re 249 Management of Data Resouncesy syst. cist ne oncheptatctat lesen Raa chris] tne g teers eo 250 Technolo gry iaiss2) Ave seleeaiey site sh siti Oia sis leh abe: se rates hey rpeRSUAU NaI ea ole ea tae OR aera Oa 251 Concepttaall . Up iicy s een Se cise a ora) ai tbarat elle aethey ahedi Sie ara eae DS Re et ae neta eae 251 CNGANIZATION «5 Jess aeaey steed eae Los lly ate! ae ee ese ted SUAS ane en ee el Cee a 252 BP Uayn hn ig ose Mig ote aap mows shes ah kk mn A Week Ub tn oap Age Oe CRE ERS As ng ed 253 Sunveyrand'C hartin a weAORtsis sists «cis lage ult ae evoked suse ateleeketet elements voptycn ver sty area 254 USGS: ThexGLORTAGP rogram iis c's hts eater oraeyenaete yeas oh eee 254 NOAAC hei bathymetric iappimneg Prograiai) ccs ers aeie airs aoe 205 @ther Data. Collection Brograms cise. odie weir ahalee oie peeaies a ehcee bane altri aera 256 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ......................05. 256 WES Depariment ofthe Intenon tie. ce eae ce Scene a) | oe 263 National/Aeronauties' and Space Administration: =... 4. 4-4-+ ao 4 ee 265 Maes INAV pore (a Ra erases re dgaus nen acatnes oly olis wisi uke uate i ot cea tou cates aeie Uber fe DUeneNe tists 266 StatevandWWocaliGovermments acc. Sic. see i cre ae ee eee cr eee 267 Academiciand Private WMaboratonies is6 . ees oo i ee ee 267 Lb oVo LTH asta tO NSenOnd Ck eee Ga ae eM ct NE Ue ey un maG una Be C Gavan Geta coho < 267 Classification of Bathymetric and Geophysical Data ...................-.-+--- 268 Harlier Reviews of Data Classification... 6. Sse ou8 se ee ee ee 271 OWA: Classification’ Workshop oo. 6 oo. ee Oe Ss ee 273 @bservationsiand:-Altemmativesty. ck os a oe a ee ee Sai ee 276 Box Box Page jx. Major Producers and Wsers of REZ Data es ee 250 Figures Figure No. Page 7-1 “RepionalAtlases of thesBR Zio Oe Se ee 258 7c2 MUMS “Seismic Dafan si cen os. Sak eee Oe OO ee 264 7-3. Sea Beam) Bathymetry of Surveyor Seamount. .....°.. 60.0. ee 269 Table Table No. Page 7-1 Rundines for BEZRrosramasicns ooo abe ce ca en ee 254 Chapter 7 Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data INTRODUCTION Several Federal agencies have responsibility to survey and collect data on the ocean. They are: e U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),! e National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin- istration (NOAA),? e U.S. Coast Guard (USCG),? U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),* e U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),° e Minerals Management Service (MMS),° the Bureau of Mines (BOM),’ and 143 U.S.C. 31 (a) and (b), The Organic Act of 1879, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1451-1456, Public Law 94-370, The Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act Amendments of 1976; 43 U.S.C. 1865, Public Law 95-372, The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978; 30 U.S.C. 1419 et seq., Public Law 96-283, The Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act of 1980; 43 U.S.C. 1301, Public Law 92-532, The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972; and Proclamation #5030, 48 Fed. Reg. 10605, Mar. 10, 1983. 233 U.S.C. 883 et seq., The Act of Aug. 6, 1947, as amended; 84 Stat. 2090, Presidential Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1970— Establishment of NOAA; 33 U.S.C. The National Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978; 16 U.S.C. 1451-1456, Public Law 94-370, The Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments of 1976; 43 U.S.C. 1847, Public Law 95-372, The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amend- ments of 1978; 30 U.S.C. 1419, Public Law 96-283, The Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act of 1980; 16 U.S.C. 1432, 33 U.S.C. 1441, Public Law 92-532, The Marine Protection, Research and Sanc- tuaries Act of 1972; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, and Proclamation No. 5030, 48 Fed. Reg. 10605, Mar. 10, 1983. 343 U.S.C. 1865, Public Law 95-372, The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978. #33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., Public Law 95-217, The Clean Water Act, as amended; 33 U.S.C. 1401, et seq., Public Law 92-532, The Ma- rine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. 54, Public Law 93-577, Federal Non-Nuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974; 301, Public Law 95-91, Energy Organiza- tion Act 643 U.S.C. 1131-1356, Public Law 83-212, Public Law 93-627 and Public Law 95-372, The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 as amended; 43 U.S.C. 1301-1315, Public Law 83-31, The Submerged Lands Act; 33 U.S.C. 1101-1108, Public Law 89-454, The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972; 43 U.S.C. 4321,4331-4335,4341-4347, Public Law 91-190, The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; Proclamation No. 5030, 48 Fed. Reg. 10605, Mar. 10, 1983, Exclu- sive Economic Zone of the United States of America. 730 U.S.C. 21 (a), Public Law 91-631, The Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970; 30 U.S.C. 1602, 1603, Public Law 96-479, The National Materials, and Minerals Policy, Research, and Development Act of 1980. 72-672 0 - 87 -- 9 e the U.S. Navy.® Some of the designated agencies do not maintain active research programs in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Of those collecting data, some are in- volved in survey activities while others conduct more localized research. The agencies conducting broad-scale exploration of the EEZ are NOAA (the Department of Commerce) and USGS (the Depart- ment of the Interior). Several agencies and public and private laboratories collect EEZ information ranging from site-specific mineral analyses to assess- ments of biological resources and various physical and chemical parameters of the oceans; these data collectors include NOAA (four groups),? MMS, BOM, USGS, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the U.S. Navy, private industry, and academic and private laboratories (see box 7-A). All of their data must be archived and accessed. Exploration and development of the U.S. Exclu- sive Economic Zone is not proceeding economically or efficiently under current programs. There is no systematic mechanism for data collection, with the exception of plans to ‘“‘map’’ the EEZ (by USGS using the GLORIA side-looking sonar system and NOAA using multi-beam systems). The NOAA and USGS efforts will provide the first survey of the vast territory contained in the EEZ; these projects, however, are plagued by budget problems, and completion is uncertain. The many other stages of research necessary before development of U.S. seabed resources can take place (e.g., comprehen- sive three-dimensional mineral assessment, devel- opment of rapid sampling technologies, etc.) are largely either unplanned or proceeding in a piece- meal fashion. 810 U.S.C. 7203 and 10 U.S.C. 5151. 9National Ocean Service, including the Strategic Assessment Branch and Charting and Geodetic Services; National Marine Fisheries Serv- ice; the National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Serv- ice, including the National Geophysical Data Center and the National Oceanographic Data Center; and the Office of Oceanic and Atmos- pheric Research. 249 250 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Box 7-A. Major Producers and Users of EEZ Data Department of Commerce: © National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Survey (NOS) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) —National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) —National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) Department of Interior: © Minerals Management Service (MMS) ® United States Geological Survey (USGS) e Bureau of Mines (BOM) National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) U.S. Department of Defense: © United States Navy Academic and Private Laboratories: © Scripps Institution of Oceanography Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution University of Washington University of Miami Texas A&M University University of Rhode Island Oregon State University Hawaii Institute of Geophysics University of Texas Industry: © Oil and Gas Companies ® Geophysical Prospecting Companies Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory MANAGEMENT OF DATA RESOURCES Effective data management is a critical part of any systematic survey or research effort, '° but man- agement of EEZ data has been elusive. There are several aspects to the problem. Many different groups (Federal laboratories and agencies, State ge- ologists, academic research laboratories, and indus- try) collect, use, and/or archive many kinds of data from the EEZ. Data of many kinds and different quantities are collected. Consistent reporting for- mats are not necessarily used. These problems will worsen as sensors (e.g., satellites, multi-beam echo- ‘0PData management is defined as the process of planning, collect- ing, processing, and analyzing for primary use (e.g., for research); and storing, archiving, and distributing the acquired data for secondary users. sounders, and multi-channel seismic reflection recorders) produce data at faster rates. Realization of the scope of this data management problem is growing.'! 12 13 11°“There are problems with the way data are currently managed. The distribution, storage, and communication of data currently limit the efficient extraction of scientific results . . .’’ National Research Council, Data Management and Computation, Volume 1: Issues and Recommendations (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1982). 12« the actual percentage varies depending on the cost of data acquisition— about 200 percent in the Gulf of Mexico where costs are low and 10 percent in less accessible regions such as the Beaufort Sea. As a result of chronically low funding, national data centers have been able to preserve only a small fraction of the collected data, and many important data sets have been lost. Some fraction of this loss is likely due to the data collector and primary user not planning for or con- sidering secondary use. But funding agencies must also bear some responsibility for ensuring that data are properly preserved and maintained. An appro- priate amount of data management money should be included in grants—and not at the expense of funding for the research that collects the data. 221,, Brown, National Science Foundation, pers. com. to Richard Vetter, OTA contractor, Apr. 13, 1987. 23NODC funding: Fiscal year 1982 ($4.5 million), Fiscal year 1983 ($4.6 million), Fiscal year 1984 ($4.1 million), Fiscal year 1985 ($4.1 million), Fiscal year 1986 ($3.8 million), Fiscal year 1987 ($3.6 million. 24NGDC funding: Fiscal year 1980 ($3.1 million), Fiscal year 1981 ($3.1 million), Fiscal year 1982 ($3.1 million), Fiscal year 1983 ($3.0 million), Fiscal year 1984 ($2.8 million), Fiscal year 1985 ($2.7 mil- lion), Fiscal year 1986 ($2.6 million). 25Carl Savit, Western Geophysical Company, pers. com. to Richard Vetter, OTA contractor, Nov. 25, 1986. 254 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier According to NGDGC, ‘“‘If funding agencies abdi- cate their responsibility for the processing of data to a stage usable by others and the long-term pres- ervation of the data, they have in fact created a bur- den for the scientific community and create the pos- sibility of non-productive and redundant collections of data.’’2° When secondary usage is not planned 26M. S. Loughridge, ‘‘Frontiers in Data Storage, Retrieval, and Display,’’ Proceedings of the Marine Geology and Geophysics Data Workshop, Nov. 5-7, 1980 (Boulder, CO: National Geophysical and Solar-Terrestrial Data Center, 1980), p. 145. for, it either takes large expenditures to ‘‘reconsti- tute’’ the data, or the data never become available to the secondary user.”’ 27A simple library function can prevent data duplication. NGDC has a data base called GEODAS (GEOphysical DAta System) which identifies where data have been collected and by whom. The new user is then faced with copying and converting the data. SURVEY AND CHARTING EFFORTS NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) and the USGS Office of Energy and Marine Geology are the civilian organizations with primary responsi- bilities related to acquisition and processing of bathymetric and geologic data within the U.S. EEZ. While source data should be archived in a national database (NGDC), the evaluation of data quality and processing of the data into maps and charts, digital or analog, is a responsibility which must continue as a part of the NOS and USGS mis- sions. Effectively, NOS and USGS produce the Federal assessment of the best geographic depic- tion of these data. It is important that both agen- cies acquire the capability to establish and main- tain these data sets in digital form. Without such efforts each individual user would have to judge data quality and process a myriad of data sets which would be a costly endeavor. In 1984, USGS and NOAA signed a Memoran- dum of Understanding*® to conduct joint mapping and survey efforts in the EEZ. Funds appropriated to USGS and NOAA have been increasingly re- programmed to support this research over the last 3 years. Total EEZ exploration funds in the Fed- eral agencies were $9 million in 1984, $12 million in 1985, and about $16 million in 1986 (table 7-1). Eighty percent of the money for EEZ exploration is within USGS and NOAA budgets; the GLORIA and multi-beam survey programs consume virtu- ally all of this funding. 28Cooperative program for bathymetric survey by NOAA and USGS, signed by both J. Byrne and D. Peck, April 1984. Table 7-1.—Funding for EEZ Programs Fiscal year (million dollars) Agency 1984 1985 1986 Department of Commerce: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ............. 1.0 242510 Department of the Interior: U.S. Geological Survey.......... 4.7 5.1 8.4 Minerals Management Service ... 2.7 1.8 1.6 Bureau of Mines ............... 0.3 0.2 1.2 otalhfunding\eerercrcierecierrrt 827) li G2 4A SeaBeam system was purchased for an additional $2 million. SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987 USGS: The GLORIA Program The USGS GLORIA mapping program is in- tended to provide a complete and broad overview of the U.S. EEZ (see ch. 4). Currently, about 30 percent of the EEZ?® has been surveyed with GLORIA. At the present rate, the entire U.S. EEZ will be covered by the end of 1996. The time lag between surveying and publication of maps is about 1% years.2° USGS intends to distribute GLORIA data to the public through NGDC; however, none has yet been archived. All of the swath data are dig- ital and stored on magnetic tape. These data must be combined with navigational information to be of full value. 29About one million square nautical miles. 30To date, the EEZ off the west coast (California, Oregon, Wash- ington), in the Gulf of Mexico, and off Puerto Rico/U.S. Virgin Is- lands has been mapped. The West Coast Adas was published in March 1985 on the second anniversary of the EEZ declaration. The Gulf of Mexico Atlas will be published in August 1987. Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 255 Photo credit: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The NOAA ship Surveyor is equipped with the Sea Beam system for detailed bathymetric mapping of the EEZ. USGS considers the GLORIA program a “‘show- case’’ success and is committed to its completion. However, recent budget cuts will at least delay if not permanently inhibit the project. The Office of Energy and Marine Geology had a budget of $24 million for marine geology in 1986. This is the to- tal EEZ expenditure within USGS, which includes $18 million for salaries and overhead. The entire operating expenses budget of this office is spent on the GLORIA survey (see table 7-1). Only modest funds are expended on other activities, e.g., analyz- ing mineral contents of vibracores.*! All Geologi- cal Framework studies were discontinued in 1982, also because of budget constraints. USGS has a con- tract through 1991 with the British Institute of 31USGS estimates that two people spend 20 percent of their time analyzing mineral core samples. At this rate, the backlog of 1,000 cores will take 10 to 15 years to complete; plans to procure more cores from areas identified as economically promising based on this initial screen- ing have been discontinued due to lack of funds. Oceanographic Sciences (IOS) which operates the GLORIA equipment. If USGS cannot meet the terms of the contract, a significant financial pen- alty will be imposed and USGS could lose the GLORIA system. Although the United States is developing similar technologies, no system with the swath width of GLORIA will be available in the foreseeable future if the current system is returned to IOS. NOAA: The Bathymetric Mapping Program The National Ocean Service of NOAA is pro- ducing very detailed bathymetric maps of the EEZ using multi-beam or swath echo-sounders in con- junction with precise navigational positioning (see ch. 4). A bathymetric map can be constructed within 6 months of collecting multi-beam data, in striking contrast to the years needed to produce maps and charts manually. Individual field surveys 256 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier are typically processed in 3 weeks or less, provided no major system problems are encountered. Two mapping systems developed by the General Instru- ment Corp. are the Sea Beam system and the Bathymetric Swath Survey System (BS?) used aboard ships of the NOAA fleet. A more modern version of BS? called Hydrochart II is now avail- able from General Instrument. Japan has deployed the first system. NOAA intends to use Hydrochart II or its equivalent on the U.S. east coast and to upgrade BS* to the same system. Swath data are now Classified (see the last section in this chapter). NOAA has operated multi-beam survey ships since the mid to late 1970s. The EEZ swath map- ping program began in 1984 and covered about 150 square nautical miles. During 1985, about 1% ship- years were logged covering about 6,400 square nau- tical miles. In 1986, approximately 2 ship-years completed another 14,000 square miles. By the end of 1986, NOS had 3 ships in operation acquiring swath data, and about 1 percent of the total U.S. EEZ had been mapped. NOS staff estimate that it will take about 143 ship-years to survey the en- tire EEZ and that about 150,000 reels of magnetic tape will be required to store the entire set of origi- nal data. To date, about 6,000 magnetic tape reels of swath data have been recorded and stored. The storage problem is significant though not insur- mountable. NOS is currently evaluating the pos- sibility of using optical disk technology for long- term storage of EEZ bathymetric data. NOAA in- tends to archive all original data as a source data- base for use by other researchers. NOS will proc- ess the data into two gridded data sets: 1. Metric data in the UTM (Universal Trans- verse Mercator) projection to construct bathy- metric maps, and 2. English (feet or fathom) data in the Merca- tor projection to construct nautical charts. Both gridded data sets will be processed into digital graphics for use in electronic chart systems and the construction of map and chart hard copy graphics. In conjunction with the swath data, other ancil- lary data are collected by ships. These data include 3.5 and 12 kilohertz underway bottom-profiling sys- tems and surface weather observations.*? Since 1980, the budgets for mapping, charting, and geodesy programs in NOAA have shrunk 10 to 20 percent (unadjusted dollars). Ship support funds also have been reduced over this period. Cur- rently, EEZ multi-beam efforts represent about 10 percent of the NOAA surveying and mapping actiy- ities. Bathymetric surveys are not a line item in the NOAA budget; the level of effort increases at the expense of traditional mapping and charting activ- ities.°? NOAA is increasing multi-beam survey ef- forts in 1987 to 418 sea-days at a cost of about $6.1 million.** *° Eventually, NOAA plans to apply sim- ilar technologies within nearshore regions using ex- perience gained with the offshore systems. 32More detail on the NOS bathymetric mapping program may be found in the report of the December 1984 EEZ Bathymetric and Geo- physical Survey Workshop, NOAA, March 1985. 38Three ships formerly assigned to charting now do multi-beam surveys. 34Estimated from cost of ship-days in 1984-86. 35Appropriated $1.1 million for an additional multi-beam system. OTHER DATA COLLECTION PROGRAMS The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration In addition to the extensive program of bathy- metric mapping using multi-beam systems (de- scribed above), NOAA collects and synthesizes biological, chemical, and physical charac- teristics of the ocean environment. Through NESDIS, NOAA con- trols the major data centers for EEZ data (NGDC and NODC). AIM' OSPyy Ey, Cc. The National Ocean Service General Physical Oceanography Programs. — NOS is the major NOAA group systematically col- lecting physical and geological data from the EEZ. In addition to the relatively recent swath mapping program, NOS collects and maintains tidal data along the U.S. coastline. NOS has funded the de- velopment of a state-of-the-art database manage- ment system for much of these data as part of its ““‘next-gereration water level measurement sys- tem.’’ Insufficient funds have been provided to put Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 257 all of the old data into this system, and some old strip charts and hand tabulations continue to be used. NOS also maintains wave data, but there is now no adequate archival system. Within the NOS Office of Oceans and Atmospheric Research, the Sea Grant Program and the two regional labora- tories*® collect data as well. These efforts tend to be more in the mode of exploratory short-term data collection rather than multi-year systematic surveys. The Strategic Assessment Branch.—The Stra- tegic Assessment Branch (SAB) of the NOAA Of- fice of Oceanography and Marine Assessment con- ducts comprehensive, interdisciplinary assessments of multiple resource uses for the EEZ to determine marine resource development strategies which will benefit the Nation and minimize environmental damage or conflicts among users.*’ SAB is producing a series of four regional atlases (see figure 7-1) whose maps combine the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of resources and their environments with their economic, envi- ronmental quality, and jurisdictional aspects. The four atlases cover: © the U.S. East Coast; © the Gulf of Mexico; @ the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas; and © the U.S. west coast and Gulf of Alaska. The maps cover a range of topics on physical and biological environments (geology, surface temper- atures, aquatic vegetation . . .), more than 300 spe- cies of living marine resources (invertebrates, fishes, birds, mammals . . .), economic activities (popu- lation distribution, seafood production . . .), envi- ronmental quality (release of oil and grease dis- charge, bacteria . . .), and jurisdictions (political boundaries, environmental quality management areas. . .). In addition, each map is also in digital form in a computer data system with supporting software that provides the capability to prepare composite maps for combinations of species, life his- tory, etc.*° This capability may be used by visit- ing investigators. 3°The Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory. 37C.N. Ehler, D.J. Basta, T.F. LaPointe, and M.A. Warren, ‘‘New Oceanic and Coastal Atlases Focus on Potential EEZ Conflicts,” Oceans 29 (3), 1986, pp. 42-51. 38Two examples are shown in ch. 6, figures 3 and 4. About 200 copies of the U.S East Coast Atlas of 125 maps were published in 1980.39 The Gulf of Mexico Atlas (163 four-color maps) was printed in 1985; the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas Atlas (127 maps) will be printed late in 1987. The West Coast and Gulf of Alaska Atlas is scheduled for 1988 publication. A “‘national’’ atlas of 20 maps on the health and use of coastal waters of the United States is also being produced. The first five maps published were: Ocean Disposal Sites, Estuarine Systems, Oil Pro- duction, Dredging Activities, and NOAA’s Na- tional Status and Trends Program. Future maps are scheduled on hazardous waste sites, marine mammals, fisheries management areas and other similar topics. Other SAB activities include an economic sur- vey of outdoor marine recreation, a national coastal pollutant discharge inventory, a national estuarine inventory, a national coastal wetlands database, and a shoreline characterization. National Marine Fisheries Service The work of the National Marine Fisheries Serv- ice (NMFS) is done by 5 regional offices, 4 fish- erles research centers, and 20 laboratories. The NMES mission is: 1) to carry out national and in- ternational conservation and management of liv- ing marine resources, 2) to encourage the utiliza- tion and development of U.S. domestic fisheries and fisheries resources, and 3) to conduct bio- environmental and socioeconomic research. Work that results in the production of EEZ oceanographic data is largely carried out by the laboratories of the four fisheries centers. Some NMFS data are made available to and become part of the NODC ar- chives. The NMFS has an automatic data processing Telecommunications Long-Range Plan, initiated in 1981. Currently, there is active interaction be- tween the Seattle and Miami centers and among the North East Region laboratories. The Office of Management and Budget has approved funds to provide for a major upgrade of the system during fiscal years 1988 and 1989. Most of the ‘“‘traffic’’ consists of data on catch efforts, socioeconomic fac- 39Now out-of-print. 258 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Figure 7-1.—Regional Atlases of the EEZ Four atlases prepared by the Strategic Assessment Branch of NOAA depict environmental, economic, and jurisdictional infor- mation useful for regional assessment of EEZ resources. SOURCE: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ¢ 259 Underway Geophysics Collected in the EEZ As the concentration of these ship tracks shows, a significant amount of geophysical information has been collected in the EEZ; however, much more mapping, sampling, and resource assessment remains to be done. Source: National Geophysical Data Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration tors, and administrative matters. NMFS biological- environmental data (i.e., oceanographic data) are mainly of regional interest and are shared within a region by more conventional means, such as di- rect exchange of ‘‘hard’’ or paper copy. The National Geophysical Data Center The mission of the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) is ‘‘to acquire, process, archive, analyze and disseminate solid earth and marine geophysical data . . .; to develop analytical, .. . and descriptive products; and to provide facilities for World Data Center A.’’*° Its Marine Geology and Geophysics Division (one of four divisions) cov- ~ “The World Data System A was established as part of the Interna- tional Geophysical Year 1956-57 to foster data exchange between coun- tries. World Data System A coordinates information from ‘‘free’’ world countries; World Data System B, from Soviet bloc countries. ers most of the work of interest to the EEZ. The archives of this Division include some 10 million track miles of marine geophysical data, about 25 percent of which is in the U.S. EEZ. About half of the requests for data come from private indus- try. The next largest requesting groups are acade- mia and the Federal Government. Funding for NGDC activities has declined slightly from fiscal year 1981 through fiscal year 1987 while its archives and responsibilities have steadily increased. Future projections suggest an increase in data storage requirements of 600 per- cent (presuming only high-density magnetic tapes are used for storage) from fiscal years 1986 to 1992. NGDC data are processed and made available to a worldwide community of clients through series of ‘‘Data Announcements’ on topics ranging from 260 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier common depth point seismic reflection data for spe- cific regions of the U.S. continental shelf, to core descriptions for special areas, to high-resolution seismic reflection data, to magnetic and gravity data, to the latest data sets from the deep sea drilling project, to ice-gouge data. These announcements provide users with detailed information on the char- acteristics of the particular data set being offered, including related data sets, costs, and available formats. The Marine Geology and Geophysics Division has two interactive systems for accessing worldwide marine geophysical data and geological data in the sample holdings of the major U.S. core repositories. Using software developed by the Division, a user can specify geographic area, type of geophysical measurement, sediment/rock type, geologic age, etc., and receive inventory information at a com- puter terminal. First operational in June 1978, these two systems are used primarily by Division person- nel, but there has been experimental use at remote terminals by the staffs of Scripps Institution of Oceanography and other core repositories under data exchange agreements with NGDC and other Federal agencies. NGDC hopes to make three other data sets similarly accessible for users: 1. multi-beam echo-sounder data from NOS and other collecting institutions, 2. side-looking sonar data, and 3. digital multi-channel seismic reflection data if demand and funding warrant. NGDC staff states that most users of Division data do not need ‘‘on-line’’*! access; NGDC typically satisfies most inquiries by performing tailored searches of the data for the requestor. Types of EEZ data held by NGDC are Marine Geological Data Bases, Bathymetry and Marine Boundary Data Bases, and Underway Geophysi- cal Data. In terms of numbers of reels of data stored and in rates of acquisition in bytes*? per year, the Underway Geophysical Data sets dominate the NGDC inventory (97 percent). Most of the data sets are collected in digital form and stored on mag- netic tape. “Interactive access to the data. “One byte is the amount of computer memory used to store one character of text. Marine Geological Databases.—There are four major categories in the geological databases: Ma- rine Core Curator’s (MCC), Marine Minerals (MM), Digital Grain Size (DGS), and Miscellane- ous Geology Files (MGF). e All of the data sets are digital, aggregated, and stored on magnetic tape except for the MGF. The amount of MGF data stored is on 20 reels of magnetic tape. The sum of the other cate- gories is about 14x10° bytes, half of which are DGS data. All sets combined are on 23 reels of magnetic tape. © The average delay between sampling and re- porting is 10 years for DGS and MGF data and 2 and 5 years respectively for MCC and MM data. All four categories are provided on request. e All data are acquired from academic or gov- ernment laboratories ranging from 90 percent academic for MCC to 90 percent government for DGS. The sum of the acquisition rates for MCC, MM, and DGS is about 140 kilobytes per year (100 kilobytes per year for GDS) with MGEF acquiring about 1,000 stations per year. e Future uses are expected to increase by about 1 percent per year for MCC and GDS, 2 per- cent per year for MM, and 5 percent per year for MGF. Problems Handling Geological Data.— Marine sediment and hard-rock analyses present unique data management challenges. Unlike bathymetry, for example, data volume presents no real obsta- cle to geological data storage and retrieval. The problem lies in the descriptive, free-form, non- standard nature of the data. There are nearly limit- less varieties of analyses performed on sediment and hard-rock samples, each analysis requiring suitable documentation to make the data usable. Decisions must be made as to which types of analyses merit creation of a database and, for each type of data selected, which analyses or measurements should be stored. These decisions require input from the marine geological scientific community to be com- bined with data management practices to produce databases that satisfy user requirements. The non- standard form of marine geological data also makes compilation of data very labor-intensive. Much of the data must be hand encoded from descriptive data reports and other sources and entered into the Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 261 computer, in contrast to geophysical data which are collected digitally in a relatively uniform manner. Bathymetry and Marine Boundary Data- bases.—There are four kinds of data sets included in this category: NOS Hydrographic Surveys (NOS/HS), NOS Multi-beam EEZ Bathymetry (NOS/MB), Gridded Global Bathymetry (GGB), and Marine Boundary (MB). e The most valuable EEZ data sets in this group are those from the National Ocean Service. All NOS hydrographic surveys that are avail- able in digital form are archived and merged into an accessible database at NGDC. All four data sets (except NOS/MB) are collecting data, are all in digital form, and all are unedited. NOS/MB data are aggregated, and NOS/HS data are reformatted to be accessible by loca- tion. (The NOS/MB data are ‘‘on hold”’ as a result of classification.) All data sets are on magnetic tape. © The time lag for reporting NOS/HS data is about 2 years. All but the NOS/MB data are made available to others on request. e The NOS/HS data are acquired at about 42 megabytes per year from the NOS. GGB was a one-time data acquisition from academic and DoD sources. e Annual increases in uses for NOS/HS and MB data are estimated at 5 percent and GGB at 15 percent. (There is no EEZ multiple-beam bathymetry on file at NGDC because of data classification, and no acquisition is planned. NGDC does plan to index the location of sur- vey tracklines so that operators of multi-beam systems can avoid duplication.) Problems with Bathymetric and Boundary Data.—Transmission of survey data between NOS and NGDC has been irregular over the years, pri- marily because the digital versions of surveys have not been important to the nautical charting effort at NOS. Over the last 3 years, NGDC has made a consistent effort to obtain and catalog a large backlog of surveys stored at NOS headquarters. Availability of other bathymetric data sets depends on DoD classification policies. Marine boundary data are available, though they need to be central- ized to be readily accessible. NGDC has the U.S. EEZ boundary points (produced by NOS) and the outer continental shelf lease area boundary points (produced by USGS). NOS is compiling and dis- tributing a detailed set of boundary points for the U.S. coast; these data have not been submitted to NGDC. Underway Geophysical Data.—Four kinds of underway data are included in this category: Underway Marine Bathymetry (MB), Underway Marine Seismic Reflection (MSR), Underway Ma- rine Magnetics (UMM), and Underway Marine Gravity. e About 25 percent of the Underway Geophysi- cal Data are taken in the EEZ. Data are in- creasing in all sets. Except for MSR, most of the data are in unaltered digital form stored on magnetic tape. The MSR data are 45 per- cent on paper, 40 percent on microfilm, and 15 percent on magnetic tape. While 85 per- cent of the MSR data are analog, the MSR digital archive alone totals about 3,000 reels of low-density tape. The remaining 3 digital sets total about 5 million records on 10 high- density reels, about half of which are MB. © The average delay from sampling to report- ing for all sets is about 5 years. All data are made available upon request. e The combined rate of accumulation of data for all sets is about 100 megabytes per year. e Future use for all sets is estimated to increase at about 25 percent per year. Problems and Successes with Underway Data. —An internationally accepted format for underway geophysical data is in general use. Flow of data to NGDC has been good from the Minerals Manage- ment Service, U.S. Geological Survey, Scripps In- stitution of Oceanography, Hawaii Institute of Ge- ophysics, Lamont-Doherty Geological Laboratory, and the University of Texas at Austin. Other insti- tutions’ performances in submitting data have been spotty because they have not practiced centralized long-term data management. A considerable amount of data from some institutions has been lost or dis- persed in laboratories. The National Oceanographic Data Center The mission of the National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) is to acquire, archive, manage, and make oceanographic data available to second- ary users. NODC has served in this capacity since 262 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Photo credit: W. Westermeyer Marine analysts examine instrumentation aboard ; the dredge Mermentau. its formation in 1961 and probably now has the world’s largest unclassified collection of oceano- graphic data. About 95 percent of the EEZ data obtained are in digital form, the rest is in analog form. All of the data are stored on magnetic tape and comprise about 650,000 stations, equivalent to about 135 reels of magnetic tape or about 4 gigabytes. The time-lag from sampling to reporting ranges from 1 to 5 years. The rate at which data are acquired is about 650 megabytes per year, due mainly to in- puts from a few high data-rate devices such as cur- rent meters. NODC has been pivotal in the development of several data management activities that involve data that is entirely, or at least mainly, taken in the EEZ: Outer Continental Shelf Environmental As- sessment Program (OCSEAP).—OCSEAP is a comprehensive multi-disciplinary environmental studies program initiated by BLM to provide envi- ronmental information useful in formulating Alaskan oil and gas leasing decisions. Starting from a modest $100,000 data collection program in 1975, OCSEAP had assembled by the end of 1984 over 2,500 data sets covering more than 100,000 stations and consisting of more than 4 megabytes. During the early stages of this program, a great deal of ef- fort was devoted to the development of data for- mats and codes that would support the needs of in- vestigators and be compatible for preprocessing and converting to digital form prior to submission to NODC. National Marine Pollution Information Sys- tem (NMPIS).—NMPIS is essentially an annu- ally updated catalog of thousands of marine pollution-related projects carried out or supported by dozens of Federal agencies. The catalog includes types of projects, types of data and/or information covered, geographic distribution, quantity of data/information, means of access, costs, and prin- cipal contacts. Marine Ecosystems Analysis (MESA) Proj- ect.—MESA is a cooperative program between NOAA and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct baseline marine environmental measurements primarily in the New York Bight, New York; and Puget Sound, Washington, areas. This program, which began in 1978 and completed its data collection phase by 1983, resulted in more than 2,000 marine environmental data sets consist- ing of over 200,000 stations. NODC now holds these data in appropriate files in the National database. Strategic Petroleum Reserve/Brine Disposal Program.—This NOAA program began in 1977 to provide assessment information to the Depart- ment of Energy (DOE) on environmental effects of brine discharge into the Gulf of Mexico. Base- line marine environmental measurements from monitoring efforts at discharge sites consisting of over 87,000 stations have been archived by NODC. California Cooperative Fisheries Investiga- tions (CALCOFI).—The CALCOFI program, largely suported by the State of California, makes oceanographic observations in conjunction with fisheries studies at a grid of stations in the Califor- nia Current region off the California coast. Begun in 1949, this program has produced physical/chem- ical oceanographic data consisting of more than 370 data sets of over 16,500 stations which are now held by NODC. New Efforts Underway at NODC Involving EEZ Data.