74 



Do you agree with that ? 



Dr. Stratton. Mr. Chairman, I hesitate to plunge in where others 

 are much more expert, but I think it is very important that every 

 aspect be explored. I have to note, though, that I have been convinced 

 that that 1958 convention is not unchallengeable, that this interpre- 

 tation has been thoroughly denied by very competent members of the 

 legal profession. Really, what we are proposing is the need to clarify 

 this and make absolutely certain where these lines lie. We are not 

 giving away anything. We are providing access out to a depth of 2,500 

 meters. The consequences of failing to clarify and take action may well 

 be the kind of situation we face today in Peru and other places, where 

 we may have thought it was clear, but others have not interpreted it 

 the same way. 



Mr. Lennon. Will the gentleman yield at that point ? 



Dr. Stratton. Am I right in these statements ? 



Mr. Lenno?^. Is that specifically referred to in the report. Dr. 

 Lawrence ? 



Dr. Lawrence. Yes. 



Mr. Lennon. Can you identify the chapter and the page ? 



Dr. Stratton. We shall identify it. 



Mr. Lennon. Was there a special panel created ? 



Dr. Stratton. There was indeed. 



Mr. Lennon. In substance, what is the length of that panel report 

 on this particular subject matter ? 



Dr. Lawrence. I think that the question of law as to how rights 

 under the 1958 convention adhere to nations runs 10 to 15 pages, Mr. 

 Chairman. 



Mr. Lennon, Would you identify for this record that particular 

 panel report so that members can go back and when they read this 

 summary of this hearing can refer specifically to those questions which 

 give them concern, and refer to that part of the report or the particu- 

 lar panel report ? Would you do that for the record, gentlemen, before 

 you leave here today ? I thought that would be helpful. 



(The information referred to follows :) 



The interpretations of the 1958 Geneva Conventions as they apply to rights 

 to develop offshore mineral resources are treated in the report of the Commission 

 at page 143 to 147 and in the report of the Commission's International Panel 

 (Volume 3 of the Commission's Panel Report, at page VIII-11 to VIII-25.) In 

 addition, a staff paper was prepared for the Commission by Mr. Bernard H. 

 Oxman, "The Preparation of Article I of the Convention on the Continental 

 Shelf," which deals in depth with the legislative history of the "Exploitability" 

 provision and which is available from the Federal Clearinghouse for Scientific 

 and Technical Information, Springfield, Virginia, 22151, Document No. PB 182100. 



Mr. Pelly. Mr. Chairman, my attention has been called to the fact 

 that actually the recommendation of the Commission is to establish 

 goals to occupy the bed and subsoil of the U.S. territorial sea and util- 

 ize the shelf and slope to 2,000 feet and achieve a capability to explore 

 to 20,000 feet so that I do not think anybody could say by any stretch 

 of the imagination that that was a giveaway. 



Dr. Stratton. Mr. Chairman, you have no idea of how long we de- 

 bated as to whether we should use the term "colonize" or "occupy" or 

 "have access to." It was very carefully chosen. 



Mr. Lennon. I think it important that you develop that at this 

 point, Mr. Pelly, but for the benefit of those members who do not have 



