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 