—A cooperative agreement has been Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ¢ 263 signed between NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) and NODC to develop an Alaska regional marine database in Anchorage, Alaska, at the Of- fice of Marine Assessment’s Ocean Assessment Di- vision. NODC and NOS are both providing co- pies of their data holdings in the Alaska EEZ region and will provide routine updates every six months. Database maintenance will be done in Anchorage, and a full database copy will be available at the Ocean Assessment Division there and at NODC. Consideration is being given to creating Level II satellite data sets for the EEZ at NODC. While massive global satellite data archives are available from the Satellite Data Services Division of the Na- tional Climatic Data Center, investigators require easier data access than is now possible. NODC is presently archiving and distributing data from the U.S. Navy Geodetic Satellite which provide full EEZ coverage as part of the satellite Exact Repeat Mission. Prototype Coastal Information System Using a Personal Computer.—In 1986, NOAA devel- oped a prototype coastal information system for the Hudson-Raritan Estuary. The system is designed for use by regional planners, environmental specialists and managers, and citizen groups with access to an IBM compatible personal computer. Information is accessed by file directory, menu, and glossary and provides output as map sections and vertical profiles with a wide variety of properties ranging from temperature through water depth. Problems with NODC Data.— Data quality is a continuing concern for both NODC and research- ers using NODC data. To address this issue, a ser- ies of ‘‘Joint Institutes’? between NODC and vari- ous research laboratories has been initiated. These institutes are located on-site at the laboratories. Data are collected, pre-processed, and checked for quality by the program’s principal investigator(s) or their staff(s) before being provided to NODC for archival. One such “‘Joint Institute’’ for sub- surface thermal data from the Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Study (TOGA) program is now operating at the Scripps Institution of Oceanogra- phy, and others are planned, depending on re- sources, for other programs at the University of Ha- wali and the University of Delaware. Another problem is the large number of organi- zations collecting marine environmental data in varying formats, employing various levels of quality control. This situation makes it both expensive and difficult to manage resulting data to the satisfac- tion of an equally large user community. NODC does not have financial or staff resources to rou- tinely reformat and uniformly quality control every data set received for archival. U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service The Minerals Management Service (MMS) car- ries out programs to implement the EEZ proclama- tion through its Office of Strate- gic and International Minerals. The programs include: formulat- ing a mineral leasing program for non-energy minerals; estab- lishing joint Federal-State task forces in support of preparation of lease sale EISs through cooperative agreements; providing support for data-gathering activities of other Federal and State agencies and universities; and developing regulations for prospecting, leas- ing, and operations for Outer Continental Shelf/EEZ minerals. The MMS administers the provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) through regulations codified in Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The regulations govern per- mitting, data collection and release, leasing, and postlease operations in the outer continental shelf. The regulations prescribe: @ when a permit or the filing of a notice requires geological and geophysical explorations to be conducted on the outer continental shelf; and ® operating procedures for conducting explora- tion, requirements for disclosing data and in- formation, and conditions for reimbursing in- dustry for certain costs. Prior to 1976, common depth point (CDP) seis- mic data were primarily acquired by the govern- ment through nonexclusive contracts or as a cost- sharing participant in group shoots. As the cost of 264 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier acquiring these data increased, the concept of ob- taining the data.as a condition of permit was de- veloped. Starting in 1967, the MMS has reim- bursed industry permittees for reproduction costs of acquired CDP seismic data. Recent costs for such data have averaged about $600 per mile. The MMS now holds about 1 million miles of such data, of which about 260,000 miles was acquired before fis- cal year 1976 and could continue to be held as pro- prietary indefinitely. Data acquired after 1976 are held as proprietary by the petroleum industry for a period of time. MMS is about to propose a rule increasing the hold on such geological data from 10 to 20 years. Additionally, the agency is consid- ering prohibiting the release of any geophysical data until the new rule goes into effect.** The effect of this new policy would be to shut off most industry- collected data from reaching the public for another decade. Approximate amounts of CDP data re- maining in MMS archives for the years 1977 through 1985 are shown in figure 7-2. Ninety-five percent of the CDP data are collected in digital form, with the remainder analog. Of the *8T. Holcomb, NOAA/NGDC, Apr. 24, 1987, and D. Zinger, MMS Reston, Apr. 27, 1987, personal communications to OTA. Figure 7-2.—MMS Seismic Data Miles (thousands) a of. | 82 1 985 #1 = i 78 4 Year Oo Cumulative sum of seismic data SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment, 1987. Annual seismic a data portion stored by MMS, 95 percent are stored on Mylar film with the remainder on magnetic tape. Except as noted above, none of the data are avail- able to the general public. Industry is the source of all of the data and MMS expects future acquisi- tion rates to continue at about the same rate as the past few years. These data are acquired as a con- dition of offshore geological and geophysical per- mits issued under the terms of the OCSLA. There are no problems obtaining the data, so long as MMS has the funds to reimburse the permittee for the duplication costs. MMS also collects physical oceanographic data, which accounts for about 25 percent of the MMS Environmental Studies pro- gram. These data are obtained by MMS contrac- tors; MMS contracts now specify that data obtained under contract are to be provided in digital form to the NODC. U.S. Geological Survey The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the dom- inant civilian Federal agency that collects marine geological and geophysical data. USGS conducts regional-scale investigations aimed at under- standing and describing the gen- eral geologic framework of the contintental margins and evalu- ating energy and mineral re- sources. About 60 percent of the EEZ data collected are in digital form. The “‘raw’’ field data are usu- ally stored for some lengthy period for possible di- rect access. About two-thirds of the data must be merged (aggregated) with other data (usually navi- gation data) in order to be of value. The total amount of EEZ data collected to date is stored on about 50,000 reels of magnetic tape and is being accumulated now at about 200 reels per year. The time lag from collection to reporting is about three years for publication in a scientific journal and about one year for a seminar or an abstract at a meeting. Future acquisition of EEZ data is expected to in- crease approximately 10 percent per year, mainly because new equipment allows more information to be collected per ship mile. In the past, all USGS data were copied and sent to NGDC. This policy continues except for digital seismic data; only sum- maries of these data are sent. NGDC then an- Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 265 nounces the availablility of such data sets and, if demand warrants, the data are then sent to NGDC. Bureau of Mines While the Bureau of Mines (BOM) does not ac- tively collect and archive EEZ data, BOM is a prime user of information col- lected by other groups. Programs related to the EEZ include de- velopment of technologies that will permit recovery of mineral deposits from the ocean floor, studies of beneficiation and proc- essing systems, economic analyses of mineral ex- traction, and assessment of worldwide availability of minerals essential to the economy and security of the United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration The National Aeronautics and Space Adminis- tration (NASA) flies a number of satellites carry- ing sensors (passive and active) NASA that measure many ocean sur- National Aeronautics and face properties including tem- Space Administration perature, color, roughness, and elevation. From these measurements, a number of important properties of the ocean can be estimated, including biological productivity, surface wind ve- locity, bottom topography, and ocean currents. All of these satellites obtain some small but significant percentage of their data while over the EEZ. The bulk of the ocean program data archived by NASA is located at the National Space Science Data Cen- ter at the Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, and at the NASA Ocean Data System centered at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California. Scientific analysis of the data is per- formed by researchers at the two laboratories and at universities around the country. Both laboratories are currently collecting EEZ- related data. About 80 to 100 percent of the data are digital with spatial scales of hundreds to thou- sands of yards and temporal scales of hours to days. Most of the data are stored in raw form on 27,000 reels of high-density magnetic tape. The time lag between data sampling and reporting is between one and two years; these data are available to The Navstar Global Positioning System (GPS), developed by the Department of Defense, is the most precise radio navigation system available. When fully operational, 18 GPS satellites will enable users to determine their position within tens of meters anywhere in the world. Source: Nationa! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration others. NASA acquires data at the rate of about 10!2 to 10!3 bytes per year, which is expected to in- crease significantly in the future. NASA has developed pilot data management sys- tems that have successfully demonstrated concepts such as interactive access to data previewing and ordering. These programs allow users to actually view the data available; the programs will not be fully operational before the early 1990s. The ‘‘NASA Science Internet’’ (NSI) program was created in 1986 to coordinate and consolidate the various discipline-oriented computer networks used by NASA to provide its scientists with easier access to data and computational resources and to assist their inter-disciplinary collaboration and com- munication. NSI is managed by the Information 266 ° Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Systems Office within NASA’s Office of Science and Applications. The Ames Research Center in Sunnyvale, California, is responsible for technical implementation of NSI. NSI services include con- solidating circuit requests across NASA disciplines, maintaining a database of science requirements, disseminating information on network status and relevant technology, and supporting the acquisi- tion of network hardware and software. Science networks with the NSI system include the Space Physics Analysis Network, the Astron- omy Network (Astronet), the network for the Pi- lot Land Data System, and the network planned for the earth science program. Currently, these net- works support approximately 150 sites accom- modating 2,000 scientists. Growth in use has been 20 to 40 percent each year across all science dis- ciplines. NSI will coordinate links between NASA networks and networks of other agencies as well, such as NOAA, USGS, and NSF. The West Coast Time Series project converts raw satellite data to ocean chlorophyll concentrations and sea surface temperatures (useful for studies of biological productivity and ocean circulation) in for- mats agreed to by the scientific user community, and provision has been made for efficient data dis- tribution. Problems Handling NASA Data.— Users say it is difficult to obtain complete and timely responses to requests for satellite data.** This problem appears to be due to lack of funds to develop and operate efficient data archival and distribution facilities for secondary users. It is currently impossible to get satellite data ar- chives to copy very large data sets—thousands of tapes—so the ‘‘archive’’ is basically a warehouse of information with limited distribution capacity. U.S. Navy The U.S. Navy has a global marine data collec- tion program that is among the largest in the world. Data collection by the Navy is not necessarily fo- **This problem was mentioned by many other agencies and educa- tional institutions and is outlined in the 1982 NRC report Data Man- agement and Computation, Vol. 1. cused in the U.S. EEZ; therefore it is difficult to estimate how much of the Navy’s data relate to the EEZ. The Navy’s marine data collection includes bathymetry, subsurface currents, seismic profiles, bottom samples, visibility, some water chemistry and biology, vertical profiles of physical properties (such as temperature, conductivity, and sound ve- locity), acoustic character, magnetics, gravity, and some side-scan sonar and bottom photography. Most of the data are either classified or under con- trolled distribution to the Department of Defense or its contractors. Some data are collected, corrected, and filtered before being archived at the Naval Oceanographic Office; in most cases, the original/raw data are also retained. Analog data are stored in their original form. Most of the data are stored on magnetic tape, some on floppy disks, and some on paper records. Some unclassified oceanographic data are forwarded to NODC, principally through the Master Oceano- graphic Observation Data Sets, and some unclas- sified geological/geophysical data, including unclas- sified bathymetric data, sediment thicknesses, and magnetics are forwarded to NGDC. The Navy is a significant user of unclassified data obtained prin- cipally from NODC and from academic labora- tories working under Office of Naval Research con- tracts. Future use of data is expected to remain at about the present level with no particular focus on the EEZ. Currently, the U.S. Geological Survey’s GLORIA data are not subject to classification. NOAA multi- beam depth data, however, are sufficiently detailed that they are now classified as confidential by agree- ment of the National Security Council, and the Navy has recommended that this classification be upgraded to secret. Although the NOS is continu- ing to collect multi-beam data, the NOS data are being treated as classified (see next section). No Sea Beam data are currently being forwarded to NGDC from any source, and thus no such data are released in response to requests from foreign countries. The Navy’s Office of Naval Research supports a set of unclassified basic research contracts (mainly with academic institutions) that obtain data in the EEZ. Some of these are: Coastal Dynamics (to im- prove prediction of coastal ocean environmental Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data © 267 conditions), Coastal Transition Zone Oceanogra- phy (to advance understanding of upper ocean dy- namics in regions influenced by the proximity of a coastal boundary), and Sediment Transport Events on Shelves and Slopes (to understand the underlying physics of and develop a new predic- tive capability for sediment erosion). Small amounts of unclassified Navy EEZ data are provided to the NOAA national data centers. State and Local Governments Most, if not all, coastal States are collecting and/ or managing EEZ data. Though a major share of their needs is being met by national centers, most must obtain some data from other sources (indus- try, academic laboratories, and their own facilities). To determine the amount and characteristics of EEZ data being collected and/or managed by coastal States, OTA sent questionnaires to the State geologists (members of the Association of Amer- ican State Geologists) of the 23 coastal States. Six- teen replied. Analysis of the responses revealed that: © Roughly 75 percent of State data exist in ana- log form. Only one (the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries) collects most of their data in digital form. Approxi- mately 80 percent of the data are stored on pa- per only. e The most usual time lag between sampling and reporting was 1 year, ranging from 1 month to 3 years. © Without exception, those who have data make it available to others. Most of this activity is in response to individual requests. Problems Handling State Data.—Even where State digital data sets exist, transfer to other users has been difficult because of lack of a standard for- mat. The greatest need expressed by the States is for the establishment of a system to insure a regu- lar exchange of information and to encourage the coordination of activities on local, regional, and na- tional levels. Academic and Private Laboratories The academic laboratories vary widely in size, scope, and sophistication. They range from the 10 major oceanographic institutions which are mem- bers of the Joint Oceanographic Institutions*® to the hundreds of smaller coastal and estuarine lab- oratories. Many of them maintain their own data archives. Those undertaking research sponsored by the NSF Division of Ocean Sciences and and/or located near the five NODC liaison offices (at Woods Hole, Massachusetts; Miami, Florida; La Jolla, California; Seattle, Washington; and Anchor- age, Alaska) routinely provide their data to NODC and/or NGDC. About 20 percent of NODC’s pres- ent archive has come from the academic and pri- vate laboratories and recently the annual percent- age acquired from them is even greater—42 percent in 1985 and 35 percent in 1986. NODC staff credit the National Science Foundation’s Ocean Sciences Division’s ocean data policy as a contributing cause to this increase. Academic and private laboratories respond to the ‘“‘market place’’ in their handling of unclassified oceanographic data. Thus, the solution to data management problems lies with those who control the market, mainly the Federal agency sponsors of academic research. Effective processing of data col- lected on academic ships may depend on inclusion of funds in the research project specifically for the purpose of data reduction. In NSF, the Division of Ocean Sciences budgets for this activity, but the Division of Polar Programs does not. Some of the smaller laboratories have minimal involvement in either using or producing EEZ data. Networks for regional data exchange would help to alleviate this barrier. Industry Private industry has been a relatively minor source of data for the national archives, amount- ing to only 4 percent of the total NODC data. How- ever the present annual percentage for NODC in- creased abruptly to 6 percent in 1985 and then to 14 percent in 1986. NODC staff attributes this in- crease to recent practices by some government agencies contracting for oceanographic survey work (e.g., MMS) to specify that unclassified data be provided to data centers. ‘Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, University of Washington, University of Miami, Lamont- Doherty Geological Observatory, Texas A&M University, Univer- sity of Rhode Island, Oregon State University, Hawaii Institute of Geophysics, and the University of Texas. 268 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier OTA surveyed 10 industrial organizations (pri- marily geophysical firms) actively collecting and/or utilizing EEZ data, with these results: e About 75 percent of the companies contacted collect all or part of the EEZ data that they use, and almost all of the data are digital. Predominately, the stored data are unaltered and on magnetic tape. @ One major geophysical prospecting company far outstripped the combined total of stored data by all other companies—10'* bytes— amounting to a total of about 2 million reels of magnetic tape. The other companies ranged from a few reporting hundreds of reels of mag- netic tape to the remainder utilizing only a few tens of reels. © Most of the companies make their data avail- able only through purchase. A few reported providing data to national data centers, espe- cially ‘those collecting data for a Federal agency under contract. e Estimates of future increase or decrease of use were highly variable and were indicated as be- ing sensitive to future economic conditions, particularly in terms of variability of costs of EEZ resources (e.g., oil). Problems Handling Industry Data.—Govern- ment agencies frequently replicate data that private companies have “‘in-house.’’ Such duplication of efforts is extremely costly. Some industry spokes- persons believe that Federal survey programs are unfairly competitive with industry surveys. On the other hand, private industry often retains details related to their surveys as proprietary information. Federal access to details creates an awkward situa- tion in that once survey data are in Federal hands, they can be accessed by others through the Free- dom of Information Act. A centralized index of in- dustry surveys similar to the NGDC GEODAS (GEOphysical DAta System) system is needed so researchers will know what private sector data ex- ist, thereby avoiding potential duplication. CLASSIFICIATION OF BATHYMETRIC AND GEOPHYSICAL DATA Multi-beam mapping systems, e.g., Sea Beam and the Bathymetric Swath Survey System—BS?°, can produce bathymetric maps of the seabed many times more detailed than single beam echo sound- ing systems (figure 7-3, for example). This new gen- eration of seabed contour maps approaches—and sometimes exceeds—the accuracy and detail of land maps and provides oceanographers a picture of the deep ocean floor not available a scant decade ago. Prior to 1979, before the first NOAA research vessel Surveyor was equipped with Sea Beam, the U.S. oceanographic community only had available low- resolution bathymetric maps that were suitable for navigation and general purposes but lacked the de- tail and precision needed for science. Some marine geologists and geophysicists con- sider the development of multi-beam mapping sys- tems to be their profession’s equivalent of the in- vention of the particle accelerator to a physicist or the electron microscope to a biologist. Now that the technological threshold for sensing the intricate de- tails of the landforms beneath thousands of feet of ocean water has been overcome, oceanographers believe that tremendous strides can be made in ex- ploring the seabed and understanding the processes occurring at great ocean depths. The convergence of two advanced technologies— multi-beam echo sounders and very accurate navigational systems—provides the basis for ex- tremely detailed maps of the seabed that are spa- tially accurate in longitudinal and latitudinal posi- tion on the earth’s surface as well as precise in de- termining the depth and landforms of the undersea terrain. Multi-beam systems, when used in con- junction with the satellite-based Global Position- ing System, can produce charts from which either surface craft equipped with the same shipboard in- struments or submarines with inertial navigation and sonar systems can navigate and accurately po- sition themselves.*° If geophysical information, e.g., gravity and magnetic data, is superimposed over the mapped region, its value for positioning and navigation is further enhanced. A 1987 workshop of Federal, private, and academic representatives *8R. Tyce, J. Miller, R. Edwards, and A. Silver, ‘‘Deep Ocean Pathfinding—High Resolution Mapping and Navigation,’’ Proceed- ings of the Oceans ’86 Conference (Washington, DC: Marine Tech- nology Society, 1986), pp. 163-168. 270 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier A Typhoon class submarine can operate in any ocean of the world and still have her main targets within range. concluded that NOAA should acquire geophysical data that would not hinder the timely acquisition of the bathymetric data.*” Classification stymied NOAA’ s effort to form a cooperative arrangement with industry and academia. Thus, to date, NOAA has not acquired gravity or magnetic data. While the capability to identify subsurface ter- rain features and accurately determine their posi- tion is a boon to scientists seeking to locate and ex- plore geological features on the seafloor, it presents a potentially serious security risk if used by hostile forces. Because of the security implications, the U.S. Navy, with the concurrence of the National Security Council’s National Operations Security Advisory Committee, initiated actions to classify multi-beam data and restrict its use and distri- bution. *7The OTA Workshop on Data Classification was held Jan. 27, 1987, at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, under the auspices of the Marine Policy and Ocean Management Center. Modern undersea warfare requires that sub- marines, once submerged, remain submerged to avoid detection. When submarines operate globally, this long-term submergence presents significant navigational problems. Inertial guidance systems and other navigational gear must be occasionally updated with precise locational information if the submafrine’s position is to be determined accurately. One means for doing this is by fixing terrain fea- tures on the ocean bottom and triangulating within them to determine the vessel’s position. With detailed bathymetric maps and precise geodesy, modern acoustical detectors and onboard computers are capable of precisely fixing a submarine’s posi- tion without having to surface and risk detection. Little imagination is needed to understand the secu- rity implications of high-resolution bathymetry. Bathymetric data may also affect other aspects of undersea warfare, including acoustical propogation and mine warfare countermeasures. In 1984, NOAA centered its bathymetric data collection in the NOAA ships Surveyor (equipped Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 271 with a Sea Beam system) and the Davidson (equipped with BS*) and announced long-range plans to sys- tematically map the U.S. EEZ. NOAA’s plans for comprehensively mapping the EEZ at a high reso- lution—depth contours of 10-20 meters, and geo- detic precision of 50-100 meters—have been chal- lenged by the Navy, and the two agencies have since entered into protracted negotiations in search of a workable solution, but in the summer of 1987 significant problems remained unresolved.*® Marine scientists and private commercial inter- ests are concerned that the Navy may classify NOAA bathymetric and geophysical data. When- ever data classification is at issue, the reasons for the security restrictions themselves are considered sensitive, thus opportunities are limited for public review of the need and extent of restrictions or for consultation to identify possible compromises to bal- ance security risks and scientific needs. In general, both the oceanographic community and private in- dustry have not been involved in the negotiations between NOAA and the Navy to the degree that ' the non-government interests believe they should be, given their stake in the outcome of the classifi- cation decision. Even some scientists within NOAA feel alienated from the process. Earlier Reviews of Data Classification In 1985, the Director of the White House Of- fice of Science and Technology Policy requested that the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) re- view the National Security Council’s position that public availability of broad-coverage, high-resolu- tion bathymetric and geophysical maps of the EEZ would pose a threat to national security; NAS was asked to explore plausible means to balance national security concerns with the needs of the academic and industrial communities. In the course of its study, the NAS Naval Studies Board found it im- possible to ‘‘quantify’’ national security benefits gained from classification or the possible benefits that could be realized by the U-S. scientific and in- dustrial users if such data were to be freely avail- able to the public. 48Letter from Anthony J. Calio, Administrator, NOAA, to Rear Admiral John R. Seesholtz, Oceanographer of the Navy, Feb. 3, 1986; and reply from Seesholtz to Calio, Mar. 14, 1986. An extensive ex- change of correspondence followed between Calio and Seesholtz through Nov. 6, 1986. Because of the difficulty it encountered in evalu- ating the benefits and risks associated with classify- ing bathymetric and geophysical data, the Naval Studies Board restricted its inquiry to whether the unrestricted release of accurately positioned, high- resolution bathymetric data could result in any new and significant tactical or strategic military threats. It did not assess the needs of the oceanographic and geophysical research community for the data, nor did it assess the ocean mining industry’s need for such surveys. The Naval Studies Board concluded that ‘‘map matching,”’ i.e., locating one’s position by matching identifiable features on the seafloor by using precise bathymetry from broad regional coverage, could afford potentially hostile forces a unique and valuable tool for positioning subma- rines within the U.S. EEZ. While the Naval Studies Board supported the Navy’s position with regard to classifying and con- trolling ‘‘processed’’ survey data, it did not favor classifying raw data until they are processed into a form that provides full geodetic precision and large area coverage. As a further measure, the Board suggested that each processed map be re- viewed for distinctive navigational features that would make it valuable for precise positioning and that the sensitive data be “‘filtered’’ as necessary to permit its use in unclassified maps. The Board further recommended that the sensitive data be made available on a classified basis to authorized users and that raw data covering a limited area be released without security restrictions for the pur- suit of legitimate research.*? A second review of the Navy’s data classifica- tion policy regarding multi-beam data was also un- dertaken by the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) at the request of NOAA in 1985. NACOA generally supported the Naval Studies Board’s conclusions, and found the national security argument for classifying high- resolution bathymetric data made by the Navy more ‘‘compelling’’ than the counterargument made by the academic community for free exchange of scientific information.°® NACOA therefore rec- *8Naval Studies Board, National Security Implications of U.S. Ex- clusive Economic Zone Survey Data, (Washington, DC: National Re- search Council, Mar. 25, 1985), p. 6. 5°National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere, NACOA Statement on the Classification of Multibeam Bathymetric Data (Washington, DC: National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere, Jan. 17, 1986), p. 4. 272 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ommended that only ‘‘controlled selective dissem- ination’’ of NOAA’s multi-beam data be allowed. Analyzing the two public reports of the Naval Studies Board and NACOA, OTA found that nei- ther group, in reaching its conclusions, appears to have fully weighed the risks, costs, and implications of withholding most high-quality bathymetric maps from the academic community and the private sec- tor. Furthermore, neither report seems to acknowl- edge the extent that multi-beam technology has proliferated throughout the world among the aca- demic, commercial, and government entities of both friendly and potentially hostile nations. As multi-beam survey data becomes more widely avail- able, secure navigation is possible without NOAA data. Many foreign countries, including the Soviet Union, are now operating multi-beam survey sys- tems. Additionally, there has been no restriction placed on data produced by U.S. academic research vessels operating Sea Beam systems. Finally, nei- ther report discusses the possible inconsistency be- tween the restricted use of broad-coverage, high- resolution bathymetry by U.S. scientists and the private sector and the U.S. position regarding in- ternational principles of freedom of access for sci- entific purposes in other nations’ EEZs and foreign scientists’ access to the U.S. EEZ. NOAA’s Survey Plans—Navy’s Response After the release of the Naval Studies Board and NACOA reports in March 1986 and June 1986 re- spectively, the positions of NOAA and the Navy on multi-beam classification diverged rather than converged toward a solution. In response to the Navy’s opposition to allowing NOAA to proceed with comprehensive unclassified multi-beam cov- erage of the EEZ that might serve as an atlas of the seabed, NOAA proposed to abandon its com- prehensive long-range plan and substitute a series of smaller-scale targets for multi-beam surveys. These smaller-scale targets included: ® specific sites in water depths greater than 200 meters; ® continuous coverage surveys in limited areas of concern, e.g., in estuarine areas and for navigational safety in depths of 200 meters or less; © widely-spaced reconnaissance swaths over the extent of a seabed feature; ¢ detailed investigation of areas up to 20 nauti- cal miles square; and © international waters outside the U.S. EEZ con- sistent with international law in a manner sim- ilar to multi-beam surveys made by the do- mestic and foreign academic fleets.°! The Navy formed a working group to address NOAA’s proposal. The working group concluded that: 1. Surveys in waters shallower than 200 meters along the U.S. coastline are particularly sen- sitive and should be restricted and classified. 2. Bathymetric data on survey sheets that allows positions to be fixed to less than one-quarter nautical mile should be classified secret; there- fore, based on tests showing that a significant proportion of NOAA’s multi-beam surveys fall into this category, the Navy proposed that all multi-beam data be collected, processed, and held at the secret classification. 3. Navigation and bathymetric data either must be shipped separately to secure onshore facil- ities, or if combined (which NOAA does to maintain quality control), it must be handled under secret classification. 4. Areas outside the U.S. EEZ that NOAA pro- poses to survey may still be sensitive since they could pose a threat to allies and therefore should come within the classification scheme. 5. Small ‘‘postage stamp’’ (20 by 20 nautical miles) surveys also should be considered classi- fied. The Navy did allow that accurate and re- liable unclassified nautical charts with appro- priate contour spacing can be produced from the classified database to support NOAA’s nautical charting mission.°? The Navy is continuing to work on filtering tech- niques that would distort (degrade) the shape and/or the location of seabed features. Distortion would reduce the usefulness of a survey sheet for vessel positioning but would allow NOAA to distribute survey sheets in unclassified form to all users. Ef- forts to date have not produced a filter that can ‘Letter from Anthony J. Calio, Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to Rear Admiral John R. Seesholtz, Oceanographer of the Navy, Feb. 3, 1986. 52Letter from Rear Admiral John R. Seesholtz, Oceanographer of the Navy, to Anthony J. Calio, Administrator, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Oct. 6, 1986. Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ¢ 273 satisfy both the security demands and positional cri- teria established by the Navy while still providing oceanographers and the private sector with suffi- ciently detailed information to be useful. The prospects of developing a mutually acceptable fil- ter seem remote. OTA Classification Workshop In collaboration with the Marine Policy and Ocean Management Center of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, OTA convened a work- shop in Woods Hole, Massachussetts, in January 1987. Academic and government oceanographers and industry representatives who attended delved further into the impacts and dislocations that data classification might impose on user groups. Work- shop participants were asked to: © focus on the costs and risks of classification to scientific and commercial interests, @ relate the loss of information and/or commer- cial opportunities in the EEZ to the economic and scientific position of the United States, © consider the consequences of data classifica- tion on U.S. foreign policy related to the need for access to other Nations’ EEZs for oceano- graphic research, and ® identify factors that could affect the operational integrity of a Navy classification system. Costs and Risks to Scientific and Commercial Interests Marine geologists and geophysicists believe that it is impossible to evaluate what the loss might be to the U.S. oceanographic community as a result of classifying multi-beam data until a sufficiently large area is surveyed and mapped to discover what scientificially interesting features might be detected as a result of high-resolution bathymetry. The rela- tively small sampling that has been made available to date receives high praise from the academic community and government oceanographers who anticipate significant breakthroughs in understand- ing the conformation of the seabed if general-cov- erage multi-beam data are made available from the REZ: To advance oceanographic science, some scien- tists believe that they must be able to detect and characterize individual geological seafloor features with dimensions as small as 100 meters. Only multi- beam mapping systems provide sufficient resolu- tion to achieve that goal in waters exceeding 200 meters in depth, although optical systems and side- scanning sonar can provide useful information about such features. Should broad-coverage, high- resolution bathymetric surveys and geophysical data be either abandoned or excessively restricted, ge- ologists and geophysicists are concerned that they would be denied fundamental information impor- tant to their professions, according to those attend- ing the OTA workshop. Both NOAA’s and the National Science Foun- dation’s (NSF) charters require them to share and publicly disseminate scientific data among non- governmental users. Oceanographic data collected under the aegis of NSF’s Division of Ocean Sci- ences is required to be made public after two years through a “‘national repository,’’ e.g., the National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC). As a conse- quence of classification of multi-beam data, there is a possibility that neither NOAA nor NSF would support or undertake large-scale seabed mapping efforts. NOAA has reserved the option of terminat- ing all multi-beam surveys if it is not permitted to conduct unclassified surveys in the U.S. EEZ and elsewhere.