501 



Mr. Reinecke. On page 17 you indicated that there were sugges- 

 tions that there be no unilateral exploitation of the resources oi the 

 deep ocean floor. Which country made that suggestion ? 



Mr. PoppEiR. There were several who did. I would have to look 

 that up. 



Mr. Reinecke. Will you place that in the record, please ? 



Mr. Popper. Yes. 



(The information follows:) 



Countries Suggesting No Unilatebai- Exploitation of the Ocean Floob 



Those countries whicli, during the debate in the General Assembly on the 

 Maltese item, advocated a moratorium on unilateral exploitation of resources 

 of the ocean floor are (in alphabetical order) : 



Ceylon Libya Somalia 



Finland Malta Sweden 



Thailand 



Mr. Reinecke. Then, regarding the ad hoc committee, I think we 

 discussed this before. Do you feel 1 year is an adequate period of time 

 to accomplish any results on this proposal ? 



Mr. Pollack. You are talking about the ad hoc committee in the 

 United Nations? 



Mr. Reinecke. Yes. 



Mr, Popper. I would say that 1 year is not enough, and I think it 

 would be premature to expect that this committee will come up with 

 firm answers 1 year from now. The whole timetable to which it is 

 geared would preclude that. The Secretary General is making a study 

 which started last year and which is to be concluded next spring. This 

 committee will barely be able to conclude its work by next September. 



Mr. Reinecke. If 1 year is not going to give us the answers, I hope 

 we will not go ahead and start generating frameworks based on incom- 

 plete data. 



Mr. Popper. I am sure we would not be guilty of undue haste. We 

 would proceed at a deliberate pace. Just as it took 8 or 9 years to get 

 to an outer space treaty, I think it would take several years before the 

 United States could decide whether it would want to assume a binding 

 commitment. 



Mr. Reinecke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Lennon. The gentleman from Florida. 



Mr. Rogers. What do you consider the present law to be governing 

 beyond 200 meters offshore? 



Mr. FuTTERMAN. You mentioned 200 meters, which is the minimum 

 figure specified in the Convention on the Continental Shelf. The Con- 

 tenental Shelf is there defined "as referring (a) to the seabed and sub- 

 soil of the submarine areas adjacent to the coast but outside the area of 

 the territorial sea, to a depth of 200 meters or, beyond that limit, to 

 where the depth of the superjacent waters admit of the exploitation of 

 the natural resources of the said areas; (b) to the seabed and subsoil of 

 similar submarine areas adjacent to the coasts or islands." 



So 200 meters is the minimum depth. The key word, often overlooked, 

 is "'adjacent" to the coast, and I think that is what Congressman Pelly 

 was referring to. It is not clear just to what distance an area beyond 

 the coast could be considered to be adjacent. 



