Dear Editor,

I read the letter to the editor from Tuifagaloa Dr. Afu Lefaoseu III and, while I do not intend to use this platform for ongoing discussions, I felt it necessary to respond to this request for clarification. Moving forward, I encourage anyone seeking clarification, information, or discussion on this topic to contact me directly by email or phone.

I appreciate the interest in this important issue and welcome thoughtful discussion. However, I would first like to clarify my role.

I am not the Chairman of the Deep-Sea Minerals Steering Committee. This is Governor Pulaalii Nikolao Pula’s committee, supported by key members of his cabinet through various subcommittees. My role is to assist with implementation of the public outreach initiative, coordinate activities of the Steering Committee, and advise both the Governor and the Committee on matters relating to deep-sea minerals. The Governor’s memorandum establishing the committee has been widely circulated online, and I am happy to provide a copy to anyone interested.

Deep-sea minerals is a highly technical and complex subject, and many aspects of the federal leasing and regulatory process are not widely understood. For that reason, I believe it is especially important that discussions surrounding deep-sea minerals accurately reflect the facts, the current stage of the process, and the respective roles of federal and territorial entities. Questions and concerns are both appropriate and welcome, but they should be grounded in a clear understanding of the process so the public receives accurate information on this important issue.

I am happy to sit down with anyone interested in learning more about this topic and share what I know and what I have learned. We are all learning together. Some are simply further along in the process than others.

First, it is important to distinguish between an exploration lease and a commercial mining project.

No commercial mining project has been proposed, approved, or authorized. The lease currently being discussed would not authorize commercial extraction of deep-sea minerals. Rather, it would authorize preliminary exploration activities such as surveys, scientific studies, environmental baseline data collection, mapping, sampling, and other information gathering activities necessary to determine whether any resource exists and whether future development could ever be technically, economically, and environmentally feasible.

In short, we are discussing exploration, not mining.

Second, many of the questions being asked are precisely the questions that exploration is intended to answer.

The letter requests definitive information regarding mineral quantities, commercial viability, employment projections, government revenues, royalty payments, economic impacts, environmental impacts, operational requirements, and long-term benefits to American Samoa.

At this stage, definitive answers do not yet exist because the information necessary to answer those questions has not yet been collected.

We do not yet know the quantity, quality, or commercial recoverability of any mineral resources that may exist offshore. We do not know the technical feasibility of extraction. We do not know future market conditions. We do not know what future technologies may emerge. We do not know what environmental studies may reveal.

Many of the questions raised can only be answered through scientific studies, baseline environmental assessments, resource evaluations, and data collection that occur during exploration.

That is why exploration occurs before any consideration of commercial development.

Exploration provides the scientific, environmental, and resource information necessary to determine whether future development should proceed, be modified, or not proceed at all.

If exploration does not occur, many of the questions being asked today may remain unanswered indefinitely. Exploration is the mechanism by which governments, scientists, regulators, and the public obtain the information needed to evaluate both potential benefits and potential risks.

Third, the federal regulatory process may not be widely understood, so it may be helpful to clarify how it works.

An exploration lease is only the beginning of a long and highly regulated process.

Should exploration occur, any future proposal for commercial extraction would require additional planning, additional scientific studies, extensive environmental review, public participation opportunities, and federal regulatory approvals.

A commercial mining operation cannot simply begin because an exploration lease exists.

Any future commercial proposal would require submission of detailed plans, environmental assessments, and potentially a full Environmental Impact Statement. Those reviews alone can take years to complete.

Only after all required studies, reviews, consultations, and permitting processes have been completed would federal regulators determine whether commercial activity should be authorized, modified, or rejected.

In other words, exploration does not guarantee mining.

Exploration simply provides the information necessary to make informed decisions in the future.

Many residents have sincere concerns regarding potential impacts to marine ecosystems, fisheries, cultural resources, and the environment. Those concerns are legitimate and deserve serious consideration. They are also precisely why scientific studies, environmental baseline assessments, and environmental reviews occur before any future development decisions can be considered.

It is also important to understand that any future decisions regarding federal offshore leasing, environmental review, permitting, or commercial development would ultimately be made by the appropriate federal agencies operating under federal law and federal regulations.

Fourth, some of the questions raised suggest there may be uncertainty regarding the respective roles of federal and territorial entities.

Federal agencies are responsible for administering federal leasing programs, conducting environmental reviews, and making regulatory decisions regarding activities within federal jurisdiction.

The role of the American Samoa Government is to ensure that the interests of the people of American Samoa are represented, that information is shared with the public, and that local stakeholders have an opportunity to participate in discussions affecting our offshore resources.

Our responsibility is to advocate for American Samoa – not to predetermine outcomes before the facts are known.

Finally, I would encourage everyone to approach this discussion with an open mind.

The growing interest in deep-sea minerals is not unique to American Samoa. The United States and many allied nations are examining these resources because minerals such as nickel, cobalt, manganese, copper, and rare earth elements are increasingly important to energy systems, advanced manufacturing, defense technologies, critical mineral supply chains, and national security.

At the same time, legitimate questions exist regarding environmental impacts, economics, technology, and governance.

Those questions deserve careful study.

The best way to answer them is through science, research, data collection, and public engagement – not speculation.

At this stage, no one is being asked to approve commercial mining.

No one is being asked to approve a 20-year extraction project.

The discussion before us is whether sufficient scientific and environmental information should be gathered so that any future decisions are informed by evidence rather than speculation.

The purpose of exploration is not to decide whether mining should occur.

The purpose of exploration is to determine whether there is enough information to make an informed decision in the future.

Gathering information does not predetermine the outcome. It simply ensures that future decisions are based on facts rather than assumptions.

Respectfully,
Michael McDonald
michael.mcdonald@pa.as.gov