°? Should NOAA forsake broad cover- age multi-beam surveys worldwide, the Navy it- self would likely lose a valuable source of strategic and tactical bathymetric data from both the U.S. EEZ and elsewhere that could strengthen the U.S. fleets’ operational position. One anticipated indirect long-term impact that could result from restrictions on the collection, proc- essing, and dissemination of multi-beam bathymet- ric data is a move away from academic emphasis on marine geology and a slowdown in progress in understanding the seafloor and geological processes. Ocean mining interests foresee setbacks in exten- sive mineral surveying within the U.S. EEZ if NOAA is restricted in its unclassified mapping pro- gram. Some industry representatives believe that seabed mining holds a special position of national importance, and, therefore, even if classification procedures were imposed, ocean miners should be given access to the classified, ‘‘undegraded,’’ high- resolution bathymetric data. Yet, while Federal 53Tbid. 274 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier agencies with properly cleared personnel will have access to the multi-beam data, it is uncertain whether or not private firms can have similar ac- cess. Some firms can handle classified data, but others cannot. Firms that can access such data would have a significant advantage in the bid proc- ess. It remains to be seen as to whether or not in- dustry will tolerate such a disparity. Since the NOAA mapping program is currently the only one affected by the threat of classification, it remains possible for individuals to contract with domestic and foreign firms to conduct multi-beam surveys in the U.S. EEZ. International law does not preclude the conduct of such surveys within the EEZ. Permission is required only when surveys fall within the Territorial Sea. A West German sur- vey ship has already conducted surveys within the U.S. EEZ in cooperation with U.S. industry. Broad-coverage bathymetric surveys would be ex- pensive, and, given the many other uncertainties facing the domestic ocean mining industry, e.g., unstable minerals markets, high cost of capital, and regulatory uncertainties, it is unlikely that mining ventures would commit the necessary funds to con- tract for such reconnaissance multi-beam surveys, thus reducing the likelihood that mine sites would be developed successfully. Security restrictions on multi-beam data will affect a number of other undersea activities as well, e.g., submersible oper- ations, modelling, identification of geological haz- ards, cable and pipe routing, fishing, etc. Through July of 1987, there were no classifica- tion restrictions placed on multi-beam bathymetry collected and processed by the academic fleet. How- ever, the Navy has given no assurances that aca- demic data will not be classified in the future. With the exception of surveys made of the Aleutian Trench in the Pacific Ocean and Baltimore/Wil- mington Canyons in the Atlantic Ocean, seldom do academic vessels undertake broad bathymetric coverage; rather, they tend to concentrate on smaller specific units of the seafloor. Most of the surveys made by the academic fleet have been made outside the U.S. EEZ. On the other hand, if funds were made available, it may be possible to mount a cooperative broad-scale mapping effort among at least three world-class oceanographic research ves- sels in the U.S. academic fleet that are equipped with multi-beam systems to provide high-quality data with atlas coverage.** Impacts on U.S. Economic and Scientific Position Commercial interests represented at the OTA workshop in Woods Hole suggested that restrictive classification procedures could chill the development of new echo sounding technology, since domestic civilian markets for such instruments would prob- ably disappear. Should this situation arise, foreign instrument manufacturers are likely to displace U.S. firms in international markets, and the pre- dominance established by the United States in the 1950s and 1960s would give way, with the leading edge of acoustical sounding technology (much of which was sponsored by the Department of De- fense) being transferred overseas. To some extent, this has already happened. There is also a risk that as other nations allow unclassified multi-beam bathymetric maps to be produced within their EEZ, U.S. ocean mining firms, most of which are multi- national, might find it advantageous to locate min- ing ventures in foreign economic zones and aban- don efforts in the U.S. EEZ. At a minimum, classification may drive U.S. firms into multina- tional agreements in order to acquire needed data within the U.S. EEZ. International scientific competition is fierce. This fact is seldom fully appreciated by those unfamiliar with the science establishment. Oceanographers at- tending the OTA Woods Hole workshop were uni- form in their belief that U.S marine geologists and geophysicists would be put at a disadvantage with their foreign colleagues who may not be limited by data classification. This might tend to lure U.S. researchers to focus their efforts elsewhere in the world where there are fewer constraints on the use and exchange of multi-beam and geophysical data, thus depriving the United States of the benefit of research within its own EEZ. There was general agreement at the OTA Woods Hole workshop that, if faced with the alternative **The research vessel Thomas Washington operated by Scripps In- stitution of Oceanography and the research vessels Robert Conrad and Adlantis IT operated by Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution respectively. . Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ¢ 275 of having high-resolution multi-beam data that has been ‘‘degraded”’ or ‘‘distorted”’ by filters and al- gorithms, the oceanographic community would pre- fer to continue using the best ‘‘undoctored,’’ un- classified data available even if it were of lower resolution. If the choice of having high-resolution multi-beam bathymetric data over a small area is weighed against broad coverage with filtered data, most oceanographers prefer limited coverage and high-resolution. Foreign Policy Implications of Data Classification In proclaiming the establishment of the U.S. Ex- clusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in 1983, President Ronald Reagan carefully specified that the newly established ocean zone would be available to all for the purpose of conducting marine scientific re- search.*® The President’s statement reaffirms a long-held principle of the United States that it main- tained throughout the negotiations of the Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC): notwithstanding other juridical considerations, nations should be free to pursue scientific inquiry throughout the ocean. Although signatories to the LOSC granted the coastal states the exclusive right to regulate, author- ize, and conduct marine research in their exclusive economic zones, the United States—a non-signa- tory to the LOSC—continues to support and ad- vocate freedom of scientific access.°° Thus, although other nations may impose consent requirements on scientists entering their EEZs if they view such sur- veys as counter to their national interest, the United States has no such restrictions. While oceanographers are generally pleased with the U.S. open door policy for scientific research in the EEZ, those attending the OTA Woods Hole workshop see potential problems if the Navy estab- lishes precedence for classifying high-resolution bathymetric maps for national security reasons. If the Navy continues to prevail in its position on the sensitivity of multi-beam data, then the United States might find it necessary to prohibit or con- trol the acquisition and processing of similar data by foreign scientists. Such action would, for prac- 55Statement by the President accompanying the proclamation estab- lishing the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, Mar. 10, 1983, p. 2. 5*United Nations Law of the Sea, Part XIII, Sec. 3, Art. 246. tical purposes, repudiate the President’s announced policy of free access to the EEZ for scientific re- search. Should multi-beam bathymetry in the U.S. EEZ be classified, many oceanographers believe that other countries would follow suit or retaliate against U.S. scientists by placing similar restrictions on the collection and processing of data within their EEZs. To date, no foreign multi-beam data has been sub- mitted to NGDC. Other countries are waiting to see how the security issue is resolved within the U.S. The consequences for marine geological and geophysical research on a global scale could be se- vere as a result of removing a significant portion of the world’s seafloor from investigation. The with- drawn areas would include much of the continen- tal margins that are scientificially interesting and may also contain significant mineral resources. Will Classification Achieve Security? Although the National Security Council and the Navy may effectively derail NOAA’s plans for com- prehensive coverage of the U.S. EEZ by high- resolution multi-beam mapping systems, the action in no way assures that such data can not be ob- tained by a potential hostile through other means. Broad-coverage multi-beam data could be collected and processed by non-government sources, and ac- curate, unclassified bathymetry could be acquired for strategic and tactical purposes. It is also possi- ble that foreign interests could gather such data and information either covertly under the guise of ma- rine science or straightforwardly in the EEZ un- der the U.S. policies related to freedom of access for peaceful purposes—although the latter approach might prove politically difficult. The Navy, on the other hand, considers that any action it may take to gather bathymetric informa- tion using its own ships is by definition not con- ducting marine scientific research, but conducting ‘‘military surveys for operational purposes’’ which are therefore not subject to coastal State jusisdic- tion as are civilian scientific vessels gathering the same kind of information.*” Because the Navy con- 57*“Navy Oceanography: Priorities, Activities and Challenges,’’ speech presented by Rear Admiral John R. Seesholtz, Oceanogra- pher of the Navy, Center for Oceans Law and Policy, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, Oct. 24, 1986. 276 ° Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier siders its operations using multi-beam bathymet- ric systems to be ‘‘hydrographic surveying’ rather than scientific research, it remains possible for other foreign navies to make the same claim to gain ac- cess to the U.S. EEZ for similar purposes. Over 15 vessels are known to be equipped with multi-beam mapping systems worldwide, not in- cluding those of NOAA and the Navy. Multi-beam mapping systems, while expensive to purchase and operate, are not a technology unique or controlled by the United States. Multi-beam technology is shared by France, Japan, United Kingdom, Aus- tralia, Federal Republic of Germany, Finland, Aus- tralia, Norway and the Soviet Union. (Canada is now in the process of purchasing a system.) While several multi-beam systems were purchased from U.S. manufacturers, other countries, e.g., Federal Republic of Germany (two companies), Finland, and Norway, developed their own systems. Multi-beam technology is not new. The first Sea Beam unit outside a U.S. Navy vessel was installed on an Australian naval vessel the HMS Cook, in 1976 and the second on the French vessel Jean Charcot in 1977. The technology is over 20 years old. While oceanographers are reluctant to consider Sea Beam as ‘‘obsolete’’ or ‘‘outmoded,’’ they note, however, that better technology has been de- veloped and is available in the world market. Export licenses have been denied to U.S. man- ufacturers of multi-beam systems for sale to Brazil and Korea for security reasons, but comparable echo sounding equipment is available from foreign sources. U.S. restrictions on the export of multi- beam systems put U.S. equipment manufacturers at a disadvantage. Since foreign multi-beam man- ufacturers exist, current U.S. policy on technology transfer does not effectively limit the availability of these systems to foreign purchasers. Foreign firms have interpreted U.S. policy to mean that they are not restricted from collecting multi-beam data in the U.S. EEZ. Moreover, operating only within the domestic market, U.S. manufacturers find it difficult to remain competitive. Private commercial firms have recently an- nounced their intent to enter the multi-beam serv- ice market, offering contract arrangements for ac- quiring, logging and processing high-resolution bathymetric data; and perhaps to recover geophysi- cal data as well. It is apparent that restricting and controlling the acquisition and dissemination of high-quality bathymetric data will become more dif- ficult in the future as its commercial value increases. Just as geophysical surveying firms have been formed to respond to the offshore petroleum indus- try’s need for seismic survey data, so too may bathymetric survey firms respond to an increased demand for multi-beam data. New survey systems that combine wide swath bathymetric measure- ments with side-scan sonar imagery, e.g., SeaMARC, are also available in the commercial fleet. Some oceanographers believe that a large amount of unclassified bathymetric data and charts of suffi- cient precision and accuracy to be used for strate- gic and tactical purposes are already in the public domain and that much of it may have to be classi- fied if subjected to the Navy’s positioning tests. For example, many of NOAA’s single-beam surveys that are run with precise electronic control and close line spacing for charting coastal areas and harbor approaches have resolution comparable to multi- beam surveys and are currently in the public do- main. A considerable amount of similar commer- cial data has also been collected and is available for sale. A potential adversary would only need selected data sets to complicate a warfare situation. The current move to classify bathymetric data is not the first time data restrictions have been im- posed on the oceanographic community. From the end of World War II in 1945 to well into the 1960s, some bathymetric data collected in deep ocean areas by the single-beam systems were also classified. One difference between now and then is that earlier sur- veys were either made by Navy vessels or procured by Navy contract; there was no drain on civilian research and survey budgets, hence little proprie- tary claim for access to the data could be made by civilian interests. Observations and Alternatives Dealing from its position of power regarding security matters, the Department of Defense ap- pears not to have opened the doors of inquiry wide enough to allow adequate involvement of the sci- entific and commercial communities. Even in its dealings with NOAA, the Navy leaves an impres- Ch. 7—Federal Programs for Collecting and Managing Oceanographic Data ° 277 sion among civilian officials that it can maintain its control by not sharing important information germane to the issue, such as technical limits of its requirements. At the same time, the Navy appears to be skeptical about the scope of claims made by civilians on their need to access multi-beam data. Whether facts or perceptions, the current debate is rife with concerns that must be overcome if a mutual solution is to be reached. While much of the current debate has centered on Sea Beam data because of NOAA’a plans to ex- tensively map the EEZ, the Navy has proposed to restrict other multi-beam surveys and geophysical monitoring as well, e.g., magnetic and gravity data. Proposals have been made that NOAA collect geo- physical data concurrently with bathymetric data.5® Such multiple sensing could enhance the scientific usefulness of bathymetric surveys, and it also could increase the usefulness of data for positioning sub- marines. Thus far, scientific and commercial interests have resisted the proposed use of mathematical filters to distort the shape and location of subterranean fea- tures. One option they have discussed is the estab- lishment of secure processing centers to archive bathymetric and geophysical data. Appropriately 58National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Report of the NOAA Exclusive Economic Zone Bathymetric and Geophysical Survey Workshop, Dec. 11-12, 1984, p. 2. cleared researchers could then have access to clas- sified data and secure processing equipment to meet scientific and commercial needs. A similar option would be to allow secure facilities to be located at user installations. A significant amount of classi- fied material is handled by civilian contractors un- der supervision of DOD. Similar arrangements may be possible with appropriately cleared users of bathymetric/geophysical data. However, a ma- jor problem exists in that we are now in a “‘digital world,’’ and secure processing of digital data is both expensive (site security) and restrictive (no network- ing of computers). Universities and firms typically have linked computers and may have to submit to the added expense of additional systems to handle these data. Other innovative means to manage the difficult problems of balancing national security with data access may be possible. Acceptable resolution of the debate over classify- ing multi-beam bathymetric data will require more candor and a better exchange of information on all sides of the issue. The Navy appears to have done an insufficient job of communicating its needs and reasons for classification. On the other hand, the scientific community also has had difficulty in ar- ticulating its reasons for needing high-resolution bathymetry and in backing them with solid exam- ples. Satisfactory solutions will only come by in- cluding in the classification debate those with a stake in the academic and commercial use of bathymet- ric and geophysical data. and Dol Sin aS lehedtin 02 ety 8S a + Oe ) ; nae i Atay ; \ doh eal ZY r Hav Ub tele iretehanai ea ile ; nected’ @' ata yr daly jth) ose tinea oe a y an oy Wiiheia eo: " i A bata (Ma ihy oy eet 1 = Ny y : y ie Arr pean wt cihe vei ae weft! yy 0 eae Mees ,, 1 7 n'a eae , ae Sapa phy 7 A. ti ay 54 4 i ; ry : as ‘ i ( f 5 Ge Appendix A State Management of Seabed Minerals State Mining Laws All States bordering the territorial sea have statutes governing exploration and mining on State lands, in- cluding offshore areas under State jurisdiction. The stat- utes range from single-paragraph general authoriza- tions, equally applicable on land or water, to detailed rules specifically aimed at marine exploration and min- ing. Some States provide separate rules for petroleum and hard minerals. These laws are outlined in table A-1, which only includes laws affecting mining activities. The States also have water quality, wildlife, coastal zone management, administrative procedure, and other laws that might affect seabed resource development. There are large differences among the State mining laws, making a typical or model mining law difficult to describe. A review of the coastal States’ mining laws does reveal some common characteristics that suggest different ways to achieve each objective. Scope: Many States do not separate onshore from offshore development, thus providing a single administrative process for all mineral resources. At least four States (California, Oregon, Texas, and Washington) distin- guish oil and gas from hard minerals. Exploration: Most States have general research programs, carried out by geological survey offices or academic institutions. Some States provide for more detailed state prospect- ing in areas proposed for leasing. Private exploration generally requires a permit. Area limits are unspecified in most statutes. Land- oriented statutes tend to require smaller tracts. Alaska limits permits to 2,560 acres but allows a person to hold multiple permits totalling up to 300,000 acres. Prospecting permits may be general or for designated tracts. Alaska, California, Texas, and Washington grant exclusive permits while Delaware, Florida, and Oregon do not. Permits may also specify the type of mineral be- ing sought. California and Washington grant a preference-right lease to prospectors making a discovery. Delaware and Oregon do not. Other States, including Alaska, Maine, New Hampshire, and Texas, allow all or part of the ex- plored area to be converted to a mining lease upon dis- covery of commercial deposits. T2072. © = BY == 10 Exploration results must be reported to the State but their confidentiality is protected for the duration of the prospecting permit and any subsequent lease. Massa- chusetts requires survey results to be made public prior to the hearing concerning the granting of a lease. The duration of prospecting permits is generally 1 or 2 years with renewal terms ranging from 1 year to in- definite. Alaska provides a 10-year prospecting term. Annual rents range from $0.25 per acre in Texas and Washington, to $2.00 per acre in California, and $3.00 per acre in Alaska. Maine has a sliding scale, increas- ing from $0.25 per acre in the first year to $5.00 per acre in the fifth. Mining Lease or Permit: Some States grant preference-right leases or allow conversion. Competitive bidding is the general basis for awarding leases with a cash bonus, or royalty, or both being the bid variable. California also allows bidding on “‘net profit or other single biddable factor.’’ Some States grant leases noncompetitively, conducting an administrative review of individual lease applications. Public hearings are usually required under all of these systems. Most States do not specify area limits for mineral leases. Where conversion is allowed, a prospector may only convert as much land as is shown to contain work- able mineral deposits or as much as he can show him- self capable of developing. Where limits are specified, they range from 640 acres (Washington) to 6,000 acres (Mississippi). States limiting the acreage covered by each lease generally do not limit the number of leases that a single person may hold. Lease terms range from 5 years (Virginia) to 10 years (Delaware, Georgia, North Carolina, Oregon) to 20 years (Alaska, California, Texas, Washington). Renewal is available, usually for as long as minerals are produced in paying quantities. Leases are generally assignable in whole or in part, subject to State approval. Most States require a minimum rent, credited toward a royalty based on production. Minimum annual rents range from $0.25 per acre in Delaware to $3.00 per acre in Alaska. Minimum royalties vary from 1/16 of pro- duction in Texas to 3/16 in Mississippi. Louisiana pro- vides different royalties for different minerals, ranging from 1/20 to 1/6 of production. Some States provide for payment in kind. The use of leasing income varies greatly. Among other purposes, it may be allocated to the general fund, 281 282 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ‘gOez 0} 002z§§ Zz }I} @poD “ulMpY ‘leo (S861 ‘ddns) (L261 1S9M) 0069 ©} 0689 pue 17¢9§§ epop “Buluiw @aijoe OU }nq ‘janes6 pue pues ul }sa19} -U] BWOS ‘payod -81 u9aq aAeY S8lJBAOOSIP OU }Nq ‘penssi useq aaey s}iuied Buy « PIBY ae spue| 84} YoIUM uodn jsni} au} U}IM 91aJJ9}U! 10 Bulysly pue uol} -eBiaeu 0} s}ubu o1gnd au} weduwi A\yeijueysqns,, “s}uawalInb -81 Wodal joedui je}UsWUOJIAUa uyim Ajdwoo “WUWI] 8Z1S ON “SWWJ9} JeaA-OL JO} ajqemauas “W19} 1e38K -AjUaM| ‘8108 Jad Qo'L$ jue jenuue wnwiuiyy ‘40}0B} B\Geppiq a|6Guis saujo JO aleys jiyoid ‘ayes AjjeAo ‘snuog yseo uo Pig ani}i}edWoo Aq pasee| spur) jesoulw UMOUY esea| e Bulule} -qO Ul edUaJajaid 0} palyijue }iwed Buljoed "SOY “GNd ‘|eO -joadsoid maj Y jou Aew saseaq jsnW sased| ||\V -SOld jo JapjoH ‘aiqemaual ‘Wd9} deak-oz “Aya -doid Bulj}j}1yaueq sainjipuedxa *seB pue JO} }1P919 YIM {10 UY} Jay}O aioe Jad goes Ayiaijoe ero judd jenuue -J@WWOO }Ud1INO ‘snuog yseo/piq ON ‘pejsneyxe 8AI}I}adwWoo MOU ‘jU9LU Aq paiajjo spue| -99 10} s}isod fesaulw uMOoUY -9p |]eys yo Bul *sa10e Q00'001 -Bpaip aaisua}xa Ppeeoxe 0} JOU A\sauO4 “2861 “JUapISal 10 uaz ‘syisodap ajqe JOJ pauuejd = -1}19 Aue 0} paju -4JOM Ule}UOD O} si Buluilw ayeos = -ap aq jou |jeys UMOUS SI Se puR| “(L86L -|IN4 “986, pue spue| pebiew yonw se JO} ‘uer) Z9 “YO LL S86l ul eoRjd -qns paidnoooun }iwied Buioed “yy apog ‘ulwpy yoo} awoN JO 9SN aAIS -Soid jo Japjoy eysely ‘(p86L) jjO ssaoejd -NjOxeuou ‘Me| Pposinbas "ydaq =O} Ajaai}ijadwoo osz'so'ges auyew ul pjob = Aq payiuij asim = BW puke ysi4 -uou ye1S eyXsSelV 40} Buluiw yOjiq -J8Y4}O JOU UBYM wo} jeAoiddy pojuesb aq Aew “S}eJOUIW *}S9J9}U! Ol] *sa10e 00Z‘G 0} (O86L) BL puey ON ‘seses| -qnd 9y} ul apew dn sje} ‘Buip -G1-6§ Epo ‘ely seB pure |!0 “paijloeds jon aq jsnW Spig — -PIG AAI}I}adWOD suoljejnBas s}uaWwWOD AyiAijoe ysed sasn Buljoijuo9 uol}99}01d yiwied Buiuipy pue sajnjeys JO JUaLIND ; Je} UBWUOLIAUR “aioe jad 00'z$ JO je}Ual jenu -uy “JeaK Quo 10} a|qemeual ‘Ws9} Jeak-om} ‘pue| paiojdxeun uo UOISSIWWOD }ilwed aaisnjoxy SpueTe}eIS) Ase | BIWOseD ‘uosied auo Aq pjau S}iwued uo jy} WI] 2198-000'00€ “seak anisseo -ons yoes a10e jad oo'e$ ‘sueah OM} }SJIj 10} Q10e Jad Q0'E$ “Wwie} UOISIAIG Jeak-o| ‘sasoe spue7 ‘saounos 00z‘g 0} dn -8y einen jiwied aaisnjoxy jO JuUQwUedeaq “TT eysely UOISIA “Id Spue] 3}e8}S ‘se0inosay puey B UOH}eAIaSUOD ‘payloads jon jO Jugwyedeg “"""""**** ewege|y uolyesojdxy, Aoueby aje1S sme Buu 2323S—"b-v a1ge1 App. A—State Management of Seabed Minerals ¢ 283 “LZ-SL ‘L@-D9L ‘92-O9L “yd 8pogD “ull -PV eld (SEL ‘seM) Sp'eszs ‘uuy “Je1S “el4 “(€861) b9 "YO 21 “uuy apo |8q (S86 1S8M) 06E-EZZ 0} ege-ezz§§ ‘uuy *yEIS “U9dH “UUOD “L861 Ajyea ul sajni Buijoadsoid oui -ewW jo uoljdope e pajdwod s}iw -Jad uolyesojdxa jeseulwW pue ‘seb 10 10} SUOI} -eoijdde jus00y "}S$919} -Ul Buljo1juoo jo Buioueyeq pue uole -JapISUOD sauinb -8y ‘ajnye}s paiejap Aa, *Aenuapun SI SIDJEM JIND Jo Agains yesaulu Vv ‘9yeos |jews ® UO UO!}OBI}X9 |la@ys pue pues “syesoulW psey Yim AYAIWOe OU 1NG sauinbul awosg “‘Buiyejs si uolesojdxe seb Pue |10 awoS “OWl} juasaid ye UON ‘sesn Arewid U}IM 319}19}UI 10 WO4l} JOeIJaP JOU op Aay} }! pamo} -e aq Aew sasn Auepuooas 93)q -Iyedwoyd ‘sesn Avewid ae Bulyeoq pue ‘Bul -USlj ‘UOI}EIID0Y "eae asea| jo sasn Buljoijjuoo -uou ‘ajqeuos “eas Moje Aew ayeis ‘uoneb -lAeu pue 9d19W -WOD Y}IM 80ua -Japaj}ul ‘}seoo }O sanjea olu90S pue o1}9y4}Sse ‘asn jeuoljeaioas JO jeljuapisal UUM aoualay -J9}uU! ‘eave ay} ut Bulyiom 10 Ayedoid Builumo ajdoad 0} Juew -lujap Aue Japis -U0d JSNW a}e}1S “SOND -e} uolyeBiaeu ‘syauUMO UBWedI jo s}yBu ‘spue| -dn Bulusolpe JO JUaWdojeAep Japisuod }snw *pesodoid si uolebiyiw ayenb -ape pue aaijeu -19}/e a}qeuoseas OU SI 3/94} {I Ajuo pamoye sai} -IA1JOe BSIBAPY “SHIPIIM pue Ysit jo uoneBbedoid pue suoljipuoo jeanyeu 10} Aji -zewiid pabeuew S19}eM je}SeOD “uoljnjod 4@Y}O 10 ‘Wa}eM ‘are ayes P|NOM Buses] Jo4yJOyM Japisuod jsnNW 9}e}s ‘spiq Buljiaul 0} JOU “syeyiqey aj -pjim Auessaoeu JO uolenasaid au} ‘syeyiqey ysiy uly pue spunoi6 yusi|jays Aues -S909U JO Ul} -09}01d ay} ‘UOIS -018 B1OYS JO uoljelaayje pue uOol}UusAeId 84} 40} pueBai anp,, “snuoq Yyseo /Plq SAl} -1JadWood ‘juawW -dojanap pue uol}}es0jdxa 104} powinbai eseay “speuaulw Jo Ayjuenb Buifked jo ua -AOODSIP JO siedh 8914} ULYIM ulBeq ysnw UuOI}ONpOJd ‘a10e Jad Gz'¢ judd winwiulj ‘pred }UdJ JO} JIP|IO UUM §%G SL AyyeAod Winuulyy “say auenbs xis eae WNWIxey| ‘g0e|d saye} udl} -onpoid se Guo} se 10} panul} -uod ‘sueak OL $O WJ9} lewd “snuoq yseo/piq SBAedwoyg “Buueey oijqnd eB jaye poulw -ajep Bulsea) jo Ayiqiseas ‘aBewep 0} puog “}ueoljiu -Bys you yoedwi Je}usWUOI|AUa ssajun paijnbes Buyeay ‘asod -ind yelosauWW0d JO} pasn jeu -ayewW 4! payinb -81 JUuaWAed “suayeM je}Seoo JO Jepl} Woy je -ayew Bulye} 10} Pauinbas Wad suoiejnbas pue sajnjyels s}UaWWOD Ayiaijoe ysed 4O UaLIND sesn Buljo!|ju09 uo1}99}01d Je}UsWUOIIAUG panuyjuog—sme7 Buu ayeis—"b-y 21421 }iuued Buu, yeaA puooas JO} ajqemaual “w49} Week -38uO ‘paiinba jiwJad Buljsa} jeo1isAydoab pue jueweeibe asn SAISN|OXSUON ‘ases) 0} }4yBu jeljuaiajoid ON “a|qemaual ‘Wd19} seek om} ‘})Wued S@AISN|OX9-UON ‘payloads JON ABojoay JO neaing pue UOISIAIG Spue ayes ‘seoinos -8y |eINJeN JO Juawyedeq |01}U0D Je}UsWUOJAUR pue seoinos -8y jeinjeN JO JuUswWYedeq wun BOINOSSY JBJe\\ ‘U01}99}O1d JejyUaWUOIIAUG JO JugwWyedeq “o> Bpyols > asemeloq jnoWoauUOD uolyesojdx9 Aouaby 8}e81S 284 Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier (9861 ‘ddns)(SZ6t 1S9M) PL'6ZL :0€ 0} LZL:0e§§ ‘uuy YES “AY “eT ‘(Buiseaq spue7 pebiew -qng pue ueed0) L6 me “sses HWEMeH 9861 (8961) ZBL ‘Uo “JEYS “ABH HEMEH (S861) Ev-91-0S8 ‘uu Bpoyd ‘ed ‘e}Jap wa -jsea jo s}isodep 4ao0ejd ul }sa10} -Ul JeINIBWWOD awos ‘sy901 deo Buieeg-inydins 4o} Ajuyews ‘sawop yes ul jsau9}u| ‘seseo| anydjns 6ulyiol| -os ‘JuaWwYslnoU yoeeq 10} pues "2861 Ayea ul dno) YOM jsmi9 aseueb -ue|W |e1apey -ayejs e Aq penssi sem ayes asee| jesoulW aulew pesodoid B 10} SIZ Weip ay, “uo!oIpsint 9721S UUM Buluiw uess0 juaseid ON *AJOUS}JO auou ing shem -JOyEM Pue|UI UO UO1}0B1]X9 BWOS “paijioeds JON “Buiulw pasod -oid uey} 9}e1S 84} 0} }1jeUEq 4ayea16 jo aq P|NOM asn ain} -N} ajqeaasaio} A\qeuoseal 10 Bulysixe ay} yey} SOUIWUA}P 9}e1S 2u} J! paaoid -desip aq |jeys sesea) Buluiw 40} suoijeoiddy ‘uoieb|A~eu JO uol}OnJ}sgo juaneid ‘ajqeol} -oeid se ley SY “paiioads JoN SMe] }O1JUOD UO!}N}|od aye pue Joyem We Uy Ajdwos,, jsnw sesee] “O}!l auewW pue ‘Sia} -SAo ‘ys $O UOl} -Ondjsap Wyem }O uol}n\||}od judaaid ‘a)qeol} -oeid se jie} SY ‘Pig ealjijed -woo Aq palajio ‘uosiad auo Aq play sesea| jo Jaquinu uo }iwi| Ou jnq ‘asea| dad sajiw aienbs 4noj uey} asOW JON ‘}ISodep 8u} 10} Spouyow Buisseooid pue Buluiw yeo;wou -0098 ysijqe}se 0} JUaWdoOjaA -ap pue yoleas -a1 uo Aauow Pueds 0} pasinb -81 S| 8assa| yoiym Burnp poued jeuolippe ue JO} Moje Aew aseaj }ng ‘asee| HuluBis yo sveah 8014} UIY}IM Q@OUDWWOD O} Bulul “uolje19 -SIP S,pueog je ssa} 10 sueak Gg jo wia) ‘Buiesy oijqnd Buimo} -]O} uOI}ONe O}| -qnd ye pajueld5 “sueak OL SI Wa} asea) AeWwid “sueaX juanbes -qns pue yyno} uy} ul aoe Jad QO" L$ 0} sea }SJ1j 94} Ul G10e Jad OL'$ woud} ses judas jenuue WNWIUIW ‘UO!} -onpod jo g/| SI! AyyeAos winuwiiuiw ‘pig aAedwWoD “‘Buisea) 410} pasodoid seaie ul SAQA -ins jeo1Bojoab pue jeoishud -0e6 Bulpnjo -ul ‘uoloedsul sayeyepun ajej\s “Sy}UOW XIS UIU}IM ased] e 104 Ajdde jou saop 9a}!wied | paseajas aq Aew uoljewso} -Uj “Jeluaplyuod day ing a}e1Ss 0} J8A0 pausn} sAesse pue s607 “sisAjeue pue Bul -]S9}] 10} papoau Ayyyuenb puod -8q paAowal aq Aew sjesoull ON "pauinbas }IWded ‘asea| 0} Salisep }! pue) SAA “INS 40 s}oedsul ayes ‘Bulppiq 9@AI}1}adWOO }NO -Y}IM UOl}esO|dxe JO} 1OB1}UOD O}UI Ja}ua AeW 3}e}S 8910 seounosay Jesoulp ‘Seounos -8Y JeIN}eN JO JUBWyedeg s90inos -oy jeinjen pue pue7 jo pueog ‘UOISIAIG }UQW -oBeueyw pueq UOISSIWWOD saledold ajejs Se eS euelsino7] “yemeH e1610a5 suojjejn6ai pue sejnyeys Ss}UBWWOD Ayiaijoe ysed JO JUaLIND sasn Burjoijuog uol}99}01d jeyuawuOdIAUy jiwied Bulul— uolesojdxg Aouaby B}eIS penujuog—smey Guru a21S—"L-V e1geL App. A—State Management of Seabed Minerals © 285 ‘(€861) 62 "YS OLE HH} EPOD ‘uluupYy “SSeW (L86L 1S9M) gg 0} yS§§ ZL “yo ‘uu SMe] “ued ‘sse-W “ylwad JO} SWda} }8S 0} saj}nj}e}s au0z \e}seoo pue spur} -J2M SASN 3}e}S ‘sajeinBa Ajjoo1 -IP eynje]s ON ynoyyip Buus pogess ayew AewW Suol}oy}s -81 9UOZ |B}SeOD (G86L) V8ssS 0} 67S§§ ‘ZL ‘YEIS “AOY “AW *janei5 pue pues JO uol}e1}U9DU0D yBiy & payeo -Ipul Aevins E264 “2261 © B184M Joquey uo} -SOg punole si Buluiw 10} ajqe -njoues uea00 se pajoajoid ae SJa]yeM |e}Seo0o we Ajyean *sjoafoud juow -yslunou yoeaq @wos ‘juaseaid ye Bulujw on *juawdojanep Aq pajuejddns $90JNOS pue]-uUO 90e|da1 0} pasu Bunedionue ‘keg ut janei6 pue pues Jo} Buiyoayo jods awos “jueWeM sBurpuly jei}iul jl syesouiw Aneay ye yoo) Ae; “$9Y4S Je}UsUl} -uOd UO UOl}NG -LJSIP JUSWIPEsS Buiddew Aj}u91 «IND “‘jaaei6 pue pues jo ayes ul pa}jnsas soquey aioujjeg ul Bul -Bpaip seg ‘Aeg ayeedesayo Ul JEAOWA [JAYS *9]98|dWo0o si Aavins jeso -uaB iajje sea }xeu ulbaq Aew SaIpNnjs jesaulW paylejeq “yjyeq -OSI 19}8W OO} 0} pefanins Bulag sJayem je}seoo ‘oBe sieah OL }noge uol} -onpoid paddojs eS 94} O}U! Bulpue}xe suiw jaddoo y ‘bul -ulW juasaid ON *sa90unos -a4 jeunyeu JO uolyeAasuod 4o ‘Buiysij ‘uo! -eBineu Y}IM 194 -1a}u! Ajqeuosee -un jou Aew “peisloads JON paijioads jon suolyejnBa1 pue sajnjejs s}uaWWOD JO Juang sesn Buljoljjuog ‘peduinp useq aaey so}sem snopyezey SJ9YM payiqiy -old Bululp “spunoi6 Bul -paaj 10 ‘Auasinu ‘Bulumeds ysi} “Ul} PUB YSI}||9YS ul Jo seaue ysiy “Buueay a10jaq sAep O€ yse9] }e Ol] -qnd apew aq 0} AdAINS ‘pesinbes SI SySU je}uaW -uoj|AUa pue S90JNOSA1 AY} JO Aanins aqeijas pue yBnoiou} Vv ‘Buuesy | “paiyloods jou }SOO pue UOl} -eing ‘pasinbau Bujeeu -1Bug Ayyeno -|]2US Ul payiqiy -qnd je pamatAal Buyesy oljqnd Je}UsWUOIIAUG -oid Buiulpy ‘pauinbai aseay pue 9suadl7 JO juawyedaq s}asnyoessey| ‘joe youeig suuen} SPUE]]OM 9}e}S Jeuayew jo ayes -Sq pue jejseoo JO s}uawasINb pue jeAaoweal 10} ‘Kaning jeo!bo} -81 MO}JO} ISN poasinbea }iWded “poijloads JON -085 puejuey) puejAuey “‘Yluued JO Wd} JO} rel) A jeljuapljuoo day -aid Ajpes9uab ‘pouinbas s}jns sayes AyyeAos -81 UOI}eO|dxa ajqeoijdde jo yoda jenuuy 0} payejai Ajqe =“ y jy} @Y} Ul Gude -uoseal,, ‘aseo jad Qo'Gg 0} 1e9A ‘ease asea| apis Aq ased jas Ajje }S4lJ OY} Ul que -jno Ayedoid 0} = -Aoy “‘Buueay 91) Jad Gz $ wold eBewep jsureBbe -qnd iajye aseo) Sasi juas jenu }09}01d 0} 0} payaAuoo -uy “sleak daly pue eae wield aq Aew wiejo JO} B|qemoudas Aanins eo -81 0} puog }soOq uolyesojdx9 ‘wia} 1eak-2uO -Bojoay aurey aulew uo1}09}01d }iuued Buu uoljesojdx9 Aouaby 9}e1S je}usWUOIAUy panujuog—sme7 Buu e1e1S—"l-v age 1 286 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier "GZ-E:ZL 0} LZ-E:7b ‘Zb-E:74§§ ‘uuYy "JEIS “f'N (L861) a-cl “yo “uu “YEYS “ABY “HN (S861) ZL -L1-6Z O} 1-2-62§§ “UUW 8POD ‘SSI: pun }sni} |OOYOS 0} 06 sjuawheg “AyAjoe a0yUs -uO }e pa}oaip aynyeys Buju ‘jauueYD 9soiq -wy jo a6pa ye pabpaip Buleq janei6 pue pues *sayeM je}seoo jesope4 pue ayes ul auop Bulaq si yiom Aening ‘AyAyoe JEINJOWWOD ON AyaAjoe yesoulw puey ou ‘sesea} seB pue |!I0 “paijjoeds JON “paijioeds JON paijloeds jon suojjejnBas pue sa}nje}Ss s}USWWOD Ayiaiyoe ysed JO }UaLIND sasn Buljo1|jU0D ‘payloads JON “PUBION NS -ul ase Sainseaw uoljuaAdid uol} -njjod 40 sued uolyewejoal 94} 40 suOS ea) je}uaWUOI -lAud 10} Buluiw 4O} ajgeyinsun S| Bole $1 pajuap aq Aeuw }IWded “UO1}21}X9 10 uojyesojdxe wold} uoljnjod yo dn -ue9}|9 O} pue dji| -PIIM pue ‘pue} ‘suayem JO }UBW -efeuew 0} paye} -ojpap aie sal} -jeAol Jo JugoIed Z ‘}ueWpedeq UOI}EAIBSUOD 9}! -PIIM Aq matAed 0} JOoalqns spue| -8pl} JO punos Iddississiw JO seaie JUOW -eBeuew a4sI|/pjim ul} uo}}eJO|dxy "a10YS O} jusoe[pe saseo| 40} Ayoud eaey siauMO UBedIY “ajqemeual ase seseay ‘uolesued -WOO pue Ul} -eINP SaulWa}ep [lounoy ‘suayem ayeys Wooly Jeweyew J94}0 10 pues a9A0wWal 0} pouinbas asuedlq aseo| JO} uoleoi|dde uodn peuluwie} -8P aq 0} (SUO}} -puod jeloads ‘KyyeAos ‘uoiyes -Np) Sua} esea] “ywued e Bulule} -qo pue wiejo e Burjly uodn euiu Aew sod -8P & SJBAOOSIP OUM J0}DedSOld “aynyeys ul palyioeds jou uoljeing “pajoes}xe sje -ABUIW JO QL/E JO AyyeAos winwiulw *snuoq yseo/piq aAI}}EdWOD "aZIS Ul Sel0e 000‘9 0} dn Sy90|q ased| 96 QjU! paplAip pue peAesuns ae SJOJEM JEUO}WUL “paiyioads JON “a|qemau -81 ‘W9a} 1eah-2uC “pasinbas }IiW «sed Buljoadsold “sueak UB} 10} Jel} -uaplyuod sure -81 1NG B}ye1S 0} paplaoid aq }snW ejeq “pauinbos {Wed jlounog eounos “ay Spuelapl | juowdo -|@AE8q D1WOU0DZ pue seojnosey JO Jugwyedeq UOISIAIG asea jelaUuIW ‘KBo|0a5 40 neaing ‘seoinos -9y jeunjen jO JuswWyedseq Kasiat MON “**gu1usdueH MAN iddississiw uoj}jo0e8}01d je}uawuOIIAUR yiuued Buju uojyesojdx3 Kousby BIBS penujuog—smey Guru aye1S—"h-v ede App. A—State Management of Seabed Minerals ° 287 ‘(L86L) 098'72z 0} SOZ'pZ7z pue 1Sgg°e2z§ JEIS “ABH JO (S861) 8-9rl ‘68e-derl ‘89-p2 0} 0S-72§§ ‘JEIS ‘U2D “ON ‘(9861 Aeu -UIMOW) 7z§ meq Spur] “Gnd “AN ‘pawedaid Buleq aie youeas -81 oluapeoe 8 sjeseulw puey JO} S8INY “9BEL aunr pajdope sAeains inud -ins 9 seB ‘10 SJOYSJJO JeIOIOW -WOD JO} S8|nd SAlVesSIUIWPY “se0unos -81 yeunzeu S,8}e}S JO UOl} -BM@SUOd pue juawdojaaap 40} pue s}soo SAI}e1}SIUIWpe JO} Sadunosay jeunjeN jo ‘jdeq 0} 06 sajes WO1} SP8dD014 “seo Aq aseo suol} -eoijdde 0} joe uey} Joyyes web -oid jugwebe -UBW W9}-Hu0} e Japun esea| 0} aye} 84} MO|IE PINOM SIYL *ajajdwoo Ajjeau SI ayeoyiyeo Ayiyenb sayem 38 -ue|q e 10} JuaW -ayels yoedui! je}UsWUOJIAUa aul “Ayanjoe Bul -UIW ON “986 JO JawuNs (sia}eM je1ape4) abpiy eBpioy jo Aavuns @AISUd}U] ‘paja|d -woo Aj}uU90 -8) saounosal ueaco jo Aanins “Buruiw ayeudsoud 40 Ajjiqiseay Apnjs 0} pawsoy Bulag ao104 yse] “Susao -uoo Ayyjenb JayeM 0} anp paiuep jaaei6 pue pues 10} 210|dxa 0} }Ssanb “81 JU998Y “6/61 QOUIS SIB}EM ayeys ul Buiuiw uO WNHO}eIoW ‘Bul -Bpaip janesb pue pues pamau -91 10} wesBoid seak -o, e Bul -l1edaid jo sabes Jeul} 84} UI! SI 9321S 81 “PB6L aouls aoueAaqe ul ugaq sey Joqiey YO, MON JAMO] Ul JeAOWAL jaaei65 pue pues suojejnbas pue sajnjejs s]UaWWOD ‘uonebiaeu 10 BOIBWIWOD YIM Q0UdJAJJa}UI 10 ‘asn jeuoijeoioes JO Jeljuapisal U}IM 90U9I9j19}UI ‘ease ay} ul Ayo -doid Buiumo 10 ‘Buial ‘Buryom 9|doed 0} }uowW -jap Aue Japis -u0d }SNW 9}e}S ‘uoiebiaeu 40 s}YyBi1 0} 398/ -qns apew sajes JO sasea| ||V “‘pailoeds JON “OJIIPIIM JO O41] GULL -ewW 0} 1aBuep ‘uoljn|jod sayem JO sre ‘sanjea 91U90S JOpIS -UOO JSNW a}e}S “asea| 10 jiwdaed 0} 10d pajjns -uoo 9q }snw juswpedeg 9}!| -PIIM puke ysi4 “spuepuejs Ayiyenb sayem JO JN BYEJOIA ||IM }I J140 ,,‘saue -YSlj BULEW JO ‘guuenjse “ayem YSOl} JO B}1/P|IM UO $}D9}JJa BSIBA -pe Ajnpun,, avey IM UL 4] peluep aq Aew jiwied v “paiioeds Jon *Klan00 -SIP JO sueah aesy} Uy U6 -aq }sNW UO!}ONp -O1d pue sieak aay ULUyIM U6 -oq ysnw Bulyjug ‘agoejd saye} uol} -onpoid se Huo} se 10} pamouas ‘W9} JeaA-ual ‘anp AjjeAos Aue psemo} pa}ipao ‘aioe Jad OG’ 40 juas jenuue wnw “LUI “UOH}ONp -oid ssou6b jo g/L AyyeAos WNuUlYy “snuoq yseo/piq aAI}}EdWOD "ysasa}ul o1qnd 84} Ul 8q P|NOM spiq Bulyaut J] QUIWWIA}AP O} Buyeay ognd “"payoey -Je S| }S919}U! Ol] -qnd juedijiuBbis }! pasinbas Bul -1e8H “ajqemeual ‘W9} weaf-ual a" ayeyg ey} Aq juaipedxa pue asim pewaep aq Aew se SUOI}IPUOD pue Swe} uodn«** ew} JO spoled aUIYap 10} SAE -Ppunog peyeu -Bisep ulUiIM, uoljonp -oid uo paseq a}e}S 0} pied AyyeXos ‘pasinb -81 8SusdI7 -asea| e Buljues6 }O UO!}IPUuoo eB se pally aq 0} eaneyu Aew pi0o0el uolyesojdxa |jN4 “9}e}S YM pail} eq }snW spiooal Bulg ‘ajqemou -34 ‘W4a} Je8A -OM| ‘S|eJOUILU Palanoosip 0} 1UuBu jeluae -Joud Ou ‘}iwued S@AISN|OX9-UON ‘paisioads JON “paisjloads JON spueq 93E}S JO UOISIAIG juawdojar -ap Ajlunwwoo pue saoinos -ay jeunjen JO JuUawyedeq SODINOS Je1auay jo 99140 ‘UOISIAIG seounosey puey Ayiaijoe ysed 4O JUaIND sasn Buljoljjuog uol09}01d je}UawWUOJIAUG jiwued Buu, penuijuop—sme7 Buu e1e1S—"h-V a1geL uolesojdxg Aouaby ees BUl|OleD YON 4IOA MON 3381S Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 288 ¢ Marine Minerals (6261) QE'EL OF LeveL §§ LE “HW apo ‘ulwW -PY “X81 ‘(9861) “suayeMm eyejs ul se6 pue [10 Ue} 184j}O se0jnosei UMOUy «BYES BY} JO S}SaJo}U! OU} JO uO!}Oa}OId JO} Ayessaoeu,, pola -PISUOD SUOIS *pasinb -a1 Yoda AjyjeAos A\yuo ‘peonp -O1d sjesouIL JO ON|BA JO OL/L jo AjyeAos Wnw -julu eB ysurebe aioe Jad QO'LS ‘sueaA juanb -asqns ‘aoe jad 00'2$ 3se9| ye jejual e9A Sul-4 ‘Saiijuenb Buifed ul paonp -O1d ave SjesouIW se 19}je010U} Huo| se 10} pue sueak Og JO Wd} Mew eae au} ul esee] jsaq 84} 0} 9/9 -eyedwoo Swe} 4a};0 pue jisod -ap jeloaWWOd ® $0 ALQAOOSIP “play st yiuied Bululw 10 Bujjoedsoid se Huo} se 10} \e1} -uaplyuoo SuleW -91 UOIJEWUO}UI ‘pasinbes yoda Ayayeno “e10e jad Gz‘$ jo Jul jenuue wnwiuiW *sueak jeudl} -Ippe 4no} O} dn 40} ajqemaual ‘W9} 1eah-2uD jUaWdOJaA -aq JeseulW pue €S ‘Yo apoD ON “AyAI}Oe -aoid Aue apnjo eouepiAe jsnw = *Sas0e QQ 0} dn WNajOljaq ‘BDI} "SOY JEN “XOL jeJOUuIL PJeY ON ‘payloads JON -u) Aew oseaq asea| pesodoiq jiwsed aaisnjoxy -JO puey jeieuey sexo] “juaseid ye jso9}Uul elouawWWOd OU jng ‘38}eM MO} -yeus ul sjisod -ep ayeydsoud umoUy ae BOUL ‘uoljonp (9/61 'do-09 “alul} JuaSold “sme| UOI}EIOS -O1d JO g/} 40 UOISSIWWOD UOl} Me) 649 ‘OL 3H} ye uolyesojd -uod 0} Oalqns = AyyeAOd WNWiUl| -eNaSUOD pue ‘uu 8poD ‘O'S -x@ JO Bululw ON ‘payloads JON ale Sased| ||V ‘pasinba aseeq ‘payloads JON sedinosay puey euljoueg yyNoS "spuod yes ul pue sjajyemM jept} ul pue saunp pue sayoreq ‘eae uo pa}igiyold si jo ad} yoeo Bululp ‘}uawuol JO} sainpaooid -|AU@ JB}SeOO Oy} juawdojaaep aBewep Jo yim pue sasn pa}}iw yoIyuoo Aew «iad Bulysijqejso JO 0} saj}ejal ‘seaie je}seoo yorum juaudo pue siayem -|QAQP Pur] JBAO ayes saijissejo pue ssayem 9}e}S wei6oig }UaW yjounoD *(G86L) ul JUaWdo|aAep ‘uoj}08} + -abeuey sedJnos *pauinb juawabe €Z'Ud ‘Op 11} We AOAO AjOU}Ne “AYA -Old je}U9W =-AY je}SeOD pue| -81 |JOUNOD -ueW S90unos SMP ‘U9D ‘|'y sey [IOUNOD eyL -oe juesaid ON -UOJIAUQ 89S -S| Bpouy OyL WO} }IWI9d *paijioeds JON -ey jeyseop Pues] epouy suojjeinBas s]U9WWWOD Ayayjoe ysed sasn Bujjoljuog uol}998}01d jiwied Buluiw uolyesojdx3 Aoueby 9181S pue sajnjejs JO JUuaIND je}uawWUOL AUF penunuog—smey Burry aeis—"t-v e1geL App. A—State Management of Seabed Minerals ¢° 289 ‘1861 ‘juawssessy ABojouyoe! JO 891j30 ‘JOUNOS (LL64) 91-ZEe “yd Bspod “ul -Py “usem (S861) 0S9°L0°6Z 0} QLOLO'6Z§§ “UUY BPOD “Ady “YSeMA (9861) ‘wwoD saounosay auLeW ‘eA ‘soul| -8pInd5 snosenb “eqns (9861) py-l¢g pue ¢ -L79§§ epoo “eA “speeu juaw -dojanep ain} -Nj jeaw 0} web -o1d aaije}siba} 2 ulm youeas -81 pjaly Buiuig -wood Ss} pue ue|d juowaeBbeuew sjesoulw snoenb -eqns e Buied -aid SI a}e1S ay, JOAIY BIQUIN|OD ay} JO yyNOW ye eae Spues yoe|q ul Bul -}oadsoid awosS “SJa]eM jesepe4 pue a}e}S ul sjesoul Buesg-wniue}l} OJBWWOD JO Ayijigqissod poob sjeanei youeas -a1 Bulobuo ‘Bul -UJLW JUSIIND ON “‘Buljoedsoid Jo Bul -uilw Aq pasneo eaBbewep Aue JO} payesuadwoo 9q 0} SI aassa| ‘asodind isayjoue JO} pesee| ugeq Apeas -ye sey paul 8q 0} pue} 3} “sauaUsiy UO $]09jJ9 aSJaApe uassa| 0} pesod -wi aq Aew Suol} -e}!u!