71 
the Subcommittee on Oceanography, House Committee on Merchant 
Marine and Fisheries stated : 
Since the committee first addressed itself to this interim legislation, the inter- 
national negotiations, which have so long dominated administration policy on 
marine resources, have seemingly receded even farther into the future. Little 
was accomplished in 1972 negotiations except the production of a conference 
agenda of doubtful content and a few items of proposed treaty “language” of 
somewhat dubious utility. The nature of these items, and particularly the last 
minute timing of their production, may easily lead one to believe that their ac- 
complishment is more cosmetic than substantive in intent and effect. 
The 1973 Conference on Law of the Sea has now become the 1974-75 Confer- 
ence to be preceded by a short organizational exercise in late 1973. 
The Seabed Committee, sitting for 2 years as a conference preparatory com- 
mittee, after a previous 3 years of general debate, has not produced even a 
minimum amount of proposed treaty language upon which to structure negotia- 
tion in the Conference. It only has some 65 scheduled days in 1973 to do so. 
If it cannot, and I believe that it cannot, the November-December 1973 United 
Nations Genera] Assembly has the authority and responsibility to delay Confer- 
ence plans for another year or more. 
In the face of continual delay and disruption at the U.N., domestic interests 
continue to suffer disadvantage and administration neglect * * *, Our ocean 
miners are frustrated in their plans to-develop highly desirable alternate metal 
sources because investment capital is difficult to secure in a politically emo- 
tional legal atmosphere. * * * 
These miners are now ready to make substantial investments leading to 
actual mining operations. This investment must not be inhibited by the irre- 
sponsible actions of materials-exporting countries using the U.N. as a mechanism 
to prevent the United States from developing alternative sources of copper and 
other critical metals. 
It is time for the United States to protect its national interest and to reaffirm 
strongly its commitment to the principle that deep ocean resources should remain 
available to all nations and should not become the monopolized resource of any 
one entity—private, public, or international. * * * 
This legislation has a potentially beneficial effect on domestic revenue, bal- 
ance of payments, materials availabilities, ocean technology, and many other 
facets which may very well outweigh considerations related to our international 
relationships.” 
The State Department response to Senator Jackson and Representa- 
tive Sullivan was also conveyed to delegates in the U.N. Seabed Com- 
mittee by the head of the U.S. delegation, Mr. John Norton Moore. 
He informed the other delegations that the Executive Branch opposed 
the passage of U.S. seabed legislation at this time although they could 
not rule out the alternative of interim legislation if a Law of the Sea 
Conference is not concluded as scheduled and does not produce a treaty 
that assures an accommodation of the basic objectives of all nations. 
He pointed out that the Administration was keenly aware of the lack 
of confidence many people have in the timely and satisfactory progress 
of the U.N. Seabed Committee and the need of U.S. companies to 
secure a more stable base for seabed investments. Using these points 
as leverage, Mr. Moore pressed the Seabed Committee to maintain its 
schedule. He also stressed the need to prepare for the provisional entry 
into force of an internationally agreed regime immediately after a 
law of the sea treaty is opened for signature. He suggested that this 
would be necessary to ensure that all seabed exploitation is covered 
from the beginning by the treaty ‘“‘so that states will not have to con- 
sider other alternatives to resolve the problem.” ; 
This proposal to the U.N. Seabed Committee for an interim regime 
was then reported to the House Subcommittee on Oceanography in 
34 Deep Seabed Hard Minerals, op. cit., pp. 11, 12, ish 
