207 



Mr. Frasek. Is there one that represents any kind of olHcial policy 

 position ? 



Mr. Froscii. I believe there is one. 



Mr. Fraser. It would be helpful, Mr. Chairman, if we could get 

 that. If it is a classified nature 



Mr. Froscii. I think it would have to come from the Department 

 of State. 



Mr. Fascell. We will rrat it from the Department of State. 



(The material referred to is in the files of the subcommittee.) 



Mr. Fascell. Admiral Ilearn, before we go into executive session, I 

 want to ask a question. 



In the resolution, H.J. lies. 816, language is used that any action 

 at this time would be premature but it uses this wording, "to vest con- 

 trol of deep ocean resources." It further goes on to say that the dele- 

 gates of the U-N". should "oppose any action at this time to vest con- 

 trol of the resources of the deep vSea." 



In one case it talks about vesting control of "deep ocean resources" 

 in an international body and in the other case it refers to the "deep 

 sea." In no case does the language cover jurisdiction of the deep seabed. 



Is there a legal difference in your opinion and, if so, what is it? 



Mr. Froscii. I believe the deep oceans and the deep sea can be inter- 

 preted to mean the same thing. 



Mr. Fascell. How about the "resources of the deep sea" and the 

 "resources of the deep ocean" ? Are they the same as the "deep seabed" ? 



Admiral Hearx. The resources could be those that lie free on the 

 ocean bottom or located in the subsoil. I think there is a difference be- 

 tween resources in the subsoil and on the seabed, itself. 



Mr. Fascell. Is there a difference between resources, either on top (^.r 

 in the subsoil, and title to the bed itself, or to sovereignty over the bed, 

 or jurisdiction of the bed ? 



Admiral Hearx. There are lots of differences. 



Mr. Fascell. I would think so. If you oppose vestitig of the re- 

 sources, it doesn't necessarily mean 3^011 might oppose vesting of juris- 

 diction or vesting of the title or any other legal regime. 



Admiral Hearx. As to our interest in the continental shelf, we don't 

 have complete sovereignty over the continental shelf. We have sov- 

 ereignty for the specific purposes of exploring and exploiting the nat- 

 ural resources of the shelf. 



Mr. Fascell. That is an interesting viewpoint because I am sure 

 that many of my colleagues are of the opinion that the United 

 States actually owns the continental shelf to the limits fixed, what- 

 evev tliey were. Now there seems to be some doubt on this under the 

 International Convention on the Continental Shelf. 



Admiral Hearx". I think the Secretary may have the Continental 

 Shelf Convention here. 



Mr. Fascell. If it is your legal opinion that the United States does 

 not really have title and that we have jurisdiction or use purposes 

 for onl}' specific uses set forth in the convention, then I think we 

 ought to make that quite clear because I am sure some of us have 

 operated under a misconception. 



Admiral Hearx. Let us see if I can find the article I have in mind. 



Mr. Fraser. Mr. Chairman, on that point I suppose that there is 