| BuiBpeip jeuoseas ‘ysl} “ays jo Buryey 4o ‘Buljmo} ‘Bul -ySlj 0} S}YyBU Ol] -qnd yim asajJ90} -u! Aew asea] on . S9|dlo -uld UuOl}eA -J8@SUOD je1oUeB U}IM }U9}SISUON,, aq }SNW YOM “paijioads JON *poued uol}esojdxa 10 Buljoedsoid ae sueak Ino} \Sdl4 “a|qemaual ‘Wa} seak-AyUaM | “‘peanowal Jeuayew jo pued oiqno sed 09°$ ueYy} alow Jou Q2@'$ ue} ssa} jou AyyeAoy ‘ajqemeaual ‘suea SAI} Wd} asea] ‘jeuoyew JO JeEAOWAI 104 pasinbas }iWWad ‘uosiod Jad sasee| jo 10g -WNU UO }IWI| OU ‘sau0e Org ueU} aJOW JOU sa10e Ov uey} sso} OU asea -}0e1}U00 Bujuiw 0} aoua -Jajaid sey ase} Buljoadsoud $0 JOPJOH *yoeujuooBululw 0} B/G!IH9A -uoD ‘a10e 4ad Gz'$ JO }uaJ jenu -uy ‘a|qemaual “wa} weak OM} ‘pasinbas aseay ‘paijioads JON saoinos -oy jeunjen jo JuQWYedaq “++ uoBulysen uoIssiw -WwO9 seoJnos -0y aueyW mores BIUIBIIA suoljejnBal pue sajnjejs S}UaWWOD Ayiaijoe ysed 4O JUaLIND sasn Buljoljjuop uo1j}0e}01d Je}UaWUOJIAUg }iuued Buu uolyesojdxy Aouaby 9}e1S panunjuog—sme7 Buu ayeis—"t-v e1geL 290 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier to education, to administration of the mining program, to resource conservation, to management and research programs, to the agency having management responsi- bility for the leased property, and to local governments. Many States require work to proceed at a minimum rate. Some simply require ‘‘diligence’’ or a “‘good faith effort’’ or may specify a time limit for starting produc- tion (3 years in Delaware and Hawaii, 4 years in Wash- ington). Other States require minimum expenditures for development or improvements ($2.50 per acre an- nuaily in Washington). In Hawaii, the lease may pro- vide for an initial research period during which the les- see is required to undertake research and development to establish economic mining and processing methods for the mineral deposit. Environmental Protection: Environmental regulations may require preparation of an environmental impact analysis for each project. Some States prepare a blanket analysis as part of a com- prehensive management program, anticipating individ- ual applications. Many statutes identify special areas to be protected or avoided. These include shellfish beds and spawning, nursery, or feeding grounds (Connecti- cut, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Virginia), areas that are part of the beach sand circulation system, and areas where hazardous wastes have been dumped (Massachu- setts). Environmental review also requires coordination with other agencies and statutes. Among these are fish and wildlife departments, air and water quality laws, and coastal zone management agencies. Conflicting Uses: Some States identify certain uses as primary or pro- tected, and conflicting uses are prohibited or restricted. Fishing and navigation rights are most commonly men- tioned as protected. Virginia may impose seasonal dredging limitations to protect commercially or recrea- tionally important fisheries. Florida gives priority to maintaining natural conditions and propagation of fish and wildlife. Recreation, fishing, and boating are pri- mary uses. Rhode Island State waters are classified by use (from conservation areas to industrial waterfronts) with permitted activities and development spelled out for each class. Connecticut, Delaware, and Oregon re- quire that impacts on upland property owners or users be considered. Hawaii would not allow mining if the existing or reasonably foreseeable use of the property would be of greater benefit to the State. Delaware and Oregon require scenic values to be considered. Pipe- lines, cables, and aids to navigation are protected by minimum setbacks. Setbacks from shore are specified in some cases. Florida requires oil and gas leases to be at least 1 mile offshore. Other leases are prohibited from the 3-foot low water depth landward to the nearest paved road. Massachusetts prohibits mining in nearshore areas that supply beach sediments, generally to the 80-foot depth contour. Public Participation: About half the States require published notice of a proposed lease, either in a statewide newspaper or in the affected county or both. About one-quarter of the States require a public hearing before granting a lease. Two require a hearing prior to granting a prospecting permit. Massachusetts requires an applicant to disclose ‘reliable information as to the quantities, quality and location of the resource available .. .”’ Regulation and Enforcement: All States reserve the right to inspect the work site and the prospecting or mining records. Exploration re- sults, development work, and materials mined and sold must be reported. Reporting periods vary from monthly to annual. The States generally require bonds or insurance to cover faithful performance of the contract, reclamation of the site, and cleanup of pollution resulting from ex- ploration or mining and to indemnify the State against claims arising from the project. Permits or leases may be revoked for failure to dili- gently pursue exploration or mining, for failure to meet reporting requirements, or for failure to pay rents or royalties. Revocation is generally an administrative act by the managing State agency and is subject to admin- istrative or judicial appeal. Revocation may be partial, allowing the operator to keep production sites not in default. Current Activities There is little offshore mining in State waters at the present time. Sand, gravel, and shell are the only ma- terials currently with significant commercial markets. Existing operations include sand and gravel dredging on the New York and New Jersey sides of Ambrose Channel in lower New York harbor, sand and shell ex- traction in Florida, shell extraction in Chesapeake Bay, and a pilot gold dredging project off Nome, Alaska. In addition, there are non-commercial beach nourishment programs using offshore sand. The absence of other activity is variously attributed by State officials to a lack of mineral resources, a lack of information about any resources that may exist, or to the higher cost of ocean mining compared to onshore mining of the same ma- terial. App. A—State Management of Seabed Minerals ¢ 291 The general lack of mining activity means that few of the statutes have been actually tested. But there are several States where recent exploration has spurred a review of existing laws. The Virginia legislature estab- lished a Subaqueous Minerals and Materials Study Commission. Now in its third year, the Commission’s mandate is ‘‘to determine if the subaqueous minerals and materials of the commonwealth exist in commer- cial quantities and if the removal, extraction, use, dis- position, or sale of these materials can be adequately managed to ensure the public interest.’’ The commis- sion is preparing recommendations for systematic ex- ploration of seabed resources (supplementing the present cooperative effort by the Minerals Management Serv- ice, Virginia Division of Mineral Resources, and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science), a subaqueous minerals management plan, and statutory changes (some already adopted) to guide future development. Public debate over a 1984 permit for seismic studies in the Columbia River prompted Oregon to review its laws. In particular, there was concern with protecting established fishing and navigation interests, maintain- ing the quality of the marine environment, and provid- ing adequate public input into what had been an in- house agency review process. The Division of State Lands adopted administrative rules for commercial off- shore oil, gas, and sulphur surveys in June 1986. It is now preparing administrative rules covering geologic and geophysical surveys by commercial hard mineral prospectors and for academic research. A recent change in Oregon State law permits the Division of State Lands to enter into exploration contracts whereby a prospec- tor would have a preference right to develop and recover minerals should the State move to actually permit ocean mineral development. Florida adopted marine prospecting rules in January 1987 to cope with a growing number of applications to explore for oil, gas, and other minerals in State waters. The North Carolina Office of Marine Affairs is be- gining a long range project to develop a marine re- sources management program. Conclusion While the States are for the most part inexperienced in managing seabed minerals, they have the ability to develop effective programs. Knowledge and resources from established coastal zone management, water qual- ity, and hydrocarbon development can be readily tapped. Expertise is also available from academic ma- rine science programs and State geological survey offices. As projects continue, the States have used them as a basis for reviewing their existing management pro- grams and for making improvements. Since 1983, the Minerals Management Service has been funding State marine minerals research under an annual cooperative agreement with the Texas Bureau of Economic Geology of the University of Texas at Aus- tin. All of the coastal States and Puerto Rico have par- ticipated in this program at various times since it be- gan. State research projects focus on both petroleum and hard minerals and range from general surveys of a State’s seabed to detailed geologic studies and economic evaluations of specific mineral occurrences. Some of the research extends into Federal waters. The agreement for the fifth year of this program (fiscal year 1987) is now being prepared. Funding has been approximately $550,000 annually, with about 18 States participating each year. While a State’s role in the Exclusive Economic Zone has yet to be defined, State-Federal task forces have been formed for areas where promising deposits have been found. The task forces’ mission is to appraise the com- mercial potential of the deposits and to oversee the prep- aration of environmental impact statements for leasing proposals. Such task forces have been formed with Ha- waii (cobalt-rich manganese crusts), Oregon and Cali- fornia (polymetallic sulfides in the Gorda Ridge), North Carolina (phosphorites), Georgia (heavy minerals), and the Gulf States (sand, gravel, and heavy minerals off Alabama, Mississippi, Texas, and Louisiana). The functioning of these task forces may provide a needed test of Federal-State cooperation. If sand and gravel and other nearshore deposits are likely to be the first to be developed, it is also likely that operations will overlap State and Federal jurisdiction. Even activities entirely in Federal waters may concern the States because of environmental effects extending beyond the mining site, economic and social effects of onshore support facilities, or effects on local fishing, navigation, and recreational interests. Proposed min- ing operations would benefit from a system of compati- ble Federal and State requirements. Federal support for work by the States can take two paths: continued sup- port for field research to gain better knowledge of ma- rine resources, and support for legislative efforts to de- velop consistent systems for environmentally sound and economically feasible seabed mining. Appendix B The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories U.S. Territorial Law In addition to the waters off the 50 States, the Exclu- sive Economic Zone (EEZ) includes the waters contig- uous to the insular territories and possessions of the United States.! This inclusion is significant in that the islands include only 1.5 percent of the population and 0.13 percent of the land area of the United States?, but 30 percent of the area of the EEZ.? This appendix dis- cusses the legal relationship between the United States and these islands, with attention to the power of the U.S. to proclaim and manage the EEZ around them. The general principle of Federal authority has been that, ‘‘In the Territories of the United States, Congress has the entire dominion and sovereignty, national and local, Federal and State, and has full legislative power over all subjects upon which the legislature of a State might legislate within the State . . .”’* This claim of complete power has been modified for some islands by statutes and compacts granting varying degrees of au- tonomy to the local population. The discussion below classifies the islands into three categories distinguished by the degree of Federal control and local self-govern- ment. The first group (A) includes eight small islands, originally uninhabited, which are under the direct man- agement jurisdiction of Federal agencies. The second group (B) includes American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands. These islands are largely self-governing but subject to supervision by the Department of the In- terior. The third group (C) includes Puerto Rico and the Northern Marianas whose commonwealth status gives them the full measure of internal self-rule where Federal supervisory power is greatly reduced. Group A Palmyra Atoll.—Claimed by both Hawaii and the United States early in the 19th century, Palmyra was annexed to the U.S. with Hawaii in 1898. The Hawaii Statehood Bill excluded Palmyra (as well as Midway, Johnston Island, and Kingman Reef) from the territory ‘Proclamation No. 5030, 3 C.F.R. 22 (1984), reprinted in 16 U.S.C.A. 1453 (1985). 7 2U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1986, 6 (1985). ’C. Ehler and D. Basta, ‘‘Strategic Assessment of Multiple Resource-Use Conflicts in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone,’’ OCEANS ’84 Conference Proceeding, 2 (NOAA Reprint, 1984). ‘Simms vy. Simms, 175 U.S. 162, 168 (1899). 292 of the new State.° The island is privately owned and uninhabited. By executive order it is under the Depart- ment of the Interior’s jurisdiction.® Johnston Island.—Claimed by the United States and Hawaii in 1858, Johnston Island was annexed to the U.S. in 1898. In the late 1950s and early 1960s the is- land was the launch site for atmospheric nuclear tests. A caretaker force maintains the site and operations cen- ter for the Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA), which is responsible for the island. About 500 U.S. Army per- sonnel are on Johnston, preparing a disposal system for obsolete chemical weapons stored there. Entry is con- trolled by DNA.’ Kingman Reef.—This island was annexed by the United States in 1922. Most of it is awash during high water. The island is under the U.S. Navy’s jurisdiction,® but no personnel or facilities are maintained on it. Midway Islands.—Annexed in 1867, Midway has been managed by the U.S. Navy since 1903.° The Mid- way Naval Station was closed in 1981, leaving a naval air facility as the only active military installation. Wake Island.—Wake has been claimed by the United States since 1899. Initially assigned to the U.S. Navy, Wake was transferred to the Department of the Interior (DOI) in 1962!° and is now administered by the Air Force under special agreement with DOI." Howland, Baker, and Jarvis Islands.—Originally claimed under the Guano Act of 1856,'? these islands were formally annexed by the United States in 1934. They were assigned to DOI 2 years later.'* Briefly col- onized during the 1930s by settlers from Hawaii, the islands have been uninhabited since World War II. Comment.—Johnston, Midway, and Wake Islands and Kingman Reef have been declared Naval defense areas and Naval airspace reservations.'* They are sub- ject to special access restrictions, some of which are sus- pended but which may be reinstated without notice. ‘Public Law 86-3 §2, 73 Stat. 4 (1959). °Executive Order No. 10967, 26 Fed. Reg. 9667 (1961). 732 C.F.R. 761.4(c)(1985). ®Executive Order No. 6935, Dec. 29, 1934. °Executive Order No. 11048, 27 Fed. Reg. 8851 (1962), superseding Ex- ecutive Order No. 199-4, Jan. 20, 1903. Executive Order No. 11048, 27 Fed. Reg. 8851 (1962). 137 Fed. Reg. 12255 (1972). 248 U.S.C. 1411 to 1419 (1982). Executive Onder No. 7368, 1 Fed. Reg. 405 (1936). 432 C.F.R. 761 (1985). App. B—The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories ° 293 The Federal District Court of Hawaii has jurisdic- tion over civil and criminal matters arising on the eight islands in this group.'° Group B American Samoa.—U.5S. interest in the islands of American Samoa dates back to the middle of the 19th century, and for a time there were conflicting claims with the United Kingdom and Germany. These claims were settled by a treaty in which Germany and the U.K. renounced all of their rights and claims to the islands east of 171 degrees west longitude in favor of the United States.'® On April 17, 1900, sovereignty over Tutuila, Aunu’u, and their dependent islands was ceded to the U.S. by their chiefs. The Manu’a islands were similarly ceded on July 14, 1904.17 The cessions were formally accepted by Congress in 1929.!8 The United States ex- tended sovereignty over Swains Island (originally claimed under the Guano Act) and added it to Amer- ican Samoa in 1925.19 The act accepting sovereignty over Samoa states that until Congress provides otherwise, “‘all civil, judicial, and military powers shall be vested in such person or persons and shall be exercised in such manner as the President of the United States shall direct.’’?? The U.S. Navy administered American Samoa?! until authority was transferred to DOI in 1951.?? The islands are largely self-governing under a constitution adopted in 1966, with DOI exercising only general supervision. The con- stitution is subject to amendment by Congress.?? While the cessions, constitution, and statutes of Samoa pro- tect traditional local government and land tenure, all are silent as to any use of the sea beyond the 3-mile ter- ritorial limit (tidal and submerged lands have been transferred to the territorial government*‘). The cessions required respect for local property rights and recogni- tion of the traditional authority of the chiefs over their towns, while ‘‘all sovereign rights thereunto belonging”’ were granted to the United States. Article I, Section 3 of the American Samoa constitution declares it to be the policy of the government “‘to protect persons of Samoan ancestry against alienation of their lands and the de- struction of the Samoan way of life and language. . .”’ 548 U.S.C. 644a (1982). ‘6Convention for the Adjustment of Questions Relating to Samoa, Dec. 2, 1899, United States—Germany—Great Britain, 31 Stat. 1878. 17The cessions are reproduced in the historical documents section of the Amer- ican Samoa Code Annotated. 1845 Stat. 1253, 48 U.S.C. 1661 (1982). 1943 Stat. 1357, 48 U.S.C. 1662 (1982). 2048 U.S.C. 1661(c) (1982). 21Executive Order No. 125-4, Feb. 19, 1900. 22Executive Order No. 10,264, 16 Fed. Reg. 6419. 2348 U.S.C. 1662a (1982). 7448 U.S.C. 1705 (1982). The American Samoa code implements this policy, pre- serving “‘customs not in conflict with the laws of Amer- ican Samoa and of the United States . . .’’* Guam.—Spain took possession of Guam along with the other Mariana Islands in the 16th century. The treaty ending the Spanish-American war ceded Guam to the United States.?° Article VIII of the treaty ceded crown lands to the U.S. Government and guaranteed protection of existing municipal, church, and private property rights. The U.S. Navy administered the island until 1949 when DOI took over.?’ Since then, Guam has been governed under the Organic Act of 1950, as amended. ”® The governor and legislature are locally elected and are responsible for most matters of internal governance. DOI’s role is to provide ‘‘general administrative super- vision.’’ The Department is most active in the areas of budget, capital improvements, and technical advice. Congress reserves the power to annul local legislation. A proposed constitution failed to win popular approval in 1979. Since that time, efforts have been redirected toward settling the island’s status before another con- stitutional convention is called. Guam residents strongly favored commonwealth status in a 1982 referendum and a proposed commonwealth act will be presented to the voters in Guam on August 8, 1987.?9 Virgin Islands.—The U.S. Virgin Islands were ceded to the United States by Denmark in 1916.3° The rights to crown property were transferred to the U.S. Government, while municipal, church, and private prop- erty rights were preserved. Other than a few exceptions named in the treaty, Denmark guaranteed the cession to be ‘‘free and unencumbered by any reservations, privileges, franchises, [or] grants... .”’ The U.S. Virgin Islands are self-governing under the Organic Act of 19367! and the Revised Organic Act of 1954, as amended.*? The popularly elected legislature and governor have authority over local matters but Con- gress retains the power to annul insular legislation.*? Matters of Federal concern are ‘‘under the general administrative supervision of the Secretary of the In- terior.’’ DOI’s role is mainly administration and au- diting of Federal funds appropriated for the islands. 25Am. Samoa Code Ann. §1.0202 (1983). 2Treaty of Peace, Dec. 10, 1898, United States-Spain, 30 Stat. 1754. 27Executive Order No. 10077, 14 Fed. Reg. 5523 (1949). 2®Codified at 48 U.S.C. 1421 et seq. (1982). 29Guam Commission on Self-Determination, ‘‘The Draft Guam Common- wealth Act’’ (June 11, 1986). 3°Convention for Cession of the Danish West Indies, Aug. 4, 1916, United States—Denmark, 39 Stat. 1706. 3148 U.S.C. 1391 et seq. (1982). 3248 U.S.C. 1541 et seq. (1982). 3348 U.S.C. 1574(c) (1982). 294 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Like Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands are authorized to draft their own constitution.** The most recent of sev- eral proposed constitutions was turned down by voters in 1981. At the present time, the issues of a constitu- tion and status are in abeyance. Comment.—All three of these territories enjoy a large measure of self-rule, but under the territorial clause of the Constitution®> their governments are, in effect, Fed- eral agencies exercising delegated power. Neither the initial cessions nor any subsequent grant of local power have insulated the islands from highly discretionary Fed- eral authority. The Executive Branch, acting through the Depart- ment of the Interior, maintains fiscal and other super- visory powers. Congress retains the right to approve and amend local constitutions or to annul local statutes. It appears that nothing in domestic law would impede the establishment and development of EEZs around these islands. Group C Puerto Rico.—Spain ruled Puerto Rico from 1508 until 1898. The island was ceded to the United States by the Treaty of Paris under the same terms and con- ditions as Guam.*° After nearly 2 years of military rule, the island was administered under Organic Acts passed in 190037 and 1917.38 In 1950 Congress passed the Puerto Rican Federal Relations Act ‘‘in the nature of a com- pact so that the people of Puerto Rico may organize a government pursuant to a constitution of their own adoption.’’?? This Act provided for the automatic re- peal of those sections of the 1917 Act pertaining to local concerns and the structure of the island’s government. The repeal was effective upon adoption and proclama- tion of the constitution in 1952, and Puerto Rico then ““ceased to be a territory of the United States subject to the plenary powers of Congress . . .’’*° The govern- ment of Puerto Rico no longer exercises delegated power, and its constitution and laws may not be amended by Congress. The Puerto Rico constitution establishes the common- wealth and declares that ‘‘political power emanates from the people, to be exercised according to their will within the terms of the compact between them and the United States.’’*1 ‘“Commonwealth”’ is an undefined term and, as noted above, the ‘‘compact’’ is not a comprehensive Public Law 94-584, 90 Stat. 2899 (1976), as amended by Public Law 96- 597, 94 Stat. 3479 (1980). 35U.S. Const. art. IV, §3. 36See note 26, above. 37The Foraker Act, ch. 191, 31 Stat. 77 (1900). 38The Jones Act, ch. 145, 39 Stat. 951 (1917). Ch. 446, 64 Stat. 319 (1950). ‘United States v. Quinones, 758 F.2d 40, 42 (1985). “1P.R. Const. art. I, §1. agreement but the residue of the 1917 Organic Act from which the irrelevant provisions have been stripped. It has remained for the courts to struggle toward clarifi- cation of this status. Puerto Rico is subject to the U.S. Constitution but “like a state, is an autonomous political entity, ‘sover- eign over matters not ruled by the Constitution.’ ’’* Federal laws “‘not locally inapplicable’’ have the same force and effect in Puerto Rico as in the States.*? Fed- eral statutes may exempt Puerto Rico or may include it on terms different from the States.** Relations between the courts of Puerto Rico and the Federal courts are the same as those for State courts.*® The principles of defer- ence and comity apply to Federal court review of Puerto Rico’s legislative, executive, and judicial acts.*® For all of its State-like attributes, commonwealth sta- tus is inherently ambiguous. Congressional power to treat the island differently leaves Puerto Rico uncertain as to its participation in important Federal programs. Court cases resolving specific issues do not provide a coherent, overall definition of the scope of local author- ity. What President Johnson called a “‘creative and flex- ible’ relationship‘? has come to be viewed as an un- satisfactory, interim arrangement. While disagreeing on the form of the ultimate relationship, all of Puerto Rico’s political parties agree that a clear outline of the island’s powers vis-a-vis the Federal Government is essential. *® There are no legal obstacles to such a change. On the island’s side, ‘‘the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico does not close the door to any change of status that the people of Puerto Rico desire . . .”’*° On the Federal side, there have been repeated execu- tive®® and congressional®! declarations that the choice of status remains with the people of Puerto Rico. Statehood would give Puerto Rico equal standing with the other States in whatever management regime Congress establishes for the EEZ. Independence would Rodriguez v. Popular Democratic Party, 457 U.S. 1, 8 (1982) (quoting Mora v. Mejias, 115 F. Supp 610, 612 [D.P.R. 1953}). 848 U.S.C. 734 (1982). ‘*Harris y. Rosario, 446 U.S. 651 (1980) (per curiam) (overturning a ruling that lower A.F.D.C. payments in Puerto Rico violate the equal protection guarantees of the Fifth Amendment under the territorial clause. ‘‘Con- gress . . . may treat Puerto Rico differently from States so long as there is a rational basis for its actions.’’). #48 U.S.C. 864 (1982). *®Rodriguez vy. Popular Democratic Party, supra, at 8; Hernandez-Agosto v. Romero-Barcelo, 748 F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 1984). ‘7Statement in Response to the Report of the United States—Puerto Rico Status Commission, 2 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1034 (Aug. 5, 1966). *8P_ Falk, ed., The Political Status of Puerto Rico (Lexington, MA: Lexing- ton Books, 1986); Puerto Rico’s Political Future: A Divisive Issue with Many Dimensions (GAO Report GGD-81-48, Mar. 2, 1981). *?Puerto Rico Socialist Party v. Commonwealth, 107 P.R. Dec. 590, 606 (1978). g 502 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1034 (Aug. 5, 1966) (Johnson); 12 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1225 (July 7, 1976) (Ford); 13 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1374 (Sept. 17, 1977) (Carter); 18 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 19 (Jan. 12, 1982) (Reagan). G 51$. Con. Res. 35, 93 Stat. 1420 (1979). App. B—The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories ¢ 295 give the island full control and sovereignty. Under the present system, the island’s local power does not include rights in the EEZ. The Popular Democratic Party’s pro- posed modifications to the compact include local author- ity over the use of natural resources and the sea.*? The Northern Mariana Islands.—These islands were colonized by Spain in the 16th century and trans- ferred to Germany in 1899. Japan seized Germany’s Pa- cific possessions in 1914 and was given a mandate over them by the League of Nations in 1920. The Marianas were taken by the United States during World War II. In 1947, the United States was granted a trusteeship over the former Japanese mandated islands.*? As per- mitted by the charter of the United Nations, the Trusteeship Agreement recognized both the strategic in- terests of the United States and the political, economic, and social advancement of the inhabitants.** Status ne- gotiations with the Northern Marianas resulted in the establishment of a commonwealth “‘in political union with the United States.’’°° The other three island groups of the Trust Territory became free associated states.°° When the U.S. EEZ was proclaimed, the Marianas were included in the zone ‘“‘to the extent consistent with the Covenant and the United Nations Trusteeship Agreement.’’°” Article 6(2) of the Trusteeship Agree- ment requires the United States to ‘‘promote the eco- nomic advancement and self-sufficiency of the inhabi- tants’? by regulating the use of natural resources, encouraging the development of fisheries, agriculture, and industries, and protecting the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources. The Covenant is silent as to management of ocean resources but provides for a constitution to be adopted by the people of the Northern Mariana Islands and submitted to the United States for approval on the basis of consistency with the Covenant, the U.S. Constitution, and applicable laws and treaties.°® The constitution was adopted locally on °2Puerto Rico’s Political Future, supra n.48, 45. °3Trusteeship Agreement for the Former Japanese Mandated Islands, July 18, 1947, 61 Stat. 3301, T.I.A.S. No. 1665 [hereinafter ‘‘Trusteeship Agreement’’]. 54U.N. Charter, chapter XII; Trusteeship Agreement, arts. 1, 5, 6. 5SConvenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the United States, Feb. 15, 1975, 90 Stat. 263 [here- inafter “‘Covenant’’]. 5°As such, they are independent countries in which U.S. interest is mostly limited to security matters. The Compacts provide that the states conduct for- eign affairs in their own names, including ‘‘the conduct of foreign affairs relat- ing to law of the sea and marine resource matters, including the harvesting, conservation, exploration or exploitation of living and non-living resources from the sea, seabed, or sub-soil to the full extent recognized under international law.’’ Compact of Free Association: Federated States of Micronesia and Repub- lic of the Marshall Islands and Palau, Jan. 14, 1986, 99 Stat. 1770, art. II, §121 [hereinafter ‘‘Compact’’]. This provision puts the three states outside the scope of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Proclamation No. 5564, note 60, below, effectuated the Compact with the Federated States of Micronesia and with the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The Compact with The Republic of Palau is undergoing the local ratification process. *7Proclamation No. 5030, supra note 1. *8Covenant, art. II. March 6, 1977, and proclaimed effective on January 9, 1978 by President Carter.°? Unlike the Covenant, the constitution contains two provisions relevant to the EEZ. Article XI (Public Lands) declares submerged lands off the coast to which the Commonwealth may claim title under U.S. law to be public lands to be managed and disposed of as provided by law. Article XIV (Natural Resources) provides, in Section 1, that ‘‘[t]he marine resources in waters off the coast of the Commonwealth over which the Commonwealth now or hereafter may have jurisdiction under United States law shall be man- aged, controlled, protected and preserved by the legis- lature for the benefit of the people.’’ U.S. interest in the Northern Marianas under the Trusteeship Agreement was administrative, not sover- eign. The change to U.S. sovereignty required United Nations approval to be implemented. On May 28, 1986, the United Nations Trusteeship Council concluded that U.S. obligations had been satisfactorily discharged, that the people of the Northern Marianas had freely exer- cised their right to self-determination, and that it was appropriate for the Trusteeship Agreement to be ter- minated.®° On November 3, 1986, President Reagan issued a proclamation ending the trusteeship, fully estab- lishing the Commonwealth, and granting American citizenship to its residents.®! As a U.S. territory, the Northern Marianas are now subject to U.S. law in the manner and to the extent provided by the Convenant. The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Territorial Law Under our system, the authority of Congress over the territories is both clear and absolute. This authority originates in the constitutional grant to Congress of the ““Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States.’’ Any restriction on this power would come from the terms under which a terri- tory was initially acquired by the United States or from a subsequent grant of authority from Congress to the territory. As shown above, the present territories have no explicitly reserved or granted power to manage the EEZ. It has also been shown that Congress may treat the territories differently from the States as long as there is a rational basis for its action. The territorial clause has two purposes: to bring civil authority to undeveloped frontier areas and to promote their political and economic development. Its goal is the achievement, through statehood or some other arrange- ment, of a clear and stable relationship between the ter- 5°Proclamation No. 4534, 42 Fed. Reg. 56593 (1977). °T.C. Res. 2183 (LIII)(1986). *'Proclamation No. 5564, 51 Fed. Reg. 40399 (1986). 296 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ritory and the rest of the Union. In the past, Federal control over territorial affairs was tolerable because eventual statehood would bring equality of treatment and constitutional limitations on Federal power. There are grounds for suggesting that the present territories do not fit the pattern of earlier ones and that they are “poorly served by a constitutional approach based on evolutionary progress toward statehood.’’®? Rather than being frontier areas settled by Americans who later peti- tioned their government for statehood, the present ter- ritories joined the U.S. with developed cultures of their own and may wish to preserve their uniqueness by re- maining apart from the Union of States. Proposals to develop the EEZ, like other Congressional action un- der the territorial clause, should recognize their special position. International Law Considerations The EEZ is based on international law’s recognition of a coastal state’s right to manage resources beyond the Territorial Sea. President Reagan based the procla- mation on this international principle and stated that the ‘‘United States will exercise these sovereign rights and jurisdiction in accordance with the rules of inter- national law.’’®? This section examines how interna- tional law may bear on the EEZ around U.S. territories. The primary sources of international law are treaties and international custom.** The former is explicit and documented while the latter is deduced from actual prac- tice. This review will focus on three areas relevant to territories: the United Nations Charter and resolutions pertaining to non-self-governing territories, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the practice of other countries with respect to their over- seas territories. The United Nations Charter and Resolutions Article 73 of the United Nations Charter calls on member states to recognize that the interests of the in- habitants of non-self-governing territories are para- mount. Members are to ensure the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the territories and to promote constructive measures for their devel- opment. In addition, members accept a responsibility “to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political in- stitutions, according to the particular circumstances of 21 eibowitz, United States Federalism: The States and the Territories, 28 Am. U.L. Rev. 449, 451 (1979). ®Proclamation No. 5030, supra n.1. Restatement (revised) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States 102 (Tent. Draft No. 6, 1985). each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement.’’® Two General Assembly resolutions amplify the United Nations’ view of territories. Resolution 1514 calls for immediate steps to transfer all powers to the people of trust and non-self-governing territories ‘‘in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire.’’® Resolution 1541, passed a day later, establishes princi- ples for determining when a territory reaches ‘‘a full measure of self government.’’®” Three options are rec- ognized: independence, free association with an inde- pendent state, and integration with an independent state. The United Nations has formally recognized the free association status of Puerto Rico® and of the North- ern Marianas.®® The United States provides annual reports to the United Nations concerning American Samoa, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and they have been the subject of occasional visiting missions from the United Nations. Their status, along with other non-self-governing territories has been reviewed annu- ally by the General Assembly. The most recent resolu- tions are typical in calling on the United States and the territories to safeguard the right of the territorial peo- ple to the enjoyment of their natural resources and to develop those resources under local control.’° Signifi- cantly, the resolution concerning Guam urges the United States ‘‘to safeguard and guarantee the right of the people of Guam to the natural resources of the Ter- ritory, including marine resources within its exclusive economic zone...” These documents do not, of their own force, require action on the part of the United States. The Charter and the resolutions provide the international norms un- der which the United States and the territories may mutually decide the terms of their relationship. There is an obligation on the part of the United States to pro- mote the development of the territories while protect- ing their free choice of political status. This obligation is not inconsistent with the view of the territorial clause as promoting the political and economic development of the territories. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea The United States has not signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea because of objections to its deep seabed mining provisions. Nevertheless, the ®5U.N. Charter, art. 73(b). 66G.A. Res. 1514, 15 U.N. GAOR Supp. 16, at 66 (1960). 87G.A. Res. 1541, 15 U.N. GAOR Supp. 16, at 29 (1960). °8G.A. Res. 748 (VIII)(1953). ®T.C. Res. 2183 (LIII)(1986). 7°G.A. Res. 41/23 (Question of American Samoa), G.A. Res. 41/24 (Ques- tion of the United States Virgin Islands), G.A. Res. 41/25 (Question of Guam), 41 GAOR Supp. 53 (1986). App. B—The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories ¢ 297 United States “‘will continue to exercise its rights and fulfill its duties in a manner consistent with international law, including those aspects of the Convention which either codify customary international law or refine and elaborate concepts which represent an accommodation of the interests of all States and form a part of interna- tional law.’’’! The presidential statement accompany- ing the EEZ proclamation contains similar language.” The body of the Convention contains only one refer- ence to territories. Article 305(1) provides that self-gov- erning associated states and internally self-governing ter- ritories “‘which have competence over the matters governed by this Convention including the competence to enter treaties in respect of those matters’? may sign the convention. Accompanying Resolution III declares that in the case of territories that have not achieved a self-governing status recognized by the United Nations, the Convention’s provisions ‘‘shall be implemented for the benefit of the people of the territory with a view to promoting their well-being and development.’’ The former provision recognizes that territories may achieve a degree of autonomy allowing them to participate in international matters. The Cook Islands and Niue, states associated with New Zealand, have signed the Law of the Sea Treaty under Article 305(1).’