lU 



continental shelf (at depths less than 

 200 meters) extends so far from the coast 

 that at some point, it may reasonably be 

 aro^ied, it is no longer "adjacent" to it 

 and, therefore, not within the Convention's 

 definition. 



At the other extreme, it has been argued 

 that the adjacency criterion is not a limita- 

 tion even upon the exploitability criterion, 

 but that as soon as it becomes technologically 

 possible to exploit mineral resources to any 

 ocean depth, the seabed of all the submarine 

 areas of the world — totaling more than 128 

 million square miles beyond the 200-meter 

 isobath — will belong to the coastal nations. 

 They would then divide these areas among 

 themselves in accordance with Article 6 of 

 the Convention on the Continental Shelf; in 

 effect, it would give each coastal nation sov- 

 ereign rights to the natural resources of the 

 seabed and subsoil from its coasts to the 

 median line, that is, the line every point of 

 which is equidistant from the coasts of the 

 nearest nations. 



Other suggested interpretations of the con- 

 tinental shelf definition are presented in the 

 Report of the Commission's International 

 Panel. We think it important to consider here 

 only the view presented in the Interim Ee- 

 port of the National Petroleum Council's 

 (NPC) Committee on Petroleum Resources 

 Under the Ocean Floor, which was adopted 

 on July 0, 1968. The NPC Interim Report 

 maintains that the exploitability and adja- 

 cency criteria, taken together, give coastal 

 nations "sovereign rights" over the natural 

 resources of the continental land mass sea- 

 ward to where the submerged portion of that 

 land mass meets the abyssal ocean floor, that 

 is, over the natural resources of the geological 

 continental shelves, continental borderlands, 

 continental slopes, and at least the landward 

 portions of the geological continental rises. 



Wliere the continent drops off sharply from 

 near the present coastline to the abyssal ocean 

 floor, the NPC Interim Report would add to 

 the legal "continental shelf" an area of that 

 floor contiguous to the continent. 



On the basis of the studies of its Interna- 

 tional Panel, the Commission concludes that 

 the NPC position is not warranted either by 

 the language of the definition of the "conti- 

 nental shelf" or its history. We do not think 

 that there is any reasonable way to interpret 

 the Convention's definition that would place 

 a precise outer limit on the existing legal 

 "continental shelf." 



To eliminate the uncertainty, the NPC In- 

 terim Report proposes that the United States 

 declare to the world that it will exercise 

 sovereign rights over the "continental shelf" 

 as defined by the NPC and invite all other 

 coastal nations to issue similar declarations. 



This proposal, at first, may seem attrac- 

 tive. The United States has the power to ef- 

 fectuate it and acquire permanent, exclusive 

 access to the mineral resources of an addi- 

 tional 479,000 square statute miles of seabed 

 and subsoil. It already has approximately 

 8.50,000 square statute miles of continental 

 shelf up to the 200-meter isobath. Very rich 

 oil and gas deposits are expected to be found 

 in this additional vast area, and the United 

 States would make itself the sole beneficiary 

 of their exploitation. Furthermore, some U.S. 

 oil companies seemingly would prefer to con- 

 tinue to face the known perils of the exercise 

 of exclusive authority by coastal nations 

 around the world rather than the unknown 

 perils of international legal-political ar- 

 rangements yet to be negotiated. 



Nevertheless, the Commission rejects this 

 proposal as contrary to the best interests of 

 the United States. It would benefit other 

 coastal nations of the world proportionately 

 more than the United States and give them 



