dation and at most may bind those States which 

 vote for it and, perhaps, those which do not dis- 

 sent from it,''" it would help greatly to "hold- 

 the-Une" in a way that would not jeopardize the 

 new legal-pohtical framework being negotiated. 



V. OTHER STEPS TO BE TAKEN PENDING 

 NEGOTIATION OF NEW FRAMEWORK 



The principles urged upon the Ad Hoc Commit- 

 tee by the United States have certain consequences 

 for domestic policy as well. 



A. Leasing Beyond the 200-IVIeter Isobath 



The United States must decide whether it will 

 continue to lease rights to explore and exploit the 

 mineral resources of the bed or subsoil underlying 

 the high seas beyond the 200-meter isobath, 

 subject to any new framework that may be 

 adopted. We think an affirmative answer to this 

 question is implicit in the principles stated. But we 

 recommend that the United States should take this 

 position explicitly. Only such a position is consist- 

 ent with the objectives of the Marine Resources 

 and Engineering Development Act of 1966. 



To remove all uncertainty for American private 

 enterprise, the United States must also take a 

 position soon on the precise boundary it would 

 like to see established between the "continental 

 shelf and the "deep ocean floor." The panel 

 recommends that, for purposes of the Convention 

 on the Continental Shelf, the continental shelf 

 should be redefined so as to fix its seaward limit at 

 the 200-meter isobath or 50 nautical miles from 

 the baselines for measuring the breadth of the 

 territorial sea, whichever alternative gives the 

 coastal State the greater area of seabed and subsoil 

 for permanent, exclusive mineral resources explo- 

 ration and exploitation. 



B. Guaranteeing Private Investment 



If, as the United States proposed, exploitation 

 of the mineral resources beyond the 200-meter 

 isobath is not to prejudice the ultimate location of 

 the boundary between the "continental shelf and 

 the "deep ocean floor," a dilemma confronts 



Henkin, supra note 38, at 531 n. 162, citing 

 Asamoah, The Legal Significance of the Declarations of 

 the General Assembly of the United Nations (1966). 



private enterpreneurs and all other prospective 

 investors in marine mineral resources exploration 

 or exploitation. To proceed with such exploration 

 and exploitation is to run the risk that the area of 

 operations may ultimately find itself included in 

 the "deep ocean floor" rather than the "conti- 

 nental shelf and governed by a less favorable 

 framework than now applies under the Outer 

 Continental Shelf Lands Act. 



This risk would be obviated if any new frame- 

 work exempted all exploration and exploitation 

 occurring prior to its adoption. However, the panel 

 thinks the United States wisely resisted suggesting 

 this solution, because it would encourage develop- 

 ments that might jeopardize the possibiUty of 

 reaching international agreement on a framework 

 based on the principles enunciated by the United 

 States. 



If, to avoid the risk described, American private 

 enterprise should decline to proceed with explora- 

 tion and exploitation beyond the 200-meter 

 isobath. United States objectives in the oceans 

 would be thwarted. 



The International Panel thinks this dilemma is 

 not very serious and, more important, that it can 

 be resolved. We agree with the position taken by 

 the United States before the Ad Hoc Committee. 

 Furthermore, under the international legal- 

 poUtical framework which we recommend, private 

 enterprise will actually run very little risk by 

 proceeding with exploration and exploitation 

 beyond the 200-meter isobath. There is no 

 guarantee, of course, that this reconunended 

 framework will be accepted. Accordingly, we 

 recommend that Congress should enact legislation 

 to compensate private enterprise for loss of invest- 

 ment or expenses occasioned by the fact that the 

 international legal-pohtical framework ultimately 

 adopted includes as "deep ocean floor" the area in 

 which it was previously engaged in exploration or 

 exploitation of mineral resources. 



C. Amendment of Outer Continental Shelf Lands 

 Act 



The scope of this Act is as uncertain as the 

 existing definition of the continental shelf. It is 

 important, however, that private entrepreneurs 

 should know when they must seek the Govern- 

 ment's permission to engage in exploration and 

 exploitation of subsea minerals. It is equally 



VIII-32 