? Resolu- tion III restates the commitments of Article 73 of the Charter and of Resolutions 1514 and 1541. Article 305(1) and Resolution III both reiterate international norms compatible with U.S. territorial management. Practices of Other Countries Where there is no treaty or other explicit source, in- ternational law may be ascertained from ‘‘the customs and usages of civilized nations.’’’* A 1978 study re- viewed the law and practice of six nations with respect to their overseas territories.’° The study found as a gen- eral rule that metropolitan powers with overseas terri- tories or associated states: 1) have either given the pop- ulation of the overseas territory full and equal representation in the national parliament and govern- ment or 2) have given the local government of the over- seas territory jurisdiction over the resources of the EEZ. The first category includes Denmark (Faroe Islands and Greenland), France (overseas departments and territo- ries), and Spain (Canary Islands). The second category ™Declarations Made Upon Signature of the Final Act at Montego Bay, Jamaica, on Dec. 10, 1982—United States of America. (Quoted in Theuten- berg, The Evolution of the Law of the Sea, 223 [Dublin: Tycooly International Publishing, 1984}). Statement on United States Oceans Policy, 19 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 383 (1983). 78Status Report, U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, ST/LEG/SER.E14 at 701 (1985). The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 700 (1900). T. Franck, Control of Sea Resources by Semi-Autonomous States (Wash- ington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1978). includes the United Kingdom (Caribbean Associated States), New Zealand (Cook Islands and Niue), and the Netherlands (Netherlands Antilles). While small, this study includes all instances of overseas territories hav- ing no, or token, representation in the metropolitan gov- ernment. The study concludes that the United States represents the sole significant exception to the rule. American territories have neither full representation nor local control of the EEZ. While some information in the 1978 study is no longer current (for example, the Caribbean Associated States are now fully independent nations), its conclusion still seems correct. British practice, as exemplified by the recent declaration of an exclusive fisheries zone around the Falkland Islands, is for the national government to establish policy and for the territorial government to im- plement it. Thus, the Falkland’s government will de- cide on the optimum level of fishing, issue licenses, and establish and collect fees and taxes. London will pro- vide advice and technical assistance.’® The practice of the Netherlands is similar. Matters of broad policy are decided in the Hague, with consid- eration given to the preference of the Antilles. Explo- ration and management are in the hands of the Antilles, and the benefits from production would go to the is- lands.’’ The Territories Under International Law Though relatively recent, the EEZ is a generally ac- cepted concept of international law. The United States based its proclamation on international law and declared its intent to follow that law in managing the zone. The declarations of the United Nations, the Law of the Sea Convention, and the practice of other nations are not, of themselves, mandatory upon the United States. Taken as a whole, however, they outline international norms for the treatment of territories. These norms suggest that if territories are not fully integrated (and represented) in the national government, their natural resources should be managed for the benefit of the local popu- lation. Territorial Laws Affecting the EEZ Geography, history, and culture bind the territories to the sea. All of them have adopted laws pertaining to activities in the ocean. These range from coastal zone management and water quality laws akin to those adopted by the States to broad claims of jurisdiction amounting to local EEZs. 76Conversation with Robert Embleton, Second Secretary, British Embassy, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 1986. 77Conversation with Harold Henriquez, Netherlands Antilles Attache, Em- bassy of the Netherlands, Washington, D.C., Dec. 10, 1986. 298 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier American Samoa’s water quality standards provide for protection of bays and open coastal waters to the 100 fathom depth contour. A permit is required for any activity affecting water quality in these areas.”® The U.S. Virgin Islands coastal zone management program extends ‘“‘to the outer limit of the Territorial Sea’’ (3 nautical miles). Its environmental policies call for accommodating ‘‘offshore sand and gravel mining needs in areas and in ways that will not adversely affect marine resources and navigation.’’’? A permit to remove material is required and may not be granted unless such material is not otherwise available at reasonable cost. Removal may not significantly alter the physical char- acteristics of the area on an immediate or long-term ba- sis. The Virgin Islands government collects a permit fee and a royalty on material sold. The U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa do not assert their jurisdiction beyond the 3 nautical miles of Territorial Sea granted to them.*®° The other three self- governing territories have taken steps to assure them- selves greater control of their marine resources. By a law adopted in 1980, Guam defines its territory as running 200 geographical miles seaward from the low water mark. Within this territory, Guam claims ‘‘ex- clusive rights to determine the conditions and terms of all scientific research, management, exploration and ex- ploitation of all ocean resources and all sources of energy and prevention of pollution within the economic zone, including pollution from outside the zone which poses a threat within the zone.’’*! In a letter accompanying the bill, the governor stated that, ‘‘[a]s a matter of pol- icy, the territory of Guam is claiming exclusive rights to control the utilization of all ocean resources in a 200- mile zone surrounding the island.’’®? Possible conflicts with Federal law were recognized, but the law was ap- proved ‘‘as a declaration of Territorial policies and goals.’’ Section 1001(b) of the proposed Guam Com- monwealth Act includes a similar claim to an EEZ.* Puerto Rico claims ‘‘[o]wnership of the commercial minerals found in the soil and subsoil of Puerto Rico, its adjacent islands and in surrounding waters and sub- merged lands next to their coasts up to where the depth of the waters allows their exploitation and utilization, in an extension of not less than 3 marine leagues. . .’’** This continental shelf claim extends beyond Puerto Rico’s Territorial Sea. It combines the principles of ad- jacency and exploitability codified in the 1958 Conven- tion on the Continental Shelf.®° A statement of motives 7?Am. Samoa Admin. Code §§24.0201 to 24.0208 (1984). 79V I. Code Ann. tit. 12, §906(b)(7) (1982). 5°See note 24, above. ®\Guam Code Ann. §402 (1980). ®2Td., Compiler's Comment. ®3See note 29, above. ®sP_R. Laws Ann. tit. 28, §111 (1985). 8515 U.S.T. 471, T.I.A.S. No. 5578, 499 U.N.T.S. 311. accompanying the 1979 amendments to Puerto Rico’s mining law explains the Roman and Spanish law ante- cedents for government trusteeship of minerals. It also points out that Section 8 of the Organic Act of 1917 placed submerged lands under the control of the gov- ernment of Puerto Rico and gave the island’s legisla- ture the authority to make needed laws in this field ‘‘as it deems convenient.’’ The legislature concluded that “after 1917, the Federal Government has no title or jurisdiction over the submerged lands of Puerto Rico. The title is vested fully in Puerto Rico. It is up to the Legislature to determine the extent of said jurisdic- tionnagce The most comprehensive territorial management pro- gram is that of the Northern Mariana Islands. The Commonwealth’s Marine Sovereignty Act of 1980 es- tablishes archipelagic baselines, claims a 12-mile Ter- ritorial Sea, and declares a 200-mile EEZ.8” The Sub- merged Lands Act applies from the line of ordinary high tide to the outer limit line of the EEZ. It requires licenses and leases for the exploration, development, and extrac- tion of petroleum and all other minerals in submerged lands.** The latter statute has been implemented by detailed rules and regulations. These claims are based on the statutory law of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands which confirmed the earlier Japanese law ‘“‘that all marine areas below the ordinary high watermark belong to the govern- ment.’’8° A subsequent order of the Department of the Interior transferred public lands, among them sub- merged lands, to the constituent districts of the Trust Territory, including the Northern Mariana Islands.°° In addition, Section 801 of the Covenant provides for transfer of the Trust Territory’s real property interests to the Northern Marianas no later than the termina- tion of the trusteeship. There is some question as to whether the conditional inclusion of the Northern Marianas in the U.S. EEZ Proclamation (‘‘to the extent consistent with the Cove- nant and the United Nations Trusteeship Agreement’’) implies recognition of local claims. There is also a ques- tion as to whether U.S. territorial law would permit this local claim to survive the transition to U.S. sovereignty. The Supreme Court has held that ownership of sub- merged lands is vested in the Federal Government as ““a function of national external sovereignty,’’ essen- tial to national defense and foreign affairs.°! When the trusteeship over the Northern Marianas ended, the United States extended its sovereignty over the islands 861979 P.R. Laws 279, 281. 87Commonwealth of the Marianas Code, tit. 2, §1101-1143 (1984). 88Commonwealth of the Marianas Code, tit. 2, §1211-1231 (1984). “Trust Territory Code, tit. 67, §2 (1970). *°Department of the Interior Order 2969 (Dec. 28, 1974). United States v. California, 332 U.S. 19, 34 (1947). App. B—The Exclusive Economic Zone and U.S. Insular Territories ° 299 and became responsible for their foreign affairs and de- fense. The situation of the Northern Mariana Islands may be comparable to that of Texas, which was admit- ted to the Union after having been an independent coun- try. When it joined the United States, Texas relin- quished its sovereignty and, with it, her proprietary claims to submerged lands in the Gulf of Mexico.°? In 1985, the Northern Mariana Islands Commission on Federal Laws suggested that Congress convey to the Marianas submerged lands to an extent of 3 nautical miles ‘‘without prejudice to any claims the Northern Mariana Islands may have to submerged lands seaward of those conveyed by the legislation.’’®? The Commis- sion recognized that there are strong arguments for and against the Northern Marianas’ continued ownership of submerged lands after termination of the trusteeship, but it pointed out that it “‘makes little sense’’ for the United States to transfer title to the islands, only to have that title revert to the United States under the doctrine *United States v. Texas, 339 U.S. 707 (1950). *8Second Interim Report to the Congress of the United States, 172. The Com- mission is appointed by the President under Section 504 of the Covenant to make recommendations to Congress as to which laws of the United States should apply to the Commonwealth and which should not. of United States v. Texas.°* The Commonwealth is still negotiating with the Executive Branch over the accept- ance or modification of its marine claims. Territorial Ocean Laws The history and culture of the territories are intert- wined with the ocean. Some of them have acted to as- sert their own claims to manage ocean resources beyond the territorial sea, although their authority to do so is uncertain under U.S. territorial law. The present situ- ation is one of latent conflict which could become ac- tive when marine prospecting or development is pro- posed. Should the United States decide that Federal jurisdiction is exclusive, an explorer or miner may be greatly delayed while Federal and territorial authorities argue their positions in court. A Congressional resolu- tion of this conflict would require action using the ple- nary powers of the Constitution’s territorial clause, tempered by the goals of American and international territorial law, and the political and economic develop- ment of the territories and their people. Tdi 8 179: Appendix C Mineral Laws of the United States The five legal systems discussed below illustrate the changes in national minerals policy over the past cen- tury. One major shift was from a policy of free disposal, intended to foster development of the frontier, to a leas- ing policy intended to provide a return to the public and to foster conservation by controlling the rate of develop- ment. A second change resulted in a balancing of miner- al values against other values for the land in question. Thus, the Mining Law of 1872 requires only that the land be valuable for minerals, but the leasing laws al- low a lease only after a prospector shows that the land is ‘‘chiefly valuable’ for the mineral to be developed. The leasing laws, and, to a greater extent, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act also require consideration of economic and environmental impacts, State and lo- cal concerns, and the relative value of mining and other existing or potential uses of the area. A third change was a recognition that different types of minerals could best be developed under different management systems. The hardrock minerals remain under a system that re- wards the prospector’s risk-taking, the fuel resources are leased under a system that takes national needs and pri- orities into account, and common construction materi- als are made readily available under a simplified sales procedure. When creating a legal regime for the mineral resources of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), the United States can benefit from long experience under several diverse systems. The experimental nature of much of today’s explo- ration and recovery equipment and the gaps in our knowledge of the physical and biological resources of the EEZ indicate that it may take years of research and exploration before an informed decision to proceed with commercial exploitation can be made. A legal system must reasonably accommodate the risk being taken by the mineral industry under these circumstances. At the same time, the system must also accommodate impor- tant public interests and ensure a fair market value for the public resources. The law must also consider the na- tional and State interests in ocean development and de- fine the respective Federal and State roles. Onshore Mineral Management Federal onshore minerals are managed under three principal legal systems: the Mining Law of 1872, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 and related leasing laws, and the Surface Resources Act of 1955 (table C-1). The laws do not apply uniformly to all Federal lands, and a mineral may be subject to different rules in different 300 places, including some cases where there appears to be no applicable law at all. The Mining Law of 1872 The Mining Law of 1872 is applicable to ‘‘hardrock’’ minerals in the public domain in most States. Like other laws of its era, it was intended to expand development of the Western States by making Federal lands availa- ble to persons who occupy and develop them. It adopt- ed a system that was developed under State law and local custom between the start of the California gold rush in 1849 and passage of the first mining law in 1866. All valuable mineral deposits and the lands in which they are found are free and open to exploration, occu- pation, and purchase. State mining laws and customs of the mining districts are recognized to the extent that they do not conflict with Federal law. The Mining Law outlines the requirements for locating, marking, and evaluating claims; sets a $100 minimum for annual ex- penditures on labor or improvements; and provides for transfer of ownership to the miner when these condi- tions are met. Depending on the type of deposit, pay- ment of $2.50 or $5.00 per acre is required. The Government receives no royalties or other payments for the minerals. In its original form, the Mining Law allowed for the greatest individual initiative and the least Government regulation. Over the years, its operation has become more restricted. First, the Government has withdrawn extensive areas from the operation of the Mining Law when they were needed for other purposes (military reservations, national parks, dam and reservoir sites, etc.). Second, certain minerals were excluded from the law and made available under other programs. Third, mining operations are subject to environmental and reclamation requirements and varying degrees of review and approval by the surface management agency. Pri- or to issuance of a patent, a claimant’s use of a mining claim is limited to that required for mineral exploration, development, and production. Nonconflicting surface uses by others may continue. Mineral Leasing Acts Concern over resource depletion and monopolization in the early years of the 20th century lead to withdrawls of coal, oil, phosphate, and other fuel and nonmetallic minerals from entry under the Mining Law. In 1920 Congress passed the Mineral Leasing Act, making these App. C—Mineral Laws of the United States ¢ 301 ‘yiun Buluiw jeo -160} e asudwoos snw YaulWwW Aq uasoyo uoljeo0} pue azis “}luwed 94} jo uolyeinp ay} 10} AlaAooe, Bul -ulejulew ‘Sainjipuadxe wnw -lulwW ‘juaWdoO|aAep juabi}IG “Ayijigedeo jeoiBojou -Y99} pue jeloueuls Bulyesjsuo -wap uodn jiwed e Bulule}qo, “UO!}E4}S|UIWPY oueydsow}y pue o1ue800 JBUuOI}eEN ay} WOl BSudd!| Ag JOU ‘uoljyeu Aue jo uoljoipsun! 80JNOSAJ JO {JOYS Je}UBUI}UOD 84} Bpis}no peqess daap au} uo Sajnpou aseueBuew :(E/p1 -LOVL “O'S'N O£) }0V seounosay S|EJOUIW PIeH peqeas doaq “JOU9}U] BY} JO Aleja19ag aU} Aq P9UIWJa}ap aZIS :s/e/aUJW 1AaYJO pue snydjng ‘yun uolnonpoid Odlwouo0da ajqeuoseai e asd -WOOd 0} Auessaoau Ss! Pale 19612} ® ssajun saioe 99/‘g :seB JO IO “JUBWUOIIAUAa puke ‘o}I/PJIM ‘YSI} JO uoljoajoid ‘Ajayes ‘uol}Onp -oid jo ayes “JuawWAed Buipnjour ‘asea] JO SW9} YIM aOURI|dWOD “BuIppiq aAi}iadWoOd 419} -e pojuei6 asea| e o}u! Buisa}ug “JOU9}U] BY} JO JUOW -yedaq ay} Aq jeaoidde 0} j00/ -qns ‘ue|d uolyesojdxa s,aassey ‘weiBoid Buiseo) Jeak-g e 0} JUeNsInd ‘OWe}Ul 8y} JO JUBWYedaq 9} JO JAaUIL *$9}81S OS 8} JO SJa}eM [e110}1118} 94} PUOA -8q JAYS [e}UBUI}UOD J9}NO aU} JO spue| peBiewuqns uy} ul sjesoulw Wl@ (QGEL-LEEL “O'S'N Ev) 19V Spue] J9YS JB}UBUI}UOD 4198}NO ajqeoljdde joy ajqeoljdde joy "yuBu Ayedoid e asinb -08 JOU S8OP JOUIW! “aAISN|O -xauOU JO JeuNWWODd aq Aew a}Is e JO asp) ‘ayes Aq jesodsiq ajqeoijdde joy JOUIN “me Bul -UI [249UBH By} JO adods ay} WoOl} sjesaull aAOge sapnjo -X :(G1L9-LL9 “O'S'N OF) SSBL 40 JOY Seounosay a0eJINS ‘spue| oiqnd uo Aejo pue ‘siapulo Jenei6 ‘auo}s ‘pues jo ,,saljal “BA UOWUWOD,, ‘(709-09 "O'S'N 0€) Zr6L JO JV S/eHe}eEW ‘aseo| iad souoe 09S'Z :ysejog ‘asea| iad saioe Org ‘OolxeyW) MEN pue eueIS -INO7 ul UNYydjng ‘sai0e OZL‘S :aJ/UOS/IB JO a/BYS JIE “S}O14}SIP Buisea| om} JO YyoRd ul Sal0e OOO'OOE S! Huw} a4, sa4yM eyse|y }deoxe 9}e}S auo Aue ul Sade O8O'9rz ‘}IUN esed| Jed sa10e Og :se6 40 JIC ‘“apIMUOl} “eu saioe ogr‘0c :aleydsoyd “‘Bululw o1woUu0da 40} Auessa -O9U $1 Sale QOE‘G| 0} pastel aq Aew ‘ayes auo Aue ul sai0e OzL‘s ‘asea| auo Aue ul sasoe 099% :wnipog ‘apimuolyeu se10e QOO‘OOL ‘9321S auO Aue Ul Sa10e QO8O‘9p ‘“JOlUAa}U] 9uy} Jo Auejainag Aq paulwiojop asea| |ENPIAIPU! JO azIS 7je0D *uo1}09}01d Je}UsWUOIIAUS Puke ‘UOI}eAUES -u0d aosNosSa ‘Ajayes ‘juaWdO -|9@AQP pue uolyeJO;dxa JUabI|IP ‘sjuowAed Bulpnjou! ‘asea) JO SW49} YIM sOUeI|dWOD “sease }esoulus UMOUY U! Sased} JO} PIG 9AIWEdWOD ‘jIsOdap O|GeN|eA e SIBAODSIP OYM 40} -oadsoid 0} asea| }yBu-aoudde -}81q “uMOUMUN SI Jel}Ua}0d JesouIW B1BYM JUedI|dde poi}! -yenb sity 0} asea| SAI}I}adWOoO -UON ‘eSea| e O}U! Bulsa}Uy *seB 40 |10 10} pans “S| Jou s}iwsed Buljoadsolg ‘JOU9}U] 94} JO JUBWedEq UY} WO1} BSUdd}| 10 JlWJad Ag JoWa}U] ay} JO jUQW}edeq ey} 10 18uI;) “spue|jssei6 pue s}sas0} feuoijeu pasinboe ul syesoulw Jayjyo je (260 3831S 09) Qv6L JO € “ON Ue} UO!yezIUeB -108Y ‘Spue) pasinboe ul inyd -|NS pue sjesaulW aAoge :(‘bas 19 LG “O'S'N 0) PueT pasinb -OW 10} }OW Bulsea7 jesoulp) ‘peurejas ouem S}Yybu jesourw yoIuM ul Spue| pasodsip pue uyewop o1|Gnd au} ul! LuNnIp -OS pue ‘ysejod ‘ayeyudsoud ‘ayjuosli6 ‘seB ‘ayeus j10 ‘10 ‘ye0o :(‘bas J9 181 “O'S'N O&) 0261 40 JOVW Bulsee7 jeroul; *aye00| Aew uos -lad © yey} Swe} Jo Jaquinu ay} UO WI] ON “Wie|o Uoly -ejoosse ue JO} sas0e QQ} 0} dn JO SO1OB OZ !SWIP/D JBDP/q "1994 009 X 389} ONG} :suye/9 apoT “‘penss! S| }uayed e ji}UN Wiejo yoesa uo Ajjenuue s}uawearoid “Wi! 40 Joge| $O YOM COOLS “Me 8}e}S pue jesapa4 Aq poiinbai se wie}o Buipuooes pue Buimseyy “wilejo yO S}ilui) UlYyyIM jIsod -ap ajqenjea e jo Alaaoosiq ,UedQ pue 9al4,, JOUIW ‘ajqejreae Aye -UO!}!|PUOD JO ajqe|!eAeUN Seale paijioads ayew suoljeAla -Sd1 pue S/eEMeIPU}IN\ ‘UISUOD -SIM Pue ‘(Spue| Ue!pul| peped jd90xe) ewoyeR|yO ‘NOssIW ‘eyosouulw ‘uebiyoi ‘sesuey ‘eweqe|y }daoxe seje}s |e ul urewop o1/qnd au} ul sjesouIWw yooupsey :(‘bas 38 22 ‘0'S'N 0€) ZZBL JO me] Buus jesauer weajsks paqeas deaq wa}sAs Bulsea| jjays je}UuauI}UOD wa}sAs ajes sjevayey) swa}shs Bulsee) jeuaulyy s}wi] ealy anual, Bulurejyure| ounuel Burysi|qeysy Buljoedsolg SAIVEIHU] Ayiqeojddy pue meq waj}sAs juajyed pue Aujug SOpNje}S jesoUlWy [e1epe4 yo uosHedWwOoD—"|-D s1qeL 302 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier “yiwsed 0} Juensind Pparowas saodinosas JO anjen pejndwi uo juadied s/'¢ jo xe] ‘suoijeoijdde Buissaooid pue BuimaiAes jo ySOO au} 4J8@A09 O} 989} BAI}E1}S|UIWPY “yeaoid -de YVON U}IM pauajsuel} aq Aew asuadi| Jo }iwed vy *saljijuenb JelouawWWOS ul Ajjenuue pale -A0D9 ase SjesaulW se Ja}je -3494} Buo| se 10} pue sued Oz *Kueyjas00S Aq paqiuosaid juai pue A}jeAos ‘snuogq ysed uO piq daai}ijed -WOO :S/BJAUJW AYO “Ale}a1998S Aq pequoseid judas ‘uolonpoid JO anjea ssoiB jo juadied g jo AyyeAos winuujulw ‘snuog yseo uo Piq aAIedwWoo “wNydjng “jue. -1ad GZ Jo AyyeAos WinwUIW) 10} -98} a|geppigq a4} aq Aew Way} jo uolyeulqwoo Aue Jo aseus }1joid 4JO ‘JUeW}IWWOD YOM ‘snuog yseo ‘ayes AyjeAO1 84} YOIYM UI Bulppig aai}i}ad Woo ‘seb pue /iO “UOISSIW -Jad JOUa}U; JO jJUBWedeq u}IM paubisse aq Aew asea| vy *Aleja1098S Aq paquoseid :sjeiauiw JOYyJO ‘saijijuenb BujAed ul paonpoid Ss! unydjns se Ja}jeasau} Huo; se pue sueaX Q| unydjng “sajyijuenb Buifed ul peonpoid si seB Jo 10 se Jajyeasay} Guo} se 10} pue (juawdojacep abe -inooUe 0} Alessedau s| poled JeBuo; e yey} spuly Alejoi0es j1 sueaK QL) sveak ¢ :se6 pue iO *$91}!1]U9 }1yOIdUOU pue je}UaLU -UJaA06 0} abseyo ON ‘uaye} Jewayew jo anjen jayseuw 41e4 ajqeoijdde jon ajqeoijdde jon “uoljonpoid jo anjea ssoiB jo juaoiad Z jo Aye -Ao1 winuwijujws e ysuleBe pai -Ppeid sueaA juanbasqns pue P4l4} BU} Ul OO"LS Pue 4eeA puo -09S OU} Ul OG'$ ‘WeOA Sil} OU} ul a19e Jad Gz’¢ }UdJ WNWIUlWU :ysejod pue wnipos ‘uolijonp -O1d abeinoousa 0} sea G }sdl} 984} 10} panrem aq Aew AjyeAos pue judy ‘Auejai0asg au} Aq yas AyyeAos © ysujeBbe payipaio ‘aioe jad OG g¢ JO }UdJ jenuU -ue WNuwIUIWW :a/eys /IO “Snu -0g yseod ‘juadied G‘Z} 40 Aye -AO1 WNWIUIW ‘PalaAOOSIp ae saljyijuenb BulXed ul seB6 Jo j10 Jaqye aioe sad OO'L$ 0} Bulsu ‘aoe 1ad OG'$ Judas }enuUe WNW -lulw :se6 pue IO “\ndjno jo anjea ssoiB jo uadIed G jo Aye -Ao1 winuiuiu e ysuleBe pa}! -paio ‘sueaf juanbasqns pue P4IY} BY} Ul O190e Jed QOL $ pue ‘yeak puooas au} ul OG’ “WeaA }SJ1J 94} Ul a10e 1ed Gz’$ Jud wNnuwIuIWW :aJeydsoyd ‘snuoq yseo ‘soujw punoibsapun 10} sso] oq Aew ‘saulw aoeyins 104 jugoied Gz 40 AjjyeAos Wn -ulu ‘(ai9e Jad QO'E$ Aj}UauIND) uolyejnBai Aq jas juas 1/209 “pig aAltIJedwoo Aq jas sayed Jenjoe ‘ajnje}s Aq paysijqejsa sai}jeAo1 pue sjuas WNwiul;y “UOISSIWUAd 101/98} U} JO }uaWyedeq Y}IM pouBisse aq Aew asea} & Jo Ued JO || “spoliad seat QL jeuol}Ippe 40} Maud O} }YBU BOUBIAJoNd eB U]IM Sue QZ :WnIpos ‘poled ayeuiwsajapul :a/eys |/O ‘saijijuenb BulAed ul uoljonp -O1d S| a19y} Se 19}e0104} Huo} se 10} pue sasea| aAi}!}}ad Woo -UOU JO} Sed OL Pue aAI}I}Ed -WOd 10} sued Gg :seB pue JIC asd] JO SUOI}IPUOD pUue SLA} U}IM Sal|dwod aassa| se 19}Je -3194} Buo| se 10} pue sieak QZ :ysejJOd pue ajeydsoud *SAi}I} -uenb jelosawiwoo ul Ajjenuue paonpoid si jeoo se 19}jea104} Buo| se pue sieak Oz :/e0D 304} juajed a10e Jad 00'S$ 10 0S'Z$ “payweyu! 10 ‘pebeb -HOW ‘pjos ‘pases; eq Aew wiejo Buluiw pajuayedun uy ‘Ajayulyepul play eq Aew wiejo Bujujw pejuayedun uy juawhked euBbissy Wwe] wa}shs paqeas daeq wajsAs Bulsea| jjaus je}UaUI}UOD wa}shs ajes sjeualey swajshs Bulsea| jeioulW wajsAs juajyed pue Aujug penulju0g—seajnjeys jesoul] [esepe4 jo uosWedwoD—"|-9 a1GeL App. C—Mineral Laws of the United States © 303 “sa0unOSsal jo UONEAJBSUOD PUB JUSLWUOIIAUS 84} JO UOI}D8}O1d UO PauOl}Ip -UO9 ale Sasuadl| pue s}iwied Il¥ “JUewaeibe jeuo!euUsd}UI Aq paysijqe}se aq 0} aue seaie @0ualdJa1 |1/Ge]S ‘asuad}| JO yiwded e Buinss! uaym jUawa}e}s jOedwi je}UaWUOl -lAu@ ue asedaid JSNW YWON “‘puezey Ajajes e asod jo ‘a0eed 84} JO YoRelg e O} pea] “S'n 8uy} JO UOl}eBI|go jeuo!}eUsE} -Ul Aue YIM 491|JU09 ‘seas au} JO WOPsed} Y}IM aajia}U! Aq -BUOSBSJUN JOU ABW SAI}IAI}OW “UaZI}IO 9321S Buljeooidioas JO °S'fq Aue jsuleBe se aaisnjo -X@ 8B S8SUAD!| PUB S}IWI8g ‘puny jsnij Buueys anuanay pegess daaq 0} pajipaio xe, “Ains@ad| “Sf ay} JO s}dieoes SNOSUE||B9SIW O} Pa}ipaio ae4 “Ayyyenb jejuawuollAua ul sabueyo ainseaw pue Aji}Uuap! 0} asea} 34} JO W419} 384} Bunp sanuljuoo Bulojiuow “Buisea| 0} JOld pasinba saipnjs je}uswiudl -IAU@ paliejaq "auOZz je}SeOd ay} uO sjOeduI ASyaAPe 10} je1}Ua}Od uy} pue ‘se6 pue jio jo Ka -AOOSIP 8U} JO} Je!}U9}Od au} ‘abe -wep je}UdWUOIIAUa JO} |e1}U9} -od ay} aouejeg }snw BHuisea| jo uoij}e00} pue Bulwi} ay) “}uawdo -|2A@P puke UOl}es0/dx~a jo yoeRdwI Je}USWUOJIAUa ay} Ppue SadinOS -8J 8|GeMauaiUOU puke a|qemeaual JO aNjeA je}UdWUOIIAUA Oy} JAapIsS -uod }snwW Weiboid Bulsea) ay, “JJ9YUS Je}UBUI}UOO 48]NO 94} JO SadsNOSai J9Y}O pue ‘uoljyeBineu ‘sauaysiy uo sjoed -W! J@1}Ua}0d pue sanjea jejuaU -UOJIAUS PUe ‘}eID0S ‘O1WOU0De Japisuood snl Weiboid Bulseeq “Ainseai| “Sf Bu} Jo s}dieoe1 SNOS@UR|JAOSIW 0} pa}ipaig "\s010} -UI O1|qNd 94} 0} ;e}UeWIN}EpP aq },ue9d sjeliayeW Jo jesodsiq “spue] ueipu| pue sjuawnuow pue syied jeuoiyeu ul pur] sapnjo -XQ ‘paiinbas AoueBbe juaw -eBeuew aoejins jo Juasuog *(Aouabe juewebeuew Aq sae) spur] peyoejye Oy} Wolly BWOdU! JayjO se JouUeW aWes ay} u} *‘paijioeds jou ‘asimiayjO *“syoeduwi! je}UaWUOIIAUa jo UO!}EJBPISUOD }NOUyIM pej}UesB eq jou Aew sasea| jeoo ‘salyiyed -101UNW = paj}esodioou! ul JO S}USWWNUOW JO sysed jeuol} -eu ul Bulsea| ON ‘poureyurew S| Pasinboe asam spur] oy} yoium 10) asodind Avewtid au} yeu} Bulinsse suojjipuoo 0} joalqns ase pue Aouabe yuaw -aBeuew aoejins ay} jo jues -UOD 94} auINbai pue| pesinboe uo saseo| || “AjiunWWOd 10 eele Hulpunodns ay} uo s}994 -}2 94} Buapisuoo uejd asn puke} aAlsuayasdwod e YIM 91q -lyedwoo aq }snwW sasea| jeoD ‘(Aouabe juawebe -uew Aq saiea) spue| pa}oa} “se 94} WOl} BWOdU! Jay}O se JauueW aes 9y} UI! :pue] pasinboe uC *a}e}S 0} jusdsed 06 :eyse/y uj “Aunseail “s'Q 0} juadied CL ‘pun} uolyew 2/9981 0} }UBdIEd Oy ‘a}e}S 0} juadied Og :u/ewop o1jqnd ud paijloeds jon “anulj}uoo Aew siayjo Aq sasn aoejins 6ul}01|JU00-UON “sesodind Bul -UJLWW JO} BSN O} Pa}iwi| soeyns uy} JO UuOISSassod aAIsnjoxy paijioads Jon U01}09}O1d Je}UsWUOLIAUG sas¢ Buljoijuo9 awoou| JO UO!}BOO||V waj}shs paqeas daaq wa}shs Bulsea| jjays je}UaUI}UOD Wa}shs ayes sjevajye; swe}shs Buses) esau wa}shs juajed pue Aijug penulu0g—seaynjejs jesouly [esapa4 yo uosuedwWoD—"}-9 a1GeL 304 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ‘2861 ‘juawssassy ABojouyoe| 40 891}}0 ‘3OHNOS “PaljIPOW JO ‘pada -SueJ} ‘panss! aie sasuadl| pue s}iwied uaym paiinb -a1 ase (sBuyeay Buipnyjoui) JU@WWOD pue adljoU O1|Gng ‘e0uauNo -uod 9}e}S aiinbes uejd juow -aBeuew auoz jejyseoo e Bulaey aye} JO uOZ Je}SeOd ay} UI asN JayeM JO pue| Buljoayje Sal}IAlOW *SU9ZI}ID B}e}S JO Bulaq-|jam au} Pue }saJa}U! JeUO!}eU BY} UVEM} -8q aouR]eq ajqeuoseal e& apiAoud Agu} yey} Sauiwieajap Aejas0eS QU} JI po}dad0e aq 0} ale suOl} -EPUBWLWODA1 2}e}S ‘paMmaiAal Buleq ase suejd uoijonpojd pue juawdojanep pue sajes asea| pesodoid uaym pue paiedaid ave swei6oid Hulse] jio pue seb U9YM PasapISUOD puke pa}iAU! aq 0} aJe S}UBWWOD aj}e}S ‘sa}elS 24} YIM UOol}e1ad009 UI sme] uoljeAJasuod pue ‘je}UaWUO -lAua ‘Ajayes aosojua jjeys Aue} -8198S eu] ‘pleMeas pepua}xe SOlJBPUNO| S}} j1 B}E}S OU} UIY}IM 89 PINOM YOIYM j/EYs je}UsUl} -UOD 9} JO Seale BSOU} 0} Ajdde Me] jeJ8P94 Y}IM jUd}SISUOOU! JOU SMB| |PUIWHO pur |IAIO 8}e}S ‘KoueBbe Jo ‘Ayiyed -IOIUNW ‘a}e}S a4} JO JUBSUOD au} YM AjuUO apew aq ued Aouabe oijgnd 10 ‘Ayiyediolu -NwW ‘aye}S e JO ple ul uMeup -Y}JIM pur; WOly sjesodsig *S$}UBWWOD S,JOUJBAOB au} JO siseq ay} UO asea| ay} Suapis -uodel Ayeja109g 98y} a}iuM syjuOW XIS JO} pafejep si Bulsea) ‘s}oafgo 1ousaA06b 3u} J] “MAIAA1 JO} B}e]S pajoayye @y} JO 1OUWJaAOB 9y} 0} pa}}iW -qns aq jsnW sj}selo} jeuol} -eu ul sasea} je00 pasodoig ‘ollqnd ay} pue saiouebe a}e}S UuIM uOl}e}]NSUOD Ul! paled -aid aq 0} ave Bulsea} je09 40} sued asn pue7 ‘sajyels payiun ay} JO saessa; xe} 10 92j}R| -nBai 0} s}uawUsaA06 je90| 10 932} JO JY ay} Buijoayye se Ppanij}suoo aq jou Aew ajn}e}S "saqels Pa}1UP AU} JO sme] BU} YIM JUS -}SISUODU! JOU SMe] |eD0) Pue a}e1s 0} Joalqns ale sal}IAOW JUBWAAJOAIU] OINGNd Puke a}e}S wajsks peqeas daaq wajsAs Buses) jjays je}udUI]JUOD wa}shs ayes sjeuayeyy swajshs Bulsea; jeiaulyy waj}sAs juajed pue Aijug panuyyu0g—sajynjeys jesouly jesape4 yo uosedWOD—"}-5 ajqeL App. C—Mineral Laws of the United States ¢ 305 deposits available only through prospecting permits and leases. This move was a major departure from earlier policy, replacing free entry and disposal with a discre- tionary system. As initially adopted, prospecting per- mits could be issued to the first qualified applicant wish- ing to explore lands whose mineral potential was unknown. Discovery of a valuable deposit entitled the prospector to a preference-right lease to develop and pro- duce the mineral if the land was found to be chiefly val- uable for that purpose. Known mineral lands could be leased by advertisement, competitive bid, or other meth- ods adopted by the Secretary of the Interior. Prospecting permits are no longer available for oil, gas, or coal. Lands known to contain these substances may be leased only by competitive bid. Non-competitive leases may be issued to the first qualified applicant for lands outside the known geologic structure of a produc- ing oil or gas field. The Secretary has broad discretion to impose conditions for diligence, safety, environmental protection, rents and royalties, and other factors needed to protect the interest of the United States and the pub- lic welfare. Like the Mining Law of 1872, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 is applicable only to the public domain (for the most part, land which has been retained in Federal ownership since its original acquisition as part of the territory of the United States). The Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Land was enacted in 1947 and made the fuel, fertilizer, and chemical minerals in acquired land available under the provisions of the Leasing Act of 1920. Permits and leases on acquired land (mostly na- tional forests in the Eastern States) can be issued only with the consent of the surface management agency and must be consistent with the primary purpose for which the land was acquired. Hardrock minerals in acquired national forests and grasslands are available under sim- ilar conditions. Materials Sales System The Materials Act of 1947 made ‘‘common varieties”’ of sand, stone, gravel, cinders, and clay in Federal lands available for sale at fair market value or by competitive bidding. The Surface Resources Act of 1955 removed these materials from entry and patent under the Gen- eral Mining Law. The miner does not acquire a prop- erty right to the source of these materials, and the use of a site may be communal or nonexclusive. Govern- mental and nonprofit entities are not charged for mate- rial taken for public or nonprofit purposes. Offshore Mineral Management Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) was adopted in 1953 and provides for the leasing of mineral resources in submerged lands that are beyond State waters and subject to U.S. jurisdiction and con- trol (table C-1). The law’s primary focus is on oil, gas, and sulphur but Section 8(k) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to lease other minerals also occurring in the outer continental shelf. Oil and gas leases are granted to the highest bidder pursuant to a 5-year leasing program. The program is based on a determination of national energy needs and must also consider the effects of leasing on other re- sources, regional development and energy needs, indus- try interest in particular areas, and environmental sen- sitivity and marine productivity of different areas of the continental shelf. The size, timing, and location of pro- posed lease sales and lessees’ proposed development and production plans are subject to review by affected State and local governments. Recommendations from State and local governments must be accepted if the Secre- tary determines that they provide for a reasonable bal- ance between the national interest and the well-being of local citizens. A flexible bidding system is provided in which the royalty rate, cash bonus, work commit- ment, profit share, or any combination of them may be the biddable factor. A comprehensive program is not required for minerals other than oil and gas, and bidding for leases is limited to the highest cash bonus. It is unclear to what extent the law’s coordination and environmental pro- tection provisions apply to these other minerals. Leases under OCSLA are not explicitly limited to U.S. citizens by the statute, but such a limitation has been imposed by regulation. See 30 CFR 256.35(b). Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act The fifth legal system was adopted in 1980 as an in- terim measure pending the entry into force of a law of the sea treaty binding on the United States. The Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act (DSHMRA) ap- plies to the exploration for and commercial recovery of manganese nodules in the seabed beyond the continen- tal shelf or resource jurisdiction of any nation. In con- trast with the other laws, where the United States as- serts jurisdiction based on territorial control, DSHMRA’s 306 © Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier jurisdiction is based on the power of the United States to regulate the activities of its citizens outside its ter- ritory. Licenses for exploration and permits for commercial recovery are granted by the Administrator of the Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for areas whose size and location are chosen by the appli- cant. The applicant must prove financial and techno- logical capability to carry out the proposed work, and the designated area must comprise a “‘logical mining unit.’” The Administrator is required to prepare an envi- ronmental impact statement prior to granting a license or permit. To help gauge the effects of mining on the marine environment, stable reference areas are to be established by international agreement. Permits and licenses are conditioned on protection of environmental quality and conservation of the mineral resource. Because the United States does not claim ownership of the seabed or minerals involved, DSHMRA does not require rent or royalties. Only an administrative fee, sufficient to cover the cost of reviewing applications, is charged. In addition, a 3.75 percent tax on the value of the resource recovered is levied. Proceeds of the tax are assigned to a trust fund to be used if U.S. contribu- tions are required once an international seabed treaty is in effect. All commercial recovery must be by vessels docu- mented under U.S. law. At least one U.S. vessel must be used to transport minerals from each mining site. Land processing of recovered minerals must be within the United States unless this requirement would make the operation uneconomical. Minerals processed else- where must be returned to the United States for domes- tic use if the national interest so requires. Before the United States ratifies an international seabed treaty, DSHMRA calls for reciprocal agreements with nations that adopt compatible seabed regulations. The agreements would require mutual recognition of the rights granted under any license or permit issued by a reciprocating state. The United States has signed agreements with France, Italy, Japan, the United King- dom, and West Germany. Appendix D Ocean Mining Laws of Other Countries This appendix summarizes the seabed mining laws of 10 countries. Not all of these countries have declared Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs); thus, their laws may be based on continental shelf or territorial claims. These statutes illustrate the range of choices available for de- veloping marine minerals. The general comparison that follows analyzes the various provisions shared by many of the statutes, but three provisions in particular are of primary interest for assessing the U.S. seabed mining regime: 1. allocating the right to mine, 2. payment for the right to mine, and 3. the division of responsibility between national and state or provincial authorities. Allocating the right to mine includes selecting the location and size of a mining site and choosing a mine operator. In all of the countries surveyed, the initiative for prospecting or mining lies with the applicant, who must prove technical and financial capacity for carry- ing out the proposed work. Competing applications for the same area are generally assigned on a first-come ba- sis, but Australia, for one, is considering work-program bidding or cash bidding for cases where some competi- tion is needed. The applicant-initiative system is modified by general requirements for shoreline and environ- mental protection, area and time limits, and proj- ect-specific conditions imposed after an application is reviewed. Payment for the privilege to mine may include ap- plication fees, rents, royalties on the value of recovered minerals, a tax on gross or net income, or a combina- tion of these. The rate of payment may be set by law or negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Some countries provide for periodic adjustment based on economic con- ditions or the market for the mineral being recovered. In addition to paying for the minerals removed, miners may be required to spend funds each year for explora- tion or development. Spending above the minimum an- nual requirement may be credited to future years, while spending less may require paying the difference to the government or forfeiting the right to prospect or mine. The United States appears to be the only country which has a cash competitive bidding process to award leases in offshore areas. Three of the countries included in this review—Aus- tralia, West Germany, and Canada, have a federal sys- tem of government. Australia is developing a system of joint authority over the continental shelf beyond the ter- ritorial sea; the states or territories have jurisdiction over the territorial sea. In West Germany, the states regu- late activities within territorial waters while the national government has exclusive jurisdiction over the continen- tal shelf beyond the territorial limit. Canada has not yet enacted offshore mining legislation, but the Ministry of Energy, Mines, and Resources is drafting a proposed statute. A division of authority between the national and provincial governments will be part of the new law. Australia Laws e Australia claims a 3-mile territorial sea.! Under the Coastal Waters (State Powers) Act of 1981, onshore mining legislation in the states of New South Wales, Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, and the Northern Territory can be applied offshore. Activities would be regulated according to stand- ard terms, including environmental conditions. Western Australia is currently revising a model State Minerals (Submerged Lands) bill, particu- larly in regard to registration and transfer of leases. A version to be circulated to the States and Com- monwealth may be ready in early 1987. Although some states are concerned that they cannot proc- ess company applications, offshore state legislation will most likely not be enacted before 1988.? © In 1967, Australia passed a continental shelf act, based on Geneva provisions, for petroleum. In 1981, the Submerged Lands Act, which has a “‘de- gree of complementarity’’ with petroleum legisla- tion?, was passed to cover other seabed minerals.