66 
should not be subject to inspection, in accordance with Section 5 of Article IV 
(page 18, line 25 through page 14, line 10). 
Article IV, Section 2 (page 13, lines 13-18). Would these prohibitions apply 
to our Polaris submarines? If so, words should be added excluding submarines 
from the provisions of this Section. 
Article V, Section 1 (page 14, lines 13 and 14). Radioactive waste disposal in 
the deep sea should not be prohibited, but should be subject to appropriate 
safety regulations which could be established by the International Atomic 
Energy Agency. 
Article VI (page 14, lines 22-25 and page 15, lines 1-6). Many States on 
the coasts of South America and Africa possess a very narrow continental shelf, 
even under the definition proposed in this Article. In some cases, a depth of 
600 meters is attained within 12 miles of shore, that is, within the limit of the 
territorial sea. I suggest that the area of the continental shelf be defined as 
within either a specified distance from shore, or the 600 meter contour, whichever 
is greater. Such a provision should draw support in the U.N. General Assembly 
from States with narrow continental shelves, as usually defined, and would 
not harm the interests of States that have broad shallow continental shelves. 
I hope you will not consider that any of the above suggestions constitute a 
fundamental objection to the policies or institutional and legal framework 
proposed by Senator Pell. If his “Declaration” were adopted by the General 
Assembly, and accepted by the United States and other leading members of 
the United Nations, we would have taken a giant stride toward world law and 
order. 
Very respectfully yours, 
RocerR REvVELLE, Director. 
THE NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHY ASSOCIATION, 
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, 
Washington, D.C., December 13, 1967. 
Hon. J. W. FULBRIGHT, 
Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, 
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 
DpaR Mr. CHAIRMAN: This letter is in response to the request of Senator 
Claiborne Pell for remarks by the National Oceanography Association on resolu- 
tions Nos. SR-172 and SR-186. 
The National Oceanography Association is a broad-based organization having 
members from industry, the academic and scientific community and the general 
public—all with a deep interest in oceanography. NOA’s purpose is to promote 
the common interest of the field of oceanography by means of creating better 
public understanding of ocean use and its relations to the economy, creating 
nationwide interest in scientific research and educational facilities in the field 
of oceanography and promoting the development and utilization of the tremen- 
dous resources of the ocean for the benefit of mankind in general and the United 
States in particular. 
NOA has been actively concerned about the proposal that title to the deep 
ocean bed and subsoil be vested in the United Nations. Evidence of the concern 
is witnessed by the strong support NOA has given to the several resolutions 
introduced in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. These resolu- 
tions, including Senator Norris Cotton’s SJR—111, consider an approach to the 
internationalization of the deep ocean bed and subsoil and its mineral resources 
at this time as being premature. NOA feels that this attitude is desirable for the 
following reasons: 
1. The National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development 
and the Commission on Marine Science, Engineering and Resources are develop- 
ing, at the request of Congress, proposals for the establishment of United States 
goals for ocean development. Such goals do not now exist. NOA believes that these 
goals must be adopted, before action can be taken to provide for the administra- 
tion of deep ocean activities. This does not presume that the policies established 
on the recommendations of the Council, the Commission, or the Congress itself 
would ignore the need for the establishment of international agreements in the 
interest of world health, well-being, peace and security. It does assume the use 
of judicious procedures for the determination of specific agreements. 
2. The U.N. in particular has not displayed the ability nor was it chartered 
to manage the world’s resources. NOA believes that it would be ill-advised and 
premature to entrust the U.N. with the control of the deep ocean. 
