64 



to clarify and review these definitions before any final actions were 

 contemplated. 



Congressman Alton Lennon, Chairman of the Subcommittee on 

 Oceanography, reminded the Congress that studies were being con- 

 ducted by the Marine Council and the Commission on the best solu- 

 tion for controlling the exploitation of mineral resources from the 

 continental shelves." Consequently, he said, it was in the national inter- 

 est to wait for these studies to be completed "as keenest minds available 

 in international law and marine science study all aspects of this com- 

 plex problem in the hope that an equitable solution can be resolved for 

 all nations." ®^ 



LEGISLATIVE CONCERN IN THE 9 1ST CONGRESS 



As the 91st Congress convened, it had before it "Our Nation andthe 

 Sea" — the report of the Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, 

 and Resources presented to the President and to Congress on Janu- 

 ary 9, 1969.^° This report recognized the inadequacy of the present 

 framework for the continental shelf and the seabed beyond. It recom- 

 mended a precise definition of the continental shelf — a limit of each 

 coastal nation to be fixed at the 200-meter isobath, or 50 nautical miles 

 from the baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea, 

 whichever alternative gave it the greater area. For the seabed beyond 

 these limits, the Commission proposed a new international legal-polit- 

 ical framework for exploration and exploitation of the mineral re- 

 sources underlying the deep seas. It proposed further the establish- 

 ment of an International Registry Authority, and an intermediate 

 zone between the limits of the continental shelf and the deep-sea area. 

 The intermediate zone would begin at the 200-meter isobath (or 50 

 nautical miles from the coast) seaward to the 2,500-meter isobath (or 

 100 nautical miles, whichever was farther from shore) . The report pro- 

 posed policy guidelines and goals for the United States to follow in 

 considering the needs to implement these recommendations. 



The recommendations, the activities of nations on the U.N. Sea- 

 bed Committee, and an executive branch proposal concerning the sea- 

 bed submitted on August 3, 1970, raised a series of questions which 

 became the focus of attention by the 91st Congress. What were the 

 limits of the continental shelf ? Should the limit be geological or legal ? 

 Should it be based on considerations of equity, security, or economic 

 advantage? How much did the United States stand to lose by the 

 creation of an international regime ? Was a new Law of the Sea Con- 

 ference necessary? Should the states have a narrow or a wide conti- 

 nental shelf ? For areas beyond the continental shelf, what sort of an 

 international regime would be best? What principles should be 

 adopted? What kind of international machinery should be estab- 

 lished? How did all these aspects affect the economy and national 

 security of the United States ? 



A series of hearings in the Senate sought the answers to those ques- 

 tions. The Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Ocean 

 Space, chaired by Senator Claiborne Pell, heard testimony on his S. 



89 "The United Nations and the Issue of Deep Ocean Resources * * *." op. cit., page 68. 



M Commission on Marine Science. Engineering, and Resources. "Our Nation and the Se&." 

 Report of the Commission on Marine Science, Engineering, and Resources. (Washington, 

 U.S. Government Printing Office, January 1969.) 