* However, the complementary state legislation nec- essary to implement it has not been passed yet.° e Australia has not declared an EEZ.® Jurisdiction © Territorial waters: The adjoining state/territory has jurisdiction over minerals development.’ © Continental shelf: Offshore activities are adminis- tered by a Joint Authority, including a Common- ‘Law of the Sea Bulletin, December 1983, No. 2, Office of Special Repre- sentative of the Secretary-General for the Law of the Sea, United Nations (83- 35821), p. 13. ?Letter from David Truman, Assistant Secretary, Minerals Policy Branch, to OTA, Oct. 3, 1986. 3Letter from the Australian Department of Resources and Energy to OTA through Science and Technology Counsellor J.R. Hlubucek, Australian Em- bassy, May 28, 1987. *Letter from Geoffrey Dabb, Legal Counsel, Australian Embassy to OTA, Oct. 6, 1986. 5Truman, op. cit. ®Law of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 4. 7Hlubucek, op. cit. 307 308 @ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier wealth Minister for Resources and Energy and a State Mines Minister.* The adjoining State Min- ister supervises day-to-day administration and serves as an industry contact. The Commonwealth minister is consulted on important issues and has the final authority in cases of disagreement.® Permit Process e Exploration: If a company wishes to explore for minerals (defined to include sand, gravel, clay, limestone, rock, evaporates, shale, oil-shale, and coal, but not petroleum!”) in the ocean, it must ap- ply to the Designated Authority (a State Minister charged with the responsibility by that State’s Parliament!) for an exploration permit. If the area of the application is on the seaward side of the outer limit of the territorial sea, the Joint Authority de- cides whether or not to grant the permit.'? The ap- plication must be accompanied by a work and ex- penditure plan, and information regarding the technical qualifications of the applicant, and tech- nical advice and financial resources available to the applicant.'? e Exploitation: Same'* Terms e Exploration: A fee of $3,000 (Australian dollars) is charged for an application to explore any num- ber of blocks less than 500 (A block is bounded by adjacent minutes of longitude and latitude). The permit lasts for 2 years, and gives the right to ex- plore and take samples of specified minerals.!° A permit can be renewed 4 times, for up to 2 years each time, for up to 75 percent of the area in the permit being renewed. An application must be ac- companied by a report on past and projected work and expenditures and a fee of $300.'® e Exploitation: Application for a production license is done in a manner very similar to that for an ex- ploration permit. Once granted, it lasts for 21 years. An annual rent of $100 per block is charged. Royalty rates are set by the Joint Authority; the value of the exploited mineral may be considered in setting the rate.!? Within the territorial sea, 61981 Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act, Section 8. °Hlubucek, op. cit. *°1981 Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act, Section 3. "'Hlubucek, op. cit. 271981 Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act, Section 23. 13Tbid., Section 24. '4Tbid., Sections 31 and 32. 'Tbid., Sections 26 and 27. ‘*Tbid., Sections 28 and 29. ‘Ibid., Sections 31-35. royalties are shared with the Commonwealth. '!8 An application for a permit renewal must be accom- panied by a $300 fee.'9 There is no competitive allocation mechanism in the unproclaimed Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act as it stands. However, at the recent meeting of Commonwealth and State officials, it was agreed that provisions should be made for competitive al- location. Generally, permits will be allocated on a first-come basis. In cases where some competition is needed, competitive allocation will generally use a work program bidding system, but provision for a cash bidding approach is being considered. The Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act does not contain a royalty regime. At the officials’ meeting, it was agreed that the endorsement of Ministers would be sought for the adjacent state to apply their onshore royalty regime to minerals won from the sea bed within the outer limit of the territorial sea. For minerals won from the sea bed on the seaward side of this limit, the commonwealth intends to ap- ply a profits-based royalty. State royalties vary with the state and the mineral concerned, and in some cases profits-based royalties may be used, in other cases ad-valorem royalties or set tonnage rate royal- ties may be set. However, this does not preclude the states from opting for a profits-based royalty. Conditions Unreasonable interference with navigation, fishing, conservation of resources, and other lawful operations is prohibited.”° Environmental assessment is generally the concern of the adjacent state. However, where min- ing impinges on commonwealth functions, assessment may be required by the appropriate commonwealth au- thority (there are arrangements to ensure that the assess- ments can be carried out jointly in most cases). Section 105 further delineates regulations which the Governor General may promulgate under this law, con- cerning matters such as safety and conservation.”# Activities Australia has explored for tin, monazite, phosphorite, rutile, and zircon.?* Private companies have been granted exploration licenses under current state onshore min- ing acts for aggregate and mineral sands off the coast ‘®Hlubucek, op. cit. 91981 Minerals (Submerged Lands) Act, Section 36. 2°Tbid., Section 75. \Tbid. 22P. Hale and P. McLaren, ‘‘A Preliminary Assessment of Unconsolidated Mineral Resoyrces in the Canadian Offshore,’’ The Canadian Mining and Metallurgical Bulletin, September 1984, p. 10. App. D—Ocean Mining Laws of Other Countries ° 309 of New South Wales. Production licenses have also been issued for dredging limestone off the Queensland and Western Australian coasts. Permit applications have been received for areas off the Western Australia and Northern Territory coasts for which the minerals have not been specified. Public sector involvement in exploration and exploi- tation is not expected.*% Canada Laws © Canada claims a 12-mile territorial sea. © Continental shelf: Legislation was passed in June, 1969, as the Oil and Gas Production and Conser- vation Act. © Canada has not declared an EEZ, but it does have a 200-mile fisheries zone.** ® Currently, regulations for offshore mining could be promulgated under the Public Lands Grants Acts (The Ministry of Energy, Mines, and Re- sources has jurisdiction south of 60°; the Ministry of Indian and Northern Affairs has jurisdiction north of 60°). However, the Ministry of Energy, Mines, and Resources is in the process of drafting legislation which would be specifically applicable to offshore mining of hard minerals; the objective is to develop an ‘‘adequate basis in law’’ for ocean mining. The law will address administration and management, disposition of mineral rights, royal- ties, and environment and fisheries. Plans call for the legislation to be written by the end of 1987; the Cabinet will make the final decision as to whether the new legislation should be introduced in Parlia- ment. The recent Mineral and Metals Policy of Canada officially announced the Government’s in- tent to establish a legal and regulatory regime to maximize benefits from offshore mining. It seeks to develop ‘‘a simple, uniform, cooperative manage- ment system for mining development activities across all areas of the Canadian Continental Shelf.’’? Jurisdiction The Canadians hope to formulate a regulatory scheme that can be applied regardless of who has juris- diction over mining activities. However, the desired mechanism is one of cooperation with the provinces. The Canadians take a “‘single window approach’’ to regulation, allowing companies to apply to a single gov- 23Law of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 11. The Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act, as amended, 1979. The Mineral and Metals Policy of the Government of Canada, Depart- ment of Energy, Mines, and Resources, May 1987, p. 8. ernment agency for exploration and/or exploitation per- mits. The rationale for this approach is that a simpler, stream-lined permitting process will encourage indus- try activity. Permit Process e Exploration: Companies must submit a proposal to the appropriate agency. This agency in turn fol- lows the environmental assessment and review process which allows the contact agency to com- municate with the Departments of Environment, Fisheries and Oceans, and Transport for project approval. However, the contact agency has final authority to approve or disapprove the project. This approach reflects the Canadian desire to treat environmental concerns as mandatory concerns and of equal importance with economic develop- ment. Thus, potential negative effects on the envi- ronment are reviewed at an early stage of project planning. Conditions Environmental conditions are considered through the Environmental Assessment and Review Process. The government sees itself as ‘‘facilitator’’ of en- trepreneurial interests. As facilitator, it has two main functions: 1) to eliminate structural barriers, i.e. by cre- ating a regulatory scheme (since the lack of one is seen as a barrier to activity), and 2) to provide fundamental information about ocean mining. Activities Currently, mining activity is ‘‘on hold.’’ The goy- ernment will not prevent anyone from exploring, but is not issuing any mining permits. However, the gov- ernment is suggesting companies submit mining appli- cations, to protect any ‘‘first in line’’ advantage when applications are processed. In the past, sand and gravel were mined in the Beaufort Sea to construct oil drilling platforms. Permits issued for this activity were subject to requirements equivalent to obtaining land use permits. France Laws e France claims a 12-mile territorial sea.?° © France declared its rights over the continental shelf on December 30, 1968.27 2eLaw of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 31. 27Continental Shelf Law, Dec. 30, 1968 (no. 68-1181). 310 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier e France declared an EEZ on July 16, 1976. The law states that the provisions of the Continental Shelf law are applicable to the EEZ. Jurisdiction © Continental shelf: The central government appears to have complete jurisdiction over the continental shelf. The application of the continental shelf law is to be set by decree of the Conseil d’Etat.** The Directeur des Mines and the Directeur des Car- burants, supervised by the Conseil General des Mines, administer French mining laws. All are lo- cated within the Ministere du Developpement In- dustriel et Scientifique.”® Permit Process e Exploration or exploitation: Permits must be ac- companied by a work program, submitted 45 days in advance of the proposed activity. The program is reviewed by a commission, including represent- atives from the Ministries of Economy and Fi- nances, Telecommunication, and Maritime Policy. The chief of mines may solicit the opinion of these representatives in writing; however, if anyone ob- jects to the proposal, the representatives must con- vene.*° Terms e Exploration: Nonexclusive prospecting permits are issued.?! [Details regarding duration, rights, size and fees are unknown. | e Exploitation: There are three types of mining ti- tles: 1) provisional authorization pending the grant of a concession, 2) a mining concession, and 3) ex- ploitation permit. Concessions are free and last in perpetuity. Permits are valid for 5 years, renewa- ble for 2 more 5-year terms; a small indemnity must be paid to the owner of the surface area and the grantee is responsible for any damages result- ing from his activities.** A fixed royalty fee per met- ric ton is required for all minerals exploited; the value of the particular metal is taken into consid- eration. A Finance Law fixes the rate, as well as a formula for dividing revenues between central and local authorities** 28Tbid., Article 38. 29N. Ely, Summary of Mining and Petroleum Laws of the World, Bureau of Mines Information Circular, 1974, U.S. Department of the Interior, Part 5, Europe, IC, 8613. 3°Decree of May 6, 1971 (no. 71-360), Articles 7 and 8 31N. Ely, op. cit. “Ibid. 33Continental Shelf Law, 1968, op. cit. Articles 21 and 23). Conditions Equipment must comply with special safety and mar- itime regulations.3+ The continental shelf law does not appear to specify other conditions. Activities France’s activities have been limited to sand and gravel exploration and mining.*° Federal Republic of Germany Laws © The FRG claims a 3-mile territorial sea.*® e The FRG declared its rights over the Continental Shelf on January 20, 1964 and issued provisional regulations of rights on July 24, 1964.%” © The FRG has not declared an EEZ.*® Jurisdiction e Territorial waters: Jurisdiction in German laws may be split one of three ways: 1) the federal gov- ernment has exclusive jurisdiction, 2) the federal government makes the laws and the coastal states enforce them, 3) the federal government sets a framework and the coastal states make the laws. Offshore mining in territorial waters fits into cate- gory 2.%9 © Continental shelf: The federal government has ex- clusive jurisdiction.*° Permit Process* e Exploration and exploitation: Permits are awarded by the Chief Mining Board of Clausthal-Zellerfeld (for the technical and commercial aspects of min- ing) in conjunction with the German Hydrographic Institute (for the use and utilization of the waters and airspace above the continental shelf).*? Permits are awarded on a discretionary, informal basis, sometimes considering factors such as a company’s 34N. Ely, op. cit. 35P. Hale and P. McLaren, op. cit. ’°Law of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 34. *7Continental Shelf Declaration, Jan. 20, 1964, and the Act on Provisional Determination of Rights Relating to the Continental Shelf, July 24, 1964 (amended Sept. 2, 1974). 38Law of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit. 39Mr. Max Kehden, Transportation Office, FRG Embassy, personal com- munication to OTA, Aug. 12, 1986. *°Continental Shelf Declaration, 1964, op. cit., p. 37. *'The following details on process, terms, and conditions apply to the con- tinental shelf. “Act on Provisional Determination of Rights Relating to the Continental Shelf, July 24, 1964; amended Sept. 2, 1974. App. D—Ocean Mining Laws of Other Countries ® 311 reputation for cooperativeness with the govern- ment. This approach derives from a historical tra- dition in which the King had personal authority over all mining operations. Competitive bidding is not used because it is seen as discouraging min- ing activity.*? Terms e Exploration: Permits are valid for 3 years, with ex- tensions possible up to 5 years, if the Act referred to in Article 16, paragraph 2 of the Continental Shelf Declaration, has not yet come into force when the original permit expires. e Exploitation: Royalty payments to the Chief Min- ing Board of Clausthal-Zellerfeld are required “‘where the competitive position of enterprises en- gaged in mining in German territorial waters would otherwise be substantially affected.’’ The amount is to be based on mining dues which would ‘‘cus- tomarily be payable at the point in German ter- ritorial waters nearest to the place of extraction.” Royalty payments are transferred according to the Act of Article 16, paragraph 2. [Details regarding exclusive and sampling rights, size and fees are unknown. | Conditions Permits may be issued subject to conditions and re- strictions and may be subject to cancellation. The law does not specify what issues those conditions might ad- dress, although safety and technical aspects are among those considered. ** Activities Exploration has revealed that German waters have limited amounts of oil and gas and some coal.*° The sta- tus of an application for the exploration of the continen- tal shelf, filed by a consortium of companies, was un- certain as of 1980.4® No exploration is currently taking place, as no finds are expected.*” Sand and gravel extraction within the territorial seas is an established industry in the Baltic.*® *8M. Kehden, op. cit. **M.. Kehden, op. cit. *Tbid. *6Marine Aggregate Project, EIS, Vol. 1, February 1980, Consolidated Gold Fields Australia Ltd and ARC Marine Ltd. *7™M. Kehden, op. cit. *®Marine Aggregate Project, op. cit. Japan Laws © Japan claims a 12-mile territorial sea.*° @ Japan does not claim a continental shelf or an EEZ.°° e Japan has no comprehensive legislation dealing with offshore mining. The Mining Law, Quarry Law, and Gravel Gathering Law apply to offshore mining, depending on the type of mineral to be ex- ploited. The Mining Law regulates activities on the continental shelf. The applicability of the other two laws outside the territorial waters has not been ex- amined in detail.°! Jurisdiction The government of Japan exercises jurisdiction over off-shore mining under the above-mentioned laws.*? Permit Process Under the Mining Law, application for permits for offshore mining are submitted to the Director-General of Ministry of Trade and Industry (MITT) regional bureau. For quarrying, permits are granted by the Director- General of MITI regional bureau. Entrepreneurs reg- ister with the Governor of the prefecture, or with the Director-General of MITI regional bureau if their oper- ations extend over more than one prefecture. For gravel-gathering, issuance of permits is regulated on the prefectural level. Entrepreneurs register with the Governor of the prefecture, or with the Director-General of MITI regional bureau if their operations extend over more than one prefecture.*? Terms A fixed fee is assessed for each unit of aggregate mined.** Permits for exploration and exploitation are issued separately under the Mining Law. One permit covers both exploration and exploitation under the Quarry Law and the Gravel Gathering Law. Duration: Permits for exploration are valid for two years with two possible extensions; no limit in duration for permits for exploitation (Mining Law). Permits are valid up to 20 years with possible extensions (Quarry *SLaw of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 39. 5°Tbid. 5'Letter from Kaname Ikeda, Science Office, Embassy of Japan, to OTA, June 15, 1987. 52Tbid. 53Ikeda, op. cit. 5*Tbid. 312 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Law). No specific provisions (Gravel and Gathering Law). Maximum permit area: 35,000 ares (Mining Law);*° no specific provisions (Quarry Law, Gravel Gathering Law). Permits are exclusive (Mining Law, Quarry Law).°° Conditions Factors which are considered in deciding on the issu- ance of permits are: health and sanitary considerations, unreasonable interference with other industrial uses, and compliance with public welfare. Factors which are considered in regulating mining activity are: whether a firm is part of an association, exclusivity, fishing rights, location (minimum distance from shore and minimum water depth), conflicting uses, prohibited areas (seaweed ‘‘plantations’’ and drag net areas), buffer zones (sometimes greater than 500m be- tween zones), mining methods (must be sand pump or clam shell), quantity, duration of license, uses, and mar- ket area.” Activities Activity is limited to sand and gravel, 94 percent of which occurs in Kyushu and offshore the Seto Opera- tions.°® There is also some iron sand mining in the Prefecture of Shimane. Netherlands*? Laws e The Netherlands recently expanded its territorial sea to 12 miles. A law for sand and gravel extrac- tion within this area exists. By 1988 or 1989, this law will be extended to the continental shelf, based on the provisions of the 1958 Geneva Convention. © The Netherlands Continental Shelf Act applies only to oil and gas. e@ The Netherlands has no declared EEZ, because the government does not consider the EEZ to be cus- tomary international law yet. 593.5 square kilometers. 5*Ikeda, op. cit. 57T. Usami, K. Tsurusaki, T. Hirota, et al., ‘‘Seafloor Sand Mining in Ja- pan,’’ in ‘‘Proceedings of Marine Technology '79—Ocean Energy’’, Marine Technology Society, Washington, DC, pp. 176-189. ‘8Tbid. 5°This information was obtained through interviews with Mr. Wim J. Van Teeffelen, Assistant Attache for Science and Technology, Royal Netherlands Embassy, and Mr. Henk Van Hoom from the Ministry of Transportation and Waterworks, Directorate for the North Sea. Jurisdiction e Territorial waters: The central government has jurisdiction since provinces in the Netherlands have little power. The Ministry of Transport and Pub- lic Works issues permits for mining within the 12- mile zone. © Continental shelf: The centra! government has jurisdiction. The Department of Treasury issues permits. Permit Process Exploration and exploitation: If a company wishes to extract sand, it approaches the appropriate govern- ment agency with its request. As long as a company does not violate any of the informal conditions and criteria, it is granted a permit. Since few companies are inter- ested and potential mining areas are plentiful, compa- nies do not have to bid competitively for mining permits. Terms e Exploration: [Details on duration, exclusivity and sampling rights, size, and fees are unknown. e Exploitation: Royalities must be paid. [Details on rates, duration, exclusivity, size, and fees are unknown. | Conditions Currently, informal policy criteria guide the agency’s decisions to issue permits. In the Netherlands, one learns from childhood about the importance of preserving the coastal and ocean environment. The most important consideration is distance from the coastline of the pro- posed activity (must be no closer than 20 km to the coast); since the Netherlands is 2/3 below sea level, it is crucial to prevent coastal erosion. Some areas, such as the Waddensea area in the north, are off limits even though a great deal of sand is available, for environ- mental reasons (wetlands, seals, and nursery grounds for North Sea fish). Conflicts with pipelines, the envi- ronment, and fisheries are also considered; these con- flicts are rare, however, because activity is limited. A third consideration is the type of technology the com- pany proposes to use. (i.e., thin layer dredging or deep hole dredging; the former is currently preferred) The Ministry of Transport and Public Works is cur- rently working to formalize these policy criteria, which center around environmental concerns. The Ministry is examining the environmental consequences of min- ing indifferent areas. This will guide the choice of fu- ture mining sites and types of technologies. App. D—Ocean Mining Laws of Other Countries ° 313 Activities Only sand and gravel, and mostly the former, is cur- rently being extracted. No other economic minerals are expected to be found in Dutch waters. Few companies are involved and not much expanded activity in the fu- ture is anticipated unless land mining becomes very re- stricted. Sand is extracted either from areas where it is natu- rally abundant or from shallow channels in the North Sea which need to be dredged anyway to allow large ships through (e.g., on the approach to Amsterdam). Activity takes place fairly close to shore because of trans- port requirements. Norway Laws e Territorial sea and continental shelf: Norway passed, on June 21, 1963, Act No. 12, relating to Scientific Research and Exploration for and Exploi- tation of Subsea Natural Resources other than Pe- troleum Resources. On June 12, 1970, a Royal De- cree was issued, setting provisional Rules for the Exploration for Certain Submarine Natural Re- sources other than Petroleum. © Norway declared an Exclusive Economic Zone on December 17, 1976.°° Jurisdiction Under the Act of June 21, 1963, the King has the authority to issue exploration and exploitation permits and make regulations, in regard to both territorial seas and the continental shelf.*! Permit Process Unknown Terms © Exploration: The Ministry of Industry may grant two year licenses for exploration of certain subma- rine natural resources. An application must include a description of the method of proposed explora- tion. The license does not give exclusive rights or guarantee exploitation rights.° ©°Act of Dec. 17, 1976, Economic Zone of Norway. "Act No. 12, June 21, 1963, Scientific Research and Exploration for and Exploitation of Subsea Natural Resources other than Petroleum Resources. *Royal Decree, June 12, 1970, provisional Rules concerning Exploration for Certain Submarine Natural Resources other than Petroleum in the Nor- wegian Continental Shelf, etc. V2-OY2, © = Sy == Mil Conditions Exploration: Activities must avoid disturbing ship- ping, fishing, aviation, marine fauna or flora, subma- rine cables, etc.* Thailand Laws Thailand has a 12-mile territorial sea.™ Thailand has declared a continental shelf. Thailand has not declared an EEZ.% Offshore mining is governed by the Minerals Act B.E. 2510, 1967, as amended by the Minerals Act No. 2, 1973 and the Minerals Act No. 3, 1979. This act also covers onshore mining.®” Jurisdiction The government has exclusive ownership of all min- erals ‘‘upon, in or under the surface of public domain and privately owned land.’’ The Minerals Act is admin- istered by the Department of Mineral Resources within the Ministry of Industry.°® Permit Process Unknown for both exploration and exploitation Terms e Exploration: There are three types of permits: 1. The local District Mineral Resources Officer, on behalf of the central government, can issue a one-year nonrenewable prospecting license for a prescribed fee. The mineral of interest and the area to be prospected must be specified. 2. Exclusive Prospecting Licenses are granted by the Minister of Industry, although applications are filed with the District Officer. The license is usually valid for 1 year, but for no more than 2. It is exclusive and non-transferable. The max- imum permit area 1s 500,000 rai (1 rai is about 2/5 acre). 3Tbid. 6*]_aw of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 82. STbid. Ibid., p. 63. 67C-U. Ruangsuvan (Department of Mineral Resources, Ministry of Industry, Thailand), ‘‘The Development of Offshore Mineral Re- sources in Thailand,’’ in International Symposium on the New Law of the Sea in Southeast Asia, D. Johnston (ed.) (Dalhousie Ocean Studies Programme: 1983), pp. 83-87. °8Tbid. 314 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 3. A Special Prospecting License is granted if the project requires substantial investment and spe- cial technology. The maximum permit area is 10,000 rai, but there is no limit on the number of permits for which one may apply. Permits are valid for 3 years, and may be renewed for no more than 2 years. A certain amount of activity is required. °° e Exploitation: Mining leases and concessions are is- sued by the Minister of Energy. An application must be made in a prescribed form and certain fees are required. The maximum mining area is 50,000 rai.’° A prospector is entitled to a concession upon making a mineral discovery and showing financial ability. Royalty rates are fixed by the government and may vary by mineral and area. An annual rent may also be required. Concessions are for a 75-year term. Conditions Environmental considerations are minor. The coun- try does not have comprehensive environmental legis- lation.’! Activities Tin is the main mineral being extracted from the Gulf of Thailand and the Andaman Sea; activity has taken place since 1907. In 1976, onshore production was 20,000 tons while offshore was about 8,300. By 1980, onshore had only risen to 22,200 tons while offshore had jumped to 23,700.” United Kingdom Laws e A bill to extend the territorial sea from 3 to 12 miles has recently been passed.” © The United Kingdom claimed its continental shelf in 1964.74 e¢ The United Kingdom has not declared an EEZ. Jurisdiction e Territorial waters: Proprietary rights to the bed of the Territorial Sea form a part of the Crown Es- Ibid. Ibid. ™D. Johnston, Ocean Studies Programme, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada, personal communication to OTA, Aug. 15, 1986. 7C-U. Ruangsuvan, op. cit. 78Letter from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United King- dom, London, England to OTA through R. L. Embleton, British Embassy, May 15, 1987. 7*Law of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op.cit. tate. Under the Crown Estate Act of 1961 the Crown Estate Commissioners are charged with the man- agement of the Estate which includes the rights to license mineral extraction on the Territorial Seabed but excluding oil, gas, and coal. © Continental shelf: Rights to mining of minerals other than oil, gas, and coal on the continental shelf are granted to the Crown by the Continental Shelf Act, 1964. The Commissioners have the power to grant prospecting and dredging licenses.’° Permit Process © Exploration: Since experience has shown that prospecting usually does not conflict unacceptably with other ocean uses, no formal government con- sultation process is required to obtain a permit. However, the Crown Estate Commissioners do in- form the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) before issuing a license and the MAFF, after consultation with regional officials, will notify the company of potential objections. Bulk sampling requires separate authorization by the Commissioners. The MAFF may propose changes (e.g., in time, place or extraction method) in order to protect fisheries.7° e Exploitation: Applications to the Commissioners are first sent to Hydraulics Research Limited to ad- vise whether there is likely to be any adverse effect on the adjacent coastline. Only if their advice is favourable does the application proceed, and it is then forwarded to the Minerals Division of the De- partment of the Environment (DOE)’’? The DOE oversees the ‘‘Government View’’ procedure which includes consultation with other Government de- partments and agencies dealing with coast protec- tion, fisheries, navigation, oil and gas, and defense interests. If any department has a substantive ob- jection, it may discuss it informally with the com- pany or with the Crown Estate Commissioners be- fore reporting it to the Department of the Environment.’® The Department ultimately makes a recommendation to the Commissioners. Terms e Exploration: Licenses are issued for either 2 or 4 years and are not transferable. They permit use of 75D). Pasho, ‘‘The United Kingdom Offshore Aggregate Industry: A Review of Management Practices and Issues,’’ Ministry of Energy, Mines and Re- sources Canada, January, 1986, p. 17. 76Code of Practice for the Extraction of Marine Aggregates, December 1981, p. 10. 77—D. Pasho, p. 49. 78Code of Practice, p. 11. App. D—Ocean Mining Laws of Other Countries ¢ 315 seismic and core-sampling techniques and limited bulk sampling by dredger (up to 1,000 tonnes over the period of the licence). The license fee charged by the Crown Estate is on a sliding scale depend- ing on the size of area. Exploration licences are nonexclusive and are normally renewable.”? e Exploitation: Licenses are granted on a continu- ing basis but may be terminated at 6 months’ no- tice. They are expressed to be nonexclusive but as far as possible each area is granted to a single oper- ator. A maximum annual removal limit is stipu- lated. Royalties are payable on the actual quan- tity removed from the seabed but a dead rent of 20 percent of the maximum permissible tonnage multiplied by the current royalty rate is charged whether or not any material is removed. Royalty rates are reviewed periodically but are indexed in the Retail Price Index in the intervening years. The current royalties represent about 5 percent of the selling price of the material at the wharf of land- ing.®° Conditions e Exploration: Drillimg and sampling near cables is restricted. ‘‘Unjustifiable interference’’ with navi- gation, fishing or conservation of living resources is prohibited. The company must provide the Com- missioners with reports on operations and a full re- port on prospecting results including geophysical profiles. e Exploitation: An applicant must have held a prospecting license for the area. According to the 1977 Code of Practice, an applicant must have the necessary vessels, facilities, etc. to undertake work. The license specifies the maximum annual quan- tity to be dredged, and safety provisions. Licenses may be terminated by either party at 6-months’ notice. The Government View procedure is intended to re- solve ocean use conflicts. Special attention is given to potential conflicts between fishing and mining in the Code of Practice. The government recognizes that both industries ‘‘are legitimately exploiting the sea’s re- sources.’’ Therefore, it does not give special priority to any particular activity; for instance, the MAFF does not object to a mining license solely because it involves a fishery area.®! Foreign and Commonwealth Office, op. cit. 8°Tbid. ‘Tbid., p. 11. Activities Sand and gravel dredging is a fairly well established activity, dating back to the mid-1920s.8? The attached table gives details on production at different mining sites. In 1985, marine sources provided about 14 per- cent of Britain’s sand and gravel needs. New Zealand Laws © New Zealand claims a 12-mile territorial sea.*? © New Zealand declared its continental shelf in IG Yo yt © New Zealand declared an EEZ on September 6, 1977 with Act No. 28. Enactment of implement- ing legislation is pending international confirma- tion of the Law of the Sea Treaty.®° © Legislation is currently being reviewed on a low- key basis by the Minister of Energy’s office; a re- port to the ministers is pending.*®° Jurisdiction Continental shelf: The Minister of Energy has exclu- sive authority to issue prospecting and mining licenses for minerals in the seabed or subsoil of the continental shelf. °” Permit Process Exploration and exploitation: Interested companies apply to the Minister of Energy and so long as they meet all the requirements, will be awarded a license. The company must show that it meets all the requirements by submitting a project assessment with its application (e.g., environmental assessment). The concerned agen- cies will become involved in the review process, but the company only deals directly with the Minister of Energy.*8 Terms Exploration and exploitation: To date, only one prospecting license has been issued, so few precedents have been set. However, the granting process is likely to closely parallel that for oil and gas. Prospecting and 2). Pasho, p. 10. ®3]aw of the Sea Bulletin, 1983, op. cit., p. 62. 8*Tbid. 85Mr. Pat Helm, New Zealand Embassy, and officials in Wellington, New Zealand, letter to OTA, Aug. 1, 1986. 8eTbid. 87New Zealand Continental Shelf Act, 1964, No. 28, Section 5 Ibid. 1er Exploring Our New Ocean Front 316 ¢ Marine Minerals janes6 ‘pues sAoge se ales spues uol| ‘JeAeJ6 ‘pues aaoge se awes janes6 ‘pues @AOge se awes {eAeJ6 ‘pues Ajjuauino auoN pues ‘joy {anes6 ‘pues jaAeJ6 ‘pues ‘uoo -J|Z ‘ajiyni ‘ayoyd -soyd ‘ayizeuow *ul) SaJOUSI} ‘juawuol|AUa ‘sauljadid :J0||JU09 asf) }sP09 WOd} W 02 1Se9| IV sesf) uojyeing Ayueno Aep jo au, pasn ABojouyoa Sauoz Jang Buysi4 diyssaquiew uojeloossy @soys WOJ} BoUe}sSIq eaoge se awes Suo|}eap|suod jeojuyoa| e Kayes e BAOge SB BWweS S9|nd SweW Kyayes eAoge se awes sseooid Ma|Ael pue JUsWSSesse |ejuawuo|AUZ anoge se awes S8}}{AlJOB jeBa| 18y}0 « UCI]EAJBSU0D © Bulys} © UoeB|AeU e TUM , ,80U819}10} -Ul ajqeuoseaiun,, Of SBJAUI SUO}}|PU0D Suol}|puod pue BIJ9}J9 JeWOJU! ysulebe Aouabe ayelidosdde — — — — _ Aq payenjene uoleoiddy ~*~ uojyesojdxg ISpueLeyjON suols|Aoid papue}xe oy98dS Ou aq Aew ‘sieak oz ime] Aueno (q ime] Ausenp (9 peulw ajeBoai6be 2Wy SE ull] Ou yun Jed a9} pexi4 — ime] Buu (e @AISN|OXA ime] Gulu (2 ahoge se awes: ~~~ ** uoneyojdxg pepuayxe suolsiAoid aq Aew ‘sieak og ayjjaads ou me] Auseno (q :me7 Aueny (q SuoIsua}xe Z LLIW Jo jesaua5, 2Uy GE ‘sieak Z -10}9911G JO 81N}oaJe1q es ie ime] Buu (2 AAISN|OX me] Buu) (2 J JouseAoy Aq pejuesy” * uolesojdxy ‘ueder SANp J9}eM |eIJO}IJ q -J8} }SeJeau UO paseg ~ = — aaoge se ewes anoge se aues* * uoney0\dxq aynsu| sydesbospAy sieah go} dn pue pieog Buluiw jaug = = — = uojsua}xe ‘sieak ¢ 40 UO|JeL9SIP Aq payuesy” uoj}2J0|dx3 sAueuwse9 s]uawuierob je90| pue jesjua9 eam} 810 -8q papiAlp sanueAdy JAUMO 0} Z Jo) ajqemaual *sayeJ Me] eOUeU|4 pue Ayuwapul -yWWad $JBaK G :JILWad AnjeA jayJewW Uo paseq auoN Aynjadied uj ‘uo} d}JelW Jed 99) pexij ‘vo/ssaau09 Buju — aAoge se awes ‘uo/ssaauo2 Bululw eAoge se aes: ** °° uoNe}ojdx4 Sjesaulw paljioeds UoIss|WWwod = — — JO} BA\snjoxeuoN a Aq pemajaes uejd yoy" * ** ** uoNesoj\dxg : 1e9U14 padojenap Bulag Ajjuauina uolejsi6e7 anoge se awes’*'*'* uo|ye}0|dx 3 Aouabe ayelsdoid = = = - yWi| ON ©—- dB 0} jesodoud ywaqns’** °° uoljesojdxg ‘epeueg Aoyne UJof Aq jes 490/0/001$ = = sieak 1% aaoge se alles** ~~ uo|}e}10)0xq S|PJOuIW Ayouyne julof Aq payuesy : paijioads jo Buyjd Ayuouyne _ (ueensny) 000'S¢ $90]q 00S 0) dp -wes pue uo|yes0\dx4 se0k 2 peyeuBjsep 0} Ajddy° «~*~ LOS saqjeAoy $994 aZIS sqybly uojesng $sao0sd }|Wsed Ayunog SWJ2 | SeljUNOD JEeYIO JO SMe] Bull UeeEDO—"}-G e190eL Laws of Other Countries ¢ 317 ining App. D—Ocean M. Ayayes Ayyyuenb WNWIxe| aouajadwo9 asuadl| SJAU0IS -siwwog Aq jeaoidde jeu -|4 ‘sajouebe ayelidoidde YIM UOl}e}|NSUOD Ul! JU -UOJIAUZ JO JUaWedeg ‘uolyels yoleesay Bunjsedsoid “918 ‘a0ld 184 aBeuuo}) parod AAISN|OXy soqineupAH Aq win} anoge se awes play arey jsnwW e -Jew ‘Ajijuenb uo paseg -de uo jual peaq - ajqesajsues} JON ajqemoual ‘JeaX | ul payenjene uoleolddy * uo!}e}10|dx4 sa0unosal BulAl| e $ajqed e Buiysy © UORBI|ACU Sauu0} 000‘ ZUM 0} dn Buljdwes juawesinbal janes ‘pues @Jaa}U! JOU }SsSNW — pasinbay 2W 009 OM, Q|Qe1J9}SUPJ} JON sieak Z M@IA@l JBWIO} ON ~~ °° ~UOl}e10|dxq ‘wopbuyy peyun anoge se ewes sAoge se awes — — pauinbey 11 000'0S — — “= uoneyoidxg eJOW te) 000'0L @ 10) ajqemauas Jejgads ‘subak § :/el9adg {e) $1eah 000'00S ‘anisnjaxz @ 0} | -eAlsnfaxgZ Joujiu suojyelapis Ajiaads alqemoual uly -U09 jeJUaWUOIAUZ juewesinbas souabiliq pauinbey ysnw -Buyjsedsoly giqeiajsuejuoN ‘WeeA | ‘Bujjoadsoig = “ "> yolesojdxq cpueyeys = - = = = = = = * uojye}0\dx3 "218 © sajqeo e afl] QUEW oe UONPIAR Bulysi} e Bulddiys e :UYIM - aJapaju! JOU }SNW) a _ — AAISN|OXBUON sieak Z _ “=== yolesoldx ‘AeMJON UMOI9 AAOge SP ales 84} 0} pled :payinbay — — — — anoge se awes’ *’ ** uojjeyojdxg sauljadid *sa|qeo— asuajap— yoeasas— uoleB}Aeu— : ueuays||— juawuoJjAUa auew— “UM 918} -J8}U! JOU ISN © AB.Jauy jo J9}SIUIY\ ayoydsoyg Kyajes e ee, pes _ AAISN|OXOUON) — Aq payenjens suojeoddy:***** uoneiojdxy puejeez Mey pauajaid BuiBpaip J9Ae) uly} :ABojouyse} Bululjy anoge se awes anoge se ales pasinbey _ = = _ aaoge se awes’'*** uolye}10|dx3 S|eJBUI|\ SUOI}IPUOD saj|ehoy sae 8ZIS sqybiy uojeing ssao0jd }IWUad Asyjunog Suwa] penunuoj—samjunos JeyO Jo sme Bululyy uUeeDQ—"|-G e1qeL 318 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier mining licenses are granted separately, so legally, the right to prospect is not tied to the right to mine. Logi- cally, however, a company which has invested in pros- pecting is likely to obtain a mining license. Furthermore, since the government is often a partner in prospecting operations, exploitation rights follow naturally. Licenses do not grant exclusive rights; however, not enough activity has taken place to make this a controversial is- sue.®° [Details regarding duration, size, and fees are unknown. | Royalties must be paid to the Crown by the opera- tor. Rates are specified in the license. No mining license has been issued, so no basis for assessing royalties has been established.