114 



Department of State, 

 Washington, B.C., April 21, 1971. 

 Hon. Edwakd A. Gabmatz, 



Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representa- 

 tives, Washington, B.C. 



Dear Mr. Chairman : Thank you for your letter of March 9, 1971, requesting 

 the views of the Department of State on HR 3662, a bill to amend the Fish and 

 Wildlife Coordination Act in order to protect the marine environment by regu- 

 lating the dumping of wastes in the coastal and ocean waters of the United 

 States. 



The Department of State is in agreement with the need to protect the marine 

 environment by regulating dumping. However, we wish to point out two problems 

 of international law raised by the present language in HR 3662. 



Section 5B (a) provides that "no person may dump waste material into the 

 ocean waters of the United States or transport such material through such 

 waters unless he has first obtained a permit from the Administrator of the En- 

 vironmental Protection Agency authorizing such dumping" (eimphasis added). 

 The Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, to 

 which the United States is a party, provides the right of innocent passage through 

 territorial waters for all vessels. Article 14 (4) of that Convention states that 

 passage is innocent so long as it does not prejudice the peace, good order 

 or security of the coastal State. This provision places on the United States an 

 international legal obligation not to restrict, prevent or regulate passage through 

 its territorial waters except on the above grounds. The simple transport of waste 

 material through United States territorial waters would not be considered 

 prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the United States. Of course, 

 the United States does have jurisdiction to control the transport fro'rn its terri- 

 tory of materials to be ocean dumped. Therefore, the Department of State 

 recommends that the phrase on lines seven and eight of Section 5B (a) "trans- 

 port such material through such waters" be deleted. 



In addition, Article 24 (1) of the Convention provides that a coastal State may, 

 in a zone of high seas contiguous to its territorial sea, prevent infringement of 

 its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary regulations within its territory or 

 territorial sea. The United States may, therefore, restrict dumping in the con- 

 tiguous zone which would contravene the sanitary regulations of its territorial 

 sea or territory. However, the high seas beyond the 12-mile limit of the con- 

 tiguous zone are entirely beyond United States jurisdiction. 



The Department of State strongly favors enactment of comprehensive legisla- 

 tion to regulate ocean dumping. It is quite clear that indiscriminate ocean dump- 

 ing of waste products from the United States in the territorial waters and con- 

 tiguous zone and on the high seas is a matter of great international concern. In 

 order to regulate such activities the Department of State favors the adoption 

 of HR 4247, the Marine Protection Act of 1971, which is before your committee 

 for consideration. 



The Oflice of Management and Budget advises that from the standpoint of the 

 Administration's program there is no Objection to the submission of this report. 

 Sincerely, 



David M. Abshire, 

 Assistant Secretary for 

 Congressional Relations. 



Department of State, 

 Washington, B.C., April 7, 1911. 

 Hon. Edward A. Garmatz, 



Chairman, Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, House of Representa- 

 tives, Washington, B.C. 

 Dear Mr. Chairman : The Secretary h'as asked me to respond to your letter of 

 February 11, 1971 on H.R. 549, and your letter of February 25, 1971 on H.R. 

 337 and H.R. 4217. bills concerning the discharging of material into any of the 

 navigable waters of the United States. 



The proposed bills would regulate disicharges in international waters by any 

 person of certain materials. There is no basis in international law for an exer- 

 cise of jurisdiction over the conduct of foreign nationals on the high seas. We 

 would propose that this problem be dealt with in the context of a comprehensive 

 regulatory scheme such as that proposed in H.R. 4247, the Administration's pro- 



