67 



expands the limits of the shelf depending on the technological capa- 

 bility to exploit in deeper waters — the principle of expanding 

 boundaries. 



The Subcommittee first asserted its jurisdiction over policy issues 

 affecting the continental shelf of the United States. It cited the Interior 

 Committee's work on the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the 

 Submerged Lands Act of 1953, giving it the responsibility for legisla- 

 tive oversight of operations under that law and any subsequent amend- 

 ments of these Acts. Assuming that the shelf was an integral part of 

 the continental United States, and interpreting the Constitution (Art. 

 IV, sec. 3, cl. 2) concerning this issue, the Subcommittee declared that 

 any modification of the property rights of the United States created 

 by or reaffirmed in these Acts would require an Act of Congress. 



The Subcommittee adopted the interpretation agreed upon by the 

 American Branch of the International Law Association that "right 

 [i.e., sovereignty] under the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Con- 

 tinental Shelf [should] extend to the limit of exploitability existing 

 at any given time within an ultimate limit of adjacency which would 

 encompass the entire continental margin." ^^ The Subcommittee sup- 

 ported the objectives calling for a stable system of law applying to the 

 deep seabed and assurance of the continued freedom for scientific 

 research ; however, it also held that — 



* * * undisputed access to the vast energy resource [oil, in particular] located 

 on the U.S. continental margin is of paramount importance. Oil is a strategic mate- 

 rial which is absolutely essential to fuel our industrial machine and thereby sus- 

 tain a sound economy.^*^ 



As to the boundary limits of the shelf, the Subcommittee argued 

 against a narrow shelf and the premise of upholding the freedom of 

 the seas through larger internationally-controlled ocean space. It 

 upheld the Geneva Convention as "* * * sufficiently precise as to per- 

 mit a positive, reliable, and adequate interpretation of the breadth of 

 the legal shelf." It also interpreted the Convention to hold that "the 

 sovereign rights of coastal nations to explore and exploit their legal 

 Continental Shelf extend to the limit of exploitability existing at any 

 given time within an ultimate limit of adjacency which encompasses the 

 entire continental margin." ^°^ Furthermore, it contended that the 

 drafters of the Convention had limited the jurisdictional claims to the 

 natural resources of the submerged land in order to preclude any 

 abrogation of the high seas freedom. Hence, the expanding boundary 

 concept was "* * * consistent with the intent of the Convention's 

 drafters as it is an additional means of prohibiting jurisdictional 

 claims not related to the exploration and exploitation of the natural 

 resources of the submerged land continent." ^°- 



On the new policy statement submitted by the President in May 

 1970, calling for a seabed treaty, an international authority, and the 

 renunciation of sovereign rights of all nations beyond the 200-meter 

 isobath, the Subcommittee endorsed the general features of the pro- 

 posal. However, it had {Objections to the renunciation of "the heart of 

 our sovereign rights," particularly relative to the continental margin. 



99 Ibid., page 3. 

 ""> Ibid., page 5. 

 10' Ibid., page 16. 

 i°2ibid., pages 16-17. 