°° Conditions Any mining activities must disturb the marine envi- ronment and life as little as ‘“‘reasonably possible,’’ must not interfere with the rights of commercial fishermen, must comply with safety provisions of the 1971 Mining Act and 1979 Coal Mines Act. ®Tbid. °Tbid. Activities must not violate any of the restrictive reg- ulations set forth by the Governor-General, concerning navigation, fishing, conservation of living resources, na- tional defense, oceanographic research, submarine ca- bles, or pipelines. ‘‘Unjustifiable interference’’ with any of these activities is defined at the Governor-General’s discretion.°! However, in practice, the details of regu- lations are specified in Parliamentary committees, in consultation with representatives from appropriate gov- ernment branches (1.e., the Ministry of the Environ- ment).°? The Inspector of Mines, in consultation with the Min- istry of Transport, Marine Division, and Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries arbitrates conflicts between miners and commercial fishermen.% Activities One license has been issued for the prospecting of phosphorite nodules.%* °\New Zealand Continental Shelf Act, Section 8. @P. Helm, op. cit. *3Tbid. *Thid. Appendix E Tables of Contents for OTA Contractor Reports Manned Submersibles and Remotely Operated Vehicles: Their Use for Exploring the EEZ Frank Busby Busby Associates, Inc. 576 S. 23rd Street Arlington, VA 22202 Table of Contents Applications Manned Submersibles Remotely Operated Vehicles Hybrid Vehicles Advantages and Limitations Capabilities Vehicle Applications in the EEZ Regional Surveys/Reconnaissance Local Surveys Sampling In Situ Mineral Analyses Examples Needed Technical Developments Technologies for Dredge Mining Minerals of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) M.J. Richardson Consolidated Placer Dredging, Inc. 17961A Cowan Irvine, CA 92714 Edward E. Horton Deep Oil Technology, Inc. P.O. Box 16189 Irvine, California 92713 Arlington, VA 22202 Table of Contents Introduction Placer Mining Technology Precious Minerals Heavy Minerals Industrial Minerals Definitions Bibliography Dredge Mining Systems Bucket Ladder Dredge Bucket Dredges for Mining Suction dredges for Mining Beneficiation Systems Tailings Disposal Mining Control Economics and Efficiency of Dredge Mining Operations Capital Costs Operating Costs Placer Sampling Methods Initial Survey Scout Sampling Indicated Reserves Proven Reserves Drilling Systems Bulk Sampling Placer Sampling Equipment Comparison Evaluation Procedures Precious Minerals Heavy Minerals Industrial Minerals Applications to Offshore Deposits Future Technologies for Offshore Dredge Mining Offshore Titanium Heavy Mineral Placers: Processing and Related Considerations Arlington Technical Services 4 Colony Lane Arlington, MA 02174 W.W. Harvey and F.C. Brown Table of Contents Titanium and Associated Minerals Salient Features of the Industy Recent History of Titanium Sands Mining in the USS. General Extrapolations to Offshore Deposits Typical Flow Sheets for Processing Ti/associated Heavy Mineral Sands Modifications for Processing an Offshore Deposit A Dune Sands Analog of the Postulated Offshore Deposit 319 320 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Offshore Titanium Heavy Minerals Production Scenario Approach to a Framework for Evaluation Component Costs for Heavy Mineral Sands Mining and Processing Ore Grades for Break-Even Production from Offshore Ore Grade Requirements: Revised Basis and Approach References Tables Figures Appendix Processing Considerations for Chromite Heavy Mineral Placers Arlington Technical Services 4 Old Colony Lane Arlington, MA 02174 W.W. Harvey and F.C. Brown Table of Contents Preliminary Notes Synopsis of U.S. Chromium Industry Mining and Processing of the Black Sands Production Potential of Offshore Chromite Placers Costs for a Southwest Oregon Beach Sands Placer Costs for an Offshore Chromite Heavy Mineral Placer Effect of New Technologies References Tables Figures Offshore Phosphorite Deposits: Processing and Related Considerations Arlington Technical Services 4 Old Colony Lane Arlington, MA 02174 W.W. Harvey and F.C. Brown Table of Contents Background and Perspectives Initial Perspectives Onshore/Offshore Comparisons Development Incentives Past Commercial Activities Qualitative Economic Considerations Broad Cost Comparison Cost Offset Via Higher Ore Values Phosphorite Placer Development Prior Engineering/Economic Studies References Tables Figures Polymetallic Sulfides and Oxides of the U.S. EEZ: Metallurgical Extraction and Related Aspects of Possible Future Development Arlington Technical Services 4 Old Colony Lane Arlington, MA 02174 W.W. Harvey Table of Contents Foreword Recent Literature Polymetallic Sulfides Subsea Occurrences Terrestrial Deposits Processing Technologies Tables and Figures, Section II Oxide Nodules and Crusts Broad Intercomparisons Major Processing and Marketing Issues Recent Process-Related Studies Figures, Section III References Appendix Data Management in a National Program of Exploration and Development of the U.S. EEZ Richard C. Vetter 4779 North 33rd Street Arlington, VA 22207 Table of Contents Introduction Conclusions, Problem Areas, and Recommendations Examination of Limiting Factors Is Technology Limiting? Is Understanding of Wise Data Management Concepts Limiting? Is Infrastructure Lacking? Is Funding Limiting? The Present Situation and the Near Future Federal Agencies Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration App. E—Tables of Contents for OTA Contractor Reports ¢ 321 National Environmental Satellite, Data, U.S. Navy and Information Service State and Local Governments National Geophysical Data Center Academic and Private Laboratories - National Oceanographic Data Center Industry National Ocean Service Other Data Management Studies National Marine Fisheries Service Study Procedures Department of the Interior References Minerals Management Service Appendices U.S. Geological Survey Questionnaire National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contacts 72-672 10) = 87 ==) 12 Appendix F OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors Workshop Participants Technologies for Surveying and Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, D.C., June 10, 1986. Participants described and evaluated technologies used for reconnoitering the EEZ, including bathymetry systems, side-looking sonar systems, and seismic, magnetic, and gravity technologies. Chris Andreasen National Ocean Service, NOAA Robert D. Ballard Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution John Brozena Naval Research Laboratory Gary Hill U.S. Geological Survey, Reston John La Brecque Larmont-Doherty Geological Observatory William M. Marquet Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Don Pryor Charting and Geodetic Services National Ocean Service, NOAA Bill Ryan Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory Carl Savit Western Geophysical Co. Robert C. Tyce Graduate School of Oceanography University of Rhode Island, RI Donald White General Instrument Corporation Site-Specific Technologies for Exploring the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, D.C., July 16, 1986. Participants described and evaluated technologies for coring, dredging, and drilling and technologies for electrical and geochemical exploration. Roger Amato Minerals Management Service Alan D. Chave AT&T Bell Laboratories Michael J. Cruickshank Consulting Marine Mining Engineer Charles Dill Alpine Ocean Seismic Survey, Inc. Peter B. Hale Offshore Minerals Section Energy, Mines, and Resources Canada W. William Harvey Arlington Technical Services, VA Edward E. Horton Deep Oil Technology, Inc. Jerzy Maciolek Exploration Technologies, Inc. J. Robert Moore Department of Marine Studies University of Texas, TX 322 John Noakes Center for Applied Isotope Studies University of Georgia, GA William D. Siapno Marine Consultant Paul Teleki U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA John Toth Analytical Services, Inc. Robert Willard U.S. Bureau of Mines, Minneapolis, MN S. Jeffress Williams U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Robert Woolsey Mississippi Minerals Resources Institute, MS App. F—OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors ° 323 Pacific EEZ Minerals, Newport, Oregon, November 20, 1986. Participants assessed knowledge of chromite sands, cobalt crusts, and polymetallic sulfides of the U.S. Pacific EEZ and evaluated existing and potential technology for mining and processing these deposits. Held in cooperation with the Hatfield Marine Science Center, Oregon State University. Robert Bailey Laverne Kulm Department of Land Conservation and College of Oceanography Development Oregon State University, OR State of Oregon Charles Morgan Thomas Carnahan Manganese Crust EIS Project f Mi Bureau of Mines, Reno, NV osc pHERGERGtchey David K. Denton Bureau of Mines, Spokane, WA Bureau of Mines, Spokane, WA Reid Stone Don Foot Office of Strategic and International Minerals Bureau of Mines, Salt Lake City, UT Minerals Management Service Steve Hammond James Wenzel Vents Program, NOAA Marine Development Associates, Inc. Benjamin W. Haynes Robert Zierenberg Bureau of Mines, Avondale, AZ U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA James R. Hein U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA Donald Hull Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, OR Data Classification, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, January 27, 1987. Participants assessed the effect that classifi- cation of bathymetric data and other types of oceanographic data may have on marine science activities. Held in cooperation with the Marine Policy and Ocean Management Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. James Broadus W. Jason Morgan Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Department of Geological and Geophysical Sciences d it area JN chaledmond Princeton University, P. Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences Peter A. Rona Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MA Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological k Laboratories, NOAA Richard Greenwald Ocean Mining Associates David Ross lomesikoralos Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution International Submarine Technology Derek W. Spencer acquclineyNianrnerieks Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Scripps Institution of Oceanography Robert C. Tyce Graduate School of Oceanography Dost SHON , University of Rhode Island, RI Office of Marine Affairs Department of Administration 324 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Mining and Processing Placers of the Exclusive Economic Zone, Washington, D.C., September 18, 1986. Participants critiqued an OTA working paper on the mineral resources of the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf coast EEZs. Technologies for offshore placer mining and for minerals processing were also discussed. Richard A. Beale Associated Minerals (U.S.A.) Ltd. Michael J. Cruickshank Consulting Marine Mining Engineer Edward Escowitz U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Andrew Grosz U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Frank C. Hamata Sceptre-Ridel-Dawson Constructors Gretchen Luepke U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA Ruud Ouwerkerk Dredge Technology Corporation Tom Oxford U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Richard Rosamilia Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Co. David Ross Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution John Rowland Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C. Langtry E. Lynd U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C. J. Robert Moore Department of Marine Studies University of Texas, TX Scott Snyder Department of Geology East Carolina University, NC George Watson Ferroalloy Associates S. Jeffress Williams U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Environmental Effects of Offshore Mining, Washington, D.C., October 29, 1986. Surface, mid-water, and benthic impacts were assessed for both near-shore and open-ocean mining situations. Potential effects of offshore dredging on coastal processes were also addressed. Henry J. Bokuniewicz Marine Sciences Research Center State University of New York at Stony Brook, NY Michael J. Cruickshank Consulting Marine Mining Engineer Clifton Curtis Oceanic Society David Duane National Sea Grant College Program, NOAA Joseph Flanagan Ocean Minerals and Energy, NOAA Barbara Hecker Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory Michael J. Herz Tiberon Center for Environmental Studies University of San Francisco, CA Robert R. Hessler Scripps Institution of Oceanography Art Hurme U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Greg McMurray Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, OR Ed Myers Ocean Minerals and Energy, NOAA John Padan Ocean Minerals and Energy, NOAA Andrew Palmer Environmental Policy Institute Dean Parsons National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA David W. Pasho Resource Management Branch Energy, Mines, and Resources Canada App. F—OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors ° 325 Mario Paula New York District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, NY Richard K. Peddicord Battelle NE, MA Joan Pope U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jean Snider Ocean Assessment, NOAA Other Contributors Craig Amergian Analytical Services, Inc. Robert Abel N.J. Marine Science Consortium, NJ W.T. Adams U.S. Bureau of Mines Vera Alexander University of Alaska Chris Andreasen National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Jack H. Archer Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Ted Armbrustmacher U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO Dale Avery U.S. Bureau of Mines Ledolph Baer National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Susan Bales David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center Bill Barnard Office of Technology Assessment Aldo F. Barsotti U.S. Bureau of Mines Dan Basta National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Alan Bauder U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wayne Bell University of Maryland, MD Jeff Benoit Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality and Engineering, MA Rick Berquist Virginia Institute of Marine Science, VA Buford Holt U.S. Department of the Interior David Thistle Department of Oceanography Florida State University, FL George D. F. Wilson Scripps Institution of Oceanography Thomas Wright U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lewis Brown National Science Foundation Bil Burnett University of Florida, FL R.J. Byrne Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences, VA David Camp Florida Department of Natural Resources, FL Bill Cannon U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Jim Cathcart U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO M. W. Chesson Zellars-Williams Company Michael A. Chinnery National Geophysical Data Center Joe Christopher Gulf of Mexico Region, Minerals Management Service Jay Combe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District, LA Stephen G. Conrad North Carolina Division of Land Resources, NC Margaret Courain National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service Dennis Cox U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA Michael Cruickshank Consulting Marine Mining Engineer Mike Czarnecki Naval Research Laboratory Lou J. Czel E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. 326 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier James F. Davis California Department of Conservation, CA Mike De Luca National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration John H. De Young, Jr. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA John Delaney University of Washington, WA Bob Detrick University of Rhode Island, RI Captain Joseph Drop National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information Service Barry Drucker Offshore Environmental Assessment Div. David Duane National Sea Grant College Program John Dugen Arete Associates Frank Eaden Joint Oceanographic Institutions R.L. Embleton British Embassy Bill Emery National Center for Atmospheric Research Robert Engler U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Herman Enzer U.S. Bureau of Mines William Erb State Department, Edward Escowitz U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Robert H. Fakundiny New York State Geological Survey, NY Rich Fantel U.S. Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO Martin Finerty Ocean Studies Board, National Academy of Sciences Joe Flanagan National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration John E. Flipse Texas A&M University, TX Mike Foose U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Eric Force U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Linda Glover U.S. Navy John Gould Institute of Ocean Sciences, England James L. Green National Space Science Data Center Andrew Grosz U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Kenneth A. Haddad Florida Department of Natural Resources, FL Robert Hall Department of the Interior Gary Hallbauer Texas Sea Grant, TX Erick Hartwig Office of Naval Research W. William Harvey Arlington Technical Services, VA G. Ross Heath Oregon State University, OR Barbara Hecker Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory J.B. Hedrick U.S. Bureau of Mines George Heimerdinger National Oceanographic Data Center, NE Liaison P.O. Helm Embassy of New Zealand H. James Herring Dynalysis of Princeton, PA Jerry Hilbish University of South Carolina, SC Gary Hill U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Tom Hillman U.S. Bureau of Mines, Spokane, WA Jack Hird Texas Gulf Joe Hlubucek Embassy of Australia Porter Hoagland Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Carl H. Hobbs Virginia Institute of Marine Science, VA Kent Hughes National Oceanographic Data Center App. F—OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors ° 327 Art Hurme U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Lee Hunt Naval Studies Board, National Research Council Michel Hunt Minerals Management Service Kaname Ikeda Embassy of Japan Roy Jenne National Center for Atmospheric Research Janice Jolly U.S. Bureau of Mines Jim Jolly U.S. Bureau of Mines Ellen Kappel Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory Mary Hope Katsouros Ocean Studies Board, National Research Council Jeff Kellam Georgia Department of Natural Resources, GA Joseph T. Kelley Maine Geological Survey Terry Kenyon Vitro Corporation Randall Kerhin Maryland Geological Survey Donald G. Kesterke U.S. Bureau of Mines, retired Daniel Kevin Office of Technology Assessment Lee Kimball Council on Ocean Law Chuck Klose NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory John Knauss University of Rhode Island, RI Skip Kovacs Naval Research Laboratory Kenneth Kvammen L.A. County Dept. of Public Works, CA Richard N. Lambert Aero Service Bill Langer U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO Raymond Lasmanis Washington State Geologist, WA Brad J. Laubach Minerals Management Service Stephen Law U.S. Bureau of Mines, Avondale, AZ Jim Lawless National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Wah Ting Lee David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center Peter Leitner General Services Administration Howard Levenson Office of Technology Assessment Ralph Lewis Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Bob Lockerman National Oceanographic Data Center Millington Lockwood National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration J.R. Loebenstein U.S. Bureau of Mines Michael Loughridge National Geophysical Data Center J.M. Lucas U.S. Bureau of Mines Edwin E. Luper Mississippi Bureau of Geology Langtry Lynd U.S. Bureau of Mines Bruce Magnell EG&G R. Gary Magnuson Coastal States Organization Frank Manheim U.S. Geological Survey, Woods Hole Charles Mathews National Ocean Industries Association Samuel W. McCandless, Jr. User System Engineering, Inc. Bonnie McGregor U.S. Geological Survey Gregory McMurray | Oregon Department of Geology & Mineral Industries Michael Hunt Minerals Management Service Rosemary Monahan Environmental Protection Agency, Region I 328 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Carla Moore National Geophysical Data Center Peter Moran Eastman Kodak Co. S. P. Murdoch Embassy of New Zealand Nancy Friedrich Neff University of Rhode Island, RI Myron Nordcuist Kelley, Drye & Warren Terry W. Offield U.S. Geological Survey Jim Olsen U.S. Bureau of Mines, Minneapolis, MN Tom Osborn Chesapeake Bay Institute Ned Ostenso National Sea Grant College Program Norm Page U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA John Padan National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Tom Patin U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jack Pearce National Marine Fisheries Service John Perry Atmospherics Studies Board, National Research Council Hal Petersen Battelle NE, MS Richard A. Petters Sound Ocean Systems, Inc. Don Pryor National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Larry Pugh National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Tom Pyle Joint Oceanographic Institutions Ransom Reed U.S. Bureau of Mines R. Reese U.S. Bureau of Mines Joe Ritchey U.S. Bureau of Mines, Spokane, WA Donald Rogich U.S. Bureau of Mines Nelson C. Ross National Oceanographic Data Center West Coast Liaison John Rowland U.S. Bureau of Mines Paul D. Ryan Embassy of Japan Carl Savit Western Geophysical Co. of America Frederick Schmidt Ames Laboratory, Iowa State University, IA Robert L. Schmidt U.S. Bureau of Mines Henry R. Schorr Gulf Coast Trailing Company Bill Siapno Deepsea Ventures Allen Sielen Environmental Protection Agency, Office of International Activities E. Emit Smith Geological Survey of Alabama, AL Jean Snider National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration David J. Spottiswood Colorado School of Mines, CO Sidney Stillwaugh National Oceanographic Data Center Pacific NW Liaison Reid Stone Minerals Management Service William F. Stowasser U.S. Bureau. of Mines William L. Stubblefield National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Tim Sullivan Atlantic OCS Region, Minerals Management Service Bill Sunda National Marine Fisheries Service Nick Sundt Office of Technology Assessment John R. Suter Louisiana Geological Survey, LA George Tirey Minerals Management Service App. F—OTA Workshop Participants and Other Contributors ° 329 Tom Usselman Geophysics Study Committee, National Research Council Gregory van der Vink Office of Technology Assessment Van Waddell Science Applications Inc. Mike Walker Intermagnetics General Corporation Maureen Warren National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Sui-Ying Wat United Nations, Ocean, Economics and Technology Branch E. G. Wernund University of Texas at Austin, TX Hoyt Wheeland National Marine Fisheries Service Bob Willard U.S. Bureau of Mines, Minneapolis, MN S. Jeffress Williams U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA Stan Wilson National Aeronautics and Space Administration Robert S. Winokur Office of the Chief of Naval Operations Gregory Withee National Oceanographic Data Center W.D. Woodbury U.S. Bureau of Mines Tom Wright U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jeffrey C. Wynn U.S. Geological Survey Dave Zinzer Minerals Management Service Philip Zion NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Appendix G Acronyms and Abbreviations AEM —Airborne Electromagnetic Bathymetry AOML —Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratories BOF —Basic Oxygen Furnace BOM —U.S. Bureau of Mines BPL —Bone Phosphate of Lime BS? —Bathymetric Swath Survey System CAIS —Center for Applied Isotope Studies CALCOFI—California Cooperative Fisheries Investigations CDP —Common Depth Point COE —U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CSO —Coastal States Organization CZMA —Coastal Zone Management Act DGS —Digital Grain Size DMRP —Dredged Material Research Program DOD —U.S. Department of Defense DOE —U.S. Department of Energy DOI —U.S. Department of the Interior DOMES —Deep Ocean Mining Environmenial Study DSHMRA—Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act DSL —Deep Submergence Laboratory EEZ —Exclusive Economic Zone EIS —Environmental Impact Statement EPA —U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ERM —Exact Repeat Mission FOB —Free on Board FWS —U:.S. Fish and Wildlife Service GEODAS —Geophysical Data System GEOSAT —U.S. Navy Geodetic Satellite GI —General Instrument Corp. —Gridded Global Bathymetry GLORIA —Geological Long Range Inclined Asdic GPS —Global Positioning System HEBBLE —High Energy Benthic Boundary Layer Experiment HIG —Hawaii Institute of Geophysics HS —Hydrographic Survey ICES —International Council for Exploration of the Seas IDOE —lInternational Decade of Ocean Exploration IGY —International Geophysical Year IOS —Institute of Oceanographic Sciences IP —Induced Polarization —International Council for the Explorations of the Seas 330 NEPA NESDIS NGDC NMFS NMPIS NOAA NOAC NODC NOMES NORDA NOS NOS/HS NOS/MB NRC NRL NSF NSI —International Submarine Technology, Ltd. —International Trade Administration —Joint Oceanographic Institutions —Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory —Law of the Sea —Law of the Sea Convention —Marine Boundary Data —Marine Core Curator —Marine Ecosystems Analysis Project —Miscellaneous Geology Files —Mini-Image Processing System —Marine Mineral Data —Minerals Management Service —Memorandum of Understanding —Marine Seismic Reflection —National Academy of Science —National Aeronautics and Space Administration —National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere —National Center for Atmospheric Research —National Environmental Policy Act —National Environmental Satellite Data and Information Service —National Geophysical Data Center —National Marine Fisheries Service —National Marine Pollution Information System —National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration —National Operations Security Advisory Committee —National Oceanographic Data Center —New England Offshore Mining Environmental Study —Naval Ocean Research and Development Activity —National Ocean Survey —National Ocean Survey Hydrographic Surveys —National Ocean Survey Multibeam EEZ Bathymetry —National Research Council —Naval Research Laboratory —National Science Foundation —NASA Science Internet App. G—Acronyms and Abbreviations ° 331 OAR —Oceans and Atmospheric Research SAR —Systeme Acoustique Remorque OCS —Outer Continental Shelf SASS —Sonar Array Sounding System OCSLA —Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act SeaMARC—Sea Mapping and Remote OCSEAP —Outer Continental Shelf Environment Characterization Assessment Program SP —Self Potential OMA —Ocean Mining Associates SPAN —Space Physics Analysis Network OMB —Office of Management and Budget TAMU —Texas A & M University OSIM —Office of Strategic and International TOGA —= —Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Minerals Study OSTP —Office of Science and Technology UMI —Underwater Mining Institute Policy USCG —U.S. Coast Guard ODP —Ocean Drilling Program UTM —Universal Transverse Mercator OMA —Ocean Mining Associates UNOLS —University National Oceanographic ONR —Office of Naval Research Laboratory System PGM —Platinum Group Metal USGS —U:S. Geological Survey PMEL —Pacific Marine Environmental WADSEP —Walking and Dredging Self-Elevating Laboratory Platform ROR —Rate of Return WOCE = —World Ocean Circulation Experiment ROV —Remotely Operated Vehicle WHOI —Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution SAB —Strategic Assessment Branch Appendix H Conversion Table and Glossary Conversion Table for Distances, Areas, Volumes, and Weights 1 inch = 2.54 centimeters 1 square inch = 6.45 square centimeters 1 cubic inch = 16.39 cubic centimeters 1 centimeter = 0.39 inches 1 square centimeter = 0.15 square inches 1 cubic centimeter = 0.06 cubic inches 1 foot = 0.30 meters 1 square foot = 0.09 square meters 1 cubic foot = 0.03 cubic meters 1 meter = 3.28 feet 1 square meter = 10.76 square feet 1 cubic meter = 35.31 cubic feet 1 yard = .91 meters 1 square yard = 0.84 square meters 1 cubic yard = 0.76 cubic meters 1 meter = 1.09 yards 1 square meter = 1.20 square yards 1 cubic meter = 1.31 cubic yards Glossary Abyssal Plain: A flat region of the deep ocean floor. Acid-Grade Phosphate Rock: Phosphate rock that can be used directly in fertilizer plants. A comparatively pure grade of phosphate rock that assays at 31 per- cent phosphorous pentoxide (P2Os), and is also called ““fertilizer-grade’’ rock. Acoustic: Of or relating to sounds or to the science of sounds. Active Margin: The leading edge of a continental plate characterized by coastal volcanic mountain ranges, frequent earthquake activity, and relatively narrow continental shelves. Alluvial Deposits: Secondary deposits derived from the fragmentation and concentration of chromite minerals from primary stratiform or podiform deposits. Allu- vial deposits are either placers, e.g., beach sands which occur in Oregon and stream sand deposits in the eastern States, or laterites, which occur in north- west California and southwestern Oregon. Anatase: One of two major crystalline modifications of titanium dioxide (TiO), the other being rutile. Argon-Oxygen-Decarburization (AOD); Vacuum- Oxygen-Decarburization (VOD): Processes for removing carbon from molten steel without oxidiz- ing large amounts of valuable alloying elements, espe- cially chromium. AOD and VOD enable the use of lower grade, lower cost high-carbon ferrochromium. are = 100 square meters = 119.6 square yards statute mile = 0.86 nautical miles square statute mile = 0.74 square nautical miles statute mile = 1.61 kilometers square statute mile = 2.59 square kilometers nautical mile = 1.16 statute miles square nautical mile = 1.35 square statute miles 1 1 1 1 il 1 1 1 nautical mile = 1.85 kilometers 1 square nautical mile = 3.43 square kilometers 1 kilometer = 0.62 statute miles 1 square kilometer = 0.39 square statute miles 1 1 1 1 i kilometer = 0.54 nautical miles square kilometer = 0.29 square nautical miles short ton = 2000 pounds = 0.91 metric tons long ton = 2240 pounds = 1.02 metric tons metric ton= 1.10 short tons = 0.98 long tons Attenuation: A reduction in the amplitude or energy of a seismic or sonar signal, such as produced by divergence, reflection and scattering, and absorption. Barrier Island: A long, narrow, wave-built sandy island parallel to the shore and separated from the main- land by a lagoon. Bathymetry: The measurement of depths of water in the oceans. Also, the information derived from such measurements. Beneficiation-Grade Phosphate Rock: Phosphate rock that assays at 10 to 18 percent phosphorous pentox- ide (P2Os) and requires the removal of hydrocarbons and other impurities before processing in a chemical plant. It may be upgraded to acid grade or furnace feed quality. Beneficiation: Improvement of the grade of ore by mill- ing, flotation, gravity concentration, or other processes. Benthos: the animals living at the bottom of the sea. Bioassay: a method for semi-quantitatively measuring the effect of a given concentration of a substance on the growth of a living organism. Biomass: The amount of living matter in a community or population of a single species. (It may be meas- ured either by wet, dry, or ash-free [burned] weight.) Calcium Phosphate: Any of the calcium orthophosphates that may be used for fertilizers, plastics stabilizers, pharmaceuticals, animal feeds, and toothpastes. They include acid calcium phosphate, calcium dihydrogen 332 App. H—Conversion Table and Glossary ¢ 333 phosphate, monobasic calcium phosphate, monocal- cium phosphate, and tricalcium phosphate. Cephalopods: Marine mollusks including squids, octo- puses, and Nautilus. Chromic Oxide: A dark green amorphous powder that is insoluble in water or acids. Also known as chrome green. It is commonly used as a standard measure of chromium content in chromite. Chromite: An iron-chromic oxide (chrome iron ore). A mineral of the spinel group, and the only mineral mined for chromium. ‘‘Chromite’’ is used synony- mously for chromium ore and concentrates made from the ore used in commercial trade. When refer- ring to the spinel mineral chromite, it is referred to as ‘‘chromite mineral.”’ Conductivity: The ratio of electric current density to the electric field in a material; the reciprocal of resi- tivity. Continental rise: That part of the continental margin that is between the continental slope and the abyssal plain except in areas of an oceanic trench. Continental Shelf: The part of the continental margin that is between the shore and the continental slope and is characterized by its very gentle slope. Continental Slope: The relatively steeply sloping part of the continental margin that is between the con- tinental shelf and the continental rise. Crustacean: Jointed animals with hard shells. This group includes crabs, shrimp, lobsters, and barnacles. Deposit-Feeder: An animal that feeds on particulate matter deposited on the seafloor. Detritus: Particulate matter resulting from the degener- ation and decay of organisms or inorganic substances in nature. Diversity: a measure of the numbers and kinds of spe- cies found in a particular area. Dredging: The various processes by which large float- ing machines, or dredges, excavate earth material at the bottom of a body of water, raise it to the surface, and discharge it into a hopper, pipeline, or barge, or return it to the water body after removal of ore minerals. Electrolytic Manganese Metal: A relatively pure form of metal produced by the deposition of a metal on the cathode by passing an electric current through a chemical solution of manganous sulfate; at the same time electolytic manganese dioxide (MnOz) is formed at the anode. Fauna: the animal life characteristic of a particular envi- ronment or region. Ferrochromium: A crude ferroalloy containing chro- mium that is an intermediate iron-chromic product used in the manufacture of chromium steel. Ferromanganese Crusts: Crusts of iron and manganese oxides enriched in cobalt that are found on the flanks of seamounts, ridges, and other raised areas of ocean floor in the central Pacific. Ferromanganese Nodules: Concretions of iron and man- ganese oxides containing copper, nickel, cobalt, and other metals that are found in deep ocean basins and in some shallower areas of the oceanfloor. Ferromanganese: A ferroalloy containing about 80 per- cent manganese and used in steelmaking. There are three grades: (1) High-Carbon (Standard)—74 to 82 percent manganese; (2) Medium-carbon—80 to 85 percent manganese; and (3) Low-carbon—80 to 90 percent manganese. Filter-Feeder: an animal that feeds on minute organ- isms suspended in the water column by using some screening and capturing (filtering) mechanism. Flotation Separation: A method of concentrating ore that employs the principles of interfacial chemistry that separates the useful minerals in the ore from the waste by adding reagents or oils to a water slurry mix- ture of fine particles of ore and collecting the useful portion that ‘‘floats’’ to the surface in association with the oil or reagent. Full Alloy Steel: Those steels may contain between one- half percent to nine percent chromium, but more commonly contain between one and four percent. Chromium is used to impart hardness. Furnace-Grade Phosphate Rock: Phosphate rock that assays at 18 to 28 percent phosphorous pentoxide (P2Os). It may be charged directly to electric furnaces to produce slag and ferrophosphorus as byproducts and volatilized elemental phosphorus as the primary product. Gangue: The nonmetalliferous or nonvaluable metal- liferous minerals in an ore. Geomagnetic: Pertaining to the magnetic field of the earth. Geophysics: Study of the earth by quantitative physi- cal methods (e.g., electric, gravity, magnetic, seis- mic, or thermal techniques). Grade: The relative quantity or weight percentage of ore-mineral content in an orebody. Gradiometry: Measurement of the difference in the magnetic or gravity field between two points, rather than the total field at any given point. Gravity Anomaly: The difference between the observed value of gravity at a point and the theoretically cal- culated value. Excess observed gravity is positive and deficient observed gravity is negative. Hadfield Manganese Steel: A steel containing 10 to 14 percent managanese; resistant to shock and wear. Ilmenite: A black, opaque mineral consisting of impure FeTiO; that is the principal ore of titanium. Interferometry: The precise measurement of wave- length, very small distances and thicknesses, etc. through the separation of light (by means of a sys- 334 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier tem of mirrors and glass plates) into two parts that travel unequal optical paths and when reunited con- sequently interfere with each other. Invertebrate: an animal lacking a backbone and an in- ternal skeleton. Kroll Process: A reduction process for the production principally of titanium metal sponge from titanium tetrachoride by molten magnesium metal. Larvae: free-living inmature forms that have developed from a fertilized egg but must undergo a series of shape and size changes before assuming the charac- teristic features of the adult organism. Laterite: Weathered material composed principally of the oxides of iron, aluminum, titanium, manganese, nickel and chromium. Laterite may range from soil- like porous material to hard rock. Leucoxene: A mineral assemblage of intermediate tita- nium dioxide (TiO2) content composed of rutile with some anatase or sphene. Usually an alteration prod- uct of ilmenite, with the iron oxide content having been reduced by weathering. Macrofauna: animals barely large enough to be visible to the naked eye and not likely to be photographed from a meter or two. Average body length might be about 1 mm. Magnetic Anomaly: The difference between the inten- sity of the magnetic field at a point and the theoreti- cally calculated value. Anomalies are interpreted as to the depth, size, shape, and magnetization of geo- logic features causing them. Manganese Ore: Those ores containing 35 percent or more manganese. Manganese Dioxide: MnOz, a black, crystalline, water- insoluble compound used in dry-cell batteries, as a catalyst, and in dyeing textiles. Also known as “‘bat- tery manganese.” Manganiferous Ore: Any ore important for its man- ganese content containing less than 35 percent man- ganese but not less than 5 percent. There a two types of manganiferous ore: (1) ‘‘Ferruginous ore’’—con- taining 10 to 35 percent manganese; and (2) ‘‘Man- ganiferous iron ore’’—containing 5 to 10 percent manganese. Mining: The process of extracting metallic or nonmetal- lic mineral deposits from the earth. The process may also include preliminary treatment, such as cleaning or sizing. Mollusk: a division of the animal kingdom containing clams, mussels, oysters, snails, octopuses, and squids; they are characterized by an‘organ that secretes a shell. Nekton: Free-swimming aquatic animals. Neutron Activation: Bombardment of a material by high-energy neutrons which transmute natural ele- ments to gamma-ray-emitting isotopes of character- istic identity. Ore: The naturally occurring material from which a mineral or minerals of economic value can be ex- tracted at a reasonable profit. Overburden: Loose or consolidated rock material that overlies a mineral deposit and must be removed prior to mining. P,O;: Phosphorus pentoxide, the standard used to meas- ure phosphorus content in ores and products. Passive Margin: The trailing edge of a continent located within a crustal plate at the transition between con- tinental and oceanic crust and characterized by its lack of significant volcanic and seismic activity. Pelagic: pertaining to the open ocean. Perovskite: A natural, complex, yellow, brownish-yel- low, reddish, brown, or black calcium-titanium ox- ide mineral. Phosphate Rock: Igneous rock that contains one or more phosphorus-bearing minerals, e.g. phosphorite, of sufficient purity and quantity to permit its commer- cial use as a source of phosphatic compounds or elemental phosphorus. Phosphorite: A sedimentary rock with a high enough content of phosphate minerals to be of economic in- terest. Most commonly it is a bedded primary or re- worked secondary marine rock composed of micro- crystalline carbonate fluorapatite in the form of layers, pellets, nodules, and skeletal, shell, and bone fragments. Phylogeny: the evolutionary or ancestral history of organisms. Phytoplankton: the plant forms of plankton. Placer: Concentrations of heavy detrital minerals that are resistant to chemical and physical processes of weathering. Placer: A mineral deposit formed by mechanical con- centration of mineral particles from weathered debris. The mineral concentrated is usually a heavy mineral such as gold, cassiterite, or rutile. Plankton: passively floating or weakly motile aquatic plants and animals. Plate Tectonics: A model to explain global tectonics wherein the Earth’s outer shell is made up of gigan- tic plates composed of both continental and oceanic lithosphere (crust and upper mantle) that “‘float’’ on some viscous underlayer in the mantle and move more or less independently, slowly grinding against each other while propelled from the rear by seafloor spreading. Podiform-Type Deposits: Primary chromite mineral de- posits that are irregularly formed as lenticular, tabu- lar, or pod shapes. Because of their irregular nature, podiform deposits are difficult to locate and evalu- ate. Most podiform deposits are high in chromium, App. H—Conversion Table and Glossary ¢ 335 and are the only source of high-aluminum chromite. In the United States, they occur mostly on the Pa- cific Coast in California and Alaska. Polychaete: a class of segmented marine worms. Polymetallic Sulfide: A popular term used to describe the suites of intimately associated sulfide minerals that have been found in spreading centers on the ocean floor. Primary Productivity: the amount of organic matter synthesized from inorganic substances in a given area or a measured amount of time (e.g., gm/m/?/yr). Processing: The series of steps by which raw material (ore) is transformed into intermediate or final mineral products. The number and type of steps involved in a particular process may vary considerably depend- ing on the characteristics of the ore and the end prod- uct or products to be extracted from the ore. Pycnocline: a vertical gradient in the ocean where den- sity changes rapidly. Pyrolusite: A soft iron-black or dark steel-gray tetragonal mineral composed of manganese dioxide (MnO. ). It is the most important ore of manganese. Reconnaissance: A general, exploratory examination or survey of the main features of a region, usually pre- liminary to a more detailed survey. Refractory: A material of high melting point, possess- ing the property of heat resistance. Remote Sensing: The collection of information about an object by a recording device that is not in physi- cal contact with it. The term is usually restricted to mean methods that record reflected or radiated elec- tromagnetic energy, rather than methods that involve significant penetration into the earth. Resistivity: The electrical resistance offered by a mate- rial to the flow of current, times the cross-sectional area of current flow and per unit length of current path; the reciprocal of conductivity. Resolution: A measure of the ability of geophysical in- struments, or of remote-sensing systems, to define closely spaced targets. Rhodochrosite: A rose-red or pink to gray rhombohedral mineral of the calcite group: MnCOs. It is a minor ore of manganese. Rhodonite: A pink or brown mineral of silicate- manganese: MnSi03. Rutile: Occurs naturally as a reddish-brown, tetragonal mineral composed of impure titanium dioxide (TiO2); common in acid rocks, sometimes found in beach sands. Seafloor Spreading Center: A rift zone on the ocean floor where two plates are moving apart and new oceanic crust is forming. Seamount: A seafloor mountain generally formed as a submarine volcano. Seismic Reflection: The mapping of seismic energy that has bounced off impedence layers within the earth. Seismic Refraction: The transport of seismic energy through rock and along impedence layers. Silicomanganese: A crude alloy made up of 65 to 70 per- cent manganese, 16 to 25 percent silicon, and 1 to 2.5 percent carbon; used in the manufacture of low- carbon steel. Sonar: Sonic energy bounced off distant objects under- water to locate and range on them, just as radar does with microwaves in air. Stainless Steel: Steel with exceptional corrosion and ox- idation resistance, usually containing between 12 and 36 percent chromium. Chromium contents of 12 per- cent are required to be corrosion resistant. Some low- chromium stainless steels are produced (nine percent to 12 percent), but chromium content averages about 17 percent. Stratiform Deposits: Primary chromite mineral depos- its that occur as uniform layers up to several feet thick similar to coalbeds. Stratiform deposits generally con- tain chromite with low chromium-iron ratio, are com- paratively uniform and extend over large areas. The chromite occurrences in the Stillwater Complex in Montana are characteristic of stratiform deposits. Stratigraphy: Study of the order of rock strata, their age and form as well as their distribution and lithology. Substrate: 1) The substance on or in which an organ- ism lives and grows, 2) The underlying material (e.¢., basalt) to which cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts are cemented. Succession: the gradual process of community change brought about by the establishment of new popula- tions of species which eventually replace the original inhabitants. Superphosphate: One of the most important phospho- rus fertilizers, derived by action of sulfuric acid on phosphate rock. Ordinary superphosphate contains about 18 to 20 percent phosphorous pentoxide (P2Os). Triple superphosphate is enriched in phosphorus (44 percent to 46 percent P2Os) and is manufactured by treating superphosphate with phosphoric acid. Synthetic Rutile: Rutile substitutes made from high- grade ilmenites by various combinations of oxidation- reduction and leaching treatments to remove the bulk of the iron. Taxonomy: classification of organisms into groups re- flecting their similarity and differences (Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species). Thermocline: a gradient in the ocean where tempera- ture changes rapidly. Titanium Dioxide Pigment: A white, water-insoluble powder composed of relatively pure titanium dioxide (TiO2) produced commercially from TiO2 minerals 336 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier ilmenite and rutile (both rutile and anatase “‘grades”’ are manufactured). Titanium Slag: High titanium dioxide (TiOz) slag made by electric furnace smelting of ilmenite with carbon, wherein a large fraction of the iron oxide is reduced to a saleable iron metal product. Titanium Sponge: The primary metal form of titanium obtained by reduction of titanium tetrachloride va- por with magnesium or sodium metal. It is called sponge because of its appearance and high porosity. Transponder: A radio or radar device that upon receiv- ing a designated signal emits a signal of its own. Used for detection, identification, and location of objects, as on the seafloor. Turbidity: cloudiness in water due to the presence of suspended matter. Zooplankton: animal forms of plankton. Index Ad Hoc Working Group on the EEZ, recommendations: 29 airlift systems: 19, 176-177 Albania: 87 Alvin: 145, 148, 151-152, 161, 245 AMAX Nickel Refining Co.: 89 Ambrose Channel: 231, 290 Amdril: 156-157 American Samoa: 293, 298 Analytical Services, Inc.: 159 andesites: 57 Anti-Turbidity Overflow System: 236 Arctic Research and Policy Act: 26 Arctic Research Commission: 26 ASARCO: 200 assistance to States: 34, 291 legislative: 34, 291 State-Federal Task Forces: 34, 291 Associated Minerals (U.S.A.): 105, 193 Association of American State Geologists: 267 at-sea mineral processing technology: 167, 185-192 Australia: 96, 99, 104, 174, 307, 317 mining laws: 307-309 Baffin Island: 161 barrier islands: 47 bathymetric data: 17, 22, 23, 132 general: 17, 132 security classification: 22, 23 Bathymetric Swath Survey System: 122, 128, 131, 256, 268 bathymetric systems: 124-131 airborne electromagnetic bathymetry: 130 Bathymetric Swath Survey System: 122, 128, 131, 256, 268 Canadian Hydrographic Service: 130 charts: 124, 128 deep-water systems: 126-128 General Instrument Corp.: 126, 128 Hydrochart: 128, 256 Larson 500: 130 laser systems: 128 passive multispectral scanner: 130 Sea Beam: 122, 123, 126-128, 131, 256, 276 seafloor mapping: 126, 131-132 shallow-water systems: 128-131 Sonar Array Sounding System: 126, 128, 132 synthetic aperture radar: 130 WRELADS: 130 beach erosion: 224 Becker Hammer Drill: 156-158 Bedford Institution of Oceanography: 161 benthic communities: 20 benthic environmental effects: 215, 223, 226-227, 243, 245 BIMA dredge: 169, 171, 200 Bone Valley Formation: 53, 56 borehole mining: 19 Botswana: 96 Brazil: 39, 41, 91, 94, 171 Brown & Root: 182 California Cooperative Fisheries Investigations: 262 Canada: 13, 39, 45, 49, 51, 65, 96, 98, 99, 102, 104, 218, 309, 317 mining laws: 309 Center for Applied Isotope Studies: 144 Challenger, HMS: 158 Challenger, space shuttle: 149 charting: 254-256 funding: 254 GLORIA program: 254-255 Chile: 98 chromite sands, seabed mining scenario: 196-199 at-sea processing: 197 costs: 198 location and description: 196, 197 mining technology: 197 operation: 198 profitability: 199 chromium, commodities: 91-93 demand and technological trends: 93 domestic production: 92 domestic resources and reserves: 91 foreign sources: 91 properties and uses: 90, 91 stockpile: 92 Clarion Fracture Zone: 122 Clipperton Fracture Zone: 122 coastal erosion, effects of dredging: 21 coastal plain: 42, 51, 52 Coastal States Organization (CSO): 34 Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA): 34 coastline alteration: 218, 224 cobalt, commodities: 89, 90 demand and technological trends: 90 domestic production: 90 foreign sources: 89, 90 prices: 90 properties and uses: 89 stockpile: 89 substitutes: 89 Cobalt Crust Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 2195240) cobalt crust mining: 182-183 cobalt crust mining, environmental effects: 240-244 plume effects: 240-242 temperature effects: 242 threatened and endangered species: 243 cobalt crust sampling: 158-160 and deepsea dredges: 159 bulk sampling: 160 measuring crust thickness: 159 quantitative sampling: 159 reconnaissance sampling: 159-160 Colombia: 96, 103, 171 commercial potential, marine minerals: 13, 17, 19, 81 339 340 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier common depth point seismic data: 264 consumption, mineral commodities: 82, 83 general: 82 nickel: 83 platinum-group metals: 83 titanium: 83 continental: 3, 7, 41, 42, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 57-59 drift: 3 margins: 41 sea: 41, 42 shelf: 7, 45, 47, 49, 50, 52, 57, 58, 59 slope: 57 continuous casting, steel: 89 continuous seafloor sediment sampler: 144, 149, 151 Convention on the Continental Shelf: 29 copper, commodities: demand and technological trends: 98 domestic production: 98 properties and uses: 97 resources and reserves: 98 coring devices: 118, 155-158 box core: 156 costs: 158 impact corers: 155 vibracores: 154, 155, 157, 158 Cross Seamount: 242-243 dacites: 57 data classification: 139, 268-277 and Navy: 272, 275 and NOAA: 272, 275 and ocean mining interests: 273 costs to scientific and commercial interests: 273 foreign policy implications: 275 risks to national security: 270-272 data collection and management: 21, 23, 32, 250-268 academic and private laboratories: 267 constraints: 251-254 Department of the Interior: 263-265 industry: 267-268 missing components: 252 NASA: 265-266 Navy: 266-267 NOAA: 256-263 State and local governments: 267 Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Study: 215, 236-242 and manganese nodule recovery: 236-237 objectives: 237 recommendations for future research: 240 deep sea mining environmental impacts: 237-238 Deep Sea Drilling Project: 137 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resourcess Act: 29, 237, 305-306 deep submergence laboratory: 152 Deep Tow: 124, 149 deep water environmental effects: 218, 226, 236-245 Deepsea Ventures: 159 Defense Production Act: 92 deltas: 42, 54, 55 Department of the Interior: 22, 56, 182 diorite intrusives: 58 direct current resistivity: 140-141 Dominican Republic: 96 downhole sampling: 162 drag sampling: 155 Dredge Material Research Program, Corps of Engineers: 215 dredge mining technology, air lift suction: 176 dredge mining technology, bucket ladder-bucket line: 171 capacities: 171 capital costs: 171 limitations: 171 operating costs: 171 operating depths: 171 dredge mining technology, bucket wheel suction: 176 dredge mining technology, cutter head suction dredge: 174-175 capabilities: 175 capital costs: 175 description: 174 dredge mining technologies, general: 18 dredge mining technology, grab dredge: 177 dredge mining technology, hopper dredge: 173-174 capabilities: 174 capacities: 173 capital costs: 174 description: 173 dredge mining technology, new developments and trends: 179-180 increasing operating depth: 180 motion compensation, stability: 179 dredge mining technology, suction dredge: 172-173 capacities: 172 components: 172 limitations: 172 price and costs: 173 types: 172 dredges, environmental impacts: 233-234 drill ships: 18 drilling, percussion: 156-157 Amdril: 156-157 Becker Hammer Drill: 156-158 vibralift: 157 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Inc.: 105, 193 ECHO I, expedition: 239 ecological: 20, 21 deep-sea communities: 21 information: 20 East-West Center: 73, 74 electrical techniques: 139-143 direct current resistivity: 140-141 electromagnetic methods: 140 horizontal electric dipole: 140 induced polarization: 141-143 induced polarization and titanium minerals: 142 induced polarization for core analysis: 143 MOSES: 140 reconnaissance induced polarization: 141 self-potential: 141 Index ¢ 341 spectral induced polarization: 142 spontaneous polarization: 141 transient electromagnetic method: 140 vertical electric dipole: 140 electromagnetic methods: 140 endangered species: 243 Endangered Species Act of 1973: 243 Energy Security Act of 1980, Title VII: 26 environmental effects: 20, 110, 215, 218, 222-223, 226-245 benthic effects: 215, 223, 226-227, 243, 245 deep water effects: 218, 226, 236-245 mid-water effects: 215, 222-223, 226 plume effects: 222, 226, 234, 239, 240-241 shallow water effects: 218, 226, 227-236 surface effects: 215, 222, 226 environmental impact statements: 215, 218, 240, 244 Cobalt Crust Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 215 Gorda Ridge Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 215, 244 Manganese Crust EIS Project: 240 environmental monitoring: 20, 21, 228-230, 237 Environmental Studies Program: 219, 264 Escanaba Trough: 162 exploration: 8, 22-28, 31 budget planning and coordination: 23, 27, 28 costs: 25 general: 8, 22 pre-lease prospecting rules, proposed: 31 private sector: 24 State programs: 26 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 23, 29, 41, 42, 45, 47, 49, 51, 52, 55, 57, 58, 61, 64, 65, LO TAD NCS 1992499 27.5 9292 Federal Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee: 26 Federal Republic of Germany: 105, 317 mining laws: 310-311 ferromanganese crusts, seabed mining technology: 182 Finland: 96 fish, effects of mining on: 231-233, 242,245 France: 94, 317 mining laws: 309-310 Frasch process: 183 Gabon: 94 Galapagos Rift: 63 garnet, commodities: 112 General Instrument Corp.: 256 geochemical techniques: 143-145 dissolved manganese: 143 helium-3: 143 hydrothermal discharges: 143 light scattering measurements: 143 methane: 143 particulate metals: 143 radon-222: 143 SLEUTH: 143-144 temperature: 143 thermal conductivity: 143 water sampling: 143-144 geographic locations, United States: Alabama: 282, 291 Alaska: 12, 16, 24, 40, 41, 56, 65, 67, 68, 100, 103, 128, 138, 169, 171, 177, 192 Alaska Peninsula: 66, 68 Aleutian Islands (AK): 41, 66 Ambrose Channel: 231, 290 American Samoa: 293, 298 Appalachian Mountains: 49, 50 Atlantic coast: 45 Atlantic Ocean: 43 Baker Island: 292 Baltimore Canyon: 43 Beaufort Sea: 41, 67, 69, 122, 253 Bering Sea: 12, 40, 66, 67, 68, 69, 122, 138 Blake Plateau: 12, 24, 45, 53, 94 Brooks Range (AK): 67 California: 12, 41, 42, 56, 57, 58, 60, 65, 122, 138, 281, 282, 291 California Borderland: 61 Cape Farrelo (OR): 60 Cape Mendocino (CA): 57 Cape Prince of Wales (AK): 67, 69 Cascade Mountains: 41, 58 Chagvan Bay (AK): 69 Chesapeake Bay: 51, 52, 224, 290 Chukchi Sea: 67, 69, 122 Columbia River: 57, 60, 291 Colville River: 67 Connecticut: 283, 290 Cook Inlet (AK): 67, 68 Coquille River (OR): 60 Coronado Bank: 61 Delaware: 281, 283, 290 Delaware River: 52 Delmarva Peninsula: 47 Dog Island (FL): 56 Escanaba Trough: 65 Florida: 12, 16, 41, 45, 53, 175, 281, 283, 290, 291 Forty Mile Bank: 61 Galveston (TX): 55 Georges Bank: 45, 46, 52 Georgia: 45, 49, 53, 281, 284, 290 Goodnews Bay (AK): 12, 68 Gorda Ridge: 12, 29, 42, 57, 61, 64, 65, 244-245, 291 Grand Isle, (LA): 218, 224 Gray’s Harbor (WA): 57, 60 Guam: 292, 293, 296, 298 Gulf of Alaska: 40, 65, 67, 69 Gulf of Mexico: 42, 55, 56, 122, 138, 183, 253 Hawaii: 43, 69, 95, 122, 182, 284, 290, 291 Hawaiian Archipelago: 72, 240, 243 Hoh River (WA): 60 Howland Island: 292 Jacksonville (FL): 53 James River (VA): 51 Johnston Island: 240, 243, 292 342 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier Kayak Island (AK): 67 Kingman Reef: 292 Klamath Mountains (CA, OR): 58, 59, 60 Kodiak Island (AK): 67, 68 Kuskokwim Mountains (AK): 66, 69 Long Island: 47, 50 Louisiana: 55, 56, 281, 284, 291 Maine: 45, 94, 281, 285 Maryland: 285 Massachusetts: 12, 281, 285, 290 Miami Terrace (FL): 53 Midway Island: 292 Minnesota: 95, 103 Mississippi: 41, 281, 286 Mississippi River: 55, 56 Montana: 103 Monterey Bay (CA): 57 Nantucket Shoals: 45 Necker Ridge (HI): 71 New England: 51 New Hampshire: 281, 286 New Jersey: 12, 41, 47, 286, 290 New York: 12, 41, 287, 290 New York City (NY): 45 North Carolina: 47, 52, 53, 192, 281, 287, 291 Olympic Mountains (WA): 57, 58 Onslow Bay (NC): 52, 53, 192 Oregon: 12, 16, 40, 42, 57, 58, 59, 60, 97, 122, 244, 281, 287, 290, 291 Osceola Basin (FL): 53 Pacific Mountains (HI): 72 Pacific Ocean: 41, 53, 63 Palmyra Atoll: 292 Penguin Bank (HI): 69 Pescadero Point: 61 Point Conception (CA); 56, 57, 58, 60 Portland (OR): 57 Prince of Wales Island (AK): 67 Puerto Rico: 122, 291, 292, 294 Raritan River: 231 Rhode Island: 288, 290 Salmon River (AK): 69 San Andreas Fault (CA): 56 San Diego Bay: 57 San Francisco (CA): 57 Santa Rosa Island (FL): 56 Savannah River: 53 Seattle (WA): 57 Seward Peninsula (AK): 12, 67 Smith Island (VA): 52 South Carolina: 288 S.P. Lee Seamount: 72 St. George Island (FL): 56 Sur Knoll: 61 Texas: 281, 288 Thirty Mile Bank: 61 Trust Territories: 122, 295, 298 Twin Knoll: 61 Tybee Island (GA): 53, 192 Vermont: 49 Virgin Islands: 122, 292, 293, 296, 298 Virginia: 281, 289, 290, 291 Wake Island: 292 Washington: 122, 281, 289, 290 Wisconsin: 100 Yakutat (AK): 67 Yukon River: 66 Geophysical Data System: 268 Ghana: 171 glacial deposition: 46, 47 Global Marine, Inc.: 177 Global Positioning System: 128, 131-132, 137, 268 GLORIA: 116, 119-123, 128, 131, 249, 251, 254-255 266 gold, commodities: 100, 101 demand and technological trends: 101 domestic production: 101 domestic resources and reserves: 101 properties and uses: 100 gold placers, seabed mining scenario: 200-203 at-sea processing: 200 costs: 203 environmetal effects: 203 location and description: 199, 203 mining technology: 200 Gorda Ridge: 122 Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 215, 244 Gorda Ridge Task Force: 244-245, 291 government subsidies: 23 grab sampling: 118, 154, 155 gravity: 17, 138, 163 airborne gravimetry: 138 and navigation: 163 shipborne gravimeters: 17, 138 Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.: 199 Greece: 87 Green Cove Springs Deposit: 105 Guam: 292, 293, 296, 298 Guaymas Basin: 65 Hallsands (UK): 224 Hanna Mining Co.: 97 Harwell Laboratory: 144 Hawaii Institute of Geophysics: 122 Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory: 244 High Energy Benthic Boundary Layer Experiment (HEBBLE): 218 Hydrochart: 128, 256 hydrothermal activity: 42, 63, 64, 65 igneous rocks: 49 induced polarization: 18, 141-143 Inspiration Resources (Mines): 16, 40 Institute of Oceanographic Sciences: 119, 255 International Council for Exploration of the Sea: 215, 218, 227-228 recommendations: 228 zones: 228 International Hydrographic Bureau: 123, 132 international law: 296 Index © 343 International Submarine Technology, Ltd.: 122 International Tin Council: 85 Japan: 39, 41, 65, 105, 173, 174, 177, 317 mining laws: 311-312 John Chance Associates: 123 Johnston Island: 17, 74, 182, 240, 243, 292 JOIDES Resolution: 160-161 Juan de Fuca Ridge: 12, 42, 57, 61, 63, 65, 122, 134, 140, 141, 143, 161 Kane Fracture Zone: 161 Kingman-Palmyra Islands: 74, 292 Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp.: 106 Koken Boring & Machine Co.: 161 Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory: 26, 122, 131 LORAN-C: 163-164 Louisiana Purchase: 115 mafic rocks: 57 magnetic anomalies: 59, 136, 137 magnetic profiling: 118, 136-138 airborne surveys: 136 satellite surveys: 136 ship-towed magnetometers: 137 sub-bottom profilers: 133 total field measurements: 137 magnetometers: 17, 137 Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976: 6 Malaysia: 171 manganese, commodities: demand and technological trends: 95 properties and uses: 94 resources and reserves: 95 Manganese Crust EIS Project: 240 Marconi Underwater Systems: 122 margins, continental: 42 Marine Ecosystems Analysis Project: 262 Marine Policy and Ocean Management Center: 273 materials: 13, 88 conservation: 13, 88 recycling: 13, 88 substitution: 13, 88 Materials Act of 1947: 305 metamorphic rocks: 49 Mexico: 98, 99 Mid-Atlantic Rift Valley: 160 mid-water environmental effects: 215, 222-223, 226 heavy metals: 223, 226 particulate concentrations: 222, 226 mineral commodities: chromium: 13, 14 cobalt: 13, 85, 88, 89 ferrochromium: 14, 15, 86, 87 ferromanganese: 14, 15, 86, 87, 94 lead: 13, 88 manganese: 13, 14, 88 markets: 8, 17, 81 nickel: 13, 14, 88 phosphate rock: 14, 16, 19 platinum-group metals: 13, 88 steel: 14, 87 supply and demand: 8, 81, 87 tin: 13 titanium: 13, 88 titanium pigment: 14 zinc: 13 mineral laws, United States: 300-306 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act: 305-306 Materials Act of 1947: 305 Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Land: 305 Mineral Leasing Act of 1920: 300-305 Mining Law of 1872: 300-304 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act: 305 Surface Resources Act of 1955: 300-305 Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Land: 305 Mineral Leasing Act of 1920: 300-305 mineral occurrences, general: amber: 39 amphiboles: 49, 56, 58 cerium: 71 chromite: 12, 15, 39, 49, 58, 59, 60 coal: 39 Cobalt=03ee/laio copper: 39, 53, 75 diamonds: 41, 49, 171 ferromanganese crusts: 10, 12, 16, 39, 53, 70, 71, 72, 73, 90, 96 ferromanganese nodules: 10, 12, 16, 39, 53, 63, 70, 72, 75, 81, 91 garnets: 49, 59, 60 gemstones: 39, 49 gold: 39, 40) 49° 50; 55, 58) 59; 685 69% 171 heavy minerals: 8, 14, 15, 19, 49, 50, 51, 52, 55, 56, 59, 105, 174 ilmenite: 14, 15, 51, 56, 59 iron: 39, 312 lead: 39, 71 lime: 39 magnetite: 18, 39, 59, 60 metalliferous muds: 39, 174 molybdenum: 71 monazite: 49, 55, 60, 308 nickel: 53, 75 oil and gas: 18, 45 phosphorite: 10, 14, 15, 52, 53, 56, 61, 69, 308, 316 eves MO), 2, is, iG Se), 40), ats), 4k}, 282), SO), D2, See, 56, 57, 59, 60, 67, 68, 69, platinum: 12, 49, 58, 60, 68, 171 polymetallic sulfides: 8, 10, 16, 19, 39, 45, 61, 62, 63, 65, 98, 100 precious coral: 39 precious metals: 12, 39, 49, 50, 58, 59, 67 pyroxenes: 49, 56, 58 rhodium: 71 rutile: 15, 49, 51, 171, 308 salt: 43, 55 sand and gravel: 12, 16, 39, 45, 46, 47, 48, 52, 54, 55, 344 e Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier 57, 67, 69, 174, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 315 shells: 39 silver: 65 staurolite: 39 sulfur: 43, 55 tin (cassiterites): 39, 49, 169, 171, 308, 314 titanium: 39, 49, 52, 60, 71 tourmaline: 49 vanadium: 71 zinc: 39, 63, 65, 71 zircon: 39, 49, 56, 59, 60, 308 mineral processing technologies: 20, 186-192 at-sea deployment: 185, 191, 192 at-sea v. onshore: 186 classifiers: 188 electrostatic separation: 190 flotation: 190 general: 20 gravity separation: 188 magnetic separation: 189, 190 shipboard processing: 20 trommel: 188 minerals industry, overcapacity: 8, 13 Minerals Management Service (MMS): 16, 22, 26, 29, 31, 73, 136, 249, 253, 263 minerals, strategic and critical: 9 mining industry, state of: 85 Mining Law of 1872: 300-304 mining laws of other countries: 307-316 Australia: 307-309 Canada: 309 France: 309-310 Federal Republic of Germany: 310-311 Japan: 311-312 Netherlands: 312-313 New Zealand: 315, 318 Norway: 313 Thailand: 313-314 United Kingdom: 314-315 miocene: 56 monazite, commodities: 112 monitoring, environmental: 20, 21, 228-230, 237 Morocco: 16, 85 multi-beam echo sounders: 22, 124-131, 249, 254, 276 National Academy of Sciences: 271 Naval Studies Board: 271 National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program: 26 National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere: 271 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): 26, 265-266 Ames Research Center: 266 data handling problems: 266 NASA Science Internet: 265-266 National Space Science Data Center: 265 National Climatic Data Center: 263 National Defense Stockpile: 10, 87, 89, 92, 94, 96, 98, 99, 101, 102 National Environmental Satellite, Data and Information System: 22 National Geophysical Data Center: 22, 32, 131, 136, 253-256, 259-261, 266, 273 data handling problems: 260, 261 Marine Geology and Geophysics Division: 259, 260 mission: 259 types of data held: 260, 261 National Governors Association (NGA): 34 National Marine Fisheries Service: 239, 257, 259 National Marine Pollution Information System: 262 National Marine Pollution Program: 27 National Materials Advisory Board (NMAB): 93 National Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978: 27 National Ocean Service (NOS): 23, 163-164, 254-257, 261, 266 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA): 6, 17, 22, 25, 122, 128, 131-132, 136, 143-144, 218, 219, 230, 239, 237, 253-263 National Oceanographic Data Center: 22, 32, 253, 256, 261-263, 266 National Operations Security Advisory Committee: 270 National Science Foundation (NSF): 22, 26, 32, 253 Division of Ocean Sciences: 253, 267, 273 Division of Polar Programs: 267 National Seabed Hard Minerals Act of 1987 (H.R. 1260): 29 National Security Council: 271, 275 Naval Ocean Research and Development Activity: 123, 130 Naval Oceanographic Office: 266 navigable waterways, dredging: 229 navigation: 162-164 ARGO: 163-164 circular error of position: 163 data classification: 268 Global Positioning System: 163-164, 268 LORAN-C: 163-164 Mini-Ranger: 163 Precise Positioning Service: 163 Raydist: 163-164 Standard Positioning Sercice: 164 Netherlands: 297, 317 mining laws: 312-313 neutron activation: 145 New Caledonia: 96 New England Offshore Mining Environmental Study: 215, 227, 229, 230 recommendations: 230 New York Harbor Sea Grant studies: 231 New Zealand: 167, 171, 315, 318 mining laws: 315, 318 nickel, commodities: demand and technological trends: 97 domestic production: 96 domestic resources and reserves: 96 properties and uses: 96 Nippon Kokan: 182 NORDCO: 161 Index ¢ 345 North Sea, sand and gravel: 228 Northern Mariana Islands: 292, 295, 298 Norway: 89, 318 mining laws: 313 nuclear exploration techniques: 18, 118, 144-145 continuous seafloor sediment sampler: 144, 149, 151 cookie maker: 144 neutron activation: 145 X-ray fluorescence: 144 Ocean Assessment Division, NOAA: 263 Ocean Drilling Program: 137, 160 Ocean Mining Associates: 239 oceanic crust: 42, 45 Office for Research and Mapping in the Exclusive Economic Zone: 252 Office of Energy and Marine Geology: 254, 255 Office of Management and Budget (OMB): 26 Office of Naval Research: 266 Office of Oceanography and Marine Assessment, NOAA: 257 Office of Oceans and Atmospheric Research: 257 Office of Science and Technology Policy: 271 Office of Strategic and International Minerals, MMS: 263 offshore mining technologies, transfer of oil and gas technology: 185 optical imaging: 152-154 ANGUS: 152 Argo: 152-153 data transmission: 152-153 fiber optic cables: 152-153 Jason: 152-153 Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC): 85 Outer Continental Shelf: 22, 56, 59 Outer Continental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program: 262 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act: 6, 23, 28, 263, 300, 305 Pacific Geosciences Center: 140 Pacific Islands, mineral occurrences: 95 Belau-Palau: 74 Federated States of Micronesia: 74 French Polynesia: 72 Guam: 74 Howland-Baker: 74 Jarvis: 74 Johnston Island: 17, 74, 182 Kingman-Palmyra Islands: 74 Marshall Islands: 72, 74 Samoa: 74 Wake Islands: 74 Pacific Ocean: 3, 12, 16 Passive margins: 42 peridotite deposits: 49 Peru: 98, 99 Philippines: 87 phosphate rock: demand and technological trends: 109 domestic production: 109 domestic resources and reserves: 108 foreign competition: 108 properties and uses: 107 phosphorite, Onslow Bay (NC), seabed mining scenario: 207-209 costs: 209 location and description: 207 mining technology: 207 processing technology: 207 profitability: 209 phosphorite, Tybee Island (GA), seabed mining scenario: 204-206 at-sea processing: 206 costs: 206 location and description: 204 mining technology: 205 processing technology: 205 profitability: 206 pigments: 91, 93, 96, 104, 107 chromium: 91, 93 nickel: 96 titanium: 104, 107 plate tectonics: 3, 43, 61, 69 platinum-group metals, commodities: 102-103 demand and technological trends: 103 domestic production: 103 domestic resources and reserves: 102 foreign sources: 102 properties and uses: 102 pleistocene: 45, 46, 57, 65, 67 plume environmental effects: 222, 226, 234, 239, 240, 241 polymetallic sulfides, seabed mining technology: 160-162, 181-182 concepts: 181 conditions: 181 problems: 182 sampling: 160-162 positioning: 162-164 Preussag AG: 182 prices, commodity: 83, 85 general: 83 nonmetallic: 85 speculation: 85 Puerto Rico: 122, 291, 292, 294, 298 Pungo River Formation: 52 radiometric dating: 71 Raritan River: 231 Reagan Proclamation (No. 5030): 5, 6, 275 reconnaissance surveys: 17, 18, 56 reconnaissance technologies: 119-139 refractories: 93 remotely operated vehicle (ROV): advantages and limitations: 146-148 and hard mineral exploration: 151 and navigation: 163 ANGUS: 151 Argo: 152 capabilities: 149-151 346 ¢ Marine Minerals: Exploring Our New Ocean Frontier comparison with manned submersibles: 146-148 costs: 148-149 Deep Tow: 149 instrumentation: 146 Jason Junior: 151 needed technical developments: 151-152 Solo: 149 towed vehicles: 149-150 types: 146 Republic of South Africa: 41, 85, 87, 91, 94, 102, 175 rift zone: 43, 63 S.P. Lee: 116-117, 245 sampling technologies: 12, 154-162 characteristics of: 154-155 crust sampling: 158-160 placer sampling: 154-158 polymetallic sulfide sampling: 160-162 representative sampling: 154-155 sand and gravel (see mineral occurrences, general): demand and technological trends: 111 domestic production: 111 domestic resources and reserves: 111 seabed mining ventures: 199 Sandy Hook Marine Laboratory: 231 satellites: 22 schist: 57 Scotian Shelf: 45 Scripps Institution of Oceanography: 26, 131, 132, 140, 263 Sea Beam: 122, 123, 126-128, 131, 268, 276 Sea Cliff: 245 Sea Grant: 215, 227, 229, 231, 257 data collection: 257 New York studies: 215, 227, 229, 231 seabed mining: competitiveness: 15, 16, 17, 19, 167 economic potential: 8, 17 legislation: 23, 28, 30, 31 technology: 10, 15, 17, 181, 182 world: 39 SeaMARC systems: 122-124, 128, 132 seamounts: 42, 72, 74 seasonal environmental effects: 224, 226 sedimentary rocks: 45, 57, 58, 67 seismic reflection: 17, 22, 118, 132-136 chirp signals profiles: 47, 56 sub-bottom profilers: 133 three-dimensional seismic surveying: 135 seismic refraction: 118, 132-136 self-potential: 141 shallow water environmental effects: 218, 226, 227-236 dredges and: 233-234 ICES: 228 minimizing effects: 232-233 Shell Oil Co.: 200 ships, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: 131 Surveyor: 131, 268, 270 Discoverer: 131 Davidson: 131, 271 side-looking sonars: 17, 116, 119-124 Deep Tow: 124, 149 GLORIA atlas: 122 GLORIA: 116, 119-123, 128, 131 Interferometric systems: 123 long-range side-looking sonar: 116, 119-122 mid-range side-looking sonar: 118-119 Mini-Image Processing System: 119 SeaMARC systems: 122-124, 128, 132 short-range side-looking sonar: 118-119, 124 Systeme Acoustique Remorque: 124 Sierra Leone: 104, 171 silt curtain: 235-236 site-specific technologies: 139-162 SLEUTH: 143-144 solution/borehole mining technology: 183 Sound Ocean Systems: 162 Southwest Africa: 169 sphalerite: 63 spontaneous polarization: 141 spreading centers, seafloor: 3, 41, 63, 64 State-Federal Task Forces: 34, 291 State-owned or State-controlled minerals companies: 14, 86 State resource management: 281 strategic and critical minerals: 9, 88, 94, 96, 98, 101, 102 Strategic Assessment Branch, NOAA: 218, 219, 257 atlases: 221, 257 Strategic Petroleum Reserve/Brine Disposal Program: 262 Stillwater Complex: 92, 103 Stillwater Mining Co.: 103 subduction zone: 3, 41, 57 Submerged Lands Act of 1953: 4 submersibles, manned: 18, 145-152 advantages and limitations: 146-148 Alvin: 145, 148, 151, 152, 161 and hard mineral exploration: 151 battery-powered: 145 capabilities: 149-151 comparison with remotely operated vehicles: 146-148 costs: 148-149 free-swimming: 145 Johnson-Sea-Link: 148 needed technical developments: 151-152 superalloys: 88, 91, 96 surface environmental effects: 215, 222, 226 Surface Resources Act of 1955: 300 tectonic processes: 41 territorial sea: 4 Territories, United States: 55, 292-299 tertiary sediments: 57, 58 Texas A&M University: 123 Thailand: 169, 171, 318 mining laws: 313-314 Third World: 13 Titanic: 124, 151, 152, 154 index ¢ 347 titanium, commodities: 104-106 demand and technological trends: 106 domestic production: 105 domestic resources and reserves: 104 foreign sources: 104 properties and uses: 104 titanium heavy mineral sands, seabed mining scenario: 193-196 at-sea processing: 193 costs: 196 location and description: 193 mining technology: 193 operation: 194 Trail Ridge Formation: 52 Tropical Ocean Global Atmosphere Study: 263 Truman Proclamation (No 2667): 6 Turkey: 87, 91 ultramafic rocks: 49, 57, 58, 60 Union of Soviet Socialists Republics (U.S.S.R.): 91, 98, 102, 105, 109 United Kingdom (U.K.): 102, 119, 169, 173, 218, 224, 297, 314, 318 mining laws: 314-315 U.N. Conference on the Law of the Sea: 3, 7, 29, 64, 70, 76, 275 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE): 12, 20, 26, 47, 224, 227, 231, 233, 240 dredging of navigable waterways: 229 U.S. Bureau of Mines (BOM): 22, 26, 59, 160, 192, 249, 265 U.S. Coast Guard (USCG): 249 U.S. Department of Defense (DOD): 253, 276 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): 26, 249, 262 U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI): 263 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 26, 229, 232, 249 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 175 22502515 i1ee7 te i19) 141, 122, 131, 142, 143, 159, 249, 253-254, 265 U.S. Navy: 23, 32, 118, 128, 131, 249 data collection: 266-267 data classification: 270-272, 275-277 U.S. Treasury: 101 University National Oceanographic Laboratory System: 132 vibracores: 143 Virgin Islands: 122, 292, 293, 296, 298 Wake Island: 292 water column environmental effects: 222-223, 226 wave pattern alteration: 218, 224 Williamson & Associates: 162 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution: 26, 131, 152 161, 273 wurtzite: 63 ? X-ray fluorescence: 144 Yugoslavia: 91 Zaire: 85, 89, 98 Zambia: 89, 98 Zellars-Williams, Inc.: 205 Zimbabwe: 87, 91 zinc, commodities: 99, 100 demand and technological trends: 100 domestic production: 100 domestic resources and reserves: 100 properties and uses: 99 zircon, commodities: 112 i i ey an bi poi LAP ay) hy gta” ae ly i ’ Ae iels Mi! iy yi laa unas wet : rere eee) tan ee) ae : Whe i Lie Foust imestrna of Sars en ee eee Me) cei. ai ' GO Maly “hyeetivivcetlowe oy) N48 7 erect bam edit alee Patera A oka BURL.‘ y yilee eu f ; re) aN Oe ae ee r? eubrieled, Adel parc att iu) a rene! eee eR Mote neuen a = 7 ; J/HERe ‘ ' , ORT } : 4 ‘ } “i 2) Ss ; ’ yd it My i t Ey ee 7% & kewl ! : f j ay | = : : Te a j id ig by) i v ai - ~ ¥ id , oe r. a. vow "AA i i Nive a OL mr iA Ce ACS) , Fs 1 Ans eat ; (Wh Cacrany ete y! ; i rine a rik? OG tbisbat teal witht . inf A ereiie 4 Sid 2 wo ee ata , KA Te t WA of E z i 0 = 1) <— a ® Se - aA eS = ' Ls ¢ 5 - 3 “ aN ye oad e s j han ans kas ‘ ani i he f a it A inet i jae = Fi ‘ a CTS ee } : ik uh é - pus a hale sd aie + = 7 if ¢ a iy Pawel er pevebal ; ; fee ' 1€ b ( \ AR ~ > ; a“ 7 y 541 y 5 rat h { Ae 2 at a ee 5 Mah eit Ss n Aig sf e . iH f i i ri : Se DUE jy \ ‘ , i ~ & 1 | pt LEI th } 4 = , ‘ i "a "i t y ay e ' § : fA in| ai! ha! mM . Avia mv a ; a eeiiyal esi 1 euiog pales cy) 7 P4 ‘ . r any) ‘ i ak ’ hal ale! Pe a Gi = , ny j ’ ane oa Te , f i , a i , t i ’ J i j ‘ ® a r 7 : A ‘a S7E6-ZOPOT “O' “uOISuIyseM ‘aotJOQ SuNUIIg JUSUIUISAOD “sjusUINDOG Jo JUapUaUTIOdNS :O], [IVA “p L8/L (injeusis) (epoo vase surpnjour auoyd oumyAeq) (ap uoneitdxe pres pai) ) j4ap4so anok s0f nok yuvyy (2P0D dIZ ‘ABS ‘AIID) [SE L | IL | JIS aia |_| IE | sl el i (ssoippe 390.19S$) IHNEE\/ PELOSI A) GOVE) AIGA [| LJ junossy ysodaq Odd EJ (QUI] UONUS}e/ssoippe [eUOTIppy) SjusuINS0q JO Juapuajutiedng ay) 0} afqeked yoayD C (aureu [euosied 10 Auedutod) sjusuAed JO poyjaur asooyp asvajq *¢ oe JULIg 10 adA], asevalg ‘saolid AJIIOA 01 BEZE-E8L-ZOZ we sed UoNPULIOJUT Pue Jop1O [feo aseajd ‘ajep sty JoyYY *gg/T YSnosy) pood ose pue Surpuey pue o8eisod onsowlop Je[ndai apnyout saord [TW (°%¢7z [euoNIppe ue ppe aseayd srawi0ysno [euoneuiajuy) ~~ SI dapio Au Jo 3s09 [eI0} BY *T ‘00°GT$ eo1d ‘T-Z/010-€00-ZS0 sequinu yoos OTD ‘IaIJUOLY ULIIQ MAN] INC Sursojdx7] :sperourpy aurseyy ‘suoneorqnd payeorpur Surmoyjoy oy) ow puas aseayd 6 SHA ie jAsea s3 6829 wp [-] e¥[o) 4noA absey9 apog Bulssav0ig sapi9 WOW AIpIC uoneolqng SJUBWINIOG jo juapuazutIodns 349 ; alien akeg eoiq GA iS = > tat) Sotteonsity we Si he> ee ~ Ana — a —_ ——— — i oa ? = mp ds a faesatit a 4 repiaé ed = : al = ae é . emecabult etiwlla atta Gee ea Ee Oth wie ‘esk ef “< RAKES ni tae Stbi8 wa « 7 a > ee Speer = aS. ye 5-2) stleree doc (7913 = , z \ = | im ‘0 re soe Shh « ou hee ce 3 =i) : i iy ~ “Ares at ee ht = 7 , 2 = Gar? sae a at = = > in r 2 ee hee a 2. no) a i ri ; Sic emesis di Te tye — a ——— nee ee ae Ef Bay ae ae Se > R ' gn I i — nme a rks Ss Ply we easier: oe {wet ww de > er! 2 oT apy PLSAWOSRAIDARA } i Dee on bs 5 : ual Sh as ee hen rr ww re =m) . : sche Me : 4 ii a ri J ~w ee A cae hee Date dong bi co ir) tind _ spoon otsy ‘ia ee ee hd: Be 14 - Office of Technology Assessment The Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) was created in 1972 as an analytical arm of Congress. OTA’s basic function is to help legislative policy- makers anticipate and plan for the consequences of technological changes and to examine the many ways, expected and unexpected, in which technology affects people’s lives. The assessment of technology calls for exploration of the physical, biological, economic, social, and political impacts that can result from applications of scientific knowledge. OTA provides Congress with in- dependent and timely information about the potential effects—both benefi- cial and harmful—of technological applications. Requests for studies are made by chairmen of standing committees of the House of Representatives or Senate; by the Technology Assessment Board, the governing body of OTA; or by the Director of OTA in consultation with the Board. The Technology Assessment Board is composed of six members of the House, six members of the Senate, and the OTA Director, who is a non- voting member. OTA has studies under way in nine program areas: energy and materials; industry, technology, and employment; international security and commerce; biological applications; food and renewable resources; health; communication and information technologies; oceans and environment; and science, educa- tion, and transportation. JULY 1987